Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

mz6greyghost · January 2007

It's better than the current-gen, but it looks like a Lexus to me. That's not a good thing...

louiswei · January 2007

I was only referring to the interior. To me the exterior needs a REVOLUTIONARY make over.

lightfootfl · January 2007

I just can't seem to understand why a lot of the manufacturers are trying to build their "sidewalls" so high that the passengers need a booster seat to see out the undersized side windows. Look at the Chrysler line, and now this too, and many others. Why don't they just design cars like a tank, without any side windows ?? Only slits to try to see out of. I know I am in the minority on this, but I will never buy something that I can't sit in, and comfortably see out of. I hope this isn't the future of our automobiles. :confuse:

backy · January 2007

Crash protection (e.g. more stringent tests from IIHS in past few years)?

jimmy81 · January 2007

It's better than the current-gen, but it looks like a Lexus to me. That's not a good thing...

Yea - an Accord that looks like a Lexus. How could Honda ever live that one down?

03accordman · January 2007

I actually quite liked the exterior - feel it looks a lot better than the current coupe. I am hoping they keep it close to the production model, maybe some more excitement needed in the front grille.

IMO, the character line on the side looks more BMW, while in profile I felt the car looks more like a G coupe than anything else. Did you feel it looks like any particular Lexus model or just in general Lexus looking?

matt44 · January 2007

I owned both (V6 versions) and drive both the same way (aggressive, floor the gas pedal, over 85mph on the highway whenever possible).

2006 Sonata - 16 to 18 mpg on average. Very poor. The MORE powerful and faster Accord used to average 6 to 8 mpg more. 3 trips to the dealer for warranty work already (including one serious leak issue in the engine).

2003 Accord - 24 to 26 mpg. Absolutely awesome. No trips to the dealer.

Very sorry I traded in my Accord for a Sonata. Learned the hard way that price is not everything. You get what you pay for.

Finally - the resale value of the Sonata is in the toilet. Got top dollar for the Accord when I traded it in. I guess fleets say it all - 50% for the Sonata and only 1% for the Accord. (http://www.fleet-central.com/af/t_pop_pdf.cfm?action=stat&link=http://www.fleet- -central.com/af/stats2006/cars_web.pdf)

This is the first and last Hyundai that will ever me owned in this family! Back to Honda next time (although GM has some impressive offerings based on the Auto Show - only time will tell).

booyahcramer · January 2007

Its tough to like Hyundai even though they build a better car now. I don't know if its the name, the zero status factor, or the looks of the car, but they're creepy to me. I'd rather spend the extra cash and get a Honda.

captain2 · January 2007

while 50% of Sonatas may be over on a rental lot somewhere, and you might have a bear of a time even finding 1 Accord, this is a function of corporate policies, Honda specifically doesn't want Accord on those lots, Hyundai OTH wants to get as many American butts in a Sonata as possible not only through Hertz etc. but also with aggressive upfront pricing. The resale value implications should remain as you suggest as long as both these things continue. Just can't imagine an older V6 Accord outrunning an 06 Sonata, althought the mpg part doesn't surprise me that much.

elroy5 · January 2007

Just can't imagine an older V6 Accord outrunning an 06 Sonata,

The 03 V6 Accord is actually quicker than the 06/07 models. Strange, but true.

captain2 · January 2007

see, now you made me go look it up - sure 'nuff the Accord picked up an extra 300 lbs. or so in there somewhere. Maybe the 290hp TL/S engine in the Accord's future because somehow don't see it going down in size?

elroy5 · January 2007

I think the Accord will have the 3.2 liter engine, and not the 3.5. They should have no problem getting 260hp (probably more) with the 3.2, and that will be enough. The regular TL still uses the 3.2, so I don't see the Accord going larger.

scape2 · January 2007

chooses an 07 Altima S automatic over an 07 Camry LE! This is a 60 year old woman who just test drove 5 different cars and chose the Altima.. Her choice came down to the Altima and the Camry. Want to know what changed her mind... The manager at the Toyota dealership started bashing the Nissans, saying they had "all these problems" and "recalls".. She was educated and knows about the Toyota whoes of present. Another factor.. the $1100 price difference.. Toyota better watch it...

thegraduate · January 2007

Am I missing something here? I think I'm completely missing the point... a little help?

thegraduate · January 2007

Just can't imagine an older V6 Accord outrunning an 06 Sonata, althought the mpg part doesn't surprise me that much.

Why not?

2003 Accord - 240 hp, ~ 3,300 lbs
2006 Sonata - 235 hp, ~ 3,450 lbs

Seems logical to me.

elroy5 · January 2007

Scape2 needs some therapy/counseling for his Toyota fixation.

elroy5 · January 2007

The Accord's little 3.0 liter engine does very well against the many 3.3, 3.5's and larger engines out there. When they unleash the giant 3.2 :surprise: in 08, it will be more than adequate.

joe97 · January 2007

C/D ran 6.6 sec on the Sonata V6.

thegraduate · January 2007

in the same test, the Accord V6 got the exact same time 0-60 - 6.6 sec.

goodegg · January 2007

I'm not surprised someone picked the Altima over the Camry. Its a much better looking car, faster, with a nicer interior. I like it too.

The 'educated' part is a silly comment.

thegraduate · January 2007

She was educated and knows about the Toyota whoes of present.

That does make it sound like anyone who buys a Camry is uneducated...Not sure if that's what was implied. I still don't understand posts like this one...

joe97 · January 2007

Your mileage seems to be on the low-end. Most V6 owners report average of 22-24 city and 29-32 highway. Some owners have had no trouble achieving mid-to-upper 20s city.

The leak does sound serious, glad you've got it checked out. This is actually the first time I've heard about it on the Sonata. To my knowledge, there has been no confirmed dealer reports of such problems.

Resale values are predicted to be fairly strong.

elroy5 · January 2007

0-60 is not my main concern. I want good response from say 40-70, and 60-80. Passing power is what I use. I don't do a lot of drag racing in my Accord. Drag racing was fun when I was 20, and had a Chevelle with a 327c.i. That was 24 years ago.

thegraduate · January 2007

0-60 is not my main concern. I want good response from say 40-70, and 60-80. Passing power is what I use. I don't do a lot of drag racing in my Accord. Drag racing was fun when I was 20, and had a Chevelle with a 327c.i. That was 24 years ago.

0-60 isn't just drag racing. On my commute, I do a 0-60 run everyday; uphill, on-ramp. There is a red-light at the bottom of the ramp and the speed limit is 60. Hence, 0-60 in a short distance does have some importance to me. I realize everybody doesn't feel this way, but things like this give you an idea of how the car will perform.

I don't make redline runs on this ramp, but a car with a 9 second 0-60 time will have to work harder than a car with a 7.5 second 0-60 time, most likely.

rgyip · January 2007

To be specific, the 244 HP Accord got 6.6 sec in the same test.

The 240 HP 2003 Accord would be around 230 HP or under the new SAE certified ratings according to Honda. I know I am nitpicking here. :surprise:

thegraduate · January 2007

Well, if we are REALLY nitpicking, then I'll use the Motor Trend report in which the 2005 model Accord (which was pre-mid-model engine boost) was used against the 05 Camry, 06 Sonata, and 06 Fusion. Accord got 0-60 in 6.6 also, while the Sonata got 6.8, Fusion 7.2, and Camry 7.2.

Accord also won in the passing power, 3.2 sec to 3.4 sec when accelerating from 45-65 MPH. Small differences, but it still backs up what our friend said earlier about the older Accord feeling quicker than the newer Sonata.

Haha, NOW who's nitpicking? :-)

kdhspyder · January 2007

OK I know that you aren't fully aware of the normal 'order of things' but as the market leader and price leader Toyota puts a price on its trims and Honda and Nissan and Hyundai adjust their prices from there.

Come Sept when the Accord is new it will likely be $2-300 below the Camry. The Altima will be $800-$1000 under the Camry and the Sonata will be another discount lower. If the Altima is $1000 under the Camry then the market is in balance and all is right in the world. The Altima nearly always sells at a discount to the Accord and Camry here.

E.g. MSRP's for 2007 models ( per Edmunds )
Altima S .. $20300
Camry LE .. $20975

rgyip · January 2007

Yes you are nitpicking there for sure!

However, you talk about acceleration numbers like they are the end-all be-all. Many factors can determine acceleration numbers, and never are they the exact same twice, as you already know. And for most people, they can't launch the car well enough to get those numbers anyways.

I don't know why so many people get tied down with numbers when it comes to acceleration, like the number is set in stone or something. Much of your acceleration is determined by your launch, road and weather conditions, etc., and rarely can be replicated twice. If a car is within several tenths of a second within each other, I wouldn't say definitively one car being definitively faster.

thegraduate · January 2007

My only purpose was to back up what someone said earlier. They stated the 2003 Accord felt faster than a 2006 Sonata. They were doubted, so I helped them support their claim with information that validates their case with supporting info.

Trust me, I'm not an accelerative guru. If I were, I wouldn't have gotten my I-4 Accord when I could have gotten a V6 Sonata at the same or better price. Acceleration, while important, is about 6th or 7th on my list of things I looked for when car shopping.

rgyip · January 2007

I am willing to bet that acceleration isn't what your friend felt to give a .2 of a second difference (which at passing speeds is around 1 mph), unless he was a robot.

It more likely has to do with the lazy confused downshift of the 2006 Sonata (now fixable via TSB upgrade), perception of speed by slightly more noise, or weather conditions (ECU commanding fuel/spark timing), or even the gear where the tranny sat and downshifted into.

thegraduate · January 2007

Well, retardation is retardation, whether or not it is due to engine power or transmission capability...

I'm happy as a clam in my 2.4L Accord, so I'll leave the accelerative debate alone. :-)

Both Sonata and Accord are more than adequate in 4-cylinder form, and quite fast in 6-cylinder form.

rgyip · January 2007

What I meant by retardation is the ECU. You really can't compare two cars or even the same car when the weather is different. Guaranteed, you will feel that your 2.4L Accord will give the V6 Accord a run for the money if you tested your accord in 30 degree weather and ran the V6 in 120 degree heat. That's all I was trying to say about that.

The 2.4L engine is nice like you say. My brother has it in his new CRV and it is smooth...

thegraduate · January 2007

You are correct sir. That's why its always best to use comparisons that have been conducted by the same driver on the same day at the same track (like the MT or C&D usually are).

How's he liking his CR-V? My folks want an AWD vehicle and are interested in one...

rgyip · January 2007

My brother like his CRV. He has the AWD version and he says it drives like a champ in the snow. I believe Honda has some sort of LSD or something that can smartly adjust the power to different wheels.

Overall, it's pretty quiet, solidly built and of course, has a beautiful interior that IMO, Honda does best in the business.

thegraduate · January 2007

It has Real-Time AWD that adjusts power to the rear-wheels only when needed. The rest of the time, it operates in front-drive mode, saving fuel.

lightfootfl · January 2007

re your 10869 and graduate's 10870
Don't you think she may have been "educated" to the problems of Toyota? You do know they have had their problems don't you? Too bad everyone isn't as "educated" regarding their car purchase.

goodegg · January 2007

Her 'education' seems limited to the isolated few issues with the intro of the 07 Camry, not with the hundreds of thousand satisfied buyers and the resounding acceptance of the car by the automotive press.

The Altima has its issues as well. She should 'educate' herself about those too.

I prefer the Altima (4 cyl version) to the Camry anyway and don't think a few initial bugs render the Camry to the recycle bin.

booyahcramer · January 2007

Too bad everyone isn't as "educated" regarding their car purchase

If everyone was so 'educated' who would buy any car? There's always complaints about every car, especially one that sells in massive numbers like a Camry. The laws of statistics dictate that.

I think if everyone was 'educated' about purchasing a car as you lament, Ford would sell half the cars they do.

prosource1 · January 2007

More than half of the car buying public could care less about acceleration. I won't even get on the impracticality bandwagon of the whole acceleration debate. Acceleration? Acceleration? Most people get the heck in their car and drive to work and never consider the 0-60 thing. Now realize, as the former owner of a Maxima, I was thrilled by this V6 after owning a 4-cylinder for 15 years. But c'mon most could care less so lets not make acceleration more than it is.

akirby · January 2007

Her 'education' seems limited to the isolated few issues with the intro of the 07 Camry, not with the hundreds of thousand satisfied buyers and the resounding acceptance of the car by the automotive press.

Don't you think the fact that Toyota recalled more vehicles last year than it sold (first time in history I'm sure) is significant? Engine sludge, transmission problems, steering problems......etc. I'm NOT saying that Toyota is any worse than the others - they're not. But they're certainly not pristine anymore when it comes to reliability.

booyahcramer · January 2007

Just cause these are midsize, family sedans doesn't mean you should give up performance. Most of these cars are sold as 4 cyls anyway, but the 6s allow "drivers" in this segment to actually enjoy their ride, considering how much time they spend in them.

Acceleration may mean nothing to you. To me its one of the primary factors I consider when buying today. A car doesn't have to be the fastest - just fast.

matt44 · January 2007

Hi - I realize my mileage is on the very low end. I completely expect that based on the way I drive. That is not an issue.

The issue is that the more powerful, faster, older V6 I traded in (Accord), got 6 to 8 mpg better than the new Sonata. That is what is very dissapointing. It shows me that Hyundai is still far behind Honda in terms of technology, engines, and refinement.

The leak I was told was not a common issue. However, the windshield washer motor that was burned out - service guy at the dealer said that was a common issue - he had seen several. Again - multiple trips to the dealer for getting stuff fixed on the Hyundai vs none by the Accord.

I'm not sure where you live but the resale value around here is in the toilet. I'm already wanting to get rid of this junky Hyundai and looks like I'll have to try and sell it myself rather than trading it in. Again that is very dissapointing as I got offered more from the dealer on my Accord than what I would have acccepted in my head before I went in. Was very happy with they offered me. I know that resale value is strongly affected by fleets and the Sonata is over 50% fleet while the accord is at 1%. This also shows that the retail demand (real end consumers) is low for the Sonata as people don't really want it thus killing resale value even more!

Oh well live and learn - I'll never be so cheap again when it comes to buying a car! Lesson learned!!!

thegraduate · January 2007

More than half of the car buying public could care less about acceleration.

But, if some of us in here talk about it, why does that bother you? Just don't respond and move on to the next post. You can talk about seat fabric if you want to, I don't care. I'm willing to bet more than half the buying public cares about it, whether or not they know it. Guess what I have to do to turn onto my street everyday? Accelerate. I have to accelerate to blend with traffic on the interstate as well, something that requires decent abilities in the engine bay. :shades:

I won't even get on the impracticality bandwagon of the whole acceleration debate.

Acceleration? Acceleration? Most people get the heck in their car and drive to work and never consider the 0-60 thing. Now realize, as the former owner of a Maxima, I was thrilled by this V6 after owning a 4-cylinder for 15 years. But c'mon most could care less so lets not make acceleration more than it is.

Ok. They don't have to respond to posts about acceleration or "car enthusiast-topics" here either.

Carry on talking about airbags, stereos, and warranties. I'll participate, as I have all three!

captain2 · January 2007

acceleration is also the ability to merge more quickly onto the highway, and also the ability to use a sometimes aggressive approach to avoiding an accident - among other things. Other factors equal, the more powerful car is safer than the same car that is more challenged. And you don't need to be a closet drag racer to appreciate that - HP, handling and braking all figure very prominently into what makes a good, safe car - even more so that crash test results, airbags, and other 'safety' systems.

03accordman · January 2007

"Don't you think the fact that Toyota recalled more vehicles last year than it sold (first time in history I'm sure) is significant? Engine sludge, transmission problems, steering problems......etc. I'm NOT saying that Toyota is any worse than the others - they're not. But they're certainly not pristine anymore when it comes to reliability."

You have just proven Leadfoot's point; 'educated' does not mean being knowledgeable about only Toyota problems, but problems with all cars a person is considering, which sadly was not the intention of that post.

How can she be considered 'educated' only because she bought an Altima? That post clearly implied that anyone not buying a Toyota is 'educated' because of the probems the Camry had at introduction.

w9cw · January 2007

Depreciation, residual value, and/or resale value mean nothing, unless you trade or sell your car. Just as with the stock market, the market value of a stock at a given snapshot of time is meaningless, unless you sell your stock at that time.

If you're one who trades a car every 2 through 4 years, don't buy ANYTHING affordable to the masses other than a Honda or Toyota (and, Scion). Most every other marque, including the up-scale European brands, will kill you on depreciation during that short period of time.

However, if you keep a car 10 years or longer, the debate on which marque you purchase is really somewhat moot. Just make sure you make the right decision in the first place, and you will be happy.

imidazol97 · January 2007

I'm not sure which you're meaning. But IMO the horsepower peak rating means little for a car. It's the amount of torque it produces at a usable rpm and the choices of final drive ratio along withgearing ratios in the transmission that make a car really peppy and usable. I.E., the horsepower races of my car make 8 more horsepower than yours at 6000 rpm means little if the torque at 4000 is less than the lower peak horsepower car.

Zero to 60 times mean little because I don't do much drag racing. I do some acceleration from stoplights and stop signs and just want the car to feel strong and that it's doing that easily.

The handling is a factor in ow the car feels valued in the way each driveer wants it to behave; I don't do much avoid accidents where I swerve and go around telephone poles and back on the roadway. But I do want a car that reacts to steering input predicatably.

Crash testing is easily built for in a car. It may not be as safe for other forms and directions of impact but it may meet the particular design standard for a 50% frontal collision with a certain shaped solid barrier; doesn't mean much when it meets up with an SUV or a guardrail anchor end.

The numbers don't tell the WHOLE story.

neteng101 · January 2007

However, if you keep a car 10 years or longer, the debate on which marque you purchase is really somewhat moot.

True - though there has been a track record in the past of old Accords/Camrys going tons of miles in their old age without much problems. Its like either way, Honda/Toyota seems to have an edge on other margues.

akirby · January 2007

I wasn't defending the previous post - just responding to leadfoot6's implication that the only problem was a few teething pains on the 07 Camry tranny. It's a bit worse than that.

kdhspyder · January 2007

Don't you think the fact that Toyota recalled more vehicles last year than it sold (first time in history I'm sure) is significant? Engine sludge, transmission problems, steering problems......etc. I'm NOT saying that Toyota is any worse than the others - they're not. But they're certainly not pristine anymore when it comes to reliability.

Inaccurate but not surprisingly so. Check your figures for US recalls in 2006. Except DCX the other 3 went down significantly. There is no way to judge any trends by recall numbers because it's a different environment now than 10 yrs ago, before Ford/Firestone. Cars are getting safety recalls on cupholders and carpeting.

This article from the Detroit News will give you a good view of what the real situation is.
Big 4 Recalls over the last 3 years

Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles