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

1…131132134136137…235

Comments

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Its a larger car in terms of exterior, but not neccesarily in terms of actual room.

    I've never been in an Impala...well not since I owned a '67 :)...but was surprised to see that, according to CR's measurements, it has less leg room than VW Jetta. :surprise:
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    Yes but now you're stuck with a Honda...
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    I agree, though I own a GM product currently (Saturn Vue) My experiences with GM cars in general have not been good. First GM car was a new Chevrolet Vega 72. It got totaled after being only 8 months old (hit broadside by a 72 Malibu. Second Vega had to have the engine replaced. Transmission was crap, 2 speed power-glide. Couldn't pass a man on a bicycle with it. Second car was a 75 Firebird. Transmission rebuild after 50,000 miles. Third GM, another dreaded Chevrolet, this time 88 Chevy Corsica with the 2.8 liter engine. The engine by the way was the ONLY good part of the car. AC needed constant repair to the point even the Factory Reps gave up on it. Power windows needed 2 motors replaced on back doors at 6 months. Transmission rebuild at 70,000 miles. Went through no less than 8 alternators, 4 AC compressors, two CPUs, and changed out a manifold the local dealer told me was warped but after replaced $$$ found it wasn't. The only GM vehicles that have seemed worth a damn is Saturn line. Drove a Saturn SC2 coupe till I sold it at 18,000 miles with only 3 costly problems and so far the VUE a 2002 is problem free except for 2 factory recalls fixed by the dealer. NO I see no advantage in owning a Chevy.
  • meateatermeateater Member Posts: 123
    ....but you can trade in a Honda now and not get a laughable trade-in value quote like a Hyundai
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    Hyundai is not installing a washer beneath the screw that would secure the handle to the frame of the car. Honda does it and Hyundai doesn't.

    You forgot to add that Sonata's are assembled in a plant that uses robots for 80% of the assembly. I am sure the washer in question isn't applied by a human at all. That's not cheap that is just assembly line technique. After reading your post I went out and pulled on all my grab handles and I weigh 200lbs. Could not loosen them when used as intended. My I suggest that some gorilla the car was previously rented to probably broke it getting his fat butt out of the seat?
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    or you can get into a wreck and listen to the EMS personnel laugh as they cut you out of Honda's beer can body. I know I work in EMS. And yeah I've seen the carnage.
  • meateatermeateater Member Posts: 123
    The only GM vehicles that have seemed worth a damn is Saturn line

    Their trucks are damn good
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    or you can get into a wreck and listen to the EMS personnel laugh as they cut you out of Honda's beer can body. I know I work in EMS. And yeah I've seen the carnage.

    Huh? Are you implying that the Honda is sub-standard in crashes?

    Not sure how you can do that, when you haven't seen how other brands would react in the same instances. The only way to do that is proper crash-testing, in which the Honda does as well or better as most other midsize sedans.

    Shoot, I have a 1996 Accord that only got 4 stars back then, I hit a guardrail skidding sideways at 35-45 MPH (was run off the road and lost control - no ABS standard 11 years ago!) and walked away. The front 1/4th of my car was lying on the road seperate of the rest of the car, but I was unharmed.
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    ABSOFREAKIN LOOTLY, I say this. I have had to extricate many people from Honda Accords and Civics what were crushed when other cars of comparable size had the passenger compartment intact. You won't see this on the commercials. Take the time to go to a wrecking yard some time and see for yourself the number of totaled out Hondas are there. another thing, I live and work in an area where there are a lot of interstate highway. EVERY accident I have gone to the imitation 5mph Honda bumpers (which are actually rated at 2.5 mph were found some distance from the scene of the impact. They are velcroed on plastic foam. They look great and tough but Honda was the first car manufacturer to relax the bumper standards on these "quality" cars when the Feds eased up on the bumper requirements for cars. I can't tell you how many others also no longer meet the 5 mph standard set forth in 1973 but I can tell you your Honda doesn't.

    "The front 1/4th of my car was lying on the road seperate of the rest of the car" There you go, you made my point for me.

    Another thing, crashing a car straight into a concrete wall at 30 mph or even a 30 mph offset which the insurance industry uses for comparison is not the real world. Car accidents I have been to where people have died or been seriously injured were impacts above 45 mph and as high as 90. Not many modern cars will stay together at the high speed impacts I mentioned but with the safety features the people in them should have been able to walk away. They didn't. So far none of the Hondas that I spoke about had side impact air bags, so I can't tell you that would have helped. I owned a Toyota Tercel for many years and I was also terrified of getting hit for the same reason. The car was reliable and handled well but it was thin metaled and light. A bad combination on highways congested with SUVs and 18 wheelers.
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    I have to agree there to a point. Our company buys fleet Chevrolet Silverado package chassis for our ambulances. However we do have our own maintenance dept that can tear down and rebuild any part of them. GM Certified. They have served us well on our ambulances putting easily 300,000 miles on them before change outs. The turbo diesels are impressive. The trucks are modified with heavy duty alternators transmission coolers etc. so that may be the reason for the longevity.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I have had to extricate many people from Honda Accords and Civics what were crushed when other cars of comparable size had the passenger compartment intact.

    Which cars are you talking about here? Are any of them part of this comparison?

    The car was reliable and handled well but it was thin metaled and light. A bad combination on highways congested with SUVs and 18 wheelers.

    So which one of these cars do you say would fare better in a crash with an SUV or 18 wheeler? Are we all supposed to drive SUVs for safety?
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    The cars I was speaking of were Honda Accords, 1990 through 2004 (the last one I had anything to do with extrication on)and Honda Civics (take your pick of the year) The Tercel I had was a 1983. SUVs only give the impression of safety. A majority of them don't even have to pass safety mandates the smallest car does. Most still have no bumper protection, most will roll over easily and the roofs are not reinforced as cars are. The frame and chassis are the only strengths these behemoths have going for them besides their shear size and mass. Truck based frames. Battering rams for smaller cars. No the best protection is crash avoidance these days. Crush zones work to a point. But there just isn't enough sheet metal in most cars today to save you. I chose the Sonata partially for the room and comfort but also it was the most car for my wallet. Safety was the selling point. Side curtain air bags, side door air bags for the front passengers (wish they had them for the back seat though) ABS, traction control and stability control. All designed to keep you out of trouble. Granted a lot of those Hondas probably didn't have those features, but I got totally turned off when I saw how many bumpers just fell off with moderate impacts. Just trying to be honest here. I own a Honda motorcycle. I think Honda has great engineering, very meticulous engine design (cars and bikes). I just think they could have done more safety wise. And that means a lot since I haul around my small grandkids with me a lot these days.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    "What he forgot about was more problems, more gas $$$, and less quality."

    How do you know this? Another typical Toyota/Honda owner false statement? Less quality? Car was pretty well put together my friend. Ever been in one?

    Yes, I have been in one (for an entire week). The Impala was jittery on straight roads, and nose dived on corners. The interior was poorly laid out, with cheap looking and feeling controls. Many family members own Chevys, and I don't see the "perceived" improvements they've made.

    If Chevy could make a decent V6, they wouldn't have to put a V8 in a car this size to get some (straight line) performance out of it.
  • lahirilahiri Member Posts: 394
    I just had a look at the window stickers of 2007 G6s with 170 HP I4. They all say 17 MPG city/ 25 MPG highway. Isn't this MPG rating too low for I4? Are the window stickers wrong?
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I chose the Sonata partially for the room and comfort but also it was the most car for my wallet. Safety was the selling point.

    So you are saying the Sonata is safer than the Accord. I think you are assuming a lot here. I bought an 03 Accord, and it has all the same safety features your car has, with the exception of stability control. Did the Sonata offer all this in 03? I seriously doubt it. And I doubt a Sonata is safer than my Accord.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    fueleconomy.gov lists it at 23/33 mpg
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    If the OP gets the Sonata, it would be either a 06 or a 07, which has all common safety features standard, plus five star crash safety ratings across the board (NHTSA) and GAG (IIHS - could be better), pretty impressive overall if you ask me.
  • ontopontop Member Posts: 279
    Yea...but you're still driving a Hyundai, something most folks don't want to risk buying.

    You keep forgeting the scarlet letter they wear thru their own doings.
  • rcc8179rcc8179 Member Posts: 131
    I just had a look at the window stickers of 2007 G6s with 170 HP I4. They all say 17 MPG city/ 25 MPG highway. Isn't this MPG rating too low for I4? Are the window stickers wrong?

    It could be that the I-4 engine was listed under "standard equipment" and then the V-6 engine was listed under "optional equipment." I have seen this before on some vehicles--often with transmissions--where it will list a manual transmission under "standard equipment" and a simple glance through the window shows an automatic.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    If the OP gets the Sonata, it would be either a 06 or a 07, which has all common safety features standard, plus five star crash safety ratings across the board (NHTSA) and GAG (IIHS - could be better), pretty impressive overall if you ask me.

    The Accord had all these safety features 3 years ago (03), except for stability control. Did the 03 Sonata have these features available? Hyundai is 3 years too late.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    Hyundai is 3 years too late.

    This discussion is about new cars, not 3 year old cars, correct?
  • lahirilahiri Member Posts: 394
    Check this... Pontiac G6 4-cyl is rated at 17 MPG city/ 25 MPG highway!

    http://www.carspace.com/lahiri/Albums/windowG6/
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The 2003 Accord did not offer side airbags in all trim lines. It offered side curtains only on the EX V6. It did not offer active front head restraints and traction control across its lineup (traction only on V6 models). It did have ABS standard in all trim lines.

    http://www.hondanews.com/CatID2006?mid=2002072937039&mime=asc

    Sonata, and in fact all Hyundais, had side airbags standard back in 2003. Honda didn't offer standard side bags across its lineup until 2006. I guess you could say Honda was 3 years late.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    This discussion is about new cars, not 3 year old cars, correct?

    Correct, but it doesn't make the Sonata any less late. Does it?

    The 03 Sonata had no curtains, no abs, and no traction control. Not even as an option. All of these things my 03 Accord has.

    What? No abs. My 92 Accord had abs. They are later than I thought.
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    Yea...but you're still driving a Hyundai, something most folks don't want to risk buying.

    You keep forgeting the scarlet letter they wear thru their own doings.

    Ouch! Probably true tho.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Where do you get this stuff? ABS and traction control were available on ANY 2003 Sonata, even the base model. Was that true also of the 2003 Accord? No.

    Only the Accord EX V6 had side curtains. Side bags were an option even on the Accord LX--but standard on all '03 Sonatas. Talk about late!
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Is MSN Autos lying to me? Link below

    http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Glance.aspx?year=2003&make=Hyundai&model=- Sonata&trimid=-1
  • shado4shado4 Member Posts: 287
    Yes, MSN Autos is full of cr*p.

    I checked the specs for my 2002 Hyundai Elantra GT on MSN Autos and it says my car is not available with ABS, traction control, or a sunroof.

    I have all three!

    I'd look elsewhere for correct information.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I looked it up on other sites. The Sonata had abs, and traction control only as options in 03. Side curtains were not available in any Sonata in 03.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Backtracking now, eh? Here is what you said a few minutes ago:

    The 03 Sonata had no curtains, no abs, and no traction control. Not even as an option.

    Also, you conveniently ignore the fact that the 2003 Sonata (and earlier Sonatas in fact) had side airbags standard, on all trim lines. Not so the 2003 Accord. No side bags on the DX. Side bags were an option on the LX. However, one 2003 Accord model, the high-priced EX V6, had side curtains. Big whoop. They should be standard on a car that expensive.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    see my post above where my sisters one year old G6 which was bought for $24K +TTF and GAP ( $27K loan ) was worth $14500 at most one year later with only 8700 miles.

    Depreciation is the single biggest expense any owner has on a vehicle, excluding catastrophic out-of-warranty expenses.

    This is what annoys buyers of GM/F/DC vehicles the most. 'Why did I pay that much for it last year, if it was only going to be worth this much this year? I feel violated.'
  • honda28honda28 Member Posts: 14
    I have owned 4 Hondas....Civic, Accord, Pilot and know an Odyssey. I have always had the best of luck with all of them. My 2004 Accord was a wonderful car and I may still have it if I didnt more room. The car was put together wonderfully,drove well and had a wonderful ride. Hondas reputation stood up well. Hyundai on the other hand doesnt have the reputation of Honda and it will probably take several years to establish.I am by no means saying Hyundais are junk but they are not at the same level as Hondas or Toyotas imo. So please do not try to convice me otherwise.
  • booyahcramerbooyahcramer Member Posts: 172
    Talk about beating a dead horse. Who cares ? !

    We could talk about pitiful Hyundai a few years back - but we're not - its about what's happening now.

    About how Hyundai has turned things around with the Alabama plant, the new 07 Camry, how the Mazda 6 handles....etc
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,311
    It's impressive the number of good choices out there in the midsize range. Ten years ago the Accord and the Camry were far beyond most of their competitors. I think they still are ahead, but there are very respectible alternatives to be found with the Sonata, Fusion, Aura, Mazda 6, etc.

    I still think the Accord is slightly ahead, even of the Camry, for the following reason:

    My impression, and it might be wrong, is that Honda is the company where the engineers have the most power. Mr. Honda himself was an engineer, and I think the head of Honda today is an engineer. I think all of the presidents of Honda have been engineers, while at other car companies that only happens once in a while. Again, perhaps I'm wrong, but I think the engineers have relatively more power than the bean counters at Honda, at least compared to other car companies. I think if you asked a large group of competent and impartial engine engineers which engine was the most advanced, the Honda i-VTEC would probably get the most votes. It gives the best mpg of any midsize sedan, and is also quite smooth and powerful for its size. The Accord's double wishbone 5 link rear suspension is also, I think, slightly more advanced than its competitors.

    I have another small example of where Honda engineering doesn't go for the lowest common denominator. Starting in the 1990s, the federal government started investigating whether improvements needed to be made in the roof crush protection standard for cars. I think the current standard, which first started about 1970, states that a car needs to hold 1.5 times its own weight upside down without the roof crushing in more than a certain number of inches. Many people have contended that this standard is way too weak, and you've probably seen pictures of cars and suvs with their roofs crushed in that make that point.

    In the mid 1990s the feds suggested that the standard might be changed to, I think, 2.5 times the weight of the car. Ford, GM, and Chrysler have fought this standard, and so far have successfully delayed it from being implemented. I read that Ford builds almost all of its cars very close to the minimum government standard of 1.5, and didn't want to invest the $200 (or whatever it would cost) per car to strengthen the door pillars and the roofs and fix the problem. That surely wasn't what the engineers at Ford wanted, but that's what the bean counters ordered--after all $200 per car adds up to hundreds of millions of dollars over the years. I read that Honda, in the meantime, designed and built the 1998 Accord to meet the tougher standard. I assume the current Accord is also built to that standard.

    On some measures a few of the Accord's competitors may be ahead—the V-6 Camry has more power, the Sonata cost less and yet has stability control across the line (whereas Honda only has it on top end models), etc.—but overall I feel that Honda engineering tends to be a little bit ahead. Now that engineering does cost more—the Accord is thousands more than the comparable Sonata—but perhaps it's even in the small things, like that washer in the door handle mechanism that another poster was talking about—that put Honda slightly ahead.

    Not surprinsingly I own a Honda, and so I'm biased. But I have also owned a Mazda, a Ford, two VWs, and two GM cars, and in my sample the Honda just seems the best engineered—in big parts and small—of any of them. But it's true there are a lot of good choices out there, and even I have been tempted by the incredible value of the Sonata.
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • cajuncyclercajuncycler Member Posts: 172
    So you are saying the Sonata is safer than the Accord. I think you are assuming a lot here. I bought an 03 Accord, and it has all the same safety features your car has, with the exception of stability control. Did the Sonata offer all this in 03? I seriously doubt it. And I doubt a Sonata is safer than my Accord. Read the posts. The Accord I looked at was $24,000 no rebates and the dealer acted like he didn't care if I bought it or not. I actually had to ASK for a test drive. The Sonata had the same features plus more interior room, and I paid $16,495. It has a longer warranty, met the same crash test standards and cost me less money and was just as well built. Safer than your Accord? I'm not willing to crash mine to find out are you? I just know safety wise I got excellent value for the dollar spent. Did you?
  • tamu2002tamu2002 Member Posts: 758
    Depreciation IS a huge problem for domestic cars. I think they key is not to pay too much for them in the first place. All the extra equipments don't add much value to a used car. I'd guess that a less equipped 1-year old G6 is probably valued very similarly to your sister's loaded one (assumed from the $24K price tag). If she had gotten a cheaper G6 for around $18K, things wouldn't have looked this bad, assuming you could get one for that much.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    And you were having a laugh at the poor person/s stuck inside, probably injured, while doing this????????
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Looks like a draw in the real world:

    http://www.iihs.org/brochures/ictl/ictl_4dr.html
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I think you make too much of the bumpers. Bumpers are there to protect the sheet metal and save insurance companies money, they have little to do with protecting occupants of the vehicle.
  • prosource1prosource1 Member Posts: 234
    If you are driving a 2006 Accord, good luck in a rear crash.

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?hyundai

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/head_restraints/headrestraints.aspx?honda
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    You're replying to the wrong post. I didn't bring up the stuff from 3 years ago and didn't mis-state facts in comparing the Accord to the Sonata. Funny how when someone tries to respond to stuff like that, they are the ones called out for it.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I have my opinion, you have yours. BTW, I agree with you that Hyundai doesn't have the reputation of Honda and it will take several more years to establish.

    I've owned Hondas and liked them very much. But I've also owned Hyundais and liked them very much. To me, the Accord is no longer worth the price premium over the Sonata. But a lot of people think otherwise.
  • ctalkctalk Member Posts: 646
    If you are driving a 2006 Accord, good luck in a rear crash.

    If you are driving a 2006 Sonata, good luck in the side crash ;)

    Accord

    Sonata

    - and if you're comparing the "Poor" the Accord got on the rear, to the "Acceptable" the Sonata got on the side. IIHS seems to put side crash tests ahead of rear crash tests.

    They placed the Accord at a higher level.

    Ranking

    The Sonata is a safe car. It offers a lot of standard safety features. The only improvement I think they should make, is the side crash test score.
  • w9cww9cw Member Posts: 888
    Backy - I compared a new generation Sonata and a 2006 Accord on back-to-back test drives during the same day - in fact, within 30 minutes of each other. The Sonata was impressive, especially in terms of road and wind noise over the Accord. It will take time for the market to accept Hyundai, but for those of us who've owned both marques, it easier for us to be objective. Those who haven't, seem not to be able to accept Hyundai as a viable alternative, because of a preconceived perception of sub-standard quality.
  • jimmy81jimmy81 Member Posts: 170
    seem not to be able to accept Hyundai as a viable alternative, because of a preconceived perception of sub-standard quality.

    This "preconception of sub-standard quality" didn't happen by chance - Hyundai earned it.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    seem not to be able to accept Hyundai as a viable alternative, because of a preconceived perception of sub-standard quality.

    This "preconception of sub-standard quality" didn't happen by chance - Hyundai earned it.

    'Tis True about Hyundai earning it.

    Just a little thinking out loud here about GM...

    Last night I rode in my sunday-school teacher's 05 Tahoe, and it already had a light bulb out in the interior (behind the climate control sliders), and it was not the first relatively new GM vehicle I have seen with burned-out interior bulbs.

    I just found it interesting, because GM supposedly has quality probelms, and I see tons of new Trailblazers, Silverados, Tahoes, and Suburbans with brakelights or DRLs burned out. That just doesn't bode well, even for such a minor thing. Did GM cheap-out on their bulbs?

    Something else that is not a big deal, but would annoy me anyway, is that everytime the turn signal lit up, you could see the light from that bulb shine through the check-engine light (or whatever light is to the right of the right blinker...it looked yellow).

    I have an 11 year old Honda that only 2 months ago burned out its first interior lightbulb, the one that lights up the PRND321 for the gearshift on the floor-console.
  • prosource1prosource1 Member Posts: 234
    '05 Tahoe, and it already had a light bulb out in the interior (behind the climate control sliders)'

    Yeah, my Dad's 04 Accord's center stack/radio information center's lights burned out very early. He ret'd it to be fixed and it just kept burning out.
  • beantownbeantown Member Posts: 228
    IIHS seems to put side crash tests ahead of rear crash tests.

    I find it odd that the IIHS puts more emphasis on side crash tests instead of rear, considering you're about 10 times more likely to be rear-ended than broad-sided if you ever find yourself in an accident.

    And how exactly does a car with two goods and one poor score "better" than a car with two goods and one acceptable?

    If I had to choose, I'd rather a good for rear and acceptable for side than good for side and poor for rear....
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I did the same--drove a 2006 Sonata GLS vs. an Accord EX I4 over the same course, back to back. I preferred the Sonata overall, for what I am looking for in a car. It's interesting that the car that had any noticeable quality gaffes was the Accord (rattles).

    It's unfortunate that some people can't look past Hyundai's history to take a look at what they are doing now. I made that leap with Honda in 1985 and was glad I did. And I made the leap (and quite a leap it was back then) with Hyundai in late 2000 and am glad I did.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Probably has to do with the severity of injuries likely in a rear-end crash vs. a side crash. Not as much metal protecting people in the side crash vs. rear crash.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles