Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1162163165167168540

Comments

  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Sure, you can learn something from the owner reviews. They will mention things about the car that are special or different, that you may not notice on a test drive. But as far as going by the total scores, I put no faith in them. Some comparisons are done over many miles, and the cars are driven back to back. That gives the reviewers an instant comparison. A personal owner review can give you some insight about a car, but you have to take them with considerably more than a grain of salt (tablespoon maybe).
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Posts: 23,913
    I agree about the owner reviews. but like you said you have to read them and collect the information and check it for validity. A lot of the reviews are after owning the car two days or two weeks. That's the honeymoon. Sometimes there's useable info but that info usually comes from someon who's owned it for several thousand miles and some time.

    Reading each one also lets you place a validity value on the info as to how true it may be. And example is someone a couple years back just ranted about a particular car because he had rented it and hated it. Probably base model, etc., etc. Can't blame him but info didn't help a potential buyer much.

    2015 Cruze 2LT, 2014 Malibu 2LT, 2008 Cobalt 2LT

  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    We weren't talking about posts, we were talking about the consumer reviews on the right. Have a look. Personally, I have a problem with the ones that say variations of "I just got this car and it's wonderful" and there are a number of those, but a fair number of people report their experiences very straightforwardly after some real time behind the wheel. The reviews are focused on the cars themselves, not the purchasing process, so whether they think they paid too much or hated the salesman, etc., isn't relevant and usually isn't reported (not in the ones that I edit, anyway ;)).

    That is why I said the fewer reviews posted, the more skeptically the rating should be viewed. The "just got it and I'm in love" reviews skew the results more heavily when there are fewer reviews.

    Check them out. If one reads them as one should read anything "on the internet", i.e., with however many grains of salt might be necessary, there is some really helpful information to be gained.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    If you know of a review that was posted by someone who rented a vehicle, please either let me know where it is or use the "report it" feature. That review needs to be taken down and we'll take care of it.
  • urnewsurnews Posts: 668
    If you know of a review that was posted by someone who rented a vehicle, please either let me know where it is or use the "report it" feature. That review needs to be taken down and we'll take care of it.

    Pat,
    The very first post, the latest one, dated 12/11/2007, for the Ford Fusion, begins "I rented one of these for a week ..."
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    I read on another website that Toyota is showing off a facelifted Camry at Detroit.

    Doesn't make sense seeing as the Camry is barely two years old...facelifts usually come for the fourth model year???

    I hear new engines (for the I4 at least) are in the mix.
  • tedebeartedebear Posts: 832
    The Avenger they tested had the top-of-the-line 3.5 liter engine. It did 0-60 in 7.7 sec. and got 20 mpg. The Accord V6 tested in the same issue was both quicker (0-60 in 7.4) and got better fuel economy (21 mpg). The Saturn Aura XR they tested last year blew its doors off, doing 0-60 in just 6.6 seconds.

    And my Viper can blow the doors off any of them.

    Why is it that when people start comparing cars they always jump to some speed test? I didn't purchase my Sebring based on whether it can get to the next red light faster than the Camry next to me. I bought it because it has loads of gadgets, has a nice quiet ride, great styling (IMHO) and is fun to drive. My mom, who owns an 06 300C, commented on how nice it rides.

    I bought the top-of-the-line Limited with every option except a sunroof, which I rarely used in my old car and didn't want in this one. It has nice, soft leather seats, no clunks in the suspension and no wires protruding from under the dash on anywhere else that I've noticed. CR must have gotten an Avenger that was built on a Friday.

    I test drove a 3.0L AWD Fusion and sat in a Camry before buying my Sebring. I didn't make it down the road to the Saturn dealer to see what they had because the Chrysler salesman made an offer that was too tempting to pass up.

    BTW, here's some info that doesn't always get published. Chrysler's engineers were limited in their design abilities when Daimler still held the reins. The DC bosses didn't want their Mercedes interiors to be overshadowed by less expensive domestic vehicles. Rumor and recent articles say that the Viper program might be axed to make money available to upgrade some things on the Sebring.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    The DC bosses didn't want their Mercedes interiors to be overshadowed by less expensive domestic vehicles.

    I heard a very high ranking Chrysler executive on TV (Autoline Detroit I think) admit that they simply underestimated the importance of the interior and the competition and did not allocate enough money to it and that they had already fixed that problem within the current development cycles. They simply chose not to spend the money on it.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    We weren't talking about posts, we were talking about the consumer reviews on the right. Have a look.

    I have read a lot of owner reviews. Like you, I think the people who have a new car for a couple of days, and decide to write a review don't have any real experience with the car to report anything useful. Yes, some people give you good information about the car (likes, as well as dislikes). The people who say "I bought the car yesterday, and I love it", then give the car all 10s skew the average score, even if there are 100 reviews. I put absolutely no stock in the average score (9.2 or 8.2) it means nothing IMO.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Thank you. I reported it. It may take a week or so to get it down, but it will come down.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    I understand. But the only point I was trying to make is that those "I bought it yesterday, I love it, all 10s" reviews skew a small sample far more than a large one.

    But I hear ya!

    It is worth the time to look through them to find the ones that are posted after the owner has really gotten to know the vehicle and is able and willing to provide a straightforward assessment of the positives and the negatives. They do exist and can be very helpful.

    Actually, that's the kind of thing that would be very useful in this forum as well. ;)
  • mickeyrommickeyrom Posts: 936
    Pat, I reviewed my KIA several times.It started very negative and now after over 14K miles I have learned to love it and now it's a 10, or very close to that.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    You've been posting that in the CRRs? That's great!! I remember reading your issues in the Optima discussion when you first got it and I'm glad to hear you are happy now. :)
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    Went out to dinner one night this week with four colleagues while out of town for a class. We took one guy's rental car, a Milan Premier. I got the back seat. :( The driver and front passenger were talking as we got into the car on the return trip. Part of the conversation went something like this:

    "You know, this is a nice car!"
    "Yeah, I like it better than the Accord." (Front passenger got an Accord rental that week; I only got a Civic.)

    All I can say about it is, the leather smelled good and felt good, and it was a smooth and quiet ride, but it was a little cramped in back width-wise with 3 adult men--not recommended except for short trips (like we made).

    Next day at the parking lot, the Accord and Milan were side-by-side. The Accord looked like an LX-P. I liked the looks of the Milan better--classier, sleeker.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Front passenger got an Accord rental that week

    Was it the new or old Accord?

    but it was a little cramped in back width-wise with 3 adult men

    I think that would be the case with any midsize sedan. I don't think I would want a car that was wide enough to be comfortable with 3 adults in the back seat.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    It was the 2008 Accord (and I got a 2008 Civic LX). But I saw a previous-gen Accord at the rental lot also, so some of those are still around too.

    I guess if you expect to carry five adult men a lot, better get a full-sized car or big SUV or a minivan.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    I've been in the back of an Accord. There is plenty of room for 3 full size adults. Of course, this boils down to: "my definition of plenty is different than yours".
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Yes depends on the meaning of "comfortable" or "plenty" to you. I would just say that my Mazda6 has enough room for 3 in back, but would not want to go on too long a trip in it, if I would have to be one of the three. I am pretty sure I'd feel the same about any midsize. Two hours is the furthest we have gone with 5 adult-size people.

    What year is the Accord that has "plenty of room" for 3 in back?

    CR says about the Fusion: Three adults can fit across the rear with generous leg room. and they list rear shoulder room at 56 inches.

    CR describing the rear seat of (2007) Accord says: Rear leg room is expansive,
    but the seat is too low for optimal thigh support.
    and they list rear shoulder room at 55 inches.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    "What year is the Accord that has "plenty of room" for 3 in back? "

    Late model, not 2008. I've been in the back of a Milan and they are not as roomy as an Accord. The Accord would be fine for a long trip with 5 people.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    CR didn't say how big those 3 adults were, did they? In my case, it was 3 guys who are not offensive linemen in the NFL, but one guy is pretty tall (6'3" or so) and he and the other two (each around 5'10") are broad-shouldered. I felt cramped, especially when sitting in the middle (I sat on the outside one trip, the middle the other trip). Now, maybe if you have 2 slender women and an average-sized guy in there, it will be fine. Just proves "YMMV" and "try before you buy".
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    Personally I would not want to take a long trip in any mid-sized sedan with four other adults. That's where minivans and other vehicles with 3 rows of seats really shine, IMO. Nothing like a comfy captain's chair in the second row, and the ability for the fifth passenger to stretch out on the rear bench if they want. :)
  • drwilscdrwilsc Posts: 140
    Personally I would not want to take a long trip in any mid-sized sedan with four other adults.

    Depends. If I'm the average sized guy with the two slender women....
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    LOL! Well, I'm averaged sized, but married with 3 kids, so captains chairs in a minivan might be better for me, from a number of perspectives :)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Personally I would not want to take a long trip in any mid-sized sedan with four other adults.

    I agree, in fact I think that would be the case in most sedans of any size class. Though, maybe a Crown Vic with 56 inches of rear hip room and 60 inches of rear shoulder room would do the trick. But, then, I would not want to drive anything that wide all the time.

    I posted the comments from an independent source in response to the claims made about the Accord back seat. There is simply no magical way to make 53-56 inches (typical hip and shoulder room numbers) of horizontal space all that comfortable for 3 adults, barring the fantasies of drwilsc (and even in that fantasy, while he is comfortable the two women are, perhaps, having different thoughts :P )

    Now to the extent any of the adults are my 95 pound adult daughter's size, it certainly does help.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    "I posted the comments from an independent source "

    One of the great things about car reviews, is that you don't have to like 'em or even agree with 'em. Having said that I honestly wouldn't want to go on a long trip in any midsize sedan with 5 people. But I stand by my observations.
  • This thread has so many opportunities for comments about things that are wide that require more room when seating, mostly in regards to people's backside.

    I would not want to drive anything that wide all the time.

    This was too straight a line to pass up, but alas, with my spouse looking over my shoulder I should let it go.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    Isn't the Accord a mid-sized sedan? :confuse:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    In sunroof-equipped models, yes. In LX and LX-P models, it is full size (just barely).
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    So traveling with 5 will be more comfortable if there is no sunroof, eh? ;)

    If you are still going to insist that this EPA definition is the one and only way to determine the size class, then you should accept it fully. They do not put the 2008 Accord in two different size classes based on whether or not there is a sun roof.

    The Accord sedan is listed only as a large car:

    http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/FEG2008.pdf
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    So traveling with 5 will be more comfortable if there is no sunroof, eh?

    NO. And that's why size classification doesn't mean anything. Calling it a large car, or midsize, doesn't make it any more or less comfortable for 5.
  • csandstecsandste Posts: 1,866
    Agreed. The Elantra has more space than the new Malibu, but we all know it's down a class and the Sonata (a large car, like the Accord--barely) is the real competition.

    Azeras, 300's, Tauruses, Impalas, Avalons are all up a class for the sake of this discussion.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    Finalists were Accord, CTS, and Malibu. So GM had a 2-in-3 chance. And the winner is...

    Malibu.

    Maybe GM should give the G6 a redux this year so it can win the NACOTY next January. ;) The voters seem to like those GM mid-sizers.

    And in recognition of this award (?), Edmunds.com has given the Malibu a seat at the table on the right. What got dropped? Legacy?
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    The Accord has been voited INTERNATIONAL car of the year.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    But the Accord in the rest of the world is not the US version, is it?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Correct. Here it is called the Accord and in Japan it is the Inspire. The Accord the rest of the world gets is the Acura TSX.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    The voters seem to like those GM mid-sizers.

    I would say thats true due to how far along the GMs have come. The Accord improved slightly, nothing too earth shattering, IMO. The Malibu is leaps and bounds over the previous gen. Personally, I really don't think it's anything special.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    I think that is pretty much it. But the Malibu could be considered "special" because it is the first GM famly car able to take on the likes of the Camcord head-to-head, and come out well in the comparison. The Aura was a big step in that direction, but the Malibu is one step closer.
  • hackdhackd Posts: 65
    It seems many articles are now being written regarding the car market turning into a buyers market due to the economy. Does anyone have any insight for the midsize car segment on what we can expect over the next few months in terms of incentives to try and hit sales targets? Personally I have to think more 0% offers will soon be rolled out...is anyone hearing anything or expecting something based on history?
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The Aura was a big step in that direction, but the Malibu is one step closer.

    So are you saying the Malibu is better than the Aura? How? I thought the Aura was the higher end car, and the Malibu was the economy version.
  • pengwinpengwin Posts: 74
    aren't the aura and the Malibu the same car?

    its like Pontiac G5 = Chevy Cobalt/ Saturn sky = Pontiac solstice = Vauxhall/Opel something.
  • ts like Pontiac G5 = Chevy Cobalt/ Saturn sky = Pontiac solstice = Vauxhall/Opel something.

    GM has taken a very necessary step back from the badge engineering. The cars look pretty different (G6, Aura, Malibu) and are tuned differently. Some drivetrain elements are similar, but Toyota puts that 2.4l from the Camry in just about everything as well.

    Sharing platforms across continents isn't a bad idea except parts of the American market want more cushy vehicles the the Europeans do. Ford has been working on this, eh, forever. The Ford Cortina was a Euro import, the early 70s Capris, the Meurkurs, the Contiques, and the Focus.

    I think Saturn will do well with the Astra, they didn't even rename it when they brought it over. Global platforms aren't a bad thing, especially as modular as they are now; the same platform can be FWD/RWD/AWD as needed.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    General professional opinion that I've seen is that GM took the lessons learned from the Aura and applied them to the Malibu, so yes, in some ways the Malibu is better than the Aura. Interior design and materials for one, quietness for another. That should be expected from a newer design that is based on the same platform.

    Why do you think the Aura is the "higher end car"? Have you priced the top-end Malibu LTZ?
  • pengwinpengwin Posts: 74
    Yeah, toyota drops the 2.4l into everything but they dont have 8 branches. Heck, every company drops an engine from one line to another, BMW, lexus, merc, GM, ford, everyone. My gripe is that they all look similar (except for the G6). The malibu and aura look similar, look at the front. The back is just ugly on the malibu. What ticks me the most is the inside, every GM car has the same center console, that black rectangle with aircon/climate control at the bottom. Im not saying its a bad unit, very easy to use, but its just boring, ugly and looks cheap.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    I believe Elroy gets the idea that the Aura is supposed to be the higher end version over the Malibu because originally when the Aura was released, GM admitted that the Aura was to be a "Class above" the Malibu and G6 in terms of refinement, quality, features and materials. Many of us were lead to believe that this would be the case even with the new Malibu (yet the new Malibu is offered in far more trim levels and better equipment standard and optional on trim levels compared to the Aura)

    GM wanted to position Saturn as the V6 almost Acura-TL like Alternative (yea, crazy I know) but Lutz himself talked about this before the release of the Aura. THe Malibu was to offer I4 and V6 choices but wouldnt be as nicely equipped as the Aura was to be. That changed though.

    Overall on the food chain, Saturn is considered to be more of a higher level, import fighting brand..which why some are lead to beleive the Aura is the "upper level" vehicle. This notion is sure to be the case when the new Lambda Chevy Transverse is released at base price some thousands less than the Base Outlook.

    I think in overall refinement, the Malibu is the better car (its interior is NOT as refined in the materials department as the Altima or Accord IMO, especially those cheap, hallow, 2002 Nissan Altima door panels) but its a solid step above the Camry and ahead of the Aura overall.

    As far as styling. I actually PREFER the Aura's more elegant looks over the Malibu. From XE vs LS all the way up to XR vs. LTZ. Aura just has more of a "Euro" look to it. Malibu looks good until the backend.

    Both look better than the new Accord IMO.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Thanks for answering Backy's question for me Max. :D
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,934
    Looks like GM is waking up to the fact that ALL of their brands need to be "import fighters", not just Saturn. Maybe that is one reason that the Malibu went beyond the Aura in some ways--to better compete with Camcords et. al. Imagine the market reception the new Malibu would have received if it had been a lesser car than the Aura. Not a good way to grab Honda and Toyota fans.
  • maxamillion1maxamillion1 Posts: 1,467
    I agree 100 percent. Hopefully the NEXT Aura will be that much better than the Malibu. I'm more of a fan of the Aura than the Malibu.
  • pengwinpengwin Posts: 74
    the aura looks a LOT better than the malibu.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I actually beg to differ here - to me the Aura looks a narrow and tippy. I know they're both narrow, but the Malibu pulls it off better to me.

    To each his own style, right! :)
  • urnewsurnews Posts: 668

    To each his own style, right!


    For my money the Ford Fusion is the looks leader among all the mid-size sedans because it is so distinctive, in a very pleasing fashion.
Sign In or Register to comment.