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

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1…229230232234235…544

Comments

  • vanman1vanman1 Member Posts: 1,397
    GM interiors the last couple of years are as good or better than anything out there.

    It's a shame this economic disaster hit just as things were starting to look good at the General.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    If Uncle would have the guts to liquidate Chrysler and focus its efforts on restructuring GM, then I think they've got a chance to survive and prosper down the road. I don't think the government can continue to afford propping both of them up.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I don't think the government can continue to afford propping both of them up.

    What makes GM special? They loose more money? Stop the insanity! If they can't survive on their own, Chapter 11 both of them.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,298
    there must be some big problems winding down some GM brands, otherwise it woudl have been done.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Member Posts: 1,601
    Why should the government become involved in restructuring any company?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Such as that in the current Cobalt or Impala? :P

    Too bad they can't get the quality up across the line.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Why should the government become involved in restructuring any company?

    I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, but the reasons given are the enormous number of people who are employed directly and indirectly by the auto mfrs. In addition to direct employees there are hundreds of thousands of retirees. Entire communities are supported by local manufacturing plants. Suppliers are dependent on all mfrs and if one goes under the suppliers may go under, too, and that would affect the other mfrs like Ford and possibly even Honda and Toyota. Then you add in the massive dealer networks and the local impact of those and the potential economic impact across the country is huge.

    And try to remember that we're talking about LOANS, not gifts. They'll be paid back one way or the other.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    And try to remember that we're talking about LOANS, not gifts. They'll be paid back one way or the other.

    Since GM stock is virtually worthless at this point, perhaps the federal government might accept payment in the form of midsize sedans? I hear the Malibu and Aura are very nice.

    In other news, CR's "bucks per bang" rating (a new stat this year) places the Sonata and Accord neck and neck. Anyone have any thoughts on this? If you were rating the "bucks per bang" of various midsize sedans, which ones would score best? Worst?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Right now Fulan, Malibu, Sonata, and maybe Optima would be at the top of my "bang for the bucks" list in this class. But that is based on the low pricing available on 2009 Fulans. If Ford keeps the pricing low on the 2010s, it will be an even bigger bang for the buck due to improved content.

    This is hard to say right now because there are great deals on practically every mid-sized sedan.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Stop the insanity! If they can't survive on their own, Chapter 11 both of them.

    Toyota and Honda are asking for bailout money from their govts too. Does the above apply to them as well?
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Backy, I'm with you on the Fulan for sure. I tend to prefer tauter handling cars, so I probably wouldn't enjoy the Sonata as much, but I have to agree that it's a quality piece and a good value.

    I'd also put the Accord LX/LX-P in the mix, at least with the manual tranny.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Stop the insanity! If they can't survive on their own, Chapter 11 both of them.

    Toyota and Honda are asking for bailout money from their govts too. Does the above apply to them as well?

    If I were a Japanese taxpayer, I would have an opinion. I doubt they are in the same shape as Detroit.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Translation - it's ok for Honda/Toyota, not for Chrysler/GM. Typical.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Translation - it's ok for Honda/Toyota, not for Chrysler/GM. Typical.

    Wrong! If ANY company wants MY tax dollars, I say NO. What they do with Japanese taxpayer's money, is there own business.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Translation - it's ok for Honda/Toyota, not for Chrysler/GM. Typical.

    Come on, akirby, that was a cheap shot. What elroy5 said was that it should be up to Japanese taxpayers to decide whether the Japanese government should give Japanese tax revenue to support those companies.

    As I presume that neither elroy5 nor I nor you pay taxes to support the government of Japan, I fail to see how our opinion should influence Japanese governmental policies.

    On the other hand, we do pay taxes to support the U.S. government, and we have a right to say how that money is spent.
  • vanman1vanman1 Member Posts: 1,397
    "Why should the government become involved in restructuring any company?"

    ----------

    Quite honestly I hate that tax dollars are going to prop up banks, insurance companies and autos but in the end it's a necessary evil. You can't allow key financial firms and industries to disappear, it will throw the economy into depression and maybe worse. Governments around the world are propping autos up, the U.S. and Canada must also.

    This is not business as usual, we are in the economic disaster of the century. That said, we are off topic.

    Malibu is a great sedan... discuss.

    ;-)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Malibu is a great sedan... discuss.

    I liked it. Thought it was a little cramped on the inside to be the size it is on the outside (although many GM cars are guilty of this, especially the W-Body cars), but wanted to drive it. Too bad in the 2.5 hours I spent having my car serviced there (a 12 year old car at the time, looked like I'd be ready to trade), not ONE salesperson so much as SPOKE to me, offered to let me inside one, much less drive one. I was dressed in khakis and a button-up, not like a hooligan 20 year old.

    The Ford dealer across the street is much more friendly.

    My folks went to test the Impala and the Taurus, but after 15 minutes without being able to get a test drive, they got frustrated and went to that Ford dealer. Bought a 2008 Taurus that day.

    Shame on you Premiere Chevrolet! :sick: You lost a sale.

    At least our American cars aren't the junk they once were. Now if we can get the Impala up to class-standards we'll be in business on the Chevy side!
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    What elroy5 said was that it should be up to Japanese taxpayers to decide whether the Japanese government should give Japanese tax revenue to support those companies.

    And the implication was that Ford, GM and Chrysler should stand or die on their own without help but it's ok if Toyota and Honda get help from their government. It doesn't matter whether it's your tax money or not, the principle should be the same. It's not and it never will be with him.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    How about that Subaru Legacy, eh? :)
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    How about that Subaru Legacy, eh?

    They lost me when they lost the wagon.

    Or when the all but eliminated the manual...

    I guess thats what happens when you get bought by Toyota...one size fits all, except when it doesn't.
  • robsisrobsis Member Posts: 162
    I think it's a great vehicle...the AWD is amazing but does drag the mpg down a little (but people still report getting mid-20s around town and 30 on the hwy...). Styling is sharp. The interior is snug, more akin to a sports sedan than a family sedan...and the tight back seat reflects this, too....also, the trunk is small for this class. Auto tranny could benefit from at least a 5spd....the 4spd they use probably hurts performance and mileage. The power is only adequate with the standard 2.5 boxer...great with the turbo; however, the turbo requires premium and gets poor around town mileage for most situations (CR reports low teens around town with the turbo). The 2010 model is supposed to get larger inside/outside and, I suspect, will be more competitive with the 4 door family sedans generally discussed in this forum. I'm interested in seeing what they do with the '10 model as Subie has recently become a very reliable vehicle and certainly one of the safest on the road...build quality is superb on all currently produced models.

    As to Toyota owning Subie....not true. Research will show that Toy has an investment interest only and there is some cross development going on...no different than with most industries these days....
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    The market's definition of "midsize" has changed. When the current Legacy (and the previous generation Mazda6) came out, it was squarely in the mainstream. Now it's not, as the current Camry, Accord and Sonata have physically grown.

    I'd like a not-quite-midsize sedan, say the size of the current Legacy or the Jetta or the old Contour. But so far the automakers aren't really taking me up on it, probably because there's no price gap between upper-level compacts (Civic EX, Mazda 3s, et al) and the midsize mainstream.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    I guess thats what happens when you get bought by Toyota...one size fits all, except when it doesn't.

    Remember that until about a year and a half ago Subaru was part-owned by GM. Did that hurt Subaru's cars?
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I'd like a not-quite-midsize sedan, say the size of the current Legacy or the Jetta or the old Contour.

    I seem to like cars that are right on that borderline also. Had a couple coutours and now have a prior generation Mazda6 and my wife has a jetta.

    It seems that size is not too availabe in a smallish midsize any longer and the only options are becoming largish compacts. Besides the Subaru, the VW Paasat and TSX areabout all that comes to mind. Beyond those, I think only some even pricier, generally european, cars fit that category (eg. Volvo S60).
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Yes, the Elantra, Sentra, and even the sub-compact Versa have "mid-sized" interiors, in some cases more roomy than some cars (like Legacy) we consider mid-sized. The Jetta is fairly roomy also but I don't think it's officially (per EPA) mid-sized by interior volume. (Prius is mid-sized in volume also, but not a sedan.) So someone who liked something like the Contique in the past (125 hp I4) might find something like the Elantra, Sentra, or Jetta (that probably closest to the Contique in driving feel) just the right size. In fact, the Jetta I5 has about the same hp as the old Contique V6, and the Sentra is available with high-power I4s also.

    I am not a fan of the ever-increasing exterior size of "mid-sized" sedans, but as the compacts grow larger, they can fill that need for a smallish but roomy car.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    I just can't bring myself to consider a Sentra. The Jetta and Elantra are about as close as I can come to finding something in the size range I'd like. Of the two, the Jetta has the quality furnishings I expect out of a midsize car, while the Elantra doesn't. I guess it's more of a "large compact."

    This raises a bigger question: does "midsize" really refer to size? For me it's more of a measure of price and market role--Accords of 20 years ago would be considered "compact" today based on their interior and exterior dimensions, but the quality of materials inside would identify them more closely with today's midsize cars.

    By this measure, the Legacy is a midsize sedan even if its interior space is somewhat compact. And at the other end of the size spectrum, the Accord, Sonata, and Impala are midsize even if their interior and trunk space makes them nominally full-size.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Accords of 20 years ago actually were classified as compacts. I had a 89 Accord. It's based on the EPA classification which is based on interior volume.

    I agree that it really should be more of a relative size based on the current lineups. There is no way a Prius should be a midsize or an Accord or Sonata should be a full-size.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    The Jetta is fairly roomy also but I don't think it's officially (per EPA) mid-sized by interior volume.

    Yes, but neither is the Legacy or TSX, both are compacts according to EPA's definition. This merely demonstrates the shortcomings of relying completely on EPA to define the class, IMO.

    Not that I am saying the Jetta is midsize, it is just toward the larger end of compacts (with a very large trunk). Which is how I would have described the Contique, as well. A fair number of contique-ites seem to have migrated to the mazda6 (prior gen).

    Anyway, as was said it is also about the quality (not meaning reliability) of the vehicle and I would say a certain more "solid" feel when driving...not feeling like you are buzzing around in an econobox. For example, the focus has (or at least had) the kind of handling, etc. that would appeal to me...but it still had that economy car feel, in the end.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I don't see what quality has to do with what class a car is in, unless we are talking luxury vs. non-luxury. There are some "big compacts" that feel every much a quality piece to me as "real' mid-sized sedans; examples are Jetta, Mazda3, Elantra SE with leather or Elantra Touring (ok, that's a hatch), Civic EX (esp. EX-L), and Impreza (esp. with black interior).
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I don't see what quality has to do with what class a car is in

    It doesn't and my intention was not to imply that it did. The context of the discusson was just which cars are appealing to a couple of individuals here, who happen like cars that are larger compacts or smaller mid-sizes.
  • cannon3cannon3 Member Posts: 296
    has grown to much for my taste also. My next vehicle will be more the size of a Focus/Jetta sized vehicle. I am reading more about the new 2010/11 Focus and it too is growing just a bit in size. I have to ask why? Mid-size needs to stay mid-size. My predictions are the V6 in mid-size sedans are going to go by the way side in about 10 years. The only way you are going to be able to get a V6 is to have a "special edition" or an SS badging/model/trim level.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    My predictions are the V6 in mid-size sedans are going to go by the way side in about 10 years.

    I think just the opposite. If the Civic, Elantra, Corolla, etc. get much larger, they will probably have a V6 option.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I don't think V6 for midsize sedans is going away any time soon in the US. Not that I understand why some feel that a 175ish HP 4 cylinder is not enough.
  • oldcemoldcem Member Posts: 309
    Drive a lot on mountainous interstates while listening to the engine scream at high RPMs trying to maintain speed and you'll understand. One of my midsizers has a 3.5 Liter V6, the other has a 4.2 Liter V8 - both get decent fuel economy driving the interstates here, and, handle the hills with no problem.

    Regards:
    Oldengineer
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Drive a lot on mountainous interstates while listening to the engine scream at high RPMs trying to maintain speed and you'll understand. One of my midsizers has a 3.5 Liter V6, the other has a 4.2 Liter V8 - both get decent fuel economy driving the interstates here, and, handle the hills with no problem.

    Having grown up in a mountainous area myself, and understanding that a modern 4 cylinder engine is designed to rev higher (which can be seen from the horsepower/torque curves), I am pretty used to the engine reving a bit.
    The 1.8 l Escorts seemed fine, as did the 2.2 l Accord and the small V6 (2.5 l) Contour. The V6 in the Caravan and the Sienna had the most trouble.

    Locally hwy 154 was a pass through the mountains, and trips to Mammoth and Tahoe or Yosemite involved a lot mountain driving. Even just going to LA required traversing the Conejo grade, and Cuesta grade is just north of San Luis Obispo.

    A 4 valve/cylinder motor is more effective when its flowing more air. To flow more air, the revs need to be higher...this is what gave rise to complaints about no low end torque (and why variable valve timing is important on these vehicles to address that).
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    Ford Fusion SE
    Honda Accord EX-L
    Mazda 6 i Touring

    Details and results here
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I think there is an irrational fear of even modestly high rpm (like 3000-4000) amongst Americans (or at least Wisconsinites). It is understandable, if one is driving something like my old minivan with it's 3.8L push rod engine, which has lots of torque at low rpm and makes frightening noises if you floor it. But in my more modern 2.3L I-4, it does not make frightening noises or anything even at the ~6500 rpm redline and it sees that from time to time.

    Even when I pull away from a light at a modest ~3000 rpm, I seem to be maybe about 1/2 mile down the road in the time the other cars cover about 1/4 mile. When I am not first in line, I find the typical driver accelerates at a rate that I achieve at barely over 2000 rpm.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Well, we talked about that 2 weeks or so ago, but thanks anyway!

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f12d514/11754!keywords=allin%3Amsg- text%20limit%3A.f12d514%20Fusion%20SE#11754
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    If I use even moderate throttle my wife thinks the car will blow up. I was merging onto a divided freeway (2 lanes each direction) with traffic going 70 and was about to merge doing 65 when I glanced back and saw a car just behind me in the lane I was about to merge into. I knew he was probably about to slow down, so if I had slown down that wouldn't work, so I just floored it (loaner Lincoln LS while the Aviator was in the shop) and went from 65 to 85 in a blink, then backed off to 70. My wife thought we were about to die (literally). Just because I accelerated quickly from 65 to 85 in the daytime on a straight, level dry road. Of course she has no problem cruising at 85 in the Edge. I think a lot of people are scared of the engine noise.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Thank you for being willing to accelerate, rather than forcing others to brake. I am so annoyed by people who will pull out in front of me, when there is insufficient space for their normal turtle-esque acceleration and even in that situation they will not accelerate any faster (Pulling out is fine there is plenty of room if they would just step on the #%& gas pedal.) It is amazing that they would rather risk being rear-ended, rather than to accelerate rapidly. If they want to be turtles, they should wait until they have like a mile of clear road so that they have enough time to get up to speed.

    This is one reason that we have over-powered engines in mid-size sedans. I think many buy a ~250 HP (at say 6000 rpm) V6, but never run it over 3000...which means, at most, they are using 125 HP.
  • madpistolmadpistol Member Posts: 126
    I hate people that get high-horsepower cars and don't use them. I mean, if you're going to get a V6, use the throttle when passing, don't baby the thing. If you don't use all of that V6 power EVER, do all of us a favor; get rid of that V6 and join everyone else in a I4 sedan. Then you'll appreciate the full power of that V6 a little bit more.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    My old 92 Accord 4 cylinder had 140hp, and the power was adequate most of the time (it would out accelerate my brother's V8 Bonneville). Only when merging on the interstate, and passing on rural roads, that I found the power lacking. The V6 in the 03 makes these maneuvers so much easier. I also like the smooth quiet operation around town, and the total lack of vibration at stop signs, the V6 provides. It's nice not to have to floor it, to get good acceleration. To me, a car can never have too much power, and considering many luxury midsize sedans have over 300hp, I'm not the only one who feels this way.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    A midsize sedan without a V6 may be adequate to some of you, but it's out of the question for me. Not only are they quieter at cruising speed and when driving around town, but the power is all but instant when you hit the gas, unlike having to wait for the revs to build up on most 4-cylinders.

    And yes, I do rev my car past 4K RPM (quite frequently, I may add) when passing or accelerating on an on-ramp, so I'm not "afraid" to drive it. Gas mileage? Well, I get about 10-20% BETTER gas mileage with my V6 Mazda6 compared to my previous DD, a 4-cylinder Grand Am, because I'm not constantly gunning it just to keep up with traffic.

    Sorry, but a V6 in a midsize sedan isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    There are also the I4 turbos in cars like the Passat that provide more than enough get-up-and-go.

    I've never owned a V6 in any vehicle other than a minivan, and there I think it's a necessity due to the weight of those vehicles (although my 1991 Caravan had a 100 hp I4, in which I got my first speeding ticket). My 2000 626 has 125 hp and 2004 Elantra has 138. (And my 2005 Jetta only 115, and is a heavy little car but not mid-sized). Although the extra power of a V6 is fun, I don't miss it in daily driving. But I'm not going 85 mph or running on mountainous roads, either.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738

    This is one reason that we have over-powered engines in mid-size sedans. I think many buy a ~250 HP (at say 6000 rpm) V6, but never run it over 3000...which means, at most, they are using 125 HP.

    Which is why my 125HP 4 cylinder with a manual transmission is just as quick in traffic. :P I keep my engine wound up and it jumps into spaces very quickly.(and the thing weighs about the same as a typical midsize sedan)

    You can do this same "trick" with a 4 cylinder Accord or Civic with manual as well. 150-160HP and 4-5000rpm in 3rd makes for lightning fast merges.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    A midsize sedan without a V6 may be adequate to some of you, but it's out of the question for me. Not only are they quieter at cruising speed and when driving around town, but the power is all but instant when you hit the gas, unlike having to wait for the revs to build up on most 4-cylinders.

    And yes, I do rev my car past 4K RPM (quite frequently, I may add) when passing or accelerating on an on-ramp, so I'm not "afraid" to drive it. Gas mileage? Well, I get about 10-20% BETTER gas mileage with my V6 Mazda6 compared to my previous DD, a 4-cylinder Grand Am, because I'm not constantly gunning it just to keep up with traffic.

    Its too bad you are a Mazda man, it sounds like a 3.8 pushrod motor from the General would be right up your alley. Great low end torque, and it all but goes to sleep on the highway loafing at 75-85 mph. Drop it in a large or midsize sedan and get fine highway fuel economy numbers as well.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    You can do this same "trick" with a 4 cylinder Accord or Civic with manual as well. 150-160HP and 4-5000rpm in 3rd makes for lightning fast merges.

    I have found it to be a safety feature that both the '93 Accord EX and the '07 Accord EX can run in 3rd gear at highway speeds for evasive maneuvers, quick passing, or anything along those lines. Eh and sometimes its actually, dare I say it, fun.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Indeed it can be fun. The thing I like (that others may not) is that full throttle isn't required to get to 3rd gear in the automatic, from 5th, when at highway speeds. You want to pass that eighteen wheeler but don't want to wake grandma? Give it a good 70% throttle and you don't get the neck-snapping power/shift that you do at full throttle, but you are almost instantly in the 5k RPM range and accelerating swiftly.

    Something I dislike about GM vehicles I've driven is that I can't, for the life of me, get much of a downshift without giving it full boot. I should tell you, I've never driven the new 6-speeds from GM though; just 4-speed trucks and cars.

    On a somewhat related topic... can someone enlighten me on the similarities or differences (if any of either) between the 6-speed auto in the Malibu, et. al. and the 6-speed in Ford's Taurus? I know its not a midsizer, but the other forums are all but dead, and this one has a lot of knowledgeable folks.

    Thanks!!

    TheGraduate
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    You can do this same "trick" with a 4 cylinder Accord or Civic with manual as well.

    Bingo. The manual makes a huge difference with the 4.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    4th gear is gone so I cruise the interstates in 3rd gear at over 2200 rpm. This isn't too bad at $1.79 a gallon. I think I hit 4000 rpm once when I hit 90 merging from the on-ramp. 3800SC. Have no Idea what over 4000 is like.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles