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…143144146148149…544

Comments

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    The stat isn't based on volume, but based on per 100 cars (I think). That said, not all thefts may be for parts, but that can be assumed for most cases. In case of Hondas, you have to couple longevity and compatibility.

    It was with 1998 Accord that Honda got very serious about it. An example is the audio system. It was beginning of a new era that has led to more integrated (and unique) systems since then, and virtually no compatibility going from one generation to another. You could take stereo out of a 1991 Accord and put it in 1997 Accord, or even a 2000 Civic. You can't take 1998 Accord's stereo out (first of all, it is anti-theft coded, but even if you get past it), you can't simply put it in a 2003 or 2008. That has limited the appeal.

    Similar case can be made for engine, and most other parts.
  • throck25throck25 Member Posts: 1
    My dealer is telling me I need new rear brakes, pads, etc. after only 25000 miles. I was expecting them to last at least 40k miles. It is going to cost me over $300 for just the rear brakes. When questioned he said they are worn down and rusted. Is this common for these cars?
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    Aren't you covered by the car warranty?
  • jlindhjlindh Member Posts: 282
    What is rusted? If the dealer is talking about a rusted rotor, it sounds like one of your calipers is not working. On the other hand, all your brake rotors will rust when exposed to water. The brake pads will remove the rust when the brakes are applied. The overall wear would depend mostly on your driving style.

    If you're hard on brakes, you might try a different pad.
  • phaetondriverphaetondriver Member Posts: 175
    Rear brakes should out last the fronts 2 or 3 to 1. ABS is one thing that can make rear brake pads wear out faster than normal. I would suspect that there is a PROBLEM with the ABS system which should be a warranty covered system. If the calipers are rusted, that would be a factory material defect and should be a warranty covered part. The only thing not covered by most new car warranties would be the pads (and labor).
    I would immediately take my car to a brake shop and get a second opinion from an expert. No way should pad replacement cost $300.

    Good luck
    Oh! Happy Thanks-giving too
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    25K is way too early, more so for rear brake pads. How much life are they estimating is left on the front pads? If you can believe it, my 1998 Accord's pads lasted 90K miles (front) and 132K miles (rear). At 184K miles, those are the only times they have been replaced but they both seem due for replacement soon.

    But, did they say you needed more than brake pads? Then, you might be able to ask for warranty coverage. I can see pads being a wear and tear item and not covered, but if it involves rotors or something else, ask them.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    But not the Malibu--the CTS. GM's first MT COTY in a decade. The 2008 Accord and Malibu were finalists, however. What was interesting that in MT's scoring system, the Malibu out-pointed the Accord. The link below takes you to the reports on the Accord and Malibu.

    http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/112_0801_2008_car_of_the_year_finalists
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Shouldn't there have been a spoiler alert in that subject line? I subscribe to MT.

    :cry:

    I'll be sure and check out the article when it gets to my house.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Maybe you should talk to MT about publishing the COTY results on the Web for all to see before paying customers like you hear about it. :(
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    Perhaps I read the article too quickly. Where does it indicate where the vehicles finished in Motor Trend's scoring system? I noticed the vehicles were listed in alphabetical order but that's not an indication of the order they finished.

    The A5 got robbed.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    Well deserved!!
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    Doesn't sound right under normal driving conditions.

    I'd suggest getting a second opinion if possible; you may also head over to the Sonata forum and check out if anyone else has had this issue:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.ef14c39/?ed_displayMakeModelRelatedDiscus- sions!make=Hyundai&model=Sonata
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    If you look at the reviews of each car, you can see how MT scored each car in various categories. The Malibu got higher "star" scores overall than the Accord, where 5 stars is the top score. Across the 7 categories, Malibu averaged 4.3 and Accord 4.0 stars. Also Malibu got no lower than 4 stars in any category, whereas the Accord got one 2 and one 3, in addition to some 4s and 5s.

    So my prediction awhile back that the Malibu could take the MT COTY over the Accord was wrong, but in a way partly on target in that it did top all other mid-sized family cars, including the Accord. :shades:
  • mickeyrommickeyrom Member Posts: 936
    Except for sensing my key,my 97 Chrysler Town & Country LXi could do that,so it's old technology.You could program 2 seat and mirror settings, and depending on which remote you used they would adjust themselves.
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    According to GM Inside News the 'Bu beat the Accord but the CTS beat the 'Bu. I'd probably agree with that, although MT's selections have been head scratchers in some past years.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    See 7467.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Except for sensing my key,my 97 Chrysler Town & Country LXi could do that,so it's old technology.You could program 2 seat and mirror settings, and depending on which remote you used they would adjust themselves

    Yeah, why doesn't the Accord do that? Or a Fusion? Why do we need to push a button on the key chain to make it work?
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    If it was a reliability issue NO Honda's would be stolen...ever... because, as we know, they never break down and therefore need no parts.

    Your theory would be great if every driver out there was like me and as good at me at not getting into accidents. HOwever, since the reality is that I've had a few of my Honda parts damaged by other drivers on the road from collisions, stolen parts could come in handy if I was into that sort of thing. ;)
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • motownusamotownusa Member Posts: 836
    What exactly is special about the Malibu anyway ? Basically a CHEVY version of the sales dud Saturn AURA. It certainly isn't the most powerful midsize sedan. The V6 Camry outpowers the Malibu and gets better gas mileage while both the I4 and V6 Accord outpowers the MALIBU by nearly 20 horspower while getting better gas mileage. ME thinks MOTOR TREND was just feeling sorry for GM for ignoring them for so long. I consider it a pity prize for GM.
  • drwilscdrwilsc Member Posts: 140
    Did you read the article? The Malibu did 0-60 in 6.4 seconds, while the Accord V6 took 6.6 sec. Not sure why you are saying the V6 Accord 'outpowers' the Malibu when in fact in a race it would be looking at the Malibu's taillights.

    The Malibu has a 6-speed auto while the Accord has a 5-speed unit.

    The article also mentions Saturn's 'hot-selling' Aura.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    There has been a bit of discussion of keyless ignition systems in multiple midsize sedan models. Why I would not purchase a car with a keyless ignition system.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    In motown's defense, the Accord does outpower the Malibu. He didn't say it was faster.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    There has been a bit of discussion of keyless ignition systems in multiple midsize sedan models. Why I would not purchase a car with a keyless ignition system.

    And when insurance rates go up for vehicles equipped with such devices, I will worry. A few obscure postings on the internet about an elite group of hackers isn't enough to concern me. If I was that worried, I wouldn't have RKE or a garage door opener either.

    I guess that is a risk I am willing to accept, since it provides quite a bit of convenience and is of no cost to me (other than requiring the option package).
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    It's not a few obscure postings on the internet. I heard this on major network news first and couldn't believe it, but couldn't find a reference. This is one reference, but the issue IMO, just like the issue with stolen HID Acura headlamp assemblies, is real.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    No one here has said the Malibu is faster than the Accord. But in MT's tests, the Malibu was a bit quicker 0-60. Just proves again that performance is not all about horsepower, even though there seems to be a fixation on that even with mid-sized family cars. :confuse: Maybe the Malibu's 6-speed AT helps it be quicker than the Accord even with fewer horses under the hood.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    It's not a few obscure postings on the internet. I heard this on major network news first and couldn't believe it, but couldn't find a reference. This is one reference, but the issue IMO, just like the issue with stolen HID Acura headlamp assemblies, is real.

    Thats not how news works. If it happened every day all the time, it wouldn't be news would it? If it happens once then its news. If a baby is born, its typically not on the news...if a baby is born with an extra set of limbs, thats news.

    It been around for years...there was a CHiPs episode (so that was early 80s at the latest...I'm pretty sure it was CHiPs) about "hackers" stealing alarm codes for keyless entry systems and garage door openers.

    When the raise insurance rates for vehicles equipped with such systems, I will worry about it.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    When the raise insurance rates for vehicles equipped with such systems, I will worry about it

    Different strokes. It concerns me enough my next ride won't have one until this issue is resolved.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I worry more about folks who want to drive but can't press a button to open the door. Or, may be driving itself is a chore to those folks. They might prefer a chauffeur if they could afford one.

    I still remember, back in 1999 when S2000 came out, folks called the start button a gimmick. And while it wasn't about keyless ignition, now it appears many (if not all) of those folks find it a pain to not have a start button.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    0-60 isn't solely about power. It is about gearing. Malibu is likely geared to run 60-61 mph at redline in second gear. This is about as optimum as a car could be designed to impress when it comes to 0-60, which is a guaranteed measurement by any automotive source (its validity is a whole another issue). Accord will pull 75-76 mph in second gear. That has been typical of Honda unless mated to manual transmission, and not the "setting" that one should place bets on for optimum 0-60 run.

    Accord does have more power, but the power that it gets to use only during high speed acceleration (as opposed to around town driving, or even 0-60 run). It can also be seen in higher trap speed thru quarter mile.

    But more importantly, Accord's V6 w/VCM isn't tuned for stop light drag racing. The cam profile selection is compromised in favor of improving fuel economy (via VCM). Under 4000 rpm, it behaves more like a 3.2-liter V6 than a 3.5, much less a larger 3.6. It is beyond the "VCM point" (around 4000 rpm) that the engine goes all out. This is by design. Without VCM (Accord V6/6MT), we already know, that there is no such compromise and it goes for all out performance.
  • drwilscdrwilsc Member Posts: 140
    So many excuses to explain away Accord's slower times...

    The point is the Malibu/Aura ARE worthy of awards like MT COTY and North American Car of the Year because they do compete well with the Camcords of the world, including performance catagories. The GM cars (finally) have a modern DOHC engine that produces overall acceleration times in the same ballpark as the foreign competition. They have also improved handling (skidpad 0.82 for GM cars vs 0.80 for Accord) and improved overall quality.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Excuses? How about the realities?

    BTW, handling isn't "seen" in skidpad numbers. So, don't even start a debate on that or how MT worked on pick and choose for the award that makes little sense... in fact, a of the few objective measures is always going to play against practicality oriented vehicles, like it did against Caravan. How was it supposed to win? Given the criterias, it makes no sense to include a vehicle that can't "perform".
  • drwilscdrwilsc Member Posts: 140
    The GM cars have an extra cog in the transmission compared to the Accord (6 vs 5). This probably accounts for being closer to redline around 60 mph in 2nd gear than the Accord is. It's a simple advantage of having an extra gear. It's going out on a limb to say the gearing was done intentionally specifically for 0-60 times.

    I, too, want to stick with realities. That's why we should focus on the realities that exist: test results.

    Motownusa was the one who suggested the Malibu was not worthy of the COTY award because it has a few less hp than the Camcords. I also believe the Dodge Caravan DID win the COTY award back in 1996.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,147
    The idea that this car has a motor that's rated at 5 more horsepower than the next car and that makes it a better car is a silly idea. It's all in the torque and the characteristics of the graph of the torque vs. engine speed. The gearbox and overall gearing makes the difference as well, and that's what people are saying here. It looks to me like Accord is behind with their 5-speed and needs to get with the plan to have a viable car! After listening to people criticism GM's very capable 4-speeds It's refreshing that the worm is turned.

    95% of the people buying a Camry, Malibu, Accord, etc., care about the 0-60 time for their daily and normal driving use of the car because they're never going to use it. Most of us drive the cars normally and much more conservatively. That's the kind of driving capability that should be being compared.

    Most of us don't drive around curving winding roads at the edge of traction limits for the tires. I care about how they hold in normal driving use. That's what should be compared.

    I recognize there are some who want to feel their car is the best road-holding at 80 on a 50 mph curve car there is and that makes them feel better about driving it the 99.9% of the rest of the time. But some of these comparisons of "mine is better than yourn is because ..." just wastes bandwidth.

    Let's hear about the practical uses of the midsized cars and how they compared there.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    It looks to me like Accord is behind with their 5-speed and needs to get with the plan to have a viable car!

    Yeah, that 0.2 seconds behind the Malibu makes all the difference in the world. I guess having a car that's on par in performance but delivering better fuel economy is not viable.

    I think what's being missed here is that the Accord offers an I4 with V6 like performance. It doesn't make the headlines like the 168 hp V6 but its power is more than sufficient.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Good idea - why don't you get us started?
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    IMO the power of the I4s in all the mid-sized family cars is "more than sufficient." We're talking power in most cases (Camry excepted) of over 160 hp, which just a few years ago was what you got from a typical V6, or even a small V8. Does that surge of power you get when you plant the accelerator of a 260-270 hp V6 to the floor feel good? Sure. Is it worth the extra money, both up front (typical $1000-2000 price premium) and in gas and extra maintenance for the lifetime of the car? Not for me.

    I do question whether the I4 Accord offers comparable performance to that of the V6s that are common in today's mid-sized sedans. For example, we know that some V6s in these cars (e.g. Camry, Malibu, Sonata, and of course the Accord) are capable of sub-7 seconds 0-60 with ATs. Can the I4s on the Accord do that, with an AT?
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    I do question whether the I4 Accord offers comparable performance to that of the V6s that are common in today's mid-sized sedans.

    Good point. I guess I meant previous V6 engine output. I think the Accord's 190 HP I4 is a nice compromise between power and fuel economy.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Not necessarily. RPM/Speed is determined by gear ratios, not by number of cogs. GM's 6AT might pull 60-61 mph in second gear, but Toyota's 6AT will pull 71-72 mph (in Camry). And Honda could have chosen to pull 60-62 mph but in the end, the choice is largely about tradeoffs.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I worry more about folks who want to drive but can't press a button to open the door.

    How would they get in the car? You still have to open the door, you just dont have to spend 15 minutes digging your keys out of your jeans pocket, backpack, gym bag, purse, etc with your hands full of groceries, small children, large children, gifts for your spouse, etc. You take the card, you put it in your wallet (or attach it to your work ID or what not) and you're done.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Maybe he would like it better if the door responded to voice commands, instead of simply opening by walking up to it, ala "Driver's door, open sesame!" :)

    This is yet another feature I can live without, but I always thought I could live w/o remote locking until I got my first car so equipped several years ago. Now I wouldn't want a car without it. Maybe I'd feel the same way about "intelligent key" if I had it for awhile. The more we have, the more we want. ;)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    I remember not that long ago, we were all talking about how buttons were arranged in these mid sized sedans, and how a few here thought that the Honda Accords were top knotch in basically every way possible. Well, it seems MT disagrees.....with statements like "even the interior drew harsh criticism for it's overly buttony center stack and cold appearance"
  • phaetondriverphaetondriver Member Posts: 175
    I think what's being missed here is that the Accord offers an I4 with V6 like performance. It doesn't make the headlines like the 168 hp V6 but its power is more than sufficient.

    Did I miss something?
    What V6 car only has 168 HP and made headlines?
    Most of the V6's in this discussion group are 240+ and the new Honda is 268 HP.
    So what Honda I-4 makes 268 HP? or 240HP? or 200HP?
    You would need to Turbo charge that little I-4 to equal the performance of the V-6's in this group.
    Most of the V-6's discussed here are getting 27 to 30 MPG and some more (one 3.5 L claimed 35 MPG).

    Acceleration may not be a nice to have feature in rural Minnesota, but in Southern California it can be life and death sometimes.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I would've said something but thought his typo was pretty obvious... He meant the 268hp Accord, and hit 168 by mistake.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Why then are small, low-powered cars like the Fit so popular in SoCal? I'd venture to guess any of the current crop of mid-sized I4 cars is at least as quick as the Fit, if not quicker. Personally I think the need for lots of horsepower in the name of safety is way overstated. I can't think of one situation I've been in in over 35 years of driving in which extra horsepower would have helped me avoid an accident--with the exception of a couple of times when I passed a car (or tried to pass a car) when I shouldn't have, and that was my fault and avoidable. I can think of times when my car's handling and braking--along with paying attention behind the wheel--have been very important in avoiding an accident. Maybe because I drove low-powered cars for the first 20+ years of my driving experience, and mostly low-powered cars for the 15 years after that, I learned how to drive without needing lots of power to save me. That included a 100 hp I4 Caravan. I got my first speeding ticket driving that van. ;)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Now I know where "ideas" come from. For the record, I don't have trouble pressing a key to open/close the door. Somehow I feel, your idea will fail in favor of keyless ignition/unlock system... it takes more effort to speak while walking than to just walk. :D

    There you go, another "idea" thrown out the window. Now what may not... if the car feels you, opens the door, blinks the lights, rolls out a red carpet after having arranged everything inside, hands you a newspaper/magazine, prepares to launch, and drive you home!

    Then this person can chat about how we want more exciting cars and driving experience.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Count 'em as folks who prefer conformity over ideas that make life easier. Form took over function in their assessment, exact contrast to what Edmunds and C&D have said about the same. I blame intimidation.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    Thank you for pointing out that it was a typo error!

    It's not like I made the assertion that the 08 Camry lost to the 08 Accord in a comparison test from Edmunds then provided a link from such a test conducted in March 06. Or that I described stability control as adjusting shock compression and rebound.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    I didn't think having 250+ HP in a mid-size sedan was a necessity no matter where you lived in the USA. Certainly not a life and death situation. Silly me for thinking that 190 HP is more than enough power for even southern California. It wasn't too long ago that horsepower in the 190 HP range was considered good for a V6. Most notably that was the case for many GM mid-size V6 sedans from a generation ago.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Personally I think the need for lots of horsepower in the name of safety is way overstated.

    I agree...I'll reconsider, if I start hearing of insurance discounts for the V6 version of a car over the I4. Pretty sure that'll never happen.

    You are correct about cars like the Fit. In Dec. 2006, CR tested a crop of 5 small cars, including the Fit, in Dec. 2006. All were slower than most I4 midsizes. 0-60 ranged from 10.1 to 12.8 sec (the Fit was 12.4). In 45-65 passing test these cars were measured from 6.4 sec (Versa) to as slow as 8.4 sec (Fit). (these figures are for automatics)

    For comparison I4 automatic Milan/Fusion (which is not the fastest midsize I4) had 0-60 at 9.5 sec and 45-60 at 5.9, as measured by CR.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    It's not like I made the assertion that the 08 Camry lost to the 08 Accord in a comparison test from Edmunds then provided a link from such a test conducted in March 06.

    Oops, I meant:

    It's not like I made the assertion that the 08 Accord lost to the 08 Camry in a comparison test from Edmunds then provided a link from such a test conducted in March 06.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles