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

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1276277279281282544

Comments

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    The financial trade-offs also depends on the deal one gets on the car. My new Mazda6 cost me $16K plus about $800 in sales tax, there is no difference in annual registration costs here, it is a flat $75 per year whether you have a Rolls Royce or a $1000 junkmobile.

    It is 3 years old with about 25,000 miles. Edmunds gives me a private party value of about $13,000 and dealer price of about $14,500. So someone buying my car used would pay only about $1500 to $3000 less than I did. They'd also save $75-150 in sales tax. The insurance savings would be insignificant here, except that you might pay for collision/comp coverage for fewer years. The cost of this for me is about $200 per year, so assuming 3 years less of this coverage would mean $600 in savings. OTOH, since someone buying used missed 3 years/25K mi of no repair bills, what is that going to cost them later on? $1000?

    For my case, at most, the net difference appears to be maybe $3000. Far less than your $10K guess. If I keep the car 10 years, that difference is only $300 per year.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    edited March 2010
    Note - good luck getting private party value. The real value for trade-in is wholesale and low trade in if a private sale. It's a rough marketplace out there right now if you're trying, no begging people to buy your used car from you. (the opposite is true - you can haggle like a bandit now)

    A 3 year old Mazda 6 can be had for $11000 without trying(dealer) and $9000 private party if you haggle(some dealers have 45-50K mile examples for $9K even). I checked this right now with Autotrader, so it represents real street prices.

    16K vs 9K? At that savings, you could trade cars every three years *still* and end up saving an enormous amount over new. I seriously doubt is anything made in Japan will fall apart any more or less in years 4-6 vs 1-3.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    A 3 year old Mazda 6 can be had for $11000 without trying(dealer) and $9000 private party if you haggle(some dealers have 45-50K mile examples for $9K even). I checked this right now with Autotrader, so it represents real street prices.

    All depends on location and supply vs demand.

    I just sold a 2008 Mazda6 i SV with 31K on it for $11,995. I am currently toying with the idea of selling my 2005 Mazda6 i Sport Hatchback (loaded) and it has 62K on it, and I have had 3 offers on it, all over $9,500.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    $11995 is exactly how much off of new, though?

    The smart person always gets a 1-3 year old(certified if it makes them feel safer I guess) car versus brand new. That initial $10K in depreciation is really rough.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Can we PLEASE cut out this talk about people who buy new cars are "dumb"? Did it ever occur to you that they might just ENJOY driving a new car?!? And it's THEIR money to spend as they wish?

    Personally I have gone the slightly used route lately, and it works for me and what I need in cars right now. But I've bought new before and will do so again when it's the right thing to do. And I won't feel I am "stupid" for making that choice to buy new, when the time comes.

    Maybe we could talk about cars?
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    I have no problem with what people do with their money, but when I head someone going on about how it costs the same to buy new versus used, well, that's just simply wrong.

    There's no shame, really, in buying used versus new. Many of these program/dealer cars and short-terms lease vehicles are so close to new that sometimes the driver's manual hasn't even been removed from the shrinkwrap.
  • omelet1978omelet1978 Member Posts: 10
    I have an 80 total mile commute which ads up to 40,000 miles a year including normal driving on my car...And I decided to buy new. I got a Ford Fusion Sport a few months ago.

    I've had 2 used cars in my life and in both cases I had to spend a lot of money with upkeep. New tires, repairs, etc...

    I decided to just buy new and at the very least have some financial stability for a few years in the fact that the Fusion is an extremely reliable car. I'm sure I'm going to be pissed off at the value when I try to sell it, BUT cars are plummeting in value so fast nowadays I don't think anyone will be happy!
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    It's not about the cost of new vs pre-owned, it's about how long you keep your cars. I know people who get(buy) a new car every 3 years. That certainly costs more than buying a 3 year car every three years. But it's their money.

    However, if one keeps their car for 10 years, it's a basic wash. Or if one puts on 30K miles a year a used car is a bad bet. Or if one gets a lemon a new car, in that instance, after the fact would have been a better bet.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    The prices I gave were for 25,000 miles.

    One used Mazda6 I test drove before I bought my new one, seemed like a deal based on the online listing. But it turned out to be an amazingly crapped up 1-2 year old car. This is why edmunds gives different average prices for clean vs. average, etc. So one cheap listing with 2x the mileage does not prove anything about what a buyer would need to pay to get a "clean" car with 1/2 the miles of your examples.

    No one has said it costs the same, but it certainly is not going to cost me anywhere near your figure of $10,000 more to have bought my new car, that I will likely keep for 10 years or more.
  • andyfromvaandyfromva Member Posts: 79
    You also have situations like I just encountered. The 2011 Hyundai Sonata, which I'm going to purchase, is head and shoulders above any of the previous versions of the Sonata. So you have to buy a new 2011 Sonata to get the superior model.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Yeah, you know, now that you mention it, I had wanted to get a 2006 or later Mazda6 when I bought because they had improved the seat (the original was too hard for me), gone to a 5 speed auto, and they had made the car quieter based on my test drives (at least part of this was related to the transmission, the 4 speed ran at much higher rpm than the 5 speed auto).
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    edited March 2010
    It looks like Hyundai did okay with the new Sonata, but it also looks like the GLS is FAR from a game-changer in the midsize segment.

    Full test

    Bottom Line:
    The 2011 Sonata ticks all the boxes, but the chassis feels underdone, leaving us to imagine how good this car could be if Hyundai charged a couple grand more.


    Surprised?
  • tenpin288tenpin288 Member Posts: 804
    The 2011 Sonata ticks all the boxes, but the chassis feels underdone, leaving us to imagine how good this car could be if Hyundai charged a couple grand more.

    They do charge a couple grand more--I think they call that one the Sonata SE! ;)
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    Or if one puts on 30K miles a year a used car is a bad bet.

    Exactly. When you put 100 miles a week on a car, have your wife and kids with you for part of that ride each day, you want a safe reliable car, so in this situation, its a no brainer. You also have the peace of mind that you have a car that has no hidden issues the previous owner covered up that you will wind up paying to have repaired. You have a full warranty for a good portion of that time, so no out of pocket expenses for a while, and you get the latest in safety features that you may not get on a 3-4 YO car. When it comes to the cars I have, there are no USED models out there with the features I have. There may be a few used Flex models, but they don't have telescopic steering wheels. The Fusion Sport is new for 2010, and it is the car that I have been looking to get for the past 3 years, so used in this model? One other thing about buying new vs used, finance rates, where can you get 0% for 60 on a used car? When you add up how much you pay for the finance rate on a used car, vs a new one @ 0%, the finance charge more than makes up the difference on a used car. If you can get a 1.9% for 48 months new, vs a 6.9% for 48 used, and depending on the car and bank, could be higher, 5% interest can add up to quite a bit. 1.9% on 22K is roughly $864, 6.9% on 18k is roughly $2649. So if you buy a car for $22K, get 0% for 48, the same used car is $18K, you are only paying roughly $1400 more for it in the long run.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    edited March 2010
    My Toyota has almost 400K on it, so I guess YMMV. I also drive a lot of miles and it just doesn't worry me at all. The most expensive thing that I can replace on the vehicle costs me 4 months worth of payments on a new one(manual transmission). Another advantage of buying used is that you can often buy with cash and save money on insurance as well. I have literally everything on my policy. High coverage limits as well. Not some bargain basement policy. I save almost $500 a year by not having collision(my fault) on it. I'm covered by literally anything other than it being my fault and it right there saves me enough to pay for any repairs. If you buy new, there is no option unless you have $20-25K in cash and are willing to risk that much without coverage.

    That said, yes, the old Toyota is in need of replacement. But I have no problems with buying something with 30-40K on it and running it for 300-400K.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Interesting that everyone was screaming about the 0-60 time when watching a video of the race between the '11 Sonata and the Camry. Here are some times that will probably put to rest any notions that the DI I4 is gutless.

    Edmunds '11 Sonata 7.7 secs
    Edmunds 09 Accord LX-P 9.1 secs
    Edmunds 10 Kizashi 9.1 secs
    Edmunds 10 Legacy 9.4 secs
    Edmunds Fusion SEL V6 7.3 secs
    CR 09 Camry LE 9.4 secs
    Edmunds 09 Sonata LTD I4 9.8

    I would say it gives a pretty respectable showing and certainly would beat a Camry I4 easily. Not that I personally care very much about 0-60 times(now 60-0 is a different story) but a lot of people were bashing the new Sonata because of those videos.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    Why bash a 4 banger that puts out the numbers of a V6? Power of a V6 when you want or need it, with the fuel efficiency of a 4 Cyl when you don't. It's like those who bash Ford's Ecoboost, a v6 that puts out more power than the 4.6L V8 in a Mustang GT.

