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!
Are you currently car shopping and intentionally avoiding vehicles with all of the flashy new infotainment and technology features? Are you considering an older car just to avoid the complex tech, or trying to find a new model that’s as basic as possible? If so, a reporter would love to speak to you. Please send a note to [email protected] with your information by the end of the day on Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2019.

Midsize Sedans 2.0



  • Me neither but I've heard the same thing and have watched several online demos and videos of Sync in action. If we get another Ford I'm definitely paying the $300 for Sync. I'm sold.

    What will the 2008 Accord voice commands control? Sync allows you to control everything from your bluetooth cell phone (which can be in your purse or pocket) right down to the mp3 player you have plugged into the USB port. That USB port allows you to get software/feature updates into the system using your own USB drive too IIRC. Pretty cool IMO.

    Due to a somewhat sudden change of events, the Accord is likely to get flipped for a Fusion or Focus, and whatever I get will have Sync. I am anxious to try it out.
  • tedebeartedebear Posts: 832
    My Sebring with MyGIG has voice activation that works great. I think I remember reading in the manual that it has a 1,000 word vocabulary. It's fun to play with as I cruise along.

    The Bluetooth phone interface also works fine. I recently read some comments that others were having trouble getting their systems to recognize their cell phones.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Voice Recognition works! That is why I rely on it a lot. The new Accord's is even better (than my TL), especially when it comes to NAV related functions. The only challenge happens when someone "naughty" happens to be in the car, who takes pleasure in confusing the system.

    As for touch screen, it isn't as better than an intuitively laid out dash, but it reduces number of "buttons" by getting only the selections related to function you chose. I agree, real buttons are better, but not always. They need to be laid out well, and distinctly marked (that they require no more than a glance, just like it would be with touch screen), and can be felt with a little learning. That takes me back to Honda, and why I feel they know how to get those little things done, well (but apparently, few recognize the point of having mostly dedicated buttons). Take a look here again...
    Voice Recognition works! Thats why I rely on it for most part. The new Accord's is even better (than my TL), especially when it comes to NAV related functions.

    As for touch screen, it isn't as better than an intuitively laid out dash (again, tough to beat Honda there, although, it is quite a challenge in my TL to figure out the buttons), but it drastically reduces eyes off the road when I want to use it (which is usually when I'm at a light/stopped). The best bet is with buttons that are not only grouped well but "feel" different than others.


    - Well marked, easy to read buttons
    - Logically grouped
    - Multi-push buttons (like fan speed, category, skip, scan etc) have notches at the end to differentiate from others (that can be "felt" so with a little learning, the driver can simply position the finger and operate them).

    Here is another example of thoughtful design (note the presence of dots)...

    And of course, the buttons on the steering wheel. They are distinctly designed, large enough and easy to read. One of the problems I have had with my TL is between bluetooth selection and voice activation buttons in that they look/feel very similar. Honda addressed that with the new Accord. Now bluetooth selection is flush with the spoke on the rim and voice activation button stays put.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,924
    The 2008 Accord joins the Legacy as the only mid-sized family sedans that are IIHS "top picks", meaning they scored "Good" in front, side, and rear crash tests and have ESC at least optional (but standard on the Accord).

    One question, though: I wonder why the IIHS tested the Accord thoroughly within a month of its introduction, yet the Altima's been out for a year and hasn't been tested by the IIHS for side crashes yet, nor has the Optima, which has been out for over a year and a half in its present form? It's not like the Altima isn't a popular seller. The Optima less so, but it sells more units than many other cars that the IIHS has managed to squeeze into their test schedule in the past 18 months. Interesting...
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    What about the Sonata? Are these cars not on the list because they weren't tested, or because they didn't make the "top safety pick" cut?
  • In the case of both the new Camry, and now the new Accord, IIHS test results are posted almost immediately after official introduction. This begs the question: Is this because of their respective popularity and sales, or payola on the part of manufacturers? No other vehicle or manufacturer results are fast-tracked in this fashion.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Sonata not listed in that news release because it is not a "top safety pick" (or "also ran"). It is listed here:

    with "acceptable" for side, that is why it did not make the list.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Conspiracy theory, again! :sick:

    Of the sixteen vehicles listed in that link (previous post), only one is from 2007 (Kia Optima). 2008 Accord and Camry have been out for couple of months but 2008 Malibu is the newest, and still found itself being tested. Payola?
  • chronochrono Posts: 149
    Well not exactly. It looks like the rear and side impact crash tests were not performed on the 2008 Malibu. Side impact was not tested on the new Altima. Seems fishy to me.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Quit whining. Were Accord and Camry the only cars tested? Do you think they are not interested in testing the newest entries? (then why do they have even the front ratings in yet?)
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,924
    Correct. The Malibu is only there (for frontal impact) because GM did the test--which is the case for most IIHS frontal tests now, if the previous design did well in that test. But IIHS itself does the side and rear tests.

