Midsize Sedans 2.0

jd10013 · July 2007

true or not, a very very difficult thing to fathom on a purchase of this magnitude. Maybe I am assumming too much intelligence for the average American carbuyer?

I don't think it's a matter of intelligence, or lack there of. For Most people, buying a car is big deal, almost a special occasion. Unlike the car nuts here, I don't think its something the average person does more than once every 5-10 years. So, they go into the dealership with their mind already made up as to what they want, with the intention of driving it off the lot. Then the salesman steps in and starts throwing numbers and documents at them faster than they can possibly understand them. They totally loose track of what their paying for, and how much its costing them. then, they're off to the finance officer. He (in the same quick, incomprehensible fassion) starts throwing more numbers and papers arround, gives the buyer a monthly payment amount that they know the buyer will find too high. they then play with the loan term, or interest rate (maintaing the same prive for the vehicle and options) and come up with a $50 lower monthly payment. the owner quickly signs the papers thinking he just got a great deal, and doesn't realize he was realy screwed till a week or so later after spending 2 hours or so reading the 30 pages of documents he brought home with him.

benderofbows · July 2007

I'll add to that... when I was in car sales for four months, there were people who just didn't care about the total numbers. They just wanted to know what the payments were going to be- "payment buyers." Then, there were the "Get me done(s)", who would just come in and say, "Can you get me done?" [financed]. Sometimes we'd have to switch vehicles on them, to something completely different, and it was no big deal to them. They just wanted something new (to them) to drive, without having to pay anything for it right at the moment. I can go on but this is getting off topic... Basically, people would surprise you.

zzzoom6 · July 2007

geez, all this talk about residual values and TCO and KBB and BS and PDQ... look, all I'm saying is that on some cars (particularly the slower selling ones) can be had for deals that will reduce the usual impact of resale values that are often touted as benefits of buying a camcord. I'm not saying that everyone will be able to get the same type of deal that I did (a bit more than 6.5k off of MSRP) but if there are buyers out there that read this forum, this type of info may help them take advantage of the current market and get an amazing deal. And it is these amazing deals that can reduce the true cost to own of a Mazda6 to be among the best in this class.

But that assumes that they would want a Mazda6 in the first place... but for those who want a fun to drive car that has an expressive personality and is priced very competitively, it may be worth considering.

kdshapiro · July 2007

When you buy a used vehicle, you never know what someone really paid for the car. The price is the price. The car is a value based object, if it is worth the price, with the miles, in the condition it is in, with the options it came with, if the dealer gave the car away for $1 it will not effect the resale price. The individual buyer might try to second guess the seller, but in the end the price is the price. Haggling is always a good strategy for the buyer. Buy low and sell high is a good strategy for the seller.

elroy5 · July 2007

I'm not saying that everyone will be able to get the same type of deal that I did (a bit more than 6.5k off of MSRP) but if there are buyers out there that read this forum, this type of info may help them take advantage of the current market and get an amazing deal.

Can "average Joe" of the street get 6.5k off MSRP on a Mazda6?

bhmr59 · July 2007

I don't remember the numbers right now, anyone can check them, but the price shown on TCO and TMV were different. Other variable costs in TCO were auite questionable also.

goodegg · July 2007

An Accord or Camry with 100,000 miles should be priced similarly to a lesser (comparably equipped and sized) vehicle with 50,000 miles.

Logic being Honda's last over 200K while other cars are just happy to go 100K.

I think that is the main driving factor behind resale value. Miles mean little to Honda/Toyota midsize cars.

Andres! Where do you come up with these blanket statements? I've owned a Cam and a Cord and have an Odyssey and a TL in my garage tonight, so I obviously love Honda, but I don't subscribe to the thought process that Hondas are twice as good as the others out there.

I think most people buy Hondas because of their sporty, athletic attributes and their outstanding engineering, not because they feel they're gonna get rewarded with out of this world qualities.

zzzoom6 · July 2007

I'm not anybody special... I don't know the dealer, salesman, or work for a company that offers special deals for buying mazda's. So, yeah, I geuss any average Joe could get a similar deal as I did. In fact I've seen advertisements in our local newspaper that were offering to sell mazda6's for less than I bought mine. But what buyers actually get talked into paying vs what dealers advertise is completely different.

I think since many buyers are intimidated by the whole car buying process/ experience, many people act irrationally or impatiently and end up paying more than they need to. I knew what the situation was in terms of ad prices and the amount of inventory the dealers had so I leveraged this information to secure my pricing making clear to the dealers I negotiated with that I was in no particular hurry nor was I dead set in getting their car or even their brand. This midsize segment has many good cars and the vast majority of them have proven to be very reliable according to CR and JD Powers so having an open mind allowed me to be comfortable with choices that would let me maximize value and bang for my buck(s). It's a buyers market for most of these cars right now, and people shopping in this category can benefit if they were to consider the many good choices in this segment.

baggs32 · July 2007

Boy, it's pretty bad when one Honda guy is telling another to tone down his love for the big "H"! :P

We should all admire andres' passion for his car. But that's not to say we should all follow in his and scape2's footsteps. :P

thenebean · July 2007

where is scape2 anyways? haven't seen him in a while...

i love nissans, however i know they have flaws, as do all vehicles out there. the best way to decide what the best car for you is, is to go out and actually drive them. cars have come a long way, and a lot of the stereotypes are no longer even remotely valid.

i have a saab 9-3 sportcombi as a loaner car while my hubby's saab 9-2x is in the shop. i was very impressed! fast, fun, nimble, comfortable...i never would have thought it. im glad i don't let the stereotypes get in the way...

-thene

captain2 · July 2007

Points well taken, also part of it is that far too many buyers make these decisions based on payment size - something along the lines of walking into a dealer, with that car on their mind, as you say - and after some sticker shock will skip any preliminaries and directly ask the salesman (or this may be his first question) something like 'what can I get for $500.00/month?'. The answer to that question is, of course, almost anything, if you have reasonable credit and let the dealer work its 'magic'.
A really big mistake IMO as the real price of anything is what it costs in cash. Giving the dealer the opportunity to 'play' with any multitude of 'financing' arrangements or (even worse) lease plans is nothing more than asking to get screwed. If I run into a salesman at a dealer that does ask me how much I want to pay a month initially, I will simply walk out!
Thereafter the buyer's remorse you mention, simply because that buyer has no idea what he really paid for his car, only that he got his 500 buck payment, and a few years later is hit with some sort of refinance (or lease 'buyout') balloon or is paying some outrageous interest rate over a too long term on too high a price etc. etc. Again a hard concept for someone like me to understand - negotiate a cash deal (no trades or 'special' financing), that being the true cost of the car, and then go from there if you must.

zzzoom6 · July 2007

I've heard that from other people as well about the Saab 9-3. I'd like to see how they are to drive since most people seem to say it is a performance oriented sedan. So, I wonder how much they sell for? I remember either summer of last year or the year before when GM was having their fire sale, the Saab's were being discounted heavily and I almost got the 9-2x aero (the turbo one) but by the time I got serious, they were sold out in my area. What do you think of the suspension and tranny on the 9-3? regardless, thanks for the insight...

jeffyscott · July 2007

I don't remember the numbers right now, anyone can check them, but the price shown on TCO and TMV were different. Other variable costs in TCO were auite questionable also.

The TCO purcahase price includes taxes and fees and "typical" options.

But besides that, there is a difference in the TMV used in the TCO and the TMV you get when you go through the edmunds pricing function. For example the Accord SE TMV is about $600 lower in the TCO, while the Mazda6 SVE is about $100 higher in the TCO.

jeffyscott · July 2007

that assumes that they would want a Mazda6 in the first place... but for those who want a fun to drive car that has an expressive personality and is priced very competitively, it may be worth considering.

Yeah, I did not buy one because it was cheaper, that was just gravy

.

Just out of my own curiosity I did my own TCO, assuming I paid invoice price minus rebate (not even considering the much greater discount that I actually got). I used edmunds numbers for repair and maintenance costs. I adjusted fuel costs to reflect the amount I drive. I used edmunds figures for expected value after 5 years. I assumed no significant difference in insurance cost, because I know in my case there would not be a significant difference. As I am a cash buyer, I estimated what I would earn (after tax) on the amount saved by purchasing a 6.

For me this adjusted TCO came up with the Mazda6 being cheaper than the Accord by about 3 cents per mile. This shows how much things can vary when you look at your own individual circumstances, since the generic figues had the Accord at 3 cents per mile less than the Mazda6.

