Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

allmet33

Oh trust me...I'm not surprised at all. With the experience I had with my '02 Sonata...I didn't hesitate with getting the Azera. I think a lot of folks that are downing this car aren't really thinking about what exactly they are getting for the money. They knock it for is minor shortcomings, but considering what you pay...overall, bang for the buck it wins hands down!

pat

We're not going there, okay? We are through taunting others. Trust me and work with me on this.

pat

That should not be that way. I'm reporting it, thanks.

allmet33

My apologies, this wasn't typed as a taunt of any kind. I'm also not making that statment with a biased opinion. I looked at the cars that compared to the Azera when I shopped and my conclusion is more factual than anything.

It's the same reason I bought the '02 Sonata I had. I intially wanted the Camry, but to get everything the Sonata gave me...Toyota wanted $23,400. Hyundai only wanted $16,800 for the Sonata.

Again, with the Azera w/Premium Package...I only paid $26,048. Can you match any other competitor's vehicle to that price and get everything you get with the Azera?

The argument will come down to which one will last longer, be more durable and have better resale value. That will have the forum on fire and I won't make any claims on any of those topics...only what I know through my research when I purchased the vehicles.

You have my cooperation.

pat

Thanks - I didn't mean to pick on you, but what you said gave me the opportunity to tell everyone that we're done with the unpleasantness that occurred over the weekend.

Back to the cars!!

allmet33

No problem, I do understand completely. This past weekend was a bit off the hook.

pahefner01

That's one Chrysler Concorde with a transmission that laster for what should be expected. What about the cheap parts they are putting on Jeeps like power windows that fail repeatedly on all of the Jeep's owners that I know. While the K car may be from the 80s it is an example of Chryslers lack of quality. My Jeep also had a short in the wire running between the headliner and the roof, an issue that is unacceptable and one I have heard from many other Jeep owners wanting to know the solution. It costs me 300 dollars to have it troubleshooted and fixed. This is a Jeep that is garaged all the time and has never been off road. Why a pattern of wire failure? My point is there are numerous qualtiy issues with Chrysler.
Certainly other auto makers have issues but not in a pattern of Chrysler.

joe131

Maybe since U.S. car manufacturers can't make any profit by building and selling cars, they have decided to make crappy ones that need a lot of service, so at least their parts and service departments have a chance of making a profit eventually?

captain2

do have an acquaintence that happens to own a number of car dealerships, all in the same place and he was really looking forward to getting his new Ford dealership open - his other dealerships at the same location - Toyota and Nissan. Service/warranty work is how he makes his money, and he thought the Ford dealership would put some more money in his pocket.
My Avalon Touring comes with HID headlights, trust me a very desirable option, each light [non-permissible content removed]'y happens to cost a grand through the parts dept. These should be standard on the higher level XLS. Makes no sense because for the XLS owner to switch out the lights (2 grand+) he would have to spend more than for the top of line Limited which does come std with the HIDs. Only an illustration of ridiculous parts prices.
Assume your post has your tongue in cheek, no manufacturers (US brands or not) out there are intentionally building bad cars - this would in no way a winning proposition. The US mfgr problems may have more to do with not having the money top to do any better?

allmet33

You can do aftermarket HID set ups and only pay about $450-$600 depending on where you get them. If you're handy, then you can install them yourself. I'm not sure how much a shop would charge to do the install, but I know it's not that hard or time consuming.

I got my side marker lights installed and it was a job that took about 1.5 hours and installation ran me $140.

captain2

have no doubt this could be true but how do you handle the autoleveling on the factory units - but a good example of how a mfgr can make a killing on parts? Try to build a Cadillac out of the parts dept and the silly thing might cost a quarter million.

allmet33

I didn't say they would be the exact same as what the factory can give you. I just know that some folks don't feel that HID systems are worth $2K!

captain2

and netiher is a NAV system at least in an empirical sense given that if you have to have such a thing, a few hundred bucks on a Garmin whatever will do the same thing?

allmet33

You're absolutely right! And actually, you don't even need to do that if you have a cell phone with GPS OR if you have web access...you can get driving directions from your phone, so why spend $1500+ for a nav system???

I mean...salespeople and those who travel to new areas all the time, sure...there's an actual NEED for it. However, most people that have it pretty much drive to places they know already. Talk about waste of money! :confuse:

I guess some people just like having a machine tell them when to turn and which way to go. Unless of couse you have the system like in the Acuras that tell you which route is backed up and how to circumvent it.

smith1

Warranty repairs certainly don't generate profit for the manufacturer -- they are a big cost. Non-warranty repairs are profitable for dealerships, but not so much for the manufacturer.

The biggest profit center for many dealerships these days is used car sales. None of that profit goes to the manufacturer either.

captain2

and yet, if I survey the dealer lots today for any higher level trim Avalon, finding one without a NAV system as well as a whole lot of other 'unnecessary' gingerbread is darn near impossible. Dealer and distributor profiteering on a car that happens to be in high demand but also an indication that many folks will pay that extra money for stuff they at least think they want or is 'fashionable' to have. I mean how can they possibly sell things like an Azera, that is a helluva value by almost any standard, and expect folks to do without that TV screen?

allmet33

Oh...most definitely. In our society that feeds off the material possessions and the motto of: The more, the merrier! They are simply feeding that hunger that most consumers have.

Personally...I don't have the need or desire a TV screen in my Azera. If I want to watch a movie, I'll go home. I can see the need for it in a mini-van, cross-over, SUV and such as those are usually used for long trips and can entertain the passengers. So I won't say they don't have a place in vehicles today, but come on now...be realistic about your needs!

joe131

factory makes the parts

smith1

True, but the factory only profits from those parts if they are used for non-warranty repairs, or body work. And competition from non-OEM manufacturers has driven down margins on OEM parts.

In any event, no automaker would deliberately build a less-reliable vehicle just to increase parts revenue.

floridabob1

Just remember, many of us bought Ultimates because of the bells and whistles.
The "top of the line model" should have ALL of newest technology available, even if those extras are options.
All cars will get you from A to B, even the cheapest model.

allmet33

I guess most figured if they were gonna get a Hyundai, it may as well be the top of the line model, right? At any rate, all the bells and whistles will help when it comes time to trade it in.

captain2

my neighbor who is retired and who spends a lot of time out of town at dog shows in 'remote' locations, calls his NAV system a 'toy' in his loaded Camry XLE. And he would logically have a reason to use it more often than most of us that spend the majority of our time driving to places we go every day - which I think was allmet's point. But I think you are right, Hyundai is likely blowing off a grand or so profit on many of the Azeras they sell by not offering NAV.

allmet33

They are offering Nav units now...haven't you heard about the deal between Hyundai and Garmin? You can get a Garmin portable unit when you purchase a Hyundai now. LOL It's not the same, but it is the same.

captain2

yeah make a deal for 50000 of the things at $50 each and then, offer them as a $500.00 option? on a little more serious side, I have always regarded spending a lot of money optioning out a car a little like putting a swimming pool in your backyard - never money that you actually can get all back relative to what you paid for it, although that pool is sure a nice thing to have in July.

floridabob1

RE; 870
I never bought a car considering the resale value as a prime reason for the purchase. For most people, cars are never a great financial investment. You buy one for transportation, ego or fun.
Usually the options support the last two reasons, and are rarely needed.
Remember the old adage, he who dies with the most toys wins.

pahefner01

I disagree that no manufacturers are intentionally building bad cars. Chrysler has known about the power window failures in Jeep Cherokees and Grand Cherokees for more than ten years and they have failed to improve the part. Let the buyer beware. Chrysler has also known about the Jeep's evaporator coil problem again for more than ten years and has done nothing to improve that part. Remember the "rust bucket" Chevrolet pickups back in the 80s? It is still hurting sales of Chevy trucks today but yet they continued to build trucks that would rust out. What about Fords issues with exploding gas tanks that management knew about, Fords knowledge of the failure of the Explorer to meet rollover requirement so they told owners to underinflate the tires at an unsafe level. To save a few bucks people died and the Explorers reputation was ruined. Big business does intentionally build bad things to fill their pockets and sometimes conceal they have knowledge of it.

joe131

good points. its a money thing. maybe shortsighted.

jaymagic

I just sold my Mother's 00 Avalon XLS and just bought an 07 Azera. I have to say that these were the two cars that I was most interested in owning when I was looking. I am a 6'2" unfortunately 300 lb. guy and not all the cars out there either fit me or are easy to get in and out of. A practical consideration for me. Both cars easily accommodate me.

Also, I can believe the 27MPG on the Avalon. My Mother's (which mostly I drove, she is upper 80's)would easily get 24 in town and 30+ on the highway. With only about 2,000 on my new Azera, I am getting 23-24 in town and seeing 29 on the highway. My Mom's 00 Avalon took regular, while the new Avalons take premium. The Azera uses regular.

For the $5,000 difference in price (not sticker but as offered from a dealer similarly equipped) and the savings of regular versus premium, my choice was made pretty easy. Having a Nav system was not that big of deal for me.

nimimi

I don't know where you got the mistaken idea that new Avalons take premium. The owner's manuals all say that regular fuel should be used in the '05-'07 Avalons.

While I have run premium to see if there is any mileage difference, the extra cost isn't outweighed by any mileage change so I continue to use regular and get ~ 31 mpg on the highway.

joe131

Any noticeable change in power with premium? Someone claimed that there is a difference with the Azera if you switch gas octane.

tjc78

We just have to deal with less than perfectly optioned cars. You either have spend more and get things you don't want or spend less and not be totally happy with the car. My "ideal" Avalon would have been a Touring trim with JBL and heated mirrors but WITHOUT heated seats and VSC/Trac. Guess what? It doesn't exist, so I drive an XLS that was 2K more, it was the best compromise. Although I still can't fathom why the XLS does without HID lights when the Touring and Limited have them. Toyota must feel that its another reason to make people step up to a Limited.

nimimi

The car has so much power anyway that it's difficult to tell.

quietpro

You're absolutely right! And actually, you don't even need to do that if you have a cell phone with GPS OR if you have web access...you can get driving directions from your phone, so why spend $1500+ for a nav system???

I mean...salespeople and those who travel to new areas all the time, sure...there's an actual NEED for it. However, most people that have it pretty much drive to places they know already. Talk about waste of money!

I guess some people just like having a machine tell them when to turn and which way to go. Unless of couse you have the system like in the Acuras that tell you which route is backed up and how to circumvent it.

Well, from personal experience, I would LOVE it if my sister and brother-in-law invested in a GPS system. They drive me nuts by constantly asking for directions. But, in their case, I'm going suggest they opt for the OnStar navigation option since neither of them are tech-savvy enough to even work a cell phone much less anything more complicated. By asking for directions by voice and having a voice telling them where to go, they will probably be able to handle it.

floridabob1

Options generate great profits for both the manufacturer and the dealer. By not offering options such as navigation systems, back up sensors etc. they are losing out on these additional profits. If they are offered as options, buyers could select which of the other "feel good" features that they want. You practical guys would not be stuck with these toys.
I feel that Hyundai is missing the boat by not making these features available.

rpfingsten

Nimimi.... when i bought my 07 xls in sept of last year, I was told by the service dept. that I could run regular in the avy with no problem, but if I wanted increased performance it was recommended that we use premium fuel. I even called the 800 number for toyota customer service and asked them about this and was told the same thing. So as a result, I have been using premium. can't tell you if there's a perfermance difference between the two since I've only used premium since buying the vehicle.

Roland

captain2

I estimate about a 5-10% power difference using 93 octane instead of 87 but have never been able to discern any difference in FE regardless, and you are right the car is such a 'rocket ship' anyway, having more power than you are likely to need to use, in all cases. But when you do, it's wonderful and a remarkable technology.
Another engine that runs fine on regular but shares the same 'for maximum performance use premium' admonition is the Nissan VQ. If I'm not mistaken this is done (in both cases) with some preignition sensors tied back into the engine's computer which in turn adjusts things like the valve and spark timings to compensate for the lower octane.

barnstormer64

and you are right the car is such a 'rocket ship' anyway, having more power than you are likely to need to use

Thanks for confirming what I've been saying all along. :P

So, how is it that one can say the Five Hundred is "underpowered" when you're not likely to use all that power in the other vehicles?

I propose that we call the Five Hundred "adequately powered", and call the other ones "over powered".

tjc78

I am sorry, I just can't call anything overpowered! LOL

gamleged

Oh no no no I'm a rocket man...
Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone... :shades:

captain2

and I thought about you specifically when I wrote this - and how you would likely take this out of context and 'jump' all over it. Not exactly what I said is it?
And yes the 500 is any otherwise well designed car that needs a serious heart transplant. Underpowered and rough as a cob would be an understatement.

tjc78

Think about this... Even IF the Avalon was "overpowered", so what. It still gets better gas mileage than most (if not all) of the sedans on this board. IMO its a good thing having all that power on hand and not feeling it at the pump.

captain2

there is no doubt, in my feeble little mind anyway, that all else equal, the same car with more power is safer than the one that is more 'challenged'. Meaning having that extra power to avoid an accident however infrequently this really happens. As far as the Avalon getting such great FE, what many folks don't understand is that the same efficiencies that make the engine so powerful are the same ones that make it so economical - it may not be possible to simply cut the HP and get even better FE. IMPO 200 hp is just not enough for a 3500 lb+ sedan, the 500 and the 3.8 Lucerne being good examples of that.

barnstormer64

I am sorry, I just can't call anything overpowered! LOL

In that case, I submit that YOUR car must also be underpowered. By definition. :P

barnstormer64

IMPO 200 hp is just not enough for a 3500 lb+ sedan, the 500 and the 3.8 Lucerne being good examples of that.

I submit that the fact that I routinely pass up Corvettes on the road with my "underpowered" 500 shows that to be false.

barnstormer64

Underpowered and rough as a cob would be an understatement.

Ever driven one with the CVT? "Rough" doesn't even belong in the description of how it drives.

louiswei

I routinely pass up Corvettes on the road with my "underpowered" 500 shows that to be false.

I submit that it's due to the fact that maybe most of the Corvette drivers don't see your 500 as a worthy opponent thus they don't even bother to pay any attention to you.

Heck, even I don't give a darn when I see a 500 trying to pass me up because I know if I want to I can smoke that car in any given second.

pahefner01

I think it would be more appropriate to call the 500 "adequately powered" and the Azera and other large sedans with more horsepower "exceptionally powered".

pahefner01

I agree. I have frequently passed a few Dodge Vipers in my Jeep Cherokee but I don't think that means my Jeep is the faster vehicle. Maybe in the snow perhaps but not in normal driving situations.

kwk1

LOLOL!!!!!

floridabob1

RE: 891
Those Vets must be parked.