Midsize Sedans 2.0

aviboy97

Hey... I thought this was the Nissan Altima forum....

LOL.....we discuss every mid-sizer here!

mz6greyghost

I have read some reviews that say there is not that big of a difference between a 3.0L Fusion and the 3.5L in the Fusion Sport. I have never driven a Fusion Sport, so, I can;t give you a personal opinion. You would be better off asking someone more familiar with that car.

I've test-driven both a SEL (with 3.0) and the Sport, and I noticed the difference almost immediately, especially when I turned the first corner. The suspension tuning of the Sport is VERY evident, with a stiffer, more controlled ride and tighter handling. The better ride goes to the SEL, but IMO the overall ride/handling combination was better in the Sport. The steering is also hydraulic (unlike the electric assist in the SEL), and IMO there was more feedback and was nicely weighted (the SEL was too light, with little feedback).

As far as engines are concerned, there really wasn't a HUGE difference. The 3.5 felt slightly more refined, and I felt it had more mid-range punch, but the power difference between them (from the driver's seat) is minimal.

lehrer1

Thank you.
Lehrer1

lehrer1

Hello mz6greyghost,
thank you for your response.
I had 97 Taurus V6. The hydraulic assist steering in Taurus 97 was much better than in Fusion SE 2010 V6. It is a pity because otherwise SE 2010 V6 is a very good car.
Does anybody know how electrical assist steering works?
Just in case, I am mechanical engineer with some knowledge in electromechanical dives.
Lehrer1

explorerx4

what was the front tire pressure on the Fusion you the drove?

baggs32

First off, I never said they ruled them completely. For their North American Operations, Ford had a HUGE say in how they conducted business. Second, Ford had a lot of their brass in Mazda North American Operations. That is a FACT. Coming from someone who is associated with Mazda, I would know more then you.

Right. That's why I told you Ford did not control them completely. Yeah, I Googled it and learned all of it from other forums. It's public knowledge and I don't need to work for Mazda to know that.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the 3 too. The last gen 3 was a joint effort between Ford, Mazda and Volvo where each contributed their own expertise. IIRC Ford provided the chassis engineering and balance, Mazda developed the platform and provided the powertrain, and Volvo obviously worked on the safety. Maybe the new one has morphed away from that formula but that's how I remember the original being born. So in a nutshell, the last gen 3 was very much a Euro Focus and Volvo S40 too.

Mazda had "free reign"to develop the Mazda6 because Ford at the time did not have a mid-sized vehicle. They had a corporate fleet Ford Taurus. Ford used the Mazda6 platform, electronic design, suspension architecture, I4 engine to build the Fusion. They even have the same ECU! Ford saved $10 billion in development costs when building the 1st gen Fusion.

Right answer. That's why Ford bought the controlling interest. Another example is with Volvo where Ford bought them simply because they were so impressed with the S80 platform which now underpins several Ford and Lincoln models. Aside from some trucks there really are very few Ford cars that who's platforms were actually developed by Ford.

Fact of the matter is, Ford had much more say in the daily operations of Mazda then you think they did. Even tough they were "business partners", Ford had a little leverage.

No, I'm well aware of how the arrangement worked. Google is more powerful than you are giving it credit for. I probably read your statement differently than you intended it to read so I understand your point more now. lf nothing else it looks like others have learned something from this conversation because there seems to be a lot of questions about Mazda and Ford cars/motors all of a sudden!

This was always something that bugged Mazda. For the first time since the early 90's, Mazda can do what they want, when they want, without Ford having to approve.

Well, let's wait and see how that goes before saying it's good or bad for Mazda. I took my two boys out to the lots yesterday morning to check out the new models. We first stopped at one of the top 3 Ford dealers (in sales) in the area and there were zero new Fusions on their lot, which is what I really went there to see, and not much more there other than F-150s and Focii. I'm guessing they are waiting to sell off the '10 models before they build up the '11 MY inventory so that could explain the emptiness of that lot over how it usually is. Higher sales than normal could explain it too though.

Next we drove a few miles up the road to the VW/Mazda dealer. The Mazda dealer's lot was packed to the gills with '10 models most sporting bright neon colored paint on the windshields advertising 0% interest + cash back. Sure it's only one dealer in a medium sized city but when the Ford lot up the road, and the Honda lot we drove past, are nearly empty at model year end time, you have to wonder.

I also had the unfortunate opportunity to see a Mazda2 in person there. After seeing a Fiesta down the road I have to say that Mazda really messed that one up. The Fiesta looked sporty and sleek whereas the 2 looked like a cheap little blob. Maybe it was the white color or the base wheel/tire package. Either way I did not like it at all.

aviboy97

I also had the unfortunate opportunity to see a Mazda2 in person there. After seeing a Fiesta down the road I have to say that Mazda really messed that one up.

Ford definitely put a little more effort into the Fiesta, no doubt. The Mazda2 we see is virtually the same as it has been for the past couple years, outside of a few different styling cues. I will say, when sitting inside the Mazda2, it is not as cheap as it seems. It is put together very well. It could be better, though, especially with the quality of all their other vehicles.

From what I hear in Mazda world, and this is nothing official, it that Mazda released the Mazda2 as-is with the intention of adding their soon to be SKY drivetrains in the next year or so. Since a new model usually generates buzz, they figure to ride the initial wave of success and then come out with the new drivetrains. Kinda like what Ford did with the 2010-2011 Mustang. Again, this is nothing official, but, that is the plan from what I have been hearing.

csandste

Moderators-- This has been posted all over Edmunds today. Virus?

Kirstie_H

Nope, just your run-of-the-mill pesky spammer. :mad:

cobraboy1

Ford definitely put a little more effort into the Fiesta, no doubt. The Mazda2 we see is virtually the same as it has been for the past couple years, outside of a few different styling cues. I will say, when sitting inside the Mazda2, it is not as cheap as it seems. It is put together very well. It could be better, though, especially with the quality of all their other vehicles.

Actually even though they both came out at roughly the same time, they really don't share all that much in common with one another. I don't know all of the specifics about what each car shares with the other but I believe its very little if anything at all. The Fiesta is a european car that Ford pretty much brought straight over from europe and only changed what they needed to do to make the car legal for U.S. roads and laws. The Mazda2 is a vehicle brought from Japan.

That said I've driven both of these vehicles (w/ the manual tranny) and they are very different cars. I drive about 60k per year (I currently have a 2010 fusion sport with 46k miles), looking for a car with better mpg. The Mazda2 is a great city car that is a lot of fun to drive as long as your drive is no longer than an hour or two. And the performance in the straight line is really really really sluggish.

The ford on the other hand is a lot more solid feeling and seems like a much larger car. It handles very well and in the straight line if feels very eager and fun to go through the gears. The styling is better and not as weird to look at, not to mention that the mazda is a much simpler car than the Fiesta. These two cars are great because they are both designed to do two very different missions in life.

BTW. FYI, Mazda is still owned in part by Ford, only 13% currently, but hey still part.

sandman_6472

Personally like the looks of the Fiesta better than the Mazda2...outside looks sportier and a much better dash layout. But out current Mazda 3s has been great up to a month ago, so think the wife would prefer the Mazda. We've had a Ford and a couple of Lincoln Continentals growing up & all 3 were crap compared to our Cadillacs, so not sure if I could ever purchase another Ford. The Fiesta would have to be an exceptional car to even be considered. But if the wife got such a small car, she'd need the one with the most powerful auto tranny. But coming from a 2.3 to a 1.6 will probably not work for her.

Wish I could find a small car with a 2.0 engine that would make her happy. She won't go any larger than her current M3s and would be happy dropping down a size. We don't need a large car anymore as we already have 4 cars for us and the girls and anticipate having to purchace a fifth for our just graduated boy to start his new job. Not sure what we're gonna do!



The Sandman :confuse: :sick: :shades:

backy

If wife needs a small car about the size of the Mazda3, you should show her the 2011 Elantra when it's out. It will likely continue its heritage of having a mid-sized interior and compact exterior, but will have a new DI I4 (might actually be smaller than the current 2.0 Beta II, but with at least as much power if not more), 6AT, high fuel economy, and the looks of a mini-Sonata (some think it actually looks better than the Sonata). Another nice midsize-inside/compact-outside car is the Sentra. I am leasing one now and I find it's a smooth and comfortable car, with plenty of room and excellent FE with its 2.0L CVT. Best car I could find for $179/mo. with 0 out of pocket.

sandman_6472

That is one that I've already planned on showing her...we done the Sentra thing and had bad luck... yet, the kids versa is a great vehicle so far. She really likes the other girls Accent, but I think she'll like the Elantra's extra power, which she's used to. Our time frame is for a 2012 model which will work out great. brike my 1st year model with my '06 Civic & don't want to repeat that again!

The Sandman :sick: :shades:

dash5

Not sure if this should go someplace else, but at 31k, I think this fits in the standard midsized section now?

G25 preview

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/13/2011-infiniti-g25-arrives-stateside-priced-at- -30-950/

backy

IMO, a car starting at $31k doesn't belong in this discussion. If it did, we'd have to add several other cars to this discussion. All the cars on the right start close to $20k, with the exception of the current Passat. And I've read the new Passat will be priced lower than the current one. $10k+, or 50%, is a huge difference in starting price. Yes, the G25 has a V6, but the cars on the right offer a V6 or a like-powered turbo for much less than $31k.

stephen987

IMO, a car starting at $31k doesn't belong in this discussion.

Nor do the Mazda2 and Fiesta.

backy

I agree, they are not mid-sized cars by any stretch of the imagination. Being formally accepted in this discussion vs. a mention in an occasional post are two different things, however.

Just my 2 cents... since the question was asked.

acdii

Most people who have test driven the Sport vs SEL dont notice a power difference mainly beacuse the engines need to learn, which takes at least 1500 miles or more being driven by the same driver. Also keep in mind the 3.0 and 3.5 use different transmissions. After about 10k on the two cars, the Sport will smoke the SEL. The 3.5 has a different power band and the trans connected to it is designed to maximize that power band. If you drove the Sport AWD, it will feel more like the 3.0 due to the parasitic losses of the AWD transmission and Center differential. My Sport easily smokes the front tire with very little effort, and after 20k miles, looks like I may need to get new front tires soon. :blush: Due soon for its next oil change, so i will get the tires rotated again. I should get a few more miles out of them then.

Had ford decided to drop the 3.5 DI Ecoboost in the Fusion, it would be one that could blow the doors off most cars out there, including some of those very high priced "luxury" models. I have the Flex with ecoboost and it easily does 0-60 in just under 6 seconds. It is a 4600# box, so imagine that power in a 3600# aerodynamic car like the fusion. It is also tuned down in the Flex, the Taurus has 10 more HP. 360HP 355 Torque in the Sport, LOOK OUT!

akirby

I seriously doubt that the front clip in the Fusion could withstand the 3.5L EB torque. When they first put that engine in the Taurus it totally destroyed the front end in just a few minutes, necessitating a totally new front clip for the Taurus and Flex to handle the torque (this is sometimes referred to as the D4 platform since there were also changes made to the rear suspension IIRC from the original D3 platform).

It could be done but probably costs too much at this point to do that much reengineering on a lame duck platform (scheduled to be replaced by a jointly engineered CD4 Fusion/Mondeo replacement in 2 or 3 years).

kaliforniak

I finally got to drive a 6 S GT and really loved the car. It's quite at low RPM and the engine growls to live when I step on it. I gotta say it's many levels above my 2003 6 with the I4 engine. BLIS worked like a charm on local street and I'm sure it'll be even better on the Interstate 5.

The CC I test drove a couple of months ago had a certain European feel to it. The road noise was much less than the 6 probably because of its 17 inch wheels. I also like how the 2.0T almost snapped my neck when I punched it. Oh, the seats fitted my driving posture more, too.

My question for you shoppers / owners is which car do you guys think will be the better choice down the road ? I am a little concerned with VW's quality from what I've read while my Mazda has been problem free for 7yrs/65K miles. Repairs on a German car would probably cost more than a Mazda as well. The 6 is fast but gets far worse gas mileage which could add up over a 5-8 yr ownership. Say 300 bucks a year over 8 year is 2400 bucks.

I'm hoping owners of current 6 and CC/Passat can shed some light on their experience.

backy

I own a 6(26) but that's not what you had in mind. Just two comments:

* Is back seat room important to you at all? If so, the obvious choice is something other than the CC.

* If you can wait a bit before buying your next car, you might want to wait until the 2.0T version of the Sonata and also the all-new Optima (same engine) debut. 274 hp will do some serious neck-snapping. Also the Sonata has a similar profile to the CC's yet has room for 3 adults in back (as long as they aren't too tall or broad).

rdm925

I can only speak in terms of my 07 Mazda 6i 5-door. I have over 65,000 trouble free miles. I just came back from a week long trip from Detroit to Boone, NC and back. I got as high as 30.8 and 30.2 MPG from Detroit to/from Lexington, KY and 28.5 and 27 MPG from/back to Boone from Lexington. Around the mountains near Boone, NC I never went below 23-24 MPG. The 5-speed auto worked great in manual mode and I love the handling, even with almost worn OEM tires. And the A/C worked fine in mid 90's weather.
I had a VW Jetta in the late 80's. It was a fun car to drive but not realiable and expensive to repair. :shades:

kaliforniak

Thanks Backy

Back seat isn't important to me, most of my time my jackets and sweaters occupy the spot. With the CC I still get 4 doors and carry 3 people when I have to. I'm 5'7" myself and none of my friends and family are taller than 5'10" so nobody will be complaining about head room no matter which car I buy.

I am waiting until January of next year so I definitely have some time on my hands, which probably is great for a shopper. From what I've read about the 2.0T on the Sonata/Optima is that they behave more like a larger displacement V6 instead of your traditional turbocharged engine. I also want to see if the Korean pair drives more like fast family sedans or entry level sports sedans.

PS: the woosh sound from VW's 2.0T was a plus

kaliforniak

Thanks!

My 2005 Mazda6 i sedan with the 4 spd auto has been very reliable as well. The only problem I had was a driver side window motor that wouldn't roll the windows down and a blown fuse. If I remember correctly it was about $450 at the driver for both items. The AC has been amazing from day one, but sometimes it's just too cold LOL.

One of the biggest problem I have with my car is the 4 spd auto unit. It's pretty tough and slow to shift, up or down. I got to experience much better trannies while test driving both the CC and 6 S GT, both were smooth, none of that lurching business

m6user

I don't think you will match the CC's drive dynamics with one of the Koreans. They will no doubt be pretty powerful and probably more trouble free but they are still midsized family sedans. The sport models of each will be pretty much family sedans with stiff suspension. Not bad but not "sports sedans". I love the CC both outside and inside but have some pretty big hangups about not only their repair frequency but the cost and reputations of VW dealers in general. I would buy an extended warranty if you keep your cars for awhile if buying the CC. Better yet, if you lease you can turn it in at the end of the standard warranty and enjoy the free scheduled maint they throw in.

I too have an 07 Mazda6 I4 and it has been absolutely trouble free for almost 50k now. I'm glad to see others have gotten 65k out of their OEM tires. We have pretty decent tread left on ours as well. It's hard to imagine having to take your car for repairs a couple of times a year when you've had a couple of cars that have been perfect for several years. Maybe we're spoiled.

kaliforniak

I definitely trust Mazda since my 2003 has only required 1 repair and it was relatively minor. I just hope my car has some more pep and a smoother transmission.

Did you ever get to drive a current V6 model ? If you did I'm wondering if you were as impressed with the new car as I was. The chassis felt rock solid at turns and it rides a ton better. My only concern was the road noise. I think a good amount of it came from the 18in wheels.

mz6greyghost

I bought a brand-new '04 Mazda6 V6 Sedan and accumulated 92K miles in the 6 years I owned it, it's only problem being a faulty gas cap. Other than that, it was one of the most fun DD's I've ever owned.

I replaced it with a '10 Mazda6S GT this past June, and after 2500 miles, I'm still VERY happy with my choice. Gas mileage has been around 22 MPG with my normal driving (60% highway, 40% city), and I've gotten 26 MPG on highways (cruise set at 75 MPH with A/C on). The mileage will go up as the engine gets "worn in" even further, but I'm happy with what I get now, since the punch of the V6 is simply intoxicating, and passing/merging on highways is effortless. Road noise is indeed slightly more than other cars in it's class, but from experience, it's from the Michelins, since it seems every set of 'em seems to be loud. I replaced the OEM tires on my '04 6 with Yokohamas, and the noise virtually disappeared, along with significantly better handling in both dry and wet, a smoother ride, and at half the price of the OEM Michelins.

Before I bought the 6, I test-drove just about everything else in it's class/price range, including the CC. The styling is indeed very nice, and the interior is a half-step up from the 6, but IMO the turbo lag of the 2.0T was very evident, and it felt like it had virtually no low-end torque compared to the V6. Quality and reliability is still very suspect, since they're still near the bottom in just about all long-term surveys, and I've experienced their (lack of) reliability firsthand (a previous employer used a '99 and '00 Golf TDI, hoping to get 200K+ out of the diesel engines, but both didn't last past 125K, with tons of electrical gremlins, faulty transmissions, and fried turbos). As for pricing, $29K for a 4-cylinder is a little steep IMO (and $39K for a VR6 is outrageous! I'd rather get an A4, 3-series, or G37 for that $$$$).

Between the two, I'd stick with the 6.

rdm925

I understand about the transmission issue. I haven't had that experience with my 5-speed auto, although the the down shift to passing gear is hard and it requires some lag time for the engine to rev up to power. The best response is between 3-4,000 rpm for the 4-cylinder. I just paid off the loan and plan to keep my 07 6i at least ten years.
BTW, does the CC 2.0T require premium gas? My 2000 Civic Si did and it drove my wife nuts that I bought a car that required it.
As much as I like the styling of the VW CC, I still recommend the Mazda 6, and it's built in Flat Rock, MI. along side the Ford Mustang.
I only wish they still made the 5-door model. :shades:

mz6greyghost

BTW, does the CC 2.0T require premium gas? My 2000 Civic Si did and it drove my wife nuts that I bought a car that required it.

Yes it does. My wife also has a problem with that.

akirby

When gas prices went up, how many times did you hear people say that they got rid of their old car and got a new one because the old one required premium and they either couldn't afford it or just didn't want to pay extra? I heard it a lot, almost daily.

The funny thing is the difference in the cost of regular vs premium never changed. In Atlanta the price difference was $0.20/gallon regardless of whether regular was $2/gallon of $4/gallon.

Therefore the price penalty for premium was still only $0.20/gallon or about $3/fillup - it never changed. Then again people will waste $3 in extra driving just to save $2 on a tank of gas.

It's all perception.