Topic: Mega Comparison Test: 2013-2014 Compact Cars

[Noto]

Elantra
- chassis needs work
- steering needs work
- NVH among the worst
- Blech.  My last place finisher by a large margin

Is this not all promised to be addressed (except for the Blech) in the 2014 upgrades?

3) It's a mixed comparison - hatchbacks, sedans, 4WD, gas and diesel...

Hmm, which vehicle had 4WD?  Do we need a lesson on the difference between 4WD and AWD?

[aquadorhj]

great comparo, folks!!!!!!


two thumbs up!!!!!!




and great job, Toyota, for making Corolla better!!!!!!

it was really a dreadful car to drive, but it's now tons better!!!! (according to you guys)

[normancw]

Here's some notes from each car, in the order I drove them:

The notes is great!  I'd like to see notes from each reviewer in the comparison test.

[hemusbull]

3) It's a mixed comparison - hatchbacks, sedans, 4WD, gas and diesel...

Hmm, which vehicle had 4WD?  Do we need a lesson on the difference between 4WD and AWD?
[/quote]

It's a generic use of the term as long as here is no other vehicle with both AWD or 4WD. The point is that here is a comparison between FWD and non-FWD vehicles. Regarding the "need" of "a lesson" I thing is an irrelevant question.

[EastToronto]

As far as pricing, there are sites that do fairly comprehensive feature-for-feature pricing comparisons across models. E.g. you can do a Focus vs a Sentra and specify that both have 16 inch wheels, 215 rubber, 6 speaker stereo, etc. I just ran through that comparison on TrueDelta and they were almost exactly the same, like +/- 1% price difference.

I know you have to test them as provided, but I really don't think a Ford is 40% more than a Nissan. There's also the issue that the domestics are, ahem, aggressive about discounts in a way that imports usually aren't. MSRP means less for a Chevy/Ford than a Volkswagen.

Thing about the Cruze is that is has more conservative looks than a lot of the other compacts and I feel like that will age a lot better. It looks more like a mid/full-size in profile and design. But I agree with JohnM, especially if you have kids then the hatch is mandatory for a compact. The Sentra does look impressive space-wise (and winning child-seat installation gets my attention) but lack of a hatch rules out the Civic and Cruze for me.

[Noto]

Fair enough.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

I was involved in the testing for Day 2 driving of all the cars (and have spent a week independently in nearly all the compacts) and am rather surprised by the results. Handed in my scoresheet without a copy, but my personal ranking would roughly be as follows (gets a little mirky sorting at mid-pack):

Jetta - Nicely styled mini exec sedan. Roomiest in all areas, nearly class above in feel. Two-tone interior most upscale. Tightly screwed together. Fantastic 1.8 TSI engine isn't as quiet as some others but is satisfying to drive with admirable mid-pack fuel economy. Transmission shifted oddly at low speeds, upshifting quickly and not always smoothly - it does feel like a DSG. Although expensive, it feels merited.

Mazda3 - I'm not crazy about the long hood styling but does grow on you in person, stands out in a good way. Great balance of all attributes - room, ride, handling, power, value, and fuel economy (the GT's 2.5 really would have made a positive difference and is priced alongside most of the other entries). The infotainment system takes some getting used to and I don't like that the touch screen isn't enabled all the time - extremely frustrating, but the placement of the rotary knob is perfect for me. Few places to store stuff in the centre console. Mazda3 does check most of the practical boxes, while hitting sporting and emotional appeal too - no easy task.

Impreza - The surprise of the group for me. Sure it's a little 'mature' and plain, but Subaru has nailed the basics in this car. Drivetrain was responsive and I didn't even mind the CVT - it somehow was quieter and better behaved than I recall in the last 2012MY Impreza I drove. It was pretty quiet, very good ride, secure handling, and superb visibility in all directions even looking up where the windshield extends nearly above you (aside from a rear spoiler that makes it appear the trunk is open when viewing out the IRVM). Fuel economy is competitive with the FWD compacts too. I even like the simple interior dash layout. Only huge negatives to me are the awful retro audio system display and clumsy controls for the instrumentation trip computer. Although as it stands Impreza deserves more attention from average shoppers, I really wish Subaru would address the small things to vault this car right up near or at the top.

