An "Airbag" for $39.95 a day
There’s a little badge on the lower right side of the dash in our Chevrolet Aveo, near where many cars have one, letting people know what they’re riding in. Only this one doesn’t say "Aveo." It says "Airbag."
While the fact that there's an air bag in there is good information to have, I'm guessing the badge is going to cause confusion among drivers who get introduced to Chevrolet's smallest car by renting one. After all, I can't find the word "Aveo" anywhere in the cabin, except on paperwork in the glove box. I can imagine a vacationing couple reporting: "We had the most wonderful trip to Aunt Edna's, except we rented an Airbag. It was awful."
Could it be that this car is so bad, even the company wants to distance itself from it?
Frankly, I don't get the Aveo. It’s a miserable little car, and I can’t figure out where it fits in Chevrolet’s lineup. The sticker price on our test car was close to the Chevrolet Cobalt we tested along with it, and we actually paid less for the Cobalt with discounts. The Cobalt gets about the same gas mileage in our real-world fuel economy tests, and it is quieter, more refined, and more comfortable. It also handles better and is better equipped.
The Aveo, on the other hand, is not only among the lowest scoring small cars we’ve tested, even owners think it stinks. They’ve told us as much in our Annual Car Owner Satisfaction Survey, where buyers of both hatchback and sedan models have ranked Aveos at the very bottom of their respective categories.
As reported by Consumer Reports and mentioned in previous blogs, GM is cranking out some very good, if not class-leading vehicles these days. Chevrolet’s own Malibu makes the list, as do the new Cadillac CTS and Outlook/Acadia/Enclave, and soon to be Chevy Traverse SUVs. That said, the Cobalt was outscored in our testing by some competing models, but it still far outshines its sibling.
If you're looking for a small car and don't have loyalties to the Bowtie brand, there are many better choices than the Aveo, for the same money or less. The Honda Fit and Hyundai Elantra come to mind, and the Fit trumps the Aveo with better versatility to boot.
If, on the other hand, you're committed to supporting the home team, do yourself a favor and go with the Cobalt. It's a better car. And just to help seal the deal for domestic fans, the Cobalt is built in Ohio. The Aveo is imported from South Korea.
Chevy, you can do better than the Aveo. You already have.
See the road tests and videos for the July-issue gas-saving sedans, including the Aveo.
Posted by: Derrick G | Jun 2, 2008 7:52:53 PM
Amen. Having driven a rented "Airbag" in the mountains on I-40 between Asheville and Knoxville, I can say from experience there's nothing else I'd less rather drive. It made me yearn for my 1981 Plymouth Reliant. At least during the periods I wasn't praying.
Posted by: Steve Bier | Jun 2, 2008 9:00:11 PM
I don't know...I happen to like my Aveo a lot. Go figure.
Posted by: Ed | Jun 2, 2008 10:54:07 PM
Everything is relative. Go back just 10-15 years and the Aveo probably drives like a dream. Go back 15 years further and its a freaking sport car! Every years cars get better and better but the same exact words are used to describe the ones the come up slightly short of the best. CR has also talked a lot of bad words about the current generation Yaris but in actuality its a great car for the price that happens to be up against good competition. I believe that CR used to words "vastly underpowered" when talking about the lack of low end torque on the Toyota Matrix but its 127hp is a huge amount of horse power from a 1.8 liter 4 banger today, let alone 10 years ago. We would have been ecstatic to own that machine in 1990! This begs the question, whats changed? I will admit up front that I am a minimalist. However, I really do not understand the need to whine and complain about a mediocre car that starting at under 12k that does everything that it promises. I remember being completely stoked to get my first car, a 1984 oldsmobile delta 88. Compared to that the Aveo is a freaking Porsche! I think people in the autoworld need to keep these things in perspective for those of us who really just want transportation. Why do we always decide to keep improving cars and charging 15k for a cheap one when we could be working to build cars that focus on cost reduction instead. Thats exactly what the Aveo has done. Am I wrong?
Posted by: Derrick G | Jun 3, 2008 12:48:18 PM
Ed, I think you're wrong. If the Aveo were lots cheaper than the cars that are much better than it, it'd be one thing. But as Jim clearly pointed out, there are much better cars than either the Yaris or the Aveo for about the same money or maybe even less. So the only cost reductions done seem to be those than improve GM's and Toyota's bottom lines. GM seems to be admitting that both the Cobalt and Aveo fall short as it announced yesterday that a new global compact will replace the Cobalt and that the Aveo will be redesigned with new, high-efficiency engine technology for the US (guess that means that the Korean market version of the car will continue to suck gas, relatively speaking). Car makers don't rename cars with great reputations and they don't point out specific areas where a redesign will get special emphasis unless the outgoing model is admittedly weak in that area.