    The current Altima has been out for about a year now and has not been tested for side impact by the IIHS. The 2006.5 Optima came out in 1H 2006 and hasn't been crashed in the side yet either. (And that's significant because if it were to get a Good score on the side crash test, it would be a "Top Pick.") Yet the Accord and Camry get near-immediate testing. And they should--they are popular cars and many people (like me) want to know how they fare in crash tests before buying. But the Altima is one of the top-selling cars, as is the Malibu. IIHS also hasn't tested (side) some other cars that debuted last year but sell in significant numbers, e.g. the mid-sized (interior wise) Elantra and Sentra. Just kind of curious.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    how many 'stars' any given vehicle gets in a crash test? The point being that such things very rarely if ever happen -even though it is a big thing thing if it makes a difference. In my case, I've totalled one car in about 30 yeras of driving, and even that was a case of me being hit hard form the rear - nothing would have saved that particular car and I fortunately was unhurt. A truly SAFE car has more to do with how well it brakes, handles, and/or how much power it has - in that order, and less to do with how well it hits anything. The ability to avoid that accident being the key thing...
  • urnewsurnews Posts: 668
    seen the interior of a new 2008 Malibu yet? The photos I've seen make me think of a circus. Maybe it's not that bad in person. Anyone have any thoughts on this topic?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Posts: 22,712
    > brakes, handles, and/or how much power it has - in that order,

    I agree with you about those factors play above the stars in a staged test. Your collision may not be the same as the staged test therefore a 6 star ability may be only a 2 star crush for your. I am think I agree on your order of those factors.

    I watched a collision of two cars Saturday. Brakes made the collision a whole lot less energy. The young, inexperienced driver hit the brakes for a good second of screaching rubber and burned off a lot of energy. The Saturn rear end was admirable in handlig the collision and the front of the Cobalt RS absorbed the 35-40 mph without appearing to move the front cradle--the wheels looked in place.

    A more experienced driver would have steered right onto the berm and low ditch and gone around the Saturn who had started to move forward upon seeing the driver behind not stopping. The Cobalt stayed straight with the braking and probably could have steered off to the right. and gone around. The 17-year old was so startled he probably had no brain at that time other than brakes and stay on the road. He probably felt he was a great driver before the accident but didn't realize the lack of training and always looking or the out in case of an accident. Just had a kid go through a good driver training course where that was emphasized continually---the out in case of the unexpected.

    The 17-year old showed no contrition as mom and a younger brother picked him up in an older van. His body language looked like he was having a good time.

    Oh, the accident was because he was digging for, reaching for a cell phone.

    Yes, I take straight braking ability with antilocks as most important. Handling overall is second. But handling doesn't mean ability to turn corners at 50 mph in city streets and taking curves at 30 over the marked speed; it means keeping its feet when a car is asked to do avoidance maneuvers. It doesn't have to be graceful while doing it--just capable.

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

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    IIHS testing doesn't rate based on stars (NHTSA does that). IIHS testing is more towards helping insurance companies figure out "liabilities" in a car.

    I can't speak for IIHS since it is just another safety rating system but since you brought it up, NHTSA's star rating has some holes that I noticed. For example, side crash test rating measures injury in three areas (head, chest and pelvic) in terms of forces subjected to each of them. However, in their final rating system, they use only chest. A car doing marginally better in protecting chest, but significantly worse than another in protecting head and pelvic area would get 5-stars but the other would get 4-stars. I've yet to figure out why they would measure three, but use one.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,924
    Yes, I care about how much protection a car provides in a crash. I also care about how well the car stops, steers, and moves. But when driving in traffic, there's always the chance that someone will hit my car no matter what I do to avoid it. Another thing to consider is that I'm not the only person who will drive my next car. Most likely my wife and kids will drive it sometimes, and I'll hand it down to my daughter in a few years for college. So I want the most active and passive safety I can get in a mid-sized family car. I'll take a "Good" crash test score over a lesser score any day, even if it improves my odds of walking out of a crash without serious injury only a little bit.
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Alamogordo, NMPosts: 7,615
    phone he was gonna text-message on it.

    It's bad enough to have people exhibit that "spaced-out" glare and dorky, buzzed-out driving we have to live with when they're driving and talking on their cell-phones at the same time. But when they text-message while driving that is heightened stupidity personified.

    2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed

  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    Yes, I care about how much protection a car provides in a crash. I also care about how well the car stops, steers, and moves
    as we all do - but given 'safety' also generally comes with a size and weight penalty, are you willing to sacrifice some of that evasive capability for some better performance in some industry (or governmental) crash test.? Any one of those attributes (braking/handling/power) we use most every day, how often do any of us hit anything hard enough even to get the airbags to deploy? The obvious 'duh' answer to that has to be 'it only has to happen once' but my question is do we really and truly disqualify an otherwise good car just because the NHTSA for example has decided that you don't want to get hit in a certain manner?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Like everything else, it can't be the sole reason, but can be one of the major reasons.

    Would you buy a car that had excellent dynamic ability but structurally challenged in crash tests for yourself and family?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,924
    how often do any of us hit anything hard enough even to get the airbags to deploy?

    Once would be more than enough. I've never done it, but my oldest son has. I'm glad that car had frontal airbags. No injury except a little scrape on one arm.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    I think crash testing is necessary because it makes sure the cars are as safe as they can be. How well a car maneuvers can also make it safer than another. How large a vehicle is also helps in crashes. Each person has to decide how important these things are to him/her. Personally, I will not buy an Excursion or Hummer, because I have a better chance of surviving a crash in one. I would rather go with a car that maneuvers better, and maybe avoid a collision with less chance of a rollover. If I have a decision to make between two cars, and one car does better on crash testing, and the other may maneuver a little better, I will take the better crash test score.
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    IIRC, all vehicles sold after September 1, 2007 are required to have NHTSA ratings displayed on the window.
  • csandstecsandste Posts: 1,866
    I assume you're talking about the 2 tone brown interior. It's much better in person.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    I agree that it is strange that IIHS has not bothered to test the Altima, particularly since IIHS says in their FAQ that: We try to cover as much of the marketplace as we can, choosing vehicles to test that represent a range of manufacturers and the largest portions of new car sales.

    You'd think the a model with sales of 200,000+, and the third biggest selling midsize (and 8th best selling vehicle, overall) would have fit in their schedule at some time in the last year. :confuse:
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    If I read it right (from IIHS), they did start with Altima frontal crash test which failed to deploy thorax/curtain airbags when done by Nissan. Eventually, IIHS conducted a second test on it (hence the rating) when it worked fine. So, there might have been a delay for that reason. It has also been rated for rear impact safety. Side crash hasn't been done yet.

    I also noticed they don't test every model every year. This is the first time since 2004 that Accord has been tested for side impact. In fact, Fusion is perhaps the only cars in the list tested two years in a row (2006, 2007).
  • I also noticed they don't test every model every year. This is the first time since 2004 that Accord has been tested for side impact.

    That's because the last "new" model was in '03, and it doesn't make any sense for the IIHS to retest a car that hasn't been significantly revised.

    In fact, Fusion is perhaps the only cars in the list tested two years in a row (2006, 2007).

    The Fusion is the exception in this case, because in '06, they only tested a non-airbag equipped model, and received poor ratings because of it. In '07, Ford had it tested again with side airbags and the results improved because of it.
  • urnewsurnews Posts: 668
    I assume you're talking about the 2 tone brown interior. It's much better in person.

    The one I saw in a photo was orange (lighter color) and brown. According to reviews, several color combinations will be available.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The one I saw in a photo was orange (lighter color) and brown. According to reviews, several color combinations will be available.

    I looked at the different color combinations, and none of them seemed right. All of the colors seem strange/odd (colors I've never seen before). Who wants an Orange interior?
  • Just returned form the Post Office. As I walked out I hit the remote start button on my Aura XR keyfob. The engine started like always, but this time there was a man walking between my car and his, 2008 Jaguar 3.0 sedan, in BRG :shades:
    He stopped dead in his tracks, staring into my car. I walked up and hit the unlock button when he said, your car started itself. I smiled and said Yup. It likes to do that when it see's me coming.
    He said, expletive deleted, I just paid $63000 for this new Jag and it doesn't do that. Shaking his head as he got in his beautiful Jag.

    I got in and chuckled to myself knowing he could have bought three Aura XR's for the price of his (Ford) British tin. :shades:
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,870
    What is the benefit of starting the car with remote as you are walking toward it instead of turning the ignition key? Do you still have to put the key in the ignition before you can drive the car?
Sign In or Register to comment.