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
BTW it's to Porsches credit the awesome performance of the Cayman. Let's see Mazda build such a big vehicle with the same performance specs.
Um, the Cayman is a small sports coupe. Are you thinking of the Cayenne instead?
Four years ago I bought a new Sonata. It was affordable for me and came loaded with features. It's been trouble free (only 26 to 27K miles). And it wasn't politically correct in that it included 2 ashtrays & a lighter. My typical drive is less than 5 miles and I usually get better MPG than the EPA rating of 19 (local) in suburban driving.
When my host saw the car outside her house, she said, "Oh, you got a Toyota!" I told her it was a Saturn. She looked quite surprised.
Overall, the Aura seems like a solid, competent mid-sized sedan with a powerful but economical powertrain and a pleasant ride. Too bad it won't be around much longer.
"Oh, what a feeling!"... of disappointment (had it been a Toyota).
Some cheapness? Try a lot of cheapness, I for one am sadly disappointed in the material quality in the Camry. I sat in a 2010 Fusion Sport and it made the Camry feel cheap, the quality in the Ford is far superior to the Toyota.
Regards:
OldCEM
And yes, Toyota is her favorite brand. Has been for many years. She drives an Avalon. Her husband drives an Avalon. She'd own a Sienna but her parents have one, so she can just borrow it when she needs it. And she didn't seem to understand why I didn't buy a Toyota instead of the car I did just buy.
Just as elroy5 thinks you should get a 2003 Accord V6, while I think you'd really like an 06 Accord with the 2.4L. The world would be so much better if everyone made all the right decisions, like I do. :P That's how most people's minds tend to work, anyway.
I digress; it's bedtime!
If this compromise becomes law as it has been described, the government will reward anyone junking an 18 mpg clunker and buying a 22 mpg Malibu with a $3500 voucher.
200 people got laid off by Cummins near Columbus, IN, today. That brings Cummins to 8000 worldwide layoffs so far in this recession. The guy they interviewed on news said he expected to get 72 weeks of unemployment. Ford has converted one big vehicle plant to small vehicles so far and it was expensive. We will see if it ever returns a profit.
But the number one reason is create some business for the automakers. It should also help the used car market somewhat as there won't be the clunkers to buy. Gee, maybe some people will even insure their vehicles if they have a little more invested in them.
The government is probably the biggest user of gasoline in the country what with the military and such. The price of gas going up hurts the federal government much more than getting a few extra dollars from higher gas taxes.
As economic stimulus, it will probably work pretty well, and it's more targeted than most Keynesian plans, so it will not be a "bottomless" program. I realize there are potential problems, and it's still quite possible that Congress could snafu the details, but on balance I think it's probably going to have a modest positive impact.
If they'll pay me to swap my 13 mpg rolling Superfund site (a '94 Ram 1500 pickup) for something more efficient (perhaps a US-built 4-cylinder Ranger, Frontier, or Tacoma good for about 22 mpg), I'll certainly consider it.
My 2009 Sonata was manufactured in Alabama so I still did my part.
(I know the cash is kicked overseas but they still employ American workers to assemble)
Well, not everything... for example:
http://www.hatci.com/locations_CA.htm
Labor is one of the largest costs of producing a car, and if it is assembled in the USA with USA produced components, then I know that I have put a good amount of money into the USA. My Camry built in Kentucky had a 75% North American part content.
Of the mid-sized cars, it is one of the most "American".
So is the Mazda6. It's assembled in Michigan at the same plant as the Ford Mustang, and IIRC also has a high NA part content as well.
It's ironic, since the Fusion/Milan twins are assembled in Mexico...
Soc Sec will now be BK 4 years sooner. If we can eliminate all US Auto tech jobs and UAW jobs, maybe we can move that BK date forward a little more. I would guess it would take 30 plants the size of the Honda one in Greensburg to replace the amt paid into soc sec by the 8000 R&D GM workers who recently lost their jobs in Warren, Mi.
The new Civic Plant in Greensburg will alone replace 250,000 currently imported Civics. And they do that with 890 robots and even fewer US hires. They were also the first to be cut in the downturn.
Discussing the NA content of a US sold GM is like spitting on a bonfire to put it out.
Actually, the Mazda6 has only 45% U.S. / Canadian parts. But, it is assembled by the UAW because Ford builds the Mustang on the same line. There are vastly different quality procedures though. It was rather strange. The UAW worker essentially needs to know how to built two totally different cars by two companies that implement completely different building and inspection procedures. Rather tough if you ask me.
On a side note, I had an opportunity to tour the AAI plant in Flat Rock, MI. I got a nice history lesson from the Mazda North American Operations employees up there and the tour was directed by Ken Bagdon, the chief vehicle quality control assurance inspector of the Mazda6. Really great guy.
I thought I'd read that it is only about 10% :confuse:
How many jobs would be created in the U.S. if the U.S. auto companies did their manufacturing in the U.S. vs. places like Mexico, Canada, and Europe? Or is this a "it's OK for me, not OK for you" kind of thing?
They are MARKETING and testing centers. I was investigating when I was job shopping.
Even Toyota still designs most of their cars in Japan with some "Americanized recommendations" coming from Ann Arbor. Non-world cars like the Venza (which chimes to put a seat belt on with my laptop bag or a pizza on the front seat) and the Sienna have more input.
How many jobs would be created in the U.S. if the U.S. auto companies did their manufacturing in the U.S. vs. places like Mexico, Canada, and Europe? Or is this a "it's OK for me, not OK for you" kind of thing?
How many jobs will be lost when all the engineering jobs go to India and all the manufacturing is in Russia? No manufacturing jobs, no engineering jobs, who cares. There won't be anyone left in Michigan to kick anyone out of their houses.
I have pointed this out before, but all the cars to the right are built in the U.S. except the Passat (and VW's new mid-sizer will be built here) and Fusion. So I don't see what all the fuss re where Toyota and Hyundai and Honda build their mid-sized cars is all about.
Anyway, this is supposed to be about the CARS, isn't it?
I believe Honda and Toyota also have their drive trains shipped over from Japan. For our economy's sake, I would rather have these cars assembled by Americans. At least it means we are employed. From my experience, a car assembled over here is not better or worse then the same product assembled in Japan. I'm sure most of you will disagree....
That doesn't even take into account the final assembly point: in addition to the US-made Hondas, Hyundais, Mazdas, Nissans, & Toyotas, and the Mexican-built VWs, Chryslers & Fords, the US market also has received Volvos made in Belgium, Porsches made in Finland, BMWs made in South Africa, and I'm sure I am leaving out a few.
There is a local content label on new cars. If you want to "buy American," or as American as possible, use it. But I know a few people who, when shopping for a Honda, will parse the VIN so as to be sure they get "one of the Japanese ones" because they think they're somehow better than the ones made in Ohio or Ontario.
I've heard many people say the Hondas from Japan are better built than the ones made here. I think you can get a lemon from either country. When I was shopping for a truck at the Toyota dealer, the salesman said "This truck was assembled in Japan" like that meant it was flawless. Hogwash! It was far from flawless. Both of my Accords were assembled in Ohio, and I'd say the Marysville people did a very good job.
I've also heard about the higher-ups in these plants being Japanese. So, do these Japanese workers fly back to Japan each night? I don't think so. They live here, buy homes here, and contribute to the economy here.
How about that Jetta TDI...low end torque, a manual transmission and 50 mpg?
How about the new Legacy...or has it pulled an Accord and jumped the shark?
41 mpg is really good, but given it's possible to get near 40 mpg on several mid-sized I4 sedans on the highway (e.g. I got nearly 38 mpg in an Aura recently, and it doesn't have the top highway mpg rating in the class), there is the question about the huge price premium on the Fusion hybrid when the Fusion I4 is no slouch in fuel economy. I wonder how many people will buy a Fusion hybrid because it has that "stigma" (in a positive sense) of being a hybrid, when they could come very close to its fuel economy on the highway with a plain I4 Fusion. Not as "cool" and "green", but does the job for a lot less up front cash.
Give me a conventional large-displacement four-cylinder in a car that isn't overweight, and I'll show you 35 mpg in real-world highway use, without the compromises of a hybrid. Doesn't matter if it's an Altima 2.5, Fusion, or what.
My driving is about 60% highway, 40% suburban, with very little urban congestion of the sort found in NYC, San Francisco, etc. Once in a while I drive in Atlanta or Houston, but that's mostly high-speed urban freeway stuff. So for me either a gas 4 with a very responsive transmission (either manual or automatic), or a diesel with a very broad torque curve would be most appropriate. So maybe an Altima CVT, or a manual Accord. Or whatever mass-market midsize (some variant of the Skoda Superb?) that VW is planning to build in Chattanooga, with TDI engine and DSG.
My driving is 99.5% highway. My 07 Accord EX gets 31-34 mpg on summer/spring gas (at 70-80 mph) and the '05 Legacy gets 28 mpg at those speeds, but slowing (if you can stand it) gets over 30 mpg. I bet a GM car with the 3.8 would be in the 30s on my commute and that Jetta diesel would be off the chart.
Umm.....41 is the city mileage. You're not going to get better than upper 20's in the city with a conventional model.
Not saying I disagree with the premise that a regular I4 is more cost effective, just pointing out the error in that part of the comparison.