From the logbook: Toyota Yaris

With the recent spike in gas prices, it's not surprising that more and more people are setting their sights on fuel-efficient cars. With that in mind, here's candid look at the Toyota Yaris--a model that performed well in our fuel-economy tests, but didn't wow us otherwise, especially compared to competing "budget cars."  (Available to ConsumerReports.org subscribers only.) We tested both the two-door hatchback model (equipped with the manual transmission) and sedan version (with the automatic). They rang in at $12,569 and $15,543, respectively.

The major test-result differences we found between the lighter, manual transmission hatchback and the automatic-equipped sedan were in 0-60 mph acceleration times (hatch: 9.3 seconds, sedan: 11.4) and braking distances (hatch: 0-60 dry 163 ft, sedan: 139 ft). The non-ABS-equipped hatchback took much longer to stop from 60 mph than the automatic, which had ABS, in both dry and wet tests. Also, at its handling limits, the hatchback is less forgiving, with a tendency to oversteer when you come off the throttle quickly. Fuel economy numbers are about the same: 34 mpg overall for the manual vs. 33 for the auto.

Here's a look at tester's notes from the two Yaris logbooks:

"Engine has to work hard to merge on the highway."

"Handling is responsive--more so than the Kia Rio--but the electric steering is a bit light at low speeds."

"The automatic transmission is smooth and responsive...and communicates well with the engine."

"The automatic sedan feels more responsive than the manual hatchback."

"The manual shifter is a bit stiff."

"[The manual version] is hard to drive smoothly: the clutch is too close and you can't modulate it for smooth starts or shifting. The brake pedal is too close to the throttle, too."

"Lots of road and wind noise on the highway."

"Interior packaging not nearly as clever as the Honda Fit."

"Center-mounted speedometer is hard to read."

"Sedan version feels more substantial than the [outgoing] Echo in terms of interior quality and equipment."

"This replaces the Echo? Seems like not much of a leap."

"[The hatchback's] austere interior has lots of switch blanks, hard-to-reach manual window cranks, and old-fashioned mirror adjustments. Even the rear seat looks like it came out of a '72 Chevy."

"Not too comfortable for me: the dead pedal is too close, the non-telescoping wheel is way too far away, the seats lack lumbar support, and the cushion is too short."

"Climate controls are a bit low and canted backward, making me study them more than I should have to."

"The radio displays are hard to see in the daylight."

"Rear seats [in the sedan] are actually quite useable for kids without putting the front seat passengers too far into the dash."

"Not great fit and finish - there are exposed screws, bad fitting passenger cup holder and seams about the air bag."

"For an additional $2,000 [for the sedan], you get so much more car than the bare-bones hatchback."

"[The sedan version] feels much more substantial than the hatchback, which has fewer storage pockets and a different climate control arrangement."

"If the Yaris is selling at list price, you can probably buy a much nicer Corolla for the same price."

"Not one of Toyota's better efforts."

"What is a 'Yaris,' anyway?"
(According to Toyota, the Yaris name "...stems from the Greek goddess Charis, the symbol of beauty and elegance; the city of Paris, a cultural epicenter; and the German expression of agreement 'ya.'")

As you might expect, the Yaris shows that Toyota doesn't hit a homerun every time. Although it's a new design, we think the Yaris needs to go back to the drawing board.

--Mike Quincy