In a Nutshell: Neither a Vice-Versa nor a Viceless one... a little of both.

Nissan, in a move that is basically similiar to what Honda did with the Civic and Fit, has moved its formerly entry-level Sentra up one marketing notch and has introduced the 5-door subcompact Versa hatchback as its new American market entry-level car. As I have already reviewed the latest versions of the Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, and Kia Rio, I felt that the Versa, naturally, should be the next small car I look at, not only to evaluate it on its own merits but to compare it to its established competition as well. The Versa has not been available until now......Nissan has dragged its feet somewhat getting it to market....and they are just now beginning to appear at American dealerships. Two different trim lines are offered, ( S and SL ) each with the same 1.8 L in-line four. The base S model has a choice of a 6-speed manual or 4-speed automatic, while the SL offers the same 6-speed manual plus a CVT. Versas are not exactly plentiful at most Nissan dealers right now, and the one I visited today had only one or two ready to go...and a dark blue S automatic one with beige cloth interior was parked right out in front, and as that particular model is ( usually ) better-suited to the driving conditions around here than the manual, ( but not necessarily better than the CVT ) I decided to go ahead and review it.

Nissan, in its public-relations hoopla, has made a big deal about this car's size and power advantages over its rivals for about the same price. I did find the interior, in general, well-suited for big, tall people (and my physical size is generally a good test) but, like with several other entry-level cars in this price range, I did not find this particular engine and powertrain combination very impressive. In spite of a clutch and manual transmission's awkwardness in heavy traffic, on cars like this, with small engines, a manual may be worth considering unless you have a foot or leg problem, simply can't drive a clutch, or don't mind being in the slow lane all day.

Other than that, the car, more or less, is visually a basically scaled-down version of larger Nissan products, trim and appearance-wise. There are some differences with other Nissan products in the ride-and-handling department, neither of which was particularly impressive. So now let's take a look at the car in greater detail.

Model Reviewed: 2007 Nissan Versa 1.8 S Automatic

Base price: $13,350

Major Options:

1.8 S Power Package $700

ABS Package $250

Freight $615

Price as reviewed: $14,915


Drivetrain: FWD, Transverse-mounted DOHC 1.8L in-line 4, 122 HP @ 5200 RPM, 127 ft.-lbs. torque @ 4800 RPM,
4-speed automatic transmission.

Exterior Color: Blue Onyx

Interior: Beige cloth


PLUSSES:

Good exterior fit-and-finish.

Good exterior hardware.

Well-designed automatic transmission lever.

Efficient 6-speed manual and CVT transmissions available.

Better-than-average small-car paint job.

Roomy for tall people and space-efficient inside.

Well-designed gauges.

Slick-feeling controls.

High-friction suede-like cloth on S-model seats and door panels holds you in place.

Solid-feeling exterior mirrors.

Relatively quiet-running engine.

Good torque.....but only starting from rest.

Nice stereo for an entry-level car.

Engine fits underhood nicely, reasonably good access to dipsticks and some components.



MINUSES:

Engine runs out of breath too quickly with 4-speed automatic.

Spongy brakes, with poorly-designed pedal for big feet and shoes.

Low-feel, feathery, non-self-centering power steering.

Suspension not a particularly good compromise of either ride comfort or good handling.

Lots of road and tire noise on coarse road surfaces.

Cheap-looking silver finish on much of the interior metallic trim. ( wood-tone trim not avalable ).

Oil filter unaccessible from above, plastic panel complicates access from below.

Absurd exterior paint-color choices.

Flat, square, oddly-shaped front seats with almost no side bolstering.

Small, triangular A-Pillar windows do not provide any significant added visibility.

Droop-down front fenders not visible from driver's seat....a hinderance in parking.


The first impression of this car as you walk up to it is that of a not-too-terribly original-looking car. The front end is strongly Nissan Murano-like in appearance, and the rear end, particularly the C-pillars, is strongly reminiscent of the new Toyota RAV4, Mitsubishi Outlander, and Pontiac Vibe, with Nissan 350Z-like taillights. Nissan, recently, has given all of its cars, and most of its other vehicles, the same general look on the outside, trim-wise, and this car is no exception......it is instantly identifiable as a Nissan product at first glance.

Having said that,though, it does benefit a little on the outside from Nissan's also-recent efforts to improve the fit-and-finish on its cars. The paint job is better-than-average for an entry-level car, though not quite to the level of Toyota / Scion small cars. The outside mirrors, a weak point on many vehicles, are made of solid-feeling materials and are well-screwed on. The outside trim is neatly and tastefuly done, again not lavish, but in line with the car's price. But the exterior paint colors.......an unbelievably poor choice. Come on, Nissan.....you can do better than THIS. Two medium-to-dark blues, two silver-grays, bright red, white, and black. Reminds me of Henry Ford with his model T, some 80-90 years ago.

Get inside, shut the rather light-feeling door, which shuts with a fairly solid thud, and the interior is reasonably well-done, although the all-too-common Nissan metallic-trim and low-finish cheapness is evident in some places, like the interior door handles. Even with the beige interior, where a number of automakers use wood-tone with the beige, and metallic trim with the gray / black, Nissan offers only the brushed-metal look...no wood-tone available.

But the interior is generally quite well-done. There is plenty of room for large, heavy people like me, there is no sunroof to cut down on headroom ( I had no problem even in my ubiquitous baseball cap ), there is adequate legroom front and rear....especially with the front seats a little forward, and a reasonable amount of room to carry things behind the seats. Looks like Nissan's advertising was correct when they bragged about the room inside.

The gauges and controls are also generally well-done. The well-designed dash gauges had the usual Nissan / Infiniti yellow-orange lighting and numerals. Almost all of the controls and stalks were clearly labelled and easy to operate. About the only thing I missed was a proper radio tuning knob instead of the small button provided, but that is the case on many vehicles today. The dash gauges were surrounded by the now-trendy chrome rings... much nicer than the regular Nissan metallic trim.

OK...start her up. The 1.8L 122 HP four is quite refined and idles smoothly and quietly, with little noise or vibration. Shift it into gear, which is a real pleasure with the fore-aft shift-lever movement ( none of that zig-zag nonsense here ) and take off. It is obvious that Nissan's engineers programmed the engine's computer, fuel injection, and transmission ratios to try and create an artificial feeling of power, which it does provide right on take-off. Unless you feather foot it, the throttle is quite jumpy from rest...up to about 10 MPH, where it then goes flatter than Twiggy in a stack of pancakes. Get rolling from a stoplight up to about 15-20 MPH or so, and THEN give it some gas, and, with the 4-speed automatic at least, you'd better be ready to stay in the slow lane. I did not check-test a manual or CVT model ( none were available today ), but rest assured, the 4-speed automatic model is not going to win any Friday-night drag races.

The automatic transmission, though it obviously saps a lot of power from the engine, is quite exemplary in other ways. Despite a lack of a manual-shift mode and having only 4 gears. it is smooth and quiet, and has the " OD/OFF " mode that Mazda and Ford pionered on their automatics years ago. Punch a button on the left side of the shift lever, about halfway down, and the OD OFF lights up on the dash. This locks out fourth overdrive gear and prevents the transmission from going above third... useful for going up and down long, steep, hills, for engine braking, for keeping the tranny out of O/D in the twisties where you want quicker response, and just for situations in general where you don't want the engine to lug. And it still allows the transmission to downshift to 1st automatically when you stop, and then upshift automatically back up to 3rd when you start up again.

Unfortunately, the suspension and the relatively high-profile 185/65-15 all-season tires (a rarity on today's cars) do not deliver either a very smooth ride or particularly sharp handling....often one is a trade-off for the other. On the road, and particularly in the twisties, I missed the superb driving dynamics of the rival Honda Fit. I wouldn't call the Versa's ride particularly rough, nor its handling particularly sloppy, but both, especially compared to other rival entry-level cars, could be better. The power steering had neither much road feel nor self-centering characteristics. And, while the Versa's engine and 4-speed automatic transmission are quiet, and the body ( by entry-level car standards ) well-sealed against wind noise, a pretty fair amount of tire noise penetrates the cabin, especially on concrete and grainy surfaces. There is some body roll, but the suspension and chassis keeps it in check.

The brakes are also nothing to write home about. The pedal is spongy, especially with light prssure, the response is not even, and the pedal is too low and too close to the gas pedal for my big size-15 clodhoppers, which tend to catch the brake pedal as I lift them from the gas. ( This is not a Versa-only problem....my big, wide, clown-shoes have that trouble in many smaller vehicles, and I just have to drive them carefully at first until I get used to them ).

So...the Verdict? And how does it compare overall with its entry-level competition? Well, about average, overall. The Versa has nice interior space efficiency with plenty of room, acceptable fit-and-finish except for the cheap metallic trim, a reasonable price, and an efficient CVT option. But I found it mediocre in the important categories of ride, steering, handling, refinement, and braking action. In the form I reviewed it, it is little more than basic commuter transportation. Nissan needs to rework the steering, suspension, and brake systems a little, offer better metallic trim, and offer a MUCH better exterior color choice. I would rate the Versa well above the Daewoo-built Chevrolet Aveo, and just slightly above the Yaris, overall.. mostly because the Aveo is just too much of a toy, and because of the Yaris's too-stark interior and awkward, unacceptable center-mount gauges. But the Honda Fit trounces the Versa in chassis dynamics, steering feel, and interior fit-and-finish, and both of the Korean entry-level cars...the Hyundai Accent and the Kia Rio... substantially outdo the Versa in value for the money and in the warranty department. None of these cars, particularly with a conventional automatic, really has enough power to handle a situation where you need to accelerate quickly.. like on a short expressway on-ramp.

So there you have it. If you want to save money and gas, don't want to pay the higher cost of a hybrid ( or the ADM's that Honda dealers are charging for Fits ) don't care much about automotive status or big-car crash protection, and are satisfied with base transportation, and want a vehicle that is at least reasonably reliable, here are definitely some cars to look at.

Every fall, I do a CL thread on the best ways to spend your money on good inexpensive new snow cars for your son or daughter off to college in a foul-weather area, if you need to get around on slick roads, or if you just want the peace of mind that AWD gives you knowing that your car will handle deteriorating weather conditions in general if you have to face them. I'm a little late posting this fall, for a number of reasons, and by now some of your sons and daughters are already off to school, ( and no doubt, some of you reading this are college age yourselves ) but still, there is Christmas / Hanukkah coming up, and a nice new inexpensive snow car, for many people, makes a mighty nice Christmas present.

This winter, after years of the title being dominated by the Subaru Impreza ( which is still an excellent bargain snow machine ), IMO there is a new King of the ski-bunny values....the Suzuki SX-4. I did a CL review of one recently and was amazed at what this car gives you for the money, starting at just $15,000-$16,000 ( More on this below ). Some of the former contenders are gone....victims of marketing decisions or the bean-counters. So the list this winter, and my rankings, which have been more or less constant for the last several years, is significantly different. Still, these cars, as before, can be expected to cost little money, give good service, get through bad weather, and be reliable...although the SX4, of course, is brand-new, unproven long-term, and with a fairly complex multi-adjustable AWD system that can be programmed 3 ways.

So....here are my 2006-2007 recommendations for pinching pennies in the snow:

SUZUKI SX-4: http://www.suzukiauto.com/sr_07/sx4/

With a diminutive size to match its diminutive price, the SX4 is, nevertheless, truly a bargain any way you look at it. It iswell-made inside and out, with a nice paint job, good fit-and-finish, excellent hardware, a good level of safety / convenience standard features, and, of course, AWD. It is light-years ahead of its corporate ( and slightly more expensive ) brother Aerio AWD in just about everything but physical size.....and makes up for this in higher quality and more features for the money. The interior, while not plush or ornate like a luxury car, is tastefully done, has all the basics ( and more ) of what you would expect for the money, and, unlike other small AWD cars, has a multi-position rotary dash switch that sets the AWD system to one of 3 modes....2WD ( yes, you can turn the AWD off for high-traction conditions when you don't need it ), normal AWD for on-pavement slickness, and 4WD lock for tough conditions and mild off-roading when you want max traction....though like most small AWD cars it is not a true off-roader. Its tall roofline and high seating position gives plenty of room for reasonably tall people, front and rear. The SX-4's only real question marks, right now, are of course the newness and unproven nature of the rather complex AWD
hardware ( much more complex than the relatively simple and proven Subaru units ), and the somewhat underpowered 2.0 four, with only 136 ft.lbs. of torque, though the acceleration is a little better, as expected, in the 2WD mode, freed from the AWD drag. It also has rather low ground clearance for deep snow. And any misgivings about the AWD reliability in the long run should be settled by Suzuki's long 7 year/ 100,000 mile drivetrain warranty....no deductible and fully transferrable.

SUBARU IMPREZA: http://www.subaru.com

Right on the Suzuki's heels in the bargain snow-bunny department is the ubiquitous Subaru Impreza, a car long known for value, reliability, and foul-weather traction at a low price, although it can't match the SX-4's ultra-low price, 7 / 100,000 drivetrain warranty, standard features, or multi-position 2WD/AWD switch. However, the Impreza offers the advantage of a simple, proven AWD system, if less versatile than the Suzuki's, and one that will be easier and cheaper to repair after the warranty DOES run out.

Imprezas start around $18,000, and, unlike the SX-4, offer a choice of sedan or wagon versions. The Impreza's standard 2.5L boxer-four offers significantly more power than the SX-4, and, if one cares to spend more for performance and more versatility, a more rugged Outback Sport and higher-performance rally-bred WRX and STi versions, but these, of course, detract from the main idea of getting a good snow car as cheap as possible. The WRX and STi also come with wheels and tires that are less-conducive to good snow traction than ther base 2.5i Impreza does, and the Outback Sport, though mildly capable off-road, rides stiffly...too stiffly for my tastes.

Some people may also dislike the Impeza's aircraft-inspired split-wing grille....a styling idea that may be shortly nixed after applying it to both the Impreza and Tribeca. Otherwise, the Impreza is a class-A small car in many ways. Paint is well-done if not quite Toyota-Lexus quality, interior fit-and-finish is good though the interior is somewhat cheaper-looking than the superb Legacy-Outback interior, and the car has been consistantly above average in reliability. Some of that reliability has come from the simple design of the AWD system, made possible by the fact that Subaru's boxer engines have the output shaft coming straight back, where it goes right into the transmission and front AWD hardware without the need for bevel-gears adding to the complexity.

SUZUKI AERIO AWD: http://www.suzukiauto.com/sr_07/aerio/

The AERIO, a slightly bigger corporate brother to the SX-4, has a bargain price starting at $16,299 for AWD versions but cannot match either the simplicity and consistant above average reliability of the Impreza's AWD system nor the versatility and flexiblilty of the AWD system on its little brother SX4. The Aerio has a more or less conventional small-car AWD system with a sideways in-line 4 up front, which, like the SX-4 and similiar systems on the Toyota RAV-4, Honda CR-V, etc.... requires extra directional-transfer-gears to route the power back to the AWD hardware. Like the SX-4, it has low ground clearance which could limit it in deep snow, and it lacks the SX-4's handy 3-position switch for the AWD system.

The Aerio has rather unconventional looks with a tall roofline and plenty of headroom, and more total room inside than either the SX4 or Impreza...especially the Impreza sedan. Its reliability record has generally been average...it generally wont leave you stranded but don't expect it to run trouble-free quite as long as a Subaru. Its interior once included an odd, triangular-shaped gauge cluster that had a quirky digital speedometer, but, thankfully, the Suzuki people tossed that out and it now has a much nicer, more conventional analog cluster. The rest of teh interior is OK, quality and fit-and-finish-wise.....it is no luxury car, but better than on many American-nameplate vehicles. Its 2.3L four, with 152 ft. lbs. of torque is margainally adequate for this size car and an AWD system, but, as with the SX-4, don't expect it to win any Friday night drag races.

HYUNDAI TUSCON / KIA SPORTAGE: http://www.hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/tucson/tucson.aspx
http://kia.com/sportage/sportage-build.php

I'll treat both of these vehicles together because they are corporate brothers built on the same platform and drivetrain. Both are more SUV-like than the cars listed above, sit much higher off the ground, which, of course, helps in deep snow, and have some differences in styling, trim, standard equipment, and AWD base prices. Both have a sideways-mounted 2.0L four with, ( like the Suzuki SX-4 ) only 136 ft.lbs. of torque.....which probably explains why neither Hyundai nor Kia will sell AWD versions of this vehicle with a 4-cylinder automatic, only with a manual... you have to get the more expensive V6 if you want automatic and AWD, though the V6 models aren't that expensive, either, by V6 standards... about equal to Toyota and Honda 4-cylinder competitors like the RAV4 and CR-V.

In a reverse of the usual pricing tier at Hyundai / Kia, the Tuscon 4-cylinder manual AWD, at a base of $18,399, notably undercuts the Sportage 4-cylinder manual AWD at almost 20K...$19,899. The Tuscon is clearly the better bargain of the two, although I rate both as bargain, well-made entry-level AWD vehicles....otherwise, of course, they wouldn't be on this list. As mentioned, both vehicles have much high center-of-gravity than the cars listed above, so if you are going to buy one for Junior, make sure he or she understands the laws of physics enough to know that you can't throw these two vehicles around corners like you can a Miata... even stability systems can't overrule the laws of physics. Both vehicles are quite well built for the price, with good fit-and-finish and general build quality approaching that of Toyota and Honda ( no, I'm not kidding ). Korean manufacturers, as has been pointed out repeatedly, have made absolute light-years of progress recently in the quality of their vehicles.....I wouldn't hesitate for a second to recommend one, although they still trail other automakers in both engine efficiency and HP/torque per liter. The AWD systems, like Suzuki's, are not as simple or as proven as Subaru's, but the 10 year / 100,000 drivetrain warranty covers them a LONG time. Those warranties, however, are not transferrable to anyone but an immediate family member.


TOYOTA MATRIX / PONTIAC VIBE AWD twins: The FWD models live on, but, sorry.....both of the AWD models have been dropped for the 2007 model year. Look for them either on the used-car lot or a rare one still on the dealer lot unsold. Unfortunately, the AWD versions never sold well, and dealers never kept many in stock even when the car was still on the market....but, for the people who DID buy them, they were a good alternative to the Impreza for years and were on my snow-bunny list despite having a too-low ground clearance for deep snow.

So... Happy Shopping. And you can laugh on the way home from the dealership at all the RWD cars stuck in the ditch while you breeze right past them in the snow.