Author Topic: Comparison Test: City Cars  (Read 5344 times)

Offline Autos_Editor

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 6556
  • Carma: +80/-446
  • member
    • View Profile
Comparison Test: City Cars
« on: November 12, 2012, 06:23:27 am »


Autos.ca compares a trio of tiny city cars, one of which more or less qualifies as a legitimate motor vehicle.

Read More...

Offline hemusbull

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Posts: 714
  • Carma: +11/-133
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2012, 07:58:04 am »
Where are Fiat 500 and the original new Mini with two doors? They are MOST SOLD cars in this class! Or you consider them highway cruisers?

Offline Mike

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 4908
  • Carma: +152/-93
  • Gender: Male
  • Used to be here, still like to visit
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2005 Saab 9-2x Aero, 2008 Suzuki SX4 Sedan
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2012, 08:03:20 am »
Where are Fiat 500 and the original new Mini with two doors? They are MOST SOLD cars in this class! Or you consider them highway cruisers?

As mentioned in the article, the 500 was not available in a trim anywhere near affordable.  The Mini would be absolutely massive compared to these cars.


Offline hemusbull

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Posts: 714
  • Carma: +11/-133
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2012, 08:21:59 am »
The autor say: "As well, the iQ is much wider and uses a larger, more powerful engine than the Smart." So, the same size differences applied regarding Smart and IQ. But IQ is included in this comparisin. Besides, where is Aston Martin Cygnet? Well, I'm joking, but seriously, what's the criteria to chose THIS cars? Slow sales?

Offline Mike

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 4908
  • Carma: +152/-93
  • Gender: Male
  • Used to be here, still like to visit
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2005 Saab 9-2x Aero, 2008 Suzuki SX4 Sedan
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #4 on: November 12, 2012, 08:29:37 am »
The autor say: "As well, the iQ is much wider and uses a larger, more powerful engine than the Smart." So, the same size differences applied regarding Smart and IQ. But IQ is included in this comparisin. Besides, where is Aston Martin Cygnet? Well, I'm joking, but seriously, what's the criteria to chose THIS cars? Slow sales?

The Mini is not a city car.  The Mini is substantially wider and longer than all three.  It is longer than the Spark and wider than the iQ

Offline redman

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
  • Carma: +57/-197
  • Gender: Male
  • "Salty Crisps Anyone ?."
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2010 Subaru Legacy Limited, 98 Subaru Forester S
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2012, 08:35:14 am »
I think the ultimate city car would be a fully electric car. With constant start/stop and idle the electric car would be best suited.
Most city drives are short drives that would easily accommodate today's battery technology. 
Now if they could only lower the price to make it more viable.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2012, 09:00:11 am by redman »
Past New (8yrs) Car Dealer for : BMW, Lexus, Nissan and Toyota<br />Past Used Vehicle Dealer: All Makes and Models. Seen a lot of it. Drove a lot of it. <br />Four-stroke Otto Engine 1876. Modern timer, pop-up toaster 1919. Let's keep convincing yourself that you have the "latest appliance".

Offline Rupert

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2182
  • Carma: +22/-101
  • member
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2012, 09:52:15 am »
  Will many buy any one of these in prefference to a Fiat 500 at about the same price? I think the 500 hits the sweet spot size wise here with a neat engine and cache. Personally I think this size of product should be around the $10,000 mark and the two door Accent Hatch sold under that price in basic trim (not that basic) just a couple of years ago around $9,000. How can that price have doubled in a couple of years? You don't need luxury or whatever just to go around town.

Offline ezbst

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Carma: +0/-1
  • No stranger to danger.
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 1991 BMW 318is
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2012, 10:17:24 am »
All these cars are too expensive, and not fuel-efficient enough.  The Toyota's real-life MPG is embarrassing, it needs to be significantly better than the Yaris to be relevant.  Otherwise, what's the point?

I also want to meet the folks that would pay north of 20K for the overwrought design of the Spark, what a horrible-looking car.  Thankfully, I haven't seen one on the road yet.  Here's hoping it's a dud.

Old as it may be, the Smart serves its intended purpose in the best manner but it's out of its habitat here.

