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
On the Malibu, I like the black grill and do not like the chrome grill Malibu.
I actually always thought that was a cool thing, its very consistent across brands so you don't have to figure it out every time.
Is there something you would do to improve the look or feel? Is it too shiny or not shiny enough? Should it be a flat color? Do you like the knobs that are knurled on the ends or rubber-ized? I think the things people touch every day in their cars (steering wheel, switch-gear, door handles, radio/climate controls) are the most important. I think Honda (great door handles) gets this, Ford is trying to figure it out, GM is outsourcing figuring it out, Toyota is forgetting it, and Chrysler is...well I am sure they will do better in the future.
I mistake it for the previous generation Accord all the time.
vs
I think you might be exaggerating just a bit.
In the picture of my Accord's interior below. Where are the square shapes? Where does the audio and the A/C unit begin and end? It is all integrated, with one display, and looks like it was designed for this car only. Buttons and knobs are placed where you would want them, not according to where the unit is placed. It's called attention to detail, and I appreciate it. GM is getting better in this area, but the "cheap freaks" still have some control over the designs.
P.S. The color combo in the Malibu photo that you selected is the one I detest. :P
I don't find any of the colors appealing. :P They have some very strange colors, and combinations of them. That's all subjective though. I guess if the design doesn't bother you, maybe the colors don't either.
Maybe try comparing apples to apples, e.g. a Caddy w/o nav to the Malibu?
Is there such a thing (Caddy w/o nav). It would probably take forever to find a pic of that.
Anyway, If you can't see that the Accord and Caddy interiors look more sophisticated, and more cohesive than the Malibu interior, I give up. You see what you choose to see.
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable pre-2008 models are examples of using integrated climate & audio unit to reduce cost.
Integrated = cheap
Integrated NAV/audio/climate are not cheap, however, they are not as simple to use as traditional 3 dial climate and two dial audio systems.
Complex is not necessarily better.
IMO the Accord has taken two steps backward regarding design of controls for audio and climate. Same with the current Civic.
Like the exterior of the new Accord and I'm a fan of Honda, however, very disappointed with all the darn buttons.
Two piece design for audio and climate has no correlation at all to lack of attention to detail.
One more point, replacing an integrated unit is more expensive than replacing a radio or climate control module when they are separate units.
Really? That's a new one
Like the exterior of the new Accord and I'm a fan of Honda, however, very disappointed with all the darn buttons.
More buttons can be a good thing. A car can have one button for all the climate control vent positions (windshield, floor, dash + combinations), but you have to cycle through the selections. Although this eliminates 5 buttons, it is actually more difficult than having 6 different buttons. You may have to push that one button 5 times, to get to the selection you want, whereas with 6 individual buttons, one push is all it takes. This translates into less eyes off the road time, so give me more buttons. If I can push a button once, instead of 4-5 times, I'll take more buttons.
And since those were mostly fleet sales, they didn't care about the lack of features or ability to upgrade the audio system. There are aftermarket faceplates for those applications now though.
IMO the Accord has taken two steps backward regarding design of controls for audio and climate. Same with the current Civic.
Actually, in my seating position, I think the controls in the '07 Accord to control where the air is coming out and the defroster and so forth are very low and hard for me to read/see. I didn't find this issue in the Civic.
One more point, replacing an integrated unit is more expensive than replacing a radio or climate control module when they are separate units.
In the case of the Accord, its pretty much impossible. Most of the audio people add a second system and put it in the pocket in front of the shifter. My '05 Subaru has the same issue, which is ashame since both vehicles have pretty poor stock systems.
I've had a lot of time to really sit down and look into the Malibu, Aura and Accord for the last couple of weeks. From an interior standpoint, the Aura is "acceptable" the Malibu is "better than Average" but the Accord is "excellent" as far as materials are concerened, especially compared to the other two.
The Malibu and Aura's door panels feel about as cheap and hollow as the door panels used on the 2002-04 Altimas. Yet its because of the bright trim work, and unique color combinations that are used on the Malibu's interior that gives the car this "upscale" appearance.
Those materials are still cheap feeling IMO, especially the lower dash materials and the secondary controls. It's almost as if GM is doing a half and half process.
The top half of the dash board is the "NEW" Gm, while the lower half and the secondary controls are still "OLD" GM. From the Power window swtiches, power seat controls, secondary buttons on the dash and even the unpadded, hollow feeling door panels and armest, the interior gives me a half baked feel. And the fact that everything from steering wheels to audio controls are shared between the Aura and the Malibu doesnt help it's case with me either.
I think most of these automotive journalist are going Gaga over the new Malibu because it is indeed a much much better effort than the previous malibu and a cut above the Aura. But when I hear folks say it has the "BEST" interior in this class, I have to disagree, and I happen to be a true fan of these two new Sedans (Malibu and Aura.)
As far as styling. The Aura just looks more daring to me. Even in base form, the Aura XE looks way more expensive than the Malibu LS with those ugly wheel covers or "Fasica Covers" as GM calls them. Plus as good as the Malibu looks, it's like GM cut the back end of the car off because the tail lights look funny to me.
But styling is subjective and to each his own.
If you can't make it fit, just post the link instead of displaying it.
Thanks.
I agree. IMHO the new design of the Sebring is hard to beat. The Inferno Red with the chrome trim is my favorite. Add aftermarket tinted glass and...wow! :shades:
Given that the 2009 Escape is now getting a 3.0L 230 HP V6, which is most likely the PIP D30 once discussed here, I'm guessing the Fusion is still in the running to get the same motor. However, it has been written that the Escape's engine bay will not accept the slightly larger D35 and this was the only viable option for it at this point. So I guess that doesn't rule the D35 out for the Fusion either because its bay can accept the D35.
V6s aside, at least the standard I4 option seems clear now. The Escape, along with other Ford and Mazda products, are getting the new 2.5L I4 which in Escape form makes 170 HP. It looks like the 2.3L I4 is dead so it seems to me the Fusion getting this one as its base engine is a no-brainer. The Escape Hybrid is also being upgraded to an Atkinson Cycle version of the 2.5L I4. Since the Fusion has long been promised a hybrid powertrain, it looks like this will be it in 2009. If they give us the hybrid in 2009, that is.
My money goes on the D35, the 2.5L I4, AND a hybrid for 2009. I know the EcoBoost, formerly the TwinForce, engines are making all the news these days. But it seems like they are not ready to offer them up on all models yet. I could be completely wrong about that and maybe we'll see the 2.5L I4 as the base engine and a EB I4 in place of the V6. Either way the 2009 Fusion will have more power and better fuel economy no matter which engine you choose. It seems we'll find out what the specs are and the new duds look like at the NY auto show. But that is someone else's speculation, not mine.
Not bad for a 3rd year refresh.
The 3.5 DT (unfortunately) is reviewed to have the same sort of refinement issues as the old DT3.0 and is also not setting any sort of FE records in the Taurus/Edge/MK etc. Maybe Ford will learn to build a smaller engine - sometime this century - or maybe they could strike a deal with Hyundai for the 3.3 and the "World engine' I4, starting yet another unsubstantiated rumor. It's really too bad - a Ford automobile that has demonstrated some quality related attributes but also not having a 'heart'.
Don't know what it is that has you Ford guys so consumed in wishful thinking - whatever the company does manage to do will be several years late and still short of what the competition has been doing for some time now.
09 Escape: FWD 170hp I4 21/27
08 CR-V FWD 166hp I4 20/27
08 Rav-4 FWD 166hp I4 21/27
08 Vue FWD 169hp I4 19/26
08 Rogue FWD 170hp I4 22/27
Looks like best in class power AND fuel economy. Just because you don't WANT to believe it doesn't mean it isn't true. Ford has made a dramatic turnaround from just 3 years ago and it will take a few more years for them to get fully back on track throughout the lineup. But anyone who writes them off or ignores them now will be sorely disappointed.
Honda Accord : 24-34
Nissan Altima: 26-34
Toyota Camry: 24-33
Ford Fusion: 23-31
Mazda6 : 24-31
I believe that the oldest engine design in this segment is the Fords, because they are using Mazdas 2.3L design that debuted in 2002 for the 2003 Mazda6. All of the other 4 cyl's are newer, aside from Hondas 2.4. Fuel economy seems to be pretty darn close.
http://media.ford.com/mazda/article_display.cfm?article_id=27485&make_id=227
Lets take a look and see if Ford is competitive with their 3.5L to Honda and their new 3.5L. The following engines are applied to the Ford Taurus and Honda Accord
Power:
Ford: 263hp 249tq
Honda: 268hp 248tq
Fuel Economy:
Ford: 18-28
Honda: 19-29
Lets look at the definition of "competitive" or to "compete": To be able to do as well or better then others. To put up a reasonable contest.
From these numbers, can we say Ford can compete with Honda. By definition, yes.
Considering that Honda has an advanced VCM system and a high tech variable valve timing system, to only have a 1mpg advantage and 5 hp over Fords 3.5L is quite disappointing.
Lets look at the definition for "refined": Sophisticated and effective, developed to or possessing a high degree of precision and effectiveness.
Considering that these numbers are quite similar, how can you claim that Ford is not a "refined" engine or for that matter, competitive? Please explain?
Ford: 263hp 249tq
Honda: 268hp 248tq
Fuel Economy:
Ford: 18-28
Honda: 19-29
Can you tell me when the power comes online? If Fords 249 comes on line at a higher rpm, then I would have to say I would take the Accords lower torque rating as better because more is available at a lower rpm.
What are the acceleration numbers? Measuring raw output is almost meaningless.
No, it is not meaningless. We are not comparing the Ford Taurus to the Honda Accord. We are comparing the Honda 3.5 to the Ford 3.5. My response was to the claim that Ford cannot build a fuel efficient / powerful / competitive engine like Honda, or other manufacturers do.
Fords peak torque is 4,500 rpms, Honda is at 5,000
In fact, give me the smooth and quiet operation of Honda's 4 banger in lieu of any DT V6. There is nothing in Ford's past (or present) that would indicate to me that they magically learned to build a truly good smaller engine. I challenge you to name just one. To be fair though, this is a 'problem' shared with 2 other pretty large mfgrs. I can think of, and kind of summarizes the other difficulties all three have been in for 30+ years now.
Also, in regards to engine noise, the majority of the noise is deadened by materials used in the car so you cannot hear it in the cabin, not the actual engine its self. Blame the entire car, not the engine.
even if that were the case - of course it can. I can think of a number of primarily British and Italian engines over the years that were quite 'refined' but wouldn't start when it even looked like rain. Thank you Lucas and Magnetti Morelli (splg.)
Some V6s are surprisingly close to fuel economy of 4 cyls (even non-Ford ones). But just comparing the 4 cylinders we have:
Fusion 23 mpg
Mazda6 24 mpg
Accord 24 mpg
Camry 25 mpg
Altima 26 mpg
As for the "wimpyness" I believe acceleration tests, that are performed the way normal people drive (ie. those done by CR) show any of these within a few tenths of a second of each other for 0-60.
My feeling when I was shopping for a midsize with 4 cyl, which was a year ago+, was that performance and mpg were not different enough to be a significant factor amongst the cars I considered. However, I did not give much consideration to the Altima or Camry for other reasons that trumped any acceleration or mpg advantage for those. I am also one who does not put a lot of miles on...8-10K per year.
I disagree. Without looking at the hp and torque curves interpeting the figures means zippo in real life. Case in point, looking at the G37 engine and the N56 (turbo) from BMW, on paper the G37 should have it all over the 3 liter turbo. But it doesn't. Looking at the hp and torque curves tells the story.
Same with the Ford vs Honda engine. I'll betcha in real life (sic: on the street) the Honda is faster and more efficient.
I was reading over at a VW website (some of you may know this well known site) that the 09 Sonata is to debut at the Chicago Int'l Auto Show next month and that models are actually beginning to surface at dealerships (or should be within the next week)
I know Navigation will be avaialble, but what else will change. Some of the guys on the forum are Hyundai Salesmen and they claim to even have pricing. I'm interested in the facelifted Sonata because it finally addresses the one issue I had with the car...it's interior.
Thanks in advance Backy or to any others who may know!
R.L. Gist