Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Notice that the next 6 is larger. Someone mentioned that it will get the 3.7L V6 but I've only heard of it getting the Mazdafied version of the 3.5L. The 2.5L I4 seems to be true too. I wonder if the 6 will get AWD as an option too?
They started hitting the lots last week. Ford said Spring of 2007 and it currently is Spring of 2007 by my calculations.
This is what Honda has been doing for years, hence the Accord EX-L (and available with a manual transmission to boot!!), and the Fusion is available with a 4cyl and the SEL trim level.
I wonder when the 4 cylinder from the Mazda6 will hit the Fusion.
Most people don't budget $30K for a car, spend $20K and then take $10K and just spend it. While I'm glad you like the Mazda, it would not be my choice. I would gladly spend more to have the car I want and feel I got more in the process.
That's the thing though...I got exactly what I wanted for a lot less money than I originally budgeted for. I budgeted between 20 and 25k for my purchase and I knew that I wanted something pretty fun to drive, something that had a comfortable back seat, and preferrably had a good deal of hauling capability. After my test drives, I thought the Accord, Legacy GT, and Mazda6 would meet my needs, so the shopping began. Once I saw what I could get a Mazda6 for, I jumped at the chance. It's been a great car that has exceeded my expectations. I'm sure I would have been happy with the other choices also, but looking back, I'm sure I would make the same choice today as I did over a year ago.
And why the h*** would I want to buy an Accent? Just cuz it's cheap? When I buy something, I want something that I actually want. Not something I buy and regret later and end up spending more for what I really wanted... I still had criteria that I was going to use so I made sure I got what I wanted; something reliable, fun, practical, and comfortable. And I ended up with something that looked good too!
I'm just saying that saving on up-front costs was more than just a number; it was money that could be used to get a great tv, a good camera, a better shifter, a nicer looking car, and a great storage system for the hatchback. These were things that I was going to buy anyway, but knowing that I got all these things sooner while still staying under budget is a huge bonus.
I think his point was that you could put your savings on your car (the difference of the money budgeted vs the amount spent) in a savings or investment account or similar, not that you should have gotten a less expensive vehicle. He was saying the amount you had left over "budgeted" was about the cost of a Accent.
Misinformation?
Ford needs to get some communication going between those bean counters controlling things and those salespeople that promise things - a problem in Dearborn for several years now.
The Duratec30 in the Five Hundred and Freestyle are low in the HP range but do perform rather well due to their CVT transmissions. From a marketing standpoint though, you are right, it was a "fatal" flaw.
Now this I like! I'd much rather pay a small premium for a diesel engine than pay a HUGE premium for a hybrid that I know I'll never make the cost up for. At least with the diesel I know I'll make the extra cost up relatively quickly and not have to deal with the hybrid quirks.
I concur and other automakers are following suit - I believe Nissan is looking at a diesel as well. I wonder if GM still has any relationship with Isuzu (Chevette/Luv diesels back in the day were Isuzu designs).
And I don't think the 3.5 was ever promised as a 2007 model. Please provide a link.
As baggs32 said the 3.5 was supposed to be ready for the Five Hundred debut but it was delayed. However I don't think that it was ever promised for 2007.
I believe there is still an Isuzu branded copy of the Trailblazer and Colorado so I'd guess yes. However I don't see GM putting a diesel in the Malibu or any other car they make in this class.
IIRC the Mazda6 and Ford Modeo use a Ford or Mazda diesel in Europe so who knows there.
By then, it will be 10 years behind the Nissan VQ, 7 or 8 behind the Honda V6, and 5 behind the Toyota 2GR/Hyundai 3.3 and likely still not as good as any of them are today. Not to mention a solid 25 or 30hp (or more) - too little too late!
in 2010 nissan will be making a maxima diesel available for sale in NA. But the other big advantage to the diesel is its longevity. you can put 300-400-500 thousand miles or more on one. Just drain the water separator and fuel filter every so often, and replace the fuel filter every 10k or so and it will run forever.
Yea but the engine, if properly maintained, isn't the thing that's gonna break first. More like transmissions, pumps, seals, timing chains, brakes etc.
The seats, carpeting, accessories etc. all get ancient and crusty - who wants to be surrounded by that for many years? Not me. Kinda depressing.
I like the new car thing.
Ford has earned that emotion.
I like the new car thing.
Wow, I want your salary
However, you are probably correct in Ford's applied value-engineering. It may have been something totally different in the hands of Porsche. It is a rough-sounding engine, but once you look at the block, and underside design, of the engine, it's apparent the design didn't originate in Dearborn. The bottom end - externally - looks very European.
Here's a copy-and-paste from WikiPedia on the DuraTec engine:
"The 2.5 L and 3.0 L V6 Duratecs are evolutions of the same design, first used in the 1994 Ford Mondeo. It is a modern aluminum DOHC V6 with a 60° bank angle. The primary engineering input came from Porsche, who were developing a similar V6 before selling the engineering to Ford, and Cosworth, who helped with cylinder head manufacturing.
The Jaguar AJ-V6 engine is similar but adds variable valve timing. Mazda's AJ version also has this feature."
Porsche and Cosworth (Mike Costin/Keith Duckworth) - not a bad lineage, even though the execution may not be to one's liking.
And I guess you haven't been reading the posts in this forum??
I wonder why this post was not removed?? :confuse:
Once again here we go.. if it were a Honda or Toyota plant, no questions asked they would get it righ the first time right??
Why the chip on your shoulder? He said nothing of the sort. It seems like you are resentful of having a Ford by making comments like that.
Why do it?
Their cars are, however, improving - finally - albeit with some rather ancient technologies. It is a fact that as go the (what used to be) Big 3, so goes the country. It is better for all of us that Ford, if it can continue to mfgr. in this country, if it sells a bunch of whatever they attempt to sell and if it makes a good solid profit doing it, does well. A helluva lot of 'ifs'. Wish them luck actually, they will need it, because none of these things are happening now or are they likely to happen in the forseeable future. In which case, this great country of ours will be facing the biggest business failure in history.
to get back on this thread though, I'd hate to see truly good 'niche' cars like the Mazda 3/6s (blown 4 bangers notwithstanding), go down with the ship. My prediction - by 2010 or 12 Mazda will be sold off in a last ditch effort by its parent company to stay afloat and a few years later will become again the innovative and independent company (Toyo Koygo(?)) they once were.
Depends on your definition of "good" I guess. The 2.5L in the Contour SVT, the 170hp 4-cyl in the Focus SVT, and the 3.4L from the last SHO Taurus come to mind as "better than average" engines (for their time).
That'd be me your waving the wacking stick at AGAIN. I never said this you did. I simply state the Accord/Camry have a whole lot riding on a PAST reputation. Reputations fade. I am just one consumer who saw past all the CR.. and went back to spending less on vehicles, saving thousands of dollars in both interest and initial cost. Got rid of my Accord and never looked back..
Wrong, I have a friend who actually manages a Honda dealership. His sales people alway use the Honda reliability card. Bashing other makes/models.. using the scare tactics.. It was used on me when I bought my Accord in 2000 and I FELL for it... Not again, never.. Once bitten, twice shy.. :shades:
The thing is, its not that you "saw past the CR." You didn't like the car. Saying you don't like the car is perfectly valid. I didn't pick up a Consumer Reports before getting my Honda, so that alone makes "seeing past it" quite difficult. I DROVE the car, and compared it with other cars I DROVE. You can't make a judgement from words and pictures, you have to feel it.
Those that buy it (as has been said before) likely don't spend $20,000 on a car that someone else likes that they don't care for. They had to like it too, unless they've been labotomized.
Someone told you the car was reliable, even though the engine was loud and not refined to you you still bought it? Why buy something on reliability alone?
I just can't fathom spending $5,000 or more without trying out what I'm buying first (be it a TV, boat, car, or anything).
I can explain this to you.. TAX BREAKS.. I have personally been to one of these transplants you love... Hate to burst your bubble. But here goes. Americans ASSEMBLE the cars only. Most of the high paying, skilled work force is Japanese. Most of the tooling is Japanese, all of the replacement parts for the tooling.. Japanese. Should I go on?
And pay taxes on what they earn. Once again, this has nothing to do with comparing sedans' characteristics, does it? (I'm not just directing this at scape)
Why are you so down on Ford? Grad, Accordman, and you are always bashing Ford. You post that Ford "runs out of money". You are so out of the loop its insane!! Ford only lost money in its North American operation. Ford is doing fine in Europe and Asia. If anything, Ford may pull out of NA all together. Ford will survive as much as you don't want them too, obviously by all your bashing.. :shades:
What difference does it make who designed the Fusion engine? Does it make it run smoother, quieter, more fuel efficient, or more powerful? Nope.
You beat me to it! this room is full of Ford bashing and misinformation about Ford. When I correct, I get slammed!.
Taurus is not behind schedule. As a matter of fact, Ford is ramping up 3.5 engine capacity as we speak. The Taurus/Sable are just the first to get the new 3.5. Looks like the Fusion/Milan may get it in 2008/09 time frame. Just in time for a model redo..
Dude, chill...
Why get ticked off by such a thing? If some posters are posting incorrect information then it's up to every single one of us to make that correction. That's that, nothing more to it. People make mistakes, some are intentional but MOST ARE UNINTENTIONAL. Is that so hard to understand?
People who don't like Ford doesn't mean they are out to challenge you or make you mad. They just have a DIFFERENT OPINION, that all. Last I checked, this is still a free country right?
To make this post not totally irrelevant...
I made this statement before and here I'll say it again:
If one can't see the reason to pay the premium for Accord/Camry/Altima then one shouldn't. By all means go get the less expensive midsizer like Fusion and Sonata. Since in this case he/she would just be paying more for absolutely nothing. However, for those who can justify why the premium is worth it (like me) then there is also nothing wrong to opt for the more expensive camcords. At the end of the day...
to each of his/her own.
It would bode well for Ford to put the 2.5 in the Fusion/Milan and have at least 175HP mated to a 6speed auto/manual box. I don't see this happening, if at all until 09 model upgrade.
Why was this a "fatal flaw"??? :confuse: Because once again on paper the 500/Montego didn't do 0-60 in 5.2 seconds?? The DT moved the 500/Montego just fine. It is a relaible and trustworthy engine. The drive train on the 500/Montego is quite and sure. It is obvious to me you have never driven one. Ever thought there is more to a car other than 0-60 numbers??
Probably because it is the first detriment mentioned in most tests of that car. It was referred to as loud, and underpowered for the weight it was pulling. What do you mean it was quite and sure? I don't get it...
And, it isn't a midsize sedan.
**************
Fortunately, the Five Hundred is one tasty box of sorry-about-that candy. Our example is a six-speed front-drive version (a CVT is also available, as is all-wheel drive), powered by the only engine choice at the moment, a much-modified 3.0-liter Duratec V-6. At a modest 203 horses, the power deficit is a bit much even for the close-ratio automatic to offset (wriggling through the cut-and-thrust of modern urban traffic produces an auditory spectacle of roaring downshifts).
****************
Highs: Classy looks outside and in, huge interior space, whopper trunk, Vista Cruiser view all around.
Lows: Underachiever V-6, six-speed auto too reluctant to downshift, front buckets are back killers.
*****************
These are from two different sources.
REgards:
Oldengineer
you make it sound like "fatal flaw" means the car won't move! Or does 0-60 in 15 seconds.. when in all actuality 0-60 in the 500 with the DT 3.0 is from 7.3 - 7.5 depending on what review you want to believe. Please, stop spreading this misinformation.
This is your opinion.. The DT 3.0 spins up nicely and is just as quiet as your Toyota or Honda engine in normal driving conditions. This was proven way, back when someone posted the DB noise levels. And, before you jump.. Yes, the DT 3.0 is a bit more noisy than both the Honda and Toyota at FULL Throttle, once again.. FULL THROTTLE. I highly doubt most people drive around at full throttle.. :shades: