Midsize Sedans 2.0

sda

andres3 said:

imidazol97 said:

benjaminh said:

A second improvement over my wife's 2013 Accord is the aluminum hood. It's much lighter! Not that it's so hard to lift a regular hood, but this one feels like it weighs half as much as the ones on previous Accords.

Does any other midsize sedan have an aluminum hood?

My '14 Malibu's hood is aluminum. My 2003 leSabre's hood was aluminum.
Don't think Accord's got anything new there. Probably a little late to the party.

To be fair, Buick is/was supposed to be upscale, whereas Honda is for mere peasants. As for the Malibu having aluminum for at least the last 2 years, that's a good sign of some positive change at GM.

"whereas Honda is for mere peasants" Really? LOL

andres3

sda said:

andres3 said:

imidazol97 said:

benjaminh said:

A second improvement over my wife's 2013 Accord is the aluminum hood. It's much lighter! Not that it's so hard to lift a regular hood, but this one feels like it weighs half as much as the ones on previous Accords.

Does any other midsize sedan have an aluminum hood?

My '14 Malibu's hood is aluminum. My 2003 leSabre's hood was aluminum.
Don't think Accord's got anything new there. Probably a little late to the party.

To be fair, Buick is/was supposed to be upscale, whereas Honda is for mere peasants. As for the Malibu having aluminum for at least the last 2 years, that's a good sign of some positive change at GM.

"whereas Honda is for mere peasants" Really? LOL

Well, you get the idea. Although a fully tarted up Honda is getting might expensive these days. Still, out of all the "economical" brands, I don't see anyone making anything that would be very compelling to avoid another Civic or Accord if I was shopping in those segments.

Not outright saying Honda is the best of the affordable brands, but they seem to be doing just fine despite the alien bug-like looks of their new cars.

benjaminh

Pix showing the LED fog lights and the mpg...

sda

benjaminh said:

Pix showing the LED fog lights and the mpg...

Excellent. I have been very pleased with the mpg and overall performance of the 2.4 Accord.

andres3

OK, so how much does a brand new Accord EX cost these days?

benjaminh

andres3 said:

OK, so how much does a brand new Accord EX cost these days?

$27,215 is the msrp on the 2016 Accord EX with shipping, but discounts of 4000+ are possible. And so 23k + TTL is possible, with 0.9% financing from Honda for 5 years thrown in. They are blowing them out the doors since the (identical) 2017s are already on the lots. It's a great time to buy.

brian125

andres3 said:

OK, so how much does a brand new Accord EX cost these days?

In SoCal 2016 Accords are selling between 2500 to 3k below invoice.

nyccarguy

Hey @brian125 - I'm here in Myrtle Beach for a couple of days. Boy is it HOT!

brian125

nyccarguy

Yes sir it gets hot there in the summer . My house is 10 miles outside of Myrtle Beach. If I was there I'd have you stop by. To bad ............................... enjoy and have a safe trip home

akirby

nyccarguy said:

Hey @brian125 - I'm here in Myrtle Beach for a couple of days. Boy is it HOT!

Try being a few hours inland (Atlanta). It's even worse. 2nd hottest summer ever so far.

sda

benjaminh said:

berri said:

So what are the things you don't like as much?

Well, the rather baroque alloy wheels on the EX/EXL take some getting used to. They are directional and have blacked out areas, and so they remind me a bit of a pinwheel. Honestly, they just seem a bit odd, like they are trying too hard. Bling gone overboard?

On the other hand I find the wheels on my '13 EX to be bland, generic looking. It is hard to find that attractive middle ground. What trim level does your wife have, an EX?

benjaminh

sda said:

benjaminh said:

berri said:

So what are the things you don't like as much?

Well, the rather baroque alloy wheels on the EX/EXL take some getting used to. They are directional and have blacked out areas, and so they remind me a bit of a pinwheel. Honestly, they just seem a bit odd, like they are trying too hard. Bling gone overboard?

On the other hand I find the wheels on my '13 EX to be bland, generic looking. It is hard to find that attractive middle ground. What trim level does your wife have, an EX?

Agree.

My wife has a 2013 EXL navi, but I think she has the same wheels as the EX. As you say, good enough but rather plain.

I'm actually warming up to my new wheels, even if they have maybe a little too much pizzazz.

PS I really like the alloy wheels on the Acura TLX 2.4. To me those are about the right balance between bold and classy.

benjaminh

Of the midsize rental cars I've driven, I think I like the Hyundai Sonata best. The standard features on the Sonata for 2016 are quite impressive—heated mirrors, XM radio, split folding rear seats, and AndroidAuto—which as I've found on my 2016 Accord EX is a very useful feature for Google maps/navigation, etc. But the Sonata has AndroidAuto on the base model, making it a real bargain. And more than that, although with good negotiation you can get c. $4000 off of msrp on the last of the 2016 Accords, you can get as much as $7000 of the msrp on the last of the 2016 Sonatas. My local Hyundai dealer has a 2016 Sonata SE advertised for just $15,900, which is an incredible deal for this good midsize car.

http://www.oxmoorhyundai.com/inventory/2016-hyundai-sonata-se-fwd-4d-sedan-5npe24af0gh307577

suydam

I've only gotten the base Sonata as a rental, and it isn't much. Car companies do themselves no favors by sending their lowest cost cars to fleets.

benjaminh

suydam said:

I've only gotten the base Sonata as a rental, and it isn't much. Car companies do themselves no favors by sending their lowest cost cars to fleets.

I agree that a base Sonata is not as nice as an Accord LX, even if the Sonata has a few more features thrown in. But for the low, low price the Sonata is still a lot of car for the money. The Sonata has also seemed slightly higher in quality to me in some places than the base Camrys and base Altimas I've also driven as rentals.

But Honda bravely refuses to make the Accord into a rental car, which I appreciate.

I personally think that the 2016 EX I just got is the sweet spot in the Accord line-up. It's kind of Acura-like in some ways, and beyond Acura at this point in terms of having AndroidAuto, and yet it costs significantly less. It's not quite as quiet or luxurious as a TLX, but the Accord is still luxurious by my perhaps low standards, and it has a lot of practical and easy-to-use technology.

benjaminh

Something that makes me happy about my new Accord is that the engine was made in Ohio, the transmission was made there too, and it was also built in Ohio. Nice to know our hard-earned dollars are going to support jobs in the USA....

roadburner

All of my cars make me smile- their place of origin notwithstanding.
Although I must admit that it warms my heart to get flipped off by a guy in a car or truck wearing a UAW sticker...

benjaminh

Just took a necessary 145 mile highway trip and got 39 mpg with the AC on going c. 70 mph. Seems like that's not far off from a hybrid? Although maybe I'm fooling myself there....Anyway, it's about 9 mpg higher than my 2008 Accord with the manual transmission for this exact same trip. I slightly miss shifting—but not 9 mpg worth! I know that the transmission is probably more likely about half of the difference, but it's still significant. At 70 with the CVT I have c. 1900 rpm on the tach on my 2016, while it was close to 3000 rpm with the 5 speed manual in the 2008 at that speed. That's a lot of gas right there....

My total mpg, as you see, is c. 30. But that includes some short hilly treks to Kroger that get c. 15 mpg.

andres3

benjaminh said:

Just took a necessary 145 mile highway trip and got 39 mpg with the AC on going c. 70 mph. Seems like that's not far off from a hybrid? Although maybe I'm fooling myself there....Anyway, it's about 9 mpg higher than my 2008 Accord with the manual transmission for this exact same trip. I slightly miss shifting—but not 9 mpg worth! I know that the transmission is probably more likely about half of the difference, but it's still significant. At 70 with the CVT I have c. 1900 rpm on the tach on my 2016, while it was close to 3000 rpm with the 5 speed manual in the 2008 at that speed. That's a lot of gas right there....

My total mpg, as you see, is c. 30. But that includes some short hilly treks to Kroger that get c. 15 mpg.

That's impressive gas mileage. Who needs a hybrid or diesel now?

akirby

Hybrids aren't that much better than non hybrids on the highway. They excel in city/stop and go driving.

benjaminh

andres3 said:

That's impressive gas mileage. Who needs a hybrid or diesel now?

And at this point a new Altima, Passat, and maybe one or two other midsize cars would probably do just as well on the highway.

benjaminh

And speaking of high highway mpg, some people with the 2016 Civic turbo are getting as much as 50 mpg....

http://www.civicx.com/threads/gas-mileage.2386/page-10

stickguy

might have to look at them too! Actually, I already planned to.

my kids both have 1.8t Jettas, and will easily get 39+ on trips, without babying it.

benjaminh

from
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2016/08/usa-best-selling-cars-july-2016-sales-figures.html
Best-Selling Car
July 2016 compared with July 2016; 2016 YTD compared to 2015 YTD
#1
Toyota Camry
34,122 38,435 -11.2% 233,882 254,251 -8.0%
#2
Honda Civic
32,952 31,139 5.8% 222,792 189,440 17.6%
#3
Honda Accord
31,946 34,496 -7.4% 201,300 190,242 5.8%
#4
Toyota Corolla
31,717 30,249 4.9% 213,910 220,380 -2.9%
#5
Nissan Altima
24,949 33,842 -26.3% 197,644 205,873 -4.0%
#6
Ford Fusion
24,007 25,105 -4.4% 170,840 178,263 -4.2%
#7
Hyundai Sonata
20,635 23,917 -13.7% 125,044 119,738 4.4%
#8
Hyundai Elantra
20,629 22,135 -6.8% 116,935 150,833 -22.5%
#9
Nissan Sentra
18,536 18,511 0.1% 141,550 124,412 13.8%
#10
Ford Focus
13,973 17,027 -17.9% 117,117 134,106 -12.7%

benjaminh

Interesting article in Bloomberg:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-31/nissan-chases-u-s-sales-gains-as-discounts-lift-it-beyond-honda

"Nissan Motor Co. is growing faster in the U.S. than any mass-market carmaker and edged past rival Honda Motor Co. in this year’s first half. That might not be a good thing for Nissan’s bottom line....In the first half, Nissan sold almost 800,000 vehicles in the U.S., beating Honda by about 6,000....

For Nissan, fleet sales rose 42 percent in the first five months of the year to 175,505, according to the most recent data from R.L. Polk & Co., as Honda sold fewer than 10,000 vehicles to fleets. Most of Nissan’s fleet sales went to rental agencies, which tend to buy cars at a discount and order them with fewer price-boosting options than those sold to individual consumers. Without fleet sales, Honda would have outsold Nissan in the U.S.....

Nissan has also stepped up its incentives, averaging about $3,400 a vehicle this year through June, a 6 percent increase from a year earlier, according to Autodata Corp. Honda’s average was $1,630, down 11 percent. Among mass-market automakers, only the U.S. companies spent more than Nissan."

It was the best of times for Nissan, but it was also the most heavily incentivized and reliant on fleet sales of times?

Still, Nissan has seemingly passed Honda by a small margin. Will Honda be able to catch up in the last months of the year?

stickguy

Honda always has seemed to have the smart LT vision. Sell a few less units maybe, but get more for them (can do that with a nicer product).

and man, the Civic is certainly a rousing success. See what happens when you redo a model and make it vastly better?

andres3

stickguy said:

Honda always has seemed to have the smart LT vision. Sell a few less units maybe, but get more for them (can do that with a nicer product).

and man, the Civic is certainly a rousing success. See what happens when you redo a model and make it vastly better?

You mean as opposed to making low-cost bare bones value rent-mobiles ala Altima? The last time I looked at a rental lot it seemed Nissan's had taken over the world. I look in my companies parking lot and don't see but one or two Altima's though.

Sandman6472

They did a nice job on the new Ciivc but let's be honest, the last generation sucked so bad that after the 2011 model, they had to redo it. So, about time they finally got their [non-permissible content removed] together on the Civic. Owned a 2006 model and liked it a lot and would recommend this new model to ,y kid as her next ride. As for me, not sure I'd ever go back to a Civic.

The Sandman

stickguy

among the many cars I owned over the years was 1 Civic. a 1984 S. the year before it became an Si. Cute little hatchback that was fun to drive. Used of course.

Michaell

stickguy said:

among the many cars I owned over the years was 1 Civic. a 1984 S. the year before it became an Si. Cute little hatchback that was fun to drive. Used of course.

I almost bought an Si in 1991. This was when A/C and stereos were optional with Hondas.

Ended up with a Nissan Sentra SE (not an SE-R, out of the budget).

andres3

My wife's first car (she was a late bloomer to getting a driver's license was a 10 year old '92 Civic DX hatchback with 4-speed Auto.

It was a quick little 3-door son of a gun. Bought it with 166,000 miles on the clock and didn't flinch. Got to 200K miles with little issues and enjoyed a healthy resale value.

She ended up buying 2 more Civic's before leaving Honda for VW.

benjaminh

andres3 said:

My wife's first car (she was a late bloomer to getting a driver's license was a 10 year old '92 Civic DX hatchback with 4-speed Auto.

It was a quick little 3-door son of a gun. Bought it with 166,000 miles on the clock and didn't flinch. Got to 200K miles with little issues and enjoyed a healthy resale value.

She ended up buying 2 more Civic's before leaving Honda for VW.

The Civic certainly has grown. A 1992 Civic hatchback was 160 inches long.

Even the 1992 Civic sedan was only 173 inches long and 67 inches wide.

A 2016 Civic is 183 inches long and 71 inches wide.

Compare that to a 1994 Accord sedan, which was 184 inches x 70 inches.

In other words, a 2016 Civic is almost exactly the same size as a 1994 Accord.

But the 1994 Accord got a combined EPA mpg of 23, while the 2016 Civic gets 35, which is a 50+% increase in mpg.

benjaminh

The midsize segment as a whole continues to shrink. It's now down almost 7% for the year, and down by more than 13% in July compared to July of 2015. This is one reason why great deals can be had across the board—there are too many midsize cars trying to chase too few buyers.

From the WSJ:

Midsize 269,688 -13.4 1,932,610 -6.7

stickguy

I know that CUVs have been doing the most damage, but the big compacts/small mid size (jetta, civic, elantra now) models are also taking a slice of that pie. I actually think the mid size models (including mine!) are bigger than a lot of people need, including me. Next time, if I get a sedan, I am probably going down in size a bit.

benjaminh

Midsize sales for July. Except for the Legacy, every single midsize car declined compared to last year, some by significant numbers:

Camry 34,122 -11.2%

Accord 31,946 -7.4%

Altima 24,949 -26.3%

Fusion 24,007 -4.4%

Sonata 20,635 -13.7%

Malibu 11,820 -26.2%

Optima 9,780 -22.7%

Passat 6,549 -5.1%

200 5,474 -43%

Legacy 5,212 +15.8%

6 4,341 -10.3%

benjaminh

Sales in the compact/midsize area look a bit better.

Civic 32,952 +5.8%

Corolla 31,717 +4.9%

Elantra 20,629 -6.8%

Sentra 18,536 +.1%

Focus 13,973 -17.9%

Cruze 13,723 -35.7%

Jetta 11,449 -.2%

Forte 10,303 +30%

3 8,103 -14.7%

Impreza 5,200 -20.3%

Dart 3,341 -42%

benjaminh

One thing that surprises me is the the new KIA Optima has gotten great reviews, with a few even saying since its redesign this year that it's the best overall out of the midsize cars. And yet sales of the Optima declined this month by 23%.

stickguy

Probably because they were giving the old ones away. More people seem to buy on price (or features per $) than actually functional excellence.

m6user

I don't put much stock in monthly numbers. There are too many variables. YTD or quarterly paint a better picture. I thought I just read where the Impeza was doing fantastic. Doesn't look like it when looking at these numbers. But YTD may be completely different.

benjaminh

m6user said:

I don't put much stock in monthly numbers. There are too many variables. YTD or quarterly paint a better picture. I thought I just read where the Impeza was doing fantastic. Doesn't look like it when looking at these numbers. But YTD may be completely different.

Year to date we have a c. -7% decline in the midsize segment as a whole.

The Mazda6 is for some the best car in this segment, and yet it looks like annual sales might be c. 50,000 or so. YTD the Mazda6 is down 25%:

http://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/press-release/july-2016-sales/

YTD Mazda's SUV sales are up c. 8%.

benjaminh

In part because of weak midsize sales, as mentioned, the deals that can be had are sometimes close to incredible. My local Hyundai dealer, for instance, is advertising a 2016 Sonata SE for $15,900. As usual with Sonatas even the base model has lots of equipment, including even CarPlay/AndroidAuto. That price is less than you'd pay not just for a base Civic, but for a base Elantra. That's *a lot* of car for the money.

Or take my case where I just got more than $4000 off of msrp on a loaded 2016 Honda Accord EX, putting it at close to the price of a 2016 Civic EXL.

Someone buying a 2016 Camry today gets 0% financing for 72 months, etc.

Has anyone else seen amazing deals in their neck of the woods on a midsize car?

iluvmysephia1

Wow, $15,900 for a 2016 Hyundai Sonata of any flavor is a great deal. I tend to agree, quarterly or half-yearly numbers tell a better, bigger picture.

suydam

They've just gotten too big. Same reason I don't buy an Impala even if they're cheap. We are looking at either the Mazda 3 or Chevy Volt for our next vehicle.

iluvmysephia1

suydam, I'd take either of those two cars over a new Sonata any day.

benjaminh

suydam said:

They've just gotten too big. Same reason I don't buy an Impala even if they're cheap. We are looking at either the Mazda 3 or Chevy Volt for our next vehicle.

For me, with a family of four and a small dog, the current Accord is the right size. We are taking a car trip to Canada soon, and with our luggage we will be using all the room that the car has—and yes, we're taking the darn dog too lol!

But I can totally see how for you and many others midsize cars have gotten closer to full size and are now too big.

Although actually my 2016 Accord is slightly smaller than my 2008 Accord.

The 2008 Accord had a length of 195 inches, and was c. 73 inches wide, and was 58.1 inches high.

My 2016 Accord is c. 191 inches long, still c.73 inches wide, but now 57.7 inches high. It's still a big car, no doubt about it, but this 9th generation of Accord has slimmed down just a little from the bloat of the 8th generation.

suydam: I've probably asked this before, but I'm forgetting right now why you aren't considering the new Civic. But the Mazda3 is a great car. I personally wouldn't buy a new Chevy I don't think, but that's just me. I'm sure the Volt has a lot of good qualities.

suydam

benjaminh said:

suydam said:

They've just gotten too big. Same reason I don't buy an Impala even if they're cheap. We are looking at either the Mazda 3 or Chevy Volt for our next vehicle.

For me, with a family of four and a small dog, the current Accord is the right size. We are taking a car trip to Canada soon, and with our luggage we will be using all the room that the car has—and yes, we're taking the darn dog too lol!

But I can totally see how for you and many others midsize cars have gotten closer to full size and are now too big.

Although actually my 2016 Accord is slightly smaller than my 2008 Accord.

The 2008 Accord had a length of 195 inches, and was c. 73 inches wide, and was 58.1 inches high.

My 2016 Accord is c. 191 inches long, still c.73 inches wide, but now 57.7 inches high. It's still a big car, no doubt about it, but this 9th generation of Accord has slimmed down just a little from the bloat of the 8th generation.

suydam: I've probably asked this before, but I'm forgetting right now why you aren't considering the new Civic. But the Mazda3 is a great car. I personally wouldn't buy a new Chevy I don't think, but that's just me. I'm sure the Volt has a lot of good qualities.

Yes for families with children a midsize car is probably a must, along with a minivan. But we are empty nesters now, and on the occasions when grown kids visit as long as they they can squeeze in the back seat it's all good.
For some reason I just don't care for the looks of the Civic. Maybe it seems too much like the Accord on the interior and I want something new. I really liked the Accord, but I didn't love it and I'm not sure why. It did everything so effortlessly. The Mazda is a hoot to drive and has terrific maneuverability. And we like the practicality of the hatch.

I would have felt that way about Chevy once. In fact my entire life. But we really like the Buick we have. I test drove the Volt and really liked it. We are doing a lot of start-stop driving in our new area which really kills standard gas powered mpg. But the Volt costs twice as much as the Mazda. So we are dithering.

benjaminh

You probably know this site, but it's a handy way to compare the annual fuel costs of different vehicles:

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbsSelect

Since the Mazda3 gets great gas mileage, the estimated annual fuel costs are only c. $950 based on 15,000 miles a year.

The Volt has electricity and fuel costs of c. $650 a year.

Given the c. $15,000 difference in price between the Mazda3 and the Volt, it would take several decades for the $300 in annual savings to even get close to paying off.

That right there in a nutshell is why electric cars don't sell very well.

Of course, in terms of the larger environmental picture, probably the Volt is the better car, although I still do wonder about the recycling of the batteries in c. 10-15 years.

stickguy

Also empty nesting. But last week had the whole FAmily, 4 adults, in the Jetta and fit just fine. Helps that my 5-2 daughter was driving. Riding behind her, even the S40 was like a limo.

suydam

benjaminh said:

You probably know this site, but it's a handy way to compare the annual fuel costs of different vehicles:

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbsSelect

Since the Mazda3 gets great gas mileage, the estimated annual fuel costs are only c. $950 based on 15,000 miles a year.

The Volt has electricity and fuel costs of c. $650 a year.

Given the c. $15,000 difference in price between the Mazda3 and the Volt, it would take several decades for the $300 in annual savings to even get close to paying off.

That right there in a nutshell is why electric cars don't sell very well.

Of course, in terms of the larger environmental picture, probably the Volt is the better car, although I still do wonder about the recycling of the batteries in c. 10-15 years.

What we are discovering with the Encore is that we are now getting the lower end of the EPA estimates, where we weren't before in more rural driving. I expect that would be the same with the Mazda. There are also several free charging stations around here. I know gas is cheaper now but it's still pretty high in California.

I think most people lease these vehicles figuring they keep improving year after year.
Who knows what we will do!

fushigi

You also need to compare TCO, not just fuel. Example: Hybrids, PHEVs, and electrics are going to need brakes less often due to regenerative braking significantly reducing brake wear.

Of course, if leasing it may not matter as you wouldn't own the car long enough to need some of the stretched out maintenance items. So your buying frequency may matter as well. I'd like to see a 10 year/150K mile TCO comparison as that's closer to my ownership history.