Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
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
Sure, but to compare the costs from two different sources, as you suggest is questionable. I have compared cost of 8 year 100,000 mile zero deductible extended warranties from a single source, my credit union. In the case of Fusion and Accord the difference was about $200.
Another consistent source, that uses extended warranty cost, is edmunds "true cost to own". This shows repair cost for 5 years and 75,000 miles. Fusion $757, Accord $637...I don't know about you, but $120 one way or the other is not going to be a deciding factor for me.
According the edmunds data, the tiny difference in average repair costs is more than made up for by much higher maintenance costs for the Accord...about $500 higher than Fusion over 5 years.
Now there are a few truely costly ones out there, but not many. One example is Jaguar X-type with repair costs of $4097!
Granted, this is ONE article, ONE good article out of how many about Ford?? The media has played a part in GM/Ford demise and image. Notice I say PART not REASON.
We're still driving our original 1994 Mercury Villager with the Nissan VG (variant of VQ) engine. We're at 215K miles. We've done no work on the engine or transmission. And it is still very smooth and we don't add oil between changes...
Is that version of the Duratec related to the smaller one that was in the Mazda MPV around 2002? We were looking for minivans at the time and actually really liked the MPV...until we drove it. Sounded like an imbalanced washing machine up there. Our Accord's 4 and my Jetta's 4 were much smoother and quieter than that engine. If I'm going to spend over 20K for a car it is not just about reliability. I'm going to buy some refinement. I can always rent the thrashy cars.
According to JD Power, that would be Lexus.
Maybe he was including car rental companies to come up with the high rebuy percentage for GM!
Granted, this is ONE article, ONE good article out of how many about Ford??
There were about 30ish documented Prius stalling, before Toyota reprogrammed the car software. There was 0 death.
There had been more than 100 death caused by Ford Explorer catching fire at the steering wheel, before Ford finally recalled. :lemon:
You know, people rant a bit more when there is fatality involved.
As for the 3.8 Turbo, my dad had a '86 Buick T-Type (the supposedly more "adult" version of the Grand National). Always enjoyed borrowing that car. It didn't blow up.
I don't think Japan had a 6 cylinder in the '80s that came close (with the possible exception of the Supra engine).
Some reviews call the 3.5L "thrashy" while others praise it for being smooth and quiet. It sounds like they're driving different vehicles. I think we need to wait for more reviews based on the production model, not pre-production prototypes.
That is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. There are no confirmed fatalities due to the cruise control switch which primarily affected full size trucks and SUVs and only a few explorers.
Please retract your lie.
What lie? At least one person died as a result of those fires related to the bad part.
http://www.rolloverlawyer.com/rollover_news/rollover_news_page.php?ArticleID=52
http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/ford-explorer-lawsuits.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/16/ford.vehicles/
Also link to http://www.fordfires.com
What I think you're thinking of was the Firestone tire debacle.
WILLIS & AMMONS LAW FIRMS FILE NATION’S FIRST CRUISE CONTROL DEATH CASE
Incidentially, the part in question isn't even a Ford part, its a brake component so its either Bendix or Bosch or Continental Tevis or one of the other suppliers that makes brake components.
Still, it comes on a Ford, so Ford will take the blame.
Panasonic makes the Accord's stereo(last I checked), but the complaints about the display going out go to Honda, not Panasonic.
I know you didn't say that Ford shouldn't be responsible, but some people will likely see it that way.
Many automakers have different parts suppliers, but it is the automakers who are selling the product, and they will have to take responsibility, most likely.
The 3.8 that GM is continuing to put in cars these days, has long been reliable and, with the help of some appropriate gearing, economical as well. Limited to about 200hp in normally aspirated forms, it does have however a disportionate amount of torque (as pushrod engines tend to)that can help hide the lower HP. Pushrod designs, of course, are generally not very happy at higher revs, but it is a good choice for those that want a solid if somewhat non-performing engine. I thought they actually tried supercharging the 3.8 as well - but, in any case, not a good way to make up for the any engines inherent limitations. Ford also tried it in a supercharged T-bird. While there are some mfgrs that have made turbocharging a matter of habit, the Swedes and Subaru come to mind, and the technology has improved to a point that it is becoming almost transparent; the mechanical consequences of forced breathing, added mechanical complexity, and drivability issues (lag) remain. Supercharged engines, incidentally, do tend to have less 'lag' problems than turbocharged ones at the expense of some more reliability.
In this group, don't understand why you would spend the extra money on that 270hp blown 4 in a Mazdaspeed when you can get the about hp and performance in the Camry V6, Altima/Accord V6 - and save a little on FE not to mention the extra 20 cents a gallon. The V6s will 'drive' better and the engine should last longer and/or be less problematic.
I liked the the SHO engine as well, but it was a Yamaha engine that happened to be in a Ford, as you note. If I remember correctly it did have some reliability issues. GM recently managed to coerce Honda into supplying V6s for the Vue - think there were a lot of Vue buyers out there that were real happy to get the Honda engine. Never did figure out how GM pulled that one off because Honda has always been very protective of their substantial engineering prowess? While it did certainly improve the Vue, it is certainly not a Saturn engine! It is interesting to note that Ford has again enlisted Yamaha's help, a 4.4 liter V8 300+ hp that is available on some Volvos.
That 'refinement' that you think is subjective is one of the reasons why they sell the heck out of the Accords/Camrys/Altimas, and continue to have difficulties marketing the Fusions/Malibus/G6s etc. And no, I don't think it is a result of some sort of media plot, just the result of some more objective test drives by discerning buyers and professional reviewers.
I would agree that all things being equal, you don't want to forced induce an engine with the performance being the same. Today's OHC engines have better NVH and are better performers. But at the time, the 3800 and 3800 S/C were very competitive engines. But to cut down the supercharged V6 performance and engine reliability I think is wrong. A lot of people don't buy supercharged/turbocharged engines and leave it stock, they mod it, which hurts reliability.
My remaining question on these blown 3.8s - if they were so good, why did GM abandon them as quick as they did - warranty claims, perhaps?
Not quite true. To cite an example, the new G35 and 335 both have similiar HP numbers about 300, Yet the 335 makes it to 60 in about 4.7 seconds, with the automatic transmission. It's because the maximum torque comes in about 1400 rpm on the 335 vs. in the 3000s (or whereever it is) on the G35.
It's the torque/hp curve working in conjunction with one another that determines straight line performance.
Saturn Aura XR:
Nice is the word that comes to mind. I'm not a fan of orange gauges (never have been, don't like them in the Altima either). The interior quality is certainly better than GM products of 10, or even 3 years ago. The interior styling is very "nice," tactile quality of the buttons and knobs is even good, if not great.
The orange/brown leather was interesting, if not my taste. I applaud Saturn for going stylish on this one. A good effort, and one that should be a contender for shoppers looking at V6 sedans. The fuel economy is too low for me to ever consider it though.
Problem areas for me? As mentioned; fuel economy, and the back seat. The back seat, when I adjusted the seat to the position I would drive in (all the way back) seemed small to me. I don't have the figures on the back seat, but with me in the driver's seat, and my friend (5'11", 210lbs) behind me, he didn't fit as comfortably as he does in my 2006 Accord (his words, not mine).
I'd give Saturn a "Most Improved" award versus the old L-series. Kudos, GM.
2007 Nissan Altima (3.5 SL w/Navi):
Once again Nissan is a letdown. The interior of the Saturn surpassed the Altima, IMO. The switchgear felt loose in its housings (the knobs were all wobbly feeling). Quality was better than the old model, but that didn't take much effort to deliver. Altima was probably equal to the Fusion on how I feel about the interior - a letdown to an otherwise good car. The Altima has some cool design details, but the faux wood is too muddy looking, and the steering wheel controls were too easy to perform the wrong function (rocker switches that double as buttons to be pressed were easily pressed, but the rocker function required a delicate touch to get them to rock without pushing down).
Altima, you gave me high hopes, but you let me down again!
2007 Mazda 6i
Nothing about the Mazda interior offended me really (except for the relative smallness of it), but nothing made me like the car particularly either. I realize the Mazda's purpose lies in the drive, but today was strictly an interior comparison for me (car show, remember?), and the Mazda made me yawn. The small, leather-wrapped steering-wheel was sporty, but that was the only real detail that stood out to me. A lot of black plastic abounded, and didn't make the car feel very upscale.
Nice car, but nothing special inside, even for this lower-model.
2007 Ford Fusion (SEL)
Just a recap, and a refresher on this car. I really liked this car when I saw it a year ago, but the interior is a letdown to an otherwise stylistically and dynamically good car. The buttons lack proper damping, which in turn makes them feel lower in quality. The F-150 is more expensive feeling (given, it costs more, but should I have to settle just because I want a car and not a truck?
I had forgotten about this one issue I have; the placement of the blinker stalk at the 10 o' clock position at the steering wheel. I'm used to the blinker being where I could wrap my thumb around the spoke of the wheel and have the blinker where my fingers could activate it. In the Ford, I can't. It's a simple ergonomic flaw for me, but little things like that, the stereo buttons that look alike, the steering wheel functions that require me to look at them (as opposed to my Accord which each button has a different raised texture so I can tell the buttons apart), and the climate control being below my knees all add up to a flawed interior.
I still feel like it is a beautiful, brand-new, 10 year old car, when I sit in the new Fusion. Great car, but a few R&D hours short of greatness.
*No claim is made that the opinions expressed are final, fact, or more correct than yours ever will be. Also, no claim is made that the media has influenced my decisions and feelings of American cars in any way. Your results may vary.
Here's one link:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0610_2007_bmw_335i
I test drove the 2.5S and it did not impress me. The sticker made me want to puke.
My sentiments too. Consumer Guide has the road test for the 2007 Altima on line now. According to them the car still has "pronounced" torque steer.
But there's little tugging on the wheel now and little deviation in the path when the power goes down. Uruly no more, this front-driver.
http://www.caranddriver.com/
And the original claim was 100 - not 1.
I don't agree with that at all. Perhaps Buick drivers don't go beyond 3000 RPM but many other drivers do.
I doubt that the new G35 feels wobbly at that speed, because it is just as good as the BMW in all aspects. There seems to be a lot of media bias towards the BMW's. I personally don't see the appeal and cannot justify the price tag. Plus we all know the crappy reliability of the BMW's. Almost everyone trades them in after the warranty is over.
What is the point of having all them horses, if you never let'em out to play?
As one who is an Advertising Manager for two national consumer magazines, I can say unequivocally that unless there is no advertising in a magazine, there is product bias, and reviews can be affected accordingly. In the magazine publishing business, display advertising pays the bills and salaries, not subscriptions or newsstand sales.
To be fair to C/D and others, they do at times rip a new vehicle apart even with their advertising.
Now, the 3.8 is a monster in sheep's clothing. Supercharging is what almost all of the serious racing cars in history have used, especially if you look at Formula-1 racing.
Reliability isn't an issue, though, since the GM 3.8 is running with only a few pounds of boost. Seriously underblown, in fact. But it's enough to make up for the low end torque problems. A bit of gearing and presto - V8 torque and V6 fuel economy.
But there IS one problem. Lag. The thing spins up slowly and really needs to be kept at about 3000rpm or more at all times.
But the VVT 3.6... GM should drop this in everything that will fit it. It's smooth as silk, has no power-lag(1800rpm or so and it hits max torque), and responds instantly - like something from Honda. Fantastic economy, 200hp, and torque that's low and flat as a small V8.
So do I, but we're not average drivers.
3000 RPM was probably a bit low, but the point was that most people don't rev their engines that high on a regular basis. Especially with folks so mpg conscious these days.
Why do enthusiasts think the whole world drives like they do and likes what they do?
Going above 3000 RPM is not a bad thing, especially in certain circumstances.
The Mr Magoo types are all around me. 300 hp Avalons that probably will never see 3000 rpms ever. What a waste.
What is the point of having all them horses, if you never let'em out to play?
Exactly, so why do people saddle all this power to a lug automatic transmission?
The advantage of a supercharger is the immediate power; the advantage dimishes as the RPM increases and that's when turbos become more efficient.
The Eaton M90 supercharger always puts out the same amount of power at all times--90 cfms (hence the "90"). The supercharger is always "on", it's only when the valve opens up that the extra air is forced induced into the motor. The M90 is capable of putting 7.5psi of boost stock with the supplied 3.8" pulley that GM puts on their cars.
I don't know if I agree that GM's "High Feature" V6 3.6L is the leader in the current V6 market, however it's a good engine. My opinion is that Toyota's 2GR-FE or even better, the 2GR-FSE are the best V6s out now. The 2GR-FSE has variable intake and exhaust timings, both direct and port injection, gets great fuel economy and great NVH levels that are typical of Toyota. All my opinion of course.
Then the #4 can be selected, etc
well, take it from somebody who owns one - it is damn near impossible to keep it under 5000 rpm, never mind 3 - the engine is that smooth (and willing). The new Avalon (and, for that matter Camry V6) scaring the bejeepers out of those "magoo types", that previous versions were rightfully known to attract. Imagine an Avalon with a console sequential shifter and a reason to use it - redefined the car. They both are still relatively 'soft' rides, of course, a characteristic that Toyota/Lexus has shown to be an American preference over the years.
Not to mention the 27 mpg I get overall or the well into the 30s on the highway - the best combination of power and FE available in any large sedan - what a waste?