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
Yeah, but it was still a compact (trust me, at 6'4" I'm an EXCELLENT judge of that ). It also weighs a lithe 2,855 pounds, only about 100 more than the 1990-1993 sedans.
Despite the light weight, it is still pretty darn slow when trying to accelerate above 50 MPH. Around town it is plenty adequate though.
I've often wondered what the 0-60 times for my car were (I've never seen a Car and Driver or Motor Trend test of a 1994-1997 Accord without the V6 or VTEC). Knowing the specs of a Corolla (same horsepower, a little less torque, 300 pounds LIGHTER) and it's acceleration numbers, I can only imagine how dismal mine would be. 11 seconds, maybe? It IS an automatic!
And it shows. The car is superb. Only Mazda makes a better manual gearbox/clutch in this price range. It's efortless, revs extremely quickly and smooth as a sewing machine, and you can snap through gears faster than even some automatics.
Oh - it's fast as well. Tons faster than the shushomatik. I'd have no problem owning one myself and ditching the V6.
P.S. For cars that are also sold in Europe(usually under some other name), I like Top Gear's track test. It really nails the actual speed of a car. Much better than the typical 0-60 abuse-fest magazines tend to love.
I would not call it an "advanced timing maneuver", whatever car you are driving the best way to pass is to do most of the accelerating before going into the oncoming lane. Instead most people will tailgate the car in fromt of them, then when they see an opening they swing out into the oncoming lane and then accelerate to pass.
Even at 40 mph, the proper minimum following distance is 120 feet, based on the 2 sec rule. I'd guess that space should be enough to do most of the acceleration needed for passing, even with "only" 150 HP or so in a 3000 pound car.
I just can't see ever cutting a passing maneuver so close that 0.5 to 1 sec would make a difference. It's fine that you want a V6, I just don't buy your attempts at rationalizing it as almost a need.
0-60
Accord, 4 cyl = 10.4 sec.
Accord, V6 = 9.7 sec.
Ford Taurus V6 = 9.4
Ford Contour 4 cyl = 12 sec.
Mercury Mystique 6 cyl = 10.4 sec
Chysler Cirrus, 6 cyl = 9.6 sec
Toyota Camry V6 = 8.6 sec
45-65
Accord, 4 cyl = 6.4 sec.
Accord V6 = 6.4
Ford Taurus V6 = 5.8
Ford Contour 4 cyl = 7.7 sec.
Mercury Mystique 6 cyl = 6.7 sec
Chysler Cirrus, 6 cyl = 6.4 sec
Toyota Camry V6 = 5.3 sec.
Most of the V6 performance numbers from then are around where the 4 cylinders are today.
But thats not the bennifit of the cvt, not to me at least. It't the way it handles, the acceleration you get at any speed, the overall smoothness of it. and after having drove about 2k miles with it now, i stand by my prediction. In 10 years most cars will have the option of a standard or cvt. the automatic transmission will go the way of the carburator.
Agree with this sentiment totally. This will however likely bring out those few regulars who seem to strongly adhere to the view that " more and more accleration prowess is directly correlated to greater safety ". As usual , the impossible challenge is to find agreement on what is required so to safely pass another vehicle, or,to safely merge into traffic. Your comments concerning the appropriate TECHNIQUE to pass are right on the mark!!
this is from a review, can't remember where:
"A CVT has no forward gears or complex clutches and bands. Instead, there are two tapered pulleys with a steel belt connecting them. These pulleys can change their effective diameter through a signal from the computer. If the pulley halves are squeezed together making them narrower, the diameter in effect, increases causing the belt to move to the outer edge. At the same time, the other pulley would spread out causing the diameter to decrease. Changes in the two pulleys are always coordinated to keep the belt taut.
If the smaller pulley is being turned by the engine (the drive pulley), the steal belt would turn the larger pulley (the driven pulley) more slowly. If the diameters change, the speed of the driven pulley will also change. By allowing the computer to control the diameters of the two pulleys, the transmission ratio will smoothly and gradually change from low "gear" to high "gear"
This design eliminates the need for a 4 speed, five speed or even a six speed transmission, instead allowing for an infinite number of "speeds". The net effect is better fuel economy (at light throttle, the engine rpm is always at the optimal point for maximum fuel efficiency), and better performance (the engine can stay in its sweet spot for maximum horsepower delivery)"
Which leads to a thought... since the Versa is roomier than some "mid-sized" cars, especially in back, is it a mid-sized car? I'll bet most people don't consider it mid-sized, but it can hold four adults in comfort with the best of the mid-sized field. There's a few other small cars like that too, e.g. Elantra and Sentra. I wonder if people who are satisfied with a four-cylinder cross-shop cars like that when looking for a "mid-sized" car? FWIW, I do.
Would you share the dimensions for the Accords without the sunroof please? I'd guess it would be 100 or more.
(Just trying to keep this discussion on track).
Thegrad
2006 EX Cloth, Automatic
I don't think the entire 5 feet is for the moonroof. The power seats are also larger, and may account for some of the total.
For future reference, you can find all the specs such as interior room on the Accord and all the Hondas here: http://automobiles.honda.com/
First you say you would not call it an advanced timing maneuver, then you describe exactly what I meant by the phrase. :confuse:
I just can't see ever cutting a passing maneuver so close that 0.5 to 1 sec would make a difference.
I have never cut a passing maneuver so close with the V6, that I would not have made it with the 4cyl. But it is nice to have that extra margin for error. And yes, the V6 does make a considerable difference, when it comes to passing. Opinions, like mileage, may vary.
My solution? I unscrewed the pull itself, and removed it, leaving a small hole where it used to stick up. I'll probably try to find some sort of cap to pop in there. I guess you can say my Honda has now been modified/customized
The Hyundai Sonata is a prime example.
The 1996 Accord 4-cylinder weighs 2,855 pounds, according to ConsumerGuide, with the wagon weighing in at 3,053 pounds.
Just some useful info when trying to compare relative weights of these cars.
Wow, I just read a few of the owner reviews on the 96 Sonata, and I don't think any of them are going to be repeat customers. Not hard to improve on that.
This convo gets off track and too personal with one little post these days, even posts not intended to start trouble are often taken WAY personally.
I think Ford Fusion and Hyundai Sonata should share an award (for last year) for Rookie of the Year, or Most Improved midsize offering from that company.
Take a tip from thegrad. He's completely pleased with his Accords and tells us why. He also acknowledges that there are some worthy competitors, including the Sonata. Mainly, he preferred the Accord's interior. Some may like the Accord interior the best, some may not and some may put more importance on a different attribute of the cars.
As a former ford customer (many, many years ago) I think I know why they do that. I think, its because they allow their cars to become so inferior in quality, style, and reliability that they have too. I, for example, owned two Ford escort. both ran fine till about 70k miles, then were nothing but problems. everything from major engine problems to buttons and knobs breaking, to the most bizzare of all, the catch for the door lock (the metal piece on the frame) actualy rusted (actualy it was the body that rusted) and fell off. I couldn't close the door.
But getting back to the point, If ford had kept making them and ever improved the car, it woundn't have mattered. it wouldn't have mattered how many awards that car would have won, or how great the reviews would have been; i would never have bought one again in my life. IMHO, ford (and to some extent GM) have such a reputation for letting their cars go to crap that they have to ditch them and start over.
Five Hundred to Taurus (as the full-size upscale offering)
Escort to Focus (as the compact offering)
Windstar to Freestar (as the minivan offering)
These are the first ones that come to mind.
Five Hundred to Taurus (as the full-size upscale offering)
Escort to Focus (as the compact offering)
Windstar to Freestar (as the minivan offering)
I don't know whether the Taurus was replaced by the Fusion or the 500, but they had to have new names because they overlapped. The Taurus, Fusion, and 500 were all being sold at the same time. There are 2006s and 2007s of all three of them. Same goes for Escort and Focus which overlapped around 2000, IIRC.
FWIW, My opinion is the Fusion was the replacement of the Contour and the 500 replaces the Taurus. Just like other manufacturers, each model gets bigger.
The Freestar name was perhaps mainly because they were on a (silly) mission to have (almost) all cars names start with "F" (with the exception of Mustang).
Just to clarify and not to extend the debate...what I meant was that all I was describing is the proper way to pass.
Corona - vaporized
Celica - vaporized
MR2 - vaporized
Carina - vaporized
Starlet - vaporized
210 - vaporzied
510 - vaporized
610 - vaporized
Original BRAND NAME - DATSUN - vaporized
Maybe its not just Ford that does this, eh?
Honda can't do this because they aren't original enough to come up with any names, look at what happened when they renamed everything in the Acura line.
So what :confuse: The acceleration times of the V6s of a decade ago are about where the 4 cylinders are today, despite the increased weight.
So we can baseline that 9s+ 0-60 and convince ourselves that that must be good
No, we can say today's 4 cylinders are surely more than adequate, since the performance figures are about equal to many V6s from about 10 years ago, which are still on the roads today.
Still waiting for any evidence (not anecdotes, please) that a V6 improves safety. Statistics? Insurance discounts? IIHS report? ...Anything?
How about Stanza?
Actually Honda has done it, too...Prelude, Passport.
My survey of the Altima vs the Aura puts me in the Altima side of the aisle. Much more confident fit and finish. Let's see how the Aura stacks up with 80,000 miles on it.
I get a kick out of how these newcomers get anointed status of being great and the paint isn't even dry on them.
Relative to a French car being sold by a Japanese company pushing new/not totally proven technology (CVTs)with a Jack Nasser-esqe CEO? I think its pretty close to a toss up.
and I wouldn't realy consider datsun a company. it was just the name nissan marketed their US cars as when they first entered the US. And going by that, there was also
Geo, plymoth, and oldsmobile