Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
What is it anyway? :shades:
Maybe you missed this the first time around so I'll post several for you to see this time.
:P :P :P :P
Do you know what those mean? Talk about sensitive!!
I don't know what :P means. Explain please.
From wikipedia...
:-p or
good for Nissan!
Not to say that I wouldn't have purchased the car I did last month... but had I known they had matched the best warranty in america... I may have given a Mitsubishi car a second look, and test drive.
Galant is Mitsubishi's mid-sized sedan entry--Lancer is a compact, although quite roomy inside. But more cool than the Galant.
Exterior size seems to me to be a better difinition of "mid-size" or "large". Although it's a bit of a mouthful, what's wrong about talking about a mid-size car with large car interior room?
I think that is basically saying what backy was saying.
I would hope all prospective buyers do a "sit test", not just in the driver's seat but in the rear, with someone who is as large as your largest typical passenger (for me, that was my big, tall oldest son).
Doing a sit test can be surprising. For example, when I did that at the local auto show last March, I found that the rear seat of the Versa had more stretch-out leg room than the Altima next to it. Does the Altima have a bigger interior, in cubic feet? Sure. But the Versa had inches where it counted, plus a high driver's seat that allowed feet to slip under it comfortably.
Do not have much experience with power windows on older cars...we do have a '97 windstar and have not had a problem with them. Our other cars with power windows are less than 3 years old. In shopping for older cars for a couple kids recently, I have not seen many with power window problems. I only recall one and all it needed was a new switch.
My daughter recently got rid of a contour with non-useable manual driver window...would have cost $150 or so to fix it, IIRC. The car was 11 years old when the stub that the crank connects to broke off.
The power windows on the Contour were fine for the 10 yrs/150k time, while the Accord went through all of its power window motors and 2 antenna motors in that time. The only car that can beat that was the Reliant, which was the reason the Caravan had crank windows (which never failed). I think the biggest issue I had with manual windows (in a 70s Nova) was the part you hold on to, the little knob kept coming off.
Manual responds immediately, and TL's works but take a few seconds longer (after cold starts, I guess the chemicals inside the mirror casing take a little while to "warm").
This is similar to manual seat adjustment versus powered (although in this case, I'm the only one who drives the Accord which has power seats and rarely needs adjustments, while TL has memory seats, so it adjusts itself before I get in the car).
Our Subaru has that mirror, same one, same supplier. We have been told from other people who have that mirror that we have a 5 year life before it goes bad and permanently defaults to that green hue. I really don't mind just flipping the little lever that much.
In answer to your question: 2006 Civic EX sedan automatic...1995 Dodge Stratus ES sedan...2000 Hyundai Elantra sedan. This is titled to me but our son drives and maintains it so for all intents and purposes it is his.
Sure they do. It's called sarcasm. Get over it.
Just try to be more careful when trying to disprove someone next time is all I, and probably others, ask. Two of us were in agreement on what the EPA numbers show us because we looked it up.
Nobody likes to be proven wrong, myself included, but it's even worse when it's done without any effort to find the facts. I've learned to laugh about it now and so should you.
I'm surprised nobody caught this yet. Overall, very positive comments from Edmunds.
A couple items I noticed:
With the VSA turned off, the engine electronics doesn't allow full-throttle acceleration until 20 MPH. Honda's worried about the possibility of too much torque steer? Whatever the reason, I'm sure Honda has good intentions, but to me, it's another useless electronic watchdog.
Also, why are they STILL cursing their cars with Michelin Pilot HXMX4 tires? They are quite possibly the WORST all-season touring tires invented, and can cost over $200 PER TIRE to replace, when much-better touring tires are available for half the cost or even less.
Other than that, a very nice-looking machine that should continue to do well for Honda.
I replaced the OEM Michelins on my '01 Elantra with Kumhos that cost about 1/3 of what the Michelins cost, and they were quieter, had better all-weather performance, and lasted longer.
And when it comes to "EPA rating", it doesn't count your opinion on what defines class. They stick to a standard definition. Or, are we to go with one's whim? Then we have a chaos, and there is no need for standards.
It is not due to electronic nanny of any kind. It is part of Honda’s V6 design, or so I conclude based on my observation. Honda surprised a lot of us (I’m speaking for another board which is largely for Honda enthusiasts) by putting 3.5-liter engine in the Accord while many were expecting a revised 3.0 or 3.2. Apparently, Honda’s plan was to go with VCM version 2. With this version, there is little wiggle room in low-mid range since the engine is to operate in two additional modes (I-3 and V4). VTEC is busy doing that, trying to enhance around town/low throttle fuel economy.
So, instead of 3.0 or 3.2, they went with 3.5 really tuned more like a 3.2 (as in my TL) up to about 3500 rpm (the "eco zone"). It is beyond this rpm that the hot cam takes over and VCM is out of the picture. The result is 3.5/V6 going full force (hence the peak numbers).
The effect is that of a 3.2/V6 under 3500 rpm (which will coincide with about 20 mph) and 3.5/V6 above it. In non-VCM version (only Accord Coupe/6MT at this time), the engine is full force 3.5 right off idle. While with VCM, the engine now has more performance in low-mid range than the 3.0 offered before and a lot more performance on the highway.
this type of 'program' is also tied into whether the 'watchdog' thinks the front wheels are straight as well, the Acura TL - and possibly tranny gear selections (the Toyota/Nissan approach). Things like this make you wonder though - what haapens when TV lawyers gets their teeth into your lawsuit contending you got into an accident because these 'watchdogs/nannies' limited your ability to avoid it?
That said, I used to think the TL had some kind of nanny via DBW to limit power around corners. My car has debunked my belief since. You can get on the throttle around a turn and it will take off, and in the direction you point it at.
OTOH, Accord's V6 (as I explained above) is due to VCM design. Now if Honda were limiting power in non-VCM V6 (Accord 6MT), that would debunk my theory. I haven't heard about it yet.
The new Mazda6 V6 is going to blow this thing away performance wise I'm guessing. It is bigger than the outgoing model but reportedly lighter IIRC. Plus the D37 engine will add roughly 50 HP and 50-60 ft-lbs of torque. Gas mileage will surely suffer though if that's your bag.
As for performance, Honda has rarely sought benchmarking performance with Accord in the American market. They have stuck with the middle ground to deliver "almost" the best of both worlds. It has been the winning formula for Honda, for a long time.
I do wish that Honda would offer Accord with a sport trim (from the factory as opposed to offering dealer installed HFP package) to address the "concerns" of naysayers, but I guess they won't do it unless sales (or lack of) demand it, and from the fear of seriously stepping on Acura's toes (which is a sad fact that Honda has opted to live with).
And we know, just performance doesn't sell. The current Mazda6 is a prime example of it, even with about half of its sales going to fleet. It appeals to a small niche of buyers. Instead, Honda focused on what might help them in the longer term (again)... fuel economy. With a little road time, Accord V6 is unlikely to scare buyers away with its real world fuel economy, as some others might face when the prices go up (again) and they will.
No. Not at this time.
The new Mazda6 V6 is going to blow this thing away performance wise I'm guessing. It is bigger than the outgoing model but reportedly lighter IIRC.
Well, that's the global car anyway. We'll see with the US-spec bumpers and other "necessary" safety equipment if this holds true.
Gas mileage will surely suffer though if that's your bag.
That depends. Toyota does okay with a 6-speed auto with their V6 (only 1 MPG less on the highway compared to the Accord V6 w/5-speed auto and cylinder deactivation, IIRC). Since Mazda already uses a 6-speed auto, I don't see why they can't get similar results if they get the ratios correct.
Then of course, Mazda always gears toward the performance crowd, buyers that don't mind 1-2 MPG for better performance.
We shall see.
So, while Accord may be a few ticks slower in a 0-60 run, it got 20% better fuel economy. And speaking of acceleration numbers, I would love to see how these cars stack up in 30-50, 40-60 etc runs. They are far more useful measures in the real world (outside of drag racing).
Aren't the bumpers larger across the pond due to their stricter pedestrian crash laws though?
That depends. Toyota does okay with a 6-speed auto with their V6 (only 1 MPG less on the highway compared to the Accord V6 w/5-speed auto and cylinder deactivation, IIRC). Since Mazda already uses a 6-speed auto, I don't see why they can't get similar results if they get the ratios correct.
I was only comparing it to the Accord because it is different, but you're right, it shouldn't be any worse than the Camry or others with similar drivetrains.
Honda does that. But it won't put performance brakes/tires on cars. Although, 17" rims are standard in Accord V6 (I think they have been for last generation too). Drive an Acura TL-S and that cars rides way better than one can expect it to be. I have a 2006 TL, and Honda softened the 2007 TL (base), but it actually handles just as well now with better ride.
The downside to these refinements seems to show up in curb weight since most of it is probably achieved via stronger chassis.
IIRC, the pedestrian standards affect the hood height (in order to allow space between the bottom of the hood and the engine/chassis, so it can "give" and soften the blow to a pedestrian.)
The larger bumpers are for the 5-MPH crash tests in the US.
I don't belive the rubber wrapped around them was as low profile or aggressive as the OEM rubber on the 6 though.
Honda does that. But it won't put performance brakes/tires on cars.
Hopefully you were referring to the Acura models when you stated that. The Accord does ride softer than the 6 but it in no way handles the same as or better than it. Thus the tradeoff between handling and comfort. I don't see Mazda moving away from an excellent handling car with the new 6 so it's either going to be rough riding like the current model or they'll have found a way to soften the ride without taking handling away. The latter should sell much better IMO.
As far as handling goes, I have said it before, Honda hasn't sold "sport tuned" Accord in America, and should. But for now, what we do get is one that has the balance to appeal to a wider audience. It is one of the reasons Honda sells as many Accords in a month as Mazda does selling 6 in six months.
For sportier performance, Honda prefers to send buyers to Acura dealership (TSX), and while I don't like the idea (I would rather see the formula applied to mainstream car) it is how the company has chosen to go about its business.
And even TSX is far from being as sporty as some Accord models sold in Japan.
I wasn't feeling the leather seats, felt a lot like vinyl to me.... .is it?
I wasn't feeling the little V6, I thought perhaps it was a really great 4 cylinder. I honestly wasn't sure if it was a V6 model until I looked under the hood. However, if it had been a 4 banger, I'd of said it was ever so slightly superior to Nissan's 2.5 or Honda's 4 banger. As a V6, it wasn't that good; however, it's midrange 3K to 5K power was quite good. It seemed to have less low end torque than a VTEC V6 though (which isn't all that good to begin with).
The car was floatier and softer than I expected; it actually rode very comfortably to me. Even though it bounced and floated when hitting expansion joints on the freeway exchange ramps, it held the ground like it was on rails despite all the soft slow movement in the cabin. I did take a ramp at a high rate of speed to test this. So it definitely handled as well as my Accord Coupe; would have to drive more to declare it a clear winner rather than a tie. I went through 3/8 of a gas tank in about 120 miles; not so good (though I don't know what kind of mileage that is since I don't know the tank size). I was exercising the engine to red line occassionally.
The interior materials feel and look cheap to me. The car showed its wear (you Mazda lovers can blame that it's a loaner/rental car, but I won't accept that excuse entirely). The lighter gray plastics in the middle of the dash are the worst, including the matching trim on the sides and doors. The seats were comfy and sporty at the same time.
The hatchback trunk was strange.... are all Mazda sedans equipped with the lifting rear window/trunk combo? That could be useful. I like that feature; provided it doesn't cause more noise or other issues. I noticed the finish/fabric on the lid behind the rear seats covering the trunk was "low rent."
one note: the front tires were a bit low; probably around 25 psi.
Overall grade B- bordering on straight B.
Improve the interior materials and improve the engine, and Mazda may have something! Oh, what the heck is Mazda thinking with not having a trunk release button either on the remote or in the car? That was idiotic. Even a 2006 Civic has the buttons.
Honda does that.
They forgot to do it on my '07 Accord EX then. It seems to be very effective at showing me expansion joints and pavement irregularities, yet still handles like a wet sponge.
But it won't put performance brakes/tires on cars.
The brakes are okay, but its like they go out of their way to buy tires with low performance limits. I think its because they chose tires based on rolling resistance, which improves MPG at the cost of actually sticking to the road.
The downside to these refinements seems to show up in curb weight since most of it is probably achieved via stronger chassis.
I would hope so, since the carpet, floor mats, and other interior components seem to be of lower quality than my '93, so its definitely not materials or sound reduction components.
And while we're at it, we might as well test the real road handling skills (instead of arm chair racing with printed spec sheet on hand).
Tires: I haven't noticed any decline in mileage since I replaced the OEM Michelins 132K miles ago. In fact, it went up. I'm thankful that Michelins that came with the car were overly expensive to replace. It gave me a good excuse to explore other options.
Quality/Features: At one point, you had to buy floor mats (they are included now, or at least were a few years ago). My 98 actually has better quality to the controls than your 93. And back then, Hondas were well known for being ridiculously underfeatured and undertired (now I'm complaining about them going overboard with features and rim size). Heck, even the mainstream Civic now has bigger wheels than my 1998 Accord.
Do you REALLY own an Accord? I'm really beginning to wonder. :confuse:
Do you REALLY own an Accord? I'm really beginning to wonder.
I wasn't dissatisfied with the '93, it was about as good as the Contour and the Jetta, it just was apparently not this holy grail I should've been expecting.
As far as the '07, it was definitely a mistake. It was a very good deal at the time but generally speaking one of the most soulless cars I have driven. It was at a low point of other things going on in my life. My goal right now is to keep it as pristine as possible and hopefully learn about the incredible resale it should have in a year or so. I have no idea why I bought it, I have never been so underwhelmed with a vehicle.
I take that back, as I mentioned previously, it does a fantastic job with holding the infant seat, and it gets mileage in the mid-30s. That screams driving enjoyment to me.
No, I think the Mazda is aggressive, but at least it can go around a cloverleaf without feeling like it was scrapping its doorhandles on the pavement.
Tires: I haven't noticed any decline in mileage since I replaced the OEM Michelins 132K miles ago. In fact, it went up. I'm thankful that Michelins that came with the car were overly expensive to replace. It gave me a good excuse to explore other options.
That treadwear number on the tire - the higher the number, the harder the rubber, and the longer the wear. The number is also roughly inversely correlated with rolling resistance - soft, sticky tires by design have more rolling resistance and thus, lower mileage, while highway tires are designed to roll quietly and efficiently.
Quality/Features: At one point, you had to buy floor mats (they are included now, or at least were a few years ago).
Yeah, the floor mats on the '93 were an additional ~$90. I wouldn't pay anything for the floor mats that came on the '07 EX.
My 98 actually has better quality to the controls than your 93.
You know, that is one area I never complained about, the controls always had a great feel to them. Same with the '93 and '07.
And back then, Hondas were well known for being ridiculously underfeatured and undertired (now I'm complaining about them going overboard with features and rim size). Heck, even the mainstream Civic now has bigger wheels than my 1998 Accord.
The '93 had 195/60R15s on alloy wheels. I thought that was fine for the size and weight of the car. When I replaced the highway Michelins with performance oriented Kumhos (and the stock 130k shocks with aftermarket replacements), the car handled very well and was fun to drive.
One nice thing about traveling a lot is that I get a chance to try out lots of cars... except Accords.
The EPA rating on my '05 Sonata is 19/27. I average, year round, including summer with A/C and winter temps in the teens, right about the EPA estimate for city. I drive less than 3 miles to work and most trips are less than 5 miles. I do very little highway driving so I can't really comment on that except for 2 instances. I bought the car new in Florida and drove it home to CT (1300+ miles) and after about 700 miles did better than the EPA estimate, going with the traffic flow and using cruise control when traffic permitted.
I know the EPA uses their own definition of class sizes. I was merely responding to your earlier post questioning if the Sonata & Accord should be considered in the large car rather than mid-size forum discussions. I was trying to say that comparing the milage figures for the Sonata & Accord would lean in favor of those cars when compared to cars than are larger in exterior size (and probably weight).
BTW, have you finally learned the information you claimed to be trying to obtain for your friends to help them determine what car they should buy?
Well according to you, anything Korean is better.
If American branded cars are selling so poorly, then why aren't there more for sale on dealers lots?
The local Saturn dealership has turned into some 'used car' headquarters, with very few new Saturns to see, the two Ford dealerships have very few cars to choose from, and the "Number 1" Chevy dealership in town has fewer than 10 cars under $20K (but over 50 dumb trucks). Meanwhile, the Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai dealerships are balls-to-the-wall in new cars of all colors, shapes, sizes, and prices.
It's no wonder American branded car sales are down - there's no reasonable selection to choose from.
During the recent short-lived strike against GM (thankfully short) I read than GM had a 90 day inventory of cars compared to a 60 day inventory a year ago.
Maybe the problem in you area is a distribution problem.