Y'know, I was prepared not to like this car from the beginning. In general, city cars are not my thing. I'm too tall for most of them, for a start, and while I can temporarily have a fling with one, a long-term relationship just isn't the thing.
Especially one which is especially designed for the city, like a Smart. A brand I could never take to, mainly because of the poppety sound of the engine, more reminiscent of a lawnmower in poor tune than a car.
Toyota's iQ looked to be in the same league when I saw the pictures, and later the metal at the motor shows. And I knew there was some level of marketing sleight involved when they showed pictures of it with teenagers in the back. Officially it is designated as a 3+1 in capacity, the inference being that three people is normal, and an occasional small one.
It's a question of interpretation, really. Or, a question of size. Of passenger size. An asymmetrical dashboard styling allows the front passenger to be a bit more forward than usual, leaving a little extra room for one rear person behind. Any ordinary size of driver, however, makes it impossible for any more than a small child behind, and then at a (literal) pinch.
The short footprint of the iQ also boded poorly for handling dynamics and ride. The car is shorter than an Aygo, for God's sake; it couldn't be anything but bumpy on real Irish roads.
There would also be compromises in instrumentation, controls, and the other creature comforts we take for granted in 'real' cars. Like there were in the Smart. And while the engine was familiar, and likeable in the Aygo, was it not likely be buzzy in this foreshortened beastie?
And finally it was going to be too expensive for a mere 'city' car, priced higher than the larger Aygo and not a lot short of the much more substantial Yaris.
Like I said, I was predisposed not to like this one.
Some of which predispositions turned out to the true. The business of having people in the back, for instance. Emergency only, really. Though at least in any subsequent accident, Toyota has had the wisdom to invent a rear transverse airbag to protect against any impact from behind.
There's compromise in instruments too. Well, in the radio, which for space reasons is operated by a pesky little do-da that actually made me feel the car would be better without a radio at all.
And then there was ...
Well, there wasn't, actually.
In every other respect, the iQ is a machine well worthy of the designation car. Better than a few others out there, as it turned out.
There's nothing claustrophobic for the two occupants most likely to be on board. In fact, there's an amount of headroom that exceeds that in some larger and more luxury cars I've driven.
There's good elbow room, too, as the iQ is wide relative to its length. A matter that also works wonders for its actual instead of its expected stability.
And the engine -- a 1.4 diesel and a new 1.33 with stop/start are due to join the line -- is just as much a likeable little flyer as it is in the Aygo and its siblings (as well as a Daihatsu or two).
Also, whatever they magicked into the suspension, it isn't at all the choppy ride I expected.
The rear space, when not taken up with people under back seat arrest, is very useable for carrying stuff, unlike the Smart because that's where the poppety engine is parked.
And it also made people smile as I drove by. Because the iQ has a perception of character.
The final nail in my preconceptions was the overall driving experience over a number of days. It was fun, and unlike the Smart, the iQ feels real. It drives real, even in the plains and mountain roads where it doesn't make any claims to belong.
it was frugal -- just 99g/km of emissions with the manual, and an automated manual version only bumps up the carbon grammes by a measly five.
And it turned out to be a car that, if it came up, I would be quite able to commit to for the longer term. Even if it is more expensive than the Aygo.
Just goes to show, how fickle we men can be, I suppose. Our heads are easily turned ...
Brian Byrne.