Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Midsize Sedans 2.0

12357543

Comments

  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Odd that you got poor mileage in your Accords. I get 38-40 MPG on strictly highway in my 2006 Accord, and that's with an automatic at 70 MPH. The old one, a 1996, will return 31 MPG at that speed, with A/C. Not bad for a 4-speed that turns 2,800 RPM at 70 MPH.

    We have had to Chryslers, one with a 2.4L 4-cyl (Sebring) and one with the 2.7L. Both cars had transmission issues (refusing to back up on many occasions), and the second one (2.4L) had suspension issues that confused the dealer for 4 months. A horrible creaking/groaning that they heard but could never find. My family traded the car with 35k miles, since the warrany was about to expire and we knew we'd be upside down in repair bills soon after that occurred. I remember the 2.4L was pathetically powered for that car, with something between 11 and 12 seconds to 60 MPH. The Sebring convertible is a HEAVY car. I can't say I remember the mileage they returned (these were some years ago).

    And yes, I think "[non-permissible content removed] cars" as you call them are reliable as a whole. My other daily driver is a 1996 Accord LX with 172,000 miles on it. Hasn't left me stranded a day in its life (which started in my family in November of 1995). Pretty reliable to me. So was my granddad's 260k mile Civic which he sold for $1,000. Not saying other cars aren't reliable though, just that our "[non-permissible content removed] cars" have been the epitomy of reliable transportation, and that I've seen no evidence that tells me my Accord should be any different.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    My other daily driver is a 1996 Accord LX with 172,000 miles on it. Hasn't left me stranded a day in its life (which started in my family in November of 1995)

    Yeah we got a raw deal. The Accord displaced the previous record holder ('83 Reliant) for most times on a hook, and it still doesn't have the miles yours does.

    The new "world" 2.4 seems pretty cool, the Hyundai/Mitsu/DC motor looks cool. I would hardly consider that domestic though, being a Japanese company, a Korean company, and a German company.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Thanks for your impressions of the 2.3, benderofbows. I did not really drive the Mazda6 with Ford's V6 enough to form much of an impression of it. If you had put the 2.3 in the "unrefined" category, then I'd have had to discount your impression of the V6, since I am happy with the 4 (I would not mind more torque off the line, of course).

    The ford V6 I have driven is the old 3.8L, in our Windstar. Now that engine really makes you worry when it revs. OTOH, these "antiquated" pushrod engines seem to generate lots of low end torque...225 ft-lbs at only 3000 rpm in that 3.8L, which is also satisfying in its own way.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    had the experience to drive a new ML320 CDI recently, close to 5000 lbs of SUV. No diesel clatter or other associated ill behavior and the thing 'felt' quick, and indeed is considering the vehicle weight. A rather unusual amount of compression braking though when you let off the gas. Owner was reporting high 20s mpg in strictly big city driving.
    Remarkable drivetrain that is now available in a mid size 'E', expensive as it may be. Honda is reportedly also working on a 'clean' diesel, but I agree the diesel and/or the diesel hybrid may be where we are heading.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    as being illustrated by many of these new V6s - with the increased efficiencies (HP) also comes the increased FE. The two seem to go together. The Toyota 2GR-FS, which I have argued is the most advanced in this group, was originally rated at 280HP (pre the 06 SAE changes) - added 500cc of displacement, some torque, about 80 HP, and a coupla three mpg. From Toyota's standpoint, if they can produce something that wins both the HP and FE 'wars' they would be foolish not to - because both SELL. Besides which, for those folks that put a high priority on FE, the 4 bangers and the hybrids are available. A can't lose situation for the auto buyer?
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    but was light by todays standards and geared very, very low (5th gear at 80mph was 4,000 RPM!).
    the weight would be the thing - but 4000 rpm for 80? 4 banger territory these days and would be actually be high for any of the V6s in this group. My 2GR Toyota with a 5 speed auto is at 2700 for 80 mph and would suggest to you that some of those 'old' 3.8s are turning even less than that.
  • altestaltest Posts: 79
    " I get 38-40 MPG on strictly highway in my 2006 Accord, and that's with an automatic at 70 MPH."

    Wow... that's more than what I get. What's the key? Weather? Tires? The way you drive?

    Enjoy the great mileage :)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The key word there is "Strictly" highway. That means, I fill up at a gas station along the interstate (my usual trips put me on I-65), and fill up within a couple of miles of getting off the interstate. Once I hit my steady speed (70-75 MPG typically), I usually go the ENTIRE trip without ever summoning a downshift, so revs stay at a constant 2,400 or so. These trips were in cooler months with no A/C as well, and never more than two of us in the car. A/C seems to knock 1 MPG off of my regular numbers.

    So, conditions were very conducive to excellent mileage. My typical mileage on my regular route is 29-30 MPG, with 14 miles of interstate, 12 miles of two-lane/four-lane streets. Conservative acceleration is common (rarely topping 3,500 RPM except when I want a grin :)). My dad had a car similar to mine (a 2005 version of the same car), and drove much more aggressively, and in return, averaged about 5 MPG less than I would get on trips. He is constantly summoning a downshift to pass or accelerate, though. Driving style is HUGE in mileage.

    I'm planning a trip to Oklahoma again soon, and will report on the mileage I get on that 1,500 mile trip. It'll be hot (May) and the car will be loaded.
  • "The ford V6 I have driven is the old 3.8L, in our Windstar. Now that engine really makes you worry when it revs. OTOH, these "antiquated" pushrod engines seem to generate lots of low end torque...225 ft-lbs at only 3000 rpm in that 3.8L, which is also satisfying in its own way."

    That's the same engine I had in my '93 Sable two cars before my '07 3.5 SE--had traded it in on an '04 VW NB TDI. It had 140 HP, same as the 3.slow as someone called it, but its torque was wonderful--it never sounded or felt strained, simply jumped ahead whenever I needed the extra go. Just proves that because time goes by, things don't automatically improve. Ford dropped its availability in the redesigned '96-forward Taurus and made do with two 3.slows--they both had to scream and rev for even the least increase in speed because they had no torque available. No wonder Taurus became the King of Rentals from then on...
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    I've heard that it's not so much "de-powered" as just using different metrics to measure power - specifically using SAE standards.

    That could very well be the case too. It would certainly explain why C&D has not done a performance test on the 6 since 2004 IMO. Why re-test if nothing really changed?
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    There has been much debate surrounding this topic. NVH-wise, I believe some of the engines in this class have performed very well in terms dB. Off the top of my head, and based on my experiences, I would say the 3.3L from Hyundai is probably one the quietest, if not the, out of the V6 engines in this class. Toyota's 3.5L and Honda's 3.0L is not far behind in terms of dB.
  • "To those who keep calling the Mazda 6 engine "antiquated", "rough", and "thrashy", perhaps the less-exaggerated way of putting it is "not as smooth" or "not as quiet" or "not as efficient" as some other engines in this class... Given these awards, it can't be as bad as you describe... As an analogy, since the Accord is slightly behind the Sonata in JD Powers reliability reports, perhaps you'd say the Accord is junk? I'd say that this is also an exaggeration that doesn't stand to reason... 6's engines aren't class leaders. But they don't deserve to be dogged either."

    zzzoom6,

    Excellent post about the Mazda6.

    I apologize if I came across as exaggerating or dogging the Ford/Mazda 3.0L, that was not my intent. I was merely comparing, and yes you are correct in that instead of saying "rough" and "thrashy" as compared to ___, one can say "less smooth" etc.

    I've owned two Mazdas, a 1991 626 and a 1998 626 V6, both very good cars (and both stick shifts). I haven't driven the Mazda6 "s" 5-speed manual because, as I mentioned, all the performance numbers which I had seen for it (low-7 seconds manual, about 8 seconds 5A, mid-7 seconds 6A) were not too different manual versus 6-speed auto. When shopping I drove Fusion 2.3L 5M, Fusion 3.0L 6A, and Mazdaspeed6.

    If I had known mid-6 second runs were possible with the 3.0L 5M, I'd have definitely tried one before buying the Accord 2.4L 5M. The Accord feels quick to me but certainly not sub-7 quick. It can and has outrun Mazda6 "s" 6-speed automatics. (That's the only disagreement I have with your post, my Accord 4-cyl is considerably faster than the Mazda6/Fusion 2.3L, at mid-7 seconds versus low-9 seconds to 60).

    I was just focusing on one area: trying to define engine refinement and giving examples. Of course this is just one small factor to evaluate! I agree that the 6 is an excellent car with many class-leading qualities. I'd love to have the clean, well-designed and attractive "5th-door" hatchback in my Accord, not to mention the 6's handling. Also, I will be thrilled if my Accord has the reliability record of my old 1998 626: over 100,000 miles with only scheduled maintenance and wear item replacements.

    When it comes right down to it, all else equal, I'd take better performance for slightly less "refinement." I chose the Accord mostly for value (purchase price and resale), its blend of refinement and performance/handling, and record of reliability. But as you said, to each his own, and I'm happy. Would I also be happy with a 6? Of course.

    I assume you have a 6? Want to trade cars for a weekend? :)
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    That'd be fun actually! Seems most of my friends have gravitated toward SUV's rather than cars, so I haven't spent a whole lot of time in an Accord since I test drove them over a year ago. Honda continues to improve their cars, and considering the high level they've been at for quite some time, that says a lot about their commitment to excellence. I only hope that in the long run, my Mazda 6 holds up as well as my previous accords. 16 months so far, and I have had no major problems (had a rattle fixed and a blown speaker replaced under warranty). But if all continues to go well, I'm sure I will have this car for several more years.

    your posts have been quite civil and described well so no worries about hard feelings.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    Let me step in, if I may, since I'm also a 6 owner (S sedan, 5-speed manual). :)

    I haven't driven the Mazda6 "s" 5-speed manual because, as I mentioned, all the performance numbers which I had seen for it (low-7 seconds manual, about 8 seconds 5A, mid-7 seconds 6A) were not too different manual versus 6-speed auto. When shopping I drove Fusion 2.3L 5M, Fusion 3.0L 6A, and Mazdaspeed6.

    I bet you wouldn't have paid much more (if any) if you bought the MazdaSpeed 6 compared to your Accord, since they're practically giving them away.

    If I had known mid-6 second runs were possible with the 3.0L 5M, I'd have definitely tried one before buying the Accord 2.4L 5M.

    You're right, it's no barn-burner, but mid-6-second 0-60 is almost the norm for the V6 with 5-speed. The low-end punch is lacking a little IMO, but over 3000 RPM, it really moves. Dropping a gear to pass on the highway is almost TOO easy, and fun BTW!

    (That's the only disagreement I have with your post, my Accord 4-cyl is considerably faster than the Mazda6/Fusion 2.3L, at mid-7 seconds versus low-9 seconds to 60).

    A slight correction. The low-9 seconds to 60 MPH that you refer to is for the Mazda 6 with the 2.3L and automatic. With the manual, I believe you're looking at mid- to high-7s, same as the V6 with automatic.

    When it comes right down to it, all else equal, I'd take better performance for slightly less "refinement." ... Would I also be happy with a 6? Of course.

    I like how you think. :) I bought my 6 in '04, after repeatedly test-driving it, an Accord coupe (V6, 5-speed manual), an Altima 3.5SE (V6, 5-speed manual), and a Legacy GT (limited with manual). In the end, each had it's flaws, but the 6 won me over on the not-so-bad V6 power, excellent handling, great styling and an inexpensive price.

    The Accord was smooth, powerful, and styled nicely, but the 2-door is impractical for me, and at the time, the only V6, 5-speed manual combo from the factory was the coupe (but yes, I know it's available on the 4-door now.)

    The Altima wasn't bad. Excellent power with the V6, but the body-roll while cornering almost gave me motion-sickness. The torque-steer was terrible, especially during cornering, and the interior was cheap-looking and cheap-feeling to me. Apparently, the '08s have fixed all that, but I haven't driven one yet.

    The Legacy had AWD, but you can feel it's extra weight from the instant you hit the gas. The 4-cyl was okay, but I know I'd get terrible gas mileage with the AWD. And I could never get comfortable in the driver's seat, no matter what position I tried.

    I assume you have a 6? Want to trade cars for a weekend?

    I do. And no, sorry! ;)
  • 4000 rpm for 80? 4 banger territory these days and would be actually be high for any of the V6s in this group. My 2GR Toyota with a 5 speed auto is at 2700 for 80 mph and would suggest to you that some of those 'old' 3.8s are turning even less than that.

    I forgot to mention, that motor was a screamer! Redline was 7,000 RPM, but it would readily and willingly surpass that- I was a couple of hundred RPMs into it by accident a few times and the rev limiter never interfered, and this one time...

    My wife will KILL me if she ever sees this, but... When driving a stick she used to get nervous and try to do everything too fast, even though I taught her it doesn't matter how slow you operate the clutch and gear shifter, always better to take your time.

    One late, late night she was driving it and merging onto an empty highway. She ran it out pretty high in first gear, shifted very quick to second and ran it out to make the jump into 3rd... and instead, went right back into first and dropped the clutch. Talk about a motor "screaming" !!! I couldn't see exactly from the passenger seat but it was WAAAAAY in the red, over 7,500 RPMs. I can still hear the sound. Maybe the limiter finally stepped in and saved my butt that time, lol.

    But everything was fine, no ill effects. It had almost 100,000 miles on it at that point, too. It's still ticking along somewhere I'm sure, the last time I spoke to the guy I sold it to he had no complaints. Take that 3.8 above 7,500 and see what happens!
  • I bet you wouldn't have paid much more (if any) if you bought the MazdaSpeed 6 compared to your Accord, since they're practically giving them away.

    Yea I thought about that, they had the one I drove marked at $23,000 and that was last year. That's only a few grand more than my Accord was. But, insurance and speeding tickets would have been much, much more :)

    I can't restrain myself well. It's more fun for me to run my Accord 4-cylinder hard than it was for me to drive that 2005 Mustang GT (which I had from a local dealer for two days when the wife wanted to upgrade) because of having to refrain from taking advantage of the power. You could floor it in one gear and that was it, fun was over or you're looking at a BIG TIME ticket or accident.

    Oh, and this is a little off topic but speaking of engine refinement, the Mustang story reminded me... my wife currently drives a 2004 Mustang with the 3.9L V6, and it makes the DT30 seem like a BMW six.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    I can't restrain myself well. It's more fun for me to run my Accord 4-cylinder hard than it was for me to drive that 2005 Mustang GT (which I had from a local dealer for two days when the wife wanted to upgrade) because of having to refrain from taking advantage of the power. You could floor it in one gear and that was it, fun was over or you're looking at a BIG TIME ticket or accident.

    LOL!!! I'm having that very problem right now. Coming from a Mazda6 S with a stick I was used to being able to floor it for 2 or 3 gears when merging onto a highway (Yes from a stop because the drivers around here can't merge for anything :sick: ) and I'd still be at a reasonably safe speed. With my current Mustang GT I'm doing 80 before I'm even at redline in 2nd gear. It's really hard getting used to that sensation but boy is it fun! I just make sure the coast is really clear before doing that. Otherwise I "granny" it. ;)
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    sorry I guess I misunderstood what you were calling 'low'. But, in any case, I find it hard to believe that any V6 especially one with a Ford label, would run out past 7000 rpm. If so, it certainly can't be related to the 3.0 DT. The 2GR Toyota has a 6500 redline, the tranny will hold right to redline with any sort of encouragement, so much so, that you find yourself bouncing off the rev limiter simply because it (the rev increase) is so transparent and quick. As far as that 3.8 at 7500 - can you say schrapnel? ;)
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    a 2004 Mustang with the 3.9L V6, and it makes the DT30 seem like a BMW six
    the curse of the pushrod???.
  • madurbsmadurbs Posts: 19
    Isn't the 04 Mustang V6 the 3.8? We have the 3.8 in my wife's 2000 Windstar. My lawnmower or weedwacker (take your pick) are smoother than that Ford 3.8.
  • jd10013jd10013 Posts: 779
    The thing is, many of the high-horsepower cars are getting some of the best mileage estimates (compare the Altima 4-cylinder to the rest of the 4-cylinder class, it has best economy AND acceleration.)

    thats the cvt doing that. I would look for it to show up in more cars over the years because of that. It takes a couple hundred miles to get used to it, but once you do, its quite an amazing bit of technology.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,735
    Isn't the 04 Mustang V6 the 3.8?

    My niece has an 04 Mustang convertible V6. That is one pitiful engine. I know it's larger displacement than my 03 V6 Accord (3.0). The performance is sad, for a sports car.
  • tinatinatinatina Posts: 388
    Hey thegraduate,

    I've noticed that my 2006 Accord SE 4 auto. has gotten better mpg. I bought the car last June new and it has about 12,000 miles. Starting at about 7,000 miles the car consistently rewarded me with over 30 miles to the gallon (Over 33 miles on one trip to Monterey, CA and going over 450 miles before the light came on). I use the car primarily on the freeway with trips about 70 miles or so. At times in some streches, its stop and go on the freeway and speed no higher than 25.

    As far as the new, 2008 Accord, the vtec.net site had some good information about the 4s and 6s (albeit perhaps highly speculative). I don't think Honda will increase the hp of the 4 by that much though - usually its 10. Look for a boost in fuel economy and additional safety items.
  • oldcemoldcem Posts: 309
    The 4 banger accords gave me less than expected mileage because I live in the mountains. I had to constantly downshift to maintain interstate speeds, especially if I was carrying passengers and luggage.

    Never said the Chryslers were reliable - my last 2 have been terrible, but, they do get great gas mileage.
    My experience with Japanese cars - my first Accord was great, the second was a lemon. Two of my kids bought Civics, and, with much interstate driving, the engines in both were pretty much shot by 90K. My other kid has tried a Toyota MR2, a Nissan Sentra, and a Hyundai Excel. The MR2 and the Sentra were money pits, but, the Hyundai went 146K with minimal repairs. Do I think Toyotas and Hondas are reliable - Sure, but, I've also gotten similar reliabilty out of most of the Ford, GM, and Chrysler cars I've owned. IMO I think Ford and GM have gotten much better of late, and, Chrysler seems to have gotten worse.

    Regards:
    OldCem
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    The 4 banger accords gave me less than expected mileage because I live in the mountains. I had to constantly downshift to maintain interstate speeds, especially if I was carrying passengers and luggage.

    Ah, that makes perfect sense. Hondas aren't known well for low-end torque for good reason; until lately, they simply didn't have much of it. Top end power was plentiful in most models, but below 3,000 RPM, not a whole lot would typically go on. This is true in my 1996 Accord (although my 2006 is plenty torquey with peak torque a good deal lower than the older models as well).

    You probably get the best mileage out of high-torque, lower hp engines in your conditions. In mine, the Honda balance works much better.
  • oldcemoldcem Posts: 309
    Easiest way for Ford to make up ground with the competition is to do exactly what Chrysler did with its midsize - stuff the 3.5 in it coupled to a 6 speed tranny, and, make the two smaller engines available as lower cost options. I've not driven a 3.0 Fusion yet, so I don't know if its supposed NHV problems are real or not. Plan to drive one as soon as I start shopping for a replacement for my business driver Sebring.

    Regards:
    OldCEM
  • goodegggoodegg Posts: 905
    Not sure how interstate driving renders an engine "shot". But my neighbor had an MR2 that he put 180,000+ miles on it, rarely had any work done to it, redlined the hell out of it, and when he sold it it ran so smooth that you couldn't tell the engine was even running when it idled.

    My colleague's Hyundai Excel was a POS. A joke.

    My Ford experiences have been disappointing. I've gone Japanese for many years now and have never been disappointed.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,941
    My colleague's Hyundai Excel was a POS. A joke.

    Relevance? The Excel was a subcompact, last sold in the U.S. in 1994.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    Relevance?
    actually a whole lot of relevance - despite the Sonata being a much better car by all measures, experiences like this underline the reputation issues that Hyundai still faces - and therefore effects not only the price that these vehicles command but also the resale values later. On the other side of the coin, Toyota and Honda, in particular, will continue to enjoy the honeymoon they have been on for years, even in the event that their cars prove to be unremarkable.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    "Toyota and Honda, in particular, will continue to enjoy the honeymoon they have been on for years, even in the event that their cars prove to be unremarkable."

    The fact the Honda cars are unremarkable is interesting due to the fact Honda keeps beating the competition with old designs to new designs. If Hondas' cars are unremarkable it makes Hyundais' cars non-existent.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    in the event that their cars prove to be unremarkable.
    is what I said, the last thing that I would tell you that even in its current form - that the Accord is 'unremarkable', the point was that if by some magical wave of the wand, the Honda became even an 'average' car, the preception that it is still among the best will last long after thereafter. Same thng applies, incidentally to the Camry, IMO.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,735
    I have been so impressed by my two Accords (for 16 years), that I will keep buying them, until one fails to meet expectations. Many others will do the same, I suspect. Frankly no other car company has a chance, until an Accord fails me. When I find what I want, I don't keep looking.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    stuff the 3.5 in it coupled to a 6 speed tranny, and, make the two smaller engines available as lower cost options
    I think Ford's PR dept. would tell you that this is exactly what they are going to do - the beancounters are the ones that may have a problem with it...
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    if it ain't broke, why should you fix it! I think your attitude is shared with many many Accord owners, and not something that you will find too much amongst Malibu owners, for example.
  • jd10013jd10013 Posts: 779
    stick with what works. Its the same reason i stick with the nissans. 3 of them so far, 380,000 miles (and the altima only has 1500) and never been left on the side of the road, or not made it somewhere because a car wouldn't start.

    And as for the civic's that somebody said were dieing at 90k, did you ever change the oil or maintain them? Though I prefer my nissan's, I've got to give Honda credit. They do build one heck of car. the 2002 civic my wife drives has 110,000 on it, and has never needed anything but schedulded timing belt change somewhere around 100k. and it runs perfect
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    stick with what works. Its the same reason i stick with the nissans. 3 of them so far, 380,000 miles (and the altima only has 1500) and never been left on the side of the road, or not made it somewhere because a car wouldn't start.

    Congrats on your good fortune. I find that the SR20 would pop a head gasket around 95-105k and the transmissions would start popping out of 5th gear somewhere in that time frame too. In its day, that was a great motor. I know the 2.5l had some issues early on but those seem to be resolved, and if the VQ didn't require premium unleaded, that great 6 would be on my list as well.
  • oldcemoldcem Posts: 309
    Just to set the record straight. Both Civics were used by my kids to run back and forth to college. Both were serviced every 3K miles using Castrol GTX. Both of them were burning excessive amounts of oil by the time 90K rolled around and needed their valve trains rebuilt. One of them developed a crack in its exhaust manifold orignating from the Ox. sensor fitting as well. The dealer wanted $1000 to fix it. One good thing - they did have decent resale value when I dumped them.

    Regards:
    OldCEM
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,941
    Relevance? actually a whole lot of relevance - despite the Sonata being a much better car by all measures, experiences like this underline the reputation issues that Hyundai still faces...

    From Post #1:

    Let's see if we can start off with some ground rules so that it is abundantly clear what this topic is about. Well, duh, it's about midsize sedans. But here is what it is not about:

    * manufacturers issues...


    Based on that, I comsider Hyundai's reputation based on late '80s-early '90s subcompact to be irrelevent to this discussion. People who haven't had their heads in the sand since the mid-'90s realize that the Sonata is very competitive in the mid-sized class, in both capabilities and reliability.
  • oldcemoldcem Posts: 309
    The 2.5 and 3.0 Duratec derivatives that I've owned both redlined at 6500 as well, and, would get there quite quickly. My Chrysler 2.7 redlines at 6500 also, but, is not happy.

    Regards:
    OldCEM
  • oldcemoldcem Posts: 309
    Very simple - Interstate driving here in the mountains where I live means a Civic 4 banger with automatic spends its life at high RPM an excessive amount of time, because that's where its power band is. The engines simply wore out.

    Regards:
    OldCEM
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,735
    Is there a "4 banger" you feel would have lasted longer, under these conditions? To kind of switch this to midsize sedans, I think Accord 4 bangers would have held up better.
  • ew3074ew3074 Posts: 20
    You may want to check this out
    image
    image
    image
    Dashboard is so not Toyota
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    You may want to check this out

    ewwwww(3074), I think most of us have seen a camry; as one of the best selling cars, it's hardly a secret. Even though it's only been out for a year, they are everywhere...if you see the same thing over and over and over and over again, I think by default it becomes a bit boring despite having an amusingly large bulbous nose. And btw...it seems you're picturing a car that is not even available here...the taillights on your pic are completely wrong for US models. Why show us something that is not available here? yawn, those pics make me tired. Time to go to bed...
  • w9cww9cw Posts: 888
    As you can tell from the URL in the background of the last shot, those photos were taken in China.

    I think with most modern cars, a properly maintained vehicle will last far beyond 100K miles, regardless of brand. Preventive maintenance is the key, not only with oil changes, but everything else.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 5,284
    Camry: 42,000
    Accord: 36,000
    Altima: 27,000
    Prius: 19,000
    Fusion: 16,000
    Malibu: 14,000
    G6: 12,000
    Sonata: 11,000

    At this point, it seems unlikely that any car in the near future is going to unseat the Camry, especially with the Subaru factory in Indiana gearing up to produce 100,000 more a year (but I do wonder if Toyota really can sell more than 500,000 of this car a year). The Accord is a solid but distant second, and the Altima is a solid but distant third.

    The big surprises to me at this point are two: The Prius is now #4, and saw sales increase by 130% over the previous year. The second surprise is how far down the list the Sonata is, and even more shocking is that sales are down 40% from last year's pace.
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,941
    The Accord could easily overtake the Camry when the all-new Accord debuts later this year. The current model is five years old; the Camry was recently redesigned. Also, the Camry's numbers include a large number of sales to fleets; almost all the Accord's numbers are to individuals. The limitation with the Accord will be production, as you noted.

    Hyundai has deliberately cut back on Sonata sales to fleets this year, so that is part of the reason for the dropoff from last year, when many Sonatas went into fleets. Also, incentives have been lower so far this year than last year, when they were $3000 total for most of the year on V6 models.

    The Prius has had incentives for the first time recently, and $3.00+ a gallon gas doesn't hurt Prius sales either.

    Malibu numbers should pick up later this year also, when the all-new and improved Malibu comes out.
  • I know this is superficial, but I've gotten used to if there is a half-moon cut-out for a chrome exhaust tip on one side, then there ought to be a matching one on the other side, or the exhaust should just be hidden. I know this is a 2.0 engined car, so it's not going to have duals. I know the Altima 2.5-3.5 don't have real duals, but I like the way they finally made nice-looking dual chrome tips in the rear valance instead of playing around like they did so many years with a little cut-out on one side with two pipes turned down and so on. That's one of the things that I found strange on the Mazdaspeed 3--here's this high performance car with a half-moon cut out on one side with a big chrome tip in the rear, just begging to be balanced with one on the other side.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,735
    The people who bought the 2.5 Altima may not be as excited about the dual exhaust outlets, if they ever have to have the exhaust system replaced (added expense). I see no real reason to have the dual outlets on V6 engines, except for "looks". Not so long ago, even V8 cars had single exhaust. I do agree, it looks cool though. I wonder how much more the 07 2.5 Altima exhaust cost, than the 06 system did.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Exhaust systems are all stainless these days aren't they? They last a really long time...the life of the vehicle in many (most?) cases.

    I like the dual look on my 4 cyl Mazda6. This only adds one small muffler and a bit of pipe, not a big deal, if it ever needs replacing. I have found that exhaust system work is a lot cheaper if you find a place that will weld in new parts, rather than going to Midas, et. al. and having them sell you an entire new system, because that is all they are set up to do.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,735
    The muffler on my old Accord lasted about 5 years. The factory muffler was $220 (not including installation). If I would have to replace two of them, I would have been looking at double that $440. Of course, if you don't keep the car that long, it becomes the next guy's problem. But it will cost more, sooner or later, for whoever has to change it.
Sign In or Register to comment.