Midsize Sedans 2.0

joe97

Legacy gets it.

kdshapiro

They may not have copied it, but the corporate lawyers did not want to take a chance that a lawsuit could go in Toyotas' direction. Therefore they entered into a deal to $eliminate that possibility. It might not have been a direct copy but Ford chose not to take any chances.

maxamillion1

show's how rusty I've become with the automotive world...I forgot the 09 Came out in Feb.

baggs32

Good news, the 2009 Optima gets ABS, ESC, and traction control standard across the board, joining the Accord, Mazda6, Passat, and Sonata (and Legacy?) as "true" mid-sizers with ESC on every trim.

Add the 2010 Fusion/Milan to that group too. All of them will have Ford's AdvanceTrac ESC and TC standard.

Kirstie_H

A reporter is interested in talking with satisfied owners of a 2001-2006 Toyota Camry who are also parents. If you are interested in commenting on your experience, please reply to jwahl@edmunds.com no later than Friday, November 21, 2008 and include your city and state of residence, the model year of your vehicle and the age of your child/ren.

Thanks for your consideration,

Jonathan Wahl
Corporate Communications
Edmunds Inc.

backy

I was thinking of cars available now, vs. next year. But good to hear that Ford/Mercury is getting on board with ESC after not even offering it on the Fusion and Milan during its their 3 model years, or the pre-2009 Mazda6 I4 for that matter.

explorerx4

i know esc is goverment mandated at some point, but some cars need it more that others.

backy

Yes, I agree... cars with people who drive them need it especially.

waygrabow

I agree that Electronic Stability Control could be extremely helpful in certain situations; the question is how often such a situation occurs. I have been a licensed driver for 46 years, including living in Europe for 5 years, had two accidents in which the vehicles were totaled, and yet I can think of no incident in which ESC would have helped me. My conclusion is to question why such a seldom-needed feature should become a federal mandate? Wonderful that it is an option (present on all our vehicles), but I am tired of the federal government treating us like stupid children when they can't even do their job in Washington.

backy

I have been driving for over 35 years and I haven't been in a situation in which an air bag would have deployed. But I am very glad all my cars have them now. Three of my four cars have ABS, and I can count on one hand how many times it has activated while I was driving even in Minnesota winters--yet I am very glad for the feature. I just bought a car with ESC. I have yet to activate it and I doubt I ever will. But again I am glad my car has that feature, and every car I buy from now on will have it. Why? Two reasons:

1) I have no way of predicting what may happen in the future, and what kind of crazy/stupid/ill drivers I may find myself sharing the road with.
2) I know that people make mistakes, so I feel better knowing that these kinds of safety features are in the cars my family drives. My oldest son made a mistake while driving a couple of years ago, and was in an accident in which the airbags deployed. He walked away with a little scratch on his arm. Next time, it could be a feature like ABS or ESC that saves one of my loved ones, or perhaps someone they are sharing the road with, from serious injury. That is good enough for me.

On most cars with ESC, you can turn it off. Go ahead, push that button, and then maybe say a prayer that one of those "certain situations" doesn't happen to you.

akirby

I was thinking of cars available now, vs. next year

The 2010 Fusion goes on sale in January. "Next year" is only 2 months away.

backy

Last time I checked, January is "next year."

thegraduate

Oh dear... Let's just call it "in a few months." How's that? Haha

baggs32

But good to hear that Ford/Mercury is getting on board with ESC after not even offering it on the Fusion and Milan during its their 3 model years,

I agree (although for competitive reasons only). However ESC is offered on the '09 Fusion as a $495 option. Not standard like the rest, or the 2010 Fusion, but still offered.

backy

Yes, I actually had a typo in my original post and meant to say, "...after not offering it on the Fusion and Milan during its first 3 model years", i.e. 2006-8.

explorerx4

i'm with your view ESC, good idea, nice to have, but probably won't come into play.
it does require active involvement of the driver. they have to be willing and able to make the avoidance moves.
awd is higher up my list than ESC.

waygrabow

We are agreed. All our vehicles are AWD; I have never driven without a seat belt engaged (and it saved my life); ABS is certainly nice to replace the "pumping the brakes" routine. Airbags have their pros and cons. Crush zones are a great engineering feature. Other safety features are present but go unnoticed. But I want to apologize for introducing politics into a car forum (election atmosphere). The sticking point for me was the federal mandate. But ESC is definitely valuable in certain situations and a feature on all our vehicles.

robsis

As a retired accident reconstructionist, I can say, professionally, that the combination of ABS, ESC, and Traction control have absolutely made the roads a safer environment. Add a good AWD to that mix with electronic brake force reduction, and you have the safest vehicle on the road, knucklehead driving notwithstanding!

kdshapiro

That is not quite a correct statement. The purpose of ESC and all of the associated electronics is the keep the car going in the direction the steering wheel is pointed. It does that with a combination of engine control and individual ABS wheel control, something a driver cannot do, because a driver cannot modulate individual wheels.

If you are trucking down the highway and start to skid because you are hydroplaning ESC will kick in to help. Or if you are skidding on ice and snow ESC will kick in to help.

It has nothing to do with avoidance manuevers. It's sole purpose is to keep the car from slipping and sliding and to go where the front wheels are pointed, before you know you are about to skid.

akirby

It has nothing to do with avoidance manuevers. It's sole purpose is to keep the car from slipping and sliding and to go where the front wheels are pointed, before you know you are about to skid.

It has everything to do with avoidance manuevers. ESC counteracts understeer and oversteer (in Nascar terms understeer is when the front of the car hits the wall and oversteer is when the back of the car hits the wall). When you make an emergency avoidance maneuver (lane change) ESC keeps the vehicle under control and prevents it from spinning out. Just look at all the ESC demonstrations and this should be obvious.

baggs32

It does that with a combination of engine control and individual ABS wheel control

That varies from vehicle to vehicle. I know my Explorer uses both engine retardation and individual wheel braking for its ESC but I'm pretty sure the Fusion only used brakes.

Or if you are skidding on ice and snow ESC will kick in to help.

It will kick in on ice and snow but its effectiveness is limited on those types of surfaces.

I agree with akirby in that it is most useful in emergency maneuvers. If you are depending on ESC to save you in spirited driving then you have other that ESC will not help. Like oncoming traffic, guide rails, and trees to name a few. You can still move off the beaten path somewhat even though ESC is doing its job.

kdshapiro

It has everything to do with avoidance manuevers

It has nothing to do with avoidance maneuvers. If at any time the front or rear of the car is not going in the direction of the steering wheel ESC will kick in. There are various reasons skid could occur or could be about to occur that are not due to avoidance. Stupid driving in slick conditions is one example that comes to mind.

kdshapiro

It will kick in on ice and snow but its effectiveness is limited on those types of surfaces.

As noted, ESC can't manufacture traction or go beyond physics. It's another safety device, of which stupidity can negate it's effectiveness.

akirby

When you make an emergency lane change the potential exists for oversteer - the rear of the vehicle starts to slide out - which is usually followed by an overcorrection causing the vehicle to fishtail and possibly to spin out. ESC will absolutely, positively correct the oversteer and prevent fishtailing and loss of control. It doesn't have to be a slick surface to cause understeer or oversteer.

Go here and click on the 1.5 minute video on the right hand side. Almost every demonstration of ESC includes an emergency lane change.

kdshapiro

akirby, you keep missing the point. It's not about emergency manuevers. It's about keeping the car going in the same direction as the front wheels are pointed. Oversteer, understeer whatever.

I'll repeat, one does not have to make an emergency manuever to have ESC kick in. I have some knowledge about ESC systems as my former car had one. ESC would kick in to keep the car from sliding or to stop the wheels from spinning.

m6user

You guys are basically saying the same thing but are hung up on grammatics. Anytime I feel any slippage I am going to react and perform some sort of "avoidance or emergency manuever". It doesn't have to involve an emergency lane change.

elroy5

ESC will help you control the car, regardless. It could be from an avoidance maneuver, or not. Any time the wheels loose traction, ESC will take action to stop it.

ESC, and all the other safety features have their value, and help reduce accidents. That's great! The question I have is, when is it too much. ESC, ABS, Airbags, Seatbelt tensioners, lane change sensors, crumple zones, etc, etc,. All these safety features are adding to the price of our cars, so where do we draw the line? When the safety features cost more than the rest of the car? We may be close to that point now.

backy

That point came long ago, when cars were first invented actually, since the most important safety feature of any car is the human brain--the value of which is priceless.

But that aside, I'd rather pay more for all the latest safety features than for stuff I don't need like nav systems, 100 gigawatt sound systems with disk arrays, DVDs, etc. etc.

akirby

But you said it had "nothing to do with emergency maneuvers" and that's not true. I never said that was the ONLY time ESC kicked in. It will definitely kick in whenever the car begins to understeer or oversteer including slippery conditions.

However, it doesn't stop wheelspin - that's traction control and while TC is almost always included with ESC you can get TC without ESC in some vehicles.

elroy5

I can agree with you on the things I don't want or need, like nav systems, mega sound systems, etc. But will the price for safety ever be too much for you backy? Should every safety feature be mandated by the government? Do you need a sensor to tell you when you've gone over some line on the road? If my car goes off the road, or into the other lane, I will know about it. I don't need to pay for some gadget to tell me that.

backy

I'm more interested in help in staying on my side of the road vs. being told that I've crossed over the line to the other side. I don't think any car in this class has such a device anyway, does it?

elroy5

The new safety features always start in the luxury cars, but will eventually make it down to mainstream level. Do you think all these safety features are really necessary? Tire pressure monitors, lane departure sensors, blind spot sensors, etc. Where will it end? I don't want a computer driving my car. I would like to do that myself. I don't know about you, but when I change lanes, it's intentional, so I don't need some beeper to tell me it actually happened. It just seems to me that we are on a never ending road of added safety features, with the associated added weight, complexity and cost. I think a lot more time and money should be spent on making people better drivers, instead of making the cars idiot proof. :sick:

backy

Human behavior can't be controlled very easily, car design can, hence the trend to add more safety features will continue. The good news is, the more cars to spread the costs around, the lower the cost per car. So a feature that might cost $1000 on a low-volume luxury car will probably cost much less once it hits the high-volume mid-sized sedan market. ESC is a good example. What did that cost when it was first introduced? Now the incremental cost is pretty low such that many low-end cars have it. And since many safety features are electronic and use existing systems e.g. braking, the weight penalty for those is nominal.

leonfam

Thanks for the ESC discussion. We are still on the hunt for the car...my last post in this forum said we ruled out the mid-size sedans...but here I am again in this forum. More test drives, more reading and thinking...and it turns out the only viable option for us for a compact with ESC is the Civic EX-L. At that price I'm a blink away from an Accord or a Mazda6. Those are longer than I need for the amount of parallel parking I do...but would like to hear some opinions/facts on comparing safety in Mazda6, Accord and Civic.

Used Acura's are also on the list and will be test driven this weekend. 2004/2005 TSX or TL.

oh yeah...I'll also throw in doubts about the first year of a new generation. Seems like a good idea to avoid them....no? Moves the Mazda6 down the list...

stephen987

At the risk of going down an oft-traveled road in this discussion, leonfam, have you looked at an Elantra SE? It has the compact dimensions of a Civic, interior room that's not far from the midsize sedans, and ESC standard, and it's significantly cheaper than a Civic EX-L.

kdshapiro

However, it doesn't stop wheelspin - that's traction control and while TC is almost always included with ESC you can get TC without ESC in some vehicles.

We'll that's true, but without TC ESC isn't effective. It's the TC which modulates the brakes. Do you have an example of a manufacturer that has ESC but not TC?

leonfam

Ah...the Elantra...yes, the Hyundai fan club has done a great job of pushing, I mean describing, that car.

Just funnin'...These forums have been great for getting me to think more broadly.

And...the other half believes in 'brands" and "quality"..and is so luke warm on a Hyundai it becomes a dead-end conversation. Last thing I need is the "i told you so" at the first sign of trouble...and I want to be able to switch back and forth between the cars. I'll be stuck in the Hyundai with no escape if I go that route.

I could drag us out to drive one this weekend...and while it will surely be "fine"...i don't see it overcoming doubts or arrousing any passion...

stephen987

Fair enough. FWIW I'm mostly a Honda guy, so I guess I'm one of the "brands" people. I drove an Elantra as a rental for a few days last month, and was pleasantly surprised with the power and the room. Despite these factors and the high level of equipment it was clearly a compact car of the same ilk as Civic, Corolla, et al, and not IMHO a true competitor to the midsize sedans generally discussed in this thread.

I was, on the other hand, very impressed with a four-cylinder Milan I drove for a couple of weeks in the summer.

My apologies for the brief detour down Elantra Avenue.

thegraduate

I tend to agree with stephen... check out the Hyundai Elantra. Lower price, compact dimensions, ESC standard. It also happens to have midsize interior room, according to the EPA. The Accord and Sonata are technically full-size sedans, though just barely.

I do...but would like to hear some opinions/facts on comparing safety in Mazda6, Accord and Civic.

To answer your request directly, all of the vehicles you mention are very safe, and MUCH safer than the average compact or midsize car was 5 or 6 years ago. It's actually hard to make a bad decision based on safety, these days.

Here are the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's "Top Picks" for the vehicle categories you are looking at (compact and midsize, non-lux models) These sedans did exceptionally well in testing, and offer ESC.

MIDSIZE
Ford Fusion
2009 models with optional electronic stability control

Honda Accord
4-door models

Mercury Milan
2009 models with optional electronic stability control

Subaru Legacy
with optional electronic stability control

Volkswagen Jetta
2009 models

Volkswagen Passat
2009 models
************************************
COMPACT
Honda Civic
2009 4-door models with optional electronic stability control

Mitsubishi Lancer
2009 models with optional electronic stability control

Scion xB
2008-09 models

Subaru Impreza
with optional electronic stability control

Volkswagen Rabbit
2009 4-door models
****************************
You asked specifically about the Civic, Accord, and 6.

The Civic and the Accord received "Good" scores (the highest rating possible) for the frontal-offset test on each of the measures below. The Mazda 6 received a marginal rating (2nd lowest possible) for the Leg/foot-right portion, but received "Good" overall.

Injury measures: Restraints/dummy kinematics, Head/neck, Chest, Leg/foot-left Leg/foot-right

The IIHS had this to say about the Mazda 6's "Marginal" rating in that particular area:

**Forces on the right tibia indicate that injuries to the lower leg would be possible.**

For the side-impact test, the new Mazda 6 has not yet been tested. The Accord received "Good" scores across the board for risk of injury for the measures below. The Civic received "Good" scores on all measures except Driver Torso, in which it received "Acceptable" ratings, the second highest. As far as that goes, the IIHS had this to say about that particular Acceptable rating:

**Driver — Measures taken from the dummy indicate that rib fractures would be possible in a crash of this severity. The risk of significant injuries to other body regions is low.**

Injury Measures: Head/neck, Torso, Pelvis/leg, Head Protection

I hope this helps!

akirby

They work differently. TC uses the brakes individually to limit wheelspin and loss of traction. ESC uses the brakes individually to correct understeer/oversteer. If you go around a corner too fast and start to understeer, ESC will brake the rear inside wheel to pull the front end around back in line with the steering, but there is no loss of traction.

newowner10

I believe the missing information on the safety equipment's worth debate is how much does it add the the price of the car. Is it worth $100 most would say yes. Is it $2000 some would say yes some would say no. A helmet may be good for maximum safety. Bigger cars with poor gas mileage would be safer than a small car if the run into each other.

stephen987

Bigger cars with poor gas mileage would be safer than a small car if the run into each other.

But of course a smaller, lighter, more maneuverable car in the hands of an alert driver may be able to avoid that collision completely. . .

One reason for the popularity of the midsize cars to which this particular forum is devoted: they are an excellent compromise between these two extremes.

explorerx4

that's basically, what i was trying to convey, although i guess not too clearly.
for some anyway. :P

canddmeyer

The NHTSA has given the 2009 Mazda6 5-stars on all ratings, including the side-impact test. I do agree that IIHS testing results are different. The Accord proved safer in frontal impact load tests, although both the Mazda & Honda are 5-star rated. The 5-star Mazda6 proved safer in all side-impact tests, although interestingly, the numbers are very close to the 3-star rated Accord. Not sure why a 2-star deviance for such similar numbers.

plekto

It probably has something to do with the seatbelt anchoring points or something similar(. Ie - something that the testers decided was worthy of a deduction. Like when they mark down a car because the foot well is pushed in a few inches more.

Realistically, both cars are very safe.

akirby

Pictures are too large to embed.

Interior:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/11/06_fusionsport2010.jpg

Exterior (Sport)
http://cache.jalopnik.com/assets/images/gallery/12/2008/11/medium_3042372762_c3d- b79e048_o.jpg

akirby

http://jalopnik.com/photogallery/10fusionhybridpress/1004693069?viewSize=thumb80- 0x800

stephen987

Love the interior! The nose is a little too much like the new Taurus for my taste, but that wouldn't keep me from buying the car.

Other things, not related to the quality of the car itself, might. . .

aviboy97

I actually like the look of the Fusion. Ford did a good job with it. This is probably the most extensive refresh I have ever seen. With new engine / tranny choices and new sheet metal, this is more like a totally new model.

mz6greyghost

Pardon me, while I add the Fusion to my short list of cars I'm looking to purchase in the summer of 2010.

In a word, nice! I really like the interior, and if the materials are any better than in the current car, even better.