Yeah I think the CX-3 is a sub compact SUV whereas the CRV is just a compact. The CX-5 would be comparable to the CRV. I just don't like the rear body shape of the new CRVs:

4/18/2016 9:37:49 AM

The HR-V looks nicer though

4/18/2016 9:59:57 AM

The magic seats in the HRV almost put it in another class compared to its competitors. If you think this is the size vehicle you want, and you think you'll utilize some seats down cargo hauling, then it's your best bet. I'm not sure how Honda is pricing them, but sometimes their smaller cars can be a little pricier due to this (IMO) - cargo space in the compact/subcompact market is a huge deciding factor in the US, Honda leads in this area, so they can get a slight price premium, the Honda name plays a factor too.

Only wonky thing about the HRV is the center console. I do not understand the "storage underneath the center console" theme that Honda and some others have used in some cars. Seems useless in a lot of situations.

But I'd definitely recommend driving a HRV and the CX3 back to back. I think TKE is right that the CX3 will be a little more interesting to drive, or maybe it won't matter. Then I'd take a long look at relative prices, they both start at around the same point, but you may be able to get a optioned out CX3 for the price of a stripped HRV (or vice versa).

4/18/2016 10:25:42 AM

I'm starting to see more Jeep Renegades. I just can't not think Fiat 500L had a baby with a Jeep. Hey if you want a sub $20k turbocharged 5 speed 4WD Jeep...

Isn't the CX-5 only slightly more than the HRV/CX-3? Think base MSRP starts at like $21k.

Cargo capacities (seats up / down):

CX-3: 12.4 / 44.5
CX-5: 31.1 / 64.8
HRV: 24.3 / 58.8

HRV comes in a 6 speed manual...although I'm getting used to CVTs with my GF's 2014 Impreza. The paddle shifters are kinda dumb as the gearing is all relative but the gas mileage is great for an AWD car.

4/18/2016 11:52:29 AM

^95% certain that the 6 speed manual is only available with FWD for the Honda. I think a 6 speed manual is available for the CX-3 with either drivetrain configuration. Nah, 6 speed auto only - a bit surprising.

Quote :

"The CX-3 seems significantly smaller though. The CR-V was appealing because of its size and cost. I'm not looking for something that has amazing performance, I don't really treat cars as toys, they're more devices to get from point a to point b. I mean, I drive a Fiesta now"

I'm a bit confused. You're the one that brought up the HR-V. To which the CX-3 is a competitor. The CR-V is in another class altogether.

IIRC the rear seats of the HR-V can slide forward/backwards (as TerdFerguson alluded to). That skews the measurements for rear seat/cargo space.

[Edited on April 18, 2016 at 1:28 PM. Reason : k]

[Edited on April 18, 2016 at 1:35 PM. Reason : k]

4/18/2016 1:26:58 PM

^Good point. I forgot many times the manual is only offered with the base / FWD version.

Quote :

"IIRC the rear seats of the HR-V can slide forward/backwards (as TerdFerguson alluded to). That skews the measurements for rear seat/cargo space."

Yeah but look at my stats. The CX-3 has a 44.5 ft^3 cargo area when the seats are folded down. The HRV is 58.8. That's a 32% increase. Or am I missing something?

4/18/2016 1:37:12 PM

You're not, but the HRV's stats are somewhat flexible. I tried to compare the interior volume of both vehicles for comparison's sake but could only find them for the HRV, nothing for CX-3 (granted I didn't do an exhaustive search b/c I don't care). FWIW, the HRV is 96.1 (AWD) or 100.1 (FWD) cubic feet.

4/18/2016 4:07:38 PM

CX-3 then get a box if you need more storage space.

4/18/2016 6:17:30 PM

I love the CX-3, just wish it wasn't so small. The CX-5 is a viable alternative, bigger, with a nice interior and from what I've heard similar good driving dynamics. The CX-3 is more attractive though.

We'll probably be replacing the Forte Koup with a small CUV at some point in the next year, so this is pertinent to my interests. However, my wife is quite taken with the design of the new for '17 Kia Sportage, and it's her car, so that one may end up beating out either Mazda.

4/18/2016 9:52:41 PM

the more i look at cars, the more i realize i have no effing clue what i want.

4/25/2016 11:10:03 PM

^^ Get the CX-4

4/26/2016 9:51:49 PM

Only available in China for the time being?

4/26/2016 10:19:52 PM

yeah, just revealed a couple of days ago at the beijing auto show as a china-only model. but, i don't see how they can keep something like that for china only.

4/26/2016 10:25:31 PM

Attractive, but just as pointless as an X6. With that swoopy hatchback roofline I'm sure it probably will have less cargo space than the CX-3 despite being longer. Seriously, who buys these things?

4/27/2016 1:52:13 AM

uncool people worried about looking cool

4/27/2016 6:25:07 AM

Mazda Crosstour?

4/27/2016 6:38:50 AM

The Subaru Crosstreks are super popular around here. Slightly different target audience but there's an appeal for a crossover type coupe with AWD and slightly higher clearance than a typical sedan or coupe. There's a good chunk of the population here that hits the mountains every weekend and AWD and higher clearance are often required but they don't want to get a larger SUV or even crossover. Still a small niche but I understand the appeal.

4/27/2016 10:59:11 AM

the majority of these cars will be lucky if they see gravel

4/27/2016 11:07:06 AM

Elsewhere sure I agree with you. In my small niche they'd probably see it every weekend. Rarely do you see clean AWD/4wd cars around here. I feel like most millennials are steering away from trucks and SUVs and getting into the crossover or other AWD car market. I'd say 80% of my friends have either a crossover (CRV, Forester, Rav4) or some type of AWD car like an Impreza, Crosstrek or other smaller crossover. They're great for gas mileage and AWD is required by law here unless you have snow tires when the traction laws are in effect. Higher clearance is great too because most of the trails you're driving on are pretty bumpy and sedans almost always bottom out. Also they're more affordable than a full size SUV or truck.

Again agreeing it's a small niche but a niche nonetheless.

4/27/2016 12:16:52 PM

I agree they're great little cars, but I still can't help my self from lol'ing at the surcharge Subaru puts on a vehicle that is just an Impreza with an extra 2 inches of ground clearance and more cheap rubber/plastic body cladding.

Also pretty unfortunate that they're only available with a penalty box of a transmission.

[Edited on April 27, 2016 at 3:50 PM. Reason : ]

4/27/2016 3:50:21 PM

They start at $21,500 I think. I mean they get great gas mileage for an AWD car and they have 8.7" of clearance which is very appealing because is allows you to go in places you couldn't with an Impreza. With that being said yeah it's a relatively boring car to drive. They offer it in a 2.0 manual but it's meh.

I wish my still offered the manual turbo XTs on the Foresters and Outbacks. Could go to Canada and pick up a 6 speed manual 2016 Forester. I don't think they'll be around for long though with Subaru's new global platform.

4/27/2016 5:10:49 PM

It's about $3000 more than an Impreza, though I'm not sure if it comes with more standard equipment.

Didn't know it was available with the manual. That's something I suppose.

4/28/2016 9:01:13 AM

Base Impreza is $18,795 for the Hatch.

Base Crosstrek is $21,595.

So yeah a $2,800 msrp difference.

However the base Impreza has hub caps and is pretty bare bones (no alloy wheels, no fog lights, no sport styling).

The Crosstrek on the other hand at base compares with the Impreza Sport Premium which goes for $21,890. That's the first Impreza with the sport alloy wheels plus fog lights and sport styling.

The Crosstrek at base comes with the 17" alloy wheels + larger tires, fog lights, rear-vision camera, and power mirrors with sport styling. So it appears you're actually getting a lot more features for the money with the Crosstrek plus it's cheaper? ($21,595 Crosstrek compared to $21,890 Sport Premium Impreza).

My gf actually has the Sport Premium Impreza and our friend has the base Crosstrek. They're very similar in features and styling and I think they paid about the same for them.

The only things the premium and limited versions of the Crosstrek get you is heated side mirrors (which are super handy), windshield wiper de-icer, then the blind-sport detection, rear cross-traffic alert, and some more lighting for the limited. Whereas with the Impreza the extra trim levels get you the things the Crosstrek already has at base.

[Edited on April 28, 2016 at 11:17 AM. Reason : s]

4/28/2016 11:11:55 AM

jesus how long can you guys go on about this shit?

4/28/2016 12:07:21 PM

^^Nice, makes more sense now.

^WTF do you care? The Garage has been dead as shit of late, and you're gonna complain about some activity?

4/28/2016 12:18:21 PM

^^What shit? We were talking about crossovers and coupe crossovers. We're talking about the niche market. Crosstrek's are hugely popular around here and there's a reason. You can get a reliable, cheap, high mpg, AWD car with high clearance that handles well in a bunch of snow and off road for under $22k. They're quite appealing for those reasons.

4/28/2016 12:27:05 PM

i own my first subaru and have been pleased - i bought it solely for eyesight but the rest of it has been nice minus the infotainment is behind the times

4/28/2016 3:44:23 PM

I think they finally fixed the Infotainment system for MY2016, but yeah the older ones are pieces of shit.

4/28/2016 4:05:18 PM

The difference in my 2014 Outback Premium and my coworkers 2016 is HUGE. Everything is redone. It has automatic braking, stays in the lane for you, rear heated seats, nice entertainment system. Too bad they no longer offer the 2.5 in the 6 speed.

4/28/2016 11:24:09 PM

still talking about this shit?












P.S. I'm busting your balls.

4/29/2016 6:40:05 AM

i have a 2016 and they haven't fixed the infotainment yet - maybe 2017

4/29/2016 9:02:26 AM

^ah I guess the implementation varies by model. The only Subaru I keep track of is the BRZ and it's infotainment system changed for 2016.

^^fucker!

^^^Ah, good to know (maybe?). I could give two shits about all those driver aids. Nothing but crutches IMO that most people will take advantage of by paying even less attention to their surroundings while driving. And sadly you know that's gonna happen.

I was almost hit on I-40 last week when I was passing a Volvo. The driver may not have seen me because I may have been in the blind spot...and I know for a fact the Volvo in question came standard with a Blind Sport Monitoring system.

4/29/2016 11:30:31 AM

Yeah completely agreed although when automatic braking is standard on all cars..

It's like there's going to be a point in time where the systems aren't good enough to prevent all collisions but people are going to start relying on them to. In 5 years sure maybe cars with be fully autonomous but there's going to be a scary gap where you see people on the road not paying attention to anything but their phone while they're driving.

[Edited on April 29, 2016 at 11:53 AM. Reason : spelling]

4/29/2016 11:53:05 AM

Quote :

"but there's going to be a scary gap where you see people on the road not paying attention to anything but their phone while they're driving. "

Dude, we're pretty much there now.

4/29/2016 12:43:30 PM

Yeah that's true. It scares the shit out of me on my bike commute when a big SUV passes me and the tiny girl in it has her eyes glued to her phone. I'm debating if I should start reporting it. As a bike commuter I usually pay a lot more attention to the faces of drivers around me to see if they acknowledge me and some of the stuff I see out there is scary.

--Although with that being said automatic braking as a cyclist does make me feel more comfortable if it's working correctly.

[Edited on April 29, 2016 at 12:54 PM. Reason : s]

4/29/2016 12:50:28 PM

yeah i see about 5 people per morning looking at their phone on the commute in...

FACETUBES CAN'T WAIT!

4/29/2016 1:21:29 PM

About 2 months ago I was on my normal morning commute and per usual if there isn't a bike lane (which luckily is only about 15% of my commute) then I stay as close to the right as I can. I was crossing through an intersection where the right lane merges with the left a couple hundred feet after the intersection. The girl I mentioned in her SUV almost hits me and honks her horn because I'm in her way because the lane is already halfway gone because it's merging with the left lane and I was blocking her path forward. I understand some people don't like cyclists but the speed limit was 25 and I was probably going 18 and was only blocking her because she was too dumb to get in the correct (left) lane. The entire time I was watching her she had her phone up in front of her steering wheel. She precedes to zoom past me at about 10mph over the speed limit like I ruined her morning commute.

4/29/2016 1:46:21 PM

http://www.motor1.com/news/62456/mclaren-is-selling-one-of-the-last-f1s-ever-made-and-its-stunning

One of the last F1s ever made and kept by McLaren until now, in factory condition, being sold directly by McLaren

Based on the last sentence in the link above, I am guessing they will sell it for anywhere between $10M and $20M, probably closer to 20.

God I love that 3-seat configuration... never made in a car again (AFAIK) and never to be. Be sure to click for drool-worthy pics


[Edited on May 1, 2016 at 1:23 AM. Reason : too big to embed]

5/1/2016 1:22:31 AM

I definitely wouldn't describe its styling as "dated", but it's funny that it now appears relatively subdued, compared to the current crop of hypercars.

5/1/2016 5:30:26 PM

^^I'm curious to know why you're so confident that another car will never be built with a seating configuration like the F1's.

5/2/2016 9:26:21 AM

It was just a figure of speech, and it is more or less true. Among ICE cars, that's the only car I know with such seating, so the chances of another one in the future are very low. Sure, when we have autonomous cars and flying cars in the future, there will be all sorts of seating coming out, but in non-autonomous cars, the chances are very slim.

5/4/2016 11:03:43 PM

http://www.chevyjoltev.com

5/9/2016 3:55:36 AM

http://jalopnik.com/no-gm-is-not-making-an-electric-sports-car-called-the-1774766538

No, GM Is Not Making An Electric Sports Car Called The Chevrolet Jolt

5/9/2016 11:00:23 AM

LOL

5/9/2016 12:03:20 PM

You guys think I don't know that?

Where do you think I got the "official" site's link from?

(Not to mention, the official site makes it abundantly clear that it is a fictitious car)

5/9/2016 12:06:44 PM

I don't know man. You were pretty serious about it, methinks.

5/9/2016 1:20:28 PM

haha lol, must be the smoking emoticon, amirite???!!1

i got it from http://www.motor1.com/news/62566/bogus-chevy-jolt-ev-website-is-something-to-be-admired

looks pretty cool, though! and i surmise it would sell really well if they made it and priced it right. all the fresh graduate engineers and programmers will be picking one up!

5/9/2016 1:44:32 PM

very good slideshow

http://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/research-guides/american-power-brokers-of-2016/ss-BBtbBSv

shows the most powerful american cars available on the market today, all the way from the Focus to the Raptor to the Ford GT.

And yes, the Tesla is there too, and so is the Falcon F7, something new to me! Who knew about the Falcon F7 before?

6/22/2016 11:57:16 AM

That Falcon looks like a piece of crap. I've seen better build quality in first gen Kias.

6/23/2016 8:42:06 AM

there is no excuse for wheel gap like that on a $250k car.

6/23/2016 8:44:59 PM