You're better off with a 2005 Honda Odyssey (also starts at $25k). It's got almost 3 times the cargo capacity of the audi, more horsepower (255hp), more torque, and it's the safest car on the road today. It's handling rivals most cars.
Oh, and it gets 28 mpg on the the highway, higher than that puny audi. Did I mention it's a Honda?
{Edit: For the record, I own a 2005 Honda Odyssey)
You're better off with a 2005 Honda Odyssey (also starts at $25k). It's got almost 3 times the cargo capacity of the audi, more horsepower (255hp), more torque, and it's the safest car on the road today. It's handling rivals most cars.
Oh, and it gets 28 mpg on the the highway, higher than that puny audi. Did I mention it's a Honda?
{Edit: For the record, I own a 2005 Honda Odyssey)
I also own a Honda Odyssey, which is a good minivan (probably the best minivan). If you are looking for a minivan, that is the one.
But its handling is much worse than any of the cars we are talking about, and it is slow (the fastest minivan, but still slow). The materials are very low quality compared to Volvo, BMW, Audi, or even VW. It is plain jane, nice for a minivan, but not nice enough to compete with the V50 or A3.
I also own a Honda Odyssey, which is a good minivan (probably the best minivan). If you are looking for a minivan, that is the one.
But its handling is much worse than any of the cars we are talking about, and it is slow (the fastest minivan, but still slow). The materials are very low quality compared to Volvo, BMW, Audi, or even VW. It is plain jane, nice for a minivan, but not nice enough to compete with the V50 or A3.
You have not driven the 2005 Odyssey. It is a vast improvement. Interior quality and handling are way up (so much so Honda has introduced a $35k+ Touring edition, the flagship of the Honda brand). When Honda was designing the 05 Odyssey, they specifically wanted to achieve "european car handling". And it's not slow: 0-60 in ~8 seconds. All that and it still gets better gas mileage than these tiny wagons with much better safety.
You have not driven the 2005 Odyssey. It is a vast improvement. Interior quality and handling are way up (so much so Honda has introduced a $35k+ Touring edition, the flagship of the Honda brand). When Honda was designing the 05 Odyssey, they specifically wanted to achieve "european car handling". And it's not slow: 0-60 in ~8 seconds. All that and it still gets better gas mileage than these tiny wagons with much better safety.
The wagon is dead.
No matter how good this minivan is, "The wagon is dead" is bullshit.
- No amount of black magic will make a tall vehicle handle as good as an equivalent low one.
- No amount of black magic will give a larger vehicle smaller gas mileage than that of an equivalent smaller one.
Now with those things established, it's clear that if the cargo and people hauling capacity that is desired only fills a wagon, then the optimal car is only that big and no bigger.
If a great fuel consumption is desired, it's time to cut engine power - all modern cars have enough for point to point driving anyway - and pick a diesel. An A3 1.9TDI, for an example, cuts fuel consumption by at least 30% compared to a 2.0TFSI.
Having said all that, there is a general notion that über reliable Japanese cars are great if you want an appliance for getting from point A to point B, but if you want a little fun in your ride a few more mechanical hassles are worth it (and really, modern cars are so vastly superior to their predecessors, it's not like you're choosing between "reliable" and "falls apart" but more like "reliable" and "freakishly reliable").
That's a bit strange view I think. Why can't Japanese cars be fun? Is the RX-8 not fun? Mazda6? S2000? WRX? Lancer Evo?
Personally I think Japanese seem to make more fun cars than anybody else!
Now that we're discussing A3's and equivalents, how about Accord Tourer? I test drove it, the interior seemed very well built and most of all the car was extremely fun to drive. After you pass VTEC revs, the car feels fast at whatever speed. It's like it's telling you "wheee drive faster!" The milder ~150hp version and the ~190hp version felt almost equally fun. Some other cars, like Mercedes, even if they have power, seem to sound like "grrr don't treat me this harshly!" once you want to push them a little.
That's a bit strange view I think. Why can't Japanese cars be fun? Is the RX-8 not fun? Mazda6? S2000? WRX? Lancer Evo?
Personally I think Japanese seem to make more fun cars than anybody else!
Now that we're discussing A3's and equivalents, how about Accord Tourer? I test drove it, the interior seemed very well built and most of all the car was extremely fun to drive. After you pass VTEC revs, the car feels fast at whatever speed. It's like it's telling you "wheee drive faster!" The milder ~150hp version and the ~190hp version felt almost equally fun. Some other cars, like Mercedes, even if they have power, seem to sound like "grrr don't treat me this harshly!" once you want to push them a little.
No matter how good this minivan is, "The wagon is dead" is bullshit.
- No amount of black magic will make a tall vehicle handle as good as an equivalent low one.
- No amount of black magic will give a larger vehicle smaller gas mileage than that of an equivalent smaller one.
You are ignoring market realities. There is no wagon "equivalent" to the Odyessy. The Odyessy at 28mpg (with cylinder deactivation technology) has similar to better gas mileage than all large wagons, most midsize wagons and a large sample of small wagons like the V50. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm
And price matters too. At around $30k, you can get a tiny V50 or A3 with leather or an Odyssey EX with Leather that is safer, offers 3 times the cargo capacity, has more power, better reliability, and superior comfort in a large cabin all the while offering similar to better gas mileage than the V50 or A3. Thus, logically, the Odyessy is the optimal solution.
(As for diesel: diesel here in the US is very dirty, as evident in the poor EPA pollutant ratings for diesel vehicles)
Lately Audi has been pretty damn good. I don't see too many issues with the last two generation A4's.
Here in the greater Seattle area there are bunches of A4 and A6s around. I think Audi owners have been please. My girlfriends mother has a 3.0 A4 and it's been trouble free but then again it's barely over a year old.
Despite the technology sharing that Audi does with VW I find the Audi models have been more reliable than VW. I was eyeballing the Toureg but I've heard too many problems. I wonder if Audi engineers will come out with a better model based on the Toureg.
Okay.. my friend, who goes to UW, drives a '04 TT 1.8T. Last heard, she couldn't even start it up. I agree with the A4s and A6s on the road here tho.
You are ignoring market realities. There is no wagon "equivalent" to the Odyessy. The Odyessy at 28mpg (with cylinder deactivation technology) has similar to better gas mileage than all large wagons, most midsize wagons and a large sample of small wagons like the V50. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm
And price matters too. At around $30k, you can get a tiny V50 or A3 with leather or an Odyssey EX with Leather that is safer, offers 3 times the cargo capacity, has more power, better reliability, and superior comfort in a large cabin all the while offering similar to better gas mileage than the V50 or A3. Thus, logically, the Odyessy is the optimal solution.
(As for diesel: diesel here in the US is very dirty, as evident in the poor EPA pollutant ratings for diesel vehicles)
Um, I'm glad you like your van and all, but trying to claim it is the "optimal solution" is a bit of a stretch.
Driving dynamics matter to me, I get better gas milage, my wagon cost considerably less, it has all the cargo room I need, it's easier to park, and I have no idea what "superior comfort" due to a larger cabin means. Somewhat more power in a much heavier vehicle is a net minus. Did I mention that driving dynamics matter to me?
All of that except for price applies to the Audi wagon.
Again, I'm sure the Odyssey is a fine vehicle, but there's no such thing as the best car for everything.
That is not exactly fair - you are implying that Volvo is using Mazda platforms and parts, when the reverse is true.
Volvo only uses Volvo designs and parts - the rest of Ford is also using them (ford 500, etc). The old S40/V40 were really mitsubishis, but the new S40/V50 is all new and all Volvo (and it kicks a*s - I had a T5 loaner when I took my V70R in last).
You can cut it however you want, but the S40 is built on the same chassis as the Mazda3 and the European Ford Focus. I don't really care if it is a Volvo or a Mazda design: the point is that they are the same. Given the feel of the chassis, I'd be inclined to believe that it's a Mazda part, but if it's a Volvo part, then it's clear that Volvo has grown a lot in the last 10 years.
And yes, I think the S40 has a very nice feel. The comment wasn't meant as an insult. I am more interested, though, in the upcoming Mazdaspeed3, which should be a lot lighter than the volvo, but have AWD and similar engine power. There's no reason for the S40 to be so heavy.
That's a bit strange view I think. Why can't Japanese cars be fun? Is the RX-8 not fun? Mazda6? S2000? WRX? Lancer Evo?
Personally I think Japanese seem to make more fun cars than anybody else!
Generally, JDM cars are really light, surprisingly peppy, and really fun. The Japanese cars made only for the American market (Accord, Corolla, Camry, etc) are the most boring things on the road. They rival the Buick LeSabre. (which, incidentally, is the most reliable car I have ever dealt with - pure bulletproof)
Lastly, Mazda is hard to lump in with the rest of Japanese automakers. If I didn't know they were Japanese, I'd guess French, since they make really quirky cars. (Rotaries, Miller cycle engines, etc). They've also won a LeMans, which is unique to Japanese automakers.
Generally, JDM cars are really light, surprisingly peppy, and really fun. The Japanese cars made only for the American market (Accord, Corolla, Camry, etc) are the most boring things on the road.
I wonder how much that is because our respective standards and how much due to differences in cars.
Like I wrote, our Accords are really fun, even the 150hp model, and we don't even have a 240hp V6 or coupe like you do in the US. Our top of the line is six-speed, 190hp four-cyl.
Corolla is a mundane car here as well. You got the XRS with a little more kick, and priced too high for the market to be good value. We got the T-Sport, two doors, yet more kick, priced even higher (in line with Civic Type-R and so nobody buys the T-Sport).
You are ignoring market realities. There is no wagon "equivalent" to the Odyessy.
Well, I don't know what your market is like. There are very few minivans and SUV's where I live, while hatchbacks, wagons and "space vehicles" (cars set up like a short, but tall wagon) are very popular and every manufacturer offers many of them. By our standards the Odyssey's 12l/100km urban, 8.4l/100km highway is BAD. Very few cars have consumption like that. I note those numbers are about in line with a WRX, it's necessary for a high power vehicle, but then again the WRX does not take 8 seconds to 60mph...
They have the Allroad Quattro already, is that not good?
allroad being discontinued in favor of Toureg based "Pikes Peak". Taureg is the worst vehicle for reliability, period, according to the latest from CNN. Volvo XC90 much better, and less expensive.
My next car will be an XC90 V8 in white with the "inscription" black leather/piano black trim, funds providing.
I recently saw the 9-2X advertised for $26K Canadian, plus delivery costs. While I refuse to buy a new car on principle, this piqued my interest. The notion of a quieter, less ugly, slightly better bolted together WRX is pretty cool. If I'm doubley lucky, it's bound to prove less popular with the boy racers too -- which should keep resale prices down. The used car market is a fascinating thing, the saab buyer is less likely to abuse his impreza too, which makes this a good bet once the first leases start coming in in two more years...
A3: pretty nice around, but not as sporty as I had hoped.
Mazda3: Very good for $17.5k. The 2.3L version I drove has very nice low and mid range, and nice clutch feel.
S40: Feels a lot like the Mazda 3, but with a slightly dulled/softer feel. (Who'd have thunk.) The AWD T5 is very nice, but unless you plan to get that version, the Mazda3 is a much better deal.
VW GTI: It's hard to decide whether I liked this more than the Mazda3. The engine has a more sporty sound to it, and it has that distinctive german feel, but all in all I don't think it performed any better at the limit than did the Mazda3. The GTI feels surprisingly heavy during rapid lane changes, and the transmission has a terrible feel. . Those are the hang ups. (Yes, the one I drove was the MK IV since the new one isn't in america yet.) I'll also point out that the people at the VW dealership sucked.
Subaru WRX: This car was similar to the S40 in most respects, but the performance and feel of the car outshine the S40 AWD T5 handily. It is noisier, though, and ugly. It's also a lot cheaper.
Subaru Legacy GT: Again, I thought this was a better car than the A3 wagon. With 250hp, it really has some pull. The only hang up is the ultra-conservative styling. The A3 is much nicer to look at.
I'm probably going to get the WRX. At this point, I like the fact that it's kind of ugly, if only because I might complement it with an Elise in the future, and want to make the Elise look even cooler in comparison.
Losing your love of rotaries? Why aren't you hunting for a clean end of line RX-7
Not at all. I just need a car with a little bit of storage space and a back seat. I would have bought the RX-8 in an instant, but I wanted a bit more cargo space.
If you remember, until a few weeks ago I used to have a clean, end-of-line RX-7.
Comments
Oh, and it gets 28 mpg on the the highway, higher than that puny audi. Did I mention it's a Honda?
{Edit: For the record, I own a 2005 Honda Odyssey)
BMW 1 series <-> Audi A2
BMW 3 series <-> Audi A3
If a midsize four-seater is needed I'd sooner take a cheaper, more reliable and more powerful WRX, but that's just me.
Originally posted by Existence
You're better off with a 2005 Honda Odyssey (also starts at $25k). It's got almost 3 times the cargo capacity of the audi, more horsepower (255hp), more torque, and it's the safest car on the road today. It's handling rivals most cars.
Oh, and it gets 28 mpg on the the highway, higher than that puny audi. Did I mention it's a Honda?
{Edit: For the record, I own a 2005 Honda Odyssey)
I also own a Honda Odyssey, which is a good minivan (probably the best minivan). If you are looking for a minivan, that is the one.
But its handling is much worse than any of the cars we are talking about, and it is slow (the fastest minivan, but still slow). The materials are very low quality compared to Volvo, BMW, Audi, or even VW. It is plain jane, nice for a minivan, but not nice enough to compete with the V50 or A3.
Originally posted by e1618978
I also own a Honda Odyssey, which is a good minivan (probably the best minivan). If you are looking for a minivan, that is the one.
But its handling is much worse than any of the cars we are talking about, and it is slow (the fastest minivan, but still slow). The materials are very low quality compared to Volvo, BMW, Audi, or even VW. It is plain jane, nice for a minivan, but not nice enough to compete with the V50 or A3.
You have not driven the 2005 Odyssey. It is a vast improvement. Interior quality and handling are way up (so much so Honda has introduced a $35k+ Touring edition, the flagship of the Honda brand). When Honda was designing the 05 Odyssey, they specifically wanted to achieve "european car handling". And it's not slow: 0-60 in ~8 seconds. All that and it still gets better gas mileage than these tiny wagons with much better safety.
The wagon is dead.
Originally posted by Existence
You have not driven the 2005 Odyssey. It is a vast improvement. Interior quality and handling are way up (so much so Honda has introduced a $35k+ Touring edition, the flagship of the Honda brand). When Honda was designing the 05 Odyssey, they specifically wanted to achieve "european car handling". And it's not slow: 0-60 in ~8 seconds. All that and it still gets better gas mileage than these tiny wagons with much better safety.
The wagon is dead.
No matter how good this minivan is, "The wagon is dead" is bullshit.
- No amount of black magic will make a tall vehicle handle as good as an equivalent low one.
- No amount of black magic will give a larger vehicle smaller gas mileage than that of an equivalent smaller one.
Now with those things established, it's clear that if the cargo and people hauling capacity that is desired only fills a wagon, then the optimal car is only that big and no bigger.
If a great fuel consumption is desired, it's time to cut engine power - all modern cars have enough for point to point driving anyway - and pick a diesel. An A3 1.9TDI, for an example, cuts fuel consumption by at least 30% compared to a 2.0TFSI.
Originally posted by addabox
Having said all that, there is a general notion that über reliable Japanese cars are great if you want an appliance for getting from point A to point B, but if you want a little fun in your ride a few more mechanical hassles are worth it (and really, modern cars are so vastly superior to their predecessors, it's not like you're choosing between "reliable" and "falls apart" but more like "reliable" and "freakishly reliable").
That's a bit strange view I think. Why can't Japanese cars be fun? Is the RX-8 not fun? Mazda6? S2000? WRX? Lancer Evo?
Personally I think Japanese seem to make more fun cars than anybody else!
Now that we're discussing A3's and equivalents, how about Accord Tourer? I test drove it, the interior seemed very well built and most of all the car was extremely fun to drive. After you pass VTEC revs, the car feels fast at whatever speed. It's like it's telling you "wheee drive faster!"
Originally posted by Gon
That's a bit strange view I think. Why can't Japanese cars be fun? Is the RX-8 not fun? Mazda6? S2000? WRX? Lancer Evo?
Personally I think Japanese seem to make more fun cars than anybody else!
Now that we're discussing A3's and equivalents, how about Accord Tourer? I test drove it, the interior seemed very well built and most of all the car was extremely fun to drive. After you pass VTEC revs, the car feels fast at whatever speed. It's like it's telling you "wheee drive faster!"
It's a German thing. You wouldn't understand.
Originally posted by Gon
No matter how good this minivan is, "The wagon is dead" is bullshit.
- No amount of black magic will make a tall vehicle handle as good as an equivalent low one.
- No amount of black magic will give a larger vehicle smaller gas mileage than that of an equivalent smaller one.
You are ignoring market realities. There is no wagon "equivalent" to the Odyessy. The Odyessy at 28mpg (with cylinder deactivation technology) has similar to better gas mileage than all large wagons, most midsize wagons and a large sample of small wagons like the V50. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm
And price matters too. At around $30k, you can get a tiny V50 or A3 with leather or an Odyssey EX with Leather that is safer, offers 3 times the cargo capacity, has more power, better reliability, and superior comfort in a large cabin all the while offering similar to better gas mileage than the V50 or A3. Thus, logically, the Odyessy is the optimal solution.
(As for diesel: diesel here in the US is very dirty, as evident in the poor EPA pollutant ratings for diesel vehicles)
Originally posted by hmurchison
Lately Audi has been pretty damn good. I don't see too many issues with the last two generation A4's.
Here in the greater Seattle area there are bunches of A4 and A6s around. I think Audi owners have been please. My girlfriends mother has a 3.0 A4 and it's been trouble free but then again it's barely over a year old.
Despite the technology sharing that Audi does with VW I find the Audi models have been more reliable than VW. I was eyeballing the Toureg but I've heard too many problems. I wonder if Audi engineers will come out with a better model based on the Toureg.
Okay.. my friend, who goes to UW, drives a '04 TT 1.8T. Last heard, she couldn't even start it up. I agree with the A4s and A6s on the road here tho.
Originally posted by Existence
You are ignoring market realities. There is no wagon "equivalent" to the Odyessy. The Odyessy at 28mpg (with cylinder deactivation technology) has similar to better gas mileage than all large wagons, most midsize wagons and a large sample of small wagons like the V50. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm
And price matters too. At around $30k, you can get a tiny V50 or A3 with leather or an Odyssey EX with Leather that is safer, offers 3 times the cargo capacity, has more power, better reliability, and superior comfort in a large cabin all the while offering similar to better gas mileage than the V50 or A3. Thus, logically, the Odyessy is the optimal solution.
(As for diesel: diesel here in the US is very dirty, as evident in the poor EPA pollutant ratings for diesel vehicles)
Um, I'm glad you like your van and all, but trying to claim it is the "optimal solution" is a bit of a stretch.
Driving dynamics matter to me, I get better gas milage, my wagon cost considerably less, it has all the cargo room I need, it's easier to park, and I have no idea what "superior comfort" due to a larger cabin means. Somewhat more power in a much heavier vehicle is a net minus. Did I mention that driving dynamics matter to me?
All of that except for price applies to the Audi wagon.
Again, I'm sure the Odyssey is a fine vehicle, but there's no such thing as the best car for everything.
Originally posted by e1618978
That is not exactly fair - you are implying that Volvo is using Mazda platforms and parts, when the reverse is true.
Volvo only uses Volvo designs and parts - the rest of Ford is also using them (ford 500, etc). The old S40/V40 were really mitsubishis, but the new S40/V50 is all new and all Volvo (and it kicks a*s - I had a T5 loaner when I took my V70R in last).
You can cut it however you want, but the S40 is built on the same chassis as the Mazda3 and the European Ford Focus. I don't really care if it is a Volvo or a Mazda design: the point is that they are the same. Given the feel of the chassis, I'd be inclined to believe that it's a Mazda part, but if it's a Volvo part, then it's clear that Volvo has grown a lot in the last 10 years.
And yes, I think the S40 has a very nice feel. The comment wasn't meant as an insult. I am more interested, though, in the upcoming Mazdaspeed3, which should be a lot lighter than the volvo, but have AWD and similar engine power. There's no reason for the S40 to be so heavy.
Originally posted by Gon
That's a bit strange view I think. Why can't Japanese cars be fun? Is the RX-8 not fun? Mazda6? S2000? WRX? Lancer Evo?
Personally I think Japanese seem to make more fun cars than anybody else!
Generally, JDM cars are really light, surprisingly peppy, and really fun. The Japanese cars made only for the American market (Accord, Corolla, Camry, etc) are the most boring things on the road. They rival the Buick LeSabre. (which, incidentally, is the most reliable car I have ever dealt with - pure bulletproof)
Lastly, Mazda is hard to lump in with the rest of Japanese automakers. If I didn't know they were Japanese, I'd guess French, since they make really quirky cars. (Rotaries, Miller cycle engines, etc). They've also won a LeMans, which is unique to Japanese automakers.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Generally, JDM cars are really light, surprisingly peppy, and really fun. The Japanese cars made only for the American market (Accord, Corolla, Camry, etc) are the most boring things on the road.
I wonder how much that is because our respective standards and how much due to differences in cars.
Like I wrote, our Accords are really fun, even the 150hp model, and we don't even have a 240hp V6 or coupe like you do in the US. Our top of the line is six-speed, 190hp four-cyl.
Corolla is a mundane car here as well. You got the XRS with a little more kick, and priced too high for the market to be good value. We got the T-Sport, two doors, yet more kick, priced even higher (in line with Civic Type-R and so nobody buys the T-Sport).
Originally posted by Existence
You are ignoring market realities. There is no wagon "equivalent" to the Odyessy.
Well, I don't know what your market is like. There are very few minivans and SUV's where I live, while hatchbacks, wagons and "space vehicles" (cars set up like a short, but tall wagon) are very popular and every manufacturer offers many of them. By our standards the Odyssey's 12l/100km urban, 8.4l/100km highway is BAD. Very few cars have consumption like that. I note those numbers are about in line with a WRX, it's necessary for a high power vehicle, but then again the WRX does not take 8 seconds to 60mph...
Originally posted by hmurchison
I was eyeballing the Toureg but I've heard too many problems. I wonder if Audi engineers will come out with a better model based on the Toureg.
They have the Allroad Quattro already, is that not good?
Originally posted by Gon
They have the Allroad Quattro already, is that not good?
allroad being discontinued in favor of Toureg based "Pikes Peak". Taureg is the worst vehicle for reliability, period, according to the latest from CNN. Volvo XC90 much better, and less expensive.
My next car will be an XC90 V8 in white with the "inscription" black leather/piano black trim, funds providing.
A3: pretty nice around, but not as sporty as I had hoped.
Mazda3: Very good for $17.5k. The 2.3L version I drove has very nice low and mid range, and nice clutch feel.
S40: Feels a lot like the Mazda 3, but with a slightly dulled/softer feel. (Who'd have thunk.) The AWD T5 is very nice, but unless you plan to get that version, the Mazda3 is a much better deal.
VW GTI: It's hard to decide whether I liked this more than the Mazda3. The engine has a more sporty sound to it, and it has that distinctive german feel, but all in all I don't think it performed any better at the limit than did the Mazda3. The GTI feels surprisingly heavy during rapid lane changes, and the transmission has a terrible feel. . Those are the hang ups. (Yes, the one I drove was the MK IV since the new one isn't in america yet.) I'll also point out that the people at the VW dealership sucked.
Subaru WRX: This car was similar to the S40 in most respects, but the performance and feel of the car outshine the S40 AWD T5 handily. It is noisier, though, and ugly. It's also a lot cheaper.
Subaru Legacy GT: Again, I thought this was a better car than the A3 wagon. With 250hp, it really has some pull. The only hang up is the ultra-conservative styling. The A3 is much nicer to look at.
I'm probably going to get the WRX. At this point, I like the fact that it's kind of ugly, if only because I might complement it with an Elise in the future, and want to make the Elise look even cooler in comparison.
Originally posted by Matsu
Losing your love of rotaries? Why aren't you hunting for a clean end of line RX-7
Not at all. I just need a car with a little bit of storage space and a back seat. I would have bought the RX-8 in an instant, but I wanted a bit more cargo space.
If you remember, until a few weeks ago I used to have a clean, end-of-line RX-7.