http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...rticleId=107488
April 2006
It might surprise some readers to learn that an Edmunds.com editor turned down the use of a 2005 Land Rover LR3 and instead opted to take the 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt LT on a family trip to Yosemite National Park.
Yes, the LR3 drives magnificently and has gobs of space into which you can throw everything you could ever want to take along with you. But there is one little problem: It gets only an average of 15 miles per gallon and requires premium gasoline. The Cobalt, on the other hand, averaged 31.4 miles per gallon of regular fuel for the 672-mile trip.
Before we go into greater detail, we should answer a number of questions that are, no doubt, rising to the top of your mind. Questions like: "But wasn't it ridiculously cramped?" Or, "Wasn't it a gutless wonder?" Or even: "What if you wanted to go off-roading?"
True, when Americans go into the wilderness they want to take everything from home along with them. The other vehicles we saw at Yosemite were lugging all manner of conveniences and machinery: bikes, coolers, lawn chairs, tents, sleeping bags, video games, DVD players and on and on. It would have been impossible to take all this in the Cobalt. But Senior Consumer Advice Editor Philip Reed took what he needed for himself, his wife and their 15-year-old son.
Packing the night before, Phil was doubtful he would be able to get the growing number of bags and packs into the compact four-door. He even began to reconsider his decision to turn down the LR3. But the next morning, the trunk swallowed their three suitcases, three backpacks and an assortment of hampers, grocery bags and a cooking stove.
Driving to Yosemite from their home in Long Beach, the Reeds took turns riding in the backseat and found it acceptable. The only annoyance was the wind noise whistling through poorly installed weather stripping around the right rear door. Curious to see what kind of fuel economy could be achieved, the cruise control was set for 70 mph and they grew used to seeing assorted vehicles flying past them.
The valley floor of Yosemite is at 4,000 feet elevation so it was a long climb from Fresno to the park. The Cobalt downshifted frequently on steep grades (albeit reluctantly) but the 2.2-liter, 145-horsepower engine proved more than adequate. On steep descents, when engine braking was necessary, the automatic's gear selector was a bit inconvenient to operate; Phil said that he would have preferred a sport shift feature for quicker changes.
The real advantages of the Cobalt were its size and maneuverability. While the steering feel is a bit numb, once they got acclimated to it the twisting mountain roads became a romp. Very little body roll was detected at moderate speeds and the Cobalt felt confident and composed on a variety of terrain. Once inside the park, the small car proved easy to park and our editor allowed a degree of smugness to filter into his knowing smile as he witnessed larger vehicles contributing to the congestion of the park and increased emissions in the crystal blue skies.
Now comes the best part. Being a real tightwad, Phil created a comparison of the fuel consumption of the two vehicles, the Cobalt and the LR3. The Cobalt used 21.4 gallons of gas, costing only $66.34 at $3.10 per gallon of regular unleaded. The LR3 has been averaging 14.9 mpg and to cover that distance burning premium unleaded would have used 45.1 gallons, which at $3.30 per gallon would have cost $148.83. The Cobalt, also a much cheaper car to buy, saved 23.7 gallons of fossil fuel and $82.49 (which the Reeds happily squandered on knickknacks in the park's gift shops).
Finally, here is a list of things, both good and bad, that Phil noted after spending four days in the Cobalt.
Pros:
* The sunroof made for easy viewing of mountaintops and waterfalls.
* Steering-wheel-mounted controls were easy to use — a luxury feature.
* The sound system provided excellent quality and the CD changer was convenient.
Cons:
* The trunk opening is tight, making loading more difficult.
* Climate control knobs feel cheap and sloppy.
* No grab handles were available anywhere for passengers or driver.
* There is no pull-down handle in the trunk.
In other news, the Cobalt had an oil change and tire rotation performed at Albertson Chevrolet, in Culver City, California. We did have to wonder why it cost so much ($30 for a tire rotation and $45.72 for an oil change) but the service advisor was friendly and the work was performed quickly and efficiently.
Our Cobalt now has over 8,000 miles on it and has performed reliably and economically. In an era of rising gas prices, this vehicle might be an attractive option, even for small families.
Current Odometer: 8,323
Best Fuel Economy: 32.6 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 19.9 mpg
Average Fuel Economy (over the life of the vehicle): 25.9 mpg
Body Repair Costs: None
Maintenance Costs: $75.72
Problems: None.
The 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt LT parked in the wilds of Yosemite National Park. The little Chevy made the 700-mile round-trip averaging 31.4 miles per gallon — nearly the 32 mpg estimated by the EPA.
