RJ's compact review almost kinda sorta thread

[Rotary Junkie]

Well then...

First I drove was an already-sold Focus 5-speed. No complaints aside from the radio being set up very oddly and the steering wheel being shaped for someone's hands, just not mine. Oh and using textured stuff instead of, oh, I dunno, leather? Vinyl? Anything? The engine seemed to pull well but I wasn't able to really give it anything as a sales guy came with me, car being sold and all. Actually seemed a little weak down low and the e-throttle was a bit inconsistent. Visibility to the sides was great, rearward was okay but not great, mirrors are HUGE and help quite a lot.

Next up, Cruze Eco 6-speed. Interior layout was preferable to the Focus in my opinion, just felt like it was made to be comfortable and actually work rather than be a styling exercise. Visibility was good, pull was very good, and the clutch/gearbox like me more than the Focus'. In all day-to-day driving aspects I'd have to say the Cruze is actually the better car. It seemed more effortless accelerating, steering wasn't noticeably "worse" than the Focus (though both are fairly dead), and honestly... I think it actually looks nicer. My only gripe with it is that the shift light tells you to go for 6th a bit early at times and that it's not quite HAMAZING. Still a massive improvement and the only one I've driven that's an improvement over the previous offerings from that manufacturer.

Last for today was the MkVI Jetta TDI/6-speed. They've erm... Taken a step back from the MkIV in every real way. The TDI pulls well but only if you're way deep in the pedal, otherwise it feels quite gutless, shifter is vague, clutch is consistent. Interior is... Well... Not a happy place. They've gone from what felt extremely well made to something that feels worse than late 80s GM stuff. Oh, the radio was good aside from cheap buttons.


That's it for now, going to try and get another go with the Focus though as I didn't get quite as much time in it. Oh and I still need to try and find the new Civic, wait for the new 3, and find a manual Corolla. GL me.

Update 8/9/2011: Drove the new Civic today, an LX sedan 5-speed. Ew. Visibility is good but it's a damn fridge and is about as confidence inspiring around corners as an F150 with 200k miles. The e-throttle also does the newfangled Honda rev-hang on higher RPM shifts which is just... Ugh. Oh and it's bleeding gutless at low revs. Not a lot to say about it other than it being a bit of an also-ran now.

 

[Joey D]

The Focus is a little down on power, however the performance improves with premium fuel a bit. I didn't drive a 5-speed Focus but the double clutch the upper models have is quite good once it's broke in. The best way to describe the engine is that it surges, you feel like you have power through the entire RPM range but it never just dumps in on you and makes the car feel quick.

I drove a Cruze right after driving the Focus and I pretty much hated everything about the car. It just didn't feel comfortable to me and just didn't do it for me on the inside. It drove nice though and felt a bit sportier than the Focus did, but the suspension was a bit more jarring. It is worlds better then the Cobalt it replaced though so I can't fault GM on that one, it's just that they need more of a luxury feel with the car like Ford did with the Focus.

 

[Tornado]

Man. Mk VI Jetta...

So bad. In every single way it is worse than the V. I was shocked when I test drove one.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

The Focus is a little down on power, however the performance improves with premium fuel a bit. I didn't drive a 5-speed Focus but the double clutch the upper models have is quite good once it's broke in. The best way to describe the engine is that it surges, you feel like you have power through the entire RPM range but it never just dumps in on you and makes the car feel quick.

I'd agree with that though it's theoretically up on power vs the Cruze (155? 160? One of the two vs 138 for the Cruze). Didn't really get much of a chance to give it much though so I can't really compare the pull directly.

I drove a Cruze right after driving the Focus and I pretty much hated everything about the car. It just didn't feel comfortable to me and just didn't do it for me on the inside. It drove nice though and felt a bit sportier than the Focus did, but the suspension was a bit more jarring. It is worlds better then the Cobalt it replaced though so I can't fault GM on that one, it's just that they need more of a luxury feel with the car like Ford did with the Focus.

In a way I felt more comfortable with the Cruze, the armrest design and positioning in the Focus is just... Odd. And I can't get past how they set the radio up. Ride quality in both was good, Focus may have been a bit better but unless I'm getting murdered by every bump in the road I don't really care.

Man. Mk VI Jetta...

So bad. In every single way it is worse than the V. I was shocked when I test drove one.

I never drove the V but it's a large step back from the IV as well. That interior is just... Nastiness. And it feels too big inside without actually being that big inside, dunno how they did it. The TDI's power delivery is just odd as well. You have the pedal 3/4ths the way down before it really gets anywhere.

 

[Joey D]

The Focus is 160hp with 148lb.ft. of torque. The Cruze may only have 138hp but it's close to the 2.0L out of the Focus on torque with 146lb.ft.

The radio on the standard Focus is awful, but I have the MyFord Touch in my so it's a big screen that controls everything. Even though it froze up a lot when I first go it, it's been sorted out though with the latest update.

And I drove an MkVI Jetta a couple weeks back, it was a rental car though. I agree it was fairly terrible.

 

[Tornado]

I never drove the V but it's a large step back from the IV as well. That interior is just... Nastiness. And it feels too big inside without actually being that big inside, dunno how they did it. The TDI's power delivery is just odd as well. You have the pedal 3/4ths the way down before it really gets anywhere.

Nothing about it feels right. If I had to compare it to anything, I would say it felt like a Cavalier when I drove it. It obviously isn't that bad, but when you go to the dealer in a Mk V, test drive a Mk VI and then leave the dealer in a Mk V, that's basically what it felt like.


The steering felt off. Like you knew which way the wheels were pointing at any given time, but you couldn't tell exactly why you knew that. It wasn't overboosted, but it was... vague? The suspension technically was doing what it was supposed to do most of the time, but other times it felt spongey when you feel that it should be taught, and harsh when you feel it should be compliant.
Anything in the interior that you grab to operate the car makes you pause for a moment when you touch it, because it almost seems like it is going to come apart in your hand. It feels like there's just a little bit of give in everything that makes it seem like it is made out of balsa wood. That same awful feeling that Chevrolets had a decade ago, only with better ergonomics (and what I suppose are better materials).



Basically, I went into the test drive knowing that it wasn't going to be as good as the V, but I was still floored by just how not as good it was.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

The Focus is 160hp with 148lb.ft. of torque. The Cruze may only have 138hp but it's close to the 2.0L out of the Focus on torque with 146lb.ft.

The radio on the standard Focus is awful, but I have the MyFord Touch in my so it's a big screen that controls everything. Even though it froze up a lot when I first go it, it's been sorted out though with the latest update.

And I drove an MkVI Jetta a couple weeks back, it was a rental car though. I agree it was fairly terrible.

True on the power figures... The Cruze also makes its peak torque a lot lower than the Focus and it's readily evident.

Well... They've all been beaten overall in awfulness as of today. 2012 Civic says hello. Never quite got used to the clutch, had to rev it pretty hard to get anywhere... And it felt like it would kill me if I tried to corner quickly. Wasn't particularly quiet inside and the motor didn't make a particularly nice noise.

Then I drove an '07 Si because it was there. It was quick, rode okay but not great, and cornered flatter than my car... All fine and good until it started to let go around an on-ramp about 5mph sooner than my car lets even a peep out of the tires at. And it had better tires.

Nothing about it feels right. If I had to compare it to anything, I would say it felt like a Cavalier when I drove it. It obviously isn't that bad, but when you go to the dealer in a Mk V, test drive a Mk VI and then leave the dealer in a Mk V, that's basically what it felt like.


The steering felt off. Like you knew which way the wheels were pointing at any given time, but you couldn't tell exactly why you knew that. It wasn't overboosted, but it was... vague? The suspension technically was doing what it was supposed to do most of the time, but other times it felt spongey when you feel that it should be taught, and harsh when you feel it should be compliant.
Anything in the interior that you grab to operate the car makes you pause for a moment when you touch it, because it almost seems like it is going to come apart in your hand. It feels like there's just a little bit of give in everything that makes it seem like it is made out of balsa wood. That same awful feeling that Chevrolets had a decade ago, only with better ergonomics (and what I suppose are better materials).



Basically, I went into the test drive knowing that it wasn't going to be as good as the V, but I was still floored by just how not as good it was.

I agree with pretty much everything here. Even the shifter felt like that in comparison to the MkIV I was used to.

 

[CSLACR]

For what it's worth, in the U.S. new compacts suck. Mostly because they're all midsize cars now, I can't consider anything over 2700lbs compact, and from the newer "compacts" I've driven, no trickery hides the lard of 3,000 pounds or close to it.

Maybe a Honda Fit, if one exists with a respectable amount of power, I have hopes for them, still sort of small.

 

[Joey D]

The US compacts are no different then the rest of the world's compacts, the Focus and Cruze are sold world wide. Also the Jetta, Golf, Civic, Mazda3, etc. are all compacts too. I'm sure if I went through their specs, they'd all be similar in size and weight.

As for the weight you can thank governments for that. With all the added safety features required on cars now days it's hard to make one that doesn't weigh as much as a house. Airbags, traction control, stability control and so on all add weight to the overall car, and quite a bit of it at that.

As for the Honda Fit, that isn't a compact. It's a subcompact along with the Fiesta, Polo and Aveo.

As I suggest you actually drive new compacts before saying they suck, they've managed to be comfortable, fuel efficient and fun to drive. Who cars about weight if the auto makers update the engine, transmission and brakes to cope with it?

 

[Pupik]

Drove a Chevy Cruze in winter driving for two weeks, and again two weeks ago in fairer weather. In warmer, dry weather, the traction control is very stubborn (it's automatic), but defeatable. Wanders at highway speeds, and steering wheel is very Toyota-like; i.e. it feels like there's no connection with the road. Personally, I feel the old Buick-like 215/60R16 tires are not sporty enough at a T-rating, and ought to be at least H-rated for any sort of handling fun. That said, the chassis is really taut and quiver-free, although damping is set for softness. Brakes pretty good after 10,000 miles of abuse. No manumatic feature on the 'box. Ipod integration was wonky on this vehicle (could have just been a dud unit, though.) Flaky A/C...I hate those "I know that you'd really prefer fresh air over recirculate!" circuits that think they're smarter than me (it's not just Chevy, to be honest).

Drove a 2012 Jetta 2.5 for nearly 1600 miles, about 1300 of it was highway miles. Okay...road feel is pretty good at highway speeds; excellent damping, which gives you confidence to drive at 90mph all day long (and received my first speeding ticket in years thanks to to me, not the car). Very composed chassis when swerving it about at slow speeds, rather unflappable. Engine isn't all that bad, 170hp seems to be plenty for a small car. Seats are a bit of a pinch for my 210-pound, 5'11" frame. Mysterious dash rattles at 5000 miles; truly intermittent, for some reason. A/C not cold enough for a Florida summer. Lacks some features, admittedly...basic is what you get with a rental, anyhow. Automatic was the biggest disappointment; DSG logic was perfect in the previous generation's Jetta, rather recalcitrant in the latest model. It had a "sport" button which was not sporty, but shifty. Auto-stick feature that was a big drop in fun compared to the older DSG...Didn't use it much. Controversially-boring looks grew on me, although it didn't stop a cop from writing a ticket, obviously (okay, so going 15mph faster than the other cars is still my fault). Back seat was roomy enough for me (I don't drnink and drenive, rode in an associate's rental Jetta).

Had an 2011 Chevy Aveo 4-door back in March (yes, Avis counter...I'd like anything but another Impala). Car gets a bad rap, although I think dynamically, it's not as bad as the public perception marks it. I had one with a sunroof, "pleather", fake wood grain, and decent stereo and motions (although not as taut as VW). Nothing broke off in my hand, nothing seemed to be of any worse quality interms of plastic and grain than any other Chevy. Engine was just a little weak, little 15" wheels (with 55-series, V-rated shoes!) provided more grip to make up for a lack of handling prowess. But odd things like power locks were...weird to operate (?), radio is stubborn, wheezy sounds remind you that you're in a $15,000 car. But duh...that's the low-end of the market.

I've had a 2011/12 Hyundai Elantra for rentals, and I have to say it's my favorite small car to get as a rental. Willing engine, auto-stick feature that actually responds quickly to changes...useful for hills and back roads. Engine seems a little on the light side, feels like it needs a little dollop of torque. Nice overall damping and chassis, maybe a little softer than the Jetta. Feature packed (gimme chargers and AUX ports!), comfy seats, and interesting overall styling do it for me. Not much negative to say about it, to be honest.

Tooling around in a brand-new Fiat 500C. (Yes, Avis rents those...counter-person thought I was nuts; but hey, youzeguys have about a dozen of them in the back lot! On the other hand, it was my-don't-need-another-Impala reaction.) Oddball driving position, engine has just enough zip if you plan accordingly, transmission has a "sport" mode which isn't bad, ETC should always be off in this car, if the weather's fair, and the go-kart handling is right up my alley. Will startle you with a pang or two if you hit a bump mid-corner. Not terribly happy on the highways, unless they're smooth...frost heaves and joints tend to bounce the car a little, which comes standard with a little car like this. Gets looks and questions (who's little...er, Fiat? is that?), from the co-workers and associates. Fits my carry-on luggage and backpack just fine. Couldn't really fit a kid's car seat in the back unless you are a single, lonely parent (or a "little person") with only one kid.

Drove a Toyota Matrix...way-too-light steering (holy crap, my Scion felt like a BMW by comparison), reluctant 4-speed transmission shift logic (rowed it myself on every conceivable back-road), seats and driving position felt a bit weird, for some reason. It's basically a Corolla wagon. As un-exciting as you'd expect a Toyota to be, although for most missions this would have been fine; being tempted by all those fun roads was sort of a divine punishment for hawking Lexuses all those years. On second thought, some of those roads were on the verge of dangerous, so it might have been providence to prevent any floorboard-is-the-new-roof actions.

Before I settled on the xD, I drove the 2009 Fit. I wanted the Fit...before I drove it. Tight little car, but really narrow for my wife and I (we were occasionally rubbing arms during the test drive). Not much juice, although probably just enough for 98% of my driving. Manual shifter was superb. Missing lots of little trim pieces that seemed to remind you that you should have sprung for the Civic. Overall, not bad...probably would have signed for it, but local Honda dealers weren't budging on the price (most also had a "market adjustment"). $19K seemed a little high at the time for a Fit with no navigation system (there weren't any available in-state with stick and nav, anyhow). Drove an automatic, but it's really slow for me...maybe enough for a driver who prizes fuel economy over acceleration.

Drove an old 2010 Focus in the winter, and there's really nothing new to add about a 10-year-old car. Actually expecting to drive a new one, but haven't received one, oddly.

 

[CSLACR]

The US compacts are no different then the rest of the world's compacts, the Focus and Cruze are sold world wide. Also the Jetta, Golf, Civic, Mazda3, etc. are all compacts too. I'm sure if I went through their specs, they'd all be similar in size and weight.

As for the weight you can thank governments for that. With all the added safety features required on cars now days it's hard to make one that doesn't weigh as much as a house. Airbags, traction control, stability control and so on all add weight to the overall car, and quite a bit of it at that.

As for the Honda Fit, that isn't a compact. It's a subcompact along with the Fiesta, Polo and Aveo.

As I suggest you actually drive new compacts before saying they suck, they've managed to be comfortable, fuel efficient and fun to drive. Who cars about weight if the auto makers update the engine, transmission and brakes to cope with it?

I have driven a few, and they all feel heavy. You just can't hide weight well, period IMO. The best weight hiding car I've ever driven was a Nissan.
Subcompact is the new compact, I for one won't be calling the 3,500 pound monsters of 2020 (at this rate) "compacts" no matter exterior dimensions.

But that's just me, I'm a driver first, passenger never.

 

[Joey D]

I have driven a few, and they all feel heavy. You just can't hide weight well, period IMO. The best weight hiding car I've ever driven was a Nissan.
Subcompact is the new compact, I for one won't be calling the 3,500 pound monsters of 2020 (at this rate) "compacts" no matter exterior dimensions.

But that's just me, I'm a driver first, passenger never.

Car classifications are based on dimensions and interior space, not weight. Yes they've grown over the years, but as I've said you can thank government's for this with increased safety regulations.

I'm a driver first too and I can easily say the Focus is one of the best small cars I've driven. It handles very similar to my smaller MINI Cooper and it's 2,800lbs doesn't really affect anything.

 

[Tornado]

I want so bad to drive a 500, but I'm guessing the way things are now that a dealer would probably make you put down half of the deposit before they let you even look at them.

 

[CSLACR]

Car classifications are based on dimensions and interior space, not weight. Yes they've grown over the years, but as I've said you can thank government's for this with increased safety regulations.

I'm a driver first too and I can easily say the Focus is one of the best small cars I've driven. It handles very similar to my smaller MINI Cooper and it's 2,800lbs doesn't really affect anything.

I thought I made that clear with the "regardless of exterior dimensions" remark.

The only Focus experience I have is lifeless... Comfortable, but lifeless. But that's been my experience in every new "compact". Gone is the lively, darting steering of yesterday, feeling bumps on the road, and everything else I enjoy about small cars.

 

[Joey D]

I want so bad to drive a 500, but I'm guessing the way things are now that a dealer would probably make you put down half of the deposit before they let you even look at them.

I walked into the Fiat dealer in Bloomfield and just said I wanted to drive one. I found it to be nothing short of horrid. It felt like I was sitting in a cheaply made, Chinese, iPod. Everything was just so cheaply made. The seats were spine crushingly uncomfortable too.

It was very fun to drive though, better then the MINI even in the short drive I took. Gearbox wasn't all that bad either. It just wish it had a better interior. I'm guessing Chrysler kept the chassis setup and then cheapened everything else to turn a profit.

I thought I made that clear with the "regardless of exterior dimensions" remark.

The only Focus experience I have is lifeless... Comfortable, but lifeless. But that's been my experience in every new "compact". Gone is the lively, darting steering of yesterday, feeling bumps on the road, and everything else I enjoy about small cars.

But the exterior dimensions are what determines the class of car. Saying they are no longer "compacts" because of the weight doesn't really make sense. If they were determined by the weight in the first place then it would be a valid statement to make.

And I guessing you haven't driven a new Focus then, but rather the generation prior to that which was based on a chassis designed last decade. Just about every automotive news source that has drive the Focus has praised it for it's handling.

And the reason that stuff is gone is because we developed cars now that have technology.

 

[TheBook]

All you need to know about the Cruze is this.

The steering wheels can fall off.

 

[Jondot]

The US compacts are no different then the rest of the world's compacts, the Focus and Cruze are sold world wide. Also the Jetta, Golf, Civic, Mazda3, etc. are all compacts too. I'm sure if I went through their specs, they'd all be similar in size and weight.

Well you say that, but the impression I get from the likes of Autoblog when they hop over to Europe and test the pre-production models is that the US spec ones get dulled down a bit. I might be wrong, but I think they said the US Fiesta was a bit less uh... feisty in the steering department than ours, simply due to different market tastes or something. Though you're right on the weight front, I think.

 

[Pupik]

All you need to know about the Cruze is this.

The steering wheels can fall off.

One example. Two thousand more will be inspected/repaired.

A little early for an across-the-board generalization, no?

 

[homeforsummer]

The US compacts are no different then the rest of the world's compacts, the Focus and Cruze are sold world wide. Also the Jetta, Golf, Civic, Mazda3, etc. are all compacts too. I'm sure if I went through their specs, they'd all be similar in size and weight.

Only they aren't considered "compact" over here.

It's happened everywhere, but now what you'd call subcompacts are the size of compacts from 15-20 years ago.

The only Focus experience I have is lifeless... Comfortable, but lifeless. But that's been my experience in every new "compact". Gone is the lively, darting steering of yesterday, feeling bumps on the road, and everything else I enjoy about small cars.

You'd appreciate a lot of what we get in the UK then. Still possible to find genuinely small, cheap and genuinely fun cars over here.

 

[Eric.]

Update 8/9/2011: Drove the new Civic today, an LX sedan 5-speed. Ew. Visibility is good but it's a damn fridge and is about as confidence inspiring around corners as an F150 with 200k miles. The e-throttle also does the newfangled Honda rev-hang on higher RPM shifts which is just... Ugh. Oh and it's bleeding gutless at low revs. Not a lot to say about it other than it being a bit of an also-ran now.

Have never driven an R18 (or, even been in one, to tell you the truth..) but I hadn't heard much about rev hang in those before. The reason for it is efficiency, when you let off the throttle pedal the computer shuts off the injectors but lets the throttle stay open to do a lean burn of any remaining fuel. Tuning does get rid of that for the most part in the Si. But I'm not about to recommend a new Civic to anyone, let alone an R18. A friend (girl) got one recently and she's barely even getting 31mpg out of it when my Si gets 28-31 or more on every tank.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Have never driven an R18 (or, even been in one, to tell you the truth..) but I hadn't heard much about rev hang in those before.

All I know is that it only happened on higher RPM shifts and only really badly once. Wasn't a good feeling.

The reason for it is efficiency, when you let off the throttle pedal the computer shuts off the injectors but lets the throttle stay open to do a lean burn of any remaining fuel. Tuning does get rid of that for the most part in the Si. But I'm not about to recommend a new Civic to anyone, let alone an R18. A friend (girl) got one recently and she's barely even getting 31mpg out of it when my Si gets 28-31 or more on every tank.

Yeesh. Actually, could you truthfully recommend the previous (your) Si? I was surprised how little grip it seemed to have; it let go well before my car even thinks about it and the tires on it should have been better for that than mine. Did roll less but still doesn't change that I can get away with an extra 7mph around the same on-ramp in my car. Iunno, it was quick but the rest wasn't that impressive.

 

[Eric.]

I like mine. The stock all seasons don't have ANY traction though. Which is why they still look fairly new at 30k miles.

 

[TheBook]

One example. Two thousand more will be inspected/repaired.

A little early for an across-the-board generalization, no?

You're right; I wasn't really trying to make a point, just share something I found interesting.