Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

captain2

and the not-so-funny part of this is that many of these new OHC engines, the GM 3.6 or Toyota's 3.5 (and others) - have enough torque in a wide enough band that they really don't need all these speeds in the tranny in the first place. The price of 'progress'?

allmet33

Ahhhhhhhhhh, but pletko...that's not what I asked you. :P

However...Buick is doing better. Domestics as a whole, still have more problems than imports. Don't believe me, read the story on the link below!

As a matter of fact, this should make for some good reading my man. Highest ranking GM product came in at #14 and it was GMC, not a Buick. Oh...and Hyundai placed on at #7!!!

Car Reliability

GM/Hyundai Reliability Blog

allmet33

Depends on what type of transmission you're dealing with too. I had a '96 Camry (4 cyl. auto) that I paid $1800 to get the transmission rebuilt and it had 90k miles on it. When I traded my '02 Sonata (6 cyl. auto) in, it had 105k miles and nothing was wrong with the transmission at all. Only money I spent on it was to get the power flush and fill done around 50k miles and then again at around 95k miles.

Jury is out on the Azera, but if this transmission is anything like what was in the Sonata...I don't forsee any problems. Then again, if I do...it's covered under warranty!

joe131

So the Azera is nice, but could you really tell any difference between it and the Sonata? Some on here can't.

allmet33

Are you kidding? The differences are like mid-morning and mid-afternoon! LOL

Seriously...I don't know who couldn't tell the difference, but they obviously didn't test drive BOTH vehicles. The differences are clearly evident from the moment you see the two sitting on the lot.

I mean...sitting in the Azera, you get the sense of luxury the way everything is set around you. The Sonata makes no bones about being luxurious in any way, it just is. Don't get me wrong, it's still a comfortable car, but it doesn't say, "Luxury." in any way.

joe131

Just curious, as a percentage of original total MSRP, what do you think the sale price of last year's model big GM car with 20,000 miles on it would sell for? What % would you expect to pay for one?

sergio19

allmet33,

I totally agree...they are night and day!

Let me share my buying experience....
2 weeks prior to my purchase I made my dad buy the top of the line Sonata at a different dealer around his place. I loved the test drive and said I'll be buying the same car in a few weeks at a dealer near my place.

2 weeks went by and went to the dealer with my wife but at this dealer they had a White azera. My Wife 1st noticed it and when I opened the door and sat in it, we both said WOW! what the hell is this car? anyway...

Salesman came over and said do you want to test drive it? I said no thanks! I wanted to see what people had to say about this car before anything. Give me a price on the Sonata fully loaded and he did.
Went home and searched the internet everything and anything I could find on the Azera. (That's how I found this forum). Long story short I called the salesman the next day and asked to take the Azera for a test drive. Man people were right...that's the killer right there!!!

I said Give me a price for a fully loaded Azera and where do I sign!
"I love my car" is what I'm saying every day!

They are 2 VERY different cars

Kind regards,

louiswei

I would not say the difference between Azera and Sonata is like night and day and I sat in both before. However, Azera does appear to look more upscale than Sonata to me, at least exterior wise. I didn't like the way Azera looks when I first saw the picture but it since has grown on me. Especially after I saw one on the road, this is definitely one of those cars that pictures don't do them justice. If I have to choose one word to describe Azera that word would be: elegant.

prosource1

Yesterday, while filling up-a Black Azera was next to me. I asked the gentleman how he liked his Azera. He told me he traded in his 2002 Camry. He told me he couldn't believe he bought a Hyundai after owning 4 Camry's in a row. He mentioned he had driven the Avalon and liked it but after driving the Azera, he saw no 'significant difference' which warranted him spending an addition $5k for the Avalon. I asked him what his neighbors thought about a long-time Camry owner buying a Hyundai. He said his neighbor was so impressed he went to the dealership to look at a Hyundai.

pahefner01

I like the CTS and the Seville STS. However, after driving some STS "program cars" I did my research on the incident of repairs and reliability and wound up buying an Azera. I just couldn't logically buy a car that has such a low reliability rate. I would suggest you test drive some program CTSs and do the same research. I would buy an STS in a minute if it had the quality that should go with the price.
I don't mean to tell you what to buy, please purchase what you want but do your research. The CTS may be better than the STS.

dodgeman07

Just curious, as a percentage of original total MSRP, what do you think the sale price of last year's model big GM car with 20,000 miles on it would sell for? What % would you expect to pay for one?

On an '06 Lucerne about 70% of MSRP. Of course you can do better than that but from what I price, 70% of MSRP is typical asking price for a one year old Large GM car.

joe131

With rebates and incentives, that's about what I paid (70.8%) for my most recent purchase of a new current model year Hyundai, an XG350L.
That was before Buick's LaCrosse and Lucerne came out. I have not looked at them closely yet, but the either might suit my needs well enough to be considered as an alternative to the Azera.
My guess is, comparably equipped, I could buy an Azera cheaper and enjoy driving it more.

plekto

Resale value is moot since I am not stupid enough to buy brand-new anyways. To me, it's a $20K Lucerne. The depreciation/value is calculated from then on - and it's a lot less to buy and own than most imports. Easily enough to get that extended warranty and then some.

I personally love the Lucerne, though - beautiful car, but no manual is a deal-killer. Drives exactly like an old Mercedes S420(late 90s big tank). For a Buick to reach even what Mercedes did a decade ago is astounding. That S420 was in the top ten cars in the world at the time.

But no manual. Not negotiable.

cobrazera

A loaded Lacrosse CXS ( comparable to a Limited with Premium Pkg Azera ) lists for close to $32k and is smaller in every interior dimension. It has 240hp, and has about the same mileage rating as Azera.

IMO the Lucerne makes a better comparison to the Azera due to a step up in luxury above the Lacrosse, but similarly equipped costs over $5k more for the CXL with the Northstar V8. That powertrain is marginally slower than the Azera, and gets a couple MPG less. The V6 Lucerne is no contest with a basic engine approaching its 50th birthday and less than 200hp.

That said, the V8 Lucerne is a beautiful car, and for me was very competitive with the Azera. Color me silly, but I passed on the Lucerne because it doesn't have a folding rear seat. It's all about priorities.

allmet33

So...now those of us that buy brand new are stupid??? Man, that's a heck of a statement to make in a forum where most of the owners did buy brand new!!!

Anyway, you're right...the Lucerne is a great looking car, it even had my attention for a little bit. That was until I found out I would have need to get the Lucerne with the V-8 to come close to getting what I got with my Azera.

Basically, it sounds like you're looking for a car that rides like a land yacht, the Azera is definitely not for you. Good luck finding a large sedan with a manual.

pahefner01

Neither buying used or brand new are stupid on there on. Used cars come with a lot of unknown factors such as who owned them, were they a rental car, how they were maintained and numerous factors that could be expensive and unpleasant even with an extended warranty. I drove a Cadillac Seville STS that was "certified" by Cadillac. The anti-lock brakes engaged for no reason every time I stopped the car. It also appeared to have new "electronics" installed which were visible through the gap where the plastic side of the console met the carpet on the side of the console which was carpeted. I informed the salesman of the problem with the brakes and he asked me what I would pay for the car. I told him I wouldn't buy the car at any price.
The depreciation value is important if one buys a new car every two or three years. I have a 99 Jeep Cherokee that is long ago paid for and has lots of service left in it. I puchased it new and I don't think the depreciation is a factor at all. I drove my 02 Hyundai XG four years and over 80K miles and think I did okay on the depreciation when I traded it for an 06 Azera Limited
Buying new or used is not stupid as long as one considers all the factors involved and their personal needs and desires. As a travelling consultant I would never risk buying a used vehicle that might have been a rental car.

plekto

It sounds like the car was definately an accident survivor/rebuilt and then moved to another state to give it a "clear" title/etc.

A good condition 1-3 years old car is a great way to go - you pay about half the price and get well, half the payment as well. That buys a lot of repairs.

floridabob1

RE:1427
A VIN check can be performed on any vehicle. The charge to do this is minimum, and many companies can be found on the internet. This check will indicate all transfers of title since new.

tjc78

"you pay about half the price and get well, half the payment as well"

Not always half the payment, new cars traditionally get a better interest rate than used cars. Heck, how many advertisments do you see for 0%? Of course, if your paying cash this is a moot point!

bsparks294

I did a search on "auto trader". There were quite a few pre-owned Azera's for sale. Just makes me wonder why people trade these vehicles in with less than 10,000 miles on them. I doubt they are lease returns. Maybe it is the gas mileage issue. The consensus price seemed to be about $22,000 for a car with 9,000 miles on it.

Have a great day and when I find the "right" used pre-owned Azera I will have my second Hyundai. The first one is the Hyundai computer monitor I am using as I type this message.

Enjoy the weekend,

Brad :shades:

floridabob1

RE: 1430
They can be purchased well under 22k. If you are serious, search harder and make offers.

pahefner01

Hi Bob. I actually had a Carfax check run on that Seville STS and it showed nothing. Then I ran a Carfax check on the car I owned at that time which had been rear ended, a police report filed and an insurance payment made and it showed no accidents on my car. Makes me a bit suspicious of Carfax. I do think that STS probably was flood damaged and shipped here from somewhere else. I found out from a relative who had a bad experience that cars can be run through Texas to get a clean title. He bought a used BMW that he later found was involved in sever collision. The Texas title showed it was clean as did Carfax.

floridabob1

RE: 1432
I'm not sure which Carfax service that you used, there are several available, but it should have indicated any change in title, registration or insurance action, unless the insurance company goofed and did not file claim into data base.

quietpro

It was reported a while back that the various title search services weren't always as accurate as they like to claim. It didn't get too much into the details (like a lot of news reporting these days) but my guess is that there are established ways to remove unwanted information from a title history if an unscrupulous person wants to do so. It is time for the title research companies to plug the holes but of course, that won't happen until their business is affected. In the meantime, I wouldn't place too much clout in a "Carfax" report. It will catch some things but can't be counted on for catching everything. Trust your own (or your mechanic's) abilities for evaluating a car before purchasing.

floridabob1

RE:1434
While changing states can sometimes remove "salvage" from a title, it should ring a bell about a possible problem.
Insurance companies are supposed to notify the bureau about claims paid in excess of $1000.00
Even "salvage" vehicles can be returned to original specifications. It usually is a financial consideration.

plekto

The only way is to verify that it has been its whole life in the originating state/your state.

The #1 way to spot an accident is to look at the wheelwells. Under them - up inside. See, almost every manufacturer puts cheap plastic there up deep inside the fenders now. And it's rarely if ever replaced after an accident - or the original is patches\d/fitted back. But, like a piece of fruit, bruises and cuts and such always show up later on. The screws used to put it in originally? Removing them strips the hole clean out - and it's easy as pie to spot. One looks clean and proper and the other looks ragged and has bits of plastic at the edges.

Bumper covers also are the same - replacements rarely fit properly unless they literally spared no expense and fit OEM parts. But you have to look from underneath and behind the bumper most times - then it's obvious.

cm3

I owned a 05 Chrysler 300 Touring since 2 years ago. But it's now 27k miles into its life and I've been driving it carefully ever since I got it. Everything seem s fine except they had to fix the alignment a few times ( a common issue among all 300's)when it was less than 1000 miles and they also replaced the rear left power window module and flushed the software. Dealers got those issues taken care. But I was told the camber bolt has to be replaced in order to adjust the alignment again. And it is not covered under warranty. I was a mechanic in the service too so I understand how things work. In this case, it's either the mechanic at their dealership was trying rip me off by charging $460 to replace it, or Chrysler had a defect bolt on this one. How can it be damaged when this bolt sits at the center of the wheel? So I contacted one of the warranty Rep to discuss it, but this lady seemed know nothing about mechanical problems and she called up the service Dept. A few minutes later she returned to me saying that Chrysler 300's has different alignment design and it's costly to fix the alignment issue. Then she kept on saying the $460 job of replacing this Camber Bolt is considered "Normal Wear and Tear". What a joke!!!
I like this car and I expected to see big panel gaps and some issues as people stated on forums. But now I believe why people also said "Chrysler doesn't stand behind their products".
To those people who consider Chrysler products as their daily drivers, be prepared to deal with quality issues during life expectancy of their products. If you want reliability and service, go somewhere else.
And to Mercedes Benz, they made a big mistake to associate with Chrysler. This kind of experience truly damage the image of a world class car manufacturer. Mercedes should sell Chrysler, NOW!!! They don't deserve it.

floridabob1

RE: 1437
It does not seem reasonable that they consider the "camber bot" a wear and tear" item. Does the warranty disclaim this system?

dborth

While all of us can sympathise with your problem, I suggest you not make "sweeping generalizations" about MB/Chrysler, otherwise your future posts may be considered by this Forum's HOST as drifting too far.

captain2

this is strange, the 300 with the 3.5 has had a decent reliability record, and the alignment issue I assume you are talking about is with the rear wheels (?) a design actually taken from the MB E class. Have and will never touch another Chrysler product again when they refused to acknowledge any responsibility for a really bad design on some transmission oil lines that cost me several thousand dollars on some tranny replacments several years ago on a truck I owned. MB has really taken a bad hit in quality/reliability lately, bet they are rueing the day that Chyrsyler infected their product lines.

quietpro

MB has really taken a bad hit in quality/reliability lately, bet they are rueing the day that Chyrsyler infected their product lines.

C'mon, now...we're talking business and mechanics here, not genetics. How exactly did Chrysler "infect" Daimler? It was never a "merger" as was promised/advertised at the time. The Germans (of which I share ancestry) took over the company and made changes at will. If there were any "infections", it was likely the other way around since the Daimler component was in full control from the moment the ink began to dry. If you review your history, you'll see that Chrysler was in the middle of its post-Iacocca rebirth with a very popular LH line, newly-redesigned Ram truck, Viper, Prowler, and PT Cruiser on the way.
With the exception of the return to RWD in the 300/Charger/Magnum (which you attribute to hand-me-down MB technology), the innovation stopped when Daimler took over. It seems to me that Daimler just wanted to squeeze whatever they could out of Chrysler (market/network/etc) and then toss them aside as they are now.
I don't hold it against Daimler. It was business and the Chrysler shareholders deserve any blame for going along with it. If Chrysler is worthy, they'll rise from the ashes once again. Besides, it's easier to climb to the top than to stay there.

floridabob1

RE:1441
What some readers fail to note is that the Chrysler end financially supported the merged companies for the first couple of years. Daimler was having fiscal woes and Chrysler was pumping green with it's minivans and trucks.

captain2

the 'infection' comment has much more to do with the beating that MB has taken in about any known reliability study known to mankind e.g. CRs recent automotive issue, MB cars were what, ranked last? While I'll grant you that at least some of this is because of the mechanical complexity and technical sophistication of most of their cars, it is a relatively recent change correspondent to the timing of the 'merger'. Don't think there is any question that Chrysler, directly or indirectly, has hurt MB.

allmet33

Actually, I don't think that Chysler has hurt MB its the fact that they are making their cars so complex. Remember the old addage...K.I.S.S (Keep It Simple Stupid)?

Then again, MB lost some key folks too from my understanding.

Chrysler definitely benefitted the most in the merger with MB. How is it that Chrysler hurt MB?

vic10

My first real-life exposure to MB was in the early '70's when my girlfriend's Dad owned a 230S and I had a Firebird. At 24k miles, the MB went in for a routine check and got an oil change, head gasket change, rear suspension link replacement, transmission seal change, and on and on, all costing about $400. My Firebird needed oil, filter and a grease job. Cost: $18.00. I figured at the MB maintenance rate, I could replace my Firebird every 4 years or so and still be better off financially. They didn't impress me then. They still don't. Over priced. Over engineered. And overly expensive to maintain. Remember at "Mercedes-Benz" is German for "General Motors". Defies logic how they got their reputation a super cars....

captain2

and if you ever drive one that is working properly they still do make 'super' cars. Most recently had the pleasure to drive both the E350 (a semi-large sedan with an engine similar in several respects to the Avalon) and the ML320CDI (a diesel SUV with that high tech diesel in it) - both likely over 50 large. The ML (or should I say the engine in it) was easily the most impressive, 5000 lbs or so, the owner claims 25 mpg (primarily City) and almost as much spunk as either the E350 (a genuine 'sports sedan')or my Avalon. Between these and the BMWs, though, these are difficult for many buyers to justify especially when they compared to things like Avs or Azeras. The way I figure it, BMWs/MBs in this category you pay a 10-15k premium for the label and the rest of the money actually goes into building a dynamically superior car.

allmet33

Dynamically superior and yet...been rated low in reliability in recent years. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...if that's dynamic superiority...you don't have to worry about me buying in! I'll save that $10-15K premium (and then some) and be quite content in my Azera!!!

captain2

Chrysler definitely benefitted the most in the merger with MB. How is it that Chrysler hurt MB?
agree on the first part of this statement, the 300 and Crossfire being the most obvious examples - as for the other way around - I can only point to MBs somewhat recent nosedive in most quality/reliability surveys - it may have more to do financial loads created by Chrysler when gas prices went up and those cash cow truck and SUV sales plummeted. Chrysler recently had to 'shutdown' a few plants primarily because of overproduction and a soft market for some of their cars - this cannot be good for the folks back in Stuttgart...

allmet33

That's about the only way I can see it as none of Chrysler technology is being put into MB products. So it can only be from a financial aspect that Chrysler is hurting MB. It would certainly seem that MB bit off more than they thought they could chew in acquiring Chrysler. Bet they wish they were eating brats now!

captain2

Dynamically superior and yet...been rated low in reliability in recent years
rather than KISS, I'll invoke Murphy's law #2 - the more complicated something is, the most likey it is to break! By definition, your Azera is more likely to cause you a problem or two than had you bought an Elantra - if only because it has a lot more stuff on it to go wrong. For many years the Avalon has rated slightly below Corollas in terms of reliability - same reason!

captain2

the hot rumor a few months back had Nissan acquiring GM - good thing they didn't, maybe too many problems there for even Carlo Ghosn (Nissan/Renault CEO) to handle?

allmet33

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....no, I'll disagree. Hyundai hasn't done anything more complicated than what they've already been doing. Now the Genesis, could very well pose some problems as they are getting into some new things like the 5 link rear suspsension and the 6-speed Shiftronic transmission.

No...the Azera won't give me any more problems than my '02 Sonata gave me...which was NONE. The Azera, if you break it down, is really a simple car to be honest. The most complex thing on it would be the ESC system...IMO.

Can't blame Benz for pushing the envelope, however...their reliablity reputation has taken a severe beating due to that.

floridabob1

RE:1448
In 1998 when the two companies joined, they were both powerful and profitable and close to being equal in size.
MB influence was shown with models like Crossfire. Chrysler was coining money with it's dominance in the minivan business. The merger helped Chrysler rid itself of some union pressure. When the gas prices began to rise, the honeymoon quickly ended.
You can't win them all.
If you check into most auto takeovers, very few been successful.

captain2

vs. your 02 Sonata then with that simplier low tech 2.7(?) vs. your more contemporary (and competitive) 3.8 in your Azera with the VVT and all - or you could even reduce it to other differences like memory seats/pedals etc.. It is VERY unlikely that your Azera will hold up as well as your older Sonata except that Hyundai build quality has improved over the last 5 years.

allmet33

Don't know about low tech, but it was reliable and durable. At the time when the 2.7 came out, it was fine. Which in turn forced Nissan to drop the 3.5 and thus started the HP wars!

We shall see how well the Azera holds up. My Sonata lasted 4 years w/105K miles before it was traded in for the Azera. So far, 1 year old with just under 29K miles...it's doing quite well.

allmet33

Was Chrysler really that powerful? It seemed to me that they were floundering a bit right before the merger, which breathed new life into Chrysler. I mean...the 300 M was Chrysler's claim to fame at that point and it was getting old fast. As a matter of fact, all of their lines Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep were getting QUITE stale at that point. If it had not been for MB...Chrysler would have tanked.

I agree that most auto takeovers are not successful.

captain2

Hyundai never started or had never really been too competitive in the HP wars, as you call them - it wasn't until the 3.3 and 3.8 in 05/06 that they could really point to a technologically current V6. Remember the Nissan 3 liter of the early 90s (the predecessor of the VQ35), well before Hyundai was putting a V6 in anything and the Maximas that had the 4DSC (4 door sports coupe) emblazoned on the rear windows - that would be where the 'wars' started.

captain2

Bob - is right on - Chrysler owns the minivan market to this day, and back in the late 90s even GM and Ford were making money thanks to those high profit trucks and SUVs as well as lower gas prices. And then, of course, they found out that nobody would buy their cars - a market long since abandoned to others.

allmet33

You are absolutely right, the reason for that...they were busy working on the dependability formula. They were working on modeling themselves after Toyota in terms of reliability. So in reality, the HP wars were not their bag at the time. However, with the proven increased reliability beginning with their '02 line-up, a few years later...Hyundai emerged in the middle of the HP wars with Toyota following right behind.

The wars didn't really start with the Maxima because if you look...the Avalon and Maxima were neck and neck in almost every category. Then, Nissan decided to go sporty and turned the Maxima into the 4dr sports sedan. However, the HP didn't really start being a drastic change until the introduction of the '02 Altima (240 HP) and then the restyling of the Maxima followed with a hefty 265 HP stallion under the hood. Immediately after Nissan introduced the 3.5 240 HP Altima, Honda shored up the Accord with it's own 240 HP power plant. Toyota, in the meantime was still busy churning out bland, senior citizen scoot-abouts. 2005, Hyundai turns the Sonata from a 170 HP bench warmer (at this point), into a 240 HP contender. 2006 shows up and they release the 263 HP Azera. Lo & behold...Toyota feels left out and pumps the Camry up with a 268 HP engine along with it's badly needed restyling. The Avalon benefitted as well, considering it sat at 190 HP for the longest, then an increase to 210. Finally with the last one putting the Avalon in contention with the Azera, Maxima and Accord.

Back when Nissan was putting 4DSC on the rear windows...it still didn't have 200 HP.

Heck, Ford had a 3.0 V-6 back in '92, but it was pumping out a whopping 145 HP then!!! LOL

V-6's have come a long way baby!!!

WHEW!!!

allmet33

Yeah...that is one market that Chrysler had a strangle-hold on, but I wouldn't say that it was enough to call them a power house company. That might have beent he only thing keeping them going aside from the 300 M. The Concorde, which was Chysler's version of the Toyota Camry (dependability-wise) faded into the LHS, which simply faded into oblivion.