Buy/Drive/Burn: Alternative Japanese Compacts From 2008

by Corey Lewis

Published: November 3rd, 2021

buy drive burn alternative japanese compacts from 2008

In our last edition of Buy/Drive/Burn, we considered the Mazda Protegé, Mitsubishi Mirage, and Subaru Impreza sedans from 1998. Most of you preferred the Protegé as your Buy of the three. Today we fast forward to the same offerings in 2008, and see if things shake out differently.

Note: We’ve chosen mid-range trims for the Mazda and Mitsubishi as the base Impreza is notably more expensive than the other two in basic form.

Mazda 3

Mazda ditched the Protegé name after 2003, probably in an attempt to escape its well-known rust issues across the nation. For 2008 the 3 is in the final year of its first-generation, as a new model promises to continue the 3’s sales success in 2009. On offer in sedan or hatchback body styles, the 3 is available in eight different trims and shares its platform with the Ford Focus and Volvo S40. Today’s trim is the middle-range i Touring Value (weird name) sedan, which uses the smaller of the four-cylinder engines available. With 2.0 liters of displacement, the 3 produces 148 horsepower sent through the front wheels via the five-speed manual. Its ask is $16,595.

Mitsubishi Lancer

Mitsubishi also abandoned its smallest brand, Mirage, in the North American market after 2001. Its replacement in 2002 was the very slightly larger Lancer. Lancer is in its ninth global generation this year and is all-new for 2008. Based on the Chrysler-Mitsubishi GS platform, the new Lancer is available initially only as a sedan. Trims are three in number: DE, ES, or GTS. The ES is today’s choice at $16,090, and offers a 2.0-liter inline-four good for 152 horses. The power is allocated to the front wheels via the five-speed manual transmission.

Subaru Impreza

Impreza is also new for 2008, as Subaru debuts its third-generation model around the globe. Like the Mazda, Impreza is available in sedan and hatchback formats; the Impreza wagon becomes a thing of the past. Four trims on Impreza range from the very basic 2.5i through the expensive and racy WRX STi. The base 2.5i trim asks $16,995 as it comes standard with Subaru’s all-wheel-drive system. The boxer-four engine produces 170 horsepower, sent through all four corners via the five-speed manual.

Which of these three compact sedans is worth a Buy with your Great Recession 2008 dollars?

[Images: Mazda, Mitsubishi, Subaru]

#2000s #AffordableSedans #Buy/Drive/Burn #CompactSedans #Compacts #EconomyCars #Editorials #Imports #Impreza #Japan #Mitsubishi #UsedCars #Mazda #Subaru #Mirage #Protege #JapaneseCars #SubaruImpreza #MitsubishiMirage #MazdaProtege #NewsBlog #Nineties

Corey Lewis

Interested in lots of cars and their various historical contexts. Started writing articles for TTAC in late 2016, when my first posts were QOTDs. From there I started a few new series like Rare Rides, Buy/Drive/Burn, Abandoned History, and most recently Rare Rides Icons. Operating from a home base in Cincinnati, Ohio, a relative auto journalist dead zone. Many of my articles are prompted by something I'll see on social media that sparks my interest and causes me to research. Finding articles and information from the early days of the internet and beyond that covers the little details lost to time: trim packages, color and wheel choices, interior fabrics. Beyond those, I'm fascinated by automotive industry experiments, both failures and successes. Lately I've taken an interest in AI, and generating "what if" type images for car models long dead. Reincarnating a modern Toyota Paseo, Lincoln Mark IX, or Isuzu Trooper through a text prompt is fun. Fun to post them on Twitter too, and watch people overreact. To that end, the social media I use most is Twitter, @CoreyLewis86. I also contribute pieces for Forbes Wheels and Forbes Home.

More by Corey Lewis

Comments

Join the conversation

4 of 53 comments

Eng_alvarado90 on Nov 04, 2021

This is a tough one because overall I think these three were very closely matched. Buy: Lancer. It looks the best, has the most features and it's surprisingly reliable for what it is (arguably the least reliable Japanese brand). Drive: Subaru. It must be fun on an unpaved road + it's got some power. But I don't want anything to do with the EJ25 engine in the long term. Burn: Mazda. The only reason this is a burn and not the Subaru is because this 3 was behind the other two in safety equipment. Side/Curtain airbags and ABS were an option while it was standard equipment on the other two. Had this been the 2.5 the outcome would've been entirely different

Like Reply
CoastieLenn on Nov 04, 2021

Hey Corey, another idea for a B/D/B: "Near Premium Midsize Cars from [insert year]". Volvo S60 (2.5T had 208hp) Audi A4 (3.0/3.2 200+hp version) Acura TSX (TSX had 200hp) All were relatively close in price, too. You could also throw in the Subaru Legacy GT as a wild card....

Like Reply
- See 1 previous
- Corey Lewis on Nov 04, 2021
  
  Liking the ideas, now I have two more BDBs to do!
  
  Like
- Dal20402 on Nov 04, 2021
  
  Volvo doesn't have much of a shot here, but with manuals A4 vs. TSX is a legitimately interesting choice.
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.
Lynn Joiner Lynn JoinerJust put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Lynn Joiner Just put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Ollicat I am only speaking from my own perspective so no need to bash me if you disagree. I already know half or more of you will disagree with me. But I think the traditional upscale Cadillac buyer has traditionally been more conservative in their political position. My suggestion is to make Cadillac separate from GM and make them into a COMPANY, not just cars. And made the company different from all other car companies by promoting conservative causes and messaging. They need to build up a whole aura about the company and appeal to a large group of people that are really kind of sick of the left and sending their money that direction. But yes, I also agree about many of your suggestions above about the cars too. No EVs. But at this point, what has Cadillac got to lose by separating from GM completely and appealing to people with money who want to show everyone that they aren't buying the leftist Kook-Aid.
Jkross22 Cadillac's brand is damaged for the mass market. Why would someone pay top dollar for what they know is a tarted up Chevy? That's how non-car people see this.