2012 Hyundai Accent

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

If you go test-drive a new economy compact – any new economy compact – you will discover something the car industry would probably prefer to keep quiet: There are no latter-day Chevettes or Pintos. There’s nothing embarrassing about any of them.

You might want to spend more to get a high-performance car, or maybe a larger car, or a car that has This or That.

But for the first time in automotive history, the bottom feeder is history.

The ’12 Hyundai Accent proves the point.


The Accent is Hyundai’s lowest priced model – but far from the Cracker Jack Box prizes of 10 years ago. It’s available in sedan or hatchback wagon versions, with the base sedan starting at $12,545 and the base hatch wagon starting at $14,695.
It competes in the same class as other economy-priced compact sedans/hatchback wagons like the Ford Fiesta, Chevy Sonic and Mazda3, among others.


The ’12 Accent is all-new.


Lowball price – but still really nice.

Strong for the class standard engine (138 hp).

Class-leading fuel economy (40 highway) with standard engine.


AC not standard in base sedan.

Not as quick as turbo Chevy Sonic, which also matches Accent’s 40 MPG highway performance.

Corporate cousin Kia Rio sedan is a bit snarkier-looking, sportier handling, gets the same 40 MPG – and only costs slightly more ($13,400) to start.


The ’12 Accent has an all-new 1.6 liter, direct-injected four rated at 138 hp – a class leading figure matched only by the Chevy Sonic (also 138 hp).

But the Sonic’s standard 1.8 liter, 138 hp engine can’t match the Accent’s standard 40 MPG highway economy. The Chevy falls short at 35 MPG. You can get 40 MPG in the Sonic, but not without springing for the higher cost optional 1.4 liter turbo, which means buying the higher cost LT ($15,065 for the sedan) or LTZ ($16,665) trim and then paying extra on top of that for the turbo 1.4 engine.

It’s a similar story with the Fiesta. It, too, is capable of 40 MPG – if you buy the extra-cost Super Fuel Economy (SFE) package. The Fiesta’s also packing only 120 hp – and without the SFE package, gives you 29 city, 38 highway. That’s good – but only good enough for second place.

If you check out other competitors, including the new Mazda3 SkyActiv, you’ll discover more of the same. They’re all good – but the Accent is better – for less.

The Accent’s standard transmission is a six-speed manual (a few competitors, including the more expensive Sonic, only give you a five-speed) with a six-speed automatic optional. Here again, pick of the litter – for the dollar and for less than the dollar.

Acceleration is also good for the segment – though not the best. Zero to 60 with the manual transmission takes about 9.7 seconds. Both the Fiesta and the turbo 1.4 Sonic are just slightly quicker.


I am old enough (mid 40s) to remember when economy cars were miserable cars. Pathetic looking, obviously shoddy and dangerously slow on top of that. If you are in your 20s or have never driven something like an early ’80s Chevette or a Plymouth Champ you have no frame of reference to appreciate just how good you have it today.

If anything, the Accent is too good. It will cruise all day at 80-plus without sweating and still give you 30s-something MPGs. Fifth gear is easily skipped over; just go direct from fourth into sixth and save a little fuel. There is power to spare on top and down low, the direct-injected engine has a 7,000 RPM redline and you’ve got six gears to work with in a car that weighs just under 2,400 lbs. You can have a lot of fun with that – and more to the point, you’ll never feel you brought a (rubber) knife to a gun fight.

Handling, too, is a high point. As in the other areas already mentioned, the latest economy cars handle better than some sports cars used to – and only if you’re SCCA autocrossing (or driving like that on the street) will you be able to discern any meaningful difference in maximum grip, the extent of body lean or how quickly you can drift the thing through an S turn relative to others in this class. It is nothing like Back in the Day, when a Chevette would make it very clear, very quickly, you were pushing it by going into a corner at say 5 over the posted speed limit. You have to be really moving to induce any tire screech (let alone slip) in a new Accent. The bar is that high – not just for the Accent but generally. Even the more conservative econo-boxes of today – like the Toyota Corolla, say – will surprise you with how far and how hard they can be pushed, if you happen to be so inclined.

The quality that’s more relevant to the discussion is ride quality – which will also startle you if you haven’t test-driven an economy car in a few years. Because it’s that good – meaning, quiet, well-damped and just … comfortable. The old POS economy cars made you suffer. The seats were cheap and hard – and so was everything else. You felt every pothole (twice, if you  counted the reverb), heard the wind whistle – and often, felt the rain drip.

You had to be young and tough – or older and with a high pain threshold – to take a car like an old Chevette out on the highway for any length of time. Or frankly, to spend any more time in the stinking thing than you absolutely had to.

But I’d take an Accent (or a Sonic or a Fiesta) across the country – and enjoy the trip.


I wish I did have a circa ‘early ’80s Chevette (or any other economy car from that era) to park next to the Accent and give you a side-by-side look-see. It’s really the only way to appreciate how much has changed in 25 years – hell, in 10 years. Go back to 2000 and park the 2002 Accent next to this one. Sad-looking. Bleak. Really slow (0-60 took 15 seconds or more). It was a car you bought because you had to – not because you wanted to.

Well, forget all that.

Instead, look at this: Cushy, comfortable seats. Full gauge package, housed in a cluster that’s just as nice looking as what you’d find in cars with $10k higher sticker prices. iPod hook up, nice stereo. Aluminum-finished and “piano black” trim plates (in my tested $15k-ish wagon). Back seats roomy enough to comfortably fit my 6ft 3, 200-plus pound self – knees not hunched up against the front seatbacks, head not scrunched down so as to avoid scraping up against the roof.
Now, other cars in this class are similarly nice, comparably fitted out. But they do cost a bit more – and in a few key categories such as standard hp and/or standard MPGs, don’t give you quite as much for your bucks.

Personally, I prefer the hatch-wagon layout because of the additional room (21.2 cubic feet of cargo capacity behind the second row and 47.5 if you fold them flat vs. 13.7 period for the sedan). You also get more equipment standard in the hatch-wagon, including keyless entry and trim upgrades.

But, if the object of the exercise is to spend less – not just up front, but also down the road, go for the sedan. It comes with 14-inch steel wheels – which means next-to-no worries about potholes hurting them and also dirt-cheap replacement tires, when the time comes for that.

Or, on the other hand, order the whole menu – the top-trim SE deal and 16 inch alloys, leather trim, premium upholstery, Bluetooth, steering wheel mounted secondary controls, the six-speed automatic. You’ll still have a tough time spending more than $16k – sticker. That’s the number ($15,925) on the Monrony that came with my loaded-with-nearly-everything Accent SE wagon.

I had a  Mazda3 SkyActiv wagon last week – also very nice. Also 40 MPG capable. But it started at $19,300. A top-of-the-line Fiesta SES hatch-wagon lists for $17,500. A Sonic LTZ is about the same at $17,365 – and mind that’s before you pay extra for the 40 MPG engine.


What else is there? The only negative I could come up with is the lack of AC – and lack of a radio, period – in the base sedan.

But this is equally true of others in this class (at least as regards AC) and there are probably still people out there who can live without AC and who prefer to pay less for a car without one.

If you do want AC, you can get it as a part of a comfort package that also adds power windows and locks, plus a decent stereo.

However, the base car’s pre-wired, so you could save some coin and buy your own aftermarket head unit if you wanted and probably end up with a better system for less than the factory piece.


Today’s Accent is a car that makes you feel good the next morning. You buy it and are happy with it. No one laughs at you. If anything, you laugh at them – because of how little you paid to get so much car.

Again, all the cars in this class are really nice. But the Accent wins, to my way of thinking, because it costs the least but gives you the most.

Throw it in the Woods?



  1. Automatics have lower insurance costs. Because most drivers of autos keep both hands on the wheel. Also manual drivers cut into and out of cars to avoid changing gears. With autos you are always in the right gear, good for driving in snow. With driving in snow, ice or slush on a manual, you can get into a stall position too easily. That’s why I preferred autos in the snow. Autos are great for city driving, saves your left knee from premature arthritis.

  2. Eric, I’ve become a regular reader of your site because of your very informative articles and reviews. I’m looking at buying a 2nd car for my household, possibly the 2013 Accent or Rio and I’m curious about your opinion on manual vs. automatic transmission. Do today’s manuals still get better mileage and excelleration, or is the difference negligible? I wouldn’t mind driving the 6-speed, but I’ll also be teaching my daughter to drive soon, and I’m debating over whether or not teach her on a manual or automatic. Thanks. – Stu in Central Florida.

    • Hey Stu. I know what Eric is going to say about the transmissions. Modern automatic transmissions have reached the point where the difference really isn’t noticeable. When my daughter (six years old) is learning to drive I’ll teach her on a manual.

      Two reasons:

      1. Better understanding of the way the power-train works
      2. If she’s ever in tight spot and needs the skill to get out

    • Hi Stu,

      Believe it or not, the efficiency (MPG) advantage these days is often with the automatic – not the manual! If you scan the specs, you’ll discover that the automatic-equipped version of a given car gets 1-2 or so MPGs better gas mileage than the same car with a manual.

      The big advantages of the manual over the automatic are: Lower cost (usually, but not always) to buy. And (again, usually) lower repair and maintenance costs down the road. Barring a bad design (or abuse) the transmission itself will almost always last the life of the vehicle. You may need to do a clutch job every 100-150k or so, but that (and the occasional lube change) is the typically the extent of the repair/maintenance costs associated with a manual.

      I still am a big proponent of teaching new drivers to master a manual transmission – even if the automatic gives you better mileage. Mastering the skill will make them safer, better drivers – even if they end up driving an automatic. Modern manuals are also so much easier to learn to operate than in the past – to a great extent because all modern manuals have hydrauically assisted (and self-adjusting) clutches. It takes less leg effort to operate them – and they’re less abrupt (usually) and so, more forgiving.

  3. I’m on my second Sonata and am planning to move up to the Santa Fe (growing family), and I know several people that own (newer) Hyundais, and I haven’t heard a complaint yet! Great cars with very good prices.

    • Thanks for your input, MC –

      My mother-in-law got one on my recommendation and has been very happy with hers. I’d get one myself, if I were in the market.

    • The old (previous generation) was your basic econo-box and not one of the better ones. The current one is outstanding. If it’s not the best car in its class, it’s one of them. Definitely recommend taking a look. Keep us posted!

  4. eric, I am a 79 year old retired carpenter and a Libertarian. I want to but a new, small< $30,000 or less, sports car, must have rear wheel drive. I am considering the toyota, scion FR-S. Have you done a review on this car? Where can I find it?

  5. Eric,
    I appreciate that you take the time to review the less-than-glamourous, everyman’s car like the Accent and all the others. I’ll never have a prayer of buying anything other than these rides, so a big thank you!

    • You bet!

      And: From a real-world driving point of view, the lower cost cars are arguably more fun – because you can really work them (on the street) whereas the high-dollar, high-performance stuff is so powerful, with limits so high, that it’s practically impossible to really drive them – on the street, for any length of time. They’re great track tools – but how many of us regularly do track days with our cars?

      • I know what you mean. I’m actually enjoying driving this POS ’96 Accord that was given to me recently. No worries about babying it or scratching the (nonexistent) paint. And as for finding its limits, those are discovered soon after ignition. 🙂

        • A few years ago, I had (and restored) a ’64 Corvair Monza coupe. Pretty much all stock other than a Corsa-style dual exhaust. Anyhow, I used to enjoy driving it right on the edge, which in a Corvair doesn’t take a whole lot of speed, as in a decreasing radius highway off-ramp. I could push the car (and myself) without exposing myself to extreme risks, physically or legally. It was a lot of fun!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here