Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The less good looking cars, for me, are Camry, Altima, Malibu, and the Chrysler cars.
I used to sort of like the Sonata, but my opinion of it has slowly declined the more I see of it. I'm not sure if the look is aging well.
I am having a hard time placing the Passat. Half of me says boring bread box, the other half says European good looks. Most of me likes the 3.6 SEL though.
Hey, speaking of the Passat, didja know that the 6 speed automatic in the 3.6 SEL is an automated manual? That would kill the deal for me. A regular 6 speed w/ a real torque converter would last longer in this area.
Less nice: Fusion (I know everyone here loves it, but I hate the big wide chrome grill), Camry, Malibu.
I rented a Sonata over the summer and it seemed nice looking but not a standout. I couldn't tell you what an Optima looks like.
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
Also, believe it or not, I think the upper trimmed Optima looks most like a Jaguar XF. Honestly. Here is an XF:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.themotorreport.com.au/content/ima- - - - ge/2/0/2012_jaguar_xf_03-4daf9205368ef.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.themotorreport.c- - - - om.au/51709/2012-jaguar-xf-update-unveiled&h=1067&w=1600&sz=387&tbnid=GgRrbejPgU- - - - cZ4M:&tbnh=113&tbnw=170&zoom=1&usg=__u2mxYpyDLp_8XEFu56_oxUKPcsk=&docid=9b3it178- - - - MvJ6BM&sa=X&ei=AcJOUrjyBJTC9gSXuoCgAg&ved=0CFsQ9QEwBQ
Here is a Optima SX-L
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2012/12/3- - - - 0/061318-first-drive-2013-kia-optima-sx-limited-by-henny-hemmesw.4-lg.jpg&imgref- - - - url=http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2012/12/30/061318-first-drive-2013-kia-op- - - - tima-sx-limited-by-henny-hemmesw.html&h=683&w=1024&sz=225&tbnid=TM_t_Op8seH7rM:&- - - - tbnh=120&tbnw=180&zoom=1&usg=__J5rmbgSDFlJ4RP6E3PzpSR722oo=&docid=7hnSMTbp6PzjPM- - - - &sa=X&ei=McNOUtWMMoHe8wTkvIHIDA&ved=0CEcQ9QEwBg
I have my windows tinted exactly the same shade as the Jaguar, and I added piano black gloss B-pillar trim panels to complement it.
Here is a picture of the modification + tint: http://i.imgur.com/FmBHfsL.jpg
So, to get my car the way I wanted it cost very little money.
Tint (35%) $180
OEM spoiler, painted: $120
B -pillar trim - $30
OEM mudguards : $60
Infinity Sub: $220
Red LED interior accent: $25
Lamin-X fog light protection, tinted: $18
So, total is : $653
That would suggest Hyundai-Kia has totally worked out the bugs in their hybrid power train.
But, for the calender year, both the Fusion and Camry hybrids have a better year-to date then the combined Kia/Hyundai variants, by a hefty margin.
September buyers are typically more of bargain hunters and September is sell down month making way for new models. The Kia and Hyundai have lower transaction prices then the Fusion and Camry do as well. I'm willing to bet that is a factor as well.
One month of sales do not dictate a change in product, for the better as you are insisting, but rather a reflection on market conditions. If Kia and Hyundai were to progressively gain on both the Fusion and Camry, you might be one to something, but that is not what September suggests.
1) Mazda6 (absolutely no contest)
2) Accord
3) Altima
4) Optima (there's an original name for ya...)
5) Fusion (want to love it, and photos look great at the right angles, but in person it appears a bit tall and narrow... not exactly the Rapide that the grille is mimicking)
6) Passat ("restrained", not "boring")
7) Sonata (not sure this is aging well...)
8) Camry
1. Mazda6
2. Accord
3. Optima
4. Altima
5. Passat
6. Fusion
7. Sonata
8. Legend
9. Camry
10. Malibu
1) Fusion (long wheel base does work against it)
2) Accord (nothing bad, takes no chances)
3) Altima (only bad is the front fenders)
4) Optima (very Jag looking, but rear lights wrap around to the side too much)
5) Sonata (grille could be toned down a bit, rear lights are weak)
6) Mazda6 (front grille too big and c pillar trim styling is awful)
7) Passat (timeless design from 1995)
8) Camry (stylists(?) just mailed it in)
Well. Avenger is last. 200 next to last. Malibu is just above those. Chrysler is on a roll, their next mid sizer should be great. But man are those dogs tired.
EXTERIOR
1. FUSION: absolutely stunning from any front angle (and side profile with certain wheel combinations); portly and slightly awkward looking from the back
2. MAZDA 6: attractive from every stance; nicest rear-end of the group
3. ACCORD: looks like a much more expensive car from any angle but the front
4. (tie) ALTIMA: the best result Nissan has achieved with the "melted look" so far
4. (tie) MALIBU: I don't understand why people think it's such a wallflower; I think Chevy did a decent job w/this and GM always seems to have a pretty strong color palette
4. (tie) PASSAT: bland but not unattractive; should only be sold in tuxedo black
7. OPTIMA: looks best from the back; the side profile styling is ruined by the hatchbackian C-pillar kick-up
8. CAMRY: tries too hard to look futuristic; succeeds easily in looking putrid (SE trim is better than the others, but not by much)
9. SONATA: while I actually like the side profile, spin it just a sliver more on the platform and that Joan Rivers-in-a-Nuclear-Powered-Wind-Tunnel front-end brings new meaning to the word grotesque (particularly from the three-quarter view) - double that for the hybrid version
INTERIOR
1. MAZDA 6: the beige/black color combination is gorgeous; has the most upscale cloth upholstery design (w/subtle pinstripe) I've seen from any automaker in several years
2. PASSAT: also looks very sharp in beige; simple but elegant dash layout
3. MALIBU: it's hard to believe it's from the same co. that was stamping out Lumina interiors from blown plastic just 10 years ago
4. FUSION: certainly not unattractive; Ford should fit the appearance package models with an anthracite headliner and ditch the satin trim
5. ACCORD: again, appealing in the beige/black combo but stacked dash is so '80s Pontiac 6000 (though I do like the large Volvo speedometer); looks very bland in monochrome dark gray color option
6. SONATA: windblown styling seems to work better on the inside than the outside but the excessively swoopy dash reminds me of a circa-2000 Mustang
7. OPTIMA: Bauhaus inspired instrument panel is uninspired; wall-like
8. ALTIMA: just tolerable at night (with the interior lights completely off)
9. CAMRY: a complete mess; the dashboard looks like the spawn of a love tryst between a Gobot and a Transformer
lol!!
"...Joan Rivers-in-a-Nuclear-Powered-Wind-Tunnel front-end...."
lmao!++
I think a new taillight scheme would greatly improve it's overall look. Lincoln did great on the MK-Z, and managed to mask the long wheelbase too. It's funny how the MK-Z is marketed as a "Compact Luxury Vehicle", but the Fusion is mid-size.
Also, you nailed the Sonata problem. The front end just looks like someone pinched it between their fingers in the middle. I can't argue about the zillion of them I see on the road though. It is probably the most prolific mid-size sedan on DC roads; period.
You said the Passat had a "simple but elegant" style...but the Kia was "uninspired"?
I have sat in all three, and driven two. The Mazda and the Optima of course, and the Optima interior had the best design in my humble opinion.
I am not on a personal attack BTW....and maybe I am fighting for my baby a little, but I really think the Mazda dash had too much black plastic, and the LED readouts for temp and whatnot were tiny and harder to read. The Passat's dash is very high quality, but very minimalistic as well.
The Passat is a clean design, but I'd put it a notch below the really good looking midsize cars.
What's interesting is that in terms of style, function, safety, performance, mpg, and the rest, this segment is so competitive that the best of the midsize cars are not just good, but near great, and an amazing value for the money compared to most other cars . Just a few thousand dollars separates these cars from their smaller siblings like the Civic, Corolla, Elantra, etc, but the midsize cars are significantly ahead in terms of room, acceleration, safety, style, etc., and only sacrifice a comparatively small amount when it comes to mpg.
1. Mazda6
2. Accord
3. Optima
4. Camry
5. Passat
6. Altima
7. Passat
8. Sonata
9. Malibu
10. Legend
I doubt I would ever buy a Mazda anything as they do not inspire me with their quality. The Passat is a bit bland but pulls off the look better than the Jetta. Sonata is tired and has not aged well. Legend is a typical Subaru styling job, rather dumpy.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Although none of these cars are perfect in terms of design (again, IMO), I can't recall a time the mid-size class had so many stylish entries. And yet they're each going their own styling direction - for the most part (which, as a car aficionado, I love). The "problem" with that philosophy (for the manufacturers, of course) is that when you bolt on a 22-inch tall teardrop shaped headlamp assembly, such as Hyundai did with the new Sonata, some people (like myself) will go running as fast as possible in the opposite direction. Other people, like my neighbor, are going to fall in love and sign on the dotted line.
I believe the front end of the Fusion is stunning. But that's me. I bought a new Chevy HHR in Sunburst Orange Metallic back in 2008 because I absolutely loved the style of the vehicle from the front and sides and, yes, orange is my favorite color (shame on you, Dodge, for eliminating Toxic Orange from the Charger's color palette). The chrome grill, chrome wheels, all that bright orange metal... my God, I thought that car was beautiful. And as polarizing as boxy, retro-inspired orange vehicles have the potential to be, it still constantly surprised me to discover how many of my friends disagreed with my taste. Long story short, beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
Interestingly enough, with each subsequent visit to the Chevrolet service dept. to repair problems with the steering system and sunroof, I loved Hhr a little less until she left my garage forever in 2010 (and an almost equally problematic Ford product drove in to take Hhr place).
I don't fault anyone for buying a Sonata or Optima based on style as Hyundai was clearly trying to inpart a distinct styling theme into each of those designs. I do, however, call into question someone's veracity when they say the Camry is a *visually* appealing car. Because it's all too apparent that aesthetic design was way down at the bottom of the list when Toyota penned it. Do I think the Camry is a bad car? No, but it's the proverbial ugly wife of the the midsize class. And, shallow me, I wouldn't want to be seen walking up to the thing in a public parking lot for that very reason.
It's a mix of several factors:
I really dislike the wall-like dash of the Optima; it almost seems like the instrument binnacle is launching itself toward the passenger compartment. While the Mazda's dash is nothing spectacular per se, it's certainly not offputting either. Mazda also uses a simple grayish white lighting scheme which I prefer to Kia's generally red lighting.
The aspect of the Mazda that really does it for me though is the cloth trim in the "Sand" color. I'll tell you right up front, I'm not a leather guy (I live in a state with 5 months of winter), so mine is a cloth vs. cloth opinion.
From what I've seen lately, and this seems to be reaching a crescendo, manufacturers are putting the ugliest materials and patterns they can find into their cloth equipped models (presumably so that buyers are forced into checking the box for cowhides). Mazda has just broken that pattern - no pun intended - with the 6. Their pinstripe cloth design reminds me of the textiles Audi used in their line-up in the '80s and early '90s (before Europe went all leather and leather substitute on their US spec. models). IMO, it actually looks nicer than the cowhide versions of the same model.
Legacy:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/11/2013-subaru-legacy-25i-qui- ck-spin---01-opt-1352990890.jpg
Accord:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/09/2013-honda-accord-ex-l-sed- an628opt.jpeg
IMO I don't know how anyone could consider the Camry to have better exterior styling than the Altima or Sonata... or the Malibu or Legend for that matter. To each his own!
But, interesting that the Passat is both 5th or 7th... does that depend on the trim level, or ??
My current car is a 2007 Accord EX with cloth which I love since it's soft and looks plush, and after seeing the cheap, rough-looking fabric and finishes that many competitors use in this class on their base models, it's a bit disheartening. Thankfully Mazda is bucking that trend.
Styling is obviously subjective. I find the Camry styling not bad. I would not mind being seen in one.
I find the Legacy very unattractive and don't see the similarity you mention. The front overhang looks way too long and the trunk way too short. Proportions are awkward.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
The mat draped across the dash is awful, and on the outside it is just a thin plastic mess. The fake chrome around the fog lights and the steel wheels with hubcaps just don't cut it anymore in this segment...but then again I see a zillion Sonata GLS running around. There are tons of people that aren't "car people", so I understand the rational. New and shiny is good, and for many it's good enough.
Another thing is that on the Camry (and the Corolla) the bodywork on the front wheel well is way wider than the tires, (for aerodynamic reasons I am sure), but it doesn't look right.
The SE is acceptable. It has a nicer looking front end and good looking rims. It's just bland.
In particular I can't stand silver painted plastic. (satin faux-aluminum) The Optima has NONE. It has an actual piece of aluminum around the gear shift. The Mazda doesn't have any either. The Sonata does. Lots of it. That is why I slammed the Sonata interior in another post. Still a good car though.
In the Camry, it's fake aluminum plastic is also squishy, and you can damage it with your fingernail. Awful.
It is a turn off for me in any product. Reminds me of a low buck Soundesign boom box.
My Focus had them, but usually you have to get leather to get the heaters.
Also, I do like my toys, so usually that model includes leather seating.
So, the story goes that he approved a rework of the interiors on the spot at $100 per car, a sizable investment. The the "hard points"" of the cars are exactly the same as pre-2011 cars, (so they can use essentially the same tooling) but there have been a host of other mechanical changes. With the addition of the 3.6 liter, 283 hp engine, the 200 has become a respectable ride....but still doesn't reach the sophistication of the majority of the other players. The 4 cylinder Avenger still uses a 4 speed automatic, and the 2.4 liter has been called "farm machinery" at higher rpm.
Here is some unabridged wiki info since no one else has posted any, and the Avenger is indeed mid-size:
"Although the Sebring platform has been retained, there have been numerous cosmetic and powertrain changes to the 200. While the 2.4 L four-cylinder 173 horsepower (129 kW) 166 lb·ft (225 N·m)[citation needed] engine with either a four-speed or six-speed automatic transmission is carried over, Chrysler's new Pentastar 3.6 L V6 engine is also offered, with a six-speed automatic transmission, generating 283 horsepower (211 kW) and 260 lb·ft (350 N·m) of torque. A flex-fuel version of the 3.6 L Pentastar engine is also offered. Other changes include stiffer body mounts, a softer ride rate, revised suspension geometry, a new rear sway bar, and upgraded tires. The 200 also introduces more premium features than the Sebring, such as LED lighting, thicker seat cushioning with higher quality materials, along with new measures to decrease noise, vibration, and harshness.
The 200 is produced at the Sterling Heights Assembly Plant and arrived at dealers in December 2010. A 2-door convertible model was added in early 2011 with the same engine choices.
The 200 and sister car Dodge Avenger were ranked the "Most American Made" sedans and convertibles by The Kogod Made in America Auto Index in 2013."
Then I saw an Optima SX (turbo) in electric blue with the pizza wheels. Killer. It turned heads. While I couldn't rationalize the expense of a turbo, I saw the EX model was very well equipped. Even the base model has dual exhaust and fog lights....along with alloy wheels. Also has the most horsepower in the base engine.
So, the Fusion "did it" for you. That's the cool part. People don't "fall in love" with Camry's. They need a car, and don't want to get a lemon.
That leads me to the American car. You mentioned your HHR, with a recurring steering problem, replaced by a problematic Ford.
I had the exact same experience. My Z24 had a cracked transmission resulting in poor clutch alignment....eating clutches every 30k. Then the alternator went every 30k also. I kept a spare in the trunk. Then I had an SHO. The engine seized .
I don't buy american cars anymore. Period. All the Asian cars I have owned have worked flawlessly. No "glitches". Also, I buy more mainstream engines, instead of the higher-zoot V6/turbo models; crammed into a small engine bay. That is why my Chevy's alternator fried. Too hot. I don't want a turbo- fear of more time in the shop as the car ages. When metal parts get red hot and spin at high RPM, then endure ice cold winters and 100+ heat summers, that hot and cold cycling will eventually break something....and that something will be attached to something else. However, it really boils down to having 3 kids under 13. I can't afford hi-performance engine problems/insurance/fuel/tires, and will not be able to until they are on their own.
Then, I will buy a mid-life crisis car when my hair is silver and my Viagra is daily!
I was happy that I found something in the middle for now. Sporty, roomy, reliable, smooth powertrain, and comfortable. $24,000.
I like ones that also have heated seat backs.
Incontinent grandmother? No worries. Drooling canine? Not an issue. Careless children that can't hold on to their waffle cones? No problem. It's VINYL!
Leather, on the other hand, does not age well - at least not when it's installed in a car interior. Cowhides dry out and crack when exposed to extreme heat (and car interiors, even up here in MN, can get HOT in the summertime) and will discolor and pick up a sheen when they come into continued contact with human body oils (natural or otherwise). The lighter leather colors are the worst for wear, but I've seen some pretty nasty dark leather interiors on cars without a lot of miles on them too.
I think one of the big reasons automakers push leather nowadays is that, regardless of how solid a car is mechanically or structurally with over 100K on the odometer, it will "feel" old if the seats are brittle, worn and/or held together with duct tape. Call it today's version of planned obsolescence. Take a stroll down the back row of any large car dealership's lot and peek into some windows if you doubt my veracity.
In the 60's, '70s and '80s, cars would very often be well on their way to rustdom after 7 or 8 years in this part of the country. Build a car like that today and your brand image would drop with each and every passing glance on the road. But if your fancy model's leather interior looks like the backside of a cow exploded in it after just a handful of years, no one but the owner (and perhaps an additional occupant or two) will be any the wiser.
For anyone who is planning on keeping his car for a long time, vinyl is a much better choice [than leather]. That said, even if you poke a bunch of tiny holes in it (read: perforate), vinyl is a poor choice for actual *seating* surfaces.
After receiving a promo offer from VW, I was somewhat seriously considering a Jetta SE turbodiesel a few months back and took a close friend along on the test drive to get his opinion. While not obese, let's just say he's carrying along a few extra pounds. And he could not stop complaining about how much his butt was sweating on the VW's hot vinyl (and, no, the seat heaters were not on). Perhaps it was partly psychological, but I started feeling the same sensation by the end of the drive (I'm only 160 lbs, so perhaps my manner of driving had something to do with it). Ultimately, the vinyl interior (combined with the most abrupt clutch engagement of any new car I ever driven) was a dealbreaker.
Vinyl on door panels, seatbacks and armrests is one thing. Vinyl on seating surfaces is quite another. It may wear like plastic, but it breathes like it too.
I still have my 1991 Mustang, and have had it for 22 years.
My kids drove my 11 year old Explorer in high school and I'm glad to have it back.
Can't wait to take my 2013 Fusion out to South bend for the ND/USC game.
Different perspective.
It's exactly what's causing me so much agony right now [as I dream about driving that 3 year old dud of a Ford out of my garage for the very last time]. My heart says, "Get the Fusion. It's so beautiful and fun to drive," but my head says, "What? Are you nuts? You've done this before. Get the Accord or a Mazda 6."
And then I have all the constraints that go along with shopping for a new vehicle with a manual transmission (like, there's only about 5 choices still out there in the midsize class... and if you want cruise control and a radio, knock another two off the list...).
I saw the interior of a base Honda Accord today at the grocery store, so I stuck my head in. The first thing I saw was lots of shiny plasti-silver faux-aluminum. I like the Accord exterior, but what you have to see everyday is the inside. So, if that 1980's Emerson-Soundesign boom-box cheap plastic is on other Accords...then Honda blew it interior wise.
They always took the road less traveled and it never has really worked.
Ford's financial stake was never over 33%, Japanese law.
My opinion is that the car reviewing media is trying to promote Mazda to show that still have market influence.
That is pretty much a Fail.
Personally I wish Mazda had more market influence than they have. Maybe then the "market" would make better cars.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I chuckle when I read posts about a problem a car company had 10 or 15 years ago and people will still cite those problems as reasons not to buy a brand. Just about every car company has had problems of one kind or another. If we didn't buy a car because the brand had some sort of problem years ago we would all be walking. Ford had Pinto fires and Explorer roll overs and the Fusion has had more recalls than three or four other cars put together and their mpg numbers on their hybrids have been "recalled" as well. Look at Toyota and the problems they have had with bad press. Hyundai has been caught fudging hp and mpg numbers. Honda had well documented problems with transmissions. Audi almost withdrew from the U.S. because of their unintended acceleration problems but now are on a roll. Hyundai used to market crap, and I do mean crap. Now they have competitive products. So problems can be fixed, products can be improved. So please stop citing problems from many many years ago as if they are current problems. I knew all about the Honda transmission problems before I bought our Acura. The sky did not fall.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
And not sure why you would compare the 3 with a car like an Impreza which is an AWD car which has a cost of entry deficit because of its extended capability drivetrain, yet also battles for FE also because of it being AWD. Of course many might choose the 3, with more bells and whistles for similar outlay as a lesser equipped but AWD Impreza. As for 3's getting the nod over a Cruze whose company many NAs still hate because of buy-out memories, and Focus during a time period whose NAs favourite choice of transmission is an auto, but with its dual clutch operational issues, since as per Ford's usual practice in rolling out new tech upon customers (guinea pigs) prematurely. Then you have VW's Jetta whose past less than stellar reliability issues, while much improved of late, still come back to haunt them at times. And the Dart? They really screwed that one up...not a decent transmission available even tho 3 are offered. And the first year, they foolishly EPA tested their turbo on premium fuel requirements, in order to get the higher MPG bragging rights. Once engine management makes timing adjustmenst for the many customers who would fuel it with 87, no wonder few if any are meeting the EPA numbers. So naturally, between that and the poor auto choices avail, 'and' a less than smoothly refined 2.4 NA engine, is it any wonder many kicked a tire only to pass?
Then you have Mazda's highly successful advertising ZoomZoom deal, and new SkyActive tech offering fairly impressive real world FE numbers, (whose longevity potential is still an unknown) and claims that rust issues maybe really have been addressed through the use of galvanized metal (something their competitors had been already using) they have certainly secured a few new customers. Having impressively handsome cars like the new 6 doesn't hurt either. But promises of a diesel have been shelved till late next spring, will, and has put off some customers.
As for the alluded stereo-type of wx-capable AWD cars being popular in Cda ahead of the USA, SD just recently got a massive snow blizzard prior to Cda and that is often the case.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
As for the points I made, I don't agree that I was grasping at anything.
Since this discussion is about mid-sized cars, I'll reply wrt the Mazda 626/6. I owned a 2000 626 ES which I purchased when it was 6 years old, and owned it up to 10 years and 120k miles, and now own a 2005 Mazda6i which I just purchased. In each case, the car was driven its entire life in the Twin Cities area, which uses lots of road salt. Neither car showed any signs of rust even after many winters. The polished alloys on the 626 did show some signs of pitting late in life, but the painted alloys on my 6 are perfect after 8+ years.
As for interior trim, I think the trim on both cars was at least as good if not better than most cars of their eras. The 626 had tan leather that was soft and held up well. The dash controls were smooth and had a quality feel. The interior of the 6 also has held up well, and after 8+ years and 162k miles looks like new with the except of a hole worn in the driver's floor mat by the previous owner (a woman--high heels maybe?) and a bit of fuzzing on the center insert of the driver's seat. As with the 626, the controls have a smooth, quality feel.
So I really don't know where you are coming from re your comments on rusting and interior trim quality, wrt Mazda's mid-sized cars over the past 10-15 years.