Focus - This car drives tight! When driven back-to-back I couldn't believe how enjoyable and sporty the Focus rides and takes corners relative to the others - but it's a Germanic heft I love rather than lightweight dainy feel of others here like the Mazda3. It's expensive, but the tester was loaded with options and looked superb. It's also pretty tight inside, which is the largest demerit against the Focus. That, plus the engine was less powerful than I expected, which is a shame in an otherwise sporty feeling package.

Forte - The SX is loaded and gives you a lot of frills for the money. It also looks great - proportions, wheels, lighting - definitely top 3 in the group. It drives well (far, far better than the Elantra) and feels like a larger car - if engine noise were a little more suppressed this car would satisfy a lot of boxes and huge swath of the population. 

Cruze Diesel - Aside from the acceleration from standstill hesitation, this is an awesome powertrain that does deliver superb mileage with exceptional punch. At idle it's a bit loud, but once at speed the interior is nice and quiet. Infotainment system is straightforward and attractive. Well finished, the Cruze feels narrow inside and is shortest of rear legroom, but does offer a ton of front legroom due to generious seat travel. Opening and closing the doors feels solid. For one of the older designs in the group, it held up well.

Civic - Looks like a Civic - which I don't mind. It's surprisingly easy to get used to, drive, and live with. Good interior size, and balanced overall. Navigation system graphics are a bit behind what I expected, but the rest of the interior appears surprisingly rich even if you're in the camp against the two-tiered dash. There's a reason it's the best selling car in Canada.

Corolla - Improved styling still doesn't move me - the front is aggressive but it gets more frumpy from the C-pillar on. LED headlights are exceptional. I don't like the interior blocky dash layout - it's trying too hard yet is most dated to my eyes, and materials aren't to my liking despite good use of soft-touch where it matters. The CVT works very well. It's less dull, but still a Corolla on the same mission.

Dart - I think Dart looks pretty good... until you park it next to a competitor, where it suddenly becomes rather generic and bulbous. I didn't have as much issue with the clutch compared to the griping heard from others about it. Out on the highway section, Dart was very quiet and serene. Best infotainment and intuitive controls of the group. Worst leather quality/appearance of the group. Also has a severe lack of headroom.

Elantra - Love the Elantra GT's fluid styling. Interior centre stack gives generous room for legs, but the seat travel isn't enough to really get comfortable. Great pana roof. Seems more functional than the Focus. But the Elantra alarmed by being the worst on the road in terms of NVH - it's loud, gruff, and relatively gutless. And the steering is wandery. For such a looker it's disappointing the engine, suspension, and steering simply can't keep up, and for that reason alone it was the most disappointing car of the comparison.

Sentra - It has a tall appearance, but in top SR sport trim manages to conceal it nicely. Jump in the car and it's clear Sentra's mission is about affordable comfort. There's not many frills here (and the high value price reflects that) but the interior is cheaper looking than I'd prefer. Like the Versa Note, I find Sentra interior space isn't very wide if you're a big person like myself, but leg room and head room are good - it's especially roomy in back. Very good fuel consumption figures too. Unfortunately it just doesn't move me in any way though.

I really enjoyed participating in the evaluations and the process brought forward many differences between the vehicles that wouldn't have otherwise been apparent. Despite the finishing order being quite different from my own, great work and excellent write-up from the Autos.ca crew! 

[Noto]

This is what the Forum is for - maybe instead of scoresheets, all persons involved in the scoring should write in the Forum what they liked/didn't for each model.  No scores necessary, but just things to "look out for" when cross-shopping.

Subjective things matter less, but I'd like to know that the Elantra is NVH-er than a Forte.  Many people tend to do their research online - tell us things that we can't experience without a test drive so we can narrow which cars we do, in fact, test drive.  It would take me 3 weekends to test all of these!  It'd be nice to narrow based on my own priorities, which I can decipher from all ya'll notes.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

In reviews in general, it bugs me when people complain about the lack of space in a compact car. It's a compact. If you need more space, get a mid-size.

What ends up happening is you get things like the current Jetta, which is bigger than previous Passats, and a Passat that's bigger inside than the defunct Crown Victoria.

[Oldsguy]

That lines up much closer to my experience than the overall results here.

I would agree. Nice job, Weels.

[Oldsguy]

Ugggg....no scoring data again?

So are we to assume the winner was chosen on gut-feel then?

And that the cheque from Hyundai bounced... 

[Northernridge]

In reviews in general, it bugs me when people complain about the lack of space in a compact car. It's a compact. If you need more space, get a mid-size.

What ends up happening is you get things like the current Jetta, which is bigger than previous Passats, and a Passat that's bigger inside than the defunct Crown Victoria.

Especially given the size of compacts. WHY THE HELL ARE MY SUPERSIZED FRIES SO SMALL??

[JacobBlack]

Here's what I sent to my colleagues when we were sharing notes on the cars we didn't write up:
11 Dodge Dart (JY) – Manual! Yay! Oh wait. A vague clutch point and front-wheel drive had me wondering why Dodge bothered. This car’s interior tech is brilliant, beaten only by the Mazda’s, but the drive experience lets it down.
10 Ford Focus (JY) – Too many tricks, not enough ponies. The Titanium is not the trim I’d have entered in this fight, with too many excessive options (like the cool-but-pointless interior light show).
9 Chevrolet Cruze Diesel (PB) – Dear Cruze transmission. No. Just no. Love Jacob. Shame though, because this thing pulled better than the rest from a standing start.
8 Hyundai Elantra GT (JY – Aren’t Korean cars supposed to be value-packed boxes of technology and tricks? Without those, it’s hard to make a case for the Elantra.
7 Kia Forte (JB) – No quote, I’m writing it. 
6 Subaru Impreza (JW) –  Poor Impreza. I think this proves that looks mean a lot, and Subaru’s Impreza is fighting an uphill battle on that count. AWD just isn’t important enough when it comes to compact commuters, Subaru needed to do more.
5 Nissan Sentra (PB) – An ex-girlfriend once took me to her friend’s gig at a local pub. For some reason, listening to the Nissan CVT screech and carry on off the line, I was reminded of that horrible, ear-bleed of a night. The CVT is its main downfall, though a cheap interior and dorky styling don’t help.
4 Honda Civic (JW) – In this class, ease of use is all-important. The Civic is a better driver than most, and is one of the best at off-ramp assaults, but it’s interior is less welcoming than a portaloo at an Autos.ca test day.
3 VW Jetta (PB) – Downright pleasant in every day, offensive in none. Lop $2K off the purchase price and it would have conquered all.
2 Toyota Corolla (JW) – One of the few with an easy-to-use text message to voice system, but still I expected more. Offensive dashboard and limp steering let Toyota down.
1 Mazda3 Sport GS – no quotes, I’m writing it. But I won’t call it a clown shoe. How about, “curvier than a 1950s pinup, with none of the aesthetic benefits.”


 

[JohnM]

"In reviews in general, it bugs me when people complain about the lack of space in a compact car. It's a compact. If you need more space, get a mid-size."

In virtually every small or compact car review since the '60s, the standard comment has been "could be a little bigger and could use a little more power".   So now we have compact cars bigger than midsize sedans of 2 decades ago and 0-60 times faster than most sports cars of yore.  Still not enough.

Of course, the average consumer has probably put on 40 pounds so space isn't what it used to be.

But I'd love to see sizes frozen and some reviewer actually say, the size is perfect for the segment and the power is ideal for its mission.

Cheers,
John M.

[Northernridge]

I like colourful one line summaries.

[johngenx]

Of course, the average consumer has probably put on 40 pounds so space isn't what it used to be.

 

[jyarkony]

This is what the Forum is for - maybe instead of scoresheets, all persons involved in the scoring should write in the Forum what they liked/didn't for each model.  No scores necessary, but just things to "look out for" when cross-shopping.

Subjective things matter less, but I'd like to know that the Elantra is NVH-er than a Forte.  Many people tend to do their research online - tell us things that we can't experience without a test drive so we can narrow which cars we do, in fact, test drive.  It would take me 3 weekends to test all of these!  It'd be nice to narrow based on my own priorities, which I can decipher from all ya'll notes.

sure, here are my notes:

11 Dodge Dart (JY) – The Dodge Dart wasn't necessarily the worst car in the test, but it was flawed in some very important ways, and priced far too high without enough reward to drop it into last place. The manual transmission hurt it in ease of driving and probably did it no favours in fuel consumption either, but the biggest issue was the cramped rear seat and hard, unforgiving ride.
10 Ford Focus (JY) – The Ford Focus is a car we all loved, but the highest price in test laid it low, dropping it all the way from third to tenth – not surprising that it scored lowest for value, though perhaps surprising that one of the three hatchbacks scored lowest in cargo space. The Focus was much loved for its looks inside and out with a good driving position and seat, but its engine, gearbox and rear interior space failed to impress.
9 Chevrolet Cruze Diesel (PB) – Goes to show that efficiency is not enough in an Autos.ca comparison. Despite stellar fuel consumption and top marks for Engine/power, the Cruze was cramped and somewhat plain, weighed down dynamically by the heavy diesel power plant and without the zippy handling and sharper responses of last year's RS trim.
8 Hyundai Elantra GT (JY – what? Why am I writing up all the losers?)– The Elantra GT seems to have also been mostly in the middle, but its practical hatchback layout and interior storage wins and EPA fuel economy ratings weren't enough to boost up its mediocre driving experience, weak sauce engine and low feature content.
7 Kia Forte (JB) – with a good warranty and a smooth transmission and loaded with Content (ventilated driver's seat FTW!), and scores near the top in styling, the Forte is still a good choice for those not looking for dynamic excellence and fuel efficiency.
6 Subaru Impreza (JW) – Despite being downright ugly on the outside and cheap inside, the Impreza was a middling performer in most areas with easy access and good sight lines making it easy to drive. I also think we generally didn't give it enough credit for AWD as a major feature – it's easily the equal of a sunroof and leather…
5 Nissan Sentra (PB) – What!?!? The Sentra, in fifth place? A low, low price brought the Sentra up from last in raw scoring, though it did show well in fuel economy and rear seat space, but in general it was not well loved. This is the choice for someone who wants an efficient, spacious car with no character or fun – meet the new Corolla.
4 Honda Civic (JW) – strong Value, and good ease of driving and parking and decent quality helped it overcome low styling and usability/stereo scores – fix that HMI Honda!
3 VW Jetta (PB) – by far almost everyone's favourite and the leader after the raw scoring, dropped to third after the price adjustment, earned high marks for styling, usability, stereo and interior and cargo space.
2 Toyota Corolla (JW) – Jumping up 3 places because of its low price and excellent value. Curious note: the Corolla scored neither highest nor lowest in any single category – the very definition of  balance (some would say mediocrity)

And, as predicted by your glorious, omniscient leader:
1 Mazda3 Sport GS (JB – NO CALLING IT  A CLOWN SHOE – think up a new insult) – Though lacking in power, the smooth transmission, efficiency and refined interior matched with a well balanced ride and handling compromise won it solid scores in many key categories, while its second lowest price in test earned it a Best Value rating and helped it leapfrog the Jetta into first place. Not surprising that it fared poorly in visibility and ease of parking because of the thick D pillar and sloping windows, though I am curious as to why it scored so poorly in Cabin Storage… Jeff?

[greengs]

VW seems to have finally fixed the Jetta enought with Independent rear suspension and disks on all models.  I like the fact that right now you can choose from 6 (2.0, 2.5, 2.0T, 1.8T, 1.4T, 2.0TDI) different engines in the Jetta!  Wish that kind of choice was available on all cars haha

[cruzzer]

"11 Dodge Dart (JY) – The Dodge Dart wasn't necessarily the worst car in the test, but it was flawed in some very important ways, and priced far too high without enough reward to drop it into last place. The manual transmission hurt it in ease of driving and probably did it no favours in fuel consumption either,"

Not sure why six speed manuals are getting bad press about fuel numbers. Just looking at fuelly.com and Darts with manuals generally are average or better than average in fuel use. CR did a feature only a year or two ago that showed manuals to be both substantially quicker and more fuel efficient than conventional automatics (non CVT). Why the change? And I'm still scratching my head on the Civics fuel numbers. About two litres per 100km worse than I've seen in any other tests. Any reasons? Under inflated snow tires? Fuel use is normally one of the Civics strongest attributes.

[OliverD]

In virtually every small or compact car review since the '60s, the standard comment has been "could be a little bigger and could use a little more power".   So now we have compact cars bigger than midsize sedans of 2 decades ago and 0-60 times faster than most sports cars of yore.  Still not enough.

Ha. Buddy of mine recently had a rental Cruze after someone hit his TL SH-AWD. He said it was terrible. I asked him to elaborate and he said it was slow and small. I pointed out that, well yes, of course it is...in comparison to his Acura.