Howdy, Stranger!

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





Midsize Sedans 2.0

124252729301028

Comments

  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    keep in mind the 95 Accord a much much lighter and smaller car. The 2.7 V6 weighed a whole 3200 lbs. the 4 banger almost 200 LESS. Goes to show you how far we've come in 10 years+ and how much larger cars in this class have become. FE (especially in the now 244hp 6) has improved substantially over the old V6, not to mention that the 0-60 time that has lost about 3 seconds. So we can baseline that 9s+ 0-60 and convince ourselves that that must be good because that is what the Accord V6 was able to do 10 years ago, or we can enjoy the added safety of that extra power, and know that that efficiency is not effectively costing much at the gas pumps.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    I would not call it an "advanced timing maneuver", whatever car you are driving the best way to pass is to do most of the accelerating before going into the oncoming lane.

    First you say you would not call it an advanced timing maneuver, then you describe exactly what I meant by the phrase. :confuse:

    I just can't see ever cutting a passing maneuver so close that 0.5 to 1 sec would make a difference.

    I have never cut a passing maneuver so close with the V6, that I would not have made it with the 4cyl. But it is nice to have that extra margin for error. And yes, the V6 does make a considerable difference, when it comes to passing. Opinions, like mileage, may vary. ;)
  • Well, after months of ownership and being overall very pleased with the Accord, I have my first complaint. The manual locking mechanisms for each individual door are the pull style, and are located on top of the window sill by the B-pillar. This is right in the way of where I sometimes like to rest my arm/elbow, especially when the windows are down. On my old car, the mechanism was a lever that was built into the side of the door right by the door handle.

    My solution? I unscrewed the pull itself, and removed it, leaving a small hole where it used to stick up. I'll probably try to find some sort of cap to pop in there. I guess you can say my Honda has now been modified/customized :D
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Back in 96 the V6 Accord was pretty much a wasted effort. It only added 25hp, over the 4cyl VTEC engine, and added (like the captain said) almost 200 lbs because it had a cast iron block, which made it close to a wash, as far as power to weight ratio. The V6 in the current Accord adds about 80 hp, which is more than enough to account for the added weight. The 4cyl has gained 25hp since 96, and the V6 has gained 75hp since then. The V6 Accord has come a long way, in 10 years.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    How tall are you? The window sill seems very high, to have your arm resting on it. I guess if it's comfortable for you, it's not too high. However, if you have side airbags, this could be a problem in the event of a crash.
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,598
    The V6 Accord isn't the only car that has come a long ways in 10 years.

    The Hyundai Sonata is a prime example.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    keep in mind the 95 Accord a much much lighter and smaller car. The 2.7 V6 weighed a whole 3200 lbs. the 4 banger almost 200 LESS.

    The 1996 Accord 4-cylinder weighs 2,855 pounds, according to ConsumerGuide, with the wagon weighing in at 3,053 pounds.

    Just some useful info when trying to compare relative weights of these cars.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The Hyundai Sonata is a prime example.

    Wow, I just read a few of the owner reviews on the 96 Sonata, and I don't think any of them are going to be repeat customers. Not hard to improve on that.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Yeah, but with a brand new customer base getting a lot of car for the money, Hyundai is still rising. You really can't take that away from them. Like the old phrase goes...."You've come a long way baby." Well, Hyundai has gone from a joke of a company to a company offering solid contenders in MANY classes of car.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    It is amazing how far Hyundai has come in 10 years, when some other companies have only taken baby steps. Should I name them? No, I think you all can guess which ones.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    No, naming the companies wouldn't be good here. Naming the individual vehicles might be, but if the comments aren't constructive, there's just no point.

    This convo gets off track and too personal with one little post these days, even posts not intended to start trouble are often taken WAY personally.

    I think Ford Fusion and Hyundai Sonata should share an award (for last year) for Rookie of the Year, or Most Improved midsize offering from that company.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Another thing I find interesting, is that with such a bad start, the Sonata has retained it's name over the years. It shows that Hyundai knows what is important. Improving the car, is more important than changing the name, to give the illusion of improvement.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Well, maybe they didn't want to follow in Ford's footsteps of renaming its cars every decade.
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,598
    I knew that posting something positive about a car other than Honda Accord, especially a Hyundai Sonata would push your button.

    Take a tip from thegrad. He's completely pleased with his Accords and tells us why. He also acknowledges that there are some worthy competitors, including the Sonata. Mainly, he preferred the Accord's interior. Some may like the Accord interior the best, some may not and some may put more importance on a different attribute of the cars.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Please read the post above. I thought it was a complement, to the Sonata anyway. Oh, well.
  • jd10013jd10013 Posts: 779
    Well, maybe they didn't want to follow in Ford's footsteps of renaming its cars every decade.

    As a former ford customer (many, many years ago) I think I know why they do that. I think, its because they allow their cars to become so inferior in quality, style, and reliability that they have too. I, for example, owned two Ford escort. both ran fine till about 70k miles, then were nothing but problems. everything from major engine problems to buttons and knobs breaking, to the most bizzare of all, the catch for the door lock (the metal piece on the frame) actualy rusted (actualy it was the body that rusted) and fell off. I couldn't close the door.

    But getting back to the point, If ford had kept making them and ever improved the car, it woundn't have mattered. it wouldn't have mattered how many awards that car would have won, or how great the reviews would have been; i would never have bought one again in my life. IMHO, ford (and to some extent GM) have such a reputation for letting their cars go to crap that they have to ditch them and start over.
  • Re naming like Ford. Are you referring to the latest rename of the Ford 500 to Taurus? Ford thinks the reason the 500 didn't sell well was because nobody recognized or associated with the name. I think it is a very good car, better than the previous Taurus MHO. :blush:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Taurus to Fusion (as the mainstream family car offering)
    Five Hundred to Taurus (as the full-size upscale offering)
    Escort to Focus (as the compact offering)
    Windstar to Freestar (as the minivan offering)

    These are the first ones that come to mind.
  • jd10013jd10013 Posts: 779
    how does the contour fit in there? was it in between escort and focus?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    No, the Contour was a larger car than either of those, and filled the gap between the Taurus and Escort (much like the old 90s Altima did between the Maxima and the Sentra). The market for cars like the Contour, Mazda 626, and compact Altima sort of vaporized, along with the name Contour.
Sign In or Register to comment.