Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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.
van
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.
The Honda plastic is more pleasing to the eye. Thanks for taking the time to illustrate your point.
As for the rear windows lowering all the way, I guess none seem to do that these days. L
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
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.
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.
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.
In conclusion I think RWD is preferable in a sports car, but for a family sedan, FWD is fine.
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
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.
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:
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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...
The Azera would make an interesting other choice. But Hyundai resale can bite.
L
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.
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.
Old MIke
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.
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.
The rear windows in our 2007 AWD SEL Ford Fusion do not go all the way down. It bugs me.
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.
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.