Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

m1miata

I have seen the 8.1 second 0-60 and the 8.6 0-60 times listed. My Miata had a 0-60 time of around 8.8 seconds, which in most cases was plenty. That said, there were those times I could have used a bit more horse out of that car. As for on-ramps, there are times when you must slow due to too many a car bumper to bumper on the freeways here on the 101 in California. In this case scenario, it would be nice to accelerate from say 5 or 10 MPH on up to 80 MPH quickly as possible. I do agree the i4 is enough, I am going to drive them both again to see how close they are to owning the V6. If I am still unsure it is not packing enough punch, I am going to error on the side of having more power than adequate. I do not want this car to be a compromise in any way if possible.

They don't make it as simple as I thought it would be choosing which Honda is best in the Accord line. While I like the looks of the Coupe, you have but a choice of base, with i4 engine, and drum brakes in back, or you go with an EX which adds the junk like moon roof, which I do not need and reduces head room by 2.3". To get a V6 in the coupe, you go to some $25K car, with moon roof. What seems odd is that you can get the SE V6 sedan for much less money. Actually, it is a sweet package. And the sedan is more sensible. Ah, that coupe though looks so much more sexy. What to do - what to do!
To get an EX coupe in i4 or V6, upgrades the rear brakes, and offers some goodies, but my taller friends would have to watch their heads.
:surprise: and I still find it so odd that car companies figure everyone needs a moon roof.

Anyone out there test driven the Aura base model, and found it as good as the Honda? To me, the one test run I did left me with an opinion of the Aura being an OK car, yet not quite as good overall as the Honda. The Aura is the North American Car of Year Award and all that jazz. Am I missing something here? Anyone found something more in the Aura than what an Accord gives the customer? Amy I missing something -- maybe need another test drive? I have not driven the Camry yet. I am a bit concerned about newest Toyota products for glitches and the fit finish of those cars I looked at was not as perfect as past Toyotas, IMHO. I must say the look, except for the nose, is kinda interesting now. But are they still boring for handling?
Did test an Altima, and it was OK, but I don't care for the CVT transmission and the steering feels a tad light to me. Altima road noise is so-so, though I guess the Accord is not exactly the most quiet. The Altima i4 has a lot of power, but what about engine problems, like oil consumption?
-Loren

jiamin

I had a 94 Altima (I4) for quite a few years. It was loud but powerful enough for most of my commute. Then I had 96 Maxima which was much more powerful, smoother and quieter. I got used to driving Maxima and decided to have no more I4. I just can't go back and downgrade myself. To me I4 and V6 is a day-and-night difference.

jiamin

Actually when it comes to purchase a new car, quietness is very close to the top of my checklist. Therefore, V6 is my minimum requirement.

kdhspyder

YOu missed the discussion on fixed costs. It's basic cost accounting.

thegraduate

Just a little info -

I know you mentioned having to upgrade to "some $25k car" to get the V6. Accords are now going for $750 under invoice in most places best I can tell from the prices-paid forum; I imagine this holds true for coupes too. That would put an LX-V6 Accord between $22k and $23k I'd guess. You can check out invoice prices yourself through Edmunds if you like, they are usually a reliable source. There is a $750 factory-dealer icnentive which the dealer can pass on to the customer, hence the reason for the sub-invoice pricing.

The last EXV6 (read: loaded) sedan I saw on the prices paid forum was for $24,200, $3,100 off of sticker price.

Not trying to tell you what to do, just providing you with some info you may or may not have known about.

exshoman

99% of the time, those slow cars that make others slow down are not due to the cars themselves, but the drivers. Often those cars holding up traffic have plenty of power, but the driver chooses not to use it. Very rarely do I see anybody floor their vehicle. Maybe because with many cars that is indeed an unpleasant experience. It's been my good pleasure to own cars where stepping on the accelerator has been fun. An old V8 Camaro, a couple Taurus SHOs, a 300M, and now an Accord 4 cylinder.

Is this a fast car? Not in todays world of sub-6 seconds family sedans. But it is quick, especially with the 5-speed. I've driven my share of dog slow cars, so I know when something is slow or not, and this car has a good amount of pickup.

I certainly don't begrudge anybody getting a V6 in a midsize sedan. It does make the driving experience more fun. Then again, fun is pretty far down the list of desirable attributes in a car for many people.

m1miata

Thanks to everyone for providing really good input here on this forum.

Intelichoice shows the LX i4 coupe as a good choice, as is the SE in the sedan, if I decide on the sedan. Looks like the SE V6 sedan is not too bad a deal dollar wise, if I go that way. Seems that an EX V6, LX V6, and the EX-L in an inline 4 seem to cost more in the long run. Funny how some models just are better investments, even within the family of cars.
Some of these packages Honda has simply don't pan out. Looks like the base Coupe with the i4 or the SE sedan in i4 and V6 are the top three in the Honda Accord family for bang for the buck.
-Loren

m1miata

Why do people do that? They buy a fast car and drive it like they are running out of gas. I don't get it. I floor my PT, with a stick, often. Out on the highway stop lights, 0-60 is perfectly legal to open her up. Ummm, not blinding speed however from a PT, though I have 150HP and 165# of torque. And I even have the narrow back seat left at home to save on weight; hopefully increasing performance / gas mileage. Not exactly the prettiest tones coming out of that engine when revved, but what the heck. :shades:
Loren

benderofbows

So much talk about horsepower and 0-60... so little talk about handling. I find my I4 Accord to be the better balance of both.

A V6 engine adds OVER 200 pounds to an Accord, mostly in the front. This of course adversely affects handling in some situations. You can feel that weight up there in a hard corner.

For me, perfectly executing a rev-matched heel-and-toe downshift right before a corner, while braking hard to load up the front suspension, throttling it through and then flooring at the apex has been just as much (if not more) fun that drag racing it at a stoplight or on an onramp (although that is fun too!).

I am willing to give up a little horsepower in my sedan to have slightly more balanced handling. However it is all a matter of personal preference.

gooddeal2

99% of the time, those slow cars that make others slow down are not due to the cars themselves

Yeb, I agree that drivers are also part of the problem here. However, for my personal taste, when I tried to drive a 4c to accelerate as fast I can, people think that I’m way too aggressive b/c of the excessive rev. and hesitation.

These are the cars I’ve been driving so far: Avalon ’00 (my brother), Corolla ’99, Camry 4c ’02, Altima 4c ’03, G35 coupe ’05 and now G35x ’07. I like the coupe the most b/c it has all the power and is a lot lighter than the new G35x. However, when it rains or snows the X is the best and we all know it.

A couple weeks ago, I wanted to cut in front of the ’06 or ’07 Accord V6 (it was raining), the kid (probably 19-21 years old) was thinking he can out race me from the stop light but he was wrong. His car kept spinning cuz he accelerate too fast while I was like 6 cars in front of him already. :shades:

jeffyscott

So much talk about horsepower and 0-60... so little talk about handling. I find my I4 Accord to be the better balance of both.

Yes, I pointed that out wrt my Mazda6 as well. I'd rather not have the extra 200# in front and the resulting understeer.

Another thing is there are so many slow accelerating drivers, having a too fast car just makes it all the more frustrating being stuck behind them.

One other thing is if you are unlucky and need engine repairs, these can sometimes be much more expensive on the V6s that are jammed sideways into these midsize cars. Not sure if this is the case with these cars, but in our V6 minivan replacing gaskets necessitated removal of the engine.

captain2

last night - and attempting to easily merge accelerating from 50 or so(with my V6) onto a highway doing 70 or so - a Scion Xb abruptly cuts in front of me from a stop leaving perhaps 200 yards between him and the freeway. I had to jam on my brakes of course, and he with his accelerator nailed (I'm guessing) gets up to all of 35 or 40 mph before getting into that right lane doing about 70. The pick up that he had cutoff in the same manner as he did me ends up slewing all over the road although everybody does manage to accomodate this guy. Could'nt help but think that the whole problem would have been avoided if that little Scion had a V6 - or he could've waited until it was safe recognizing that his little bread box is underpowered?

m1miata

Thanks for the opinion. I am leaning towards getting a i4 Coupe in the Accord. Isn't that 200# though combined weight of engine, stability control, and perhaps other items added to V6 package. These FWD cars seem like you are really driving a two wheeler and the back is along for the ride, like a cart you are towing. I do like the idea of the Charger with closer to 50/50 weight distribution and RWD, but I am not sure it is a best buy all around. I would think the Honda to be most trouble free, fuel efficient, with lowest depreciation, while still being fun to drive. The Charger seemed to handle well, with a bit of lightness to the steering, and well let's say a bit more size to lug around the town. Interior is a bit plain, though it gets the job done. In comparison of interiors though, the Honda seems more like a luxury car between to two. But then again, Charger is suppose to be the mean kid on the block, and not the pretty boy.

You said you floor your car, with FWD, when coming off the apex. Can you get good bite with FWD doing that? I guess backing off does no harm if you get one wheel a spinning, as the real enemy of FWD is understeer. While going through turns, downhill runs, I like to squeeze the brakes lightly enough to keep at least a little slowing action going on in the back. Just not the same as having RWD. Overall, the FWD does its thing well. Ya never know, I could even get stuck in snow again, like leaving Las Vegas for California. That day, FWD did its magic.
-Loren

neteng101

The SE V6 shaves about a 100 lbs off the LX/EX V6s... no moonroof and power seats.

All Accords (I4/V6) can be tightened up for corners... a 17mm rear sway from the TL is an easy install and reduces understeer a ton. 20/22mm rear sways can result in a bit of oversteer at times even from what I've read.

Stock tires (either trim) aren't really built for cornering either.

m1miata

Good info. - thanks. Are you running a couple extra pounds air pressure up front? Interesting to note that the stock Michelin's, while great on durability, don't seem to be as highly rated as say the Yokohama and even the inexpensive Kumho tires where it comes to quiet ride, good cornering, and overall desirability according to users on TireRack site. Great to see Honda is not putting really cheap tires on their cars. My goodness how bad some of the domestic car original tires have been over the years. I think I set a record back in 1976, destroying Goodyear Customs in around 7k to 8k miles. Ahhhh, those were the days of cheap American cars.

Has anyone found a domestic car which they feel is better than a Honda? If so which one, and in what way is this car a better buy.
-Loren

captain2

actually all of these cars will understeer to some degree, some more than others, 4 or 6 cylinder. It is true, however, that aggravating that weight imbalance towards the front (in some part due to a heavier engine) will create even more understeer, that 'plowing' you feel along with fighting that steering wheel that wants to straighten. Most cars, even RWD ones, will ultimately understeer, but it is also an inherently safer condition for most drivers.
Since we all have lived with primarily FWD for many years now, I think that a mass movement back to RWD might actually cause a lot of problems for the average driver especially in winter driving conditions.

scape2

"Has anyone found a domestic car which they feel is better than a Honda? If so which one, and in what way is this car a better buy.
-Loren "

You opened the door, I'll step in..
Yes, I feel the Fusion/Milan are a better value than the Accord. They handle just as well if not better in my opinion. Quality/fit/finish are on par. In my region you can now get an SE V6 Fusion for under $20,000. On the Web I am now seeing people get SEL V6 Fusions, loaded with leather, sunroof, heated seats, the works, for under $23,000. Choice is nice. Test drive..

scape2

An Saturn Aura today in Black. I came up from the rear of the car and it must have been a 4cyl model, no dual exhaust. Like the design. Still, to me the front looks very Accord like..

m1miata

Nope, that be the Aura XE, which is a 3.5 OHV pushrod V6 , mated to a four speed tranny. Test drove one -- not bad. But is it better than the Accord? First impression was not really. May consider a second test drive.
-Loren

m1miata

I was raised on RWD cars, but yeah, point well taken that after driving FWD cars, or most new drivers never exposed to RWD other than a Mustang or truck, many people are going to have trouble with RWD cars.
And, I may add, it is totally amazing that most people can NOT tell you if they are driving a car with anti-lock brakes or not. So, do they sqeeze to close to threshold on emergency braking, then back off if locking up, or just jab the brakes and let the computer think things over? How would they know what to do, or what is going on? -Loren

neteng101

Always extra PSIs for me - 34/31 (recommended is 32/29).

The one thing you might notice at times though is the turning radius - the V6 has a larger one vs the I4, making a bit more work sometimes in tight parking situations.

jeffyscott

Has anyone found a domestic car which they feel is better than a Honda? If so which one, and in what way is this car a better buy.

If I hadn't bought a Mazda6, I would have gone for the domestic Milan or Fusion. Of course the Mazda is not a "domestic" (though it is assembled in Michigan).

I think all three of these look better than the Accord, of course this is subjective. I thought any of these three had excellant ride and handling, with each being a little different form the others. I also found the seats to be very comfortable for me, though oddly the Milan seems less so than the Fusion somehow. I believe any of those three can generally be bought for about $2000-3000 less than a comparable Accord. However, it is probably true that the net cost difference to someone who trades frequently (which would not be me) will likely be less.

The main reasons I did not give the Accord much consideration were the much higher price and its exterior appearance. It also had comfortable seats and ride and handling is also good...though steering seemed excessively light to me.

For the $16,000 I paid for a Mazda6, I'm pretty sure I'd have had to go down to the Civic had I wanted a Honda at a comparble price.

imidazol97

I saw one Lincoln LS in the snowstorm Tuesday evening who probably wished he wasn't rear wheel drive. He was trying to go up the exit ramp and kept sliding to the right because the ramp sloped that way slightly. Of course there was a stopped semi there in front of him parked on the right side of the uphill ramp.

I thanked my stars for having a front wheel drive vehicle for the 4-5 inches of snow with all the idiots creeping on the interstate at 25 mph, or less.

explorerx4

did you check the tread on their tires? any vehicle can have a hard time in snow if the tires are worn out.

gooddeal2

Yeb, must be the tires...I had G35 coupe for a little over 2 years and never had a problem w/ snow here in PA.

kartez

I haven't posted on Edmunds forums in a number of years.

My $0.02 on this topic.

I have a B5 passat 1.8T stick. I have never felt the engine to be underpowered, passing trucks or getting onto a highway. The motor is torquey so I don't even have to shift down from 5th to pass cars/trucks.

I think while 0-60 is important, top gear acceleration is more important. Does anyone have the figures for top gear 30-60, 50-70 times for the cars discussed in this forum?

Thanks. Keep up the good discussion.

explorerx4

year 3 is usually the bad year, depending on how many miles you drive. an ls is a car that is usually driven with some enthusiasm, which tends to shorten tire life.

imidazol97

>did you check the tread on their tires?

Yeah I stopped but he wouldn't stop spinning the tires enough to let me measure the depth with my depth tool.

Seriously the problem looked like it was light in the rear and the ramp was uphill and where he was sloped to the right. It may have had limite slip differential?

I had rear wheel drive cars for a long time and am aware they require some weight in the trunk for ones that are lighter, but they simply don't get the bite with the rears that the fronts do. That's why they have snow tires.

I had limited slip differential on one and could dig through almost anything with snow tires. But I swore I'd never order it again because both wheel lose traction letting the car go sideways.

explorerx4

regardless, tires make the most difference. my father in law's '84 cutlass wagon with new tires was way better than the '04 malibu with 40k miles on it that i rented from enterprise, in the snow. drove them the same day.
as matter of driving experience, the cutlass was better that my wife's saab wagon, too.

rockylee

Has anyone found a domestic car which they feel is better than a Honda? If so which one, and in what way is this car a better buy.

Loren,

are you serious ?????

The Aura, is better than the Accord......The CTS is better than the TL, The Silverado is better than the Ridgeline.

Rocky

m1miata

Please elaborate on that. I test drove an XE Aura. May need a second run. First impression was that the engine a bit gruff, though not bad. Would have to run one again, and listen to the motor more. The salesman kinda threw me off with some OnStar presentation he thought I needed to hear. Blah, blah, blah. The car cornered good, but I thought the Honda steering feel was better. Maybe I should test on same day. Perhaps a little less tire noise with the Aura, though I thought I detected a little wind noise around the windshield. Both cars not bad though.

The Honda Coupe looks sharp to me, while the sedan is elegantly smooth as well. The Aura is pretty refreshing - good simply design which should stand the test of time. Seems like a wide turning radius on the XE. Never heard of Hankook tires. Overall, fairly impressed with Aura. Interior perhaps not as good as Honda, yet close. Ride on freeway as good, if not better than the Honda. Currently they are not selling well, so I would expect not only the $500 rebate, but the $1000 Conquest Saving Deal for Californians which own a non-GM car as added or replacing the $500 cash back to customer. Net price though after 5 years of ownership, Honda will still be less expensive to buy. I do believe they have deals on as well.
May give Saturn another try. If the car is better and they deal more, it is one to really consider. The power is about in-between the i4 Accord and V6 Accord for speed with the Aura XE. It is suppose to be 0-60 of 7.5 sec. which is not bad.
-Loren

m1miata

As for CTS, I did enjoy the test drive of the used Cadillac. Looking at the evaluation on the Intelichoice site, it seems that the CTS can be costly in the long run, bought new.

And you mentioned the Ridgeline vs. Silverado -- They seem to be two different animals, and both have they following and fit a particular need. For urban cowboys, I would say the Tacoma is the deal, as it has the gas mileage and is great for resale and reliability.
-Loren

thegraduate

Could'nt help but think that the whole problem would have been avoided if that little Scion had a V6 - or he could've waited until it was safe recognizing that his little bread box is underpowered?

Well, if he did have it floored, I think a V6 would be way too much for that car (that weighs WAY under 3,000 pounds I think). Perhaps the 1.8L from the Corolla (about 25 more horses) or at most, the 2.4L from the Camry and Scion tC.

I did read that the new Scion xB boxy thing will have the 2.4L, and will increase in size.

thegraduate

Would you elaborate on why you think the Aura is better than the Accord, etc...?

Personal opinion is fine and dandy, but helping us understand your reasoning would be most helpful.

thegraduate

Top gear acceleration affects about 5-10% of the market. The rest of us "drones" drive automatics.

I agree about passing acceleration though, it is important to be able to go from 50-70 quickly sometimes more than it is to go 0-70.

plekto

Actually, I drove the Grand Prix - and with the 3.8 engine and the nice shifter(dead simple to shift manually - all in one striaght row, no button to hit - just tap it to the next gear), it flat out whomps on the Accord.

I'd rather have one than a 4 cylinder Accord. I suppose you could compare the GXP package to an Accord V6, that's not really fair. 300hp V8 and all..

2006 GXP(cars direct) Net Cost: $24,533 303HP V8.
2006 Base(cars direct) Net Cost: $18,743 The 200HP V6 is a better engine than the Accord's I-4.

elroy5

I'd rather have one than a 4 cylinder Accord. I suppose you could compare the GXP package to an Accord V6, that's not really fair. 300hp V8 and all..

Sure, there is no law saying you can't compare any car with any other car. But while you are comparing hp, you should also compare the fuel economy, among other things, where the Grand Prix is lacking.

thegraduate

Or the 5.3L engine's torque running through the front wheels. Or the V6 engine's sound/feel. Or the interior in general. Or...

I'm gonna stop for a while.

m1miata

Seems as those cars, such as the Grand Prix and G6 take a huge hit to the pocket book long term, as in total cost in and out. Intellichoice is not so hot on the Grand Prix. I did test a G6 GT at a dealership, marked down down to $18759 or something like that. Not too bad a car. The 2006 still has electric steering. The transmission was so-so, and the engine fair. The car really did not feel faster than the Accord with an i4. And not as smooth as the V6 Honda. Now, for the price, yeah, not a bad looking G6 coupe. After looking over the car, I got the impression the Aura is a bit classier in the GM line. The Aura, with the 3.5 engine is a little quiker than the i4 Honda -- a matter of compromise on gas mileage. Was going to test the 3.6 V6 Aura, but it seems they are only interested in selling loaded XR models, with not a one in a base form.
-Loren

plekto

I'd put the GM 3800 up against the Toyota engines anyday. The thing is that the Pontiacs are better equipped for the same money - I mean, can you get a Camry V6 for 18,000?

The real advantage, though, is used. A used Grand Prix can be had for about 11-12K. With 4/80 left on the GM warranty, (we're talking about a used 2007 with 10-20K on it), it's a very compelling choice compared to the Toyota and Hondas.

As for the way it accelerates, just use the shifter. There's a reason they put it in like that. If you keep the 3800 in 2nd gear until you get up to nearly highway speed, it flies. The Toyota I-4 has zero chance.

EDIT:
CarsDirect Price: $21,987 for a base Camry V6. $4K is a significant chunk of change.

m1miata

You are comparing the 3800 V6 to the 3.5 Camry with 268HP. I wouldn't go there No comparison. As for price difference, you get that back at trade-in time. Camry has some first year issues, so I am avoiding that car. Not sure the interior fit / finish is up to old standards of Toyota, as I noted some misalignments and such. Pretty neat looking car overall, and very fast. The Accord and Aura are better for back road cornering, I would think.

Grand Prix may indeed be a bargain used. It is kinda a relic of a different age however. I guess it is gone soon.
Good used car prices, as you noted. What's up with the gazillion round vents in that car?
-Loren

jeffyscott

From CR test March and August 2006, some 45-65 acceleration times, all are automatics:

Passat 3.6 V6 = 4.3 s
Passat 2.0T = 5.1 s
Fusion 3.0 V6 = 5.5 s
Milan 2.3 I4 = 5.9 s
Sonata 3.3 V6 = 5.0 s
Sonata 2.4 I4 = 6.3 s
Impala 3.9 V6 = 5.4 s
Charger 5.7 V8 = 3.8 s
Charger 3.5 V6 = 5.7 s
Accord 3.0 V6 = 4.4 s
Camry 2.4 I4 = 6.0 s
Camry 3.5 V6 = 4.4 s

For other models, some older numbers which may or may not still apply, also from CR:

Accord 2.4 I4 = 5.5 s (Jan 2003)
Mazda6 3.0 V6 = 5.3 s (May 2003)
Mazda6 2.3 I4 = 5.9 s (May 2003)
Legacy 2.5 4 cyl = 6.6 s (Jan 2003)
Altima 2.5 I4 = 5.5 s (Feb 2005)
Galant 3.8 V6 = 4.5 s (Feb 2005)
G6 3.5 V6 = 5.3 s (Feb 2005)

Non-turbo 4 cyl range 5.5 - 6.6 sec
V6 range 4.3 - 5.7 sec

For those that I found both 4 and 6 cyl figure for:
Largest differential = 1.6 sec (Camry)
Smallest differential = 0.4 sec (Fusion/Milan)

rockylee

Would you elaborate on why you think the Aura is better than the Accord, etc...?

Sure Would !

Personal opinion is fine and dandy, but helping us understand your reasoning would be most helpful.

Well for starters you get a lot of car for the money. It is cheaper than most of it's competitors and IMHO it has the best exterior/interior in the appliance segment. It has the option of the very respectable 3.6 "high feature" V-6 a long with a 6-speed automatic for around $24,595 and that is $1200 less than Lorens V-6 Accord he likes so much.

I guess the judges were high on it as it was named North American car of the year and won some reviews and received very good reviews by normally biased car mags

http://www.saturn.com/aboutus2/news/press/index.jsp?storyID=121

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070126/FREE/70118010

Rocky

kyrpto

"Emergency handling could be better. The V6 in the XR easily provoked torque steer and wheelspin.The interior is nice but has some second-rate details."

In Consumer Reports' ratings the Aura came in squarely in the middle of the pack with a score of 70. The V6 Camry got an 87 and the Accord was #1 with an 89.

IMO, CR tests are far more realistic than C & D, MT, etc.

rockylee

Well I'm glad that is just your opinion because I and many others will strongly disagree with you. Consumer Reports as Bobby Boucher mother would say is "the devil". They are Toyota and Honda's propoganda machine and will always site good reviews for both company's even when both are recalling cars.

I take what that magazine says with a grain of salt and I'd be willing to bet that 99.9% of their subscribers are import owners thus they will always pander to their loyal subscribers with anti-american bias reviews. The Aura, gets a positive review by almost every magazine and CR gives them a middle of the pack. That is flat out poethetic and the bias is obvious. :mad:

Rocky

jeffyscott

Could'nt help but think that the whole problem would have been avoided if that little Scion had a V6...

It is a 2500 pound vehicle. I don't think it needs a V6, maybe a better 4 would be nice, though...

With an automatic, acceleration times per CR are:

0-60 = 11.4 s
45-65 = 7.3 s

Most of the 4 cyls in the midsize cars get around 9 to 9.5 for 0-60 and 5.5 to 6.0 for 45-65. There is as much difference between the Xb and the typical midsize 4 cyl car as there is between the typical midsize 4 cyl and the typical midsize V6.

I have driven cars with numbers like the Xb's and felt they were kind of slow and underpowered. This is not the case (for me) for those cars that can do 0-60 in about 9.5 s and 45-65 in about 6 s.

kdshapiro

You can't be serious. The Accord is better than Aura. While a good shot, it's not good enough for me not to buy the Accord over the Aura. One can pick on certain things in both cars, but the overall package..the Accord. The CTS and TL are two different cars. Although I like the CTS interior the overall nod goes to the TL. I agree about the trucks although way off topic.

backy

If CR is "Toyota's and Honda's propaganda machine," how do you explain that CR rates not a Honda or Toyota, but a VW and Nissan at the top of the four-cylinder family sedan category, ahead of Honda and Toyota, and rates a Kia ahead of the Camry LE? They also rate a VW and Nissan ahead of a Toyota in the V6 category. As far as anti-American bias, they rate the Fusion and Milan ahead of Hyundai, Kia, Mazda, and Mitsubishi in the V6 class. If they are a "propaganda machine" for Honda and Toyota and have this huge anti-American bias, they are really not doing a good job showing it, are they?

Please name one comparo of mid-sized cars (that includes some of the typical choices in this class such as Accord, Camry, Fusion, Sonata etc.) by professional car reviewers in which the Aura came out on top. In every comparo I've seen, it's received some positive marks but is squarely "middle of the pack." Nice car, just not best in class. Not just CR, but consensus opinion.

rockylee

Please name one comparo of mid-sized cars (that includes some of the typical choices in this class such as Accord, Camry, Fusion, Sonata etc.) by professional car reviewers in which the Aura came out on top. In every comparo I've seen, it's received some positive marks but is squarely "middle of the pack." Nice car, just not best in class. Not just CR, but consensus opinion.

I guess you ignored my link ?????

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070126/FREE/70118010

FYI I'm not the only person here on edmunds that thinks Consumer Reports has a anti-domestic bias. Hell I could if you like site other websites where people feel just as strongly as I do. I have never read a bad review for a import from CR that compares a domestic vs import. I do once in a great while read "friends" CR mags at work and I get mental images of Joseph Goebbels dropping leaf lets out of planes which has essentially happened to the left coast of this country. The Milan/Fusion winning a comparo is a carrot they typically throw at readers once in a while to make them look bi-partisan. However after they get enough angry hate mail and threats of import owners canceling subscription the following review will be less kind to the domestic and a 360 degree smear campaign will happen.

I've witnessed this with my own eyes and instead of getting angry I just laugh anymore. I know where they stand and I take what's printed in that magazine with a grain of salt. It to me is like reading the National Enquire or watching a Soap Opera, and the greatest thing ever happened to them when they botched a review with car seats and admitted it on national television. I swear that was a blessing from above.

Well back to the topic at hand. CR (The Bible) says the Aura, is junker and all midsize imports are superior. Got it !!!! :sick:

Rocky

imidazol97

> but a VW and Nissan at the top

When did VW and Nissan (Datsun) become American companies?