Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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'll go out on a limb and say that as long as the economy remains in the doldrums, gas prices won't go back to the $4 levels we saw last year. In the next few years, customers who are actually able to buy a new car will be value-shoppers, not mpg shoppers. Therefore, the car to buy will be the four-cylinder Fusion S or SE.
Unless, of course, the Detroit 3 crash and burn, in which case the Sonata will experience more sales growth than any other midsize sedan.
Let the games begin. . .
I think something like that has to be part of a bankruptcy, remembering how much they got sued over Oldsmobile.
But I left out one mid-sized car that is due for re-design soon--and none too soon: the Legacy.
I read an article about Subaru in my Motor Trend that was kind of interesting. Subaru is owned by Toyota. Sounds as if Subaru doesn't have the cash needed to keep its own line of engines going. Subaru is knows for the flat boxster engines. Sounded like Toyota will swallow Subaru and start using much of its own engines/drivetrains ect in the coming years. I guess it will be interesting how this one plays out.
Saturn. Too bad if they go under. I like the Aura styling. Love the 2 seater Sky also. But GM needs to cut brands if they are going to survive. With China coming down the track and wanting to send cars here to the U.S. GM needs to look into getting lean and VERY mean.
Not quite correct. Toyota owns a small stake in Subaru. For details of the business relationship and its likely implications for their product line, see the following article in Car and Driver.
If the Legacy is ever built on a Camry platform, or worse still, the Impreza and Corolla start to share major components, I will weep without ceasing.
1. They wanted access to more manufacturing capability (might be a mute point now)
2. They wanted some technical help in making something fun to drive, because in the 20 years since the MR2 Turbo, Toyota forgot.
I think this happens a lot, BMW bought Land Rover for just long enough to develop the X5 and then Ford bought them and they shared a lot of off road knowledge.
I think there are rumors about an AWD turbo sport coupe from Toy that Subie is going to help develop. Even Toyota should be aware of Subie's DNA enough to not mess with it.
Apparently not, but it might be moot...sorry, couldn't resist.
Apparently not, but it might be moot...sorry, couldn't resist.
Maybe I should be muted for using mute instead of moot. I hate it when I demonstrate my illiteracy.
The Camry is quiet and smooth, but for some, too isolated from the road and definitely lacks driving fun.
The Accord is the most fun to drive of the three, and offers lots of interior space. It also has a firmer ride and offers less isolation and noise insulation.
That's my short synopsis. There's not a "bad" choice here. Drive them thoroughly and go with what you like best.
You might consider the KIA Optima too,if you like a firmer ride,but stick with the 2.4 because the 2.7 V6 requires a new timing belt at 60,000 miles.
I think the Accord FTD element peaked in the 86-89 versions and has been on a downhill trend since, ending up with the current version which is slightly less rolling-couch like than the Camry (so there is truth in 'grad's statements).
If FTD is important, I would look at the Mazda6 and Fusion.
If interior volume is important, I would keep the Accord on the list.
If purchase price is very important, I would look at the Sonota.
If isolation from the driving experience is very important, I would look at the Camry.
And the Altima.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/gm-say-more-aid-bankruptcy/story.aspx?guid- =%7BD2483F8A-638A-4A2B-9EC2-428EE920D5E5%7D&dist=msr_1
With the Sonata you get the best bang for the buck. The camry has a smooth ride and quiet. You can get a stellar deal on a 2009 since the 2010 comes out next month. No matter which car you pick, all are good in their own ways.
One correction to some posts re interior volume, re the Accord having the advantage there. Actually it doesn't, in this class. The Sonata is tops in interior volume, with the LX/LX-P Accords (w/o moonroof) having a 0.6 cubic foot advantage in passenger space, but the Sonata having a 4.5 cubic feet edge with moonroof and a 2.3 cubic feet edge in trunk space (all trims). The Mazda6 is also quite roomy, 102 cubic feet of passenger space and 16.6 cubic feet of trunk space. But more important than the raw numbers is to check out how the interiors fit the people who will frequently ride in the car. The numbers alone don't tell the story of how much toe space is under the front seats, how high the rear seat is (very important for roominess back there), whether heads will brush the headliner in back, etc.
Fact is the only thing the Accord/Camry has over the Hyundai is resale value. Remember, you will pay more up front for a like optioned Accord/Camry. If you plan on owning the Sonata for 5+ years, resale will become pointless.
Sonata wins in my book.
Pretty strong opinion there, which is good; but it's not a "fact" as you call it.
Driving dynamics, powerplants, and the overall driving experience is pretty different from car to car, so to say the Sonata is just "better" really doesn't fly. To me, the Sonata was a little boring to drive, but had a more compliant highway ride than my car. To me, the Sonata didn't drive as well, but to you, it might be better.
That's why the best advice here, I'd say, is to drive them yourself, form your own opinions and take everything you read here, including my posts, with a grain of salt.
EDIT: Cannon3, you mention in your post that resale beyond 5 years is pointless; I beg to differ.
I compared a 2004 Sonata LX V6 Automatic (the most expensive, in order to find competetive prices with a lower-model Accord) with a 2004 Accord LX I4 Automatic (the next up from the base model). Both with 75,000 miles, and standard equipment per Kelley Blue Book. The results might surprise you:
Sonata LX V6 - $5,750 in Good condition, $5,125 in fair condition
Accord LX I4 - $8,175 in Good condition, $7,325 in fair condition (Worth ~43% or $2,200 - $2,425 more)
To show that it isn't just with the Sonata, but with the brand, let's compare Elantra and Civic. I chose an Elantra GT (the top model, including leather seating) to compare to the Civic LX (the mid-range model), both with automatics. That way starting prices are competitive.
Elantra GT - $5,940 in Good condition, $5,340 in fair condition
Civic LX - $8,210 in Good condition, $7,410 in fair condition (Worth ~39% more, or $2,070-$2,270 more)
If the 5 year resale value is pointless, can I have $2300 please? You won't miss it. :shades:
Best regards,
TheGrad
For instance, my car has a trade-in value about $2K less than a Camry of equal vintage (when equipped as similar as possible, same mileage & condition rating). But based on sale prices of the time I know I paid at least $3000 less than an equivalent new Camry. So in my case the higher Camry resale price is more than negated by the higher initial price; it indicates an approximate $1000 "Camry tax".
Just speculating; not speaking for robbieg.
Also, Hyundai has made great strides in quality(and the perception thereof) over the past 5 years, so the future resale values of cars bought today may be closer than the previous 5 years. However, that is just my opinion and I can't say it will be that way.
Let's stick with apples to apples and consider the whole picture when making comparisons especially if you're going to go through the trouble of looking up all the numbers in the first place.
P.S. I read some glowing reviews of the Ford Fusion Hybrid. In short it seems like a great Hybrid and it might even be better than the Camry Hybrid. My question is why is Ford pricing it $1100 higher than the Camry Hybrid. Doesn't Toyota command a premium over Ford?
The fact is the difference in resale value on today's vehicles is relatively small and is usually offset by the lower street price of the Fusion or Malibu. Making the actual cost of ownership about the same. The reason for crappy resale in the past has been because the American mfrs overproduced substandard vehicles and had to heavily discount them and dump them into rental fleets which combined for poor resale. Ford in particular has greatly reduced fleet sales and cut back on production which will keep resale values in check.
As for the price difference on the Ford Fusion Hybrid versus the Toyota - I'm sure there is a difference in standard equipment. But even so, don't you think it's worth $1100 for significantly better fuel economy (41/36 vs. 34/33), BETTER reliability and much better looks (ok, the last one was subjective but I think most would agree).
Totally agree.
>The fact is the difference in resale value on today's vehicles is relatively small and is usually offset by the lower street price of the Fusion or Malibu. Making the actual cost of ownership about the same.
Right on point.
>The reason for crappy resale in the past has been because the American mfrs overproduced substandard vehicles and had to heavily discount them and dump them into rental fleets which combined for poor resale
Not quite. The sales to fleet and rental markets help keep factories producing to cover the cost of manpower in those union factories. It's like the japanese producing and selling here at dumping prices on all kinds of things to keep factories at home running.
The idea they produces substandard vehicles to do it isn't right. Rental markets often wanted bare minimum equipment to keep the price low to the rentals. Same for fleet buyers. So the cars had minimum equipment. See your point #1.
> Ford in particular has greatly reduced fleet sales and cut back on production
GM also has cut back on sales to rental and fleets.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Do the math - a 5 year payback on the $1100.00 difference - not to mention that you apparently don't want to acknowledge C&Ds 2-09 Hybrid comparo (my God, the Fusion 'won' I'm surprised you haven't told the world. They tested the FEs of The Fusion Hybird vs. the Camry Hybird and it wasn't the Toyota that used the most gas despite what the window stickers say. Further you make a rather illogical assumption that the Fusion with new powertrains can be as reliable as the past models with antiquated powertrains. That probably won't happen.
Lastly, with our erstwhile new President's 'Buy American' initiative, it would seem that the Camry (or the Sonata) should be the choice there as well? :P
The idea they produces substandard vehicles to do it isn't right. Rental markets often wanted bare minimum equipment to keep the price low to the rentals. Same for fleet buyers. So the cars had minimum equipment. See your point #1.
You misunderstood my point. They were making substandard vehicles 10-15 years ago. Period. On top of that, they were overproducing them to keep the factories humming because they had to pay the UAW workers whether they worked or not. This caused huge rebates which lowered the cost of the new cars by several thousand dollars which accordingly lowers the value of used cars. In addition to all that they were dumping large numbers of sedans into rental fleets which also caused a glut of high mileage used vehicles, further eroding resale values.
