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…110111113115116…544

Comments

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    That's not bad, but its eight controls vs. five and depending on how small/flush/packed the buttons are, hard to work with gloves/mittens on. The top row appears to be a little tightly packed, for example.

    Edit: I miscounted, ten controls vs. six (forgot temp and fan controls).
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I've never had problem using those with gloves. Each of those buttons is large, an inch wide by 3/4 inch high.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    My 92 Accord had the buttons in the picture, and they were much better than the old slide levers (remember those?). The cycling isn't really a problem in the 03 Accord, because I will do that before getting on the road. Don't usually have to change it after that.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    At first glance those buttons for mode seem like they would be better than a rotary dial. I wonder how they are to operate with winter gloves on though?

    I don't think I'd like auto climate, as I do like cold air blowing in my face at times and hot air blowing on my feet at other times :). I can see where digital settings might work better for auto climate temp setting, though. With manual, I think a dial or slider for temp is better.

    For fan speed, I can't think of anything that would be better than the rotary dial.
  • effect18effect18 Member Posts: 41
    Isn't the 2006-2008 Sonata ranked in the Large car catagory? And the 2008 Accord as well?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Yes, both sneak into the EPA's large car category by interior volume.

    But then, some compact cars like the Elantra, Sentra, and Versa are considered "mid-sized" cars by the EPA based on interior volume.

    So it gets confusing. But lots of choices for people looking for a "mid-sized" sedan, depending on what they mean by "mid-sized". For me, the smaller the car is on the outside and bigger it is on the inside, the better I like it. So cars like the Versa hatchback, the Fit, the Elantra, the Sonata, and the MPV (RIP) appeal to me.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    Yes, both sneak into the EPA's large car category by interior volume.

    Accord with a sunroof is still midsize.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Accord LX with a full-sized Kleenex box in it is mid-sized too. ;)

    I was thinking that the 2008 Accord is probably one of the worst uses of extra size I've seen in a car. Consider that the sedan is 3 inches longer (to 194.1") and the wheelbase is 2.3 inches longer, and yet there is only 0.3" more overall leg room (+0.4" in back, -0.1" in front). And the trunk is only 14 cubic feet, less than in some compact sedans. Where did all that extra length go? At least the interior width is up by 1.5" with only a 1.1" increase in exterior width, and the front passengers get 1" more headroom from the 0.9" increase in height (no change for the rear).
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Comfort is more important than actual inches. Reviewers have commented that the interior is more comfortable as spacious. :confuse: Did an Accord run over your puppy?
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Perhaps the ultra powerful large 3.5L V6 takes more room up than the ultra powerful smaller 3.0L V6?
    '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
    That's a thought; how much longer (front of the car to back) is the 3.5L engine compared to the 3.0L engine?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    No, but thanks for asking!
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Hyundai is in the business of selling new cars, and offers a generous warranty to those people. As a secondary level, those buying a Hyundai used get a more normal warranty. It is spelled out clearly on their website, which is very easy to access and read, when compared to most brands requiring you to contact a dealership for details.

    The GM warranty of 100K miles may indeed match some people's needs, if they drive more than say 15K per year. If they are driving 20K miles a year, it helps. As for increased quality, it appears that GM and most manufacturers have increased quality since I would say 2001. Most, but of course not all, cars seem to be getting more reliable during the 2002 model year and on, so I would say yes, they are paying having to do less warranty work on those cars - makes sense. Has GM quality doubled??? Come on now, of course it has not doubled, unless you compare it to a couple decades ago.

    Mazda quality has possibly dropped on the Mazda6 or has been less than stellar the last number of years, the rest of the line is not too bad. The Miata seems bullet proof. I was not aware of the warranty changes. Maybe you should ask Ford about that?

    Toyota power train appears to be questionable, based on reports by customers on this board (which is not too precise of a way to determine reliability of anything ), as the Honda transmissions seem to have recently improved and are more durable for the V6 models now.

    If a warranty means a lot to you personally, value it heavily when purchasing that new car. If it is but one element among many, just consider how much it really does mean to you. Buying a car like a Hyundai, which you must keep a good long time for it to be the best value, you may be better off with a long warranty -- they have a long warranty. L
  • effect18effect18 Member Posts: 41
    Companies offer better warranties to give peace of mind to consumers who are concerned of additional costs while paying off they're new car. Not to mention to ease claims of the cars being less reliable. Companies such as Honda and Toyota have had no intentions on increasing they're warranties because they have their names to rest on(for label lovers). Even though you would think, since Hondas and Toyotas are supposed to be super reliable cars, why cant they offer a better warrenty? It shouldnt hurt them too much, right?
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    I agree - so let's stick to the features and attributes of the specific cars. The various warranties manufacturers offer may be an interesting side conversation, but they really are not the focus here.
  • mickeyrommickeyrom Member Posts: 936
    What about Chrysler's lifetime warranty? A pretty good idea IMO.How many keep one car their whole life.It will get more buyers than the 100mi/10 year one from Hyundai/KIA and with a few exceptions will be cost effective for the company.I dont know anybody that has kept their car for their lifetime. :confuse:
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I wonder how many people trade for a new car at least partly so they can get a new-car warranty and not be at risk to pay for expensive repairs, especially to the powertrain e.g. automatic transmissions that are very expensive to fix/replace. I know that is one consideration for me when I buy a new car, to get the benefits of a factory warranty and keep my repair costs low for several years. If a car has a lifetime powertrain warranty, how might that affect car buying patterns? Just a thought.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    I wonder how many people trade for a new car at least partly so they can get a new-car warranty and not be at risk to pay for expensive repairs, especially to the powertrain e.g. automatic transmissions that are very expensive to fix/replace.

    Getting a new car warranty was certainly a significant factor in our decision to buy a mid-size 2007 Ford Fusion. A power train warranty is what sets a new car apart from a used vehicle. Guarantees are certainly part and parcel of the buying decision.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Yes, I like the peace of mind that comes with buying a car with a long warranty or with the Honda or Toyota name on it. To me, the Honda or Toyota name is at least as good as a 7/100K warranty without needing the warranty.

    In other words, I get MORE peace of mind from buying Honda or Toyota then I do from getting GM's or Chrysler's warranty. Secondly, I'd buy a Hyundai because their warranty meets my minimum requirements for the original owner at least.

    AGain, proven companies don't need a warranty, unproven one's do.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I don't see a warranty as a big factor. I bought a car I have confidence in, and don't anticipate expensive repairs. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I have never had an expensive drive line repair. I guess if it ever does happen, it could cause me to change my thinking. We'll see.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Oh I do. I know a relative driving the same VW he had in college. But then again, it is a rather simple piece of machinery. New cars may not be around more than a couple decades. L
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Its the same block. The old 3.0 and the new 3.5 should be about the same size, and the 3.5 may actually be lighter.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I already responded earlier, those buttons are big enough for all but hulk-sized fingers (even with gloves on). If 1 inch by 3/4 inch button is small, what is that tiny slider knob going to do?

    You may like rotary dial or slider knob, for me that is 80s/90s era. I prefer point and shoot.

    As for manual ac over auto climate control, latter is still a luxury, but will likely become a norm eventually. At home, I prefer leaving the thermostat in auto mode. And don't like vents blowing air on my face. If I needed air, I would by a pedestal fan. :D
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    If I were to buy a 1-2 year old car, I would look for certified cars like those from Honda, Acura and Lexus. You get extended warranty with those, much more than the base warranty.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    AGain, proven companies don't need a warranty, unproven one's do.

    I am wondering then why Lexus' warranty is longer than Toyota's and why Acura's is longer than Honda's. I consider Lexus and Acura to be proven companies. :confuse:
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I wonder how many people trade for a new car at least partly so they can get a new-car warranty and not be at risk to pay for expensive repairs, especially to the powertrain e.g. automatic transmissions that are very expensive to fix/replace.

    That would be being penny wise, pound foolish. With new cars, you lose money when one drives car off the lot (a lot more than a transmission repair might cost), and then comes monthly payments.

    I considered trading my 1998 Accord when it hit 100K mile mark. The idea wasn't around saving money from repairs, but the new car factor. Then I realized, if I have a car that was paid off in 2.5 years, has absolutely no problem, why splurge?

    A few years later, the same thought came back. I finally did buy a second car, but only because I have been driving a lot and found an exceptional deal on a car I wanted (TL).

    Ten years and 181K+ miles later, I can reflect back and consider not having made a single loan payment in 7.5 years on the Accord, and only expense has been around gas and scheduled maintenance. $15 radiator hose doesn't count.

    IMO, it is a bad idea to buy a new car based on the fear that it might start giving you trouble. Unless, you opted for a car with a proven history of problems, then you got into trouble by choice and deserve it. Unless repair costs almost equal monthly payments, I don't consider it a bright idea to buy new.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Additional warranties and stuff in Lexus and Acura are sold as an incentive to buy those brands. They aren't doing that to show to the world that they are any more reliable.

    Or, are you still trying to make a point that longer warranty = better quality?
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yesterday, at the local Cadillac dealership, they had an '07 base CTS parked next to an '08 CTS fully loaded - direct injection and blah, blah, blah extras. The '07 is $31K before any discounts, but that new '08 is $47K. I kid you not! What, a baby Caddy? They look pretty close, though the new one has less balance to it. Seems like the eye goes to that overdone front, and kinda stays there. Looks like the Cadillac emblem is looming large these days, as it is now closer to that of a Frisbee. If you could say bargain the base '07 down to a cost of $29K, it would make the difference between the two some $19K. Now, take $2K off the overpriced '08 and it is still $17K difference. Heck, you could buy another car to run around town with and keep the Caddy for the longer drives, with that sort of pricing.

    Here is another jaw dropper; a Volvo C30 for $31K. Has the World gone made? Loren
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Or, are you still trying to make a point that longer warranty = better quality?

    I, for one, don't believe a longer warranty equals better quality. However, a longer warranty certainly does have the potential to be a real money-saver should an engine or transmission decide to self-destruct.

    A life insurance policy for a drive train is a good thing; the longer the better. It's common sense.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Oh heavens, there have been warranty wars since I was a child. Chrysler ups warranty, then GM & Ford would up their warranty, which in turn would lead to yet another one upsmanship. Many years ago that was the famous 7 yr. plan, and in more recent times it is, well the 7/70K plan, which in turn gets beat by the 10 year plan of Hyundai, and now ends with the Chrysler lifetime warranty. Somewhere in the middle of all this is the GM 5 limited 100K plan.

    Guess the real question to ask is would you buy a car you did not like, just because it has a longer warranty, so you can be miserable for a longer period of time? If you had two cars in mind, which both seemed very-very fine to you, then a warranty difference could tip the scale. It is all about adding up that which is good, that which is mediocre, and that which is less in a car when comparing, so yes, the warranty is important as a part of the buying decission. Due to $85 per hour labor and so much electronics, and more high tech transmissions, which are expensive, and such, the warranty becomes a bit more important than it once was for those keeping a car for many years. Cars hold up well, and last a good long time, but what will happen to the technowizard cars of today ten to twenty years down the road? Alas, so many buy or lease every three to five years, it becomes someone else's worry.L
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I don't expect my cars to have major warranty related issues under 100K miles anyway. If there were, I probably won't settle for that brand.

    When the dealership tried to sell extended warranty to me on the Accord, I smiled and said, no thanks. I'm here for a reason, instead of signing papers at the VW dealership couple of miles down the road.

    $900 (the number I was quoted for extended warranty) would have expired 4 years and 81K miles ago, and without getting used.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I had a PT with the 7/70 plan, which was good, but have now sold the car, and don't see me in a Chrysler any time soon. That said, what is the deal with this lifetime warranty. Is that not one of those, "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" , things? Or do they rob Peter to pay Paul? Is the bumper to bumper then 3 years? That is not so bad I guess. One could a be a smarty and ask if that is the life of the car, or the life of the company, but I won't do that :P . Guess it is a good thing they offer here, though perhaps not as good as the Hyundai plan. Guess it all boils down to fitting the need of the individual.

    If I was to be choosing between a Sonata and a Sebring, I am sure it would take all of one second; the Sonata is the car, but due to warranty so much as every other element of the buying decision, then one can add the nice warranty. Same goes for the car I did buy, the Honda, which has shorter warranty. Simply can not see driving what you could not stand to own just to get a lifetime warranty. Now perhaps a Dodge Charger or 300 would be much nicer, and thus throwing in the warranty is a bit more candy. And yeap, Honda, please feel free to offer more warranty in the future. :shades:
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I have never bought a car warranty, but isn't an Accord 5 sp. tranny like some $5K to replace? Just thinking down the road a ways here.....
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I wouldn't know. :)

    I will be surprised if any transmission in mainstream cars would cost as much to replace.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    From what I have seen, certified means they have added yet another thousand or two to the price. It is like a $15K private buy, becomes a dealership $17 to $18K buy, which gets upped another notch to $18k to 20K when it is a certified car. Which, to me is certifiably crazy. I have seen USED Scion tC cars on the lot for the same or higher pricing than a new one. Just nutso! Is this just not adding $2K in warranty. I realize they are suppose to do all this checking and fixing, but for at least Ford dealership I went to, this was NOT the case. Tested a Mustang with a grinding sound from the front drivers side wheel, and a clunk when it went back into first on a stop. Then I test drove another Mustang, from the same dealership, and told the salesman, " hey look the check engine light is on." Then there was the Sonata test drive. I wanted to use a used one to test out how it accelerate and such. Well I tried to adjust the lumbar support and the lever fell to the floor.

    While you hope to be getting a better car, inspection wise and well serviced, I do wonder. Perhaps it is not worth the extra paid over the private buying of a car. Seem to save $2K to $4K. That said, a dealership, once bargained down price may be closer; say $1K difference???
    Loren
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I worry about price on a car when I start to negotiate. On a new car, it starts with MSRP, and on used, depending on age and mileage. I won't pay whatever the dealer tells me. I did just that on 2006 TL a little over a year ago, paid $28K for a 1 year old car (MSRP $36K). :)

    There are plenty of private buyers that try to overprice their cars anyway.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I don't recall saying anything like that. I was asking why Lexus and Acura have longer warranties than their non-luxury counterparts even though there was an assertion that proven companies don't need long warranties.

    Personally I think companies offer long warranties for two reasons:

    * Buyer expectation: this applies to luxury brands, i.e. people expect a better warranty when they pay a lot more money for, say, a TL than an Accord.

    * A way to stand out from the competition: this applies to brands like Hyundai/Kia, Mitsubishi, Suzuki, GM, Ford, and Chrysler. There are only so many ways to stand out from the competition in the mid-sized family car class. You can do it with features (and some do that), you can do it with power (some do that), you can do it with a reputation for quality and reliability (ala Toyota and Honda), you can do it with price, etc. It's expensive to add features and you can't build a reputation for quality and reliability overnight, and prices can only go down so far. But you can add a longer warranty overnight. As long as your product quality is OK, it won't cost the manufacturer much to do it and may actually help improve long-term reliability scores because people may tend to have their cars serviced better knowing that if they don't, it could void the warranty.

    I am rather puzzled as to why Honda, Toyota, and Mazda among others grant competitors this advantage. It would cost them very little to offer longer warranties (at least I think it would) and it would take away a competitive differentiator.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Probably not that much. For example, a friend of mine recently replaced the failed 5-speed tranny on his Odyssey (about 90k miles) and the cost would have been around $3000 had he not had an extended warranty.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I am rather puzzled as to why Honda, Toyota, and Mazda among others grant competitors this advantage. It would cost them very little to offer longer warranties (at least I think it would) and it would take away a competitive differentiator.

    Because they don't need it, like Chrysler, GM, Suzuki, Isuzu, Hyundai and Kia have. Do you think if Hyundai didn't have the reputation that it did, they would still offer that warranty? No.

    When a company struggles to do business, they need steps that helps them grab attention. Look at Chrysler. Why did they start offering lifetime warranty in the middle of the year? Because their sales suck. This is yet another marketing strategy to get customers to their door step and not unlike offering massive rebates. Many automakers don't need it, or not to exceptional levels. Why would they do it?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Maybe, for example, because the increase in sales of Sonatas to individuals over the past two years is coming from someplace?

    When you have up-and-coming competitors like Hyundai and Kia, and desparate competitors like Chrysler and Mitsubishi, you don't wait for them to get in better health before taking action. You try to kill them, or hurt them, when they are relatively small and weak.

    Maybe if Honda, for example, had offered a longer warranty on the last-gen Accord, they would not have had to offer such large incentives--and even then see its sales fall off.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Incentives have to be offered on clearance. Are you telling Hyundai and these other automakers that offer long warranty don't have to offer incentives?

    Seriously, I find it rather amusing that you dig really hard to find things to talk against anything but Hyundai.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    That is not what I said.

    Glad you find my posts so amusing, but why not stick to cars rather than taking jabs at those who have a different opinion than you do?
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I prefer point and shoot.

    What does this mean :confuse: ?

    At home, I prefer leaving the thermostat in auto mode. And don't like vents blowing air on my face.

    Yes, well that is not a very good anaology, there really are not a lot of similarities there. One difference is when I walk into my house it is not over 100 degrees from sitting in the sun all day, like the car.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    Some pics to hopefully distract people from the warranty discussion (yawwwn...)

    image
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I like those I beams - very cool. This is a covered parking garage, which is a tough of class, no doubt. So what car is that with the big butt? It is getting to the point, when in a darkened view, they all look the same. Is it the Mazda6? L
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Looks like Monday it is strike a deal, or strike GM day for the Union. Yet another element of a buying decision, the stability of the company selling the vehicle. Could come a day when GM pulls out of the manufacturing in USA and Canada. Not saying it is planning on doing so, but it sure looks like profits would be greater, and it is tempting to manufacture elsewhere, as they seem to be doing better at selling elsewhere, such as the popularity in China. Another what if, is that GM could decide to go into bankruptcy, after or during a strike period, and start over as a leaner company, not necessarily as a USA manufacturing based one. Just a thought. What would this do to the USA economy, and the stock and bond markets if GM just said, we throw in the towel, the debt is too much and we can no longer make it?

    Management these days may be thinking a bit farther ahead than in the past, and the Unions perhaps may want to consider all possibilities at this stage of the game. A high stakes chess match is soon to unfold. L
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    Fortunately the Mazda6 has projector type headlights, so changing the halogens over to HID's doesn't create much glare for oncoming traffic. But I can see more when driving at night, so I love having them.

    I used a fisheye lens for that pic and although I tried to use the de-fishing part of my picture developing program, but there are still some minor proportion issues in that pic. The angle also accentuates the rear of the car a bit too, but maybe the Mazda6 does have a big butt (I don't personally think it is too big since my view out the back is good so reversing is safe).

    I just put on some window visors (although the pic is a bit dark and small so it may be hard to see) but ever since then, I've been getting nice comments from people (mostly from people I don't even know) saying how they like how my car looks. I'd like my car without these compliments of course, but its nice that other people also see my car as good looking enough to tell a total stranger and not looking like everyone else's where they wouldn't even notice it.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I had to say it after seeing your “points” that relate more about dismissing Accord. Here is another example.

    I was thinking that the 2008 Accord is probably one of the worst uses of extra size I've seen in a car. Consider that the sedan is 3 inches longer (to 194.1") and the wheelbase is 2.3 inches longer, and yet there is only 0.3" more overall leg room (+0.4" in back, -0.1" in front). And the trunk is only 14 cubic feet, less than in some compact sedans. Where did all that extra length go? At least the interior width is up by 1.5" with only a 1.1" increase in exterior width, and the front passengers get 1" more headroom from the 0.9" increase in height (no change for the rear).

    Yet, and you either missed it or deliberately left it out, all those increases have added up to increase the interior volume to 106 cu ft, larger than any of its direct competitors and on par with bigger cars. As for trunk space, Honda’s approach to use a 5-link double wishbone in the rear (as opposed to less bulky but simpler multi-link/torsion beam/MacPherson Struts suspension that others use) eats up space. In addition to that, I don’t know if everybody uses a common standard to calculate trunk space. Honda uses VDA method globally, and it results in a smaller number compared to other standards as it disregards small nooks and crevices (akin to filling up cargo with sand/water and measuring the volume versus using standard size blocks to measure volume, the latter is VDA process).

    That said, overall length is not a good measure to draw the conclusion you just did. A car can be longer for a lot of reasons (for that matter, Accord V6 is slightly longer than Accord I-4, and that is due to a lip spoiler which is standard in V6, and as you may have guessed by now, it doesn’t add to the interior volume). First generation TL was a compact sedan and actually only 2” shorter than this Accord. Acura RL has the same exterior dimensions as this Accord (including the wheelbase), and it is about 3 cu ft smaller.

    Bumpers and shape of cars can contribute to additional length too. Compare Camry or 300 to Accord. Honda went for a real bumper (which adds 1-2 inch to the length). Camry and 300 have no bumper. The Toyota and Chrysler are also flat nosed. Accord’s nose has a slight tapering (additional couple of inches). An inch or so might be extra in the rear bumper. Add them all up, and you will figure out that not always do a car’s length dictate interior volume.

    And that aint no opinion. :)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I don't think your explanations have anything to do with the wheelbase, which increased by 2.3 inches. Where did that 2.3 inches go?

    BTW, the same question would apply to the Fusion vs. the Mazda6. Fusion stretched wheel base by 2.1 inches, but only 0.5 inch of that shows up in increased leg room.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Explain to me how did Accord gain 3 cu ft? You guys are making it sound like the increase in dimensions went nowhere.

    And no, wheelbase doesn't explain legroom. Do you think Chrysler 300, which has 120" wheelbase (10" more than Accord) offers almost as much advantage in legroom? Accord has 80", while 300 has 82" (total).

    Altima's wheelbase is about an inch shorter than Accord's, but it has about 2" less legroom than the Accord. Again, is it all determined by wheelbase?

    Besides, measurements are one thing, reality is another. The points of measurements are critical in the outcome.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles