Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Midsize Sedans 2.0

13567540

Comments

  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Doesn't the EPA do the mileage estimates? Not Toyota. Frankly, I trust my own mileage, rather than EPA's estimates (actual mileage may vary). I find EPA estimates on the Accord kind of low, on the V6 anyway.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    I think in the 90s, Honda had the best FWD manual transmission in the business. I think the current Accord is highly competitive although perhaps not class-leading. A short throw shift kit like Subaru offers would help the feel a lot.
    Also in the olden days of yore (the mid 90s :P ) it was pretty easy to pick up aftermarket suspension components for Hondas that firmed them up quite a bit (shocks, sway bar links, and bushings) could button things down while not dramatically affecting ride quality, slaming the thing to the ground, or most importantly, knocking me out of stock classes.
    Toyota has TRD, Subaru has STI, even Chrysler has DirectConnection, but Honda lacks an in-house aftermarket performance supplier. These places allow one to add performance without affecting warranty, etc.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Honda lacks an in-house aftermarket performance supplier.

    While not being a full line, they do offer the "A-Spec" upgrades. Just thought I'd mention that.

    I think the current Accord is highly competitive although perhaps not class-leading.

    For the current Accord to be near the top of the pack five years after being introduced (and with all other cars except the Mazda 6 being redesigned since then) I'd say Honda has performed an amazing feat. I must say, some of use feel it is still at the top of the pack (those that bought one obviously :) as well as the latest tests of the Accord, placing it ahead of the Optima, Camry, Altima, Sebring, and Aura.

    This is the most recent post in the Accord Prices paid forum:

    Earlier this month I purchased a 2007 Honda Accord SEDAN (not the coupe) EX-L V-6 Automatic Transmission with Navigation for $25,061.76 (NOT INCLUDING TAX AND TAGS).

    That is a $30,000 car for $25,000. If you like the Accord in its current iteration, now is the time to get a steal. This price is $5,000 below sticker, and fairly typical on the forum, opposed to some people who imply that "Honda dealers don't deal." It just isn't true, they do!
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    I think the current Accord is highly competitive although perhaps not class-leading.

    Sorry, I should clarify. I meant with regard to its manual transmission.

    As far as A-spec, its a start, but TRD offers a supercharger for a Camry for crying out loud.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Ford simply neglected the passenger car market in favor of trucks and SUV's...

    I think you have reversed cause and effect. The consumer did not want to buy cars, they wanted to buy SUVs and trucks. Ford produced vehicles to meet that demand. The F-150 is still the biggest selling vehicle in the US and the Siverado is second.

    What happened to new cars that Ford did come out with? In 1995 the Contour (a smallish midsize car, imo) was introduced and it never did sell well in the US, a new version of it is still going as the Mondeo elsewhere.

    Getting back to current mid-size cars, in the recnet past I've read some complaints here on edmunds and elsewhere along the lines of "why doesn't Ford bring the new Mondeo to the US?" Well, my understanding is that car starts at about $27K in Europe, does anyone really think this would sell here at anything close to that price? I don't...they could maybe try to sell it, in very limited numbers, as a Lincoln, replacing the Fusion sibling.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    from a suspension/ ride viewpoint, I don't think the Accord is in the middle of this group. I'd rate it in the top 3 for firmest suspension in this group

    Just curious who you would put as the third one in that group? In addition to the 6, I liked the handling/ride of the Fusion, but did not drive Altima or Accord enough to really make a good comparison.

    I did not drive the Accord enough to really know if I would like it, I suspect I would. The only negative I noticed was the steering was too light. I did not give it serious consideration, because I really don't like the appearance and then on top of that the price would have been much higher than my Mazda6. It's a wonderful thing when the car you like the best also has one of the lowest selling prices in the group :-).
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    this would be from that Ford commissioned study of vehicle reliabilities? :D
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    jeffyscott- you have to admit, that in the SUV euphoria of the later 90s none of the 'Detroit 3' did anything to develop anything in the car end of things. Even the Fusion/6 while they are decent designs are plagued by antiquated and non-competitive drivetrains. The GM entrants? - historically and still largely plagued by what version of a pushrod V6 you really don't want. And the Sebring? - enough said.
  • micro99micro99 Posts: 51
    Your efforts to encorage some civility in this forum and preclude another shutdown are laudable and it would be nice if they were taken to heart. I`m not optimistic however given the strongly held views and biases that are so prevalent and the emotions that seem to inevitably get out of conrol. It would be so nice to actually comment on and compare cars by some metric ( build quality; material quality;conveniece features;comfort features; ergonomics ; handling: drivability; acceleration; exterior style; or whatever!! But I fear this is a pipe dream- SIGH .
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    Micro, take heart, I think with the exception of a few, most of us are discussing metrics. I think we are struggling to define and quantify those metrics, with the majority of posters providing good insight on what benchmarks they use to define those metrics.
    With the exception of a few "Toyota good/Toyota Bad/Ford Good/Ford Bad" type posts, I think we are on a good path. I know have a lot of insight in to what drives Elroy's, Graduates, and ZZZMazda6's purchase decisions and how they evaluate their vehicles.
    I think its important to realize that different folks expect different things from vehicles, so what is good for one might not be good for another.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    you have to admit, that in the SUV euphoria of the later 90s none of the 'Detroit 3' did anything to develop anything in the car end of things.

    I think that is an exxageration, at least in terms of Ford (reference the Contour). And the point is this is a result of consumer preferences, Ford and GM are not the cause of the SUV craze...the american public (and CAFE) are.

    As to "antiquated and non-competitive drivetrains", I do not agree with that with regard to Fusion/Mazda6. I don't see being behind in the excessive horsepower bragging rights contest as a real world performance issue...it's a marketing issue.

    I think you have a valid point on the GM pushrod V6, but that should not be classified with the current Ford V6. The 2.3L 4 cyl first came out in 2000, that is not antiquated. I don't know enough about whatever Sebring is using to comment.

    Anyway, I think Ford/Mazda has updated these engines over time and they do put 5 and 6 speed automatics in the Fusion/6. I don't know about the V6 versions, but in the 4 cylinder midsizes Sonata, Sebring, the GM entrants, and Subaru Legacy all are still using a 4 speed auto, as was Altima prior to the CVT.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    Micro, take heart, I think with the exception of a few, most of us are discussing metrics.

    Yes and now if we can also convince those who are discussing manufacturers and the history of SUVs/trucks, we'd be completely back on track. ;)
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    I don't know enough about whatever Sebring is using to comment.

    I think the Sebring uses the the 2.4 "world engine" that was made by DCX, Hyundai and Mitsubishi for Global Engine Manufacturing Alliance (GEMA). Its got VVT and all the buzzwords. It comes as a 1.8,2.0, and 2.4. Production began in 2005.

    Global Engine Manufacturing Alliance
  • micro99micro99 Posts: 51
    I think its important to realize that different folks expect different things from vehicles, so what is good for one might not be good for another

    A very nicely put observation ! Its unfortunate that much of the discussion reverts to a sometimes irrational defense of a prior purchasing decision and escalates into a pissing contest !
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    and escalates into a pissing contest !

    I'm all for pissing. eh hmm I mean...eh...I'm gonna go for now :D
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    some of you are trying to be helpful, but the best way to help is to post in the ways you are wishing that others would post and just ignore those who are not. If someone is way out there, feel free to drop me an email to get me here sooner than I might be otherwise.

    Continuing the conversation about what others should be doing isn't really moving us in the right direction.

    Thanks for your help with this.
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,601
    The 6 cyl Sonata has had a 5 speed automatic (with "shiftronic") since the 2006 model year.

    I, too, don't know about the other models you mentioned.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    So for the Sonata at least the trans on the V6 is off the "antiquated and non-competitive" list, but the 4 speed trans on the 4 cylinder remains. And according to what was posted above the Sebring 4 cylinder engine is also off the list, but the associated 4 speed trans still remains. :)
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Posts: 425
    I'd put the 6, accord, and altima as having the least amount of body roll when turning and having firmer suspensions than others. the sonata, legacy and fusion are pretty close in suspension firmness to those that I've mentioned, though body roll in the sonata seemed much higher than the others. strange since I thought the suspension was pretty firm but well dampened unless you hit something like a highway expansion joint.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    And according to what was posted above the Sebring 4 cylinder engine is also off the list, but the associated 4 speed trans still remains.

    If I were a betting man, I would say the Sebring is likely to go CVT with the smaller motors and keep the 6 speed auto for the V6.
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    When looking for a new car, I did test drive the Fusion, and found it to be pretty good in handling. The Sonata seems to not have the same abilities in cornering, and the suspension from time to time thumps, like it has bottomed out. I ended up with the Accord SEV6, which has the 17" wheels. Great handling, a little firm with those lower profile 17" rims on the V6 model, but not too harsh. That said, my Dad prefers his 2000 Camry softer ride, so it ain't for everyone. The i4 Accords, with 16" wheels may have a tad bit more softness to the ride. The double wishbone suspension works like a champ for handling. And the SEV6 comes with the stability control standard.

    The Fusion, and Sonata are good cars, but with the Accord SE package, and current discounting going on for Hondas (check more than one dealership) it was just so much more of a deal overall than I could get on other cars tested. The Accord is now at a low price to buy, and has the resale value, and overall refinement. While the interior of the Fusion, Sonata and others like the Aura are OK, the Accord to me just seems one notch above. Same goes for the Honda engines. Smooooooth! When pushed, they make some sweet engine sounds, and do not sound at all like rattly old four bangers and V6 of days-gone-bye American engines.

    Attention to detail points go to Honda. Fusion is still using a rod to prop up the hood -- what's up with that?

    The Fusion was fun enough to drive, and the Sonata has some good room inside, but seemed less interesting - more like an Impala. The Aura XR is one more exciting car to drive. I would say it comes closer to Honda / Camry for total points. It is sporty, a little more narrow, but overall pretty comfy. Aura XR and Accord were the too best overall rides I found. The Altima was another one I test drove, but it seemed not as quiet, had that different feel of the CVT transmission, I do not care for, and a strangely place emergency foot brake. Altima does have a nice look and some interesting gadgetry, like the push button start / stop button. I guess that is a good thing??
    If I lived in snow country, I would at least test drive a Legacy. I would have done a quick test run in a Legacy sedan, but none were on the local dealerships lot. Seems they sell more other types of Subarus.
    Did not test drive the new Camry. Too worried about the first year run cars possible defects. And the interior looked a bit misaligned, and/or something just not right about the overall appearance of several areas on the interior. The exterior is OK, with the funny nose up front as one sore spot. Camry typically doesn't excite one for handling, though my Dad's car, the 2000 Camry, is not bad. I was looking for a bit more snappy handling.
    :shades: Loren
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    "Even the Fusion/6 while they are decent designs are plagued by antiquated and non-competitive drivetrains. "

    I thought we were not supposed to bash in here? The drivetrains of the Fusion are anything but antiquated. It has a 6spd transmission. Double wishbone suspension, A 24v v6 Dual overheadcam engine that does have VVT. The Duratec is not "outdated" Granted it doesn't offer an "autoshift" function. But if you would read other chats. 90 percent of people use "D" "R" and "P" 99% of the time. Now offers AWD also! I'll give you the HP advantage when comparing the Accord/Camry/Altima V6's. I know a Fusion will out handle a Camry hands down. And is even with the Accord. I have not driven a new Altima yet.
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    The Sebring, IMHO, is just too awkward looking to sell well. The Dodge Avenger looks a bit better. Overall, I doubt that there is enough to love about these two cars for there to be any larger number of sales for those two combined. The Avenger does have that "cute factor" of being a miniature Charger.
    Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    Isn't that 6 sp. the transmission developed between Ford and GM for all the new cars? And if so, why did Ford not go with the paddle shifter like on the Aura XR? Guess it is the cost. You are right, the Fusion is not antiquated, though the V6 is to replaced with the 3.5 some day.

    I have the Accord, which is a 5 sp, and has a D3 which holds the three lower gear. I like that, though the paddle shift on the XR is not a bad idea. Doesn't the Ford, like the Honda have some sort of shift logic with the automatic? I think the Fusion 6 sp. should work just fine.
    Loren
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    Am I to respond to someone in this Forum? I simply posted a site showing differnet MPG for the Toyota Camry. This is called bashing. Some says the Fusion/Milan drivetrains are "antiquated". I respond showing otherwise. How then do we discuss?? or confront?? or respond in this forum?? :confuse:
  • Why do you feel the need to respond, contradict, or confront?

    I think its silly to assert that a Fusion is as good as an Accord. That's my opinion. I test drove a V6 Fusion twice and tried to like it. But having owned both the Accord and a Camry its a stretch to call the Fusion in the same game.

    It ain't. Go ahead and confront.
  • xnewman1xnewman1 Posts: 10
    You wrote: If I lived in snow country, I would at least test drive a Legacy. I would have done a quick test run in a Legacy sedan, but none were on the local dealerships lot. Seems they sell more other types of Subarus.

    - I've kept an eye on the Legacys because I like the car. I live in New England so the base car is the Special Edition. Good thing too, I need to have the power seat and the power moonroof. They're already talking about the 2008's coming in, which is probably why there are so few out there. The dealerships that thought to stock up will probably be able to sell them for more because the supply is so low on 2007's.
  • jd10013jd10013 Posts: 779
    Ford and GM are not the cause of the SUV craze

    I never meant to imply they were. but when it hit, they focused entirely on it, to the detriment of their passenger car line. And, I'm not saying it was a bad business move either. Heck, Ford and GM made a killing durring that time. What I am saying is, it a lot of the reason ford and GM have the problems now that they do. It's not to say they won't be alright in the end, just that their years of neglect in the passenger car market has left them with some catching up to do. It's made big news lately that toyota passed ford in sales, and will soon pass GM. Well, they did that in the passenger car market years, and years, and years ago. And Ford/GM allowed it to happen.

    But anyway, I do know a lot of mechanics who think the fusion might be the turn arround car for ford. So long as they keep improving on it, and don't give up on it.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Why don't we ALL drop the "go ahead and confront" attitude, okay?

    We're here to discuss the positive and negative attributes of the cars in this class. We have GOT to keep in mind that the purpose of these discussions is to help people make buying decisions, not to somehow "prove" our own personal choice was the only one worth making.

    I think that there are many here who understand that and some who don't. Let's be crystal clear - those who can't get a grip on that approach are very soon going to be watching from the sidelines.

    The confrontational attitudes must go.

    Thanks for your cooperation.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    A 24v v6 Dual overheadcam engine that does have VVT.
    big deal, it is still a 15 year old design that is rough as a cob, and further sounds like something's going to blow when and if you ask anything from it. A good illustration of why there is more to an engine that what we can read on a spec sheet and a genuine problem with this particular engine specifically noted in about every road test or consumer magazine that has looked at the thing over the last 10 years or so. I don't consider this 'bashing' at all, more an opinion (shared by others that know a lot more about this than I do) that I have that the Fusion/6, in this case, need better engines if they truly are to be regarded as comparable to the Camcordimas or even the Sonatas currently available - gimmicks like AWD and sponsored comparos notwithstanding. GM is finally starting to weed out all their multiple pushrod V6s, the new 3.6 a reasonable engine in the Aura (and the next Malibu), why not Ford? Take this all personally if you must, but that is not the intention here.
  • "A 24v v6 Dual overheadcam engine that does have VVT.--
    big deal, it is still a 15 year old design that is rough as a cob, and further sounds like something's going to blow when and if you ask anything from it."


    I agree about the Fusion/Mazda6 engine, that Duratec 30 has been around forever and although it has been updated, basically it has stayed the same when it comes to NVH and general feel/refinement.

    I had a 2.5L V6 in the old 626 which was sort of related to the Duratec 25 from the Contour, just worked over by Mazda. This was 1998, and this V6 had 24 valves with DOHC, and although it didn't have VVT it did have a dual stage intake manifold (cool stuff). Redline wasn't until 7,000 RPMs and it was smooth and quiet all the way there, even after it had 100,000 miles.

    I wanted a replacement for that 626. When I drove the Fusion and Mazda6, and floored that 3.0, I felt like I was dogging it. The "high RPM experience" was nothing like in my old Mazda.

    Why can't Ford make an engine that willingly revs up that high, and does so in a manner that makes you want to do it again? (Besides the Mustang GT, which we aren't talking about...)
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 13,867
    too many people form their opinions based on magazine comparisons. they do provide a yardstick, but they don't always result in the same conclusion.
    i don't mind some engine noise. wind noise bothers me more.
    if driven smoothly, those 'rough' and 'old tech' engines can deliver some very good gas mileage.
    don't drive a 911, it may be a little rough. :P
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2017 Ford F-150 Limited
  • Most journalists state that the Accord 4-cylinder is among the best in the world, it is like a BMW inline 6 in that it feels stronger than it's specs suggest, makes them rethink the need for a V6, etc, etc...

    The Toyota 2.4L 4-cylinder, although just as powerful on paper, feels significantly slower, to me.

    The Fusion/Mazda6 2.3L is another step down. I noticed a big difference when driving a manual Fusion SE. Slow to rev, and not very powerful at high revs.

    Haven't driven the Sonata 4 or the Nissan 2.5- I'd especially like to drive the Altima 4-cylinder now that it has a 6-speed manual!
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,601
    RE: Accord discounts. I don't know what they are presently. We bought an '07 Sonata SE w/XM in the end of February for $16,651 + doc fe and TTL for $4300 under invoice, or $6089 under MSRP. (Price included $2500 rebate)

    How much are the Accords being discounted from invoice or MSRP?
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,229
    Isn't that 6 sp. the transmission developed between Ford and GM for all the new cars? And if so, why did Ford not go with the paddle shifter like on the Aura XR? Guess it is the cost.

    To be brief, no. The 6-speed tranny in the Fusion is sourced from Aisin or Jatco, I can't remember which one it is. From what I've read it would only take a software tweak to allow for the manumatic functionality in that tranny but Ford left it out for their own reasons. I personally don't care for the manumatics myself as I'd rather have a stick. The lack of a stick with the V6 in the Fusion alone will keep me from ever buying one.

    IMO the lack of manumatic in the Fusion probably displeases the same amount of people as the lack of a stick does. My dad has an '06 Zephyr and didn't even notice that there were no lower gears, aside from the "L", until I pointed it out. He doesn't care. He just loves the car extra gears or not.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 13,867
    i have a focus with a 2.3 and 5 speed. i bought it because i read it was more powerful than the 2.0. i had no idea how much more that is. maybe in a fusion, it is muted somewhat.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2017 Ford F-150 Limited
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    agree about the Fusion/Mazda6 engine, that Duratec 30 has been around forever and although it has been updated, basically it has stayed the same when it comes to NVH and general feel/refinement.

    Its funny that 10 years constitutes forever nowadays. It was introduced in '96. The Vulcan 3L has been around forever (well at least since the Taurus of '86). By comparison, the K-family of engines (K24 is in the Accord) has been around since about 2000 or so, and the B-series it replaced had been around since about 1990 or so.

    I had a 2.5L V6 in the old 626 which was sort of related to the Duratec 25 from the Contour, just worked over by Mazda.

    Actually, the Duratec 2.5l in the Contour (introduced in '94) was totally unrelated to the Mazda 626/MX6/Ford Probe engine. The MPV shared the same block as the Contour but used different intervals.
    In the mid/late 90s, Mazda got the AJ with VVT, but I think that was only in the minivan until they 3.0 duratec went in the Mazda6.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    Which one is it? Is the Accord less or more Expensive than a Fusion/Sonata? Every article/review/price comparison I have ever read or seen, or even car ads on Saturday/Sunday show Honda Accords to be prices at lease $2 - 3,000 more than a comparable Fusion/Sonata? :confuse:
  • I made what I thought was an innocent comment otherwise praising the Honda Accord but ruling it out for a relatively small backseat. I apparently offended at least one Honda fan and was challenged to prove it.

    I could answer that perceived size is enough to settle it for any consumer that values rear seat leg room in a midsize sedan. Most consumers don't get out the tape measure. But to be fair and contribute to the discussion I went back and looked up the data with the midsize sedans I am actually considering (with one five door included because it was on my list). The cars are a pretty good cross section of mainline 2007 midsize sedans: Impala, Malibu MAXX (the five-door), Camry, Sedona, Fusion and Accord.

    I looked at reported rear leg room, rear hip room, rear shoulder room, and rear head room. In every circumstance but one (the Malibu's rear hip room), the Accord was the smallest dimension or tied for the smallest dimension. I totaled the four measures for some rough measure of total differences. The Accord was smallest with the Fusion slightly larger. The Sedona and Impala were significantly larger. The Camry was in the middle. The MAXX does well for four passengers because it has great legroom and headroom on a narrower chassis. This pretty much parallels my perceptions. The Sedona and Impala were in fact my finalists partly because of interior space.

    Again, I love how Accords drive. The current Accord has a marvelously designed dash, both in function and aesthetics. It just doesn't have a large back seat. It is driver focused (not necessarily bad, if that's your priority). It is not as well disposed to transport three or four adults of 5' 10" or taller in long distance comfort. To my senses the Accord may even feel smaller due to the shape of the roof and C pillar. The Fusion feels bigger to me than its actual dimensions revealed.

    I'll restate my point. The best car varies based upon your priorities. As good as an Accord is (and I acknowledge it has many virtues), this one weakness is fatal given my priorities in buying a midsize sedan. I'm not saying anyone has to have the same priorities, but given the number of Sedonas and Impalas I see, I suspect I have company.

    I'd guess there are also other, similar, differentiating criteria beyond just resale value and reliability or perceived quality. I'd like to hear about other points of differentiation off the well beaten path of these three.

    Thanks. This is the heart of the automobile market. These cars serve a wide audience with vastly different mixes of priorities. So what tips the balance for you in the details of design?
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The Accord and Fusion have the same size engine (3.0 liter V6). The Fusion engine is "dual" overhead cam with VVT. The Accord engine is "single" overhead cam with Vtec. The Accord V6 engine amazingly has 20 more hp, and runs smoother and quieter. So the Fusion engine should at least have better fuel economy, but sadly it doesn't. Engine design, therefore, must be more important than the number of camshafts. The Duratec 30 is not outdated, or antiquated, so what's the problem?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    $25k for Accord EX-V6s with Navigation, overpriced?

    I guess we're all allowed an opinion!
  • w9cww9cw Posts: 888
    The Duratec's actual design, and preproduction versions, were done by Porsche. Porsche sold the design to Ford. I would like to know the background of "why" Porsche sold the design. My daughter has a 2000 Mercury Sable LS Premium with the 3.0L Duratec, and it's not as smooth as one would expect, and much noisier than any Japanese or Korean OHC V6.
  • madurbsmadurbs Posts: 19
    I'll start by stating for the record: I like this discussion, respect all posters, and love all cars. Well, at least 1/3 is true. I like this discussion.
    My dollar vote, all things considered, is for the midsize from Marysville Ohio. The design has been around since 03 which may be outdated to some, but certainly is still competitive in 07. I can't wait to see what the 08 will add to this competitive market. Bottom line: many good choices, but for my buck, Marysville won.
    I apologize in advance for having offended or challenged anybody with this post.
    (NO SOUP FOR YOU!!)
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,601
    Scape, you can't even go by the newspaper ads, most of them have enough small print to fill a phone book. They're designed to attract attention and maybe catch unsavy buyers.

    You have to check an internet price or do a personal quote to find out the real street price.

    My recent expeiences say that internet pricing is the way to go. Forget MSRP or dealership ads, find out what the car really costs.
  • Once again PERCEPTION. Someone in the last sedan room posted 0-60 numbers and 45 - 60 numbers for the 4cyl Fusion vs Camry vs Accord and the numbers showed different. The 4cyl Fusion if I remember was .1 second slower 0 - 60 .. Perception.

    Searching through the last sedan room, I didn't find the post you mentioned, that had numbers showing a Fusion 4-cylinder was .1 second slower 0-60 than an Accord 4-cyl.

    I did find a post that referenced these numbers from Consumer Reports:

    Honda Accord sedan - I4 2.4L (166 hp) 5A + ABS 7.91 16.22 90.80
    Honda Accord sedan EX - V6 3.0L (244 hp) 5A + ABS 7.80 15.88 93.70

    Ford Fusion SEL V6 - 3.0L DOHC (221 hp) 6A + ABS 7.47 15.78 92.30
    Ford Fusion SEL - I4 2.3L (160 hp) 5A + ABS 9.36 17.27 82.50

    Anyways, not that the actual numbers matter all that much, you keep keying in on PERCEPTION... Well, since I dove a couple of Fusions before I bought my Accord, and I perceived that A) they were much slower, and B) flooring the cars was not fun, as the engines were rough and harsh... I felt that was significant.

    It's not so much the age of the Duratec 30 that is an issue. It is that harshness at high RPMs has been a criticism for many years and Ford hasn't found a way to fix that. Why can't Ford make a V6 for a midsizer that has a high RPM and is smooth and refined such that it makes you want to open it up?
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    I got about $1,600 off sticker. I hear of much larger discounts. Could be why I got a pretty good trade-in for my PT Cruiser. I would expect somewhere around $1,600 to possibly as much as $2,000 or more off on the SEV6, which is a great pkg. There are claims of $4,000 or more off, but it is hard to believe. I was pleased to see over $1,000 off on a Honda, as discounts are tight compared to other cars. Resale on Honda Accords is outstanding. At least here in California, they are as good as gold. At around $22,000 say for discounted Accord SEV6, I think it is a very good deal.

    So you got a Sonata SE, I assume V6, for $16,651 ??? Sounds like those desperate days of deep discounting which GM did some time ago. Is Hyundai in trouble? I did see some $5K off on Mazda6, but the sticker price would only reduce to around $22k, as they all seemed loaded.
    Loren
  • I have a Ford Focus ST with the 2.3 5-speed. That extra power makes me grin every time I drive it. It is so much fun in a relatively inexpensive car. It is transformational power. The 2.0 liter Focus doesn't feel like the same car. I love cars, but none of my bigger or more expensive cars have ever given me so much bang for the buck in driving enjoyment.
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    Accord V6, with automatic, 0-60 6.6 seconds, with sweet Honda engine singing all the way. The Aura XR 3.6 V6 DOHC is also a fine sounding and revving engine.
    :shades: Loren
  • madurbsmadurbs Posts: 19
    Wish the XR were available when I bought my 01 LW300 (which is long gone and I took a bath). What a difference!! Still happy with my midsize from Marysville.
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    Does the " L " chose from 2 or 3 lower gear selections? The Fusion automatic may work just fine for most all occasions.

    A stick can be fun, but not around town. I prefer a stick on a sports car, preferably RWD. For FWD, from now on, I will stick with automatics. My Accord has the D3 selection for gears, and that seems to work for those times in town you wish for only three gear shifts, or on the twisty roads when you do not want a taller gear, or changes going on as much during corners. It has some sort of grade logic to the automatic too, which helps. I will wait for a sports car, with RWD, to get back into clutching again. Never owned a car with Tiptronic, so I have no idea how good or bad it would be, other than to say, I would likely miss the clutch and stick fun.
    :shades: Loren
Sign In or Register to comment.