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
Reading each one also lets you place a validity value on the info as to how true it may be. And example is someone a couple years back just ranted about a particular car because he had rented it and hated it. Probably base model, etc., etc. Can't blame him but info didn't help a potential buyer much.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That is why I said the fewer reviews posted, the more skeptically the rating should be viewed. The "just got it and I'm in love" reviews skew the results more heavily when there are fewer reviews.
Check them out. If one reads them as one should read anything "on the internet", i.e., with however many grains of salt might be necessary, there is some really helpful information to be gained.
Pat,
The very first post, the latest one, dated 12/11/2007, for the Ford Fusion, begins "I rented one of these for a week ..."
Doesn't make sense seeing as the Camry is barely two years old...facelifts usually come for the fourth model year???
I hear new engines (for the I4 at least) are in the mix.
And my Viper can blow the doors off any of them.
Why is it that when people start comparing cars they always jump to some speed test? I didn't purchase my Sebring based on whether it can get to the next red light faster than the Camry next to me. I bought it because it has loads of gadgets, has a nice quiet ride, great styling (IMHO) and is fun to drive. My mom, who owns an 06 300C, commented on how nice it rides.
I bought the top-of-the-line Limited with every option except a sunroof, which I rarely used in my old car and didn't want in this one. It has nice, soft leather seats, no clunks in the suspension and no wires protruding from under the dash on anywhere else that I've noticed. CR must have gotten an Avenger that was built on a Friday.
I test drove a 3.0L AWD Fusion and sat in a Camry before buying my Sebring. I didn't make it down the road to the Saturn dealer to see what they had because the Chrysler salesman made an offer that was too tempting to pass up.
BTW, here's some info that doesn't always get published. Chrysler's engineers were limited in their design abilities when Daimler still held the reins. The DC bosses didn't want their Mercedes interiors to be overshadowed by less expensive domestic vehicles. Rumor and recent articles say that the Viper program might be axed to make money available to upgrade some things on the Sebring.
I heard a very high ranking Chrysler executive on TV (Autoline Detroit I think) admit that they simply underestimated the importance of the interior and the competition and did not allocate enough money to it and that they had already fixed that problem within the current development cycles. They simply chose not to spend the money on it.
I have read a lot of owner reviews. Like you, I think the people who have a new car for a couple of days, and decide to write a review don't have any real experience with the car to report anything useful. Yes, some people give you good information about the car (likes, as well as dislikes). The people who say "I bought the car yesterday, and I love it", then give the car all 10s skew the average score, even if there are 100 reviews. I put absolutely no stock in the average score (9.2 or 8.2) it means nothing IMO.
But I hear ya!
It is worth the time to look through them to find the ones that are posted after the owner has really gotten to know the vehicle and is able and willing to provide a straightforward assessment of the positives and the negatives. They do exist and can be very helpful.
Actually, that's the kind of thing that would be very useful in this forum as well.
"You know, this is a nice car!"
"Yeah, I like it better than the Accord." (Front passenger got an Accord rental that week; I only got a Civic.)
All I can say about it is, the leather smelled good and felt good, and it was a smooth and quiet ride, but it was a little cramped in back width-wise with 3 adult men--not recommended except for short trips (like we made).
Next day at the parking lot, the Accord and Milan were side-by-side. The Accord looked like an LX-P. I liked the looks of the Milan better--classier, sleeker.
Was it the new or old Accord?
but it was a little cramped in back width-wise with 3 adult men
I think that would be the case with any midsize sedan. I don't think I would want a car that was wide enough to be comfortable with 3 adults in the back seat.
I guess if you expect to carry five adult men a lot, better get a full-sized car or big SUV or a minivan.
What year is the Accord that has "plenty of room" for 3 in back?
CR says about the Fusion: Three adults can fit across the rear with generous leg room. and they list rear shoulder room at 56 inches.
CR describing the rear seat of (2007) Accord says: Rear leg room is expansive,
but the seat is too low for optimal thigh support. and they list rear shoulder room at 55 inches.
Late model, not 2008. I've been in the back of a Milan and they are not as roomy as an Accord. The Accord would be fine for a long trip with 5 people.
Depends. If I'm the average sized guy with the two slender women....
I agree, in fact I think that would be the case in most sedans of any size class. Though, maybe a Crown Vic with 56 inches of rear hip room and 60 inches of rear shoulder room would do the trick. But, then, I would not want to drive anything that wide all the time.
I posted the comments from an independent source in response to the claims made about the Accord back seat. There is simply no magical way to make 53-56 inches (typical hip and shoulder room numbers) of horizontal space all that comfortable for 3 adults, barring the fantasies of drwilsc (and even in that fantasy, while he is comfortable the two women are, perhaps, having different thoughts :P )
Now to the extent any of the adults are my 95 pound adult daughter's size, it certainly does help.
One of the great things about car reviews, is that you don't have to like 'em or even agree with 'em. Having said that I honestly wouldn't want to go on a long trip in any midsize sedan with 5 people. But I stand by my observations.
I would not want to drive anything that wide all the time.
This was too straight a line to pass up, but alas, with my spouse looking over my shoulder I should let it go.
If you are still going to insist that this EPA definition is the one and only way to determine the size class, then you should accept it fully. They do not put the 2008 Accord in two different size classes based on whether or not there is a sun roof.
The Accord sedan is listed only as a large car:
http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/FEG2008.pdf
NO. And that's why size classification doesn't mean anything. Calling it a large car, or midsize, doesn't make it any more or less comfortable for 5.
Azeras, 300's, Tauruses, Impalas, Avalons are all up a class for the sake of this discussion.
Malibu.
Maybe GM should give the G6 a redux this year so it can win the NACOTY next January. The voters seem to like those GM mid-sizers.
And in recognition of this award (?), Edmunds.com has given the Malibu a seat at the table on the right. What got dropped? Legacy?
I would say thats true due to how far along the GMs have come. The Accord improved slightly, nothing too earth shattering, IMO. The Malibu is leaps and bounds over the previous gen. Personally, I really don't think it's anything special.
So are you saying the Malibu is better than the Aura? How? I thought the Aura was the higher end car, and the Malibu was the economy version.
its like Pontiac G5 = Chevy Cobalt/ Saturn sky = Pontiac solstice = Vauxhall/Opel something.
GM has taken a very necessary step back from the badge engineering. The cars look pretty different (G6, Aura, Malibu) and are tuned differently. Some drivetrain elements are similar, but Toyota puts that 2.4l from the Camry in just about everything as well.
Sharing platforms across continents isn't a bad idea except parts of the American market want more cushy vehicles the the Europeans do. Ford has been working on this, eh, forever. The Ford Cortina was a Euro import, the early 70s Capris, the Meurkurs, the Contiques, and the Focus.
I think Saturn will do well with the Astra, they didn't even rename it when they brought it over. Global platforms aren't a bad thing, especially as modular as they are now; the same platform can be FWD/RWD/AWD as needed.
Why do you think the Aura is the "higher end car"? Have you priced the top-end Malibu LTZ?
GM wanted to position Saturn as the V6 almost Acura-TL like Alternative (yea, crazy I know) but Lutz himself talked about this before the release of the Aura. THe Malibu was to offer I4 and V6 choices but wouldnt be as nicely equipped as the Aura was to be. That changed though.
Overall on the food chain, Saturn is considered to be more of a higher level, import fighting brand..which why some are lead to beleive the Aura is the "upper level" vehicle. This notion is sure to be the case when the new Lambda Chevy Transverse is released at base price some thousands less than the Base Outlook.
I think in overall refinement, the Malibu is the better car (its interior is NOT as refined in the materials department as the Altima or Accord IMO, especially those cheap, hallow, 2002 Nissan Altima door panels) but its a solid step above the Camry and ahead of the Aura overall.
As far as styling. I actually PREFER the Aura's more elegant looks over the Malibu. From XE vs LS all the way up to XR vs. LTZ. Aura just has more of a "Euro" look to it. Malibu looks good until the backend.
Both look better than the new Accord IMO.
To each his own style, right!
To each his own style, right!
For my money the Ford Fusion is the looks leader among all the mid-size sedans because it is so distinctive, in a very pleasing fashion.