Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
What I've often wondered about is, why is steam not a viable option? I know the main fuel comsumption would be to heat it, but today aren't there ways to heat water efficiently? At least with much less fuel than would be burned by even a small gasoline engine. Of course, the safety issue would have to be addressed, but again with today's materials, I don't see why that couldn't work in conjunction with a nice pop-off valve. I expect there'd have to be a way to get a quick head of steam on a 15 degree day, too. The things have massive torque from dead stop and wouldn't require a transmission. I'm sure it's been discarded for very good reasons, 'tho. It never did exist again after the 20s. I remember seeing a Stanley in operation at one of our Rambles back in the 70s--that thing would huff and puff up the hills in Cameron Park like there was nothing there when the other old cars were gasping in low gear...
It is the same old mundane comments like these that are typical of the Honda/Toyota brethren.
What you don't seem to understand is I have had Ford products that went up to 150,000 with no issues, others that went 110,000 another that went 75,000 and another that went about 90,000. Try to convince me that Fords are all garbage.. yeah right..
Bro, I guess I'll bash my 2000 Accord then??
Your previous posts give me a chance to make a couple of points to everyone. I will use your words for examples, but nearly everyone here needs to listen.
It's really not useful to make sweeping generalizations such as "typical of Honda/Toyota brethren" - let's have conversations with each other as individuals instead of painting large groups of people with one brush. It's not only not helpful, but it cannot be correct.
As for the square buttons comment, no statement was made whether or not Honda and Toyota have them. It's dangerous to react to assumptions. That's when things start to get out of hand.
Why don't we ALL try to have some new conversation instead of just saying the same things over and over again?
What is the energy effiency?
Even coal can be pretty clean (leaving aside the carbon dioxide issue, nuclear solves that one :surprise: ). The reason being, it is a lot more cost effective to control emissions from one gigantic source rather than millions of tiny ones.
It seems crazy that burning coal to boil water, to run steam turbines, to generate electricity, that is than sent through miles and miles of wires can be more efficient than an internal combustion engine, but I believe Tesla motors has some papers that show that this is the case.
Some time time ago I did a calculation myself...looked at the equivalent mpg based on what the electricty would cost and the price of gasoline. At the time, I came up with their electric car being equivalent to getting about 100-300 mpg. Of course, this answer depends on what you pay for electricty and gasoline and whether you remove the taxes from the price of the gasoline.
I am a little concerned about buying a car that needs 93 octane gas and gets mpg in the 20s when gas is going over $3/gallon, but I don't drive that much and I might as well enjoy it when I do.
It has the wholesome attributes of the Mazda6 (4 doors, good trunk, rear seat room for kids, etc) plus 270hp and AWD. The clutch like a switch but I think I could get used to that...the clutch in the Accord was never a champ either.
It has been a very long time since I have actually gotten to pick out a vehicle for myself, usually I scoop up hand-me-downs or things people were going to trade-in, and its very likely I won't get to pick out anything for myself for a long time to come.
was the lack of a folding rear seat
Yeah, that was an issue for me too until the sales guy showed me that it does still have a folding seat. There is a trim piece that can me removed to provide access to the seat folding mechanism from the regular Mazda6. The cross-brace is still there but I am pretty sure what I need will fit around it.
I think the bikes will be on the roof, so I am not worried about that, and the other car is the family truckster, so this one need not have the same level of utility.
I guess I could see that with respect to the drivetrain, instead of 2 axles to need boots there are 4 to tear and rip and wear out, it has 18" wheels so tires will be pricey, etc. The motor itself I am not too worried about, the 2.3 has been well proven, and I don't see myself cranking the boost or doing a lot of modifications to the car.
Mazda has been doing Turbos for a long time, as has Mitsubishi (the Eclipse/Talon/Laser/Galant/Lancer turbos did well)and Subaru. Now even Acura and BMW are doing it on gasoline engines. I am not too worried about that part.
I agree 100% with that. I think anyone who is buying one of the vehicles on this thread based solely on quality or reliability ratings is crazy. That's right, crazy. :P
I understand some manufacturers had issues in the past with quality and reliability but times have changed and they changed fast. Any of these sedans are worthy of one's hard earned dollars and I don't feel any of them will let anyone down. If I were in the market for one I'd have no problem buying the one I liked best based on style and a good old fashioned road test and I feel anyone who's not tied a need for high resale (That does still vary and probably will for a little while longer), high fuel mileage, or low cost should do the same. There are fairly obvious choices to suit those needs in this comparison and I understand that people like that do exist. But we, as enthusiasts, need to be a little more open, right?
I think in reality it is a balance of these things. That balance is different for each individual.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Really? Premium fuel is .20 a gallon more. So a 15 gallon fill-up costs you $3 more than regular. 5 fill-ups a month is $15. Is that a big cost?
I think in my mind that was co-mingled with going from a car that easily gets 30 mpg to one that struggles to get 25, more realistically 20 mpg.
That premium fuel thing is one of my beefs with the VQ35, too. It seems like the other V6s don't need premium (Honda, Mazda, Toyota).
I think the likelihood is relatively high I will wuss out and try to find a Mazda6 V6 5spd :sick: (especially since they have been around for a while, so finding a used model is easier), but I really liked the ride and driving feel of the Speed6.
Some people are influenced by trends (SUV craze). Others do not care what "everyone else" is driving. I've never needed an SUV, so I've never owned one. I've always seen SUVs as wagons that ride like trucks (not what I want).
Handling won't be as sharp (still pretty good though), but it has a lot more room and folding seats. Its also just about as quick and gets very good gas mileage. Some people are getting high 30's on the highway at moderate speeds, as it has a very tall 6th gear.
Taxes is probably the stopper. Here in CT the state doesn't wack us hard enough with a $0.45 tax per gallon so they also have a gross earnings tax applied at the wholesale level. It's currently 6.3% and increasing to 7% on July 1.
The gas station I normally go to is currently charging $3.159 per gallon. If the station is making $0.15 per gallon, the wholesale price is $2.55 and 7% of that is $0.178 per gallon. Then the feds charge $0.184 per gallon. $0.812 of that $3.159 is tax.
Keep that in mind the next time you hear some politician attacking "Big Oil" and the high price of gasoline.
Handling won't be as sharp (still pretty good though), but it has a lot more room and folding seats. Its also just about as quick and gets very good gas mileage. Some people are getting high 30's on the highway at moderate speeds, as it has a very tall 6th gear.
I think that is a good thought but I actually don't need more room, I don't even need that much room. I drove the 4 cyl Accord and found it competent but far from sporting (although power was fine). I think the Mazda6 V6 is more comparable to the Accord V6, and its several thousand dollars cheaper. I was also looking at used vehicles, so Honda's resale value doesn't appeal to me.
The only thing comparable is that they're both 6 cylinders.
unless Nissan has changed their owner's manual that says ' for maximum performance 91 octane fuel is recommended', haven't found this to be the case - my wife's VQ35 (in an Altima) has been running just fine now for about 80000 trouble free miles - on regular.
Some can't feel the difference. I never could tell in our Odyssey van (the drop was from 210 hp to 205, and from 229 lb-ft to 221lb-ft, I think). Not noticeable. For those touting their car getting 270 hp, well, if they aren't putting premium in it, they are not getting 270 hp. The computer is retarding the spark for the lower octane gas.
There is a reason ford's drop in value so much, so fast. the likelyhood that you'll only get 70% of the miles out of it than you would a forign make is a huge part of it.
of course not, and no big deal - for those cars that can effectively use the extra octane, though, it is a helluva nice option to have. My personal driver, a Toyota 2GR, is much the same way as my wife's VQ35, I tend to put premium in my car
Hopefully. the whole idea of it (to anybody likes cars and doesn't just view them as transportation) is sickening. but this is still 10-15 years away. they'll probably show up sooner than that, but not on a large scale. I figure 20 years or so from now (for obvious reasons) the gasoline powered car will be forced out.
when I first read about the volt, thought it was just something GM was doing that would never work. But when I read up on it more, and saw that toyota and honda were also working hard on it, and nissan went as far as creating a joint company with NEC to design make and sell theese batteries I realized it was for real.
and i mention this begrudgingly, as I'm a nissan man myself. :P My wife drives the honda.
I know a lot of people who are brand loyal, and if that makes them happy, great. Personally, I love how good companies adjust to the marketplace and make improvements. Whenever a new model comes out, you never know how they will change. And perhaps my own needs and wants will change too. Sometimes the changes that a manufacturer makes will mirror the new needs of a given customer, but sometimes not.
When I was buying a car this time around, I wanted something that could haul a lot but also something that handled well. That eliminated suv's and trucks and knocked half the cars listed above off the list. I geuss the Accord stayed on my list since I had good luck with it in the past and it did handle pretty good. But in the end, brand had very little impact on what I bought and I'm glad.
Having many good cars to choose from makes us all very lucky no matter what our balance of priorities are.
Recently I traded off my '96 Honda Accord LX 4cyl auto. At 165,000 miles on it the original brakes had at least 50% life left in them. Only repair items were a brake master cylinder and a new radiator (not counting a new muffler and exhaust pipe-spark plugs-other regular maintenance items). I always changed the oil regularly with Mobil 1, the trans fluid (again Mobil 1 tranny fluid) and Bosch Platinum spark plugs at 30k. This was one great car! Gas mileage was always 30 mpg+. I hope my new '07 Accord SE will do as well in the years ahead.
Always anticipate your stops and the brakes will last a lot longer.
"We are standing on Giants".
Nice big discs on a nice light car, they never have to strain, don't get hot and last.
Rear disc pads only lasted 95,000 though. They cheaped out on those.
Yet another generalization the host spoke of.. right host??
All my Fords lasted and if you get out on the net you will see plenty of high mileage Fords/Chevrolets with happy owners. Honda/Toyota have a PAST reputation for high mileage vehicles..
While I don't agree with the post you were replying to (it is exactly as you say, one of the sweeping generalizations about car makes), the one saying Ford's likelihood of reaching high miles vs. others' etc.., I am a CURRENT example of high-mileage Honda-owner, and wonder how you intend to back up your statement.
I like to think I have moderate-mileage, with 172,500 miles as of yesterday on my Accord.
no, personal experience. But for every ford you can find with 200,000 miles on it, I'll find you a toyota with 300,000 on it.
But your right, it is a generaliztion. I'll give you that. But since you are standing firm on the notion that a ford is built as well as a japanese car, perhaps you'd care to explain why a ford, after 3 years, is only worth 1/3 of what you paid for it?
here is a list of the 10 worst cars for holding their value. 9 of them are domestic, and 3 are fords. can you explain this?
link title
A must read for those arguing the domestic vs foreign quality issue.
To sum it up the Japanese had to make their cars better every year because they were so bad to begin with (they celebrated when they finally could keep up with a VW bug). The Americans, meanwhile, were so far ahead that their biggest concern was saving money on each piece that went into the vehicle, so they could maximize profits.
Completly different cultures. One funny part was the Japanese wondering why their cars did not start in the U.S. when they would in similar cold climates in Northern Japan. It turns out the Japanese all covered their cars at night with blankets, and they figured the Americans did the same.
As far as the current battle for the midsize sedans, it is getting hard to tell where the cars are made, and where the profits are going. I will say that cheaping out is not the way to go. I briefly looked at a Focus (despite having a Taurus that was not good to me) because of the excellent handling and the availability of a wagon. Everything just felt off. The seats were so soft like they had no springs, and the gauge cluster looked cheaper than the speedo I had on my Schwin.
It seems to me the domestics are close in many ways, but they are often trying to cut corners in areas they think people won't notice. They do notice.
One thing I do like about the domestics and about the Focus was the ability to order the exact vehicle you want (or close to it). They should push that angle.
I'd say there are several factors that can, alone or in combination, cause low resale value.
1) Perceived quality difference. I believe there is still, in general, a quality/reliability advantage that some makes have over others. (I believe it is mostly smaller than it used to be, and smaller then most people's perceptions, but those perceptions are what matter.)
2) Heavy used supply from fleets. Some makes/models are heavily owned/used in fleets. Fleets' generally short retention means quick turnover and more used availability of those makes/models. (PS: Food for thought... Despite the lower resale value numbers, you wanna bet that those fleet models STILL offer lower overall lifecycle costs for the owners? Companies are obsessive about the bottom line; you can be certain that if it made fiscal sense for them to own/operate some other make in their fleets, they would be doing so.)
3) The calculation itself is non-representative and inexact, at best. Those quoted percentages are all figured based on MSRP, not what you or anyone else actually paid for a vehicle. Makes that have more slop/incentives/rebates built into the sticker will show misleadingly low resale value figures. Caravan SE is on the list, for example. The first one I find on Fitzmall's site shows an MSRP of $19975, but can be bought for a no-haggle $15623. In this case, the resale calculation is done using an MSRP that is over 27% more than what I actually paid. So yeah, it's gonna look ugly calculated that way. But I didn't 'lose' that $4k+ -- I never spent it in the first place.
I bought my $21,000 Mazda6 for $16,000...if it is worth $16,000 in a year, that site will claim 30% depreciation when reality would be 0%.
Wow, 144k and its halfway though its 3rd set, and this last time it needed new rotors, which is a major ordeal. I'm not complaining about brakes every 50k, just wondering how other people can go so long.
Only repair items were a brake master cylinder and a new radiator
As the family AAA tow record holder, it has also needed those things as well as 3 distributors, a starter, an ignition switch, and of course a main relay. Most recently, it pushed out its cam seals, making a big oily mess, but I cant really count that as the car is 15 years old and has 140k.
I always changed the oil regularly with Mobil 1, the trans fluid (again Mobil 1 tranny fluid) and Bosch Platinum spark plugs at 30k.
I have always changed the oil but not used Mobil 1 with that vehicle. Piston rings, oil seals, etc are fine, I don't expect a mechanical problem from the engine in that car. I also have had bad luck with the Bosch plugs (in that car and others). The Accord seems to like the NGK plugs called out for it, and even the Contour (which was on a hook once, for a water pump, at 130k) liked the Motorcraft/Autolite plugs the manual specified better than the Bosch ones.
a big part is what brakes you put on it. when the original brakes the car came with wear out, you have to be real carful which aftermarket brakes you put on it. The quality of the origianals is much higher than what you find in an autoparts store. Those are driven more by price than anything else. But 50k for brakes isn't bad.
With its $27,105 MSRP we could have bought an Accord or Camry, for example, but the ultimate deciding factors were style (looks), handling and features.
Five months and 3,000 miles later we are still pleased with our purchase EXCEPT for the horrific 14.8 miles per gallon in-city mileage. The revised EPA rating for this drive train is 17 mpg city, 24 mpg highway. Unfortunately, 95 percent of our driving is in-city, stop-and-go, short hops.
Naturally we hope that the Fusion will be as reliable as the Accord and Camry have proven to be. Only time will tell if Ford's new entry into the midsize market will prove to be a better idea. Our own personal experience with other Ford products has been generally favorable and we did not want a plain Jane-looking product.
The Asian cars, in general, have a certain sameness to them while the Fusion is definitely bold and distinctive. It stands out in a crowd. Pride of ownership is a factor with any automobile. The fit and finish of our Fusion is exceptional and the car has many features only found on autos costing thousands of dollars more.
Another factor was the dealer. Our previous experiences with Sherwood Ford, Lincoln, Mercury in Salisbury, Md., were A1. Having a good dealer means a lot in the long run.
To be sure, the midsize sedan market is one of the most competitive these days and there are good things about each manufacturer's entry but the Fusion was the best choice for our tastes. Now, if the in-city mileage would improve to the revised EPA estimate, we would be totally satisfied.
Boz
Fortunately after 7000 miles we are getting over 19 city (when I drive carefully, less when I am having fun) and 27+ highway.
Love the car, handling and performance more than the other features.
Glad to hear you love your Fusion for the same reasons I love my Aura.
Please excuse me pat Host. I thought the Honda Accord was a midsize sedan. My "list" in regards to my midsize Accord was only meant to be informative about their durability as a midsize entry compared to others in this class.
We definitely live in a "difference stokes for different folks" kind of a world. Didn't the Aura win some organization's "Car of the Year" award? I seem to recall a TV ad to that effect. We envy your miles per gallon results. In retrospect, I wish we had ordered an I4 with either a manual or automatic. The V6 with AWD combo is a real mileage killer in town driving
$25K MSRP. $17K end of year sale($18K right now, without end-of-year anything).
So it depreciates in two years to 14K. Looks dreadful on paper. Actually, it's 1.5K a year, or about what an Accord does, percentage-wise.