"Here we go again - if Honda/Toyota don't make it then you must not need it."
Well, some consumers are finicky about features. And, I won't be surprised if they give up their Camrys for Fusion's AWD. But there are not many who will give up a Camry simply because it does not have AWD. Camry is a better value over long-term. You can buy one for $20,000, drive it 80,000 miles with little or no maintenance, and then you can sell it for around $7500. Compare that with my Chevy Blazer - paid $27000 + $1700 for 5 yr/ 75000 mi GM Major Guard warranty, spent over $10000 on repairs, and sold when it was 7 yr/ 72000 mi old for just $3000. GM even sent me a $2500 loyalty certificate that I could use for buying another GM (after rightly apologizing for poor quality and resale value). I trashed the loyalty certificate and switched to CR-V. Many buyers like me care less about features and more about value (bang for the buck). Accord and Camry sell not because of feature content, they sell simply because of overall value. Quality, resale value, crash test ratings, etc. are the key ingredients of what many consumers (not everyone) perceive as value.
My 2002 Mazda Protege is quite reliable (bought new, now 5 yr/ 40,000 mi old). So far I have spent $800 (which I think is reasonable) on repairs such emission valve problem and power window problem. This vehicle is much better than the lousy Chevy Blazer that I traded in for a CR-V.
I will consider Mazda6 when I trade in this Protege next year even though I am leaning towards a 4-cyl Accord.
Accord and Camry sell not because of feature content, they sell simply because of overall value. Quality, resale value, crash test ratings, etc. are the key ingredients of what many consumers (not everyone) perceive as value.
Well said, and I totally agree. A car is not just a combination of features.
The Subaru is a kid car, whether it has a little maturity on its little brother Impreza or not
This might be true. You can actually feel the engine and drivetrain a little bit, and you can actually hear that it has a motor. I think the inside and outside are competitive in the segment, the NVH maybe/maybe not, but thats the part I like. When I get old and crochety, I will get a Buick.
The Passat 3.6 AWD, with 280 hp and Audi luxury sure stands out as a quick, luxurious midsize sedan to me.
Sure, especially compared to sub-$20k 4 cylinder mee-too CamCords. Of course, the VW is 10k more than the CamCords. More like a German G35 except the G35 is actually trying to be a real sports sedan with a manual transmission.
My dealer sells VWs besides Honda... the salesman was saying to me, you can never be sure how a new VW engine will sound but you can always count on the Honda engines. I've heard so many VW horror stories to consider avoiding the brand, even if they do make some rather nice cars for the money. There's a reason they aren't charging BMW prices for a VW for the most part, and their attempts at doing so (the white whale Phaeton) wasn't very successful.
OK, I have to disagree with you. GM really has gotten better over the years, and they are waht I consider value, not overpriced, boring Japanese cars. And they arent that great. Did you see the last C&D? Camry finished 5th in midsized review. And why on the world would you spend $10k to fix a Blazer? Did you get in a wreck? Even then, I wouldn;t spend more money to fix it than its worth.
Did anybody read this month's Car & Driver? There's a great family sedan comparo.
Midsize Sedans are really a great segment. I have a wife and a 14 week old baby. Since we had the baby, we've seen A LOT of each other's family. It never fails that someone has to make a comment about the dimunitive size of our vehicles. I drive a 2001 Honda Prelude Type SH (5 speed stick - 77,000 miles). My wife drives a 2000 Mazda Protege ES (Automatic - 79,000 miles). Then the inevitable question comes up: So when are you getting an SUV?
We don't need one. Sure the new CRV is really nice and I'd love to have either a BMW X3 or upcoming Land Rover LR2. A BMW 328i Sports Wagon would be ideal.
Midsize sedans give you a lot for your money. For the price of a well equipped CRV, you can get a REALLY NICE ACCORD that will be quicker, handle better, ride better...
While I won't be in the market anytime soon (unless something disastrous happens to either my Prelude or her Protege), I'd probably check out the following midsize sedans for their sporting characteristics:
1. The Accord (new body will be out by the time I'm ready). I've driven one as a loner car when my Prelude was in for service. It handled well, wasn't too floaty considering the soft ride, had great brakes, and the engine revved pretty freely. I like the LED style tail lights. No the acceleration wasn't blistering (4cyl), but I never felt strained while trying to merge. I've also got a great relationship with my Honda Dealer.
Has anybody driven the 4cyl & 6cyl Accords back to back? What were the major differences besides acceleration? Did the weight of the V6 adversely effect the car's handling?
2. The new Altima. I dig the aggressive styling. I've never driven one, but was impressed with the writeup the 2.5 got in C&D. I always thought if I bought an Altima, it would have to be with the VQ. Has anybody driven the 2.5 & 3.5 Altimas back to back?
3. The Legacy 2.5 GT. I love TURBOS :P I'm just not so happy with the turbo lag (it would be wifey's car equipped with an automatic) and turbos get lousy gas mileage around town.
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
"Ford's new mid-size sedans were the major factors behind the increase as combined sales for the Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, and Lincoln MKZ totaled 211,469. Awareness and demand for these award winning products continues to grow. In December, Fusion sales were up 67 percent, Milan sales were up 36 percent, and MKZ sales were up 78 percent. MKZ sales of 3,795 were the highest for any month."
Now someone was saying how they thought that these cars weren't living up to Ford's expectations. They had little to no incentives on these cars and pushed 200K units. That is without the new Sport package, without the AWD, and without the 3.5. Like I said before success breads success. THe more positive word of mouth, the more units you'll move. The more people that have them and like them, the more positive lip you get. Next year they should sell more Fusions if anything. And when the 3.5 comes the following model year, sales may rise even more and then we'll be at the mid year refresh. Ford addressed the safety issues people were having with the ABS and side airbags, so the Fusion is even in a better position now than before.
When a Camry can come in fifth in a comparo, you know the winds of change are stirring though you have to consider the source. Interesting that the old Accord won the comparo but the Camry got car of the year in a different mag. Serious descrepancy there to me. True the Fusion wasn't in the comparo but better to not show up at all than to show up and finish near the bottom.
PS. I am almost deadset in buying a Passat in the middle of this year or a CUV like a CX-7. I have no bias towards the Fusion save for it being a good car from Ford that is unjustly bashed on boards which feeds negative word of mouth. Somebody has to say the blatant truth about the vehicle being a competent competitor. I don't believe in negative word of mouth on a public forum, where potential buyers may go for knowledge, just to have cocktail conversation.
When a Camry can come in fifth in a comparo, you know the winds of change are stirring though you have to consider the source
That was a 4 cylinder Camry. Historically the 4 banger Camry was never strong in performance aspects and never finished well in any comparo.
However, as far as I know, the new V6 Camry hasn't lost in any comparo it's in yet. Of course, that could change when put against the new Altima.
Most importantly, people don't buy cars based on comparos. Especially those whom buy "family sedans" don't base their buying decision on "performance auto magazine" comparos. What they want is the most comfortable and reliable appliance, not a 3-series wannabe.
Most importantly, people don't buy cars based on comparos. Especially those whom buy "family sedans" don't base their buying decision on "performance auto magazine" comparos. What they want is the most comfortable and reliable appliance, not a 3-series wannabe.
I'm sure what he meant to say is: Most importantly, Idon't buy cars based on comparos. Especially those whom buy "family sedans" don't base their buying decision on "performance auto magazine" comparos. What they want is the most comfortable and reliable appliance, not a 3-series wannabe.
Just because its a family car doesn't mean it hast to be boring. I would still rather have a used 3 series than a new CamCord.
Just because its a family car doesn't mean it hast to be boring. I would still rather have a used 3 series than a new CamCord.
Get ready for some major maintenance bills on your lovely used 3 series. I'll take the brand new V6 Accord with 4 miles on the odometer and a strong prediction of $0 in maintenance costs over the next 4 years. And unless your used 3 series is an E90 or newer, get ready for some mediocre performance compared to newer the Japanese V6s.
tons of snow, tons of rain, always FWD, never any trouble.
I have lived in WI and Northern IL all my life and never had AWD or 4WD. Somehow I have also managed to survive without any significant problems, at least since I started having FWD. Back in the 70s and early 80s had some RWD cars, those were a problem in winter. Though my father-in-law says he has no problem with his Crown Vic, thanks to traction control.
I have found that they plow the snow from the roads around here, when it snows. In the last 20 years, I have never stayed home from work because of snow.
The worst winter driving I ever experienced was in Kentucky and Tennessee. About 24 hours after a snowstorm, still had to drive on 4 inches of ice in certain counties that apparently felt they did not have any obligation to clear show and ice from the interstate. Other counties plowed, etc. and we were driving on pavement.
AWD may help some when driving on 4 inces of ice, though it does also give a false sense of security...leading many with AWD to drive too fast. Despite what certain posters here think, ESC can help maintain control of the vehicle in winter conditions, not going to debate this...my wife has it and yes, it does.
Has anybody driven the 2.5 & 3.5 Altimas back to back? oh yeah, think the Altima continues to be underrated, despite all the obvious accolades for the VQ. Have owned in sequence 2 4 banger Altimas, both of which are now getting a little long in tooth, kids drive them, and neither has ever been in the shop - combined mileage about 250k. My wife drives an 03 3.5 which I feel is twice the car (the others the older body style) - 70k and also never in the shop. Gets about 26 mpg on maybe 80% highway - changing the oil this weekend, I couldn't help but notice that the engine is still so smooth that I thought I could balance a quarter on it. Driving both the 4 cylinder and the VQ a few years ago - remember that the power/smoothness difference was not actually all that apparent, but I spent the extra money anyway even though my wife at the time thought the 4 banger was fine. Now there seems to be a question of which she loves more - her hotrod or me! She would now not allow me to buy anything other than the V6. The 07 (which my wife is already googling at) now comes with a CVT that has been in the Murano for a few years and TMK been a solid tranny, that apparently improves FE despite even more power. You need to drive one - it is an unusual sensation because the car is always seeming to 'catch up' with the engine and there are no perceptible shifts. Recommend the Altima (and the VQ) without reservation, I guess I had better, my wife will be right in line behind you next spring or summer. Nissan does make some fine cars, as are your other choices although I do not share your enthusiasm for turbocharged engines over the long term.
C'mon you can not possibly think that you can continue to fit in your current vehicles, now that you have a kid . It's interesting that you say everyone asks when you are getting an SUV...not a minivan, which would have been the assumption maybe 10-20 years ago...not a wagon, which would have been the assumption before that.
Now the "new" thing is the "crossover"...didn't subaru invent this long ago and call it the Outback??? Of course VW also invented the minivan and called it the microbus, long before Chrysler came up with the minivan.
With three kids, having a minivan was great. Today, if I had only 1 or 2 kids and wanted a car that was fun to drive as well as functional, I think I'd look at a Mazda6 wagon or hatchback...though some of the minivans (not Honda or Toyota, of course) seem to be a real bargain in terms of space for the dollar.
I am about to be in the the same boat as you are, my wife is due in April and we have two small cars, a 2 door Civic and a Legacy GT. In my opinion the Legacy GT is much sportier than the ACcord or Altima. My upcoming concern about our cars is trying to fit a stoller into either trunk. While I would rather keep our current cars, I feel that the Civic may have to be replaced by something bigger that will fit the stoller and the dog.
Get ready for some major maintenance bills on your lovely used 3 series. I'll take the brand new V6 Accord with 4 miles on the odometer and a strong prediction of $0 in maintenance costs over the next 4 years.
There's a bunch of ex-540 owners fed-up with maintenance costs showing up on boards with V6 Accords! The 3 is closer to a TSX really, the back seat doesn't have a lot of room for adults... only works for a very young family.
I love C/D. Its my favorite car mag to read--I'm a subscriber.
HOWEVER--Gospel, its not. Let the record reflect that not so long ago, in a CD comparo, the Oldsmobile Intrigue beat the Camry. Where is the Intrigue now?
Now, I owned an Intrigue--a 2002, in the last model year. It had most everything on it. I thought by then, all the gremlins would be gone, plus it came with a nice warranty. I was wrong about the gremlins, it turned into a nightmare and nearly got me killed. I traded it for my Camry.
a related story - a couple of years back, an employee of mine with a relatively late model 325, one that did not have the 50k mile 'free maintainence' that BMWs now have. A great running and driving car that also looked great but with some apparently minor electrical problems (intermittent stereo and check engine light) - took it in to a dealer for his 40k 'scheduled service/maintainance' The big items were a brake job and a major tuneup. After $1200 for a brake job, he ended up getting the silly thing back a total of $2300 later. About the most ridiculous thing I'd ever heard. Another friend, a confirmed BMW 5 series addict, goes thru several of these on lease type arrangements only under the condition that they never get past the 50k and is constantly driving loaners while his dealer is fixing something, guess I can understand why. The employee BTW sold the thing shortly thereafter.
Well, actually no, WI is not so flat as Il, but in any case, I hear the same thing from many around here (WI)..."must have AWD/4WD".
My neighbor has a very steep driveway. I often see them struggling to get up it, even though both vehicles are 4WD drive SUVs...however, I am sure the 4WD does help. Not sure why they don't just clear the snow off first :confuse: .
I'm sure getting up a slippery hill is easier with AWD/4WD. I doubt that this is the main reason that the majority of buyers pay for it, though. I really think they buy it because they think they are going to be blasting through 3 foot snow drifts, even though reality is they are always driving on plowed roads. Then there are those who seem to have the hope of having bragging rights...they want me to get stuck, so they can brag about their 4WD SUV.
I do have a couple of steep hills that I drive up every day, never a problem going up them. I have slid down hill, through a stop sign occassionally. AWD would not help with that...which is more dangerous than not being able to get up a hill. Once I slid clear across the cross street and steered my way into a driveway, ended up with the vehicle half in the drive and half in the street, yet going up hill was not a problem.
Problems that I had with my Blazer: Front wheel bearings, dashboard instrumentation, distributor, fuel injector, alternator, head gasket, front axle, transfer case, heater (not the a/c), fuel pump and fuel line, transmission leak, air/ water leaks, power mirror, and some more that I can't recollect.
Honestly, I even did not know that a car had all these components (call me a dumb right-lane driver if you wish). I never look under the hood.
Had to be towed 9 times to the dealership! Thanks to AAA I didn't have to pay for towing.
I understand that my Blazer is not representative of GM. I understand GM is getting better. To GM's credit, GM apologized for the problems and gave me $2500 in loyalty certificates so that I could replace my Blazer with another GM vehicle.
Since I was sick of waiting for tow-trucks, and I chose to switch to CR-V. Also, I was unhappy that GM didn't want to pay for the repairs. I didn't want the loyalty certificate. I wanted them to pay (at least a part) of the excessive repair bill.
New GM vehicles may be more reliable, but I still won't look at them until I find something seriously wrong with this Honda.
GM and Ford have lost customers (as evident from the marketshare data and my example), and winning the lost customers back won't be easy.
That is odd that it would be "late model" and not include the maintenance. This started with the E36 3-series in the early 90s as part of the lease package that was popular among my peers. The 6 cylinder 3/5 series had plastic impellers on the water pump (same as my old Contour) which would fail every 80-90k, which at the time was about when you had to replace the rubber band running the valves on the Japanese models (which was quoted at $700 by the Honda dealer).
For those that want a sedan, you should look at a Hyundai Azera. You can by a loaded 06 Azera for about $24,000 and an 07 for $25,000. They are larger than an Avalon (had a 00 XLS), with an incredible warranty, and have a huge amount of luxury features for the price. Basically, its getting an full Avalon for a Camry price.
I can provide another example. I once had an '86 Mercury Sable, bought it in 1993 and it has 100-something thousand miles on it. The only item besides your usual maintenance items, given the age of the car, the CV boots were worn and needed to be changed. It ran reliably, started easy in winters and served me well for the 2 years I had it. This is the 1st gen Sable/Taurus!
Years later, bought a '00 Ford Taurus with 50k miles on it... and Ford hasn't radically changed the Taurus/Sable... its still a Vulcan engine. In the 40+k miles that I had the car, there's still one gremlin that no one has been able to figure out (it would lose all power for a few seconds, when accelerating, only at speed like highway passing, not from a stop). A whole bunch of other items needed fixing too... throttle position sensor, ignition coil, belt tensioner bearing. And I know either the water pump is corroding, or the engine block is, or the heater coil is (all 3 are know problem areas) and never bothered fixing that. And this is on a run of the mill 4th gen Taurus which is a high volume car - you'd think it would be more reliable than the first generation I had before, given it hasn't been radically changed. There was a recall for front coil spring failures... Ford's answer was not to replace the defective coil springs, they just deviced some cheap tack on shield to prevent tire blowouts when the coil springs do fail.
I know a Honda can easily go 100k miles with nothing more than regular maintenance items.
There was a recall for front coil spring failures... Ford's answer was not to replace the defective coil springs, they just deviced some cheap tack on shield to prevent tire blowouts when the coil springs do fail.
That's better than what Honda did with their failing transmissions. IIRC the car seized when they failed which could be a big time problem at highway speeds. All they did was extend the warranty on the piece.
That's better than what Honda did with their failing transmissions. IIRC the car seized when they failed which could be a big time problem at highway speeds. All they did was extend the warranty on the piece.
Not quite, here's the solution...
ON VEHICLES WITH 15,000 MILES OR LESS, THE DEALER WILL UPDATE THE TRANSMISSION WITH A SIMPLE REVISION TO THE OIL COOLER RETURN LINE TO INCREASE LUBRICATION TO THE SECOND GEAR. ON VEHICLES WITH MORE THAN 15,000 MILES, THE DEALER WILL INSPECT THE TRANSMISSION TO IDENTIFY GEARS THAT HAVE ALREADY EXPERIENCED DISCOLORATION DUE TO OVERHEATING. IF DISCOLORATION EXISTS, THE TRANSMISSION WILL BE REPLACED IF DISCOLORATION IS NOT PRESENT, THE DEALER WILL PERFORM THE REVISION TO THE OIL COOLER RETURN LINE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 21, 2004, FOR PILOT, ODYSSEY, AND MDX OWNERS. OWNERS OF THE ACCORD VEHICLES WILL START RECEIVING LETTERS ON JUNE 28, 2004, AND ON JUNE 29, 2004, FOR OWNERS OF THE TL AND CL VEHICLES. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT HONDA AT 1-800-999-1009 OR ACURA AT 1-800-382-2238
And part of the problem that created the transmission failures is that Honda has an over-engineered auto transmission to begin with, its not like your typical auto trans...
as louiswei suggests, the 05 and later Avalon much larger than the earlier Camry related models, and also quite a bit larger than an Azera - not to mention the fact that it will be in the next county before the Azera really gets its wind - a gross exaggeration, of course - but it is noticeably quicker and gets better mileage as well. Don't know that the market will ever be able to understand that the Avalon is not a gussied up Camry anymore - Toyota may have been better off calling it something else, and yes it will cost thousands more than the Azera at any given 'bling' level. Typically, the new XLS will sell in low 30s. The current Avalon has the highest resale value in its class, the Azera obviously much lower, but a helluva a value new as you said.
According to manufacturer's specs, the Avalon and Azera have exactly the same amount of interior room, and the Azera has more luggage space. So it is not inaccurate to say that the Azera is "bigger" than the Avalon. As far as the Avalon being "noticeably quicker", C/D's test showed the Avalon is 0.1 seconds quicker 0-60 than the Azera. Whether 0.1 seconds is noticeable depends on the driver I guess.
That's interesting. I saw an Azera on the highway yesterday and I never would have guessed it's about the size of an Avalon. It was a dark color, maybe that contributed to it looking smaller than it really is.
Actually, the Avalon and Azera is very similar in terms of size.
Outside, the Avalon is about 4.5 inches longer than the Azera, while width, height, wheelbase are very similar between the two.
The Azera shines is interior dimension such as front head room, front leg room and rear head room, while Avalon excels in front and rear shoulder and hip room, and rear leg room.
"the 05 and later Avalon much larger than the earlier Camry related models, and also quite a bit larger than an Azera - not to mention the fact that it will be in the next county before the Azera really gets its wind"
And EPA puts both Avalon and Azera at 107 cubic feet of passenger volume, while Azera has 3 cubic feet advantage over the Avalon in luggage volume, for a total of 124 cubic feet, versus 121 for the Avalon.
I think the Azera has hit the spot for Hyundai. The car exemplifies Hyundai's drive to compete in the large car category, with premium offerings. I was certainly surprised when I had a chance to test drive the car Actually, much of Hyundai's new lineup have shattered my perception about the brand. Kudos!!
Azera is only larger than the Avalon in 2 areas: head room and front leg room. Because of its higher roofline design, Azera offers more (a lot more) head room than the low roof Avalon. Due to those advantages the interior volumn is almost identical between the 2 cars.
I know that many cross-shop these cars (Avalon, Azera) with Camry/ Sonata. Are these also called midsize? What's a midsize? I get confused. Impala is midsize and Malibu is midsize too? But LeSabre or Grand Marquis are not midsize. Exactly what determines the label "midsize"? 2006 Accord is much bigger than 1994 Accord... but both are "midsize"?
"you'd think it would be more reliable than the first generation I had before"
I guess some companies are cutting corners and not just costs. Even Toyota made huge recalls last year. Not good. We want the quality of all makes and models to go up and not down.
I'm not really arguing with anyone in particular, but I do want to point something out that I experienced firsthand a couple of years ago. When I was run off the road in my '96 Accord LX (ABS was an option then, one mine does not have) I LOCKED UP all 4 tires, even with rear drum brakes. This was a warm sunny day, dry road.
If I can lock up my brakes, how much better stopping power do I need? I know that discs dissipate heat better, but unless you regularly go down steep miles-long hills, what's the point of rear drums? Personally, if I could have opted out of my rear discs on my 2006 EX Accord, I would have, just to save a few bucks. Discs mean nothing to me but more brake dust and more expensive maintenance/replacement costs.
So far I have spent $800 (which I think is reasonable) on repairs such emission valve problem and power window problem.
$800 for a car with 40,000 miles doesn't seem particularly cheap to me, especially since I've spent just that on my 170,000 mile Accord. (actually, I've only spent $620, but I have a broken rear-power door lock actuator which would cost about $200 to repair - I just lock it manually and have kept my $200! , so I included that in my price since many people would pay to fix that).
Interior volume determines classification under the EPA definition. This is certainly not the only way that "mid-size" can be defined. For example, edmunds does not always follow the EPA classifications (e.g. Subaru Legacy is a compact according to EPA). Another example: IIHS goes by weight.
Interior volume leads to some other strange classifications, such as G6 is compact, but Malibu is mid-size. I assume this is due to lower roof-line reducing volume in the Pontiac.
If I can lock up my brakes, how much better stopping power do I need?
I would opt for better tires to take better advantage of the vehicle's capabilities, with the incredible stopping ability of small front discs and rear drums.
Discs mean nothing to me but more brake dust and more expensive maintenance/replacement costs.
Except that they have lower maintenance/replacement costs. If you have decent brake pads, dust should be a non-issue.
If I can lock up my brakes, how much better stopping power do I need?
On wet pavement, the LAST thing you want is for the brakes to lock up. It lengthens the stopping distance, as well as losing the ability to maneuver around objects.
I refuse to even consider a car without ABS these days. I don't have to be carefully modulating the brakes in a panic stop to be sure they don't lock up, and the ability to steer around objects to avoid collisions is much better than the alternative.
Personally, if I could have opted out of my rear discs on my 2006 EX Accord, I would have, just to save a few bucks. Discs mean nothing to me but more brake dust and more expensive maintenance/replacement costs.
Not me. 4-wheel disks usually have shorter stopping distances than disk/drums, and can dissipate heat faster, which usually means less brake fade if you're on them for a long period of time. Plus, this may seem strange, but I feel like I have more control, in terms of both modulation and feel, with disks at all four corners. As for brake dust, I've only had a large build-up of it on the front wheels anyway, even with disks in the rear. They CAN be more expensive to maintain than drums, but a quality set of pads and disks can last as long as the drums and shoes.
the biggest benefit to me of 4 wheel discs is that I can change them easily, in my driveway and have yet another reason not to have some crooked mechanic tell me what I need but really don't. Agree with you about the ABS as a required safety feature, while possibly even lengthening stopping distances on dry roads, it does allow for that control you wouldn't have with your brakes locked up. A reasonable and logical trade-off.
Comments
Well, some consumers are finicky about features. And, I won't be surprised if they give up their Camrys for Fusion's AWD. But there are not many who will give up a Camry simply because it does not have AWD. Camry is a better value over long-term. You can buy one for $20,000, drive it 80,000 miles with little or no maintenance, and then you can sell it for around $7500. Compare that with my Chevy Blazer - paid $27000 + $1700 for 5 yr/ 75000 mi GM Major Guard warranty, spent over $10000 on repairs, and sold when it was 7 yr/ 72000 mi old for just $3000. GM even sent me a $2500 loyalty certificate that I could use for buying another GM (after rightly apologizing for poor quality and resale value). I trashed the loyalty certificate and switched to CR-V. Many buyers like me care less about features and more about value (bang for the buck). Accord and Camry sell not because of feature content, they sell simply because of overall value. Quality, resale value, crash test ratings, etc. are the key ingredients of what many consumers (not everyone) perceive as value.
I will consider Mazda6 when I trade in this Protege next year even though I am leaning towards a 4-cyl Accord.
Well said, and I totally agree. A car is not just a combination of features.
This might be true. You can actually feel the engine and drivetrain a little bit, and you can actually hear that it has a motor. I think the inside and outside are competitive in the segment, the NVH maybe/maybe not, but thats the part I like. When I get old and crochety, I will get a Buick.
The Passat 3.6 AWD, with 280 hp and Audi luxury sure stands out as a quick, luxurious midsize sedan to me.
Sure, especially compared to sub-$20k 4 cylinder mee-too CamCords. Of course, the VW is 10k more than the CamCords. More like a German G35 except the G35 is actually trying to be a real sports sedan with a manual transmission.
Midsize Sedans are really a great segment. I have a wife and a 14 week old baby. Since we had the baby, we've seen A LOT of each other's family. It never fails that someone has to make a comment about the dimunitive size of our vehicles. I drive a 2001 Honda Prelude Type SH (5 speed stick - 77,000 miles). My wife drives a 2000 Mazda Protege ES (Automatic - 79,000 miles). Then the inevitable question comes up: So when are you getting an SUV?
We don't need one. Sure the new CRV is really nice and I'd love to have either a BMW X3 or upcoming Land Rover LR2. A BMW 328i Sports Wagon would be ideal.
Midsize sedans give you a lot for your money. For the price of a well equipped CRV, you can get a REALLY NICE ACCORD that will be quicker, handle better, ride better...
While I won't be in the market anytime soon (unless something disastrous happens to either my Prelude or her Protege), I'd probably check out the following midsize sedans for their sporting characteristics:
1. The Accord (new body will be out by the time I'm ready). I've driven one as a loner car when my Prelude was in for service. It handled well, wasn't too floaty considering the soft ride, had great brakes, and the engine revved pretty freely. I like the LED style tail lights. No the acceleration wasn't blistering (4cyl), but I never felt strained while trying to merge. I've also got a great relationship with my Honda Dealer.
Has anybody driven the 4cyl & 6cyl Accords back to back? What were the major differences besides acceleration? Did the weight of the V6 adversely effect the car's handling?
2. The new Altima. I dig the aggressive styling. I've never driven one, but was impressed with the writeup the 2.5 got in C&D. I always thought if I bought an Altima, it would have to be with the VQ. Has anybody driven the 2.5 & 3.5 Altimas back to back?
3. The Legacy 2.5 GT. I love TURBOS :P I'm just not so happy with the turbo lag (it would be wifey's car equipped with an automatic) and turbos get lousy gas mileage around town.
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
Now someone was saying how they thought that these cars weren't living up to Ford's expectations. They had little to no incentives on these cars and pushed 200K units. That is without the new Sport package, without the AWD, and without the 3.5. Like I said before success breads success. THe more positive word of mouth, the more units you'll move. The more people that have them and like them, the more positive lip you get. Next year they should sell more Fusions if anything. And when the 3.5 comes the following model year, sales may rise even more and then we'll be at the mid year refresh. Ford addressed the safety issues people were having with the ABS and side airbags, so the Fusion is even in a better position now than before.
When a Camry can come in fifth in a comparo, you know the winds of change are stirring though you have to consider the source. Interesting that the old Accord won the comparo but the Camry got car of the year in a different mag. Serious descrepancy there to me. True the Fusion wasn't in the comparo but better to not show up at all than to show up and finish near the bottom.
PS. I am almost deadset in buying a Passat in the middle of this year or a CUV like a CX-7. I have no bias towards the Fusion save for it being a good car from Ford that is unjustly bashed on boards which feeds negative word of mouth. Somebody has to say the blatant truth about the vehicle being a competent competitor. I don't believe in negative word of mouth on a public forum, where potential buyers may go for knowledge, just to have cocktail conversation.
Well put
That was a 4 cylinder Camry. Historically the 4 banger Camry was never strong in performance aspects and never finished well in any comparo.
However, as far as I know, the new V6 Camry hasn't lost in any comparo it's in yet. Of course, that could change when put against the new Altima.
Most importantly, people don't buy cars based on comparos. Especially those whom buy "family sedans" don't base their buying decision on "performance auto magazine" comparos. What they want is the most comfortable and reliable appliance, not a 3-series wannabe.
I'm sure what he meant to say is:
Most importantly, Idon't buy cars based on comparos. Especially those whom buy "family sedans" don't base their buying decision on "performance auto magazine" comparos. What they want is the most comfortable and reliable appliance, not a 3-series wannabe.
Just because its a family car doesn't mean it hast to be boring. I would still rather have a used 3 series than a new CamCord.
Get ready for some major maintenance bills on your lovely used 3 series. I'll take the brand new V6 Accord with 4 miles on the odometer and a strong prediction of $0 in maintenance costs over the next 4 years. And unless your used 3 series is an E90 or newer, get ready for some mediocre performance compared to newer the Japanese V6s.
I have lived in WI and Northern IL all my life and never had AWD or 4WD. Somehow I have also managed to survive without any significant problems, at least since I started having FWD. Back in the 70s and early 80s had some RWD cars, those were a problem in winter. Though my father-in-law says he has no problem with his Crown Vic, thanks to traction control.
I have found that they plow the snow from the roads around here, when it snows. In the last 20 years, I have never stayed home from work because of snow.
The worst winter driving I ever experienced was in Kentucky and Tennessee. About 24 hours after a snowstorm, still had to drive on 4 inches of ice in certain counties that apparently felt they did not have any obligation to clear show and ice from the interstate. Other counties plowed, etc. and we were driving on pavement.
AWD may help some when driving on 4 inces of ice, though it does also give a false sense of security...leading many with AWD to drive too fast. Despite what certain posters here think, ESC can help maintain control of the vehicle in winter conditions, not going to debate this...my wife has it and yes, it does.
oh yeah, think the Altima continues to be underrated, despite all the obvious accolades for the VQ. Have owned in sequence 2 4 banger Altimas, both of which are now getting a little long in tooth, kids drive them, and neither has ever been in the shop - combined mileage about 250k. My wife drives an 03 3.5 which I feel is twice the car (the others the older body style) - 70k and also never in the shop. Gets about 26 mpg on maybe 80% highway - changing the oil this weekend, I couldn't help but notice that the engine is still so smooth that I thought I could balance a quarter on it. Driving both the 4 cylinder and the VQ a few years ago - remember that the power/smoothness difference was not actually all that apparent, but I spent the extra money anyway even though my wife at the time thought the 4 banger was fine. Now there seems to be a question of which she loves more - her hotrod or me! She would now not allow me to buy anything other than the V6. The 07 (which my wife is already googling at) now comes with a CVT that has been in the Murano for a few years and TMK been a solid tranny, that apparently improves FE despite even more power. You need to drive one - it is an unusual sensation because the car is always seeming to 'catch up' with the engine and there are no perceptible shifts. Recommend the Altima (and the VQ) without reservation, I guess I had better, my wife will be right in line behind you next spring or summer. Nissan does make some fine cars, as are your other choices although I do not share your enthusiasm for turbocharged engines over the long term.
C'mon you can not possibly think that you can continue to fit in your current vehicles, now that you have a kid
Now the "new" thing is the "crossover"...didn't subaru invent this long ago and call it the Outback??? Of course VW also invented the minivan and called it the microbus, long before Chrysler came up with the minivan.
With three kids, having a minivan was great. Today, if I had only 1 or 2 kids and wanted a car that was fun to drive as well as functional, I think I'd look at a Mazda6 wagon or hatchback...though some of the minivans (not Honda or Toyota, of course) seem to be a real bargain in terms of space for the dollar.
Flat as a board, no?
I'll say it one more time -- it's a different ballgame when you throw hills into the mix.
There's a bunch of ex-540 owners fed-up with maintenance costs showing up on boards with V6 Accords! The 3 is closer to a TSX really, the back seat doesn't have a lot of room for adults... only works for a very young family.
I love C/D. Its my favorite car mag to read--I'm a subscriber.
HOWEVER--Gospel, its not. Let the record reflect that not so long ago, in a CD comparo, the Oldsmobile Intrigue beat the Camry. Where is the Intrigue now?
Now, I owned an Intrigue--a 2002, in the last model year. It had most everything on it. I thought by then, all the gremlins would be gone, plus it came with a nice warranty. I was wrong about the gremlins, it turned into a nightmare and nearly got me killed. I traded it for my Camry.
My neighbor has a very steep driveway. I often see them struggling to get up it, even though both vehicles are 4WD drive SUVs...however, I am sure the 4WD does help. Not sure why they don't just clear the snow off first :confuse: .
I'm sure getting up a slippery hill is easier with AWD/4WD. I doubt that this is the main reason that the majority of buyers pay for it, though. I really think they buy it because they think they are going to be blasting through 3 foot snow drifts, even though reality is they are always driving on plowed roads. Then there are those who seem to have the hope of having bragging rights...they want me to get stuck, so they can brag about their 4WD SUV.
I do have a couple of steep hills that I drive up every day, never a problem going up them. I have slid down hill, through a stop sign occassionally. AWD would not help with that...which is more dangerous than not being able to get up a hill. Once I slid clear across the cross street and steered my way into a driveway, ended up with the vehicle half in the drive and half in the street, yet going up hill was not a problem.
Honestly, I even did not know that a car had all these components (call me a dumb right-lane driver if you wish). I never look under the hood.
Had to be towed 9 times to the dealership! Thanks to AAA I didn't have to pay for towing.
I understand that my Blazer is not representative of GM. I understand GM is getting better. To GM's credit, GM apologized for the problems and gave me $2500 in loyalty certificates so that I could replace my Blazer with another GM vehicle.
Since I was sick of waiting for tow-trucks, and I chose to switch to CR-V. Also, I was unhappy that GM didn't want to pay for the repairs. I didn't want the loyalty certificate. I wanted them to pay (at least a part) of the excessive repair bill.
New GM vehicles may be more reliable, but I still won't look at them until I find something seriously wrong with this Honda.
GM and Ford have lost customers (as evident from the marketshare data and my example), and winning the lost customers back won't be easy.
The 6 cylinder 3/5 series had plastic impellers on the water pump (same as my old Contour) which would fail every 80-90k, which at the time was about when you had to replace the rubber band running the valves on the Japanese models (which was quoted at $700 by the Honda dealer).
Picked up mine during the Denver blizzard and the electronic stability control (including traction control) worked incredibly well in the conditions. You might want to check it out at http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/category/cat.2007HyundaiAzeralimited
Years later, bought a '00 Ford Taurus with 50k miles on it... and Ford hasn't radically changed the Taurus/Sable... its still a Vulcan engine. In the 40+k miles that I had the car, there's still one gremlin that no one has been able to figure out (it would lose all power for a few seconds, when accelerating, only at speed like highway passing, not from a stop). A whole bunch of other items needed fixing too... throttle position sensor, ignition coil, belt tensioner bearing. And I know either the water pump is corroding, or the engine block is, or the heater coil is (all 3 are know problem areas) and never bothered fixing that. And this is on a run of the mill 4th gen Taurus which is a high volume car - you'd think it would be more reliable than the first generation I had before, given it hasn't been radically changed. There was a recall for front coil spring failures... Ford's answer was not to replace the defective coil springs, they just deviced some cheap tack on shield to prevent tire blowouts when the coil springs do fail.
I know a Honda can easily go 100k miles with nothing more than regular maintenance items.
Your 00' Avalon is a very different breed of animal then the current gen Avalon.
That's better than what Honda did with their failing transmissions. IIRC the car seized when they failed which could be a big time problem at highway speeds. All they did was extend the warranty on the piece.
Not quite, here's the solution...
ON VEHICLES WITH 15,000 MILES OR LESS, THE DEALER WILL UPDATE THE TRANSMISSION WITH A SIMPLE REVISION TO THE OIL COOLER RETURN LINE TO INCREASE LUBRICATION TO THE SECOND GEAR. ON VEHICLES WITH MORE THAN 15,000 MILES, THE DEALER WILL INSPECT THE TRANSMISSION TO IDENTIFY GEARS THAT HAVE ALREADY EXPERIENCED DISCOLORATION DUE TO OVERHEATING. IF DISCOLORATION EXISTS, THE TRANSMISSION WILL BE REPLACED IF DISCOLORATION IS NOT PRESENT, THE DEALER WILL PERFORM THE REVISION TO THE OIL COOLER RETURN LINE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 21, 2004, FOR PILOT, ODYSSEY, AND MDX OWNERS. OWNERS OF THE ACCORD VEHICLES WILL START RECEIVING LETTERS ON JUNE 28, 2004, AND ON JUNE 29, 2004, FOR OWNERS OF THE TL AND CL VEHICLES. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT HONDA AT 1-800-999-1009 OR ACURA AT 1-800-382-2238
And part of the problem that created the transmission failures is that Honda has an over-engineered auto transmission to begin with, its not like your typical auto trans...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Honda_transmissions
But then, neither of these cars is a mid-sized sedan, is it?
Outside, the Avalon is about 4.5 inches longer than the Azera, while width, height, wheelbase are very similar between the two.
The Azera shines is interior dimension such as front head room, front leg room and rear head room, while Avalon excels in front and rear shoulder and hip room, and rear leg room.
"the 05 and later Avalon much larger than the earlier Camry related models, and also quite a bit larger than an Azera - not to mention the fact that it will be in the next county before the Azera really gets its wind"
And EPA puts both Avalon and Azera at 107 cubic feet of passenger volume, while Azera has 3 cubic feet advantage over the Avalon in luggage volume, for a total of 124 cubic feet, versus 121 for the Avalon.
I think the Azera has hit the spot for Hyundai. The car exemplifies Hyundai's drive to compete in the large car category, with premium offerings. I was certainly surprised when I had a chance to test drive the car
However, an Avalon does LOOK larger than Azera.
Sure does to me!!
Apparently, "interior volume"...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_size_class
I guess some companies are cutting corners and not just costs. Even Toyota made huge recalls last year. Not good. We want the quality of all makes and models to go up and not down.
I'm not really arguing with anyone in particular, but I do want to point something out that I experienced firsthand a couple of years ago. When I was run off the road in my '96 Accord LX (ABS was an option then, one mine does not have) I LOCKED UP all 4 tires, even with rear drum brakes. This was a warm sunny day, dry road.
If I can lock up my brakes, how much better stopping power do I need? I know that discs dissipate heat better, but unless you regularly go down steep miles-long hills, what's the point of rear drums? Personally, if I could have opted out of my rear discs on my 2006 EX Accord, I would have, just to save a few bucks. Discs mean nothing to me but more brake dust and more expensive maintenance/replacement costs.
$800 for a car with 40,000 miles doesn't seem particularly cheap to me, especially since I've spent just that on my 170,000 mile Accord. (actually, I've only spent $620, but I have a broken rear-power door lock actuator which would cost about $200 to repair - I just lock it manually and have kept my $200!
The 1994 was considered compact, but a large on in its class.
Here are a few:
Avalon: Large
Azera: Large
Sonata: Large (the only one here)
Camry: Mid-size
Impala: Large
LaSarbe: Large
Grand Marquis: Large
Accord: Mid-size
Interior volume leads to some other strange classifications, such as G6 is compact, but Malibu is mid-size. I assume this is due to lower roof-line reducing volume in the Pontiac.
I would opt for better tires to take better advantage of the vehicle's capabilities, with the incredible stopping ability of small front discs and rear drums.
Discs mean nothing to me but more brake dust and more expensive maintenance/replacement costs.
Except that they have lower maintenance/replacement costs.
If you have decent brake pads, dust should be a non-issue.
On wet pavement, the LAST thing you want is for the brakes to lock up. It lengthens the stopping distance, as well as losing the ability to maneuver around objects.
I refuse to even consider a car without ABS these days. I don't have to be carefully modulating the brakes in a panic stop to be sure they don't lock up, and the ability to steer around objects to avoid collisions is much better than the alternative.
Personally, if I could have opted out of my rear discs on my 2006 EX Accord, I would have, just to save a few bucks. Discs mean nothing to me but more brake dust and more expensive maintenance/replacement costs.
Not me. 4-wheel disks usually have shorter stopping distances than disk/drums, and can dissipate heat faster, which usually means less brake fade if you're on them for a long period of time. Plus, this may seem strange, but I feel like I have more control, in terms of both modulation and feel, with disks at all four corners. As for brake dust, I've only had a large build-up of it on the front wheels anyway, even with disks in the rear. They CAN be more expensive to maintain than drums, but a quality set of pads and disks can last as long as the drums and shoes.
"Ford addressed the safety issues."
The fact the triplets are the only 07 midsize tested (IIHS) without a good ranking in the frontal offset discomforts me.
On the sales side, I thought the Fusion alone would have finished with at least 200K units, but 140K is still pretty good.