04.30.07
More thoughts on the Scion xB2
I first got to see the new Scion xB2 back in December at a private unveiling. Recently I got to learn a lot more about it and to drive it. No question, I was impressed with the handling, braking, quietness, smoothness and power of the new xB2. I believe the engineers and designers have come up with a real winner.
I’m a Scion xB owner. The OLD xB. One of those small, very boxy, City Cars built by Toyota.
If I were buying a vehicle specifically for highway travel, it would probably not have bought the box. I specifically bought a “City Car” or “Urban Utility Vehicle” that was superb in such use (tiny, nimble, roomy, easy access, excellent visibility, economical, inexpensive, practical). Less than 5% of my driving is outside the city environment, and I bought a vehicle to match my needs and desires.
The new xB2, while it seems an excellent vehicle, and is designed as closely as possible to match the wants of those unhappy with the original xB (Scion followed very closely the answers they got to the question “What should we change?”), is not really a “City Car” but a step in the evolution toward a more “universal” middle-America car – longer, lower, wider, more power, heavier, quieter, more shiny knobs and flashing lights.
The new design actually is a good one – I’m personally impressed how well it answers the suggestions of those who didn’t care for features of the original xB, and had different needs. I’m also impressed with what one gets for the money. The vehicle is a bargain. But please don’t think that it is a little “City Car” in the same class as the original xB, it is not. It is a tC station wagon, a step toward a fancy, funky, fun, family function vehicle for young Middle America.
I don’t dislike the new xB2, it is an excellent design specifically aimed at a closely targeted market segment, and it will meet their needs and be popular with them. What I do “dislike” is there is a vehicle that is missing – one not being sold here – a replacement for the super practical, unapologetically square, City Car. 🙁
I’m a city dweller. My vehicles are used primarily on city streets. When I needed to go off road I had Land Cruisers, Jeeps, and a lone Ford Explorer. When I needed to cruise the highways I had Volvos, Plymouths, Chevy’s, and one misplaced Porsche.
NO vehicle can be the best at everything – there is no combination Ferarri/Peterbuilt/Lincoln/Jeep/Prius that can go like a nimble bat-out-of-Hell, carry massive loads, cruise the highways in superb comfort and quiet, and cross a mountain range without a road, all while getting amazing gas mileage. All vehicles are compromises.
Each of those compromise vehicles have a very narrow range of things they are designed to do excellently, and a wider range of things they can do if necessary. The compromises in the new xB2 are different than the compromises in the old xB, and that is not a bad thing, it is just a slight shift in focus.
The new xB2 blends in with the rest of the cars on the American landscape better than the original xB. Its compromises are different, and it is more able to meet the average US uses. It isn’t as narrowly focused. Maybe it was felt that the original xB was too “different,” and the line needed to be refocused so the folks in Podunk wouldn’t complain that it wasn’t comfortable for the weekly 75 mile drive to Wal-Mart.
The new xB2 doesn’t do the “City Car” routine as well as the original, but it can still do it. The new xB2 does, however, match the ‘wide open spaces’ of America better.
I’m sure that the new xB2 would be a lot nicer on my drives to Montana, but my old original does the job just fine, since those long drives are less than 1% of my time in it, in the average year. The other 99% of the time, my xB Classic is in it’s “comfort zone” and is doing just exactly what it is designed to do.
The xB2 is a very nice vehicle to drive, quiet, smooth, powerful, excellent handling, reasonable visibility, etc. It just doesn’t fit the City Car niche as well as the xB Classic…
It will sell well. 🙂
