I like it. I may be tempted to buy it depending on performance. For example, I'd get a Yaris over the Smart any day since it gets the same gas mileage but is bigger. If this outperforms the Yaris I might consider it.
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7907 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 4238 times:
While I get the concept and purpose of micro-compact cars and I get their place in certain markets... I just don't get it for me. I see the need to move towards more fuel-efficient vehicles, and my future purchases will most certainly reflect that, but I see much more value in a more flexible and versatile vehicle. Frankly something like a Honda Fit, which is surprisingly roomy, makes much more sense to me.
Places where the compactness and maneuverability of the iQ or Smart make sense are probably places where improvements and investments in transit and types of development that allow for walking/biking/transit make even more sense. In general in those cases I'd like to see a move away from the personal automobile.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
With carbon dioxide emissions starting at a road tax-free 99g/km and combined cycle fuel economy of 65.7mpg for the 1.0-litre VVT-i with manual transmission, iQ is more than a match for many of its eco-themed rivals. And it returns these remarkable figures without having to sacrifice style, creature comforts and ride quality.
Its ground breaking design makes it the ideal compact machine for around-town driving, but with all the stability and handling dynamics of a larger car to keep it on the pace on the open highway. It can turn on a sixpence and slot easily into parking spaces that are forbidden territory to its rivals, yet the interior is spacious and flexible.
At launch the iQ range offers a revised version of Toyota’s award-winning* 1.0-litre three-cylinder VVT-i engine with a choice of five-speed manual transmission or Multidrive, the latest development of Toyota’s continuously variable transmission. On-the-road prices start at £9,495.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8362 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4182 times:
There are persistent rumors that Toyota will show a US-legal version of the iQ at the Los Angeles Auto Show next month. It will be badged as a Scion model (hence the possible name Scion iQ), will use a 1.3-liter I-4 engine rated at around 85 bhp, and will offer either a five-speed manual or CVT automatic as transmission choices.
Why the Scion badge? Mostly because the iQ is much more a "fashion statement" than the Yaris economy car, and as such Toyota could price the vehicle higher.
TSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3125 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4107 times:
Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 10): At least it doesn't have its speedo mounted in the center of the dash.
My first thought as well. The center-mounted instrument cluster wasn't state of the art on Model A Fords and it certainly has no place on modern vehicles, either.
Quoting ABQ747 (Reply 16): Are Japanese automakers in a race to see who can build the ugliest car?
Yes they are. They have been competing very strongly in that race since the end of WWII. Nissan generally leads the race by pushing current automotive styling trends to their most absurd extremes (Nissan's "Piece Of Plastic Gone Warpy In The Sun/Car That Fell to Earth" look from the 70s, "No Curves Allowed/Origami" look from the 80s, and "Shapeless Blob/Jellybean" look from the 90s are three stunning examples), but Mazda, Toyota, Mitsubishi, and Subaru have produced outstandingly ugly individual vehicles as well.
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
Francoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 4412 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3957 times:
Not the best looking car from toyota, although I have to acknowledge their effort to depart from their usual dull styling.
I am no fan of these type of cars either, but I don't get all the flaming.... Shouldn't it be objectively compared to its competitors? (mostly the Smart, but there are a few others).
Admitedly, I don't see the point of such a car in the US where every city has wide streets and ample parking. If you're looking after fuel economy, $15000 is a lot of money that could be spent on fuel in your old car, even if it's a V6.
The size and economy does makes sense in many Japanese and European cities, and that's where it'll be sold.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 9835 posts, RR: 24
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3953 times:
Guys, I see a lot of laughs and guffaws here, but Toyota has just put out a SMARTCar-killer. Smart has sold oodles of those cars (Americans might not realize how popular it's been in Europe) and basically had the segment to itself for the last 10 years. Here comes a high-quality Japanese product, competitively priced with great milage, and if Mercedes (the owner of Smart) is not careful, they may be pushed right out of the segment.
Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils.
Rsg85 From Australia, joined Aug 2006, 257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3936 times:
i think its a wickid looking little car, havent seen the rear end tho which can be a real killer (celica and aygo comes to mind)
Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 9): If this outperforms the Yaris I might consider it.
same, i used to have a yaris as a company car, as useful as it was in city driving it was useless anywhere else, ride on lawn mowers had better acceleration, its best feature was the number of cup holders.