Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

celica8 · November 2006

According to Consumer Reports, the Buick Lucerne is rated higher than the Toyota Avalon.

As for buying American, yes, the Avalon is assembled here in the U-S, but all the planning and design, etc. is done in Japan, and the profits go to Japan.

The Lucerne is designed, tested, etc. in the U-S and built in Detroit/Hamtramck Michigan. Profits stay here in the U-S.

captain2 · November 2006

wrong, the Avalon was designed and engineered in California, almost all parts 95%+ are made in this country including obviously engines (Michigan) trannies (Va., I believe), steel etc etc. The Lucerne is one of the few remaining 'American' cars that may be as "American' as the Avalon.
Where does the money go - paying all those American workers, and something Buick doesn't do paying American taxes. Profits? Most of it, into building new plants etc so that Toyota can pay more American workers and pay even more taxes. Even Hyundai just spent $1 billion on a new plant in Alabama. The facts are, that right now, the Toyotas/Nissans/Hondas are contributing a whole lot more into our economies than GM/Ford/Chrysler can even make a dent in.

louiswei · November 2006

Avalon is assembled here in the U-S, but all the planning and design, etc. is done in Japan

WRONG. Avalon is planned and designed here in the US by Toyota's North American design center.

captain2 · November 2006

According to Consumer Reports, the Buick Lucerne is rated higher than the Toyota Avalon

rated higher in what? The Avalon (along with the TL) is the highest rated sedan (89) ever tested by CR and remains so. It has also won every comparo I know of done by the enthusiast mags including both the LaCrosse and Lucerne, as well as many others.

reliability? - as per my previous post, doesn't surprise me - that's is the one benefit of 50 year old engines and antiquated designs in the Buicks.

plekto · November 2006

You meant Lexus IS. The GS is in the same category as the E-class and STS.
***
No, I meant the GS. The IS is a souped-up Corolla and not even in the same class as a CTS(or any of the other Lexus models)

louiswei · November 2006

No, I meant the GS. The IS is a souped-up Corolla

I am sorry, IS is definitely NOT a souped-up Corolla (FWD vs. RWD, 4 banger vs. 6 banger, 150 HP vs. 300 HP and $15K vs. $35K). Last time I checked, CTS is set to compete with the 3-series and C-class (note: NOT the 5-series) and that's in the same category as the IS.

Entry Lux Performance Sedan: 3er, C-class, IS, G, TL and CTS.
Midsize Lux Performance Sedan: 5er, E-class, GS, M, RL and STS.
Lux Sedan: 7er, S-class, LS, Q and "maybe" DTS (might be pushing it though).

plekto · November 2006

The IS is a joke. Both built on a Corolla platform, so despite the bling and fancy engine and so on, it's still a small car. Stuffing a huge engine it the 350 isn't changing that fact anymore than Mercedes can ignore what a piece of junk the C class is for the money(the C230K they made for a while aside - it was priced right)

The CTS is anything but small. And it has way more power and room inside than the IS series. Better trim and seats as well. 255HP out of the 3.6 engine.

Toyota overcharges by at least 20% on all of their luxury lines, like Merdedes and BMW do, so basing it on price when the CTS isn't more than 35K loaded isn't quite fair, either.

Pull up a window on each:
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/lexus/gs300/100508673/specs.html

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2007/cadillac/cts/100717104/specs.html

Put them side-by side and gosh if they don't look really simmilar. Length, width, wheelbase, weight... it's all very slose to each other. But the CTS has more power, better torque curve, and it also turns tighter. I'm not making this up when I say that they are in the same segment.

Just - Lexus is pricing theirs for way more money.

CTS Sport(to be fair): $36,120 $33,772
GS 300 : $43,150 $37,971
And the CTS comes with most every option standard. I priced the Sport version to be fair, but the base CTS is about $30K - so loaded up, it's just at $35K.

CTS
3.6L V6 Luxury Package (w/o wheels) info $1,550 $1,287
5-Speed Automatic Transmission w/Driver Shift Control info $1,200 $996
Power Glass Sunroof w/Express Open info $1,200 $996
AM/FM Radio w/6-Disc In-Dash CD Changer info $1,000 $830
Split-Folding Rear Seat info $400 $332
(the others like fancy paint and engine block heater and so on aside - you have four main choices)

The GS300 has options galore - like making you pay for rain-sensing wipers, trunk mat, wheel locks, and alloy wheels(all standard on the Caddy). 45K is really easy to hit.

The CTS? 35K, because rebates are easy to get and they barely sell over invoice.

captain2 · November 2006

equating an IS with a Corolla - just because they are the same size??? By your way of thinking, we should all be buy cars by the pound, and should think that the best deals out there are things like Crown Vics and pickup trucks! And I guess that there would be nothing better than those depreciation hits you suffer on Caddys and Lincolns once they leave the showroom, equalizes those purchase price differences in a hurry.
You are, however, right about one thing - the CTS is not comparable to any Lexus!

imidazol97 · November 2006

Browsing CR recent copies at the library I thought I saw that Avalon had been lowered in CR's ratings. This was a picture and rectangular note on the bottom of a page--not a full review.

>the highest rated sedan (89)

And I love my 50 year old engine (I thought the redesign was in 1997 for the 3800, but you should know better) that gave me 36 mpg to and from the RCA Dome in Indy two times this weekend. Yup, Corolla 4 cyl stick mileage with V6 power and large car smoothness. And don't tell any of the fadists..., it has overhead valves!!!! Keep it a secret.

>50year old

And GM pays taxes in US. Toyota is a Japanese company. Guess where the money flow eventually ends after the gerrymandering of profit/loss of subsidiaries and captive suppliers.

louiswei · November 2006

The IS is a joke. Both built on a Corolla platform

Dude, before posting some non-sense, do some googling. The IS is built on the same platform as the GS but a shortened version. The IS is RWD (like the GS) and Corolla is FWD, the two is not possibly to share platform.

Say whatever you want but the CTS is slotted to compete with the 3er, IS and G. Let me remind you the last time...that segment is called "Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedan".

captain2 · November 2006

imidazo - you know better than that (I hope). GM has lost billions in the last few years - US tax law allows those losses to be applied to any future years, if and when, they do make any profits. It will be a number of years before any GM Co. pays anything other than some real estate taxes. Besides which GM has been losing about $2500 on EVERY car they sell (or give away), there are no profits to pay taxes on, money for R&D, or even the money required to close more plants and/or move them to Canada, Mexico, China or wherever.
The Avalon, fyi, has never been rated higher than 'better than average' in CR reliability even going back into the 90s, and in terms of reliability it was downgraded to merely average in late 2005 - the Avalon, at that point, something unknown to the 'American' mfgrs. - a completely NEW car. From what I understand, the 06s etc. have been rerated back up which could be logically expected. If GM/Buick , for example, had the financial and engineering abilities to even try what Toyota did with the Avalon, the tow trucks (and 'black circles') would still be lined up solid between here and Flint, Mich.!
But be happy thinking that you are better supporting our great country buying that Buick, Chevy, Ford or whatever as opposed to one to those 'nasty' Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans - exactly the opposite is probably the truth!!!

tjc78 · November 2006

"Yup, Corolla 4 cyl stick mileage with V6 power and large car smoothness"

Last time I checked the Avalon gets better or the same mileage with about 70+ more HP and equal or better smoothness. Just for curiousity at what average speed did you achieve 36 MPG?? No way at anything above 65 MPH.

batista · November 2006

The 3800 is nothing special. I dumped my 01 Impala because of intake manifold leaks and transmission problems. 200HP out of 3.8L sucks and you know it. So what if the fuel economy is 19/29 there are way better autos out there.
When accelerating the pushrod engine sounds like a vacuum cleaner and boy does it sound rough when pushed hard.

For me the deal breaker is no RWD. The Buick doesn't have it and neither does the Avalon. So I chose the Dodge Charger which allows me to accelerate without worrying about torque steer and better weight distribution of 52/48 versus a FWD car which has 62/38.

captain2 · November 2006

and you are absolutely right about a basic superiority in getting something close to 50/50 weight distribution. The Avalon has no noticeable torque steer, but will, of course understeer heavily at the limit as all FWD drive cars will.
Sure limits your choices in this category though.
The Avalon will easily outaccelerate your Charger (if its not the Hemi) and even a V8 Lucerne, not to mention FE that's not even close!

plekto · November 2006

Check out a CTS. Less than 30K for one with the 3.6 engine is easily doable after rebates and a bit of haggling.

Used? Silly cheap - 18K asking price on a two year old model at the local dealer here in Pasadena, CA. Sure there's some wiggle-room in that figure as well.

255HP, VVT, engine that makes the 3800 look like the aging hunk of metal that it is, and it's RWD. The only thing is.. well, it's not a jellybean. Heh. That's good and bad - as most reviewers have said - it kind of grows on you. I think we are all used to seeing jellybeans and it looks odd at first

2007 CTS 3.6
Cars Direct:
Net Cost: $29,414 That includes delivery. $29,414 out the door. It just whomps on the competition at that price-point.

$31,964 with the 18 inch/high-end suspension option, rear folding seat, engine block heater, and whatever else I could reasonably throw in other than a sunroof(which leak and are is too far back to really be useable)

I see no reason to get an Avalon or Lucerne or simmilar with this costing a huge amount less and having about the same performance.

maximafan · November 2006

Oh, Puhleez!!!!

maximafan · November 2006

Look, I don't drive the IS, but, come on!!
The Corolla sure wishes it looks like the IS!

rpfingsten · November 2006

Please allow me to throw in my 2 cents worth on the 3800 v-6. Around town or on a "flat" level highway, the 3800 is adequate... I just traded in an oldsmobile regency elite that had the 3800 in it and I have to tell you, whenever I would drive thru those hills in the Ozarks, that poor 197 hp engine was straining to the top of each and every hill..and not to mention the engine was so noisy that a friend of mine asked me if I had a diesel engine under the hood...gas mileage was fine, and the engine was dependable..hardly anything major wrong in almost 15 years of service, but god help you if you needed to get out of the way of an oncoming train or semi... the power just isnt there.

Roland

floridabob1 · November 2006

Many of these vehicles being compared are definitely not "large sedans"
I believe that the purpose of this thread was to compare Azera to similar sized and priced models.

pat · November 2006

I was just getting ready to post something similar, thanks floridabob1.

The vehicles we are (supposed to be) comparing (across the board, not just to the Azera) in this discussion are those listed at the top of this page.

imidazol97 · November 2006

>hardly anything major wrong in almost 15 years of service

Your Oldsmobile was 15 years old. Did you check the exhaust manifold donuts for seal under load? That may have been giving some noise. I had replaced one on a 93 3800. While you may believe your engine was noisier than it should have been, I find mine 3800s are just fine.

>to get out of the way of an oncoming train or semi

I find I got out of the way of oncoming semis just fine in two recent trips to Indy last week.

>poor 197 hp

It's the torque output on a motor and at what speed it produces what torque that makes the car driveable (unless you're on a NASCAR track

). I used to hang on every 2 or 3 horsepower change in cars when I was younger; now I've realized how unimportant those changes were in the actual driving of the vehicles. Torque, transmission ratios, final drive gearing all are more important; horsepower makes nice advertising fodder for the unwashed.

floridabob1 · November 2006

RE: 326
I mentioned the comparison to Hyudai's because this is a thread of the Hyundai forum. No?

pat · November 2006

It is linked to all of the boards of the vehicles listed above - it appears on all of them.

floridabob1 · November 2006

Re 328
My bad! I did not realize that.

plekto · November 2006

That's why the 3.6 GM is offering in the upper-end LaCrosse and CXS is such a fantastic engine. No mush at the bottom end, plenty of torque, and it's quiet. It feels like the biggest darn VTEC you've ever driven.

The LaCrosse, though, has a low output version of it and FWD, plus looks like a jellybean. Pass. The Cadillac version of the same engine has more power, is RWD, and best of all, with stickshift, it's a very very fast car. 6 speed manual with 255HP and about as much torque is reminiscent of a 70s muscle-car.

And, it's under $30K by a few dollars, so it fits the criteria of this discussion :P

varob · November 2006

Let me throw in my .02 about my 2005 Chrysler 300 Limited since so little has been written about it. I bought mine in August of 2004. The base price was around 26.5 K, and mine came loaded-up, so it's a bit over the 30K discussion limit. It has the 3.5 V-6, but forgive me, I don't know all the specs, etc., but I can tell you that it has plenty of spunk, gets reasonable gas mileage (19/27or so), and has been very reliable so far. I'm pushing 40K miles and just got back from a road trip from VA to FL and back, and the drive was very comfortable. There have been some issues with the 300C and the 5.7 Hemi engine, but my 3.5 V-6 has had no problems. The Continental tires that came on it were trash, but I replaced them with Goodyears and have had zero problems. Anyway, I just didn't want a discussion of large sedans to continue without some mention of the Chrysler 33.

floridabob1 · November 2006

RE; 331
Friend has an 06 300C Hemi and loves it.
He has had little or no problems and is getting same or better gas milage than me.
My wife refuses to drive the 300C because she feels as if it to big. I like the ride.

kdhspyder · November 2006

And GM pays taxes in US. Toyota is a Japanese company. Guess where the money flow eventually ends after the gerrymandering of profit/loss of subsidiaries and captive suppliers.

In Texas, building the multi-$Billion truck facility. The Tundra launch will be a $5 Billion investment in the US alone. Thus the money eventually ends up back here. As opposed to GM for example where the money ends up developing facilities in China. Note that since GM only creates losses it pays no income taxes here. What positive cashflow it does have is redirected to Asia as it expands it's presence there.

pat · November 2006

Let's get away from this topic and go back to comparing the cars listed above - we've really been wandering lately.

pat · November 2006

No "bad" whatsoever. If you don't already know that we link discussions to all related boards, it's not obvious at all and lots of people think what you thought. I'm happy to have a chance to explain how that works for anyone who doesn't know. Generally speaking you can expect any comparo to be linked to all of the boards in the subject.

Carry on!

marsha7 · November 2006

liked the DC300, hemi and all, and its design was quite nice, I do feel cramped in the car because it seems, real or not, that the door sills are higher, with less window glass exposed, so I feel like I am sitting in the bed of the newer Ford F150, with higher sidewalls...

If the door sill was lower, I may never have bought my 04 Crown Vic, as the Hemi was tempting, but I just felt like the car was swallowing me...same with, of course, the Magnum, Charger, etc...

cdmuile · November 2006

The 300C was one of the cars I drove before buying the Azera. Gillis(sp?) did a marvelous job with the styling. So distinctive and aggressive looking. It drove like a dream thanks to MB underpinnings. This was the first American made car I've looked at since 1984! ( bought a Dodge 600 convertible with the Mitsubishi 2.6 V6).

I traded a Jag S Type on the Azera and really wanted a fwd car this time because of our nasty Iowa winters. There were just a number of little things with the 300 that tilted me to the Azzie: The tortoise shell interior pieces, the fit and finish in the trunk area and the Conti tires. My dealer said these tires were the only option.

Glad you like the 300. It's a handsome car. Nice to see Chrysler back in the thick of things. I couldn't be happier with the Azera....such a quality car. We'll see what I think after 30,000 miles.

wamba2000 · November 2006

cdmulie, I also was impressed with the 300C, had one when they first came out as a rental, it was loaded and I put about 450 miles on in two days. VEry nice.

We bought the Azera because the lower rooflines on many cars (Charger, 300, Camry, etc.) made ingress/egress painiful for my wife, as she has a neck injury. The Azera doors cut into the roof higher than others. There is also less of a "closed-in" feel than the 300/Charger.

We are very pleased with handling, ride and performance of the Azera, we'll see about durability as the years go by

captain2 · November 2006

no, the 300 is a perfect fit in this discussion, sticker price and price paid are 2 different things and a number of these cars (you'd be hard pressed to keep any optioned Avalon for example below $30k drive out) will get well over the $30k.
IMO, and I did drive your car before I actually bought my Avalon, the 3.5 is probably the engine to buy - much better FE and apparently better reliability. And despite its size and partly because of the RWD, it doesn't drive nearly as big as it is. Although none of the cars discussed here really qualify as any sort of 'sports sedan', the 300 comes the closest.
The deal killers for me: what I thought to be lower general interior fit/finish and option levels, lower FE and not quite as good in drivetrain refinement, and the styling - obviously a completely subjective judgement but definitely different!
In any case, happy to hear that there are some happy 300 owners out there!

plekto · November 2006

The Cadillac CTS is under 30K - it should be on the list above(the set of blue links at the top of the discussion page).

Also add the Crown Vic - it's definately large and under 30K.

tjc78 · November 2006

I've mentioned the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis before also and would agree they are relevant here. However, the CTS is not a "large" car by any means. I would bet it's dimensions are the same or smaller than a Camry/Accord. The CTS belongs in a discussion with the Acura TL, BMW 3, Lesus IS, and Lincoln Zephyr.

louiswei · November 2006

Thank you very much...

plekto, let's face it, your beloved CTS belongs in the same group as the 3er, TL, C-class, G and the "so-called" souped up Carolla - IS.

plekto · November 2006

Then at least put the Crown Vic/Marquis in.

Cars Direct(fairly average price)
2006 Net Cost(Including delivery): $21,431. ($3000 in rebate)
I've seen even higher rebates from time to time, plus on a 2006, there's always a way to get them to drop the selling price a few thousand compared to the 2007 next to it.

$20K out the door? That's a lot of car for the money.

BUT CHECK THIS OUT.
This is the Grand Marquis Ultimate - fully loaded with every option I could put on it.
Cars Direct:
Net Cost: $24,832. Leather, moonroof, dual exhaust, full size spare tire, chrome wheels, all the bling and such. Even the trunk organizer and side airbags.

Kind of a no-brainer compared to a stock Crown Vic. The $6000 in rebate kind of helps some. Heh. $22,268 otherwise.

allmet33 · November 2006

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...but the styling is so lacking, boring and oh so bland. Besides, where's the thrill in looking like you're driving a police cruiser???

I would actually have leaned more towards comparing the Buick Lucerne with the Azera, however...to get the performance of the Azera, you would have to get the Lucerne with the Northstar V-8! Other than that, the Lucerne has been put together very nicely!

Just so you know...I'm an owner of a '06 Azera with just over 21K miles on it. Loving every minute (and mile) of it!!!

plekto · November 2006

The Marquis isn't a "cop car". It's the non-fleet model with chrome, alloy wheels, two-tone paint(optional), and all sorts of features that make it a proper car.

And they sell virtually none to fleets or for government use. So that helps resale quite a bit. BTW, the GM 3.6 engine can be had in the La Crosse CXS. The Lucerne CXS is a whole other animal thanks to the Cadillac suspension they put in it. But it's $35K new. Used it's a great car for about $25K.(one year old - imagine what two more years will do).(grin)

tjc78 · November 2006

Were probably off topic here, but, the Grand Marquis has probably the worst resale value of any car on the road. My grandfather bought a fully loaded Ultimate (34K+ new) for 20K. It was less than a year old with 10K miles without a scratch from a local Linc/Merc dealer.

Also the cop car reference isn't far off, how many people would see a Grand Marq and call it a Crown Vic?

All this being said, I do enjoy driving the Grand Marquis something about the "big boat" ride and handling. Of course when I get back in my '06 Avalon I do prefer it.

tjc78 · November 2006

Just a side note.. starting to see a lot of Dodge Chargers as police cruisers too.

allmet33 · November 2006

The Marquis is the non-fleet model, luxury version of a "cop car"...still as blah and uninspiring as the Crown Vic.

The 3.6 engine (240 hp) in the La Crosse CXS still doesn't compare to the Azera's 3.8 (263 hp). Not to mention...the bells and whistles that come with the Azera. The LaCrosse is ALMOST a viable option, but falls down with the 500. However, the 500 will be seeing an upgraded engine to give it more respectable power. While very roomy, the interior just doesn't make me want to be in it.

allmet33 · November 2006

The police are starting to wise up! LOL The Crown Vic has served them well over the decades it's been used. It's time to retire it and move on. The Charger is a very smart choice for police use!

plekto · November 2006

The 3.6 is an amazing engine as it has VVT that actually works properly. Please stop worshiping HP. It's not important once you get over about 200 unless the car is a bloated pig and needs more.

Why? Because HP is basically top-end speed. And with 80-85mph being the fastest anyone will ever drive in the U.S.(passing), it's worthless. Just like the top two gears in a Corvette are.

Torque is what matters. How much grunt it has to make quick changes and respond to your inputs. A whiny little 4-cylinder like in the Civic that has to be flogged because it has no torque gets its butt kicked when you put it against a V6. Upping the HP by tweaking the compression and changing the gearing won't do anything in normal driving if it still has no mass behind it.

The Civic Del Sol was a perfect example. Same engine - just tweaked differently. 120HP or 160HP - it still drove the same because the torque was virtually identical. They should have dropped a small supercharger or turbo on it instead. Like Mercedes did in the C230K(great car, btw)

The GM 3.6 does exactly what Honda does, but it's tweaked to run opposite. That is, instead of giving power when it hits high speeds(VTec), it is made to compensate for the slushy low-end. And it works. - 1600-1800 RPM and you've got almost all of your available torque. Plus, it's diesel-flat. The Azera's 3.8 has this as well, but it's crude and unrefined.

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/hyundai/azera/100673112/specs.html

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/buick/lacrosse/100569954/specs.html

A few things I see.
- despite being a bit smaller, the Hyundai weighs *more* than the Buick(?)
- The GM has *maximum* HP at 2000 rpm. Not 4500 like the Hyundai. Hyundai takes time to wind up. The GM is instant.
- Hyundai has 5 speeds, though that's not really good when you think about it. More shifting instead of USING that power to do the work for you. Bet it's more money to replace as well. I'm not buying this more speeds=better argument. How fast do you need to go, really?
- Hyundai has a full-size spare. Gotta give them credit for that. (it's a pet peeve of mine)
- Buick has an air filter, which is a nice touch. Living here in L.A, it's nice to have.
- Hyundai has a better stock stereo(no MP3 - shame GM!)
They look prety simmilar on paper otherwise.

http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91020&acode=USB60HYC101B0&restor- - e=false
$23,461 For the Hyundai

http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91020&acode=USB60BUC081C0&restor- - e=false
$29,014* for the Buick. Note - this includes three options to make it a fair comparison. It says $2000 less(27K on the site, but anyone would opt for the 0% for 60 month financing instead.

After factoring in a good finance rate (7%) on the Hyundai, it's about the same price in the end. But the GM engine is the real gem. Pay Buick prices and get a Cadillac CTS engine thrown in for pretty much free.

Gotta give Hyundai credit, though, for making an awesome Camry V6/Accord equalizer(and the Base La Crosse as well).

****
Oh - yes, the Marquis is bland. Heh. But a fully loaded one costs $24K NEW.(2006 model). That's why tjc's grandfather got the deal he did - because the same model with 30 miles on it was $4K more. $17,044 for the base model via Cars Direct - which is a pretty good deal if you ask me.

allmet33 · November 2006

Ahhhhh...yes, but you fail to leave out is the manual shift mode the Azera has that makes a world of difference when shifting.

As you stated above, HP doesn't matter until you get over 200 HP, the Azera has 263 HP. Granted it's heavier, but it's also a "luxury" car. So therefore, torque isn't an issue here. In the end, it will depend on what type of driving you do. Personally, the Azera has plenty of ooommph and can jump off the line if you know what you're doing.

Yeah...the Marquis is a pretty good deal if you're lookin for something your grandmother would be proud of! LOL

Once again, bang for the buck...Azera wins hands down!

plekto · November 2006

What I said was that HP doesn't matter once you GET over 200. Not "UNTIL".

Anything over 200HP is wasted due to our archaic and woefully slow speed limits. What is more important isn't HP, but torque.

Granted it's heavier, but it's also a "luxury" car. So therefore, torque isn't an issue here.
Probably about the stupidest statement I've heard all week here at Edmunds. If you have a heavy car, torque is what you need to move it quickly.

Let's see - 2 seconds to get from 30 to 45mph without flogging it versus 1 second... nothing... oh you want me to downshift... 2-3 seconds to wind up and get you there. The Azera feels suspiciously like the GM 3.8(3800) that way.

Now, that's not to say it's not a good step. Hyundai making an engine that competes with a GM workhorse is a major sign that they are evolving into a decent brand, finally. And giving most of the other imports bad dreams at night as well. :P But it's not the same as the Cadillac CTS engine they're stuffing into the CXS.(for way less money, too)

Note - the CTS has it tweaked for higher-end torque. The CXS is set for low-end over top-end HP and actually drives better than the CTS in daily traffic. Sure, you lose 15-20HP, but you drop your maximum torque to 2/3 the rpms. Buick did a good job figuring it out. Now if they'd just replace the 3800 with this...

joe97 · November 2006

In my opinion, the 3.8 V6 in the Lucerne, for example, is out-dated and very inadequate for the class, V8, however, makes up for it, but suffers in other trade-offs.

Here is what Edmunds had to say about the Azera and the Lucerne:

This front-wheel-drive Hyundai is also plenty quick. Equipped with variable intake valve timing, the Azera's all-aluminum, DOHC, 3.8-liter V6 provides 263 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 255 pound-feet of torque at 4,500 rpm. This translates to more than enough thrust for passing and merging maneuvers, and the five-speed automatic transmission upshifts smoothly under full throttle. Downshifts are prompt, too, though there's slight hesitation if you jump on the accelerator abruptly in traffic.

Our test car posted a swift 7.2-second 0-60-mph time and a 15.5-second quarter-mile, right in line with the numbers we've gotten out of the Avalon, which has a 268-hp, 3.5-liter V6. Interestingly, the Azera is also a half-second quicker to 60 than a V8-equipped Buick Lucerne, which we tested the same day.

In addition, the Azera's brakes are excellent. Pedal feel is progressive during normal driving. Although effort levels increase markedly during full ABS stops and the car's front end droops, it's hard to argue with the results: 60 to zero in 118 feet.

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=109613/pageNumber=1?s- - ynpartner=edmunds&pageurl=www.edmunds.com/new/2007/hyundai/azera/100800758/roadt- - estarticle.html&articleId=109613

plekto · November 2006

You missed the entire point, though.

Any engine will post decent times if flogged to an inch of its redline, with high HP engines doing well.

But in and around town, you never have the combination of gearing and torque in most engines to actually make it useable.

263HP at 6000 rpm(redline) 255ft-lb at 4500rpm - that's useless in city driving as the gearing is going to be -= what? 50mph you shift into 3rd gear if you have the thing floored? And you must have it floored or the computer takes over at the *slightest* let-off on the pedal and upshifts.

In simple terms, let's use the GM 3.8L as an example, since I know this engine well - for over 20 years in fact. The output is lower in HP, but the RPMs it maxxes out in both are simmilar to the Hyundai.

Heavy throttle/floored:
1st gear - maximum 30mph.
2nd gear - maximum 50mph
3rd gear - maximum 90mph
4th gear - maximum 140+(in theory)

Light/driving around town pedal:
1st gear - shifts at 10mph
2nd gear - shifts at 25mph
3rd gear - shifts at 35mph
4th gear(overdrive) - drops into it at 40mph the second you let off the gas to about 1/4 throttle or less.

The maximum HP and torque at these speeds is only about 1/2 to 2/3 of maximum, ever. Now, you could punch it, but all that gets you is a downshift after a pause of about a second and then if you really want to use that power... oops, - you're going faster than city traffic will allow and still in 2nd gear. You let off even a milimeter and boom - it upshifts a gear or two instantly. Lug Lug Lug. Power all gone.

Oh - and the testers manually shift the automatics in the tests. Almost every single time to override this behavior in fact.

The problem is an engine design that has to rev like a 4 cylinder engine to get that power coupled with tall gearing to get good gas mileage. And so in city driving the thing is a total slug or a total rocket. It drives like an old Muscle-car with an on/off Jekyl and Hyde throttle personality. It makes reviewers happy and the MPG counters as well, but it drives like a toad. Only a manual transmission with you overriding the computer(s) will save you. Or shifting it manually if it lets you(some cars only have a "D")

But the GM VVT develops maximum torque at 2000rpm. That's about 1/4 throttle from idle or even overdrive. It does the opposite. You get full power the second you want it and then it lets off nicely.(V8 diesel flat)

Go drive one. I have. The Hyundai is "okay" in traffic but is slow to do roll-ons and transitions and getting going after you slow to take a corner and so on - like the GM 3.8, the Honda V6, and the Toyota V6. The CVVT and the V8 - roll in and roll right back out without a blip. Less gears, faster delivery of the power it has.

floridabob1 · November 2006

RE;354
If you guys bought the or are considering buying the Azera for racing or fuel consumption, you are buying the wrong car.

Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles