FAQ  •  Login

Car Reviewing

<<

titleguy1

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 624

Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:37 am

Location: Long Island, New York

Cars: None right now.

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Yay, it's time for a NEW TG1 REVIEW!

Today, we're checking out...
The 2014 Astana City Dweller.
A hatchback that should rival cars like the VW Golf and Baltazar Quark, which recently won our small car test.
Image
Image
---Statistics---
1.2 liter (1201 CC) inline-4
105 HP @ 7200 RPM
81.3 lb-ft @ 6300 RPM
2689.5 lbs.
36.3 MPG
5-Speed manual gearbox, RWD
0-62 MPH in 12.1 Seconds
Quarter Mile in 18.42 Seconds @ 79 MPH


Okay, first impressions. First off, get my eyes off of it. Just, I cannot stand the looks. Sure, it's "simplistic," but I like simple things. But sometimes, simple things can be worse. And here is our prime example right here.

Performance- ImageImage
The City Dweller has a Inline-4 cylinder engine paired with a 5-speed automatic. Let's cut to the chase: Both are absolute utter CRAP. Actually, the engine is just mediocre. While it is pretty smooth, somehow when I floor it smoke comes out of the exhaust. And it smells terrible, even from the driver's seat. The emissions in this is so high, you could probably be more eco-friendly with a big diesel truck. It's fairly smooth, so it didn't really rumble. But if you stomp on the throttle, you get the sense that the engine is saying "do I have to? Why not later? NOW? Alright, I'll try... Not." It's not responsive at all, and has a mushy accelerator pedal. Talking. This car has a strange yet not strange powerband, if that makes sense. It's fairly smooth and flat, but there are some weird dips. Power seems to be cutoff by RPM, so you must work the engine in order to get any power. But, the truly horrific thing about this car is the transmission. I mean, horrifying. Top gear at 75 MPH converts to 4300 RPM. Yes, I said 4300 RPM. The spacing is also strange and unsuitable for the car. This leads to a 0-60 time of 12.1 lethargic seconds, and a surprisingly high top speed of 124 MPH. It's not even very tame or at all sporty, thanks to the pencil-thin 165/65 tires. Overall, this car has an absolutely terrible powertrain, no matter how you see it.

Ride Comfort-ImageImageImage
Somehow, the ride is fine. It's a bit harsh, but it's okay. Until you get to a bump. Astana only had 1 job, and the City Dweller COMPLETELY screws it up with UNBELIEVABLY firm damper settings. Look, I've gone racing, and I wouldn't even have the settings half of what is on the Dweller. Again, it's fairly smooth, but I can't get my mind off of the damper settings. There isn't actually much roll, thanks to the dampers, but wow, those dampers... The tire profile is pretty good. I mean, it does look like you have superswamper tires, but it saves- SOMEWHAT- the suspension settings. The ride is totally ruined by the dampers.

Handling-ImageImageImage
You'd expect the City Dweller to be terrible in the corners. And you'd be pretty much correct! The handling is bad. Never mind the suspension, the tires alone kill the car. As skinny long-lasting tires, they pretty much suck. And there's no knowing where you're going, because you don't want to keep on rowing, but you'll just keep on going. In easier terms, it's not tame and you must expect the unexpected. And with what is has, you'd expect it to be light and fun and like an 80's hot hatch. But it just is the complete opposite. Even with RWD, it understeers like crazy. And there's no power to send you into oversteer, even with the tiny tires. There are more driver assists you'd expect from a car like this, so Power Steering, ABS, and Traction Control. It doesn't roll badly at all, surprisingly, but the engine still is not responsive. In the end, the City Dweller does need to stay in the City. Because if it didn't, all hell breaks loose.

Refinement-ImageImage
The Astana is pretty quiet from the engine, unlike what you'd expect, and there is some sound insulation to back it up. However, unlike the last car I reviewed, the Aspire, it isn't whisper-quiet. It is comparable to, let's say, a Honda Fit or Mazda 2. But don't expect a mini Rolls-Royce. You'd be dissapointed.

Equipment-ImageImage
Dear lord, here we are at equipment. You already know what I'll say for this. this car is basic. As in, all the equipment is basic. And with how everything feels, it's just very.. Cheap. The dash is made from the same plastic, as I feel it, as a children's toy. There is a decent amount of Driver Assists, as mentioned, but safety equipment is only mediocre. All in all, the Astana isn't any luxury car, and it shows.

Quality-Image
With the bad quality and lack of equipment, the City Dweller is nothing to brag about. I'll go more depth with the cheapness here. The plastics are from a toy, the fabric feels like sandpaper, and the seats are unsupportive. There is some equipment, but not much. This car is more stripped-out than a Mitsubishi Mirage. And that's not a compliment.

Reliability-ImageImageImageImage
You'd expect the City Dweller to be completely bulletproof, because of its current rubbishness. But, as a matter of fact, it isn't. Well, it is reliable, but one would expect the thing to be twice as reliable as the Aspire we tested. but, no, it's about the same in terms of reliability. A huge letdown for me.

Running Costs-Image
36.3 MPG is very good. For many cars, 36.3 is a dream. But in a car in this class, 36.3 is... So bad it is shameful. Meanwhile, you have cars in 3-4 size classes larger than this laughing in front of it's damn face. And for such a cheap car, you would also expect the maintenance to be dirt-cheap, but again, it's only fairly average for it's class. This is absolutely horrendous and embarrassing.

Structure-ImageImageImage
A standard steel chassis and steel panels make for a decently safe car. Don't expect anything great. There are a few driver assists that help you be safe. However, it's let down by under average safety features. It's not the best, nor is it what you'd expect from a modern-day car.

---Overall---ImageImage

Pros: Fairly safe, smooth ride until bumps come..
Cons: Every. Thing. ELSE.

Do YOU want a cheap and cheerful car? Then GTFO! Do YOU want one of the worst cars, ever? Than this is an amazing, brilliant, perfect choice for you! Highly unrecommended.
Rennen Automotive
Historic Collection
Rennen. Perfection in Performance.™
<<

USDMFTW

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 397

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Cars: 2000 Saturn SL2
Look i have DOHC :P

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 3:41 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

RWD hatches are not to common.
<<

Jakgoe

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 2104

Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:25 am

Location: United States of America

Cars: 1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT SL,
1994 Mercedes-Benz S600

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 3:45 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

USDMFTW wrote:RWD hatches are not to common.

Perhaps cars like this are a reason :P .
World #1 Ranked Automation Player!

Co-Owner of the World Rally Team

Smolensk Motors Showroom

Smolensk Tuning

We will continue the Epic Rap Battles of Automation.
<<

strop

User avatar

3-Star Beta Tester
3-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 3462

Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:31 pm

Cars: Honda Civic VTI-S MY13

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:27 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Holy crap that was more than a review, that was a slam! No pulled punches in that one!

It almost makes me curious as to how the car would drive... Except I've driven my share of horrendously crap cars so :P
<<

titleguy1

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 624

Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:37 am

Location: Long Island, New York

Cars: None right now.

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Well, I could send a file, but you'd delete it pretty quickly like I did. I tried to be nice. But I failed in doing so >: P
Rennen Automotive
Historic Collection
Rennen. Perfection in Performance.™
<<

USDMFTW

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 397

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Cars: 2000 Saturn SL2
Look i have DOHC :P

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Thats how people learn how to build cars in automation, im sure the next car he makes will be much better.
<<

strop

User avatar

3-Star Beta Tester
3-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 3462

Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:31 pm

Cars: Honda Civic VTI-S MY13

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 6:22 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

What was the MRSP of this model?
<<

USDMFTW

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 397

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Cars: 2000 Saturn SL2
Look i have DOHC :P

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 6:35 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

strop wrote:What was the MRSP of this model?

Agreed, i would like to see total cost and production units listed in each review, cant compare a tata nano to a golf gti.
<<

EnryGT5

User avatar

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 753

Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2012 2:30 am

Location: Seishido HQ, Ebisu, Tokyo.

Cars: '01 Ford Focus 1.8 TDdi
'10 Citroen C3 1.6 HDi

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 7:53 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Wow... that was nasty! :lol:
CEO of Seishido Motors.
Forum Thread: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=8343

Suddenly, a temporary logo appears.
<<

HighOctaneLove

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 573

Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 10:44 am

Location: Brisbane, Australia

Cars: 1997 Toyota Starlet Life 3dr

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 8:22 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

Ummm, don't take this the wrong way but, Titleguy1, this review is WAY too harsh. Maybe some of the comments where the car got 2 stars can be kinda justified but when you get a 3 star or 4 star rating there should be a lot more positiveness in the comments than this article displays. These reviews need prices (retail prices that is) or else their usefulness is limited. No point reviewing an ultra cheap hatch against an expensive sports/luxury hatch (which is how this article reads btw) when the difference in price is a major factor that's missing from the review and biases the review against the cheaper car.

I think this car needs to be re-reviewed or the review process revised as IMO allowing overly harsh reviews is unsporting. This particular review should have been written in a less confrontational tone as we're all on different learning curves and this car is a pretty representative example of ALL our early efforts; everybody falls the first time, regardless of whether you turned out to be Neo or just another Smith...

Titleguy1, please PM me the contributors file as I'd like to go over it, try and fix it and re-submit it for a new review. Then if the original contributor wants a copy of the revised file he can PM me. You should have helped him/her Titleguy1, just poking fun at the car is not very nice at all...
Bogliq Automotive #1929007
Leeroy Racecraft #1930086
<<

utopian201

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 382

Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 11:12 pm

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

It is no more harsh than a Jeremy Clarkson review.
I dont think it deserves a retest - there are other members cars who have also submitted their cars.
I have written reviews before and they take me several hours to have a look at the car, do the actual write up, revise it so it reads well, then finally posting it and adding all the formatting and presentation. It is not a 5 min job.

