Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Midsize Sedans 2.0

1…8990929495…544

Comments

  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    As packages go in the Honda line, this particular model, the SE V6 represents the most bang per dollar

    Not only does the car pass the pipe-smoker's analysis, it's just one heck of a machine.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    Here in the Pacific NW, it's pretty common for mazda6's to be advertized for 6-7k off of msrp (including rebates), so it would seem the advantage over an Accord would be at least 3-4k from the start. The Mazda6 was reported to be one of the least expensive midsize cars to insure also. Both the Accord and the Mazda6 have scored well in crash tests where and when side airbags were used on these cars (I include European tests here since some US tests don't use the Mazda6 w/ airbags). The Mazda6 was tested to stop 10 feet shorter than an Accord in midsize comparo's by Edmunds and other car mags and the consensus of these articles have the handling of the 6 as the better of the two without giving up much in terms of comfort. Personally, I like the interior of the Accord because of styling but not because of better materials (the seat material on the 6 I think is better) or because it's bigger (most measurements of leg room and headroom are pretty much equal b/t the current Accord and Mazda6). From an external styling perspective, I much prefer the looks of the 6 and still get compliments from complete strangers pretty frequently. If a buyer of the 6 chooses a hatchback or wagon (which won't be available much longer), the Mazda6 will have the ability to haul much larger objects. Gas mileage on the Accord will likely be about 10% better, which would save the average driver about $500 a year based on 12k miles annual mileage. Jd Powers and Consumer Reports indicate that the difference in reliability is likely to equal less than one problem per car per 5 years (I think the Accord average was around 3 problems and the 6 was a fraction higher).

    Maybe I've been watching too much of the US Open lately, but it seems to me the Accord is like Sampras while the Mazda6 is like Agassi. Both are excellent, but their personalities are quiet different. I always had my favorite, but in the end it was very hard to root against any one of them. In the end, a solid case could be made for both and I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing one over the other.
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    "Jd Powers and Consumer Reports indicate that the difference in reliability is likely to equal less than one problem per car per 5 years (I think the Accord average was around 3 problems and the 6 was a fraction higher)."

    The importance of that one extra problem (which may occur during the time you own the car over 4-7 years) depends, of course, on what that one extra problem ends up being, exactly. If the trademark power swinging vents stop swinging, well, no big deal (for me at least). However, if it ends up being much more serious (and thus expensive and/or unsafe), that is something to consider.

    Don't get me wrong, I think that JDP and CR data is good for comparison purposes. However, I wish somebody would take it further, maybe weight the results for the severity of typical problems and not just number of occurances. Plus, as I said before, I'd like to see breakdowns by model (e.g. not just overall Mazda6 reliability... but Mazda6 I4, V6, and turbo reliability).

    This would add real value to the results as we would have more accurate data. For instance, if examples of car A have a common failure in the radio, and some examples of car B occasionally have one vital component suddenly fail... even though they have the same number of problems per vehicle, the two cars will no longer be ranked as equal in terms of reliability.

    This brings up some interesting questions if you really think about it. Example, how much of BMW's reported reliability decline, shown as higher numbers of reported problems per car, might be related to owner complaints about iDrive "not working" (when they can't figure out how to operate it) or just simple gadget failures as opposed to real engine or transmission problems?
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "Has anyone seen the Accord for 2008? From the photos, it looks pretty good to me."

    No surprise there. The car isnt ugly but its far from the best looking in class. When there are so many cars of nearly equal size and performance I see no reason to get a boxy Accord. Plus the 2009 6 is coming out next year and based on the pic released it seems to be quite a looker.

    "New Malibu should be on par with the rest overall for looks."

    not in my opinion and not in the opinion of many who have seen it in the flesh.

    "Isn't a base SAAB 9-3 something like that with a stick?"

    The base 9-3 has far less power and less room than a Malibu LTZ. At $27k the Chevy is the better car.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    this month's CR - a lengthy report about keeping a car going for 200k+ - how much money that would save (and
    certainly a point at which the suspect resale values of some of these cars would mean much less) - the 10 recommended models for those few that do keep a car this long consists of 3 Hondas and 7 Toyota products. HMMM - and then folks wonder why cars of those particular brands costs more to buy(new or used) but LESS to own over more usual time frames.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    The base 9-3 has far less power and less room than a Malibu LTZ.

    164/262 for the Ecotec and the 3.6, respectively for the Malibu. 210/250 for the Saab, but both Saab engines are available with manual transmissions.

    Its just different strokes...one is for people who pick cars based on how much space it takes in their garage and one is for people who like something sporty and fun while dragging their children to-and-fro.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    If you consider "more money for less car" then you really should say, more money, for higher quality, nicer smaller car."

    The Optima doesn't get anywhere near the fuel economy of the Civic. I say you get more BANG for your buck with the Civic by saving on gas.

    Of course the Civic gets better fuel economy than the Optima, but that's not really the point here (not to say the Optima has bad F/E, pretty good, actually). There probably were a lot of other factors accounted for the purchase of the Optima instead of the Civic. FWIW, both cars have advantages and drawbacks.
  • bristol2bristol2 Member Posts: 736
    In the end, a solid case could be made for both and I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing one over the other.

    Good post.
    This whole Mazda6 vs Accord seems a little uneccessary. It's like comparing BMW and Mercedes: yes they are both in the same cost class, but they are intended for different customers.
    The Mazda6 probably tends to be bought by younger buyers (lower initial cost, sporty design and handling reputation) or buyers who are looking for something that, at least by reputation, is more sporty.
    The Accord tends to be bought by folks who want something that has an strong reputation for reliability and great resale.

    Before I get jumped on, that is not to suggest that either vehicle cannot score points in the other vehicle's strong suit (I have a 6-speed V6 Accord EX-L and would certainly describe it as sporting- just a little undercover...).
    But I will say I went for the Accord for reliability and resale, performance was a bonus.

    Again- different customers for each car.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    It wasn't bad. I'm not a Indy driver but it wasn't as tight and hdid have quite a bit more lean in the corners than the 6. The SE felt a lot bigger and one reason was because of the sight lines from the drivers seat. I like the Mazda because you can almost see the end of the hood and you can see the trunk lid. Turning radius was a little better with the SE but no great shakes. I would put the new SE between older accords which I think were a little tighter than more current ones and the 6.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I did and it took 5 minutes to get the price approved after I presented it to the salesman. I said thanks, said I would be back in three hours to pay and sign papers. Told the salesman I didn't want any add ons, insurance, warranty, other crap. Came back, they had the car prepped and detailed, signed the papers (they even had already checked off all the things I didn't want) and wrote them a check. I would say I spent no more than 30 minutes total buy the car. Fastest in my life but I credit these forums with providing very good information going in.

    Anyway, if I can do it, anybody can. In fact I don't know anyone that would pay 19,279 for a car that stickers at 21,125 and has a 1,750 rebate. That is already down to 19,375. That't like saying I got WOW, I got $96 off the MSRP. Not much to brag about.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I agree that the Accord and 6 may be designed and marketed to a little different demographic. However, my second choice in this field was the Sonata. Now that is a total different ride/handling and I liked it for it's roominess and features offered per price much like the Mazda. I'm certainly not within the so called Mazda demographic, but I was looking for a third vehicle for my wife and I that was reasonably priced, less operatiing cost and a little more fun to drive than a SUV and PU which are our other two vehicles. The Mazda fit the bill this time because of the heavy discounts.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Congrats! Drop by our Dealer Rater page and write up your experience.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Comment at will. The front has a little too much Camry for me and I don't like the red/orange lighting inside. But not bad overall.

    image
    image
    image
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    I think it looks too much like the Lexus IS250. Not that the IS250 is bad looking, I actually think it is sharp, but I like the current Mazda partly because it does look different than anything else. The interior looks good to me but I wonder what it would look like without the NAV.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "this month's CR - a lengthy report about keeping a car going for 200k+ - how much money that would save (and
    certainly a point at which the suspect resale values of some of these cars would mean much less) - the 10 recommended models for those few that do keep a car this long consists of 3 Hondas and 7 Toyota products.

    wow, CR said that? What a shock! And its very relevant since tons of owners are interested in keeping their cars for 200k miles. Considering how long the average person keeps a car its pointless to tout how some cars supposedly will last 150k+ miles while others supposedly wont. I think ANY car today can last 150k miles if you maintain it and are willing to pay for the parts that will wear out over time.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "164/262 for the Ecotec and the 3.6, respectively for the Malibu. 210/250 for the Saab, but both Saab engines are available with manual transmissions. "

    the cars are basically the same underneath the skin and the $27k 9-3 does not have 250hp. I would say a Malibu LTZ could hold its own vs a non-Aero 9-3. It should be able to since its on the same platform.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    exterior is HOT but interior is lackluster and is barely better than current car. They need to do better inside. Tell you what, its better than the Accord from every angle.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I wonder what it would look like without the NAV

    Picture is too big to display here, but here is the link:

    Non NAV stereo
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    I absolutely LOVE it!

