Whats iQ doing?

[Kal-El]

As cool of a novelty these micro cars are, when you weigh all characteristics, they make little to no sense to buy. Especially in wide open America. New York City, maybe.

Here's how I would run my buying criteria comparisons. We're are talking about the Smart and iQ.

Price?
........They are no more affordable than the sub-compact class. This is perhaps their greatest downfall because this would probably be the best argument for such extreme downsizing. $9K for a new iQ? Sign me up!

Fuel economy?
........We know the Smart gets about 40mpg combined. No official EPA estimate on the iQ yet but I bet it will best the Smart even though it's bigger. Again, no real big advantage over sub-compacts. The Fiesta has a 40 mpg/highway EPA rating. Many of us average around 40 in the Yaris. Even the next size up - new Focus, Cruze, and others are supposed to hit the magical 40 figure. The cars are twice the size as the micro's. Not to mention cars like the Prius, which has mid-size volume inside and gets 50+ mpg.

Size?
........The only argument in favor of such size is to fit and maneuver anywhere/park anywhere especially on the tight and narrow roads throughout Europe. Still, it's not required. Europe is still filled with large cars and trucks that manage. The argument against can be a very long list but I'll try to keep it short. Obviously, they're primarily just for two. The iQ, however, makes for more useful space with actual space behind the front seats. Sub-compacts carry 5 adults + a healthy portion of cargo. Twice that of micro's. This may greatly effect your real life usability which may require you to own 2 or more cars. Just as with owning a pure electric vehicle, a micro car is only practical as a second vehicle. With a sub-compact, it is perfectly fine as your only vehicle.

Styling?
.........There's definitely a "cool/hip" factor to these cars. Although, you either love them or hate them. Many, in America especially perhaps, the Smart is often laughed at. I say they look good, but a larger car will almost always look better with it's classical proportions. Micro cars look like they've been chopped.

Safety?
.........The Smart has proven not to be a death sentence. However, there's no question that physics still rule. Bigger objects win, plain and simple. The Smart, and surely the iQ, have amazingly strong safety cages but have very little, if any crumple zones. They simply bounce and are thrown in the air off the larger vehicle. Severe whiplash is the inevitable result. Many people are weary of even driving sub-compacts or even compacts with safety concerns, again mostly in America. Never mind a micro-car.

Performance?
.........Well, we know these cars will be nimble in tight areas and at low speeds. However, push them at high speeds and on the highway, and another weakness reveals itself. First, they're usually only moderately powered, but their lightness helps them get up and go. Still, probably only matching but most likely falling behind even basic sub-compacts. Their main problem is quietness and stability on the highway. Or cornering at high speeds.

The result? I just cannot find any logical reason why someone would buy one?

Anyone have a very compelling reason to buy one?

[wooverstone8]

CVT transmission will be standard for the States.

[yarisugi]

From what I read in Autoweek:

Seating described as 3+1. Front passenger seat slightly offset for one adult and one child in the rear. Engine to be a 1.3liter with CVT. Safety features include 10 airbags, stability and traction control, brake assist. Price estimated to be around $14,995.

[bronsin]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

Anyone have a very compelling reason to buy one?

We are destroying the planet. I dont think you could even justify an iQ in that respect. But smaller is clearly the direction we have to go economywise and ecology wise. The iQ is a start.

[Flipper_1938]

!

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by bronsin

We are destroying the planet. I dont think you could even justify an iQ in that respect. But smaller is clearly the direction we have to go economywise and ecology wise. The iQ is a start.

That's the thing, until these micro-cars get at least 30% or so more mileage than sub-compacts, they don't make much sense. I say about 30% because they are about 30% smaller. Right now, they're only getting about 10-15% more MPG and yet you give up so much practicality and still pay as much as for the larger sub-compacts. And since you'll probably have to own a second larger car along with your micro, well then that doesn't do much for the planet.

[why?]

Originally Posted by bronsin

We are destroying the planet. I dont think you could even justify an iQ in that respect. But smaller is clearly the direction we have to go economywise and ecology wise. The iQ is a start.

we are not destroying the planet. Stop believing al gores get rich quick scheme. It truly is brilliant, so many people are just falling for it.

I agree for $9k the iq would've been worth it. But at the assumed price point, plus it being a scion, which means said price is non-negotiable, it isn't worth touching at all.

[BailOut]

Originally Posted by why?

we are not destroying the planet.

Even completely ignoring our potential effects on climate change your statement is wholly invalid. From our polluting and destruction of 70% of the world's fresh water supply to mountaintop removal in coal mining to overfishing and polluting the seas to the use of GM crops to the deforestation of the Amazon rain forest and other areas we indeed are destroying the planet.

One also cannot overlook the fact that if everyone lived like we Americans we'd need no less than 7 Earth's worth of resources and pollution absorption to support it all.

It is impossible to live without impact, but we can each choose - directly and through our spending and support (or lack of support) for various organizations and factions - to leave the world better off than we found it, or spiraling downward that much faster.