Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
It is hard to put a finger on the actual price. You could use Intellichoice website, which I used for the price when I went to the Honda dealership. My guess is that Sonata may deep discount the most, though Ford has to be pretty desperate by now, and may match Hyundai. But then again, not all the same features.
Loren
Regards:
OldCEM
Do these engines (or derivatives) make the Fusion engine better?
Not in the least. :confuse:
Its tough to beat a Honda engine. Add in all the ergonomics and tactile Honda feel with a huge dose of reliability and its tough to beat even a 5-6 year old designed Accord.
All the other cars in this class have redone their versions recently (maybe not the Mazda) and Honda can still outdo them. When the 08 Accord arrives Honda will, once again, set a new standard that all others will be compared to.
Mr. Captain2 - Is the 24v V6 DOHC w/VVT in the Fusion/Mazda6 a "pushrod" engine?
My point exactly, and not a reason to 'bash' Ford (or Mazda) products, more to point out that those particular cars could be improved so much with some heart transplants. Maybe the new DT 3.5 will help with the problem, but I'm not sure that it will acutally find its way under Fusion hoods. Putting the engine in a lower volume high priced Lincoln is one thing, getting it into the Fusion/Milan/6 may be more than Ford can handle from a production capacity standpoint.
Exactly what are the things that cause refinement? What parts in the motor have to be there?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Even the older Hondas have very advanced, active engine mounts designed to dampen the vibration of the engine and mute sounds from the engine compartment (of course these fail over time and are somewhat costly to replace).
Additionally, the exhaust note can be engineered as well. Cars like the Miata had extensive research put into optimizing the exhaust note.
I don't understand why Ford doesn't sweat the details a little more with respect to NVH and all of these complaints will go away. Improved motor mounts and some additional insulation should solve the problem.
Its funny though, I don't mind some mechanical noise. I think that is one of the reasons I like the Subaru so much. I feel part of the driving experience as opposed to isolated from it.
The DT 3.0 is an overhead cam motor. While I think you have the right idea of improving breathing at high RPM, I think your mental model of how variable valve timing technologies work is a little skewed.
The i-VTEC in the Accord operates only on the intake. There is a low and high RPM mode, and some component in the rollers allows for additional variation (which is different then the double cam version which allows the cam to operate 25 degrees out of phase). This second system is similar to Toyota's VVTL-I which controls both lift and duration.
The Porsche system (vario-cam) I believe primarily affects cam timing with respect to when the valves open, but not the lift and duration. I am ohly familiar with the earlier versions of Vario-cam so its very possible and likely they have modified their system as well.
I will not put down the VQ in any way, shape or form, since I agree it's a great engine, but the V6 in my 6, IMO, may be louder (due to less sound-deadening), but it's NEVER felt "strained" to me, whether it's on the open highway, or passing on a two-lane. Drop it a gear, hit the gas, and it goes, just as well as the VQ.
In terms of refinement, both the VQ and DT don't come close to Honda though...
Okay, just checking as in the past some on that other discussion seemed to confuse the old Vulcan V6 with the Duratec. I guess I somewhat misunderstood your point as I got the impression you were saying the DT3.0 should be grouped with 1950s pushrods. And actually, I am not real concerned about the number of valves. etc., etc...
Anyway, I'm driving the 4 cyl Ford/Mazda engine. It seems fine to me, sounds good to me at all times and I have not felt there is any problem with reving the engine to redline. The one minor thing I have noticed is I feel some vibration in the steering wheel when stopped in "D"...I'll find out when I go for my first oil change if this is normal or not. I don't remember feeling this on my test drives, but that does not necessarily mean it was not there.
IOW, define the characteristic itself - not the badge.
So refined means better, more useful, cheaper...
That's my opinion (at this time and I reserve the right to change my opinion in the future :shades: )
I contrast this to the Contour, which had less satisfying controls which had hard clicks, although it too, had very positive engagement. The function was there, it just didn't feel as good. I also liked how easy to use the audio systems were in both of those cars.
The controls on the Legacy feel very Honda-like, with that damped engagement feeling. It doesn't have the control layout of the older Honda though, and I have to look down activate some features in the Subie (this might be because I don't drive it as much).
I think I can summarize refinement for me as the perception of quality in the things I touch when I'm in the car, so that is why I tend to concentrate on switches and controls.
I don't mind a bit of drivetrain noise, I like knowing there is an engine up there, so that's not a big issue with me, nor do I need the interior cabin to be a library or mortuary.
Using my Honda 2.4L inline 4-cylinder as an example of what I consider to be refined... Its as smooth at redline as at 1,000 rpm. Hold the RPMs anywhere in between and it always sounds and feels like it is meant for just that purpose; no vibration, and the tone from the engine and exhaust is nothing but pleasing. It never even gives you the impression that you are working it harder than it wants to. Going to high RPMs is sort of like switching from "Low" to "High" on my favorite 240-mph electric leafblower, in that it feels like just another setting available for normal use; no drama involved, just a louder "whoosh" and more performance when needed. Throttle it up and it lightly growls, then just sings... and you want to do it again. It is a great motor especially considering its in an inexpensive, practical sedan.
Now, a motor that is not refined has none of the above qualities. In fact, in many ways it will be opposite. It may be perfectly acceptable under normal conditions, but push it and the sounds are harsh and displeasing, and/or you can almost feel the motor is out of balance, thrashing or vibrating. It doesn't feel like it was made to rev that high. These engines make you feel guilty when you take them to redline, like you are damaging the motor based on how it sounds or feels through the controls. Floor it once, and you'll think "I don't need to do that again unless I have to." The impression is that the engine is tearing itself apart to get at those high revs.
When driving that DT30 Fusion, I enjoyed the performance, and please don't think I am "bashing" or "hating," but I wanted to lift off the throttle well before redline. It did not feel nearly as "refined." This, to me, takes away some of the enjoyment of putting an internal combustion engine through its paces.
If I think car A is more refined than car B, the sum of its qualities is better than it's competitor. A lot of it will be subjective (interior and exterior appearance, the feel of the controls, handling, etc). Some of it isn't (acceleration, noise, etc). It's really how good a end product it is as a whole from the smallest detail on up.
Do the door handles flex when you pull on them? Does the cup holder block the shifter? Does the steering wheel block the instrument cluster? Does the steering communicate to the driver what the car is actually doing? Do potholes make you wonder if parts of your car are falling off?
You say "that the Honda V6, is still SOHC, and is unarguably vastly superior (in terms of HP and refinement) than the DT3.0"
You say that with a tone, to me anyway, that the Honda V6 is a superior power plant than, everything? I know that is not what you say, just the way it sounded when I reread it. That is a fine opinion and I am not saying you said anything wrong or that can be argued. You believe strongly in the, quality?, refinement?, efficiency?, superiority?, of the Honda engine(s).
I have owned I4's Turbo I4's, I6's V6's H6's, V8's V10's OHV, SOHC, DOHC, 2v/c, 4v/c, 1.2L, 2.L, 2.6L, 3.0L, 3.6L, 5.0L 5.3L, 5.7, 6.2L, and 8L cars/trucks.
They all had superior something to something else and performed their assigned tasks very well for a long time (except for the aluminum Vega engine).
So what is your opinion comparing the Honda V6 to
Cadillac (GM) 3.6 DOHC VVT V6 (DI 300 H-P version)?
Lexus IS 3.5 DOHC VVT V6 (306 H-P)?
How about the Audi new Diesel engines?
I'm not entirely sure but I recall someone posting that the manual states just that. When in "L" the tranny decides which gear is best, between 2 or 3 gears, given gas pedal placement, speed, etc. Someone who has actually used it could maybe let us all know how that works?
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.
I'm the opposite for the most part. Cars we've owned with sticks include a '96 Civic EX, '98 ZX2, '04 Mazda6 S, and currently an '06 Mustang GT. The only one I hated driving in city traffic, which I do on a daily basis, was the Civic because it had zero low end power. As long as the car has some power and I don't have to rev it up to move a few feet I'm happy. The 6 was FWD and an absolute blast to drive.
FWIW I did test drive the Mazda6 i with a stick and the V6 with the manumatic. The i was like the Civic to me and the manumatic was useless because it shifted too early IMO. Plus there was the whole bored left foot sydrome associtated with it.
PS I fully expect that it'll be Honda that shortly comes out with some engine superior in almost all respects even to the Toyota 2GR-FSE you mentioned.
Did you drive the 2.3L I4? If so, did you have the same impression of that engine?
Thank you, exactly what I'm talking about, with many of the other cars in this group, you don't have the time to "want to lift off the throttle"
Yes I have driven the 2.3L I4: normally aspirated in a 2006 Fusion SE manual, and then turbocharged and direct-injected in a 2006 Mazdaspeed Mazda6.
In normally aspirated form, I noticed a slight "buzziness" to the sound, not entirely displeasing because it reminded me of the 2.2L I4 I had in my first car, a 1991 Mazda 626. Also, when accelerating through the gears, I'd let off the gas completely and push in the clutch, and the RPMs would always jump up by 500. The manual shift knob was huge, and the lever action wasn't very precise (not unlike my 1998 626 ES-V6). As I mentioned before, the Ford/Mazda 2.3L (at least in the midsizers) feels a notch slower than the Camry 2.4L, which is a notch (or two) below the Honda 2.4L. Performance/acceleration numbers seem to bear this out. I'm sure it's more fun in a Mazda3 or Focus. Bottom line, I wouldn't call this motor "unrefined," it was quite happy to buzz along. I just wanted more grunt from my 4-banger.
In turbo form, the motor was a real hoot. Tons of torque, but power started to drop off above about 4,800 RPM. I liked it very much, and would have purchased it, but even heavily discounted to around $24,000 it was a little more than I wanted to spend, even before I figured up the insurance!
This was from a high volume dealer about 100 miles away. The local dealer was only discounting the car $500 and had a $210 higher doc fee and throws in $500 advertising for good measure. The dealer we bought from had an internet price of $1800 below INVOICE. There was a general $1,000 rebate and another $1,000 rebate if financed through Hyundai Finance (5.9% for 60 months)We also qualified for the owner loyalty rebate of $500. Our price for the car, before doc + ttl, was $4300 under invoice or $5429 below MSRP.
The resale value game is a shell game. Trade-in value or retail value of a used car? I just saw Enterprise rent-a-car offering a comparably equipped '06 Sonata with 14,692 miles for $17,999 and they say, "blue book retail value" of $20,690. Enterprise is a "no haggle" price.
Now, I certainly don't think the Fusion is slow when you get the V6. The DT30 may not like to rev high, but that 6-speed automatic is pretty good for a slushbox, and it makes up for it (I've always like Aisin-built trannys, had one in a Cherokee that was bulletproof). Once out of first gear, the transmission kept the motor on the boil. As I mentioned, it just didn't seem very "refined" (see previous definition) when doing so. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I'd prefer that it be smoother as opposed to more eager to rev, because overall not that slow of a car. 7.2 seconds?
Most V6's these days are quicker. The Mazda6 with the same motor and equipped with a manual isn't quicker because it only has 5 speeds versus 6 in the Auto. Some of the faster four cylinders in this class (Accord, Altima) can keep up when equipped with manuals. Decent performance.
Can't really use much more than that around here. My wife wants a new Mustang GT. I drove one for a couple of days last year. This was the drill: gas it in first to get going good, short-shift, give it some gas in second. You're now going 10-15 mph over the speed limit. Shift to 5th. Otherwise, I'd get in a lot of trouble. Insurance was too high on it to begin with.
The original VTEC of the early 90s was variable cam timing, while later versions also affected lift (there is a component on the roller). I believe they can now do duration as well (i-vtec). Toyota skipped the early versions and showed up late with timing, duration and lift.
Remarkably, the next leap might be GM with getting rid of the cam altogether.
Again, the parallel to the lumpy cams is also seen in the aftermarket as a number of companies make "vtec controllers" that vary the rpms where they activate, etc.
Have any 0-60 times to back that up?
I've driven the manual (my personal ride) and auto-equipped (test drives) V6-model 6's, and I can tell you firsthand, the manual will beat it out of the gate every time, as long as the person behind the wheel knows how to properly operate three-pedaled cars. The auto is a 6-speed simply for better fuel economy (actually better than the manual on the highway, IIRC, according to the EPA.)
The number of gears isn't the issue, its the final drive ratio and the individual gear ratios, as well as top speed in gears. Manual transmission cars that are geared super short are slower because they have to be in 3rd to hit 60, while some of the taller cars can do 60 in 2nd.
The time to shift is a factor here (I know don't get started on DSGs and what not, take it to the manual trans forum).
refined = a car that is a pleasure to push a little
or
unrefined = a car that 'screams' in protest when you do.
Yes, the better V6s are generally found with those labels on it you don't like or maybe you would consider taking a new Aura XR out on a test drive.
refined = a car that is a pleasure to push a little
or
unrefined = a car that 'screams' in protest when you do.
By push do you mean push the gas? Or is there some element of how it corners in there too? Does interior accommodations play any role in that?
Unrefined = Crude, rough, unsatisfying, not pleasing.
Displeasing or unsatisfying is a subjective connotation. I think the Accord felt more "refined" than the Legacy but wasn't as fun to drive. The Subie shakes when you turn it on (not like a vibration but you can feel the torque of the starter as the car kicks over) and it makes engine noises when you floor it or rev it.
The Honda's handling is also "more refined" in that it pretty much understeers no matter what. The Subie will under or oversteer depending on where your foot is.
I have been watching the American LeMans Series and am stunned by the performance and dominance of the Audi TDI. A turbo-diesel is blowing the rest of the field off the courses.
Maybe next decade we will all be driving Diesel/Hybrids.
mz6greyghost and lilengineerboy,
Fusion V6 6A is just over 7 seconds to 60, correct? I'd assume the Mazda6 V6 6A would be pretty much the same (basically same chassis, motor and transmission, roughly the same weight). Now the Mazda6 V6 5M doesn't break into the 6's does it? I've always read they are in the low 7's.
I found this on Consumer Guide, regarding the 2006 models: "The i versions are acceptably peppy with manual transmission, sluggish with automatic. V6s lively, but need high rpm for maximum punch. Test manual s sedan did 7.5 sec 0-60 mph." Even if you can flog one barely under 7, that's still not really much faster than the 6A at just over 7. We're talking 10ths of a second.
I could be wrong. My 1998 626 ES-V6 was good for 7.2 0-60. It only had 170hp (by the old standards) but was light by todays standards and geared very, very low (5th gear at 80mph was 4,000 RPM!). I miss that car... The Mazda6 added horsepower, but also several hundred pounds, and isn't geared that low.
It used to when the V6 produced 220 HP. C&D clocked their long term V6 MTX at 6.4 seconds. The latest iteration of the 6 with V6 has fewer horses than those of the first year or two though. I don't know what the current time is to 60 with the slightly de-powered engine.
To those who keep calling the Mazda 6 engine "antiquated", "rough", and "thrashy", perhaps the less-exagerated way of putting it is "not as smooth" or "not as quiet" or "not as efficient" as some other engines in this class. Remember, this engine/car continues to garner awards like most desired by editors of Edmunds in 2007, sportiest car by consumers digest in 2007, and one of the most desireable cars in Esquire magazine for 2006. Given these awards, it can't be as bad as you describe... As an analogy, since the Accord is slightly behind the Sonata in JD Powers reliablity reports, perhaps you'd say the Accord is junk? I'd say that this is also an exageration that doesn't stand to reason. Ok, the 6's engine isn't the best, the newest, the quietest, the most efficient, or even the most desireable... but it's still a good enough engine that propels the Mazda 6 to garner a great deal of respect by many auto journalists (who arguably are some of the most passionate people when it comes to cars...after all they have dedicated their livelihoods to that passion!).
As a sidenote, I've spent quite a bit of time with the Subaru boxter engine. With a turbo, that thing makes the legacy exhilarating. But since it's relatively quiet on the inside, it hides how clackity that engine is. Perhaps because the older 6's (I think the 06's and newer are a bit quieter than my 05) didn't have as much sound deadening material as the legacy, it makes the duratec sound less refined than others because you can hear more of it. Personally, I find reving the 6's engine up quite rewarding and not at all objectionable... so to each, their own.
As to the 2.3 engine that the 6 has, Motor trend described that engine as follows: "Mazda's four-cylinder version of the 6--the i--is a willing partner on these curvy roads: a free-revving 2.3-liter, 160-horsepower inline-four joined to a snicky five-speed manual and a driver-focused cockpit, all wrapped in far-spicier-than-vanilla bodywork.... Like its Camry and Accord competitors, the 6i is no rocket off the line, but once the tach tops 3000 rpm, the DOHC powerplant comes on strong, delivering an enthusiastic pull. The standard five-speed manual is one of the most positive shifters around, though we long for another cog. And, yes, you can heel/toe downshift in this family car.
The 6 is a joy on curvy roads, quickly taking a set with minimal understeer and negligible bump steer--not something you expect to find in the four-cylinder midsize-sedan category. Mazda thoughtfully includes grippy and supportive bucket seats in the open-feeling interior, which is designed with large, strategically placed knobs, dials, and switches."
So yeah, the 6's engines aren't class leaders. But they don't deserve to be dogged either. In the end, they are solid components that don't detract from those who value a vehicle that is both comfortable and fun.
Regards:
OldCEM
Awkwardly however, the vehicles that are lower on power also seem to offer less fuel economy, with the exception of the GM 3.5L pushrod, which does quite well for an engine of its size economywise, although power is only modest.
Regards:
OldCEM
When will these improvements be realized in the Fusion? When the competition is yet another two or three steps ahead of them.
I've also ridden in one of the new ford vehicles with the 3.5 Duratec. Performance seemed quite good, and, I noticed no undue NHV when the owner got on it a bit.
How does the performance of the 3.5 Duratec make the 3.0 Duratec better?