Howdy, Stranger!

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





Midsize Sedans 2.0

1243244246248249721

Comments

  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The U.S. version should arrive next year as an 09 model but will likely have different sheetmetal.

    That is not true. My contacts at Mazda have stated that only minor differences will be present. Interior and exterior will remain mostly identical.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,688
    That's good to hear. The Euro version is nice.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I agree. I think it is fine the way it is over there.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    see post #7561 - our resident FoMoCo expert - for some reason when we end up talking about rumors and changes that just don't happen (or happen late) , that would be Ford-itis. Exactly how long do you suppose that we've be seeing posts about the 'rumored' arrival of real engines for the Fusion? How long has the Fusion been available - that's how long. At first the Fusion was going to get the 3.5 (for sure, for sure) and later that changes to some sort of 'improved' 3.0 and to this day I'm not sure that anybody really knows. This has been going on for 3 years now. Just in time for Ford to rename the car a 'Falcon', I guess, and hope it sells better - oops - they've already done something like that and yet another unfounded rumor... ;)
    It seems that whenever we all get involved in discussions of what's on the horizon, Ford/Mazda are in the middle of that conjecture, and it does get old - promises, promises - Ford-itis. - and it is a shame that a good company like Toyo Koygo should be so infected :cry:
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    if the implication is that you must drive in some sort of unsafe manner and/or that in real traffic situations you don't have to do things like merge onto a highway off a short entry ramp - dream on. These things can (and do) happen every day - to all of us - at varying frequencies. I'll keep my extra 100 hp (or so) , and pay the 3 mpg (or so) .
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    These things can (and do) happen every day - to all of us

    Sure do, but implying (not saying you have) that people with the 4-cyl equivalents of these V6 vehicles are incapable of taking care of these situations is ludicrous. Is the V6 faster? Sure, but it doesn't render the 4-cyl useless. If it did, 4-cyl midsize sedans wouldn't outsell V6 equivalents by such large margins.

    I think some people buy a V6 because they don't want to rev past 3,000RPM ever. Personally, I see no problem with using an engine to the fullest, although I didn't pass 3,500RPM today in my 130hp Accord today on my way to school. And that includes commuting in 60-75MPH interstate traffic between 8 and 9AM.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,688
    Where has Mazda promised anything for the U.S. Mazda6 that they haven't delivered? I don't recall anything being announced or rumored. They released pictures of the 2008 European model and some of us got confused and thought it was the U.S. model. Period. Stop inventing things that don't exist.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    In reality, you will always keep those extra horses and pay extra on fuel costs. I know, I do, when driving my TL. It has about 120 more horses than my Accord. Do I need them? Nope. And my Accord isn't a light weight car either. In fact, it was one of the heaviest cars in its class, and at ~3200 lb would still rank up there while having "only" 150 HP.

    Short ramp acceleration excuses are unwarranted if the four cylinder is a capable design to begin with. Most four cylinder engines aren't however (but then, not all V6s are equal either).
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    see post #7561 - our resident FoMoCo expert - for some reason when we end up talking about rumors and changes that just don't happen (or happen late) , that would be Ford-itis

    I assume you are talking about me. I am not a FoMoCo expert. I have knowledge pertaining to Mazda. There has never been a launch date for the North American Mazda6. All we heard, this going back about a year, is that a new Mazda6 will debut in 2008. Does this mean MY 2008? or actually be available in 2008? Who knows. That is not Ford-itis. Why commit to something and then not come through. That would be a mistake. So far, I have not seen evidence that something has not been fulfilled from Mazda.

    It seems that whenever we all get involved in discussions of what's on the horizon, Ford/Mazda are in the middle of that conjecture, and it does get old - promises, promises - Ford-itis. - and it is a shame that a good company like Toyo Koygo should be so infected

    What promises from the manufacturer have not been fulfilled? I am not talking about rumors from magazines or anything like that. I am talking about words directly from the manufacturers. So far, Mazda has done what they said they were going to do. The have a new Mazda6 out, just not here. I have never heard of a specific launch date, time, or what MY it would be. I only heard "2008" as part of the rumor from my sources at Mazda. Nothing attached to launch date has ever been verified.

    A blunder attached to the Mazda6 would be the launch date of the 2006 Mazdaspeed6. It was promised to be out in early 2005, and we got in in December 2005.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    I think some people buy a V6 because they don't want to rev past 3,000RPM ever.

    I think most people who buy a V6 do so because they don't want to rev past 3,000RPM ever. :cry:

    I imagine they don't even go above that on the test drive and this is why they feel the V6 is needed. My favorite is when these people pull out in front of me and still will not step on the gas...no, they'd rather do their pokey 2500 rpm acceleration and force me to step on my brakes.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    don't know about that - have 2 cars (both V6 and very quick by almost any standard) and I get the engines wound up to maybe 5 grand or so - almost every time I'm on that short hwy entrance ramp and need to be able to get from 30 to about 80 in a hurry.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,688
    My wife has a 300 hp Aviator. She's never gone beyond 50% throttle - EVER. When I do it she starts screaming about the gas gauge or thinks we're about to wreck. The AVERAGE driver is scared of their vehicle and scared of acceleration.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I'd bet you are the exception rather than the rule, however. I applaud you for it though. You USE the engine you bought, so you aren't constantly driving around with an extra liter of displacement under the hood.

    Personally, for the few times I need to really move, my '06 4-cyl pleases ME in how quickly it takes off (as far as 4-cylinder's go, the 2.4L in my 2006 Accord is darn quick relatively). I drive from the suburbs to downtown Birmingham, drive to work through city streets (over a small mountain) and back to school at night, before driving back home.

    I filled up my car yesterday - 13.7 gallons on 411.2 miles. That's 30.01 MPG in a midsize car that is as fast as I've ever needed or wanted, and is only 1 MPG shy of the highway rating in my much slower 1996 Accord, which averages between 26 and 27 MPG in the same commute. I am MORE than pleased. I'm glad you are too, cap'n.:)
  • I remember when I bought a "typical" economy car back in October 1970, a 60HP (yes, that's right 60 screaming horses!) front-wheel drive car - a Simca 1204. I got along just fine on compact and short freeway entrance ramps, as I actually accelerated through the entire entrance ramp, and entered the freeway at close to the prevailing speed. On the other hand, large Detroit iron with multiple times the HP of the Simca would lag behind or putter along on the entrance ramp - until they reached the freeway, and then it was pedal to the metal.

    In many cases, the driver, and the driver's technique and skill along with the car's handling, is more important than raw HP.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Well I did say "most" not "all"...besides don't you need to get over 6000 rpm to hit max HP :) ;) .

    BTW, the not wanting high rpms is not limited to V6 drivers, as was stated most are deathly afrain of high rpms. I get my 4 cylinder to redline from time to time, when I want maximum acceleration...but I am quite sure most do not ever come close.
  • I'm not saying people shouldn't buy V6's. I was just complaining about how irresponsibly most people drive when they have some power under the hood.

    Interestingly, mostly of these jack*** drivers will be in mid-size $25K to $40K cars. You'll notice most people driving expensive 300 to 400 HP German cars drive safely and courteously. Guess they feel they have nothing to prove.

    I'll be shopping for a car in the next few months and will probably get a V6. Personally, I'm happy as long as my avg fuel economy is above 20 MPG, and having the extra power for hills and passing definitely gives peace of mind.

    The smooth and quiet power delivery is nice too, although some newer 4cyls are very smooth/quiet as well.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The smooth and quiet power delivery is nice too, although some newer 4cyls are very smooth/quiet as well.

    Yes they are. I'd put my 2.4L 4-cyl in my Accord (2006) up against the 3.5L V6 in the Aura/G6/Impala or the 3800 in the Lucerne when comparing smoothness and bet the Accord would win. Mine sounds smoother and more turbine-like than the coarse pushrods from GM, despite having only 4, large bore cylinders to the 6 of the GM V6.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    the not wanting high rpms is not limited to V6 drivers, as was stated most are deathly afrain of high rpms
    well, maybe so, but some of these engines, the 2GR Toyota and about any of Honda's 4 bangers can and do sound and feel good at those high rpms. Perhaps it is those engines that feel like 'somethin' is gonna blow' that perpetuate this adversion that you are talking about?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Yep. 99% of my driving involves sub-3000 driving (unless I'm cruising at 80 mph, which I do for most part :P). Entering freeways or high speed passing will always see hitting redline, which is a lowly 6300 rpm in my 98 Accord. But it is fun while it lasts (and that isn't for very long). I've estimated that car to go from a rolling 40 to 85 mph in 9-10 seconds.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    reminds me of my 1970 Buick Opel Kadett - 1100 cc's and also about 60 hp.
    Didn't feel it was dangerous or anything at the time (at that age I was just happy to have wheels), also 60hp and remember really having to row thru the gearbox to get anything out of it, FE if I remember right was unremarkable (in the 20s). My how far we've come - because now my Altima 3.5 will return better FE than that Opel AND blow the doors off of many of those 'muscle' cars of that time at better than double the FE...
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    would submit that 99% of everybody's driving is below 3000 rpm - even those who have the 4 bangers. 70mph on these V6s is usually closer to 2000rpm, and the 4s a few hundred higher. Only on harder acceleration are any of us ever going to see anything above even 5 grand, and as you say, it doesn't last long when you do.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    "I'll be shopping for a car in the next few months and will probably get a V6. Personally, I'm happy as long as my avg fuel economy is above 20 MPG, and having the extra power for hills and passing definitely gives peace of mind.

    The smooth and quiet power delivery is nice too, although some newer 4cyls are very smooth/quiet as well. "


    I agree with autoritiker's comments. Also, I live next to a busy street, and cars are always accelerating from the S curve when they pass by my driveway. When a 4cylinder Accord passes, you can definitely hear the engine winning. When a 6cylinder Accord passes, you hear nothing. I like that. The V6 engine makes the Accord feel and sound more luxurious, and more like a high-end car. While I definitely like (and use) the passing/merging power, there are other reasons that the V6 appeals to me.
  • My Aura XR is turning 1800 RPM at 70 MPH 2000 at 80 MPH and I am getting 30 MPG (910 miles on 30.08 Gal.) at 80 MPH. It sees the 7000 RPM red line every once in a while too.

    Hypothetically speaking, we are cruising at 80 MPH down I-5 through the central valley of California, side by side, my engine is turning 2000 RPM, What does your Honda's Tach. indicate?

    We come to the Grapevine and I drop to 5th and continue at 80 MPH up that 15 degree hill turning about 2700 RPM. What gear are you in, and are you still beside me going 80 MPH?
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    Here's some excerpts from a review from a European newspaper, the not very famous (in America) Belfast Telegraph.

    The revamped Mazda 6 is a real revelation: lighter and more agile, yet supple and serene.

    So here I am on a road I know well, in the hills and mountains just north of Nice. It's the kind of road that proves there's still enjoyment to be had from driving, and – if the car's not worthy of it – frustration can set in. It doesn't have to be some mega-money supercar, compromise-free sports car or honed hatchback for everything to gel; it simply has to be designed and engineered to work with the driver's commands and instincts, to involve the driver in the whole dynamic process.

    This new Mazda 6 does exactly that, to a wholly remarkable degree. It feels like an Alfa 159 should, or like a BMW 3 series would if it were, like the Mazda, front-wheel drive. It has the precision, fluidity, light-footedness and sixth-sense responsiveness that used to mark out the Peugeot 405 nearly two decades ago. Mazda has been annoying us for several years with the puerile "zoom-zoom" slogan, but the reality really matches the hype.

    All this driver-pleasing responsiveness would soon turn sour if the Mazda made a meal of poor road surfaces, but it proves supple and serene over bumps and waves. Quiet, too, with little roar from the road and engines – all three versions sampled – which are smooth, almost inaudible at idle and restrained when revved.

    It's clear, then, that huge thought has gone into how this car feels to drive. There's a Mazda philosophy here that is close to the one Peugeot used to follow. It says that a car's nose should be keen to turn and in doing so must load up the outside rear wheel, making the car feel "pointy". If you then ease the accelerator, the car's cornering line should tighten, but in a controlled, progressive way.

    This makes for great economy of effort on the part of the driver with great reward, because the driver is using the accelerator as much as the steering to guide the car. It makes a good Mazda feel vital, but never scary. And should the tail want to break free of grip when you brake hard on a tightening corner, there's the standard-fit ESP to rein it in. The brakes, too, have a natural, progressive response, and the gearshift has precise, satisfying movements.

    All three versions are designed to look Japanese, celebrating their origin instead of trying to hide it behind a cloak of Europeanism. There are references to swords, mist-shrouded mountains and attention to tiny details, all of which has the scent of baloney. It's a good-looking car, though, with a strong Mazda personality thanks to its bulging front wings and trademark front grille.

    There are some good details here. The horseshoe-shaped wind deflectors ahead of the front wheels are a simple aid to the Mazda 6's excellent aerodynamics (it has a drag coefficient of 0.27). Inside, there's a feeling of soft-touch quality that would befit a premium car.

    Gadgetry abounds. At night, a wave of light passes through the controls on the centre console on start-up, simulating a heartbeat, and some versions play (annoyingly) the three "zoom-zoom-zoom" notes on switch-off. The cross-functional network controls on the steering wheel handle all sorts of functions, including trip computer, stereo, sat-nav and air-conditioning, and Mazda claims a young person can master them in minutes. Older people, it concedes, might need up to a day.

    Those more senior souls will also hate the small odometer display, the difficulty of reading it made worse by the orangey-red used for all the digital read-outs. As Mazda expects most buyers to be over 50, that's a problem. "I can't read it, either," says Hajime Matsumura, project leader for the Mazda 6, with surprising frankness. But that's the only significant fault with his car, which otherwise might just be the new class leader. Surprised? So am I.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    forgot a picture...(again this is the Euro Mazda6, which may or may not look like the one we'll see here)

    image
  • would submit that 99% of everybody's driving is below 3000 rpm - even those who have the 4 bangers. 70mph on these V6s is usually closer to 2000rpm, and the 4s a few hundred higher. Only on harder acceleration are any of us ever going to see anything above even 5 grand, and as you say, it doesn't last long when you do.

    I typically stay under 3k on my daily commute but I have been getting in the mid-30s in my mixed hwy/city driving. I do like to leave it in 3rd from time to time getting on the freeway. The 2.2 in the old Accord and the 2.4 in the new one both seem to do a fine job. While I can't say I am pleased as punch with my '07, its FE and power have never been on my complaint list.
  • Great find, zzzoom6.

    It has the precision, fluidity, light-footedness and sixth-sense responsiveness that used to mark out the Peugeot 405 nearly two decades ago.

    Ahh, my father owned one of those 405s back when Peugeot was still in the states. It was a fun-to-drive car, and handled better than some "sports" cars of the day. If only it wasn't in the shop all the time (as most 405s were).

    It's clear, then, that huge thought has gone into how this car feels to drive.

    Too bad this feeling will be lost to MOST midsize sedan buyers.

    Inside, there's a feeling of soft-touch quality that would befit a premium car.

    I just hope this also translates to the cars we receive stateside as well.

    Those more senior souls will also hate the small odometer display, the difficulty of reading it made worse by the orangey-red used for all the digital read-outs. As Mazda expects most buyers to be over 50, that's a problem. "I can't read it, either," says Hajime Matsumura, project leader for the Mazda 6, with surprising frankness.

    First of all, I'm guessing that most buyers in the US will be below the age of 50, not above. Secondly, I prefer the orange-red display at night, since it's easier on my eyes than the horrendous green that I used to deal with. I guess we'll see how "difficult" it really is to read when the examples hit the showrooms.

    But that's the only significant fault with his car, which otherwise might just be the new class leader. Surprised? So am I.

    I'm not... :P
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,327
    Well, in my 2003 Accord V6 I recall I'd be at about 2500 RPM at 80 MPH in top gear (5th gear in Auto).

    If hypothetically speaking, no one got in my way and I was able to maintain 80 MPH all the way up the grapevine, I don't believe a downshift would have been necessary; just a little extra press on the gas is all.

    The Aura XR seems to have excellent choices for 5th and 6th gear ratios..... Do you find most of the gears to be about 700 RPM apart at the same speed?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    My 1998 Accord turns about 3000 rpm at 80 mph (2300 rpm at 60 mph). Interestingly enough, a 2007 Civic I drove recently turned 2500 rpm (and we recorded 39.2 mpg at the end of 309 miles in a little more than 4 hours of driving (average driving speed was 75-76 mph).
  • If hypothetically speaking, no one got in my way and I was able to maintain 80 MPH all the way up the grapevine, I don't believe a downshift would have been necessary; just a little extra press on the gas is all.

    Not many cars have the torque to pull an overdrive gear up the grapevine. Even normal high gear is a struggle for many if they are not at or near the torque peak when they hit the bottom of the grade.

    I think 6th is about 7-800 RPM below 5th (high gear). 3-4 are pretty close together, about 600 RPM but the rest are closer to 1000 RPM

    Anyone with a Honda I-4 want to divulge there RPM's at 70/80 MPH?
Sign In or Register to comment.