Posted by: Michael Eby | Jun 3, 2008 1:08:59 PM
Ed--I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the Aveo has a low purchase price and is adequate for basic transportation. The issue is that there are other cars that do much, much better--for about the same amount of money. The Aveo may be better than some cars from 10 years ago, but why buy one when the same amount of money can get a better car? For a small car, it's not even overly fuel efficient--heck, I get faster performance and only marginally greater fuel consumption in a Subaru Legacy.
I do like the Matrix, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that 127 hp is a huge amount for a 1.8 L engine. There are plenty of normally aspirated engines in that size range that make more power. Nor would I say that 127 hp is a lot for the car, since it's much heavier than the small cars from 10 years ago.
You're right that it's all relative--but that means that being better than cars from 10 years ago isn't enough to be competitive.
Posted by: Ed | Jun 3, 2008 2:52:21 PM
You all have made excellent points and I do understand the argument. However, what I was really trying to get at is that in the automotive world we constantly increase the weight, size, horsepower, and ride quality of cars while attempting to keep a certain price point such as say, $15,000 for a new one. What is the result of that is you can now buy a $15,000 car that is faster, larger, more comfortable than a $30,000 car from the not-so-distant past. Thats great and all but... Why cant we build a car that drives exactly as good as a car from the past (that we were perfectly happy with then) but cost considerably less. In other words, instead of focusing on content which merely spoils consumers by giving them more and more of what is not really necessary (hence the SUV crazy and virtually no improvement on fuel economy in the last 30 years since the last oil crisis). What if you could buy a 1985 toyota corrola brand new for $6,000 or datsun 5100 for $5,000? We loved those cars when they first hit the market but now we describe them as under powered and "Cramped" (americans are fatter today). Every year the corrola, accord, everything gets bigger and bigger with increased horsepower (which aid fuel economy) and increased wait ( bad for fuel economy). We focus far too much on driving dynamics and comfort connivence more than fuel economy, practicality, cost, and safety. And please do not try and tell me that safety is related to heaver weight because that is an entirely different blog :) Point being, why is it that cars HAVE improved so much in the last 20 years in almost every area except starting price and fuel consumption. My buddies 1986 civic gets him close to 40 mpg on a fairly regular basis, (when its still running!) Maybe I choose the wrong car to illustrate this point such as the current generation Aveo. However, the Aveo before the redesign was closer to $12,000 rather than the top of the line model tested at $15,000. Does anyone remember the slow selling Echo that had two trim levels only and ranged from 11,000-13,000 in 2001? PErfectly good car, reliable, economical, and safe. Thats the really point i was tying to make. Thanks for the great comments everyone!
Posted by: IFCAR | Jun 3, 2008 4:47:10 PM
The Aveo makes more sense if you buy a base version. Optioned-up models near $17,000 at sticker like the CR tester are silly, but the base price is still lower than most cars.
Miserable is a bit harsh for a car with such a low entry price. I'm more comfortable in the front and rear seats than in the Cobalt's, too.
Posted by: Derrick G | Jun 4, 2008 3:28:42 PM
Ed, I think you'll be seeing more smaller, basic cars coming to the US soon. There's already talk of a B-segment Chevrolet (the Aveo is considered a C-segment car) and I wouldn't be surprised to see others, especially if the economy doesn't pick up. The Echo was oddly styled and from a distance the front end always looked like it had been wrecked. I have to wonder if that wasn't part of why it never sold better.
That said, there are safety regulations to meet so the days of anything as light and as stripped as say a Starlet are over.
Posted by: Bran | Jun 18, 2008 7:06:33 PM
I have never owned a car with a badge inside proclaiming what kind of car it is. It seems tacky, and unnecessary.
Posted by: Steve | Jun 18, 2008 11:49:39 PM
The Aveo is just what it says it is a BASE car for transportation. I have driven one and found it to be a simple low end car that does what it was built for, getting from point A to B. I think the Cobalt is a better car also but in reality I would not buy either. A good used car makes more sense then most base cars from any car maker. I think that CR missed the boat on this and should have said that the Cobalt is a better value then most base models not just the Aveo
Posted by: Craig | Jun 19, 2008 9:06:12 AM
Umm... the #1 selling car in America (Honda Civic) doesn't have a it's name anywhere in the cabin either. Does this make it a bad car?
Posted by: jimpoe63 | Jun 19, 2008 8:31:31 PM
what the hell!!! everbody talkin bout 32 mi. pr ga, . now days, I have a 95 Lesabre that gets over 31 MPG--- and now they're talking bout gettin 32MPG, well I've getting it for yrs!!!!! may be new to some , but not me--- WHY don't the car co. tell the truth ONE BIG LIE FOR ALL co. politicks
Posted by: Rachel | Jun 19, 2008 9:20:43 PM
Hello Everyone,
I own a 2008 chevy Aveo and I love my little car. I get excellent gas millage and find the ride very quiet. I was also in an accident with it, (a lady blew a stop sign and broad sided me) it kept me safe. I walked away from the accident without a scratch on me. If this is GM's worst, I dont think it's bad at all. It's safe, great on gas and has an excellent stero.
