Jump to content
Server Move In Progress - Read More ×
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

CAR AND DRIVER $15,000 COMPACTS

regfootball

By regfootball
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

The O.C. Newbie

The O.C.

Posted
Posted

well that depends which one he has... if hes got the 240 horse coupe... and it performs similar to my monte... he'll smoke a 325 and a 330... ive done it... dont know about an X3 tho...

He has a G6 GT with the 3.5L V6.

BTW....I'm making my point using C&D acceleration numbers.....that's where i'm getting my arguments....

The new 325i with 6-speed manual goes 0-60 in only 6.1secs.....properly driven, THAT would outaccelerate your 240hp Monte Carlo.....automatic 325is are quoted by BMW as being able to go 0-60 in 7.1sec I think.....which would be tough for your Monte to beat....(based upon a lighter Malibu Maxx going 0-60 in 6.9secs in C&D.)

Not bashing the Monte.....look at my test drive of a 3.9L in "C&D Drives" and you'll see I was quite complimentary of that 3.9L in the Monte.....just trying to make a discussion interesting with some numbers to kinda support my arguments....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The O.C. Newbie

The O.C.

Posted
Posted

NOS owns a 3800 V6 Camaro.

Oh.....

Well, my story is not to bash the 3800V6 Camaro....I actually REALLY think it was great (at the time) when GM made that engine change.

CERTAINLY beat anything Ford was offering in the Mustang at the time....and the car was surprisingly close to the V8 Mustang automatic in performance....

I was only making the point that it's not just "low end torque" or "high-revving power" that makes an engine better....or quicker.....or snappier....

You just have to look at the total engine package and what they bring to the table.

The few "high-revving" DOHC/multi-valve engines that I don't think are extremely flexible are the Honda 2.2L S2000 engine and the Toyota "hi-po" 1.8L VVT engines....

I think with those you lose way too much flexibility for them to be competitive in day-to-day driving.

Most other multi-cam/multi-valve engines are quite flexible in everyday driving and compare well to the pushrod/torquer engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The O.C. Newbie

The O.C.

Posted
Posted

I know. Just making a joke.

I agree about Toyota's 1.8l. Its lousy on pretty much all fronts and not even all that smooth versus an Ecotec.

Speaking of V6 Camaros.......

When they were new, I had a '93 Camaro with that 3.4L V6 and a 5-speed manual tranny.

Now THERE was a dog.....

At the time I couldn't afford/justify the insurance of the V8.....being under 25 and all....so I ordered a V6 Camaro but loaded up with t-tops, Bose stereo, Z28 wheel package, etc.

I even liked the first advant-garde dash design in that generation Camaro over the mid-cycle restyle they did.

YES...mine had those "yellow" gauges.

Also, mine had the worlds-worst-sounding Bose stereo ever...! Remember the Bose in the '93 Camaro? It had 3 (!) speakers!!!!! Two in the dash, and one more back in the luggage compartment area...(I think they improved it with the mid-cycle dash change and stuff......)

BUT it was a looker of a car, and was very tight, and handled great. But MAN it had no power.....(I think contemporary tests of a base V6, 5-speed Camaro of the time was 0-60 in 9.2secs...from a C&D comparison of that with the base Mustang.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daves87rs Collaborator

daves87rs

Posted
Posted

I don't see what the big deal is about the Fit.

I like the Fit, I think it is a pretty good package for the price.( should be a little cheaper, though)

I can see why it finished 1st.

I've seen the Yaris, and I am not impressed-at all.

The Rio doesn't look all that bad-the 5 door is growing on me.

The current Aveo is a good car (though better gas milage would be nice)

I think the 07 Aveo will be a solid car, right up there with the Fit.

It may not be a Fit-beater-but it will be quite close.

Since it is going to offer more bang-for-buck, I think the new Aveo will do quite

well on its own...

My choice-I could go with either a Fit or and Aveo. Or Both. 8)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
04monteintimidator Newbie

04monteintimidator

Posted
Posted

Not bashing the Monte.....look at my test drive of a 3.9L in "C&D Drives" and you'll see I was quite complimentary of that 3.9L in the Monte

i know i was actually really happy to see someone finally drive it and realize that just bcuz its FWD doesnt mean it suckz beyond compare... thank you for that article an putting that terrible rumor to rest

and i was talking about personal experience... ive beaten both new and slightly old (model right before the mid-year change) 325s and 330s... some of them from a rolling start at like 40ish... so either the drivers were just really bad... or my monte has some tricks i dont yet know about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The O.C. Newbie

The O.C.

Posted
Posted

I don't see what the big deal is about the Fit.

Well, I'm not a big fan of its style.....I think it looks dated.

However, two things......

1) The interior does look to be of extremely high quality in terms of materials and fit-and-finish. When I sat in them at Frankfurt last September, the interiors WERE typically impressive.

2) IF it does ride-and-handle nearly as well as C&D reported (and it did show some damn impressive numbers) then it should be a cracker to drive.....very un-econobox-like...

Also, an 8.7sec 0-60 for an economy car is not exactly snail-like....

AND it's got the "Honda" name. Nuff said....for many folks out there.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daves87rs Collaborator

daves87rs

Posted
Posted

Well, I'm not a big fan of its style.....I think it looks dated.

However, two things......

1)  The interior does look to be of extremely high quality in terms of materials and fit-and-finish.  When I sat in them at Frankfurt last September, the interiors WERE typically impressive.

2)  IF it does ride-and-handle nearly as well as C&D reported (and it did show some damn impressive numbers) then it should be a cracker to drive.....very un-econobox-like...

Also, an 8.7sec 0-60 for an economy car is not exactly snail-like....

AND it's got the "Honda" name.  Nuff said....for many folks out there.....

Still think it has the better overall package, bland looks or not. I look at it as a smaller civic wagon. sitting inside, you really don't get that "i'm drving a covered lawnmower feeling" like you would in other cars.

I have to agree with the F&F-it was quite nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sciguy_0504 Newbie

sciguy_0504

Posted
Posted

The Fit interior may have nice materials but I am not a fan of its design. It looks way too busy, especially for an economy car. I prefer the simple layout and different (for an econobox) look of the Yaris and new Aveo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cory Wolfe

Cory Wolfe

Posted
Posted

Heh... while the Fit may not be the sexiest thing there ever was, it is certainly better looking than it's competitors. In substance and overall good looks. While the interior may be... techy, it's certainly not ugly and it certainly doesn't have center gages. :P

Combine that with the superb chassis and such, as well as the interior, and it's easily the best. Worth the premium, in a way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrewSwillis Newbie

BrewSwillis

Posted
Posted

Check out the results of the poll on C&D's front page:

Which econobox would you have chosen as the winner of our $15,000 Cheap Skates comparison test?

Dodge Caliber SE-39%

Honda Fit Sport-33%

Nissan Versa 1.8SL-11%

Toyota Yaris S-10%

Kia Rio5 SX-3%

Hyundai Accent GLS-2%

Suzuki Reno-1%

TOTAL ENTRIES: 2192

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings