regfootball

I was getting the oil changed on my taurus X today and in the showroom they had a new Fiesta. I had not even sat in one yet so I was very curious about it. I think the sticker was like 18k and they did not have much off on it. I have to say i was impressed with the EPA rating on it. I tried to get in the trunk but for some reason I could not. I got in the back seat and the seating itself seemed comfortable but it also seemed tight and claustrophobic in just about every dimension. This particular example did not have an armrest. I am like 'wtf' why do these carmakers not even put in a simple 100 dollar armrest? Once I got in front, I did admire the dash design, the touch and feel of some of the surfaces, and the upper door and dash plastic I thought was well done for a cheap car. If the Focus merely matches this I think its not bad. Seat cloth was kind of cheap. Climate controls seemed flimsy cheap but at least easy to understand. The radio stack was interesting, but this unit had a small display. View out the front seemed nice. the narrow width of the car seemed prevalent, leg room was provided but it didn't seem like you could sprawl out. Front headroom didn't seem to bad. The seat recliner lever was in a dumb spot. The seat bottom felt a bit chintzy. I will say it seemed to have a much more interesting cabin than the Fit. I have to admit it seemed like a pleasant cabin. If the Focus is as good or better, than Ford should do well with the Focus. I'd be a lot more comfortable with this car 2 grand cheaper though. an 18k sticker on a nice penalty box is still a hard paradigm change when the next class and two up is not that much further out of reach and gives you so much more. I thought I did have was if I was single or just in high school or college, and not making many trips, the small size of the car would be totally ok. easy to park, etc. It will be interesting to see how the Sonic hedgehog compares in interior space.

I assume i may be in a regional incentive area. The dealer I bought my cobalt at was even advertising close to 3 grand off the loaded LTZ. I will need to go back and read fine print, maybe there was a targeted incentive for toyota owners or something. The Cruze leases though, the ads are ALL OVER the net. like 1899 down, 159 a month on an LS. I would fully expect the LT1 to have a better residual and if you used that 3500 to cover the down payment and tax and title and license, you could lease with intent to purchase. That is, just know that all you are doing by leasing is buy down the loan at a slower rate than if you borrowed the full amount, but if you hate the car after 39 months give it back. With 3500 down on a lease, the balance after 39 months may not be all that much more than what would be left on a 5 year loan at high percent after 39 months. After 3 years, the residual on the Cruze you lease is no doubt going to be less of a price for a buyout than a 3 year old used Cruze sitting on a dealer lot with a 5,000 dollar markup over wholesale. If you are seriously just looking for a cheap drive for 3 years and won't exceed 12 or even 15k miles, it may behoove you to just consider the Cruze. You spend 17 on a cobalt, after 3 years if you try to trade it, you'll get offered 5 grand and you may still owe 7 or 8 grand. You lease that cruze now your payments may be cheaper and unless you beat on the car you will have the option to just say goodbye to it or buy a really nice used car you know the history on for less than what a dealer will charge for the same thing used and several thousand less than new. I had 3k in GM car dmoney built up I was saving for a new Regal or Cruze lease but then my Aztek sorta f`orced` my hand `before those 2 cars came out. I am still upset over settling for the cobalt. the cobalt fine, but it is what it is. If you get a Cobalt just make sure you are not putting yourself in position for future remorse about paying too much for what you get. as it is for me now, the cobalt was literally the most cost effective option for me, and in return i get a car that is actually fun to drive sometimes. And, I can beat the snot out of it and not worry about ruining a 'nice car'. In no way would I have paid for say, a Jetta. The Jetta is dull and drab and not worth close to what it sells for most of the time and the Cobalt has a personality where the Jetta really doesn't. So in that respect its a bargain and more interesting to boot. I drove an Aztek for like 6 years. But I never could look with remorse on it, because i didn't lose my ass on it. The running costs were requisite with how nice of a vehicle it was. I probably saved 15 thousand bucks vs. a Pilot or something that was similar. I look at a cobalt the same way. It's fine as long as you don't overpay or put yourself in a box with it. I can drive mine for 3 or 4 years and still not lose any money on it I figure. Be sure to look at those Regal leases too. Bluetooth is a cheap option on the LS. Chevy deserves major scorn and outright ridicule for not having made Cruze available on the LS. THat is the old bad GM still tainting the matter, and really people should lose their jobs over that blatant disregard for the customer. Yes, whoever was responsible for that ultimate decision should lose their job.

i can believe that Viper. My rig is still getting broke in, and right now its winter and i confess I need to get my tire pressures back up. But mostly right now I blame that 90% of our driving is in town, and with crappy ethanol blend oxygenated crap gas we are force fed in this corn state. Mine is not an XFE even though it is a stick. I hate low rolling resistance tires and the Hankooks on my American Cobalt are not much of an upgrade either.

Perhaps a Cruze LS may be a better option than that Cobalt. A cruze with Auto is what, 18,500? and i know that some dealers already are like 2 grand off that........a new Cruze at 16,500 is a huge upgrade from a Cobalt at that price. The Cruze will have stability control and 54 airbags....ok, just 10. LOL. But it will lack cruise control and some other goodies. Maybe even a bare bones LT Cruze is worth stretching into?

We've owned our 2010 Cobalt since the end of April last year. I wanted / needed to be in a small car for a bit of time and I had GM money I needed to burn. I explored leasing a Malibu or buying an HHR or Cobalt or G6. At the time, the incentives were not great on the HHR which was what I really wanted although the Cobalt and HHR are pretty much the same thing the HHR has more utility. Since we bought our Cobalt there are nicer deals on the HHR now. We just topped 10,000 miles and have not had to get anything fixed. MPG has probably been about 28 overall. I expected a little better, but when i use non oxygenated non ethanol small engine gas I get about 32 mpg. Highway trips with one person, 35 mpg should be realistic. Ours is an LT1 with Mylink package and ABS. This included bluetooth for phone, leather wrap steering wheel audio controls, and we also have a USB port on teh radio. Ours is also a manual trans and has alum wheels, power windows, locks etc. One of the reasons I bit the bullet and got the Cobalt compared to other brands was because the engine is so strong in the Cobalt. The interior is loud and buzzy, the ergonomics are off, not much creature comfort, but it does accelerate well and even though the steering dead / terrible the overall experience for a small car is ok at the price. I had on two separate instances had 08 Focus as one week loaners before that and I can tell you I do prefer the Cobalt in a lot of ways to the 08+ Focus. The Cobalt's strength is that it chews up miles very well because of the strong engine and decent ride. In top gear at high speed the rpm is lower than many smaller cars and it cruzes (hehe) fairly quiet. I dislike my Hankook tires, but its a cheap car its gonna have crap tires. The HHR for me was a noticeable amount cheaper for insurance in comparison, the higher price might be offset by some insurance savings. The HHR will get a bit less mpg. A very base Malibu will not be much more right now. Other options to consider non GM are a basic Kia soul or leftover 2010 Kia Optima (they are dirt cheap right now). You may want to think about saving the GM card money and buying another brand, if you buy a cobalt, that 3500 you put into it the equity is pretty much gone once you drive it off the lot with a Cobalt. The real truth is that compact cars are now going to be closer to 20k than 13, 14k so you will never have the chance to buy a car that cheap ever again. In that regard and for what you will use it for,a Cobalt may suit you fine. It's not going to be as safe or well equipped as a Cruze. But I think in return for a lower price, you will likely get the durability, operating costs, and nice running behavior that may surprise you. Someone will always buy a used Cobalt, the resale may not be top tier, but if you ever have to sell it, someone will always be interested in buying it. I would just explore finding an HHR LS with auto trans, that will have stability control on it, and may not be too much more than a Cobalt and has more cargo space. Same car, bigger interior basically. I am 'ok' with my Cobalt but I will be looking to move it at the first responsible opportunity I have to do so. That 3500 GM card would prepay a huge chunk of one of those subsidized leases they have been advertising on the Cruze right now.............If the Cruze had been out when i needed to get my car, that would have been what i would have done.

