hyundai had a couple of cars for best initial quality and are tied for second in overall quality

the tib does low to mid 15s stock and responds like a V8 when it comes to mods
they have dynos of 10+whp just from an intake and near that just from an exhaust and they have upgraded computers and a crap load more
they already have supercharged tibs running 13s with not a whole lot of work done to them

hyundai got their bad rep from mitsubishi since hyundai used mitsubishi stuff in their vehicles but their cars have been great since they left mitsu

oh yea mitsubishi is crap, their is not one car i think that is worth it when it comes to that company some might be fast but its all crap at the end

 

But when it comes to long-term (part of the reason for the lower-resale value and poor reputation):

 

If by expensive, you mean dull, uninspired vanilla Camry styling, then, yes, I agree.

Just because it has a Camry engine, doesn't mean they had to make it look like a cross between a Paseo and a Camry.

In the same price range, I would choose a Civic Si or a supercharged Matrix/celica over the tC. It's a cool car, I just think the stying is incredibly unimaginative and lame. The Celica iat least has some original looking lines.

The tC looks to me like Toyota appealing to the bland tastes of its 45-65 yr old demographic again.

Save the bar of soap, featureless styling for Toyota's if you must. Stick with the plan to make Scions unique and stand out.

I've only seen on tC on the road so far and I HONESTLY came thisclose to missing it because it looks like every other car on the road. This one was also that extra exciting shade of primer gray (I guess it's supposed to be silver?) that many of the press photos of the tC show.

tC = teh yawn

 

ouch i got owned

but that alot better than when they were with mitsubishi

 

The tC is the best OVERALL, OVERALL value on the market right now, PERIOD!! Not meaning to rant here, but DAMN already! I had a 96 Cavalier as my first car, and I absolutley LOVED IT!! I beat the ____ out of the car, and it ALWAYS started and I NEVER had any MAJOR probs with it til it got over 85,000 miles, so I was VERY happy with it. The Cobalt looks kick ___, and I was guna wait for it, but I wanted something different, and my Cav is dying now (haven't put any money into it in a LONG time, so it is what it is, lol), and I came across the tC. The only thing the Cobalt will have over the tC is power, but how about RELIABILITY???? I was happy with my Cav to no extent, but have known people who've had some not so nice stories about them. If the tC holds its own as most Toyota's do in this department, the look, the options, and the reasonalbe power for the price make it unbeatable. And I considered a Mazda3, but it was MORE than I paid for my tC with tax (still a awesome little car though), so I'm hooked on the tC with good reason.

 

You really cannot compare the Cobalt to the Cavalier as the Cobalt is completely redesigned. The Cobalt is just the Cav's replacement. However, I have never been a fan of those cars belonging to the category which I like to call "American gone rice". They try so hard but they just can't cut it when compared to Toyota or Honda in efficiency, dependability, and resale value. Those three things are the most important when you're living in the real world (unless you enjoy the headache of taking your car to the repair shop every couple thousand miles after 60,000). I can almost guarantee that the Cobalt will lose over half it's value in just over 3 years time.

 

The Mazda 3s is a more than competent competitor to the tC. It all comes down to performance versus "percieved" upscle style. The Mazda 3 looks good, but the tC looks like a more expensice car (they LITERALLY coppied lines from the A4, 3 series, and Volvo, G35).

As for performance- stock Mazda 3 has similar zip, incredibly better handiling and driving characteristics (From my test drives experience).

Also, the chevy Cobalt may well be a competent competitor. The interior actually looks BETTER than both the tC and the Mazda 3 so far!!! Wait a second, GM with a class leading interior??? We'll have to wait and see what the production model really looks like.

The tC has good value- and the only all glass roof... which doesn't apeal to me, but that is just my opinion. Lotsa great cars comin' out!

 

I've been looking for a car for a long time. Mazda 3, Rsx, celica, and of course the TC. In my opinion the TC is the best car for the money. The Mazda 3 is the closest competition and is a cool little car but its to damn expensive for what you get. I hear everyone talking about how great the Mazda 3's interior is but cmon its nothing special compared to the TC. I think the TC's exterior is much more attractive also. The Mazda 3 just looks to smashed together (is this just me?). Rsx and the celica are great cars but they are overpriced. Scion might be new and all but I trust Toyota over Mazda any day.

 

mazda 3 inetrior is so pretty unlike the tC
tc's looks crappy and cheap, but it has the best value for the overall spec.

 

The first time I got in the TC I thought it looked very cheap also and I was disappointed.....But the more and more I go in the car I like it. Its not anything special its just a simple interior. I have to say tho, it looks pretty at night and I love the roof. :D

 

:twisted:

 

omg... from the looks of that chart theres another car company worser than Kia and thats Land Rover...


im not suprise Honda and Toyota is lower than average problems for cars



why compare Mazda 3??? that scooby thing?? its ugly...


tC still wins; cheaper, better standards, better engine, and better quality..

 

yea i heard mitsubishi's body and the interior are not good, like the exterior is made out of plaster or some plastic, the interior also.... my cousin got into a car reck with his eclipes and whole front end was caved in, but the other car he hit was not damaged, it was a head on collusion.

also i saw a euro show about them comparing the Subaru WRX STI and the mitsubishi Lancer EVO8, the interior for the Lancer he said "the interior is made of plaster design that is just easy to pull apart.", also saying how the interior is so dull looking...

 

I'm going to have to disagree on the interior here. Now, the tC's interior isn't quite "BMWish" like people may make it out to be, but I feel it still looks for upscale with the gray plastic that appears to give it a somewhat "chromish" appearance here. I love the tC overall, but the outside of the the Cobalt is amazing to me (I wanted one, but couldn't wait that DAMN long now, lol), but the interior seriously disappointed me. The tC is a nice little "more than the price" looking crusier, while the Cobalt is that little "fast" car, but here's why I chose the tC. If I wanted performance within reason, I would've bought a TA Ram Air (friend has one and damn, it's a beast), a Cobra, or a Z28, I go for "all-round" cause a TA Ram Air would smoke any of these cars stock, but the insurance for me (21y/o) is insane, so I went practical and am loving it !!!

 

The tCs interrior looked fine to me compared to some other cars in it's class. and I think the tC looks alot better then the mazda 3. but you know what they say opinions are like _______s every one has one.

 

I can settle this.....I am trading my Mazda 3 in on the tC. Im told it should be here on Monday. There are several reasons for the trade. The 3 I have I paid 18,915 and put a 2277.48 as a down payment. Let me tell you some of the reasons Im trading. 1.) There's no intermitant wipers. I know this sounds petty but you don't know how bad you miss them till you don't have them. 2.) Mazda has a square oil filter on the car and also has the lock on them in the market. This means that no aftermarket company can produce them for a specified time. I am told it is a year. So since the nearest dealer is almost 75 miles away this really presents a problem. 3.) There's no way the 3 out handles the tC. 4.) Very little has come out for the 3 and i have had the car for almost 4 months. The tC has just come out and there are already things being planned for release. 5.) It looks good in a way but it also looks like a small family car due to the 4 doors. 6.) Cheaper payment. 7.) The service department at that Mazda sucks. I took the car in for it's 7500 mile maintenance. I paid 50 bucks to get an oil change and the tires rotated like they suggested. They charged me for everything but when I got home they hadn't rotated the tires and had written they didn't need it. I called back they say that you are also charged if they look at rotating them.

So there in a nut shell is why im getting rid of my 3.

 

I'm utterly flabergasted by this comment. How many 45-65 yr old are buying tCs? You're an xB driver right? Why is most of the hate on this car coming from other SCION drivers?

I'd say the tC has the cleanest look of all the cars mentioned, and I like clean. You can't compoare the interior to a Maz 3. The tC interior just flows. I won't talk performance, because then there's a lot of cars that'll beat tC but none in the price range.

What do you guys think of the Saturn ION Redline. A friend of min drove one and said its pretty sweet. Starts at 20K with I guess is what a base tC with SC would cost.

 

I only have one comment----Why would you buy a chevy over a toyota anyway?

 

The Cobalt and Ion are about as similar as the Avensis is to the tC... my how selectively observant you are.

Some suspension components, drivetrain, unitbody are shared- sheetmetal (or glass!), interior, sealing, forged oil pan, laminated steal, sound dampening foam, transimssions, all different... to name a few distinctive feature on the Cobalt.

That little 2.0 is producing about 200 wheel HP on the ion, and is still making HP increaes at the fuel cutoff. I think that the Super Charged tC and the Cobalt SS will be excellent competitors. Competition only benefits us, the consumer- and it appears Chevy may have a solid contender.

 

You say they will be excellent competitors, that is until you drive the cobalt off the lot and find out it has depreciated about 50% in the first five minutes of ownership.