Topic: Test Drive: 2014 Ford Fiesta SE

[Autos_Editor]

A smart little car that offers decent utility, reasonable performance and an interior that bests the competition ' all for a great starting price. But is this Fiesta your kind of party?

Read More...

[dkaz]

Nice little hatch. Pretty awesome you can get auto climate control in a middle of the line SE with the reasonably priced $500 Comfort Package. $21k taxes in. Wait for employee pricing.

[amplitech]

CORRECTION: 7.4 l/100km is 38.2 MPG
                          5.2 l/100km is 54.3 MPG

The author probably took his MPG readings from the trip computer without realizing they were for U.U gallons. We aren't in the U.S.. All Canadian journalists should have a copy of Natural Resources Canada's Fuel Consumption Guide where both metric and imperial units are given. It also provides the simple equations for converting l/100km into MPG and vice-versa. Yes, the Canadian government officially recognizes both the metric and Imperial methods. Just have a look at the Energuide window sticker on a new car if you want further confirmation.

[dkaz]

There's an argument to be made here. Who buys gas by the imperial gallon anymore? No one. The only reason MPGs still exist in the energuide is for the benefit of those who drove before 1976. The youngest driven from the imperial gallon era is 54 today, so guaranteed in 20 years, MPG will disappear from Energuide.

Mazda advertises that the 3 gets 58 MPG here, I have no idea what that means. I either buy 50L of gas here or 13 US gallons of gas when traveling stateside.

[Rupert]

   Why not call it km/L and have done with it altogether. It's not the units that cause confusion...it's the arse about facedness of them and choosing a hundred km. When you go to a gas station, you fill your tank and watch the $ meter. You don't think of hundreds of km.
If it was km/L., everyone would be on board immediately now and new words like 'kimage' would be coined. Much better than 'hunkimage' or worse 'kimhunage'.
   Oh, I forgot...sounds like a nice little car. Wonder why they don't just put a stepped hinge in the seatback and at least make the folded back level with a hard surface and folded back stop (would stop the crushing of the upholstery). I don't mind a step and the resulting volume would be about the same, but a hard horizontal surface would be much more useable IMO.
   I much prefer this latest version to the first one. The grille is super (Lotus Cortina-ish) and rear less confused. Brill. Oh...like it in spades. Would include the price of some form of silent travel kit on small cars. Would be the best up-scale for me.

[Frontier1]

A friend bought a slightly used one, she could not stand the automatic, she found the shifting very abrupt.  She returned it and got an Elantra wagon.

[Rupert]

Is this that dual clutch thingy? and did they not improve the latest version?

[dkaz]

You'd think people would realize these things during a test drive. "Hmmmm, I don't like the automatic, but I'll buy it anyway and hope for the best."

[Wildsau]

CORRECTION: 7.4 l/100km is 38.2 MPG
                          5.2 l/100km is 54.3 MPG

The author probably took his MPG readings from the trip computer without realizing they were for U.U gallons. We aren't in the U.S.. All Canadian journalists should have a copy of Natural Resources Canada's Fuel Consumption Guide where both metric and imperial units are given. It also provides the simple equations for converting l/100km into MPG and vice-versa. Yes, the Canadian government officially recognizes both the metric and Imperial methods. Just have a look at the Energuide window sticker on a new car if you want further confirmation.

I use the manufacturer's ratings for the L/100 km in my reviews, and then convert them online - to US mpg.

[canuckystan]

Ok I have to laugh at the "relatively painless $16,900k".  In BC with taxes and freight, that $17k is $20K.  For a compact that wheezes to 60 in 10 seconds.  That sounds like a very painful purchase to me.  That's a lot of money for a basic little noisy car.

[Noto]

CORRECTION: 7.4 l/100km is 38.2 MPG
                          5.2 l/100km is 54.3 MPG

To use Imperial MPG is illogical.  To argue for it is just plain moronic.  I'm not calling you moronic, but your argument is.  Let's keep it simple:

In Canada, we use the metric system. 

In the US, where imperial is widely used, 'mericans use the US MPG. 

So why, then, would the Imperial MPG unit of measure be used in Canada?!  Oh, right, Manufacturers will because they like the sound of "hey, I have this new 'Skyactiv' platform that gets 58MPG!" - not targeting any company  in particular .  It's entirely misleading, even if stated as "MPG imperial," since the general public has no idea what that means, nor can they compare it to other vehicles. 

Standards of L/100km is the fairest, simplest, and should be maintained.  How many km/L you get is doable as well, but used more typically in Europe.

That's a lot of money for a basic little noisy car.

I'd like to see you price out something better (sic. less noisy/basic) for cheaper.  I think the Fiesta is an amazing value proposition and returns real world fuel economy that is simply outstanding.  Every car has ridiculous freight/PDI/taxes.

Where I cannot agree is with:

The seats are relatively comfortable fabric thrones, manually adjustable and heated.

I may have autoimmune arthritis, but I can assure you that these seat bottoms rival only the Mazda 3's for the most basic, flat, plank-like torture devices available.  Horrid seats, and that's the only thing keeping me from buying one as a cheap commuter box.

[PJ]

It's a nice car but I liked the Mazda2 better.  They are both on the same platform but the Mazda version felt quicker and more eager.  Ford tried to make theirs more upscale feeling but it only brings out it's short comings.  The Mazda2 is happy in it's role as a $14K basic car.

And advertising Imperial MPG numbers is false advertising.

[sailor723]

NoTo wrote

"To use Imperial MPG is illogical.  To argue for it is just plain moronic.  I'm not calling you moronic, but your argument is.  Let's keep it simple:

In Canada, we use the metric system. 

In the US, where imperial is widely used, 'mericans use the US MPG. 

So why, then, would the Imperial MPG unit of measure be used in Canada?!  Oh, right, Manufacturers will because they like the sound of "hey, I have this new 'Skyactiv' platform that gets 58MPG!" - not targeting any company  in particular .  It's entirely misleading, even if stated as "MPG imperial," since the general public has no idea what that means, nor can they compare it to other vehicles.  "


^  Well said. I find Canadian car companies use of Imperial gallon MPG numbers in advertising dishonest and misleading....just another example of the questionable sales and marketing practises I've come to expect from  the auto industry.

[dirtyjeffer]

i test drove one of these before getting my Rio5...it was a decent little car, but felt like a little car...not that my Rio5 is huge or anything, but this car is "skinnier"...the Rio5 was also cheaper and had more features and a better warranty...while there wasn't really anything wrong with the Fiesta, there really wasn't any reason to buy it over the Rio5.

[cruzzer]

The mileage, at 7.4l/100 is very good considering it was achieved while commuting. One question though, in the ratings it only received 3.5 stars for fuel economy. Shouldn't that have been a four or 4.5? Car and Driver tested a manual that got 9.3 sec. to 60mph. About average for the class. Good looking car, better than most anything in this category.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

The traditional unit in Canada is imperial. To quote the US numbers is stupid. Older folks grew up buying their gas in imperial gallons. Quoting US figures is just confusing the issue.

Of course quoting the metric figures removes all doubt.

[Blueprint]

A friend of mine bought a 2013 SE auto with a few pkgs for 18k$ all in - solid value when all incentives are factored in 

I did test a Titanium 5 door last year with the Powershift tranny, and it felt fine to me. Of course, for a pro-manual guy, a dual-clutch tranny feels like a manual, so there are no surprises. For the average buyer who thinks a transmission has 3 settings (park, forward, reverse), it may appear a bit rough around the edges.

[Frontier1]

You'd think people would realize these things during a test drive. "Hmmmm, I don't like the automatic, but I'll buy it anyway and hope for the best."

She's a lady, come on man, not everyone is like us. 

[Frontier1]

It's a nice car but I liked the Mazda2 better.  They are both on the same platform but the Mazda version felt quicker and more eager.  Ford tried to make theirs more upscale feeling but it only brings out it's short comings.  The Mazda2 is happy in it's role as a $14K basic car.

And advertising Imperial MPG numbers is false advertising.

Same platform? You sure? thought Wing said it was not the case.

[Rupert]

For pete's sake...what does it take to get it across.

Miles per gallon (US, IMP, whatever)---------------KM per liter.

It's easy...forget the number of anything to do 100 km...it's an illogical thought process.
 You want to know how many length units you can travel on one measure of volume... liter, Gallon,....eggcup full if you like.

It has nothing to do with the METRIC system or 'old folks' it is simply upside down.

And that is why MILAGE is still around...you can't have kilometerage as it stands because it is always 100. Making the necessary measure 'literage' which has nothing to do with distance travelled...only a volume statement.

So if km/liter is good for the EU, where the metric system was first used...WHY DO WE HAVE TO BE DIFFERENT.