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

1320321323325326544

Comments

  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Are total fleet sales the same as sales to rental companies? I don't think so. I don't know where to get figures for auto sales versus truck/van sales to rental companies but I know that truck/full size van FLEET sales are huge. Nissan and Toyota truck sales are miniscule compared to the Big 3 and Honda doesn't have a regular regular body on frame pickup and I think that's why Honda isn't in the mix. None of the Asian makers have been marketing a full size work van in the past. I think Nissan has just shown one but I don't even know if it's for sale yet.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Ford's daily rental fleet sales were up 13% in March 2011 over the previous year.

    Here is a website that reports what ALG has found at the conclusion of the 2010 MY. Yet again, Chrysler and GM are at the top of rental fleet vehicles ....

    http://www.autorentalnews.com/News/Story/2011/01/ALG-Releases-OEM-Rental-Fleet-P- enetration-Statistics.aspx
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    "Are total fleet sales the same as sales to rental companies? I don't think so."

    And your thinking is correct. Fleet sales include taxis, police cars, flower delivery trucks, etc. For example, one of my kid's baseball coaches works for Red Bull and drives a company car. What does Red Bull buy as one of their loaner company cars you might ask? The Toyota Prius. Those were bought at fleet prices but they are certainly not rental cars.

    I've never seen a report on what percentage of fleet sales go to rental companies either come to think of it.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Ford's daily rental fleet sales were up 13% in March 2011 over the previous year.

    That's pretty much a snapshot in time. What would it indicate if they were down one month versus the previous year? Not a lot. Besides, haven't seen too many Prius with Uhaul printed on the side. ;)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Just reporting what information was available. It usually take s alot of digging to find exact rental fleet numbers.

    Judging by the run sheets I receive from Hertz, Enterprise and National rental car agencies, the vast majority are American cars and Chrysler has by far the most amount of cars available. Toyota and Hyundai seem to have the biggest numbers from the imports.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    edited May 2011
    I'd like to find out where those Hyundais are. The Hertz lots I go to around the USA all say the same thing: "We don't buy Hyundais anymore." Same story at Avis, although I did find a 2010 Elantra with 30k miles on it the other day in Madison, but they said "it's not ours." I think National has some Hyundais, but no idea how many. I do see LOTS of Toyotas and Nissans. I almost always get a Nissan (Versa, Sentra, Altima) when I rent a car from Hertz these days. They try to give me Toyotas sometimes (Yaris, Corolla, Matrix, Camry) but I try to switch for another car (except for the Camry) if possible.

    This is borne out in sales numbers, e.g. as of April 1, Hyundai sales to fleet accounts were down 31 percent for the year with fleet sales representing 13 percent of the total sales mix year-to-date, and 11 percent for March. Those numbers seem a lot lower than for other automakers, e.g. Nissan, as mentioned in an earlier post.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    I don't know where to get figures for auto sales versus truck/van sales to rental companies but I know that truck/full size van FLEET sales are huge.
    Trust me, when you're making $100 off of each car from fleet sales, it adds up to a lot of nothing in your pocket quick. Fleet sales are the last thing you want as an auto company if you can help it. Now, someone has to buy new rentals and so on, but you certainly don't want it to be 20-30%+ of your sales. That's essentially just running the plants to keep them running at that point.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I'd like to find out where those Hyundais are

    Enterprise and Budget is where I have been seeing them. My local Budget store has a fleet of the new Elantra's available.

    I think this is how the whole conversation started. Enterprise has a boat load of 2011 Sonata GLS's they are selling at $18,000 plus....

    Starting in 2009, Hyundai/Kia Group sold a whopping 1/3 of all cars to rental fleet agencies Enterprise, National and Hertz in the first quarter. As of August 2010, Hyundai was the largest supplier to rental fleet, at 16%, of all foreign auto makers, with Nissan and Toyota following them.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    2009 and 2010? This is 2011, last time I checked.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Trust me, when you're making $100 off of each car from fleet sales, it adds up to a lot of nothing in your pocket quick.

