http://autos.aol.com/article/consumer-reports-scion-iq-review/
Rare for a Toyota to get such a negative review.
Also given the tiny size you think the gas mileage would be better than the mid 30’s per gallon.
I’m curious about what the car with the lowest score in the magazine’s history is–would it be the Yugo?
The Suzuki Seppuku?
(Samurai. I know. Couldn’t resist.)
Has Top Gear ever done a review of this car? It’s been on the European market for awhile. I can just hear Richard Hammond exclaiming “Look at it! It’s hideous!”
Series 13, episode 3
James May had to stuff a St. Bernard into one and then do a lap of the track. He quite liked the car.
Well, of course HE would. Should’ve made him stuff Jeremy Clarkson into it and see how much he liked it then with the constant whining about the leg and head room, the ride, the lack of power, etc. 
Thanks for the tip, I’m going to go look up that review.
That fact thats its stone ugly should be enough.That aside,how in the hell do these tiny assed cars,{like the smart car,yeh right,a real dummy would drive one of these and feel safe}meet impact standards?Poor Corvair!!!
Looks like another very specialised city-car, just like the Smart car. Expecting these things to perform well according to ‘average car’ criteria is rather like expecting an RV to be a practical commuting vehicle.
Unless your need is for a car that MUST fit into half a standard parking space, will never need to accommodate more than two people and two bags of shopping, and will only be asked to break 50mph on two occasions per year (both marked in the calendar) then these cars are not for you. Duh.
If your need is for just such a vehicle, then they will probably be a better bet than a Honda Accord.
Next up on Consumer Reports: how the latest 45cc Stihl chainsaw makes a terrible hedge trimmer, and why Wal-Mart nail scissors are the worst cable cutters they have ever tested.
I think part of the problem is that it’s priced the same as or more than a Yaris or Corolla that are larger, faster, and can carry more things.
It appears that the only benefit is fitting into a shoebox sized parking space. You start cutting chunks of car away, people expect to get some kind of savings, either in purchase price, fuel or both.
Yeah, but that’s because people are stupid. It’s not exactly unusual for limited-run specialised compact versions of an very common ordinary thing to be more MORE expensive, not less. Same with compact dishwashers, washing machines, chainsaws, etc. etc.
Same problem with the Smart ForTwo. Given its size, its 36 MPG rating is actually quite disappointing. You can buy larger, more useful cars for less money, and get better mileage than a Smart.
Not really very Smart at all.
I was all excited about the Smart cars, until I saw their horrendous mileage. It’s no better than my Civic sedan, with 5 passenger seating and a good-sized trunk. Why bother?
I really don’t understand. I had a car 20 years ago (1987 Chevy Sprint = Geo Metro) that got at least 40 mpg with my lead foot. I knew people that got over 50 mpg in the same car.
Why is mid-30s the best mileage I can get these days?
Yep, I also used to have a Chevy Sprint ER in the mid '80s that got 52 MPG. That’s right. 52. In the 1980s. In the US.
It’s not. I have a 2011 Honda CRZ, and I get 43 MPG. Not fantastic, but pretty darned good. Of course I run it in Econ mode most of the time. Sport mode goes through gas like a fat man at an all-you-can-eat buffet.
We had a thread on this not so longer ago. I am also appalled by the terrible gas milage of Smart cars all things considered. However, you can get cars with higher gas mileage all day long in the U.S. including the Volkwagon TDI wagon (40+ mpg) and it is a family sized car.
I think Smart cars are just badly engineered and a terrible fit for the vast majority of drivers in the U.S. The only real advantage is in areas where parking is extremely limited and that only applies to a few places in the U.S. The same is true for the Scion iQ so I don’t see why Toyota would want to sell them in the U..S. at all.
Just out of curiosity, I had a look at fueleconomy.gov. The Smart fourtwo is rated at 36mpg city cycle. The scion also does 36 city. [Oddly, neither seems to be available in a hybrid version - I think there is a hybrid smart car in Europe]
Looking at Ford’s 2012 range, the absolute best for a non-hybrid seems to be the fiesta, which does 29mpg city.
So you’ll certainly get a larger more useful car if you can find somewhere to park it and can fit it through the traffic, but you won’t get much better mileage (at least from Ford) unless you spend a significant portion of your time on the highway. And if you spend significant time on a highway, why on earth would you buy a subcompact city car?
Certainly I would never buy a smart or a Qi (wheels too small for London’s 3rd world streets, completely inappropriate for rural sweden) but I still think they have their uses if you happen to live in the kind of environment they were designed for. We rented one in Maastricht and it was perfect for puttering round the narrow medieval streets, even if it did nearly herniate itself driving to the airport.
Stricter emissions standards and more realistic MPG ratings.
So 30 years ago, I could get a car that got 50+ miles per gallon and ran on regular gas.
To get 40-something mpg (maybe, if you’re lucky, it doesn’t look promising if you actually read those links), I have to either get a diesel or a hybrid. And pay several thousand dollars extra (compared to my current car) for the privilege.
Still doesn’t make any sense.
OK, I might buy the stricter emissions, if someone could explain why.
But I’m talking about verified mileage tracked by me (and others), not the EPA ratings.
I regularly got over 40 mpg in the Sprint. I barely get 35 mpg in my Civic. And I drive MUCH more conservatively than I used to.
Yep.
Yep, my CRZ is a Hybrid, well, kind of, but it consistently gets an average of 43 MPG, so I’m not complaining, and that’s real-world mileage.
Not really that rare. The Yaris only received a score of 41 from CR (IQ 29, Smart 28). The FJ gets a 36. Toyota seems to put out its share of winners, and losers.
I’m not all that surprised about the mileage. Most of the weight of a vehicle is the motor and frame and you’re only cutting a few feet off the frame/body for the IQ and Smart. The engines are smaller, but not a lot smaller since they need to be able to (try to) keep up on the highway (foolish as it may sound). Looking at the specs, an IQ is only 230 pounds lighter than a Honda Fit, so yeah, only a couple MPG improvement.
Cars in the 80’s were much smaller, lighter, less safe, and slower. You could get impressive mileage today in an 1800-pound car that takes 13 seconds to get to 60 mph, but not many people would buy it.