Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

driverdm

Most people finance because they don't have the cash to begin with. Your scenerio would only work if both people were paying cash for the car which they are not. You could also say that that $5K difference is made over the life of the loan. If you took that approach you would be saying that each month the person would deposit the $100 difference in monthly payment (assuming a $5K price difference) and putting it into the Bank since a with a CD you have to buy in up front. This is extremely unlikely given that our average savings balance across America is negative and we all know people spend on a car almost all the way up to what they can afford on monthly payments. That extra hypothetical $100 will be spent probably on clohtes, shoes, and bubblegum.

driverdm

leadfoot6, I own a Mazda 6 and I am anxiously anticipating the unvealing of the next one. THe Camcord bores me too death. To me a Camcord should come with a warning that it may be the cause of sleeping at the wheel. My next car will be something heart pumping. Either a Mazda6, a used G35, a CX7, a new Altima, something that gets the blood moving in the turns. In all fairness the Accord does deserve its due respect thought as the perfect balance. Anyhow, my last post was aimmed at keeping the discussion fair. Many people were arguing one thing for the sake of the Sonata, and then flipping and arguing something contradicting, again for the sake of the Sonata. That can't be right.

m1miata

True, I can not be responsible for others bad monetary habits.

My math is correct however.

And buying more than one can afford is foolish. Pay cash. If you do not have the cash for a new car, buy a used one. Preferably a used American make, as they lose value quicker and repair parts are usually less expensive. If you buy a house on time payments, it may go up in value. A car is guaranteed to go down in value. Paying interest on a loan for something which depreciates is a double negative.

If getting in debt and paying more for another car than they can afford is making a person happy, they may need professional financial help.
-Loren

P.S. You have expertise in finances. Are you pulling my leg here? You know which is cheaper of the two cars. Your playing me. I looked up your info. here under profile.

m1miata

For all out performance in turns, you may want to consider RWD. Perhaps the G35 you were talking about. And there is the CTS, which is said to be pretty good. I have not driven one though.
-Loren

djm2

Have you considered the resale value after three years of ownership?---- The Accord will hold its value, while the Hyundai's value will drop rapidly.----- I am presently looking to replace my 2003 Accord. I have looked at the Hyundai vehicles. Yes, they are very impressive in appearance, and the cost is less than other vehicles, but when making a purchase, as consumers, we need to look at both ends of the deal. (The initial cost, and the trade in value when it comes time to replace the vehicle.)----I am looking at the following vehicles: ---Toyota Camrey or Avalon, Ford 500, Chevrolet Impala, Honda Accord. One of the issues in the "mix" is the compatibility of the new vehicle with E85 fuel. The Chevrolet 3.5 Impala engine can burn regular gasoline, (10% alcohol & 90% gasoline) or E85 fuel, (85% alcohol and 15% gasoline). I am presently checking with Ford to see if the 3.0 V6 engine in the 500 is E85 compatible. This E85 fuel will become a reality, within a three year period of vehicle ownership. My concern is that at the end of three years, a vehicle that is NOT E85 compatible will be worth nothing at the time of trade in, because no one will want it, since it is locked into only one type of fuel! Owning an E85 vehicle gives the owner the option of burning two different fuels. This could be VERY IMPORTANT in terms of fuel cost, and / or fuel availability! This is something that everyone needs to consider. ----- Best regards. ----Dwayne

driverdm

m1miata, indeed I do have soem expertise in finance. And what you say is the most financially prudent thing to do theoritically. But we have to bring those finance ideas to the real world and see if they are livable. I would wager that somewhere above 90% of all new car buying purchases are financed. I think very rarely would someone have $18K - $29K in cash to pay for something in this segment. I don't think it fair to say that if someone can afford to buy it in cash, that they can't really afford the car. I think that when thinking about whether someone can afford the car you have to look realistically at if they can afford the monthly payment plus insurance plus maintenance costs.

I am just going off the logic expressed in this forum. If the cost to own is basically the same over five years for a Camcord, Sonata, Altima, etc., thus making resale value a moot point, than also the premium for the Camcord is a moot point as the cost is said to be the same anyway.

P.S. Good financing logic and your normal car buyer are mutally exclusive.

backy

The Accord will hold its value, while the Hyundai's value will drop rapidly.

More accurately, it is likely that in the first three years of ownership, the Accord will lose less of its value than will the Sonata. The Accord will not hold its value. Cars are depreciating assets. If you plan to keep the car only 3 years, then a Camcord is a better bet depreciation-wise than the Sonata. Unless you take advantage of a subsidized lease, then the Sonata could turn out better financially. But then so could other cars with subsidized leases such as the Fusion/Milan.

If you have narrowed your choices to those that run on E85, then it is a much easier decision for you. That eliminates cars like the Accord, Camry, Sonata, Fusion/Milan, Altima, and many others.

backy

So if you finance a car and Car A costs $5-6000 less than Car B, doesn't that make your financing costs for Car A much less? And what if the buyer of Car A takes the monthly payment savings and pays off other debt, such as credit card debt, with it (or avoids incurring more credit card debt)? $100 per month less credit card debt over a five-year period is significant savings also.

autoboy16

I always thought that comparison test between the sonata accord and camry was weird. Turns out it is. I read the Full test of the Toyota camry hybrid. In the middle of the article, it stated:

"With a 0-60 time of 8.6 seconds, you won't win any drag races in the Camry Hybrid, but no one will make fun of you as you try to merge onto the freeway either. The numbers aren't bad compared to the previous-generation non-hybrid Camry with an inline-four engine, which took 10.3 seconds to reach 60 mph in our comparison test against a Honda Accord and Hyundai Sonata. The Accord, which was also a four-cylinder, managed 9.5 seconds while the Sonata, even though it was a V6, took 8.2 seconds. For the record, the V6-powered 2007 Camry XLE cut 0-60 times to 6.5 seconds."

Now isn't that strange to compare a 4 cylinder to a 6? I'm guessing that if that was an accord LX v6 and a camry SE v6, those results would have been much different. I think the accord V6 goes from 0-60 in 7.4 seconds. That sonata for a bigger liter v6 IS slow (the accord uses a 3 liter v6 and both the sonata and old camry have a 3.3 liter v6). Remember the results of the v6 comparison?

Now before i start getting these abusive replys i want to state how i don't hate nor dislike Hyundai. My mom thought the old santa fe sucked and i didn't like it either. We both love the sportage and tucson. The new vans are great and i like em. Now the sonata, tiburon and the azera, there is just something i don't like about them.

autoboy16

Have no worry. The AURA's gauges are right where they belong .

I just wish the smaller drivers luck at changing the airflow settings or reaching the emergancy flashers...

ontop

So in year 5, when the Accord buyer gets his premium back for paying more by trading the car or selling it, he has a big $, whereas Sonataguy doesn't. If you're pinching pennies to buy a Sonata, then you'd probably spend your hypothetical $100/month anyway.

Plus NOT EVERYONE loves Hyundais. That don't have too. Honda offers time tested peace of mind, and that costs extra, and millions of people recognize that and pay for it.

backy

Sure, if the Honda or Toyota ownership experience is worth the extra bucks to you, by all means go for it because it's unlikely you will be happy with anything else.

Anyway, as I've said I'd rather have the big $ NOW vs. five or ten or whatever years from now. If you would rather give the extra money to a car company for their use instead of your use for several years, great.

kdshapiro

There is no doubt Hyundai has made some strides. However, when it comes to my $$$, I'll spend the extra $$$ on the Accord, because I believe the Accord to be a better car. Pay more, get more. I'm okay with that.

kdshapiro

If you really wanted the $$$, you wouldn't get one of these expensive cars, you'd get an Excel for half the price. If I was really concerned about $$$, I'd get the cheapest thing that got me from point A to point B. From that perspective none of this makes any sense.

backy

You might want to go back and read the full review to see what was going on. Edmunds decided to test an Accord, Camry, and Sonata (all '06 models) that were priced the same, vs. having the same level of equipment, to see what $22k could buy in a family sedan. That accounts for the differences including powertrains in the cars. All $22k would buy with the Accord and Camry was an I4. With the Sonata, they were able to get a V6.

backy

Yes, that is the strategy I use when buying a car--get the least expensive car that meets my needs. However, some people (myself included) need (or want) more car than, say, a used Excel (which these days would cost only a few hundred bucks). So why should I pay thousands more for an Accord, for example, when a less expensive car will meet my needs?

I should add I have a thing for new cars--I really like driving a car that no one else has messed with--so I am willing to pay a premium over a used car in some cases, such as when I will hold onto the car for many years. That being said, my last two car purchases were used cars.

backy

This is weird. Swap locations of the center vents with the stereo, and the Aura's dash is almost a copy of the Sonata's (especially the black dash available for '07). Even the curved line framing the center vents (the stereo on the Sonata) is almost exactly the same. Obviously Saturn didn't set out to copy the Sonata, but the similarity is interesting.

bobad

Pay more, get more. I'm okay with that.

I agree, with 1 catch: If you pay $5K more, you must actually get $5K more. Not $1K, not $3K, but the whole $5K. "Experience" and other intangibles are worth exactly $0.00 to me, but others apparently put a very high value on them. It's your money, and you are the person you have to satisfy.

bobad

Edmunds decided to test an Accord, Camry, and Sonata (all '06 models) that were priced the same, vs. having the same level of equipment, to see what $22k could buy in a family sedan.

Now THAT is the way to compare cars. It's always about the money.

autoboy16

Yea but how much will your car be worth when its time to upgrade and move on? I'd rather pay the extra $5k and get the accord because i see how much they are worth down the road.

Here are two examples but to do with reliability:

I bought a 1995 accord exv6 and paid $4500. My brother bought a 1996 sonata for $3000 the same day. A week later my check engine light comes on and is covered until 150,000 miles. His radiator shattered that night. He spent $1k to fix it. I spent $0.

Kbb says my accord is worth $60-7k. The sonata, well $-4k

My dad wants an 04 expedition and i say spend the extra $1k on 04 armada. The armada holds WAAYY more value and has much more hp and torque (395lb ft Armada vs 335lb ft Expy). Plus you'll enjoy it more while having it and when selling times come. From 04, you can find and expy for $18 and a armada for 26k (check autotrader).

My point here is how reliable is your sonata and dealership say 5years from now?

thegraduate

"Experience" and other intangibles are worth exactly $0.00 to me, but others apparently put a very high value on them. It's your money, and you are the person you have to satisfy.

Well, the problem I had with Hyundai was in fact that everything "tangible", meaning door-handles, climate control knobs, and even steering precision/weight was not near enough to the standard set by the Accord. It all felt cheaper, belying the price on the window; perhaps belonging in the Elantra, but not the Sonata. On the other hand, I felt like the Accord had an interior belonging in a more expensive car than my $21k EX Accord. It was my money, and I wouldn't have been satisfied with the "functional yet just decent" interior and driving experience (too much like the old, numb 2002 Camry)of the Sonata when I knew what could be had with Honda.

To me, the Accord was worth more from the start, it wasn't an even matchup in my opinion, so paying more to get more seemed only fair! The extra resale value of Honda is just a bonus.

badgerfan

If you are all that concerned about having your next vehicle an E85 car, then you should keep your three year old Accord and drive it at least another 5-7 years. You have already lost the biggest rate of depreciation in the first three years, and it will cost you little in depreciation from here on out.

If Accords are as reliable as many seem to claim, then your repair costs will be low too.

Waiting will only gain you more options as to cars with E85 capability as more manufacturers will be offering this capability, whether E85 becomes a big factor or not.

kdshapiro

I agree with you. But to say it another way all steaks are not the same. Some 8 ounce steaks are much better than some 16 or even 32 ounce steaks. But you have to decide if you want the 16 ounce steak or the 8 ounce steak.

thegraduate

Nice metaphorical interpretation of what I've been trying to say. Despite what the Accord lacks in features per dollar, it more than makes up for it in quality. The Sonata isn't "bad," but decent (and better than GMs I've been in) but the Accord is much more than decent...MUCH more.

joe97

Price plays a big factor in midsize and below

For some folks, leasing might be the way to go...

E85 will catch on only when:

1) Cost decreases to the level of regular or below
2) Available public stations increase

joe97

"I bought a 1995 accord exv6 and paid $4500. My brother bought a 1996 sonata for $3000 the same day. A week later my check engine light comes on and is covered until 150,000 miles. His radiator shattered that night. He spent $1k to fix it. I spent $0."

My god, did you insepect either car before purchasing? I know they are old but within a week of purchase, problems already existed on both? You should have asked for refunds on both, seriously...

"My point here is how reliable is your sonata and dealership say 5years from now?"

The previous generation Sonata did extremly well in various industry reliablity tests/studies...while it is still way too early to assess the 06+, given Hyundai's dedication to quality (which so far they've done extremly well) and reliablity, I have no doubt the new Sonata will continue to be rated as one of the most reliable models.

sc00bs

Resale value is really dependent on how long the person plans to keep the car. Most people I know that trade their cars in are doing so because the warranty has run out, not because the car has become unreliable.

With the Hyundai your warranty is longer overall. I would keep the car personally until the warranty would run out on it and then sell the thing privately (more than trade in). If you must have new cars at that point.

That brings up another point. People who "trade in" their cars to a dealership are really not what I would call bargin hunters. Obviously if they were really wanting the most for their car come time for a new one they would be prepared months before hand and sell their car privately as we all know they would get MORE than the dealership would give them. Regardless of the cars brand.

Last, someone else made a good point that the Honda costs significantly more to begin with. When they compared it to another car (I think it was a kia) they found that the difference between the cars at trade in was 4,000. Almost exactly the difference between the cars at purchase.

I see so many people say, well you could only get 7,000 for the Hyundai at trade in. You could get 11,000 for the Honda at trade in. Well yeah, but the Honda cost 4,000 more to begin with so you really aren't losing out by buying a cheaper car (not to mention you would get a longer useage out of the cheaper car if you are warranty is up get rid of it kind of person).

sc00bs

Sure, if the Honda or Toyota ownership experience is worth the extra bucks to you, by all means go for it because it's unlikely you will be happy with anything else.

I haven't read the HOnda forums lately (personally I do not care for them at all) but tell that to the people in the Toyota forums with their newly plauged Avalons and Camry's. They even have a Toyota rep in there trying to save face and sucking up to everyone about their problems and assuring them at some point Toyota will figure out the problem, but until then they get to take their cars back and forth to the dealerships.

sc00bs

2006 Honda Accord EX-V6 $43,393
2004 Hyundai Sonota LX-V6 $42,821

Well over 5 years it looks like either car will land you with the same cost to own.

Strangely enough the car that has the lowest cost to ownership over the 5 year period was the Chevy Malibu LT at $40,298.

Camry XLE was 43,879.
Mazda 6 was 45,707.

autoboy16

No no the honda was fine, it was just the oxygen sensors snd we knew that from the start. The hyundai was in good shape also. But if u see it now you'd think all was fine, until you start it up...

The previous generation Sonata did extremly well in various industry reliablity tests/studies...

His sonata was the generation before that

And trust me, :lemon: isn't the word to describe it.

My honda is in fantabulous shape inside and out. My only gripe is that i should have used the money i had leftover to get the windows tinted. My car was thouroly inspected and it isn't broken down. My step-mom likes it better than her o4 explorer and 02 626. It has a little more power than the 4cyl accord out now. Plus with 115k on the odometer and a 150k warranty not to mention the 23.5mpg in city, LIFE IS GOOD :shades:!!

sc00bs

Not everyone loves Honda's either. You fail to consider in the 5 year period the other aspects of car ownership. Look at what Edmunds lists as the True Cost to Own either car over a 5 year period, they are almost identical. The only differnce is the intial outlay of money. The Honda of equivalent features is $6700 MORE, so with the same cost to own considering depreciation it would logically make more sense to purchase the Sonota over the Honda.

Honda Accord ex-v6 5 yr. Sonota LX-v6 5 yr.
Depreciation 14,012 14,569
Financing 5,057 3,830
Insurance 7477 7710
Tax & Fee 2950 2533
Fuel 8613 8793
Maintenance 4614 4784
Repairs 670 602

Total Cash Price

Sonota 20,853
Accord 27,531

m1miata

Well they assume a retail price paid on the Sonata, and no one really does do that. And the price difference, does not add in the money made on the money retained.

Yes, the Malibu is the cheapest. And even cheaper than a new one, is a used one. If you want to drive a Malibu.

Actually, while the numbers game is fun, it all boils down to what you really want to live with over time.
-Loren

m1miata

Yes, that is so true. Hardly anyone handles money properly. Then they complain they can not retire early on. They make the car manufactures, dealers, and banks a little ( a lot ) richer by buying far more than they need and doing it with monthly payments. I guess that keeps other employed.
-Loren

prosource1

My father is quite disappointed with the fact that his 2004 Accords electrical system has demons. His stereo console lights went out and the dash lights flash occasionally. No car is bullet proof. It's funny how so many people dispute the Sonata but never mention the fact that Accords and Camry's have issues.

autoboy16

Like the 2007 camry's 0 Recalls and TSBs?
The 3 recalls and 10 TSBs for the 2006 accord?
Or the 3 recalls and 29 TSBs on the 2006 sonata?

kdhspyder

I think a better option might be to wait 3 yrs and get a new hightech Honda, Toyota, BMW that will burn biofuel.

These next 10 yrs should be something else in the overall history of vehicles. So much is changing so rapidly it's almost like the dawn of the PC's in the 80's.

2008 increased diesel offerings
2008 new hybrid technology
2007-2010 new interior options and features
2007-2010 new safety features becoming standard

joe97

"No car is bullet proof."

Agreed 100%.

"It's funny how so many people dispute the Sonata but never mention the fact that Accords and Camry's have issues."

Hearsay and perception, mostly. More and more people are coming around, though

w9cw

autoboy16 wrote: "Like the 2007 camry's 0 Recalls and TSBs?"

Given the transmission problems discussed on the Camry forum, not only the small-sample production-related snap-ring problem with the V6, but drivability problems associated with the transmission in the 2007 4-cylinder, maybe it's time for Toyota to issue a recall, or at the very least a TSB.

Perhaps Toyota is not as willing to issue even a TSB as are other manufacturers. Food for thought . . .

backy

TSBs are funny animals. Often they have nothing to do with any problem or defect in a car. For example, I remember a TSB on an Elantra I owned that listed the paint codes for the car. Wow, what a problem!

kdhspyder

Outside of the snap ring problem on a few V6's there are no issues.

Regarding the 4c there may be a breakin/learning period where both the vehicle and the driver need to learn each other's characteristics. This is not something that can be TSB'd. There is an rpm issue being investigated but not apparent everywhere.

The electronic vehicle is upon us and it does act differently than the mechanical ones we've been driving for over 100 yrs. It's just different and we just need to learn how to use its best features. Refinements certainly will be made along the way but there is nothing 'wrong' with it that can be 'corrected'.

Buyers not wishing to drive cutting edge vehicles at this time can continue to look to the older designs until all the wrinkles have been ironed out. Everyone has that choice.

bobad

Despite what the Accord lacks in features per dollar, it more than makes up for it in quality.

I disagree. Not to the tune of $5K anyway. I would pay $1-2K more tops for an equally equipped Accord. It's all in perception vs reality. I am a nuts and bolts guy, and don't get into the warm fuzzy feelings about cars and other mechanical devices. Some people actually love their cars. I haven't met a car yet that loved them back. Maybe that will be an option on the 2020 models.

kdshapiro

"I disagree. Not to the tune of $5K anyway."

Reality is perception and perception is reality. Hoping the Sonata is a better car than the Accord/Camry does not make it so, even though it may be better for you. While there is no doubt that Hyundai is moving up in the world and it is the underdog, the Accord to me would be worth the extra money. In the same vein the 3 series is more expensive than the G35 and people are will to pay a premium. The 3 series is the segment sales leader.

Apparently to a lot of people as well.

booyahcramer

I would pay $1-2K more tops for an equally equipped Accord.

That's doubtful. Because only the price of the Sonata seems to be your only compelling reason for someone to buy it over the time tested, and publicly accepted CamCord. Altho the Accord is suffering from an aged design (which will soon be rectified) it still appeals to me more than a Sonata. So a few grand for feeling good about my purchase vs. settling on a cheaper Sonata just doesn't fly with me.

Sure the Sonata is a decent vehicle, but priced as a Camcord their sales would be halved.

imidazol97

There seem to be a lot of problems in the Toyota world about problems with their electronics or the transmissions. I believe buyers have a right to expect a product that has been prepared to be driven by their customer base; I don't think the buyer should serve as the beta or even alpha testing for the product's logic system or electrical or design flaws. The discussion on Edmunds was about Avalon and Lexus problems and now the Camry problems with transmissions.

alpha01

Chysler has comprehensive information on the new Sebring on the www.chrysler.com webpage. In pictures, to me this is an awkwardly styled vehicle, but thats not worth debating because its so subjective.

What I do not understand is why the 2.7L is even offered. I also do not understand why the Spec sheet that you can click on lists the different brake set ups, and ABS seems not to be standard on the basic 4 cylinder, YET on the main "Safety/Security" page, electronic stability control is claimed as standard.

OK Chrysler kids, quick FYI- it would take quite a feat to facilitate stability control on a car w/o ABS...

~alpha

kdhspyder

Toyota as being the technological leader has taken the step to advance the state of technology for autos. The AI systems in the tranny, throttle, safety features, steering and braking are cutting edge for mass produced vehicles.

This is the future though and some manufacturer has to be the first. As the leader Toyota has IMO shown us what all vehicles will be in 10-15 yrs. Toyota can take this step ( has the know-how to take this step ) as the leader. GM and Ford are damaged presently. Honda is good in engineering but it's a small player in the worldwide market.

The same situation arose in the late 60's/70's/80's with the advent of seatbelts and airbags. Neither was perfect immediately and many refused to use them or buy vehicles that had them. Volvo took the step to promote them and mainstream them.

Should we the consumers be guinea pigs? If these were patently dangerous or likely to create the risks of failure then no. But the level of complaints seems small in relation to the amount of vehicle being driven without complaints which indicates that it may be more a driver-acclimation situation than vehicle-failure one. There have been mismanufactured vehicles for sure but the number is very small.

pat

Let's get away from the manufacturers and back to the vehicles please. These types of conversations always start out fine here but they eventually deteriorate to flame wars which is why I posted what I did about sticking to the cars themselves as that is the purpose of this discussion, after all.

Again, the Automotive News board is the best place to debate what manufacturers have done and should do in the future. All of you are welcome to pursue your thoughts there.

I appreciate your cooperation - I also appreciate any comments about this be directed to me in email rather than being posted.

The point is that this discussion has been on the verge of imploding too many times and the rules are different now because I am trying as hard as I can to keep from shutting this down for good. I need you guys to help, though. Please.

Thanks!

imidazol97

The problems with the transmissions lead me to have a friend shopping for a car read about the 6-cyl and other problems with the Camry. I suggested if she insisted on a Camry she should buy a 2006. She ended up with a Corolla. I hope she'll find it relatively trouble-free.

m1miata

So which one of the sedan on the market, in mid-sized group, is looking good these days? Which car has the style points in their favor? I fully realize that style is subjective, but when the style appeals to more people, that is an important factor in bringing in the customer to at the least test the car and look over the specs on the car. Seems to me there are no really ugly cars in the mid-sized range, though it could be Chrysler is working on one -- will have to see it up close and personal. From the photos, it doesn't look huggable at all.

Looks wise, I am thinking the Fusion/Milan are near the tops. The Altima still stands out. The Sonata looks pleasing, as in could look just as good among car seen in a showroom ten years from now. Likewise the Accord is simply good. The Camry, IMHO, looks richer now, better styled, yet the front end is a let down, and will be changed within a years time, no doubt.
Mazda6, looks a bit sporty, yet doesn't seem to have the visual impact that the Mazda3 does. Perhaps looking more dated? It may wear well with time though. The Malibu has not looked good since the last of the late 60's or earliest 70's. The Galant is - what's a Galant? May as well be a Matador. The Pontiac G6, is good, I guess. For some reason, it doesn't grab me, as in saying buy me, I am hot! Then there are the expensive four door sedans, which for the most part, all look good. -Loren

jrock65

I, too, think that the Fusion is tops in this class in style. Like you said, the Sonata is pleasing to the eye, although it is very conservatively styled. The Camry is more "stylized" and I like it in some ways, and don't like it in others. Altima, Passat and Mazda 6 are pretty good looking vehicles as well.

Among these cars, I'd have to say that the Accord is at the bottom in terms of exterior design. And before I get jumped on, mind you we have an Accord.