The Sonata looks so 90s. The Accord you're posting is a 6 year old design. The 2008 looks sweet.
Stats are misleading. You don't hear mag editors talking about the odd thumping on an Accord like they do a Sonata. I'm not talking dbs. I'm talking the V and H, something Hyundai needs to fix on this car.
Consider this . . . how much does one typically pay for an Accord EX-L V6?
You can buy a Sonata Limited V6 with Leather for $17,500, including incentives, not including TTL. Some folks can withstand the higher depreciation rate when you're able to buy a car for such a price.
No revelation about it. I just prefer the cleaner design of the Sonata. To each own. The photo I posted is the 07 Accord, I don't care how old the design is, if I am a perspective shopper of the two, those two would be on the lot for purchase at present time.
The 08 Accord to my eyes, at least the front end, resembles somewhat to the current Sonata, especially the headlight.
Stats are misleading
Believe what you want to believe. It's funny how cars like the Sonata, when it performs well in various areas, you'd get comments like this from the naysayers. When it's the other way around, well, everything seems to be invisible.
The Accord is a competent car, the Sonata is a competent. Appreciate the choices you have out there, only when you have competitions out there, the vehicles keep improving.
The 08 Accord to my eyes, at least the front end, resembles somewhat to the current Sonata
Interesting observation considering most people thought the Sonata snagged the Accord's rear and tailights for their "new" design. You know what they say about imitation.
I do realize that all these cars do share a lot of styling cues. How can't they? But Hyundai just doesn't seem to attend the 21'st century design school like the others in this comparo.
Even the Azera is a yawner. I think the Genesis has potential.
Up until next year, the Mazda6 still has 3 body styles: sedan, hatchback (some call this a 5-door), and a wagon. The Legacy was on my short list not only because of AWD and a fun driving GT, but also because of the wagon option. In the past I had an Accord hatchback and a Legacy wagon and found the extra hauling capacity handy not only for work but also for moving larger items... and even for taking naps on long road trips
It's too bad the Legacy and Mazda6 won't be making their wagons anymore, but with the Outback and CX-7, there's still good alternatives for buyers of both brands. So from a practical/utility perspective, the Mazda6 and the Passat will be the only cars in this class that will have an expanded cargo carrying capacity over a standard sedan... too bad too, I'd think the average person/family would find extra hauling space would be a good feature that would take away the appeal from heavier and less efficient SUV's which are also more rollover prone.
Do you know what the 08 Accord will, or will not have? I guess if the buyer is more interested in gadgets, than the car itself, sync could be a plus. IMO there are already too many gadgets to take the driver's mind off what he/she should be concentrating on, DRIVING.
I'd bet a huge amount of buyers purchase a car based on looks ALONE
You're right, and that's the reason why I got the 2007 Sonata SE :shades:
I'd say the:
bang-for-the-buck price i.e. most number of standard features on a mid-variant model better-than-competetion warranty & interior space competent power,fuel consumption, NVH, comfort & handling
are simply bonuses. Besides, the chances that my car will be vandalized or stolen are less, since i got such a no-name-brand car.
I'm happy with my purchase and i couldn't care less for those who are nit-picking. I owned Honda's & Toyota's and I wish their followers don't convert to Hyundai like me bcoz it might drive Hyundai's prices up :surprise:
Our next target purchase: either a Santa Fe or a Veracruz
"I'd bet a huge amount of buyers purchase a car based on looks ALONE"
I couldn't disagree more this statement. A car has to has form and function, such as the BMW 335. If not form and function than function, such as the Aztec.
I would never buy a daily beater based on looks alone.
I know that Ford has an exclusive on Sync for at least a year so it's guaranteed that no other mfr will offer Sync. So from that standpoint yes, I know for a fact the 08 accord won't have it.
Having voice and manual control via the radio of both the phone and mp3 player is safer than trying to use these devices manually.
If the situation was reversed and the Camcord had that feature I'm sure we'd be hearing a totally different tune. Didn't we hear the same thing about AWD? I guess is the Accord doesn't have it then nobody needs it - right?
You can buy a Sonata Limited V6 with Leather for $17,500, including incentives
Yes, those who harp on resale value seem to forget that the "depreciation" that comes before you buy is not a cost to the buyer. My mazda6 depreciated by $5000 before I bought it, according to the way some seem to look at this.
I think looks can end up being a deciding factor, because the other differences are minor. For instance I could have been comfortable driving an Accord or a Mazda6, but one of the main reasons I bought the 6 is because I think it looks better.
It is nice that it looks so good while I am walking to it, because it takes me a long time to get to my car...weighed down, as I am, with a much heavier wallet than I would have had I bought an Accord .
"Having voice and manual control via the radio of both the phone and mp3 player is safer than trying to use these devices manually."
Huh, I disagree 100% about voice. I would not want to interact vocally with my radio. Pressing a button on the steering wheel is about as safe as you can get in terms of fiddling with the radio. By the time I say 101.5 I could have pressed the button three times.
We're talking about using a MP3 player or manually dialing a phone - you can't do that with a steering wheel control. It requires multiple button presses either on the phone or the MP3 player which Sync eliminates. Saying "play track Freebird" is infinitely safer than scrolling through Ipod menus to find it. Same with looking at your phone to find a contact to call.
Why can't you just admit this is a very nice feature instead of looking for ways to bash it just because it's a Ford feature?
"Actually the laws aren't that well written. A crummy wired ear-piece is all you need to be in compliance with the laws."
Actually no, because in some states you are not allowed to remove your hand from the wheel to dial or hangup the phone. So if you can do this from your crummy wired ear-piece you would be in compliance to the law.
in some states you are not allowed to remove your hand from the wheel to dial or hangup the phone.
I've never seen such a specific restriction. Considering you remove your hand from the wheel all the time to change radio stations or climate control I don't see how you could enact something that much more restrictive just for cell phones. Care to post a link to one of those laws?
"I know people who could care less about handling but would kill for more gadgets. Does that make either of you wrong? Of course not."
But what it means is that when I buy a car, gadgets don't mean anything. There are people who buy a car based on gadgets to the dollar, that is not me.
It's not about being right or wrong, it's about the way I buy cars and what I look for. When someone posts that car x has a nine-gigabyte hard drive, I say so what, but others go ohh and ahh.
I wish that FoMoCo, instead of spending all that money developing Sync with Microsoft, has instead devoted it to making a more economical engine. Our 2007 3.0-liter, 221-horsepower V6 SEL AWD Fusion gets 14.8 mpg in all-city driving and 24 mpg on the highway at 55-60 mph. The revised EPA estimate for this power train is 17 mpg city and 24 mpg highway.
I could care less about about gadgets like Sync but do care about mileage. I'm sure that there must be a demand for such technology or Ford wouldn't have invested in it. But, do we really want to turn our cars into computers more so than they are already?
I'm pretty much a basic transportation guy when it comes to vehicles and like our 2000 Focus station wagon just as much as I do our $27,105 MSRP Fusion. Power steering, power brakes, air conditioning, an automatic transmission and I am happy. Heck, the Focus even has crank windows.
The bells and whistles trend has far exceeded its usefulness as far as I'm concerned and the Sync idea is nothing more than a gimmick that's likely to go on the fritz in very short order, IMHO.
Call me old school, but cars were made for commuting not computing.
I'm very impressed with that video showing the capabilities of Sync. Of course, I'm 26 years old, and am a huge technology fan. I don't spend that much time in a car, so most of my technology is related to other things (example, my car is pretty spartan; but I have GPS tracking and navigation in my new wristwatch (Garmin Forerunner 305), so I can use it anywhere, especially running and biking).
What really intruiges me about Sync is that it will be upgradeable with new software packages in the future. Compared to other options available in cars today, that makes it much more appealing. If you are planning on keeping the car for a while, it is nice to know that your high-tech features won't be out of date in a year or two. A few years is a long time in the technology world, and something brand new may come onto the market that appeals to you. All you'll have to do is download the latest patch, and whatever hot new high-tech gadget you want in 5 years will likely be able to "Sync" with your car.
Call me old school, but cars were made for commuting not computing.
I guess I'm old school too. My Accord has a six CD changer, but 99.9% of the time I'm listening to my favorite local radio station (Walton & Johnson in the morning and classic rock all day). My nieces a nefews have all these gadgets, and seems to me they are just toys. The play with them, and play with them, but never really just listen to the music. They spend way more time downloading music than they do listening to it :confuse:. I don't see the need for it.
I'm a tech fan too, but with cars I believe the technology should go into making the car better to drive. Yes, I love a good stereo, I'd like to be able to plug in an mp3 flash drive. But I wouldn't make a purchase decision on a cars entertainment center or other gadgets.
I'm all for gadgets if it helps keeps my loved ones and I safe. So I'm all for the latest safety wizardry such as ESC, ABS with Brake Assist, active head restraints, side curtains, etc. I've also become accustomed to certain creature comforts over the years; power windows, locks, mirrors, and remote locking are something I won't do without on a 4-door car. And I'm a real fan of flexible driving positions via seat adjustments (love those dual height adjusters or power ones, and telescopic wheels). Little things that improve passenger comfort are nice, too: center armrests, padded armrests (amazing how even some cars in this class fall down there), lighted vanity mirrors, lots of storage pockets, lots of foot room under the front seats, etc. Other than that, the rest is gravy. Don't need audio controls on the wheel (they're not bad, but I really can do without them). Don't need nav. Don't need Bluetooth (although I can appreciate it). Really don't need a 500 petabyte audio system with built-in data warehouse. Don't need a computer that is too smart for its own good (ala iDrive). Don't need DVD screens (I can always bring along my $80 DVD player if we're on a long trip). Don't need LED lights all over the place, or an auto climate control, or push-button starter.
Hard to bellieve my first car, the mid-sized '66 Dodge Coronet, had no carpet, no radio, no A/C, no power anything (except brakes I think), and a 3-speed automatic. But we got by. Really easy to work on that slant 6 engine, though--lots of room in the engnie bay!
Your thoughts are along the same thoughts as mine. I don't call power windows, seats, or door locks gadgets though. Most cars except for the cheapest of the cheap come with them anyway. Climate control makes life easier in the cabin, don't need dual controls though. Don't even need cruise. I like the audio controls on the steering wheel, aids in the prevention of distraction from fiddling with the radio. Don't believe in XM/Sirius or NAV. VZ Nav is way cheaper and can be used on foot or bicycle. I'll take leather although leatherette is fine. In this segment, I would want a decent car for family transportation, some amount of creature comforts, efficient, yet lively engine.
IMO, when one moves up to LS460 or 750 class it comes with the gadgets. Drove the 750 and it comes with a dizzying array of gadgets, maybe too many. But when you spend $90K for a car that's what you expect and that's what you get.
“I am struggling with the trend to make everything bigger. The Civic is about the same size as my old Accord”
What I find troublesome, except for the Civic and Corolla, mileage for growing subcompacts has skidded down from early 1990s ratings of 31/37 in many cases to 24/32. This is CamCord/Sonata/Optima 4-cylinder mileage territory. Subcompacts that used to weigh 2100–2300# now are now nudging 3000#. The latest Jetta has gone past it now (3230 MT) and is almost the same tonnage as an I4 Sonata (3253 MT). The new Rabbit with a 5-cylinder is rated @22/30. I have read a test where drivers only averaged 19 mpg, another just over 25. At around $3 a gallon and nearly 20k purchase price, what kind of economy car is that? I am aware that these cars have more ‘stuff’ on them, and didn’t accelerate so well, but how about a 2600# subcompact? The 2005 (I think) remake of the Malibu added about 3 mpg. That will be lost in the 2008 conversion to the longer-wheelbase chassis. The new revised mileage ratings will send it down further. Another thing: does everybody have to go from 0-60 in 7 seconds or less? 8 seconds is quite adequate for a lot of people, I think.
“the Accord is bigger than the 80s Crown Vics.”
On this point, I think you are confused. The LTD began in 1965. The incarnation you referred to started in 1979 as the Galaxie/LTD. It was around 214" overall length. I don’t know of any Accord that big. Ford did bring out a Fairmount-based vehicle called the LTD in the early 1980s, as a precursor to the Taurus. This may be what you are thinking of. I think the Crown Victoria label was lifted from a fancy 1950s Fairlane to differentiate from its lesser stablemate.
I'm with you when it comes to my commuter car. I picked up a low end Altima 2.5S with no other options, but ABS. Didn't want or need to all the gadgets on the higher trims.
However, you listed out exactly what you want and need, but you still purchased the 'SEL' trim?
You could of picked up a base 'S' model or the 'SE' trim if you really needed AWD and/or a V6, which according to you, not really needed from your list of must haves.
FWD cars will get better mpg vs. their AWD counterparts.
Ford offers low end trims w/o all the toys like every other brand, yet you choose the top of the line trim.
Your list of priorities and complaints would of made the Fusion I-4S, your "dream" car, yet you chose the top of the line V6 (your mpg complaint), AWD (your mpg complaint), and the SEL trim (your too many gadgets complaint).
Your list of priorities and complaints would of made the Fusion I-4S, your "dream" car, yet you chose the top of the line V6 (your mpg complaint), AWD (your mpg complaint), and the SEL trim (your too many gadgets complaint).
I'm not following your logic.
Truth is we made an illogical buying decision which I now regret. The wife was a critical factor: Wanted a moon roof. I wanted leather seating. The six-disc, six-speaker CD/radio seemed nice (but we only use the radio). A power driver's seat is handy when you have two drivers.
We didn't order the car; it was on the lot. In retrospect, an S with an I4 automatic would have been just fine. I have buyer's remorse. The mileage is horrific and we seldom use, or appreciate, all of the bells and whistles.
I thought we "needed" a V6 because I4s are traditionally anemic. That, too, was a mistake. The AWD is totally uncalled for in our climate. Again, the car came that way.
We did not make a wise decision, but the car is a fine automobile which has many nice features and nary a squeak or rattle one after eight months and 4,204 miles.
We did not make a wise decision, but the car is a fine automobile which has many nice features and nary a squeak or rattle one after eight months and 4,204 miles.
And your fusion is a daily driver too right? That's about 10 miles each way per trip? No wonder your gas mileage is so bad...your car is barely warming up before you've arrived. Add to this situation you're doing city driving with some stop and go, and no wonder your mileage is so dismal. I have a similar engine as you with lots of stop and go on my commute in all city driving, but with a longer overall drive and I'm getting 19 mpg even when I'm "stretching out the car's legs" pretty frequently.
I'm a tech fan too, but with cars I believe the technology should go into making the car better to drive. Yes, I love a good stereo, I'd like to be able to plug in an mp3 flash drive. But I wouldn't make a purchase decision on a cars entertainment center or other gadgets.
But when you're at the point in your buying making process where you've narrowed down your short list to a few vehicles, these extras can make a difference. Of course if you save a lot of money buying one of those vehicles, the money you save can often buy those options that the car you choose didn't come with from the factory... just like the savings on my car over the next car on my list (6spd honda accord) bought my plasma tv, a DSLR, my GPS/mp3 player, an mp3 input device that I installed in my center console and paid for my car insurance for a year and a half :P
I think looks can end up being a deciding factor, because the other differences are minor. For instance I could have been comfortable driving an Accord or a Mazda6, but one of the main reasons I bought the 6 is because I think it looks better.
It is nice that it looks so good while I am walking to it, because it takes me a long time to get to my car...weighed down, as I am, with a much heavier wallet than I would have had I bought an Accord
I agree completely... although the main reasons I bought this car did not involve how the car looked, I still get a certain amount of satisfaction when a stranger walks by and tells me that I have a nice looking car or something to that effect. And it happens pretty frequently too. I think it's great that every time I walk up to my car to go for a drive I'm thinking, "That's a good looking car. Glad it's mine!!"
"But when you're at the point in your buying making process where you've narrowed down your short list to a few vehicles, these extras can make a difference."
I see what you are getting to, but I don't buy cars like that. I figure out what car I want, then what options I want or don't. If it came push to shove, I certainly wouldn't get the car I wanted if it had more bells and whistles, but I don't go looking for cars with the most gadgets.
Call me old school, but cars were made for commuting not computing
There's deffinitly an age component to it. by the same token, I'd be willing to be you also wouldn't plunk down $600 for an iphone, and niether would I. But those gizmo's and gadgets can separate one car from the other, and for the buyer who isn't really concerned with price, or rather value, It can make the difference in what they buy. The various fan boys of each model can say what they want, most of the cars in this segment are nearly identical performance, handling and reliability wise. Sure, an enthusiast will notice the subtle differences, but the majority of drivers, in bumper to bumper traffic, never will. To me, honda is deffinitly making a bad call if they ignore the tech stuff. Thats the way the market is going, and what the younger buyers will demand. They, along with toyota, will be fine for the next 20-30 years, but the 20 somethings out there now will begin to view the accord and camry as "grandpa's car" and look for cars with the gadgets and stuff they want.
The asian car companies got where they are today in no small part by always innovating and adding value to their vehicles. I think if they loose that sense of giving you more than you asked for, and stuff not found on other cars, In 20 years we may be discussing what toyota and honda have to do to get back on top of the market.
Exactly and that is the essense of the conversation. What is value to one is not value to another. In this sense I take it to mean value is: relative worth, merit, or importance. Some people place value on gadgets, some don't. Some people place value on the drive and performance, some don't.
I think we are in agreement...most of the decisions I will make about a car purchase is about how the car drives and how it fits my needs/wants (ie bodystyle). The rest is only an issue if all else is mostly equal. I find it interesting that Nissan has decided their signature/headline feature on the new Altima is a push-start button... their marketing must have found that most people are not like us.
I never disputed that. What I'm saying is, in the not so distant future, the majority of car buyers will place a lot of value on gadgets. car manufactures ignore that at their own perril. To someone over 30, it doesn't mean much. To the kids out there learning how to drive right now, not having some of those "gadgets" will seem as alien to them as a car not having AC does to us older drivers. Their and others desire for tech is already showing up. Take the altima, since I'm posting and reading through that forum, the fully loaded, all the bells and whisles, version of the sedan and coupe are the hardest to find. despite the fact all the gadgets can push the price up over 30k. I don't fault honda, toyota, or any other manufacturer for going after the 40+ buyers, they are the largest demographic buying midsize sedans. But, if they don't cater enough to the younger drivers (their future customers) I think its going to cost them down the road.
The Altima has a CVT which I bet is limiting the sales. I for one was not impressed with CVT. And that emergency foot operated brake, is in a very strange place. Looks to me to be odd, and I wonder if the leg hits it in an accident. No, I want the emergency brake near my right hand, thank you. The push to start / stop, I guess is OK. So what does the key or whatever it is called now that it is StarTrek transmitter age device, cost if it should break or become lost? I miss the days of the .97 keys Loren
So with these new Altimas, if you want to turn off the engine, and just listen to the radio (or whatever) how does that work. Does the button turn everything off, or just the engine?
Limiting the sales? have you looked at the numbers for it? sales of the 07 altima are more than 20% over last years. it (+ the versa) is the reason nissan was just about the only auto company to post a sales gain for july.
if you push the button once, the car shuts off, no different that removing a conventional key. if (while running) you push it twice in sucession, the car cuts off, but everything else stays on. no pause in the radio, or anything. the motor just stops.
and before you ask, no, the car will not shut off if you push the button while it is moving. nothing happens unless you hold it in for about 5 seconds or so.
the cvt is nothing less than amazing. can cruis at 75 mph and only 2200 rpm. give it about 1/2 throttle, and it will instantly, smothly, without any kind of jerk, jump to about 5000-5500 rpm and get you to whatever speed you want in a very short time. deffinitly takes some getting used too, especialy the car getting used to you (it will learn your driving style and behave accordingly) but once you get used to it, and it gets used to you; it's hard to imagine driving anything else.
Comments
Accord V6:
Db @ Idle: 46.5
Db @ Full Throttle: 74.7
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 70.0
Sonata V6:
Db @ Idle: 40.0
Db @ Full Throttle: 74.3
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 69.0
And the fuel economy of the V6 seems below average to that of the Accord.
2008 Ratings:
Accord V6: 18/26
Sonata V6: 18/27
The front end is aweful looking too.
Subjective but I prefer the Sonata more:
Wow - now there's a revelation.
The Sonata looks so 90s. The Accord you're posting is a 6 year old design. The 2008 looks sweet.
Stats are misleading. You don't hear mag editors talking about the odd thumping on an Accord like they do a Sonata. I'm not talking dbs. I'm talking the V and H, something Hyundai needs to fix on this car.
You can buy a Sonata Limited V6 with Leather for $17,500, including incentives, not including TTL. Some folks can withstand the higher depreciation rate when you're able to buy a car for such a price.
Teaser snap
mz6greyghost, "Midsize Sedans 2.0" #3922, 7 Aug 2007 6:50 am
The 08 Accord to my eyes, at least the front end, resembles somewhat to the current Sonata, especially the headlight.
Stats are misleading
Believe what you want to believe. It's funny how cars like the Sonata, when it performs well in various areas, you'd get comments like this from the naysayers. When it's the other way around, well, everything seems to be invisible.
The Accord is a competent car, the Sonata is a competent. Appreciate the choices you have out there, only when you have competitions out there, the vehicles keep improving.
Interesting observation considering most people thought the Sonata snagged the Accord's rear and tailights for their "new" design. You know what they say about imitation.
I do realize that all these cars do share a lot of styling cues. How can't they? But Hyundai just doesn't seem to attend the 21'st century design school like the others in this comparo.
Even the Azera is a yawner. I think the Genesis has potential.
It's too bad the Legacy and Mazda6 won't be making their wagons anymore, but with the Outback and CX-7, there's still good alternatives for buyers of both brands. So from a practical/utility perspective, the Mazda6 and the Passat will be the only cars in this class that will have an expanded cargo carrying capacity over a standard sedan... too bad too, I'd think the average person/family would find extra hauling space would be a good feature that would take away the appeal from heavier and less efficient SUV's which are also more rollover prone.
If you think the Sebring and Avenger attend the 21st century design school, then... well, there's no hope for you, I'm afraid.
http://blip.tv/file/299867
You're right, and that's the reason why I got the 2007 Sonata SE :shades:
I'd say the:
bang-for-the-buck price i.e. most number of standard features on a mid-variant model
better-than-competetion warranty & interior space
competent power,fuel consumption, NVH, comfort & handling
are simply bonuses. Besides, the chances that my car will be vandalized or stolen are less, since i got such a no-name-brand car.
I'm happy with my purchase and i couldn't care less for those who are nit-picking. I owned Honda's & Toyota's and I wish their followers don't convert to Hyundai like me bcoz it might drive Hyundai's prices up :surprise:
Our next target purchase: either a Santa Fe or a Veracruz
I couldn't disagree more this statement. A car has to has form and function, such as the BMW 335. If not form and function than function, such as the Aztec.
I would never buy a daily beater based on looks alone.
Having voice and manual control via the radio of both the phone and mp3 player is safer than trying to use these devices manually.
If the situation was reversed and the Camcord had that feature I'm sure we'd be hearing a totally different tune. Didn't we hear the same thing about AWD? I guess is the Accord doesn't have it then nobody needs it - right?
Yes, those who harp on resale value seem to forget that the "depreciation" that comes before you buy is not a cost to the buyer. My mazda6 depreciated by $5000 before I bought it, according to the way some seem to look at this.
I think looks can end up being a deciding factor, because the other differences are minor. For instance I could have been comfortable driving an Accord or a Mazda6, but one of the main reasons I bought the 6 is because I think it looks better.
It is nice that it looks so good while I am walking to it, because it takes me a long time to get to my car...weighed down, as I am, with a much heavier wallet than I would have had I bought an Accord
Huh, I disagree 100% about voice. I would not want to interact vocally with my radio. Pressing a button on the steering wheel is about as safe as you can get in terms of fiddling with the radio. By the time I say 101.5 I could have pressed the button three times.
Why can't you just admit this is a very nice feature instead of looking for ways to bash it just because it's a Ford feature?
Because I don't go in for that type of stuff on a car. To me I would still get the Accord, without AWD and without this feature.
Handsfree bluetooth is a must if one is to be in compliance with the cell phone laws in a number of states.
Actually the laws aren't that well written. A crummy wired ear-piece is all you need to be in compliance with the laws.
Actually no, because in some states you are not allowed to remove your hand from the wheel to dial or hangup the phone. So if you can do this from your crummy wired ear-piece you would be in compliance to the law.
As I stated before - anything the Accord doesn't have must not be worth having. Unbelievable.
I've never seen such a specific restriction. Considering you remove your hand from the wheel all the time to change radio stations or climate control I don't see how you could enact something that much more restrictive just for cell phones. Care to post a link to one of those laws?
I say the same thing about the crap they load up BMWs with.
I know people who could care less about handling but would kill for more gadgets. Does that make either of you wrong? Of course not.
But what it means is that when I buy a car, gadgets don't mean anything. There are people who buy a car based on gadgets to the dollar, that is not me.
It's not about being right or wrong, it's about the way I buy cars and what I look for. When someone posts that car x has a nine-gigabyte hard drive, I say so what, but others go ohh and ahh.
I could care less about about gadgets like Sync but do care about mileage. I'm sure that there must be a demand for such technology or Ford wouldn't have invested in it. But, do we really want to turn our cars into computers more so than they are already?
I'm pretty much a basic transportation guy when it comes to vehicles and like our 2000 Focus station wagon just as much as I do our $27,105 MSRP Fusion. Power steering, power brakes, air conditioning, an automatic transmission and I am happy. Heck, the Focus even has crank windows.
The bells and whistles trend has far exceeded its usefulness as far as I'm concerned and the Sync idea is nothing more than a gimmick that's likely to go on the fritz in very short order, IMHO.
Call me old school, but cars were made for commuting not computing.
What really intruiges me about Sync is that it will be upgradeable with new software packages in the future. Compared to other options available in cars today, that makes it much more appealing. If you are planning on keeping the car for a while, it is nice to know that your high-tech features won't be out of date in a year or two. A few years is a long time in the technology world, and something brand new may come onto the market that appeals to you. All you'll have to do is download the latest patch, and whatever hot new high-tech gadget you want in 5 years will likely be able to "Sync" with your car.
Pretty cool.
I guess I'm old school too. My Accord has a six CD changer, but 99.9% of the time I'm listening to my favorite local radio station (Walton & Johnson in the morning and classic rock all day). My nieces a nefews have all these gadgets, and seems to me they are just toys. The play with them, and play with them, but never really just listen to the music. They spend way more time downloading music than they do listening to it :confuse:. I don't see the need for it.
I'm a tech fan too, but with cars I believe the technology should go into making the car better to drive. Yes, I love a good stereo, I'd like to be able to plug in an mp3 flash drive. But I wouldn't make a purchase decision on a cars entertainment center or other gadgets.
Hard to bellieve my first car, the mid-sized '66 Dodge Coronet, had no carpet, no radio, no A/C, no power anything (except brakes I think), and a 3-speed automatic. But we got by. Really easy to work on that slant 6 engine, though--lots of room in the engnie bay!
IMO, when one moves up to LS460 or 750 class it comes with the gadgets. Drove the 750 and it comes with a dizzying array of gadgets, maybe too many. But when you spend $90K for a car that's what you expect and that's what you get.
What I find troublesome, except for the Civic and Corolla, mileage for growing subcompacts has skidded down from early 1990s ratings of 31/37 in many cases to 24/32. This is CamCord/Sonata/Optima 4-cylinder mileage territory. Subcompacts that used to weigh 2100–2300# now are now nudging 3000#. The latest Jetta has gone past it now (3230 MT) and is almost the same tonnage as an I4 Sonata (3253 MT). The new Rabbit with a 5-cylinder is rated @22/30. I have read a test where drivers only averaged 19 mpg, another just over 25. At around $3 a gallon and nearly 20k purchase price, what kind of economy car is that? I am aware that these cars have more ‘stuff’ on them, and didn’t accelerate so well, but how about a 2600# subcompact?
The 2005 (I think) remake of the Malibu added about 3 mpg. That will be lost in the 2008 conversion to the longer-wheelbase chassis. The new revised mileage ratings will send it down further. Another thing: does everybody have to go from 0-60 in 7 seconds or less? 8 seconds is quite adequate for a lot of people, I think.
“the Accord is bigger than the 80s Crown Vics.”
On this point, I think you are confused. The LTD began in 1965. The incarnation you referred to started in 1979 as the Galaxie/LTD. It was around 214" overall length. I don’t know of any Accord that big. Ford did bring out a Fairmount-based vehicle called the LTD in the early 1980s, as a precursor to the Taurus. This may be what you are thinking of. I think the Crown Victoria label was lifted from a fancy 1950s Fairlane to differentiate from its lesser stablemate.
However, you listed out exactly what you want and need, but you still purchased the 'SEL' trim?
You could of picked up a base 'S' model or the 'SE' trim if you really needed AWD and/or a V6, which according to you, not really needed from your list of must haves.
FWD cars will get better mpg vs. their AWD counterparts.
Ford offers low end trims w/o all the toys like every other brand, yet you choose the top of the line trim.
Your list of priorities and complaints would of made the Fusion I-4S, your "dream" car, yet you chose the top of the line V6 (your mpg complaint), AWD (your mpg complaint), and the SEL trim (your too many gadgets complaint).
I'm not following your logic.
I'm not following your logic.
Truth is we made an illogical buying decision which I now regret. The wife was a critical factor: Wanted a moon roof. I wanted leather seating. The six-disc, six-speaker CD/radio seemed nice (but we only use the radio). A power driver's seat is handy when you have two drivers.
We didn't order the car; it was on the lot. In retrospect, an S with an I4 automatic would have been just fine. I have buyer's remorse. The mileage is horrific and we seldom use, or appreciate, all of the bells and whistles.
I thought we "needed" a V6 because I4s are traditionally anemic. That, too, was a mistake. The AWD is totally uncalled for in our climate. Again, the car came that way.
We did not make a wise decision, but the car is a fine automobile which has many nice features and nary a squeak or rattle one after eight months and 4,204 miles.
We did not make a wise decision, but the car is a fine automobile which has many nice features and nary a squeak or rattle one after eight months and 4,204 miles.
And your fusion is a daily driver too right? That's about 10 miles each way per trip? No wonder your gas mileage is so bad...your car is barely warming up before you've arrived. Add to this situation you're doing city driving with some stop and go, and no wonder your mileage is so dismal. I have a similar engine as you with lots of stop and go on my commute in all city driving, but with a longer overall drive and I'm getting 19 mpg even when I'm "stretching out the car's legs" pretty frequently.
But when you're at the point in your buying making process where you've narrowed down your short list to a few vehicles, these extras can make a difference. Of course if you save a lot of money buying one of those vehicles, the money you save can often buy those options that the car you choose didn't come with from the factory... just like the savings on my car over the next car on my list (6spd honda accord) bought my plasma tv, a DSLR, my GPS/mp3 player, an mp3 input device that I installed in my center console and paid for my car insurance for a year and a half :P
It is nice that it looks so good while I am walking to it, because it takes me a long time to get to my car...weighed down, as I am, with a much heavier wallet than I would have had I bought an Accord
I agree completely... although the main reasons I bought this car did not involve how the car looked, I still get a certain amount of satisfaction when a stranger walks by and tells me that I have a nice looking car or something to that effect. And it happens pretty frequently too. I think it's great that every time I walk up to my car to go for a drive I'm thinking, "That's a good looking car. Glad it's mine!!"
I see what you are getting to, but I don't buy cars like that. I figure out what car I want, then what options I want or don't. If it came push to shove, I certainly wouldn't get the car I wanted if it had more bells and whistles, but I don't go looking for cars with the most gadgets.
There's deffinitly an age component to it. by the same token, I'd be willing to be you also wouldn't plunk down $600 for an iphone, and niether would I. But those gizmo's and gadgets can separate one car from the other, and for the buyer who isn't really concerned with price, or rather value, It can make the difference in what they buy. The various fan boys of each model can say what they want, most of the cars in this segment are nearly identical performance, handling and reliability wise. Sure, an enthusiast will notice the subtle differences, but the majority of drivers, in bumper to bumper traffic, never will. To me, honda is deffinitly making a bad call if they ignore the tech stuff. Thats the way the market is going, and what the younger buyers will demand. They, along with toyota, will be fine for the next 20-30 years, but the 20 somethings out there now will begin to view the accord and camry as "grandpa's car" and look for cars with the gadgets and stuff they want.
The asian car companies got where they are today in no small part by always innovating and adding value to their vehicles. I think if they loose that sense of giving you more than you asked for, and stuff not found on other cars, In 20 years we may be discussing what toyota and honda have to do to get back on top of the market.
Exactly and that is the essense of the conversation. What is value to one is not value to another. In this sense I take it to mean value is: relative worth, merit, or importance. Some people place value on gadgets, some don't. Some people place value on the drive and performance, some don't.
I never disputed that. What I'm saying is, in the not so distant future, the majority of car buyers will place a lot of value on gadgets. car manufactures ignore that at their own perril. To someone over 30, it doesn't mean much. To the kids out there learning how to drive right now, not having some of those "gadgets" will seem as alien to them as a car not having AC does to us older drivers. Their and others desire for tech is already showing up. Take the altima, since I'm posting and reading through that forum, the fully loaded, all the bells and whisles, version of the sedan and coupe are the hardest to find. despite the fact all the gadgets can push the price up over 30k. I don't fault honda, toyota, or any other manufacturer for going after the 40+ buyers, they are the largest demographic buying midsize sedans. But, if they don't cater enough to the younger drivers (their future customers) I think its going to cost them down the road.
Loren
and before you ask, no, the car will not shut off if you push the button while it is moving. nothing happens unless you hold it in for about 5 seconds or so.