Smart ForTwo crash test results and video

With the Smart ForTwo coming to the United States for the first time, we have heard many questions about this microcar’s safety than its fuel economy. How will its occupants fare in a collision? We now have some definitive answers regarding crash protection from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS); both organizations give the miniscule ForTwo decent marks.

In April, the NHTSA conducted front- and side-crash tests on the redesigned 2008 model, awarding the car four stars for frontal protection for the driver and three for the passenger. In the side crash test, the agency gave it five stars, though flagged a safety concern because the driver door unlatched and opened, creating a risk for occupant ejection.

After viewing the NHTSA test and videos, we were anxious to see how the Smart ForTwo fared in the more stringent IIHS tests. In a report released today, IIHS has given the ForTwo its highest rating of Good in frontal-offset and side-impact tests. As can be seen in the video (search in the Consumer Reports crash test video player), the ForTwo experiences some drama in the tests.

Frontal-offset test
When the Smart strikes the offset barrier, there is precious little structure ahead of the passenger compartment to absorb the crash energy, putting more work on the restraint system. The driver dummy’s head struck the steering wheel through the front air bag, though injury measures were considered Acceptable. The restraints and dummy kinematics were rated Good, matching the overall rating. In watching the video, the ForTwo spins around in what could be an adjacent lane or possibly off the road. Most vehicles do not spin nor move laterally in such a way, raising the possibility of other risks. In the NHTSA test, on the other hand, vehicles are crashed into a flat wall; the ForTwo rebounds expectedly in that test, without rotating or moving sideways.

It is important to note that the IIHS’s frontal-crash-test simulates what would happen if two cars of the same weight and type crashed head-on, left headlight to left headlight. The results can only be compared to other vehicles in the same class. However, there are no other microcars offered in the U.S. by IIHS’s classification. So, while the ForTwo would do well in a frontal impact with another Smart or in a single-car crash, the test results can’t predict how the Smart would fare hitting a larger vehicle. The reality is the Smart will always be the smaller car in a two-vehicle accident.

Side crash test
In the side-impact test, the 3,300-pound IIHS moving barrier pushed the diminutive car quite a distance across the floor of the test center. This test represents the impact from an SUV, and the visual is reminiscent of the Mini Cooper test (check out the video). Again, this could raise the possibility of other risks.

The ForTwo’s stiff side structure and standard side air bags protected the driver, earning the ForTwo a Good rating for side-impact performance. Injury forces recorded on the dummy’s head, neck, torso, pelvis, and left leg were all low. However, the driver door unlatched, as it had in the NHTSA test. As a result, IIHS downgraded the structural rating from Good to Acceptable, however the Institute notes that “the opening didn’t appear to affect dummy movement during the test and injury measures on the driver dummy were low.” Translation: make sure you’re wearing your seatbelt.

The risk of small cars
While the ForTwo performed well overall in the tests by these two organizations, the risk of death is high in crashes of smaller, lighter vehicles. "For vehicles 1-3 years old during 2006," reports IIHS, "minicars experienced 106 driver deaths per million registered vehicles compared with 69 driver deaths in large cars."

The ForTwo is the smallest car offered in the United States, measuring just 106 inches and tipping the scales at a bantam-weight 1,745 pounds. To put it into perspective, our tested Mini Cooper S was 146 inches long and weighed 2,690 pounds. Inquiring about the safety is only natural with the ForTwo.

"All things being equal, in safety, bigger and heavier is always better. But among the smallest cars, the engineers of the Smart did their homework and designed a high level of safety into a very small package," said Institute President Adrian Lund in a released statement. The ForTwo includes seat-mounted side air bags (as opposed to curtain-style, head-protection bags), antilock brakes, and electronic stability control (ESC)—car safety features we recommended you look for in any car. Having ESC in such an inexpensive car is commendable.

There are many small, comparably priced cars to choose from, though admittedly few are as distinctive on the roads, easy to park, or promise such high mileage as the Smart. As with any car purchase, be sure to research all your options to ensure you are making a truly smart decision.

Look for a full road test of the Smart ForTwo in the months to come.

—Jeff Bartlett

View videos of about 250 vehicles evaluated in IIHS crash tests.

For more information on safety, visit our car safety section and read "Crash Test 101."
Discuss Smart cars in the forum.

2009 Suzuki SX4 to have standard GPS

Suzuki has announced that it will offer in-car navigation as a standard feature on the 2009 Suzuki SX4 Sport sedan and front-drive SX4 Crossover hatchback models. This is the first time a manufacturer is including integrated GPS navigation in an entry-level vehicle in the United States.

The navigation system is based on the Garmin Nuvi 700 series portable navigation device (PND). The Suzuki version, called T.R.I.P (Travel, Real-time traffic, Information, and Play) will offer a 4.3-inch touch-screen display with preloaded maps and millions of points of interest (POI), such as restaurants, hotels, ATMs, and gas stations. Suzuki has customized the POI database by adding recommended destinations such as music venues, surf spots, and other activity-focused attractions.

Buyers will be able to upgrade to a more premium navigation system, adding Bluetooth capability and Microsoft Network service—which offers real-time traffic, weather, and gas prices. Suzuki will launch a community Web site to share and download destinations and recommendations among other SX4 owners.

The system will be integrated into the audio system, which automatically lowers the volume of the radio or CD when the navigation system is giving a verbal instruction. Additionally, the Microsoft antenna is integrated into the vehicle’s antenna to continuously receive new data with the premium version.

The Garmin device can be removed from the dash-board docking station, and Suzuki advises that it could be replaced/upgraded in the future by the car owner with another similar Garmin unit. The Garmin Nuvi 700 series has performed well in our ratings (available to online subscribers) of portable devices.

Suzuki decided to add this system after hearing feedback from current SX4 owners that navigation is the most desired feature in their next vehicle. In-car navigation systems from the factory can cost $1500-$2000, or be a part of an even more expensive technology package.

Suzuki has not yet released pricing for the 2009 SX4 line, but says it will have a base price of under $16,000, signaling a potential price increase. The SX4 Sport starts at $14,270 and the SX4 Crossover at $14,770, plus $625 in destination charges. For comparison purposes, you can buy a portable Garmin Nuvi 700 series device for around $600, so with a possible increase in base price, you may be paying for the system, after all. (Suzuki will not announce pricing until closer to on-sale date this summer.)

The docking station concept is an exciting one, as it could allow users to choose the level of GPS they want and potentially upgrade it in the future, allowing for new features to be brought to the car. It is conceivable that docks could become the navigation equivalent of iPod connectors, allowing consumers to choose the device and upgrade as desired. Of course, this would require the adherence to standards. With Garmin accounting for half the U.S. market, it is a possibility. Toyota is experimenting with a dock application in the 4Runner SUV. Although Toyota offers a DVD-based navigation system on the 4Runner, the Urban Runner model includes a removable TomTom portable navigation device.

Clearly, consumer interest in GPS-enabled devices is on the rise, and we expect to see more creative solutions in the future.

What solutions would you like to see? Post your thoughts in the comments below.

—Liza Barth

Lifting the hood on the Saturn Astra

Forbidden fruit - that's how some enthusiasts regard many models sold overseas that never make it to these shores. Alluring cars like Ford's second-generation Focus, Mondeo, and S-Max; the Honda Accord Tourer (wagon); and various high-performance Alfa Romeos, Opels, Peugeots, and Renaults are out of reach to the American car buyer.

The Saturn Astra represents something of a victory for the huddled masses yearning for these cars. The Astra is European through-and-through. Developed in Europe and built in Belgium, our Astra is almost identical (including suspension tuning) to the Opel/Vauxhall Astra that is one of Europe's top-selling cars. (The next Aura is also rumored to be a lightly altered Opel Vectra.)  Another victory worth celebrating: it replaces the highly undesirable Ion as Saturn's entry-level car.

But the story of the Astra highlights some of the problems of transforming a design intended for one marketplace into a global one. Since the Astra wasn't originally intended to be sold here, the decision to sell it in America reportedly came pretty late in its product life-cycle. GM made the modifications necessary to sell the Astra here in only 13 months, an impressive feat. But to do that quickly without investing a lot of money in the existing platform required some compromises:

—GM engineers picked the Astra's only existing gas engine - a 1.8-liter version of their Ecotec four-cylinder -- with an available automatic transmission. (Remember: Europeans aren't too keen on automatics.) That leaves Americans with 138 horsepower, and a choice of five-speed manual or four-speed (rather than five or six-speed) automatic. Most other competitors here have a lot more power. There are very tempting high-performance Astras in Europe, but we won't see them this time.

—Rather than using GM's very simple-to-use "Black Tie" corporate radio (the one that made even Saab dashboards simple), the Astra retains its complicated European radio. It's a mess to use. Furthermore, the only available connection in the back was used for OnStar. Big deal, you say? Well, that means that there is no auxiliary input or satellite radio, features almost every other GM car has. Worse, those are features that the Astra's target demographic will likely demand. (We've been told that the engineers are reconsidering.)

—The Astra picks up the three- and five-door hatchback body styles that the freshened-for-2008 Ford Focus dropped. Most of us at CR love hatchbacks because they add practicality without bulk. But most car buyers in this market don't share this view, considering hatchbacks to be downmarket. The Astra has a wide range of body styles in Europe, including a sedan, wagon, the Zafira microvan, and a nifty hardtop convertible - but we will not see such diversity in this generation.

—With the shrinking dollar and unfavorable exchange rates, the Astra is a rather expensive car to build overseas and import here. While Europe is more accustomed to paying a premium for well-equipped small cars, Americans see most small cars as entry-level transportation. So, in order to move any Astras here, they have to be priced to sell.

This creates a delicate balance. Consider that our Astra XE with a sunroof, automatic, heated seats, and stability control, just topped $20k—with no alloy wheels. (And you can't haggle at Saturn dealers— although incentives are sometimes available.) That money buys a Volkswagen Rabbit (the American version of the Golf, the Astra's main sales rival in Europe) with 170-hp.

On the flip side, while the Astra seems quite fully-priced here, buying a (mostly) equivalent Vauxhall Astra in England would run you 17,165 pounds (before lots of taxes). Basically double that to get the price in dollars. (It is about $32k in Germany.) Some of us have joked that you could run a lucrative business buying Saturn Astras and shipping them back to Europe for sale.

This pricing disparity has lead Bob Lutz, GM's vice chairman and head of product development, to quip that "We are considering applying for non-profit status." Later remarks from Lutz in Automotive News spun it a different way. They note that importing the Astra saved GM $900 million in developing a new platform. Of course, a new platform would have a much longer shelf life than the two or three years the Astra will be sold here—and GM is in the midst of developing a new global small-car platform, anyway.

Our first impressions are that the Astra has an impressive ride/handling balance, firm supportive seats, and some rather annoying controls. So, is the Astra a case of "be happy you got what you asked for," or will it leave buyers wondering what might have been? We'll see when we test it against the Rabbit, Subaru Impreza Outback Sport, and Toyota Matrix in a future issue.

—Tom Mutchler

Discuss Saturn in the Cars forum.

Help us Honda - Having a fit over the lack of TSX appeal

It was tough to sit through the two Honda press conferences today. Both the redesigned Acura TSX and the Honda Fit have been stars on the Internet for seemingly months now. The Fit was introduced in Japan last fall where it is Honda's top-selling model. And various TSX pictures and the press release have been rattling around online for a while now.

So the introductions here have been awkward. With very little adieu, out rolled each car. Loud music was playing...and kept playing...and just when you thought it was done, played some more. It was as if Honda was trying to build excitement in the press corps that never quite happened.

Further, the Honda executive doing the presentation jumped directly from reinforcing that Honda is an engineering driven company to announcing that Acura was the preferred vehicle of the W hotel chain. Even engineering-driven companies wind up with marketing relationships with boutique hotel chains, I guess.

It's a bit of a shame that the TSX and Fit were received with a collective yawn here. The Fit has some solid improvements—available ESC, driving position improvements, easier folding back seats. And the very, very reliable TSX outsold Acura's initial forecasts, providing nimble handling if not a ton of power. (The new car is slightly bigger but doesn't appear to deviate far from that recipe.)

Maybe the general ennui was caused by the TSX and Fit looking an awful lot like the cars they replaced. That makes sense for the distinctive Fit, but the TSX looks like a lot of other cars melted together, namely the Euro-Accord with the latest Acura grille.

As I wrote about Hyundai, I'm all for Honda's making solid practical improvements in redesigned cars. What else would you expect from a manufacturer that bills itself as an engineering-based company? And with a Honda Odyssey in my driveway, I'm pretty far from advocating making buying decisions based on styling alone. But in a world of sleek-looking Hyundai coupes, and a redesigned Nissan Maxima and Infiniti FX that have distinctive (if controversial) front ends, I wonder what Honda loses in sales by playing it safe.

—Tom Mutchler

See the 2008 New York auto show coverage.

From the logbook: Volkswagen Rabbit

Question: When is a Golf not a Golf?
Answer: When it's a Rabbit

Question: Why do car companies spend time and money creating a model name and then kill it? Or, why does it seem like they can't make up their minds?
Answer: In the 1970s, Volkswagen renamed the European Golf the Rabbit here in the United States to replace an icon (the original Beetle). The company also went so far as to make several versions of it: two- and four-door models, a convertible, and the memorable GTI. But then VW decided to scrap it all and rename its mainstream model the Golf. Lo and behold, Golf sales didn't shoot through the roof. The name game has come full circle, and the latest hatchback model is called the Rabbit. I suppose this keeps the marketing people busy, but for the rest of us it just seems baffling.

Regardless of what you call it, we now have a four-door S model. For $19,725, our test car includes an automatic transmission, stability control and 16-inch alloy wheels. Interestingly, the word "Rabbit" doesn't appear on the car's exterior - makes you wonder how much confidence the company has in its name...

Here are the raw, first impressions written in the new Rabbit's logbook by the test team so far:

"Engine sounds a bit coarse, but it's torquey."

"Runs out of oomph at higher revs."

"Automatic transmission is a bit slow to downshift, but the 'Sport' mode works well."

"Handling is good but steering feel is vague."

"Great chassis—quiet, nimble, and rides very well."

"Quick, easy and fun to drive."

"Wide C-pillar makes rear viewing a chore."

"Seats are comfortable and supportive."
(But others said):
"Seat is too small, particularly the seatback where the pocket is very narrow and my back bridges the wing bolsters."

"Rear seat room is marginal."

"Surprisingly quiet inside, especially on the highway."

"Controls are simple - why is it easier to set the clock on a $19,000 Rabbit than a $50,000 BMW?"

"Great seat heaters. Good thing because the heat sucks—takes about 20-30 minutes to warm the cabin at 24-degrees."

"Heater is slow, slow, slow."

"Great fit and finish and high content level for the money—including heated seats and power-seat recline."

So, what do you call this car? One tester went so far as to write that the 'Rabbit' name is "unfortunate." Whatever the final nomenclature, we're fairly impressed with VW's entry-level model. Look for a complete test later in '08.

—Mike Quincy

SEMA - 2009 Toyota Corolla and Matrix

There is a temptation to playfully tie-together Halloween and Toyota's debut of the redesigned 2009 Corolla and Matrix in this report from the SEMA show floor. Thing is, though, there isn't really anything scary or shocking about these cars. Toyota sold 390,000 Corollas in the United States last year, even though the current generation has been around since 2002. Only scary, perhaps, for the Corolla's competition.

Solid and sensible define the Corolla. Consequently, you don't see a lot of modded Corollas in the halls at SEMA. (That spot in the corporate portfolio is filled by the ubiquitous Scion xBs and xDs.) No bother--the Corolla provides reliable and economical transportation for many buyers, and it looks like it should continue to do so for another generation.

The 2009 Corolla and Matrix don't stray far from the current product. Despite the same displacement, the revised 1.8-liter, four-cylinder engine has many revisions that should aid fuel economy and response. The top-of-the-line XRS sporty version shares the 158-hp, 2.4-liter engine found in the Camry and Scion xB. That's slightly down on power compared to earlier Corolla and Matrix XRSs (which last had 164 hp in 2006), but this engine doesn't need to be revved to nosebleed levels to wring out power. While the XRS has a 26-hp upgrade from the lower trim levels, it pales in comparison to other factory sportsters like the Chevrolet Cobalt SS, Dodge Caliber SRT-4, Honda Civic Si, and Subaru WRX. After a brief absence from the lineup, AWD will again be available on the Matrix.

As expected, safety gear has been improved. Curtain air bags, active front head restraints, and ABS are standard. Stability control is standard on the XRS models and available on all other models. (Toyota was clear to state that the ESC system was defeatable, in case you wind up being one of the handful of owners to take your XRS to the track.) Given that ESC was almost impossible to find on previous Corolla and Matrix models from regional distributors stocking limited build configurations, we're hoping it's more available this time around. Toyota will make ESC standard by the end of 2009 -- 18 months from now. While this is well ahead of the 2012 federal mandate, the Corolla is a popular car for young drivers, increasing the need for ESC's benefits. It should be standard now.

A brief sit in each car suggests similar passenger space to the current cars. A telescoping steering wheel is a plus; the current Corolla and Matrix have an awkward driving position with the pedals too close and the steering wheel too far away. The Matrix's already small third-quarter window is now reduced to a slit, creating a big, thick blind-spot-making roof pillar.

For the first time, the Corolla will offer a factory navigation system. XM real-time traffic will also be available, marking a first in this segment. Of course, you can get a portable navigation system with real-time traffic for $500, a considerable savings over factory systems.

So, all in all, there aren't too many tricks to detract from the new Corolla's treats. We plan to test the Corolla against other competing small cars when it goes on sale next year.

--Tom Mutchler

Discuss the Corolla and Matrix in our Toyota forum.

SEMA - Give the Kia brand some Soul

Not so long ago, Kia was known for building some pretty crummy cars. The old Sportage, Sephia, and Spectra were crude and undesirable; they sold by virtue of a low, low price. But that's changed with the company's recent products. The Optima competes well against the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, the revised Sportage and Rio are competent, and the Sedona is a good minivan let down by so-so reliability.

This history tracks with what Len Hunt, Kia's executive vice president and chief operating officer, has been emphasizing at basically every recent press conference. He said that the company needs to build a reputation for building a car that's decent, and then they'll move on to building a car that's a car that's truly desirable and alluring.

There are some baby steps being taken here at SEMA, basically a Spectra5 "SX" that's lowered, has bigger wheels, and some body modifications. A similarly modified Rondo is parked next to it, looking a bit like a tricked-out Popemobile. More intriguing is the Kia Soul concept; we've seen it before at Detroit, but it's now actually approaching production. The Soul looks like a Scion xB but drawn with a finer-pen, giving it more flowing lines.

There was one note of discord: playing in the background during Hunt's speech was a showroom video (winding roads, smiling people, autumn leaf-lined drives) of a Kia Amanti. When we tested the Amanti, we said it was "the clumsiest-handling sedan we've tested recently..." (available to online subscribers) Recent revisions have improved handling considerably, but the Amanti still remains a Korean interpretation of combining the handling of a mid-1980s Buick interior crossed with the styling of a mid-1990s Mercedes-Benz E-Class.

Seeing that Amanti just goes to show that changing both a brand image and the product line takes time...

--Tom Mutchler

Discuss SEMA in our Auto Show and Aftermarket forums.

Personal Picks: Small and sporty cars

Car testing at CR covers the gamut of the automotive world. It's strange, perhaps, but we'll really go from testing pickup trucks--with some weighing up to 8,000 pounds--to measuring the strengths and weaknesses of small, economy cars weighing considerably less (around 3,000 pounds). And with fuel prices never far from our minds, it's good to know that there are a number of good, capable small cars that deliver fine fuel economy but also relatively refined and comfortable driving experiences. For when you want more fun in your life (but still want to conserve fuel), we've uncovered a few small and sporty gems.

Here are more small car (and sporty car) picks based on our recent test groups:

Gabe Shenhar:
Small car: Among small sedans my choice is the Mazda3. It looks good, handles well, and has a pleasant interior; it doesn't feel like you are driving an econobox. Even though the Honda Civic is a logical choice--with more futuristic styling and more sparing with fuel--it's less fun to drive. Better yet, I would pick the hatchback version of the 3 for its added versatility and even better looks.
Sporty car: Out of the sporty cars, I'd take the Mini in a heartbeat. It's such a blast to drive. It handles like a go-kart, goes like hell, and it sounds awesome. I might even get used to the unintuitive controls. And while the Mazdaspeed3 is more capable on a track, on the road the Mini is more fun. The Mini looks like nothing else and oozes character. It's the closest thing to my original first-generation Volkswagen GTI that I was piloting two decades ago.

Gene Petersen:
Sporty car: This year, I'm picking the Mazdaspeed3. Few other cars provide the practicality, refinement, and fun-to-drive balance.  It's a perfectly easy car to live with as a commuter and for running around town with the family in tow.  I'm taken by the well-rounded refinement. There aren't many cars that deliver sports-car handling with a comfortable ride or have an exciting, smooth revving turbo engine that is equally drivable in normal use. And don't forget the sensible four-door hatch design that's versatile and yet sporty looking. Shortcomings? Not much, but I would prefer not to have to fill up with premium fuel and those sticky summer tires won't do in New England's winter months. 

Tom Mutchler:
Small and sporty car: Emerson wrote that "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." That might be why I don't just simply pick two different versions of the Mazda3 as my choice for best small car and best sporty car. The Mazda3 hatchback does everything I want a small car to do. It handles well, is lots of fun to drive, has a pretty nice interior, stability control is readily available, and it's been reliable. But picking a small, practical sporty car is a different story. As much fun as the Mazdaspeed3 is to drive (and, whoo-boy, it is a lot of fun), I'd probably try to find a 2003-2004 Ford Focus SVT five-door. Maybe an orange or yellow one with the European Appearance package, which also gets you lovely Recaro seats. The Focus certainly isn't as fast as the Mazdaspeed3 or a VW GTI, and it lacks modern safety gear, but handling is razor-sharp and the ride remains comfortable. It would only run around $13,000, leaving me plenty of budget for tires for track days.

Mike Quincy:
Small and sporty car: I know this is turning into a Mazda3 love fest, but if you haven't tried this car (and you want something that's fun, practical, affordable and economical) you must drive one. I can't really get worked up over the extra speed and pizzazz of the Mazdaspeed3 version when the "regular" 2.3-liter model is so good. I'm fond of the s Grand Touring hatchback version with the manual transmission. My two boys fit in the back with lots of room, and in those blessed moments when I have some time to myself, I can fold down the rear seats, load my bike in the back, and meet my buddies for a ride. While I wish there was less road noise on the highway, getting a model with the optional Sirius satellite radio would keep me happy for an extended road trip. Hence, this is the car that fulfills both my economy car and sporty car wants and needs. It does it all.

Read more Personal Picks from the sporty car group and Jim Traver's "Pick of the Litter."

Personal Picks: Pick of the litter

Our group of recently tested small cars is a varied one, to say the least. With everything from sensible sedans to sporty models and even a roadster, it offers something for everybody--and at least one car for nobody. But that's just my opinion, and I'll keep it to myself. Deputy Editor Jeff Bartlett asked me for a personal pick, and here it is:

The Hyundai Elantra.

Yup, that's my pick, a humble but competent, nondescript little sedan, easily misplaced at the mall parking lot. Sign me up even over more interesting stuff like the Mazdaspeed3 and Mini Cooper S my colleagues are all worked up about from the sporty car group.

Don't get me wrong. They're a smart bunch, (my colleagues, not the cars) and like me, they love cars. Both the 'speed3 and the Mini are a blast to drive, with quick acceleration, good handling, and responsive steering. But where those sportier models can be frantic and hyper like a Yorkshire terrier, the Elantra is just friendly and eager to please. Think of it as an automotive Cocker Spaniel.

The Mazda is less of a poorly trained pooch than the Mini, and manages to put its bodacious 263-hp to the pavement with minimal torque steer. But the ride can be punishing over time, especially over broken pavement or abrupt bumps on the highway. In its favor, the Mazda comes without the Mini's lane-changing torque steer and annoyingly cute if dysfunctional dashboard controls. Give me function over funk any day of the week. As my colleague Managing Editor Jon Linkov so aptly summed it up, "What's up with the Flavor-Flav speedometer?"

In the end, a Mazda3 Touring with a five speed manual would be my pick if that was an option, but Jeff doesn't like it when we pick cars not in the group - even though the Auto Test guys do it all the time. (I like it less when the guys pick the Nissan Murano for EVERYTHING. --Ed.) Still, with sufficient power to step out as desired, better fuel mileage than the 'speed3, less edginess to its suspension but still enough sportiness to make it fun in the twisties, the Touring strikes me as a good compromise. It even has room for a couple of Cocker Spaniels, though fitting my two Belgian Shepherds may be tough.

But it wasn't part of this group, so the Elantra it is. I'll just have to carry a picture in my wallet so I can find it. Or look for a dog in the back seat.

--Jim Travers

Personal Picks: Small, economical cars

While the "PeeWee Sports" sporty cars in the October 2007 may have elicited the most water-cooler conversation among the staff, the all-new and redesigned models in our "Small Wonders" test group warrant a closer look.

View video reviews of the small cars.

Here the staff shares their personal insights with picks, and sometimes pans:

Eric Evarts: I'll start with a confession: I'm not a big fan of small sedans (though we have one in the family that my wife loves). It seems to me if you want a small car to save gas or money, you'll benefit by maximizing the car's interior space. Uncool though it may be, that means buying a wagon or a hatchback.

But that's not the only reason my personal pick among this month's Small Wonders is the Scion xB. The main reason is that it feels more grown up than the other cars here, despite its youthful target audience. The xB strikes me as a car I could consider as a substitute for the much more expensive Toyota RAV4. It has a huge back seat, plenty of room for cargo, and lots of room up front. I especially love all the handy storage nooks and crannies for road trip gear and the iPod adapter that lets you control it through the xB's radio or steering wheel. There's plenty of power, and cornering is relatively lively.

Unlike the old xB, the engine remains subdued on the highway, and the doors don't feel like they'll bend every time you slam them shut.

Like the old xB, the new one looks hip and youthful. And your neighbors don't have to know you only spent $18,000.

Jeff Bartlett: Be careful what you wish for. The manufacturers do listen closely to owners and auto show goers, as well as monitor online forum banter. The original xB was funky, affordable, and frugal, giving Scion an instant hit to grow the fledgling, youth-targeted division.

The public, at least certain hipster and hip-replacement segments, loved the original, but there was a desire for a little more power, refinement, and safety. (However, the 2004-2006 models earned a Poor rating in the IIHS side-crash test.) With the new xB, Scion delivered what buyers wanted, but in this ever-changing world, the timing was a little off. The second-gen went on sale this year amid elevated gas prices, right when the country really needed another high-mileage choice. The new xB only gets 23 mpg overall in our tests, down from 30 mpg in the last one.

The latest xB feels much different than the original, which had great visibility and feather weight. Now, the xB feels solid, with small, Hummer H3-like side glass and perceived heft. The larger engine does give the car appropriate verve, and the Dr. Who Tardis effect of an impossibly roomy interior continues.

In a segment where the competition is a variety of typical c-a-r-s, albeit with more refinement and features than ever before, the xB stands out as a buck-the-mainstream choice. The basic package provides more rear-seat space than just about anything within a yard of its length, and it just feels fun to drive a vehicle that seems like the off-spring of an armored bank truck and an urban dance club mix CD.

Once again, the xB succeeds in being a distinct alternative, without exacting a price penalty. But, I sure would welcome a couple more miles per gallon, and I suspect Scion hears other voicing similar desires. Maybe with the next generation... And if the next model launches when gas prices go down, I won't complain.

Cliff Weathers: My wife coos at our Mini Cooper the way she would a tiny puppy. Yes, she may think it's so cute and adorable now, but wait until she tries to work the radio or the confounding switchgear while driving. And the Mini's torque steer would yank her around a bit too much. She'd end up denouncing this wide-eyed little buggy faster than you can say "high-strung Chihuahua."

Unfortunately, she's always found the Scion xB to be unlovable and ugly. But if she gave it a home, she'd find that it to be a loyal companion. First of all, it plays well with the kids. Our nine- and ten-year olds barely fit in the back of our Subaru Forester these days, yet they're plenty comfortable in the back of the xB.

Also, the xB from the "Small Wonders" test group does some pretty cool tricks, especially with an iPod. If she attached hers to the wagon's dedicated jack, she'd discover that the car's audio system integrates seamlessly with Apple's media player, letting her control it through the steering wheel and radio controls.

And last, nobody wants a vehicle that's difficult to control. My wife would find that the xB is obedient on the road and only emits the slightest growl from its 4-cylinder powerplant. And at 23 mpg overall, it doesn't have much of a gas problem.

I'm always lecturing my wife when it comes to dogs cars: Make sure that you can find one that you can live with; don't take home the first one that you find adorable. Maybe next time she'll listen.

Small and sporty car tests and videos

The two complementary test groups in the October 2007 issue prove car buyers don't need to break the bank to drive fun and affordable models.

The full road tests from the magazine have been posted at ConsumerReports.org, along with videos featuring our Auto Test Center engineers Jake Fisher, Tom Mutchler, and Jennifer Stockburger. These experts bring the tests to life by driving the cars and demonstrating the strengths and weaknesses of each model.

"Small Wonders" features the Hyundai Elantra, Mitsubishi Lancer, Nissan Sentra, and Scion xB. Watch the videos.

"Sporty Cars" features the Mini Cooper S, Mazdaspeed3, and Saturn Sky has also been reproduced. These cars were covered in a comparison article in print, though we will soon have full road tests posted in the model overview pages (available to online subscribers). Watch the videos.

--Jeff Bartlett

Mazdaspeed3 - Torque steering it straight

We make a big deal about buying all of the cars that we test. That's because press cars don't always represent what you, the consumer, can buy off of the dealer's lot. Sometimes they lack options you'd expect, like a sunroof or four-wheel drive. With a sunroof-less model, for example, an automotive journalist might think that it's quiet. But if most of the cars sold to the general public come with sunroofs, the cabin might not be as serene as you'd think from that review. Likewise, a model without four- or all-wheel drive will likely produce better fuel economy and acceleration.

Sometimes press-fleet cars are the best examples of the model that will never be built, or at least sold to the public. Some are gone over with a fine-tooth comb to help hide or accentuate certain traits. And sometimes their condition is just the opposite, especially after several thousand miles at the hands of automotive journalists. We wouldn't count on a press-fleet car to be 100-percent representative of what you'll get at a local dealer.

That seems to be the case with the Mazdaspeed3 (model overview available to online subscribers). Like other enthusiasts, we read all of the "buff" magazines, too. Curiously, some of these reviews mention heavy torque steer--the steering wheel squirms when you accelerate hard--but some of them say this isn't an issue.

We've experienced this same difference of opinion, even among the CR staff. When I picked up our test car from the dealer and accelerated hard onto the freeway, it tracked straight and true. Jake Fisher, one of my fellow engineers here at the track and an avid racer, commented how well the car puts down its 263-hp through just the two front wheels. This is probably due to the car's standard limited-slip differential and the "Mazda Advanced Torque Management System," which bleeds off boost in some situations to keep things in check.

But another colleague, Managing Editor Jon Linkov, commented that a Mazdaspeed3 press car he drove at a motoring journalist organization track event in California torque steered quite a bit on both the street and the track. As an experienced driving instructor, Jon also knows his way around a racetrack, so I don't discount what he said.

But it makes me wonder: could the press car he was driving (and that some of the magazines have driven) have a cooked limited slip? (One press car mile probably equals ten normal-owner miles, especially on a car with such hooligan-potential as the Mazdaspeed3.) Or, maybe the boost has been cranked up a bit for the press car. Either scenario might explain the difference between that car and the one we bought... For our money, literally, the Mazdaspeed3 tracks true.

--Tom Mutchler

Read "Mazdaspeed3 faces the digital sound barrier."

Just in: Scion xB

As my esteemed colleague Jim Travers blogged on last month, we've recently picked up our 2008 Scion xB (available to online subscribers) and have been racking up break-in miles. To put the new car into perspective, think of the thin, trim cheeky previous xB graduating from high school and gaining its "freshman 15" in college. The new xB has grown considerably in size and weight; it's now 12 inches longer and 650 pounds heavier than the last xB automatic we tested.

But unlike a student, who only has an expanding waistline to show for binging at the buffet, the xB gained some benefits from this growth. The new xB is a considerably more refined traveling companion, with less noise and a better ride. Plus, with 50 more horsepower, the xB is now much zippier, even with the automatic. New curtain air bags and standard stability control--which the old xB had as well--add up to a rather complete safety package at a starting price of $16,230.

At first glance, though, not everything has improved. Picture the old xB being squashed under a giant foot, a la Monty Python. It got wider and longer, and the windows all got shorter. The old xB used to be like driving in a greenhouse, with huge windows and thin pillars. This xB is a bit like a shrunken FJ Cruiser; it's depressingly dark inside with a compromised view.

Making things worse, we're still looking for the check box on the order form for "Rear third-quarter window delete" that we seemed to have checked off. There is a huge C-pillar, even though the interior wall trim is contoured to accommodate a window cutout. (Maybe that space is intended to allow customizers to install half-moon windows like they did in groovy 1970s custom vans.)

For now, staff opinions are split on the xB. Some could drive it everyday as cheap wheels, enjoying the small surprise-and-delight touches like lighted door sills and the funky green paint. Others aren't swayed, citing driving position and visibility shortcomings. We'll see how it all sorts out in our testing, with the final report scheduled for the October issue.

--Tom Mutchler

99.9 mpg in a Mini Cooper!

I love trip computers. Especially when you turn on the "instant mpg" feature. Go down a hill in even a gas-guzzling Navigator and - shazam! - the truck is getting 99.9 mpg. I think this is a hoot. Who ever thought a 6,200-pound monster of an SUV would ever achieve such a feat?!

While driving my son to soccer practice recently in the Mini Cooper S, I had the "instant mpg" display active on the tiny screen in the lower part of the tachometer. As I observed the car attaining this incredible mpg down a hill, I thought, "Who really believes this?" I mean, when you're hammering the Mini's turbocharged engine, the instant mpg falls quicker than a yodeling first-round American Idol contestant. Who's surprised that you're not maximizing the car's fuel efficiency when you're driving hard? And how often can you drive down hills to and from your job to get this 99.9 mpg?

Trip computers have many useful features--I'm especially fond of the distance-to-empty display--but the instant mpg? The only reason to look at this gizmo is to highlight the appalling fuel economy you get when you accelerate hard. Admittedly, keeping an eye on this display can help modify your driving habits to attain better fuel economy. So, if you didn't know this already, hard acceleration = poor mpg. And frequent descents make you feel like the king of the green world.

May all your commuting be down hill...

--Mike Quincy

Measuring fuel economy progress

In examining our data for the story, "Which companies make the best cars?" in the April 2007 issue, we found that a few problems stood out that explain why many cars from U.S. automakers don't score as well in our Ratings as those from some foreign companies: fuel economy, handling, braking, standard safety equipment, and crash test scores. Through the analysis, we dug deep into fuel economy to truly understand its impact across models and brands. While this research influenced the published text, there was more insight to be drawn from the number crunching than space allowed.

In looking at fuel economy, we wanted to be fair to all automakers and not penalize some manufacturers for building more large trucks than others. So, we didn't count pickups in our assessment. We also didn't include sports cars or minivans because not all automakers build them. Instead, we compared only sedans and SUVs made by major manufacturers. And we separated small sedans and SUVs into separate categories to compare them only with each other.

For our comparison, we judged fuel economy versus acceleration, or how much performance automakers achieved per gallon of fuel burned. We chose this basis of comparison for two reasons. First, it rewards automakers that improve fuel economy without sacrificing performance. And second, it doesn't favor one fuel-saving technology over another.

In the end, we found that BMW, Honda, Mazda, and Toyota offered the most performance per gallon in their sedans and SUVs, while Chrysler, Ford, GM, Hyundai, and Subaru offered the least. This is based on our measured overall mpg and 0-60 mph times.

The other thing that stood out in reviewing manufacturers' performance in fuel economy is how unimpressive mileage ratings are overall. In Consumer Reports testing, current midsized SUVs, such as the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, Ford Explorer, and Toyota Highlander, average just 16 mpg overall. Family sedans, like the Honda Accord and Pontiac G6, do a little better, averaging 22 mpg.

Taking a simple view without factoring sales volume and fleet mix, we see that on average the small sedans we've tested (excluding hybrids) miss the Federal goal of 27.5 mpg that all automakers' cars are supposed to meet under the current Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. They only get about 26 mpg overall in our real-world testing. Other than hybrids and diesels, the only vehicles that surpass the requirement, are even smaller cars like those tested in our December group, including the Nissan Versa, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent and Toyota Yaris. And even they return just a little more than the law requires. The 10 inexpensive, so-called misers we recently tested could muster an average of only 30.6 mpg overall. Without paying a premium for a hybrid or choosing a diesel, unfortunately that's about the best consumers can do 35 years after the government began mandating higher fuel economy under CAFE.

We've reported before on how CAFE ratings don't reflect real-world mileage and how the government will address that later this year. But one might have hoped that, "real" numbers or not, higher fuel economy targets would have brought significant real-world improvements. But our data shows that while fuel-saving technology has advanced, automakers have largely traded off actual fuel economy gains for other benefits.

Today's best fuel-sippers are much bigger, safer, quicker, cleaner, more reliable, better equipped, and more comfortable than economy cars of the early 1970s. Back then, the best barebones car Consumer Reports tested crossed the 30-mpg threshold. While consumers are certainly getting a better overall package, the fuel-economy figures are not leaps and bounds better in the 21st century. That there are not small cars now with modern safety equipment that get even better mileage seems like an unfortunate, missed opportunity as America's oil addiction deepens.

--Eric Evarts

From the logbook: Suzuki SX4

Driving our new SX4 reminds me of the Spring break road trip I took with my college buddies 21 years ago. Three of us drove to the beach in St. Petersburg, Florida, in a “space blue over liberty white” Subaru XT coupe. It had a tiny backseat, adjustable height suspension, a slow reacting 111-hp turbocharged engine, on-demand all-wheel drive, and a moveable and brightly lighted instrument cluster that made the designers of the Asteroids video game jealous.

The SX4– adds two rear doors, doesn’t bother with the over exuberant displays, but retains the on-demand all-wheel drive system. It also has a 143-hp four-cylinder engine. And compared to the Subie, the SX4 comes standard with ABS, side- and curtain air bags. We bought one with the Sport package and four-speed automatic transmission ($17,994), which includes stability control. Admittedly, many of these safety features were as far away for most automakers as the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 were to Atari.

Like the earliest Subarus, the SX4 brings back the compelling idea of affordable AWD. To see how this new Suzuki is holding up, take a look at the first impressions our car experts have scrawled so far in the SX4’s logbook:

“Well equipped for an $18K car.”

"The engine’s 143 hp seems optimistic; it gets boomy and buzzy in hard acceleration."

"Automatic transmission’s programming is really bad; it up shifts way too early and then hunts on even minor highway grades."

"Very stiff ride."

"It’s nimble with a wonderful driving position and excellent visibility."

"Simple controls are well-sized for convenient use."

"Nice fit and finish in the class with tight gaps, cloth inserts, and quality feel for most controls."

"Comfortable seating in front; [seating] is good in the rear, but leg room is so-so."

"Twelve-gallon tank translates into a really short cruising range."

"So many acronyms--AWD, ATC, ESC--for so little money."

"Why is the headlight indicator on when the lights are off?"

"Plenty of head room [according to our tallest tester]."

"Overall, this is a cheerful little runabout and a pleasant surprise."

"If only the [Dodge] Caliber was as good as this SX4."

Certainly the four-door SX4 would provide three college students a more comfortable transport to Spring break beaches than the old XT, though without the distracting (but occasionally entertaining) dash display light show. Check back for more insights on the SX4 as testing continues.

--Mike Quincy

Lost Focus

When the Ford Focus came out in 1999, it was such a logical, yet fun car that truly took the small sedan class to a new level. It had a tall stance for easy access, it rode like a sophisticated European sedan, and handled with agility and finesse. It was also fun to look at, boasting sharp edges that echoed the theme in the interior. It wasn't for nothing that the Focus became CR's top-rated small sedan and stayed there for a few years. It was really a focused car-no pun intended.

The 2008 freshening, at least to me, is clearly a regression. A quick examination of the interior reveals that there's no big remote trunk release you could reach to operate through the open driver's window. The prominent triangle-shaped hazard light switch on the center stack has been replaced with a tiny button on top of the steering column. There used to be four assist-grip handles above all four door, but no more. The stubby and precise stalks are also gone in favor of one stalk on the left side of the steering column; there is no more dedicated wiper stalk on the right. At least standard curtain air bags have been fitted. Let's hope they didn't sacrifice the telescopic steering wheel in the process of adapting the Microsoft-developed Sync system.

And the styling? The original looked so solid and well-proportioned, yet understated. The new one looks wimpy and reminds some of my colleagues of the defunct Saturn Ion. Has someone instituted a front fender vent on every new Jaguar, Land Rover and Ford vehicles lately? This styling detail is becoming such an overplayed cliché'.

Finally, there is no more three-door hatchback, five-door hatchback or wagon variants. But the ZX2, essentially a two-door sedan version trying to pass as a coupe, returns. Returns? Yes, from the Escort days. Does that mean that the next Focus redesign will revert to Ford's small car Pinto days?

--Gabe Shenhar

Personal picks: Economy cars, part 4

In the final installment this month, Consumer Reports writers offer their own views on the budget cars featured in the December 2006 issue.

Jim Travers: There are only two good reasons to buy a Smart ForTwo. One is if you live in a place where parking is tight. The other is if you're lonely. When you drive a ForTwo, everybody wants to talk to you. It helps if you're forlorn enough you don't mind having the same conversation over and over again.

If you have both parking and friends, anything in our December group of subcompacts is a better bet. They all have seating for four, plus room for luggage.  All cost thousands less than the two-seater Smart's almost $22,000 price tag and get mileage close enough to the ForTwo's that you're unlikely to ever make up the difference in fuel savings. Plus, in terms of safety in the land of the giant SUV, it's reassuring to have a little more car around you.

The ForTwo may make sense in Europe, but unless the next-generation model, said to be coming to the United States in 2008 is much more impressive, even its expected $15,000 price won't offset its shortcomings compared against its four-door subcompact rivals.

Of the rest of the group, the Honda Fit gets bonus points for utility with its foldable, versatile interior that allows it to double as a mini-minivan. But what really seals my deal is that the Fit is a hoot to drive, particularly the Sport model with the five-speed manual. A balanced chassis, plenty of grip, and a rev-happy yet economical engine are always a good combination. For me, the Fit is just a Smarter choice.

Mike Quincy: I think the Mazda 3 is the best bet in this category. I realize that adding a few options blows the price out of the water, but this car's combination of fun, finesse and frugality are too good to pass up. The base i Sport model with the manual transmission, ABS/air bag package and A/C comes to around $15,600 before haggling - not a far cry from this group's low of $12,500 (Toyota Yaris) and high of $16,600 (Nissan Versa). I'd rather a Mazda 3 with the 2.3-liter engine, but even the cheapest (an s Sport) would cost almost $18,000 with the side air bags. Perhaps a good used model is the one to buy.

Personal picks: Economy cars, part 3

Consumer Reports engineers offer their own views on the budget cars featured in the December 2006 issue.

Rick Small: For my size (about 6' 3") I fit best in the Hyundai Accent or Kia Rio. The seat cushions in both can be tilted and I can get the most thigh support and most comfortable driving position for my frame. They handle well, have nice interiors, a long warranty, and Korean car reliability, in general, is not as much of a crapshoot as it used to be. The Honda Fit is the sporty one of this month's group. It has versatile interior features, but I don't 'fit' in it as well as the others. The Nissan Versa has a roomy back seat, but the front seat (again) wasn't as comfy; plus, it costs more than the Accent or Rio.

Gabe Shenhar: There's no question that the Honda Fit is the most interesting car here. It has an amazingly creative interior packaging that offers a lot of versatility. It also drives nicely, and you don't feel like you've been shortchanged with a cheesy interior as you would in most competing models. But my personal choice would be the Mini Cooper. Ideally, I'd opt for the S supercharged model, but if my goal is to be frugal, I'd go with the base. Granted, I'll be getting "only" 31 mpg instead of 34 with the manual Fit, but the Mini's go-kart like handling and cool looks more than make up for that loss. Of course, the Mini is also $4,000 more expensive, which might be justifiable considering the Mini's low depreciation.

Personal Picks: Economy cars, part 2

Consumer Reports editors offer their own views on the budget cars featured in the December 2006 issue.

Jeff Bartlett: Purchasing an entry-level, subcompact car brings certain inherent compromises, though the December group reaffirmed to me that the concessions vary from model to model. The Honda Fit carries instant appeal for me, with its clever second-row flip-and-fold seat, well-executed controls, surprising interior space, and impressive fuel economy. However, it only takes one unwelcome design element to send me cruising to the next dealership. In this case, the narrow footwell and lack of a proper dead pedal rendered this Honda unFit for me. There is no position I could find comfortable to place my left foot. Further, the stiff, choppy ride elicited passenger complaints not heard on familiar roads in other models. The Toyota Yaris pleased me more than some testers with its overall livability. From behind the wheel, the Yaris feels good to me--polished even--in daily commuting, but its key flaws are ever-present in my field of view. The Yaris ruined our potential relationship by being the automotive equivalent of a beautiful girlfriend with a hair-sprouting chin mole; I just couldn't stop staring at the featureless, textured dash that looks more like plastic lawn furniture than function-rich instrument panel and an oddly placed gauge cluster tucked within a center-dash cyclopean binnacle. The South Korean twins impressed with a decent overall feel, but the Accent and Rio deal killer for me is the ho-hum fuel economy. Given a choice, I want it all. The closest this group came for me is the Nissan Versa--a giant among the class, with a relatively spacious cabin and fewer compromises. Its wide seats, attractive dash, nice interior details, roomy back seat, and compliant ride made it the most appealing of these cars on my weekly commute. Now, if only the fuel economy was a little better...

Jon Linkov: After driving our December test cars--and repeatedly looking at the copies of the window sticker in their glove boxes--I keep coming to the same conclusion: unless I had to have a brand-new vehicle, I'd opt for a reliable used car over any of these small cars.

Buyers can find a used vehicle in the same price range that is roomier, has more features, has a proven reliability record, and delivers good fuel economy. Of the small cars we tested, only the Honda Fit is CR recommended, and none of the tested cars can match the features and roominess of some used models.

For example, our upcoming 2007 Used Car Buying Guide has a detailed list of reliable used cars by price range. For the same $14,000-16,000 our tested small cars cost, consumers could find a 2001 Acura MDX, a 2004 Buick Regal, a 2004 Honda Civic Hybrid, a 2005 Hyundai Santa Fe, a 2004 Nissan Altima, a 2003 Subaru Impreza WRX, a 2003 Toyota RAV4, or even a 2002 Volvo S60. Many of these would still be under warranty, as well. Looking at more affordable cars, there are several appealing options for small, efficient models. Ultimately, shoppers should consider all their options, even used cars.

Personal Picks: Economy cars, part 1

Within this month's magazine test category (budget cars) we've got another round of inside looks as to what models we'd personally choose. A far cry from the October ultra-performance and luxury sports cars or November three-row SUVs and wagons (available to ConsumerReports.org subscribers only), these are models where gas-sipping is king over speed and bling. Here are some of our economy-style "Personal Picks":

Gene Petersen: I'm very attracted to the Honda Fit's versatility and handling, but the awkward driving position gives me some pause to consider something else. I like the Kia Rio5 for its hatchback feature, comfortable seating, and very good driving position. The car looks well built with a nicely finished interior. Handling and ride is befitting of some larger family cars. The manual transmission would be my choice despite the rope-a-dope feel to the shifter--it rewards you with about three mpg over the automatic. Overall, the Kia does not do much wrong and so seems like a logical choice.

Tom Mutchler: Of all of the cars in this group, I most enjoyed driving the Focus ZX3. I took several road trips with it and tremendously enjoyed its seemingly telepathic steering and comfortable ride, plus its smooth and willing engine. But, it has some downfalls - particularly sparse safety equipment and a cheap, noisy interior.
So, my vote goes to the second-generation Europe-only Focus's platform-mate: the Mazda 3i. Even with adding air conditioning, ABS, and curtain air bags, a manual tranny 3i sedan stickers about $15,600. Same engine as the Focus, more safety gear, nicer interior, and better reliability.

But if I wanted cheap and fun to drive, I'd find a used 2004 Focus ZX3 with the bigger 2.3-liter engine found in the Mazda 3s and optional ABS. Depreciation is swift and steep, so it gives me a starting point around $9,000. A big bonus is that Ford sells factory performance parts from the sadly defunct SVT Focus for dirt cheap: adding the SVT wheels ($120 each) and suspension bits (a bargain $266) plus another $500 for tires would get me a fantastic handling car.

From the logbook: Smart ForTwo

One of my colleagues suggested calling this the "Not-So-Smart Car" and one went so far as to write "Dumb Car" in the logbook. Our First Look of this roller skate on wheels praised its excellent fuel economy (45 mpg average) but also criticized its overall performance, going so far as to call it "the slowest, current production vehicle that Consumer Reports has tested."

Does the Smart need more education? Our engineers take it to school:

"Surprisingly, it doesn't feel dinky when you drive it - but then you get out and laugh."

"The semi-automatic transmission is slow to change and makes the car nod forward and back as it shifts...makes me sea sick."

"Steering is a bit vague and needs constant adjustments on the highway."

"Excellent maneuverability, visibility, access, parking ease, and turning circle."

"The [three-cylinder] diesel engine is OK off the line, but the car is slow and loses speed quickly on hills."

"You have to have a sense of humor about this car."

"Would be OK in a retirement village."

"The transmission's auto mode makes me want to walk home...works better in manual [mode] because you can anticipate the shifts to eliminate the bucking."

"This car is only a fashion statement... for people who don't know better."

"God help me if I hit a deer!"

"Drove it into Hartford--it makes sense in the city, where it keeps up with other cars, zips into holes in traffic, and fits in tiny spots."

"For this money [about $22,000], a Toyota Prius gets similar mpg and is infinitely more practical."

"Gets looks like the Viper--probably better fuel economy, though."

"Everyone smiles when they see this car...like it belongs in the circus."

Keep in mind that this car will be replaced by a new model that DaimlerChrysler will be bringing to the U.S. for 2008. We'll have more on this miniature automobile in the months to come.

--Mike Quincy

From the logbook: Nissan Versa

With the Nissan lineup lacking a compelling entry-level model and a gas-prices making fuel economy  a primary concern for new-car shoppers, the new Versa couldn't have come at a better time. Consumer Reports purchased a Versa 1.8 S hatchback with a six-speed manual, carrying a sticker price of $14,015.

Has this car managed to successfully supersede the Sentra? Take a look at the initial comments from our auto engineers:

"[This is a] competent small car, with a decent ride and noise levels."

"Having a sixth gear is a pleasant surprise in this class."

"Not fast, but smooth and relatively quiet."

"Only $14,000? I'm floored. It's roomy and impressive inside. Feels like an Infiniti compared to the [Toyota] Yaris."

"It's a good deal narrower outside than the Mazda3 or Dodge Caliber, but you don't notice [the difference] in the spacious cabin."

"Controls are easy to see and reach. Fit-and-finish is good, too."

"Fun to drive with agile handling and a smooth, free-revving engine.

"Amazingly roomy in the rear."

"Plush interior with the softest door armrests out there."

"Good thing the engine likes to rev--you need to spin it out and row the clunky shifter to keep up and merge with traffic."

"Decent seats, but could use more lumbar [support]."

"Not as fun to drive as the [Honda] Fit but probably nicer to live with."

"Good ride and handling...what a steal"

We'll have more on the Versa and other so-called "economy cars" soon.

--Mike Quincy

From the logbook: Kia Rio5 SX

Not surprisingly, with the increased price of gas, the popularity of small, fuel-efficient cars has gone up. We’re putting together a group of frugal, four-cylinder fuel sippers for an upcoming issue of Consumer Reports, including the Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit and Nissan Versa, among others. We currently have a “First Look” of the Honda Fit, and you’ll see more about the rest of this group soon.

For now, here’s a snapshot of our initial impressions of another model that will compete in this petrol-miser competition: the manual transmission Kia Rio5 SX.

“Not a bad ride and relatively quiet, too.”

“Lousy steering feel and fairly soggy handling.”

“The car has odd gearing: At 80 mph, the engine is turning 4,000 rpm, making a highway cruise frenetic and wasting fuel.”

“Interior is spacious enough for four, and fit and finish seems above average except for the shifter boot that (strangely) unzips itself.”

“Rope-a-dope shifter and low clutch feel takes the fun out of using a manual [transmission].”

“[My] kids got a kick out of the wind-up windows and were playing with them as I would have done with the first power windows car I rode in…how times have changed.”

“Controls are nice, big and well-situated for easy use.”

“I like the seat cushion tilt knobs, but the hard, flat seat gets old after about 45 minutes.”

“Nice looking interior, but I’d give up the metal pedal covers and fog lights for power mirrors and central locking--having to manually lock the hatch is dumb.”

“Engine lacks low- and mid-range torque, particularly when passengers are on board. Still, it’s a nice little commuter with a much better driving position than the Toyota Yaris.”

There’s more to come from our test track for those interested in maximizing fuel economy.

--Mike Quincy

Looking smart

CR Engineer Thomas Mutchler finds the small car leaves a big impression:

One of the cool thing