Chevy Aveo, why not spring for a Fit?

[Jay2TheRescue]

Originally Posted by 101mpg

I used to have a 1980 Pontiac Bonneville 2-door. We got 11 in, no one in the trunk. Got 30 MPG in it, 5.7 liter 350, 55 MPH on cruise, flat ground.

This is why I think I can get 100 MPG out of a severely modified CRX.

I got T-boned in the Bonneville in 1991. Needed a new left front tire. Passenger door was smashed in a little, but the power windows still worked fine. Totalled the Honda station wagon that hit me, took her front bumper off and more. Built like a tank. Wish I'd never sold it.

My good friend I bought it from was in the same model car, her family was in a wreck head-on at 55 MPH. Her dad had the engine in his lap but they all walked away, no broken bones. Those were the days.

Oh the times in that car... I never actually hit anything in my wagon, but I can remember one night when I was 17 I was driving home down the "main road" which was a 2 lane country road with a 55 mph speed limit. I came to this one spot where the road dips down into a little valley, makes a 30 degree bend right at the bottom, and immediately starts going back uphill. There is a 30 foot ravine 3 feet beyond the shoulder of the road, and no guardrails.

I was traveling at 55 and just before I got to the bottom a deer darted out in front of me from the ravine. I locked up all 4 wheels. I spun that car around 90 degrees before it finally came to a stop. I was frightened to find that my car was longer than the road was wide, and I was inches from the edge of the ravine. I think I drove 30 mph the rest of the way home...

Another time I was driving home durring a really bad icestorm. There was about 1/2 inch of accumulated ice on the roads, and no sand or salt trucks had gotten that far out in the boonies. I was doing quite well, although I was taking up the entire road. The car would start sliding left, I'd steer left, recover, and start sliding right, steer right, recover, slide left. I did this for about 5 miles. Right before my subdivision was a steep hill followed by an "S" curve. As I approached the hill the car started sliding left, and I could not get it to recover. I saw a driveway and aimed for it, and slid into someone's front yard. I knocked on their door, told them what happened, and told them I'd take the car out in the morning when the ice was gone. I walked the last mile and a half home, barely able to stand on the wet, icy roads.

[Beelzebubba]

Originally Posted by AK97CX

We are finally returning my wife's rental Aveo today when we pick up her Fit Sport from the body shop.

I will be the first to admit that I am biased towards Hondas but I have to say that there is nothing redeeming about the Aveo. Has anyone else driven one?

The interior is terrible, the fit and finish doesn't even measure up to my 12 year old CX hatch with 178,000 miles.

I know it's a rental but it doesn't even have a CD player, just an AM/FM radio. It's also an automatic (again because it's a rental) which makes the agonizingly bad driving experience even worse. I wonder if a stick would help at all.

I looked up the Aveo online and saw that they start about $4500 less than a base Fit but once you option out an Aveo to the Fit's level you have to be within a few thousand bucks.

For me it's a no-brainer, spend the small amount extra and get a better looking, more fun to drive, better quality car that will actually hold it's value for years.

Just wondering if anyone else agree's, disagree's.

I wish that Chevy/Ford, etc. could make a car that stacks up to Hondas and Toyotas. I'm all for buying American but not if I get a sub-par product.

The Chevrolet Aveo is the most abysmal car currently sold in the U.S. I was given one as a rental car back in Dec. 05 when I wrecked (totaled) my '02 Honda Accord. I returned it after one day and insisted on something different- ANYTHING had to be better! They put me in a Chevy Cobalt and, compared to the Aveo, it was better in every possible way.

The Chevy Aveo is actually built by GM-Daewoo in South Korea. It's sold as the Daewoo Kalos in most other markets. The Suzuki Reno & Forenza models, which are almost as horrible as the Aveo, are also rebadged Daewoos. This isn't the first time that GM has imported a sub-standard Daewoo and sold it under an American brand name- the nasty little Pontiac LeMans sold from '87-'93 was known the rest of the world as the Daewoo LeMans! Bad, bad cars...the Aveo shows just how little progress they've made. Note- GM and Suzuki purchased 66.7% of Daewoo in 2002 after it went bankrupt.

Sales figures for last month (June) hint that car buyers are taking a closer look at the bigger picture, not just purchase price, when choosing a new car. The Aveo was down 19.7% in sales while Cobalt sales increased by 21.6%! FYI- the Honda Fit was up 78.2% for the month...and the only thing holding it back from even more sales is the lack of cars!

[spazzer]

For what its worth, the 2009 Aveo has a 1.6L DOHC version of the ecotec engine. Perhaps GM should put that engine into the Cobalt XFE?

[Beelzebubba]

Originally Posted by spazzer

For what its worth, the 2009 Aveo has a 1.6L DOHC version of the ecotec engine. Perhaps GM should put that engine into the Cobalt XFE?

Chevrolet may call the 1.6L in the Aveo an "Ecotec" for familiarity and branding purposes, but it's not in any way related to the 2.2L or 2.4L engines currently in the Cobalt lineup. It is actually a GM-Daewoo engine developed in South Korea along with the Daewoo Kalos which is the vehicle rebadged and sold here as the Chevy Aveo.

The 2009 Aveo's EPA ratings show that the it's 1.6L engine is significantly less efficient than the Cobalt XFE's 2.2L.

Here's a comparison-

Aveo LS 4-door- 2,568-lbs, 107hp/106lb-ft torque
Manual trans- 27/34mpg, Auto trans- 25/34mpg

Cobalt LS 4-door- 3,216-lbs, 155hp/159lb-ft torque
Manual trans (XFE)- 25/37mpg, Auto trans- 24/33mpg

Despite weighing 650 pounds more, having 48 more horsepower and an additional 53 pound-feet of torque, the manual transmission Cobalt XFE can still achieve 3mpg more on the highway than the Aveo. The Cobalt with automatic and the same power gains as noted above is only rated 1 (one) mpg lower than the Aveo with automatic.

It should also be noted that the Aveo with automatic takes 11.7 seconds to accelerate from a stop to 60mph, while the Cobalt 2.2L automatic can hit 60mph in 9.2 seconds (2.5 seconds faster).

The Aveo really doesn't make very much sense in Chevrolet's product lineup. The base model Cobalt LS with no options isn't substantially more than a similarly equipped Aveo, yet the Aveo is smaller, slower and far less comfortable....and with manual transmission, the Aveo also has worse fuel economy.

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by Beelzebubba

The Aveo really doesn't make very much sense in Chevrolet's product lineup. The base model Cobalt LS...

There's no hatchback Cobalt. I don't like hatchbacks (just ignore the fact that I'm driving one) but some people do.

[GasSavers_BEEF]

speaking of hatch backs. I wish they would throw away the aveo and bring back a newer version of the metro. if they did (which they wont) they could offer the 3 cyl motor again.

my first car was a '93 metro. I drove it like I stole it and still got 46MPG. back when gas was a buck a gallon at the "EXPENSIVE" gas stations, and nobody cared about MPG.

[theholycow]

A new Metro would still be much heavier than a '93, and I doubt even this energy-expensive economic climate could support the R&D to make a decent 3 cylinder engine with more power than the '93 3 cylinder.

[froggy81500]

Originally Posted by Beelzebubba

Chevrolet may call the 1.6L in the Aveo an "Ecotec" for familiarity and branding purposes, but it's not in any way related to the 2.2L or 2.4L engines currently in the Cobalt lineup. It is actually a GM-Daewoo engine developed in South Korea along with the Daewoo Kalos which is the vehicle rebadged and sold here as the Chevy Aveo.

The 2009 Aveo's EPA ratings show that the it's 1.6L engine is significantly less efficient than the Cobalt XFE's 2.2L.

Here's a comparison-

Aveo LS 4-door- 2,568-lbs, 107hp/106lb-ft torque
Manual trans- 27/34mpg, Auto trans- 25/34mpg

Cobalt LS 4-door- 3,216-lbs, 155hp/159lb-ft torque
Manual trans (XFE)- 25/37mpg, Auto trans- 24/33mpg

Despite weighing 650 pounds more, having 48 more horsepower and an additional 53 pound-feet of torque, the manual transmission Cobalt XFE can still achieve 3mpg more on the highway than the Aveo. The Cobalt with automatic and the same power gains as noted above is only rated 1 (one) mpg lower than the Aveo with automatic.

It should also be noted that the Aveo with automatic takes 11.7 seconds to accelerate from a stop to 60mph, while the Cobalt 2.2L automatic can hit 60mph in 9.2 seconds (2.5 seconds faster).

The Aveo really doesn't make very much sense in Chevrolet's product lineup. The base model Cobalt LS with no options isn't substantially more than a similarly equipped Aveo, yet the Aveo is smaller, slower and far less comfortable....and with manual transmission, the Aveo also has worse fuel economy.

The same comparison I had done with my 06 Ion manual sedan and an Aveo we were stuck with for a rental for a month. Its insane to think how much heavier the Ion and Cobalt is from the Aveo, even having higher displacements, yet still have higher EPA figures. And I can tell you from driving mine everyday, I am getting more than the 35 MPG highway that the 06 manual is EPA rated.

When compared to the Cobalt (in the current line up), why would anyone opt for an Aveo? Other than price, there is no reason to even look at one.

[Beelzebubba]

Originally Posted by froggy81500

The same comparison I had done with my 06 Ion manual sedan and an Aveo we were stuck with for a rental for a month. Its insane to think how much heavier the Ion and Cobalt is from the Aveo, even having higher displacements, yet still have higher EPA figures. And I can tell you from driving mine everyday, I am getting more than the 35 MPG highway that the 06 manual is EPA rated.

When compared to the Cobalt (in the current line up), why would anyone opt for an Aveo? Other than price, there is no reason to even look at one.

For the sake of discussion, I just priced an '08 Aveo LT 4-door (with ABS as the only option added) and an '08 Cobalt LT 4-door (with ABS and Cruise Control as the only options) so the equipment levels would be closely matched. The figures shown below are Edmunds True Market Value for each car, which is the price factoring in any discounts and incentives currently offered....

The results- Aveo LT- $14,359 and Cobalt LT- $14,356

It makes perfect sense that the Aveo was one of the very few subcompact cars to experience a sales decline in June (10.6% drop). What I can't understand is- HOW DO THEY SELL A SINGLE ONE OF THESE THINGS? They are essentially the product of a failed South Korean automaker (Daewoo) that GM bought for pocket change after they filed bankruptcy and flopped.

[GasSavers_BEEF]

the way the sell them is that people assume that smaller cars will get better mileage and most salesmen are going to point you in the direction of the cars they can't get rid of. if the cobalts are selling like hotcakes then they know they will push them through. so they offer everyone who comes in for a cobalt a look at the aveo. some jump on it because "it's smaller, it must get better FE".

just like other cars, it will find it's way to the redsign room and be renamed (hopefully with better FE).

as far as the metro goes. I think with the right engine, the car would be awesome. I feel like I could get by with about 50hp or so even in a 2k lb car. I know they will never make one but it would be cool.

closest thing is the smart or the wildfire which both have their own set of drawbacks.

down with the aveo, hail to the metro of days gone by.