Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2013-honda-accord-ex-page-5
In that steady state highway mpg test (not that anyone drives that way) done by Consumer Reports, the difference in mpg was even more significant. If you do a lot of highway driving that could make a real difference:
Accord CVT 65 mph=42 mpg
Fusion 1.6 65 mph=36 mpg
The Ecoboost engines have great power and great durability--no doubt about it. Ford has done a wonderful job with them. But right now they seem to be slightly slower and slightly less economical than some of the Fusion's competitors, like the Altima, Accord, Mazda6, etc.
The Fusion is a very good car, and clearly a top choice in the mid size field. But perhaps a few people are now wondering whether turbo engines are necessarily in the future for every midsize car. Hard to say at this point, since I'm sure the next generation of Ecoboost engines will be even better, and even Honda is apparently considering a turbo for the next Accord, which isn't due out until 2017.
MPG diff is greater as well. They get the Accord at 30 mpg overall and the Fusion 1.6 at 25 mpg overall.
I would say much slower and much less economical - especially when the 1.6 liter ecoboost gets worse mpg than the V-6 Accord (26 mpg overall), and the fastest 2.0 Fusion is barely faster than the slowest I4 CVT Accord, and slower than a 6MT I4 Accord.
I hope Honda stays away from turbos - they only seem to impress the EPA.
From my experience it takes about 10k for a Ford drive train to break in.
Honda has also started using 0 weight oil.
The best mileage car I ever had was a 2004 Focus 2.3 with a stick, averaged 30 mpg with it.
I learned a lot about efficient driving for that car, but I'm no hyper miler.
The only long trip I took with it in 4 years, 1800 miles, I averaged over 38 mpg.
Highway rating was 33, same as my new Fusion.
My new Fusion, 2.0 and 19 inch wheels, is getting over 28 mpg, rated at 26 mpg average, and hasn't hit 5k miles yet.
The long and short of why I didn't get one was peace of mind. I want this engine to last a long time, with few service worries. Lets face it, I still don't fully trust Hyundai-Kia, and I know that the corporate bottom line on many automotive components is "will it last the warranty period".
The modern DI engine already has a very high pressure fuel injection system (and thus the chattering sounds from these engines when cold), and lastly my engine already has 200 HP and 186 lb ft, on a 3200 pound car. It moves from rest to 60 in 7.5 seconds, and that is all I need here 13 miles from the Pentagon. There aren't even many fun twisty roads in Fairfax County any more. They have all been turned into parkways and boulevards due to high volume. My average speed on my trip computer never gets over 26 mph. To tell you the very truth, I know know why there are droves of Prius Hybrids. They make a lot of sense in this dense stop and go world this car guy has begun to dread. That's enough out of me! :shades:
Have you seen Ford's durability tests for the Ecoboost in their trucks? They truly torture the engine under the most awful conditions for about 6 months with logging, desert racing with sand, etc., etc., giving it the equivalent of at least 150,000 miles iirc. And then they take it apart, examine things, and do a compression test, and it still appears that the engine has a lot of life left to it. Ford's engineers really made more durable a lot of the components in the engine to make sure Ecoboost wouldn't have reliability problems. Only time will tell, but right now it's looking pretty good as far as I know.
But if with all that high tech high pressure stuff you don't actually go faster with less gas than, say, a Mazda6, Nissan Altima, or Honda Accord, is there a point to it? The base Fusion has a thrashy old-tech engine that's rather unpleasant from my rental car experiences. You have to move up in trim (c. $2000) and then still get the optional Ecoboost engine iirc. At this point a Fusion costs significantly more than a comparable KIA, Honda, etc. once you factor in the upgraded engine.
Honda actually did something similar on the previous generation Accord. If you got an LX, you got a lower power, less sophisticated, and slightly noisier VTEC engine. Moving up the EX and above you got a VTEC that was closer to being an Acura engine. But starting with the 2013, you get a better and more advanced engine on the LX than you got even on the previous year's EX (And yet it doesn't seem to have clatter. Haven't figured out if they added sound insulation somewhere or if they solved the clatter issue with a tech fix of some kind.)
