I'm getting a new car this summer. Since turning my Kia Sorento back in to the dealership in July 2012 as a lemon (the dealership couldn't get a part it needed, so they had it for almost a month and a half and wouldn't give me a loaner or help pay for a rental, which resulted in me cutting my losses and turning in the keys as a lemon), I've been renting cars and sharing Mabel (a 1998 Corolla) with my sister, Meggie. Mabel is getting on in years and miles and needs some pretty substantial (ie, expensive) repairs to get her ship-shape. Pretty much the entire suspension needs to be replaced, the AC compressor needs to be replaced, and there are various other odds and ends that need to be replaced/fixed.
Since leasing the Sorento in 2012 (I leased it from March-July, although I only had it in my possession from March through the beginning of June), my income has gone up a good amount, primarily due to coaching, and my expenses have gone down a large amount as various bills and lines of credit have been paid off. Getting to the point, I have approximately 1.75 times the potential budget for car shopping that I did two years ago.
I've long had the goal of getting a compact/mid size SUV. My dream SUV is the Audi Q5, but that was out of my price range in 2012, so I settled for the Sorento, which I thought was the best of the rest. My original plan was to get the Q5 this summer/fall, but I've decided to hold off on that for a couple of years. Audi is supposed to redesign the Q5 for the 2016 model year (should be out in the summer of 2015), so I'm intrigued to see what the redesign will look like. I understand it is going to lose a substantial amount of weight, so since I'm primarily interested in the diesel model, I want to see what the more svelte version of the Q5 will be like. So, since it's not being redesigned for another year, and it's switching to a new factory at the same time, I've decided to wait at least till the 2017 or 2018 model years to let them work out any manufacturing kinks due to a new design and new factory.
Thus, I'm looking for a car to tide me over till then. Enter the DC auto show. I used it to take a look at, and tried to sit in, the various cars that I'd researched. As far as what type of vehicle I'd researched, I'm interested primarily in sedans this time around, although I'm open to an SUV. Here are the main criteria I am looking for in a car, in no particular order:
- The car cannot feel "cheap." It makes zero difference to me if it is inexpensive, but I will not get a car that feels cheap. Inexpensive = good. Cheap = bad.
- There must be suitable room for 4 adults. We carpool a fair amount to local meets, concerts, and the like, so I'd like to be able to drive from time to time without having to rent a car as I do now.
- Tying in with the first criteria, I want a car that feels premium. There are inexpensive cars that do this well and there are expensive cars that do not--as far as I can tell, price really doesn't have anything to do with the premium feel.
- The seats must be comfortable.
- The car must have a good level of amenities: leather (or high quality pleather), nav, upgraded sound system, etc.
- The upgraded sound system must be high quality. I listen to a loooot of music, and I demand good quality.
- It must not feel tiny. I drove a friend's early 2000s Jetta from time to time in Charleston and it felt like a clown car.
- There must be good visibility all around, but especially to the rear half of the field of view.
- There must be good cargo space.
- If possible, it needs to have a sunroof.
- When driving, road and wind noise need to be subdued. Mabel has practically zero insulation, so both abound. Ixnay on that in a new car.
- The ride quality needs to be composed--I'm fine if it's firm or soft, I just don't want it to be all over the place like Mabel's terrible ride quality.
- Engine performance is key--I don't need to be able to go 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, but it needs to take less than a minute and a half to get to 60. And it needs to be able to do that with decent fuel economy. Around here, driving is about 60-70% city, 30-40% highway. Mabel has only been getting an average of about 25 mpg, and the engine does not have the oomph to be reassuring when accelerating.
- Ingress and egress has to be easy--the driver's seat in Mabel is really low to the ground and I nearly always jam my leg into the steering wheel when climbing in, so I want a car that doesn't involve me experimenting with contortionism to get in and out.
Hatchbacks
- Kia Forte5: I liked it a lot. It's the Kia version of the Elantra GT, and I prefer the Forte5. Nice quality interior with a fair amount of front and back seat room. Comfy seats and nice level of amenities when loaded up. Decent sized cargo area, although it didn't overwhelm me. Good visibility out the sides and with the side mirrors, but the rear window isn't very tall. I'd have to see how the rear visibility is while driving. Comfy seats, too. Fully loaded it's about $25k. I'd give it a solid A.
- Hyundai Elantra GT: I was kind of disappointed. They only had the bare bones version on display, so I didn't get a chance to see what it's like after this year's redesign--one of the people in my complex has a fully loaded version from a year or two ago and I quite like how it looks, but the base version of the new model is just meh. It didn't feel cheap or anything, just so-so. The seats felt flat in both the front and back, but I believe the higher trim models have different seats; plenty of room front and back. Good visibility out the sides and with the mirrors, but the rear window is a shade smaller than I'd like. Decent sized storage space (seems like it has a bit more than the Forte5). Fully loaded it runs about $24k. I'd give the model I saw a B-. With a higher level of amenities, that will probably improve to an A.
- Mazda 3: I looked at both the sedan and the hatchback. I think the hatchback is gorgeous looking inside and out, while the sedan has a matching interior but only ok exterior. The interior quite impressed me--comfy seats, nice level of amenities, and satisfactory room front and back. It has an ok amount of storage space, but nothing to write home about; didn't get a chance to check out the sedan's trunk. Visibility is good to the side and front, although rear visibility is merely ok out the back; the sedan has slightly better rear visibility in my opinion. A fully loaded hatchback runs around $29k and I believe the sedan runs about $2000 cheaper. I'd give the hatchback a solid A and the sedan an A- due to the exterior styling.
Sedans
- Kia Cadenza: Very nice car. It's a fairly large sedan, but didn't feel gargantuan. Fantastic interior--I liked it a shade more than the Hyundai Azera--feels a touch higher quality, but the layout is a bit better in the Azera, in my opinion. Very high quality in fit and finish, and didn't feel cheap in the slightest. Good visibility all the way around, and excellent visibility with the side mirrors. Decent sized trunk, too. With how I'd option it up, it's at the top of my completely arbitrary price range of $37k. I'd give it an A+.
- Kia Optima: I thought it looked fantastic. I've driven Optimas several times as rentals, but those were bare bones models. They had a fully loaded top of the line model on display, and it was substantially nicer. Excellent interior and amenities, with plenty of room front and back; comfy seats all around. Good side visibility through the windows, but I couldn't check the side mirrors--they were tilted down and I couldn't change them. The rear window is small, though, and the rear view mirror doesn't show a whole heck of a lot. Fully loaded, it goes for about $33k. I'd give it a solid A.
- Hyundai Azera: This is Hyundai's version of the Cadenza. Tons of interior space--it felt like a somewhat bigger car than the Cadenza (haven't looked up its stats to tell if it is in fact longer, but it felt longer) and very comfy seats. I really like Hyundai's dashboard layout, but it felt a small rung below the Cadenza in terms of quality and fit and finish. Nothing to complain about at all, but the Cadenza did feel a touch higher quality inside. Good visibility out the sides and rear, but I could only check the passenger mirror, as the driver mirror wouldn't move and was aimed at the ground. Largeish trunk. It is cheaper than the Cadenza, at about $33.5k. I'd have to test drive it, since it is a pretty big car, and I don't need that much passenger space. I'd give it an A+.
- Mazda 6: Like the Elantra GT, they only had bare bones models on display. I wasn't terribly impressed. Phenomenal looking exterior and enormous trunk (seriously, I could probably lay down lengthwise in it and only have to curl my legs at the knees), but the interior just looked and felt meh; looked and felt nicer in the 3, in my opinion. I was also very disappointed in the seats--the sport bolstering was very narrow at the top of the shoulders and dug in about 1.5 inches in on either side into my shoulder blades. I had to curl my shoulders forward just to get my spine to touch the seat back. I don't know if that would be ameliorated by moving up to a higher trim level, but I would absolutely not be comfortable in those particular seats over an extended period of time. Besides that, though, the seat cushions were comfy and there was plenty of room. Decent visibility all around, too. A fully loaded one goes for about $29.5k. I'd give it a B-, primarily because of the seat bolstering. A higher trim might bump that up to a solid B, but that's as high as it's going to get with that seat bolstering and interior.
- Audi A3: I was very, very impressed with this one, and thought it was the best of the lot. It felt very high quality all around, higher quality that all the other cars on the list, although it wasn't quite as opulent looking as the Cadenza. Excellent dashboard layout and front room, and still plenty of room in the back. The sport seats the demo model had were very comfy, and I didn't have any issues like I did with the Mazda 6. It felt sporty, even more than the Mazda 3, which is probably the "sportiest" car of the bunch. Good sized trunk. Visibility was excellent all around, though people kept opening the trunk when I was in the driver's seat, so I couldn't get a good look out the rear view mirror. A fully loaded, top of the line model runs about $44k. They offer the same model with a smaller engine that runs about $41k. With the discount I get through Deloitte, though, that drops down to about $37k. With a regular sized down payment, I'm under $35k. I'd give this one an A+.
SUV
- Hyundai Sante Fe Sport: I was very pleasantly surprised with this one. I've seen pictures of the car and have seen a few on the streets, but haven't really had a chance to look at it in depth. Excellent interior, very comfy seats, plenty of room front and back, and a good sized cargo area. Good visibility all around. I think the interior looks and feels high class, which is something I couldn't say for the previous Sante Fe (I test drove it in 2009). Fully loaded, it runs about $33k. I'd give it an A+.
Prognosis and general thoughts
My extended driving experience (not counting weekend rentals) to date has been large sedans (my first car, a Toyota Avalon, and multiple extended rentals of Ford Tauri and Chrysler 300s), compact sedans (Corollas, primarily), and SUVs (the Sorento). I've got a soft spot for large sedans, since my first car was the approximately aircraft carrier sized Avalon. On the opposite end of the spectrum, I've been driving Mabel for almost two years now, and don't feel as badly pinched as I first did.
That being said, while I do have a soft spot for large sedans, and have enjoyed the nine Ford Tauri I've rented over the last two years, I don't *need* a full size sedan. The Cadenza and Azera, while very nice, are more than I need. None of the cars I looked at are too small for my tastes. On a side note, I find it quite interesting how much larger the compact cars of today (Forte, Elanta, 3, and A3) are than the compact cars (Mabel and the aforementioned Jetta) of 10+ years ago. I didn't have any problems with the sizing of said cars at the auto show. Compact cars today are approximately the size of yesterday's mid size car, and today's mid size car is approximately the size of yesterday's full size car, and so on and so forth.
With all that said, my top cars of the auto show were the Cadenza, Azera, Optima, A3, Forte5, and 3 hatchback. I really liked the Sante Fe Sport, but I think I'll stick with a sedan for now.
Of those 5 cars, I'm primarily interested in the Audi A3. I was beyond impressed with it and it has high marks on all my non-driving criteria. The Cadenza and Azera, while very, very nice, are probably too much car for my purposes. Driving in DC is bad enough with a small car, and I'm not a fan of driving around here with a big sedan; if I was still in South Carolina, or even just 30 miles down I-95, that would be a different matter. The 3 hatchback and Forte5 are likewise very nice, but can't match the level of refinement of the A3. Same with the Optima, although it is the sedan closest to the A3 in size on my short list. I will test drive all six cars over the next few months, but pending the test drives, my money's on the Audi. I've test driven several other (older) Audis, and had a 2014 A4 rental over Thanksgiving and was quite impressed with the lot of them.
So, in the order that I will test drive and seriously think about the cars as of now:
- Audi A3
- Mazda 3 hatchback
- Kia Forte5
- Kia Optima
- Kia Cadenza
- Hyundai Azera
I'm going to be researching cars through April/May, then plan to buy or lease one at any point after that. All six are within my budget, so it just comes down to the test drives and my gut feel.
Should be a fun few months! :-D