    I don't believe for a minute that the car companies only make $100 off each car sold for fleet. I've heard that low of number thrown around and just don't believe it. Never have had anybody ever offer up any real proof either. That's like a dealer selling you a car for $100 over invoice and trying to get you to believe that's all they made.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    I don't believe for a minute that the car companies only make $100 off each car sold for fleet.

    Well, since GM lost billions over many years of high sales while selling a LOT to fleets, I'd be surprised if they were actually making anything on those sales.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Them and others as well. Could it be they were making $1000 profit when they needed to be making $2000 thus the huge losses? I don't know the answer but selling any item that is valued at $20-$30k for only a $100 margin doesn't make sense. I just think there is obviously a lot more to the equation than simply selling for a loss to rental fleets to keep the presses running.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    Ford Crown Vic's are only sold to Fleet, a regular consumer can no longer purchase them, so 100% of all CV's are fleet sales. Police and taxi mostly, the rest corporation sales, and usually just stripper models. Those and I would say standard cab LB F150's would be the other majority of fleet sales. When you consider how many police departments still use the CV as their #1 cruiser, that adds up to a lot of sales, and it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of departments are hording them since 2012 is the last year they will be produced. The beauty of the CV is the parts are interchangeable from year to year, a fender from an 07 will still fit a10. A lot of barns store up these parts inventories for the CV, and once they are no longer available, well, they will try to keep them going as long as they can. Look how many years the Checkers were on the road after they were no longer made, some are still being used.

    I found the sales figures, link title

    Crown vic sales were up 91% between 2009 and 2010. Taurus sales jumped up 121%, but those aren't broken down between consumer and fleet. March 2011 sales figures for the CV are at 6176 compared to last year at 3223 units sold. To date this year 14620 have been sold. Those are all Fleet sales. In addition a lot of Town Cars are also sold to fleets. What I didn't see in those numbers above, is that just Ford, or is Mercury, Lincoln, and Volvo included in those fleet sales figures?
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    edited May 2011
    2009 and 2010? This is 2011, last time I checked.

    We just finished 1Q in 2011. I think Q3 2010 is valid. If you would like to share evidence that shows a different trend for 2011, I'm listening....
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I just think there is obviously a lot more to the equation than simply selling for a loss to rental fleets to keep the presses running.

    I think we would be shocked if we saw what it actually costs to build a car. The number would be surprisingly low.

    My guess is it costs $10,000 or less to manufacturer a Chevy Malibu valued at $20,000, not counting R&D
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    There are 3 types of fleet sales.

    Commercial - work trucks, government vehicles, etc. These are long term owners and make good profit. The only discounts are usually for volume purchases.

    Normal rental fleet sales. These are typically higher end vehicles or at least nicely equipped vehicles - not stippers. They're not sold at big discounts and they're not sold in high volume so they don't flood the used car market. They're typically used for premium rentals.

    Rental fleet dumping - this is what Ford, GM and Chrysler used to do when they were overproducing - building more vehicles than they could sell at retail just to keep the factories running. When this happens the mfrs lose - they make little to no profit on the sales and they kill resale value.

    Ford no longer does fleet dumping. The crown vics and town cars are either going to livery service or police/government service. The remaining vehicles that do go to rental fleets are premium models at regular prices. Just go look at any Ford lot and you'll see that they've stopped overproducing vehicles. In fact - they're underproducing a lot of models.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I already did, a few posts ago. You must have missed it.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Commercial - work trucks, government vehicles, etc. These are long term owners and make good profit. The only discounts are usually for volume purchases.

    One of my roles has been to facilitate focus groups for OEMs to learn what fleet owners want from their vehicles. This is really important for trucks...understanding what up-fitters they use and for what equipment, what special use cases they have, etc. This influences product design (like the up-fitter power panel on F250 and modular racks on Transit Connect). My impression is if one customer is going to by a few hundred trucks, get them all out-fitted the same, and keep them for a while, its a pretty good customer to have.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Right. Because they make their profit on the out-fitting and modifications. But in the rental car industry, it's not like that at all. Take the Malibu. What percentage of fleet sales for that model are NOT rental companies? Probably less than 5%.

    That kills the model's resale values and image for virtually no profit.

    Of course, if you notice, most of GM's downsizing is from smaller fleet sales, which is a move in the right direction. They really should not care about rental companies any more than Porsche does. Let one of the "other" companies take up the slack.(with the emphasis that their cars are better quality/image and not rentals) If the company wants to buy some, they cough up full price like normal people.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,146
    A reporter is interested in talking with Volkswagen customers who are excited about the upcoming Passat or car shoppers who thought about a Volkswagen vehicle but recently passed on it.
    If you are interested in commenting on your experience, please reply to pr@edmunds.com no later than 5pm Pacific this Wednesday, May 11th and include your name and email address.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,146
    A reporter is interested in talking with recent buyers of the Chevy Cruze, Ford Fiesta or Ford Focus. If you care to share your comments, please email your daytime contact info to pr@edmunds.com no later than Monday, May 16, 2011.
    Thanks,
    Jeannine Fallon
    Corporate Communications
    Edmunds.com

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • j2jj2j Member Posts: 147
    "Judging by the run sheets I receive from Hertz, Enterprise and National rental car agencies, the vast majority are American cars and Chrysler has by far the most amount of cars available. Toyota and Hyundai seem to have the biggest numbers from the imports."

    - No, nowadays that would be Nissan, followed by Toyota.

    Among domestics, the Fusion and Malibu had a fleet mix % of 31.2% and 32.2%, respectively, in 2010.

    The Altima had a fleet % of 19.1% and the Camry followed with a fleet % of 17.3%.

    The Sonata had a fleet % of 11.1% and the Accord, 4.1%.

    In total nos. for the foreign-makes, 56,799 Camrys went into fleet, followed by 43,707 Altimas.

    21,738 Sonatas and 11,525 Accords went into fleet in 2010.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/01/the-truth-about-the-ten-best-selling-se- dans-of-2010/
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    That is total fleet sales, not total rental sales. There is a difference.
  • jkobty2jkobty2 Member Posts: 210
    I might have some insight into this, I own the 2009 mazda6 2.5 and also drove a rental ford fusion with the same engine.
    I noticed the fusion runs at lower rpm cruising speed, so the culprit might be the transmission/engine tuning. I prefer the how the fusion is tuned. wonder if there is a way to reprogram the mazda to match maybe by taking it to a ford dealer?
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    No.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    It isn't tuning, its gearing, the Fords are geared higher(or is it lower, always get them mixed up) so that the engine turns at a lower RPM at certain speeds.

    My F350 used to be geared at 4:10, and turned 2100 RPM at 65 MPH, I have swapped out the gears to 3:73, and now cruise 65@1800 RPM. I reduced the pulling power, and off line acceleration, but gained fuel economy. @ 3:73 it still has plenty of low end power to pull my 2 horse trailer, and that's what I have it for.

    That's where the differences are with the Mazda and Fords, different transmissions, the tuning would only make a difference at where it shifts, but not at what rpm it turns at a set speed.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    Click me!

    After seeing the article and the pics, it's quite obvious that VW doesn't seem to care about it's German roots and has settled on the lowest common denominator to sell sedans. Just when I thought the Jetta was the worst it could get, I was proven wrong.

    This even makes the Camry look stylish... :sick:
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    greyghost-

    I read the review, and it seems to have better driving dynamics, especially in the handling / steering department. Only their diesel engine is impressive. The 2.5L has decent power but, just like the Jetta, it results in ho-hum real world performance.

    VW made a point to talk a bout how big it was. I remember when Mazda did the same thing for the 09 Mazda6, and sales have not reflected the perceived demand for a large sedan, although the Mazda6 is quite a nice car and is still the drivers choice in this crowded segment.

    VW has a similar demographic to Mazda in that their buyers look for fun cars to drive. I don't expect this car to be that much of a success for VW.

    About the Jetta, I do see a good amount on the road in my neck of the woods (CT), but, they are just so horrible to look at. Same goes for the Passat.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited May 2011
    After seeing the article and the pics, it's quite obvious that VW doesn't seem to care about it's German roots and has settled on the lowest common denominator to sell sedans

    You must have read a different article than I did or are you just saying this because it got bigger? They said it handled sharply(like before) and has a nicely laid out interior with good quality(like before). While the exterior is kind of plain, I like it. You could say the Audi is plain but it's styling certainly holds up well and still looks very classy IMO.

    I guess I'll wait to really bash it until I see one in person. The Jetta got the same grief and it has been selling better than ever. I also remember all the posts in here bashing the new Sonata as people looked at pictures and called it the ugliest thing they had ever seen. In person it looked a lot better and was a smash at auto shows and dealer showrooms.

    I just got a different tone from the article than you did I guess. I've always liked the Passat but when optioned to my specs it was up in luxury car territory and was too expensive compared to other midsizers. Maybe now it will be more competitive.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    I'll give it the handling that it has (supposedly) retained, although I won't know for sure until I drive it. I'm looking more at the styling (or lack of it IMO) and interior. The gray plastic look cheap in the pics, and the fake wood just looks tacky. I liked the older VW interiors, where even the low-end models had quality plastics and nice controls.

    I guess I'm looking for something with more style in this class than others. I bought the '10 Mazda6 partly because I liked the looks, both inside and out, and the Fusion was my second choice. Since then, the Sonata/Optima twins have hit the market, and although I don't care for the Sonata's styling, it definitely has character, and the Optima IMO is one of the best-looking in this class.

    To me, the Passat has lost some personality to please the masses. It's just... generic.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    To me, the Passat has lost some personality to please the masses. It's just... generic.

    Your generic may be someone else's subtle and classic. To each his own. I think the Mazda6 from the front view looks hideous, you like it. This just proves that exteror styling is pretty much a subjective thing. Like I said, everyone was making similar comments about the new Jetta which looks similar to this new Passat and they are selling very well. I don't think anybody will argue that the interior on the Jetta didn't get cheapened and the drivetrains are pretty much the same. So that leads me to believe that most like the new styling just fine.

    It will be interesting to see how this new "American made" Passat will fare versus the "Mexican made" Jetta.

    I agree that the new Optima is very good looking and I think that is because it has a little more Euro look to it.......like the new Passat. ;)
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    edited May 2011
    Based purely on the pictures the Passat needs to have an actual color to look good in my opinion. The pics in that article make it look very drab and generic I agree.

    Much like the Sonata in fact. I find a black, red or white Sonata to be very sharp looking. In grey I think it's really ugly. Here's a quick search for the Passat in Red and Blue... looks good to me!

    Passat 1

    Passat 2

    Have to see em in person to really judge though.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Hey dash how's that SX performing. MPG, drive, zip, bells/whistles?????
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    edited May 2011
    Still loving this car. Took a longish trip over the weekend, 4 hours each way all highway. It did about 31mpg doing 80 mph for the vast majority of the trip. Typically MPG isnt very big on my list since I have a short daily commute but 50+ bucks per fill up makes me appreciate it.

    Definitely has all the zip I need, I still compare it favorably to my old 2004 G35 in that regard, and the interior is far better than the G was. Punch the gas and it moves. Love the power. Bells and whistles are still overwhelming. I'm coming from a 2001 Jetta daily driver, great car but not much in the way of tech features. The SX has things I would never think I wanted but now I find myself using all of it. Used the cooled seats on the long drive this weekend. Used the Navigation to get there and find a place to eat. Granted I could easily have used my smartphone for Nav, and truth be told the Droid nav is a bit easier to use but having the Nav integrated is nice. Automatically lowers the radio when she speaks among other things, and I use the backup cam that comes with it a lot.

    Liking the push button start. Love the panoramic sunroof, my 3 year old loves it too because he can see planes flying overhead.

    The bluetooth for the phone is great, it even streams audio which I've used a couple of times. I hook up my ipod to the car every day now. Wife uses the second memory setting on the seats. Tons of room to haul people and luggage. Seat comfort is totally fine on long or short trips. The HID headlights really make a difference too at night.

    As for looks, I still get compliments on it all the time. It's really impressive in person in a way the pictures simply cant recreate. The SX especially.

    The only downside I see to it, if you can call it that, is that it's a large car.
    Coming from the smallish Jetta, the Jetta was just more nimble and maneuverable in tight spaces like turning around in my driveway. The SX is very maneuverable but it's simply larger.

    I'd also prefer it to be transmit a bit less road noise. As it stands it's about exactly equal to an Accord. It's not bad, it's just something they could improve. I'm told the tires might be a big factor there but no firsthand knowledge.

    Are you still in the market for anything?
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited May 2011
    Tks for the update on your SX. Interesting that you feel the interior is better than your '04 G35. I have a '02 QX4 and really think the interior is first rate and have yet to have anything break on the inside. Leather is still in great shape, clock works etc. I would guess the '04 G35 is at least as nice as mine so you saying the Optimas is better is really saying something IMO.

    Is it the layout and spaciousness of the interior you like so much better or is it the actual quality of materials? I sat in the Optima at the auto show and really wouldn't consider it to be better quality than an Infiniti interior by any means. Was more spacious though and I liked the layout.

    I don't think I've ever averaged 80 mph on any trip over say about 25 miles. Just don't drive that fast unless I'm in a really big hurry and then it would be for very short distances. You have a lead foot it seems. What do you think you would get MPG wise at say around 65 or 70mph avg? Do you think it would be around the EPA hwy estimate or better?

    I'm still in the market but am having a hard time deciding if I want to go sedan or CUV. I have a short list for both. I thought I could make a final decision after going to the auto show in February but didn't happen. I tend to keep vehicles for 7-10 years so I get kind of anal about it.

    Current short lists and in no particular order:

    Sedans: Optima, TL, Altima, Maxima, possibly new Passat. All with either turbo or v6.

    CUVs: Q5, Murano, and waiting on the new Infiinti JX to preview in August.

    I may wait until all the new models debut this summer and fall to make a final decision and buy in Nov/Dec time frame.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    edited May 2011
    I cant comment on the QX4 but the 2004 G35 coupe interior was what I'd call adequate. Edmunds called the quality "Average" http://www.edmunds.com/infiniti/g35/2004/?sub=coupe&style=100330765

    Maybe a case of inflated expectations since I was buying an Infiniti, but the interior was just good and I expected entry level lux to be a bit better I think. Meanwhile the Kia strikes me as hitting above it's weight class. It is clean and simple. Note this is the SX model only, the lower trim (including EX Turbo) levels I found to be ok, nothing special for the class. The supervision cluster I just love, it's the one feature that made the SX a must for me instead of just an option over the EX-T. Of course the angled cockpit is a great touch imo. The nice large NAV screen, black interior works for me in this car even though I had been thinking tan before seeing it, and I like the steering wheel. They also put enough soft touches where your hands will make contact for it to feel upscale to boot.

    Well the 80 mph was a little bit lead foot but I was on the NY Throughway which is 65 posted but 75 is the average. I was keeping up with traffic for the most part. I had it set to 65 cruise on ECO mode for a bit and it was creeping up steadily so maybe a solid mid 30's MPG? Others have posted 42 MPG doing 65 in ECO with cruise on for extended stretches. I personally havent seen that though I dont doubt it.

    I like your sedan picks although I'm kinda down on the Altima. It's a bit long in the tooth now and doesnt offer as much as the others. Really like the Maxima as an option. CUV's you list I cant speak to but I love the look of the Q5. That is a very sharp vehicle.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    How do you like the fabric/leather seats? Do you think the fabric will hold up well ? How does the punch compare, say to your '04 G35?

    Yeah, the Altima is due this year for a complete redo. I haven't seen one spy photo or anything of the 2012 Altima so I'm beginning to wonder if the redo will happen this fall or not. I'm kind of leaning to the new TL now that it gets 20/29mpg with a six speed auto trans. They toned down the angles just enough to make it look pretty sharp IMO. Before it was just too angular for me.

    It will also be interesting to see what Toyota will do with the 2012 Camry. Will they bite the bullet and improve the interior greatly, add a little styling and tighten the steering/suspension a little? If they could do all that they would attract not only their die hards but people that actually compare. The drivetrains on the Camry are great and the v6 is a screamer for a midsize car.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    Check out the Flex SEL with Ecoboost. So much HP under the hood, yet quieter than a Lexus RX400H. Lots of room inside, and seats 7, comfortably, 6 if you get the captains in the second row like I did.
  • dash5dash5 Member Posts: 421
    edited May 2011
    TL is one of those cars where when I catch the profile I'm always doing a "nice, what is that?" Yeah the new one looks pretty good now I agree. Inside is nice too.

    Fabric in my Optima seems like it's quite durable on the seats, i dont foresee any issues with it. Stylistically it seems unnecessary but i don't notice it at all other than as an "at a glance" when taking in the whole interior. In that context it looks good.

    The SX accelerates just as good as the G did, power to weight ratio is virtually identical. Plenty of passing power is available. It's not going to pin you to your seat like a Corvette but it's great to have that power available.

    I'm curious what the new Camry will look like too. For me I can appreciate everything about the current one except for the god awful interior. Not expecting that to change much, but maybe I'll be wrong!

    No interest in the new Malibu?
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    To me that is a full size CUV. Lot bigger than my other choices and I really don't need that much HP(16-21mpg on prem. fuel), passenger capacity, cargo space. etc. Not sold on the Mytouch either. I like the techy stuff but like my interface with it to be more traditional I guess.

    The standard engine engine with 262hp MPG and price matches up to the Murano pretty well(still not as good though) but overall it's way more vehicle than I need.

    In addition, the styling is for sure different and adventerous for Ford but it's exterior styling is not that appealing to me. I rode in one and it was a very nice ride and everything but just the not for me.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Since the interior of the Camry has been slammed continously and Toyota knows it has to step it's game up I would think that would be a no-brainer but who knows. I would expect them to upgrade it but they do some strange things sometimes.

    I forgot about the Malibu because I don't think it's going to be on sale until spring next year and I may have a new vehicle by then. I like the new styling except for the "camaro" tail lights. They may look good in person but they remind of the Camaro a lot and I'm not real fond of the rear end of that car either. The drivetrains that have been described sound pretty interesting. Another car that I will take a good hard look at this fall will be the Buick Verano turbo.

    I'm a little put off by GM and it has nothing to do with political crap or loans etc. It just seems that new GM models have tons of recalls. They also spend so much time in development and tease so much that after the they arrive in US dealerships they look kind of old already. I used to be a pretty devoted GM buyer for about 25 years but the quality really faded in the 80s-90s and I jumped ship. It will take some good product to get me back.

    GM cars/trucks owned:
    1960 Chevy Biscayne
    1963 Pontiac Tempest
    1971 Pontiac Lemans
    1965 Buick LaSabre(paid $325 in 1975, had two years and sold for $350)
    1980 Chevy Malibu
    1984 Olds Cutlass
    1987 Olds Cutlass Ciera
    1987 Pontiac Bonneville
    1992 Pontiac Grand AM
    1993 Buick LaSabre Ltd.
    1995 Chevy S-10

    A few of these were actually company cars but I drove em for couple years each and maintained them so I count them in my "car owning" experience even though I didn't have to pay for them.

    Anyway, yeah, I'll check out the new Malibu even if I already purchase something. Don't we all? ;)
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Reply to self.

    The 1965 Buick was an Electra 225, not a LaSabre. Had a 455 engine and flew. What a boat.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Since the interior of the Camry has been slammed continously and Toyota knows it has to step it's game up I would think that would be a no-brainer but who knows. I would expect them to upgrade it but they do some strange things sometimes.

    You would think so, but look at GM and C going 20+ years with crappy interiors before they got the message that it might be important to buyers! Honda has been getting slammed for declining interiors, yet the new Civic is worse than the previous one. I wonder if Toyota will slip more?

    GM has gotten the interiors message and has been improving in this area big time. They just need to get it together with reliability/mpg/power tradeoffs to be competitive. Perhaps the new Malibu will be a home run, as the previous one was a base hit after many years of pop flys.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Yeah, you're probably right. There's a better than even chance that any improvement in the interior from Toyota will be small at best. But after seeing what Chrysler, even moreso than GM, has done with it's interiors and in a very short time with new management there is hope. Maybe that's what Toyota needs......new management. :confuse:
  • tenpin288tenpin288 Member Posts: 804
    Maybe a new management style is in order?

    Toyota deaf to outside advice?
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    (16-21mpg on prem. fuel)

    Try 19 avg 27 Highway on 87. Premium is not needed in the Ecoboost.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    That was what cars.com had for the all wheel drive model. Maybe premium is recommended but not necessary but they had just premium listed. I was comparing to all wheel drive Murano.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    If that's the case, I would be skeptical on what cars.com says then. The Ecoboost models do not require premium, it is recommended IF you want max performance out of it, but NOT required, so it should not be quoted as needing premium in these articles. In fact the jump to premium is so slight that to me it isnt worth the extra cost unless I plan to take it to a strip.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I'm a little skeptical of all the sites that list vehicle specs but they are usually easier to access the data quickly than going to the manufacturers site. I've seen errors like that at many websites including this one. Edmunds "comparator" used to be the best but now it is one of the worst since the revamp of the site. Cars.com has one similar to the old Edmunds but all are not perfect. Sometimes they say premium, sometimes premium recommended when "premium recommended" is actually the case. I stand corrected on the reference to the cars.com info then.

    MPG on the awd ecoboost is still EPA 16/21(per Ford's official site info) which is lower than I want especially when I don't need that much power in the first place.

    Try 19 avg 27 Highway on 87

    Don't know where you come up with those numbers. Even the standard 3.5L in the Flex front-wheel drive is EPA rated at 17/24(per Ford). I got 36mpg in my Mazda6 one trip but I certainly wouldn't come on here and say it gets 36mpg highway because in reality it most routinely gets about 32mpg hwy. I checked the Flex forum for real world mpg and none were getting 27mpg hwy except one post of yours for one 300 mile trip. CR reports a 17mpg average in their test. I know, I know CR is not the be all or end all but they do test cars in a very methodically manner for comparison purposes.

    I prefer to deal in EPA numbers for comparison purposes because I see many people complain that they can't get the EPA numbers and many others say they can beat them easily. The EPA numbers do seem to be a pretty good average.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    Try 19 avg 27 Highway on 87

    Don't know where you come up with those numbers.


    Those are my actual numbers. I own a 2010 Flex SEL EB, and those are my AVG MPG numbers. I have seen 27 MPG on long stretches of highway, as long as I'm not fighting a headwind, then it drops to 24. My daily commute consists of back country roads, which has a few stop signs(gas wasters), turns, and a couple 35 MPH stretches with lights(more gas wasters), so 19 is my overall avg. I would say that is VERY good considering how much I play with the giddyupgo peddle.

    In any case I am getting better than the rated EPA standards, but then again, I did put 50K+ miles on hybrids, and those I went well over the EPA ratings.
Sign In or Register to comment.