Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

1207208210212213235

Comments

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    It's a bit worse than that.

    I think you would like it to be but it is not. It's just a different environment than pre-2000.
  • hootcoothootcoot Member Posts: 5
    Acceleration from 0-60mph means little in real world use. What means more is passing capability, say from 25mph to 50mph or more, where acceleration in those ranges is needed to pass the slow pokes on the back rodes of America.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    It's just a different environment than pre-2000.

    I'm not sure about the recall numbers - I've seen different websites report different numbers for Toyota for 2006. But if you're suggesting that the reason Toyota has had so many recalls the last 2 years is because the rules changed, you're mistaken. Transmission failures, engines dying at highway speeds and steering failures are not a result of a changing environment. These would have been recalled prior to 2000.

    Again, I'm not saying it's terrible, just that Toyota's reputation for stellar quality is a bit tarnished and they're not bulletproof like they used to be.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    This is where I appreciate manual transmissions. Merging onto a highway going from 35 to 70 mph with urgency is just a quick drop into 3rd gear, no waiting for the transmission to figure out I want the car to go faster now.
    I can make do with less horsepower because it is actually accessible.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    I'll tell you what, get stuck behind that idiot that stops at the end of a highway entrance ramp and then tell me that 0-60 times means nothing because you don't 'drag race', or maybe you have to comfortably pass that semi on a 2 lane road and you need to get from 40 to whatever as quickly as possible and then me that it is a static measurement called torque that allows you to do it. Follow this up with a little research into all the cars of this group in terms of acceleration times and what you will find is a direct correlation (HP/lb) between how well the cars in this group (and any other ) can do both of these kind of things and the HP (not torque) there is available to do it. Torque has a lot to do with how well a car drives but little to do with how well it moves.
    We have been thru this before and don't see any need to rehash this but I really think you need to buy a diesel and then wonder why getting from 0-60 (or passing that semi) has suddenly become a real problem.
    In terms of the safety value of things like handling and a good set of brakes, you are right they don't matter much (I guess because none of us do much swerving around telephone poles) - UNTIL, of course, you need them, and that could only be a difference between life and death.
  • neteng101neteng101 Member Posts: 176
    There are now 6 of 6 midsized family sedans in the row 5 homes I live in, all with V6 engines. No 4-cids in this size class on my block! All from the big 3 of Japanese car manufacturers.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    maybe because the 'price' paid in FE is shrinking and these 150hp (or so) 4 bangers have a tougher time moving 3300 lbs.?
  • w9cww9cw Member Posts: 888
    But, Accords and Camrys don't have a lock on "tons of miles in their old age." I have an '85 SAAB 900 that is now over 200K without any major engine work. The only powertrain-related work was a new clutch at 150K. In 22 years of ownership, the only repair items replaced were: brakes, tires, shocks (doesn't use struts, thank goodness), belts, mufflers, plugs (all standard consumables), battery (I'm on my 3rd), one starter motor, one power steering pump, one water pump, the aforementioned clutch, and a few ancillary light bulbs - that's it. It's on its original timing chain. Not too bad, I'd say.

    With some exceptions, I think a number of cars today can go a long time or way without major maintenance, if - and, only if - they are maintained correctly from a normal preventive maintenance point-of-view.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    You want high mileage?
    300K+(estimated) 1975 Cutlass Supreme
    235K - Volvo 164E
    270K - Volvo 240
    180K - Buick LeSabre
    170K - Buick Park ave(sister's)
    365K - Toyota 4Runner(current commuter vehicle for me)

    All are still registered and running in California except for the 164E.

    Now, as for power, it's useless if it comes at the price of a massive weight increase. Check out the BMW 3 series weight versus what it was 20 years ago. 800 lbs difference. There's a real reason many peolpe prefer to find a late 80s/early90s M3 instead of the boated mess we have now. Mustangs are simmilar. The old mid 90s model was small, fast, and cheap to modify. The new one - is a joke. Way too heavy and too much money for what you get.

    What I want to see is a 2800-3000lb sedan with a decent I6/V6 engine in it, RWD, and stickshift.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    But if you're suggesting that the reason Toyota has had so many recalls the last 2 years is because the rules changed, you're mistaken

    But it is precisely what I'm saying. There was a Highlander safety recall last year for carpeting! There was a Durango safety recall last year for cupholders! I'm not denying that serious problems like the Sequoia/Tundra ball joint issue are not occuring, they are.

    But the environment has changed. The NHTSA is not going to be blind-sided again like it was with Ford/Firestone. If there is a risk - recall everything. Let the manufacturers sort it out.

    That article from the Detroit News referenced the NHTSA numbers for each of the last 3 years.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    What I want to see is a 2800-3000lb sedan with a decent I6/V6 engine in it, RWD, and stickshift.
    Yeah, I think BMW E30/E36s have the lock on that with RWD. A 90-93 Accord with an H22 would be a lot of fun. If you just want a RWD with an I6/V6, there are a number of 70s domestic products with your name on it. ;)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I agree the mfrs and NHTSA are more likely to do a recall. But it sounded like you were implying THAT was the reason for the increased Toyota recalls, which I don't agree with.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Why do I think we are getting pretty far afield of midsized sedans, gee I dunno where I would get that idea. :sick:

    Also, let's get away from the recent personal insinuations while we are getting back on topic. No one has to read nor respond to any post that seems senseless, out of line or otherwise inappropriate. It would be a good thing for keeping this discussion open to keep that in mind and there are a number of posters here who need to think about that. Seriously.
  • neteng101neteng101 Member Posts: 176
    For a bit above 3000lbs, and with max fun to drive factor... WRX or Evo. Its AWD though in both.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I agree the mfrs and NHTSA are more likely to do a recall. But it sounded like you were implying THAT was the reason for the increased Toyota recalls, which I don't agree with.

    Responding in another forum to stay on topic..

    recall response
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    "Am I missing something here? I think I'm completely missing the point... a little help?"

    The whole point here is someone CHOSE something other than the same old same old Camry/Accord.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Take a look at Mycarspace http://www.carspace.com/scape2/Albums/My%20Toy/

    I added a sunroof deflector and a rock guard to the front. I will probably switch to a high quality bra when they become available. :shades:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Funny how ten years ago, the V6 Accord was the top engine offered (170 hp on the old SAE guidelines (and weighed about 3,200 lbs). Now, with 170 hp (on the old guidelines, 166hp on the new), and 3,100 lbs, and an extra gear in the automatic, the 4-cylinders are faster.

    4 MPG is 4 MPG (which translates into 400 extra miles every 100 gallons - substantial to me), and a car capable 8.0 seconds to 60 MPH is more than enough to move along safely, regardless. Today's so-called "tougher time" are yesterday's top-of-the-line.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The whole point here is someone CHOSE something other than the same old same old Camry/Accord.

    Ok... most driver's do this. I guess I didn't realize it warranted a post. I guess I should've posted that my father bought something other than an Accord, eh? Or my boss, or my aunt, or my best friend, or his girlfriend, or...

    C'mon scape, we know you hate the Accord and Camry, but do you have to constantly make attempts to deride them? It'd be different if it brought something new to the conversation, but can you honestly say that it did by posting that?

    Anybody can physically open their eyes in a parking lot and see that people DO choose vehicles other than Camry and Accord. You don't have to force your hate of HonYota on us AGAIN. We get it, man! :shades:
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    Today's so-called "tougher time" are yesterday's top-of-the-line.

    Exactly. Faster, more fuel efficient while being heavier, safer and easier to maintain.

    We've added numerous air bags, ABS, VSA (et al), TPMS, 100 mile engines, emissions reducers, safety cages etc to already great cars. They can handle the added weight.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    5 gears, instead of 4 makes a big difference (closer ratios).

    and a car capable 8.0 seconds to 60 MPH is more than enough to move along safely,

    I agree. Extra power, in less capable hands, can be more dangerous than simply adequate power. More power does not mean safer.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    1992-1997 M3 - 3.0 L S50B30 I6 286 hp
    1995-2000 M3 - 3.2 L S50B32 I6 321 hp
    (Europe)
    1995 M3 - 3.0 L S50B30 I6 286 hp
    1996-1999 M3 - 3.2 L S50B32 I6 321 hp
    (U.S. - some overlap in years and styles between Europe and the U.S.) That's plenty, considering.

    And the car weighed 2950lbs.(lighter version - stock it was 3175). It's not too surprizing that many people feel that the current 3 series is a let-down from the older models. Many purists feel that even 2950lbs was bloated, since the original M3 was no slouch, either:

    238 bhp 0-60 mph - 6.2 s. Top Speed: 150 mph
    Weight: 2850lbs. And this, from a sedan. Not much slower than the current models.(the mid 90s lightweight version did 0-60 in about 5.6 seconds and handled like it was on rails)

    The current 3-series is over 3500lbs. That's um... gotta hurt performance. And stuffing 400 or 500hp in the next M3 isn't going to fix the problems of it just simply weighing too much.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    It's not too surprizing that many people feel that the current 3 series is a let-down from the older models.

    Every midsize car has done the same thing (gained weight). Why? you ask. Because the consumer wants larger, smoother riding cars (hence the kooshy Camry is tops in sales). All the midsize cars handled better 5-10 years ago. But they were lighter, and had smaller, lighter engines. If BMW tried to sell a car like the 97 3.0 (smaller, lighter) today, no one would buy it. They are actually forced to give the public what it wants. PSSSSSST.....It's all about sales, and profits.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,256
    i drove my neighbor's '02 m3 a few times. as far as i was concerned, it was 'what weight?' this was accelerating or stopping.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Member Posts: 1,601
    matt44, I've asked a couple of times before, what was the engine size and HP rating of the Accord you are talking about?
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    The post title says 2003, and the HP would be 240, for the V6 (ratings at the time).
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    that the Fusion/Milan/MKZ are competitors..
    http://www.autoworld.com/apps/news/FullStory.asp?id=5767&frame= :shades:
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    That's a nice pic of the Lexus IS 350 :shades:

    Rocky
  • ontopontop Member Posts: 279
    A hint of the IS350 in the new Accord coupe, but that can't be a bad thing.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    a car capable 8.0 seconds to 60 MPH is more than enough to move along safely, regardless
    regardless?? 99% of the time perhaps, but there remains a number of real life traffic situations, however infrequent, that the more powerful car might just save your butt. Whether that is worth the 4mpg in the Accord, or the 2mpg in the Camry - that would be buyer's choice.
  • neteng101neteng101 Member Posts: 176
    The Camry is what is showing up in driveways in my neighborhood these days. A couple of new Sonatas have shown up on driveways too. Another neighbor just got a Camry this week... I'm seeing loaded V6s.

    Toyota marches on unstoppable it seems.

    And the Accord seems to be the ever popular choice for buyers looking for the more economical 4-cylinder engines. So many Accords I see that are new are all 4-cyls.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Just a hint ????? :surprise: That thing might as well be a clone. It looks good but dang.....At least the new TL, won't look all that bad.

    Rocky
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    Honda's 4 bangers, while they (naturally) give away some HP, continue to set the standard for smoothness (as they pretty much always have) and the pricing structure is such that there is a large premium for the V6. Toyota's V6 is that good and sacrifices less in the FE dept. so folks will spend the extra money for it.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    If BMW tried to sell a car like the 97 3.0 (smaller, lighter) today, no one would buy it.

    Actually, they do sell it but they had to call it a 1-series since the 3 had turned into such a huge barge.
  • matt44matt44 Member Posts: 9
    It was a 2003. HP is at 240. Any and all stats for it are available on line. Engine in it was three to four years 'older' that the 2006 Sonata engine yet looks like Honda had much better technology and engine quality even back then compared to what Hyundai has now.

    I had even spoken to the guy (whom I bought the car from) at the dealership that I had gotten to know (when the car was in for warranty work AGAIN) about the poor gas mileage compared to the Accord V6 and his response was that basically Honda made the best fuel efficient engines out there and it didn't surprise him that an older Honda engine would get better mileage with more hp than a Hyundai engine!

    The only positive thing about the whole Hyundai experience was the sales guy. Best most honest sales guy I have ever met. I just hope he moves to another brand soon so I can buy from him again.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    Just a hint ????? That thing might as well be a clone. It looks good but dang.....At least the new TL, won't look all that bad.

    Rocky, from which angle does it look like a clone to the IS? I didn't know that the IS line has spawned a coupe.

    Maybe someone with the ability could post pictures of the two, side by side?
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    You gotta have A LOT of imagination to see an IS in the new Accord coupe.

    Here you go 03accordman, I honestly don't think these 2 look alike from ANY given angle.

    image
    image

    image
    image
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Well, I guess in my real-life traffic situations I never put myself in a place where I need upwards of 250 horsepower. If the difference in pulling out in front of a car or not is that you have the V6, you probably shouldn't be cutting it that close anyway... but hey, that's just one guy and his insurance rates talking...

    Your Results May Vary (and I shouldn't have said "regardless" in my last post which you replied to, sorry)

    I've never been in an accident because my vehicle was underpowered (and that includes 4 years in a 130 horsepower Accord). My grandfather went 15 years in his 70 horsepower Civic Wagon - commuted 40 miles to work daily, including a drive through downtown. That car was never ever wrecked (which is amazing regardless of engine power).

    I say all that just to let you know where I'm coming from on this stance. I see the V6 as the more fun choice (unless you prefer handling, which I do) but at a high price ($2k or so + F.E.).
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Yeah, for me personally, the WRX non-STI looks like where its at. AWD/manual trans/225hp and up. My biggest issue is that I have to go for a 2004 or newer to get a sunroof, which is a little bit more saving up.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    Thanks Louiswei; I agree, you really need a lot of imagination (and a few monsters in your head) to call similar looking.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    In the Wikipedia article on the 1 series, it appears as if BMW is taking the same route that Honda is - where the Civic is becoming the upsized middle-range car and the Fit is the new entry-level offering.

    Light, same engines as the old 3 series, and a lot less expensive.

    http://www.carpages.co.uk/guide/bmw/bmw-1-series-130i-m-sport.asp

    2006 - 130i: 2996 cc I6, 24 valves, 265 hp/195 kW, 315 Nm
    Kerb Weight 1375 kg(3031 lbs)

    2007 - will be 306HP. Essentially you'll get an IS350's power with 500lbs less weight. Expect 0-60 times in the 5.5 range and handling that is like a rally car.

    The U.K. price includes massive taxes and such, so the U.S. price would be in the 30-35K range, most likely, for the 130 M(essentially a "M1", but they don't want to re-use the name)
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    every morning I have a specific highway entrance - the type of road where if you are doing 75, you are probably in the right lane, heavy traffic all moving at those kind of speeds 'bumper-to-bumper'. While I'll admit that there is sufficient 'run-up ' space for that 4 cylinder Accord (or similarly powered cars) to get up to the 70 or so that is needed, I don't even have to worry about it in my Avalon, or my wife in her 3.5 Altima. A convenience, some peace of mind (and I'll still contend a safety margin) that I do effectively pay for at the gas pump.
    The Accord 4, BTW, one of the very few, that it is difficult to tell that it is not a 6, at least until that point that you need to floor it. The 4 also should handle BETTER, less overall weight and better vehicle balance.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    The Accord is made in Japan as a 4-Cylinder model from the ground up, with the V6 usually available in the models they sell as Accura over here. (ie - they stuff a nice V6 in it kind of like how BMW throws a big engine in the M series) for the U.S. markets. Though I thing you can also get an Accord V6 in Japan, nobody really does it due to the insane tarrifs and surcharges.(if you have that much money, you get a real luxury car)

    So the 4 cylinder models that are made in Japan are among the most refined and best values for the price. Take the Accord VP. Same exact trim level as a Civic LX, with only a couple of exceptions(alloy wheels and a better stereo are it, I think) - so it's not a bad car, considering. Add in two rear speakers and a couple of minor accessories and it's a decent car.(Honda alloys weight exactly the same as the steel wheels, so there's not much point in getting them - the handling's exactly the same)

    http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91107&acode=USB70HOC011A0&restor- - e=false

    $16,215 with manual transmission, before shipping. Honda routinely has $500 or $1000 off, though, on these - so it's possible to get one for under $16K including shipping near the end of the model year.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    What are you talking about? The current Accord sold here in the states are DESIGNED here. The Japanese Accord is the same as the European Accord and to us that's the Acura TSX which comes with 4 cylinder only.

    The NA Accord is designed to carry both the I4 and V6 engines from the ground up. There is no such thing as it was designed to carry a 4 in Japan and we just stuck a 6 in there for the NA market. That is totally nonsense.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    The current Accord is an evolution of the older models, which were designed in Japan with the 4 sylinder engine in mind, much like how the current Buick LaCrosse shares a huge amount with the previous LeSabre and Regal.

    So even the current model still drives very well with the 4. It's not like GM and Ford where they design around the bigger engine and offer a small one in the base model and the car is a slug as a result.(take the puny 4 they put in the base Caprice and simmilar) 3400lb car with 2.4L pushrod engine. Ack. Honda designs around the 4 and you get the 6 if you want more power than it was designed to need. Mercedes does this, too(as does BMW) - so the C36 AMG is a C with loads more power than it has to have(not needs to have). :D

    And some Accords that are made in Japan make it over here - a few specific models like the VP.(roughly half are made in the U.S. and half in Japan). Get one if you can, as the QC in Japan is incredibly anal these days, as are the buyers.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    The current Accord sold here in the states are DESIGNED here. The Japanese Accord is the same as the European Accord and to us that's the Acura TSX which comes with 4 cylinder only.
    I believe this is correct - the only thing you forgot to add is that is also built here 'ground up', the reason that the smaller European Accord even exists is for the tighter European roads and the engine displacement taxes they have over there that effectively precludes the use of any V6.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    The current Accord is an evolution of the older models, which were designed in Japan with the 4 sylinder engine in mind

    The last gen Japanese Accord was also different than the US Accord.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    I looked at an Accord VP a few weeks ago and it said "Saiyama" on the build sticker.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    It's DESINGED here but a few of them were BUILT in Japan due to Honda doesn't have enough capacity to build them all here.

    Same thing as the Fusion is DESIGNED in Detroit but BUILT in Mexico.

    Another example, BMW Z4, X5 and X3 were all DESIGNED in Germany but were BUILT here in South Carolina.

    If you need more example I'll have them ready for you.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    GM and Ford where they design around the bigger engine and offer a small one in the base model and the car is a slug as a result.(take the puny 4 they put in the base Caprice and simmilar) 3400lb car with 2.4L pushrod engine.
    while I'll agree with the first part of your statement - when (or where) could you ever buy a Caprice with a 4 banger? Maybe you mean that great new CHINESE automaker, General Motors?
This discussion has been closed.