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 large
engine with a smaller turbocharged one that, in theory, provides the same power
while using less fuel. Thus 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. On top of that, it was
the only car in the test that required premium fuel, a cost consideration for
value-conscious buyers.
The
Civic was the second-least powerful car present and it felt like it behind the
wheel
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 the Sentra wouldn't burn much fuel, but it returned
the second-lowest observed fuel economy at 21.2 mpg. With rating 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."
The
Mazda3 was the longest-running model in this test and by far the fuel-sipping
champ
As much as we knock the Civic because its
old five-speed transmission doesn't offer manual control, it still gets the job
done. The Civic was the second-least powerful car present and it felt like it
behind the wheel, 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 lowered the fuel economy ratings on a number of its car. The Forte
wasn't affected, but nobody told the new model, because it delivered. Despite
having the most horsepower and second-highest torque rating, as well as a
conventional six-speed automatic, the Kia returned 24,4 mpg-falling just within
the EPA city/highway ratings of 24/36 mpg and good for second best in this
comparison whose observed fuel economy fell within its EPA ratings.
The big winner, though, was the car that
won the fuel economy comparison on handling rather than mpg. The Mazda3, with
its funny-sounding Sky active 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 mpg, but fell short of its 28/40-mpg city/highway rating.
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
rear seat and trunk are cavernous for the class, and the navigation and
entertainment systems are simple and intuitive to use
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 touch-screen 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 and front-and-back steering wheel controls. Where the Dart
struggled was in seating, with hard perches front and rear and compromised
about the grainy, low-resolution back-up camera.
The
Forte received similar praise for being second to the Sentra in rear seat space
Ridding 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 nav and its tiny buttons, and rear seat space
ranked smallest among the competitors.
The Mazda3 received some of the harshest
criticism. While we liked its sporty, supportive seats overall, many were
disappointed with its small, cramped rear seat. The dashboard looked the oldest
and appearing to be made of the cheapest materials.
"The split screens are the least
well-organized/executed," wrote Loh. "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 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
weren't, 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. So the Civic is the only car here 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, but the 2012 car
received 5-star front and side rating and a 4-star rollover rating for 5 starts
overall.
Civic
is the only car here named a Top Safety Pick + after receiving a Good score in
all tests
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 white 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. The Dart fared better in crash
testing, earning a 5-star overall rating on 5-star front and side impact rating
and a 4-star rollover rating. It is also a Top Safety Pick with Good scores
across the board.
