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
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I understand the Malibu will have a four cylinder. If the weight is the same as an Aura, less the i4 vs. v6 weigh in difference and it has an automatic, it will not move out too well. The 3.5 is a better choice, and the 3.6 fills the need for speed urge.
-Loren
And I don't think a lot of their country (their food and weather are quite awful, and most people lack any kind of courtesy or kindness that I came into contact with), but I like their program overall. It's pretty funny.
I know I'm just one consumer of a midsize sedan, but it would certainly save me a trip to the Saturn dealer by learning of no 4-cylinder option.
Yes but you had no intention of going there anyway and commented on how much you enjoyed your other Accord, so I don't think you were in the market for that vehicle anyway. Very generically, they are all midsized 4dr sedans, but as far as market demographics, they are pretty different.
It may also be the fuel economy different isn't so great (3-4mpg really isn't going to make a huge difference at 15k/yr).
If you are one of the folks that like the sound of a 4 cylinder winding out, thats cool, I can totally understand that, but agian, someone who likes rev-happy engine noises isn't the person who is looking for a plush sedan like the Saturn.
Its the middle of winter, its slow season. Toyota is offering discounts on the Prius. Its a seasonal thing.
Some choices are good, the CTS is a RWD performance oriented platform..thats G35/IS250/3-series range. The other FWD mid-sizers seem like the have pretty different tuning and styling to appeal to different markets. Depending on how similar they are underneath, it might not be that huge of an expense with respect to design, engineering and manufacturing costs, but still each one has to be marketed.
It may also be the fuel economy different isn't so great (3-4mpg really isn't going to make a huge difference at 15k/yr).
Actually, I tested several models, including a V6 Fusion and a V6 Hyundai that were the same price of my I4 Accord, but I went with the Accord because it was just that good of an engine and had better interior quality. At the time, GM had no offering that came close to the quality of the other compeitors based on my simple auto-show sit-ins. The 2006 Malibu and G6 were pretty sad in comparison with even the Altima, which isn't particularly well-made. Again, one experience, one perception, but that was mine.
If you are one of the folks that like the sound of a 4 cylinder winding out, thats cool, I can totally understand that, but agian, someone who likes rev-happy engine noises isn't the person who is looking for a plush sedan like the Saturn.
Actually, having been in several GM pushrods, I can tell you that I felt that the I4 Accord is much smoother and less thrashy at high RPMs than the 3.4 and 3.8L engines on which the 3.5L and 3.9L GM engines come from. I do not know about the 3.5L from the Aura XR, but it is more expensive than 4-cylinder competitor, so I won't go there.
Anybody heard a Pontiac 3.8L after 5 years (a family from church has a Bonneville which is what I'm referring to)? I swear that "sporty" exhaust note makes the car sound like it is falling apart.
Even the minor problems can add up to being big problems if there are enough of them. IMO, it comes down to overall quality.
Rocky
I posted a comment just like this one many months ago. GM should examine the Accord, the Camry -- and then build a better car in every way!. Sell it at a loss if they have to to be competitive. Think of the PR that one car would get, what value it would add to the brand name. Change consumer perception! Ten pretty-good models aren't going to do it.
-Loren
-Loren
The 3.5L and 3.9L have nothing to do with the 3800 whatsoever. Furthermore the 3500 and 3900 are heavy evolutions of the 3.4L V6 and have VVT and are way more refined. If you look at the recent C&D test you will see the 3.5L Aura is about as quiet as the Accord and Altima 4 cylinder cars in the test.
"The 2006 Malibu and G6 were pretty sad in comparison with even the Altima, which isn't particularly well-made. Again, one experience, one perception, but that was mine."
Totally disagree. My brother had a renatl 2006 altima and it was far cheaper looking than the G6 and had huge panel gaps in certain location. There is no way that it was in a different league than the GM cars. The new one is much better but is still very similar to the G6 on the inside, right down to the round air vents.
When you buy a Aura (or similar GM) you know you're gonna have a loose vehicle 4-5 years from now, and that it will also lose a lot of its value.
Plain and simple reality of Japan vs. domestic.
This is the problem with making generalizations based on last generation models. The new Impala is far more refined than the last one. The new Malibu will be far more refined than the current one. The G6 is more refined than the Grand Am and so on. This is why they REDESIGN cars in the first place. I can assure you the tactile feel of current GM midsizers is far beyond my 2002 MY vehicle. I rented a Lacrosse a few months back and its interior components were far better than what's in my car. The stalks, switches and materials were all top notch and just as good as anything in the camry or Accord. Sit in or drive the Aura and compare it to your Accord. Every door is damped, every knob has heft, every stalk moves precisely. Trust me, its not a step down from an Accord. You pay more for an accord to get resale value.
My parents have a '98 Intrigue that is still rock solid. Loose vehicle? please, GM sedans are amongst the most rigid in industry.
Speaking of Japanese cars and high resale value, let's remember that Toyota and Honda are the ones with the great resale. Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Nissan, Suburu, etc. are not that great. Hyundai (Korean) is also average in resale. If you really care about resale than you need to get a German car.
I'll bet GM has already thought of that. And Honda and Toyo and all the others. They buy a car and take it apart and take the parts apart, looking for engineering and money-saving techniques as well as patent infringments.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The rampant discounting you are talking about lasts until 2/20 and is a very limited promotion. As someone esle stated Toyota dealers are running President's Day discounts as we speak. I looked at some dealer ads yesterday and Camrys, Corollas and everything else in the Toyota lineup is being disconted by the dealer. The Corolla already has a factory rebate available. The new Altima/Maxima/Sentra are also being discounted at local dealers and the Maxima has a factory rebate available. What was your point again?
As for killing brands and streamlining, Gm tried that with Olds and it paid no dividends. Didnt boost sales, didnt help grow or even maintain share. They had to cut one brand and they did so but it didnt make the drastic improvement "experts" predicted. Now people are suggesting they should cut more brands to grow. It wont work. As for "few cars = huge sales numbers per model" I think its important to note that only the CAmry and Corolla sell in huge numbers for Toyota and only the RX and ES rack up big numbers for Lexus. The rest of Toyota's products are either average sellers or marginal players on the market. In fact Toyota is the sales leader in two categories (based on nameplate basis); midsize cars and compact cars. Toyota keeps getting share because a) they have had a constant flow of new products in recent years and b) they are constantly expanding their number of offerings.
Incidentally, while Toyota has deservedly been receiving some bad pub for its new trannies - understand it is not a transmission problem in a traditional sense - it is a computer problem. Other than a few hundred trannies that did get out of the factory with a physical (snap ring) defect, all others issues (for several hundred thousand cars) seems to be in computer related gear selections and engagements. Not to excuse Toyota, but these recalcitrant multiple speed electronic 'learning' transmissions infect many many cars from a variety of manufacturers.
:confuse: I thought Toyota's were always known for having vague steering and handling. Have not driven one recently, though.
Actually, having been in several GM pushrods, I can tell you that I felt that the I4 Accord is much smoother and less thrashy at high RPMs than the 3.4 and 3.8L engines on which the 3.5L and 3.9L GM engines come from.
I have found the 3.8 to be more than adequate, I think its main strength is it doesn't have to rev. The Grand Prix rental (man is that a big car) had no issues with maintaining speed on the Conejo grade, the Cuesta grade, or the Grapevine w/4 people and luggage (and a dog). It never felt thrashy to me.
The Vulcan Taurus had a little bit more trouble with those hills with roughly the same load, but the Fusion (4 cyl) was fine, as was the duratec Taurus. The last Accord I had for that trip was a 4th gen but it spent a lot of time in 3rd and 4th.
I'm glad you have a car you enjoy so much and feel so passionate about. This is why there are so many different models available, so everyone can find something that makes them happy.
van
Noise insulation does not make an engine more refined, smooth, or less thrashy when revved, with all-due respect. It simply mutes the noises and engine is making.
My brother had a renatl 2006 altima and it was far cheaper looking than the G6 and had huge panel gaps in certain location. There is no way that it was in a different league than the GM cars. The new one is much better but is still very similar to the G6 on the inside, right down to the round air vents.
I guess we can agree to disagree. The G6 was worse in design (to me) than the 05-06 Altima, but now the Altima is really Pontiac-busy inside too, so I'm pretty sure I wouldn't go with either. On exteriors between those two, I'd go with Pontiac.
--correction needed & noted--
Loren
Under 3,500 RPM they are fine; it's just when you need to punch it to pass when the old 3.8L gets rowdy. I guess it's not bad considering its age. I think Moses had a 3.8L Oldsmobile when he was a kid...
"If you really care about resale than you need to get a German car."
Hogwash! With VW reaching for the stratosphere in pricing most model lines and Mercedes recent reliability issues, Hondas and Toyotas are unbeatable for resale value.
Example: traded a 2yr old Tundra D Cab - got $27K for SR5.
But you need the high resale to make up for the high cost of maintenance and repairs!
I personally don't mind a little bit of engine noise when I am on it. A bit of a growl is okay with me. I don't need to be so isolated from the driving experience as to feel like I am in a sensory deprivation chamber. It's not a big secret that there is an engine in the car, I don't mind hearing from it occasionally. Its a mechanical thing, it is going to make some noise.
My previous vehicles had an aftermarket performance exhaust systems anyway (Borla, Bossal, and Dynomax)and I liked the exhaust note as the engine reved up. The Borla on the 2.5 duratec was fantastic. Come to think of it, they had intakes as well. Those were amazingly loud.
I have not driven a new Toyota Camry. Should give it a go, I guess. Don't care for a CVT Altima, so that is out.
-Loren
Personally, me neither, as long as it is a pleasant sound, which is why I drive an (loud by today's standards but still quiet by mine) Accord.
By the way, it was funny and scary to see a girl nearly hit by a Toyota Prius in our parking deck at school. The Prius saw her so it wasn't a near-death thing, but it certainly scared the girl. She never heard it coming because it was running on electric-only at the time. Interesting.
How timely of a comment... my Autonews safety breifing had this article linked:
BLIND PEDESTRIANS SAY QUIET HYBRIDS POSE SAFETY THREAT
Honestly, it doesnt matter. You can make whatever excuses you want, but the Aura is just as quiet as the competition even with the OHV engine. 60 degree V6s are naturally more balanced than 4 cylinder engines regardless of the layout of that V6. This why fours always have a degree of buziness when revving and V6s do not. The OHV v6 may make a different type of sound, but its not a less refined or louder sound.
You think the old Altima interior is better than the current one? That is the first I have heard of that. I think the old Altima interior was one of the worst in class and the current car is now on par with GM sedans and the Fusion/6 but not as nice as Camry or Passat.
Well, I was only able to judge a new 2006 Altima vs. an Auto-Show veteran 2007, which already looked rough and beaten up somewhat. The design of the 2006 wasn't bad to me, but I don't like the busy-ness of the 2007 version. I don't necessarily mean, quality, but design.
Honestly, it doesnt matter. You can make whatever excuses you want, but the Aura is just as quiet as the competition even with the OHV engine.
Nobody's deabting quietness; I'm debating smoothness. And to me the GM "High Value" V6s tend to sound more coarse than the Honda I4. My opinion is mine, yours is yours. At least we can move on. Agree to disagree .
fours always have a degree of buziness when revving and V6s do not.
Eh, just drove into town today, had to gun it to merge - revving to probably 5,000 RPM. No buzz, just smoothness. Car and Driver seems to have the same impression I do according to their Article comparing 5 4-cylinders and the Aura. Here are their comments on the Accord engine:
Second, the powertrain is marvelous. It has torque, it is hot-blooded for revs, the vibrations stay out of the cabin, and the transmission is never in the wrong gear (even though it lacks a manumatic function). At redline the exhaust snarls, a lively contrast to the other cars, which have nothing to offer but a rising crescendo of whirs, hums, and buzzes.
MOST 4-cylinder's will buzz; not the Accord 2.4L. Actually, my 2.2L in the 1996 model doesn't buzz either, but it sure gets loud relative to new cars!
Or my old 1967 Mercedes at higher rpms.
Or any motorcycle.
Feh. Who cares whether it sounds like a sewing machine or not if it goes like stink or has an amazing feel to it.
that said - no contest between an old GM 3.8 versus any import's 4. I'll take 200+ lb-ft of torque anyday.
Rocky
Rocky
That was a fun car, mostly because it didn't redline until 7,000 RPM, weighed only about 2,700 pounds and the 5-speed manual was geared very, very low (5th gear was 4,000 RPM at 80mph). I think it was rated for 170hp and 160lb-ft. It didn't have variable valve timing, but it did have some sort of variable intake manifold. It would run to 60 in about 7.2 seconds.
My new Accord I4 5-speed drives almost exactly the same way, except for just slightly less low end torque and a little more top end with the VTEC. Maybe slightly slower to 60, I'm thinking 7.5 secs as an Automatic 4-cyl Accord has been clocked at 8.1? Probably the same quarter mile.
I never modded my 2.5 V6, but I kinda wish I had. I know it would have sounded better than the new 2.4 4-cyl would if I were to put a coffee can on it (definately not)
while it is certainly true that a 5 year old 530, for example, will fetch a lot more dollars than a 5 year old Accord - the fact is that in terms of gross dollars spent (a TCO type number) the BMW is much much more expensive to own (as it should be). TCO of that $50k 530 (according to Edmunds) for 5 years is $65 grand (with 29k depreciation) the Accord is $35k (with $12k depreciation). So yes the resale value is high mostly becuase the 530 costs so much new, but so is the gross dollar hit in resale value.
I had a '96 Contour SE V6/MTX with 170hp/165 lb ft torque and 2900 lbs or so. It did 0-60 in about 7.5 or so. The car was actually geared pretty tall in 4th and 5th, and I usually got 28 or 29 mpg. The motor seems similar, no VVT but it did have the dual intake runner thing (which was one of two repairs the car needed while I had it). The car was loaded (lthr, roof, alloys, htd mirrors, etc) and it had the greatest, most comfortable supportive bolstered seats...they de-contented those seats in '98. The 95-97 SEs actually had more aggressive suspension tuning than the later SVTs. That car was 155k of smiles and chuckles.
I had a KKM intake and a Borla exhaust and it sounded beautiful (although it probably wasn't any more powerful), and the only other "modification" was Brembo rotors and KVR brake pads, which I need for the track events as R-compound tires are very hard on brakes (moves the weakest link upwards in the system).
I still miss it.
Rocky
And the Impala already sells better than the Malibu at the moment too.