Now, since 3 cents per mile one way or the other amounts to about $20 per month for me, this would not be enough of a difference to push me one way or the other anyway.

andres3 · July 2007

Okay okay, so Honda doesn't have the market cornered with excellent vehicles. But when you compare an Accord to some of the worst stuff a company like say (Chrysler) is making, then it is very easy to start saying the Honda is twice as good and doubly superior.

andres3 · July 2007

Would you become passionate about Honda if I offered to pay for all of your "unexpected maintenance/repair" costs on any Honda you purchase for the first 100,000 miles for 50% of what the Honda dealer will do it for? (the Honda care extended warranty program; usually around 1.4K after negotiating)?

I'm giving you half off!!!

mz6greyghost · July 2007

Would you become passionate about Honda if I offered to pay for all of your "unexpected maintenance/repair" costs on any Honda you purchase for the first 100,000 miles for 50% of what the Honda dealer will do it for? (the Honda care extended warranty program; usually around 1.4K after negotiating)?

Considering that my wife's Neon is over 107K miles, and I haven't even come close to sinking $1400 in it for repairs, then I would've been at least $1K for NO reason. So no, I wouldn't become passionate. In fact, I'd think they're scam artists (since most "extended" warranties turn out to be a scam anyway).

thegraduate · July 2007

I hear ya. There hasn't been $1,400 spent on my old Accord either, and it got 174k miles. Lots of people from all makes likely have stories like ours.

Have I spent money on some repairs? Sure, but at 100k miles, the only repairs were done under an extended emissions warranty (due to a recall in 1996 Accords). It needed a new Oxygen sensor.

andres3 · July 2007

Trust me, I wasn't planning on making a penny less than $700 profit off of my "offer."

Heck, I'll offer 60% off!

:P

bhmr59 · July 2007

Those TCO figures can be so far from reality.

For our '07 Sonata SE purchased in February: TCO says purchase price (before DMV fees, etc) is $20,855, we paid $16651. TCO says 1st year financing (with 10%) down = $1343, our 13.7% down shows our HMFC financing at $851 (the extra $700 down is NOT saving us $500 interest in the first year). The insurance, with 300K liability & UM, 5,000 medical, and $200 deductible comprehensive & $500 collision deductible is $400 less than TCO projects.

TCO says the expected resale of this car after one year will be $15,195. If this is accurate, the 1st year deprecication would be $1,456, not the $6272 shown in TCO.

Take the TCO with a grain of salt. As jeffyscott said, your actual purchase price will greatly affect your TCO.

oldcem · July 2007

Whoa - my friend. Our last 6 Chryslers lasted longer than our last 3 Hondas did. My old boss used to brag about the reliability of his high mileage Accord (Had about 200K on it) until it caught fire and burned on the interstate one morning. Guess it was equipped with the Viking funeral option package.

Regards;
OldCEM

baggs32 · July 2007

Would you become passionate about Honda if I offered to pay for all of your "unexpected maintenance/repair" costs on any Honda you purchase for the first 100,000 miles for 50% of what the Honda dealer will do it for? (the Honda care extended warranty program; usually around 1.4K after negotiating)?

How about you just reimburse me for the repairs to our '96 Civic and we'll call it even? :shades: That would be somewhere in the range of $500-$700 that you owe me. Probalby closer to $500. We sold it with just over 40k miles on the odo and I can find the second owner if you want to reimburse him for his repair costs too.

Seriously though, my answer is no. I tried to like Honda's vehicles but just can't. I found that I just can't become passionate about a vehicle that has no passion to me. I'm very passionate about my Mustang but it is an American icon so not many people wouldn't be. I was passionate about my Mazda6 too because it was, simply put, an amazing car. Our Explorer? Well, I'm not so passionate about it because it is very much like a Honda in that it is an appliance which is how I see them.

Also, that Civic was the highest mileage vehicle we've ever owned. We usually lease or trade up after 2 or 3 years. Yeah, it's stupid financially but I like cars a lot and it's my money. :P So you'd never sell me on that reimbursement plan anyway.

baggs32 · July 2007

I was bored and decided to play with the EPA's new mileage estimates. I compared a 2008 FWD Taurus with a 2007 Accord V6 ATX and a 2007 Camry V6 ATX. Engines are 3.5L V6, 3.0L V6, and 3.5L V6 respectively. Trannies are 6sp, 5sp, and 6sp respectively. The Taurus and Camry have nearly equal HP while the Accord is short about 20 horses.

EPA estimates for the three are 18/28, 18/26, and 19/28 respectively. The Taurus is the heaviest and the Accord is the lightest IIRC.

For reference I threw in an Acura TL 3.5L V6 5sp ATX to see how the Honda 3.5L favored because it is supposedly similar to the new V6 for the Accord as we've talked about. It has roughly 20 more horses than the Taurus and Camry in terms of power and its weight falls somewhere in between the two. EPA estimates are 17/26.

So I'm guessing we're not to expect great things fromt he Accord V6 when it comes to gas mileage? Cylinder deactivation should help a little I'm sure. But from what I understand based on other mfrs who have implemented it, including Honda in the Odyssey, it's only useful on long straight highways where you can just cruise along. I don't live anywhere near those types of roads so I surely wouldn't pay extra for that technology.

captain2 · July 2007

So I'm guessing we're not to expect great things fromt the Accord V6 when it comes to gas mileage?
a spot where we will differ, any car that logically should run in the low 6s (high 5s?) 0-60 and still return something like 30 mpg on the highway and well into the 20s all around, gets my vote for 'great' gas mileage. We do after all have those 4 bangers for those willing to trade that extra performance for a mpg or two or three, don't we?
Chrysler (and GM) both claim a 10% increase in overall FE with the 'variable displacement' systems they put on their gas hog V8s and I have observed the same thing you talk about, the inability of the cars to even hold anything close to current highway speeds on 4 cylinders. Would imagine it would be even less effective trying to get a 3400 lb. sedan to do the same given the lesser displacements (and torque) of the V6s. Think the real answers are right in front of us, OHC engines with intelligent control systems that maximize engine efficiency in almost all conditions and I wouldn't bet that Honda won't be able to take it to a next level above what Toyota has already done.

jeffyscott · July 2007

I wonder why the FWD Lincoln MKZ with the 3.5L V6 is rated at 17/25...1 city and 3 highway less than the Taurus :confuse: .

akirby · July 2007

I can think of a few reasons. The MKZ still uses the Aisin 6 speed tranny instead of the new 6F joint venture tranny that the Taurus, Edge and MKX use. The 6F is supposed to be more fuel efficient. Not sure if the MKZ gets the 6F for 08 - I hope so. I also think they've had longer to tune the 3.5L in the Taurus for fuel economy now that Bill Ford is no longer in charge and emphasizing emissions over FE. If that's the case I would expect the 08 MKZ to have improved FE.

captain2 · July 2007

a possibility that the 'new' 3.5 is really nothing more than a bored/stroked 3.0? The car based MKX and Edge SUVs have been reviewed poorly recently by both CR and MT in comparisons, lack of engine efficiency and refinement both problems apparently. In especially the Lincoln, while noted for the good power you, would think think that Ford would've 'tuned out' (or isolated) that trademark DT harshness...

thegraduate · July 2007

Whoa - my friend. Our last 6 Chryslers lasted longer than our last 3 Hondas did.

Interesting. Our experience with Chrysler would show that 6 Chryslers might have the combined lifespan of 3 Hondas! I'm at 174k miles on the '96 Accord, and it hasn't stranded me yet. Has it needed some repairs? Of course. Any car with that many miles will, even so-called "perfect" Honda. I've spent about $1,000 in the last five years on three repairs. Not perfect, but not bad at all in my eyes.

We got burned once in 1994, and in an act of stupidity, bought another one in 1996. BOTH proved to be garage-queens, with one vehicle needing a suspension rebuild, and both having transmission issues keeping them in the shop for not multiple days, but instead weeks.

And, the lucky for us, the cars were so new, they never got out of their warranty (the '94 LeBaron Convertible had less than 20k miles and was traded 8 months after purchase on a 95 Civic. The '96 Sebring was sold at 35k miles because my folks knew they couldn't afford the car once in ran out of warranty - they came back to Honda the second and final time). They don't limit their shopping choices to Honda (nor do I), but they do boycott Chrysler, even 10 years later.

And, "Viking Funeral Package" lol

baggs32 · July 2007

a possibility that the 'new' 3.5 is really nothing more than a bored/stroked 3.0?

There's a good bit more to it than that but I don't know all the details off hand. Some reviews I've read of the Taurus have praised the low engine noise levels so maybe the D35 has been tweaked over the last year.

baggs32 · July 2007

a spot where we will differ, any car that logically should run in the low 6s (high 5s?) 0-60 and still return something like 30 mpg on the highway and well into the 20s all around, gets my vote for 'great' gas mileage.

I don't differ with you on that but I don't see Honda increasing the mpg numbers over what they are for the competition that's all. Claims have been made in this thread that they will increase those numbers (thus saving the planet :P ) and I'm a bit skeptical if you can't tell.

captain2 · July 2007

yes, also have read some better opinions of it and not had the chance to 'experiment' with one myself. But almost all reviews I've read (even the more favorable ones) still put the 3.5 at some level lower than similiar (and older) engines from you know who...

baggs32 · July 2007

I get the impression that no matter what anyone does to their motor it will always be at least a level lower than you know who. :P

One reason for the better refinement is the way Ford changed the engine mounts. They mounted it to a different part of the structure and used different mounts which went a long way. I'm wondering if this new discovery will carry over to other products like the Fusion in the coming years.

captain2 · July 2007

if Honda is going to save the planet, look for an Accord with a high tech diesel in it. Toyota's 2GR is a remarkable accomplishment (and yes, I drive one of these) but I don't believe even it bumps the limits of these current engines. Honda I would put a lot a faith in to improve on these things that Toyota has already proven possible, the nextstep maybe a mpg or two after correcting for EPA changes. Revolutionary hardly, although that title might be argued for the now 'ancient' Nissan VQ and the Toyota 2GR.

urnews · July 2007

I, too, have not had an opportunity to test drive the 3.5-liter V6 from Ford but, from what I've read on the Internet, it is a reworked 3.0-liter Duratec, but has already earned a spot as one of the 10 best engines from Wards Automotive.

According to an article in Wikipedia, Ford expects the 3.5 to be in 20 percent of all FoMoCo vehicles by the end of the decade.

Mileage results for this engine do not seem very impressive to me, sort of run-of-the-mill. Am I missing something here?

captain2 · July 2007

no actually I believe the GM 3.6 is a really fine effort, an engine that sounds and feels good in the XR (and the CTS).
As for the rest of it, I don't think that it can be argued, that 'Detroit' mfgrs. in general has NEVER produced a smaller engine that 'led the pack' in anything (except possibly gas consumption), those type of engines coming instead from the 'Japanese' and 'European' mfgrs.. Call it bias if you wish, I'll call it fact, at least until GM/Ford/Chrysler can produce a whole lot more than just a single 3.6L 'high-feature' V6.

urnews · July 2007

I, too, have not had an opportunity to test drive the 3.5-liter V6 from Ford but, from what I've read on the Internet, it is a reworked 3.0-liter Duratec, but has already earned a spot as one of the 10 best engines from Wards Automotive.

According to an article in Wikipedia, Ford expects the 3.5 to be in 20 percent of all FoMoCo vehicles by the end of the decade.

Mileage results for this engine do not seem very impressive to me, sort of run-of-the-mill. Am I missing something here?

captain2 · July 2007

it is a reworked 3.0-liter Duratec, but has already earned a spot as one of the 10 best engines from Wards Automotive.
I actually agree with baggs32 on this, think there just must be something more ot it than just a simple displacement increase. Ward's 10 best - whoopee - that honor held for many many years by things like the 50s vintage GM pushrods (as well as the DT3.0) in whatever rendition. 'Best' engines are powerful, economical, smooth and quiet, and if the DT3.5 fails to measure up in 3 of those qualities, it will never find its way under my hoods - or maybe I'm just expecting too much?

urnews · July 2007

'Best' engines are powerful, economical, smooth and quiet, and if the DT3.5 fails to measure up in 3 of those qualities, it will never find its way under my hoods - or maybe I'm just expecting too much?

At least you added the all-important "if" to your statement. I'm not saying Wards Automotive is the "be-all, end-all" judge of motors but it is a significant accomplishment to be included in the "Ten Best," don't you think?

andres3 · July 2007

So he went down in a blaze of glory; not a bad way to go in my book.

urnews · July 2007

Apparently, the mid-size Fusion and Milan will continue to use the 3.0 Duratec as their V6 for the 2008 model year. The MKZ Lincoln, the Edge, the Taurus (Five Hundred) and Sable (Montego) all get the 3.5.

andres3 · July 2007

If you like spending "your" money on repairs, tow trucks, and unexpected maintenance, have at it. Your repair bill on the Civic sounds quite low. If your experience with your other cars has been similar, then you are a lucky man.

I get passionate when I keep driving a Honda day after day, year after year, and I never have to lift the hood.

For me, Honda's number 1 attribute is bullet proof dependability. #2 is overall greatness; no weaknesses.

captain2 · July 2007

a significant accomplishment to be included in the "Ten Best," don't you think?
not really, much in the same way that I don't think that the Camry winning the COTY was a significant accomplishment, an award largely bestowed on that car because so many people buy them - and, incidentally why the GM 3.8/3800 pushrod/cam-in-block (or whatever marketing spin they choose to put on a really outdated design) achieved such recognition - it appeared
in about every GM product known to mankind for many many years. And furthermore, I believe it to be true that 'Ward's' awards are also 'sponsored' much in the same way as JDP's - if 'Wards' (in this case) knows that Ford needs some favorable pub and can get Ford to pay to use their name in some advertising campaigns, those '10 best' lists might just be predetermined!

baggs32 · July 2007

If you like spending "your" money on repairs, tow trucks, and unexpected maintenance, have at it. Your repair bill on the Civic sounds quite low. If your experience with your other cars has been similar, then you are a lucky man.

I get passionate when I keep driving a Honda day after day, year after year, and I never have to lift the hood.

I put over $1000 in repairs into that Civic. The only other money I've ever spent on a premature or unexpected repair, and I'm not kidding or lying here, was $300 or so for a new A/C compressor in my '98 ZX2. Other vehicles I've owned, and see if you can spot the trend here now, were the '98 ZX2, '04 Mazda6 S, '02 and '05 Escape, '06 Explorer, and '06 Mustang GT.

Your blanket statements of Honda's perfection just don't fly with me andres. I'm sorry to disappoint you but there are others who agree with me. Even other Honda boys and girls can't believe your loyalty anymore! :P

andres3 · July 2007

I'm not Honda loyal or Honda fanatical at all. Contrary to what you'd like to believe.

I'm just objective and report the truth. The truth is my family and friends have had no issues with Toyota's and Honda's throughout my lifetime.

The truth is other cars have given Many MANY costly problems. The truth is I was the only one during my teenage years with my car in the shop all of the time (just ask all my friends). It's not like I bragged about my car being a junker, but they soon caught onto the fact that Dodge sucks!

urnews · July 2007

It's not like I bragged about my car being a junker, but they soon caught onto the fact that Dodge sucks!

What Dodge products did you have trouble with? Any mid-size variations?

andres3 · July 2007

It is my stern opinion that if a manufacturer can't do a simple compact car correctly, then they obviously don't have the qualications to do a midsize car correctly.

Dodge's biggest failure of all-time, the Dodge Neon. You can argue that it isn't their biggest failure, but then again, Chrysler is full of failures.

The Honda Accord and Civic are virtually identicle and interchangeable when it comes to build quality and long term dependability. The only difference is one is compact and one is mid-size.

captain2 · July 2007

Apparently, the mid-size Fusion and Milan will continue to use the 3.0 Duratec as their V6
I thimk I read in this forum, that Ford was developing a 'new' 3.0 for the Fulans at about 240hp for 09/10 models. Possibly an improvement, but as is typical for Ford - too little too late, and I think it is quite obvious that they don't have the money to do what they really need to in this regard.

akirby · July 2007

I'm not Honda loyal or Honda fanatical at all.

Now that's funny right there, I don't care who you are!

akirby · July 2007

Isn't it amazing how everything that gives a positive review to a Ford product is either wrong or the result of bribery? If you folks would put aside your Ford hatred long enough to look at the facts you'd find that Ford is doing a lot of things right nowadays and it's only getting better (slowly but surely).

It's obvious the DT3.5L has a lot more potential in both refinement, power and fuel economy than what we saw in the 07 models as evidenced by the 08 Taurus.

baggs32 · July 2007

I'm just objective and report the truth. The truth is my family and friends have had no issues with Toyota's and Honda's throughout my lifetime.

The truth is that quality is pretty much a wash now between mfrs especially in this class of cars. What someone buys now only depends on personal preference. There is no more Honda or Toyota safety net if there ever really was one.

Not long ago you could say that Honda and Toyota ruled the quality/reliability roost and back it up with different ratings and such. That time has past and it's people like you that the past losers need to convince otherwise. I hope they know how hard that is going to be. :surprise:

Midsize Sedans 2.0

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles