Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

1145146148150151235

Comments

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    you are positive that all the reviewers are actually owners??? Hmmmm

    I've done this exercise in order to skim off the false posters as well as the chronic haters and the chronic lovers.

    Take the top 10% of reviews out of the mix, 17 reviews.
    Take the bottom 10% out of the mix, 17 reviews.
    Average the remaining 137 reviews.... it happens to be 9.1

    This is the heart of the buying public. Then do it for all the others.

    If it doesnt' look so good for the Camry then just who is buying all these vehicles from a sold out plant? And why do they need to add 200,000 units next year from the Subie plant? What's going on here?
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    OK - sorry man.

    I checked the MPG posting here at Edmunds and found out that V6 Accords are getting more like 32 mpg highway.

    My bad.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    ...Doesn't look good for the Camry...

    How can you say this? Toyota sells more Camrys each year than they did the year before. Every other car maker would love to be "not looking so good". The Camry is not my type of car, but it seems to be the car most people want. And they are willing to pay a lot more to drive one. The buying public speaks loudest with their money. Not with some review on a forum.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I checked the MPG posting here at Edmunds and found out that V6 Accords are getting more like 32 mpg highway.

    I average 33mpg on the highway in my V6 Accord. 24mpg around town.
  • lweisslweiss Member Posts: 342
    To the posters that really enjoy the fast V6 Mid Size sedans- have at it, enjoy. And you know what, I would say that in 99% of the cases, you won't get to your destinations more than one minute faster than I would. And buy the way, I have gotten speeding tickets in my slow (as some would say) Volvo also.

    But I think that what car companies would love to do is to give good performance with great economy- and when gasoline soars to $5/gallon over the next 5 years (which is what many are predicting), economy and reasonable performance which come to the forefront- and then the present buyers of high performance V6 engines will incur dramatic extra depreciation- just like the owners of the big SUV's did over the past 2 years. I don't feel sorry for them at all.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I had a 4cyl 92 Accord (140hp). It was a very nice car. I would not have kept it for 12 years, if I thought it didn't have enough power for me. When I went to test drive the new Accords I was very impressed by how much smoother, quieter, and how much less effort the V6 needed to move the car. I could afford the V6, so that's what I got. I have no doubt the 4cyl would have been adequate for my needs. But when I'm out on the interstate, the V6 is just so much more fun. I loved my 4cyl Accord for many years, and miles, as I am sure you guys do also.
  • ontopontop Member Posts: 279
    Exactly.

    Today's V6s deliver the kind of mileage #'s the I4s of yesterday did. And the power on demand is a beautiful thing.

    You only live once. Enjoy the ride.
  • mfletou1mfletou1 Member Posts: 508
    There are 171 reviews up there for the Camry.

    1 Review for Fusion. 28 for the Sonata.

    Oh, yeah--clearly Toyota is the one doing something wrong.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Consider those reviews are for 2007 models (look at the numbers on the Accord!). The 2007 Camry has been out since early 2006. The 2007 Sonata has been out since mid-summer. And the 2007 Fusion just started showing up at dealers. So the numbers make sense, especially given that the Camry sells at roughly 2:1 compared to either the Sonata or Fusion.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Again, what the point seems to be is that there are market niches. Some people just want basic transportation at very low cost, others want interior styling, some want efficiency and some want speed. I think most people want a little of everything, but the mix of which ones are which is why everyone doesn't get the exact same car.
    Just because the car is going to carry my kids doesn't mean it has to be boring as heck. I still have a pulse, I still like something that feels alive. It can't break the bank either, either in purchase price, maintenance costs, or gas. It has to be safe and contrary to most here, I would put more emphasis on avoiding an accident than what 16 airbags will deploy as I get run over by a wayward SUV.
    I also realize I am not a typical buyer and as an auto enthusiast my needs and and desires are different than mainstream appliance shoppers. Thankfully, there are enough options.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    It seems that what most people want is a quality reliable car, with the smoothest ride. What else has the Camry had to offer for the last 10 years or so?

    I also like a smooth ride, but I will compromise some softness in ride, for a little handling.

    As far as safety goes, until these cars have roll-cages, three point harnesses, and we wear helmets while we drive (nascar kind of safety), these cars will be no match for a suburban or 18 wheeler coming at us. Not many people are willing to pay, or can afford that kind of safety. So we just have to be careful out there, and hope for the best.
  • tamu2002tamu2002 Member Posts: 758
    "...As far as safety goes, until these cars have roll-cages, three point harnesses, and we wear helmets while we drive (nascar kind of safety)..."

    That's the funnest line I've read for a long time :) Nascar style helmet, wouldn't be too bad. Sure beats a side airbag. Cheap safety insurance.
  • tamu2002tamu2002 Member Posts: 758
    "I average 33mpg on the highway in my V6 Accord. 24mpg around town."

    You made me so mad. A minute ago I was happy that I was getting 34 mpg in my 4-cy Accord! You have no right getting 33 mpg in your V-6! :P
  • to626nto626n Member Posts: 14
    I suppose that someone would be me. Allow me to clarify...

    I forgot who, but I was having a debate with someone that claims a 5.9 second time on an Accord. They cited Car And Driver so I decided to do a little research on that website. What I found was that C&D reported same acceleration times of a Honda Accord coupe in a test they performed in 2003 and of a 298 hp Infiniti G35 in a test done in 2005. It is likely that one car is much quicker than the other. Like I said before I would love to see these two cars drag. My money would be on the G35.

    Yes, I do think C&D is biased towards Honda and BMW. It is very evident when you read a BMW review. For example most automotive publications would state flaws they found when reviewing a car no matter how good the car was. All C&D talked about in their latest reviw of the 335i was how wonderful it is. The 335i is a good car, however it is very biased when the reviewer only mentions the pros and neglects to mention anything negative about the car. And don't tell me that the 335i is the perfect car, or without flaws because I could think of a few.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    That's the funnest line I've read for a long time Nascar style helmet, wouldn't be too bad. Sure beats a side airbag. Cheap safety insurance.

    Hey, these guys hit the walls at 150mph, and walk away. That's safety.
  • comp386comp386 Member Posts: 56
    Taking out the bottom 10% of any vehicle will raise its score. Almost all vehicle ratings have means that are higher than their medians. It's easy to say that people who give bad reviews just hate the product, but that's unlikely. In my experience, they tend to be the best judges of a product. People weren't given Camrys like manna from heaven. They did their research and bought a product they liked. When it comes to cars, people tend to even form bonds with their vehicles. Very rarely do I ever hear people talking negatively about their vehicles. If those bottom 10% hate their vehicle enough to write about it, then potential buyers should listen. Especially since they're reporting very similar problems.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Pay attention!!!

    He took the top 10% off as well...
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    ...and when gasoline soars to $5/gallon over the next 5 years (which is what many are predicting)...

    I don't think that's as much of a shock to anyone anymore, it's only just a matter of time before this happens.

    ...and then the present buyers of high performance V6 engines will incur dramatic extra depreciation- just like the owners of the big SUV's did over the past 2 years.

    Doubt it, since V6's in some sedans get as good or better mileage than 4-cyls from just a few years ago, and with trannys getting more gears, and engines getting better technology (such as VVT, displacement-on-demand, and other fuel saving devices), the V6 will only become MORE valuable, when MORE people drop their SUVs and need an efficient people/cargo hauler with more power than what a 4-cyl offers.

    IMO, I don't plan on buying another sedan WITHOUT a V6, no matter how high gas prices go. That is, unless a 4-cyl can magically match the HP, torque, smoothness, and effortless pulling power of a V6, WITHOUT the use of a turbo (which I've had problems with in the past), or those dreaded CVT transmissions (yuck!)
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    "And don't tell me that the 335i is the perfect car, or without flaws because I could think of a few."

    And what would you cite as a negative. The price or the fact it can't haul 8 people?
  • comp386comp386 Member Posts: 56
    Sorry I meant to say both 10% off top and bottom will raise the score on any vehicle. So doing that analysis is rather pointless.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    ...and when gasoline soars to $5/gallon over the next 5 years (which is what many are predicting)...

    The effect of fuel prices depends on how much fuel is used. With a 4 mile commute that is usually done by bicycle in warmer months, there is some buffer on gas prices, filling up about every 3 weeks.
    On the other hand, commuting across Grand Rapids to Lansing every day might make someone look at a more fuel efficient method of transportation.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Sorry I meant to say both 10% off top and bottom will raise the score on any vehicle

    Uh...NO!!!

    Example:

    10 scores like this: 10, 7, 5, 5, 5, 4, 3, 3, 2, 1
    Without the top and bottom 10% off average: 4.5
    With the top and bottom 10% off average: 4.25

    As you can see in this case the score actually dropped when you take off the top and bottom 10% so your assessment is WRONG.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Just because the car is going to carry my kids doesn't mean it has to be boring as heck. I still have a pulse, I still like something that feels alive.

    Yes, but what about possible better handling in the 4 cyl due to less weight up in front? Taking a corner faster does more to make me feel "alive" than accelerating straight ahead to 60 mph 1 sec faster.
  • comp386comp386 Member Posts: 56
    Show me a vehicle with scores like that. Most (if not all vehicle scores) on edmunds (with a significant sample) is skewed towards to the top. It's just statistics.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    I don't have to. All I was trying to prove is that when you take off the top and bottom 10%, it's not necessary for the score to go up. There is a POSSIBILITY that the score might drop as I just proved it.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    JeffyScott,
    Very valid point, I totally agree.
    The number of cylinders overall has very little to do with my purchase decision. The last vehicle my household purchased was a 2.5 litre flat four, where as the vehicle it replaced was a 2.5 litre V6. I actually don't care about displacement so much either (2.5 isn't some magic number).
    There is a subjective level to acceleration, people like it to feel fast, either by engine noise or by the kick in the pants, or by visual stimulus. I think people have a sense of fast or slow (and it varies between people... does this feel fast to you?) and as long as the car they are driving doesn't feel subjectively slow to them, they feel like it is quick enough.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I think part of the subjective feel may sometimes be dependant on how willing the driver is to actually step on the gas pedal and get the rpms up. I think a lot of drivers (particularly of automatics) get their subjective idea of acceleration and power based on how the car feels at about 3000 rpm or less. And if that is the only way they will ever drive, then I suppose that makes sense.

    When I test drive a car, one thing I want to see is how it does under full throttle acceleration. Because when I own the car I will not be afraid to drive it that way, when I want maximum acceleration.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Yeah, I am very used to having multi-valve engines that tend to make more power towards the upper end of the rev band. I am also used to having a manual transmission to extract that performance.
    This is one of the places I think the General actually has an edge. Pushrods have a great deal of torque low down. Thats why 0-35 or so feels so quick on those cars.
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    I think part of the subjective feel may sometimes be dependant on how willing the driver is to actually step on the gas pedal and get the rpms up.

    Yes - yes. Acclamation.

    Most driver's are afraid to push the car's revs up to the redline, especially when the car's screaming it's heart out up there. But a VTEC Accord shines at 6-7000 rpms, and can really fly.

    But who drives like that? Me sometimes. Don't you?
  • tamu2002tamu2002 Member Posts: 758
    If I'm paying for the car, there's no way I'll drive like that. Can't imagine how revving to 6K rpm won't hurt the engine big time, Honda or not.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    f I'm paying for the car, there's no way I'll drive like that. Can't imagine how revving to 6K rpm won't hurt the engine big time, Honda or not.

    If the engine isn't at operating temperature, or your redline is BELOW 6K RPM, then sure. Otherwise, it's perfectly fine to rev it past 6K once in a while. Honda or not.

    I've hit redline on every single car I've owned, sometimes as often as once/week, and I've NEVER had any engine problems. My first car was an '89 Chevy S10 with the 4.3 L V6. I bought it used with 53K miles on it, and revved that thing often, especially on the highway, and the engine was still perfect at 150K miles, when the body rusted out so bad that I had to get rid of it.

    Some manufacturers are even RECOMMENDING that the engine be revved to redline every so often during break-in. I guess it helps with seal tolerances, or something like that.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    ...What an improvement by Nissan!

    Pics of the '07 Altima interior:
    image
    image
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Hmm it would hurt about not at all. Oil at operating temperature will prevent metal on metal contact so it won't affect wear in any measurable way. The top end is designed to operate at a much higher RPM still, so floating the valves is really a thing of the past.
    I'm not suggesting one drive everywhere at redline all day, but the time spent at the top of the tach on an acceleration run won't hurt anything.
    Thats what redline is for (and even that is pessimistic).
    If you don't like to rev, I would definitely suggest something with pushrods, since you aren't going to experience what a multivalve overhead cam engine has to offer.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Still a tick below Accord and Camry.
  • shado4shado4 Member Posts: 287
    I like it!

