By Scott Evans; March 25, 2013
Dodge Dart vs. Honda
Civic vs. Kia Forte vs. Mazda3 vs. Nissan Sentra
RANKING
5th Place: Nissan Sentra
Poor handling, poor fuel economy, and a shorter feature list outweigh a low
price and big back seat.
4th Place: Honda Civic
A weak drivetrain, poor fuel economy, and frustrating nav system sank a solid
entry.
3rd Place: Dodge Dart
Sport handling and a long list of features weren't enough to overcome a high
price and terrible gas mileage.
2nd Place: Mazda3
An enthusiast's special and fuel-sipper to boot, weighed down by a heavy price
tag and missing features.
1st Place: Kia Forte
Handles well, sips fuel, loaded with exclusive features, and priced just right.
What's not to like?
According to the old maxim, Americans don't like small cars. We buy trucks by
the truckload and midsize sedans more than any other car segment. But because
of gas prices, the tough economy, or both, the compact segment is growing. In
2012, it accounted for roughly 13 percent of the U.S. car market, with most
entrants registering sales increases over 2011. With frugality in vogue,
automakers expect the segment to keep growing during the next several years.
Last year, the Mazda3 went bumper to bumper with the Chevrolet Cruze, Ford
Focus, Honda Civic, Hyundai Elantra, and Volkswagen Jetta in a battle of
40-mpg-capable cars. The Mazda won because we framed the conversation thus: Is
there a 40-mpg car you'd want to own? The question was directed at the
enthusiast who wants a high-efficiency car that's also fun to drive. In that
measure, the Mazda was without question the Goldilocks car. It finished
mid-pack on fuel economy, but it was far and away the driver's choice.
Since then, three new pretenders to the throne have arisen, and a fourth made
an emergency update to better position it against the competition. More
important, we're no longer asking which is the best sports car, but which is
the best all-around car for the average consumer. We're looking for the car
that offers the best value, content, fuel economy, and safety in addition to
performance. It's a whole new ballgame.
RIDE & HANDLING
In claiming its previous victory, the Mazda3 dazzled the judges with its crisp,
natural steering feel; responsive, unshakable chassis; and sport sedan
handling. It led this competition with the same trump card, at least in the
dry. As it happened, rain struck during our evaluation loops, and opinions of
the Mazda changed quickly. Those who drove it in the dry were again smitten
with its excellent handling on the winding road portion. Those who drove it in
the wet, however, told a different tale. Editors found it breaking loose at
both ends on wet roads when pushed hard, eroding confidence. One point we all
agreed on was the ride quality, which was among the best in the group.
Another car that divided
the judges was the Dodge Dart. Opinions were mixed on the thick, meaty steering
wheel -- while it felt direct, the steering was surprisingly heavy. Also heavy
was the car itself, outweighing the nearest competitor by more than 300 pounds,
and it felt heavy from behind the wheel. The Dart threw its heft into a corner,
but once the weight transferred, it was a smooth and stable handler. The weight
made the car feel planted on the road, but it also hurt the ride quality,
though it wasn't the worst in the group.
In terms of ride and handling, the worst was the Nissan Sentra. There wasn't a
large difference in ride quality among the group, but the Sentra was at the
bottom of the spectrum. Where it really disappointed was in handling. The
Sentra received constant complaints of terminal understeer, egregious body
roll, and lifeless steering, and it lacked grip. Said associate online editor
Karla Sanchez: "This car handled so terribly, I couldn't wait until the
loop was over."
On the opposite end of
the spectrum, the Kia Forte surprised everyone. In general, we've known Kias to
have rough rides and elastic-feeling steering, but not this car. The ride was
pleasantly firm, almost sporty, and the steering felt naturally weighted and
responsive, though it still provided no feedback. Many editors found it the
second-most fun car to drive behind the Mazda.
Somewhere in the middle was the Civic. The lightest of the group, it felt that
way on the road. Ride quality and handling both fell in the middle of the pack,
though the steering took some hits. Editor-in-chief Edward Loh found that the
"light steering feels artificial and requires jerky inputs. Initial input
doesn't seem to do much, so I kept dialing in more and more steering. Hard to
be smooth."
PERFORMANCE
The Kia surprised us at
the track. It was the quickest to 60 mph by half a second and stopped the shortest
from the same speed by 2 feet. On our skidpad, it put up respectable grip
numbers and was the quickest around our figure-eight course. Out in the real
world, we found the power strong compared with the rest of the group, and the
transmission shifted quickly and smoothly and seemed to never select the wrong
gear.
Less surprising was the poor showing from the Sentra. It was the slowest to
reach 60 mph and needed the longest distance to stop. The car also was slow to
accelerate and lacked brake bite. The primary culprit in drivetrain complaints
was the continuously variable transmission, which all agreed was slow to
respond and then provided insufficient additional leverage when it did. Despite
its poor handling on the road and lowest average g on the figure-eight test,
the Sentra did manage to tie the Dart for the highest average on the skidpad.
The Dart was a
disappointment. Its raspy exhaust and turbocharged engine seemed to promise
performance, but its jog to 60 mph fell right in the middle of the pack, as did
its stopping distance. As noted above, it posted the highest average g on the
skidpad and the figure eight, but tied the Mazda for second in figure-eight lap
time. Where the Dart really fell down was in everyday driving. The dual-clutch
transmission was jerky and often seemed confused in automatic mode, whether
dicing in the city or carving a canyon. The only remedy was to manually shift
using the gear stick, which delivered fairly quick and crisp shifts, though it
upshifted automatically at redline.
We were likewise disappointed in the Civic. The engine felt weak at low rpm,
but like the Sentra, the fault lies squarely with the transmission. The aging
five-speed gearbox was slow to shift and had no manual mode. This carried over
to the track, where it was the second slowest to 60 mph and the slowest around
the figure eight. Its low curb weight contributed to the second shortest
stopping distance, but it posted mid-pack average g numbers.
The Mazda3 was a curiosity rather than a disappointment. Despite its stellar
dry performance on the road, it didn't post the big numbers at the track. It
was the second quickest to 60 mph and around the figure eight, but dead last on
the skidpad. It also finished third in braking. Somehow, though, it all came together
on real-world roads, making the Mazda3 the clear driver's favorite.
EFFICIENCY
The two cars with the
most overt technological approaches to fuel efficiency performed the poorest.
An accelerating trend in the automotive industry today is to replace a larger
engine with a smaller, turbocharged one that, in theory, provides the same
power while using less fuel. This was not the case for the Dart. Its
turbocharged 1.4-liter engine was the smallest and offered the most torque and
second-highest horsepower rating, but it returned a dismal 19.5 mpg on our
evaluation loops, well below its EPA estimates of 27/37 mpg city/highway.
Likewise unimpressive was the Sentra's continuously variable transmission,
which should theoretically always be at the optimum gearing for fuel economy.
With the least horsepower and tied for the least torque, you'd expect it
wouldn't burn much fuel, but it returned the second-lowest observed fuel
economy at 21.2 average mpg. With ratings at 30/39 mpg city/highway, it was a
long way off. "Nissan might be on to something," quipped senior
features editor Jonny Lieberman. "No one will drive this car quickly and
in an inefficient manner, as it actually sounds like you're injuring the car
with your right foot."
As much as we knock the
Civic for its old five-speed transmission offering no manual control, it still
gets the job done. The Civic was the second-least powerful car present and it
felt like it, but that little engine and old gearbox know how to use fuel
wisely. The Civic returned 23.5 mpg, which, while not stellar, was at least
closer to its 28/39-mpg city/highway ratings.
Kia had a rough go of it last year after the EPA unceremoniously lowered the
fuel economy ratings on a number of its cars. The Forte was unaffected, but the
new car has struck back with a vengeance. Despite having the most horsepower
and second-highest torque rating, as well as an conventional six-speed
automatic, the Kia returned 24.4 mpg -- falling nicely within the estimated EPA
city/highway ratings of 24/36 mpg and good for second best in this comparison.
The big winner, though, was the car that won the fuel economy comparison on
handling rather than mpg. The Mazda3, with its funny-sounding Skyactiv badging
and no obvious technological tricks (they're all deep inside the engine), was
the longest running model in this test and by far the fuel-sipping champ. It
handily bested the competition by returning 25.3 average mpg against its
28/40-mpg city/highway ratings.
COCKPIT/CABIN
Many people put a lot of
stock in how a car looks, but the truth is, you'll spend far more time looking
at the inside of it than the outside, and it greatly shapes your perception of
the vehicle. In this category, the Sentra clawed back some favor with the
judges. The rear seat and trunk are cavernous for the class, and the navigation
and entertainment systems are simple and intuitive to use. Some editors found
the design dull, likening it to a doctor's waiting room, but others pointed out
that it barely feels down-market from the larger, more expensive Altima, a nice
treat for a value-conscious buyer.
The Forte received similar praise for being second to the Sentra in rear seat
space. It was also dinged, albeit less so, for being cold and dark with some
odd ridges on the dash. Those gripes were quickly overlooked, however, in light
of the segment-busting list of features, such as heated and cooled front seats
and power-folding mirrors.
Also feature-rich was
the Dart, with its massive touchscreen infotainment system and high-resolution,
reconfigurable gauge display. We appreciated the clear, easy-to-use UConnect
infotainment system, even if it did seem a bit cluttered compared with Kia's
UVO system. Editors also liked the front-and-back steering wheel controls.
Where the Dart struggled was in seating, with hard perches front and rear and
compromised rear headroom. The editors complained about the grainy,
low-resolution back-up camera.
Riding mid-pack was the Civic, whose bi-level instrument cluster and funky
shapes divided editors. It was given high marks for being a strong improvement
over the poorly received 2012 model, and we appreciated the better materials
and quieter cabin. We took issue, though, with the old, low-resolution
navigation system and its tiny buttons, and rear seat space ranked smallest
among the competitors.