Offline SaskSpecV

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Carma: +64/-132
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #8 on: November 12, 2012, 11:21:53 am »
All these cars are too expensive, and not fuel-efficient enough.  The Toyota's real-life MPG is embarrassing, it needs to be significantly better than the Yaris to be relevant.  Otherwise, what's the point?

I also want to meet the folks that would pay north of 20K for the overwrought design of the Spark, what a horrible-looking car.  Thankfully, I haven't seen one on the road yet.  Here's hoping it's a dud.

Old as it may be, the Smart serves its intended purpose in the best manner but it's out of its habitat here.

1.  Yes, these cars are not the $9995 Hyundai Accent of yore.  They also have a lot more creature comforts - AC, auto trans (for those that require it :(), power windows/locks, etc.  And most relevantly, the consumer is paying for the design & engineering - it's not easy to make a package that small, yet safe and relatively spacious. 

2.  You don't like the design of the Spark, that's fine.  But let me tell you - they were all over the roads of the UK and Amsterdam.  And I for one don't "hope it's a dud".  I have no intention to ever buy the thing, but good on GM for giving North America the option.  It may not make a lot of sense for most of us (compared to "real" subcompacts), but at least GM is in the small-car game - and not in a half-assed way.

For most of us where space is not THE limiting factor when purchasing a new vehicle, these cars are not a rational purchase.  But look at car (or scooter!) sales in places where it is...

Offline Fobroader

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 15171
  • Carma: +550/-728
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #9 on: November 12, 2012, 11:29:31 am »
All these cars are too expensive, and not fuel-efficient enough.  The Toyota's real-life MPG is embarrassing, it needs to be significantly better than the Yaris to be relevant.  Otherwise, what's the point?

I also want to meet the folks that would pay north of 20K for the overwrought design of the Spark, what a horrible-looking car.  Thankfully, I haven't seen one on the road yet.  Here's hoping it's a dud.

Old as it may be, the Smart serves its intended purpose in the best manner but it's out of its habitat here.

Im with you, I dont get the point of a "city car".....why not buy a real car you can use everywhere??? Especially those hideous Smart and IQs, really, you want almost $20K for 1/2 a car??? In most parts of canada these make no sense, you live in Vancouver, Toronto or something and really hate cars....take public transport.
Keep the change you filthy animal.

Offline redman

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
  • Carma: +57/-197
  • Gender: Male
  • "Salty Crisps Anyone ?."
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2010 Subaru Legacy Limited, 98 Subaru Forester S
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #10 on: November 12, 2012, 11:38:29 am »
All these cars are too expensive, and not fuel-efficient enough.  The Toyota's real-life MPG is embarrassing, it needs to be significantly better than the Yaris to be relevant.  Otherwise, what's the point?

I also want to meet the folks that would pay north of 20K for the overwrought design of the Spark, what a horrible-looking car.  Thankfully, I haven't seen one on the road yet.  Here's hoping it's a dud.

Old as it may be, the Smart serves its intended purpose in the best manner but it's out of its habitat here.

Im with you, I dont get the point of a "city car".....why not buy a real car you can use everywhere??? Especially those hideous Smart and IQs, really, you want almost $20K for 1/2 a car??? In most parts of canada these make no sense, you live in Vancouver, Toronto or something and really hate cars....take public transport.

If for occasional use, maybe a car sharing program would make more sense. Something like http://www.zipcar.com/is-it/
Great if you normally take public transit but need a car to do shopping or occasional out of town visits.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2012, 03:00:42 pm by redman »

Offline kevlar

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2551
  • Carma: +46/-69
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #11 on: November 12, 2012, 11:50:55 am »
i live right in the middle of downtown toronto and these cars still have very limited appeal to me.  as pointed out in the article, we just don't require such small cars esp. when it doesn't offer that much better mileage than the fit, yaris, prius c, mazda 2 etc.  albeit,  i drove a diesel version of the smart for a short while and it truly got stellar mileage.  i could see the smart having a unique appeal when it had the diesel engine because it got such amazing mileage.    i'm not sure why they went with a gas engine a 3 or 4 years back. 
« Last Edit: November 12, 2012, 11:59:25 am by kevlar »

Offline Mike

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 4908
  • Carma: +152/-93
  • Gender: Male
  • Used to be here, still like to visit
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2005 Saab 9-2x Aero, 2008 Suzuki SX4 Sedan
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #12 on: November 12, 2012, 11:52:36 am »
i live right in the middle of downtown toronto and these cars still have very limited appeal.  as pointed out in the article, we just don't require such a small car esp. when it doesn't offer that much better mileage than the fit, yaris, prius c, mazda 2 etc.  albeit,  i drove a diesel version of the smart for a short while and it truly got stellar mileage.  i could see the smart having a unique appeal when it had the diesel engine because it got such amazing mileage.    i'm not sure why they went with a gas engine a 3 or 4 years back. 

Emissions killed the old diesel in Canada and I guess they didn't want to spend the R&D to bring one over that would pass our emissions.

Offline PJungnitsch

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 4326
  • Carma: +43/-43
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Travel in Africa
  • Cars: Pontiac Vibe, Evolve Pintail, Evolve Carbon, Yamaha TW200
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #13 on: November 12, 2012, 12:00:07 pm »
All these cars are too expensive, and not fuel-efficient enough.  The Toyota's real-life MPG is embarrassing, it needs to be significantly better than the Yaris to be relevant.  Otherwise, what's the point?

I also want to meet the folks that would pay north of 20K for the overwrought design of the Spark, what a horrible-looking car.  Thankfully, I haven't seen one on the road yet.  Here's hoping it's a dud.

Old as it may be, the Smart serves its intended purpose in the best manner but it's out of its habitat here.

Im with you, I dont get the point of a "city car".....why not buy a real car you can use everywhere??? Especially those hideous Smart and IQs, really, you want almost $20K for 1/2 a car??? In most parts of canada these make no sense, you live in Vancouver, Toronto or something and really hate cars....take public transport.

It's rare you need a car this small but they do turn parking in congested areas from a hassle into almost a pleasure. For running to the shops they are hard to beat. I had a buddy with a Geo Metro and zipping around finding parking spaces Saturday afternoon was so much easier than even with my small truck.

Mileage is not particularly relevant, size is everything.


Offline kevlar

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2551
  • Carma: +46/-69
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #14 on: November 12, 2012, 12:00:35 pm »
thanks mike.   too bad about the old smart diesel. 

Offline Rupert

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2182
  • Carma: +22/-101
  • member
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #15 on: November 12, 2012, 01:03:54 pm »
Is that right $11,000/$14,000 in Europe for Spark. Maybe that is employee pricing hmm...

Offline cruzzer

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Posts: 225
  • Carma: +5/-20
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2012, 01:47:06 pm »
I may have missed it, but I didn't see the Spark's final fuel numbers. I agree with many here who are disappointed in the fuel economy considering how small the vehicles are. While these aren't on my shopping list, for some who do live in congested downtown environments and don't carry much stuff or passengers, they make sense. For me though, cars like the Fit, Yaris and Mazda2 etc. work better. Same kind of money, similar mpg's, way more room, more fun to drive and some even still can be bought with a manual transmission. Thanks for the test!

Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3880
  • Carma: +57/-372
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #17 on: November 12, 2012, 02:05:55 pm »
All these small cars look huge when I'm sitting in my Insight. :)
"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive." - Sir William Lyons

Offline aaronk

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1508
  • Carma: +43/-36
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #18 on: November 12, 2012, 02:17:18 pm »
It seems Smart has moved over 1,800 of these within Canada in the month of September alone, so obviously a few people get it. And let's not kid ourselves about the $10K Accent, you had to pay extra for a steering wheel on that car.  ;)

Offline jamesautos

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Posts: 233
  • Carma: +12/-40
    • View Profile
  • Cars: #11 bus
Re: Comparison Test: City Cars
« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2012, 03:07:54 pm »
The Spark is the most non-city citycar in this trio

however, there is no appeal for these cars in NA, where parking is plenty even downtown and a majority of the people who don't know and/or don't care about parallel parking

the Gov should offer lower parking rate and lower tax for city-cars in the city or Manufacturer should adjust thier pricing
Cadillac is the new BMW