your pictures are very nice, and it is quite striking in that color combo. I was not aware they had that color. Congrats on the new ride. That is a nice Ford Edge you got there!!! j/k CX-9 is the cornerstone of Mazda right now and those who drive them enjoy them. My neighbor has one, actually. Just a side note about Mazdas, I see they upgraded the cloth on the 2011 Mazda6, its actually a tolerable place to be now. Is leather standard on the CX-9? As far as I know the leather in the CX-9 is pretty nice quality. Those wheels look new for 2011, are they a new Mazda design?

well, dealers are already advertising 2000-2500 off on cruzes, at 22k that's decent. At least that brings it more into line.

I've seen ads already for new Fiestas "as low as 11,999!" but should I assume that means no air? To be honest, a new one with air at 13 or 14 is very well priced I think. 20k, not so much. Versa death traps at 15k and up but at least people can sit in the back of a versa. Versa would be a cool car if the interior wasn't ugly and if it didn't drive like crap.

won't be long and the price will drop enough so the courier drivers will start buying em.....

CRX weighed less than a ton. A non hybrid CRZ of sim size would have quite a bit of extra weight because of the safety performance required plus all the extra wiring and stuff. Even the Fit is heavy in comparison. But yeah, say a 2200 pound CRX with say a 1.5 litre. That might push mid forties on the hwy.

Edmunds always getting horrible mpg, and i think they either misreport or do it on purpose. So to some degree I take it with a bit of a grain of salt. But I think normal everyday mixed driving should not be hard to get 25mpg city and I would expect 30 on a long interstate trip. If it fails to get that, then why settle for a piss pot 4? My Taurus X which weighs 4500+ has AWD and a v6 pretty much gets 20 no matter what i do. But it is disturbing that the Regal only manages 19/30 when the Malibu is 22/33. You know Edmunds tests some small cars and only manages 21, 22 mpg for cars that have big highway ratings. When they do mpg testing it should not count the miles they spend driving the tar out of it. They should have a controlled test loop of at least 1000 miles, and none of it should involve anything besides normal driving. Stop and go some, and then extended interstate time. A/C doesn't mean much to mpg these days IMO. Heavy mpg use is a spike in fuel use and shouldn't decrease your mpg more than 10% IMO. Another example I can think of, they tested like an EcoBoost Flex or MKS and got like 14/15 in their testing when other sites I know have tested those two vehicles and registered 18, 20, 20+.

from edmunds inside line buick regal test http://www.insideline.com/buick/regal/2011/2011-buick-regal-cxl-24-liter-full-test-and-video.html this is what i mean about GM and some of their recent transmissions............ aside from the 'weak and noisy engine' which I am guessing they are probably overstating a bit......regal could use another 20-40hp on the base version likely. but oddly, then, it says this.... this is why it's so frustrating. If you have the 6 gears and the transmission itself is capable of shifting quickly and smoothly, then why isn't it allowed to perform better?

a Fiesta with an almost 20k price tag and still no moonroof?

the market will decide, you will see lots more fiestas going for 15k than 18, 19k....... Honda is even having trouble unloading Fits at that price nowadays

the hesitation before it decides it does want to shift. It's like too much foreplay. the malibu has got it too, though not as bad as the cruze. FWIW my 500 had it, lots of the new toyotas had it horribly. It's not just a GM thing. It seemed once on the boil, higher speeds and rpm, a lot of that went away. roll on was decent. GM trannies usually shift fairly nicely once they decide its time to do it, but my guess is that CAFE thing has them rejecting your immediate wishes. It's like having to fill out an application and ask, and get it approved, before it will. I noticed on teh Cruze, it's primarily at lower speeds and lower rpm. It's not so much a turbo thing IMO. Like I said, the Malibu has some shifting issues too on the 4 pop. the 6 cylinder shifted more aggressively from what i recall. But it gets back to, there is engineering work remaining to be done, or they can only program it to behave that way so they can squeeze another 1 mpg outta it, as mandated by their bosses. Just to note there are some OTHER non GM cars out there that can get superior mpg AND have fast acting fast and smooth shifting trannies.................. sad to see GM not keeping up......

