2013 American Top Picks: The best cars born in the USA (compliments of article)

[MrSnuggles]

Woot Sonic made it on the list!!! All i gotta say...
I'm not sure if anyone said anything about it today, but i didnt read it so i shall put it on here now.

2013 American Top Picks: The best cars born in the USA

2013 American Top Picks: The best cars born in the USA - Yahoo! Autos

EDIT: for those that wont go to site here is what i copy/pasted

Budget car: Easy pick here: the Chevrolet Sonic LT sedan with its base 1.8-liter engine scores well—beating the Ford Fiesta sedan we tested—and was reliable in its first year. But the Sonic's goodness depends on how you option it. Although the Sonic LTZ hatchback we tested looks sporty, we were unimpressed by the 1.4-liter turbo/six-speed manual drivetrain and the hatch lacks the sedan's huge trunk.

 

[$ub$onic]

A) no duh a hatch is less space

B) unimpressed with the Almighty 1.4?!?!?!

 

[Kuntryboy865]

I call B.S, pretty much every article and video review I've seen of the sonic praises the 1.4T.

 

[Papasonic]

Gee, I could have had a 1.8.

 

[slitzell]

A) no duh a hatch is less space

B) unimpressed with the Almighty 1.4?!?!?!

Unimpressed with the engine dumbed down to 87, and no tune lol.

 

[$ub$onic]

Some people Dont want to do that. Just get in and drive. Any motor can run great if tuned and built

 

[slitzell]

Some people Dont want to do that. Just get in and drive. Any motor can run great if tuned and built

Lol i am not saying built, and a ten minute plug in as about as quick as it gets. Plus more mpg which benefits the buyer as well. If you cant spend 10min plugging the car in, then you are lazy....

 

[$ub$onic]

Well guess what some people Dont want to do that.

 

[GeneralZod]

I agree with Kuntryboy. This is the first review to trash the 1.4. They like the cruze with the same engine.

 

[ChrisJ]

Both of my 1.4s are stock and I run 87 in them and there is no way I would say they are not better than a 1.8 in every way.


I drove my 1.8 Sonic for 11K and I've got almost 10K on my 1.4 Sonic. The 1.4 not only gets almost 10MPG more than the 1.8, it also has significantly more bottom end power.

 

[ungawd]

A) no duh a hatch is less space

B) unimpressed with the Almighty 1.4?!?!?!

" we were unimpressed by the 1.4-liter turbo/six-speed manual drivetrain"

I'm willing to bet it's more disappointment with the transmission instead of the engine. Every review I've seen has conveyed disapproval of the 6-spd manual.

 

[MrSnuggles]

I loled when i read all the comments and noticed all of them were trash talking the article. haha the only thing i really got out of this article was Amercia and Sonic. I do admit I was kinda shocked to see what they had to say about the 1.4, coming from one of those 1.8L LT Sedans. lol But then again the title does say "American Top Picks" cant argue with Merica as a whole!

 

[MrSnuggles]

I would also like to point out that Chevrolet is on there four times, beating out the competition on pretty much fuel consumption savers etc... So they can make a little of both worlds. Corvette, Camero, and Volt, sonic. And so forth. At least the 1.4 was acknowledged? Some cred?

 

[stoopid]

If you're counting your pennies at the time of purchase (as I and others here were), the 1.8L is a good deal. At stock there's less incentive for getting the 1.4L . I'd have to put more money (tune) into the 1.4L to really get big gains over the 1.8L . So add up the additional cost for the 1.4L on the sticker and cost for the tune. If someone were seeking performance then yes, the 1.4L is the no brainer, but for less money the LT 1.8L is the no brainer economy choice.

Long term I feel the 1.4L is likely the better purchase. The extra fuel efficiency will payback over tens of thousands of miles. But that is rarely a factor if you only have $xx,xxx to spend, want automatic with the cruise package, as was true in my case. My vehicle with all the addons in a 1.4L would have been close to $20k. There's a lot of good vehicles out there for $20k, and I'm not sure the Sonic is competative anymore at that price point.

The article definitely glazes over some important points about the vehicle and its different packages, but then again it's not a full review or intended to be one.

 

[ChrisJ]

Maybe I did my math wrong, but averaging 10MPG better with the 1.4 over a period of 100,000 miles I came up with a $2273 savings at the current $3.50 a gallon fuel cost using the 1.4 turbo over the 1.8 in my situation.


And we all know gas is not staying at $3.50 a gallon (in my area) for the next 5 years.

Obviously not everyone can squeeze 42MPG out of the 1.4 turbo but I can and often do and I always saw 33 from the 1.8.

 

[MrSnuggles]

I think the ultimate choice of fuel sipping transportation devices is a motorcycle. Lets all just get one, and get that 50+mpg, and i wish gas was 3.50. Its still around 3.67 by me, and that went down from 3.85... so gradually decreasing. im pretty sure it wont go down below 3.50 if it ever gets there.

 

[mowcowbell]

I wish I could squeeze 42mpg out of my 1.4L turbo. At 3500 miles on the odometer, I'm barely making 33 mpg. 70% hwy 30% city driving, too.

Just a minor complaint... definitely 33 mpg beats the 17mpg I was getting in my Dodge pickup.

Darin

 

[bornchevy]

I call B.S, pretty much every article and video review I've seen of the sonic praises the 1.4T.

Signed!!

The person that wrote this about the 1.4T should be re-assigned to reviews of housewares.

I wish I could squeeze 42mpg out of my 1.4L turbo. At 3500 miles on the odometer, I'm barely making 33 mpg. 70% hwy 30% city driving, too.

Just a minor complaint... definitely 33 mpg beats the 17mpg I was getting in my Dodge pickup.

Darin

I have the same "problem".. of course it could be our lead feet causing it maybe?

I can get 35 at a steady 75 if I baby it but seriously.. who wants to??!

If I hot rod up to 75 then race around between 75-90* I still get 32 mpg.

Also my mileage goes up to 42-45 if I drop my speed to 65.

* In a controlled environment on a closed road with adult supervision.

 

[ChrisJ]

I think the ultimate choice of fuel sipping transportation devices is a motorcycle. Lets all just get one, and get that 50+mpg, and i wish gas was 3.50. Its still around 3.67 by me, and that went down from 3.85... so gradually decreasing. im pretty sure it wont go down below 3.50 if it ever gets there.

Between people trying to kill me even in my Sonic which would be far far worse on a motorcycle, the weather and bugs, a motorcycle isn't worth the 10mpg gain over the Sonic.

 

[stoopid]

Maybe I did my math wrong, but averaging 10MPG better with the 1.4 over a period of 100,000 miles I came up with a $2273 savings at the current $3.50 a gallon fuel cost using the 1.4 turbo over the 1.8 in my situation.


And we all know gas is not staying at $3.50 a gallon (in my area) for the next 5 years.

Obviously not everyone can squeeze 42MPG out of the 1.4 turbo but I can and often do and I always saw 33 from the 1.8.

I actually get more than that ($2,916). That number is generous because it assumes the 1.8L gets 30mpg mixed, and the 1.4L 40mpg mixed to determine the average cost per mile. Using those numbers the cost per mile for the 1.8L is $0.11666 and for the 1.4L $0.0875 . It's unlikely most drivers will see the 40mpg with the 1.4L, and many with the 1.8L are not seeing 30mpg. But relative cost savings is there regardless. That's why in the long term the 1.4L is the better buy, assuming all other costs (maintenance) remain flat. But for those on a tight budget 1.4L is more money, so in the near term the 1.8L will always appear to be the better deal. The article appeared to be coming from the school of initial value, in which case the 1.8L is indeed 'cheaper'.

Also, I did some poking around in the hatchback at the showroom recently when getting my oil changed. I'm happier with the trunk versus the hatch, it just seems I can carry more stuff in my trunk than I would in the hatch. It's rare I fold down the seats, or fill the vehicle to capacity. I carry items at all times for work that would effectively eat up all the space in the rear 'trunk' of the hatch, but with the sedan I have enough room for more stuff without having to drop the seats down. The hatch only seems to be of benefit if you stuff the car full of things, or large items, and take advantage of that additional vertical cubic feet.

I know there's a strong contingency on this forum of 1.4L hatch fans, but it isn't the best fit for everyone. If given the choice and money wasn't a question I'd go for a 1.4L sedan.