Midsize Sedans 2.0

backy

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.

drwilsc

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....

backy

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

jeffyscott

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.

kdshapiro

"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.

lilengineerboy

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.

backy

Isn't the Accord a mid-sized sedan? :confuse:

thegraduate

In sunroof-equipped models, yes. In LX and LX-P models, it is full size (just barely).

jeffyscott

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

elroy5

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.

csandste

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.

backy

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?

maxamillion1

The Accord has been voited INTERNATIONAL car of the year.

jeffyscott

But the Accord in the rest of the world is not the US version, is it?

aviboy97

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.

aviboy97

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.

backy

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.

hackd

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?

elroy5

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.

pengwin

aren't the aura and the Malibu the same car?

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

lilengineerboy

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.

backy

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?

pengwin

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.

maxamillion1

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.

elroy5

Thanks for answering Backy's question for me Max.

backy

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.

maxamillion1

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.

pengwin

the aura looks a LOT better than the malibu.

thegraduate

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!

urnews

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.