right, dead on. there is a limit the public will pay on a car like this. Let the people who feel like throwing away money go buy the 800 A1's they may sell in this country for 35k. 16k for a fully loaded fiesta would make sense to me....as long as most of them sold in the 14k range. Was in the Mazda showroom the other day, they had a Mazda2 priced at 17 grand. What a steaming pile at 17k. Right across the floor was a new for 011 Mazda6 for not much more than that. The new 6 has a nice interior cloth upgrade that changes the game on that car.

Ford already has the Focus configurator up and yes its gonna be closer to 25k than 20k for a well equipped Focus. That is why I am guessing the ST will be around 30g, and at least for me, out of my reach. But I'm sorry, 20 grand is still a lot of money and really too much for a Fiesta IMO. So new normal i guess is the case. Makes one wonder if those WRX's for 23, 24 grand just a couple of years ago weren't a smokin deal....

except then they wouldn't sell them is the problem there. i'd buy one, but you know what i mean

then at least in a compromise version what should be avoided is a definite and noticeable lag or indecision, not unique to GM obivously, but programming tricks designed to squeeze 'one extra mpg' out of the powertrain at the expense of non-frustrating drivability could and should be avoided. obviously there is a happy medium in everything. must like some folks complained about GM's aggressive / overeager throttle setups and yes the notorious 6 speed camry's etc. it's almost like the product is not even tested before it sees the light of day. It's also like they think no one will notice. So if perfection can't be achieved, at least find a middle ground where the deficiencies can't be marked as deal breakers or sources of purchase remorse. 'refine the product' In other words, I find it hard to believe its not possible to make it shift quick and not hard at the same time. How many million transmissions have been built by now? It's not like a new endeavor. The regular trannies are not the only ones. That VW DSG in the TDI is laggard. I wouldn't put up with junk like that, especially with a loafing diesel underhood.

maybe just bad engineering then. explain the reason or apologize for why customers will be ok with the 'big lag' on the Cruze.....

if they can't get the tuning right then don't sell the car (aka slow shifting tranny). Or make the engineers stay late and finish the work they are paid to do. Or, settle for a hit on the mpg. If you can't have your cake and eat it too, at least don't make a crappy product. I was not aware they got the DSG. I thought the CC might but i thought the Passat normal still had the steptronic.

Cruze has the same lack of headspace so they are equal in that deficiency. However, this elantra had a sunroof. The backseat accounts for the major deficiency in space for the cruze. I haven't driven a post 2009 mazda3 so I am unsure how that compares. to me, the Elantra has far more appeal inside and out. Cruze and elantra overall are equal. It just comes down to which deficiencies you can or cannot live with. I want to drive them as manuals when the come out. The elantra is a really good small car. The cruze really needs to lose that shifter lag. That is annoying as hell. One thing cruze has in it's back pocket, the seats are a bit nicer and can be power seats. Cruzes seating position is a bit low also.

2011 Hyundai Elantra Limited automatic 6 speed EPA 29/40, MSRP 20,830 (I think) silver w/ gray interior. HIGHS snappy, smooth engine responsive and well spaced automatic trans. no shift delays, it bangs them out. No Cruze thing here. very usable and effective manumatic large interior with great space front and rear in all dimensions center stack shaped to allow a bit extra drivers knee room attractive, well laid out, and convenient gauges, radio, center stack, and other switches and controls gauge and center stack illumination is fantastic superb steering wheel, with nicely lightly weighted and responsive quick steering to go with handy and organized armrest and console / cupholder / brake area. decent size glove box and nice door pockets, neat side pockets aside of the center stack really nice interior design theme, good solid execution of textures, materials, shapes and colors knockout exterior, futuristic and sleek solid build quality large trunk solid, low slung, and sporty driving feel, a massive upgrade over the 010 version. Car feels heavier (i.e. more solid) than its curb weight suggests pretty decent visibility out the front and sides, rear is not terrible either. trunk is trimmed out ok I think PRICE and FEATURES (leather, 6 speed auto, heated seats front and rear, nice alloys, good space and driving behavior,....and sunroof for not much over 20??????) car has a wide track and feels like a long stable wheelbase yet the car has some reflexes and is not undertired decent brakes corners reasonably flat warranty interesting details like the way the headlights light up ZIPPY ATTITUDE! LOWS sensation of wanting a bit higher roof inside I'd like it if the rear seat seatback was angled a bit more back I wouldn't mind a little higher driving position, just a little front seats were ok for the most part but the bottom of the backrest I would reshape some rear quarter view cut a bit by the back door windows the leather could be a little better some may think Hyundai could ante up a bit nicer plastic since the design is so nice stack controls might be tough to organize for some Hyundai wants you to mistake stiff and harsh (read: cheap) suspension for 'sporty' Suspension lacks the initial suppleness N V H ok, let me qualify that.....there is just a lot more road noise then you want, just as with the Sonata. Same deal. A little residual buzz when you get on the throttle, too, that insulation could mitigate. The impression because of the road noise that the powertrain could use some refinement (which is not the case actually) Some folks may not like Hyundai's design direction Still just a tiny hint of that Korean car 'faux' quality Another 20-30hp would make this a sweet getabout instead of just a good one HVAC vents around center stack area are probably too low, they should be up higher to be more effective. SUMMARY Well, small cars have gotten scary good! The Cruze was a nice drive a few issues aside....Now Hyundai knocks it out of the park with the new Elantra. As yuck as the 2010 Elantra was to me, the 2011 is wow good. Really this car is nice enough that you don't need to move up to a midsize really, and it also is another example of how Hyundai wants to take over the auto market. This does not yet qualify as an enthusiasts car, but I can't really think of any other cars in this class that feel this sporty (and is not a special edition). Hyundai has basically addressed nearly every facet of the design and content of this class of car and has turned it into something you WANT to drive as your daily driver. It has some of the better performance in the class, it excels in function and utility and it has grade A design inside and out. There is value and perceived quality. To top it off, the sticker says users may achieve as high as 47 mpg on the highway in the right conditions. As for some of its competition, the Cruze has the edge on the quiet cabin. The Elantra's road noise allows you to hear more of the buzz from the engine so it give the perception of being a little less refined than the Cruze in the powertrain department. But I don't think that is true. The Elantra revs, is smooth, and the transmission is very responsive...it doesn't have the delay that Cruze is saddled with. Really as a whole, the slightly harsh and unsophicated suspension and the road noise are the only real vices with this car. You seriously at this price and class of car cannot find much out there that is more desirable. The Cruze is probably an overall equal match, but IMO is a bit more conservative although its quieter and may feel more refined.....but the Cruze lacks some space and has the annoying delayed shift problem. Now I am very curious to see how the new Focus turns out. Last Jetta I drove was a 2010 so I have no idea how the 2011 would compare but to be blunt, this Elantra is more fun, stylish, and a better drive than the VW. I am not sure why anyone would take interest in a drab VW after taking a spin in this. This is another one of those cars I could drive and be happy with in nearly every way. It's a very nice car. I'd give it an A, but will knock it down a bit until they fix the road noise and add some suppleness to the suspension. A- This is a car that is worth more than the sticker and you would likely feel glad you purchased. Top of class (probably shared with the Cruze for now). If you put a gun to my head and forced me to choose which to buy right now, it would be hard, but I might just pick the Hyundai.......and buy some Dynamat to line the floor and doors with......

yeah i can't say i am familiar with those. as far as Audi's go the DSG is probably better, etc. I just think the last 2 years or so the CVT's have improved a lot. It takes getting used to, sure. I think stepped slushboxes are fine too, but so many of them get knocked for lazy shifting. Like the Cruze, I know I thought the Malibu 6 speed was lazy. I like the idea of the eAssist with 6 speed but i really wish they would get rid of the lazy behavior.

might not make a bad car / el camino / medium duty commercial van platform