It's pretty clear that part of the credit for Honda stepping up their game with the 2013 Accord goes to KIA and Hyundai. They piled so much standard stuff (including that powerful engine you talked about) into even the base model, that it was more luxe and had more features than the base models of all of their competitors. For years Honda was stingy with the extra features, making you really buy a high end model to get some things, but I guess they got tired of KIA and Hyundai stealing their customers, and so now they've put lots of stuff on their base model too.
But back to engines. Since KIA has a 10 year/100,000 mi warranty on all of their engines, you really didn't have to worry about the reliability. I'm convinced it would have been reliable, but if not you would have been covered.
But as you say, with lots of traffic in the DC area do you really need that kind of power?
I know, cski, that you're not in the market for a car, and are lukewarm about the Accord's CVT and its styling. But, if you'll bear with me, an Accord would probably actually solve two of your pet peeves with your Optima: the rear visibility and the mpg. The Accord's slender rear pillars, as I've said a few times, give it the best visibility in the class. And now the CVT and DI VTEC engine gives it great mpg too. The trade in value of your Optima would be awesome, and you can get at least $2500 off list for pretty much any Accord. Ok, I'll shut up now. I promise! (after reading your post about the ghost cars I've been kinda haunted by that. Seriously. Don't think about a Prius for that reason, bc they are just as bad if not worse for rear blind spots.)
When it's 85 I go 90...when it's 70 I go 75..
Don't watch much TV...don't even have cable (coat hanger antenna..works pretty good
"2013 Ford Fusion 1.6L EcoBoost Automatic
Movie-star looks, athletic chassis, pedestrian powertrain.
....Consistent with Ford’s transition to smaller engines (there is no longer a V-6 in the Fusion powertrain inventory), the 1.6 employs turbocharging to extract more power from less displacement while shooting for high marks on the government’s efficiency tests. Although this is to some extent a fool’s errand—the EPA dyno rollers bear little relationship to the operating realities of America’s streets and interstates—it’s the common response across the industry to the lofty efficiency requirements mandated by various global entities.
Teetering on the tightrope between acceptable performance and high mpg, the 1.6 turbo delivers 178 horsepower at 5700 rpm and 184 lb-ft of torque at a reasonably low 2500 rpm. Assigned to towing a substantial mid-size sedan, these aren’t prepossessing output numbers, but if the driver keeps the turbo spooled up—the antithesis of driving for high mpg (we averaged 22 mpg)—there’s enough snort to make the Fusion a reasonably effective ally for dissecting day-to-day traffic.
Effective, however, only applies once the car is moving. Getting the 1.6 Fusion automatic swiftly out of the starting blocks requires some skilled brake-torquing to get a chirp of wheelspin—the better to minimize engine bog—but even then the driver’s danger of acceleration blackout is nil: In this case, 0 to 60 mph in 8.2 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 16.2 seconds at 86 mph. In a recent comparison test versus the Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, and Volkswagen Passat, a Fusion 1.6 automatic was slowest of the group...."
Lest I sound like grandpa Tom I also ride Motorcycles, one flirting 150 H.P. which sees triple digits ....too often. I just don't comprehend commuting at a frenetic pace. Point A to point B.
I would even go back on my last post; and trade for a 2014 Optima SX (in Corsa Blue) if Kia made it worth my while. I am just still smitten with the Optima styling.
Also, the Mazda looks so similar to the Kia that they could be brothers. Swapping for one with a 15 hp deficit doesn't make a lot of financial or psychological sense. The only reason to swap to Mazda is it's rear view camera, and it's refined sporty chassis. It's a drivers car...and I am a drivers car man...but not at the expense of losing $5000 in depreciation on the deal.
Do you know which car currently appeals to me the most? It's the new Lexus IS 350. What a GREAT looking, and brilliantly performing Sport sedan. It has all the attributes of a comfortable Lexus with BMW performance and modern styling....with the added promise of excellent Toyota reliability
In a recent review, it beat both the BMW 330i and the Caddy ATS 3.6.
The Mazda6 seems like a great car, but the visibility isn't as good at the Accord, plus it's a bit louder, has less rear seat space, and a smaller trunk. I thought you didn't like Mazdas? I think they are good cars, but having owned both I prefer Hondas. Of course, I haven't driven the new 6, which is earning raves and even beating the Accord in some comparisons, and so I can't really say about that one.
Haven you gone on a test drive with Honda's new CVT in the Accord? It's quite different from the CVT in the Nissan.
There is a second ecoboost option that makes more sense in this car. The 2.0 turbo. With roughly 240 HP, this engine would be more able to keep up without gratuitous stabs at the throttle. I bet the MPG from both engines in this area would no more than 1 mpg +or - , and the 2.0 would be a more relaxed highway cruiser.
I know the 1.6 is a smooth, reliable engine, and is used on many Ford models. I am not knocking it for those reasons.
The 2.0 turbo has become the industry standard V6 replacement in modern mid and full size sedans, and I think I covered why in this post.
To answer to my not liking Mazda's, it isn't that I don't like them (I bought two of them), it's that the 04 Mazda 6 had it's A/C compressor replaced twice under warranty and once out of my pocket. Also, with less than 120 k I had to put a $3000 transmission in it. Recently I found out that the outgoing models have been made in Detroit, on a Ford Assembly line with many Ford components under it's skin. My Mazda 3 was very reliable, but she almost got me killed in wet weather. (There are documented cases of it's frightening lack of traction, even two deaths). It spun while doing 45 on I-95 with no throttle application. Totaled.
The new 6 is made in a brand new factory in Japan and with tight quality control. So with that said; I might give Mazda another shot if I was in the market for a new car. It's cool is that I can track its reliability and see if it lives up to it's full potential without any personal risk. Then I may consider it when my Optima is due for replacement.
I like Ford - they have a good chassis. Hopefully the 1.5 is an improvement.
The other issue is that these EB engines seem to run very rich to prevent overheating - something that is fixed in the newer 1.5L EB and future revisions.
David Shepardson
Detroit News Washington Bureau
....In 2007, VW made a declaration: It vowed to sell 1 million vehicles in the U.S. in 2018 — about 800,000 Volkswagens and 200,000 Audis. And it announced it would move its U.S. headquarters from Michigan’s Oakland County, the epicenter of the U.S. auto industry, to Herndon, Va., to be closer to its customer base on the East Coast.
In 2011, it opened an assembly plant in Chattanooga, Tenn., its first since closing a U.S. plant in Pennsylvania in 1986. It now assembles in North America more than 72 percent of the vehicles it sells in the United States, and has vowed to boost that tally to at least 75 percent. It currently has the capacity to build more than 150,000 vehicles in Chattanooga. VW also has opened a parts center in Tennessee — its fifth — and will likely open a sixth in the northwest.
Its U.S. dealer network has climbed from 577 in 2008 to 645 today.
And the carmaker has launched a series of new or refreshed products that led to three straight years of double digit U.S. growth. In 2012, sales jumped 35 percent with 438,133 sold, marking the company’s best year since 1973. The automaker had its all-time U.S peak in 1970, with nearly 570,000 vehicles sold.
But VW sales here fell by 0.9 percent in the first half of 2013, including a 3.2 percent drop in June. Its U.S. market share has slipped from 2.9 percent in the first half of 2012 to 2.6 percent in the first half of this year. U.S. auto sales as a whole are up 7.7 percent in the first half of the year....
From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130713/AUTO0104/307130022#ixzz2Z9QeBdIG
JULY 15, 2013 by ALAN ADKINS
According to German automaker Volkswagen, the new 2014 Passat will boast improved fuel economy with a new, smaller base engine onboard. Following in the line of other carmakers ditching base engine options with more than four cylinders, Volkswagen has dropped the old 2.5-liter inline five base option in favor of a 1.8-liter turbo four capable of 170 horsepower and 184 lb/ft. torque. That’s the same amount of horsepower as the old five-cylinder base powertrain, but seven extra lb/ft. compared to the previous engine....
In terms of fuel economy, the 2014 Volkswagen Passat will be capable of 24 mpg in the city and35 mpg on the highway with a five-speed manual transmission. Figures for the six-speed automatic option are 24 mpg city and 34 mpg highway. That represents an improvement over the 22/32 and 22/31 mpg figures on the 2.5-liter 2013 Passat for manual and automatic respectively. Other engine options include a 2.0-liter turbodiesel, which is capable of 31/43 city/highway mpg with a annual and 30/40 mpg with an automatic, and a 3.6-liter V6 with 280 horsepower and 20/28 mpg EPA estimates for city/highway driving.
Apart from the new base engine, the 2014 Volkswagen Passat comes with several other new additions, such as a leather-wrapped steering wheel, parking brake and shifter for the Wolfsburg Edition and two-tone seats, push-button start, a backup camera and 18-inch wheels for the SE trim. Wolfsburg trim and higher would get Volkswagen’s Car-Net infotainment system. A Passat Sport edition is reportedly in the works, and could be unveiled later on in the year.
http://www.usdailyvoice.com/2014-volkswagen-passat-rated-at-2435-cityhighway-wit- - h-new-turbo-four-10458/matthewfaris.html
In the real world, there isn't any measurable mileage difference between the 1.6 EB and the 2.0 EB. The 2.0 can easily beat EPA estimates with careful driving. With careful driving, the 1.6 is really slow and still doesn't save much fuel over the 2.0.
Tests provide some way to measure disparate models and engines against one another. But a different driving style can provide a much bigger advantage with one set-up v. another. The 1.6 is a good first step, but there are better choices right now, if both high mpg and good acceleration are your aims.
Since the new Ford hybrids can go 60 mph on electric only you see a big drop going from 55 to 65. Other hybrids are capped in the 40s so they don't see the same drop from 55 to 65 because they're off the battery at 55 too. And the EPA test starts with a full battery charge.
It's more accurate to say that Ford's EB engines must be driven very carefully to get real world results close to EPA results. I suppose Ford could sandbag the test but that has CAFE implications. The only fair way is for the EPA to adjust the testing like they did in 2008 to match the current technology. That way it's the same for everyone.
You need to find a vehicle that fits your driving "zone". Many years ago I had a Honda Civic. It was a 1.6 but I couldn't get over 25ish mpg. I had that thing over 5000 rpm all the time.
There is a minimum acceptable performance/feel/acceleration for me. So for me, I'd do better in a diesel for day-to-day driving because of the beautiful torque (I don't own one). If I'm running on a track, say an autocross course, I'd choose something other than a diesel...say an S2000...
The 'potential' problem with the EB (theoretically...since I don't own one) is I may that I may get 'stuck' on the boost the whole time
BTW, the only EB I've driven was the 2.0 in the Explorer which was very nice and more responsive than the V6. I've driven in an F150 EB (as a passenger) and that thing flew...amazing power everywhere and at any speed...
It's supposed to be a young persons car, not a Moscow bureaucrat's new fleet replacement for the Trabant.
lmao!
All true.
But they are having trouble selling the Passat to the point where they have cut production....
Some people are hang on every test result by C&D or CR. They should test those same cars in Denver.
FRANKFURT (Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG plans to bring back the Phaeton luxury sedan to the United States as the carmaker looks to reignite flagging growth in one of the few markets it has been unable to crack....
The Phaeton, a pet project of VW Chairman Ferdinand Piech, last year sold about half the volume worldwide that the company initially targeted. Its U.S. comeback is part of a plan to spend $5 billion over the next three years to roll out new models and boost sales in the United States, where deliveries have started to slip after a two-year burst following the 2011 rollout of the Passat and Jetta sedans that were redesigned for American tastes....
The company has been losing ground this year. VW's sales in the United States fell 0.9 percent to 206,792 in the first six months of 2013, while total light vehicle sales in the country rose 7.7 percent. The Jetta, Beetle and Passat models, which fueled VW's gains over the past two years, "reached maturity in terms of their sales cycles," said Tim Urquhart, a London-based analyst at IHS Automotive.
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20130716/OEM04/130719891#ixzz2ZIesGYga
Follow us: @Automotive_News on Twitter | AutoNews on Facebook
1) Mazda 6 (not much of a contest)
2-4) Tie depending on your biases: Malibu/Altima/Camry
5) Sonata
6) Accord
No opinion: passat/optima/any thing else
Comment: As stated, general consensus appears to be that the Mazda 6 is a really nice looking car. I kinda like the looks of the Malibu, even tho I hear it'll be moderately changed after just 1 year, but Altima and Camry also within the second tier. The Sonata is sharp, but now seems "dated"-- will be interesting to see the next generation. Accord appears very conservative to me-- somewhat like the previous generation camry was.
None of this is a commentary on the interior/driving characteristics/etc. of the cars-- I'd rank those different. Just my opinion.
It's been good, but I don't love the driving dynamics. I have a relative out of town for several weeks who has asked me to drive her car some - a 2002 Accord with 110k miles on it. At 11 years old, it drives much better than my Sonata. It rides harsher, but drives like a sports car in comparison. I had a 2006 and it was the same way. The Sonata rides soft and feels big; great for cruising but it produces zero driving fun (unless you mat the throttle; the 3.3L is plenty quick!). I bought the Sonata because of the value equation. I don't dislike it, but it doesn't make me want a new one either.
Having driven a 130hp Accord (1996) for 9 years, and now a 249hp Sonata V6 (2009), I'll say that you don't NEED the big power, but rather, it's a luxury worth paying for in some instances. I drive 100 miles a day. 84 of that is on 70mph-limited interstate. I'll pay the 3mpg penalty (19/29 vs 22/32 back in 2009) and have the reserve power when I want it. For what it's worth, I tend to stick around 70-72mph, and average 29mpg in daily commuting, 31mpg on trips.
You're right that the Accord is more agile in handling than most midsize sedans. The new model has electric steering, which apparently saves on gas, but doesn't give quite as much of a feel for the road at higher speeds imho. But everyone else these days has electric steering too. One of the biggest improvement in the new Accord is that for the first time it's a quiet car. You'll notice a big difference there.
No Moon-roof, no leather, just the good stuff. I did have them add real wheels instead of the ugly hubcaps though.
I saved thousands over the EX and that's all I lost (moon roof and leather).
The 4-cylinder Accords at the time didn't have nearly as many goodies as the V6's even in EX trim.
Toyota has raised discounts and cut the Camry's price in an effort to keep it on top. In early July, the Camry's average sales price was the lowest of the nine top-selling midsize cars, according to data from J.D. Power and Associates obtained by The Associated Press. Discounts on the Camry were among the highest in the segment, according to the data....
Through June, Toyota sold 207,626 Camrys. But Accord sales rose 21 percent during the same period to 186,860. Altima sales gained nearly 8 percent to 167,787, while Fusion sales rose nearly 19 percent to 161,146. Since January, the Camry's share of the midsize car market has fallen by 1.6 percentage points to 12.6 percent, according to Ward's Automotive. During the same period, the Accord gained 0.5 points to 11.2 percent.
To combat the falling sales and market share, Toyota has lowered the Camry's price. The Camry on average sold for just over $20,900 in early July, about $1,400 below the price from a year ago, according to the J.D. Power data. Discounts, such as low-interest loans and sweet lease deals, totaled nearly $3,100 per Camry, up almost $1,900 from July of last year and among the highest in the market, according to the data.
The Accord is rolling off dealer lots even though it sells for roughly $2,600 more than the Camry for an average of $23,500. That includes discounts of only $1,300 per car, the lowest in the market....
BTW, the new Camry failed the offset crash test and Toyota is scurrying to re-design it (their new RAV4 also flunked that test).
Hyundai quietly upgraded their hybrid Sonata and its 6 speed auto transmission delivers a much more satisfying driving experience than Toyota's fleet of hybrids and their droning CVTs.
The Sonata passed the offset test.
Actually, it's worse than it sounds. Toyota asked not to have the partial offset crash test performed on the RAV4 until AFTER they had a chance to redesign it. They redesigned it and then it failed. By publicly asking to wait until the redesign, then failing, they have given themselves a serious credibility issue. For Toyota's sake, I hope the 2014 camry passes that test or they may start to pay the price in terms of sales.
Some of the razzmatazz styling of some midsize sedans can get to look dated pretty quickly. For instance, the current Sonata is already seeming a little dated to me and some others, while for many people even older Accords have a restrained and classic look that ages well. I think the same will be true of the current model.
Also, the "coupe-like" styling of some midsize sedans comes with some trade-offs—like poor visibility, big blind spots, and reduced rear headroom. I'm a "form follows function" guy, and so for me the style of the Accord works.
But some want more racy styling which for them stands out more, and that's fine too.
As for the general resemblance of the new Accord to the last-gen Sonata... I don't see it. Maybe a bit in the front (it's a pretty generic front on both cars), but on the side the Accord has a much more pronounced Hofmeister kink than the Sonata.
I didn't like the look of the 2011 Sonata when it first arrived, but it's grown on me. Maybe because I have one in the family fleet, a 2013 red GLS, mainly my wife's car. I do like it in red/tan. It's been perfect so far, and an enjoyable and comfortable car to drive around town or on the highway. And better-than-EPA FE too, when driven with a light foot.
Agreed. Both are inoffensive (read: generic), but nice looking. Style isn't a sales point for a midsize car to me.
My 2009 Sonata is still quieter than the 2013 Accord. Neither is objectionable to me though.
You're right that the Accord is more agile in handling than most midsize sedans. The new model has electric steering, which apparently saves on gas, but doesn't give quite as much of a feel for the road at higher speeds imho.
I'm more aware of the suspension tuning in the Accord vs. the Sonata; the Sonata feels a lot less disciplined than the Accord. Steering is quicker in the Honda, but both are relatively numb. It's the new standard these days.
Am I right in thinking that the 2013 Accord is on your shopping list now? If so, which model?
For what it's worth, I'm not a "first model-year buyer" simply because I'd rather have the better deal down the road. My vehicles have always been the first year of a mid-cycle refresh, not a full change (1996 Accord, 2006 Accord featuring a big exterior restyle, 2009 Sonata featuring a big interior restyle). The mechanicals have always been solid in these cars, and you have something that differentiates you from the prior years, but pricing isn't for an "all new car."
When I do look, it will likely be at a Sport or an EX-L 4-cyl (the leather-wrapped wheel is a must-have for me; yes that's a random requirement
I'll probably replace my Sonata in a year or so; I have 108k miles on it. With my entire immediate family living 300 miles away, I want to keep a car that is new enough I won't second guess my ability to leave town whenever I want.
Since the late 1990s, as you probably know, the Accord has been on a 5-year design cycle. For instance, there was an all-new Accord in 2003, and then the third year of the model cycle was the great 2006 that you got with the standard led tail lights (that was the best mid-cycle restyle of any Accord generation imho).
Anyway, by that counting the new Accord won't get a restyle and refresh until model year 2016, which will appear in the late summer of 2015. Can you wait that long? Maybe you can make your Sonata last, or maybe consider a 2014 Accord?
http://www.newsday.com/classifieds/cars/ford-fusion-c-max-hybrids-to-improve-mpg- -with-software-upgrade-1.5710505
It sounds like they had more time to test the new system and decided that they could safely raise the parameters.
Going to 85 mph on electric power is a shocker. I assumed they were maxed out at 62 mph due to technical limitations.
The good news is it's available to 2013 owners too.
To me real world mpg is fine of Fusion hybrid but the 13 gallon tank is very small to get decent range especially since no one really gets 47 mpg combined under normal driving conditions.
The upcoming Honda Accord hybrid has about 15.9 gallon tank and I'm guessing real world mpg will be higher. Although seats don't fold so each have pro/cons.
85 mph will help those who do shorter high speed runs with braking in between.