Midsize Sedans 2.0

targettuning

When you think about it all automobiles are appliances made for passenger transport. There are some that transport in a more vigorous manner. Those have room for only two passengers..little to no luggage...and cost more than my last two or three years salaries. Then there are a few with 4 doors that transport 4 passengers with vigor..their luggage..and cost more than one years salary. Then there is the rest they transport me, my wife, an occasional passenger or two. It should get out its own way (0-60 mph in around 7 seconds or so) and gets out of that semi's way at the end of the on-ramp. Gets 20 mpg around town and 28-30 mpg on the highway. Is fairly quiet and reasonably comfortable. It doesn't roll over at the first curve in the road. Has a nice hot heater and cold A.C. Has to be fairly nice to look at for 5 years or however long it takes to pay it off. And ideally it isn't in the shop for an undue amount of time. This pretty much sums up what most people are looking for so if that makes my choice an appliance so be it. Yeah, my choice of appliance may be different than anothers but in this category they are all people moving appliances.

zzzoom6

Yeah, that's the Saturn I thought the new Accord looks like! Thanks for looking it up and posting it. Despite the looks of the exterior, I am sure it will sell well. The accord, even without a redesign, is still a great car. With the noise cancellation technology and a step up in safety ratings (I'm assuming), I would think that this car will be considered an improvement by many.

benderofbows

Why me??? LOL

baggs32

I'll try linking to them later. Sorry about that!

I have a 17" widescreen laptop set to 1680x1050 so they looked fine to me.

jd10013

I'll go out on a limb and predict that the Accord will be a sales success and sell even more Accords in 2008 than 2007.

I'm not so sure they will. not because of anything honda did in the redesign, but midsize car sales have been dropping for nearly a decade now. And now, more than ever, people want smaller, more fuel efficent cars, and or hybrids. For the last decade, the asian car companies have been doing alright by taking away from the domestics, but how much lower can they drive them?

I think honda took a pretty big gamble with making it bigger, less fuel efficent. That seems to be contray to where the market is heading. It could pay off big if people (after a test drive) decide they want the bigger car. But it could also go the other way.

urnews

but in this category they are all people moving appliances.

Truer words were never spoken. While all mid-size sedan owners would like to think that their transportation vehicles are "sporty" or "luxurious," the truth is that they are "moving appliances," not unlike a fine washing machine or nifty clothes dryer. Some are better than others at what they do, of course.

backy

Unless you can read minds, you might not want to assume what other people are thinking when they are typing a post.

Have a great day!

backy

Yeah, I agree--C/D's actual review and first comparo vs. other mid-sizers will put the Accord on top--again. By then they'll get over the fact that the Accord is bigger than the previous generation. What a surprise--an Accord that is bigger than the last one! :surprise: Like that's never happened before.

Note their negative comments were really nits, e.g. picks on the dash styling and the fact that the car is bigger. And did I mention that they carped about the Accord being bigger?

benderofbows

It may not be less fuel efficient. My 2007 was EPA rated at 26/34, before the revised numbers. However, I'm seeing way over that, and I don't drive slowly at all, plus I have a 5-mile commute and do mostly city driving. On most tanks I am seeing 28-31 MPG. Highway is 34-plus, even at 80 mph with the tach pegged at 3,000 and A/C on.

I think the Accord will remain a good mix of performance, size, and fuel efficiency.

tallman1

I think honda took a pretty big gamble with making it bigger, less fuel efficent.

As others have posted, there really isn't a drop in mileage with the revised EPA estimates. Bigger, more HP and about the same mileage. Not bad.

jd10013

As others have posted, there really isn't a drop in mileage with the revised EPA estimates. Bigger, more HP and about the same mileage. Not bad.

feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I interpret most of what I've read is, the thing that keeps it's fuel numbers the same is the cylinder deactivation. But, how many people will buy that option? and how many people do enough highway driving to take advantage of it?

I still think its a gamble. most other car companies market their large cars separately, the maxima for nissan, taurus for ford, the impalla (which I think honda is targeting with the redesign)for GM, the avalon for toyota, the 300 for chrysler and so on. the only one of those cars that sell in signifacant numbers is the impala. and its sales numbers are still a good bit lower than the accord.

andres3

And in the process I managed to delete #4208 by benderofbows for no good reason. I can't even get a copy of it. I'm very sorry.

Getting a bit trigger happy over there?

m1miata

Have you ever driven an Accord SEV6 or say the Aura XR? Bet they beat most all of the older sports cars for handling and acceleration and in a way are close to modern days sports cars. Yes, they are sporty. Why do you think Mustang had to up the HP on its V8 & V6? Look at the slalom test scores, 0-60 scores, lateral G testing and such, over the years then see how well the modern day sedan is -- just awesome. OK, it is not a Miata or a Porsche, but these cars are not old boats of days-gone-bye. Style wise, they look modern and sleek, with little to no wow factor. Yes, we need to get the wow back. GM, please bring the magic of '68 - '69 back!

To me a true appliance car are those which are rental grade, such as the Taurus, Impala, Malibu, Fit, Aveo and the like. Those are bought for transportation, point A-B.
Loren

andres3

But, how many people will buy that option? and how many people do enough highway driving to take advantage of it?

That's why Honda opted not to make it a "dumb" cylinder turn off system, but a "smart" one that can use not only half its cylinders or all, but also 2/3 of them as well; for low speed cruising, for high speed cruising, and for leaving Aura XR's in the rear view mirror when the time comes.

bristol2

the impalla (which I think honda is targeting with the redesign)

I don't see Honda targeting the Impala for anything.

I think with the size Honda is making a play for those who are stepping out of SUVs but still want room.
Also, we should keep in mind that the Accord barely makes it into 'full-size' territory. If you buy it with a sunroof, it's back into mid-size range (interior + trunk = >120 cu sq ft).

On the mileage, all their engines are either more efficient than the previous generation or equally as efficient. Regardless of how they achieve that, that's the situation.

m1miata

I am old enough to recall the brand new idea from GM for the Cadillac. The 8-6-4 engine was going to be one of those great inventions. No thanks, I will do a wait and see, and may never jump into the 6-4-3 engine buy. I own the '07 V6 SE Accord and can get up to 29 MPG at good speed. At the 60 MPH speeds, who knows, maybe say 31 MPG or more???
L

jd10013

the majority of drivers now are locked into city traffic. I don't see cylinder deactivation as being usefull to most drivers. a lot the same reason fewer and fewer stick shifts are being put into cars.

andres3

I don't know any dishwasher, or clothes washer, or dryer, that would make it fun for me to use one. I do know some vehicles I could (and one I do) have fun in all the time.

Fun is good for the soul!

elroy5

The new EPA estimates will have many car buyers thinking the 08 models have terrible fuel economy, when they may actually get higher mileage than 07 models. Will this affect sales of all cars, or convince people to buy smaller cars? I think it will have some effect.

andres3

Well, sticks tend to get better mileage in the city vs. autos.......

Also, if your only concern is being locked in city traffic then there is no reason to opt for the engine with cylinder deactivation in the first place!!!!

jd10013

sticks do get better milage, but people tend to view driving them in traffic a pain in the [non-permissible content removed]. thats why thery're dissapearing. more and more people are driving in traffic.

Also, if your only concern is being locked in city traffic then there is no reason to opt for the engine with cylinder deactivation in the first place!!!!

Thats my point. I don't think many people will, and thus, the milage estimates will not bear out. As I said, I could be wrong, but from what I've read, the epa estimates are bassed on the V6 with the cylinder deactivation feature. I'm betting less than 15% of the accords will have it, and even less will bennifit from it.

andres3

Well, I live and work in and around a very high traffic city of San Diego, and I'll tell you that the highway mileage still matters more to me than the city mileage, overall.

Even then, since only the V6 has cylinder deactivation, most people will opt for the 4 banger, which gets better fuel economy than the V6, even w/o cylinder deactivation.

SO EPA estimates for the 4 cylinder are great!

tallman1

feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I interpret most of what I've read is, the thing that keeps it's fuel numbers the same is the cylinder deactivation.

That's only in the V6. The I4 does not have VCM but the EPA estimates are about same as the 07 models.

pat

A bit trigger happy? Heh, more like a bit addled!

Um, ahem, no no, we had some, um, technical difficulties. That's what happened!

thegraduate

I said, I could be wrong, but from what I've read, the epa estimates are bassed on the V6 with the cylinder deactivation feature. I'm betting less than 15% of the accords will have it, and even less will bennifit from it.

Um, all V6 models of the sedan will have vcm STANDARD. You are talking about it like its optional, so just clarifying.

bristol2

Again, the '08's all have equal to or better than mileage than the previous generation.
If you don't want cylinder de-activation, then just get one without (I4). You are still getting mileage as good or better than previous.
The I4's are the majority of Accords sold so you are correct that most people will not get the VCM. Those who buy the V6 probably will.

tgkoenigsegg

Why isn't the Mitsubishi Galant in the discussion? I mean you could get a 3.8L 258hp V6 which is more than some of the cars here. The Galant has many standard features as well. I can see this as a serious contender in the market.

backy

Look at the Galant's sales numbers. The reason you don't see it discussed here more is because almost no one else sees it as a serious contender in the market.

It's not a bad car; it just doesn't stand out. I think the interior is particularly cheap-looking and feeling--not even competitive with cars at the low end of the price scale such as Optima and Sonata.

Bottom line is: what is the compelling reason to buy a Galant vs. one of the other cars in this class?

colloquor

Loren - Although the Ford Taurus is perceived as the defacto rental car, you should drive the 2008 Taurus (aka Five Hundred) with the new 3.5L Four-Cam V6 and 6-speed AT. I just spent 5 days and 1,400 miles in one, and it's pretty impressive. A substantial number of changes from the Five Hundred, and the new engine does wonders for acceleration and top end. Fuel economy isn't too shabby either - 28.8 MPG overall average with speeds between 75 and 80 on the freeways - and, that MPG includes the driving in various cities while on the business trip. The new "Taurus" is a sleeper.

tgkoenigsegg

What about the VW Passat? It has good sales numbers, it meets or in many cases exceeds the competitors. Even in price by just a bit. But, it is even more technologically advanced than the others and offers all wheel drive like few of the others.

m1miata

Reliability? Not sure the engines are new technology or not. Ask about how they are to be broken in. Also ask VW what they would consider excessive oil consumption for an engine. It is 8/10 Qt. per 1,000 miles. To me that is plain wrong. Now, what I do not know is if this is some standard reply in the industry. Personally I expect a Japan make to use no more than a quart every 5,000 to perhaps 7,500 miles. But eight tenths per thousand, I think not. How did the VWs do in the latest Consumer Reports magazine? Ever price the transmission repair on one? Yes, they look cool, and seem to have a nicely done interior. The German cars all seem to drive well too. If reliable, and cost is no object, it certainly is a cool midsized car. I liked the older Jetta for looks too.

as always IMHO, your results may vary,
Loren

m1miata

No dealership in my area for 135 miles or more, and I live in California, which is Import car capital of USA. That pretty much sums it up. A look at resale value pretty much seals it as a no so good buying decision, IMHO. The goodness of product is a non-issue at this point. The car looks cool, with a unique look, but oh well, it is not only off my list, it is nowhere to be found.
L

backy

How did the VWs do in the latest Consumer Reports magazine?

Very well. The Passat 2.0T is CR's top-ranked 4-cylinder Family Sedan, by a nose over the Altima 2.5S. The Passat is tied with the Accord EX and Altima SE for top-ranked V6 Family Sedans. The Passat V6, which btw has the distinction of being the most expensive as-tested Family Sedan CR has tested, is Recommended by CR, and has above-average predicted reliability. The 2.0T has below-average reliability and thus is not recommended by CR. Also, the 2.0T is (as tested) about $5000 more than the 2nd-ranked Altima. Based on price, I'd say the Passat competes more with cars like the Avalon, Azera, Maxima, Taurus/Sable, LaCrosse, Lucerne, and 300 than cars like the Accord, Altima, Camry, Sonata etc.

m1miata

The Taurus is a sleeper, or at least sleepy. Yes, for those wanting a Volvo safe car, with a pretty throne like driving position, at a Ford price, yeah, go for it. Not my cup o' tea though. I was referring to the real Taurus, and not the renamed FiveHundred. What a stupid move, IMHO, to give a new car the name of one which faded into rental car land. It is just all too sad. Take a pretty solid car, under power it when introduced, make it perhaps a bit too plain, though I wouldn't say ugly, give her a name, then yank the name off in a year or two -- oh dear-dear. New engine, and some bling-bling chrome, with a bull name, will do the trick? Hey, I am not paid the big bucks, so perhaps the CEO is on to some very large plan here to save FiveHundred project. It would be sad to see it fail if it is a good car. I had a PT with the high seat position. Good around town, but nothing I liked for the open roads / country roads twisty driving. The car looks solid though and as a vacation transporter, it looks like it would be comfortable.
I can see why some may like the car, and the value is there too!

L

m1miata

Well then the plan would be to get the V6 and keep a good warranty on hand, or around $5K come tranny replacement time. Good to know the V6 is reliable. That would be the one to shoot for. Avoid the i4 engines, I guess. How about the electrical? All the gremlins leave the car? If all is well with the V6 models, it could be a choice for a German FWD for less than Audi pricing. Is it better than an Altima, which I assume took on the looks from Passat as they look similar to me?

L

akirby

Wouldn't it be even more stupid for Ford to take a name with 80% recognition and millions of satisfied owners and stick it on a shelf while carrying on with a name that only has 30% recognition and a history of only average sales volume?

Let's revisit the sales numbers in a few months and see who's right.

akirby

I guess we can't talk about the 2008 Accord in this forum anymore since it's no longer a midsize sedan. Oh darn......

thegraduate

Actually, the host has already prevented it from being added to the Mainstream Large Sedans discussion.

The Sonata is full size, but is competitive with midsizers, as is the Accord.

zzzoom6

While all mid-size sedan owners would like to think that their transportation vehicles are "sporty" or "luxurious," the truth is that they are "moving appliances," not unlike a fine washing machine or nifty clothes dryer.

Sorry, but I could not disagree more. I don't have any particular affection for my drier, stove, or microwave. Yeah they keep me fed and leaving my clothes smelling like an Irish spring morning (whatever that is...), but if they were to get dirty, dented, or even if they would break, I don't think I'd give a rip. But a car is so much more than these appliances... there is something visceral about how a car accelerates, corners and moves. For me, driving is almost therapy... it lets me forget about all the other things that may be happening and for that moment when I commit to taking that corner rated for 20 mph at 45 mph, there is faith, exhilaration, maybe even a little doubt, but my mind is focused on the car, on every little twitch, the tension of the steering wheel, remembering how much force my backside is being forced into the seat bolsters, and making sure that I know where the brake pedal is... just in case. Then I hit the apex, the tires are screeching, my heart is racing, but the car is still in my control... a small smile starts to appear on my face and all in the world is glorious! I take a deep breath and think, "I love this car! I am soooo lucky to have made this choice!"

Never in a million years would I ever get the same emotions and level of satisfaction from a clothes washer. Yeah, it is still a way to get from point a to b, but if that's all it was, I'd get a corolla. But cars mean more to me than that, especially when it comes down to MY car. It's an expression, an amusement ride, my therapist, my tour guide, my hobby, my addiction, my means to an end... There's a reason I, and dare I say "we", spend a good part of our day reading, writing, and even arguing about cars and not about refrigerators: we use appliances because we have to, and yes, in my current condition I have to drive my car, but I also do it because I like to.

targettuning

And now the question becomes: What defines fun? In my opinion there is a fine line between having "fun" while driving and reckless driving. Are those who pass me on a curve in the mountains having fun? Do they do so because their car can corner better than mine at speed? Do those who blow by me at 100 mph on a curvy 2 lane do that while having fun (a Corvette did just that not too long ago)? I like my "fun" every now and then but like most people I just go back to using my "appliance" like it was intended to be used 99% of the time.
Fun CAN be good for the soul...but hard on the wallet if you get caught!!

akirby

Actually, the host has already prevented it from being added to the Mainstream Large Sedans discussion.

Main Entry: tongue-in-cheek
Function: adjective
: characterized by insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration

mz6greyghost

What defines fun? In my opinion there is a fine line between having "fun" while driving and reckless driving.

Not if it's done right. There are plenty of opportunities to have "fun" without even being close to breaking the law. It's all in how you look at it.

Zzzoom is right. All of us spend a fair amount of time reading, talking, and debating about cars, more than the average joe (and MUCH more than my wife!) That's why we're passionate about our cars, because they're much more than just "moving appliances" to us. I'm proud of that, and you should be as well. If not, I don't think this board is right for you.

Just because the majority of us drives midsize sedans, doesn't mean that we CAN'T enjoy what (and how) we drive. I'd LOVE to have a two-door, two-seat supercar, but it's not practical for me and my life. Why can't we have our cake and eat it too?

jeffyscott

Also ask VW what they would consider excessive oil consumption for an engine. It is 8/10 Qt. per 1,000 miles. To me that is plain wrong. Now, what I do not know is if this is some standard reply in the industry.

Yes, the typical industry standard is that up to 1 quart per 1000 miles is okay. So this is not a VW thing. Our VW has not used a detectible amount in 20,000+ miles.

I think the actual reliability differences are a lot less than many think. When my wife bought the brand new model Jetta in 2005, a no deductible extended warranty to 7 years/100,000 miles was about $1500. For an Accord, the exact same warranty from the same source (our credit union) would have cost about $1000.

VW's are ususally highly rated by CR in terms of quality and drivability. They only complain about the reliability, based on data from their flawed survey.

mz6greyghost

VW's are ususally highly rated by CR in terms of quality and drivability. They only complain about the reliability, based on data from their flawed survey.

I'm no fan of CR by any means, but VW reliability (or lack of) goes beyond their surveys.

Ask the dozen or so people I know that have owned a VW over the past decade, with their flawed electrical systems (constantly burning out bulbs, faulty door locks/alarm system, windshield wipers, dash gauges, etc.), transmissions (both manual and auto) failing after 25K-30K miles, faulty ECMs, faulty turbos on the TDIs, etc.

Their lack of reliability is no isolated incident.

robbieg

I haven't driven one but from what I have read the new Taurus is a much better car than the Five Hunderd.

With the new engine Ford fixed the major "flaw" in the Five Hundred. Since everyone knew that the engine in the Five Hundred was grossly inadequate from the onset, why did Ford even release the Five Hundred with that engine?

thegraduate

Yeah, smart guy, I picked up on that. :P

I wrote what I did for the many people that may pop in to read, and then try to look for the Accord in the full-size room, since the host said we get a lot of reader traffic as opposed to a very small fraction of those readers that post (a lot of people may likely be first timers).

zzzoom6

Fun CAN be good for the soul...but hard on the wallet if you get caught!!

You don't have to be reckless to have fun. I guess I'm lucky I'm not the drag racer type since that kind of driving is much more likely to result in tickets. And before I decide to take a corner at "fun" speeds, I always make sure I can see far enough ahead to make sure that there aren't any surprises in front of me. If there are things in the way where it's difficult to see, it's not worth the risk.

colloquor

From what I've heard, the 3.5L simply wasn't ready. After having driven both, and lived with the 3.5L for the 1,400 mile trip, I can assure you the 3.5L has some serious "grunt," and it's quiet too, not thrashy. I drove about 15% in the city, and 85% on interstates, with a 28.8MPG average. And, in response to Loren's post, on twisty two lane roads in Mississippi and Alabama, it wasn't too bad either - no Accord mind you, but equal to or better than the Camry SE I last rented.

Also, I prefer the upright seating position akin to a SAAB, Volvo, or many European cars, compared to the "legs out" position of other cars. After miles and miles of interstate driving, I'm still comfortable, unlike when I'm driving a car without that seating position. In some respects, the Five Hundred/New Taurus is a more affordable Volvo anyway, since it's built on the Volvo S80 platform - not a bad thing.

targettuning

I am old enough to have had some of the premier ( mostly MOPAR 383's @ 440's with one 340 thrown in and an occasional 390/406 Ford) muscle cars of the 60's and early 70's with my last being a 1970 Chevelle SS 396. Fun then was defined as street drag racing late at night. Well I guess that still goes on doesn't it? As I said I too like my fun but now drive sedately most of the time as I would bet 99% of the owners of these (Camry..Accord...Sonata etc.) do. I was thinking a Z-06 Corvette would be nice though.

akirby

Actually, the new Taurus is built on the D3 platform which is a modified version of the previous gen S80 platform.

And the 3.5L engine was at least 2 years later than anticipated so they would have had to postpone the Five Hundred, Freestyle and Montego for 2 years if they waited for the engine. The 3.0L was simply a stopgap measure. Same is true for the Zephyr - it was supposed to debut as the MKZ with the 3.5L but they needed something for Lincoln/Mercury dealers to sell last year after they killed the LS.