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

1…295296298300301…544

Comments

  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Still ugly and bloated IMHO.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Glad to see MPGs went up significantly for the 4-cylinder, making it competitive once-again. Hopefully that translates to the real-world. Hello 6-speed!

    I'll be interested to know if that's a true taillamp on the trunklid, or just reflectors.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Some nice tweaks, but what is funny about this is, the day I first saw the 2008 Accord, I said to myself, half joking, "I'll bet in the mid-gen refresh they'll extend the tail lamps onto the trunk lid, as with past Accords." And I'll be, that's exactly what they did. But to me, it looks like the folks who designed the extensions didn't talk to the folks who designed the original lamps. The extensions look tacked-on, as if they belong to a different car.
  • smarty666smarty666 Member Posts: 1,503
    +1
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Correction; they're sticking with the 5-speeds on all trims/powertrains.

    Thoughts on where they got the big mileage gains from? 0W/20 oil wouldn't be enough to do that...
  • jayriderjayrider Member Posts: 3,602
    I really liked the last generation of the Accord. For some reason, the new one looks a bit ungainly. Having said that, if the car road and handled well, it probably wouldn't be a deal breaker. Great front seats trumps looks in my mind.
  • jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    Still ugly and bloated IMHO.

    That's a bit harsh, but after seeing the new Sonata, I wouldn't knock myself out defending the Accord's styling.

    Honda & I go way back - I bought my 1st one, a Civic, in 1974 - and for years I considered the Accord to be the best looking car in its segment. But the Sonata is now the clear styling leader among midsized sedans.
  • irgirg Member Posts: 197
    I test drove a LX-P Accord a couple of weeks ago. I about broke my knee trying to get into the car, something about the way the dashboard juts out, it just hit me wrong. Still a bit swollen, I don't think I could deal with this. The dealer commented he's done it a few times as well. Probably something you learn not to do once you're the owner, lol.

    Then I drove a Camry LE. Yeah it's a bit boring perhaps, and they're everywhere in my town, but it did drive very nice, seemed to have more power than the Accord, maybe the 6 speend auto? You sit a bit higher in it too. I haven't driven an Altima yet, I know they get good reviews too. Actually there aren't many (any?) bad choices in this segment, not including Chrysler. But I lease, so the Camry is attractive right now.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    If you lease, be sure to check out the Mazda6 and Altima also, there's some really good lease rates in my area right now, e.g. Mazda6i AT starting at $219/month for sign-and-drive.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    That's a bit harsh, but after seeing the new Sonata, I wouldn't knock myself out defending the Accord's styling.

    Honda & I go way back - I bought my 1st one, a Civic, in 1974 - and for years I considered the Accord to be the best looking car in its segment. But the Sonata is now the clear styling leader among midsized sedans.

    I've been a Honda fan since the '80's and have almost always felt the Accord was a much better looking car than the Camry. But the current gen of both has reversed my opinion. Take that and then tack on extra inches in size, softer sprung, and you have a bloated and ugly Accord - as I stated. And I like Honda. I'm just sad that they have gone this way.

    IMHO the Civic is their best looking current car. Since it is due for a redesign, I certainly hope we don't see the new one is "6 inches longer, 3 inches wider" and then gets those weird taillamps and bugeye headlights.

    And Acura is also going the big and ugly route as well...... I think Honda is losing their way.
  • irgirg Member Posts: 197
    I also like HOnda (have an Odyssey) and feel the same way. The Accord just has a sightly weird shape to it. ANd while it may handle better than the Camry, at real world speeds, I felt the Camry did as well if not better. Also seemed quicker, and I think it gets better gas mileage. I like the looks of the Malibu and Mazda 6 too.
  • irgirg Member Posts: 197
    I've thought about the Mazda but I don't have a dealership that close by. The 4 cylinder models seemed to get less than enthusiastic reviews here from owners, compared to the Camry 4cylinder.

    I should take a look at the Altima, but I still like the looks/package of the Camry more. Maybe tomorrow I'll test drive one and see how they are. I had an original Altima, and it was a good little car.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    I have to agree, I'm a Honda fan myself and I think they really need to rethink their design. I dont think the new Accord is ugly, it's just not where it should be. The Camry looks better imo, on the outside anyway. Toyota interiors are awful and I like the Honda much better.

    I own a 2009 CR-V and I think it's great inside and out. I know a few people with an Accord and it's a nice car, just not very sharp looking.
  • irgirg Member Posts: 197
    I actually preferred the inside of the Camry. The SE is even sharper, but the LE isn't bad. I think the dash is better organized than the Accord. And the transmission gearshift is much better looking than the Accord too. I like how you can also manually shift it, can't do that with the Accord (at least the LX models). And as I mentioned before, the interior of the Accord's dashboard just seems poorly engineered, the way it juts out at you. Plus you sit lower, so the Camry just seems easier to get in and out of. I'm sounding like an old man here! And I'm not really, lol. I like the power seat in the Camry a lot too. The Honda's seat seemed good, but driving position on the Camry is a little better I thought.
  • mickeyrommickeyrom Member Posts: 936
    Nobody makes an "awful" interior these days.It's just a matter of personal taste.The only "awful" dash I have seen in a Toyota is the gen II Prius,because in bright sunlight it's difficult to see any of the displays.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    IMO the interiors of the Sebring and Avenger are pretty darn awful, compared to the rest of the mid-sized class. I could live with any of the rest of them, although the Malibu's is borderline (I think it's cheap looking, except in high-end trim).
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,148
    I'm with you, backy. They're ugly and very downmarket-looking.

    I have always had an issue with GM's interiors, though they have improved on some of their styling. I still don't like the Malibu's interior a lot, and we have an older Chevy truck to remind us that GM apparently used to get design assistance for all of their vehicles' interiors from Fisher-Price. They stuck with the big, plastic knobs for their controls after competitors had more sleek- and modern-looking interiors. I rented a GM in the early 2000's with an interior that would've looked more at home in this car:




    Really turned me off GM vehicles, though I might take a peek when I'm ready to buy again (soon).

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    My issue with GM interiors (in addition to what you already said) was their insistence on using that dull light gray plastic. They are doing much better now but still have a ways to go.

    Judging by the new Grand Cherokee I think Chrysler is also improving a lot but we'll have to wait and see how much makes it into the midsized cars. Then again, they had nowhere to go but up.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,148
    Yup, that's exactly what they used for our '99 pickup. We bought it (way) used and (way) cheap as a third utility vehicle, so it's not a big deal, but it certainly wouldn't be an asset if we were evaluating the purchase of a replacement for it, or any of our vehicles.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Toyota interiors are awful and I like the Honda much better.

    Right! I had a current version Camry for a week as a loaner while getting my Tundra repaired. I liked the ride and, contrary to a lot of people, thought the exterior styling is low key and stylish in a long lasting sort of way. The thing I didn't like was the cheap look and feel of the interior materials. The door was all scratched up from people trying to access the power windows and scraping rings/watches. The centerstack was real cheap plastic looking as well. The seats were very comfortable but the fabric felt cheap. Just not up to par with earlier versions. Kind of like what GM did to their interiors in the 90s.

    Now Honda I think has very nice interiors but the seats could be more comfortable. But design, my god, when is Honda going to hire some decent designers. Just about every vehicle in the Honda and Acura line has just odd proportions and is either ugly or at least not attractive. Maybe the RDX/MDX are OK but everything else is overdone or there is a couple of aspects that just seem to not fit the rest of the vehicle.
  • jayriderjayrider Member Posts: 3,602
    Haven't seat tested either but pictures of both seats look great in leather. If the camry hip point is a bit higher, that would sway me big time-- I am old enough to appreciate the easier in and out.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    There's some nice design elements in the Malibu, but the thing that screams "cheap" to me is the black plastic knobs on the light-colored fascia. That is a common design theme for recent Chevy cars (including Cobalt, but even worse there) and it mars what would otherwise be a decent interior. The LTZ is nicer looking, due to the two-tone treatment and I think the plastic on the center console is darker also. Based on more recent Chevys, including the Equinox and Cruze, I can see they are improving a lot on the interiors.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    Yup my take exactly. I was actually taken aback when I saw the interior of the Camry. I thought "this cant be right". The exterior however I think looks very good, it's a sharp car especially in the higher trim levels. The ride too, I know some people dismiss it as floaty and whatnot but it is what it is and does a very good job of being a comfortable cruiser.

    The problem with Honda is they are moving in the wrong direction. The Accords are looking worse and Acura... that new TL is a big turn off for me. I think they took too many hits for a "bland" design on the old TL and went for bold. It didnt pay off in my opinion. Too bad because it could be a hot car, fix the can opener snout and weird looking smiley face rear and they have something.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    My daughter has a 2009 Camry for a company car. It has the a sunroof and the V6 provided by the company and she paid for the JBL sound system. She loves the car and when I drove it I noticed it flies with the V6 and she gets decent mpg. Rides very nice and you don't have to make a million little corrections as it tracks nicely on the interstate. All in all very nice except for the previously noted interior problems. I have a Mazda6 and I like the quick handling but I do notice a lot more bumps and noise then when riding in her Camry.
  • irgirg Member Posts: 197
    So I test drove an Altima 2.5S today. It had 2 packages on it, sunroof and alloy wheels were on it. Basically equipped exactly like a Camry LE I'm considering that has the sunroof and alloys. The lease though on the Altima is not as competitive. Actually not even that close which surprised me. Surprised the dealer too (all owned by the same company). But the Altima was very nice, I could easily live with it. But Camry will probaly win out due to price (tight budget).

    I like the Camry interior, compared to most here I guess. Although compared to my 2006 Impreza base, most things seem like a step up, lulz. I thought the Accord very ordinary. The Malibu looks glitzy, but I'm wondering if I would get tired of it. I went to look at the Ford Fusion too, but all my dealer had was hybrid versions, seems weird. But this is a hybrid kinda town.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    If you're looking for a good 4-cylinder model, Have you driven the Sonata? Or if you can wait, the '11 Optima?
  • temj12temj12 Member Posts: 450
    You are right about Honda styling--horrible and I own an '05 Accord.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    edited June 2010
    Ok this link allows you to build a new 2011 Optima: Optima Configuration

    Turbo SX with every option available in it, including NAV, I'm getting 31,195.00 MSRP

    Click "Optima" then "All new 2011 Optima Configurator" button on the bottom right. People have reported getting different numbers, ranging from 29k to 32k for a fully loaded turbo. So it's possible they are playing with the numbers still.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    $31k for an Optima! Talk about "the power to surprise". ;)
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Infiniti G37 Sedan (Journey)(328HP):
    CarsDirect Price: $29,427 (plus $865 delivery on top of that)/$30,292 out the door.

    Acura TL (280HP):
    CarsDirect Price: $31,023 (plus $860 delivery on top of that)/$31,883 out the door.

    Note that the G37 isn't the base model, and the Acura isn't the smaller and less expensive TSX. These are legitimate midsize sedans that compete with the likes of Mercedes, BMW, and so on head-to-head.

    That $31K has to be a typo. There's no way Hyundai will manage to compete in this segment.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    Every midsize sedan in this segment cracks 31k for their V6 model fully loaded. This is no different, except better gas mileage. That's number one, number 2, you're comparing MSRP with what looks to be invoice prices from carsdirect. Is that intentional? If so you'll have to go through your logic on that because I'm not seeing it.

    For instance the G37 Journey (A car I'd love to have, but I'd need AWD) MSRP is 34,450. Tack on premium package and MSRP is over 37k.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited June 2010
    Is that with destination chg? Usually that's around $750 or thereabouts. That would put the loaded Optima turbo at just shy of $32k which is what I've been saying over on the 2011 Sonata forum. A lot of money for either an Optima or a Sonata IMO.
  • midas69midas69 Member Posts: 118
    John Krafcik stated on Thursday night that the base Turbo Limited would be $28K. Base SE Turbo would be $25K.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I appreciate where you are coming from and it's a legit comparison but please compare apples to apples. You say "out the door". In these forums out the door means total price of vehicle including tax, title, license, dealer fees, etc. I don't think you meant that but that's what the common definition of "out the door" means on these forums.

    Next you compare discounted street price to brand new model MSRP? That is about as unfair as you can get. Ok, for a a few weeks the Sonata/Optima turbo will probably sell close to MSRP but after a month or two they will start to be discounted as well and the price will come down to $28k or $29k. Still a lot but it will get cheaper as time goes by.

    I totally agree with you though that the price is getting up their for these cars and I would certainly do a lot of comparison shopping of the new Infiniti G25 and Buick Regal. The thing that Hyundai has going for it is the warranty and the MPG combined with the HP on regualar gas. That's a pretty good combo but they are not in the same league as far as quality of materials go when compared to Infinitis, Acuras or Buicks
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited June 2010
    Where was that? Do you have a direct quote or a link? The last statements I saw in print that were from Krafcik just a few days ago were that the turbo models would start at $26k to just under $30k. If they have adjusted the price that would be great but I didn't see anything lately that differs with I saw in print earlier.

    If you do have a link or something, please let us know. Also, is the decked out Optima going to be well over $1k more than a loaded Sonata?
  • midas69midas69 Member Posts: 118
    Unfortunately not a direct link. It was in a chat session and I don't see any transcripts printed anywhere. But there were many Hyundai owners involved in the chat that can verify what was said. Remember, take my $28K base Limited and add NAV and you get to your $30K. I can't explain the difference between the $25 we were told on Thursday and the $26K you read.

    Of course these guys like to play games with numbers. You might have seen 'just under $26K' and $25,999 might still be considered $25K by some people trying to make a marketing point.
  • vanman1vanman1 Member Posts: 1,397
    I was all set to buy an LTZ but I wasn't happy with the two tone beige/brown and black. I ended up with an LT with the black interior / light wood trim. It looks very sharp with the black suede/leather seats.

    Over all the interior is impressive, it was shocking to me and everyone who drives in my Malibu that GM has come so far with interiors.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I've been impressed with the brand new GM interiors. The new Buicks are very nice, the new Malibu, the new Equinox and even the new Cruze's interior looks pretty good but have never been able to sit in one as they have always been up on pedastals or locked up at the auto shows. They are slowly getting better. Like backy said, none are hideous but some are better than others.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I did the Optima price estimator and got a different price than you did. Mine came out lower. Plus I did it twice and the options one time were $1900 each and the next time I did it both options were$2000. I put in the same zip code each time so I'm a little leary of that estimator. The KIA site caveats that they don't vouch for it's accuracy as its a third party site.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I posted the direct quote from the article in the Sonata forum. But whatever the prices are it appears that a loaded Optima or a loaded Sonata with the Turbo is going to be right around $31k give or take a few hundred. Many times in conversations the auto execs like to just give the price of the vehicle and don't inlcude the shipping charge which can add almost another $1k to it.
  • midas69midas69 Member Posts: 118
    Yea, the whole destination charge thing is all BS nowadays. At one time the cars were all made in Detroit and the further away from Detroit you were the higher the destination charge was. Now it's the same price no matter where you are. At this point it's no longer a reflection of any real cost and is no different than any other expense in the manufacturing process. They don't have a separate welding charge. They don't have a separate labor charge. Just roll it all into the final price and stop playing games.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited June 2010
    I agree, it's just a marketing thing so they advertise a lower pricepoint. It's been a very long time since the destination chgs were different for a particular vehicle. I don't remember exactly when they change but I think it was many, many years ago. They averaged them out so somebody in North Overshoe, Alaska wouldn't have to pay an arm and a leg to get a new car.

    At least the gov makes them put it on the maroney sticker so it's clearly reflected even if they don't have to mention it in their media advertsing.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Actually, what I said was, the interiors of the Sebring and Avenger ARE hideous. :)
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I knew you mentioned hideous, just didn't have the context right. I wouldn't say they are hideous, just cheap. :D
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    edited June 2010
    1: A new car/new model almost never has any reduction from MSRP for the first year. This is understandable.

    2: I chose those two as they essentially form a barrier that the others have to get past. IF you have 30K for a vehicle, you'll test-drive at least one of those two, almost guaranteed. There's a reason that Toyota sets the price of the Camry at 25-27K. Because if they touch 30K, it's game over compared to the TL and others in the real entry-level luxury sport sedan segment. And we're not even talking about the upcoming G25, which should just hit a 28K or so street price.(yes I know I said out the door, but Cars Direct has a nominal paperwork charge and that's it - almost like a fleet sale)

    I use them as a yardstick because their prices are pretty reasonable and there are few games, if any. Some dealers might beat them, of course, but most won't.

    3: And of course, the image. Hyundai (and GM and others), as muich as they want to, aren't there yet. They are getting closer, but go test drive a G37 journey. It feels like a BMW. It's solid as a brick, fast, luxurious, and everything oozes refinement and analness by the designers. Then everything else you drive for the next week gets compared to it. Usually along the lines of "for 2K more, I can have the G37..." :P And not to be dismissed, either, the TL is large, gorgeous, and has every last feature standard that you'd want. It's like a super-loaded Camry V6 with all the goodies and then some. Standard. It's not as sporty or "Euro" as the G37, but I'd take one over a Cadillac or a Mercedes for refinement and a nice quiet ride any day. At 30K, it's a GM killer if there ever was one.
  • midas69midas69 Member Posts: 118
    You must live in a strange area, and I don't mean that to be offensive. For my zip code (60634) CarsDirect lists the 2011 Sonata Limited with NAV at $27.115, which is about $2K more than I paid back in March. The 2010 Acura TL with NAV they show at $35,004. That's almost an $8K difference. The Infiniti G37 with NAV is slightly higher than the TL at $35,362.

    Even if the Turbo package adds $3K to the Sonata or Kia, the prices still aren't going to be that close.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    Well since the actual prices seem to be a bit contested, I'll just say this, if a loaded Sonata turbo with NAV is 30k MSRP that's a bargain. If it's 31k that's about even with the competition and if it's 32k it's butting up against losing a "value" status if not outright overpriced.

    Here's what I'm getting for the competitions V6 loaded vehicles. I didnt include things like headrest DVD players. Mostly just typically equipped options on their top of the line V6:

    2010 Honda Accord EX-L V-6 4dr Sedan w/Navigation (3.5L 6cyl 5A) $31,105

    2010 Nissan Altima 3.5 SR 4dr Sedan (3.5L 6cyl CVT) $31,965

    2011 Toyota Camry XLE 4dr Sedan (3.5L 6cyl 6A) $31,475

    So again unless all of the big 3 in this segment are outpricing themselves and driving people to their upper tier Infinitis and Acuras, Sonata seems to be placed just right if it is in fact 30k. If it's 32k they are overpricing it.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Yes. Hideously cheap. ;)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    ...but go test drive a G37 journey. It feels like a BMW.

    It should--it's priced like a BMW.
  • smarty666smarty666 Member Posts: 1,503
    so true man! In all the years of car shopping and even just looking at cars, I have never, ever seen a TL or G37 on the lots with prices that low! Never! They are always at least semi loaded up and certain accessories added to them. So the prices, in fact are a few thousands more than those prices he listed!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles