http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2014-honda-civic-ex-l-vs-2014-kia-forte-ex-2014-mazda-3-i-touring-2014-toyota-corolla-s-2014-volkswagen-jetta-se-comparison-test
Go and read it.
Even if you feel the cars, being that weird third-world but not quite mix, are not quite relevant to you. If you live in South Africa they are fairly relevant and take heart, in 10 years you might be able to afford them.
But read the test, because its good. Its beautifully written, humorous and above all it takes the cars seriously.
I both love - and despair at - the fact that only Americans can be bothered to skid-pan test "cheap" saloons. Also they call them "small sports saloons" which is just lovely, almost makes you feel good about them,
The Brits would just drive around the block, ask where the diesel version is and make nasty jokes about salesmen and pensioners. Americans call Mazda3s small sporting saloons and skid pan test them, the English dismiss a 535d M-Sport as "copier salesman's car". Or at least reminding them of one.
Just because you don't drive a Porsche 911 GT3RS, or a Megane R20-something full of scaffolding, doesn't mean it is impossible that you care about driving.
Why is Car & Driver so much better than the rest?
Well maybe the issue with the rest is image: their image. Do you mind being seen as a slightly geeky gear/petrolhead? Or must you be seen as so awesomely cool that you cannot be impressed by anything less than a La Ferrari. (Unless its some sort of stupid irrelevant track-day only car.)
And its not that the simple colonial Yanks are impressed by every old thing: read that test, they lambaste the Toyota and Honda, and really let the Kia's dynamics have it. While liking the Mazda and the Jetta. Because despite what our motoring presses tell us, while noone makes fall-apart in 3 years lemons anymore (?) there are still HUGE differences in how these cars are to drive.
Which should matter to you, unless you absolutely cannot drive.
