Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
(Inside Line)
I can readily see the appeal of the 6 speed mated to their base engine, but I'm not sure I understand why anyone would choose a V-6 with the 6/speed--I think that would pretty much kill resale value.
I suppose you could market it as the 'poor man's BMW' (don't they ALWAYS say that?) but that won't work if you actually DO feel like a poor man when you push the car to its limits.
I'd like to think it's because they read my posts where I gave Honda/Acura credit for having some of the nicest 6-speeds gearboxes this side of Porsche (current TL is very good, previous S2000 was great). But that's probably wishful thinking regarding the value of my opinion.
As far as a "poor man's BMW", the last car that really positioned itself in that slot was IMO, the former Nissan Maxima SE, that came with a manual transmission, sport suspension, bigger brakes and the "4DSC" moniker. I had a 1995 version of that car and notwithstanding FWD limitations, it was not as far behind the 328i in overall performance as you would have thought. Quicker 0-60, a little slower in the slalom. It even won COTY awards that year. As soon as the Maxima started bloating up and went to a CVT only transmission, their sales plummeted. So maybe Honda thinks that with the 3-seires becoming a $40-50k+ car, there's room for a new contender in the sporty FWD $10-$15k less than 3 series market.
It may very well be that they have licensed/adopted the VW automatic engine "up-rev" technique that dramatically improves the safety factor for a MT in a FWD or F/awd vehicle.
More finely "tuned" (QUICK acting) TC, and/or automatic engine derating in lower gear ratios, has proved to be adequate for alleviating loss of traction, directional control, instances in FWD or F/awd vehicles during acceleration.
But that doesn't solve the problem of the driver being too aggressive in downshifting, or inadvertently so not being full cognizant of roadbed conditions and the often resulting loss of control. The VW technique addresses THAT issue.
Well, considering it is bigger and heavier than my '04 v6 6-speed, I'd bet on it. That car was flat out dangerous if pushed too hard. And I'm not talking THAT hard. Even my '98 T5 (a 6-year-older car that was built on an even older platform) had far higher limits. The Accord's understeer was just HORRENDOUS.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Fact is, they are all getting too damned bloated. I would speak up for the 1-series, but supposedly that is going FWD soon, so get it while you can.
I'd look to Porsche or Lotus for an "ultimate driving machine."
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
Don't tell me we have to cede the title to Caddy? I refuse to give it to them until they dump the Escalades. :shades:
I think the difference in money is closer to $15,000-$20,000 when comparing a 2013 Honda Accord to a comparably equipped BMW 3 series.
As you say, they are very different cars for very different market segments.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
AWD on the other hand... :shades:
As a former 1995 Nissan Maxima SE owner and a current 2004 Acura TL 6-speed owner, I think these two cars are almost as good as you can get in FWD. But there is no way they don't have significant performance handling limitations compared to RWD. The only possible advantage is that, if you take their natural 60/40 fornt weight imbalance as a given, you can improve snow traction with FWD. But BMW doesn't take that as a given and virtually every vehicle they make is close to a 50/50 balanced car.
As for AWD being better than RWD? I attended a Porsche Performance Driving event today at Summit Point and asked that very question to some of the instructors at lunch. We ran the track for 6 laps each in 911S's, Panamera's and Boxsters S's. All of the 911's were RWD, 2 of the 4 Panamera's were AWD. The general preference among the instructors for the 911's was RWD (lighter weight, more ability to throttle steer, etc). For everyday driving with a Panamera, it was a split decision.
RWD's advantages are in straight-line acceleration thanks to weight-transfer. But given that I hate driving in a straight line, my second choice after an AWD is a FWD. And I'm usually not willing to sacrifice the MPGs to get an AWD as a daily driver (they are inefficient power-wise, but you'll never ever break one loose).
Which...?
F/awd or R/awd...?
And then which F/awd of the myriad of versions.
I don't drive on public roads with anywhere near the enthusiasm I did yesterday at Summit Point. So perhaps some of the pitfalls of FWD would not be as obvious doing the grocery store run or the daily commute. But I don't think there is a FWD car made that could make it around the track in less than twice the time as a Boxster S in the hands of the professional drivers. And the professionals don't need (or want) the extra weight of AWD as a control aid. Heck, they turned off all of the electronic nannies before giving us a "hot lap" with them in the drivers seat.
it's called a Mazda3. :shades:
Yes, you are right... it pulls the car right off the track. Trust me, I've autocrossed and tracked RWD, FWD, and AWD. If you apply power too early with FWD, you increase understeer and wheelspin. If you apply too early with RWD, you increase oversteer and wheelspin. AWD allows you to apply power earlier in a typically neutral manner, but you still have to be cautious with it, and you have the added weight penalty.
The advantage to RWD is that you can use the throttle (throttle steer) to adjust in a corner moreso than with FWD. If I overdrive a corner with RWD, a dab of throttle and a little tail out action can correct it. Overdrive with FWD and your only course of action is to slow down.
After some adjustments, my GTI was definitely a fantastic autocross car, but I can assure you that I could NOT put power down in a corner. Nothing but wheelspin.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
O.K. then it's probably unfair of me to compare a sporty compact car to a sports car like the Boxster relative to driving dynamics. But I think if you drove something like a BMW 1-series against your Mazda3 around a track with instructor input to get the most out of each, you would quickly conclude that RWD and 50/50 weight balance offers some distinct handling advantages to FWD and a nose heavy weight distribution. At least that's what I found comparing my TL to a BMW 335i. The 2004 TL 6-speed, with a stiffer suspension and Brembo brakes not available on an automatic, is a far superior handling car than the automatic version. But it's no BMW when you are hitting the brakes hard before entering a turn and then powering around it.
I haven't driven the Mazda3, but hear that it is one of the better handling sporty compact cars available - and Mazda doesn't try to overpower the car with a high HP engine that might look good on paper, but induces excessive torque steer and wheel hop when pushed. I'm sure that for 99% of the driving I do, it would feel just fine. This isn't a debate on that, rather the laws of physics and mechanics as they apply to that other 1% of the time.
For a while there the Corvette Z06 was lighter and shorter than a Porsche 911.
There is hope - the new 911 is lighter and has shorter overhangs.
Lotus appears to be bloating up, too. Will we get another Elise and Exige, or will they move up in weight and content to better meet modern desires?
Well, the smooth, naturally aspirated inline 6s are gone. The turbo 4 clatters like a diesel and start/stop makes them shake like an 80s econobox. More importantly they lost that instant throttle response they were known for.
So even BMW can't touch BMW. :sick:
An angry can of gnats driving front wheels is even less of a BMW.
Aside from the obvious FWD driving characteristics, as you add HP you increase torque steer, especially on a light, small car. They've come a long way to curing torque steer, but it's still there, especially with a manual transmission.
Torque steer on a supercharged MINI is nasty, for instance.
Or a 90's Ford Taurus - those things went through trannies faster than tires.
"..sticks can't.."
Please explain/elaborate....
Unless you mean battery so low the ECU/Etc. doesn't run...
2009 fwiw which I think is pretty modern so should qualify for "these days"
With a generator you don't even need a battery in the car. I drove my '63 Corvair all summer without a battery. Just parked on hills.
I pushed a '57 chevy automatic to start it once - had to get up to abut 45 mph though (pushed with another car).
Hopefully Porsche doesn't read this and try to retroactively jail me.
Provided it isn't new enough that it requires an ECU or electronics to "fire" the engine.
"..it does not need any charge..."
If we're talking about a car old enough that it still uses the "kettering" ignition system, "points" and coil inductive "kick", it would still need a minimum battery charge to initially power up the alternator rotor.
Maybe a magneto ignition out of an old farm tractor or aircraft engine..?
Only 2 possibilities...
1. While the battery didn't have enough charge to power the starter motor it did have enough to FULY power the necessary electronics systems.
2. Absent the above you would need to have had enough battery charge to initialize the alternator and then pushed the car far enough to have the alternator system bring the voltage level up to "snuff".
Funny thing about VW Jetta TDI batteries are they really give little to NO warning. On one battery, I had just finished a three hour freeway trip. Luckily I had parked it in the garage. I went to start, deader than a door nail. Jump start, nada. Jump start with tow truck, (they have more powerful jumpers I think) nada, rolling start nada. Change out with oem battery @ VW dealers voila !!!!
Sorry, but given the overall circumstances/situation I have to believe the dealer did something more tham simply drop in a new battery.