    Inside and out, it's stylish and sexy, something the Accord and Camry isn't...

    I still will pass final judgment after the NA version debuts and I can see it in person, but I think I found my next car... :)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I absolutely LOVE it!

    We would have never guessed...... ;)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I think ANY car today can last 150k miles if you maintain it and are willing to pay for the parts that will wear out over time.

    Funny, that is almost exactly what CR said also:

    Any vehicle can reach 200,000 miles if you are willing to keep replacing parts.

    They also said that cars with over 200k miles represent one-half of one percent of the 1.3 million vehicles in their latest annual survey.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Overall I like the looks, but there's something about the two little windows in the back that break up the otherwise smooth lines of the car. It is somewhat reminiscent of a sporty Azera, or a grown-up Elantra. I don't see any resemblence to the Camry, or Accord--which is a good thing.

    The shape looks perfect for a 5-door. Too bad Mazda dropped it for 2009.

    The picture may not do the interior justice, but there's something about it that screams "cheap hard plastics!". Hopefully that's not the case. I am also noticing a certain sameness in mid-sized car interiors lately. Maybe that's because car makers get slammed for putting air vents anywhere but high-up, so that's where they go. Then there has to be room for the nav screen. And then it seems almost everyone is using the 3-dial approach for HVAC controls. I love these controls, as they are very easy to use, but they're everywhere now.

    Kind of different plood on the floor console.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Well Mazda is simply asking too much for the car as suggested retail, if they have to discount it so much. Someone at Ford/Mazda needs to make some changes in the pricing. This deep discount, like GM was doing in recent past, kills the image of the car and any resale value.

    As a car to buy? Well it is Zoom-Zoom, with that Miata attitude in every car. The Mazda3 has the resale value, but I kinda like the Mazda6 as well. I just hope Ford doesn't kill off Mazda some how. Be it pricing or whatever.
    L
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    image
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Is that (this) a hatchback? The trunk looks small and what's up with the indent in the trunk lid? Looks like a mistake. I don't care for the orange/red instrument lighting either.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    from auto blog:
    The only official details we have so far is that the new car will weigh less than the outgoing model and will use less fuel and emit fewer CO2 emissions to boot.

    An interesting tidbit, but significant for sure. Considering it's bigger, that ought to be very good from a handling perspective that they've been able to carve out some weight.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    Weight was reduced when the new Mazda2 was introduced also.
    It is encouraging that at least Mazda is not making every new model heavier than the last one. :)
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Like to answer these one by one:
    quote:
    No surprise there. The car isnt ugly but its far from the best looking in class. When there are so many cars of nearly equal size and performance I see no reason to get a boxy Accord. Plus the 2009 6 is coming out next year and based on the pic released it seems to be quite a looker.
    While it is impossible to find a boxy Accord, I too would not buy one, unless it was the 1990 like shape, which was much like the BMW3 look in its time. Very nice. Current renditions, in more aerodynamic shapes are good too.

    As for comments on looks, I like 99.9% of the public have only photos to go by for the New Malibu and the New Accord, and commented that the looks are on par with the rest. Your response is:
    quote: not in my opinion and not in the opinion of many who have seen it in the flesh. Well then OK, it is not then on par. So sorry to hear that.

    As for my comparing the Saab 9-3 to the cost of the Malibu LTZ, I do realize there is an engine difference. Of course if you can not drive fast with 210HP, 252HP won't do you any good. It is a drive, handling kinda thing. Seriously, they do have a different nature about them, but what I am saying is that image wise, as in what one perceives as a value of a brand, the SAAB is going to win every time against that of a Malibu. Now, it could be the new SAAB is nothing more than another Epsilon GM car, with a different motor, but I would hope for more. The better handling, more world class interior, and safety beyond the common car. Or is it just another mid-sized average car? If it truly is a SAAB and is priced at or below the New Malibu, when discounted, then I think the New Malibu is well overpriced. In total in and out cost of ownership, they have to come in under the competition, not with the price or over the price. If you can but the Aura XR for $24K with $1,500 or more discounts, how the heck do they justify $27K say for the New Malibu? Dang, there are Passats, Accords, Camrys, Altimas, and more for that price, with some nice equipment. Someone at GM, please get out the calculator again, or take off the shoes when counting. :D
    L
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Very nice. Looks like a Lexus or something :shades: very cool indeed.
    L
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    LOL, admit it, you just hate Honda Accord.

    I LOVE the interior, I think it is the best looking interior out of all midsizers, including the current Accord. When will this one be available to us? I am seriously thinking about trading my IS350 for an AWD version. Which V6 will this one pack? The Ford 3.5L or Japan Mazda's 3.8?
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Gas mileage on the Accord will likely be about 10% better, which would save the average driver about $500 a year based on 12k miles annual mileage.

    You better check your math. If 10% saves $500, that means $5000 in annual gas cost. That'd be about 1600 gallons. which is enough to go about 40,000 miles. :surprise:

    10% would be more like $150 per year...which is right about what fueleconomy.gov comes up as the difference, at least for the 4 cyl automatics.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The shape looks perfect for a 5-door. Too bad Mazda dropped it for 2009.

    2008 Mazda6 Sedan, Hatchback and Wagon:

    image

    Unless those are only for the European market.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    the cars are basically the same underneath the skin and the $27k 9-3 does not have 250hp. I would say a Malibu LTZ could hold its own vs a non-Aero 9-3. It should be able to since its on the same platform.

    Depends on what you are looking for. If you just want to put car seats in then I'm sure either would be fine, but since the Chevy has no manual transmission, it has no intention of being a sports sedan, body kit or not.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    The wagon looks really cool, very Audi-esqe. A 3.5 V6 and a 6 speed manual and the kids get to soccer practice on time. Whats not to love?
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Are you sure that Mazda6 photo is not a hatchback? It has a rear wiper and almost no trunk lid. I know they are dropping the "5-door", but maybe that is the case just in the US???

    Not a fan of the new exterior appearance, glad I got the current version.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    :blush: man, my math sux. or maybe I felt like being generous to the Accord owners since I've been a bit sharp with them lately. ah well, put that into the mazda6's bonus column!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I swear I read that the Mazda6 hatch and wagon were being dropped from the U.S. market for 2009. But if not... great!

    This angle of the hatch reminds me of another mid-sizer though... the Sebring. :P
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    I heard that they were dropping the wagon for the 2008 model year, but the 2009 model line has not been released yet. The speculation though has been that the US will get the hatch and sedan but not the wagon. We'll find out for sure in a couple weeks.

    and to jeffyscott, I'd have to agree about the exterior; it doesn't seem to have as much flow to it. there are a couple elements I like, like the fogs and folding side mirrors, but no turn signals on the mirrors and no side markers? doesn't seem very safe, especially with a lot of bicyclists on my way to work. and it looks like the rear of the car is a bit higher which may make rearward visibility worse. The pronounced wheel arches still give it that "mazda" look, which is good. And the taillights look like what they have been playing around with on their concept cars.

    The interior shots I like a lot. The brushed aluminum trim is much better than the current chrome and I like what they have done with the seats (similar to what they have done with the cx7 & cx9). I also like that the interior isn't so monotone.

    But for mazda, the most important thing will be how it drives, so I'll wait for that info. Still exciting though!
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Very true, there are plenty of Model A on the road, and some Model T's. In Cuba most cars are what, say in the 1950's era? I see almost as many '65 and '66 Mustangs on the road as the New Stang..... OK a little exaggeration. If trying to save money, just get a used Impala, Crown Vic or something pretty basic and drive it 'till it drops. In most cases people want more than just the cheapest to own vehicle. For a commuter or work car, almost any used domestic, bought near half price in say three years time or so, should do.

    A salesman friend of my Dad said he use to buy a Civic with 100K on the odometer and drive it another 100K then start on over again, and said it worked for him back when he was a salesman. He liked the gas mileage and the cheap car to buy and still was able to sell it for something after 200K. One could argue that the Japan cars are best to take to 200K, just as well as there are valid arguments on the domestic car side of the issue, and those cars could be as cheap or cheaper to 200K. I would bet on the Japan make for in the i4 engines, and the domestics with the V6 & V8 may have the dollar edge over that period of time. Like I said, would bet on, and I doubt anyone has enough research to say one way or another, with any certainty.

    Would there not be two classes of long lived experiences, or is that three. The commuter may buy a Hyundai, or say the Civic and drive it until it dies, as would someone who sees a car as transportation. That be two classes, which are closely related. The third class is the collector, or one in love with the car. If I am gonna drive a car to 200K, I would really want something desirable to drive, a I am not the commuter to work class of driver. How much the car costs to own over the period is not as important as how good the ownership experience is. Just trying to imagine say 15 years of owning a Beretta, or Taurus or..... well let's say it would seem an eternity.
    L
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    The photo's are of the 2009 Mazda6. The Wagon was dropped for the 2008 model.
    2008 is a continuation of the current design.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Member Posts: 1,230
    To sum up what I've heard about the '09:

    Initial rumors had both the 5-door and wagon dropped for NA in '09, but lately, there has been talk of the 5-door resurfacing here for the second-gen model.

    The 3.5L V6 from Ford will NOT be used (since Ford can't supply enough of them, supposedly), but the 3.7L V6 that's currently in the CX-9 will step in. I've heard that the 3.7L is slightly related to the 3.5L DT, but extensively reworked by Mazda, and I've also heard it's a Mazda-only design. Either way, it'll supposedly be built in Japan. Expect about 265-270 HP.

    The 6-speed manual and 6-speed auto is a certainty, and since it's based on the Mondeo platform, so will optional AWD. It may be a modified version of the Haldex with RWD-bias, similar to the SH-AWD that Honda has.

    It will be larger, but Mazda claims it'll be lighter than the current car, with better gas mileage.

    Of course, this is all speculation, and we'll find out more when press days start at the Frankfurt show on the 11th (hopefully).
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I knew I should have done the lease on the Accord. Oh well, resale value, right?
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    and 'keeping replacing parts' is exactly where the rub is, isn't it? And maybe the reason why Toyota and Honda products deserve primary consideration in that unlikely event you are going to keep anything that long? Statistics, as a rule, generally don't deceive!
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    And after all that the Malibu still looks better than the Accord. If you havent seen a boxy accord I would check out pics of the 2008 ASAP. All your questions will be answered.

    I have seen the Malibu in the flesh but not the Accord. The accord better look WAY better in the flesh if its to match the "on par" Malibu. Styling is subjective but you seem to be in the minority in terms of praising the new Accord design. The Accord has been getting worse looking with each generation for some time now so this is no surprise. They dont want the car to offend an aging buyer base. Makes sense I guess.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "And maybe the reason why Toyota and Honda products deserve primary consideration in that unlikely event you are going to keep anything that long? "

    most people dont and even if I did I dont think Toyota and Honda products deserve "primary" consideration. The pics of the new 6 are one more example of why those two companies have little appeal to me. They put no effort into design and it shows.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    The picture may not do the interior justice, but there's something about it that screams "cheap hard plastics!".

    I'm glad somebody noticed and said this besides me. I see the same thing in the interior pictures, the new Mazda SCREAMS "cheap plastics!" I don't know about the "hard" part, but definitely looking Dodgish on the inside. I hope the materials appear better in person. I like the styling overall, though the interior is pretty bland style-wise, with a "sporty" character, but all the guts are bland.

    The outside is very nice, but I don't know about the 3 part rear side windows.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    "LOL, admit it, you just hate Honda Accord.

    I LOVE the interior, I think it is the best looking interior out of all midsizers, including the current Accord. When will this one be available to us? I am seriously thinking about trading my IS350 for an AWD version. Which V6 will this one pack? The Ford 3.5L or Japan Mazda's 3.8? "

    dont hate the accord but the styling speaks for itself, especially after seeing the 6.

    The interior of the 6 is another story though, they did not go far enough. The plastic appears to be the same old hard black stuff you find in most mazdas. The interior without nav is just OK and is no better than the 3 in my book. As of right now the Accord with nav is probably the most upscale looking interior in class.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I personally will probably never keep a car to 200k miles. I only put 8-10K miles a year on each of our cars, and the car will probably rust out from all the road salt long before it hits 200k miles.

    I do know that the one Honda I owned for longer than 3 years, a Civic that I owned for almost 8 years and 80k miles, required more in replacement parts than any other car I've owned, including vehicles from so-called unreliable brands such as Dodge and Hyundai. So statistics can deceive if people think that they guarantee a reliable car, short- or long-term, just because the average reliability of its brand is a tick higher percentage-wise than another brand.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Design is more than about just aesthetics. Design is also about designing a car to last 20 years and 300,000 miles with minimal maintenance, and virtually no repair costs.

    Design is about not saving money on inferior components so as to increase profit margins at sale while driving up warranty and consumer car costs later on.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Accord styles:

    '90-'93: Boxy
    '94-'97: Round
    '98-'02: Boxy
    '03-'07: Round
    '08-: Boxy
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles