Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread



  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    see my post above where my sisters one year old G6 which was bought for $24K +TTF and GAP ( $27K loan ) was worth $14500 at most one year later with only 8700 miles.

    Depreciation is the single biggest expense any owner has on a vehicle, excluding catastrophic out-of-warranty expenses.

    This is what annoys buyers of GM/F/DC vehicles the most. 'Why did I pay that much for it last year, if it was only going to be worth this much this year? I feel violated.'
  • I have owned 4 Hondas....Civic, Accord, Pilot and know an Odyssey. I have always had the best of luck with all of them. My 2004 Accord was a wonderful car and I may still have it if I didnt more room. The car was put together wonderfully,drove well and had a wonderful ride. Hondas reputation stood up well. Hyundai on the other hand doesnt have the reputation of Honda and it will probably take several years to establish.I am by no means saying Hyundais are junk but they are not at the same level as Hondas or Toyotas imo. So please do not try to convice me otherwise.
  • Talk about beating a dead horse. Who cares ? !

    We could talk about pitiful Hyundai a few years back - but we're not - its about what's happening now.

    About how Hyundai has turned things around with the Alabama plant, the new 07 Camry, how the Mazda 6 handles....etc
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 1,680
    It's impressive the number of good choices out there in the midsize range. Ten years ago the Accord and the Camry were far beyond most of their competitors. I think they still are ahead, but there are very respectible alternatives to be found with the Sonata, Fusion, Aura, Mazda 6, etc.

    I still think the Accord is slightly ahead, even of the Camry, for the following reason:

    My impression, and it might be wrong, is that Honda is the company where the engineers have the most power. Mr. Honda himself was an engineer, and I think the head of Honda today is an engineer. I think all of the presidents of Honda have been engineers, while at other car companies that only happens once in a while. Again, perhaps I'm wrong, but I think the engineers have relatively more power than the bean counters at Honda, at least compared to other car companies. I think if you asked a large group of competent and impartial engine engineers which engine was the most advanced, the Honda i-VTEC would probably get the most votes. It gives the best mpg of any midsize sedan, and is also quite smooth and powerful for its size. The Accord's double wishbone 5 link rear suspension is also, I think, slightly more advanced than its competitors.

    I have another small example of where Honda engineering doesn't go for the lowest common denominator. Starting in the 1990s, the federal government started investigating whether improvements needed to be made in the roof crush protection standard for cars. I think the current standard, which first started about 1970, states that a car needs to hold 1.5 times its own weight upside down without the roof crushing in more than a certain number of inches. Many people have contended that this standard is way too weak, and you've probably seen pictures of cars and suvs with their roofs crushed in that make that point.

    In the mid 1990s the feds suggested that the standard might be changed to, I think, 2.5 times the weight of the car. Ford, GM, and Chrysler have fought this standard, and so far have successfully delayed it from being implemented. I read that Ford builds almost all of its cars very close to the minimum government standard of 1.5, and didn't want to invest the $200 (or whatever it would cost) per car to strengthen the door pillars and the roofs and fix the problem. That surely wasn't what the engineers at Ford wanted, but that's what the bean counters ordered--after all $200 per car adds up to hundreds of millions of dollars over the years. I read that Honda, in the meantime, designed and built the 1998 Accord to meet the tougher standard. I assume the current Accord is also built to that standard.

    On some measures a few of the Accord's competitors may be ahead—the V-6 Camry has more power, the Sonata cost less and yet has stability control across the line (whereas Honda only has it on top end models), etc.—but overall I feel that Honda engineering tends to be a little bit ahead. Now that engineering does cost more—the Accord is thousands more than the comparable Sonata—but perhaps it's even in the small things, like that washer in the door handle mechanism that another poster was talking about—that put Honda slightly ahead.

    Not surprinsingly I own a Honda, and so I'm biased. But I have also owned a Mazda, a Ford, two VWs, and two GM cars, and in my sample the Honda just seems the best engineered—in big parts and small—of any of them. But it's true there are a lot of good choices out there, and even I have been tempted by the incredible value of the Sonata.
  • So you are saying the Sonata is safer than the Accord. I think you are assuming a lot here. I bought an 03 Accord, and it has all the same safety features your car has, with the exception of stability control. Did the Sonata offer all this in 03? I seriously doubt it. And I doubt a Sonata is safer than my Accord. Read the posts. The Accord I looked at was $24,000 no rebates and the dealer acted like he didn't care if I bought it or not. I actually had to ASK for a test drive. The Sonata had the same features plus more interior room, and I paid $16,495. It has a longer warranty, met the same crash test standards and cost me less money and was just as well built. Safer than your Accord? I'm not willing to crash mine to find out are you? I just know safety wise I got excellent value for the dollar spent. Did you?
  • Depreciation IS a huge problem for domestic cars. I think they key is not to pay too much for them in the first place. All the extra equipments don't add much value to a used car. I'd guess that a less equipped 1-year old G6 is probably valued very similarly to your sister's loaded one (assumed from the $24K price tag). If she had gotten a cheaper G6 for around $18K, things wouldn't have looked this bad, assuming you could get one for that much.
  • And you were having a laugh at the poor person/s stuck inside, probably injured, while doing this????????
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    I think you make too much of the bumpers. Bumpers are there to protect the sheet metal and save insurance companies money, they have little to do with protecting occupants of the vehicle.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,682
    You're replying to the wrong post. I didn't bring up the stuff from 3 years ago and didn't mis-state facts in comparing the Accord to the Sonata. Funny how when someone tries to respond to stuff like that, they are the ones called out for it.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,682
    I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I have my opinion, you have yours. BTW, I agree with you that Hyundai doesn't have the reputation of Honda and it will take several more years to establish.

    I've owned Hondas and liked them very much. But I've also owned Hyundais and liked them very much. To me, the Accord is no longer worth the price premium over the Sonata. But a lot of people think otherwise.
  • ctalkctalk Posts: 646
    If you are driving a 2006 Accord, good luck in a rear crash.

    If you are driving a 2006 Sonata, good luck in the side crash ;)



    - and if you're comparing the "Poor" the Accord got on the rear, to the "Acceptable" the Sonata got on the side. IIHS seems to put side crash tests ahead of rear crash tests.

    They placed the Accord at a higher level.


    The Sonata is a safe car. It offers a lot of standard safety features. The only improvement I think they should make, is the side crash test score.
  • w9cww9cw Posts: 888
    Backy - I compared a new generation Sonata and a 2006 Accord on back-to-back test drives during the same day - in fact, within 30 minutes of each other. The Sonata was impressive, especially in terms of road and wind noise over the Accord. It will take time for the market to accept Hyundai, but for those of us who've owned both marques, it easier for us to be objective. Those who haven't, seem not to be able to accept Hyundai as a viable alternative, because of a preconceived perception of sub-standard quality.
  • jimmy81jimmy81 Posts: 170
    seem not to be able to accept Hyundai as a viable alternative, because of a preconceived perception of sub-standard quality.

    This "preconception of sub-standard quality" didn't happen by chance - Hyundai earned it.
  • seem not to be able to accept Hyundai as a viable alternative, because of a preconceived perception of sub-standard quality.

    This "preconception of sub-standard quality" didn't happen by chance - Hyundai earned it.

    'Tis True about Hyundai earning it.

    Just a little thinking out loud here about GM...

    Last night I rode in my sunday-school teacher's 05 Tahoe, and it already had a light bulb out in the interior (behind the climate control sliders), and it was not the first relatively new GM vehicle I have seen with burned-out interior bulbs.

    I just found it interesting, because GM supposedly has quality probelms, and I see tons of new Trailblazers, Silverados, Tahoes, and Suburbans with brakelights or DRLs burned out. That just doesn't bode well, even for such a minor thing. Did GM cheap-out on their bulbs?

    Something else that is not a big deal, but would annoy me anyway, is that everytime the turn signal lit up, you could see the light from that bulb shine through the check-engine light (or whatever light is to the right of the right looked yellow).

    I have an 11 year old Honda that only 2 months ago burned out its first interior lightbulb, the one that lights up the PRND321 for the gearshift on the floor-console.
  • '05 Tahoe, and it already had a light bulb out in the interior (behind the climate control sliders)'

    Yeah, my Dad's 04 Accord's center stack/radio information center's lights burned out very early. He ret'd it to be fixed and it just kept burning out.
  • IIHS seems to put side crash tests ahead of rear crash tests.

    I find it odd that the IIHS puts more emphasis on side crash tests instead of rear, considering you're about 10 times more likely to be rear-ended than broad-sided if you ever find yourself in an accident.

    And how exactly does a car with two goods and one poor score "better" than a car with two goods and one acceptable?

    If I had to choose, I'd rather a good for rear and acceptable for side than good for side and poor for rear....
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,682
    I did the same--drove a 2006 Sonata GLS vs. an Accord EX I4 over the same course, back to back. I preferred the Sonata overall, for what I am looking for in a car. It's interesting that the car that had any noticeable quality gaffes was the Accord (rattles).

    It's unfortunate that some people can't look past Hyundai's history to take a look at what they are doing now. I made that leap with Honda in 1985 and was glad I did. And I made the leap (and quite a leap it was back then) with Hyundai in late 2000 and am glad I did.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,682
    Probably has to do with the severity of injuries likely in a rear-end crash vs. a side crash. Not as much metal protecting people in the side crash vs. rear crash.
This discussion has been closed.