Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kickflipjr
I got to hear that aveo review.
|
Then without further adieu, behold the Aveo!
2006 Chevy Aveo Sedan
Trim Level: "LS"
EPA Vehicle Class: Sub-compact Sedan
Engine: DOHC 1.6L, Inline 4-Cylinder rated at 103 Horsepower / 107 lb-ft torque
Transmission: 4-Speed Automatic with Torque Lock-up Conv. and Gear Hold Button
EPA Mileage Estimates (City/Highway/Combined Cycle): 24/34/28
Test Loop by miles: 75% Highway, 25% City
Max Cruise Speed = 65 mph
Weather Conditions over 1-day: Mild. Temp range: 60-75F
Driving Style: Average
Location Test: Urban Little Rock
MPG = Approximate mileage 18.6.
Conclusion: You're reading this correctly. I took delivery of the vehicle with the tank reading above "F", and in about 50 miles of driving, the tank gauge dropped like a rock. Being in the "Pre-ScanGauge" days, the mileage was approximated using the fill-up method.
Another driving test will have to take place for an accurate reading. But I do know this...
Editor's Notes: This Chevy is actually a Daewoo. What??? Yes, the people who bring us the "American Revolution" has a Korean-built and designed vehicle in its lineup. But that's not entirely bad.
The Aveo is the least-expensive, mass-produced vehicle you can buy brand-new in the U.S. This is basically what replaced the Chevy Metro in the lineup. Going into this, I pictured the days of the Yugo, Chevette, and Escort -- inexpensive, basic transportation. Truthfully, I was shocked! The base-model sedan with the automatic is honestly a comfortable, very driveable, higher-quality vehicle. I'm not saying it's the "Cadillac" of cheap cars, but cheap transpo apparently doesn't have to feel like 4-wheels and a seat any longer. It did come with minimal features: crank windows, manual locks, and a 2-speaker "stereo". So there are some subtractions.
But what's wrong with crank windows? Have we gotten so lazy that we need to effortlessly push a button to move the window or lock all the doors? The cranks were nostalgic, and frankly not a big deal. Since it was just me, I locked the other 3 doors, left them alone, and used the trunk and driver's door. There's a lot of weight savings there. It did have A/C, which is a rental-car requirement. The radio played NPR News just fine, and most people upgrade their audio systems anyway.
But it drove like crap, right? I'm glad I waited to write this in comparison to the base-model Hyundai Accent. The answer was, "No". The car drove like a normal car. The biggest feature was the Aveo's handling. Granted, it was softened for America, but quick-handling maneuvers were just that: quick, and precise. The car actually pulled so many g's in a corner, that a significant quanitity of coffee was able to spill out of the 3mm hole in the cup's top and right onto my pants (bear in mind the cup holder securely held the cup). Luckily I had coffee-colored pants on that day, but the fact that this car's weight is very low, is simple smile-inflicting Physics -- something the Hyundai lacked for some reason.
I'm not starting the paragraph with a question as it would be the third in a row. The 1.6L got the car up to highway speeds with enough time, but the suspension was sloppy and soft on the straights (but tightened up in corners). City power was deemed adequate as well. The automatic has a "gear-hold" feature to, well, hold whatever gear you're in. A nice touch the Koreans like to throw-in to make you feel like you have some control over the slushbox. The seats were actually supportive and comfortable -- the dash was spartan, but not inexcusably cheap. Ergonomics were OK, and a tach was standard. All of this sounds like a great deal: Chevy incentives and rebates, Asian build-quality, and "European" design! The catch from this drive was the astoundingly horrible fuel economy. I expected high 20's, at least! Time-wise, 50% was highway driving, and the other 135% must have been in the city (???) Average speed was around 35mph.
As with all rentals, at least one red-line run-up is performed to get a feel for high-RPM operation, shifting, and NVH (noise, vibration, and harshness). The fuel estimate would imply that I had this car bumping off of the rev-limiter all over town. But I can honestly say that I drove it like every other rental I test -- like the average American would. In each location, I accelerate with the same speed as the surrounding traffic and I tend to stay away from the NHRA drag race semi-final qualifiers. But 18-19 mpg? Something is wrong somewhere. It's either the Driver, Vehicle, Conditions, or Calculations. For the sake of this car, I hope it's the calculations, because it was an average, beautiful day in Arkansas, I explained that I didn't treat the vehicle differently than in any other rental testing procedure, so the only other variable is the starting fuel quantity.
It is possible that the tank was lower than "Full" upon delivery and the gauge is inaccurate. The last renter could've brought it back with a gallon-shy and nobody would know the difference. It took over 3 gallons to fill-up, and I only had it for one day! Honestly, more FE testing needs to be done; otherwise, it was a decent commuter. If I were to compare it with a used Civic or Corolla, it doesn't come close to the quality and economy, but if you want a new car with a decent warranty for a small amount of money this one seems to qualify.
Thanks to all who continue to support the thread! I have about 10 more cars in the queue to enter, and more every week: some of which include the Chrysler 300, Chevy Impala, and Nissan Sentra. See you next time at the airport...
RH77
Linear Mode
