General Motors India Ltd. led India’s January growth, with passenger-vehicle deliveries, including sales and exports, up 45.7% over year-ago.
Maruti’s fiscal year cumulative total came to 540,152 units, followed by Hyundai Motor India Ltd. with 252,522 and Tata Motors Ltd. with 194,067. GM, Ford India Ltd., Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. and Toyota Kirloskar Motor Ltd. had a combined cumulative fiscal total of 178,158 vehicles.
The question to ask with India and China is, once the domestic carmakers in those countries get some momentum going, will they immediately dominate those markets and turn the foreigners into bit players? The so-called experts seem to think that is bound to happen in China. India is behind China on the development curve in terms of their auto industry, so for them it may be longer. Or it may not happen, I dunno. But some are now speculating that Tata is not far off the day when it will begin to export cars to other markets, and both the Chinese and the Indians are in a race (of course) to export cars for sale in the U.S.
If the Chinese domestics DON'T turn the foreigners into niche brands, GM has a big leg up on Toyota, what with its huge market lead vs the Japanese.
If GM really hits it big in China, the question after that is can it turn huge Chinese profits into the saving grace for the suffering GM North America? Will Chinese profits, in fact, be huge, or will they be slim in a high-volume market?
I tell you, though this will be a mighty unpopular thought, GM could get a big leg up on Toyota simply by investing big in production facilities in China to make vehicles for sale in the U.S. And in the end, this is a struggle of corporate giants. That's a no-holds-barred arena.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
GM is already investing big in Chinese facilities and has many Americans running the Engineering/Development and Manufacturing over there.
I was on a project where we looked at importing an interior for a car built and sold here but also built and sold in China. While the parts were cheaper by the time the shipping and everything else was calculated it was a very small savings and not worth it to do it. I do not know why but that is the way it worked out. This was an upper level interior. Now perhaps some really cheap car could be built and exported and a profit be made vs. no profit doing it here but Korea will be doing that in the short term already.
I guess I should qualify the above. I was talking parts and GM and others get them from suppliers who are working with a much lower wage scale than the OEM's (at least the ones that are still in business unlike Delphi). Perhaps the production of vehicles could be done cheaper in China and then imported. Of course just a few changes in the currency levels can mean more than the wage rates, as can be seen from the delta in Toyota assembly cost for the same vehicles that are built here or in Japan. $2000 and up.
Seems to be about 1.5" delta. Not sure if 1.5" makes that much of a difference to go from "very hard" to "easily" since that is only about an extra 1/4" (6mm) of an inch on each side of each passenger of extra room!
There is about 1.5" delta between the CTS and STS also. So the STS may be about as wide as it can be but then again it may be able to get bigger.
In comparing the 7 series to the Commodore they are spot on in rear shoulder and exterior width to each other. The STS is spot on with the 5 series.
So, unless they can stretch the width of the Sigma platform the Zeta platform is the closest GM has to a 7 series width size.
autoweek compared the Camry to the Aura and said the Aura was superior so perhaps you should read that article. I mentioned earlier that Automobile noted in their new car issue last fall that they thought the Aura offered more style and better handling than Camry or Accord. I have already said numerous times that no monthly (or online) magazine has compared the Aura XR to the Camry V6 or Accord V6. You are acting as if the Aura and G6 GTP have been defeated in numerous head to head comparisons with the CamCord but that isnt the case at all. Why dont you wait until these vehicles are compared in the monthly mags or here on edmunds before jumping to any more conclusions about how inferior the GM midsizers are to the Camcord.
CR and C&D may agree that the Accord is a great car, but they agree in little else. C&D loves German cars while CR has always been lukewarm towards German cars because of their lackluster reliability. To CR no one does cars better than Japan regardless of price. C&D values hp, handling and speed and thus their tastes tend to lean towards expensive European cars that are often the best performing in class.
I could take CR a little more seriously if they didnt rank every single Toyota or Honda vehicle as best in class. It doesnt matter what those two companies make, CR will praise it.
Some posters here seem to be confused. Suzuki wasn't FORCED to take Daewoo products...Suzuki owns part of GM DAT and wanted those products for use in the US and Canada. The Verona wasn't a bad car (a little underpowered, but not a bad car). The Forenza/Reno are selling very well in the US.
I've been a fan of Suzuki products for many years. I liked the Chevrolet Sprint (especially the turbo model) back when Suzuki was making those for GM. When Suzuki started importing cars under their own name in 1989, I fell for the Swift GTI. While I'm not a fan of trucks for personal use, their vehicles were interesting. And the CAMI joint-venture with GM has produced well over a million vehicles (most of them Suzuki-designed) that have been sold in Chevrolet, Pontiac, GMC, and Suzuki dealerships throughout North America.
I would like to see more Suzuki-designed vehicles sold through the US Suzuki dealer network, but they are having record sales in the US with their mix of Korean- and Japanese-designed vehicles...so more power to them.
I'm waiting for the new Swift to come to the US. And there has been talk about a return to the mid-sized segment...which I hope will come with more than 155hp.
That is because Honda and Toyota are in a league of their own. Other manufacturer's cannot meet their ability to produce high quality product that is highly durable for an unbeatable value.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
> Other manufacturer's cannot meet their ability to produce high quality product that is highly durable for an unbeatable value.
Now that I've quit laughing... >high quality product like those transmissions in the Hondas and the popping bodies on the 03 Accords and the rattles and interior noises in the Accords let alone Pilots and Odysseys nd then there's Toyota with the transmission/engine tuning problems through the ES, Avalon, and Camry car and there's Toyota's rattles and I just follow certain of those brand's makes in discussions, not all of them with the problems. >that is highly durable just like other cars that are serviced regularly by owners and survive lots of miles. Inadequate regular service = shorter life. >unbeatable value have you shopped the local deals with all the addon fees and additional sticker items the Honda and Toyo dealers add on?
"have you shopped the local deals with all the add on fees and additional sticker items the Honda and Toyo dealers add on?"
Yeah and I don't see a difference between teh imports and domestics for this obnoxious process. I simply refuse the, If they offer it at cost because it's already on the car I tell them to find a car they haven't done it to or sell me the car and eat that loss. That works. Last time I paid for any of that crap was in 1979 when I didn't know any better.
I won't go into teh rest of your points only because we bounce these back and forth all the time and we don't tend to change minds. I'd rather not beat my head against a wall.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
That's right. This is supposed to be relevant to GM's ability to hold off Toyota-not about how wonderful two companies have been. But any discussion invariable has posts injected like that.
Today's paper has an article about the valuation of the yen problem in the lower cost to foreign manufacturers selling here.
There article was about Toyota and building its next plant in Mississippi. The article discusses congressmen and how the next plant will add more congressmen more interested in their localconstituents than in the country's good as a whole. Link.
"That is because Honda and Toyota are in a league of their own. Other manufacturer's cannot meet their ability to produce high quality product that is highly durable for an unbeatable value. "
I hope you are kidding. When you really look at things objectively there are only a handful of true class leading Japanese vehicles. They make plenty of "nice" vehicles, but few class leaders.
for February were up 3.7% at GM, the only domestic with an increase in retail sales.
Toyota's overall were up 12.2%, by far the leader among the Japanese Big 3. GM's overall were down, of course, because of the continuing reduction in fleet sales. Ford outsold Toyota by 17K units, so I guess it might still hang onto the #2 spot in the U.S. this year.
GM's big gains came unsurprisingly from a big rise in Silverado and Sierra sales. That's good, as it pays back the large investment in the new trucks. GM must continue its plan to become less truck- and fleet-sale-reliant of course. I find myself really believing they are going to stay the course on this latest revitalization plan.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I hope you are kidding. When you really look at things objectively there are only a handful of true class leading Japanese vehicles. They make plenty of "nice" vehicles, but few class leaders.
Japanese have all the class leaders in the sub 25K categories. Compact, subcompact, midsize, you name it, Japanese have all the class leaders; all you have to do is read Consumer Reports to verify this. Another way to verify is to go out and look at and drive all these cars in the under 25,000 market.
Is there really any small car truly competing with the Honda Civic or Mazda 3 right now? I don't think so. Is there really any car competing with the Altima/Accord/Camry combination? I don't think so. The only way to get something better than what the Japanese are making is to jump maybe 10K more in price. Nissan and Toyota are making the strongest fastest V6 engines for midsize cars. Toyota and Honda are making the most reliable and dependable. Mazda is making sports car like handling vehicles at a low price point.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
1487: I have already said numerous times that no monthly (or online) magazine has compared the Aura XR to the Camry V6 or Accord V6. You are acting as if the Aura and G6 GTP have been defeated in numerous head to head comparisons with the CamCord but that isnt the case at all.
And, as has been mentioned numerous times, this is irrelevant.
If a magazine has tested all of the vehicles in a category, and proclaims one vehicle to be either the best or at the top of the class, and the other one isn't, then we can safely conclude that the first vehicle is superior to the other.
Consumer Reports has done this, and so has Car & Driver, and I have yet to see a convincing, logical case as to why these test results are not credible, beyond the fact that you don't like the results.
And to say that this doesn't matter because the magazines have not directly compared the Aura XR or Pontiac G6 GTP to the Accord is splitting hairs. The editors know the capabilities of these respective cars.
1487: I could take CR a little more seriously if they didnt rank every single Toyota or Honda vehicle as best in class. It doesnt matter what those two companies make, CR will praise it.
You must not have read the April 2007 issue.
Here is what Consumer Reports had to say about the Toyota FJ Cruiser: "However, the FJ scores too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 75)
And the magazine's opinion of the Yaris: "First-year reliability is excellent, but the Yaris scored too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 77)
Here is what Consumer Reports had to say about the Toyota FJ Cruiser: "However, the FJ scores too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 75)
And the magazine's opinion of the Yaris: "First-year reliability is excellent, but the Yaris scored too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 77)
The truth of the matter is that anyone that thinks CR is not completely fair, rational, and even handed with all vehicle reviews must suffer from delusions (either that, or has a ton of stock invested in GM, Ford, and Chrysler!)
CR has always been unbiased, fair, and scientifically sound. Yes... they gear the (small but subjective) part of their reviews towards (family oriented criteria), but most of their data is objective anyway. Consumer Reports tells it how it is, no matter who makes the vehicle.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The Japanese do offer benchmarks in the subcompact and compact classes but thats about it. The benchmark midsize car is debatable right now. Some would say Camry, others would say Altima and others would say Aura. There is no consensus. Once you get into other segments I dont see many class leaders. They do make the best midsize pickups though.
Well if CR said it I MUST believe it because we all know they are known for objectivity when it comes to cars.
"Is there really any car competing with the Altima/Accord/Camry combination? I don't think so. "
You cant be for real. The Fusion/Milan, Aura, G6 and Impala arent competing with these cars? The '08 Malibu isnt designed to compete with these cars? YOu may not think so but most would disagree.
"The only way to get something better than what the Japanese are making is to jump maybe 10K more in price."
Wrong. Aside from navigation what are $30k Japanese cars offering that you cant get on comparable Korean or American cars? Even navigation is offered on the Fusion and Sebring/Avenger. If you jump up to the $40K price bracket you will find many featues not offered on Camry and Accord.
"CR has always been unbiased, fair, and scientifically sound. Yes... they gear the (small but subjective) part of their reviews towards (family oriented criteria), but most of their data is objective anyway. Consumer Reports tells it how it is, no matter who makes the vehicle"
You must work for them. That statement is way off base. CR doesnt even tell you how they come up with scores for their vehicles. IN a recent test the Altima scored about 20 points higher than the Aura but there was no clear explanation for this difference. In the test results at the end the two cars had almost identical performance and evaluation ratings. There are tons of holes in CR's ratings.
In selling 51% of GMAC, a company that was integrated into GM, it really is a pain to separate out the money. I think GM is also really doing more diligence since their reputation as a financially perfect (reporting) company has been blemished with the recent issues. Nothing has come close to Enron and so far nothing that has caused Government intervention but Frutz wants to make sure the financials are perfect and beyond reproach.
CR trashes two mediocre vehicles and now you are saying they are fair? I dont buy it. CR rated the new GM SUVs lower than the 5 year old Sequoia and almost every other import SUV they've tested. What are they smoking? The rest of the automotive press has almost unanimously said the GM SUVs are best in class.
The Aura has gotten nothing but praise from the press but CR pronounced it average at best and said it couldnt hold a candle to the Altima or any other Japanese sedan in that class. Did you see the Aura's score compared to the Accord/ Altima/Passat? The Aura was so low you would've thought it was one of the worst midsizers in class. People who love imports regard CR as gospel while ignoring the fact that they dont even like domestic vehicles that get GREAT reviews from other sources. The Fusion is the only exception.
And Motorweek said it was their pick for best family sedan. And Autoweek liked it better than the new camry.
BTW, the Impala (which has reduced fleet sales) posted big gains in February and outsold the civic and Altima and was within 4k units of the heavily incentived Accord.
30K for a Camry or Altima??? Only uneducated buyers would pay that much!!! (and still, that would be the fully loaded to the hilt model). I'm sure I could put myself in a V6 Altima or Camry for closer to 25K than 30K.
Okay, Fusion, Milan, Aura, G6, and Malibu are all unproven and have no track record (or proven poor in history with the Malibu). They are models that have not been out for a decade(s) or more like the Camry/Accord/Altima.
You might say... well... when the Accord and Camry were redesigned, and CR predicted good reliablity. This is because the models have shown good reliablity in every year including the years they've been redesigned, which is what??? 5, 6, 7 generations of redesign now? Ford/GM/Chrysler have no such track record, and any record they do have would reflect poor quality in midsize and compact cars.
How much do you have to pay for a Fusion, G6, or Malibu V6 that produces at least 244 HP like the 5 YEAR old Accord V6! Also, how much is an extended warranty in order to get some peace of mind that you get for free with the Toyota/Honda powerhouse?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
IN a recent test the Altima scored about 20 points higher than the Aura but there was no clear explanation for this difference. In the test results at the end the two cars had almost identical performance and evaluation ratings. There are tons of holes in CR's ratings.
You should definitely write to Consumer Reports and ask these questions that you have!!!!
Get their response, and let us know what they say. I'm sure they have a good and thorough explanation for everything they publish, I've actually spent some time reading their fine print on how they tabulate and come up with their scores (at least for reliability studies). Seemed like highly scientific methods were being employed.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Please stop being naive. CR has been asked these questions before and will not provide answers. CHeck out truedelta.com for more info about the flaws in CRs results. The person who runs that site said CR told him they do not disclose their scoring methods to the public.
CR's reliability info is presented to make it look like many models (mostly American) are unreliable but when you read what they say it becomes evident that even cars with "average" ratings are reliable but they dont want readers to get that impression because that would make their ratings somewhat pointless. CR proves that generally speaking, Japanese vehicles are the most reliable but it doesnt prove that domestic vehicles are unreliable. If CR is so scientific why cant they just provide a problems per vehicle number? Why play around with the circles and graphs? They dont tell you PPV because if people saw how low the numbers were they would start to realize that most cars these days arent problematic and CR would become irrelevent. I'm not making this stuff up, people have looked into all this.
The problem with problems per vehicle (PPV) reporting is it doesn't account for the severity and type of problem you're encountering. The faulty molding trim on the outside of my Accord windows was in no way comparable to the faulty transmission, Air Conditioning, parking brake, starter wires and cabling, O2 sensor, fuel pump or any other problem a certain Dodge vehicle of mine had. PPV doesn't tell you the whole story. CR does a good job of comparing vehicles to one another; which sets the standard. If Japanese vehicles are MORE reliable, then other vehicles are less so. You could argue all year about what the definition of unreliable is. CR presents the data as they relate to each other. Therefore even if a 2006 Fusion is reliable compared to a 1995 Escort, it could still score poorly because of how reliable the Honda's and Toyota's are. I think this is good data to know. Some people just want the MOST reliable vehicles.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The faulty molding trim on the outside of my Accord windows was in no way comparable to the faulty transmission, Air Conditioning, parking brake, starter wires and cabling, O2 sensor, fuel pump or any other problem a certain Dodge vehicle of mine had.
Yea I definately agree with that. It's the same as civics being recalled because their gas pedals could come loose when some silverados were recalled because some lables were wrong.
CR's circle method doesnt tell the whole story either. According to an article I read about the Cobalt, the main "problems" with the Cobalt that earned it an unreliable rating were related to the sound system and body integrity which means people thought the stereo was weak and the body developed squaks and rattles. Do you think those reasons are good enough to say a vehicle is unreliable? Where in CR does it say they rank problems by severity and thus vehicles with poor reliability ratings are more likely to have serious issues? I have never seen this.
Unreliable is unreliable. It doesnt matter what the class leaders are doing or not doing. CR separates the problem rates and assigns circles or half circles to various points along the range. They may said only vehicles with less than a 2% problem rate get red circles and any vehicles with a 6% or greater rate get a black circle for poor reliability. IF a Fusion has a 6% rate and a CAmry has a 2% rate you cannot tell me the Ford is "unreliable". Even if we believe that PPV isnt specific enough they could give you the PPV rate for each category so the consumer could see how each vehicle stacks up. There are tons of improvements that could be made but they wont make them because they prefer to keep as much data under wraps as possible and leave readers with a bunch of circles.
Also, I always want to know how CR defenders can explain why CR's results dont jive with JD Power short term or 3 year reliability studies. Since you believe CR is so infallable I would love to hear what you have to say.
Yeah, sorry 62vette, I was going by memory and got those two numbers mixed up. I think an 11% boost in retail sales was quite impressive, eh? However, the article did go on to say that this came mostly in sales of those trucks I mentioned, which is something GM could take for granted in the past. It is good to see that trend continue (I will of course be curious to see how the horse race looks in about 18 months with a full year of new-Tundra sales behind us, and the new F-150 out).
Now let's see retail CAR sales rise to the tune of double digits!
If Toyota does reeeaaaalllll well, it might squeak past the 2.5 million sales mark this year, of which maybe 2.2, 2.3 million would be retail. Even if they make those numbers they will still be what, close to 3/4-million behind GM in the U.S.? That is thanks to the money-printing Silverado franchise, which accounts for that entire difference all by itself (Silverado/Sierra sales, non-HD, vs all Tundra sales).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
WOW 82% believe Toyota makes better cars than GM. That might as well mean 100% since you always will get about 15% who just want to side with the underdog.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
JD Power's ratings have always caught me as fishy. Their results don't seem to be as accurate as other sources, however, they often do agree directly with CR.
JD Power specializes in initial quality. I don't know much about their long term dependability studies. I know that CR gives you at least a 5 year view, and I think they keep track for 7 years if I'm not mistaken. That is what build quality is all about, lasting 7, 10, 15 years.
By the way, I think body integrity is important, though not as important as something that makes you require the assistance of a tow truck.
Also, sound problems are probably not people complaining about a weak stereo, but people complaining about faulty wiring or electrical in their sound system. Don't confuse an unsatisfied customer with one that has a "warranty" issue.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
When my wife went shopping for a new car, she preferred the upscale Civic vs. the Corolla or Matrix.. but Toyota is on a mission to pass GM and the dealer offered to sell below invoice on a Matrix XR at $17,850 (loaded with the options). Not a bad deal at all.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Well I agree, the Fusion/Milan, Aura, G6, and Impala may indeed be competing with Japan makes. This however doesn't mean they are better by any means. Some would say, not even close when considering resale value. I do think the Aura is a somewhat close to a fair deal. I got a better deal however on the Accord SE V6, with is a better car than is the Aura XE, and can hold its own again the more pricey Aura XR, which is a pretty good performance car from GM. The G6 and Fusion are OK cars, though no real match to the Japan competition. Just go out and do some test drives in the i4 and V6 models of Japan makes, then do the same with the GM models. I like my Honda transmission and engine more than those others I drove.
Now back on topic of Toyota vs. GM. Not sure myself about the current Camry compared to historic quality, so one must default to the known. What is known by me is that a Corolla I owned was nearly flawless for seven years, and my Dad drove a Camry for nine years with zero problems. Consumer Reports surveys indicate about the same results as my Dad and I have had. When I talk with other owners, be it family or friends, they too have been happy with the Toyota line. Can Toyota make some large mistakes in design? Sure they can, with the sludge problem. But, when the whole sum of the past thirty some years of Toyota vs. GM for building cars people want to own, are reliable, fuel efficient, have good resale value, and stay tight and fun to drive for years, the sums adds up to win for Toyota.
Do the base V6 engines by GM match up in any way to the Toyota V6 engine? And what about those i4 Japan engines compared to the i4 by GM? What ya think? The base Aura XE, with the 3.5 OHV engine is not bad, but is it in the same league? The 3.6 V6 in the XR is a pretty good competitor. I did look at all the Auras. The XR on the lot typically had tons of stuff on them, thus spiking the price to around $26K or $27K say. After discounting, I assume you can get a lot of Camry for that price. I saw a base Camry V6 for $24K before discounting. Consider some $1,500 to $2,000 off, and you have a price closer to an Aura XE, which is more in the class of the i4 engined Japan makes -- thus a problem. And I think the Aura is a pretty good car, and GM's best shot at getting into the market. May add that I can see where some people are excited to own one of those cars. I ended up buying the Accord, but the Aura overall is not too bad. Perhaps dropping the price a couple thousand may do it. Same may hold true of Fords, price wise, they are not quite in there. When you figure the total price of ownership, and what exactly you are getting. Is the V6 the same quality? Does the car have stability control? Resale? How about the fit and finish? Are they cutting corners on features to save a buck, like the CTS coming out as a brand new car without telescopic steering column? Currently, cars like the CTS and Aura do offer some glimmer of hope. A little tweaking of product, and offering perhaps the top line engines as standard, may indeed yield some competitive cars which can also win over buyers. The reliability on certain US makes of cars is far better now than in the past. Gaining back the trust of customers is the hardest part. Perhaps it is Toyotas game to lose here now. Enough recalls, and reliability issues, or just too bland of products may indeed lead to some moving out of Toyota. Ah, but will they go to Honda or Nissan instead of GM? It is possible GM could win over some new customers, and perhaps persuade some previous owners that it is OK to see the USA in a Chevrolet once again. -Loren
If I am not mistaken, I believe that CR determines the reliability rating on the surveys returned from its readers. While some valid information can result, the results can also be swayed by individual biases such as, since I paid full price for this car or since everyone else says it is excellent (group think) then it must be rated good and that is how I will fill out the survey.
I subscribe to CR and have never returned a survey but have been satisfied with my "average (per CR)" cars. I use their info for background not gospel research.
How many surveys were returned for 4 cyl 07 Camrys? 6 cyl? They chose to include those already as years but didn't include 07 Impala results? Is there a reason? I think so.
I read the descriptions they use carefully. Cars they don't care for get weasel words and omission that worsens the statement. E.g. The Lucerne is using a rough-sounding 3800 V6? I have had 3; they're not. But they state the 4.6 V8 (they omit the Northstar label-too positive-is only on CXS. Nope it's available on CXL and CSX. They describe handling as not agile and steering lack feedback? Compared to what? There are three different rides in Lucerne. Which one are they describing? Probably the LeSabre base replacement; the CXS is taut. The steering is not lacking either-I believe it's different in the CXS also. Omission. Omission. Omission.
The gas mileage on 3800 is outstanding. Not mentioned; for Camry both 4 and 6 are loved and a figure for mileage listed. The 4 speed transmission in Lucerne is described as shifting smoothly-ENOUGH. They could have said shifts smoothly (it does and doesn't get stuck between gears) but they could smear it with the "enough." In the LaCrosse the 3800 is THIRSTY. Now how does a 3800 that gets 33 mpg in an 03 LeSabre turn Thirsty in a LaCrosse. A little detuning? Different rear ratio? It uses the same 4 speed that shifts smoothly enough... They did a test drive when they first got one and on their allegedly equal test route they got a lower mileage than I would expect.
Oddly when I shopped the Sonata I found that they don't seem to get the mileage I'd expect from a 3.8 V6 nor a 4 cylding. They don't get called THIRSTY.
The transmission problems in Toyotas ES, Avalon, and Camry trio don't get noted. In fact the transmission and drive train are "punchy." Again in the Avalon the transmission is "punchy." Back to the various suspensions in Lucerne; the Avalon is relatively soft (not soft, just relatively soft) but they note there is a different suspension on the Touring model. Didn't do that with Lucerne--didn't care, did they... In Avalon reliability has improved, but they phrase it as "reliability has been above average as of late" which glosses over a less than glamorous, as they had predicted, start. I recall they recanted their early wunderbar reliability prediction in a later issue.
So how many of each of these models did they get people returning evaluations for? We don't know. And to know how reliable CR's opinions are, we need a comparison of sheets returned. Then we can debate how valid the random survey is. Otherwise you're talking a convenience survey. Those who want to make a point return the survey. Are you getting surveys from those who love the car with warts or who hate the car that has little flaws, like a carpet that sticks under the gas pedal. We don't know.
You cant be for real. The Fusion/Milan, Aura, G6 and Impala arent competing with these cars? The '08 Malibu isnt designed to compete with these cars? YOu may not think so but most would disagree.
The Fusion is a good car, better now that it has decent crash results. Interior is still a bit cheap.
The G6 isn't close.
The Aura is a very good effort, definitely the closest competitor. The engine is thrashy. We don't know its reliability yet.
The '08 Malibu looks very promising. I can't judge if it is better than Accord/Camry from pictures, can you?
I used to call consumer reports, along with Lemon-Aid, my "bibles". Then, I got a little older, a little wiser, and realized that their ratings never jived with my experiences with any of the vehicles I'd owned. I still pay attention to what they print, but use that info as only part of a whole. I could never get anyone to agree with me anyway.
My Frontier has also beaten the Taco in a comparison test, according to Edmunds. And I'm absolutely sure that the others on the list have, or will be, "beaten" in other comparison tests. That is the truth of it.
Well the Malibu is yet another variant of the G6 platform, as is the Aura Saturn, Malibu, and Saab / Opels in Europe. So far, the Aura XR seems to be the most exciting of the bunch. The Opels are not available here. The Saab reliability is questionable, if you believe CR reports, yet would be a fun car to own. Have no idea, other than looks, how different a Malibu '08 will be from say the Aura or G6. I would not say the 3.5 engines are thrashy -- that's a bit harsh. They are not in the same league as the best of Japan V6 engines. If the Malibu uses only the 3.6 V6 with that DOHC engine, and mucho HP, and torque, I would say they got something going. Malibu interior looks interesting.
You described the Fusion as a good car. Ya know, that about says it all. Some of the domestics are good cars. The Japan makes, like the Accord I bought just seem to be great cars. I still think what Ford and Gm should do is to introduce American cars once again, and forget matching FWD mid-sized Japan makes. Bring back the Fairlane 500 as a RWD with some looks. Lots of great looking cars which had some character back when. So far trying to beat Japan by making a better Japan styled car has yielded nothing but grief. The Aura is kinda interesting, as it looks a bit like the real deal Opel version of Europe. That said, it is a good handling, with the XR a performance FWD, with decent looks. Close, or closer to winning over the hearts and pocketbooks. It is not selling well. I can see why now that I got down to the dollar figures between buying an Aura or an Accord. Got a better price and trade-in with the Accord. Considering resale and the cars smoothness of engine and feel, it is but icing on the cake. Aura XE is not too bad, though more like owning an i4. The Aura XR has the six speed tranny , stability control, and the better engine, but the price rolls upward far to much. Not a single one on the lot without lots of extras. You can get the Accord SE V6 with is a good package, nothing added, and a great price. The XR in stock have this and that from the factory, then the cute little side sticker stuff. Sorry, but I don't see the XR worth the price, and the XE with its usual options gets too close, or actually higher than the Accord SE. Considering Honda is dealing now, it is a no-brainer. Then those looking for really new car, be it style, or CVT transmission, may opt. for the Altima. The Camry is not one I tested, but it certainly has a following. Aside of some having transmission problems, I don't know much about any other woes. Seems like they have the Bangle Butt rears, and funny looking front. Overall, they look interesting now, if you can get past the funny nose and the copy of the BMW. Anyway, lots of choices, while the American FWD mid-sized get lost in the mix. -Loren
Its not like CR rated it the lowest mid-size car tested. It was in the middle of the pack or in the upper middle of the pack of mid-size cars that CR tested score wise. Just because the Aura won the North American Car of the Year doesn;t mean every professial car tester tester is going to feel the same way about the Aura. The Camry won motor trend car of the year but scored behind the Altima and Accord in CR's tests.
"Is there really any small car truly competing with the Honda Civic or Mazda 3 right now?"
Well the Toyota Corolla outsells the 3 as well as the Chevy Cobalt. Mazda doesn;t have the following or the amount of car dealers that Chevy, Toyota, and Honda do.
Comments
passenger-vehicle deliveries, including sales and exports, up 45.7% over
year-ago.
Maruti’s fiscal year cumulative total came to 540,152 units, followed by
Hyundai Motor India Ltd. with 252,522 and Tata Motors Ltd. with 194,067.
GM, Ford India Ltd., Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. and Toyota Kirloskar Motor
Ltd. had a combined cumulative fiscal total of 178,158 vehicles.
If the Chinese domestics DON'T turn the foreigners into niche brands, GM has a big leg up on Toyota, what with its huge market lead vs the Japanese.
If GM really hits it big in China, the question after that is can it turn huge Chinese profits into the saving grace for the suffering GM North America? Will Chinese profits, in fact, be huge, or will they be slim in a high-volume market?
I tell you, though this will be a mighty unpopular thought, GM could get a big leg up on Toyota simply by investing big in production facilities in China to make vehicles for sale in the U.S. And in the end, this is a struggle of corporate giants. That's a no-holds-barred arena.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Makes it very hard to fit 3 Adults across the rear seat.
Zeta can fit 3 across easily.
I was on a project where we looked at importing an interior for a car built and sold here but also built and sold in China. While the parts were cheaper by the time the shipping and everything else was calculated it was a very small savings and not worth it to do it. I do not know why but that is the way it worked out. This was an upper level interior. Now perhaps some really cheap car could be built and exported and a profit be made vs. no profit doing it here but Korea will be doing that in the short term already.
I guess I should qualify the above. I was talking parts and GM and others get them from suppliers who are working with a much lower wage scale than the OEM's (at least the ones that are still in business unlike Delphi). Perhaps the production of vehicles could be done cheaper in China and then imported. Of course just a few changes in the currency levels can mean more than the wage rates, as can be seen from the delta in Toyota assembly cost for the same vehicles that are built here or in Japan. $2000 and up.
........Comm......STS
shoulder..59.....57.4
ext width.74.8...72.6
Seems to be about 1.5" delta. Not sure if 1.5" makes that much of a difference to go from "very hard" to "easily" since that is only about an extra 1/4" (6mm) of an inch on each side of each passenger of extra room!
There is about 1.5" delta between the CTS and STS also. So the STS may be about as wide as it can be but then again it may be able to get bigger.
In comparing the 7 series to the Commodore they are spot on in rear shoulder and exterior width to each other. The STS is spot on with the 5 series.
So, unless they can stretch the width of the Sigma platform the Zeta platform is the closest GM has to a 7 series width size.
I could take CR a little more seriously if they didnt rank every single Toyota or Honda vehicle as best in class. It doesnt matter what those two companies make, CR will praise it.
I've been a fan of Suzuki products for many years. I liked the Chevrolet Sprint (especially the turbo model) back when Suzuki was making those for GM. When Suzuki started importing cars under their own name in 1989, I fell for the Swift GTI. While I'm not a fan of trucks for personal use, their vehicles were interesting. And the CAMI joint-venture with GM has produced well over a million vehicles (most of them Suzuki-designed) that have been sold in Chevrolet, Pontiac, GMC, and Suzuki dealerships throughout North America.
I would like to see more Suzuki-designed vehicles sold through the US Suzuki dealer network, but they are having record sales in the US with their mix of Korean- and Japanese-designed vehicles...so more power to them.
I'm waiting for the new Swift to come to the US. And there has been talk about a return to the mid-sized segment...which I hope will come with more than 155hp.
Now that I've quit laughing...
>high quality product
like those transmissions in the Hondas
and the popping bodies on the 03 Accords
and the rattles and interior noises in the Accords let alone Pilots and Odysseys
nd then there's Toyota with the transmission/engine tuning problems through the ES, Avalon, and Camry car
and there's Toyota's rattles
and I just follow certain of those brand's makes in discussions, not all of them with the problems.
>that is highly durable
just like other cars that are serviced regularly by owners and survive lots of miles. Inadequate regular service = shorter life.
>unbeatable value
have you shopped the local deals with all the addon fees and additional sticker items the Honda and Toyo dealers add on?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yeah and I don't see a difference between teh imports and domestics for this obnoxious process. I simply refuse the, If they offer it at cost because it's already on the car I tell them to find a car they haven't done it to or sell me the car and eat that loss. That works. Last time I paid for any of that crap was in 1979 when I didn't know any better.
I won't go into teh rest of your points only because we bounce these back and forth all the time and we don't tend to change minds. I'd rather not beat my head against a wall.
That's right. This is supposed to be relevant to GM's ability to hold off Toyota-not about how wonderful two companies have been. But any discussion invariable has posts injected like that.
Today's paper has an article about the valuation of the yen problem in the lower cost to foreign manufacturers selling here.
There article was about Toyota and building its next plant in Mississippi. The article discusses congressmen and how the next plant will add more congressmen more interested in their localconstituents than in the country's good as a whole. Link.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I hope you are kidding. When you really look at things objectively there are only a handful of true class leading Japanese vehicles. They make plenty of "nice" vehicles, but few class leaders.
Toyota's overall were up 12.2%, by far the leader among the Japanese Big 3. GM's overall were down, of course, because of the continuing reduction in fleet sales. Ford outsold Toyota by 17K units, so I guess it might still hang onto the #2 spot in the U.S. this year.
GM's big gains came unsurprisingly from a big rise in Silverado and Sierra sales. That's good, as it pays back the large investment in the new trucks. GM must continue its plan to become less truck- and fleet-sale-reliant of course. I find myself really believing they are going to stay the course on this latest revitalization plan.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You mispoke/typed?
GM was up 3.7% overall and up 11% in retail.
Japanese have all the class leaders in the sub 25K categories. Compact, subcompact, midsize, you name it, Japanese have all the class leaders; all you have to do is read Consumer Reports to verify this. Another way to verify is to go out and look at and drive all these cars in the under 25,000 market.
Is there really any small car truly competing with the Honda Civic or Mazda 3 right now? I don't think so. Is there really any car competing with the Altima/Accord/Camry combination? I don't think so. The only way to get something better than what the Japanese are making is to jump maybe 10K more in price. Nissan and Toyota are making the strongest fastest V6 engines for midsize cars. Toyota and Honda are making the most reliable and dependable. Mazda is making sports car like handling vehicles at a low price point.
And, as has been mentioned numerous times, this is irrelevant.
If a magazine has tested all of the vehicles in a category, and proclaims one vehicle to be either the best or at the top of the class, and the other one isn't, then we can safely conclude that the first vehicle is superior to the other.
Consumer Reports has done this, and so has Car & Driver, and I have yet to see a convincing, logical case as to why these test results are not credible, beyond the fact that you don't like the results.
And to say that this doesn't matter because the magazines have not directly compared the Aura XR or Pontiac G6 GTP to the Accord is splitting hairs. The editors know the capabilities of these respective cars.
You must not have read the April 2007 issue.
Here is what Consumer Reports had to say about the Toyota FJ Cruiser: "However, the FJ scores too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 75)
And the magazine's opinion of the Yaris: "First-year reliability is excellent, but the Yaris scored too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 77)
And the magazine's opinion of the Yaris: "First-year reliability is excellent, but the Yaris scored too low in our testing to be recommended." (page 77)
The truth of the matter is that anyone that thinks CR is not completely fair, rational, and even handed with all vehicle reviews must suffer from delusions (either that, or has a ton of stock invested in GM, Ford, and Chrysler!)
CR has always been unbiased, fair, and scientifically sound. Yes... they gear the (small but subjective) part of their reviews towards (family oriented criteria), but most of their data is objective anyway. Consumer Reports tells it how it is, no matter who makes the vehicle.
Well if CR said it I MUST believe it because we all know they are known for objectivity when it comes to cars.
"Is there really any car competing with the Altima/Accord/Camry combination? I don't think so. "
You cant be for real. The Fusion/Milan, Aura, G6 and Impala arent competing with these cars? The '08 Malibu isnt designed to compete with these cars? YOu may not think so but most would disagree.
"The only way to get something better than what the Japanese are making is to jump maybe 10K more in price."
Wrong. Aside from navigation what are $30k Japanese cars offering that you cant get on comparable Korean or American cars? Even navigation is offered on the Fusion and Sebring/Avenger. If you jump up to the $40K price bracket you will find many featues not offered on Camry and Accord.
You must work for them. That statement is way off base. CR doesnt even tell you how they come up with scores for their vehicles. IN a recent test the Altima scored about 20 points higher than the Aura but there was no clear explanation for this difference. In the test results at the end the two cars had almost identical performance and evaluation ratings. There are tons of holes in CR's ratings.
Yes, the Aura, per the US press was given the car of the year over the new Camry and Altima. They loved the car.
The Aura has gotten nothing but praise from the press but CR pronounced it average at best and said it couldnt hold a candle to the Altima or any other Japanese sedan in that class. Did you see the Aura's score compared to the Accord/ Altima/Passat? The Aura was so low you would've thought it was one of the worst midsizers in class. People who love imports regard CR as gospel while ignoring the fact that they dont even like domestic vehicles that get GREAT reviews from other sources. The Fusion is the only exception.
BTW, the Impala (which has reduced fleet sales) posted big gains in February and outsold the civic and Altima and was within 4k units of the heavily incentived Accord.
Okay, Fusion, Milan, Aura, G6, and Malibu are all unproven and have no track record (or proven poor in history with the Malibu). They are models that have not been out for a decade(s) or more like the Camry/Accord/Altima.
You might say... well... when the Accord and Camry were redesigned, and CR predicted good reliablity. This is because the models have shown good reliablity in every year including the years they've been redesigned, which is what??? 5, 6, 7 generations of redesign now? Ford/GM/Chrysler have no such track record, and any record they do have would reflect poor quality in midsize and compact cars.
How much do you have to pay for a Fusion, G6, or Malibu V6 that produces at least 244 HP like the 5 YEAR old Accord V6!
Also, how much is an extended warranty in order to get some peace of mind that you get for free with the Toyota/Honda powerhouse?
You should definitely write to Consumer Reports and ask these questions that you have!!!!
Get their response, and let us know what they say. I'm sure they have a good and thorough explanation for everything they publish, I've actually spent some time reading their fine print on how they tabulate and come up with their scores (at least for reliability studies). Seemed like highly scientific methods were being employed.
CR's reliability info is presented to make it look like many models (mostly American) are unreliable but when you read what they say it becomes evident that even cars with "average" ratings are reliable but they dont want readers to get that impression because that would make their ratings somewhat pointless. CR proves that generally speaking, Japanese vehicles are the most reliable but it doesnt prove that domestic vehicles are unreliable. If CR is so scientific why cant they just provide a problems per vehicle number? Why play around with the circles and graphs? They dont tell you PPV because if people saw how low the numbers were they would start to realize that most cars these days arent problematic and CR would become irrelevent. I'm not making this stuff up, people have looked into all this.
PPV doesn't tell you the whole story.
CR does a good job of comparing vehicles to one another; which sets the standard. If Japanese vehicles are MORE reliable, then other vehicles are less so. You could argue all year about what the definition of unreliable is. CR presents the data as they relate to each other. Therefore even if a 2006 Fusion is reliable compared to a 1995 Escort, it could still score poorly because of how reliable the Honda's and Toyota's are. I think this is good data to know. Some people just want the MOST reliable vehicles.
Yea I definately agree with that. It's the same as civics being recalled because their gas pedals could come loose when some silverados were recalled because some lables were wrong.
Unreliable is unreliable. It doesnt matter what the class leaders are doing or not doing. CR separates the problem rates and assigns circles or half circles to various points along the range. They may said only vehicles with less than a 2% problem rate get red circles and any vehicles with a 6% or greater rate get a black circle for poor reliability. IF a Fusion has a 6% rate and a CAmry has a 2% rate you cannot tell me the Ford is "unreliable". Even if we believe that PPV isnt specific enough they could give you the PPV rate for each category so the consumer could see how each vehicle stacks up. There are tons of improvements that could be made but they wont make them because they prefer to keep as much data under wraps as possible and leave readers with a bunch of circles.
Also, I always want to know how CR defenders can explain why CR's results dont jive with JD Power short term or 3 year reliability studies. Since you believe CR is so infallable I would love to hear what you have to say.
Or to the OEM's. At least not to GM. Instead GM has tried to predict scores using quantitative data with a little success.
GM was up 3.7% overall and up 11% in retail."
Yeah, sorry 62vette, I was going by memory and got those two numbers mixed up. I think an 11% boost in retail sales was quite impressive, eh? However, the article did go on to say that this came mostly in sales of those trucks I mentioned, which is something GM could take for granted in the past. It is good to see that trend continue (I will of course be curious to see how the horse race looks in about 18 months with a full year of new-Tundra sales behind us, and the new F-150 out).
Now let's see retail CAR sales rise to the tune of double digits!
If Toyota does reeeaaaalllll well, it might squeak past the 2.5 million sales mark this year, of which maybe 2.2, 2.3 million would be retail. Even if they make those numbers they will still be what, close to 3/4-million behind GM in the U.S.? That is thanks to the money-printing Silverado franchise, which accounts for that entire difference all by itself (Silverado/Sierra sales, non-HD, vs all Tundra sales).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
JD Power specializes in initial quality. I don't know much about their long term dependability studies. I know that CR gives you at least a 5 year view, and I think they keep track for 7 years if I'm not mistaken. That is what build quality is all about, lasting 7, 10, 15 years.
By the way, I think body integrity is important, though not as important as something that makes you require the assistance of a tow truck.
Also, sound problems are probably not people complaining about a weak stereo, but people complaining about faulty wiring or electrical in their sound system. Don't confuse an unsatisfied customer with one that has a "warranty" issue.
Now back on topic of Toyota vs. GM. Not sure myself about the current Camry compared to historic quality, so one must default to the known. What is known by me is that a Corolla I owned was nearly flawless for seven years, and my Dad drove a Camry for nine years with zero problems. Consumer Reports surveys indicate about the same results as my Dad and I have had. When I talk with other owners, be it family or friends, they too have been happy with the Toyota line. Can Toyota make some large mistakes in design? Sure they can, with the sludge problem. But, when the whole sum of the past thirty some years of Toyota vs. GM for building cars people want to own, are reliable, fuel efficient, have good resale value, and stay tight and fun to drive for years, the sums adds up to win for Toyota.
Do the base V6 engines by GM match up in any way to the Toyota V6 engine? And what about those i4 Japan engines compared to the i4 by GM? What ya think? The base Aura XE, with the 3.5 OHV engine is not bad, but is it in the same league? The 3.6 V6 in the XR is a pretty good competitor. I did look at all the Auras. The XR on the lot typically had tons of stuff on them, thus spiking the price to around $26K or $27K say. After discounting, I assume you can get a lot of Camry for that price. I saw a base Camry V6 for $24K before discounting. Consider some $1,500 to $2,000 off, and you have a price closer to an Aura XE, which is more in the class of the i4 engined Japan makes -- thus a problem. And I think the Aura is a pretty good car, and GM's best shot at getting into the market. May add that I can see where some people are excited to own one of those cars. I ended up buying the Accord, but the Aura overall is not too bad. Perhaps dropping the price a couple thousand may do it. Same may hold true of Fords, price wise, they are not quite in there. When you figure the total price of ownership, and what exactly you are getting. Is the V6 the same quality? Does the car have stability control? Resale? How about the fit and finish? Are they cutting corners on features to save a buck, like the CTS coming out as a brand new car without telescopic steering column? Currently, cars like the CTS and Aura do offer some glimmer of hope. A little tweaking of product, and offering perhaps the top line engines as standard, may indeed yield some competitive cars which can also win over buyers. The reliability on certain US makes of cars is far better now than in the past. Gaining back the trust of customers is the hardest part. Perhaps it is Toyotas game to lose here now. Enough recalls, and reliability issues, or just too bland of products may indeed lead to some moving out of Toyota. Ah, but will they go to Honda or Nissan instead of GM? It is possible GM could win over some new customers, and perhaps persuade some previous owners that it is OK to see the USA in a Chevrolet once again.
-Loren
I subscribe to CR and have never returned a survey but have been satisfied with my "average (per CR)" cars. I use their info for background not gospel research.
I read the descriptions they use carefully. Cars they don't care for get weasel words and omission that worsens the statement. E.g. The Lucerne is using a rough-sounding 3800 V6? I have had 3; they're not. But they state the 4.6 V8 (they omit the Northstar label-too positive-is only on CXS. Nope it's available on CXL and CSX. They describe handling as not agile and steering lack feedback? Compared to what? There are three different rides in Lucerne. Which one are they describing? Probably the LeSabre base replacement; the CXS is taut. The steering is not lacking either-I believe it's different in the CXS also. Omission. Omission. Omission.
The gas mileage on 3800 is outstanding. Not mentioned; for Camry both 4 and 6 are loved and a figure for mileage listed. The 4 speed transmission in Lucerne is described as shifting smoothly-ENOUGH. They could have said shifts smoothly (it does and doesn't get stuck between gears) but they could smear it with the "enough." In the LaCrosse the 3800 is THIRSTY. Now how does a 3800 that gets 33 mpg in an 03 LeSabre turn Thirsty in a LaCrosse. A little detuning? Different rear ratio? It uses the same 4 speed that shifts smoothly enough... They did a test drive when they first got one and on their allegedly equal test route they got a lower mileage than I would expect.
Oddly when I shopped the Sonata I found that they don't seem to get the mileage I'd expect from a 3.8 V6 nor a 4 cylding. They don't get called THIRSTY.
The transmission problems in Toyotas ES, Avalon, and Camry trio don't get noted. In fact the transmission and drive train are "punchy." Again in the Avalon the transmission is "punchy." Back to the various suspensions in Lucerne; the Avalon is relatively soft (not soft, just relatively soft) but they note there is a different suspension on the Touring model. Didn't do that with Lucerne--didn't care, did they... In Avalon reliability has improved, but they phrase it as "reliability has been above average as of late" which glosses over a less than glamorous, as they had predicted, start. I recall they recanted their early wunderbar reliability prediction in a later issue.
So how many of each of these models did they get people returning evaluations for? We don't know. And to know how reliable CR's opinions are, we need a comparison of sheets returned. Then we can debate how valid the random survey is. Otherwise you're talking a convenience survey. Those who want to make a point return the survey. Are you getting surveys from those who love the car with warts or who hate the car that has little flaws, like a carpet that sticks under the gas pedal. We don't know.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The Fusion is a good car, better now that it has decent crash results. Interior is still a bit cheap.
The G6 isn't close.
The Aura is a very good effort, definitely the closest competitor. The engine is thrashy. We don't know its reliability yet.
The '08 Malibu looks very promising. I can't judge if it is better than Accord/Camry from pictures, can you?
Toyota Camry
Toyota Avalon
Toyota Sequioa
Toyota Tacoma
Toyota Tundra
Toyota Matrix
Toyota Prius
Very impressive list of victories.
DrFill
my 2 cents
You described the Fusion as a good car. Ya know, that about says it all. Some of the domestics are good cars. The Japan makes, like the Accord I bought just seem to be great cars. I still think what Ford and Gm should do is to introduce American cars once again, and forget matching FWD mid-sized Japan makes. Bring back the Fairlane 500 as a RWD with some looks. Lots of great looking cars which had some character back when. So far trying to beat Japan by making a better Japan styled car has yielded nothing but grief. The Aura is kinda interesting, as it looks a bit like the real deal Opel version of Europe. That said, it is a good handling, with the XR a performance FWD, with decent looks. Close, or closer to winning over the hearts and pocketbooks. It is not selling well. I can see why now that I got down to the dollar figures between buying an Aura or an Accord. Got a better price and trade-in with the Accord. Considering resale and the cars smoothness of engine and feel, it is but icing on the cake. Aura XE is not too bad, though more like owning an i4. The Aura XR has the six speed tranny , stability control, and the better engine, but the price rolls upward far to much. Not a single one on the lot without lots of extras. You can get the Accord SE V6 with is a good package, nothing added, and a great price. The XR in stock have this and that from the factory, then the cute little side sticker stuff. Sorry, but I don't see the XR worth the price, and the XE with its usual options gets too close, or actually higher than the Accord SE. Considering Honda is dealing now, it is a no-brainer. Then those looking for really new car, be it style, or CVT transmission, may opt. for the Altima. The Camry is not one I tested, but it certainly has a following. Aside of some having transmission problems, I don't know much about any other woes. Seems like they have the Bangle Butt rears, and funny looking front. Overall, they look interesting now, if you can get past the funny nose and the copy of the BMW. Anyway, lots of choices, while the American FWD mid-sized get lost in the mix.
-Loren
Well the Toyota Corolla outsells the 3 as well as the Chevy Cobalt. Mazda doesn;t have the following or the amount of car dealers that Chevy, Toyota, and Honda do.