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

16970727475544

Comments

  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    So basically the G6 as RWD is OK, but not for the New Malibu. Now we have the best offerings under $25K coming from Pontiac. So this may be the decade for Pontiac? New Malibu, while a good car, is head to head with some stiff competition. Aura, so far is a low selling car.

    I do see your points, however.

    For those in need or prefering FWD in the larger car will have to move up to Buick. Wonder if that is going to work out OK?

    As for uniquely styled, I did not mean ugly. ;)
    Loren
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Bury your right foot in a 2006 Altima 3.5 and you'll suddenly see why FWD has its limits...

    Yes, but the problem is not FWD it is putting these excessively powerful V6 engines in these type of cars.

    But, HP numbers sell so overpowered FWD sedans are built and then most who buy them never even get the engine to 3000 RPM.

    Perhaps the solution is to bury your right foot in the 2.5 and realize that this will accelerate fast enought to meet your needs or, if not, buy something else with RWD or AWD.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    Yes, but the problem is not FWD it is putting these excessively powerful V6 engines in these type of cars.
    Excessive being a judgement call? I'll contend to you that a V6 Altima is 'safer' than the same car with a 175hp 4 banger, the Accord V6 safer, the torque steering XR vs. the XE etc. etc. by simply having that extra power to cope with a multitude of real life traffic situations. A number of FWD V8s (Impala SS for example) have the same 'problem' or maybe these cars have too much power (in your judgement), as well?
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    I'll contend to you that a V6 Altima is 'safer' than the same car with a 175hp 4 banger, the Accord V6 safer, the torque steering XR vs. the XE etc. etc. by simply having that extra power to cope with a multitude of real life traffic situations.

    That's got to be "Stop the presses!" front page news: V6s are safer than I4s. I seriously doubt it.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    In the case of the Accord, it may well be true. The V6 has ESC standard, and it's not available on the I4s.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    V6s are safer than I4s. I seriously doubt it.
    Perhaps you are thinking about safety in a passive sense, things like #of airbags, crash test results, electronic safety 'control' systems etc. AS OPPOSED to safety in an active sense - the ability of any car to avoid difficult situations. That extra HP let's say to pass that semi on a 2 lane highway comfortably or merging onto an interstate off a short on ramp. In short there is more to a safe car than how well it crashes or how much a computer will alow you to do before IT takes 'control'., and those 'active' safety features (things that the driver does control) and the resources with which he/she has to work with I am talking about. Those things that can help you avoid an accident(acceleration, braking, and handling) are what in my mind make a truly 'safe' car. If we are going to accept the contention that the Mazda6 is the best handling car of this group than it is also likely the safest car in this group - at least in that regard. And conversely if we know that the Fusion V6 (or 4) is the least powerful, it therefore must be considered the least safe in that regard as well.
    I am not labelling the 4 cylinder versions of these cars necessarily unsafe, heaven knows that even that 4 banger Fusion is much much safer in almost all respects than even cars made a short 10-15 years ago or so - the early to mid 90s - some really bad examples of 'wheezmobiles' - and we certainly all lived through it, didn't we?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I guess by that measure, those 500 hp luxury sedans that can go 0-60 in under 5 seconds are really safe.

    Let's get real. The powerful I4s in today's mid-sized cars--more powerful in some cases than the V8s of not long ago-- have more than enough power for safe driving. OTOH, the power waiting in those V6s can be an enticement to drive faster, for less safety for the driver and those around him/her.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    while most medical experts might tell you that a glass of wine a day is good for you - they will most assuredly tell you that a whole bottle/day is not!
    I would also be willing to bet you that, as you drive home tonight, and witness anybody driving in an unsafe manner that there is likely little correleration between what he/she is doing and how much HP their car has, meaning you will certainly find as many 'bad' drivers 'squeezing' their 4 bangers, as you will other drivers 'enjoying' their V8 300C SRT8s....
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    IMO, Detroit's future is in 'traditional' V8/RWD layouts much like the 300C and gas prices will largely determine how successful they are.

    I don't think gas prices will ever get low enough (in the near future) to make V8/RWD cars big sellers. The "Big 3" will have to develop competitive small engines/cars, or they will simply cease to exist, IMO. I don't think these companies can survive selling only trucks.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    actually I believe that GM/Ford/Chrysler CAN survive selling things like only trucks, SUVs and minivans. Total F150/Silverado sales make Camcord sales look minor league and Chrysler has owned the minivan market since they invented the thing. The problem as I see it, is the 'fat' infrastructure that those particular mfgrs. have cultivated that makes it impossible for them to do just that! 'Detroit' does make some nice (and class defining) trucks, much as 'Japan' does the same thing in the car markets.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    But accidents and unsafe driving are not caused by speed, or excessive speed, but by inattention and unskilled driving. Mainly inattention.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Inattention at 90 mph is more likely to bite you than inattention at 60 mph. That's why we have speed limits.

    You could use your viewpoint, though, to show how there is no benefit to having an I4 vs. a V6, because accidents are not caused by lack of speed, or acceleration, but by inattention and unskilled driving.
  • noles200noles200 Member Posts: 49
    on October 15th. I spoke with Chad in their customer service center and he informed me that once production begins on October 15th we can expect to see the new Malibu in showrooms within the next 4 to 8 weeks (I guess it depends on how far you are from the plant in Kansas).

    That's not really the news I was looking for, as I was hoping the car would be in showrooms by September or so. I am thinking of the Malibu or the Saturn Aura but I like the styling of the Malibu a bit better, not to mention I'm thinking it will be better equipped in the LTZ model (as compared to the Aura XR model) but I don't know that for sure.

    How do others feel about not being able to test drive this car until November or December of this year?
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Member Posts: 1,467
    The "best offerings" is purely subjective, especially if the G6 going RWD equals "better" also, I hope you aren't equating the succcess of the Aura with the new Malibu because if that is the case you are ignoring some MAJOR differences between the position of the new 'Bu and new Aura.

    -Aura has no I4=Malibu will have the class leading I4/V6 on LTZ.
    -Chevy's dealer network is HUGE compared to Saturn
    -The Malibu is a more established name than the Aura and Chevy has played in this market more heavily than Saturn.

    The Aura is a slow seller b/c it doesn't have a I4 and it's saddled with No Haggle Pricing. Mailbu without a doubt will sell better.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Captain2,

    You hypothesized that the Mazda6 might be the best-handling mid-size car and that the Fusion, both the V6 and I4, having the least powerful engine, might therefore be the least safe in the mid-size segment.

    That logic totally ignores the fact that Mazdas and Fusions have exactly the same engines and the Fusions (Milans, MKZs) are based on a slightly modified Mazda chassis.

    When it comes to safety, it is helpful to examine some raw data. From the Internet:

    Nationally, in 2005, there were 43,443 fatalities. Of these, 25,347 were a result of road departure, 9,188 intersection-related, and 4,881 were pedestrians.

    Does a more powerful engine prevent a driver from running off of the road? I doubt it.

    Will a powerful engine (who decides the definition of powerful?) help a driver get out of a tight bind? Sure, sometimes. But avoiding the bind in the first place is a better remedy. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    Our 221-horsepower 3.0-liter V6 Ford engine is quite adequate for our AWD Fusion, thank you. At no time during our seven months of ownership have I said to myself, "Gee, I wish this car had 270 horsepower."

    As a safety matter, I just don't see horsepower to be a significant factor. I once totaled a 1958 VW Beetle (32 horsepower). But the reason was driver error: I fell asleep at the wheel and took out a guardrail.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    the reason was driver error: I fell asleep at the wheel and took out a guardrail.

    Yikes, glad you didn't take yourself out in the process! :surprise:

    A '58 Beetle? Cool!!!
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Thegraduate (me) said: Bury your right foot in a 2006 Altima 3.5 and you'll suddenly see why FWD has its limits...

    jeffyscott said: Yes, but the problem is not FWD it is putting these excessively powerful V6 engines in these type of cars.

    But, then we're returning to elroy's statement that said the Chrysler RWD V6 cars were slow (which isn't true if you consider sub-8 second 60 MPH runs very slow - it's similar to a Fusion V6).

    Heck, the V6 RWD sedans (Charger/300) from Chrysler are faster than the V8 RWD sedans from Ford (Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, Town Car), which make the 0-60 run in something like 7.9 seconds (according to C&D).
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    "As a safety matter, I just don't see horsepower to be a significant factor. I once totaled a 1958 VW Beetle (32 horsepower). But the reason was driver error: I fell asleep at the wheel and took out a guardrail. "

    Good statistics on the road departures. I think the whole "more powerful = safer" argument has little merit.

    Plus one for driver error. I totaled my first car, road departure / driver error. It had 110 horsepower, in a midsize sedan.

    While I admit I've been in situations before where I want more power, I can't say I've ever needed more power.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    That logic totally ignores the fact that Mazdas and Fusions have exactly the same engines and the Fusions (Milans, MKZs) are based on a slightly modified Mazda chassis.
    urnws- I think you are missing my point. In the sentences before I am contending that vehicle dynamics (power, handling, braking) are largely what makes a car safe and given that contention that a beeter handling car (the 6 in this case) is a safer car than the others in this group simply by accepting the generally held view that the 6 handles better. And likewise, if any car is down on power (like the Fusion (or the 6), for example) the opposite must also be true. Of your quoted 25347 road departure accidents, would be willing to bet that many of those were just like the one you had in your VW, not necessarily falling asleep at the wheel but probably inattention, cell phones, and/or 'playing' with the stereo - all the kind of things that are very unrelated to the task and responsibilities at hand.
    I never said anything like that 221hp (or even the 150-175hp in the 4 bangers) wasn't enough in any particular car (although you can go back in any number of my posts and find a number of times that I have said it just isn't competitive these days) - HP and relative FE numbers don't lie. What I did say though, is that I think the 270 is safer than the 221, not because it is anything that any of us that have it use even occassionally, but because it is there, in reserve, on those very rare occassions that we HAVE to use it - having that extra 50hp gives you the option of 'aggressively' (bad choice of words, perhaps) avoid a number of real life traffic situations similar to those I specifically mentioned.

    Not a whole lot different than having a car with a great set of brakes, the same sort of very rare times that a 10 or 15 feet shorter stopping distance can make a helluva difference. When was the last time that any of us can remember 'locking them up' (or getting the the ABS to engage)? If anybody out there can honestly answer 'it happens even semi-regularly' - well, then they are driving too 'aggressively' (good choice of words), their ABS is malfunctioning, and their insurance rates are justifably stratospheric.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    Sorry. I love having more power from a V6 than a 4-cylinder, but a V6 being "safer" due to it's power reserve is simply ludicrous! For all the power "in reserve" that a V6 has, a 4-cylinder car, in general, handles better than a nose-heavy V6, due to it's lower front-end weight and better weight distribution.

    Great acceleration can help you avoid an accident, but so can an emergency lane change.

    Do I think a 4-cylinder model is safer than a similar V6 model? No way. Having both passive and active elements help to avoid/survive an accident, as well as defensive driving, paying FULL attention to the road ahead, around, and behind you, driving appropriately for road and weather conditions, and properly maintaining your vehicle.
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    I think BMW has it right with their 230 hp, RWD, perfectly balanced chassis. 230 hp isn't big these days, but in a 328, its sublime.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    a 4-cylinder car, in general, handles better than a nose-heavy V6
    absolutely - and therefore are 'safer' -in that respect, than the V6 - and effectively a tradeoff from a safety perspective - what you gain in handling abilities vs. what you are sacrificing in power.
    a true story - recently 'stuck' behind a little Korean subcompact, both of us attempting to merge off a short entrance ramp onto a busy highway that happens to be move at about 75 all the time. By the time he actually got to the end of the on ramp, he was huffing and puffing all the way up to maybe 45 or 50! The ensuing screeching of 'locked up' brakes and 'panic' lane changes , of course followed as he then 'forced' his merge, all from those 75 mph 'victims' of this certainly underpowered car cutting in front of them. Me, being relatively far behind him (maybe 100 yds.), understanding what he was attempting to do (and what he was attempting to do it in), and anticipating his probable inability to do it, bailed to the road shoulder but I thought I was about to be 'taken out'. What would expect this guy to do? Stop at the end of the ramp! That may be even worse than what he actually did do.
    And then you tell me, that having some extra power is ludricious and not safety related? Now that would be ludricruous! Granted an extreme example and I'll even admit that even a 4 banger from this particular group could at least approach a condition safe merging speed.
    BTW, I drive this ramp every day and left to my own means (and my own 268hp) I can easily hit that 75mph to merge. The Avalon, I drive, a safer car if only because of that 'surplus' of HP! Or maybe we should all drive around in (90hp?) Kias and then blame situations like this on the fact that many drivers largely ignore speed limits or tend to drive at speeds that 'keep up with the flow'? Oops can't do that either, give it enough time and even those Kias can (and do) move well above posted speeds as well!
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    For those of you who think buying a Fusion is a bad bet because Ford is going out of business, you might want to take note: Ford just announced a 2nd quarter profit of $258M NOT including the proceeds from the sale of Aston Martin. That's right - profit, not loss. Revenue was up 6% from last year. And they did it while cutting rental fleet sales. And that doesn't really include the new Taurus/Sable or Focus sales and only a few Escape sales which are setting a record pace.

    It's amazing what can happen when you cut unnecessary costs, build high quality desirable vehicles at sustainable volumes.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    Definitely good news for Ford. This news maynot help dealing with the Union, but regardless, maybe they are on teh right path to profitability. They certainly aren't out of the woods yet.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Ford just announced a 2nd quarter profit of $258M NOT including the proceeds from the sale of Aston Martin. That's right - profit, not loss.

    That's great news. Thanks for posting it, Allen.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yes, amazing, shock & awe news.
    Time will tell, with foot notes and post scripts to come.

    I would not take the time to read the small print and instead just wait and see how this all plays out. I don't see the stock price doubling today, and big inverstors now have the data at hand.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    The 2.5L I4 is said to be an option in the 2009 Fusion so this might interest some of you.

    TwinForce
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    I would not take the time to read the small print and instead just wait and see how this all plays out. I don't see the stock price doubling today, and big inverstors now have the data at hand.

    Seeing that Mulally was quoted as saying that they won't be profitable for the year and still expect that won't happen until 2009, I'd say you're right.

    It's still good news no matter how you spin it and shows that they are doing something right. BTW, Ford's NA market share increased a few tenths too. Being able to reduce fleet sales and increase market share is not an easy thing to do no matter who you are.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    However, a skilled driving manuever to avoid an accident may be to get the "hell out of there!" And to truly do that, you may need to stomp on the gas. You can't 'get the hell out' in an I4 unless its turbocharged. A good quality V6 will get you out of there in a hurry; which is sometimes needed.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    However, a skilled driving maneuver to avoid an accident may be to get the "hell out of there!"

    Agreed, my driving instructor referred to that as "being somewhere else," implying anywhere else is better.

    And to truly do that, you may need to stomp on the gas.

    This was referred to as "changing zip codes" among other things. This is one remedy, although rarely is it the only solution unless its coupled with "red fog" and "no way am I going to let that [experlative] in front of me."

    You can't 'get the hell out' in an I4 unless its turbocharged.

    I totally, completely, and categorically disagree with this statement. A moderate 4 cylinder engine and a responsive transmission (or better still, a manual) will do fine.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    "I totally, completely, and categorically disagree with this statement. A moderate 4 cylinder engine and a responsive transmission (or better still, a manual) will do fine."

    AMEN
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    OK... let me add that the car should be under 3,300 lbs, and then the I4 can be quite good...., but still... there isn't that EXTRA oomph you get from say a Honda 3.0 V6 or a 2.0 Turbo from Audi.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    With the caveat that I wouldn't want to be driving a Scion xA with 4 people in it while trying to pass a vehicle on a 2 lane road on an incline. Of course, in that situation, most of the cars would be passing me :P
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    But what about the fact that V6 versions of cars with I4's generally have better/safer suspension setups, bigger/wider tires, and more agressive braking components than the I4 couterpart. Any loss of handling due to front heavy weight of V6 is usually more than compensated for by all of these other factors.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    The 230 HP would be just right if it got significantly better mileage than the 300 HP 330i! Since it gets about the same gas mileage, I'd opt for the extra 70 horses.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    a lot of times people merge too slowly onto a fast moving freeway thereby causing a traffic jam/slowdown/chain reaction of problems not only because their vehicle is underpowered, but mainly because they are idiotic, crazy, uninformed, and stubbborn. They simply refuse to waste the little bit of extra gas useage in order to accelerate at a reasonable rate so that they can merge safely. They are either too cheap or too dumb and instead choose to merge onto a 75-85 MPH flow of traffic at 45 MPH!!!! They choose saving a few drops of gas over safety and probably cause another 1,000 drivers 1000X more gas wastage due to traffic jams than they would have wasted themselves.

    Anyway, enough of my rant. If you have a 300 HP car then you should be able to merge at full speed even at 1/4 throttle. If you have 200 HP then you should be able to merge at full speed even on a short ramp at 1/2 throttle acceleration.

    If you have 100 HP then floor the damn thing! That will help! :cry:
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    The 230 HP would be just right if it got significantly better mileage than the 300 HP 330i! Since it gets about the same gas mileage, I'd opt for the extra 70 horses.

    What 300 hp car gets good gas mileage?
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    The BMW 335i, sorry, I said 330, but meant 335.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I drive a 130 hp 1996 Accord with an automatic to work everyday. On my way home is a moderately long but steep uphill onramp onto I-65. Traffic generally flows around 70 MPH. If I accelerated modestly (making the 4-speed auto shift at around 3,200 RPM, say) I would barely be at 50-55 MPH by the end of the ramp. Instead, I use more of the car's available power (130 hp comes at 5200 RPM), wind up to just above 4,000 RPM, and manage to be going at least 65 MPH when my chance to merge comes in).
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Pssshhhh, everyone knows that Honda I4's are exceptional and out perform the "numbers" ;)
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Weeeellllll, 130 horsepower isn't particularly fast in a 2900 lb car, saddled with a 4-speed automatic. I love the car, but not for its speed.

    You can jam the throttle to the carpet from a stop, and get nary a chirp from the tires. I'll just pretend it is AWD or something.

    Interestingly, when I was a couple of years younger (and the car was too) I had a chance to run 0-60 in a flat, broad area. It took just over 10 seconds, and that's with ~150k miles on the clock.

    On the other hand, my 2006 Accord (5AT, 166 hp) does the same between 8 and 9 seconds).

    *By the way, I never brake-torque the engine (it seems really bad for it). I just hit the gas from a stop.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Assuming we a talking about newish midsize sedans, merging too slowly is not about the car, it is all about the driver. The vast majority seem to think their car will break or something if it goes over 3000 rpms.

    I believe all of these new midsize cars, in 4 cyl form, can get to 60 in under 10 seconds...I think that is plenty of acceleration capability for accomplishing this task.
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    The 335 is a turbo, cost $9K more, gets way less MPGs (who cares tho! - its a 335!) and your insurance premium doubles vs. the 328. If I wanted a race car I'd get a Mustang and save a bunch of money. High HP is one of the things you use the least in 95% of your drives. 230 in a RWD setup is perfect.

    The 328 is a mid size sedan - right? One of the best out there for the money. Fantastic leases.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The 328 is a mid size sedan - right?

    It's compact at best. $35k for a compact is high for me (space is crucial for me, I'm 6'4" and a big guy!)

    The 5-series is midsize.

    The 7-series is full size.
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    "You can't 'get the hell out' in an I4 unless its turbocharged."

    Did anyone watch the video I posted on CarSpace of my Accord running from 5 to 80 mph? 60 comes in well under 8 seconds and 80 in about 10. Before the acceleration ramp even ends, I overtake an Expedition that had a big lead on me before I took off. I think that is well above the acceleration capability of the average vehicle on the road.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Did anyone watch the video I posted on CarSpace of my Accord running from 5 to 80 mph?

    Yes, I saw the video, but I would rather not have to punch it as soon as I back out of my parking spot. With the V6 you can wait until you get halfway down the ramp, and pick a spot to blend into the traffic without anyone having to slow down for you.

    Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against 4 cylinder Accords. My 92 Accord (140hp) was plenty fast enough for me for 12 years. It's just so much easier, and takes less advanced planning, with the 6 cylinder's highway acceleration.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Just to clarify:

    - The 335 is a turbo yes, cost $9K more no
    - gets way less MPGs (who cares tho! - its a 335!) probably 34 highway after being broken in, my 330 got 34 mpg at 65
    - and your insurance premium doubles vs. the 328 not even close.

    If I wanted a race car I'd get a Mustang and save a bunch of money okay, but these cars aren't even in the same league.

    High HP is one of the things you use the least in 95% of your drives. 230 in a RWD setup is perfect. disagree, my turbo 4 gets floored quite a bit when merging
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    disagree, my turbo 4 gets floored quite a bit when merging

    Wow, your driveway must be directly on I-40 or something. I have 130 hp Accord, drive into an urban setting with 70+ mph traffic daily, and have several mountains around.

    I can't tell ya the last time I had to floor it. And it's a 4-speed auto.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    You can rationalize anything if you try hard enough.

    There is no way you can justify needing more than a good modern 4 cylinder engine. Just admit that it's a want and move on.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I never needed a 6cylinder before, and I don't need one now. But it is more fun fun fun with it, and I don't want to go back. Of course, for someone who would never use the extra power anyway, it would be a complete waste of $$$.
Sign In or Register to comment.