Howdy, Stranger!

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





Midsize Sedans 2.0

1313314316318319727

Comments

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,699
    1) Mazda6
    2) Fusion
    3) Aura
    4) Malibu
    5) Accord
    6) Sonata
    7) Altima
    8) Passat
    9) Camry
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,006
    Looks only, don't care all that much about back seat.

    1)Altima 2)Mazda6 3)Aura 4)Sonata 5)Accord 6)Camry 7)Passat 8)Fusion 9)Malibu
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    1) Mazda6
    2) Passat
    3) Aura
    4) Fusion
    5) Altima
    6) Malibu
    7) Accord
    8) Sonata
    9) Camry
  • gooddeal2gooddeal2 Posts: 749
    Altima > Passat > Accord > 6 > Sonata > Aura > Fusion > Camry > Malibu :P
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,727
    1) Mazda6
    2) Altima
    3) Passat
    4) Sonata
    5) Aura
    6) Malibu
    7) Milan
    8) Galant
    9) Optima
    10) Accord
    11) Fusion
    12) Camry

    Not a real dog in the bunch, though--unless Honda puts a grille like that on the 2009 Pilot on the Accord. :P

    Edit: I forgot the Avenger and Sebring! How could I forget them?? I was wrong about there being no dogs in the bunch. They are the only two cars in the class I would not buy based on looks alone.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    I put these pictures up all over a different number of sites on the internet. From here to GMI to DriverAccord to VWVortex and EVERY website rates the Camry worst overall for exterior styllng and the Accord is considered midpack. Malibu is considered the best looking so far too. And yet the Camry is the biggest seller. Shows that exterior styling isnt everything. Keep the votes coming. I'm going to do an interior one soon!
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,727
    Did you post the photos on any Toyota (or Camry) oriented site?

    Yes, in the family-car class, looks are hardly the main driver of sales. In fact, over time "boring" has sold better than "daring" in this class.
  • EXTERIOR STYLING:

    1) Fusion / Milan
    2) Mazda6
    3) Accord, Sonata (tie)
    4) Aura
    5) Altima
    6) Optima
    7) Passat
    8) Malibu
    9) Camry

    OVERALL:

    1) Accord
    2) Sonata
    3) Altima
    4) Mazda6
    5) Fusion / Milan
    6) Aura
    7) Malibu
    8) Optima
    9) Camry
    10) Passat
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    Ummm, guys? There's no picture of a Fusion in that post. Why are you all including it in the ranking then?

    The only 2 that stand out to me, of those pics that are posted, are the Malibu and the 6. Personally I think the 6 makes the rest look cheap and boring. They are all too similar in profile.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    Opps. Somehow I ommited the Fusion from the pics on this thread. I'm sorry about that.
  • texasestexases Posts: 5,599
    Speaking of cars without a picture, this would be my #1, if we could get it:
    image
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,727
    Because they are mid-sized sedans? :surprise:
  • moocow1moocow1 Posts: 230
    I'm guessing nobody here owns a Camry...at least not if you're rating it so low. I'd imagine most of the enthusiasts are avoiding them these days :) It seems to be that the general public at the major camry buyers. That silent, but deadly majority. I'm actually amused because my mom also hates how the Camry looks.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,699
    There's no picture of a Fusion in that post.

    Wow - I actually thought the Malibu was a Fusion. I thought the headlights looked different, but the antenna at the back of the roof convinced me otherwise.

    Just shows that I don't look at my car in side profile very often.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    1.) Mazda6
    2.) Passat
    3.) Camry (SE only)
    4.) Altima
    5.) Accord
    6.) Sonata
    7.) Aura
    8.) Malibu
    9.) Fusion
  • mickeyrommickeyrom Posts: 936
    Finally.....someone mentions the Optima. I think it's one good looking car.I have a black EX and I've gotten several compliments on it.That in itself is highly unusual.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,727
    It's a clean, honest design (some might say "boring") that I think will wear well over time. I actually like the exterior of the 2008 Optima, especially with the Appearance Pkg, better than the 2009. I think it looks better in darker colors. My favorite on that car is grey--very "buttoned-down."
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    I had the opportunity to spend an evening with an '08 Accord EX V6 this week. While its not a vehicle I would be in the market for, I do have a lot of appreciation for it.

    The driving dynamics were pretty amazing for how big a car it really is. The V6 felt very powerful and gave me a lot of confidence (perhaps too much) when merging and passing. I found the "ECO" cylinder deactivation very similar in feeling to the lock-up torque converter feeling, it wasn't intrusive but I noticed it. It seemed odd that it didn't have the video game paddles or psuedo-stick thing for the transmission, but given the age of their market, and the fact that those are silly to begin with, I can understand why they don't have it. I thought the steering wheel felt very good in my hands (its relatively small diameter is what I think leads to its sporty feel), although I didn't care for the styling at all. I also found the steering to be well weighted with a good level of effort. I found the seats perfectly comfortable, but I am not a giant by any means.

    The gagetry was a mixed bag. I had to call the 1-800 phone number to get my phone to work with bluetooth, and it said I still couldn't upload my phonebook because of some limitation on my phone (although it works fine with SYNC). There are 4 buttons to control voice activation. If its voice activated, why do I need 4 buttons? There is still no support for an iPod, and the control of MP3 CDs was cumbersome. The nav system let you manually control everything while you are driving, which is surprising given the rules/laws that went into effect for 2008.

    I found the ride quality to be fine over all surfaces, and it felt less limp than my 2007 (as an aside, my 1993 was the last year in the run as was my 2007, and neither of them have been at the level of Honda's reputation, maybe there is a lesson there). A nice ride to be sure, but at 30k, there are a lot of nice rides. I am guessing transaction prices are closer to invoice, and at 27k the car has a much stronger value point. It did everything more than acceptably and was easy to drive.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,722
    i have a fusion too. the thing that gave it away, after a long time thinking about it, was that the fusion doesn't have the separate side marker light in the rear fender.
  • 2002slt2002slt Posts: 228
    The nav system let you manually control everything while you are driving, which is surprising given the rules/laws that went into effect for 2008.

    I was surprised, too. My GM units always shut down command at about 5mph. All 3 I've recently test-driven (Camry, Accord and Sonata) all allow control. I wonder if some law changed. :confuse:
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    Here are the 3 I've seen so far. 19/29 or 30 for the I4 and 17/25 for the V6.

    Edmunds

    C&D

    MT
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    I am surprised about the Camry. GM, Ford, and Toyota are part of AAM and there are rules about nav systems and their functionality in there. Part of it goes back to some work that SAE did around the turn of the century (lol that sounds funny to say) about in-vehicle tasks and driver distraction.
    The new GM systems are a little bit more mellow, the '07 STS wouldn't let me scratch my butt while the car was above 5 mpg, but the new '08 CTS (a totally fantastic ride, IMO) let me pick what song I wanted off my iPod or USB stick, or select a POI while rollin' down the road.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    I've updated the pics and added more vehicles to the list...here we go! Rate them based on Styling. I tried to find the top of the line, V6 version of every car. Hope this is more simple and more fair.

    image

    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
  • podpod Posts: 176
    From a distance they all look like children of the same parents with minor differences: more freckles, different hair line, taller, heavier, etc.
    Given the demands of low coefficient of friction, interior space, fuel economy, safety features, etc. there aren't too many different engineering or design solutions. They are the generic current American sedan. This homogeneity is likely to continue as the price of fuel rises.
    If cost is of minor significance, then you can be artistic and creative and different as many of the much higher priced vehicles can afford to be..
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The cars with more downward slope in the roof line rear of the B pillar, have the more appealing profiles. This usually means rear headroom is compromised, or the rear seat is too low. What's more important? Rear passenger comfort, or a good looking profile? If you don't care about rear seat comfort, you may as well get a coupe, which will have a better look than the sedan.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,727
    As I noted ealier, I think all the mid-sized sedans are reasonably good looking on the outside with the exception of the Avenger and Sebring. Thus for me, I put a checkmark on "I can live with the styling" and move on to more important attributes, like how the car drives, safety, interior quality and comfort (since I am looking at the interior much more than I am the exterior), fuel economy, NVH, etc.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    If you don't care about rear seat comfort, you may as well get a coupe, which will have a better look than the sedan.

    It does not have to be all or nothing. My back seat is only used occassionally, on those occassions all I want is for it to be adequate. I don't need it to be a limosinesque experience for those in the back seat, but I also don't want it to be a torture chamber and I certainly do not want the inconvenience of a coupe.

    The supposed "tight" back seat of this:

    image

    is adequate for my needs/wants.
  • tedebeartedebear Posts: 832
    I think all the mid-sized sedans are reasonably good looking on the outside with the exception of the Avenger and Sebring.

    Funny, I have just the opposite opinion. That's why I bought one last September.

    I guess that's why Baskin Robins offers more than just one flavor.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,727
    So you are sayiing the only mid-sized sedans that have styling you could live with are the Avenger and Sebring? :surprise:

    It's a good reminder that a car's styling is entirely subjective. That's why I can never figure out why most of the automotive press makes such a big deal about it, and actually awards "points" for it, in their reviews.
  • tedebeartedebear Posts: 832
    So you are sayiing the only mid-sized sedans that have styling you could live with are the Avenger and Sebring?

    I was leaning more towards the opposite of your negative opinion of the Sebring/Avenger.

    Here at work the links for the pics in the exterior car ranking poll are blocked by my company's firewall, so I cannot see them all side-by-side.

    I did get a close-up look at a Fusion before the Sebring decision. Way too much chrome on that front end and the ho-hum Ford interior was the deciding factor.
Sign In or Register to comment.