Why don't people ever compare these cars with eachother?

[Demon-Xanth]

Base prices:
RSX-S: $24k
Civic SI $20k
Neon SRT-4: $21k
WRX: $24
Celica GT-S: $23k
Eclipse GTS: $25k
VW GTI VR6: $23k

You always see the WRX and Evo compared, the Celica, RSX, and Eclipse get compared, the Civic SI gets treated like a $15k car (but it isn't), and the Neon NEVER gets any comparison play. I could throw the Mustang GT (est $24k for '05) in, but then people would say it's not in the same class. But hey, that's what the $20-25k sport coupe class looks like.

 

[skace]

WRX 🙂

 

[gigapet]

wc

 

[vi edit]

Each has their tradeoffs. Some are balls to the wall fast (SRT-4, WRX to some extent), some are incredibly nimble (Celica, RSX, Civic), Some lean more twords the Luxury side of things (Veedub, Acura), and some just aren't either (Mitsu 😛). SOme people want low end grunt (SRT, Veedub, Mitsu), others want to wind it up and wring it out (RSX, GT-S).

Then you've got esthetics that come into play. I love the looks of the RSX and GTI, but the rest are pretty fugly to me with WRX being just somewhat unique.

Then you've got other factors like reliability, perceived reliabilty, and image. When you tell people what you drive, a lot of people would feel more inclined to be proud they drive an "Acura" than a "Neon".

The mustang, at least in the past was certainly a bargain performer. But I personally could never own one. I just couldn't live with the interior. I've had them for rentals and I drove my sisters '04 across the country that only had 26,000 miles on it. The build quality was attrocious. I'd give the new ones a second look but it would have to be a mighty high improvement to sway me.

 

[Gravity]

Because the car mags have the ability to do so for me.