Help in buying a new car!

[jut703]

Personally, I'd cross out the Mazda 3 1.6 Hatchback instantly. That 1.6 engine is way too slow for that body. I'd also cross out the Impreza 2.0, because it lacks Impreza character in the sense that even the Corolla is faster than it in a straight line and its suspension is too comfort oriented. If you want an Impreza though, get the manual (if you like that sort of thing), because apparently it's the 4-AT that robs the car of its power, along with the AWD that isn't as prominent in a car with only 150 HP.

If you're a left-wing kind of person, you could get the Soul. But mind you at 1.22M, it's not very well kitted for the price. It just looks, uh, funky. I don't know if that's your thing, sure as hell isn't mine.

Cruze 1.8 LT - Well the interior looks great for me. The exterior as well. It's eye-catching to say the least. The engine though, well it's not its most precious gem. Not the engine in itself is weak, it's just that the Cruze is one hell of a heavy car. It may have a 6-speed transmission, and is marketed as a fuel efficient car, it consumes about as much as a 1.8L Civic. 8-9 km/l isn't bad, it's just not as fuel-efficient as they say so. That said, it doesn't accelerate as quickly as you'd like as the engine-trasmission combo is very laid back. It does however, have a more comfortable ride than the others in its class, and has lots of space, both cabin room and trunk volume. If you like comfort-oriented cars, give this one a look, if you don't move on. If you chose the latter, also give this car a look:

Corolla Altis 2.0V - it's a newly face-lifted model and it's up to you if you like the new looks. I do, for the 2.0 at least. But I think the best improvement due to the face-lift is the CVT transmission. We actually own one of these so I've got quite a lot to say about it. I say the CVT is a welcome addition because the engine is potent, but like the Impreza, the old transmission (4-AT) was a let down. I believe it's one of the suspects that cause this car to consume anywhere from 6.7-7.5 km/l city driving. That said, it's economical on the highway at 10-11 km/l. Another problem of the transmission is that it reacts slowly as hell. CVT should improve that. As for the ride, the Altis really does have a very comfortable ride. Haven't compared it with the Cruze which really is the only other comfort-oriented sedan, but with the others, this one jitters you around the least. However, it gives me absolutely no confidence in the corners because it has extreme body roll. It may be quick in a straight line thanks to its light body, but handling leaves much to be desired. Nonetheless, there's no lack in features as you've got power seats for the driver and push-start ignition plus all the other goods that come with other 2.0 compacts. Like the Cruze, only take this if you value comfort over handling.

If you like a bit of performance, then you're left with the Focus and the Civic. They've both got lovely, powerful engines. The Civic's got more top end power, and will have a higher top speed, plus it's got a wider set of revs to play with. However, the Focus is a diesel and all diesels have wallops of torque. Plus, with a dual-clutch transmission, it actually accelerates faster than the Civic. With our slow-moving traffic and two-lane highways, the torque of the diesel is actually more useful than the gas engine of the Civic. And the real clincher is fuel economy. While the Civic consumes a standard 2.0 consumption of 7-8 km/l city driving, the Focus can do anywhere from 10-13 km/l and even up to 18 km/l on the highway. However, I still maintain that the Civic is the better looking car, and that it has way more features than the Focus and has a better interior and much more space. However, suspension wise, the Focus is better set-up because it gives a more forgiving ride and has good handling, while the Civic just has good handling. That said, the Civic has the stiffest seats ever, and for this reason alone, if you have a bad back, stay away from it.
In the end I stand by that the Focus is more fun to drive but the Civic is a better overall car.

Oh wait, I forgot about the Mazda 3 2.0R. It's the oldest of the bunch, released in 2004, but I think it's the best value for money. It's got all the features of all the newer cars, but costs a hundred thousand less. It also has a 4-AT, but unlike the Altis', this one is more responsive at least. Plus, it gives pretty OK mileage at 7.5-8 km/l (which is actually what the slower and thirstier 1.6 gets as well). The engine is lovely, though it only has 145 hp, it's pretty torquey in the mid-range and that's what really matters when you overtake. Plus, this car has superb handling and has garnered numerous awards for it. That said, it's pretty cramped inside compared with the others, and it's really getting old.

If I were to buy one, it'd be a toss-up between the Mz3, Civic and Focus, depending on what budget permits.

Oddly absent from your list was the EX Lancer. Why?

[arvie1]

Ford Focus TDCi. Its got the best transmission, and it is easy to extract more power from it by way of the Unichip. But I'd take the sedan for the more luxurious feel.

Haha! Nalito tuloy ako kung sedan or hatch ang piliin ko if ever na FOCUS ang choice ko. But, thanks though sir!

Personally, I'd cross out the Mazda 3 1.6 Hatchback instantly. That 1.6 engine is way too slow for that body. I'd also cross out the Impreza 2.0, because it lacks Impreza character in the sense that even the Corolla is faster than it in a straight line and its suspension is too comfort oriented. If you want an Impreza though, get the manual (if you like that sort of thing), because apparently it's the 4-AT that robs the car of its power, along with the AWD that isn't as prominent in a car with only 150 HP.

If you're a left-wing kind of person, you could get the Soul. But mind you at 1.22M, it's not very well kitted for the price. It just looks, uh, funky. I don't know if that's your thing, sure as hell isn't mine.

Cruze 1.8 LT - Well the interior looks great for me. The exterior as well. It's eye-catching to say the least. The engine though, well it's not its most precious gem. Not the engine in itself is weak, it's just that the Cruze is one hell of a heavy car. It may have a 6-speed transmission, and is marketed as a fuel efficient car, it consumes about as much as a 1.8L Civic. 8-9 km/l isn't bad, it's just not as fuel-efficient as they say so. That said, it doesn't accelerate as quickly as you'd like as the engine-trasmission combo is very laid back. It does however, have a more comfortable ride than the others in its class, and has lots of space, both cabin room and trunk volume. If you like comfort-oriented cars, give this one a look, if you don't move on. If you chose the latter, also give this car a look:

Corolla Altis 2.0V - it's a newly face-lifted model and it's up to you if you like the new looks. I do, for the 2.0 at least. But I think the best improvement due to the face-lift is the CVT transmission. We actually own one of these so I've got quite a lot to say about it. I say the CVT is a welcome addition because the engine is potent, but like the Impreza, the old transmission (4-AT) was a let down. I believe it's one of the suspects that cause this car to consume anywhere from 6.7-7.5 km/l city driving. That said, it's economical on the highway at 10-11 km/l. Another problem of the transmission is that it reacts slowly as hell. CVT should improve that. As for the ride, the Altis really does have a very comfortable ride. Haven't compared it with the Cruze which really is the only other comfort-oriented sedan, but with the others, this one jitters you around the least. However, it gives me absolutely no confidence in the corners because it has extreme body roll. It may be quick in a straight line thanks to its light body, but handling leaves much to be desired. Nonetheless, there's no lack in features as you've got power seats for the driver and push-start ignition plus all the other goods that come with other 2.0 compacts. Like the Cruze, only take this if you value comfort over handling.

If you like a bit of performance, then you're left with the Focus and the Civic. They've both got lovely, powerful engines. The Civic's got more top end power, and will have a higher top speed, plus it's got a wider set of revs to play with. However, the Focus is a diesel and all diesels have wallops of torque. Plus, with a dual-clutch transmission, it actually accelerates faster than the Civic. With our slow-moving traffic and two-lane highways, the torque of the diesel is actually more useful than the gas engine of the Civic. And the real clincher is fuel economy. While the Civic consumes a standard 2.0 consumption of 7-8 km/l city driving, the Focus can do anywhere from 10-13 km/l and even up to 18 km/l on the highway. However, I still maintain that the Civic is the better looking car, and that it has way more features than the Focus and has a better interior and much more space. However, suspension wise, the Focus is better set-up because it gives a more forgiving ride and has good handling, while the Civic just has good handling. That said, the Civic has the stiffest seats ever, and for this reason alone, if you have a bad back, stay away from it.
In the end I stand by that the Focus is more fun to drive but the Civic is a better overall car.

Oh wait, I forgot about the Mazda 3 2.0R. It's the oldest of the bunch, released in 2004, but I think it's the best value for money. It's got all the features of all the newer cars, but costs a hundred thousand less. It also has a 4-AT, but unlike the Altis', this one is more responsive at least. Plus, it gives pretty OK mileage at 7.5-8 km/l (which is actually what the slower and thirstier 1.6 gets as well). The engine is lovely, though it only has 145 hp, it's pretty torquey in the mid-range and that's what really matters when you overtake. Plus, this car has superb handling and has garnered numerous awards for it. That said, it's pretty cramped inside compared with the others, and it's really getting old.

If I were to buy one, it'd be a toss-up between the Mz3, Civic and Focus, depending on what budget permits.

Oddly absent from your list was the EX Lancer. Why?

Nice review and suggestion indeed sir, if you were to choose among ford focus and mazda 3, will you pick SEDAN or HATCH?

I didnt include the LANCER EX kasi wala siyang A/T, I prefer A/T kasi.

Thanks sir for a nice reply!

[niky]

I'd agree... should never count out the Lancer. one of the roomiest in the class.

from various test drives:

*CHEVROLET CRUZE 1.8 LT A/T - 1,048,888php

Tested consumption: 7-8 km/l mixed... test unit had only 500 kms on clock, so test not definitive.

Pros: Incredibly comfortable interior, good plastics and nice options (lacks power adjustable driver's seat, but that's really not a big deal), quiet, drives very well... about as nimble as a Focus or a Civic with a more supple ride, very refined, very good space... and... surprisingly... solidly built.

Cons: Terrible six-speed automatic mated to a weedy engine. Indecisive, slow to shift, and... well... slow. Even the Optra 1.6 was faster... and that was a slug. Trunk shallow both in depth and height

*FORD FOCUS SPORT 2.0 TDCi (5-Dr) A/T - 1,195,000php

Tested consumption: 11-14 km/l mixed (8-9 urban)

Pros: Very responsive transmission, Rear-aircon vents (still unique in this class), Punchy engine with incredible fuel economy, very good handling, great build quality and solid-feeling body.

Cons: Rear seat on the small side, ride stiffer than older Focus, though still not as stiff as the Civic.

*HONDA CIVIC 2.0 S A/T - 1,115,000php

Consumption not tested, projected around 7-8 km/l (7 km/l urban)

Pros: Fast, responsive 5-speed transmission, very good handling, good interior space, great material and build quality. The TDCi accelerates faster, but I think the Civic 2.0 has a slightly higher top speed (though there's no difference between 210 and 215-220 when you get your speeding ticket on the NLEX).

Cons: Stiff, ride, stiff seats... though if you're getting factory leather, it's acceptable.

*KIA SOUL 2.0 LX A/T - 1,220,000php

Tested consumption: 7-9 km/l mixed (7 km/l urban... better than most 2.0 gassers because of light weight)

Pros: Great looking, roomy interior (though it's on the narrow side compared to the newer cars here), good handling with the 18s, ride quality acceptable even with 18s, punchy performance (though against the clock, it's only as quick as the Focus 2.0 Gas and the Toyota Corolla 2.0).

Cons: Expensive, interior plastics suck in places... many places, rear hatch not quite as roomy as you'd expect. Kind of tinny feeling.

*MAZDA 3 HATCHBACK 1.6L V A/T - 955,000php

Tested consumption: 10-12 km/l mixed (8 km/l urban)

Pros: Handles well, rides softly, interior and exterior still look futuristic after all these years. Economy decent, despite what people may say...

Cons: 1.6 4AT will only give you decent economy if you drive very nicely. Try to wring any acceleration out of the Mazda3 and economy drops quick. It's almost as slow as the Cruze. (actually... that's a pro). A bit floaty at high speeds. Electric steering a bit dead feeling compared to newer cars here. Rear seat similar to Focus.

*MAZDA 3 2.0L R A/T - 1,039,000php

Consumption not tested, projected at 8 km/l mixed, 6 km/l urban

Pros: Decently quick, handles very well. Interior and exterior good (again) and lots of kit for price.

Cons: Getting on in age... same floatiness at speed as 1.6 and same issue with steering and rear seat space. 4AT only.

*SUBARU IMPREZA 2.0RS Hatchback A/T - 1,218,000php

Tested Consumption: 7 km/l mixed (6 urban)

Pros: Good ride comfort on most surfaces, neutral handling, rear seat roomier than Focus/Mazda3 hatches

Cons: Rear seat lower than in Focus/Mazda3, so tall people might find thigh support lacking. 4AT + AWD saps much of the 2.0's power. To the point that it's only about as quick as the Focus or Corolla 1.8s (which have 30 hp less), loses composure over big bumps, never quite as exciting to drive as you think it should be. Jut703 is right... skip this and go for the manual Impreza... that one has a very sweet clutch and gearshift and is actually kind of fun to drive.

*TOYOTA COROLLA ALTIS 2.0 V - 1,110,000php

Tested consumption: 8 km/l mixed (6 km/l urban)

Pros: Lots and lots of toys. Wafty ride. Punchy engine.

Cons: Engine breathless at high rpms (not a big deal if you aren't a racer), suspension gives too much body roll, dive and squat, no rear anti-roll bar means skittish handling in the wet, brakes not up to task of handling engine's extra weight and power, steering horrible (but better than in 1.6), front footwells oddly shaped. Not quite as compelling a buy as other cars in the class.

-


Note: since these cars weren't driven back to back, the assumed economy and tested economy may be off by a bit. Still... most 2 liter cars get similar economy in traffic, so economy shouldn't be a big factor in deciding between them. The only vehicle for which economy is different enough that it may matter is the TDCi. Where gassers can drop to as low as 5 km/l in rush hour traffic, the TDCi's worst (worst that I've seen) is around 7.5 km/l. And where the gassers will be doing 10-12 km/l at 80 km/h on the highway, the TDCi can hit 16-20 km/l at the same speeds.

[indiej]

Haha! Nalito tuloy ako kung sedan or hatch ang piliin ko if ever na FOCUS ang choice ko. But, thanks though sir!

Nice review and suggestion indeed sir, if you were to choose among ford focus and mazda 3, will you pick SEDAN or HATCH?

sedan for mazda3, hatch for tdci focus. libre wiper sa likod vs sa sedan, kidding but it's true

I didnt include the LANCER EX kasi wala siyang A/T, I prefer A/T kasi.

while with the tdci you get powershift a/t, Lancer EX has a CVT a/t

[arvie1]

I'd agree... should never count out the Lancer. one of the roomiest in the class.

from various test drives:

*CHEVROLET CRUZE 1.8 LT A/T - 1,048,888php

Tested consumption: 7-8 km/l mixed... test unit had only 500 kms on clock, so test not definitive.

Pros: Incredibly comfortable interior, good plastics and nice options (lacks power adjustable driver's seat, but that's really not a big deal), quiet, drives very well... about as nimble as a Focus or a Civic with a more supple ride, very refined, very good space... and... surprisingly... solidly built.

Cons: Terrible six-speed automatic mated to a weedy engine. Indecisive, slow to shift, and... well... slow. Even the Optra 1.6 was faster... and that was a slug. Trunk shallow both in depth and height

*FORD FOCUS SPORT 2.0 TDCi (5-Dr) A/T - 1,195,000php

Tested consumption: 11-14 km/l mixed (8-9 urban)

Pros: Very responsive transmission, Rear-aircon vents (still unique in this class), Punchy engine with incredible fuel economy, very good handling, great build quality and solid-feeling body.

Cons: Rear seat on the small side, ride stiffer than older Focus, though still not as stiff as the Civic.

*HONDA CIVIC 2.0 S A/T - 1,115,000php

Consumption not tested, projected around 7-8 km/l (7 km/l urban)

Pros: Fast, responsive 5-speed transmission, very good handling, good interior space, great material and build quality. The TDCi accelerates faster, but I think the Civic 2.0 has a slightly higher top speed (though there's no difference between 210 and 215-220 when you get your speeding ticket on the NLEX).

Cons: Stiff, ride, stiff seats... though if you're getting factory leather, it's acceptable.

*KIA SOUL 2.0 LX A/T - 1,220,000php

Tested consumption: 7-9 km/l mixed (7 km/l urban... better than most 2.0 gassers because of light weight)

Pros: Great looking, roomy interior (though it's on the narrow side compared to the newer cars here), good handling with the 18s, ride quality acceptable even with 18s, punchy performance (though against the clock, it's only as quick as the Focus 2.0 Gas and the Toyota Corolla 2.0).

Cons: Expensive, interior plastics suck in places... many places, rear hatch not quite as roomy as you'd expect. Kind of tinny feeling.

*MAZDA 3 HATCHBACK 1.6L V A/T - 955,000php

Tested consumption: 10-12 km/l mixed (8 km/l urban)

Pros: Handles well, rides softly, interior and exterior still look futuristic after all these years. Economy decent, despite what people may say...

Cons: 1.6 4AT will only give you decent economy if you drive very nicely. Try to wring any acceleration out of the Mazda3 and economy drops quick. It's almost as slow as the Cruze. (actually... that's a pro). A bit floaty at high speeds. Electric steering a bit dead feeling compared to newer cars here. Rear seat similar to Focus.

*MAZDA 3 2.0L R A/T - 1,039,000php

Consumption not tested, projected at 8 km/l mixed, 6 km/l urban

Pros: Decently quick, handles very well. Interior and exterior good (again) and lots of kit for price.

Cons: Getting on in age... same floatiness at speed as 1.6 and same issue with steering and rear seat space. 4AT only.

*SUBARU IMPREZA 2.0RS Hatchback A/T - 1,218,000php

Tested Consumption: 7 km/l mixed (6 urban)

Pros: Good ride comfort on most surfaces, neutral handling, rear seat roomier than Focus/Mazda3 hatches

Cons: Rear seat lower than in Focus/Mazda3, so tall people might find thigh support lacking. 4AT + AWD saps much of the 2.0's power. To the point that it's only about as quick as the Focus or Corolla 1.8s (which have 30 hp less), loses composure over big bumps, never quite as exciting to drive as you think it should be. Jut703 is right... skip this and go for the manual Impreza... that one has a very sweet clutch and gearshift and is actually kind of fun to drive.

*TOYOTA COROLLA ALTIS 2.0 V - 1,110,000php

Tested consumption: 8 km/l mixed (6 km/l urban)

Pros: Lots and lots of toys. Wafty ride. Punchy engine.

Cons: Engine breathless at high rpms (not a big deal if you aren't a racer), suspension gives too much body roll, dive and squat, no rear anti-roll bar means skittish handling in the wet, brakes not up to task of handling engine's extra weight and power, steering horrible (but better than in 1.6), front footwells oddly shaped. Not quite as compelling a buy as other cars in the class.

-


Note: since these cars weren't driven back to back, the assumed economy and tested economy may be off by a bit. Still... most 2 liter cars get similar economy in traffic, so economy shouldn't be a big factor in deciding between them. The only vehicle for which economy is different enough that it may matter is the TDCi. Where gassers can drop to as low as 5 km/l in rush hour traffic, the TDCi's worst (worst that I've seen) is around 7.5 km/l. And where the gassers will be doing 10-12 km/l at 80 km/h on the highway, the TDCi can hit 16-20 km/l at the same speeds.

Thanks again for a nice review of my options sir, I just want to ask what if I include LANCER EX 2.0L MX CVT, A/T pala siya. haha. Sorry, just a newbie, I even don't know what CVT means since nakita ko comment ni sir indiej na A/T pala ang lancer ex 2.0 mx. LOL! What a noob!

sedan for mazda3, hatch for tdci focus. libre wiper sa likod vs sa sedan, kidding but it's true


while with the tdci you get powershift a/t, Lancer EX has a CVT a/t

Parang masmaangas dating ng hatch ng mazda 3 both with focus sir. haha! anyways, pagfocus parehas lang naman ng specs pera lang sa exterior, sa mazda3 lang magkakatalo ang isip ko kung sakali.

May mga diesels ba yung ibang options ko? Kasi puro gas halos, focus lang ata may diesel. LOL!

Okay ba Lancer EX 2.0 MX? Sali ko na rin sa options ko since A/T naman pala.

[jut703]

Objectively, the Lancer 2.0 MX is a great car. It's got a very good engine (same engine as the Evo sans the turbo), lots of space (it's marketed as a Galant in some places, a testament to its size), lovely handling (though greatly reduced by the 16" tires) and has pretty neat features for its price..

However, there's just something with it's stance that will never make me happy if I buy one. I just get the feeling that a Lancer EX was always meant to have the aero kit and spoiler that the GT and GT-A models have. Again, it's just me, but I'm really put off with the looks of a non-GT/GT-A Lancer.

The 2.0 Compact Sedan segment is probably the best in the market right now in the sense that each of the cars are good and are only differentiated by what you value most.

If you value,

FUEL ECONOMY: Obviously the Focus TDCi.

LOOKS: Personal decision actually. I like the Civic and Mazda 3 (and the Lancer GT which isn't in your choices).

POWER: Lancer, Civic or Focus. Civic's the most responsive, Focus' will feel the fastest thanks to its torque.

SPACE: Cruze or Lancer, really big cars. Though they're also heavy cars, the Cruze especially.

COMFORT/LUXURY: Altis. It's got more of these than all of the others (though Cruze is highly comfortable as well), but it's really a one-trick pony in the sense that that's all it has.

About hatch or sedan, I like sedans more in general. And I'd definitely get a Mazda 3 sedan. However, the Focus was designed as a hatch, and it looks much better as a hatch. So I'd get that. Same as the Mazda 2, the sedan just doesn't cut it for me because I know that it's really meant to be a hatch.

CVT is a totally different system from your conventional automatic. Instead of gears it has a belt. All that matters to most though is that it drives like an automatic but is usually smoother. That said, due to its infinite ratios, it doesn't have that sporty feel. This is then helped by paddle shifters which cycle through pre-assigned ratios.

[guigui]

first, congratulations, Mr. RN!

personally, i'd go with the focus. it's thrifty when it comes to fuel because it's a diesel. downside is that diesel engine needs more PMS than a petron engine. you get to visit the casa every 5,000 kms with a diesel compared to 10,000 kms with a petrol. another downside is the price of the motor oil. diesel motor oils are more expensive than petrol motor oils and a diesel engine needs more than 4 liters of oil. 4 liters of oil is usually the amount needed with the petrol engine.

another plus factor of ford focus is that since it's a diesel car, it has a lot of torque which makes it a wolf hiding on a sheep's wool. kung maluwag ang nlex as you go to your province, kayang i-hataw at hindi ka ipapahiya. in fact, tuason racing school (sorry if i named names) uses focus diesel as their training car for their students. that's how leviathan that car is.

i'm not a ford salesman by the way. it's just my humble opinion.

:morgensmile:

[niky]

If we're talking about the Lancer, it's got the biggest front seat in the class, hands down... but the Cruze actually has more rear seat space. Both have rather small trunks... but let's face it... you're not going to fit a balikbayan box into the trunk of any sedan...

Some people find the Lancer stiff, but I like it. It's actually not stiff compared to the Civic... but if you have the 18" wheels, it'll obviously rumble a bit over sharp bumps. Otherwise, ride comfort is decent... though the Cruze is better.

[arvie1]

Objectively, the Lancer 2.0 MX is a great car. It's got a very good engine (same engine as the Evo sans the turbo), lots of space (it's marketed as a Galant in some places, a testament to its size), lovely handling (though greatly reduced by the 16" tires) and has pretty neat features for its price..

However, there's just something with it's stance that will never make me happy if I buy one. I just get the feeling that a Lancer EX was always meant to have the aero kit and spoiler that the GT and GT-A models have. Again, it's just me, but I'm really put off with the looks of a non-GT/GT-A Lancer.

The 2.0 Compact Sedan segment is probably the best in the market right now in the sense that each of the cars are good and are only differentiated by what you value most.

If you value,

FUEL ECONOMY: Obviously the Focus TDCi.

LOOKS: Personal decision actually. I like the Civic and Mazda 3 (and the Lancer GT which isn't in your choices).

POWER: Lancer, Civic or Focus. Civic's the most responsive, Focus' will feel the fastest thanks to its torque.

SPACE: Cruze or Lancer, really big cars. Though they're also heavy cars, the Cruze especially.

COMFORT/LUXURY: Altis. It's got more of these than all of the others (though Cruze is highly comfortable as well), but it's really a one-trick pony in the sense that that's all it has.

About hatch or sedan, I like sedans more in general. And I'd definitely get a Mazda 3 sedan. However, the Focus was designed as a hatch, and it looks much better as a hatch. So I'd get that. Same as the Mazda 2, the sedan just doesn't cut it for me because I know that it's really meant to be a hatch.

CVT is a totally different system from your conventional automatic. Instead of gears it has a belt. All that matters to most though is that it drives like an automatic but is usually smoother. That said, due to its infinite ratios, it doesn't have that sporty feel. This is then helped by paddle shifters which cycle through pre-assigned ratios.

I'm thinking of getting the GT-A sir, but there are some saying that the 18" shoes makes it a lil' bit bumpy ride?

first, congratulations, Mr. RN!

personally, i'd go with the focus. it's thrifty when it comes to fuel because it's a diesel. downside is that diesel engine needs more PMS than a petron engine. you get to visit the casa every 5,000 kms with a diesel compared to 10,000 kms with a petrol. another downside is the price of the motor oil. diesel motor oils are more expensive than petrol motor oils and a diesel engine needs more than 4 liters of oil. 4 liters of oil is usually the amount needed with the petrol engine.

another plus factor of ford focus is that since it's a diesel car, it has a lot of torque which makes it a wolf hiding on a sheep's wool. kung maluwag ang nlex as you go to your province, kayang i-hataw at hindi ka ipapahiya. in fact, tuason racing school (sorry if i named names) uses focus diesel as their training car for their students. that's how leviathan that car is.

i'm not a ford salesman by the way. it's just my humble opinion.

:morgensmile:

Thanks sir! I'm a little bit confused na lang between the 3, FOCUS TDCI, LANCER GT-A or SUBARU IMPREZA HATCH. Yung impreza ba na sedan na base does it goes with a spoiler na?

If we're talking about the Lancer, it's got the biggest front seat in the class, hands down... but the Cruze actually has more rear seat space. Both have rather small trunks... but let's face it... you're not going to fit a balikbayan box into the trunk of any sedan...

Some people find the Lancer stiff, but I like it. It's actually not stiff compared to the Civic... but if you have the 18" wheels, it'll obviously rumble a bit over sharp bumps. Otherwise, ride comfort is decent... though the Cruze is better.

Thanks sir, pero i'm down to my 3 options which is FOCUS TDCI, LANCER GT-A or SUBARU IMPREZA HATCH, kung may spoiler yung IMPREZA SEDAN sama ko din sa options. lol. Btw, installment po babayaran.

[ghosthunter]

CVT is a totally different system from your conventional automatic. Instead of gears it has a belt. All that matters to most though is that it drives like an automatic but is usually smoother. That said, due to its infinite ratios, it doesn't have that sporty feel. This is then helped by paddle shifters which cycle through pre-assigned ratios.

Driving with the CVT in D will feel lacking in sportiness.

But putting it in manu-matic mode, even without the paddle shifts, gives the Lancer EX a very sporty feeling. A simple flick of the shifter down instantly gives you a downshift in gear and flooring the accelerator results in a big rush forward. Watching the tach reach the redline, you flick up the shifter for the next gear and the world outside riushes by even faster.

Don't put it down until you've tried it.