If members are going to submit a car without much thought into it, or at least compare it with other cars that are out there, they cannot expect a review that would be as good if they had put work into tuning the car.

Personally I don't like the tone of the review, but if a car is bad, it is bad. The original member can see where their car went wrong.

As for msrp, not all users specify msrp as I don't think it is a requirement for review submission. If they did, who determines if it is appropriate or not? I've seen 650hp cars with a material cost of $45000 with an msrp of 55000. In real life, we don't know the production cost of a car, but maybe seeing the costs here would be a useful way to see where a car sits in the pecking order.

The reviews perhaps should talk about the brand as well. Where is the user's car aimed at; did the user say on their automationhub or company profile page that they are a high end manufacturer aimed at Lexus? Is it priced like a Toyota? Then mention the car is good, but they are going down market.

I agree with the comments about contradictions in the review - you've given it 4 stars for reliability, but it is a huge let down. So which is it, 4 stars, or a huge letdown?
I've seen contradictions in previous reviews before and it doesn't make sense to get a good rating but opposite comment or vice versa.
Aurora Motor Company: Nothing Comes Close | Youtube ads: Aurora Manticore - "Dyno"
Auto magazine plus directories - list your car in the appropriate directory to be considered for a magazine cover/article.
<<

strop

User avatar

3-Star Beta Tester
3-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 3462

Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:31 pm

Cars: Honda Civic VTI-S MY13

Post Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:58 pm

Re: Car Reviewing

to clarify, what I meant by the mrsp was that i'd like to see what market this car was aimed for. i have previously seen fit to comment on cars that appear to have high production cost but low retail, and speculate on the economic viability or the ramifications in terms of projected market performance.

in this case i remember reading a review about one of the indian tata city runabouts. the comment was that while it was cheap it did not offer as much as it should have as the discount was not commensurate with the drop in quality. that's the kind of comparison we like to be able to make.
<<

Jakgoe

User avatar

Supercharged
Supercharged

Posts: 2104

Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:25 am

Location: United States of America

Cars: 1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT SL,
1994 Mercedes-Benz S600

Post Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:35 am

Re: Car Reviewing

@HighOctaneLove: The cars are given stars based on a formula that calculates their stats. You don't slap stars on cars willy-nilly.
World #1 Ranked Automation Player!

Co-Owner of the World Rally Team

Smolensk Motors Showroom

Smolensk Tuning

We will continue the Epic Rap Battles of Automation.
<<

strop

User avatar

3-Star Beta Tester
3-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 3462

Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:31 pm

Cars: Honda Civic VTI-S MY13

Post Mon Jan 12, 2015 1:24 am

Re: Car Reviewing

Which then DOES beg the question as to where the comment came from, which was HighOctaneLove's original point (as far as the specific example of reliability was concerned).

You'd expect the City Dweller to be completely bulletproof, because of its current rubbishness. But, as a matter of fact, it isn't. Well, it is reliable, but one would expect the thing to be twice as reliable as the Aspire we tested. but, no, it's about the same in terms of reliability. A huge letdown for me.


A comment befitting a four star reliability rating? Certainly the comment does explain that the reliability was expected to be even better... but I'm not sure I buy the premise that a car that performs, handles and feels rubbish ought to be expected to be reliable. I just don't know where that came from. Is that drawing upon, say, the real life example that Hyundai surprised because its cars, while feeling every bit as cheap as they were (Excel, anyone?), were pretty much bulletproof? But even that is more exception than rule when it comes to impressions...

...or the reviewer at this point was simply so frustrated with his experience he had pretty much had it and was past the point of caring :lol:
<<

07CobaltGirl

User avatar

Queen of Track Building

Posts: 1613

Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 11:47 am

Location: Atlanta, GA, USA

Cars: Chevy Cobalt

Post Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:21 am

Re: Car Reviewing

This really was a harsh review. Wow!

There probably are better ways to convey the car does not meet expectations without continuously taking pot shots at it, but I don't do reviews. Keep in mind, a human being submitted these cars, and have feelings. I'm pretty anti-social, and I still keep this in mind (unless you really piss me off, of course) most of the time. Given the insanely long waiting list for getting reviews I think a revisit on this one probably isn't justified, but maybe for future reviews do tone it down a bit? I've built some really shitty cars, and even though they were shitty, they still had 1 or 2 good points. I didn't see a single positive in this review. Maybe at least mention those good points, however minor. Even Clarkson finds something good, if only for comic relief, about the cars he discusses, and we already know he's an asshole. If he can do it, you should be able to do the same. Please find something good about each car instead of only the bad. Even it if is only that it parks well in small city spaces. Pointing out the bad is part of the process, but it shouldn't be the only goal. Just my two cents.
PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests