The 135 is not the be-all and end-all of the handling world, but it is illustrative of how a "normal" sort of car (not a pure sports car like a Z-06 or S2000) can be set up to provide a comfortable ride, very high limits, and amazing precision and feedback.
Perhaps the "for a subcompact" qualifier is not right. Since none of the subcompacts/compacts handle very well, we can just leave it at "none of them handle well."
I guess what it boils down to, for me, is when someone drones on about how they bought one FWD econo-compact over another 'cause the one they choose is a great handling car. The differences in the segment are marginal, and none of them are even remotely close to be considered "good handling."
Since there exists no $20K car to illustrate "good handling" the examples must come from a different price segment.
A 135 is far from a "normal" car. Unless you think that a normal car is a small, RWD, twin turbo two seater with a price well above the average purchase price of a car in Canada.
All you're doing is arguing yourself in circles, and sounding pretentious while you do it.
You keep claiming that no compacts handle well, and then comparing them to the 135. What you keep ignoring is the fact that your comparison is idiotic. Comparing a five-seater, hatch-style, economy car that cost $15k to a two-seater, sport coupe with a price tag of $40k makes no sense. I'm not quite sure why you're so obsessed with making such a ridiculous comparison, other than to talk about how great the 135 is some more. We get it. You drove one, you liked it. If you think it's so great, go buy one instead of telling everyone how much better it is than a Fit or Yaris.
Your claim that "none of them handle well" is idiotic as well. As Mitlov rightly points out, an NSX would shame a 135 in handling. If we use your logic, we should conclude that the 135 does not handle well, because a car three times its price outdid it. Instead what you're doing is making a ludicrous comparison between two completely different vehicles and claiming it's valid, and then sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring a comparison between, say, a 135 and an S2000. Which, I think, is a much more valid comparison: both are roughly the same price, are available as a convertible, and seat two. But for some reason you think comparing a 135 to a Fit is fair, but comparing it to an S2000 is not.
And unless you've driven all of the compacts on the market, you're in no place to say whether any of them handle better than others. I can tell you first hand that the Fit outhandles te Yaris and Versa, because I've actually driven all three of them.
And FYI, there
is a compact in the $20k range that handles well. Take a look at the reviews for the Cobalt SS - it was faster in
Car and Driver's test than the 135. I guess we should all start claiming that RWD sports cars all handle poorly because a FWD compact outdid one, right?
We all know your 135 ride made you wet yourself. Stop trying to turn completely unrelated threads into sessions about how great it is.
