Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread

1224225227229230235

Comments

  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    How the Milan/Fusion I4 that is supposed to be so inferior to to the Accord

    Why do you consistently put your vehicle (and its counterparts) down? They aren't bad cars - you say they are more than anyone.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The Fusion/Milan have an I4 available, and I thought the Fusion I4 MT I drove was a pretty nice car, considering a car equipped like the one I drove can be had for under $16k. Just because the car is made in Mexico or Canada, that would not be enough to take it off my list.
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    The Altima seems very competent to me - CVT included. I have confidence that engine will go the distance, but if its me, and the 4 cyl. was a requirement, I don't see any competitor to the Accord.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    "Do you really think that outdated POS is better than the Camry ? Good God try again maybe next year but until then the Camry and Aura reign at the top of the podium"

    Rocky, the same "POS", "Outdated" Accord has beaten its newer competitors in most comparison tests. And I am not talking CR.
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    The Aura?

    Not even out 4 months and Rocky's elevating it to top of the class? Now there's some wishful thinking for a car that does nothing special except look fine.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    "CR is a joke."

    Yes, CR is a joke, because it has picked the Accord over a Fusion, so is CD, RT, MT etc, because they picked the Accord/Camry over a Fusion.

    However, Strategic Designs is not a joke (it picked Fusion's interiors over anything else in its class). Neiher is JD Powers a joke (it picked Fusion as the most appealing midsize), nor is the Ford sponsored 'comparison test' a joke.

    Anybody see a pattern here?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,132
    >
    Anybody see a pattern here?

    I see a pattern. People who like Honda and Toyota over the other cars think CR's loosely gained results are great. Those who think less of Honda and Toyota think CR's survey results are not up to par.

    Perhaps we can go beyond the continual Honda/Toyota favorites and discuss the merits of the cars. With a little bit of statistics knowledge I question even CR's appliance reliability survey now. At least there they give a cursory statistical reliability percent of 3-4% certainty variation to indicate the weakness of their data-collecting methods.

    To save going off topic in responses, I understand some people disagree with the reliability and intent of CR's data interpretation.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    My point is, either you give some credence to what the media/publications etc say about these cars, or you totally ignore them. You can't pick and choose what suits you at teh particular time and diss the others. This is not about CR.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    why is simple - the DT is slower to rev and produce the power needed. Nothing to do with gearing, specifically, as the Fusion as well as the other cars in this group will all have gearing to maximize FE - it is simply that there is only so much that you can do with a 'wheezy' V6. The DT makes peak Hp at 6250 rpm, the Accord I4 at 5800 - want to bet how quickly and easily each car will hit those kind of numbers? Can't imagine that anybody would even want to sit in a Fusion with that engine at 6k, an event of seismic implications. And no it doesn't suprise me that the Mazda 4 does the same thing - not a statement of how good the 4 cyls. are, however, but more how bad the V6 is.
    Going all the way back to the CVCC engines of the 70s Honda has always been the industry leader specifically in 4 cylinder engines, and has a V6 that is no slouch either. Ford, OTH, makes a good pickup truck - not smaller efficient engines. If you are one of those that appreciates a little drivetrain sophistication, refinement, and engineering to go along with that HP (4 or 6 cylinder) the Fusion should be well down the list.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Not sure what your point is there...the Accord V6 has peak HP at the same 6250 as the Ford V6. Torque peak in the Ford is at 4800 vs. 5000 for Honda's V6.

    In any case, there are other aspects to consider, when choosing a car, besides fractions of a second differences in acceleration times.

    Once again I will point out that the Accord should be expected to better than the Ford/Mercury/Mazda, in some way or another, since they sell for a higher price and/or do not offer discount financing. And yes, there is less of a difference for frequent traders or leasers.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,132
    >u can't pick and choose what suits you at teh particular time and diss the others.

    I have to disagree with that statement!

    I look at what the organization's past is. I look at the type of cars they review (only expensive, high performance cars most drivers never buy?). I look at the type of review writer the alleged reviewer is (are they only interested in how many g's on a skidpad the car can generate?).

    I most certainly do look at the source. I do the same on other scientific ideas such as global warming "expert" comments, e.g.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • ergsumergsum Member Posts: 146
    Double-wishbone suspension on Sonata:

    http://www.hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/sonata/specs/specs.aspx
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    was not comparing the Honda 6 to the DT 3.0, that would be no contest. Rather the I4 Honda to the V6 Ford - and suggesting a reason why the Accord 4 mighy actually outaccelerate the Ford at certain times despite giving up about 60 HP. It is not all about HP, but also how willingly and quickly the engine will produce it.
  • neteng101neteng101 Member Posts: 176
    Up front only on the Sonata though.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    " have to disagree with that statement!
    I look at what the organization's past is. I look at the type of cars they review (only expensive, high performance cars most drivers never buy?). I look at the type of review writer the alleged reviewer is (are they only interested in how many g's on a skidpad the car can generate?).

    I most certainly do look at the source. I do the same on other scientific ideas such as global warming "expert" comments, e.g."

    Fair enough, if you look at things that interest you and pick decisions of these publications. What is unfair and incorrect, however, is to pick a review just because it favors your favored car and diss the others that don't. For example, if you think CR is the type of group you trust, that's fine and obviously your choice, but just on the basis of it picking a car you favor, you can't say this magazine is more credible than another that doesn't pcik your favorite. This thread started from Scape calling CR a Joke while continuing to cite tests from other publications, just becuse they may have picked some other car.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I am aware of what you were comparing, but your comments do not make a lot of sense to me as the Honda V6 has HP and torque peaks at about the same rpm as the Ford. So why don't your same criticisms apply to the Honda V6?
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    HP is a function of torque applied over time - so therefore the faster an engine will pick rpm, the more HP it will produce and the faster it will accelerate. One of the problems with these 'old' tech V6s, they don't 'like' to rev, and this would definitely be a difference between any of these better V6s (and Honda's 4) and something like the DT3.0.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Actually, the DT3.0 is a relatively modern 24 valve engine. When I think of old school I think of the GM 3.8 V6. That engine, while doesn't particular like to rev, has a lot of torque off the line, making it feel fast from 0-30 or so, but that 50-70 passing time is a bit hurting until the transmission catches up.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    1992 or so is a long time ago - and just some OHCs and 4 valves a cylinder does not necessarily a competitive engine make - if you are comparing how easily and quickly the Toyota/Honda/Nissan V6 engines will rev vs. that 'meat grinder' DT. The pushrod 3.8 even worse in this respect as you would expect a pushrod engine to be, but does have somewhat of an advantage by starting out with higher relative torque - as you say.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    CR is a joke for numerous reasons. One reason would be that they dont explain where their scores come from. If you look at the table at the back of their latets midsize sedan test the Aura and Altima have very similar ratings in most categories but for some reason the Altima's total score is far higher than the Aura. If you have an explanation for this I would love to hear it. CR's findings as related to the Aura are totally contradictory to almost every other review of the car. If their comments were in line with even half of the other reports on the car perhaps I could take them seriously but only C&D was in the ballpark in terms of negative commentary about the car. Even C&D limited their criticism to some fit/finish issues, they had no complaints about ride and handling or torque steer.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    What's wrong with multi-link rear suspensions? Do not even say the double wishbone rear is better because both have similar setups. Actually, if you step underneath the two, they would look awfully close, could it be?
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    Actually the Accord beat newer cars in C&D comparison tests but that is no surprise if you read C&D and know about their Honda fetish. On Edmunds the Accord lost in two separate comparisons, once to the Camry and once to the Sonata. I'm not aware of other recent examples in other publications.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "Not even out 4 months and Rocky's elevating it to top of the class? Now there's some wishful thinking for a car that does nothing special except look fine. "

    Actually others have said the car is right there with the class leaders. Automobile and Autoweek liked the car a lot. The Aura was also named NACTY at the Detroit AutoShow. It was also named best family car by Motorweek. See, it's a little more than just Rocky's personal opinion of the car.

    The Aura does more than look fine, it handles fine, has plenty of power and is cheaper than a comparable Camry, Altima and Accord. The XR also has more standard equipment than the Camry SE or Altima SE.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Since the HP peak is at the same RPM as the Honda V6 and the torque peak is at nearly the same RPM as the Honda V6 why do you think the Ford engine does not "like to rev" but the Honda does?

    The duratec 3.0 is not the old Ford pushrod 3.0 V6 that had max horsepower @ 5000 rpm and max torque @ 3250 rpm or the 3.8 that had max torque @ 3000 rpm.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I spent a lot of time with the 2.5 DT and I loved pretty much everything about that motor (and the car it was in, for that matter). I didn't notice any NVH characteristics and one of the things I really liked about it was the sound it made running up to the fuel cut.
    I somehow don't see this as being as big a deal in a Taurus (I don't see many Tauri/Fusion on track days), but that 3l DT is a pretty common swap where the 2.5 was and I still haven't gotten any negative feedback about that motor.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I have driven the Sonata, and it is no Honda. If you compare the two based on value, as in how many features per dollar, then yes, it beat the Accord. Look over the two cars closely, drive the two, consider the resale value, then add it all up. You know which one will win. If you are looking for a pleasing enough ride, content, and keeping the car until it is scrap, the Sonata may be a good choice.
    -Loren
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Member Posts: 1,601
    In any case, there are other aspects to consider, when choosing a car, besides fractions of a second differences in acceleration times.

    I completely agree. In 1976 my parents bought a 1967 Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, rather than a new 1976 Caddy. The price for the Rolls was about the same as the new Caddy would have cost at that time. I drove that Rolls a couple of times. It had plenty of power. Yet, Rolls, at least at that time, never revealed HP or torque. It simply said they were "adequate."

    Fractions of a second in acceleration or skip pad tests don't affect what I feel is important in a family car. A few seconds, probably. But it is "adequate power", coupled with other features and characteristics, that I feel is important. The package of the entire car is what is important.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    CR's findings as related to the Aura are totally contradictory to almost every other review of the car. If their comments were in line with even half of the other reports on the car perhaps I could take them seriously but only C&D was in the ballpark in terms of negative commentary about the car. Even C&D limited their criticism to some fit/finish issues, they had no complaints about ride and handling or torque steer.

    CR's reviews may differ from many other sources because CR doesn't get their bread buttered by the manufacturers. Getting paid advertisements certainly encourages less negative reviews.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,132
    I cringe whenever someone mentions resale value. Noone guarantees the values in the future. I feel the same about cto values because most people don't get by with the minimum maintenance schedules put out by the company for whatever purpose it serves. Hopefully they maintain better with more frequent changes and maintenance. In some cases the dealers take them for a ride with schedules of extras they are made to feel they have to follow "or else" their warranty won't be supported or the dealer won't love them...

    I suggest buy a car because you love it based on your criteria.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I am aware of what you were comparing, but your comments do not make a lot of sense to me as the Honda V6 has HP and torque peaks at about the same rpm as the Ford. So why don't your same criticisms apply to the Honda V6?

    Because the Accord's V6 was much quicker 45-65 MPH than the Fusion V6, whereas the Fusion V6 had an identical time to the 4-cylinder, 34 MPG Accord. The Accord may have similar power peaks, but it has no problem being quicker than the I-4 Accord, something those CR numbers (that DID surprise me to be honest) showed the Fusion V6 couldn't do in 45 MPH passing.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Fractions of a second in acceleration or skip pad tests don't affect what I feel is important in a family car. A few seconds, probably. But it is "adequate power", coupled with other features and characteristics, that I feel is important. The package of the entire car is what is important.

    As the owner of a 4-cylinder automatic, I agree with that last statement. But I will say this...

    I guess part of the reason this is turning into a bigger deal than it needs to is that people buy a V6 expecting to find a big difference in a higher-mileage I-4 engine, but the Fusion, at least in that particular test, didn't deliver.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    You said that the Aura is cheaper than the Camry. For GM's sake, I hope you got that wrong. I take it you meant less expensive, though I doubt that very much. First of all, you can get discounts on the Camry, secondly, I don't need all the junk added on, and lastly the resale is less than the Camry. That said, I can see some areas less than stellar looking inside the cabin of a Toyota. They have slipped a bit in reliability reputation and in the area of fit and finish. While this has been noted, the overall performance is highly rated with the Camry.

    What Saturn should do is lower the XR price (note there are rebates already available), and not overload up those they have on the lot. Aura is a decent car. The XE, I may take on another spin. First impression was a bit better than average, but not on par with the Accord. Sometimes a few test rides are needed. And hopefully no demo of OnStar. I want to listen to the car, not an ad while testing. The XE may be slightly quicker than the i4 Accord, and thus a good one to compare to. Expected resale is average on the Aura, so expect to lose a couple grand there. As for the XR, it is possibly a deal at $24K, but not worth over $26K to me personally. You start to approach the price area of some other cars a class higher. The XE at $21K less $500 (may be other deals in some states -$1K) or the XR with no added junk, with similar discounting make sense. A decent deal, but not a steal. I would not say the Aura is better than Accord, Altima, Camry, Mazda6, Fusion, and such, but it is different. Most cars in this class have their own selling points. Total value, if bought at a good price, will most likely go to Accord or Camry in the long run. But there is more to it than that.
    -Loren
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    I am not defending any publication or CR; you are missing the point of my post. What I am saying is you can't quote Strategic Designs on one hand and diss other publcications on the other hand, just becasue they don't agree with you.

    As for me having an explanation for CRs rating in this particular test; I don't work for them, neither have I read it.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    Here you go. When it comes to Aura, you are happy to cite CD's comments, however when the Accord wins, you call it a Honda fetish.

    CD's affinity is towards cars that are more on the sporty side (as much as this class can be) and tends to pick cars like the Accord, Mazda6 etc over cars like the Camry etc. They even picked the Fusion over the Camry/Sonata for the same reason. If Honda makes more cars that fulfill these parameters, that doesn't mean CD has a Honda fetish. If that was true, the Civic would not have been called a loser by CD, while picking the Mazda Protege and 3 10 out ot 10 times in their compact car comparisons (both these cars are known to be spunky).

    When I have more time, I will point you to tests where the Accord has trumped its newer competitors.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    As the owner of a 4-cylinder automatic, I agree with that last statement. But I will say this...

    I guess part of the reason this is turning into a bigger deal than it needs to is that people buy a V6 expecting to find a big difference in a higher-mileage I-4 engine, but the Fusion, at least in that particular test, didn't deliver.


    I am also a 4 cyl automatic owner, who finds the acceleration capabilities of it to be adequate. Sure is not worth the extra cost (to me) just to go 45-65 1/2 sec quicker and 0-60 about 1.5 sec quicker (for the Ford/Mazda engines). I don't think the 1 and 2 second differentials for the Accord would convince me to pay up for a V6, either. I'll take the trade off of saving several thousand dollars and reduced understeer in exchange for a bit slower (but still adequate) straight line acceleration.

    I will also say that when I test drove a V6 Mazda6, I did not feel that the car was much quicker than the 4 cyl. It was an accident that they had me in the V6, I was supposed to be test driving a 4...I figured out the error only when I saw the gear indicator go to 6 on the dash :) .

    Changing direction a bit, isn't it odd that the 4 cylinders actually have peak torque at lower rpm than the V6s? For example in the 2.3 engine in my Mazda, peak torque is at 4000 rpm, vs. 5000 for the V6? Apparently the situation is similar for the Honda engines, as well.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    The Aura was also named NACTY at the Detroit AutoShow. It was also named best family car by Motorweek. See, it's a little more than just Rocky's personal opinion of the car.

    I sincerely appreciate your defense. I don't understand why people have such a hard time respecting this car. Many of the people that dislike it so much I doubt have never driven well except Loren, as I know of. Loren, probably would like the 3.6 w/ 6-speed auto combo better. ;)

    Rocky
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    if you think about what was available at that time, the DT was a competitive engine. It's not that the DT was a BAD engine, but it did remain what it is, while everybody else improved significantly in applications (3300lb cars) that really needed that improvement. I believe the first DT in a Taurus was actually in '96.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    I was comparing a typical domestic V6 to the Accord(or Camry) with the 6 cylinder engine.

    If all you have is $18-20K and not a penny more, then the wonderful all-beating-God's-gift-to-cars(sic for the imapred) V6 imports just aren't an option. 24-26K is a far cry from 18-20K.

    But a nice V6 from GM and a few others will fit the bill nicely.
  • neteng101neteng101 Member Posts: 176
    rocky - the Aura is not a bad looking car outside. The thing that disappoints to me is the lack of a sleeker interior appearance. Maybe Loren should try the XR out but its going to cost several thousand more than a nicely discounted Accord SE V6.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    Since the HP peak is at the same RPM as the Honda V6 and the torque peak is at nearly the same RPM as the Honda V6 why do you think the Ford engine does not "like to rev" but the Honda does?
    simple - by driving both of them and owning a Toyota 2GR and a Nissan VQ - the smoothness, willingness, how its sounds and feels, and most importantly the amount of time it takes to 'pull' higher rpms is the difference between night and day. Call it sophistication, design/engineering, balance or whatever you want but there is no comparison. And yes the old Vulcans are a completely different aberration that Ford should have laid to rest about the same time the original DT came out.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    if all I had was not a penny more than $18-20k - guess I would be hightailing it down to my friendly Sonata dealer.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I cringe whenever someone mentions resale value. No one guarantees the values in the future.

    A better comparison for the short-termers would probably be lease costs.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    I like the styling of the Altima.. :shades:
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    "Why do you consistently put your vehicle (and its counterparts) down? They aren't bad cars - you say they are more than anyone. "

    I don't put them down, folks like yourself claim the I4 of the Honda Accord is so superior.. Yet when you look at the numbers it really isn't.. ;)
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    "Yes, CR is a joke, because it has picked the Accord over a Fusion, so is CD, RT, MT etc, because they picked the Accord/Camry over a Fusion.

    However, Strategic Designs is not a joke (it picked Fusion's interiors over anything else in its class). Neiher is JD Powers a joke (it picked Fusion as the most appealing midsize), nor is the Ford sponsored 'comparison test' a joke.

    Anybody see a pattern here? "

    So, why is the pattern of Honda winning ok? and not Ford? Anyone see a pattern HEAR? :sick:
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Very obvious you missed this discuusion. It has already been proven the V6 Duratec is no louder than a v6 Accord or V6 Camry. DB numbers were posted, I keep posting and posting them, not going to do it again. The DT has VVT and 24valves per cylinder, in no way is it slower to rev.. The numbers don't make sense. This weekend I take my car to a track and I will test it from 45-60. Last night a friend and I did if for kicks and the stop watch said 4.9-5.1 pretty consistantly. You keep trying to downplay the 3.0 Duratec as being a slug and a shoddy engine, when it is not. Granted it is one of the lower HP/Torque V6's in this class. But in now way does an I4 from Honda or Toyota match or beat it. Hope to God I see you on the road... :mad:
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    if all I had was not a penny more than $18-20k - guess I would be hightailing it down to my friendly Sonata dealer.

    Quite true. :)

    These days, Mazda, GM, Hyundai, and others offer compelling choices to the price gouging Honda and Toyota are obviously engaging in.

    And, my typo - obviously I meant V6 from others vs the 4 in the Camry and Accord.

    Btw, when my sister was looking for a car, she narrowed it down to the Civic and the Mazda 3. The reality is that the two cars are so close as to be a wash. Same size, same interiors, same accessories, same power, same...

    There were a total of 4 small differences between the two cars that I could find. The thing that amazed me was that at first I was all "two different cars". Then I looked and drove them and poured over every square inch of them - and darn it if Mazda, Nissan, Hyundai, and others aren't making very close clones of the same car for less money. GM isn't making crud anymore, either.

    She went with the Honda. Me? I'd have gone with the 3 for less money.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    When you buy a stock, would you not consider its history? Which investment would you see as doing better, one with a steady upside, or one with a dicey past, or downward slippery slope. I think it is pretty easy to see the Honda or Toyota as being a better resale value, when compared to cars with a pretty steady history of poorer resale values. Just like, while saying that no one guarantees a stocks value, a wise person chooses quality when investing to better the odds. The Accord has better odds of resale value.

    As for Aura, they are predicting average resale. Average is an improvement for GM cars. If the car is desirable in other ways, I would not say that an average resale value is a barrier to buying this car at all. Some cars which have really poor resale may only work out if you keep them 'till they drop. And in the end I suppose people, self included, start to over emphasize the importance of getting the best dollar value car, when in fact it is the overall pleasure it provides which is important.
    -Loren
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    "One of the problems with these 'old' tech V6s, they don't 'like' to rev, and this would definitely be a difference between any of these better V6s (and Honda's 4) and something like the DT3.0.

    captain, you just shot yourelf in the foot... Very obvious you know nothing about the Duratec V6 that is offered in the Fusion/Milan. They come with VVT, dual overheadcams and 24valves.. and believe me they like to rev.... ;)
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    well let's see, the new Altima 4 banger is rated higher than the Accord 4 according to CR, the 6 cylinder the same. But that is not some substantiation of something more than a "accord wins bias"? Or is it simply that they don't agree with you?
    The Honda Accord has been the standard by which all these cars are judged (including Camrys, Altimas etc) and for good reason
This discussion has been closed.