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
Hyundai has admitted to taking a close look at a particular Toyota when designing the Sonata. But that Toyota wasn't the Camry, but the Lexus ES (the benchmark Hyundai used for NVH).
If Hyundai really used the Lexus ES as a benchmark, they should not have limited it to the NVH. There is soooo much more they could have drawn from that car to improve the Sonata, IMO.
That is not the way I'm interpeting these reviews. And from the automotivilly inclined people I speak to they agree. Let's see the sales back up your claim.
I'm thinking the Corolla is the benchmark. A benchmark offers people exactly what they want and nothing they don't. It has qualities that put it ahead of the competitors. Toyota hit the nail on the head with the Corolla.
I'll be very surprised if the retail sales of the 2008 Malibu don't exceed those of the 2007 Malibu by a considerable margin, once production ramps up. It's pretty limited now, from what I've seen at my local dealer. They got only 2 Malibus in November.
Minimalistic. I'd throw the CamCord duo in with that and we've got a bargain. Done deal. Until either Honda or Toyota shows that they don't farm out their body-designing to their 10 year old sons and daughters for extra credit and a Wally World vacation I can barely look at those cars, mush less consider parting cash for one.
With the new Sonata design from Hyundai and the new world order Optima from Kia, both loaded for less cash up front, these South Korean automakers have met and surpassed their Japanese counterparts in the mid-size family sedan class. When you throw in great body design along with total costs, great Warranty, etc.
Now, somebody beat N.E.'s Patriots this weekend and we can all have a Jack and Coke on John Madden and Al Michaels and celebrate. The two "Kings of Conformity" to ESPN and all of their east-coast bias'.
When Pittsburgh was enjoying all of those bought-off calls and missed calls and stupid refereeing in Super Bowl 40 against Seattle Michaels and Madden acted like "well...it did look like Jackson swept the pylon with his foot. Hummm..." And then forgot it like an old pair of Dennis Rodman's Piston socks. The NFL and it's whole support structure showed it's money-grubbing grandeur by throwing Super Bowl 40.
When Seattle's Seahawks visited Pittsburgh earlier this year for a 21-0 drubbing by the Stealers, wide receiver Deion Branch of the Seahawks got injured(mysteriously). What did one well-meaning Stealer fan do? They spat on Branch as he was being carted in to the locker room to go over his injuries.
Somebody beat N.E. this weekend. And just hope that those dorks that refereed Super Bowl 40 in Detroit on February 5, 2006, aren't ever allowed to ref another Super Bowl that your favorite team is on. Teams work hard to get to the Super Bowl and to have ESPN, the city of Detroit, the NFL and several idiotic referees(plus probably Lost Wages bookees) throw an entire season's chances to win a Super Bowl down the drain because "the Bus needed to get a Ring" and "it's just better for NFL football for an east-coast team to win...besides, the NFL wins more sales receipts for more gear if the Stealers win," well...that is immoral and idiotic and just plain wrong. The NFL is a corrupt enterprise.
If you're a N.E.fan and want to win the Super Bowl this year, never fear. The crew that reffed Super Bowl 40 between Seattle and Pittsburgh have been banned from ever refereeing a Super Bowl again. Why might that be? Is that an admission of guilt from the NFL front office? Or they're just concerned for the referee's safety. What a farce of supervision by the NFL administration group. And you still don't believe SB 40 was thrown?
Tee.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I thought you were the one who brought Corolla into the discussion (Post 7761), not kdshapiro. So, why take an issue with it now? (I'm raising this since an argument like this has become a norm, going all the way to even the host).
If they weigh less, yes they would not only reduce unsprung weight but reduce drive train loss. However, how did you figure a larger wheel will weigh less? Unless the new wheel is designed using different material/engineering (adds cost), larger wheels add weight.
Remember, in most of these cases, it is not only the diameter of the rim that is increasing, wider tires require greater width too.
And the Corolla does exactly what the owner wants it to do, which is get them from A to B reliably, being efficient in the process.
BTW. Go STEELERS,......Go PATRIOTS.............sore looser.
First case I weighed the wheels and tires from my car (Jeep Cherokee), 15 inch 225, 75sr 15's on steel wheels with hub caps on my bathroom scale. I bought a set of 17X7 in alloy American Eagles and Continental 225 55SR 17's
The weight difference was 30 pound per combination or 120 pound total unsprung weight saved.
If you weigh a 15 inch alloy wheel and a 17 inch allow wheel the 17 will weigh a little more, maybe 12 to 16 ounces depending on style. The weight will be saved in the tires. Both of the same width and diameter. There will be a lot less rubber in the larger tire. the weight of the rubber is more than the extra weight of the larger wheel, buy a couple of pounds each.
The big negative for lower profile tires is the harder ride due to the higher air pressure you need to run to keep the rims of the ground when you hit a pothole.
Yes, most can not bring themselves to do that, apparently. Then there are also some who drive 30K mi per year...can not plan on 10 years+ if driving that much.
However, I think if you buy the car you like best then you are likely to want to keep it longer. Buying something you will keep longer, whether it is more or less expensive (within reason) and has greater or lesser depreciation, will most likely be the better financial decsion.
While my new Accord is longer and wider it is noticeably easier to park and the turning circle is very tight for a car it's size.
Not a huge deal, but an interesting (IMO) thing to note.
Another thing I'll complain about is TPMS (Tire pressure monitoring systems). As a lifelong NH & VT'er I've bought a set of steel wheels and dedicated snow tires for every new car I buy. Since I have air tools in my garage it's a simple 20 min. process to swap over the snows. This generally runs $500 shipped to my door and teh tires last 3-4 seasons easily. Cheap insurance and peace of mind.
Well those days are over. If my Accord doesn't "see" it's TPMS signals from the wheels it will light a warning light and possibly throw a code.
This means I now have just snow tires that I have to pay someone $50+ each spring and fall to swap back and forth on the same rims. OR I can spend an extra $350+ for a second set of TPMS sensors on a TireRack Winter set of steelies and snow and hope they work with my car's computer.
Not to mention if the stem in the sensor is wrecked you have to replace the entire sensor ($150 each from Honda) :mad:
The swap costs really add up over time, not to mention the hassle of making appointments and shuffling the car around to have it done. I also prefer to do the work myself as I know how to use a torque wrench.
Frankly, I find it appalling that so many people (presumably) can't be bothered to check their tire pressure regularly so we have to have a gov't mandated nanny device to "save us from ourselves" all creating more complexity and COST to the consumer.
Are your referring to the same automobile manufacturers listed in the title of the thread as I am? Because I don't see "met" much less "surpassed".
Aren't the tires more susceptible to damage from potholes that ordinary tires with a deeper sidewall absorb with impunity? Give me the real tires and 15-16 inch rims that absorb shock and roll smoothly.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
No one has ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the general populace. I find it appalling that the EPA changed the way they rated fuel economy because people wanted to continue driving like Mario Andretti, and still feel like they were doing a good job and getting the mileage on the sticker.
I also find appalling the public acceptance of lane departure warnings...these things give feedback if someone is going out of their lane on the highway. People complain that it buzzes every time they change lanes...that means they aren't signaling when they change lanes.
Sorry about my occasional lack of faith in humanity.
Tire pressure monitors and lane change sensors are unnecessary, IMO. If they cost more than 2 cents, it's more than I want to pay for something I don't need, and is more likely to be a neusance than an asset.
With more safety and luxury features, It's easy to see how cars of the same basic size have gotten significantly heavier over the last fifteen years. A personal favorite and rarely mentioned "safety" feature is a trip computer that includes outside temperature. Living in snow country, I like to know when road temperatures may be approaching freezing. Antilock brake systems (ABS) and their extensions, traction control and stability control, are also great features when the weather turns bad.
I'm glad to have better crush zones and side curtain airbags, even with the added weight. Are there any safety features you would give up to save weight if liability issues didn't dictate their inclusion? In engineering it is always a balancing act, but for me, I like the added safety.
:confuse:
van
Accord LX-P: P215/60/R16 (16x6.5)
Accord EX/EX-L: P225/50/R17 (17x7.5)
Accord Coupe/V6: P235/45/R18 (18x8.0)
The new 17" rim/tire has actually been weighed against the old (P215/50/R17, 17x7.0) rim/tire to note a difference of about 30 lb, with the new larger wheel being heavier.
Tires may or may not be substantially different in weight (the sidewall may be smaller, but now it is wound on a larger diameter rim, even with no increase to width). Each Michelin MXV4 Plus tire in new Accord (LX/LX-P) is 5 lb heavier than the same brand/speed rated tire in my old Accord.
The reality is, when efficiency counts, automakers do worry about these little details. But in a rush to woo "I want big" crowd, they doesn't seem to care less. Besides weight, it also reflects in replacement cost, and something often missed... turning radius (upsize tires are usually wider). And I can see that frustration from someone like urnews who has a Fusion SEL/AWD. Not only does it come with big tires, it also comes with bigger replacement cost, weight, reduced efficiency and poorer turning radius. But I'm sure "give me big" folks like the looks of it.
P215/60/R16: 26.15"
P225/50/R17: 25.86"
P235/45/R18: 26.33"
The 18" wheel has the lowest profile tire but still ends up with the largest diameter. 17" rim is next when it comes to sidewall size, but smallest when it comes to diameter. The size difference between the two is about 2%.
Now, speedometer in all three may be caliberated to consider the size difference, or a median may have been used for all three which will minimize the difference to some extent.
You realize of course that both of your posts "complaining" that I stated that the Corolla is off-topic are, uh, off-topic. As is this post! So why don't we drop this chirping about a short post that mentioned the Corolla and get back to mid-sized cars?
You're right, we should drop this and move on.
Don't bother responding though, as we both have an idea and it will take nowhere but OT.
I'm not against using arguments involving cars from different class if it helps make a point here, which I thought the original post that started it all did. I'm against tunnel vision, double standards and lack of perspective often used to make points.
Thanks.
Recently, a friend of mine was looking for a car. Since he drives 20K miles/year, both warranties on new car would be history in 2-3 years. I suggested taking a look at slightly used certified Accord, and we found one with only 9K miles.
In this case, he was getting 39K miles on bumper-bumper warranty and had almost 91K miles for power train coverage left. On top of it, he saved a little over $2K over buying new. The downside to it was that this wasn't the 2008, but he was looking for a 2007 to start with, to save a few bucks from clearance. And got a lot more in return. And the car looks and smells new.
As opposed to just teaching people how to drive, which is what should've happened.
Tire pressure monitors and lane change sensors are unnecessary, IMO. If they cost more than 2 cents, it's more than I want to pay for something I don't need, and is more likely to be a neusance than an asset.
While I am sure that you (and all forum users) are a diligent motorist and would never dream of driving without checking your inflation pressures and risking a blowout on the highway that could endanger your family or your fellow motorists, nor would you ever dream of driving in a compromised fashion (on the phone, drowsy, etc) or change lanes without signaling, but there are others that do, and I would like to provide the guidance to those motorists to make the roads safer for me and my family.
That said, I appreciate driver aids in the midsize sedan segment, since they are the most popular vehicles.
And in most driver oriented vehicles, it includes larger brakes. The MazdaSpeed6 needs larger wheels to clear the larger brakes. The same is true with the Legacy GT over the base Legacy. Of course, since the '07 Accord had the weakest tire/wheel package in the class and the longest stopping distances, the point of larger brakes might be lost.
turning radius (upsize tires are usually wider).
That doesn't affect turning circle. Case in point is the '08 Accord lists the same turning circle for the entire line, 4 and 6 cylinders, all trim levels.
And I can see that frustration from someone like urnews who has a Fusion SEL/AWD. Not only does it come with big tires, it also comes with bigger replacement cost, weight, reduced efficiency and poorer turning radius.
Actually, the 4 cylinder is listed at 38.7' and the V6 is listed at 40', making no mention of tire size or trim level. The steering rack for the V6 is a different part than the steering rack for the 4 cylinder, which is the increase in turning circle.
I don't understand why someone would by a car based on how it handles and then complain about the tires that give it those properties. I think my Accord can use the same 15" wheels the base model uses, and I don't see myself running out to get those (well, maybe for snow tires...).
For the most part, there are enough tire options out there in enough sizes to keep the masses happy, it just takes a little research to find a replacement tire that meets that particular driver's needs. The $40 Kumho Ecasta ASX was fantastic on the '93 Accord, and I doubt I will have the '07 long enough to buy tires for it.
You have a valid point, and I agree, but when does the cost of a safety item outweigh it's effectiveness? Do responsible drivers have to pay for safety items they don't need? If my car is changing lanes, I will know about it. And I don't need a buzzer going off, to tell me something I already know.
You can throw the calculations out the window. Go to Tire Rack (.com) or another good online tire company and you can find out exactly what the tire diameter is for each tire. You will find that even though one manufacturer might make 5 tires of the same dimensions and you will find up to 5 different widths, and diameters based on the tire and the specific rim width it is mounted on. So you need to evaluate every tire that you are considering using to make sure it is close to the original diameter to keep the speedometer close to accurate.
Also just because one decides to replace his OEM wheels and go Plus 1, plus 2 or plus 3 (inch) rim diameter, he will most often maintain the same offset and rim width with the same tire width so there is less likely hood of a tire body rub issue.
The only dimension that needs to be changed is the profile or sidewall height.
Of course many go larger all the way around and use wider tires for better traction, I have done this many times, but it isn't required.
My example for the jeep saved 30 pounds each. Using the information form Tire Rack I conclude the original tires weighed 30.5 pounds each, The replacement tires weighed about 22.7 pounds. The rest of the weight saving was form Alloy rims replacing steel.
Replacing an alloy wheel with an alloy wheel obviously wont make a big difference and maybe only 3-5 pounds per tire so one could expect to see between maybe 4-5 pounds after the change. That may not sound like much but to the suspension components, springs, shocks and sway bars, it is enough to make a noticeable difference in the way the car handles.
That doesn't affect turning circle. Case in point is the '08 Accord lists the same turning circle for the entire line, 4 and 6 cylinders, all trim levels.
Not quite. While turning radius also depends on track, tire's width/size does play a role. Here you go:
Fusion
(P205/60/R16): 38.7 ft
(P225/50/R17): 40.0 ft
Actually, the 4 cylinder is listed at 38.7' and the V6 is listed at 40', making no mention of tire size or trim level.
V6 with the smaller size is same as I-4 (which comes with smaller wheels). It is the SEL trim (which comes with larger rims) that has larger turning radius.