regfootball

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

the newer CVT's are really responsive now. They can upshift and downshift as fast or faster, but perhaps you haven't driven them.

yeah its dandy that its got a wider spread but if its cannot change those ratios as quickly then its not an asset.

ok, just to clarify, there is no animosity here. but i don't think the latest and greatest gen of CVT's is being given a fair shake here by Dwight. and, the recognition that in models that FE is a target, you are seeing a movement to CVT's, the Cruze is even being targeted for CVT to improve the FE. It's not fair to judge CVT's on the crappy work that GM and Ford did with them over half a decade ago. Clearly the engineers failed at economy, performance, and reliability with it. They basically didn't do what they get paid to do. Look at what is being put out now. Put in the effort and resources, and you are where they are getting with them now. CVT and dual clutch again have had 1% the investment that slushboxes have had, there is nothing but improvement to be had. Go on the edmunds and such where actual owners have purchased a car with CVT and more than not say they like the stepless tranny once they adjust and get used to it. Over time as they tune the actions of it, things like the drone are minimized or gone, and adjusting to throttle and such you begin to appreciate the lack of steps. Just a fluid transition. Over time they will program the rubber bandiness out of it. CVT in no way is the only way to go, but it has a place, and GM Ford etc. can't afford to not have their entries with it. Where CVT's do well is moving the rpm to the torque band quickly and then getting off them even more quickly and settling into a non gas using range quicker than the stepped trans. The 'ratio spread' is somewhat insignificant. The response of the CVT if its quicker than a stepped tranny gets and keeps you in the powerband quicker and only as long as you need, assuming the driver is manning the throttle correctly.

what can sometimes be modular is combustion chamber design, and anything that can gain efficiency in manufacture. for example, a 2.5 four and 5.0 eight.thebottomendmightbedifferent,buttheupperscanbethesame.forgivememyspacebarjustquitonme.

any caddy v8 should be 4.5 to 5.0 litres. perhaps with the ability to be modded to 6.0 litres. a lotus and gm tie up on the v8 would add euro cred for caddy since folks in and outside the US feel GM has no ability to produce a quality motor by themselves (read:Europeans). If caddy ever wants in in Europe again they will need to have an angle like this with the euros.

i haven't driven the dual clutch on any of the gas turbo VW's (GTI etc.) but the dual clutch on the TDI was junk IMO. Apparently there is a reason the Passat etc. still has a steptronic instead of a dual clutch. Dual clutch is just like CVT in the respect that it has had about 1% total of the investment into the product that traditional slushboxes have had. Just like CVT if dual clutch had all the resources that slushoxes have had, they probably would be sublime and polished too. I think dual clutch holds promise as the automatic that has the chance to satisfy the shift it yourself bunch out there.