Posted by: Bill | Jun 19, 2008 9:40:34 PM
My wife and I bought my daughter a new 2007 Aveo sedan for her last year in high school. The car was very affordable priced around $13000 I believe and about $3000 less than the Cobalt. Recently we drove the Aveo on a 1000 mile trip to check out the FSU campus. The car consistently got 33 to 34 mpg on the interstate while driving 80 mph with 3 adults and the a/c on. Yeah the car was noisy but for the money who cares? So far the car has had no problems in the year my daughter has been driving it.
Posted by: Rick Barrows | Jun 19, 2008 10:42:57 PM
I have to join this. 15 years ago? I'm still driving my Corolla from 15 yrs ago ... 160K ... air still works ... and 38 mpg. 1984: Bought a Ford Escort DIESEL station wagon. Set the Cruise Control and she'd do 50 mpg+ on the highway without even tryng. 1978: Bought a Rabbit Diesel ... drove her 200+k ... put in a clutch (only major repair) ... and she'd do 50+ mpg without efffort. In the 70's, my wife and three kids had to be at the gas station at 6:30 AM on "odd numbered" days to buy gas for our Olds Vista Cruiser. I decided then ... my car ...hauling only my butt 5 days a week would be fully equipped and SMALL ... you can get those kind of cars today. I'm supposed to see 40 mpg as worth 20 grand? Get real, please. (And, I'd love to have a new car.)
Posted by: Dick Bojack | Jun 20, 2008 12:24:00 AM
We think our 2006 Aveo was/is great for the price. We bought the 5-door, value priced model with manual transmission as one of the end of model year loss leaders, priced at $6995.00 (new, before the gas prices started up). With our additional $1960.00 discount for using the GM Card for a few years, we got out the door at well under $6000 for a NEW car. None of the other "better" cars are nearly as comprtively priced. I am partial to Hondas which are better cars in all respects except price. Bottom line, the Aveo is the "best value" on the market today. I would like to see skid pad tests of the handling. I think the handling is reasonably good, close to our Honda Civic Hybrid. If you pay anything close to MSRP you are paying too much. At a lower negotiated price, its a great value.
Posted by: donovan | Jun 20, 2008 11:31:27 PM
I had purchased a brand new 2008 Aveo. I have had nothing but problems with it. Within months 4 & 6 from the purchase date I had the vehicle being service more times then you can possibly imagine. As of now I have had the car in the shop for almost 30 day. Power Steering, brakes, oil leakage, seatbelt dumby light blew, etc. and from May to June my cars has been more in the possesion of the dealership working on it then me driving it. I strongly recommend to everyone to closely pay attention and thoroughly review a car before you buy it. Just don't read information. Start asking people to get their feeling. These are still machines and I had wound up with a big defect. Please be careful.
Posted by: Ross | Jul 1, 2008 9:38:13 PM
If you want a real car, get a 1994 Chrysler Lebaron GTC convertible. I got it for $3k and it's much more beautiful than an Aveo and has better leather than my mom's Nissan Armada
Posted by: Mike | Nov 7, 2008 9:50:58 AM
Are you even remotely serious? I've had to rent both the Cobalt and the Aveo in the past 2 years when my car was in the shop because the drivers here suck and my car was hit twice in a short period of time. The Cobalt is, by far, the worst car I have ever driven, and I've driven beaters and clunkers all my life. When the crosswinds would blow on the highway you could literally see the doors flex inward and feel the air in the cabin compress. The Cobalt had absolutely zero acceleration in any gear, leaned horribly in any turn at any speed, and was the absolute noisiest tin can I've ever had the displeasure of driving. The Aveo, on the other hand, caught me totally off guard. I was expecting another low grade Chevy econo-box, but what I found was a nimble, quick for its size, comfortable gas sipper that actually had me considering buying an American car again.
The testers must have been on acid or something when they drove these two cars. They're completely out of their minds.
Posted by: Neka | Nov 30, 2008 10:51:19 PM
I own a 2007 chevy Aveo, and I commend its makers. I like my little, yellow car, that I refer to as my "Hawaiian Pineapple" It came with every option possible, and I paid close to 15 grand for it. The payments are cheap! It gets good gas mileage, I don't believe that it is noisy, it's comfortable, and it has all the power I need to get from point A to point B. My daughter, on the other hand, has a cobalt, and I wouldn't own one! I welcome anyone to visit my page at www.myspace.com/sweethonugurl and click on my pics, and you will see how playful an Aveo can be.