    I think the exterior of the new Altima looks really sharp as well.

    Looking forward to seeing it in person.
  • lweisslweiss Member Posts: 342
    Well Nissan needed some home runs to get back in the chase and it looks like the new Altima may be one of them. This would make the mid-size category have yet another great alternative. And with the 08 models including new Accords, Mazda6's and Chevy Malibu (which I've heard may be much nicer than the 07 models), it should give us some great choices over the next couple of years!
  • woodshop28woodshop28 Member Posts: 74
    I can speak from experience here. I have owned several "hondas" including an old 91 civic hatch, a 99 civic Si and a 99 integra GS-R. Yes, I suspect the engines will wear more quickly driving them aggressively, but I cannot tell you how many times I took the Si and the GS-R into the redline (8,000 RPM), and those engines never had any problems, and never used oil to any real measurable degree. I parted with the GS-R at about 80,000 miles, and that engine was as good as the day I bought it; absolutely a great engine. The Si was effectively the same engine, destroked a tad. It never complained. My old 91 hatch back was equally as tolerant.
    I, too, believe it is best to NOT run an engine hard until it is fully warmed. That may be the key.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I assume that this is the standard audio package with one CD and _?_ speakers and _?_ watts.

    Sat Radio option? Hmmm.

    The AUX input in the front of the dash is a little 'basic' I'd say. In other vehicles it's in the center console or the front console out of sight.

    No Bluetooth in this trim?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I'd say the styling of the sedan (coupe is better), or that wretched i-Drive (which is a HUGE downfall of BMWs, just read any of those same magazines which supposedly "help" BMW...they hate i-Drive.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    I think the interior is better but not earth shattering. The wood is too fake for my tastes and there are a few too many plastic colors coexisting in the interior. The all black interior may be better. I do not like the seat fabric either, it looks very econo car to me.

    I would like to see the Altima compared to the Aura and Camry V6.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I think this is a whole lot better than the old Altima, but the wood-grain on the covered bin and door-panels looks worse than my girlfriend's Corolla LE, and not nearly up to par with what a Camry (or Accord) offers. The design is nice, but the implementation isn't so hot IMO. Let me see it with metal-look trim instead of the cheesy-looking wood, and I'll likely feel differently.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Guess you haven't been keeping up on all those Toyota recalls huh? In fact, the most out of any car company?? This is ok? Why? :surprise:
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    I agree, most engines these days, "Honda VTEC", very fancy name.. or not.. I rev my 3.0 in my Fusion and it purrrrss right along at 80MPH, or 65MPH.. and is eager to revvvvvv.... :shades:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    It shouldn't hurt any car, including your Fusion, to take it to redline once in a while.

    I know my "fancy ;) " VTEC 2.4 is silky smooth, even at 6,000 RPM. Can't say the same of my girlfriend's VVT-i Corolla... it's quite buzzy when she pushes it above 4,000 RPM. I should mention though, that it is only 75% the size of my engine (1.8L).
  • dump_truckdump_truck Member Posts: 42
    hey atleast it has an aux-in. that was the only negative when buying my sonata. i decided it wasn't worth the extra $5-6k to buy a camry or whatever just to get an aux-in. i know, tough decision. just went out and replaced the head unit.
  • dump_truckdump_truck Member Posts: 42
    it is also POSSIBLE, that Elvis is still alive. But chances are, he's not. same w/ your little exercise.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I'm not an interior connoisseur, but I don't like wood (fake or real). I'd also want to see it in a dark gray or black color.

    But, I have never liked the exterior styling of the Altima, with its gigantic, heavy looking, rear bumper. Scrunching the taillights up to the top in the new version makes it look even worse to me. From pictures, it also looks like you will see this large lailight housing from the side...that seems like it will look pretty strange.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    /ot Forget about your mother (the magazines) telling you which girl (i-drive) you should marry. Don't you date (test drive the car), before you decide which girl is for you (decide if you like i-drive or not).

    I had not problems with it, took about 3 minutes to figure the basics.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Overall, I think this is an improvement for the Altima interior. The only things I'm not too fond of, are the blow dryer A/C vents, and the center of the steering wheel. The gauge cluster is much better than the old one. The three chrome things were pretty ugly, in the previous model.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Member Posts: 1,467
    image

    image
This discussion has been closed.