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

1242243245247248544

Comments

  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Went from a 3er to a Subaru. Cross shopped the 3er against the Navigator.

    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.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    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?
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Member Posts: 1,601
    The BEST way is to keep the +&#$*@ government out of it. Let the people decide what kind of car they want within their price range, including expected fuel usage.

    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.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I got to drive a Saturn Aura for 3 days courtesy of Hertz. It was a lightly-optioned XE, with plastic wheel covers and cloth trim. But it had the 6AT with paddle shifters, meaty leather wheel, woodgrain trim, and power height adjuster (but other seat controls were manual). The best thing about the car is its ride: compliant and quiet without being bouncy. Just a little tire thump on tar strips etc. The handling did not feel especially sporty (this was the base model with base tires/wheels after all), but was adequate for a family sedan with some lean around sharp corners. The I4 engine was plenty powerful for around town driving, and made me wonder whether it was a V6. Seat comfort was ok, except I thought the lumbar support was overly aggressive. Controls and displays were fine, but with lots of buttons that took awhile to get used to. I did appreciate the trip computer, and it told me that in suburban driving I averaged 23.8 mpg (90 F with A/C on all the time), but on the way back to the airport, about 45 miles of (sub)urban freeway at around 65 mph, I averaged 37.5 mpg. The engine was turning under 2000 rpms at 65, thanks to the 6AT, so it is a nice freeway cruiser. Quality-wise, there were no squeaks or rattles, and some of the trim such as the steering wheel, dash top, and radio controls seemed high quality. But some other parts, notably the plastic trim on the door tops, looked ultra-cheap.

    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.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    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.

    "Oh, what a feeling!"... of disappointment (had it been a Toyota).
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Why do you say that? The ride/handling was at least as good as the Camry's, if not better. The fuel economy, especially on the open road, was very good. The fit/finish was also very good, at least as good as the Camry's (which also suffers from some cheapness here/there in the interior). Power was better than the 2009 Camry, but comparable to the 2010 Camry. The Camry doesn't have the flexibility of paddle shifters. Styling-wise, I prefer the Aura to the Camry.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    Camry's (which also suffers from some cheapness here/there in the interior)

    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.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    I agree. The materials in the Fusion/Milan interior really are quite good. I was also impressed with most of the interior materials in the Aura and Malibu. Ditto the Sonata, for that matter. Compared to these, the latest iterations of Camry and Accord no longer stand out in the positive way their precursors once did.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Read my post again. Disappointment if it HAD been a Toyota.

    :)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I read it, twice, but I still really don't know what your point is. I don't understand why my friend would have been "disappointed" to learn that the car I rented was actually a Toyota instead of a Saturn. If anything, my friend would have been glad I rented a Toyota, her favorite brand, instead of a Saturn.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    How can Toyota be her favorite brand? If she doesn't know the difference between an Aura and a Camry? Just jumped on the Toyota bandwagon, I guess. :confuse:
  • oldcemoldcem Member Posts: 309
    I sorta did that. Tried the two cars you mentioned, then, I swapped one of my Chryslers for a Jaguar, and, the other for a Saturn Aura.

    Regards:
    OldCEM
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I know if it had been a Camry instead of an Aura, I'd be disappointed. I didn't realize that Toyota was her favorite brand.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The other way to look at it, if Toyota is your favorite brand, almost anything that looks remotely like a Toyota, is a Toyota. In other words, we see what we want to see. See? Anyway, I've found many people are blind to car styling differences.

    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.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    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!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Well, I did find a nice 2005 Accord but it was sold before I got there. Also a nice, low-miles, well-priced 2008 Civic--that was sold too. Either would have been fine for me. But I'm not married to Honda, or any brand. I could live with any of the cars you see to your right, with the right powertrain/equipment--and price.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    rediculous that the gov wants to encourage the use of less fuel. The gov is the biggest moneymaker as a result of the use of fuel. The gov is now scrambling to find money since fuel is lower in cost, until commerce picks back up and the gov can make it up in volume. If fuel is overpriced, then commerce will slow and less tax will collected. My 22 mpg clunkers are helping the economy. The greenies want me out of them and into Prius'. However, when I stack up $23k plus tax Prius against $18k Malibu, The bump up from 22 mpg to 28 mpg just from my clunker to the Malibu will cut my fuel use from 400 gallons a year to 310 gallons a year. The additional drop to 180 gallons a year from the Prius hardly makes the $5k initial extra cost and sending of Jobs to Japan worth it to me. We are talking 11 gallons a month vs my real estate dropping 10's of thousands as Midwest towns go bankrupt. More gas tax would just accelerate the decay. If you live away from the D3 job zones then maybe you care more about jobs for Japan and will opt for the Prius and laugh about how houses are $500 in Detroit, and call for more gas tax to create demand for when you want to get rid of the Prius.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Your 22 mpg mid-size does not qualify as a clunker. 18 mpg or less is required for that, 22 mpg would be the minimum for a car to replace the "clunker".

    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.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    It does qualify. It is rated 17 combined and gets over 22 in typical easy driving. It got 25.5 on the trip I took in it. My 3.8L is rated at 19 combined and does not qualify. It has hit over 30 mpg on a trip. So the reward may seem like it is for getting a 22 mpg car but that is the worst mileage someone would get out of it. Some 22's might get 32 on trips. I would expect to get 27 driving an L4 Malibu 15 miles to work. I would expect to nearly match that with a 304 HP Camaro V6.

    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.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    The so-called "reward" is being instituted for a variety of reasons. Less dependence on foreign oil, less air polution by getting "clunkers" with poor mpg ratings off the road. Older vehicles that are only worth a few thousand are probably not as safe either as ABS(if they have it) is probably not working properly, airbags are getting old and may not work as planned and these old vehicles are just generally less cared for then newer cars....tires, brakes, suspension, etc. New vehicles would be safer for all concerned.

    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.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    I agree. The environmental angle is indeterminate, since pollution is generated by both the manufacturing and scrapping processes. The safety angle is one I hadn't thought of, but it does make sense. Still, the need to stimulate the car business is likely the only reason for the timing of this particular proposal.

    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.
  • i360i360 Member Posts: 74
    The Prius is going to be produced in Blue Springs, Mississippi by 2010, so perhaps wait awhile then you'll be helping out Americans.

    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)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Well, technically they employ some American workers who monitor the robots who do the assembly, but there's still American workers involved. ;)
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    The "cash kicked overseas" (profit) is about 5% of the total cost. Labor and overhead that stays in the USA is WAY more the 5%, so that argument is not too good.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    they don't just kick the profit overseas. Most of all R & D for everything foreign automotive is done overseas.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Most of all R & D for everything foreign automotive is done overseas.

    Well, not everything... for example:

    http://www.hatci.com/locations_CA.htm
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    Don't forget the Toyota engineering in Ann Arbor, MI, and California.

    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".
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    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...
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    Yes, you are correct, Accord too. Fusion NA part content was only 50% at the time.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    Curious about the proposed 200 development jobs in Ca. for Hundai. That is a tiny amount. Their new plant is 1/3 the size of our small High school. What % of the 200 will be relocating in from Korea? I would guess the top 3 tiers of mgmt and then some.

    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.
  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    that includes the truck plant in St. Cath. and all other Mexican and Canadian plants as well as the Aveo and the G8.

    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.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    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.

    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.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Labor is one of the largest costs of producing a car

    I thought I'd read that it is only about 10% :confuse:
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Does anyone actually decide which midsize car to buy, based on US content, or where the car is built, or what company sells it? Would you buy a car you think is "more American" over another "less American" car that is higher quality? Judging buy sales numbers, not many people do.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    You might try reading the linked pages again. It's not about proposed jobs, but current jobs. The sites highlighted on those pages are not "plants" but design and testing centers. There's also the plants in Alabama and soon in Georgia, all the dealerships and the U.S. headquarters, plus the jobs for U.S.-based suppliers, and truck drivers (someone has to haul the cars from the plants and docks to dealers),

    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?
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    The sites highlighted on those pages are not "plants" but design and testing centers.

    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.
  • cannon3cannon3 Member Posts: 296
    There is a difference between "assembled" and "manufactured". I have a close friend who presently works for a large Japanese wafer manufacturing company. Right now, they are laying off Americans, qualified technicians and engineers. The company is bringing in Japanese nationals to take their jobs. About 5 years ago I had position that allowed me to visit a couple of Japanese transplants. I noticed right away, all the tooling, support and parts are Japanese. Many of the suppliers were Japanese transplants. Get the connection? Many of the higher paying jobs were Japanese. Americans were just labor. This is information Americans don't here in the news.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    So those companies that have invested in the U.S. by building plants and DESIGN centers here should be praised, I guess.

    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?
  • gooddeal2gooddeal2 Member Posts: 750
    Oh...please. It's a Japanese co. So, it's fair that most of their upper managers are Japanese. How many top-level manager who run GM in China are Chinese?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I know that AAI in Flat Rock, MI is like that. The UAW "assembles" the Mazda6, however, the plant is filled with Japanese people from Mazda roaming around EVERYWHERE. I would assume they are engineers of some sort. 30% of the Mazda6 is imported from Japan, excluding drive train components. Those too come from Japan, including the 2.5L which is now brought over from Japan in addition to the 2.5L's produced in Mexico.

    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....
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I think there are plenty of people that buy what they believe to be is a "Made in America" vehicle. They may not be entirely correct in their selection but the intent is there.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Most cars are not made entirely in one place. There are a few exceptions--I think the Prius really is 100% Japanese content. But for decades now, most "Japanese" cars have included electrical components made in Malaysia or Thailand, US cars have incorporated components made in Canada or Mexico, German cars have included Hungarian electronics, etc.

    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.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    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....

    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.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    How about that Fusion...41 mpg w/o the Prius stigma (or a 6 speed manual on the SE w/SYNC)?.

    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?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Well, the Jetta is a compact but good points on the Fusion vs. Prius and the Legacy.

    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.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Very good points, Backy. IMHO hybrids are a triumph of marketing over good engineering. At best they might make sense if most or all of your driving is in highly congested urban stop & go traffic. Mine isn't.

    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.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Yes, and since my wife's car does almost all in-town driving, I will be looking at a hybrid (with the Prius the top contender so far) to replace our van when we "retire" from minivans in 2-3 years. But for people who drive mostly on the highway, I don't see the advantage of a hybrid vs. the best mid-sizers.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Backy, your wife's driving really would justify a hybrid. From your other posts I am sure you'll be very thorough in your research. :)

    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.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    My driving is about 60% highway, 40% suburban, with very little urban congestion of the sort found in NYC, San Francisco, etc

    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.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    41 mpg is really good, but given it's possible to get near 40 mpg on several mid-sized I4 sedans on the highway

    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.