Best Compact Car: 8 Car Mega Comparison

Not everyone wants to drive an SUV. Sometimes, the humble compact car is the better tool for the job.

The advantages are numerous. Not only are compact cars more affordable and offer better fuel economy, they also tend to drive better than their high-riding siblings. The pickings are slimmer now than they were a decade ago, but there are still eight new compact cars available on the market. We decided to just make it easy and get every single one together for a week—yes, really. We also brought along regular AutoGuide contributor Jeff Wilson to make it all possible. Strap in for our 8 Compact Car Mega Comparison,  brought to you by Weathertech.

Sometimes during these comparison tests, one competitor simply has no hope. In those circumstances each of us who drive the sad sack feel there’s very little to redeem it, and we end up grumping if we get stuck with any more seat time than necessary.

Let’s be clear here and say that despite accumulating the fewest points in this test, the Nissan Sentra was never that car, always feeling like it deserved to be a at this party. It might sound like a cop-out, but amongst this collection there truly are no bad cars, just some that are exceptionally well-rounded, vaulting them to the top.

During the test Kyle remarked, “It feels like Nissan benchmarked the last generation Civic and successfully reached that goal. The problem is that Honda brought out a new Civic.” It’s a sentiment that affirms the Sentra as a decent choice for someone looking for new affordable transportation, but it falls short in some key areas that hold it back in the ranking.

Most notably, the Sentra’s drivetrain received the lowest score in the test. Its engine—a 2.0L inline four-cylinder unit—lacks displacement, turbocharging, or a bump from a hybrid system to keep it competitive with every other car in this group. Its meagre 149 horsepower wasn’t the lowest of test, but the two cars delivering fewer ponies (the Corolla and Elantra), receive a boost from hybridization to make them livelier around town.

The Sentra’s tepid 146 pound-feet of torque meant it was particularly weak-kneed when pulling away from a standstill, made worse by its soul-sucking continuously variable transmission. Nissan has been doing a good job of replacing its CVTs with traditional automatics in many of its models, and the Sentra would benefit from that change too.

Still, when not measured directly against the other cars in this test, the Sentra is a perfectly capable daily driver, managing to keep up with the flow of traffic just fine. Its ride comfort and handling rated mid-pack, and its efficiency bettered just about everything that isn’t a hybrid.

We especially liked the Sentra’s styling, too, with the radiant blue paint being nicely contrasted by the black roof and blacked-out five-spoke wheels, and the red SR accent badges help give it an overall sporty look. Best of all, it’s well-proportioned and doesn’t fall into the wildly over-styled trap that Kia and Hyundai’s stylists seem stuck in.

Inside, the Sentra’s agreeable looks continue with clean, simple design elements that, frankly, look like they’re several years old (they are). There’s decent room for passengers up front and in the back seat that’s comparable within the group, if not class-leading, but its infotainment screen is small, and there’s no wireless charging or connectivity—two popular features these days. The Bose sound system is okay, and while we appreciate the 360-degree camera view, the resolution on the screen is so terrible, it almost negates the feature’s value.

Our SR Premium trim is the top-of-the-line for Sentra, which means there’s no way to add more tech that the other competitors have. Even having the lowest* as-tested price in the US ($29,120) and second-lowest in Canada ($33,793 CAD) doesn’t help make the Sentra a strong enough value to rate it any higher in this test.

* - Editor's Note: the Canadian-spec Mazda3 here doesn't have an exact match in America, so something fairly close could slide in under the Nissan.

The Impreza is the oddball of the comparison which shouldn’t be a surprise as it is a Subaru after all. Marching to the beat of their own drum, the brand isn’t one to follow convention which can hurt the company as much as it does help it. In our comparison the Impreza is the only one with mechanical all-wheel drive, a boxer-style engine, and a rear hatch. Granted, many competitors showcased here do have hatchback options but for the Impreza, it’s hatchback only; the sedan is dead.

As is the case for most hatchbacks, the Impreza is a good chunk shorter than the other cars here measuring 176.2 in (4,475 mm) in length. Although the cargo area offers the most overall area at 20.4 cu ft (578 L), most of that space is vertical. The Impreza has the shortest load floor and one of the narrowest, making unsuitable for carrying wider/longer items.

On the outside, the Impreza is unmistakably Subaru with C-shaped lights front and rear. A nice touch on our tester were the accessory mudflaps that feed into its rally-car look. Not everyone is a fan of the car’s overall look as Subaru’s are rarely lookers, but this latest version isn’t offensive to the eyes.

Power comes from a 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine, one of the few naturally aspirated cars here. It makes 182 hp and 178 lb-ft of torque, sending power of course to all four-wheels through a continuously variable automatic.

The Impreza is one of the slower cars in acceleration, feeling on par with the less powerful Sentra. There’s a bit of a delay in the CVT expanding its ratio to allow for optimal power. In Sport mode this mostly goes away, but the Impreza never feels as quick as some of the speedier cars here. That stated, all the vehicles on hand have more than enough power for normal driving situations, Impreza included.

The drivetrain is one of the louder units on hand, but also one of the most fluid. We wouldn’t say it smooth as there’s vibrations and roughness, but it builds power linearly unlike the turbo cars. The one area the Impreza really falters is fuel economy, specifically on the highway. Rated at 33 mpg (7.2 L/100 km) it’s by far the lowest, and our observations during the comparison reinforced this.

The Impreza’s steering feels the lightest and loosest, which means it requires the least amount of effort to operate but also feels disconnected from the road. As one tester put it, the Impreza is like a SUV compared to the rest of the cars on hand. Not helping matters is the fact our tester is still riding on winter tires. On the flipside, the Subaru did offer one of the best ride comforts, absorbing nearly every pothole thrown its way.

Like many aspects of the car, the infotainment system received mixed reviews. Some of us do not like its dated look, both the physical trimming and layout as well as the graphics. Others appreciate how the tablet-like screen separates information in three sections, allowing different displays/functions to remain visible when in submenus like Apple CarPlay. The presence of physical buttons is also a plus, although the majority of the climate control is touchscreen operated. The rest of the interior did not score well in terms of design or material quality.

The biggest issue for the Impreza might not even be any of the competitors on hand though. Its main competition comes from across the showroom floor, in the form of the Subaru Crosstrek. All the other vehicles on hand here are sedans that differentiate enough from their SUV siblings, offering advantages to those high riding utility vehicles. The Impreza just feels like a lower riding Crosstrek because it basically is. Subaru has done such a good job with the Crosstrek, the Impreza lacks any real appeal on its own, especially since the sedan was axed. Compared to the purpose-built sedans on hand, the Impreza gets lost in a mix of compromises and lack of identity.

Kia has truly found its own design language in recent years, and whether you like it or not, that’s the point: you probably do have an opinion on it. We all like aspects: Mike can’t stop talking about those noticeably flared rear wheel arches, and I love the amber light signature, which at night emphasizes that this is the widest car here. The blue helps the big car stand out, and we don’t even mind the gloss black wheel arches.

But oh boy, that back end. There are a lot of conflicting angles, especially around the rear quarter window, that from some angles makes it look like the rest of the K4 still needs to load. Kia is still doing that trick of including black trim at the base of the rear window to imply a sedan is a hatchback, but pop the trunk and there’s a lot of space in a useful shape.

Like the exterior, the K4’s cabin is a big stylistic swing. Jeff and I scored it the same as its Elantra sibling, but Mike put the Hyundai well ahead of the more techy, angular Kia. What we do like: the big buttons front and center, the varied use of texture and color, and the usefully grippy wireless charging pad. We don't like the climate control touchscreen sandwiched between the instrument cluster and main screen, making it awkward operate. The white accents add some lightness, and while the pattern on the dashboard looks like someone’s cat fell asleep on the backslash button, it works far better than that sounds. Space is good but not great: there's a lack of headroom, and while the spec sheet shows good legroom in back, the low-mounted front seats leaves little room for tucking feet.

The K4 uses the familiar 1.6-liter turbo-four cylinder, eight-speed automatic setup that is in so many Hyundai and Kia products these days, offering up 195 horsepower and 190 lb-ft. As the most powerful non-hybrid here, the K4 feels it. Those wanting an edge will appreciate its slightly scrappy nature, with a bit of torque steer in the low gears and an engine note that sounds muscular. This was the quickest-accelerating car here on our highway on-ramp test, beating out the Civic despite carrying around about a turkey’s worth of additional weight. You’ll pay for that power at the pumps, though maybe not as much as you might think. Official ratings are 26 mpg city and 36 mpg highway, or 9.2 and 6.6 L/100 km. Our real-world loop put the Kia ahead of its official 29 mpg (8.1 L/100 km) rating, sneaking past the thirstier Mazda and Subaru with 31 mpg (7.6 L/100 km).

While the GT-Line badging suggests this is the sportiest car here, the reality is a little different. The Kia tries, sure, with many of the hallmarks of such intentions: the widest tires here, a low and stiff suspension, that rorty exhaust note. It feels distinctly old-Kia in execution however, with none of the subtlety of damping we see the Civic or even the Subaru. The Kia muscles its way over speedbumps, upsetting the cabin equilibrium. There’s not a whole lot of feel to the steering, either.

In either country, the K4 is the third-most expensive model in this octet. It’s $31,465 in America, just slotting in below the pricey Subaru; in Canada, at $36,345 CAD it undercuts the Corolla. In both cases, the K4 still is solid value based on the amount of content Kia packs in. We only wish the GT-Line would pick a lane: lean into the sporty side, or embrace its ample tech suite and be more of a laidback cruiser. As is it feels just a little confused, and its placement reflects that.

Called the Highline in Canada, the Jetta SEL is the top trim for Volkswagen’s compact car. Although, at 186.5 in (4,738 mm) in length, that isn’t exactly compact. In fact, this is the longest car in the comparison, but with a physics defying curb weight just over 3,000 pounds (1,360 kg), it’s also the lightest.

Under the hood is the smallest engine in this comparison, a 1.5-liter four-cylinder. But just because it’s small, doesn’t mean it lacks power. With a turbocharger attached, it makes 158 hp and 184 lb-ft of torque. Those numbers don’t tell the entire story though. Like many German cars, the engine feels highly underrated in terms of output. When at full power, it’s a torque-rich mini-monster that thrusts the Jetta forward as good as any drivetrain in this comparison.

The problem is the eight-speed automatic transmission. As much as we’ve lamented Volkswagen’s dual-clutch automatics in the past, this eight-speed conventional automatic isn’t much better. To say it’s leisurely between upshifts is an understatement. In regular drive mode, press the accelerator to the floor, and there is a one second delay before the transmission downshifts and gets the little turbo back in its sweet spot. Power suddenly explodes to the front-wheels making smooth driving in highway traffic a challenge.

Sport mode does somewhat alleviate the issue, but it holds onto to seventh gear on the highway, which affects the Jetta’s incredible fuel economy. How incredible? Upwards of 40 mpg (6.1 L/100 km) on the highway which trails the Corolla Hybrid by just 1 mpg. If the Jetta had paddle shifters, we might be able to better prompt the transmission when a change is required.

The Jetta’s interior is the usual conservative classy we expect from Volkswagen. There are some cheap materials used throughout, but the brand has done its best to hide them through styling. The front seat of the Jetta was scored one of the worst, as it’s very hard, unsupportive, and not as welcoming as other competitors featured in this comparison. It also doesn’t lower enough for some of our testers, giving an unusual, perched feel.

The infotainment system looks old with its small screen, dual knobs, and physical buttons. But this is what makes it great. Many functions aren’t tied to the touchscreen and despite its outward dated appearance, the graphics, response, and user experience are top notch. Some voted it best of test. The all-touch, slider-based climate controls did not win as many fans.

Despite being one of the best equipped cars in this shootout, the Volkswagen Jetta is still one of the lowest priced at $30,225 including destination charges. With a better transmission tune and upgraded seats, the Jetta would be a serious threat for the podium finishers in this comparison.

The Corolla is one of just two vehicles here with AWD, and only one other (Mazda) even offers it. Not all systems are created equal, however: unlike the Subaru, there is no physical connection here between the front and rear axles. Instead, the Corolla uses a separate 30 kW rear motor that only really wakes up at low speeds or when the system detects slip up front. Unlike other Toyotas with a similar setup, the Corolla has no more quoted system horsepower by checking the AWD box. It’s the lowest of this group, at just 138 horsepower. So yes, it’s also the slowest in our acceleration run. It still got to highway passing speed—just—but boy does that 1.8-liter make some noise doing it. To its credit, the e-CVT is smooth and responsive, making the most of that small stable of ponies.

You’re not getting a big fuel efficiency bonus to make up for the power output, either. The Corolla has the worst combined ratings of the three hybrids here, and in our real-world loop it also finished behind the Hyundai and Honda. It still beat the best gasser—the Jetta—but officially, that car only is only 1 mpg worse than the Toyota’s 41 mpg highway rating (5.7 L/100 km). City driving is a happy 47 mpg (5.0 L/100 km). If you skip e-AWD, you’ll get 3 mpg back.

We all agree: the Corolla is a comfort-focused offering in this collection of compacts. With a smooth ride and easy, predictable steering, the Corolla feels made for gobbling up large distances. The brakes are super predictable too, and drivers can shift into B if they want a little bit more regenerative braking.

It's hard to ignore the ubiquity of the Corolla: you probably see 100 of these things on the morning commute, and only some of them are driving without their lights on. Yet take it in in isolation and it's pretty dramatic: a big gaping grille, and squat stance means it isn't exactly boring, is it? Not that we can say the same for the cabin: in fact, it scored last there. The dashboard is just one big slab of soft-touch plastic, with one of the more pared-back center consoles of the group. At least its cupholders are usefully deep. The material quality is average, though it all feels like it will live forever.

Seat comfort is typical Toyota; good, but not great. There’s not a whole lot of headroom, which is another Toyota trademark. We also dinged it for its tight backseat, where it also scored dead last.

For 2025 Toyota has dropped a larger 10.5-inch touchscreen into higher Corolla trims like this. More real estate makes some menus cleaner, but the switch from volume dial to volume buttons earns boos and hisses from us. Toyota's safety suite is quite good, but none of us appreciate the nanny-like “braking ahead” audio warning.

First off, the 3 is proof that getting a car’s design right—and we mean really right—means it will age well. The Mazda3 is sleek and sexy, without overwrought design trends or awkward lines, angles or gimmicks. It’s a clean, smart design and even though it’s the oldest here, it not only looks fresher than any of the others, but will continue to do so for years to come. And we say all that despite Mazda giving us a test car painted in a hue as exciting as grandad’s trousers.

Hop inside and it’s clear the interior design team also sought to make a beautiful cabin, not a trendy one. The look is classic and the flourishes of contrast stitching or metallic-looking trim are restrained. But it’s the textures and tactile nature of the cabin’s touch points that reinforce an effort to make the Mazda3 present far more premium than most of the competition. Even the rotary dial-controlled infotainment system bugged us all less this time than it used to (probably because a touchscreen interface is now available too).

Inside it isn’t as roomy as some of the others in the test, but the Mazda3’s interior is more comfortable for four adults than the measurement numbers on a page might suggest. There’s room for rear seat passengers’ feet beneath the front seats. The roof line might be raked, but the ceiling is scooped and the seat back reclined enough that headroom is better than some of the larger cars. The Mazda3 is about smart design.

Its looks and interior are only part of its charm. It took mere minutes behind the wheel before each of us started grinning. The Mazda3’s suspension set up is firmer than most of the competitors, but it’s not harsh. It keeps the car poised to attack corners while offering great feedback through the steering. More road noise reaches the cabin than in some of the other cars, but wind noise is well-suppressed.

The Mazda3’s 2.5L four-cylinder dispenses an energetic 191 hp and 186 lb-ft of torque. The latter requires more revs than some of the other cars here, making it feel less spritely around town, but there’s enough power to keep things fun. And while adding a few more cogs to the six-speed automatic would help the Mazda3’s mediocre fuel efficiency, it’s a responsive and engaging transmission. Plus, nobody offers the level of configurability that Mazda does with the option of sedan or hatchback, and the availability of all-wheel-drive and a turbo, too.

Those seeking an automotive appliance to simply get to and from work will probably be better served by one of the hybrids in this test. But those looking for a car that still delivers driving pleasure while offering good practicality and affordability, the Mazda3 is a heck of a choice with mid-pack pricing keeping the value quotient high.

The Elantra Hybrid we have here is a bit different, as it’s a Canada specific trim labelled the HEV LUX. It differs from the American trim by not including some comfort items like a power seat, ventilated seat, or real leather seats. Besides those features, the LUX, or Luxury, comes stuffed full of other amenities like a heated steering wheel, heated rear seats, a digital driver information center, 360 camera, and much more. It’s one of the best equipped cars here. That stated, a huge miss is the fact this car still doesn’t have wireless Apple CarPlay or Android Auto. To hook up those systems a USB cord is still required and not a modern USB-c, but the bulkier USB-a.

The Elantra ties the Kia K4 for second longest vehicle, yet at 3,069 lbs (1,370 kg), it’s the second lightest car here behind the Jetta. Remember though, the Elantra is a Hybrid and has the extra weight of electric motors and batteries which makes its low curb weight even more impressive. We’re not huge fans or detractors of the Elantra’s current exterior style. It’s just sort of there, and we could take it or leave it.

The Elantra Hybrid uses a 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine paired to a hybrid system. Total system output is stated to be 139 hp and 195 lb-ft of torque. Those numbers may seem low, much like the Corolla, but the Elantra Hybrid can keep up with every car in this comparison, except for the K4. Power is a bit peakier than the Toyota or Honda hybrids, but it’s close.

A benefit of the added instant torque of the electric motor is that it masks the hesitation and jerkiness normally found in dual-clutch transmissions. It’s such a great pairing to eliminate low-speed hesitation and choppiness, while retaining the quick shifts from the Elantra Hybrid’s six-speed dual-clutch transmission. We rated this set up as one of the best transmissions in our test.

This large but lightweight front-wheel drive sedan is also at the top in terms of fuel economy, on paper at least. Although it trails the Civic in city mileage, it gets 5 mpg (0.6 L/100 km) better economy on the highway.

The 225/45R17 tires on the Elantra Hybrid are designed more for comfort than performance, which helped Hyundai’s hybrid achieve the second-best observed road comfort. The sacrifice of course is road holding capabilities, which placed the Elantra dead last in our comparison. The Hyundai puts up the most resistance when trying to change directions, wanting to continue straight with locomotive determination.

The comfort theme continues inside with the front seats scoring quite high in terms of pampering the driver. The rear seat is less inviting though. On paper it looks like it should be quite spacious, serving up 37.3 in (947 mm) of headroom and 38.0 in (964 mm) of legroom. Although there is plenty of space for our feet to rest, our heads were less fortunate with even moderately tall testers having to tilt their necks sideways.

The design of the interior was tops in the test as we liked the long center console divide, use of contrasting colors, as well as various materials. Those materials aren’t quite as nice to touch though, like the cloth inserts. On the positive side, we like how the rectangular infotainment system has a split screen option, allowing different information to display simultaneously.

In many ways the Hyundai Elantra feels like a bit like a Honda Civic Hybrid Lite. What we mean by that is it’s just a hair short of the Civic in many ways, for better or worse. The powertrain is less robust, the driving experience a bit coarser, the quality just a little lower, and so on. On the positive side, weight is lower, and an as-tested price of $30,995 undercuts the Civic by nearly $3,000.

This is the most powerful car here—though not the quickest, just losing out to the Kia. With 200 hp and 232 lb-ft of torque, this regular model now boasts more power than the sporty Civic Si. It’s responsive, and a hybrid in the most natural way: the electrified side augments a pretty natural power delivery anyway. Honda includes paddle shifters, but they’re not shifters: they’re for adjusting the level of regenerative braking. Every level is pretty light but hey, it’s nice to have that level of control. Officially the Civic is rated at 50 mpg in the city and 47 mpg on the highway, or 4.7 and 5.1 L/100 km, respectively. In our test loop however, it tied the Elantra for the best score, even surpassing its own city rating despite a highway component. If we had to guess, this is because the Civic’s gas engine just doesn’t have to work as hard. Looking at you, Corolla.

All of us keep saying the Civic feels like a class above because it’s such a smooth-riding car. The damping is fantastic, better than some luxury cars we've driven recently. It soaks up bumps despite having the biggest tires here, and doesn’t transmit a lot of noise into the cabin either.

The Civic makes a mockery of the idea that you need to be either comfortable or sporty too, at least at this end of the market. It just does both. Yes, the Si is sportier, and the Type R is a track weapon, but this Sport Touring sedan handles itself pretty well, and it might be the most fun car to drive on the twistier bits of the test route.

This generation of Civic debuted a few years ago, and the big H treated it to a very modest facelift for this year. There’s some body-color trim between the headlights and grille now, and a new lower intake that is both a bit fussier, and maybe just a little BMW. What seemed conservative at launch has aged well since, and while it isn't as pretty as the Mazda, we like the Honda's big, visibility-aiding glasshouse.

Honda manages to carve out every available millimeter in the Civic cabin. It feels wide and airy in a way that nothing else quite matches. The current Civic’s cabin design ushered in a new era at the brand and it’s one we still welcome four years on from its reveal. The mesh grille across the vents? Nice touch. The clicky dials for the climate controls? I mention this every single time I drive the Civic because they’re better than what you’ll find in some premium brands, including one related to Honda. It’s almost as classy as the Mazda’s interior, and material quality is also consistent. Honda's infotainment is only okay, though it now has Google Built-In.

In terms of comfort the Civic has some of the best seats in the segment. They’re well-sculpted and placed nice and low. That low mounting could be a drawback for you depending on how easy ingress and egress is. The Civic also has one of the most spacious rear seats in this whole comparison.

The Civic isn't untouchable, mind you. As we've said a few times, it is the most expensive here: at $33,555 in America it's about two grand above the next competitor. Canadian pricing nearly touches $39,000 CAD, or a grand above the Corolla. That sticker shocks more when you realize the Civic lacks features found elsewhere like front-seat ventilation, a head-up display, or a 360-degree camera.