Receiving some of the harshest criticism was the Mazda3. While we liked its
sporty, supportive seats overall, many were disappointed with its small,
cramped rear seat. The dashboard also drew fire for looking the oldest and
appearing to be made of the cheapest materials. "The split screens are at
least well-organized/executed," wrote Loh. However, "none of the
screens matches in background colors, fonts, or font colors, not in the
instrument panel, infotainment screen, or the two tiny screens above." We
were disappointed with the lack of a back-up camera, but equally delighted by
the preferred manual shifting orientation of forward for downshifts and
backward for upshifts, which the Dart shared.
SAFETY
With safety a key
concern among buyers, it's no surprise all these competitors performed well in
crash testing. They were not, however, all created equal. For example, Honda
found out about the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's new small-offset
crash test and designed the new Civic accordingly. As such, the Civic is the
only car here to be named a Top Safety Pick+ after receiving a Good score in
all tests. (None of the others has yet completed the small-offset test.) The
2013 Civic hasn't been tested by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration yet, but the 2012 car received 5-star front and side ratings and
a 4-star rollover rating for 5 stars overall.
Like the Honda, the 2014 Forte hasn't been crash tested yet. In this case,
though, the Kia is a thoroughly redesigned car and not a refresh, so it's
difficult to say how it will fare. The old Forte, for what it's worth, received
4 stars and Good ratings in all tests and was named a Top Safety Pick.
It's a similar story
with the 2013 Sentra, which also has yet to be fully tested. NHTSA has crashed
it, and gave it a 5-star side impact rating, 4 stars for front and rollover
tests, and 4 stars overall. IIHS hasn't tested it, but the old model was not a
Top Safety Pick because of an Acceptable rating in the roof crush test.
There is plenty of information, however, on the oldest car in the test. The
Mazda3 is an IIHS Top Safety Pick thanks to Good ratings all around, but it
didn't fare quite as well at NHTSA. It's a mixed bag, with a 5-star front
impact rating, 4-star rollover rating, and 3-star side impact rating, combined
for a 4-star overall rating. Editors also noted and appreciated the optional
Blind Spot Warning system.
We appreciated the Blind Spot Warning and Rear Cross Path Detection systems on
the Dart as well, not to mention the only Driver Knee Bolster airbags in the
group. That car fared better in crash testing, earning a 5-star overall rating
on 5-star front and side impact ratings and a 4-star rollover rating. It is
also a Top Safety Pick with Good scores across the board.
VALUE
In a price-conscious
segment like this, value is a major consideration. That's especially true in
this test, where all the competitors were heavily equipped with pricey options
such as navigation systems, leather seats, keyless entry, and more. None was
more heavily loaded than the Mazda3, which rang in just above the Dart at
$26,420. Being the oldest model in the test and lacking a back-up camera hurt
its value argument, though we enthusiasts found quite a lot of value in its
handling and performance.
The Dart also became something of a tough sell at $26,415. It was feature-rich
with its big display screens, automatic headlights and wipers, heated steering
wheel, and more. The problem is, the Forte offers all that and more for $805
less. With by far the worst observed fuel economy, the Dart's value appeal
dropped precipitously in the eyes of the judges.
That Forte, though, blew
us away. Power front seats that are both heated and cooled, heated rear seats,
power-folding side mirrors, a heated steering wheel, multiple steering modes,
and more, all for a mid-pack price of $25,610. Add to that the second-best fuel
economy in the test and far and away the best warranty, and the Kia makes a
serious value proposition.
The Civic was a tougher case to make. It offered many of the features the
others did, but the clunky navigation system and second-worst observed fuel
economy hurt it. On the other hand, it was very nearly the least expensive car
here at $24,555, and it got high marks for its quality interior materials.
The Sentra fell into the same trap as the Civic, offering the lowest as-tested
price by just over a hundred dollars at $23,715. While that appealed to our
wallets, the second-worst observed fuel economy and the poor handling made us
reconsider how our hypothetical money was being spent.
CONCLUSION
Some comparison tests
are blowouts, and those are easy to judge. Then there are tests like this,
where the field is closely matched in nearly every category. Each car had strengths
and weaknesses and none completely ran away with the award. There wasn't a
"perfect" car in the bunch, but several that would be very good
choices depending on your priorities.
If, for example, you're an enthusiast like us, you'll be happiest with the
sporty Mazda. It would also appeal to those who value fuel economy above all
else. If safety is your priority, you'll be comforted by the Honda's
class-topping crash test scores. Those who love features will be very happy
with the Dart and Forte, and the buyer shopping on price will find the Sentra's
low as-tested price very appealing.
After weighing the contenders in each category against what would best serve
the average compact car buyer, we picked the 2014 Kia Forte as the best
all-around car here and the winner of this test. Its combination of
performance, fuel efficiency, reasonable pricing, and endless feature list had
our judges agreeing it's the car we'd recommend to our friends and family.
The
Kia Sorento hasn’t been on sale for
all that long in its current form (since the 2011 model year). Still, for 2014,
the Sorento is already up for some significant improvements. And it's no minor
refresh, either: Kia says that more than 80 percent of the parts in the new
Sorento are either all-new or significantly redesigned.