The cars are no longer substandard (well, GM and Ford that is. Not sure about Chrysler right now) and they're no longer overproducing vehicles and dumping large percentages to fleet. And they're making more desirable products with better reliability. That's why resale value has improved and should stay that way.
Last time I checked 34 (Fusion) was higher than 31 (Camry) (300 mile test). The only test that the Camry won was a 80 mile highway trip. Fusion won the rest and the EPA test, which is the only "controlled" test where you know everything is equal. You can argue a lot of areas where the competition might be better than the Fusion, but fuel economy is NOT one of them, at least not right now.
Further you make a rather illogical assumption that the Fusion with new powertrains can be as reliable as the past models with antiquated powertrains. That probably won't happen.
Oh, so that only works for the imports, huh? There is nothing drastically "new"
about the new powertrains. The 2.5L is a newer version of the 2.3L but with less noise and better FE. The hybrid is basically the same one used in the Escape for several years. The 3.0L is an improved version of the old engine and the 3.5L is the same one that's been out for years in the Edge and Taurus.
You're really stretching now.......
It can be upsetting with the model for how the universe works changes.
I noticed the 6 speed manual 2.5l 4 cylinder SE has a SYNC/sunroof quick order option. That sounds promising.
And that is even before we get to the "top-rated" hybrid, which has more safety features (standard and optional) then I've seen on the Camry. I can't even compare it to my '07 Accord, it can't even play an MP3 or connect to an iPod.
Its okay to be a fan. The status quo wasn't working...the people voted for change, Ford is on board as well.
Rental fleets, like Hertz, Avis, etc, are looking for low cost reliable vehicles so they can keep costs low for rental customers. This is good for them, bad for resale.
Then there are commercial customers like MickyDs or Comcast or DTE which buy a large number of vehicles each year. These fleet users give a lot of feedback into the design cycle and are pretty much good for everyone. Another example is the Escape hybrids in the NY taxi fleet - what a great way to get accelerated life testing.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Chevy needs an all new Impala soon but I think it may be on hold because of the recession and GM's financial issues.
Take a Malibu for a drive, you will be shocked as to how good it is and how well it's built. There is no doubt I would never have really looked hard at a Chevy before the New Malibu came but it is a top notch sedan. Put your bias aside and test one.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Why don't you put your Malibu bias aside? Sorry, I won't ask you to do that, because you are entitled to an opinion as well.
I have driven a Malibu and I felt is was very cheap. I am interested in the new Fusion, as far as American goes. Chrysler? Please....it's only a matter of days before they are gone.
you are the source of the Ford press releases not me - and would say something like 'siginficantly better' FE and then use those figures to insinuate that the $1100.00 price difference would be quickly recovered with this. All I referenced was a specific test by Car and Driver that refutes your press relea, and would seem to indicate that maybe you wouldn't save anything by buying the Ford.
The Camry did take a fall recently , mostly because of the new 6 spd AT, with the truly new Camry and the drivetrains (V6) that came with it. So much so that even CR dropped its 'automatic' approval for the V6 versions of the Camry. So it seems that not even Toyota with all its billions is immune to teething problems - so now you want to contend that Ford will be successful with this - where Toyota didn't (the ratings for the V6 Camry improved rapidly). Yet another one of your press releases I guess - Ford with no money will be successful doing something that not even Toyota , with all that money - can do? Be real, probably won't happen. :confuse:
The 3.0, 3.5 and 3.7 were recently noted by CR (the 09 Auto issue) as still being relatively rough and unrefined (surprise, surprise) , so if you now wish to claim that the V6 is nothing more than yet another DT, or that the 2.5 is nothing more than yet another 2.3 - then in both cases the buyer is getting something less than what is offered by the Fusion's competitors. The 3.5 has been around a whole 3 years BTW - reliability ratings (and reviews) for the Edge and Taurus have been unremarkable at best. 3 years is hardly enough time to make any kind of judgement about the reliability of the supposedly new DT - although the results so far have not been that encouraging.
Just calling a spade a spade, something very difficult to do when you look at the world thru blue ovalled glasses.
And BTW - I did NOT insinuate that you could recover the $1100 price difference (if that's what it really is - somehow I doubt those vehicles have the same equipment level) based on better fuel economy. I said IF that was the price difference then it might be justified based on several things including better FE but also including subjective differences like styling, ride quality, handling etc.
YOU said the camry used less gas and I see 5 out of 6 tests that say otherwise (2 EPA tests and 3 out of 4 C&D tests).
You're dropping your straws........
That said, the Ford isn't rough or "unrefined." Instead, it is very smooth at low revs, but lacks the sweet sound of the Honda. At high revs, the Ford has an great growl. Sounds powerful like the Honda, but in a different way.
For what its worth, in my close family, we have a V6 Honda, 5 4-cyl Hondas, the Taurus, and a 4.0L I6 Jeep!