Midsize Sedans 2.0

imidazol97

thebean said:

I saw two 2018 Accords in the wild today. First ones I have seen here in Dallas area. Man, do they resemble the Civic. Only real clue other than the size is the tail lights. I guess they are a bit higher - wife's Civic is pretty low.

Is the Accord based on the Civic platform? During the development I understood someone was saying that, and someone else said it in posts today.

stickguy

I believe it is. Stretched and modified of course

thebean

I thought they were separate platforms, but I have nothing to back that up. It would make sense if they were not separate, for cost reasons. I thought not because the CRV is on the Civic platform, and I thought the Pilot was on the Accord platform. But I could well be wrong.

thebean

stickguy said:

2. Wow.

This was during a 25 minute trip with little heavy traffic.

brian125

thebean,

Honda said to save development costs, its moving the next-generation Accord 2018 to a platform shared with the Civic .

thebean

brian125 said:

thebean,

Honda said to save development costs, its moving the next-generation Accord 2018 to a platform shared with the Civic .

Thanks. I stand corrected. Good info.

sda

thebean said:

brian125 said:

thebean,

Honda said to save development costs, its moving the next-generation Accord 2018 to a platform shared with the Civic .

Thanks. I stand corrected. Good info.

How do you like the Civic so far? Likes, dislikes? Cold a/c, decent audio?

berri

Saw the new Camry at the dealer today. Too low to the ground (not good for snow or driveway humps), Too much bending getting in and out and too low headroom (especially with a sunroof). Otherwise it seemed alright. But those deficiencies for me kept me from bothering to test drive one. Then it was over to the Chevy dealer nearby to check out the new Traverse. Looked sharp, but the seat bottom cushion seemed shorter than previous model and the price was somewhat similar to an Audi or Acura MDX. I'm guessing they jacked up the sticker price to facilitate greater savings when they sale promote it??? But maybe not, I saw a Ford Edge a week or so ago with a sticker just over $50K. The Honda dealer is in a different area, so I'll have to get over there another day. Probably not a good time to consider a crossover or SUV.

brian125

Couldn't agree with you more @berri. Vehicles today are getting worse , Lower to the ground, Smaller sloped windows & roof lines, Ingress / Egress problems , Awful side a rear visibility , Restricting consoles. The new Camry's and Accords are not big people friendly.. Not a fan of either new generation vehicle

thebean

@sda, I like it a lot and more importantly, the wife likes it (it's her daily driver). It's a bit low for my taste, but other than that I can't find too much fault. Very good room (even headroom and I'm 6'), rides well, tons of power (I got the turbo), and it handles great. I had a '02 Civic as my DD for 13 years and this version is so far above that one that it doesn't seem remotely related. The A/C is great, even here in hot Texas. Sound system is just OK. I wish the seats were wider and more comfortable, but they fit the wife fine. I also wish the center console was lower - the one on my Accord is not nearly as high. We are overall pleased with the car and plan to keep it 10 years or so, as we try to do with all our cars.

benjaminh

For 2018 VW has upgraded the Passat's standard turbo engine from 1.8 to 2.0 liters....

"The 2018 Passat lineup features two engine options: the new 2.0-liter TSI turbocharged four-cylinder or a powerful 3.6-liter VR6®.

The changes in the new version of the EA888 advance the twin goals of power and efficiency. The peak 174 horsepower (a 4 hp increase from 2017) kicks in at 4,400 rpm, 400 revs sooner than in the 1.8-liter edition, and maintains its output until 6,000 rpm. Maximum torque of 184 lb-ft (a 23 lb-ft gain from 2017) is achieved at 1,600 to 3,940 rpm."

https://media.vw.com/en-us/press-kits/2018-passat-press-kit

benjaminh

2018 Accord 1.5 turbo slightly faster than the 2017 Accord 2.4, according to C&D....

"With the accelerator pedal mashed to the firewall, the Accord 1.5T ran to 60 mph in 7.3 seconds and waltzed through the quarter-mile in 15.7 seconds at 91 mph....The last Accord had 185 horsepower aboard, needed 7.6 seconds to reach 60 mph, and ran the quarter-mile in 15.9 seconds at 91 mph. More to the point, the 2018 model’s numbers beat out four-cylinder rivals such as the Toyota Camry and the Nissan Altima, while essentially matching the Mazda 6’s performance."

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-honda-accord-15t-automatic-test-review

js06gv

I haven't seen one '18 Accord on the road in Dallas yet but strangely enough one of my employees bought an '18 Sport for his wife last Sat. He brought it to work Monday and I sat in it. I was impressed with the looks inside and out. He said discount was about a grand.

ab348

I believe VW has discontinued the 1.8T engine in North America at least. Older tech I suppose. However, how they manage to get such low HP out of a 2.0T engine baffles me.

stickguy

they tuned it for low RPM use and MPG most likely. efficiency over output (the opposite of the 2.0T in the GTI/GLI, which I assume is a whole different motor)

akirby

If you want more ground clearance/taller seating and higher rooflines you should probably be looking at a crossover.

berri

You are probably right. Even though the Fusion has been around for quite awhile, the lower sprung Camry and Accord may move some sedan buyers over to it. It is modern looking, but has easier access I think.

stickguy

I sat in the Camry. I don't recall noticing it being too low or hard to get into. Seemed pretty much like the prior model.

brian125

akirby said:

If you want more ground clearance/taller seating and higher rooflines you should probably be looking at a crossover.

The Subaru Forester is the Senior's choice these days w/ best in class visibility, large windows , easy access, top notch safety features.

berri

I own the prior model Camry and I'm positive the new one is lower to the ground with less headroom. Might be a matter of how tall you are that reflects how you perceive it?

benjaminh

Mr_Shiftright said:

Drove my friends' brand-new 2017 Civic EX and tried out all the gadgetry. It's a pretty nice car for the money, and I must say fit and finish are top notch for the price range. I think Lane Watch would be particularly good for drivers who have to compete with bicycles on the street.

Yeah, I think you can see why the Civic seems to be outselling even the Camry—it's a lot of car for the money in a stylish package. A 2018 Civic auto has an msrp of $19,640, which is pretty good considering it's the size of an Accord from 1997.

But, like your friend has, the Civic EX is a good upgrade for the money. The EX Civic has an mrsp of 21,240—so it costs $1600 more. But for that $1600 you get....

remote engine start
alloy wheels
LaneWatch
AndroidAuto/CarPlay
heated mirrors
smart entry/pushbutton start
walk away auto lock
fin antenna
lighted vanity mirrors
rear arm rest and pocket
60/40 split fold down seat
8 speaker stereo with XM and HD radio
etc.

Definitely worth $1600

But for just another $360 more you can get the turbo if you want to shift your own with a manual transmission.

[Deleted User]

akirby said:

Every person, reviewer, editor, blogger and test driver has their own biases. It's unavoidable. You should always take any report or review with a grain of salt. C&D has always been biased to sporty vehicles. MT is biased to whoever spends the most in advertising.

I also don't think these reviews have much influence over what people actually buy which is one reason Ford stopped catering to their whims a few years ago (and ruffled a bunch of feathers in the process TTAC ).

look, all Ford had to offer was Police grade Explorer's and Taurusususis......other than great products like Fiesta ST, Focus (ST for me but they are good cars in most combinations except maybe a 1 liter non-turbo Diesel with 40hp. (this version may exist only in my nightmares' and as cabs in Scotland.)
Also the Mustang and the Fusion for this forums purposes. I think there too many product lines for them to create vehicles that are ALL EXCEPTIONAL. I hope Ford realizes that platform sharing can only take you so far. Vehicles must be exceptional from inception....and this is very, very hard to do. -Chris

[Deleted User]

I saw a 2018 Camry SE in Blood red with high quality dual exhaust ports on the right side As I moved up the side of the car-carrier truck with ( I saw what looked like 18" aggressive looking rims and I can only guess what engine lies under the hood. Is there a 2.0 liter turbo 4 version? I have a 2.4 liter, 200 HP engine. It does not normally come with or require aggressive rubber that would compromise ride quality and expense of 40 to 45 series rubber with very aggressive outer yet have little tread. there has GOT to be something in the engine bay that is NOT the quad exhaust XSE.

Any idea what I saw gents?

stickguy

might have been the V6. Only other option to the 2.4L NA 4 banger. And yes, Toyota does put low profile rubber on the SE, even with the base engine.

Michaell

stickguy said:

might have been the V6. Only other option to the 2.4L NA 4 banger. And yes, Toyota does put low profile rubber on the SE, even with the base engine.

The V6 has dual exhausts on both sides, I believe.

No turbo engine available for the 2018 Camry. Be interesting to see how that plays out in the market, compared to the all turbo Accord engine line up.

stickguy

in the midsized market, I think price is about 90% of the equation. Maybe 80%. MPG a big part of the rest. So as long as the Camry has competitive MPG #s, very few buyers will care (heck, a big % probably would have no clue) if it has a turbo, or a flux capacitor powering it. As long as it starts every day, and gets them where going in comfort.

explorerx4

Locally, I was a Toyota commercial, lease payment on 2018 Camry $209, then crossed out and replaced with $189.
That's what moves the metal.

benjaminh

stickguy said:

in the midsized market, I think price is about 90% of the equation. Maybe 80%. MPG a big part of the rest. So as long as the Camry has competitive MPG #s, very few buyers will care (heck, a big % probably would have no clue) if it has a turbo, or a flux capacitor powering it. As long as it starts every day, and gets them where going in comfort.

I would shade this slightly to say "value" rather than price. The Accord, specifically, costs a little more real world than most of the others, but some still see the value there, even with the higher price. And for a small but significant percentage of midsize buyers, good handling is a factor. Those who don't care about handling tend to buy Camry, Sonata, Altima, etc., while those who care about handling will lean more toward Accord, Fusion, and Mazda6.

sda

The '18 Camry earned an 87 score by CR, the highest current score for midsize cars. They got 32 mpg in regular driving and 49mpg(!) on the highway drive. They did say the engine was noisy when revved and the 8 speed auto delivered some rough shifts, and it still earned an 87!

stickguy

who revs up a Camry?

good mileage though.

I did not like the interior. and my wife hated the huge dashboard extrusion on the passenger side.

brian125

stickguy said:

who revs up a Camry?

good mileage though.

I did not like the interior. and my wife hated the huge dashboard extrusion on the passenger side.

Stick - Exactly .. and that's why smaller vehicles better gas, and almost the same interior room IE.......... the Elantra , Civic, Cruze , Corolla, Sentra are big sellers today.

Mr_Shiftright

benjaminh said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Drove my friends' brand-new 2017 Civic EX and tried out all the gadgetry. It's a pretty nice car for the money, and I must say fit and finish are top notch for the price range. I think Lane Watch would be particularly good for drivers who have to compete with bicycles on the street.

Yeah, I think you can see why the Civic seems to be outselling even the Camry—it's a lot of car for the money in a stylish package. A 2018 Civic auto has an msrp of $19,640, which is pretty good considering it's the size of an Accord from 1997.

But, like your friend has, the Civic EX is a good upgrade for the money. The EX Civic has an mrsp of 21,240—so it costs $1600 more. But for that $1600 you get....

remote engine start
alloy wheels
LaneWatch
AndroidAuto/CarPlay
heated mirrors
smart entry/pushbutton start
walk away auto lock
fin antenna
lighted vanity mirrors
rear arm rest and pocket
60/40 split fold down seat
8 speaker stereo with XM and HD radio
etc.

Definitely worth $1600

But for just another $360 more you can get the turbo if you want to shift your own with a manual transmission.

They got HondaSense as well thrown in the deal. I think they went out the door at around $22,750. Not a killer deal, but not bad, not bad.

brian125

2018 Interior spec's.....1- Accord 2- Camry 3- Elantra 4- Forte 5- Civic 6- Cruze 7- Corolla 8- Sentra 2017/ 18

H/Rm............. H/Rear........L/R...........S/R
1-37.5..............37.2...........42.3...........58.3
2-38.3..............37.3...........42.1...........57.7
3-38.8...............38.0..........42.2...........56.2
4-39.1...............37.3..........42.2...........56.1
5-36.5...............34.5..........42.3...........56.9
6- 38.9..............37.3..........42.0...........54.9
7-38.3...............37.1..........42.3...........54.8
8-39.4...............36.7..........42.5...........54.7

2018 Ford Fusion............39.2......37.8......44.3.........57.8
2018 Sonata ...................40.4......38.0......45.5.........57.9

brian125

Sticks Hyundai Elantra's interior size is impressive...... Nice bang for the buck!!

stickguy

yes, it is quite roomy for a medium sized car.

ab348

Civic seems designed for short folks.

brian125

How about a Civic with a Sun roof .... you will lose another inch maybe more on H/ R

imidazol97

brian125 said:

2018 Interior spec's.....1- Accord 2- Camry 3- Elantra 4- Forte 5- Civic 6- Cruze 7- Corolla 8- Sentra 2017/ 18

H/Rm............. H/Rear........L/R...........S/R
1-37.5..............37.2...........42.3...........58.3
2-38.3..............37.3...........42.1...........57.7
3-38.8...............38.0..........42.2...........56.2
4-39.1...............37.3..........42.2...........56.1
5-36.5...............34.5..........42.3...........56.9
6- 38.9..............37.3..........42.0...........54.9
7-38.3...............37.1..........42.3...........54.8
8-39.4...............36.7..........42.5...........54.7

2018 Ford Fusion............39.2......37.8......44.3.........57.8
2018 Sonata ...................40.4......38.0......45.5.........57.9

And the Malibu?

brian125

18 Malibu H/r.......39.1....H /r......37.5....L/R.....42.0...S/R.....58.5. Shoulder rm. is best in mid / class
18 Optima............39.8................37.8...............45.5...............58.1

brian125

sda said:

The '18 Camry earned an 87 score by CR, the highest current score for midsize cars. They got 32 mpg in regular driving and 49mpg(!) on the highway drive. They did say the engine was noisy when revved and the 8 speed auto delivered some rough shifts, and it still earned an 87!

Just looking thru my 2017 CR Book..

Jeep Wrangler earned a CR 20 in road test / overall. . Worst score of any vehicle. They still sell, buyers love them . The 2017 Tesla S had a CR road test score of 100. My cousin is on his 2nd Tesla. They are as advertised superb.

roadburner

My M235i received a 98, but I still want to get a newer Wrangler eventually(not to replace the 2er, obviously).

brian125

roadburner said:

My M235i received a 98, but I still want to get a newer Wrangler eventually(not to replace the 2er, obviously).

Is there much of a difference with the 2014 M235i and 2017 M240i

The newer version M240i is a road monster in a small package. The 3.0L 335 h/p pulling 3400 lbs must be a scream with that suspension.

@roadburner ...What's Bmw's 2017 M2 upgraded motor ? Do you have track times / price ?

roadburner

brian125 said:

roadburner said:

My M235i received a 98, but I still want to get a newer Wrangler eventually(not to replace the 2er, obviously).

Is there much of a difference with the 2014 M235i and 2017 M240i

The newer version M240i is a road monster in a small package. The 3.0L 335 h/p pulling 3400 lbs must be a scream with that suspension.

@roadburner ...What's Bmw's 2017 M2 upgraded motor ? Do you have track times / price ?

The M240i B58 engine is a bit stronger than the N55 in the M235i but there's not a huge difference. The big change was the 2018 LCI(facelift)- digital gauges, iDrive 6.0, etc.
The N55 in the M2 cribs some parts from the S55 found in the M3/M4 but again the performance gains in the M2 are mostly due to the M LSD and the suspension setup. Me, I'd take an M240i if I wanted two pedals, the M2 if I wanted three.

brian125

Perfect vehicles to pick up the milk n bread............ Honey going out to pick up milk n bread.

What again...... that's the 5x this week!

andres3

ab348 said:

I believe VW has discontinued the 1.8T engine in North America at least. Older tech I suppose. However, how they manage to get such low HP out of a 2.0T engine baffles me.

They are able to squeeze more MPG's to make CARB happy be de-tuning the 2.0T. In the Audi A4 Ultra (stands for FWD), they can get that sucker up to a 27/37 MPG EPA rating. Quite impressive. I much prefer that engine to my Kia 1.6T. The Audi is the Rib Eye Steak and the Kia is the Hamburger.

berri

So what is the Jack in the Box ribeye burger?

Michaell

berri said:

So what is the Jack in the Box ribeye burger?

oooo .... good one, @berri

can't really think of a brand that splits the difference between the two.

andres3

berri said:

So what is the Jack in the Box ribeye burger?

Haven't tried it yet, but I have to admit I'm curious (and skeptical) to order it.

stickguy

wait, Jack in the Box still exists? I thought they were out of business.

akirby

Steak N Shake has steak burgers (thus the name).