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
I do see your points, however.
For those in need or prefering FWD in the larger car will have to move up to Buick. Wonder if that is going to work out OK?
As for uniquely styled, I did not mean ugly.
Loren
Yes, but the problem is not FWD it is putting these excessively powerful V6 engines in these type of cars.
But, HP numbers sell so overpowered FWD sedans are built and then most who buy them never even get the engine to 3000 RPM.
Perhaps the solution is to bury your right foot in the 2.5 and realize that this will accelerate fast enought to meet your needs or, if not, buy something else with RWD or AWD.
Excessive being a judgement call? I'll contend to you that a V6 Altima is 'safer' than the same car with a 175hp 4 banger, the Accord V6 safer, the torque steering XR vs. the XE etc. etc. by simply having that extra power to cope with a multitude of real life traffic situations. A number of FWD V8s (Impala SS for example) have the same 'problem' or maybe these cars have too much power (in your judgement), as well?
That's got to be "Stop the presses!" front page news: V6s are safer than I4s. I seriously doubt it.
Perhaps you are thinking about safety in a passive sense, things like #of airbags, crash test results, electronic safety 'control' systems etc. AS OPPOSED to safety in an active sense - the ability of any car to avoid difficult situations. That extra HP let's say to pass that semi on a 2 lane highway comfortably or merging onto an interstate off a short on ramp. In short there is more to a safe car than how well it crashes or how much a computer will alow you to do before IT takes 'control'., and those 'active' safety features (things that the driver does control) and the resources with which he/she has to work with I am talking about. Those things that can help you avoid an accident(acceleration, braking, and handling) are what in my mind make a truly 'safe' car. If we are going to accept the contention that the Mazda6 is the best handling car of this group than it is also likely the safest car in this group - at least in that regard. And conversely if we know that the Fusion V6 (or 4) is the least powerful, it therefore must be considered the least safe in that regard as well.
I am not labelling the 4 cylinder versions of these cars necessarily unsafe, heaven knows that even that 4 banger Fusion is much much safer in almost all respects than even cars made a short 10-15 years ago or so - the early to mid 90s - some really bad examples of 'wheezmobiles' - and we certainly all lived through it, didn't we?
Let's get real. The powerful I4s in today's mid-sized cars--more powerful in some cases than the V8s of not long ago-- have more than enough power for safe driving. OTOH, the power waiting in those V6s can be an enticement to drive faster, for less safety for the driver and those around him/her.
I would also be willing to bet you that, as you drive home tonight, and witness anybody driving in an unsafe manner that there is likely little correleration between what he/she is doing and how much HP their car has, meaning you will certainly find as many 'bad' drivers 'squeezing' their 4 bangers, as you will other drivers 'enjoying' their V8 300C SRT8s....
I don't think gas prices will ever get low enough (in the near future) to make V8/RWD cars big sellers. The "Big 3" will have to develop competitive small engines/cars, or they will simply cease to exist, IMO. I don't think these companies can survive selling only trucks.
You could use your viewpoint, though, to show how there is no benefit to having an I4 vs. a V6, because accidents are not caused by lack of speed, or acceleration, but by inattention and unskilled driving.
That's not really the news I was looking for, as I was hoping the car would be in showrooms by September or so. I am thinking of the Malibu or the Saturn Aura but I like the styling of the Malibu a bit better, not to mention I'm thinking it will be better equipped in the LTZ model (as compared to the Aura XR model) but I don't know that for sure.
How do others feel about not being able to test drive this car until November or December of this year?
-Aura has no I4=Malibu will have the class leading I4/V6 on LTZ.
-Chevy's dealer network is HUGE compared to Saturn
-The Malibu is a more established name than the Aura and Chevy has played in this market more heavily than Saturn.
The Aura is a slow seller b/c it doesn't have a I4 and it's saddled with No Haggle Pricing. Mailbu without a doubt will sell better.
You hypothesized that the Mazda6 might be the best-handling mid-size car and that the Fusion, both the V6 and I4, having the least powerful engine, might therefore be the least safe in the mid-size segment.
That logic totally ignores the fact that Mazdas and Fusions have exactly the same engines and the Fusions (Milans, MKZs) are based on a slightly modified Mazda chassis.
When it comes to safety, it is helpful to examine some raw data. From the Internet:
Nationally, in 2005, there were 43,443 fatalities. Of these, 25,347 were a result of road departure, 9,188 intersection-related, and 4,881 were pedestrians.
Does a more powerful engine prevent a driver from running off of the road? I doubt it.
Will a powerful engine (who decides the definition of powerful?) help a driver get out of a tight bind? Sure, sometimes. But avoiding the bind in the first place is a better remedy. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Our 221-horsepower 3.0-liter V6 Ford engine is quite adequate for our AWD Fusion, thank you. At no time during our seven months of ownership have I said to myself, "Gee, I wish this car had 270 horsepower."
As a safety matter, I just don't see horsepower to be a significant factor. I once totaled a 1958 VW Beetle (32 horsepower). But the reason was driver error: I fell asleep at the wheel and took out a guardrail.
Yikes, glad you didn't take yourself out in the process! :surprise:
A '58 Beetle? Cool!!!
jeffyscott said: Yes, but the problem is not FWD it is putting these excessively powerful V6 engines in these type of cars.
But, then we're returning to elroy's statement that said the Chrysler RWD V6 cars were slow (which isn't true if you consider sub-8 second 60 MPH runs very slow - it's similar to a Fusion V6).
Heck, the V6 RWD sedans (Charger/300) from Chrysler are faster than the V8 RWD sedans from Ford (Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, Town Car), which make the 0-60 run in something like 7.9 seconds (according to C&D).
Good statistics on the road departures. I think the whole "more powerful = safer" argument has little merit.
Plus one for driver error. I totaled my first car, road departure / driver error. It had 110 horsepower, in a midsize sedan.
While I admit I've been in situations before where I want more power, I can't say I've ever needed more power.
urnws- I think you are missing my point. In the sentences before I am contending that vehicle dynamics (power, handling, braking) are largely what makes a car safe and given that contention that a beeter handling car (the 6 in this case) is a safer car than the others in this group simply by accepting the generally held view that the 6 handles better. And likewise, if any car is down on power (like the Fusion (or the 6), for example) the opposite must also be true. Of your quoted 25347 road departure accidents, would be willing to bet that many of those were just like the one you had in your VW, not necessarily falling asleep at the wheel but probably inattention, cell phones, and/or 'playing' with the stereo - all the kind of things that are very unrelated to the task and responsibilities at hand.
I never said anything like that 221hp (or even the 150-175hp in the 4 bangers) wasn't enough in any particular car (although you can go back in any number of my posts and find a number of times that I have said it just isn't competitive these days) - HP and relative FE numbers don't lie. What I did say though, is that I think the 270 is safer than the 221, not because it is anything that any of us that have it use even occassionally, but because it is there, in reserve, on those very rare occassions that we HAVE to use it - having that extra 50hp gives you the option of 'aggressively' (bad choice of words, perhaps) avoid a number of real life traffic situations similar to those I specifically mentioned.
Not a whole lot different than having a car with a great set of brakes, the same sort of very rare times that a 10 or 15 feet shorter stopping distance can make a helluva difference. When was the last time that any of us can remember 'locking them up' (or getting the the ABS to engage)? If anybody out there can honestly answer 'it happens even semi-regularly' - well, then they are driving too 'aggressively' (good choice of words), their ABS is malfunctioning, and their insurance rates are justifably stratospheric.
Great acceleration can help you avoid an accident, but so can an emergency lane change.
Do I think a 4-cylinder model is safer than a similar V6 model? No way. Having both passive and active elements help to avoid/survive an accident, as well as defensive driving, paying FULL attention to the road ahead, around, and behind you, driving appropriately for road and weather conditions, and properly maintaining your vehicle.
absolutely - and therefore are 'safer' -in that respect, than the V6 - and effectively a tradeoff from a safety perspective - what you gain in handling abilities vs. what you are sacrificing in power.
a true story - recently 'stuck' behind a little Korean subcompact, both of us attempting to merge off a short entrance ramp onto a busy highway that happens to be move at about 75 all the time. By the time he actually got to the end of the on ramp, he was huffing and puffing all the way up to maybe 45 or 50! The ensuing screeching of 'locked up' brakes and 'panic' lane changes , of course followed as he then 'forced' his merge, all from those 75 mph 'victims' of this certainly underpowered car cutting in front of them. Me, being relatively far behind him (maybe 100 yds.), understanding what he was attempting to do (and what he was attempting to do it in), and anticipating his probable inability to do it, bailed to the road shoulder but I thought I was about to be 'taken out'. What would expect this guy to do? Stop at the end of the ramp! That may be even worse than what he actually did do.
And then you tell me, that having some extra power is ludricious and not safety related? Now that would be ludricruous! Granted an extreme example and I'll even admit that even a 4 banger from this particular group could at least approach a condition safe merging speed.
BTW, I drive this ramp every day and left to my own means (and my own 268hp) I can easily hit that 75mph to merge. The Avalon, I drive, a safer car if only because of that 'surplus' of HP! Or maybe we should all drive around in (90hp?) Kias and then blame situations like this on the fact that many drivers largely ignore speed limits or tend to drive at speeds that 'keep up with the flow'? Oops can't do that either, give it enough time and even those Kias can (and do) move well above posted speeds as well!
It's amazing what can happen when you cut unnecessary costs, build high quality desirable vehicles at sustainable volumes.
That's great news. Thanks for posting it, Allen.
Time will tell, with foot notes and post scripts to come.
I would not take the time to read the small print and instead just wait and see how this all plays out. I don't see the stock price doubling today, and big inverstors now have the data at hand.
TwinForce
Seeing that Mulally was quoted as saying that they won't be profitable for the year and still expect that won't happen until 2009, I'd say you're right.
It's still good news no matter how you spin it and shows that they are doing something right. BTW, Ford's NA market share increased a few tenths too. Being able to reduce fleet sales and increase market share is not an easy thing to do no matter who you are.
Agreed, my driving instructor referred to that as "being somewhere else," implying anywhere else is better.
And to truly do that, you may need to stomp on the gas.
This was referred to as "changing zip codes" among other things. This is one remedy, although rarely is it the only solution unless its coupled with "red fog" and "no way am I going to let that [experlative] in front of me."
You can't 'get the hell out' in an I4 unless its turbocharged.
I totally, completely, and categorically disagree with this statement. A moderate 4 cylinder engine and a responsive transmission (or better still, a manual) will do fine.
AMEN
Anyway, enough of my rant. If you have a 300 HP car then you should be able to merge at full speed even at 1/4 throttle. If you have 200 HP then you should be able to merge at full speed even on a short ramp at 1/2 throttle acceleration.
If you have 100 HP then floor the damn thing! That will help!
What 300 hp car gets good gas mileage?
You can jam the throttle to the carpet from a stop, and get nary a chirp from the tires. I'll just pretend it is AWD or something.
Interestingly, when I was a couple of years younger (and the car was too) I had a chance to run 0-60 in a flat, broad area. It took just over 10 seconds, and that's with ~150k miles on the clock.
On the other hand, my 2006 Accord (5AT, 166 hp) does the same between 8 and 9 seconds).
*By the way, I never brake-torque the engine (it seems really bad for it). I just hit the gas from a stop.
I believe all of these new midsize cars, in 4 cyl form, can get to 60 in under 10 seconds...I think that is plenty of acceleration capability for accomplishing this task.
The 328 is a mid size sedan - right? One of the best out there for the money. Fantastic leases.
It's compact at best. $35k for a compact is high for me (space is crucial for me, I'm 6'4" and a big guy!)
The 5-series is midsize.
The 7-series is full size.
Did anyone watch the video I posted on CarSpace of my Accord running from 5 to 80 mph? 60 comes in well under 8 seconds and 80 in about 10. Before the acceleration ramp even ends, I overtake an Expedition that had a big lead on me before I took off. I think that is well above the acceleration capability of the average vehicle on the road.
Yes, I saw the video, but I would rather not have to punch it as soon as I back out of my parking spot. With the V6 you can wait until you get halfway down the ramp, and pick a spot to blend into the traffic without anyone having to slow down for you.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against 4 cylinder Accords. My 92 Accord (140hp) was plenty fast enough for me for 12 years. It's just so much easier, and takes less advanced planning, with the 6 cylinder's highway acceleration.
- The 335 is a turbo yes, cost $9K more no
- gets way less MPGs (who cares tho! - its a 335!) probably 34 highway after being broken in, my 330 got 34 mpg at 65
- and your insurance premium doubles vs. the 328 not even close.
If I wanted a race car I'd get a Mustang and save a bunch of money okay, but these cars aren't even in the same league.
High HP is one of the things you use the least in 95% of your drives. 230 in a RWD setup is perfect. disagree, my turbo 4 gets floored quite a bit when merging
Wow, your driveway must be directly on I-40 or something. I have 130 hp Accord, drive into an urban setting with 70+ mph traffic daily, and have several mountains around.
I can't tell ya the last time I had to floor it. And it's a 4-speed auto.
There is no way you can justify needing more than a good modern 4 cylinder engine. Just admit that it's a want and move on.