Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The Fusion Titanium that Motor Trend tested priced out at $37,670.
The new top-of-the-line Touring 6 cylinder Accord lists for $34,220.
A 2013 Accord 3.5 V-6 coupe 6 mt goes 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, which is seriously fast.
Inside Line says that the 6 cylinder auto sedan gets to 60 in 6.1 seconds.
http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2013/2013-honda-accord-ex-l-v6-vs-2013-ni- - ssan-altima-3-5-sl-track-test.html
The Fusion has indeed matched or bettered every car in it's segment with a significantly smaller, turbocharged engine; therefore improving fuel economy while doing it.
I am just defending the naturally aspirated 2.4 liter, 200hp and 186lb-ft engine in my car. I believe that this is the correct engine for it's application. (24/35 mpg).
The turbocharged, SX version of my car was too expensive for my needs. (274HP, 22/34 mpg).
I would not buy the 2.5 or the 1.6 liter Fusion. If I was going to pay for a turbo on my insurance then I want ALL of the benefits. Namely strong, powerful performance and reasonable fuel economy figures. The 2.0 liter choice felt right when I drove it and on paper.
But the Fusion Hybrid gets 47/47/47. I don't think Accord can touch that even with a CVT.
also TTAC (thetruthaboutcars) was able to get mid 40s mpg from the plug-in Accord hybrid which is estimated to get 100mpge (like the Fusion Energi) when driven in purely electric mode, so i think that the regular Accord hybrid might get similar if not better real world fuel economy than the Fusion hybrid.
I would think Honda's CVT would probably be the same story. If so, the extra savings from MPG advantage of a CVT wouldn't sound so appealing anymore? this is disregarding whether one prefer CVT or not, or whether CVT is as durable as conventional auto -> pure cost consideration.
See comparison below....
Have you guys ever seen Jeremy Clarkson (Top Gear) drive a BMW M3 vs. a Toyota Prius in order to compare fuel economy?
All Jeremy had to do was keep up with the Toyota, with the Toyota going as fast as it could around the track.
The M3 got better MPG in an engine twice as large, and on a heavier and larger vehicle.
Just a counter-point.
Nissan aims to change all that. They reduced friction/wear by 30% as compared to the outgoing model. CVT's also have far fewer moving parts. I really want to drive this new Altima. There is a 2013 on my street and I really liked the styling from afar and close up. It's gotta nice **S. :shades:
I have more faith in the engineers of the Japanese makes. How long are the cvt altimas lasting?
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
Honda has developed a new and supposedly better belt for its new earth dreams CVT. Here's a short link to a Honda site with a press release about it:
http://world.honda.com/news/2012/4120405New-CVT-Midsize-Vehicles/index.html
"....Key features of new CVT for midsize vehicles
The newly developed high-efficiency electric oil pump, high-strength belt and exclusive CVT oil raise transmission efficiency to enhance fuel economy.
The wide ratio range offers cruising with enhanced torque in the lower rpm range, thereby enhancing fuel economy. At the same time, the wide ratio range increases drive power during off-the-line acceleration to help realize an exhilarating and sporty driving feel."
Honda's "G-shift" design and software apparently much reduces the acceleration lag that you can get with Nissan's cvt. In other words, if you floor it in a 2013 Honda Accord cvt it's supposed to respond pretty quickly.
Honda has probably spent a billion or two dollars developing this transmission. The belt on the new Honda unit is supposed to be something of a breakthrough for strength and durability. Right now I think they are making the belts in Japan, but they are about to start producing them in Ohio.
I think the Honda CVTs will be quite durable, but I would probably buy an extended warranty just in case....
I think Honda's CVT is probably fairly similar.
While that itself impressed us, what's the most noteworthy in the Accord's CVT is how quickly it can respond and bring revs up when needed. For instance, a number of CVTs (including the one in the 2013 Nissan Altima, surprisingly) will feel completely flat-footed and off their game if you roll around a corner at 15 mph with your foot off the gas and then accelerate at full throttle. The time to tap into full thrust is delayed for a surprising time. But in the Accord, it very quickly raises revs all the way up to the Accord's 6,600-rpm redline. Pull off the same test, dipping into half throttle out of the corner, and it very quickly finds the right ratio for the throttle opening—feeling a lot like downshifting and with no slow, muddled ramp-up.
How did Honda achieve this far better (we think) CVT calibration when rivals like Nissan have been working at it for so long? According to the project leader, Honda's CVT isn't much different in the mechanical design, but Honda put a lot of time into oil pressure control and electrical systems, along with the control software.
http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/driven/1208_2012_2013_compact_sedan_compari- son/fuel_economy.html
Copy and paste the address if the link is not live.
Both cars drove awesome, but there were quality problems. The 6 kept having A/C problems and was plagued with wheel bearing issues, bent rims, and occasionally refused to start for no apparent reason. We found out later that the battery was bad. Our roads here in Northern VA are really good so I can't attribute the wheel issues to potholes, frost heaves, and all the other rust belt/great lakes area road problems. (no offense..I am from Buffalo).
The Protege' did NOT have ABS, but DID have summer tires. OMG. I almost died in that car. It hydroplaned at 60 mph on interstate 95 at the "mixing bowl"....slamming into two walls. Can you say med-evac? My first helicopter ride.
I think Mazda makes great cars, we probably had bad luck. I think I will pass on Mazda as long as I live though.
Really glad it was not your last...
- Ray
Medevac = really bad, typically.......
Cars are significantly safer than they were even 10 years ago, and that's a good thing...
Saved my life. The car still ran afterward. They drove it onto the back of the flatbed I was told.
I so didn't even ask if the car (Protege')had ABS when I bought it. The EX had it, but the LX and the lowly DX did not. I mean come on....it was 2003!
So much for making automotive assumptions that all cars have our safety as priority one.
My 2002 Honda Accord LX didn't have abs either....
Basically, we can thank gov't and the iihs for effectively encouraging car makers to make safer vehicles.
My commute is from West Springfield, VA to 23rd St NW Washington DC. It is 18 miles each way. 4 miles of it is suburban stop and go, then higher speed driving on 395 for 14 miles.
I never use the econ button. It slows up throttle response, and I need to be on my toes during this commute. It is dense, fast, and just plain dangerous at 6 am. (I went in and right back home this morning, just had to get my cell). I work from home on Fridays
I have 10,200 miles on the car, purchased last December 28th. My fuel economy has steadily improved from horrible; to as-advertised. Folks with brand new Optima's should be just a little patient.
There have been no problems or issues with my EX 2.4 (other than rear visibility). Great car.
Toyota Camry 34,252....314,788
Honda Accord 29,182....247,847
Nissan Altima 24,448....234,040
Hyundai Sonata 17,332....175,346
Kia Optima 14,304....114,728
http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html
Hopefully they will be 115,000 GREAT cars.
The November C/D has a comparo of their current mid-sized champ, the Passat, vs. 3 new mid-sizers. Here's the order of finish:
4. Passat SE
3. Altima 2.5 SV
2. Fusion SE EcoBoost
1. Accord EX
Not a long reign on top for the Passat!
As C/D said: "... the big H is back."
I love the tag line for the Fusion: "Mr. Bond, your rental car is ready."
Also maybe MT put more importance on things like rear seat room--C/D ragged on the Fusion about that.
Also one of C/D's knocks on the Passat was, "bland as dry toast". Uh... these are mid-sized family sedans, folks--not race cars. The Accord is pretty bland, too. And the Camry. But still fine cars for their intended audience.
It does seem clear that the Malibu and Camry need improvement to stay competitive, although that doesn't seem to be hurting Camry sales. Yet.
MT mid-size test
As you noted, Toyota doesn't have any problem selling Camrys. And Hertz et. al. need lots of mid-sized cars, so Chevy can sell a ton of Malibus there if needed for volume.
Hard to imagine that one of the oldest mid-sized family cars, once the new Mazda6 hits the streets, is the Sonata... a couple of years ago it was the latest and greatest. Fast times at Mid-Sized High.
Of course they run the risk of losing sales down the road if they get too far behind but Camry buyers do seem to be loyal.
All these cars have somewhere from 170 to 190lb-ft at varying rpms. The Fusion 1.6L EcoBoost has it WAY DOWN at 2500rpm and all the others need 3900rpm or more to hit peak. Case closed. I don't care if the interior was straight from a 1987 Tempo. I don't care if it gets good mileage or not. It has TORQUE. Being able to select the 6-speed manual is another plus but for my wife she will stick to the automatic. Another bonus, longest wheelbase, which is key to a good smooth ride. There's a reason I drive a Suburban and not a Tahoe, and it's wheelbase. There's a reason I cherish my Gran Torino over say, a Granada, and it's wheelbase.
I am really really glad we didn't order a new 2012 a year ago. The 2013 model is twice the car the 2010-2012 Fusion was and in my opinion surpasses any Camry/Accord/Altima. Stepdaughter has a 2010 Malibu and she loves it but my wife wasn't impressed and the 2013 seems to be smaller and less efficient so we'll pass. I'm not even discussing the 200/Avenger. The Passat would be my pick but only as a TDI and honestly I can get a Fusion Hybrid that can do better for the same money. Sonata/Optima are styled too wild. That leaves the Mazda and while I haven't driven one, I can't say anything about it excites me or shows me something all the others haven't been doing for years.
That's funny... speaking of Bond, I am watching 'From Russia With Love" right now.
Also, when I saw "spoiler alert" I thought there was a recall on spoilers....like the aftermarket unit on my Optima. Duhhh. (It is a copy of the stock spoiler). See, it takes a hard-core car guy to think of that first!
While I am talking about spoiler's, you can get aftermarket clones from "The Wing King", outside Detroit. I paid $109 for mine, already painted to match.
:shades:
If you want torque and don't care about fuel economy or a stick then the 2.0LEB has 270 lb/ft of torque - same or more than most 3.5L V6s.
Mazda has been advertising the CX-5 like crazy, so being a car guy, (and the son-in-law of a Mazda employee), I checked it out.
155 HP? 9.5 seconds to 60??? 150 lb-ft? 3600 lb's? Another 45 Hp and 45 lb-ft please.
That just doesn't cut it. How is that Zoom-Zoom? It's a shame to have such a great handling, quality vehicle and then handicap it with a power deficit. Kind of like forcing a marathon runner breath through his nose. :confuse:
Actually, without being able to see the actual dyno graph showing torque and at what rpms, it is a bit premature to declare case closed. The reason I say this is how the specs are advertised. The opportune (but potentially allusive) word used is 'peak' torque. What these advertised specs don't tell you is that, while a 190 lb-ft peak may reveal itself at..say..3900 rpm, there may a relatively flat and very useable scale of 185lb-ft through the rev range of 2000 rpm and up to 3850 rpm. I am using these figures to make an example. It is a bit exaggerated to make my point. But with todays such advanced electronics/mechanical electronics in engine/tran management, very real world numbers and the scale of flat available torque still is not that far off the example above.
Long, flat and high torque curves in a lower than average rev range are most easily acquired by either using a turbo or blower (supercharger). Of course the (finally...it's about time) recognition that turboing is not only the most economical and clean way to extract the most HP, torque, urge and fuel economy out of an engine, being finally upon us in day-to-day-use cars (and trucks soon too I suspect), is a welcome advancement in modern vehicles hitting the market in greater numbers.
"I don't care if the interior was straight from a 1987 Tempo. "
Seriously? Now that is a bit too forgiving, IMO. :shades:
"That leaves the Mazda and while I haven't driven one, I can't say anything about it excites me or shows me something all the others haven't been doing for years."
I have never understood how someone can make such a statement without an actual test drive. If you don't like the styling, then say so, as that is valid without a drive.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/10/05/2014-mazda6-first-drive-review/
Also, I think the 1.6 Eco-Boost should be in the Mazda 3. That would be awesome.
There is actually a red Ford Tempo parked out on the main road where I go jogging.
Do you guys remember the ad's for "High Swirl Combustion Chamber" on the Tempo/Topaz? They were decent cars back then.
I chose the 1987 Chevy Z24, red with the 5 speed. (just kept a 100 Amp alternator in the trunk) Loved the Digi-dash.
Still my favorite car ever. My first automotive love, and the first car I ever got financing on my own. Oh to be 19 again.
Oops.....rambling there a bit.
Yeah, I remember the ads for the HSC 2.3. Nothing like a buzy push rod 4 banger.