Midsize Sedans 2.0

zzzoom6 · May 2007

Whhaaaaaaaaaaat? The Hyundai motor dates back to Mitsubishi designs from the 80s. They added variable valve timing, just like Ford did in the Jag with the DT (although why they didn't do it in the Fusion/Mazda6 I don't know)

It should also be known that the Mazda 6 has VVT.

From automobile.com, "Like the four-cylinder, it has continuously variable valve timing (VVT) for its intake camshaft; but on the V6, this feature seems to be used more effectively, providing better low-down torque along with a willingness to rev, with good gas mileage and a nice set of sounds from the air intake and the dual exhausts..."

"Zoom-zoom is in plentiful supply regardless of which model you choose. Even the four-cylinder 6i is a hoot to drive. Order it with the five-speed manual and the fun zone starts at about 4000 rpm, where the engine is very responsive. The 2.3-liter, double-overhead-cam engine loves to rev and acceleration is on par with that of other four-cylinder mid-size sedans...."

ykang · May 2007

Next generation RWD Tiburon (known as BK) will be getting turbocharged Theta I4 220-250 HP and 3.8 Lamda 300+ HP.

http://www.bobaedream.co.kr/board/bbs/news_view.php?code=nnews&No=22492

louiswei · May 2007

Hmm...totally forgot about the 3.2L I6 in the M3. Thanks for reminding me that, guys.

Isn't that right the 3.2L I6 was so expensive to make and its compression ratio was so high that it is just not feasible for mess-manufactured cars? Great for a halo car like M3, however.

BTW, what's the torque of that 3.2L I6?

I'll take the 3.0L I6 (naturally aspirated version) on a 2800 lbs sedan any given day...

kdshapiro · May 2007

Isn't that right the 3.2L I6 was so expensive to make and its compression ratio was so high that it is just not feasible for mess-manufactured cars? Great for a halo car like M3, however.

No.

It was a halo engine manufactured for just one application however.

jeffyscott · May 2007

I investigated the claim that cars with higher initial prices, such as Accord, cost less than lower priced alternative mid-size cars, when trade-in value is considered.

Since my recent purchase was a Mazda6i, I compared this to Honda Accord. I bought my SVE for $16,100 and at the time I estimated, based on invoice less a $750 incentive that an Accord would have cost me $3300 more. I think that I got a better than average price, if so, perhaps a more typical price difference may have been about $2500.

Then I looked at the price of a comparably equipped 2003 used Mazda6i vs. 2003 Honda Accord LX. The price difference with 60,000 miles ranged from $1400 to $1900, depending on condition and whether looking at private party sale or trade in.

For average condition, trade-in difference was about $1500. With the assumption that a buyer would on average pay about $2500 less for the Mazda, this still leaves an average net advantage of $1000 for the Mazda6.

Now, in any financial analysis, the time value of money should not be neglected. Today I can earn about 3.8% in a tax exempt money market account. $2500 invested at that rate, for 4 years will be worth $2800, so this increases the advatage of the cheaper car to $1300. The advantage would increase to more like $1800 for one who must finance the purchase at 7% interest.

Of course, there is a lot of estimating and gueswork involved in this, but I certainly see no evidence that an Accord costs less when trade-in is considered. The Accord might cost about the same, at best, for some buyers...but this is certainly no reason to fear cars like the Mazda6, Fusion, Sonata, etc.

baggs32 · May 2007

Wrong on both counts. Fusion fleets are actually going up as we speak, while Hyundai's Sonata fleet initiative ended Q4 last year (a program lasted almost a year from early 06). Sonata sales will be down for the rest of this year because the majority of 06 included additional fleet units, which otherwise would not have skewed the YOY comparison

So do you have some links for all of us to see then? Instead of just telling people they are wrong and being done with it, how about you pass on some of your infinite wisdom? :shades:

I've read the opposite, albeit some time ago, and want to see the latest figures too.

tenpin288 · May 2007

Here's an excerpt from a Hyundai press release that mentions the reduction in fleet sales:

HYUNDAI REPORTS NOVEMBER SALES

FOUNTAIN VALLEY, Calif., 12/01/2006 Hyundai Motor America sold 28,417 units during the month of November, down 14.9 percent compared with November 2005.

Sales declined in November due to our strategy to reduce fleet sales in 2006 as well as the reduced availability of our new Elantra due to continued effects of the strike earlier this year. Improving availability of new models such as the Elantra and Santa Fe will help our year-end close on a very strong note. We are very encouraged by the sales of our new Santa Fe, which experienced a 52 percent increase in sales over last year, said Mark Barnes, vice president, National Sales, Hyundai Motor America said.

Good enough for you?

baggs32 · May 2007

Good enough for you?

Not really. It's from 5 months ago.

If you read the latest sales news from Ford, a quick search will take you to several of them, they are reporting that fleet sales are down 5% for either the year or the month of April, I can't remember which it is. How then can one state that Fusion fleet sales are climbing when the supposed Sonata fleet reductios are being based on a 5 month old statement that groups the manufacturers total fleet sales together?

Based on news that's only days old we can say that Fusion fleet sales are falling I guess? See where I'm going?

I know the Sonata is a great car, don't get me wrong. But if the American manufacturers start producing great cars, such as the Fusion, someone else is going to lose some sales. Looks like Hyundai might be the first victim IMO.

captain2 · May 2007

never said that the Accord costs less - only that at least a good portion of the initial price difference is recovered at trade in time, that 'false savings' I mentioned. Intellichoice 5 year cost of ownership is $2000 LESS for a 07 Accord LX vs. the 6s, but I rather suspect they are assumming a higher initial purchase price (for the 6) than what your actual experience was. From Intellichoice's perspective, they would have no way to forecast how much money Ford needs to discount to sell the 6 (or the Fusion). In any case, total cost of ownership which obviously plays on resale values very heavily is every bit as important in evaluating a purchase as initial purchase price which may turn out to mean very little. Cheap now will almost always equal cheap later, and the reverse is also true. Lease rates tend to be indicative of what a car actually costs to own simply because new and residual values are both considered and assumes cars are both returned in excellent and low mileage conditions. Don't have any numbers in front of me, but I might be willing to bet you lunch that the Accord (or Camry) would have about the same lease payment on let's say a 3 year deal as would the 6, the Fusion or the Sonata.

captain2 · May 2007

I am very very sure of that - I own one in the slightly larger and heavier Avalon now 50k miles old . And you can cruise any forum you would like and find folks that can't match EPA numbers, especially on the City side, on any car. In my case my 22/31 EPA turns into an honest 27 mpg overall. My wifes Altima 3.5 I think was rated at 18/27 and she ends up right at 25-26 overall although her hwy percentage is high, she is a little gentler than I on the accelerator, and the land down here in Texas is about as flat as those EPA laboratory floors. Which is the bottom line, if you really do spend much time in City gridlock and also enjoy mashing the accelerator on these wonderful new V6s, you will pay a price - this applies even to the 4 bangers. I would estimate that for the average driver in normal conditions the net cost between the 4 banger and V6 is likely going to be in the 3-4 mpg range overall and roughly correspondent to the EPA rating differences - meaning that those driver that can't get close to EPA numbers on the V6 won't on the 4 banger either! On the Camry specifically this translates into less than $20 a month assuming 1000 miles at $3 a gallon. Well worth it, IMO, if for no other reason than a 'grins' factor

benderofbows · May 2007

the numbers are wrong

OK, to make sure were on the same page, Ill take the Fusion V6 0-60 number from MT, and well look at C&D for the rest.

Fusion V6 6A  7.2 sec, 21/29 mpg (MT)
Altima I4 6M  7.2 sec, 24/31 mpg (C&D)
Altima I4 CVT  7.4 sec, 23/29 mpg (C&D)
Accord I4 5M  7.5 sec, 26/34 mpg (C&D)

Accord I4 5A  8.1 sec, 24/34 mpg (C&D)
Fusion I4 5M  8.1 sec, 23/31 mpg (C&D)
Fusion I4 5A  8.8 sec, 23/30 mpg (est.)

Your personal experience with the 5M in the Accord doesn't really matter when we're comparing auto trannies.

Why cant we compare an I4 5M Accord with the V6 6A Fusion? Look at the numbers, Fusion is very close to the import 4's. The manual-equipped Accord I4 is closer to the V6 Auto Fusion (0.3 seconds) than it is to the manual-equipped Fusion I4 (0.6 seconds). The Fusion V6 isnt available in a manual, and cant really be compared with other V6s as the automatic V6 versions of Accord, Camry and Altima are quicker by at least 0.6 seconds. It appears to me that the Fusion V6 is a very close match to the Altima 4 with either the 6-speed or the CVT and the manual Accord. The point was made that the V6 Fusion is considerably faster than competing 4-cylinders, and as the Accord 5M and Altima 6M and CVT show, that's just not the case.

Also, look at the Fusion 6A versus Accord 5M mileage penalty: 5 city and 5 highway! Those are EPA numbers, not even taking into account Edmunds forums posts of poor city mileage in late-model DT30s and posts of higher MPG in Accord I4s (my city average has been 28-29, and I dont drive lightly).

So, it looks like choosing the V6 Fusion with the only available transmission (the 6A) over an I4 Accord with the 5M gives a less than 5% improvement in performance but reduces fuel economy about 20%! At 15,000 miles per year, assuming gas stayes at $3, thats over $400 difference, or about $35 per month. That's if gas stays at $3 per gallon...

backy · May 2007

That could very well be. With aggressive discounting by Ford/Mercury dealers on the Fusion and Milan (e.g. I recently saw a Milan advertised for under $15k) and the new, improved IIHS test scores for the Fulan plus positive reliability data from CR, they could very well be taking sales from the Sonata. Many people will choose an American brand over a foreign brand (especially one with a dearth of brand equity like Hyundai) without even trying the alternatives. Also there are Ford dealers in most small towns in the U.S.--not so with Hyundai dealers. For $15k, I would be very tempted to get a Milan over a Sonata if I were buying a mid-sized car right how.

jeffyscott · May 2007

What you "said" was:

It is not generally good for...the car buyer...that they have to discount heavily.

What is the intent of this, if not to imply that the cheaper car actually costs more?

I've looked at intellichoice before and their data is just garbage...and not just based on my deal. They are more than $2300 too high on the initial price of the Mazda6. There has been $2000 in rebates available for at least 6 months, yet they have a "target" price of about $300 above invoice. This model can be bought effortlessly at invoice less rebates all day long. That site also can not account for the value of things like 0% financing that has been available from time-to-time on the Fusion.

Based on looking at edmunds predicted resale values for the 6 and Accord, I agree that on a 3 year lease the net cost is probably nearly the same. I'd assume the Sonata and Fusion would be similar as well. At more than 3 years, though, I think the lower initial cost models would have lower net cost.

My point is the higher resale value is not going to offset the higher initial cost. Therefore resale value should end up being non-issue for most.

baggs32 · May 2007

Why cant we compare an I4 5M Accord with the V6 6A Fusion?

Because you and I were originally comparing auto trannies. You threw a manual tranny Accord time in there saying it was for the 5A and it was way off. I'm also taking price into consideration. The V6 Fusion is more in line with an Accord I4 5A than the 5M when comparing an LX Accord to an SE Fusion. I'm leaving the Accord Value Package out of the mix because it is more or less a "stripper" model.

I get your point about the Accord 5M but the fact is, many more buy the ATX. I would buy the 5M and you would buy the 5M but when I address a broader audience, like that on these forums, I like to stick with what I think the norm is. So yes the performance hit isn't all that much with the Accord 5M but, given price to performance as the criteria, I can't see too many people cross shopping that with the V6 Fusion since it comes only in ATX flavor.

I also never like using numbers from different sources because there are too many variables that are different and can affect those numbers in big ways. So, if you average out the different times reported from different sources for the Fusion you get about 7.3 or 7.4 seconds. Agreed? That's nearly 1 second faster than the Accord which is "much faster" in my book.

I get fools trying to race my Mustang all the time so I am an expert in this field. :P

jeffyscott · May 2007

Just discovered this:

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/calc/CalculatorController

Using their default values the Accord, Mazda6, Sonata and Fusion 36 mo. lease rates are all pretty close for the comparable versions I looked at. They are within about $5 per month of each other.

However, using what I think is a more realistic initial price difference of $2500 between Mazda6 and Accord, the 6 came out about $50 per month less for the 4 cylinder versions that I compared...Accord SE vs. Mazda6 SVE. I also used 10,000 miles per year rather than the 15K default.

backy · May 2007

The calculator doesn't take into account special lease deals. For example, right now there's a $199/month special (I believe nationwide) on both the Accord LX and Sonata GLS. I've seen $199/month or a little less with no money down advertised locally on the Sonata GLS. The calculator says the lease on the Sonata is $389/month. Quite a difference.

benderofbows · May 2007

Let's agree to disagree.

From a dead stop, a manual 4-cyl Accord will hold its own against an auto V6 Fusion. They are close enough that it would come down to a match between the average drivers. In my experience from driving both cars, it is easier to get a good launch in my Accord manual than the Fusion 6A because in the automatic it was harder to get the perfect launch with just the right amount of wheelspin, without abusing the car. With the V6 auto it was either too much gas or not enough; manuals are easier in my opinion.

Interstate races are much harder to judge. Did you account for reaction time, and how do you know what gear the manual Accord was pulling, etc.? Here, automatics have an advantage for the average driver. Example, if you pull up next to me cruising 55mph on the interstate and floor it, your car will likely grab second gear at high RPM for a breif burst of acceleration, while I'll hesitate to shift all the way down to second at that speed and fall behind.

Baggs, the 7.9 second 0-60 time for the Accord I4 5A was posted on MSN Autos which frequently cites consumer reports. I agree, it is unusual for CR to get a better 0-60 time than C&D, but we are only talking about 0.2 seconds difference and that could have been testing conditions. Maybe C&D tested in CA at 75 degrees and CR tested in MA at 50 degrees. The 7.9 versus 8.1 second difference is minor, but I still took the slower C&D time instead.

Besides, I'll bet than when the new Accord 4-cylinder automatic is introduced later this year, it'll run numbers similiar to the Altima, and both of them will be breathing down the Fusion's neck. With four cylinders! And, any improvements to the Fusion appear to be pretty far off.

But as I've said before, they are both good cars, I almost bought the Fusion.

jeffyscott · May 2007

I've seen that Accord deal, but I think there is money required upfront??? I think the Sonata one, otoh, may be a "sign and drive"???

I'm not a leaser, so don't know how those things really work, but I think the calculator maybe rolls eveything into the monthly payment??? Doubt that is enough to account for $190 per month difference, though.

lilengineerboy · May 2007

Hyundai's new Lambda V6s (3.3L & 3.8L) currently can be found in various Hyundai and Kia applications, including the Sonata. Competent engines and flexible, as the Lambdas can be tuned to as high as 300hp (which is a likely candidate on the base engine of the upcoming luxury RWD sedan next year).

I sit corrected, the source I was using made the architecture look very similar.

The Theta I4s also can be found in many Hyundai and Kia applications, including the Sonata. Don't be confused, these are not the same as the GEMA engines. Hyundai is, however, receiving royalties for these I4s.

So Hyundai has 2 2.4 liter 4 cylinder motors?

backy · May 2007

Did you read the links I posted earlier? Hyundai's Theta engine, used in the Sonata and Optima, is partly based on but not the same as the GEMA engine used by DCX et. al.

lilengineerboy · May 2007

Did you read the links I posted earlier? Hyundai's Theta engine, used in the Sonata and Optima, is partly based on but not the same as the GEMA engine used by DCX et. al.

Yeah I think I am confused because the GEMA sites say it was jointly developed, and on here it sounds like Hyundai made it and everyone is buying it from them.

backy · May 2007

You are not the first one to be confused by marketing hype vs. reality.

Hyundai didn't make it; there is common technology, designed by Hyundai, which all the GEMA partners can use, and add their own tweaks to. An interesting fact from the article posted earlier is that the Hyundai Theta engine plant isn't even part of GEMA, but the Theta engine does use block and intake technology from the GEMA project.

captain2 · May 2007

What is the intent of this, if not to imply that the cheaper car actually costs more?
there is no intent or even any implication - simply that any car that is generally sold at big discounts will, in fact, have a lesser resale value down the road. That is not good for the buyer only in that it reduces how much he/she might recover for the vehicle at trade-in time. It has nothing to do with Fusions/6s/Sonatas or anything in particular, just a simple statement saying that cheaper up front generally equals cheaper later. It is no secret that Honda and Toyota are hard to deal with especially if you are expecting 'Detroit' style discounts, but it is largely the reason why those cars tend to have high resale values - they cost more because they don't negotiate much. The guy that really gets screwed is that guy that goes out and buys a car when it first comes out, pays something closer to sticker, only to see the mfgr. rebate or finance at 0% in some sort of EOY clearance sale thereby making that car thousands less than what he paid.
Resale value should be a primary issue for any car buyer under the proviso that he/she is not likely to keep a car more than about 3 or 5 years. Resale value starts becomings a non-issue once that car accumulated a bunch of miles and more age than that. And yes there are a number of examples where a cheaper car at purchase can and does
really cost more - all depending on those kinds of things.
My point thru this whole thread is that folks all the time point to a car that let's say costs them $3300.00 less new than Brand X or Brand Y, and then think they have actually saved all that money - to which I say 'well, yes you did, and no, you didn't.' And you are absolutely right, higher resale values will generally not offset the higher initial price (unless you bought a hybrid) and for whatever that real difference ends up being than that is really what it costs you to drive that Honda instead of something else - plus, of course, the time value of the extra money you had to borrow.

dudleyr · May 2007

When comparing costs also take into account insurance and fuel.

I comared a Mazda 6 to an Accord. The Accord was more expensive, but it saves $10 per month in gas and $10 per month for insurance.

I bought the Accord, but if there was a 6 wagon with the 2.3 liter 4 I would have bought that. Love wagons.

benderofbows · May 2007

"The guy that really gets screwed is that guy that goes out and buys a car when it first comes out, pays something closer to sticker, only to see the mfgr. rebate or finance at 0% in some sort of EOY clearance sale thereby making that car thousands less than what he paid."

That is one of the things that steered me from the Fusion to the Accord. When I saw that I could get an Accord for under invoice, I was pretty confident that was the rock-bottom price; it was as good as I would be able to get on an Accord. The new Accords will be out in a few months, the 07s will be gone, and we likely will not see such pricing on Accords again until the end of the next generations life cycle. There is very little chance that in a few years my resale value will be less because Honda will be selling them much cheaper.

The Fusion had a larger discount, but there was no gaurantee that the deal I was seeing would not have been eclipsed by some larger rebates, or 0% financing, plus a free dell computer, and iPod, or who knows what else they'll come up with to sell the things, and like captain said it'll drive the resale down faster.

That happened to me when I bought my last Ford, but I didn't even pay anywhere near sticker! I thought I had a screamin' deal on my hands... paid invoice, less rebates, and got zero percent. The next year, the rebates doubled, zero percent financing was back, they had lowered the MSRP AND the invoice, and Ford had made standard some things which I had paid extra for. Guess what happened to my resale value?

jeffyscott · May 2007

Resale value should be a primary issue for any car buyer under the proviso that he/she is not likely to keep a car more than about 3 or 5 years.

That is where you lose me. Honestly, I am trying to understand why you think resale value is so all important.

If the net cost is less for the cheaper car or even if it is about the same, why buy something you don't really want, just because the resale value is higher? For example, if after considering everything, excluding price and resale value, one likes the Fusion better than the Accord, why buy the Accord?

benderofbows · May 2007

Resale value is unknown. There are three distinct possibilities:

Scenario one: The Fusion continues to sell well for the next 5+ years, without having increased rebates or fleet sales. Also, the LONG TERM reliability proves to be on par with Honda (or Honda reliability falters). In this case, the Fusion will resale favorably compared to the Accord, and since it was less costly to purchase, will prove to be the better value. In the end, it really will cost more to drive a Honda, and the "Japanese Myth" theory is confirmed.

Scenario two: The Fusion continues to sell fairly well for the next 5+ years, with minimal rebates and fleet sales. Long term reliability is not too far behind Honda. The difference in resale vales between the two cars will be roughly equal to the difference in their purchase prices when new, taking the time value of money into effect, making the resale issue a wash. No car is the better value than the other.

Scenario three: (JUST ANOTHER SCENARIO) The Fusion doesn't continue to sell as well through the next 5+ years; maybe Ford doesn't update it enough, maybe the competition makes great leaps and bounds. In response to lower sales Ford increases rebates, and/or sells to fleets. OR, the LONG TERM reliability isn't as good as Honda. The steep discounts on the future new Fusions, the older Fusions having reliability issues as they age, and used Fusions being dumped on the market at low prices, or any combination of those, come together to make a used Fusion worth considerably less than a similiar Honda. In that theoretical scenario, the resale difference between a Fusion and a Honda would be more than the difference in purchase price, making the Honda a better value. Like my last Ford, the costs of owning the Ford would be much greater than the costs of owning a competitor.

Again, no one knows about future resale around or after 3-5 years from now.

captain2 · May 2007

no one knows about future resale around or after 3-5 years from now
absolutely true - but what we do have is about 15 or 20 years of established history whether that be Ford's history or Honda's. Resale values as used in those 'cost of ownership' studies are only estimates, even those residual values that are used to calculate lease costs are 'estimates' on the lessors part. Tomorrow we might have the greatest en masse sequence of engine failures ever known to mankind, with every Honda 4 banger blowing head gaskets simultaneuously.

At that point, those particular cars will certainly have resale value problems, wouldn't they? And every unfortunate Honda owner that happened to invest 20k or so of their hard earned money would experience a helluva financial loss, because now this car that they thought they could sell used for let's say 10k is now only worth half of that. Kind of reminds me of GMs dubious flirtation with diesels back in the first energy (gas price) crisis. Those engines darn near did all blow up simultaneously, and just like magic those resale values went into the dumper.

captain2 · May 2007

why buy something you don't really want
and all truths are self evident - you should never buy anything that you don't really want.

lilengineerboy · May 2007

Kind of reminds me of GMs dubious flirtation with diesels back in the first energy (gas price) crisis. Those engines darn near did all blow up simultaneously, and just like magic those resale values went into the dumper.

The point being it was a crummy diesel, not that diesels are crummy. Mercedes and VW diesels have exceptionally high resale values, even still.

As Honda and Nissan roll out their diesel mid-sized sedans, we will see who follows.

captain2 · May 2007

you're making this comment to someone who really believes that the diesel/biodiesel will supplant the gasoline engine within the next 5-10 years - and of course, anything that is obscenely economical and durable will have great resale values. That small block V8 diesel I was talking about, was a little worse than merely 'crummy; however.

w9cw · May 2007

Unless money means nothing to you, it is a good premise to strongly consider resale value of a car, if, and only if, you plan to keep the car equal to or less than 3 to 5 years. However in my case, I keep a car at least 10 years, sometimes much longer. Thus, resale value's importance is less of an important factor in the purchase decision. My three last new car purchases were kept 22 years, 13 years, and 11 years respectively.

jd10013 · May 2007

Why didn't you include the Sonata? It's sales are down 31% from last year at this time. See a trend? Also, Fusion sales to fleets are pretty low according to Ford and Hyundai just made some news about selling in high volumes to fleets IIRC.

I just didn't feel like looking them up. perhaps its (probably) just me buying into an old sterotype, but i don't consider hyundai in the same leauge.

joe97 · May 2007

If you read the latest sales news from Ford, a quick search will take you to several of them, they are reporting that fleet sales are down 5% for either the year or the month of April, I can't remember which it is.

Maybe you forgot Ford removed Taurus fleet completely, so let's think about this logically. Ford operated 100% of Taurus to fleet this time last year, and fleet sales YOY are only down by 5% even with the removal of Taurus fleet, you do the math. For a good part of 06, Taurus fleet led in Ford car sales monthly, ran normally from 15-20K units/month.

jd10013 · May 2007

Resale value is unknown. There are three distinct possibilities:

so true. One thing nobody has mentioned is the condition and mileage of the car. If you buy any car, put 45k miles a year on it, and trade it in after 3 years with 135k miles on it, you're going to seriously hurt the resale value. I don't car if its a honda, nissan, toyota, or bmw. You also have to consider the condition of the car. personally, if it knew I was going to be putting a lot of miles on a car, I'd buy a cheap as I could.

But to me, the whole argument is moot. Your going to pay more for an asian car. Your going to pay more to buy it, pay more to maintain it, and pay more to fix it when it needs fixed. And if the dollar does't strenghen against the yen, your either going to pay even more, or the asian car companies will continue to see their profits decline.

elroy5 · May 2007

Unless money means nothing to you, it is a good premise to strongly consider resale value of a car, if, and only if, you plan to keep the car equal to or less than 3 to 5 years. However in my case, I keep a car at least 10 years, sometimes much longer. Thus, resale value's importance is less of an important factor in the purchase decision. My three last new car purchases were kept 22 years, 13 years, and 11 years respectively.

I think resale value is still important 10 or more years down the road.

In 1992 the Taurus was the top rated car. I happened to buy a 92 Accord. After 12 years, and 140k miles, I decided to sell it and buy a new Accord. I sold the car in less than one hour for $1000 more than the KBB value ($5,000). Do you think I would have gotten close to that much for a 92 Taurus? I don't think so. I also think an 07 Accord will still be worth considerably more in ten years, than an 07 Fusion will be.

jd10013 · May 2007

if you found somebody to pay 5000 (or 6000 if you're saying kbb was 5k) for a 12 year old car, consider yourself lucky. you found a moron who would have overpaid for anything.

benderofbows · May 2007

"it is a good premise to strongly consider resale value of a car, if, and only if, you plan to keep the car equal to or less than 3 to 5 years"

The key word is plan. Things happen. Say you buy a new car without considering resale value because you plan to drive it until the wheels fall off, but in the third year you accidentally total it. All of a sudden, resale value becomes very important. Say your cars value as determined by the insurance company is $8,200 while a competeting car in the same shape would have brought $11,400. It becomes an important factor again.

Congratulations on keeping your cars for that long. You are a much wealthier person because of your restraint.

elroy5 · May 2007

if you found somebody to pay 5000 (or 6000 if you're saying kbb was 5k) for a 12 year old car, consider yourself lucky.

The KBB on the car was actually $3,800. I sold it for $5,000.

you found a moron who would have overpaid for anything.

No, he would not have paid that much for "anything". He knew exactly what he was looking for. He wanted a dependable car for his daughter to drive to college in. He got exactly that.

jd10013 · May 2007

paying 6000 for a 12yr old car with 150,000 miles on it is just stupid. at least when talking about a mid size family sedan. 6000 will buy you something 1/2 as old with half the miles on it.

just the idea of paying kbb, let alone 1 grand over it, would make me question anybodies intelligence. paying 1k over KBB is about the same as going to a dealership and offering to pay more than msrp. If i were you, i would have tried to sell this person everything i own.

As P.T. barnum said, there's one born every second.

baggs32 · May 2007

Maybe you forgot Ford removed Taurus fleet completely, so let's think about this logically.

Good point, and I did forget that. However my point was that the only proof I've seen so far of Sonata fleet sales being down is a 5-month old news article stating that all of Hyundai fleet sales are down. If that's what we're going by here, and without real numbers yet, then according to the latest news Fusion fleet sales are down too.

While typing this I found the link I was referring to. Turns out the numbers I saw are from mid-2006. Sonata fleet sales were just over 50% and Fusion fleet sales were 18.8%. Anyone know if the new numbers are actually closer now?

explorerx4 · May 2007

this just struck a(c)cord with me. my neighbor across the street had an accord that was in 3 major accidents. the first was when it was a few months old. based on what my neighbor told me, the insurance company wanted to total it, but he would not let them, so it got fixed. anyways, he put it out on the corner and some guy bought it for his daughter. when he was putting the plates on it, he gave me a look while i was mowing my lawn, like 'i got a deal'.
i really wanted to say something, but i didn't.
my point is, a lot of buyers of used cars don't have a clue.

scape2 · May 2007

"Wrong on both counts. Fusion fleets are actually going up as we speak"

Please prove this. you can't because its not true. Ford does sell some Fusions to fleets but its much, much lower than at the levels of the Taurus. This is all over the net. And what about the Toyota fleet sales of the Camry??

elroy5 · May 2007

paying 6000 for a 12yr old car with 150,000 miles on it is just stupid.

Who said $6,000? Fact is, the car was well worth $5,000 and I would not have sold it for less. I still wonder if I made the right decision to sell it. The fact that I needed to have a truck, made selling the car a necessity.

scape2 · May 2007

"Ford needs to discount to sell the 6 (or the Fusion). In any case,"

Ever thought Ford/Hyundia just decided to sell a great car at a great value and maybe Honda/Toyota are taking you for a ride?

"Cheap now will almost always equal cheap later, and the reverse is also true" Cheap in what way? Or is this just because its a Ford product?

N

scape2 · May 2007

"From a dead stop, a manual 4-cyl Accord will hold its own against an auto V6 Fusion."

No, it won't.

scape2 · May 2007

"That is where you lose me. Honestly, I am trying to understand why you think resale value is so all important."

I agree. Honda folks love to tought resale value. Yet, they leave out the initial higher price paid, along with the higher interest over the lifetime of the loan..

Cars are not an investment either...

Another thing here. Resale on the internet is an average. Real world is where resales come in. I had a 2000 Accord LX and 3 dealerships wouldn't give me more than 10,000 in 2004 for it! Perception to the public is also key on resale value. It has been bashed into our heads that Honda/Toyota are so much more reliable and they are "worth it". In my experience they are not. The internet has all kinds of information about reliability data. Get out and take a look. You will be surprised. :surprise:

bhmr59 · May 2007

According to the 12/1/06 statement pasted in #831, Hyundai started curtailing fleet sales dramatically in 11/06. If they established a new policy in November, they would not keep issuing the same press release month after month. While such monthly press releases wouldn't be a "5 month old new article",they would certainly be "old news."

Hyundai added XM radio to Sonata's built in late 2006. They had a press release about that. While they advertise that XM is included, they don't issue press releases each month to announce that XM is included.

goodegg · May 2007

Honda/Toyota are so much more reliable and they are "worth it". In my experience they are not

My experience is the total opposite. My 2 Fords have been very weak compared to the satisfaction my 3 Hondas and 2 Toyotas deliver. Ford's burned me twice. I doubt I'd ever buy one again. My 15 year old won't see one in the driveway either. Leaning towards an Elantra.

And I get "out on the internet". I don't need it to tell me to steer clear of Ford.

goodegg · May 2007

My experience is the total opposite. My 2 Fords have been very weak compared to the satisfaction my 3 Hondas and 2 Toyotas deliver.

I feel the same. Ford needs to step it up to earn my business. The Fusion seems to be an OK car, but its too new on the scene for it to be judged in the esteemed light of an Accord (yea I'm Honda-biased but for a good reason). Lets see how it holds together with 90,000 miles on it. The Aura looks good too, but how do we know what it'll be like with 90,000 on it?

I'm pulling for GM tho with its new models - the Aura, the new Malibu, and the new CTS. C'mon GM.

Midsize Sedans 2.0

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles