Edmunds stylish SUV test: Buick Envista vs. Nissan Kicks
Just because an SUV is small and inexpensive doesn't mean it has to be as bland as plain oatmeal for breakfast. The 2025 Buick Envista and 2025 Nissan Kicks are two great examples. They look good, have surprisingly big interiors, and boast prices in the $20,000s regardless of trim level. That's largely where the similarities stop, though.
It all starts with their designs. The redesigned 2025 Kicks has the sporty vibe of a fashionable sneaker with vibrant two-tone color options. It's fair to say it's more youthful. The Envista definitely isn't Grandma's Buick. It has a coupe-like look that could pass as something coming from Europe. There are plenty of other differences, too. Edmunds' auto experts compare these two small SUVs to help you decide which is the better buy.
Fuel economy and performance
The Envista has a turbocharged three-cylinder engine that's surprisingly peppy around town and when merging onto the highway despite its modest output of 137 horsepower and 162 lb-ft of torque. Fuel economy is an EPA-estimated 30 mpg in combined city/highway driving. One potential downside: The Envista is not available with all-wheel drive.
The Kicks has a four-cylinder engine with 141 horsepower and 140 lb-ft of torque. Though the Kicks has a similar horsepower output, Edmunds' editors have found the vehicle slower in real-world driving, especially when you want a quick burst of speed for getting on the highway. All-wheel drive is available, though, which might be advantageous for buyers living in areas with snowy and icy winters. The EPA estimates that the Kicks gets 31 mpg combined with front-wheel drive or 30 mpg combined with all-wheel drive.
Advantage: Envista
Interior room and comfort
The Envista and Kicks are both small SUVs, but the Buick is longer and has a coupe-like roofline. As such, the Envista has less rear headroom but more rear legroom than the Kicks. There's about 4 more inches of rear legroom. That's a lot and can be useful if you need to install a bulky rear-facing child safety seat.
We do prefer the Kicks' front seating. Its comfortable driver's seat is similar to what you'll find in pricier Nissans, whereas the Envista's is rather flat and doesn't have enough bolstering to help keep you from sliding around when going around turns.
The Envista lacks the soft, cushy ride you might expect from a Buick. Still, it isn't uncomfortable and it maintains a better composure over bumps than the Kicks.
Advantage: Envista
Cargo space
In real-world testing, both the Envista and Kicks managed to hold more pieces of luggage in their trunks than we were expecting given their cargo volume specs. Their cargo areas are very different, though, which means it's smart to look beyond the official volumes.
The Envista has a longer, more trunk-like cargo area. The Kicks has a taller, boxier space that results not only in greater capacity on paper and in practice but in better versatility too. The components needed for the Kicks' available all-wheel-drive system reduce cargo space, but even then the Kicks will still have more space than the Envista.
Advantage: Kicks
Features and value
The $23,220 base Kicks S trim level is pretty dour-looking on the inside and has a small 7-inch touchscreen. It starts at $23,220 including destination fees. Thankfully, the more expensive Kicks SV ($25,070) and SR ($27,570) get padded, upholstered surfaces on the dash and doors, plus a colorful, feature-packed 12.3-inch touchscreen. It's a surprisingly cool and high-quality environment for the money.
The Envista interior has a more refined design, and there's less of a difference between trim levels with better overall materials quality. Every trim has a 10-inch touchscreen that's easier to use than the Kicks' base system but not quite as appealing as its 12.3-inch upgrade.
The Envista's base Preferred trim level starts at $25,195. That's more than the base Kicks, but its feature content is closer to the similarly priced Kicks SV. From there, the value equation tilts back and forth depending on the optional packages you choose, but ultimately, these two are similarly priced and equipped. The most expensive Envista Avenir with the Advanced Safety package goes for $30,790, while the priciest front-wheel-drive Kick SR with the Premium package is $29,520.
Advantage: tie
Edmunds says
The Nissan Kicks offers cool design, lots of features, strong fuel economy and surprising practicality, but the Envista's superior passenger space and performance add up to a stronger SUV overall. Its more re
_____
This story was provided to The Associated Press by the automotive website Edmunds. James Riswick is a contributor at Edmunds.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Would Dave Ramsey Finance a New Car? 5 Things He Says About Big Auto Purchases
A car is often the second-largest purchase most Americans make, and it can cost them a lot of money. Recent data reveals the average price of a new car is $48,699 in June 2025, according to CarEdge. The average price of a used car is roughly half that at $25,547, per CarEdge. Read Next: Find Out: Either is expensive, but personal finance guru Dave Ramsey is on record about how best to handle such purchases, most notably his strong opposition to financing a new car. Here are five things Ramsey has said to keep in mind when you're in the market for a car. Ramsey regularly preaches to avoid new cars altogether, as they can drag on the finances of most Americans. The reasons are manifold but largely come down to cost and depreciation. 'You don't want too much of your money tied up in things that depreciate (go down in value). And cars, trucks, and things with motors depreciate big time,' Ramsey said in an X post. The average used car is roughly half the cost of a new one, allowing you to put funds toward other responsibilities and goals, which aligns with Ramsey's mentality. Furthermore, new cars lose a significant portion of their value in the first five years of life, up to 60% of their value, according to Carfax. Check Out: The average monthly car payment is $754, according to Edmunds. And roughly 20% of new car buyers have payments exceeding $1,000. Committing to such a payment is a big no-no to Ramsey. 'The best car for you is the car you can afford to pay cash for. You want to own your vehicles, not the other way around,' Ramsey said in another X post. The reason is simple: It may free you up to invest cash for the long term. 'If you paid cash for a reliable, used car and invested that average car payment amount into good mutual funds from age 25 until retirement, you'd have millions in your investments by age 65,' Ramsey added in the tweet. Paying cash for a car seems impossible, but it beats having a burdensome monthly payment that hinders your budget. Budgeting is key to achieving financial goals in Ramsey's mind. Purchasing a car is no different. Having a car-buying budget ensures you purchase something you can afford and, hopefully, avoid a large car payment. 'It all starts with a budget. A budget helps you make sure you're getting a car you can actually afford,' according to an article on the Ramsey Solutions website. A good way to do this is to save money each month in a high-yield savings account to grow until you have the funds necessary to purchase the car you want. It's easy to forget about auto insurance costs when purchasing a new-to-you car. One reason to avoid a pricey new car is it's likely going to cost more to insure than a reliable used car, possibly adding hundreds of dollars more to annual costs. 'The truth is, new cars cost more to repair or replace — so they cost more to insure (especially if they come with fancy extras like backup cameras and blind spot sensors). And even with some of the latest safety technology, insurance companies rarely offer discounts to new-car drivers for having those features,' according to an article on the Ramsey Solutions website. Car dealers love to add costly extras like rust-proofing, roof racks or extended warranties. Most simply bloat the total cost unnecessarily. 'These dealer-added extras can increase the price of the car by hundreds of dollars,' per the Ramsey Solutions website. Instead of opting for extras, put the cash in your emergency fund to handle expensive car repairs or other expenses. More From GOBankingRates 10 Unreliable SUVs To Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on Would Dave Ramsey Finance a New Car? 5 Things He Says About Big Auto Purchases
Fox News
30 minutes ago
- Fox News
Ending California's EPA power-grab will jump-start American auto and RV manufacturing
President Donald Trump and Republicans in the House and Senate on Thursday finally ended California's outsized authority to dictate national emissions standards for new cars, trucks, RVs and engines. This win is another step toward rebuilding American manufacturing strength. The EPA, under President Joe Biden, granted California exemption waivers to the Clean Air Act, handing California the keys to set their own extreme emissions regulations – including the requirement that nearly all vehicles sold in the state must be electric by 2035. Knowing that the people's representatives in Congress would reject their most extreme policies, the Biden administration had to rely on these workarounds to push their Green New Scam agenda. Biden's Clean Air Act waiver allowed other states to follow California's lead, creating a patchwork of misguided rules. More than a dozen states and D.C. follow California's standards, drastically changing the dynamics of America's critical auto and RV manufacturing industry without Congress having a say. In practice, this means California effectively set the standards for the automotive industry, and most Americans have been forced to live under a regulatory framework that none of our representatives ever voted on. This ends now. Rep. Yakym, R-Ind., along with House Republicans, took action to end this power grab, passing three disapproval resolutions under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal the EPA waivers. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., shepherded these three measures through the Senate, which today earned President Trump's signature. Republicans across the country knew there was no time to waste. Beginning this year, California's Advanced Clean Trucks regulations would have started requiring new heavy-duty vehicles, such as trucks and RVs, to be zero-emission. This regulation threatened the RV supply chain by limiting the availability of chassis for motor homes. Eleven states and D.C. adopted this mandate, which impacts 25% of the heavy-duty vehicle market in the United States, essentially making it the new national standard. The stakes couldn't be higher for the Hoosier State, especially Indiana's Second District, home to Rep. Yakym and the RV Capital of the World, where nearly 90% of America's RVs are built. This industry directly supports more than 60,000 Hoosier jobs, pays over $4.3 billion in wages, and generates a total economic output of $22 billion across the state. RV production is also critical to many other states which is why 13 Democrats joined Republicans in the bipartisan, commonsense vote against the Biden EPA's RV waiver. Reversing California's emissions power grab is essential to RV, automotive and engine manufacturing industries in the state of Indiana and across America. The Clean Air Act was never intended to effectively give one state the power to dictate emissions standards for entire industries across the country. Congress prohibited states from establishing separate vehicle and engine regulations except under "compelling and extraordinary conditions" that apply specifically to that state. We've seen this before. As a U.S. senator, Gov. Braun used the Congressional Review Act to stop Biden's vaccine mandate for private businesses, a fight that ended with the Supreme Court striking it down. The CRA exists for moments like this, an expedited option to rein in the executive branch, reverse unnecessary red tape and prohibit substantially similar EPA actions in the future. Hardworking Hoosiers shouldn't have to bear the weight of federal overreach. National rules should be set by the people's elected representatives, not by unelected regulators or one state's agenda. Ending this EPA-California backroom deal will protect American jobs, unlock our full manufacturing potential, and ensure the shift to electric vehicles is driven by innovation and consumer choice, not bureaucrats in Washington or Los Angeles. We applaud Republicans in the House and Senate and President Trump for taking a strong stand against the previous administration's Green New Deal overreach. The result will be stronger American manufacturing of cars, trucks, RVs and engines. Rep. Rudy Yakym, a Republican, represents Indiana's 2nd Congressional District.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Governors should end California's ludicrous and harmful electric vehicle mandate
In the Biden administration's waning days, the Environmental Protection Agency granted California permission to implement an electric vehicle mandate that several other states adopted, despite the economic turmoil it would create for American consumers and businesses. In granting a waiver to implement California's Advanced Clean Cars II regulations, the EPA attempted to clear the road for other states to go beyond existing federal regulations and sign on to California's pledge to meet escalating annual electric vehicle sales quotas that effectively ban gas-powered and conventional hybrid cars by forcing zero-emissions vehicles to comprise 100 percent of all new car sales by 2035. Twelve states and the District of Columbia have hitched their wagons to California's regulations. In response, Congress recently passed a Congressional Review Act measure to revoke the EPA waiver that gave California effective permission to ban new gas and hybrid power vehicles. Notably, 35 House Democrats and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) joined with Republicans in voting to repeal the waiver. President Trump should waste no time in signing the Congressional Review Act resolution into law, despite California's promise to challenge Congress's authority to rescind the waiver in court. Legal challenges aside, when it comes to electric vehicles, reality is proving to be a stubborn obstacle to politicians' zeal and environmentalists' wishful thinking. Traditional cars with gas engines and newer hybrid engines are widely popular because they are budget-friendly. In addition, the market conditions and infrastructure capabilities are nowhere near ready for the fantastical transition demanded by the new mandates — one that will be massively expensive for American families and taxpayers. A recent national survey showed that 65 percent of America's middle class struggles financially. Forty percent of all Americans are unable to plan beyond their next paycheck. Factor in inflation and the costs and effects of Trump's tariffs, and consumers agree the future looks bleak. Out of all their wallet worries, electricity prices are an extra-sore spot for consumers, with already spiking rates expected to increase as much as 30 percent for more than 65 million Americans. Consumers' grim economic outlook, shaky purchasing power and genuine infrastructure concerns are reflected in zero-emissions vehicles' lackluster national sales. Even the more ambitious forecasts have sales falling short, recognizing that national electric vehicle sales may reach only 16 percent in 2028 — the same year California's and the others states' rules would require electric vehicles to account for a whopping 51 percent of new vehicle sales. Some of these states have electric vehicle sales rates in single digits. Even California, where electric vehicles account for a relatively high 25 percent of new car sales, is lagging far behind its own requirements. Electric vehicles currently make sense for affluent early adopters with large amounts of disposable income and lifestyle habits to transition ahead of others — not so much for those in less fortunate economic positions. Even groups pushing for more adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles admit that 'electric cars still cost 25 percent more' than other vehicles. Electric vehicle owners in more privileged situations also face challenges. Some are stranded in 'charging deserts,' far from public infrastructure, and thus face a lose-lose proposition: They have to choose between installing a $1,000-$2,500 at-home charger or overload their circuits and run up electricity bills by plugging into existing outlets. If drivers are fortunate enough to live a reasonable distance from one of the 64,000 public electric vehicles chargers, data shows one in five simply don't work. New Jersey was quick to hitch itself to California's electric vehicles mandate, and businesses in the state have been sounding the alarm. The New Jersey Business and Industry Association recently urged Gov. Phil Murphy (D) to stop this rule taking effect, which they said 'will significantly add costs for both consumers and businesses during a severe affordability crisis.' In contrast, governors in Maryland, Delaware, New York and Massachusetts — all Democrats — have taken recent executive actions to steer their states away from onerous and unworkable sales quotas by delaying or withdrawing the associated penalties. Too many Americans are worried their families' income will not be enough to afford high housing, grocery and electricity prices, as well as price hikes from tariffs. Instead of adding to that burden by leaving Sacramento in the driver's seat, governors of all these states should give their constituents a reprieve from California's impractical and economically back-breaking mandate by delaying enforcement or withdrawing entirely. Mario H. Lopez is the president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, a public policy advocacy organization that promotes liberty, opportunity and prosperity for all. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
