Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1104105107109110544

Comments

  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I think that was intended as humor, because you posted: "4cyl Mazda6 runs at about 25,500rpms at 70". :)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Usually, it is first gear (or, occasionally, first two gears) with AT that revs are limited. The rest of the gears may allow you to hit redline. So it is still true. In my 1998 Accord, it will shift out of first at 5800 rpm (redline is 6300 rpm) but will go to redline in second gear (about 75 mph).

    Some manumatics will allow you to hold first gears thru redline too (Acura TSX's does that).


    It sounds like Grad found the opposite, his accord shifted closer to redline in the lower gears.

    My Mazda6 goes to redline in both 1st and 2nd (6500), don't think I'll be likely to find out about the higher gears. In the 4 cyl the HP peak is also at 6500 rpm. In the manual mode, it does not up-shift automatically. Instead, if you go above redline, it cuts off the fuel supply.

    The shifts at about 5000 rpm, that I mentioned for a contour was not a car I owned, I had a manual trans contour, but I recall reading comments about the 4 speed auto that mentioned this. I looked up the HP peak for that engine and it was 5500 rpm and redline was, I believe, about 6500.

    We do have a Windstar that shifts at about 5000. For the 3.8L engine that is the HP peak also...the tach does not show a redline. That engine is "exciting" enough at 5000 rpm, anyway.
  • lightfootfllightfootfl Member Posts: 442
    While it may be the latest style, bodies by ? whoever.. I really don't want a vehicle that you need a periscope to look out the side windows to see what is there. Why do they even bother with the windows at all? If we have to have tanks, then so be it..but for me..NO WAY, thank you. Of course that is only my opinion and my purchase, or lack thereof won't make much difference. While I am at it, I also like rear side windows that open all the way, not just the top few inches. ;)
    van
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    I don't see the great fascination for RWD?

    Drive a BMW 328 or a G35 and you'll see. A much more appealing driving dynamic than being pulled through the turns by FWD. Especially when accelerating hard. Point and shoot. No sense of having to hand on to the wheel for dear life. Great balance.

    Also the main reason the next gen TLs and RLs will have it in some form.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    The point is: Not all hard plastics are created equal. And there is a quality gap that can be so obvious yet, I'm surprised, so obscure/non-existent to many (please don't take it personally).

    The Honda plastic is more pleasing to the eye. Thanks for taking the time to illustrate your point.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    How do you have RWD in "some form"?
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Well I have no fascination for RWD. It is a better setup for automobiles in many ways. Will add a link rather than type it all out, if I find a good site. As far as I know, I have never seen a RWD Accord for '07, nor any of the mid-sized cars available, so thus I bought the FWD Accord. And it is pretty darn good for handling. The bad characteristic of FWD are pretty much controlled with all the modern day electronics. In its natural form however, the RWD cars with close to 50/50 weight distribution are still the most balanced on the road. With less going on up front, tires wear better, no CV joints, trannies seem to be tougher, and when in need of repair are cheaper to work on, cornering is naturally better, and the steering is a lot more natural. FWD can feel like the car is steering you. That said, with the modern day electronic stability control and such, the FWD is more tamed down. Hopefully no gross under-steer or lockup up front on turns if you do something stupid, when you have stability control. Of course I am not of the crazy driver class, so I have had zero wrecks, while driving since the late 60's. With anti-lock, stability and all that jazz, yes the FWD is closer to being a better car than ever before. I buy them because they are available, not by choice. Could not afford a Bimmer. Now as a second play toy, as in used little sports car, it WILL BE RWD. If I move to snow country, I would likely check out the Subaru Legacy, to get AWD. The coast of California has already excited the ice age. :shades: Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yes, my Accord is where I am drawing the line for tall door window sills. Anything higher, and I am going used car of days gone bye. The '07 is tall enough. I did NOT like the too tall doors and little rear window on the Chrysler / Dodge vehicles, and it became a major negative when looking for a car. And it really is larger than a mid-size, is it not?

    As for the rear windows lowering all the way, I guess none seem to do that these days. L
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yes, I agree. The FWD steering tends to fight you, as in wanting to pull back the other direction with a vengeance. Current handling though of FWD cars is much improved and easier to live with. Given a choice however, I am not alone in those which would buy the RWD. I think a lot of people have forgotten what RWD is like, and need to borrow a Miata for a day, just to play (beware RWD is FWD so old skills apply) And to some FWD is natural, as they have yet to drive the RWD, unless they have driven the worse examples, such as an SUV or truck. Seeing how people drive crazy on wet road and steer at high speed with reckless abandon, it could be safer for them to own a slower handling, understeering FWD, with all the safety electronics.
    For those at one with the car, and paying attention to proper driving techniques, the RWD is a better choice. I recall the first time I smoked the tires with a FWD car. I thought the engine was on fire -- folks, it just ain't natural. :P

    By some form of RWD, do you mean AWD based off the FWD as primary drive power to the wheels? Don't they have that now?
    Loren
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    They do not use plastic toy quality plastics in their cars, is what people are trying to get across. Note the dash is more rubber like and softer on say the Accord for '07.

    I don't know, the dash on my '07 Accord is about 4 different shades of the same color and the molding isn't flat (you can see where each rib in the mold was). Panel gap, which I think is what they were demonstrating in the other pictures, is very good though.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Can you see the ribs under the seek button from the driver's seat? I am just curious.

    This really wouldn't bother me so much on a vehicle in this market segment. If I went to something like a Lexus (which I wouldn't because I am not old enough to need a sensory deprivation chamber yet), I would expect it.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I drove a 300 for a few hundred miles earlier this year and for most part it is a good car with decent handling and good size. The engine was 3.5/V6 which was fine and got the job done well (the mileage sucked, and thats another issue). But at the same time, the engine sounded metallic. And there in lies the problem.

    The problem lies in the mileage? RWD cars typically have greater parasitic losses than FWD vehicles, hurting the mileage a bit.

    Or the problem lies in that something that is made out of aluminum, steel, and alloys sounds like it? I really don't mind engine noise, I like to know there is a motor in the vehicle and that its working for me. I think that is one of the reasons I prefer the Subaru to the Accord.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Before I bought my first Accord all my cars were RWD, so I know what it feels like. Had a 72 Chevelle with a modified 69 327 Camaro engine in it, and FWD would not have worked with that car. You could hardly keep the Rear wheels from spinning. In today's family cars, with under 300hp, as long as there isn't much tourq steer, and you're not driving like a maniac around corners, there aren't any negative effects. My old 65 Pontiac (383) was definitely RWD, because I can remember changing the universal joints a few times. I haven't had to change a cv joint yet (knocks on wood). If RWD is going to hurt my mileage, and take some power away, I would rather stick with FWD.

    In conclusion I think RWD is preferable in a sports car, but for a family sedan, FWD is fine.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Yes. That is how I discovered it.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yes it is. And it looks great that way. It is not suppose to be the same shade. Like the central area of the dash follows on down into the center shift console as one shade of gray. Now, if a individual does not prefer that look, it is not a positive for the sale of the car.

    The car which has the potential to have, what I personally like in a dash look, is the New Malibu. Love the rounded look. That said, the Accord '07 looks very good indeed and fits the car well. The 2004 Mustang interior look is one I liked. Of course it was a bit on the cheap side, but the basic look, and feel, for that matter, is far better than a cheesy '05 look where they try to replicate the '65 Stang. Now why a '65 cheapo hard plastic to look somewhat like that model year, when the outside is a bloated '68-'69 combo replicar look, I haven't a clue. Only Ford could answer such a thing. I would rather own the '04. And probably have fewer problems with it as well. Their best styling effort in recent models seems to be the '96. L
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The only gear I can test redline with in my cars is first and second. Redline in third gear (and above) with automatics would be well past 100 mph. I think, under WOT, this is how things go in my 1998 Accord (not much different in my TL which has a 6800 rpm redline):
    Gear 1: 45 mph at 6300 rpm (Theoretical. In reality, it will shift around 5800 rpm)
    Gear 2: 75 mph at 6300 rpm (real)
    Gear 3: > 100 mph at redline
    Gear 4: will take you well past top speed, which is in 130-140 mph range, drag limited.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Just be thankful nothing falls off, nowadays. It was but a couple of decades ago, the buttons, the turn signals, the rear view mirrors and such literally fell off the cars :sick: At least the button works.... well I hope it does. Loren

    P.S. Took a brief ride as a passenger in a Sebring. Glad it was brief. Anyone out their like the car? The Dodge version is shall we say cute, as a baby Charger. Maybe I am just too weird, but I though the previous version of the Sebring was a handsome car. Now technically speaking, it did not fair well in car tests - but that's different that judge by looks. :shades:
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    ... or highway patrol limited ;)
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    U joints are cheaper. Bet it cost like $100 or less to have changed out.
    Are they still recommending the maintenance on CV joints. Recall when they said you had to re-grease or something at x # of miles. I got a little tear in one of the boots on the Stealth, like it less than a couple of years. They wanted $100 for the part and $70 for labor. The normal however, at the time was more like $80 to $120 for parts and labor. Mitsubishi really thought well of their parts in '91 -- price wise, that is.

    I agree both FWD and RWD are fine, as is AWD in the snow belt. And yeap, I am going RWD for the sports car, if my shoulder arm and hand ever stops hurting or tingling from time to time. Can forums cause carpal tunnel syndrome? I know, I type too much. L
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    U joints are cheaper. Bet it cost like $100 or less to have changed out.
    Are they still recommending the maintenance on CV joints.


    There not cheaper if you never change the cv joints. 140k miles on the previous Accord and no change. I don't think Honda has anything for maintenance on the cv joint. Have a co-worker with a Galant (must be a Mitsu thing), and he has changed his a few times. He says he's getting better at it. Plenty of practice ;)
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Could be one of those fads in the 90's. Muffler sales went down with the advent of stainless steel, so maybe they were gonna service cv joints every 40K miles, or whatever it was, just to make a buck??? If they go dry, I guess things get nasty in a few miles.

    Oh yeah, I test drove a Celica a few years ago, and I must say, very nice for handling. Still prefer the steering of a RWD, but as far as fun drive, they had that little car dialed in well. Guess a Mini Cooper would be fun too. :shades:
    have a great day, Loren
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    As for the rear windows lowering all the way, I guess none seem to do that these days.

    Don't most come close, though? My Mazda6 rear windows end up with maybe an inch or so of the front half of the rear window still exposed, when all the way down. My wife's Jetta is the same.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Yes it is. And it looks great that way. It is not suppose to be the same shade. Like the central area of the dash follows on down into the center shift console as one shade of gray. Now, if a individual does not prefer that look, it is not a positive for the sale of the car.

    Nah, I am talking about across the top of the dash, not the IP and center stack area. The airbag cover on the passenger side isn't close to the same shade, and the pieces across the middle of the top aren't a consistent color themselves. It was just poor quality control. I didn't notice the variation until I saw it in the sunlight.
  • lightfootfllightfootfl Member Posts: 442
    Re: Rear Windows lowering all the way: My 2006 Sonata LX does open completely into the doors...a true OPEN WINDOW. :);):)
  • master_ryumaster_ryu Member Posts: 47
    I'm thinking of getting an 08 Accord Coupe V6 Auto EX-L w/Nav. I'm psyched that it's coming out next week (obviously not psyched paying around MSRP for it, but whatever). But recently I've been getting back into Altima mode. The 08 Accord has some glaring omissions when compared to the Altima:

    Smart key entry (wow, standard on all models)
    Keyless Start (standard)
    Touch Screen (will have to see how good a dial knob is)
    semi-manual mode
    Rear view monitor - (not sure if Honda will have this option
    Xenon headlights

    Damn, those are some nice features. I really don't know which to get. I know for sure though that I'm not getting the Altima Coupe or the Accord Sedan; one is too small with no rear seat room while the other is a little too big. So if I go with the Altima, I would get the sedan; with the Accord, I'd get the coupe. But damn, Sept 20 is rolling around. Need to decide now.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    are you planning on getting the manual or auto (cvt)? if you're getting the manual, the Honda is awesome. edit: oops, didn't read your post too carefully; I see you plan on getting an auto. Have you tried the CVT yet? what did you think?

    also, does handling matter? the few articles I've read about the accord coupe's suspension is that it is a bit sportier than the accord sedan, so I wonder how it would compare to the Altima...

    Too bad you're in such a hurry...car purchasing on a time limit can be costly!
  • stlpike07stlpike07 Member Posts: 229
    My 2007 Camry rear windows go down all the way. I think most new cars do.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I never sit in the back while driving I guess, so it is not an issue for me. Yes, would be nice if it went completely down. Now a strange one was the first SLK, which is as you know, a two seater convertible, which the windows are said to not fully lower, so thus a pain in the arm. I have not seen this in person, so I may do a little test myself, when I spot one on a lot for sale. Sounds strange to me, but I do believe a few cars do this in a coupe as well. Ouch! L
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I am thinking it is most cars do not. Take a look at the typical door shape, and just how much little side window is showing. Would have to be a larger fixed little window on that door, or some great gyrations to have it disappear fully. L
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Saw the 2008 Accord today. Not so impressed. I think I got a deal with the '07 SE V6. The 190HP EX I think it is said on the label, is the same retail price as my V6, with say a moonroof, which I do not like, and a side sticker for some coating or something, which is $500. So it tops the retail of my car, with less engine -- whoopee! The headlamps look stupid an the rear is OK. The raised hood is OK, but does nothing to help the car in the looks dept. so overall, it actually now looks smaller, is a tad larger and cost more. Oh the seats feel better on the lower back. Other than that, I am underwhelmed. I like the looks of the Civic now much better. Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Toyota prices -- oh my! Saw the new xD Scion today. It is $16K. It has 128HP little engine. Seems to me to be higher priced than a Corolla, or Civic, with not really great gas mileage for being a little skateboard. L
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    is midsize now? Oh my!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Well, as long as you also realize that "paying extra for an Accord or Camry is brand image" in purely YOUR OPINION then I think we can move forward and talk about these cars in an objective basis.

    How's this for objective:

    Brand values in 2007, and rank:

    Toyota, $32,070,000,000, #6
    Honda, $17,998,000,000, #19
    Hyundai, $4,453,000,000, #72

    http://www.ourfishbowl.com/images/press_releases/businessweek_bgb07_article.pdf

    It's not my opinion. It is a well-known fact that companies with higher brand valuations can charge more for their products, even if they are equivalent to products from companies with lower brand valuations. That is the benefit of a strong brand, which Toyota and Honda have worked hard and long to build. As someone said a day or so ago, "you get what you pay for." When you buy a Camry or Accord, you are getting--and paying for--a strong brand name.

    Let's suppose though that the brand adds nothing to the price we pay for a car. So when someone pays, say, $5000 more for an Accord or Camry than for a Sonata, what do they get for their extra $5000? Where is that extra money in the car exactly? Is the plastic in the interiors $5000 better? Is the sheet metal $5000 better? The tires and wheels? The glass? The fabric or leather? The instrumentation? The electronics? The engine perhaps? You get a more powerful engine with the Accord and a more powerful V6 with the Camry, compared to the Sonata, but they are all all-aluminum, CVVT engines. Is there several thousand dollars more engine there? How about the suspension bits? How much more are the Accord's and Camry's worth?

    So you are right, I can't see the extra value, but others do, and that's fine because it's their money. I don't attack other people for finding the value in an Accord or Camry, and I don't know why I should be attacked because I don't see the value.

    P.S. I'd appreciate it if when you make a post that looks like you are quoting me, you would do it accurately and in context. What I actually said was:

    As long as you realize that a lot of what you are paying extra for on an Accord or Camry is brand image...
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Between a go cart and a Cadillac, yes it is mid-sized.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I don't know about that. In some cases, I guess you pay more. I found an Accord for less money than the equal in the Saturn Aura. Guess every deal is different. I thought it would cost more to get the Accord. Actually i went to Saturn first. Considering the trade-in value, the Saturn would have been $1,000 to $1500 more costly. I forgot the exact figures from Saturn in relationship to what the lowest price I was willing to accept on a trade-in. Instead of $1,500 it could have been say $1,200 difference. Anyway, like most people assume, I thought the Accord would be more pricey. It wasn't. The cars seemed pretty equal. I suppose, if you feel a Sonata is the equal to an Accord or Camry, then yes it is less expensive. After looking at the 2008 Accord and the pricing, with little to no discounting, I would say if buying after the 'o7's are gone, I would be back bargaining with Saturn, Ford and perhaps Hyundai. I am not that impressed with the new look for Accord. I am thinking for 2008 models, the Milan will be the best looking, then the New Malibu/Aura, followed by the Sonata. New Mazda6 yet in 2008???
    The Azera would make an interesting other choice. But Hyundai resale can bite.
    L
  • mfletou1mfletou1 Member Posts: 508
    Re-sale is an overated number both ways. I have two cars on opposite ends of the resale spectrum---a 2007 Camry Hybrid, and a 2004 Chevy Malibu Maxx. Obviously, I paid more for the Camry, and got less of a discount off of MSRP. However, if I were to trade it in tomorrow, I'd make out very well as a percentage of what I paid.

    I just had the Malibu Maxx assessed at CarMax. I was offered $9500 for it. Pretty bleak for a car with a $23150 MSRP, right?

    Well, no, actually. The MSRP was $23150, but I paid $16900 for it. And that was before my GM card discount which took another $1000 off. 56% of value for a car that is now 39 months old is not bad.

    In current terms, I imagine Sonata's have lousy resale, but I'm also seeing them at huge discounts off MSRP...so if you buy one, you know you aren't going to get as much...but you didn't pay as much.

    But if you want to buy what I, at least, perceive to be a higher quality car, like an Accord or Camry, you shouldn't be dissauded because of the higher price because you know you'll get more for it. It is what it is.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    56% of value for a car that is now 39 months old is not bad.

    And if you sold it on your own, you would perhaps get more...maybe 60-65%.

    BTW, it looks like CarMax is selling those for $13-15,000. So much for the the supposed big saving for buying used. Can't imagine who would pay that much for a used '04, if a new one can be had for $17,000.
  • mf15mf15 Member Posts: 158
    I was stuck in the same boat, wanted xenons,but did not like smart key/push button start, even have Nissan VPP program, but thought that Altima cut some corners with the interior. Not too thrilled that they made the accord bigger,did not really like its looks from the pictures. So I was stuck until I drove a Tl, end of story, great car.
    Old MIke
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Is the TL priced competitively against Camcords/Fulans/Altima?
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Since they start at over $30K, I'm thinking no...but I bet the resale value is good, on a percentage basis. ;)

    Edit: Yep, there it is...intellichoice:

    Total 5-Yr. Ownership Cost $40,772 for TL and $38,317 for Fusion...I don't believe these figures for a minute, myself.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Don't know if Carmax is getting that much or just asking that much. An co-worker of mine had an absolutely cherry 2002 Malibou Classic. I mean the guy cleaned it with q-tips and mechanically perfect. Only had about 28000 miles on it. One day I noticed it wasn't parked in the lot at work and I asked him where his car was. Long story short: He traded it at a local Chevy dealer and got 6000 for it. I looked on their web site and they were advertising his car as a "special" at 12995. Now there is some bodacious mark up.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    My understanding is CarMax does not negotiate prices.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I think you make an important point that is often overlooked by people comparing "resale values" of cars. They look at published "resale value percentages" and see that a car like the Accord or Camry has a higher percentage than a car like the Malibu, and immediately assume that they will make out better financially when it comes time to sell an Accord or Camry. But as your example shows, that's not necessarily the case, if they get a good deal up front. Resale value is about the money, not percentages, when all is said and done.

    If someone likes a car like an Accord or Camry better than the alternatives, that's what they should buy, and they will probably enjoy owning it. But they should do so not counting on saving money at re-sale time compared to lower-priced alternatives like the Malibu et. al.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    My 2007 Camry rear windows go down all the way. I think most new cars do.

    The rear windows in our 2007 AWD SEL Ford Fusion do not go all the way down. It bugs me.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I know very few cars where the rear windows roll down all the way. I can't think of the last time I owned a car where they did.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    "Let's suppose though that the brand adds nothing to the price we pay for a car. So when someone pays, say, $5000 more for an Accord or Camry than for a Sonata, what do they get for their extra $5000? Where is that extra money in the car exactly? Is the plastic in the interiors $5000 better? Is the sheet metal $5000 better? The tires and wheels?"

    Better engine, better interior, better layout, better engineering, better gas mileage, better dealer service, better wheels, better manufacturer, better transmission and higher wages. Probably due to pay differences between American and Korean workers. Lower cost to repair from certain accidents. This may be worth $5K to certain people.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Our 1993 Accord did, that's the last car I remember us having that did that besides our Chrysler convertibles.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    There can be other qualities that aren't necessarily quantifiable. Nobody should have to justify their purchase. If you like it, and paid what you feel is a fair price, then you win.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    If someone likes a car like an Accord or Camry better than the alternatives, that's what they should buy, and they will probably enjoy owning it.

    That's really what it's all about, Backy. Well said. Camry and Accord are fine mid-size sedans, no doubt. They both have good reputations and a loyal following.

    We liked the Ford Fusion better, so that's what we bought. We generally keep our cars 7 to 10 years, so resale is not that big of a factor either.
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    I don't think resale is all it's cracked up to be anyway. For some it will help, for other it won't. There are a lot of factors that will affect resale. What kind of shape the car is in, how many miles are on it, how you sell it (dealership will try to screw you no matter what car it is, and will give you more if your a regular customer regardless of what vehicle it is) and the many, many unknowns between when you buy and when you sell. In 5 years a car companies fortunes could drasticly change. resale probably helps if you flipping vehicles every couple years, but in that case you'd proably be better off leasing.
Sign In or Register to comment.