    The Flex I have is the Ecoboost, 355 HP 350 PdFt torque, V6. I get 19-20 MPG daily driving(when I can keep my foot out of it), same as the non turbo 3.5L V6 in the other models. I can spank the pants off most other cars, yet get much better FE than one equipped with a V8 that meets those numbers. So why would anyone knock the I4 in the Hyundai? Why would you want a gas guzzling V6 when you can get the FE I4 that puts out more power? Smart move on Hyundais part.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Just compare the fuel economy of a comparable Audi Q7 V8 with a MKT ecoboost V6. The MKT not only has more power but significantly better fuel economy. And a nicer interior.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I save almost $500 a year by not having collision

    Insurance rates vary. In my case, as I mentioned collision costs me about $200 per year. I typically will drop that when the car's value is about $5000. So I would still have that coverage, for a time, were I to buy newish used cars...which is the sort of cars that I thought you had been touting.

    The other thing is the value of the coverage to me is more than $0, which is what you have assumed it's value is by saying you save the $500 per year that it would cost to have that coverage. Should there be a loss, I am out my $1000 deductible in addition to the premiums, you would be out the entire amount of the loss. So the proper comparison is not to assume that you will never have a loss while you are driving with no collision coverage.

    For me, the expected value of $1000 deductible collision coverage appears to be about $85 per year and for comprehensive it is about $10. So the true net cost of my $200 premium is, perhaps, about $115 per year. According to this calculator, anyway: http://insuranceriskcalculator.com/

    My entire policy does not even cost $500 per year...and no, this is not with minimum liability or anything. However, "high coverage limits" have absolutely nothing to do with the cost of collision/comprehensive. What is covered by that is only damage to your own vehicle, so the cost is not affected by your liability coverage limits.

    I would have a huge problem with putting 300,000 miles on a car...which is that it would take me about 37 years! :)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I can just hear the editor's conference at Edmunds now: "Folks, it appears the media is having a love-fest with the new Sonata, so we need to come out with a contrarian view to draw some readership. Let's focus our review on the low-end GLS, which we know doesn't handle like the SE, then talk about how it needs some improvements in handling--even though we like how the SE drives. Then let's say something about how maybe Hyundai should have spent $2000 more on the car to get it the way we want it--even though in fact they already did that in the SE trim. Yes, that ought to do it!"

    ;)
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738

    I would have a huge problem with putting 300,000 miles on a car...which is that it would take me about 37 years!


    Yeah, I unfortunately go thorough tires about every two years it seems. Commuting here in Los Angeles, home to the never ending freeway jungle, will do that for you. A manual transmission alone is most of the savings and issues with reliability. The rest of the car won't possibly literally fall apart in the first 10-12 years. So I tend to buy 8-12K used cars and drive them for several years. The truck I got with about 300K on it, but it's really my fun off-road truck. I kind of need a better commuting machine. MPG and power is kind of so-so.

    Though, it DOES make yuppies get out of my way, which is actually making driving easier I guess. :P
  • chronochrono Member Posts: 149
    backy .. nice!
  • smarty666smarty666 Member Posts: 1,503
    what one or two of the mainstream mid size sedans do you think has the quietest most refined sounding 4cyl engine???

    I haven't heard the new Sonata's yet but so far it seems that the Camry's and Sonata's, based on what I've read is suppose to be the most quiet of the mid-size sedans!

    what do you all think?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Accord has a pretty quiet and refined engine also. Also I've heard good things about the 2010 Fulan I4 being much quieter than before. Based on all I've read on the Sonata, I don't know if I would put it in the upper tier for quietness if only because of the DI adding some noise. But reports indicate it's very quiet at cruise, no doubt helped by the 6-speed trannies.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Both the Honda and believe it or not the Mazda 4's are pretty darn smooth and quiet. Of course those makes have louder rides, but that is due to the tire noise instead.
  • andyfromvaandyfromva Member Posts: 79
    edited March 2010
    It looks like Hyundai did okay with the new Sonata, but it also looks like the GLS is FAR from a game-changer in the midsize segment.

    I strongly disagree.

    If you read the review, the reviewer's main problem was with the manual transmission they tested. The reviewer noted that the auto transmission would give much better results:

    But with the new six-speed automatic transmission (which has no such throttle-dampening), we're betting the Sonata would close in on the Volkswagen CC as well as the VW Passat, which are good for acceleration to 60 mph from a standstill in 7.3 seconds and a quarter-mile of 15.2 seconds at 92.0 mph.

    But only about 5% (or fewer) GLS's are sold with the manual transmission - so why didn't the reviewer test the car with the automatic transmission? Strange, don't you think?

    Also the review contains a link to a second opinion by the Lead Senior Editor Ed Hellwig which is 100% positive.

    My advice to anyone shopping for a midsize car - test drive a bunch of them, as I did (Camry, Accord (two test drives), Malibu (two test drives), Fusion, Altima, 2010 Sonata). You'll find that the 2011 Sonata is by far the best car.
  • andyfromvaandyfromva Member Posts: 79
    And I'm buying a 2011 Sonata today.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Congratulations Andy From Va
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    If you read the review, the reviewer's main problem was with the manual transmission they tested.

    I did read the review, and I'm questioning which review you read, since he mentioned the manual transmission once, yet mentioned the chassis feel at least a few times, as well as mentioning it in the Bottom Line.

    And congrats on your purchase. It's not on my list due to a few details (lack of V6, lack of manual with SE, bundling moonroof with Nav), but it's still a huge step forward over it's predecessor.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    edited March 2010
    I think the review he posted was cherry picked and a one off, judging by the main page, which is pretty glowing:

    http://www.edmunds.com/hyundai/sonata/2011/review.html

    What Edmunds.com says

    The previous Sonata was a solid contender, but for 2011, the Hyundai Sonata vaults itself to the top of the class.

    Smooth ride, spacious cabin and trunk, capable handling, impressive value, strong safety scores, lengthy warranty.

    But the 2011 Hyundai Sonata, like a maturing great band that comes into its own, has become worthy of headliner status in the family-sedan arena.

    ll things considered, the latest Sonata manages to stand out in a segment chock full of good choices. It's more fun to drive than the ubiquitous Accord and Camry, and though the Altima, Mazda 6, Chevy Malibu and Ford Fusion are also good picks, the Sonata has the price advantage. With its spirited performance, impressive fuel economy, solid build quality and strong value, we have a feeling that the 2011 Hyundai Sonata will have no problem climbing the charts.
  • chronochrono Member Posts: 149
    This is pretty amazing IMO -> It's more fun to drive than the ubiquitous Accord and Camry ..
  • andyfromvaandyfromva Member Posts: 79
    It's more fun to drive than the ubiquitous Accord and Camry ..

    Maybe it was attempt at sarcasm?

    Nonetheless it is true.

    I did find the Accord to be a pretty good performer for a midsized car, though its thinly padded front seat and constant road noise were a problem for me. As for the Camry, it was very comfortable but fun to drive it ain't.
  • jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    You'll find that the 2011 Sonata is by far the best car.

    I think that what you meant to say is that the Sonata is by far the best car for you, which, as I'm sure that you'll agree, is the strongest claim that can be made for any car.

    As good as it is - & it is certainly very good - the new Sonata won't get the job done for those buyers who want or need 6 cylinders or AWD.

    I don't have a dog in this hunt because I have no plans to buy a new car until next year at the earliest. I'm merely pointing out the obvious.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    My High School English teacher told us that unless the writer is stating an objective fact (such as, the earth is round), we should presume it to be their opinion. So the term "in my opinion" is redundant because it's implied. So yeah in his opinion the Sonata is the best car. :)

    For me I think the Sonata hit's a nice spot in the pack of mid sized cars, and does it for a great value.
  • packer3packer3 Member Posts: 277
    Prisus any one, Monday in CA a highway runaway and just today in NY there was a runaway out of the guys driveway, who is it that said get in touch with reality Toyota is still a great car, I'm sure it was Consumer (in Toyotas pocket)Reports that made the assement. Here is reality check I would recomend people to shy away somewhat from Toyota for a few years.
    Also, who could feel safe buying a used Toyota, I'd be thinking was this one of the cars that they didn't fix?
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    I for one am not worried. As I said earlier I really kind of liked the Camry and am mulling it over.
  • shabadoo25shabadoo25 Member Posts: 232
    Exactly what the guy in the Prius doing 90 against his will in California said yesterday.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    edited March 2010
    Um, were you in the passenger seat? Do you *really* know what happened? Do you know why the car was not able to be shut off or put into neutral? Do *you* have the presence of mind to react in a potentially deadly situation? I think there is a big parallel to the "Ouchdi" (Audi) unintended acceleration issues years ago.

    Do you know that you can get killed in any car you drive, even big trucks with the 5.7 liter engine?

    You can go around worrying or you can live.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    How many here know how to shift a Prius into neutral?
  • mickeyrommickeyrom Member Posts: 936
    Me..me ... me....do I get a prize?
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    How many here know how to shift a Prius into neutral?

    Shouldn't everyone who owns or drives one know how to perform this task?
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I saw the guy in an interview and heard the taped 911 call. They asked him during the 911 "can you put it in neutral" and he said, after a rather long hesitation, "no". He said in the interview that he didn't put it in nuetral because he wasn't sure how the car would react at that high speed, maybe it could flip.

    I've never driven a Prius at anywhere near that speed so i don't know if it would react substantially different than a normal car. If engine braking is so strong or what. But it sounded like he definitely knew how to put in neutral but decided against it. Now, why he didn't shut the engine down completely I don't know. It wasn't like it was rental or a loaner and he didn't know how. This went on for 30 miles. ????.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    It's very strange. Seems like all of a sudden we are hearing about these incidents. Really not sure what to think about it.
  • shabadoo25shabadoo25 Member Posts: 232
    Yeah, and if I had to buy a new car now, I would choose to buy from an automaker that had their act together, and hadn't been lying to the public about their problems for a few years now.

    It's one thing to get hit by a falling building, it's another thing altogether to put yourself in its way when you had other alternatives.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Guys; a moron, then. He obviously thought neutral was reverse, because neutral just disconnects the engine from the transmission. Neutral, get over to the side of the road, and turn off the engine is common practice when your engine is going crazy or you dumped all of your oil suddenly or something similar.

    Or me - I just have to push the clutch in. Heh. I'd buy a manual transmission Toyota without hesitation because even if it does this on me, I can deal with it in a fraction of a second. Probably get it cheap, too, since the massive numbers of automatics will devalue both the manual and automatic versions.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Don't get carried away here. He said he didn't want to put it in Neutral for fear that he would overshoot it and hit Reverse and THAT might cause him to wreck. Don't understand why he was so scared though - I would have put it in N immediately.

    Some of these are driver error and are being reported due to the increased visibility, but clearly there are problems out there that Toyota is refusing to even admit exist. That's the troubling part for me and I think it will hurt them in the end.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    He said he didn't want to put it in Neutral for fear that he would overshoot it and hit Reverse and THAT might cause him to wreck

    All I heard him say on when he was being interviewed was that he didn't put it in neutral cause he thought it might flip. Did you actually see another interview where he mentioned about reverse or are you assuming that's what he meant? You're probably right cause I can't think of any reason why anybody would think putting it in neutral would make a car flip. Unless there is some kind of huge regenerative engine braking that goes on in Priuses. I'm not that familiar with them.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    It was reported that way in several news articles including the L.A. Times. I think he panicked so who really knows what happened.
  • avucarguyavucarguy Member Posts: 56
    Unfortunately, I do not think the man know how to operate his Prius. I have an 07 model, unfortunately the shifter is not like a regular automatic shifter(a bad design on Toyota's part to make it look different). However, all you have to do is push the shifter stick to the left and hold it for one second, and the car will be in neutral. There is no crazy regenerative braking to flip the car over, this is not black magic.
    In any new car, especially these newer car with push button start and hybrids, you need to read the owner's manual on how to operate these more fancy electronics. Don't assume you already know how to use all the features.
    Some people I talk to don't even know if their car is a 4 or 6 cylinder. Many people just know how to add gas and go.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Some of these are driver error and are being reported due to the increased visibility, but clearly there are problems out there that Toyota is refusing to even admit exist. That's the troubling part for me and I think it will hurt them in the end.

    Exactly. There may be a problem, but due to the negative media attention some driver related issues will be blamed on the car itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.