Midsize Sedans 2.0

kernick

backy: it's unreasonable for me to expect others to collaborate with me in breaking the law.

me: yes but many people think the speed limits are unreasonable - not having increased or kept pace with vehicle safety, and performance safety (better bakes and tires). So people drive what they are comfortable with. There are all sorts of laws which are on the books in many states which are largely ignored by citizens and the police. And the police typically allow traffic to flow faster than the speed limits. The true speed limit is what the police and courts begin writing tickets at.

backy: So if others are driving the limit in the right lane, I can just pass them when it's safe to do so.

me: that's nice you're that way. But the majority of people here in the NE are not so passive. If you yield too much here, near Boston at an intersection, you'll wait all day.

backy: Also, if traffic is so heavy that it is difficult to pass someone going the limit in the right lane, then I wonder how safe it is to be driving at 10+ over the limit?

me: turn on NASCAR tomorrow and you'll see cars can safely drive fast as long as they are driving the same speed. Having a lot of people change lanes is much more dangerous then having a bunch of cars staying in their lanes and spots cruising at 80mph.

backy

Thanks for the reminder that it's OK to break any law I happen to think is unreasonable. That could come in handy someday. Also I'll remember what you said about NASCAR--next time I'm driving a NASCAR car and driving on a racetrack. I'll just try to remember when I'm driving my car on a street or highway that it's not a NASCAR car, I and all the other drivers sharing the road with me are not NASCAR drivers, and the road is not a racetrack that is designed to NASCAR specs.

Your post though was a good reminder that it's possible to rationalize any behavior.

I guess no one here wants to talk about mid-sized sedans anymore, so I'm off to dinner...

babybu

Hey everyone, i own a 1999 malibu, it has a 3.1 L v-6 engine, and ive stumbled upon a supercharger for this engine. is it a good idea to purchase and install this supercharger. keep in mind that its a front-wheel drive, so ive been told the drive terrain will be under enormous stress with such a dramatic power increase. can anyone here help me?

and also, soes anyone know where i might find a custom speedometer cluster for my car? :confuse:

busiris

Here's a suggestion...

Let's start a new forum and call it "Traffic laws, Highway speeds and Those Who Wish to Ignore Reality" and let everyone who wishes to continue arguing their point on driving patterns, abilities and speed issues go there.

Its obvious that everyone here has a definite opinion on these issues and it has turned into a measuring contest, and no one is willing to let the other guy have the last word on any of these issues.

Many good and valid points have been made by everyone here, but at the end of the day, it changes nothing. Left lane riders will still stay in the left lane, speeders will still speed, and courteous drivers will still be courteous. No new laws will be passed that will result in safer traveling or increased traffic flow.

This forum used to be really interesting when midsize sedans and people's opinions of the same were the posts being made here....

backy

Welcome back!

How is your Altima doing? I saw some at my local auto show last weekend and was reminded that its probably the best-looking mid-sizer out there now, IMO. I'd pay more attention to it than I do if it offered standard ESC, or at least had it widely available on the 2.5. I don't want/need the V6. I like the fact that it offers a 6MT though--very unusual in this class, especially at the lower price range.

explorerx4

the new altima is pretty good looking. they can get pricey when you start adding options.

backy

Yes, although I've seen some pretty good lease deals in my area lately. It's not so much the options for me--I think the 2.5S is pretty well equipped as it is. It's what options I can't get on the 2.5.

busiris

So far (after approx. 2000 miles), I have been really impressed. I bought a 2.5 SL with all the options, and I have fallen in love with the CVT. It is amazing how much power that the CVT gets out of the 4 cylinder engine. Evidently, many folks around here (Southeastern USA) feel the same way, as I have yet to see a single manual transmission on any sales lot here. Personally, I think the manual would feel strange in a car of this type, but that's just me. I am sure others would feel the exact opposite.

The Bose stereo has really great sound, but the voice recognition for the Bluetooth/NAV system takes a bit of getting used to. I think the biggest thing in learning how to use it properly is to NOT overspeak....not speak too loudly. Once you learn that little trick, it works very nicely.

The real surprise for me was the XM radio. After only a few weeks, I have really gotten accustomed to it. I would really recommend it to anyone who spends any amount of time in their car.

Being a 4 cylinder, there is a little more engine noise in the cabin .vs. the 6 cylinder, but nothing that should cause anyone any concern. I'm not quite sure why, but this issue seems to be the norm in most vehicles (4 cyl.noiser than 6 cyl.). With the better MPG, I can deal with a decibel or two...

The interior is very cleanly designed, but it would be nice to have better back support in the front seat. I also have a Z4 coupe, and I admit that it's driver's seat has spoiled me. Then again, the Altima isn't a BMW, so you get what you pay for, I guess.

Overall, I would say that the car has either met or exceeded all my expectations, and I would recommend the car to anyone looking for a reasonably priced car with reasonable MPG, seats 5 comfortably, and can be configured "option-rich".

kdshapiro

And the police typically allow traffic to flow faster than the speed limits.

There are a lot of laws that people ignore criminal and civil, however should you be the shmo that gets caught you get the ticket and it cost you $$$ and/or points. This is not NASCAR. Keep some sense about you and you won't get a ticket. Speed limit violations are not absolute, although I know people who got ticketed 5 mph above the speed limit at 25, 30 and 55. It is not a "right" to speed or drive anyway you choose.

pat

Enough with the traffic debate. There are at least a couple of discussions over in Auto News where those who are interested may continue.

Thanks!

karsick

Weirdo checking in here.... :P :P

I'm one of the wackos who got a 6-speed manual tranny on a '08 Altima 2.5. I'll admit I never did try one of the CVT's (since I'm a three-pedal retro-grouch), but I've heard nothing but praise for them in comparison to the typical rubber-band CVT.

We did restrain ourselves on the options (just the convenience pkg with power seats, moonroof & alloys), so we got a pretty sweet deal.

We love how quiet the car is at freeway speeds in 6th gear, engine spinning at approx 2,000 rpm at 60mph.

My biggest gripe is that the front edge of the seats isn't high enough to give me proper thigh support (but I'm kinda tall with freakishly long legs). I may have to get a fab shop to alter the seat mounts, even though the Altima is listed as the best car for tall drivers :P

Otherwise, it is a fun car to own & drive.

backy

I don't think you're a weirdo at all.

How's the 6MT for smooth, quiet shifting? I tried the 6MT in the Versa hatch, and it sounded, literally, clunky between shifts. How are the throws--short, long, ?? How's the clutch feel--easy, or ??

colloquor

I've driven my brother's 2008 Altima SL with the 2.5 and the CVT, and it's an extremely smooth transmission. Much better than the 2006 Murano I rented a couple of years ago with the CVT.

BTW . . . in perusing the new car dealers today, I looked at the 2009 Sonata. Admittedly, the only one in stock was a GLS 4-cylinder with the tan interior, and did not like it or the new front end. It looks like a large new gen Elantra from the front.

mz6greyghost

How's the 6MT for smooth, quiet shifting? I tried the 6MT in the Versa hatch, and it sounded, literally, clunky between shifts. How are the throws--short, long, ?? How's the clutch feel--easy, or ??

Allow me to weigh in...

I've got a '07 Altima 2.5S 6MT with the Convenience Plus package, and after 6 months and 15K miles, the shifter is second only to Honda in terms of overall smoothness and operation. Having said that, it's second by next to nothing.

The shifter is smooth in the Altima, with a nice sound and feel to the "snick-snick" that it makes between gears. Clutch travel is short, with smooth take-up. The throws aren't any shorter or longer than other sedans with manuals. The only gripe I have is the large difference between the ratios for 1st and 2nd gear, which makes the shift a little jerky when first starting out, but gets smoother as the car warms up.

Again, it's no Honda IMO, but it's not that far off the mark either.

maxamillion1

I feel the same way Backy....

targettuning

We rented a 2007 Mercury Milan Premier edition this past week end. While I stayed home and worked Saturday my wife drove it on our weekly cross state visit to both her parents and my mother. She reported upon her return Sunday that she liked it and while this is hardly descriptive I had a chance to drive it around a bit on Friday before she left. It was an I-4 cylinder 5 speed (?) automatic. Like the Fusion we rented sometime last fall it drove and handled well and felt (at a hard 25K rental miles) solid with no rattles. I rather liked it (including the interior and exterior) better than the Fusion. Being the "Premier" level trim it was fancier with more extras than the Fusion but shared the same noisy on acceleration I-4. This is one thing that I hated about it even though upon reaching cruising speed it quieted down. Fuel economy was quite good as well with the trip computer showing 28.6 mpg overall including more mountainous driving than I normally do when I drive. I use the Pa Turnpike rather than U.S.Rt 30 that goes through the mountains but this is the route she took on her trip home. She did however, use the Turnpike on the trip up and reported a trip high of 30.4 mpg on that stretch. She never complained about the lack of power even on the mountains (I asked). We still lean heavily toward the 2009 Sonata but this car wasn't bad for a Mexican made Ford product.

akirby

The new Milan is due in December with a new 2.5L I4 and 6 speed transmissions (manual and automatic).

backy

New or a refresh? I'm guessing refresh since it will have been only 3 years since the Fulan debuted. Maybe interior/exterior tweaks also? The instrument panel could use a redux, IMO.

akirby

Technically a refresh. The fusion is supposed to get interior and exterior updates but it's not clear how much the Milan will receive other than the new engines.

busiris

I would have love to have tried an Altima with the manual 6-speed, but there wasn't the 1st one on any lot near me when I bought my Altima. Realistically, I would not have considered buying the manual, but I would like to have at least tried driving it, just for comparason. I guess laziness has taken over me in my older age, as far as shifting goes...I'm even too lazy to use the Pseudo-shift feature on the automatic. What's that say about me?

busiris

You know, it seems that all 4-cylinders are noisier than the corresponding 6 cylinder models, regardless what manufacturer/model is being considered. I'm not dissatisfied with the higher engine noise in my 4 cylinder Altima (its 6 cylinder model was also noticeably quieter on acceleration), especially when I fill up the tank, but I wonder why a 4 cylinder always seems to be a bit louder. You would think that it would be the other way around, since a 4 cylinder would (or should) have more room in the engine compartment.

targettuning

I subscribe to C@D (Car @ Driver) magazine and the Apr 08 issue had a test of mainstream I-4 cylinder family sedans. As a part of the specification sheet is a "noise level" section recorded in db at idle at full throttle acceleration and at 70 mph cruise. Oddly enough the actual measured sound levels (in db) between a 2008 Honda Accord EX (190hp 2.4 liter I-4) and a 2008 Ford Fusion SEL (160 hp 2.3 liter I-4) shows the Fusion to be 1 db quieter @ idle (at 42 db)...tied with the Honda @ full throttle (at 73 db) and 1 db noisier (at 69 db verses 68 db) than the Honda at 70 mph cruise. Typically the Honda is thought to be a quiet car with the "most refined" I-4 in the industry but.... And although the 2009 Sonata is considerably quieter @ idle (38 db) than either it is actually 1 db noisier than the Fusion on full throttle (74 db verses 73 db) and tied with the Accord. Subjectively, after renting both Fusion/Milan I-4's and a 2007 Sonata I-4 I complained about the Fusion/Milan being noisy and praised the Sonata for being quiet. Maybe its the nature or quality of the "noise"? Who woulda guessed it??? I still feel like the Sonata is quieter in spite of the measured numbers and that the induction noise of the Fusion/Milan is annoying to me.

hackd

Your comment above brought back memories as the Milan engine noise mentioned was the reason I did not purchase the Milan Premier. For some reason from a dead stop it was slightly loud as you mention but also unpleasent to my ear. Beyond that engine noise it was a very nice car for the price. I ended up with the Subaru Legacy Limited which has the 4 Cylinder Turbo engine which I really find enjoyable. Slightly less MPG (high for AWD car) and more expensive then the Milan but drives like a luxury car which sold me.

backy

Maybe its the nature or quality of the "noise"?

I think that is it. The Accord, and in fact Hondas in general, are noted for their tire/road noise. You see that comment all the time in reviews. But the engines are praised for being very smooth. So the 1 db extra noise at 70 mph cruise for the Fusion could be more engine noise than for the Accord, which could have a quieter engine and more road noise. And maybe people don't consider road noise as objectionable as engine noise. For me, it'a all noise. And I also found the Sonata (even the pre-2009 models) quieter overall than the Accord. The Camry is pretty hushed also.

thegraduate

Typically the Honda is thought to be a quiet car

BY WHO? HAHAHAHAHA I've heard Honda's road noise complaints on here for a long time! Honda has never been "the quiet car," that's the Camry, and it's Korean friend the Sonata (which has followed the Camry in noise and ride tuning).

This has to do with the amount of sound insulation Honda uses in its cabins (which has always been less than many of its competitors). It doesn't mean the engines aren't refined; they are among the smoothest and most refined through the rev-range that I've found (never boomy, buzzy, or thrashy). Drive a Chevy Cobalt with the 2.2 Ecotec; that's NOT a refined engine.

sc5i

For sure, the Fusion will get the 2.5 with a stick don't know if it will be a 6-speed or not. I'd say closer to Feb of 2009 before we start to see them.

targettuning

Read a bit further to finish my thought: "with the most refined I-4 in the industry" If this engine is noisy at idle (and it has been measured to be) and produces at best "average" noise at full throttle then that takes away from its overall perception as being refined, no? I was referring to engine noise mostly, not cabin noise, when I composed my previous post since I was complaining about the Milan having objectionable (to me) induction noise on acceleration.

kernick

You know, it seems that all 4-cylinders are noisier than the corresponding 6 cylinder models, regardless what manufacturer/model is being considered.

You see those knobs in the middle of the console, turn them. Mine are connected to a thing that says BOSE. There must be some music in the world that you like?

hackd

You should not have to drive a car every day with the radio blasting to cover road noise that bothers you. What happens when you actually want to have a lengthy conversation with someone in the car. In the end, however, I would imagine most people would get used to the road noise in their car..similar to people who live in the city and seem to thrive on the noises heard every day.

thegraduate

Read a bit further to finish my thought: "with the most refined I-4 in the industry" If this engine is noisy at idle (and it has been measured to be) and produces at best "average" noise at full throttle then that takes away from its overall perception as being refined, no?

No.

Put the most refined and quiet engine in your living room, and it will seem quite loud. It doesn't mean it is a loud engine relative to the competition, but rather that it is not insulated as much as its competition.

kernick

You should not have to drive a car every day with the radio blasting to cover road noise that bothers you.

I thought the issue was engine-noise, and not road-noise. Road-noise I'd assume is due to the tires, suspension, thickness of glass, wind whistling over the mirrors. Engine noise would be the engine only. You can have 1 or the other or both, or neither. I have a 4-cyl car, the engine sounds fine and is very muted at the few times I've had the radio down. There's a nice turbo sound to it also. But I don't listen to the road or engine, I listen to the radio. And there isn't that much road or engine noise that I can't play and enjoy the radio moderately and still have a conversation.

Now if you need to gun the 4-cyl to high revs, then yes you may have a noise issue. Try getting a more powerful 4-cyl then. I don't rev over 3,000 rpm and I have plenty of power. Shop for a car with a direct injection engine.

thegraduate

I like knowing I have a car that I didn't over-buy on power. Most of the time, 3k RPM or less is adequate, but I'm not afraid to gun it to get around a car or get out into traffic if I need to. Those times, I may wind up at 5k RPM, maybe higher (my car runs smoothly to over 6,000 RPM, where it starts to emit a bit of a growl, which is nice ). If I had the V6, I'd probably never end up over 4k RPM, meaning I'd have lower fuel economy than I get with my 4-cyl, yet would have more power than I need or want.

Today's I4s are amazing to me. I returned from a trip to the gulf coast in my 2006 Accord (166hp), only to get back in my 1996 Accord (130hp) to drive to work on Monday. It felt SO SLOW relative to my new car! It's amazing what more transmission gears, iVTEC, and 10 years worth of improvements can do for an engine!

kernick

I'm glad you're enjoying the Accord. I used to carpool with a guy who had an '03 or '04 and it was a decent blend of economy and sporty, at least with the 5-speed.

I've gone back to a manual after a few years of being with an auto. I just feel more in tune with the vehicle. Also there is less powertrain loss with the manual and it makes the car lighter (typically). I have a Mazdaspeed6, and am thoroughly happy the 2 weeks I've had it. It's just getting it's first tank of gas, and the fuel mileage is mid-20's in mixed driving. The 2.3 4-cyl purrs, the turbo has a nice sound when engaged, it has a Bose stereo (feel sorry for you if you can't always find something nice to listen to), and it'll seat four. And it's AWD with stability control.

The Subaru Legacy GT would have been an option too, though I flinch at spending that sort of $. The Mazdaspeed had a $4000 rebate + standard discounts.

karsick

With all the talk over V6 vs I-4 engines, why do you suppose nobody else (beyond VW) has developed a very-narrow-angle, small-displacement "inline V6"?

... an engine narrow enough to use just one head, with all exhaust ports on one side & all intake on the other, but with staggered cylinders for compact length.

One of my main objections to transverse V's is how crammed they are into a modern engine bay, with the increased costs for servicing that layout creates.

Imagine a 200hp, 2.6 liter "VR6" in your Camcordtimafulant6.

...if you've ever heard a Golf R32 accelerate past, you'll know what I'm saying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc2x09OUzTE&feature=related

BTW - I haven't owned any German cars in the past 7 yrs, so I'm not just a VW partisan :P .

busiris

You know, the noise level of the 4 banger doesn't bother me...it was just an observation. And, strangely enough, my knobs are also connected to one of those "Bose" devices you mentioned in your post. It is a very effective noise canceler!

Seeing as how the 4 cylinder is a physically smaller unit, it would also have a corresponding larger "dead space" in the engine compartment. Logically, then, it would seem that, given the same amount of engine compartment insulation, and all other factore being equal, that the 4 cylinder would be quieter.

I wonder if is has anything to do with the cylinder diameters..ie., are the cylinders a larger diameter in a 4 cylinder than the 6 cylinder? Or, is it the length of the piston stroke, which may have a larger combustion chamber in the 4 cylinder...Or, maybe a V-6 simply has a better internal insulating factor, which is inherent in a "V" design .vs. inline?

Any ideas???

elroy5

One of my main objections to transverse V's is how crammed they are into a modern engine bay, with the increased costs for servicing that layout creates.

The secretary at work has a BMW, with an Inline/straight 6. The engine is so long, you would have hard time mounting that engine + a transmission in a FWD car (sideways). A V6 is wider, but shorter, which works out great for FWD.

Imagine a 200hp, 2.6 liter "VR6" in your Camcordtimafulant6.

That would be a very small hp advantage over a regular 4 cylinder. So why bother?

karsick

Why bother?

To achieve a unique sound, refinement & selling point.

elroy5

Personally, when I am driving down the road at a steady speed, I would rather not hear the exhaust. I would rather hear the music at that time. The only time I want to hear the engine, is when I ask it to speak up (accelerator down). A constant exhaust drone, is not something I'm particularly fond of. The right dual exhaust, on the right V8 engine sounds great to me, up to a point. But after a while, it gets annoying. The radio has to be full blast all the time, and you can't hold a decent conversation without yelling. But that's just my take on it.

colloquor

One of the first and pioneering FWD production cars (SAAB) never used a transverse engine design until the Fiat/Lancia/SAAB consortium-designed 9000 or until GM's influence was felt a bit later with the Opel V6 transverse installation. SAABs always had longitudinal Inline 3's or Inline 4's. You want to see a large SOHC or DOHC 2.0L inline 4, take a look under the hood of any Classic 900. With the engine sitting on top of the transaxle - that's one big engine and transaxle assembly.

m6user

Just returned from Minneapolis to Chicago area and mpg was 32.2 with a little bit of stop and go on each end of a 380 mile drive so I would say 97hwy/3city. The 2008 EPA on this engine I believe is something like 28 or 29 mpg hwy. I drove about 74 most of the way on cruise.

aviboy97

Yeah, I have heard numerous people saying they get better then the new EPA's on the Mazda's. I have a 2005 Mazda6 i 5-speed, rated 23-31, and on my last long distance trip to upstate New York from here in CT, I got 32 mpg's going mostly 80mph.

m6user

Mines an '07 auto. It's about 1 or 2 mpg better than the 07 EPA estimate. I wasn't babying it or anything. I would assume that driving say 60 or 65 for a long trip could result in 33-34 mpg possibly. I'd like to see but I don't think I have the patience for it.

targettuning

Yeah but I don't and will never have a fully functioning engine in my living room. I guess insulation has something to do with it but why then is the Honda loud at idle, average at full throttle but falls back to be among the quietest at 70 mph cruise? Insulation, or the lack thereof,can only be blamed so much. It just has a noisy engine (relatively speaking) at idle and if so then that diminshes the perception of refinement to me. Speaking of engine refinement, and I have asked this question before, exactly what defines that? In my experiences most new car engines idle quietly and smoothly, provide ample power and fade into the backround when cruising. Calling the engine room for passing power prompts a downshift and the engine revs... OK I get that but again most modern engines provide power and rev briefly to the upper RPM range without too much drama What more should it do? I think this refinement thing is too overrated. A smooth and quiet idle is the most noticeable sign of refinement to me, maybe quiet acceleration too.

aviboy97

Well, since fuel prices are going up, up, and up, I have tried to keep it around 65mph for my commute to work, which is only 7 miles, mostly highway. I can last over 2 weeks on a tank if I don't venture out and go long distances.

maxamillion1

Anyone know if it will be at New York????

benderofbows

A V6 is not necessarily more refined by design than an I4. Also, having owned both "refined" and "unrefined" fours and sixes, I feel I can speak to the issue of engine refinement. Most engineers talk about NVH, or noise vibration and harshness. When I think of noise, I don't think volume is related, more just the "character" of the noise. An engine can be both loud and refined, or it could be both quiet and unrefined.

When evaluating an engine, I like to first give it a few good blips of the throttle in neutral, then hold the engine at various RPMs both in neutral and while pulling the car, listening to all the sounds it makes. Again, I'm not judging volume. I'm listening to the intake/exhaust, or any unusual or unpleasant sounds.

By this criteria , one of the most unrefined engines I have experienced is the 4.0L Ford V6. Even when new this engine had some unpleasant noises such as whines, ad when revved over 4,000 RPM had a very harsh sound and character. Car & Driver states, "By 5000 rpm, pieces of interior trim begin to buzz. At idle, at 70 mph, and at wide-open throttle, this [engine] makes way more racket than any of the five full-size pickup trucks in our [recent] comparo." I didn't often hold the engine at high revs because of the NVH. It sounded strained and damaging to the engine.

In contrast, both the 2.4L in my Accord, and the 2.5L V6 from the late Mazda 626 seemed happy spinning along at 4,000 RPM and above. No unpleasant sounds, vibration, or harshness, just intake/exhaust noise and hum. Truly a pleasant experience, and it doesn't give me the impression of straining or damaging itself at all.

karsick

Agreed!....... the Ford 4.0 Cologne V6 is a rough-sounding engine. Its saving grace is that it is torquey & durable (& I assume cheap to fix due to how common it is).

I've never owned a V6 (except for a smooth, 2.3L supercharged Millenia S for a short time), but my folks traded their 4.0 Explorer for a Mazda MPV 3.0L a few years back, and the refinement of the MPV's motor is shockingly better than the Explorer.

I would bet the 2.6, 2.8 & 2.9 versions of the Cologne V6 would be nearly as harsh as the 4.0, so I assume it's not just a size issue.

BTW - It's been a long time since I drove a Saab 96 V4 or Ford Taunus V4, so I can't recall if that version of Ford's V-engine is nasty too.

kernick

I would think that you tell whether you like the NVH level of your vehicle when you test-drive it? I'm surprised so many people find this to be an issue. Or aren't you test-driving them?

Or better yet many of these sedans are available at rental agencies. Go and rent one with a few thousand miles on it, and drive it 100 miles in a day or 2, before you buy one!

jeffyscott

I beleive until recently the VW Passat did not have a transverse engine either. So, as your post implies, there is no requirement to have transverse mounting just because a car is FWD.

busiris

Don't know about the VW, but the Oldsmobile Toronado, Chrysler Concorde, 300, etc. all had perpendicular engine/transmission configurations. The transverse configuration is usually used in smaller vehicles due to limited space, and probably a bit more cost effective.