The lower sales figures were projected weeks before December. Check the autochannel for news.
First some people trashed Sonata due to it's fleet sales numbers. Now, you and some are trashing Sonata because Hyundai decided to reduce fleet sales. Yes, lower sales are lower sales. Look at Ford; after posting record losses of over $12B, is planning on lower sales to improve its bottom line.
There was no "silly reasoning spin" about Sonata's reduced sales. It was planned by Hyundai. Agree or disagree with that decision, but that is what they planned.
The Ford 3.0 Vulcan is very well known as being a very reliable and pretty much bullit proof engine. Granted, its "old" pushrod technology but it is very reliable.
"and then Ford wonders why better efforts such as the Fusion/500 don't hold their value either. But, even today the 'new' (by Ford's standards) DT is anemic compared to what you find in Camcordimas."
With statements like these it shows that you know nothing about the Duratec history or its make-up. Anemic?? How? It does 0-60 in 7.2 seconds.. We are talking Tenths of a second in difference here...
So what's its torque? 300 lb-ft? If that's the case then I can PROBABLY overlook the pathetic 149 HP rating from a 3.0 V6.
You can spin it anyway you want but in this day and age 149 HP will be something from a 2.2 I4. Let me give you some reference: The 1995 Honda Accord (i.e, 12 years ago) has a 2.7L V6 that puts out 170 HP and 165 lb-ft of torque.
"Many folks don't have to pinch pennies either when buying a car. Hyundai has to price their cars less or people won't buy them when there's a Camcord for the same price. "
Here we go again.. about price. The fact is that the Honda/Camry are going to cost you thousands more at purchase price. For those of us who don't feel the need to pay the extra $$ for a perceived advantage.. we get bashed, because we didn't pay more. Why pay more and get less?? Remember when Honda/Toyota meant value, real value... When you actually paid less and got more..
Thinking about the vulcan 3.0.. I know 4 people who have this engine.. 2 in Taurus, 1 in a Sable, and one in a Mazda Truck... all have had no problems.. 2 have over 100,000 miles.. Hmm.... Plus, get out on the net. Read, Read, read... The vulcan 3.0 is known for its reliability..
Currently have an '05 Taurus Company car w/the Vulcan motor. It has 60K on it in 20 months. While the motor is old and underpowered, it has performed very well. While other parts of the car have a few issues, the motor has been bullet proof.
When do y'all consider a motor to be deemed reliable? After 50k miles of good operation? 100k? 200k?
Personally, I think any engine on the market should go 100k before requiring any more than regular maintenance and scheduled services. Saying Honda's are bulletproof because of the 69k miles of trouble-free operation out of my dad's 2005 Accord doesn't mean nearly as much as still having a daily driver with 170,000 miles on it, with only a cooling fan replaced in the engine room. Not to me, anyways.
Until I owned a Taurus, I never knew there was such a thing as a heater core that is used for the heater in the car. Didn't have to know how they worked cause they always just did - well, Taurus owners know about the heater core that replacement entails removing the dashboard pretty much. Just one of the many items that rust in the car.
Between the engine block, water pump fins and heater core that corrodes, the whole cooling system is a total POS.
There is also the crappy windshield washer hoses that harden and fall apart. Such a simple thing that shouldn't be an issue in any car.
I could go on and on and on... but I think you all understand why a Ford sedan might not seem like the paragon of reliability to some of us that owned one before. My dad had the 1st generation Accord and 2nd generation Civic and both cars ran like champs for years.
In this day and age, except for really extreme conditions, a motor to me should easily go 100k on just oil/filter changes.
Could it be that Sonata sales are down due discounted Accords, the new Aura, the G6, and whole lot of other options which are near priced. The Sonata is still a good value as a V8 if bought around $19,500 I would think. Resale value is still lacking. Those looking for handling may be buying a Fusion or Mazda 6. Then there is the Impala which I have seen on lots for around $21K. This $19K to 23K range is just getting too crowded. I hear that the G6 V6 now come with good ol' hydraulic steering now.
I did a brief test drive of a Sonata V6. Seems like the steering was OK, but just OK, and the suspension feels adequate. Maybe this matches what the reviews are saying. It is good, but possibly not in the class of Honda and Camry. Will give it another shot some day. Maybe I was too critical. The interior is good too, but I still like the Honda and some other brands a bit more. The Aura test drive was little more impressive though I don't know yet how to rate it against all the rest. Need more time in the saddle of other cars. I tested the base Aura, and I am sure the 3.6 engine would have been snappier. That said, the 3.5 feels about the same as the Sonata did. Once again, I should drive these again, as the Sonata should have more speed to it. Both cars were pretty quiet, though I did hear some tire noise with the Aura.
Has anyone else test driven the Charger yet? I was pretty impressed with the car. Seemed like good power with the 3.5 V6 and it has the good feel of a RWD. -Loren
Loren - my colleague at work has a Charger that I've sat in multiple times and he drives a ton. Haven't heard any complains from him, he seems happy with the car... he has the Hemi V8 with MDS though. He was originally looked for a 300C but they didn't have MDS on that and not sure if they do right now.
I would say try out the Hemi V8/MDS in the Charger too, it should be a hoot to drive!
Both the 300C and Charger have the 8-4 engine Hemi. I don't see the need for that engine. The car gets expensive, the insurance goes up, the gas mileage goes down, and reliability is a wait and see longer term. I would stick with the 3.5 V6 which seems to move it along pretty good.
Next up a test drive of the Accord V6, Camry V6 and a G6 to see how they compare. May consider a 4 cylinder test on the Accord, as many say it is pretty spunky. I have driven the Aura with the 3.5. I wonder how it would compare to the 3.9 in the G6 and I think a Monte Carlo, last years model. Is the power boost worth less gas mileage and higher insurance? A G6 GT with the 3.9 or is that going up a notch to GTP, may be quicker, but a we talking about second or less in the 0-60? Then there is smoothness factor between Honda V6 vs. the old GM V6. Perhaps only the GM 3.6 V6 should be compared? Personally, I can live with the old OHV engines providing that they are not overly course, and are as efficient. Come repair time, they should require less hours to be worked on. I fully understand both sides of the old debate on engine types. Guess it boils down to price, and how it will function. The Aura 3.5 I test drove had a little skip of the heartbeat now and then, but overall pulled the car well down the road. -Loren
why trade in a camry with only 88k, if it was so great?
I think 88K is a lot of miles. I like to buy mid-trim models of a car, put no money down, drive it for 4-5- years and then sell it or trade it for what I owe (or better) after putting minimal amounts of money into it for maintenance. The Camry delivered that, but so does the Accord. I'm sure other cars will do the same. Just not the Fords I have owned.
The Sonata for 08 could be in the picture if they tweak it some for the dash, better driver's seat, and a nicer front grill. I think Hyundai may have worked out the bugs of the car by then. Maybe it will qualify for my 4-5 year plan with minimal maintenance and a quality ride.
Hyundai Motor America has been quoted as saying Sonata sales are down due to their intention of reducing fleet sales.
Hyundai Reports November Sales
'FOUNTAIN VALLEY, Calif., Dec. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Hyundai Motor America sold 28,417 units during the month of November, down 14.9 percent compared with November 2005. "Sales declined in November due to our strategy to reduce fleet sales in 2006'
I drove the Charger in Florida recently while on vacation. I was NOT impressed with the very sterile, cheap and generic interior. The interior just didn't seem to match the aggressive exterior. Many of the controls were counterintuitive. On two occasions we had the stereo completely shut down as it was in a mode we just couldnt figure out. The cruise control was like nothing i have ever seen and took me time, while driving!!!!??? to figure out. While driving this I couldn't get over how many peoples heads would jerk around to look at this car. The engine/drivetrain seemed fine but didn't match the recent Grand Prix rental and Altima 3.5 rental I had. I wouldn't buy the Charger over most of the cars in that class mainly because I don't trust the tranny and I know it wouldn't be able to go the long haul.
Just because Hyundai's PR department decides this is what the company will say in response to a huge decline in Sonata sales doesn't put the issue to bed.
There's more to it than that. Even Honda nor Nissan don't try to do that when its sales decline.
Actually the Vulcan 3.0 was brand new in 1986 (developed specifically for the then new Taurus/Sable) and for the times 140 hp in a 3200 lb sedan was adequate since the torque was fairly good. This was way before the current horsepower wars e.g. the HEMI and most other V-6's developed about the same numbers and forget the 4 cylinders of the time..most were way less. Do not forget this is now 20+ year old technology so more recently developed 4cyl (not to mention V-6's) BETTER show large improvements. Anyhow, the car gained hp. incrementally over the years until it finally topped out at 158 hp I believe. You want to talk ancient try the GM 3.8 liter series V-6 and all the other variations. I owned quite a few 86-89 Taurus/Sables and while the rest of the car wasn't always that great that engine was remarkably reliable. In fact there were at least two Taurus/Sables I had that approached 200K miles and one that had 278K when sold and none had anything done to the engines except water pumps, alternators, plugs/wires and the occasional starter motor. Pathetic performance? compared to what? some other 21 year old car or a new V-6 Accord? All that I owned proved fast enough to climb the mountains in W. Pa. without loss of speed, cruise at 75 mph, merge on ramps safely enough and still get upper 20's fuel economy. It was one of the "all-time" best engines Ford made and while the AXOD transmission left something to be desired (a good transmission) I defend the Vulcan.
Since I'm not a Ford man, or necessarily a fan of Ford products, I agree with you on several of your points. Perhaps the reason the Vulcan engine was still used until the Taurus' demise is because it was a simply reliable engine. Old-fashioned, yes; outdated, yes; underpowered, yes; but, still reliable.
Look at Volvo, generally and historically viewed as a manufacturer of rugged engines, with its midsize sedans from the '60s through the early '90s, its 4-cylinder 1.6L, 1.8L, 2.0L, and 2.1L inline was based essentially on the same engine design, albeit later with a different head assembly. As some say, "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"
Technologically advanced multiple cam and valve engines with variable valve timing, and other gizmos, are wonderful, until they break, or something anomalous happens. When it does, it means big bucks to repair. This is not the case with simple engine designs, such as any pushrod V6. Some people today still think simpler is better.
The small block Chevy V8 is still in production, and it lineage dates back to the '50s.
Now back to midsize sedans comparisons . . . I look forward to seeing the new Malibu in person, and see how it shapes up with the new Accord generation, and the existing Camry. If Honda doesn't push the body and interior design element too far to alienate its core market, they most likely will have another winner.
anemic would be the correct adjective - and it has little to do with acceleration times or HP ratings. The 221hp Fusion is competitively quick (only about a second slower), it just doesn't sound or feel that way. The enthusiast mags call it 'thrashy' I'll stick with 'anemic'. Ruins what would otherwise be a pleasant ride, put even the 3.3 Sonata engine in it, then you'd have something.
"The lower sales figures were projected weeks before December. Check the autochannel for news"
I think the lower sales of the Sonata are due to the rebates being cut back; I remember some time back Hyundai had something like $3000 rebates on the V6
"Thinking about the vulcan 3.0.. I know 4 people who have this engine.. 2 in Taurus, 1 in a Sable, and one in a Mazda Truck... all have had no problems.. 2 have over 100,000 miles.. Hmm.... Plus, get out on the net. Read, Read, read... The vulcan 3.0 is known for its reliability.. "
In that case, Ford should stop any new enigne development and use the Vulcan for all new cars for the next 20 years, since it has finally found a reliable engine
I'm not good on the engine codes.. which displacement and configuration Toyota engines are you talking about? Most Toyota engines don't run for 20 years...
What's your point? Mine was even Toyota sticks with something that works. And it didn't need any more HPs.
Engine technology has changed tho, with Honda, Toyota and Nissan offering some of the quickest, most fuel efficient V6s ever. And Honda and Nissan's I4s are 2 of the best ever as well. Untouchable motors. Tough for Ford to compete against those.
Ford doesn't really compete in my book. They just hang in there.
"Here we go again.. about price. The fact is that the Honda/Camry are going to cost you thousands more at purchase price. For those of us who don't feel the need to pay the extra $$ for a perceived advantage.. we get bashed, because we didn't pay more. Why pay more and get less?? Remember when Honda/Toyota meant value, real value... When you actually paid less and got more.."
On the contrary, most of your posts have been bashing people buying Accord/Camry. You may feel you are getting a better value with your Fusion, and I may think I am getting a better value with my ex-Accord. No need to deride people who buy any car, this discussion is about the cars, not the people buying them. Glad you are out of your media-bias theory, probably reinfirced by this years North American Car and truck of the year (Saturn/Chevy)
What spin? I merely stated that it was a great design and totally reliable. Further, as far as I know it is out of production along with the car it was introduced in, the Taurus. Further..further there is only so much "squeeze" to be had with 25 year old architecture (basic design) and I don't think it was ever Fords intention to make this engine competitive directly with Honda/Toyota V-6's(the Duratech was designed for that) instead it was used as a simple base engine. Several optional V-6 engines were offered throughout the years after introduction (the unlamented 3.8 and the Duratech 24 valve 3.0) and the Vulcan was deemed adequate as the base engine and it remained so until the Taurus' recent discontinuance. GM has done the same thing, use a simple,reliable old design engine beyond its time e.g. the 3.8 SeriesII. Many,including professional testers from popular automobile magazines conceded that engine, although very long in the tooth, was very competitive performance wise/fuel economy wise to more modern Honda and Toyota V-6's.
20R The 2-valve SOHC 2.2 L (2189 cc) 20R was produced from 1975 through 1980. Cylinder bore was 88.4 mm (3.48 in) and stroke was 88.9 mm (3.5 in). Aluminum alloy heads were used.
Initial output was 96 hp (72 kW) at 4800 rpm (90 hp in California) and 120 ft·lbf (162 N·m) at 2800 rpm. Power was down slightly from 1978 through 1979 at 95 hp (71 kW) at 4800 rpm and 122 ft·lbf (165 N·m) at 2400 rpm. The final version, from 1979 through 1980, was down again at 90 hp (67 kW) at 4800 rpm and 122 ft·lbf (165 N·m) at 2400 rpm.
Applications:
1975-1980 Toyota Hi-Lux 1975-1981 Toyota Celica U.S. Version 1975 Toyota Corona U.S. Version
22R The 2-valve SOHC 2.4 L (2366 cc) 22R was produced from 1981 through 1995. Cylinder bore was 91.9 mm (3.62 in) and stroke was 88.9 mm (3.5 in).
Initial output was 96 hp (72 kW) at 4800 rpm and 129 ft·lbf (174 N·m) at 2800 rpm. By 1990 the 22R was producing 108 hp (81 kW) at 5000 rpm and 138 ft·lbf (187 N·m) at 3400 rpm.
The first fuel injected 22R-E engines appeared in 1983. Output of these engines is commonly rated at 105 hp (78 kW) at 4800 rpm and 137 ft·lbf (185 N·m) at 2800 rpm.
In 1985, the engine was significantly reworked, output was up to 112 hp (84 kW) at 4600 rpm and 142 ft·lbf (192 N·m) at 3400 rpm. Many parts from the newer 22R-E are not compatible with those from the older pre-1985 engine.
The turbocharged 22R-TE (sold from 1984 through 1988) produced 135 hp (101 kW) at 4800 rpm and 173 ft·lbf (234 N·m) at 2800 rpm.
The 22R and its variants were very common in the U.S. market. The engines are well known for their durability and low to mid range torque; However, its weakness is high-end power. Thus, most performance enthusiasts usually prefer the Toyota 18R-G, 3T-G, 4A-GE and 3S-GE 4-cylinder engines, even though the 22R has a bigger displacement and a strong block.
Applications:
22R 1981-1988 Toyota Hi-Lux 1982-1984 Toyota Celica 1981-1996 Toyota Pickup 1984 Toyota 4Runner 22R-E 1985-1995 Toyota Hi-Lux 1983-1985 Toyota Celica 1985-1995 Toyota Pickup 1985-1995 Toyota 4Runner 22R-TE 1985-1987 Toyota Hi-Lux, 135 hp (101 kW) 1988 Toyota 4Runner
None of them are on the market for more than 15 years. Also, note how many rework effort Toyota has put into the 22R engine.
I remember rebuilding a 22RE for a Celica. It reminded me of rebuilding an MG motor. If it wasn't for torque settings, I don't think you would need a repair manual.
The problem is that if the car (Sonata) was worth buying in the first place, then very few would be going to fleets. Well made cars have strong retail sales (real consumers). Keep in mind anything over 20% fleet is considered a failure by most in the auto industry.
Here are the most recent numbers available that go thru mid year 2006. Results for end of 2006 should be available soon:
But Ford started selling the Fusion and its sister Mercury Milan and Lincoln Zephyr into fleets right away. Total fleet accounts for about 16 percent of sales for the trio. Less than 10 percent of total sales have been daily rental, Ford says.
The low number of fleet sales explains why the Accord is so great at retaining its resale value.
That is incredibly valuable/interesting information, thank you for those figures. The Camry number is about what I expected, but I had NO idea that the Sonata was HALF fleet.
I know that Hyundai wanted 'butts in seats', but GOOD LORD! It is true though, in my experience, I get a Sonata probably about every other week (I rent cars weekly for work).
Interesting stuff. Thanks. I have a few questions for you regarding some other Toyota engine families, if you have a second, shoot me an email - I don't want to cause problems on this forum by asking OT questions.
Unfortunately, many competent vehicles aren't bought by the majority of the public. People buy vehicles in part because they are the recipients of well-crafted marketing campaigns, positive experiences with brands, etc. I wouldn't dispute the very competent Camcords, but just because Hyundai has chosen to keep their US operation rolling by selling a large percentage of Sonata's to fleets certainly doesn't negate the competency of the Sonata. I have personally driven the Sonata, as a rental, on many, many occasions, as well as having had exposure to several Sonata owners, and your appraisal that the Sonata is not (as) competent because it is sold to fleets or because its resale value is not a segment leader, is based on your opinion and apparently not on facts. I am very assured that the Sonata competes fully with the Accord and Camry as a family hauler.
Your immense reply to me just confirmed what I said ( and I didn't even Google it,like you apparently did, when I posted it) - that Toyota's 20R and 22R was basically at the heart of the Celica/Camry for 20 years, all tweaks included.
Why can't Ford use an engine for that long? Even with tweaks.
My guess is Hyundai feels if you "try it, you will like it" so having their vehicles in rental fleets let people try it before they buy it. I also noticed they were sending relatively highline models to the fleets. My folks got a V6 Sonata with leather and a sunroof last time they were in the midwest. That might be a general trend, the last Taurus I got had leather and moon too.
Look at how many times Toyota tweak their 20R and 22R engines. Look at the HP output when they introduced it then compare it to at end of production. I believe the difference is more than "6 HP" Ford managed to squeeze out over 20 years.
The engine even changed from 2.2L to 2.4L for crying out loud.
So Ford only managed to get an additional 6 hp over the years. To that I say...so what? I seem to recall that during the development of the Vulcan Ford was among the first to use CADCAM and the specs. e.g compression ratio, valve timing, spark plug placement etc. etc. were idealized before casting the first block. Maybe things were so well thought out initially (for the design and ultimate use as Ford envisioned it) that further gobs of hp. just wasn't necessary....or MAYBE Ford just didn't have this engine in mind for use in the Mustang Cobra!! Look, I liked the engine,it always did what I asked without breaking and for that I say it was one of the best Ford engines ever, even without 500 hp. I fail to equate a necessary periodic increase in hp.with a reliable engine.
Changing displacement from 2.2 to 2.4 is a relatively simple thing even using the existing block. Toyota didn't start from scratch when they increased displacement. They tweaked the existing engine.
Much like Ford does. Their current 6 is OK, but when compared to stellar 6s in a Camry, Altima etc. the Ford seems so undesireable.
Comments
First some people trashed Sonata due to it's fleet sales numbers. Now, you and some are trashing Sonata because Hyundai decided to reduce fleet sales. Yes, lower sales are lower sales. Look at Ford; after posting record losses of over $12B, is planning on lower sales to improve its bottom line.
There was no "silly reasoning spin" about Sonata's reduced sales. It was planned by Hyundai. Agree or disagree with that decision, but that is what they planned.
"and then Ford wonders why better efforts such as the Fusion/500 don't hold their value either. But, even today the 'new' (by Ford's standards) DT is anemic compared to what you find in Camcordimas."
With statements like these it shows that you know nothing about the Duratec history or its make-up. Anemic?? How? It does 0-60 in 7.2 seconds.. We are talking Tenths of a second in difference here...
So what's its torque? 300 lb-ft? If that's the case then I can PROBABLY overlook the pathetic 149 HP rating from a 3.0 V6.
You can spin it anyway you want but in this day and age 149 HP will be something from a 2.2 I4. Let me give you some reference: The 1995 Honda Accord (i.e, 12 years ago) has a 2.7L V6 that puts out 170 HP and 165 lb-ft of torque.
'nuff said.
Here we go again.. about price. The fact is that the Honda/Camry are going to cost you thousands more at purchase price. For those of us who don't feel the need to pay the extra $$ for a perceived advantage.. we get bashed, because we didn't pay more. Why pay more and get less?? Remember when Honda/Toyota meant value, real value... When you actually paid less and got more..
Can you please elaborate more on how did one pay more to get less with a Camry or Accord?
Anything that's that ancient and pathetic in performance better be reliable...
I know how to read, but don't have to to know how reliable my 96 Taurus was in leaving me disappointed in it. Took a bath at trade-in too.
Bought a Camry. Put 88000 miles on it and nothing ever went wrong with it. Excellent, excellent reliability.
Traded that for an Accord. Excellent, excellent reliability.
Thanks for the memories Ford.
there are a lot of reasons, i just want to know what your reason is.
Personally, I think any engine on the market should go 100k before requiring any more than regular maintenance and scheduled services. Saying Honda's are bulletproof because of the 69k miles of trouble-free operation out of my dad's 2005 Accord doesn't mean nearly as much as still having a daily driver with 170,000 miles on it, with only a cooling fan replaced in the engine room. Not to me, anyways.
http://www.taurusclub.com/forum/index.php?act=portal
Until I owned a Taurus, I never knew there was such a thing as a heater core that is used for the heater in the car. Didn't have to know how they worked cause they always just did - well, Taurus owners know about the heater core that replacement entails removing the dashboard pretty much. Just one of the many items that rust in the car.
Between the engine block, water pump fins and heater core that corrodes, the whole cooling system is a total POS.
There is also the crappy windshield washer hoses that harden and fall apart. Such a simple thing that shouldn't be an issue in any car.
I could go on and on and on... but I think you all understand why a Ford sedan might not seem like the paragon of reliability to some of us that owned one before. My dad had the 1st generation Accord and 2nd generation Civic and both cars ran like champs for years.
In this day and age, except for really extreme conditions, a motor to me should easily go 100k on just oil/filter changes.
I did a brief test drive of a Sonata V6. Seems like the steering was OK, but just OK, and the suspension feels adequate. Maybe this matches what the reviews are saying. It is good, but possibly not in the class of Honda and Camry. Will give it another shot some day. Maybe I was too critical. The interior is good too, but I still like the Honda and some other brands a bit more. The Aura test drive was little more impressive though I don't know yet how to rate it against all the rest. Need more time in the saddle of other cars. I tested the base Aura, and I am sure the 3.6 engine would have been snappier. That said, the 3.5 feels about the same as the Sonata did. Once again, I should drive these again, as the Sonata should have more speed to it. Both cars were pretty quiet, though I did hear some tire noise with the Aura.
Has anyone else test driven the Charger yet? I was pretty impressed with the car. Seemed like good power with the 3.5 V6 and it has the good feel of a RWD.
-Loren
I would say try out the Hemi V8/MDS in the Charger too, it should be a hoot to drive!
Next up a test drive of the Accord V6, Camry V6 and a G6 to see how they compare. May consider a 4 cylinder test on the Accord, as many say it is pretty spunky. I have driven the Aura with the 3.5. I wonder how it would compare to the 3.9 in the G6 and I think a Monte Carlo, last years model. Is the power boost worth less gas mileage and higher insurance? A G6 GT with the 3.9 or is that going up a notch to GTP, may be quicker, but a we talking about second or less in the 0-60? Then there is smoothness factor between Honda V6 vs. the old GM V6. Perhaps only the GM 3.6 V6 should be compared? Personally, I can live with the old OHV engines providing that they are not overly course, and are as efficient. Come repair time, they should require less hours to be worked on. I fully understand both sides of the old debate on engine types. Guess it boils down to price, and how it will function. The Aura 3.5 I test drove had a little skip of the heartbeat now and then, but overall pulled the car well down the road.
-Loren
I think 88K is a lot of miles. I like to buy mid-trim models of a car, put no money down, drive it for 4-5- years and then sell it or trade it for what I owe (or better) after putting minimal amounts of money into it for maintenance. The Camry delivered that, but so does the Accord. I'm sure other cars will do the same. Just not the Fords I have owned.
The Sonata for 08 could be in the picture if they tweak it some for the dash, better driver's seat, and a nicer front grill. I think Hyundai may have worked out the bugs of the car by then. Maybe it will qualify for my 4-5 year plan with minimal maintenance and a quality ride.
Hyundai Reports November Sales
'FOUNTAIN VALLEY, Calif., Dec. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Hyundai Motor America
sold 28,417 units during the month of November, down 14.9 percent compared
with November 2005.
"Sales declined in November due to our strategy to reduce fleet sales in 2006'
While driving this I couldn't get over how many peoples heads would jerk around to look at this car. The engine/drivetrain seemed fine but didn't match the recent Grand Prix rental and Altima 3.5 rental I had. I wouldn't buy the Charger over most of the cars in that class mainly because I don't trust the tranny and I know it wouldn't be able to go the long haul.
There's more to it than that. Even Honda nor Nissan don't try to do that when its sales decline.
Why the heck is that 20-year-old engine (BTW without much imporvement) still doing in the market?
140 HP introduced in 1986 and 20 years later Ford managed to squeeze out only 6 more? Isn't that pathetic?
Spin it anyway you want, to have this engine in any car today is pathetic and Ford knows it.
Look at Volvo, generally and historically viewed as a manufacturer of rugged engines, with its midsize sedans from the '60s through the early '90s, its 4-cylinder 1.6L, 1.8L, 2.0L, and 2.1L inline was based essentially on the same engine design, albeit later with a different head assembly. As some say, "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"
Technologically advanced multiple cam and valve engines with variable valve timing, and other gizmos, are wonderful, until they break, or something anomalous happens. When it does, it means big bucks to repair. This is not the case with simple engine designs, such as any pushrod V6. Some people today still think simpler is better.
The small block Chevy V8 is still in production, and it lineage dates back to the '50s.
Now back to midsize sedans comparisons . . . I look forward to seeing the new Malibu in person, and see how it shapes up with the new Accord generation, and the existing Camry. If Honda doesn't push the body and interior design element too far to alienate its core market, they most likely will have another winner.
I think the lower sales of the Sonata are due to the rebates being cut back; I remember some time back Hyundai had something like $3000 rebates on the V6
In that case, Ford should stop any new enigne development and use the Vulcan for all new cars for the next 20 years, since it has finally found a reliable engine
~alpha
Engine technology has changed tho, with Honda, Toyota and Nissan offering some of the quickest, most fuel efficient V6s ever. And Honda and Nissan's I4s are 2 of the best ever as well. Untouchable motors. Tough for Ford to compete against those.
Ford doesn't really compete in my book. They just hang in there.
On the contrary, most of your posts have been bashing people buying Accord/Camry. You may feel you are getting a better value with your Fusion, and I may think I am getting a better value with my ex-Accord. No need to deride people who buy any car, this discussion is about the cars, not the people buying them. Glad you are out of your media-bias theory, probably reinfirced by this years North American Car and truck of the year (Saturn/Chevy)
Sure, your choice, who's forcing you? BTW, what year/model Accord did you own? Just curious.
think they already have? too busy closing factories.
The 2-valve SOHC 2.2 L (2189 cc) 20R was produced from 1975 through 1980. Cylinder bore was 88.4 mm (3.48 in) and stroke was 88.9 mm (3.5 in). Aluminum alloy heads were used.
Initial output was 96 hp (72 kW) at 4800 rpm (90 hp in California) and 120 ft·lbf (162 N·m) at 2800 rpm. Power was down slightly from 1978 through 1979 at 95 hp (71 kW) at 4800 rpm and 122 ft·lbf (165 N·m) at 2400 rpm. The final version, from 1979 through 1980, was down again at 90 hp (67 kW) at 4800 rpm and 122 ft·lbf (165 N·m) at 2400 rpm.
Applications:
1975-1980 Toyota Hi-Lux
1975-1981 Toyota Celica U.S. Version
1975 Toyota Corona U.S. Version
------------------------------------------------------------
22R
The 2-valve SOHC 2.4 L (2366 cc) 22R was produced from 1981 through 1995. Cylinder bore was 91.9 mm (3.62 in) and stroke was 88.9 mm (3.5 in).
Initial output was 96 hp (72 kW) at 4800 rpm and 129 ft·lbf (174 N·m) at 2800 rpm. By 1990 the 22R was producing 108 hp (81 kW) at 5000 rpm and 138 ft·lbf (187 N·m) at 3400 rpm.
The first fuel injected 22R-E engines appeared in 1983.
Output of these engines is commonly rated at 105 hp (78 kW) at 4800 rpm and 137 ft·lbf (185 N·m) at 2800 rpm.
In 1985, the engine was significantly reworked, output was up to 112 hp (84 kW) at 4600 rpm and 142 ft·lbf (192 N·m) at 3400 rpm. Many parts from the newer 22R-E are not compatible with those from the older pre-1985 engine.
The turbocharged 22R-TE (sold from 1984 through 1988) produced 135 hp (101 kW) at 4800 rpm and 173 ft·lbf (234 N·m) at 2800 rpm.
The 22R and its variants were very common in the U.S. market. The engines are well known for their durability and low to mid range torque; However, its weakness is high-end power. Thus, most performance enthusiasts usually prefer the Toyota 18R-G, 3T-G, 4A-GE and 3S-GE 4-cylinder engines, even though the 22R has a bigger displacement and a strong block.
Applications:
22R
1981-1988 Toyota Hi-Lux
1982-1984 Toyota Celica
1981-1996 Toyota Pickup
1984 Toyota 4Runner
22R-E
1985-1995 Toyota Hi-Lux
1983-1985 Toyota Celica
1985-1995 Toyota Pickup
1985-1995 Toyota 4Runner
22R-TE
1985-1987 Toyota Hi-Lux, 135 hp (101 kW)
1988 Toyota 4Runner
None of them are on the market for more than 15 years. Also, note how many rework effort Toyota has put into the 22R engine.
Here are the most recent numbers available that go thru mid year 2006. Results for end of 2006 should be available soon:
Total sales / Fleet Sales / %fleet
Accord: 154,627 / 1,734 / 1.1 %
Camry: 167,529 / 21,518 / 12.8 %
Sonata: 84,627 / 42,510 / 50.2 %
This also helps explain why the sonata's resale value is in the toilet.
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060404/FREE/60403007/1024/L- - ATESTNEWS
But Ford started selling the Fusion and its sister Mercury Milan and Lincoln Zephyr into fleets right away. Total fleet accounts for about 16 percent of sales for the trio. Less than 10 percent of total sales have been daily rental, Ford says.
The low number of fleet sales explains why the Accord is so great at retaining its resale value.
http://www.forbesautos.com/advice/toptens/resale/01-resale_value.html
I know that Hyundai wanted 'butts in seats', but GOOD LORD! It is true though, in my experience, I get a Sonata probably about every other week (I rent cars weekly for work).
Curious - where are you pulling these numbers?
~alpha
~alpha
It's about time we got back to discussing what the engine goes in, doncha think?
Unfortunately, many competent vehicles aren't bought by the majority of the public. People buy vehicles in part because they are the recipients of well-crafted marketing campaigns, positive experiences with brands, etc. I wouldn't dispute the very competent Camcords, but just because Hyundai has chosen to keep their US operation rolling by selling a large percentage of Sonata's to fleets certainly doesn't negate the competency of the Sonata. I have personally driven the Sonata, as a rental, on many, many occasions, as well as having had exposure to several Sonata owners, and your appraisal that the Sonata is not (as) competent because it is sold to fleets or because its resale value is not a segment leader, is based on your opinion and apparently not on facts. I am very assured that the Sonata competes fully with the Accord and Camry as a family hauler.
Why can't Ford use an engine for that long? Even with tweaks.
I also noticed they were sending relatively highline models to the fleets. My folks got a V6 Sonata with leather and a sunroof last time they were in the midwest. That might be a general trend, the last Taurus I got had leather and moon too.
The engine even changed from 2.2L to 2.4L for crying out loud.
Much like Ford does. Their current 6 is OK, but when compared to stellar 6s in a Camry, Altima etc. the Ford seems so undesireable.
Even Hyundai is cranking up engine technology.