Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Supremus

Subpar Compact

25 posts in this topic

The headlamps bulging on each side of the xD make the car look like a mutant bug, not a frugal urban hipster's ride

it resembles a refrigerator box on training wheels

The interior materials felt like rejects from Chinese toy manufacturers

:rotflmao:

brutal review

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess he thinks it inhales deeply...

My favorite line: "The one area where the xD excels is parking. With its size, it's easy to move into the smallest spots. Plus, when you're parking, you know the driving experience is nearly over and you've arrived at your destination. "

Classic.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I think this is a great example of how the media works. There isn't necessarily a bias against anyone, but rather, all writers are inherently storytellers. The story for a long time was how the domestics were messing up and how the asian brands were growing at a crazy pace. It was sort of like watching LeBron in his first few years where he wasn't the best yet, but was very impressive.

That story was told long enough until Toyota passed GM in global sales earlier this year (briefly). At that point, it got old to praise their every little effort; much like it got old to make a big deal out of LeBron scoring anything less than 50 pts. Now, the sports media bashes him if he's not awesome every night out. So my point is, Toyota has been put in the place of the juggernaut and they are getting it stuck to them at every sign of weakness because no matter what the context, it's always a compelling story to tell people about the underdog beating up on the giant.

So I ask, is the xD really any less of a vehicle than the other offerings from Scion? To me, it has much better styling that the xA. There are still positives to tell about the xD like how Scion is the best brand in the industry at attracting young buyers, but that story was only good to tell when Toyota was the underdog on their way up. They've always been crappy, cheap vehicles from an absolute standpoint, but you didn't hear about that until now because it hasn't been as compelling of a story as it is now that Toyota is expected to do everything right.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And so are the seats. They are hard and I could never adjust them to a position I liked.

That's the same impression I got when I sat in an xB a couple months back. The seats were awfully uncomfortable and awkward, and adjusting didn't help. I can only imagine the xD being worse.

And why did they change the name of the xA to the xD, when it is still the cheapest in the lineup? Exterior dimensions aside, the xB and xD now look the same to me, and I had to go to the Scion website and compare them side by side to really see the difference.

Scion annoys me. Their website annoys me.

Click "Engine, Drivetrain, and Chassis" to see the engine specs of the xB, but you click "Mechanical/Performance" to see the engine specs of the xD. And the other menu options are equally different from each other. Let me guess, they did this to be hip? Alignment is off on a few things too.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tall body planted on 16-inch wheels adds to the car's gangly stance. While the narrow shape is typical of cars designed for Japanese customers, it resembles a refrigerator box on training wheels.

Sooooo True!!!

The xD doesn't make sense. It's as if different designers drew different pieces in separate rooms and then someone else pieced them all together.

But that's 90% of all Toyotas made in the past 20 years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan of Scion nor any Japanese for that matter, but I would have to agree with the review. Surely, they could have done a better job at least on the styling. It is in my opinion, well.... HEDIOUS. Not any better than those Hyundais and Kia junks since I hate their designs as well.

Sure, sure, it's unique, and their own design, but they could have been done much better. Scion xD and Honda Element in my opinion are the most hedious looking vehicles ever designed. I would prefer the 1st generation Pontiac Aztec(which look way better then either and was lot more functional then the two) million time over these trolls. Well, no offence to any Scion fans and Honda Element fans.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

funny, i rode in a coworkers element yesterday.

yucky mess of cheap plastic and overall very unpleasant. lacks room, warmth. just cheap cheap cheap. my aztek is so much better than that element.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, IMHO, I think Honda Element should be called as a 'TOASTER' on wheel, yet the press chewed on Aztec like there's no tomorrow while praised about Element. To me, the opposite should be true.

Sorry Element fans and its PROUD owners, I can't help it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like Toyota dropped the ball again and the Fit will remain the champion in this segment. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't buy either one of these products. The xD is unattractive and (according to this article) a horribly executed product. The Fit has collected many great reviews, but I don't find its styling attractive either.

I hope the Fiesta/Verve has the goods to challenge the Fit's dominance in this segment. The Verve compact (3 door hatchback version) is way more attractive than the Fit. If Ford stays true to the concept, it should attract attention on looks alone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, IMHO, I think Honda Element should be called as a 'TOASTER' on wheel, yet the press chewed on Aztec like there's no tomorrow while praised about Element. To me, the opposite should be true.

Sorry Element fans and its PROUD owners, I can't help it.

the real tragedy is the FJ cruiser.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Owch on the review. I'd like to feel sorry for Toyota, but I just don't have time. Tomorrow's not looking good either. :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that was a scathing review. Ouch.

By the way, WTF is up with the center stack? The main HVAC/radio cluster and the lower storage/iPod bin aren't even on-center! Talk about crappy attention to detail.

Edited by mustang84
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, IMHO, I think Honda Element should be called as a 'TOASTER' on wheel, yet the press chewed on Aztec like there's no tomorrow while praised about Element. To me, the opposite should be true.

Sorry Element fans and its PROUD owners, I can't help it.

I have to defend the poor Element here, just a little, because my dad has one (yeah, the irony - he's 60!) and absolutely loves it.

If you take out the back seats (fully removable, of course) and use it to haul stuff (like my 32-inch TV, or my entire assembled computer desk, or 20 bags of topsoil, etc.), then it's perfect. On the other hand, if you're expecting it to be the luxury equivalent of an Audi Q7, then maybe you should lower your sights a little.

The Element is a much better definition of "truck" than most of the other vehicles in its market segment. No, you can't climb the Rubicon with it, but Honda would also readily admit it wasn't designed for that. It's a solid, safe, useful and reliable little hauler - deceptively so, actually.

You can't say that about many other small utes (re: the RAV4 review by Reg, for instance), or even some minivans.

Okay, defense over. Feel free to ridicule away now, but I made my point.

(Oh, about the Aztek - yes, it was certainly useful and reliable as anything else, but you simply can't overlook its hideous exterior design. At least the Element is mostly inoffensive - sure, you notice it, but you don't get a gag reflex either.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the real tragedy is the FJ cruiser.

All of the so-called undesirable parts of the Element (weird side doors, odd styling, spartan interior), and some even worse traits besides (atrocious fuel economy, rough ride, expensive, raping a legendary predecessor in the name of marketing) - it's a real winner for the Big T!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to defend the poor Element here, just a little, because my dad has one (yeah, the irony - he's 60!) and absolutely loves it.

If you take out the back seats (fully removable, of course) and use it to haul stuff (like my 32-inch TV, or my entire assembled computer desk, or 20 bags of topsoil, etc.), then it's perfect. On the other hand, if you're expecting it to be the luxury equivalent of an Audi Q7, then maybe you should lower your sights a little.

The Element is a much better definition of "truck" than most of the other vehicles in its market segment. No, you can't climb the Rubicon with it, but Honda would also readily admit it wasn't designed for that. It's a solid, safe, useful and reliable little hauler - deceptively so, actually.

You can't say that about many other small utes (re: the RAV4 review by Reg, for instance), or even some minivans.

Okay, defense over. Feel free to ridicule away now, but I made my point.

(Oh, about the Aztek - yes, it was certainly useful and reliable as anything else, but you simply can't overlook its hideous exterior design. At least the Element is mostly inoffensive - sure, you notice it, but you don't get a gag reflex either.)

the element is equally hideous, at least until they wised up and made monochrome color schemes.

where the element fails in relation to the aztek is passenger comfort and cheap cabin plastics. also, elements I have heard about don't get much better mpg than what i get with my aztek.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the element is equally hideous, at least until they wised up and made monochrome color schemes.

where the element fails in relation to the aztek is passenger comfort and cheap cabin plastics. also, elements I have heard about don't get much better mpg than what i get with my aztek.

Geezus....the Aztek was a poster-child for the old-GM school of bargain-basement materials and shoddy fit-and-finish.

A truly horrible car.....

I may not be a big Element fan, but it's head-and-shoulders a much better execution than GM's old Aztek/Rendezvous twins.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Geezus....the Aztek was a poster-child for the old-GM school of bargain-basement materials and shoddy fit-and-finish.

A truly horrible car.....

I may not be a big Element fan, but it's head-and-shoulders a much better execution than GM's old Aztek/Rendezvous twins.

...but at least the Aztek was ORIGINAL - something the Japanese are incapable of ever doing. If the Element had come out 6 years ago, then it may have been at least interesting, but since it is, at best, a bad copy of the Aztek, Honda should be ashamed. And we can never keep an Aztek on our used car lot. One of the fastest selling vehicles we can get our hands on. A test drive easily cements the deal. Yes, GM could have done better with the Aztec, but it was mostly the late '90s Pontiac plastic cladding styling that killed that vehicle. That is something that Lutz recognized early on and stripped all GM vehicles of.

As to the Element, I drew better sketches of trucks and vans when I was 5 years old.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the element is equally hideous, at least until they wised up and made monochrome color schemes.

where the element fails in relation to the aztek is passenger comfort and cheap cabin plastics. also, elements I have heard about don't get much better mpg than what i get with my aztek.

I know it's a GM board, but people are actually bending over backwards to defend the Aztek?

Seriously? And you're gonna do it on the basis of comfort and cabin plastics?

To the first point - comfort. No, it's not as comfortable as an Aztek, mainly in the rear seat, because of the design of said seats. That's offset by their better flexibility (remember - fully removable, no tracks or hinges on the floor) and an overall larger usable cargo area when all is said and done. Most of that cargo area, of course, comes from the boxy exterior shape - a good example of form following function. As for the Aztek, I believe we all know function it was intended to serve, but in this case it was seriously impaired by the form that was forced upon it.

As to the second point - cabin plastics. I made it pretty clear that the Element was designed as a utilitarian vehicle; hence the plastics and surfacing are more sturdy and less touchy-feely by design. Even then, the usual Honda details are still there - nice rubberized surfaces in the shelves and storage bins to keep stuff from rattling around, solid construction (no squeaks or rattles), durable and long-wearing fabrics, no rough spots or unfinished pieces. Compare this to the Aztek's (and general old-GM-style) acres of brittle paneling and sharp plastic edges, coupled with the best in American-crafted mousehide and vinyl substitute. Oh, wait, wait! You did get a free air compressor, so it's not all bad. :rolleyes:

Finally, regarding gas mileage: chalk it up, once again, to the shape. It's a rolling box; what do you expect? The Chevy HHR isn't exactly setting any economy records either, compared to some rivals. With that in mind, what's the Aztek's excuse? It's certainly sleeker - if I'm being very, VERY kind - in the front end, but that doesn't make up for its prodigious and needless weight.

Enough about the Element; I like it, and will gladly defend it if need be, but I believe I've made my point.

Back to the Scion xD, which is exceedingly worthy of ridicule...

Edited by Duncan
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0