Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

1209210212214215222

Comments

  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    not to mention be forced to follow the Korean lead and to offer an ostensibly worthless 100k warranty as bait.... What's amazing is that Ford hasn't done this yet (maybe the beancounters won't let them?)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    For awhile I remember a 5/100k warranty was offered on some if not all Ford vehicles. It is currently still competitive with most, with the normal 5/60k powertrain, 3/36k b-to-b.

    Something that all don't offer but Ford happens to (I recently learned) is free roadside assitance for a period of time.
  • lightfootfllightfootfl Posts: 442
    If Ford offered the warranty you can bet they would find a loophole of some sort not to pay anything for any repairs. Like you didn't comb your hair correctly, or the like. Sorry, but me and Ford warranty can't see eye to eye on what they have agreed to pay for. It cost me big time. I wouldn't believe them until after I saw them pay.

    van
  • jontyreesjontyrees Posts: 159
    2008 Limited, black on black, $21,900 + TTL Awesome deal - you should be able to get an SEL for well less than that.
  • jontyreesjontyrees Posts: 159
    I recently went on a weekend trip to Dallas from Austin (3.5-4 hrs each way) in an Enclave. Very nice vehicle. If the Lucerne had the same engine, I would have given it a closer look, but even then, it would have been overpriced - the 6cyl certainly is now.

    On the topic of Avalon being cheaper to own - not the case according to Edmunds. They take resale into account, and depending how much better/worse you can do on purchase price, it's possible to make heavily rebated cars really cheap to own. Another factor in my world is that my car is financed, so even if two cars both depreciated $10k in two years, the car with the lower starting price would be cheaper for me to own. I would be paying interest on a lower amount the entire time. I like Avalons, but not enough to pay significantly more than the Taurus I now enjoy. And the engine isn't THAT different, BTW. There's a lot of hype around Toyota that isn't necessarily justified. I come from London, and while Toyotas are well regarded there, they don't enjoy the same divine reputation they have here.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Your price is before TTL, mine is after.
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    And the engine isn't THAT different, BTW

    Take it up to 4 or even 5,000 RPM and tell me that. Not something that you do often, however, it shows the level of refinement that the Toyota engine has. Also, its willingness to rev is outstanding. IMO the 2GR may be the best V6 out there right now.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    There's a lot of hype around Toyota that isn't necessarily justified.

    And there is a lot of hype that is very justified.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Ha-ha, not if you actually enjoy the "drive." If you don't, Toyota does everything to try and make you forget it with a quiet and soft ride. Having driven Toyotas from $17k to $30k I can say that NONE of them were fun or enjoyable to actually drive, and this includes one with the 3.5L engine.
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    Having driven Toyotas from $17k to $30k I can say that NONE of them were fun or enjoyable to actually drive

    Enjoyable to drive is a subjective quality. I think that my Avalon is VERY enjoyable to drive. Smooth and quiet, power to put you back in your seat and just enough handling to have a little fun. Is it a track car? Hell no... will it understeer every time.. Yes. As for some other Yotas, have you driven a Camry SE? Just tightened up enough to enhance the handling but has a compliant ride. To each his own I guess.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I've ridden in an SE-V6 Camry, but haven't driven it. I drove an XLE V6 Camry, a previous-gen Corolla, and a Lexus SUV. The Camry was quick but the brake-pedal travel had me panicked at the first red light because the travel was so long, and I got the feel (even though it isn't true) that the car was leaning on its door-handles just pulling into the drug-store. The Corolla was just dull in general, from the buzz of the engine to the annoyingly numb steering. The Lexus wasn't handler either obviously (it was a GX470) but I didn't expect that. Unfortunately i didn't expect the jumpseats to rattle/squeak over EVERY bump, either.

    A series of marginal cars from Toyota I've driven have really turned me off of them; at least for now.

    Different strokes for different folks indeed, I know. :)
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Toyota does everything to try and make you forget it with a quiet and soft ride.

    MT said that the Camry SE actually has harder suspension than Accord. Go figure...
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    My parents have an SE... its definately taught. The difference from an LE/XLE is even more than say an XL/XLS/Limited Avalon to a Touring.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    A series of marginal cars from Toyota I've driven have really turned me off of them; at least for now.

    Maybe that's because you aren't driving the right ones. Sounds to me like you are putting down your own judgment regarding "fun to drive" on Toyota based on the Camry (luxurious and soft model), Corolla and a SUV? Good god...

    Here are some of the models you should try and see if Toyota is indeed that "dull":

    Scion tC (you'd be surprised)
    Camry SE V6
    FJ Cruiser (take it off road)
    IS250 with manual tranny (if you are into shift-yourself)
    IS350
    IS F (this is a must)
    All the Toyota/Lexus hybrid models (a different kind of "fun to drive")
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Here are some of the models you should try and see if Toyota is indeed that "dull":

    Scion tC (you'd be surprised)
    Camry SE V6
    FJ Cruiser (take it off road)
    IS250 with manual tranny (if you are into shift-yourself)
    IS350
    IS F (this is a must)
    All the Toyota/Lexus hybrid models (a different kind of "fun to drive")


    Can't fit in the IS Lexus, so that's out. (I'm 6'5")

    Now you're down to the Camry SE-V6, which I would like to drive (but the person who owned the car I rode in I happen to work for, so I didn't ask :)).

    FJ Cruiser? No need for off-road driving; I want on-road fun without too much of a mileage penalty, anyway.

    Scion tC? I'm glad you reminded me of that one; I looked at it when I was 17, and thought it had been over-hyped (at the time). I'm not the only one, several reviews have cited the lack of fun and the numb steering. Just a forgettable car.

    Sounds to me like you are putting down your own judgment regarding "fun to drive" on Toyota based on the Camry (luxurious and soft model), Corolla and a SUV? Good god...

    Why is that a problem?

    I certainly am, although I explicitly said I didn't expect the SUV to be fun to drive, I was just commenting that the quality seemed lacking with squeaks/rattles in a LEXUS. My driving-fun statement is based on my Corolla/Camry experiences.

    I've driven Camry and Corolla competitors that are lots of fun (Accord, Civic, any Mazda). Toyota could do it too, they just don't. They appeal to a different customer, so that's fine with me. But yes, I am whole-heartedly judging Toyota's fun-factor on its bread-and-butter cars just like I do with the other companies, because those are the ones I'll buy for myself. Now that I think about it, the Camry I drove was a V6, but I think it was the LE V6 (more in my price range anyway). It didn't have leather, that was the SE-V6 in which I only got to ride.

    Anyway, not one of these cars is on topic, so I'll try and guide us back. :)

    My folks are planning on purchasing their new car on Saturday. It is a brand new 2008 Taurus, Silver Birch over Stone Leather, the convenience package (Dual Auto Climate Controls, Auto Headlamps, 6CD Upgraded Sound System, Sirius Sat Radio), and Sync. Out-the-door will be $22k. They're pretty excited about the deal, as this was the first offer I received via internet from my local dealer. It's worth them coming home for, since their dealer on the coast wouldn't come below $24k OTD.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Can't fit in the IS Lexus, so that's out. (I'm 6'5")

    No one is telling you to live with it but since you are talking about "fun to drive" how can you not try the brand's sportiest models (IS F and IS350) before slap a DULL sign on it face? :confuse:

    I am 6'1" with super long thighs (almost 1/3 of my total height) and my seat isn't all the way back yet. I am sure you'll be fine driving it (again, not live with it) with the seat all the way back.

    Oh by the way, if Jeremy Clarkson can fit in an IS then you can too...
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I am sure you'll be fine driving it (again, not live with it) with the seat all the way back.

    Attempted it at the car-show - wasn't a fit for me. TRUST ME.

    Oh by the way, if Jeremy Clarkson can fit in an IS then you can too...

    Um, no, I can't. :mad: :cry:
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    and you can check Intellichoice as well. Both the Ford and the Impala will rank very close to the Toyota despite the Toyota's initial cost hit of (at least) $4 or $5k, these 'cost-to-own' stats generally assumming a 5 year time span. Both Edmunds or Intellichoice could not know at any given time what lengths a specific manufacturer has to go thru to sell cars and therefore as you note can not guesstimate rebates/financing deals that might effect that TCO.
    BUT, if a $28k Taurus starts selling for $21k (or whatever) it is also true that those folks that bought the car for more than that are gonna take a hit on their resale values, minimizing the effect of those rebates on the 'cost-to own'. On the other side of the coin, if the Toyota (in this case) continues to sell well at some number closer to window sticker, it makes for a stable vehicle value now and later and likely a lower cost to own. Simple economics and not rocket science - but as a rule: cheap now = cheap later - and vice versa
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Toyota has one entry in this category. Let's stick to it in this topic.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Indeed. The way we're looking at it is that we're getting a lot more car (a comparable Toyota would have been over $30k, and as you say, they don't come much from sticker) for the money in the first place. If the resale value down the road is worth $8,000 less than the Avalon's, then they've laid out less up front, have had more cash to play with and invest, and still had a car that they don't feel like they've "settled" for in the least. $30k wasn't in the budget; heck, $25k wasn't either since they have no trade-in. This ruled out the more expensive up-front models, meaning to go with an import they'd have to come down in size and features (think Accord LX with hubcaps, or similar) to get a similar price to the Taurus with Leather and options.

    I see what you're saying, I'm just explaining why that didn't necessarily work here. It wasn't an option.

    I was curious and did a TCO of the Avalon XL and Taurus SEL - here's what I came up with. After five years:


    Depreciation $14,828
    Financing $4,488
    Insurance $8,689
    Taxes & Fees $3,650
    Fuel $12,938
    Maintenance $3,976
    Repairs $665

    TOTAL
    $49,234

    For the Taurus, 5 years:

    Depreciation $14,519
    Financing $4,047
    Insurance $6,805
    Taxes & Fees $3,305
    Fuel $13,251
    Maintenance $3,214
    Repairs $794

    TOTAL
    $45,935


    So, based on our friend the captain's little tool, the TCO here on Edmunds, the Taurus is cheaper to own over 5 years to the tune of about $3,300. Something my parents noticed was the fact that insurance on the Taurus is insanely cheap. That is reflected here as well.

    EDIT: Sorry Pat, hopefully this post is back on track. :)
  • jontyreesjontyrees Posts: 159
    I saw Jeremy Clarkson fit into a 1950's 50cc engined single seat car, 54" long, on Sunday evening. Where there's a will, there's a way........
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I have seen that episode, but we're really going back off-topic with that, so let's not for our friend Pat's sake. ;)

    I was looking over those TCO numbers again. I had assumed our captain was right about the numbers being the same, but in reality, the Taurus IS the cheaper car to own according to this, but a sizeable margin. Sure there are different factors here, but hey, I'm not who started the TCO topic! :)
  • jontyreesjontyrees Posts: 159
    Obviously, the higher the rebate up front, the lower the likely resale value will be. However, even if a $4k rebate up front results in a $4k hit to resale value, (unlikely, but just say it does), on a purely financial basis, you're still better off due to the lower financing cost. Now, if the Avalon actually depreciates less in total $, that's a different matter, and at some point, offsets the lower financing cost. Not rocket science either, just basic discounted cash flow analysis, (substitute discount rate for my example of financing cost)

    BTW - my bad - I typo'd earlier. My Taurus was $22.9k before TTL, not $21.9k, and I also added a $300 window tint.
  • jontyreesjontyrees Posts: 159
    I spent a ton of time comparing TCOs on a variety of vehicles before making my decision - not just using the Edmunds side-by-side comaprisons, but playing with my own revised assumptions. Probably spent more time on it than the savings were worth! Nah, I get off on that stuff - it's pretty much what I do for a living.

    Back to topic - does the Taurus transmission "learn" from the drivers habits? Seems like mine is starting to become more responsive on downshits - maybe just loosening up.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Not that I'm aware of; that'd be a question for a veteran owner, not a soon-to-have-one-in-the-family guy like me. :P
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    the extra financing costs for the more expensive car are certainly relevant but also something that is always included in these published TCO figures - and therefore something that the more expensive car must overcome (in resale value) if it is to have a similar (or better ) TCO. Resale remains the mist important single factor in cost to own - but also a factor that declines in importance if you happen to be one of those few that drives anything until the wheels fall off.
  • fool1717fool1717 Posts: 8
    I currently own a 1999 Cadillac Deville, which I love. I’m looking for a new car priced in the $30s with an emphasis on comfort and feature richness, that runs on regular gas. I’d like to have a built-in nav system on the car, and I’m not a fan of sunroofs. That leaves me with the Avalon Limited and Lincoln MKZ as my 2 top choices. This is what I see as the big differences between them:

    Av Limited pros: quality interior components, proven resale value
    Av Limited cons: sunroof standard, poor nav system

    MKZ pros: most features standard, good nav system, sunroof optional
    MKZ cons: cheap interior components

    Note that I have yet to drive either car. I suspect their rides will be fairly similar, and both will provide all the power I need for normal city and interstate driving.

    A big criticism of the 2008 MKZ was its lack of stability control; that will come standard in the 2009 MKZ. Anyone know what changes are in store for the 2009 Limited?

    Another choice may be the 2009 Lincoln MKS, but it is priced at the upper end of my desired range, and I am leery of buying a first-year vehicle.

    Any comments regarding the Avalon Limited vs Lincoln MKZ (or MKS) are welcome.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    I would put the ES350 in that list as well. Currently an ES350 with premium plus package, HID and nav has a $40k MSRP but can be had for $36k ($500 over invoice) according to Edmunds.

    The reason I throw in the ES is because it is a better competitor to the MKZ in my opinion.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 814
    Regarding your transmission question, here is what the owner's manual says:

    Your transaxle is equipped with an adaptive learning strategy found in
    the vehicle computer. This feature is designed to increase durability and
    provide consistent shift feel over the life of the vehicle. A new vehicle or
    transaxle may have firm and/or soft shifts. This operation is considered
    normal and will not affect function or durability of the transaxle. Over
    time, the adaptive learning process will fully update transaxle operation.


    I am not sure about learning from the driver's habits but I have noticed a pretty substantial change in behavior between brand new and 7000 miles. With the miles, it has become more responsive and fuel economy improved, as well.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Cool - I did NOT know that. I'll pass that on to my folks. Thanks for dictating that for us, bruce.
Sign In or Register to comment.