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

11516182021544

Comments

  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    that's weird, I got a quote on my insurance for an accord that was $150 more every 6 months compared to a mazda 6...and a civic SI was like $300 more every 6 months! Car insurance is just strange. Like a zip code where you live can have a big impact on insurance even if you park your car in a locked garage, while work addresses aren't considered and cars there are out in the open. Ah well, what do you do?
  • wardcowardco Member Posts: 27
    The Honda is one of the most stolen cars in the USA. That's likely why the higher insurance rates.
  • motownusamotownusa Member Posts: 836
    Dont you find it difficult driving a manual in stop and go driving. I personally hated it. Besides you can't chat on the cell phone and drive if you drive a stick :P
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    Me: "From a dead stop, a manual 4-cyl Accord will hold its own against an auto V6 Fusion."

    Scape: "No, it won't."

    Well, I've tried supporting my argument by stating that I have driven both cars and own one of them. However it seems we'll have to take another look at some numbers. Car and Driver clocked the 2007 Accord I4 manual as having a very respectable 7.5 second 0-60 time, slightly slower than the new Altima 4. I couldn't find much other data on 2006 and later (post engine power bump) Accord 4-cylinder manuals.

    The V6 Fusion automatic has plenty of test results available, however the results are all over the place. You are right, Motor Trend did clock one at 7.2 seconds, however there are many other credible sources that weren't able to acheive that time. Please read the following excerpts:

    Edmunds.com, Full Test of SEL V6- 0-60 mph 8.0 sec, Notes: "We achieved our best time doing a "street start" with the traction control turned off."

    NewCar.com- “The 221-hp V6 engine provides enough power, although the Fusion will not likely be mistaken for a sports sedan. The Fusion can accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in about 8 seconds, a reasonable performance though not as quick as the V6 versions of the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.”

    Autoweek- “In a straight line the Fusion turned in a respectable—if average—performance. Its 3.0-liter 221-hp V6 just edges the best our long-term Hyundai Sonata’s larger 3.3-liter V6 could deliver, both to 60 mph (7.5 seconds vs. 7.51) as well as through the quarter-mile (15.7 seconds at 91.2 mph vs. 15.76 at 89.4).”

    7.2 seconds? 8.0 seconds? 7.5 seconds? Even if you take the fastest time for the Fusion, versus the only time I found for the Accord, that's only 0.3 seconds difference. Between a 2.4L four, and a 3.0L six that has an extra gear! The results indicate to me that it would be a well-matched street race. Oh wait, I already did that myself (versus its sister car), and won.

    Seems to me like somebody just doesn't want to admit that a 4-cylinder Accord can keep up with his V6...
  • targettuningtargettuning Member Posts: 1,371
    Ever hear of "bluetooth"? anyhow driving and chating is illegal in a bunch of states including mine and doesn't need an official proclaimation, for me anyhow, to be avoided.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    According to the 12/1/06 statement pasted in #831, Hyundai started curtailing fleet sales dramatically in 11/06. If they established a new policy in November, they would not keep issuing the same press release month after month. While such monthly press releases wouldn't be a "5 month old new article",they would certainly be "old news."

    I'm not looking for another press release. I'm looking for numbers!!!!!!!

    A lot can change in 5 months which is why that press release is worthless. Hyundai also isn't going to release a statement to the press that they've increased fleet sales either.

    I go along with them having lowered Sonata fleet sales but they were selling ove 50% of them to fleets as of July 2006. I doubt the big drop in Sonata sales is a result of them cutting fleet sales by the same amount. Let's be realistic here. :sick:
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    if you found somebody to pay 5000 (or 6000 if you're saying kbb was 5k) for a 12 year old car, consider yourself lucky. you found a moron who would have overpaid for anything.

    While I agree that it is nuts to pay $5000 for a 12 year old car with 150K miles, I don't think you are correct about the person being willing to overpay for anything. I imagine that there are a lot of people who believe that a 12 year old accord with 150K miles is more "reliable" than a 5 year old Taurus with 60K miles.

    In fact, I bet in many people's view the age and mileage does not even enter into their evaluation of this...they would figure a 1992 Accord with 250,000 miles on it is more "reliable" than a brand new Fusion.
  • targettuningtargettuning Member Posts: 1,371
    Hate to jump into a series of posts arguing aceleration numbers because they are largely irrelevent due to a hundred factors e.g. driver...mechanical condition..reflexes (in a street race)..road surface condition...is it your car as opposed to a rental etc. Some of the few times I really CARE about having a fast car involve a quick pass on a two lane with oncoming traffic and the passee speeding up and I've passed "bingo". A quick entry onto an interstate with two Peterbuilts..one in each lane..bearing down on me @ about 75 mph. Those plus the occasional "pull away" from a tailgater.That said, I prefer a V-6 to a 4 and buy the larger V-6 if two of those are available. I am of the "better to have it and not need it" school of thought. Anyhow, what I wanted to say was Autoweek has the absolute slowest numbers I have ever seen for a V-6 Sonata both 0-60 and 1/4 mile
  • goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    The Honda is one of the most stolen cars in the USA. That's likely why the higher insurance rates.

    That's silly. Ever think that the sheer number of Accords out there has anything to do with its target for thiefs?

    My insurance agent says the Accord is one of the CHEAPER cars to insure.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    My insurance agent says the Accord is one of the CHEAPER cars to insure.

    Maybe that's because they are getting all those stolen body parts cheap :D .

    Seriously though, insurance costs vary. For me, my insurance agent has said for any car I have the liability will cost the same with my insurance company. He tells me for collision it varys a little based on the cost of body parts. I think he said generally import body parts would be more expensive. I think he may have also said that some cars have alternate body part suppliers, with lower prices.

    Since the Accord and Mazda6 are built here they should be toward the cheaper end along with other models that are asembled in North America. Accord might be so common that there are alternate suppliers.

    In the end, for me the make and model of the vehicle has little impact on determining my auto insurance rate. Apparently this is not the case for everyone, though.

    BTW, Mada6 made #2 and Accord #6 on the cheap to insure list here at edmunds:

    http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/110137/article.html
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    Oh I agree with you about there being a hundred factors which influence acceleration numbers. I only got started on the whole debate because someone made the blanket statement that Fusion V6 was "much faster" than competing 4-cylinders. That's simply not the case for Accord manual and Altima manual and CVT, they are right there with the Fusion V6. Car and Driver clocked a 2.5L manual Altima at 7.2 seconds, matching the best time I've seen for a Fusion (the Motor Trend test).
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I go along with them having lowered Sonata fleet sales but they were selling ove 50% of them to fleets as of July 2006. I doubt the big drop in Sonata sales is a result of them cutting fleet sales by the same amount.

    Hmmm, interesting correlation. I think you may be on to something here!

    I think there's a few factors behind the drop in Sonata sales:

    * HMA's decision to reduce fleet sales.
    * A big increase in Santa Fe sales over last year; Santa Fes are made in the same plant as Sonatas, so if they can sell a higher-priced Santa Fe vs. a Sonata, which would they choose?
    * Reduction in Sonata incentives compared to last year.
    * General slowness in the auto industry coupled with stronger competition this year vs. last year (e.g. new Camry, new Aura, big incentives on Accords and Mazda6's, improving reputation for Fulan), combined with no major changes to the Sonata since its introduction two years ago. It's no longer the "fresh-faced kid on the block."
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Dont you find it difficult driving a manual in stop and go driving.

    Wow, why do you live in a miserable place with stop and go traffic? Why don't you live closer to work?

    I personally hated it. Besides you can't chat on the cell phone and drive if you drive a stick

    Maybe if you didn't have a boring car and lots of "stop and go traffic" you would actually enjoy driving and not want to talk on the phone :P
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    I only got started on the whole debate because someone made the blanket statement that Fusion V6 was "much faster" than competing 4-cylinders.

    It wasn't a blanket statement originally. I was comparing an ATX to an ATX. You made it into an ATX vs MTX argument and you are right about that as I pointed out. However, your 0-60 times for the Accord 5A were just plain wrong and the Fusion V6 is a much better performer than the Accord I4 5A. Plus they are really, really close in price. .8 to 1 second difference is big no matter how you slice it.

    Those of you who have bought an Accord I4 5M are getting quite a performance deal because it is nearly every bit as quick as a Fusion V6 for $1k or $2k less. But I don't imagine many of you do have an Accord with that drivetrain so my point still applies to the vast majority.

    Oh I agree with you about there being a hundred factors which influence acceleration numbers.

    A lot of people don't get that though. If the two weren't tested on the same track, on the same day, and with the same driver, then it's hard to believe any comparison of numbers.
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    Agreed, on nearly all points. That Accord I4 5A time was probably fast by 0.2 seconds. A few things to consider, regarding the ATX to ATX argument: Altima 2.5L CVT is very nearly as quick as the fastest test of a Fusion V6 ATX. Also, I suspect the 2008 Accord (with the new A-VTEC engines and resulting power increases) will be able to match the Altima, closing the gap to the Fusion unless Ford has some new tricks. A-VTEC promises to increase economy as well, where the Accord already has a distinct advantage (I am seeing 28-29 city and 34-38 highway).
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    Dont you find it difficult driving a manual in stop and go driving.

    I find it quite easy to drive a stick in stop and go traffic. I actually prefer it to an automatic because I can anticipate and coast. And I've spent a lot of time in that kind of traffic. :sick:
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Accord (with the new A-VTEC engines and resulting power increases) will be able to match the Altima, closing the gap to the Fusion unless Ford has some new tricks.

    Well, that brings us back to the whole origin of this and other conversations I'm trying to clear up here. The new PIP D30 engine for the Fusion and Escape will, if all the news on Ford forums are correct, have more horsepower and better fuel economy with no hit in price.

    A CVT is a completely different animal but it is the closest thing to an ATX Nissan offers in the Altima right now so I'd say that's fair to compare too. 99% of Freestyle owners I've come across say it has plenty of power for them with the CVT (which is gone for the Taurus X and D35 motor BTW) and that's a heavy vehicle with a relatively weak engine. So something good has to be going on in a CVT. I've never driven a CVT equipped vehicle, so I can't attest to the magic they perform. ;)
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    "Dont you find it difficult driving a manual in stop and go driving. I personally hated it. Besides you can't chat on the cell phone and drive if you drive a stick"

    When I used to live in an area that had rush hour I still preferred a manual. Now the nearest town with any kind of traffic congestion is about 200 miles away. I go years at a time between waiting more than one cycle for a light. :P

    As far as cell phones go the Accord is quiet enough that I can just put it on speaker. ;)

    Love the drivetrain in the I4 manual. Nice and quick, but still give Focus like fuel economy (or better). My lifetime mpg is 31.3 for my Accord, and 40 mpg is obtainable on the highway - 35 mpg under poor conditions. :D

    Still, I was another that looked at the Fusion. It is a nice drive, but the dash and switch gear are below my 1990 Acura, seemed a little more cramped than the Accord, and mpg was not there. I also wish they made a wagon.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    also wish they made a wagon.

    Yeah that ruled out the Accord and others the last go around, but this time the car is for me so the needs are different.
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Member Posts: 1,601
    If Hyundai cut back on its fleet sales by 60%, their April '07 sales of 10,434 would have had 8347 retail sales and 2087 fleet sales. Using your 50% figure, April, '06 sales would have been 7858 retail & 7858 fleet.

    Cutting back fleet sales to a total of 20% is not unrealistic. :P
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    if all the news on Ford forums are correct, have more horsepower and better fuel economy with no hit in price
    when Toyota developed the new 3.5 2GR they did it with a savings of $1000.00 per engine and picked up 80 hp,a coupla mpgs in the process, and did it with enough (US) plant capacities to use it in about every car that Toyota and Lexus makes. That Ford should be 'rewarded' 'by a hit in price' is silly. For what, maybe making an engine that is borderline competitive, 5 years too late? I only hope that they can figure out how to take out whatever it is that makes the engine so rough sounding and harsh feeling. Even the (new?) DT3.5 has been getting some mixed reviews in that dept.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    I also wish they made a wagon.

    I think the Edge is essentially the Fusion wagon.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Good point assuming those are Sonata numbers. I guess I was figuring on the sales numbers to be higher for some reason.

    The key word in your proposal is "if" though. Did Hyundai cut Sonata fleet sales back by 60%? I'm not saying they didn't, but did they? History would tell us that they didn't.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    That Ford should be 'rewarded' 'by a hit in price' is silly.

    I never said there would be a hit in price. I have no idea what the price will be and neither does anyone else at this point. I'm guessing they won't raise the price when the new version of the engine comes out.

    I only hope that they can figure out how to take out whatever it is that makes the engine so rough sounding and harsh feeling.

    Mazda did but I don't know that Ford will.

    when Toyota developed the new 3.5 2GR they did it with a savings of $1000.00 per engine and picked up 80 hp,a coupla mpgs in the process, and did it with enough (US) plant capacities to use it in about every car that Toyota and Lexus makes.

    This isn't the right place for this, but Ford, GM, DCX, and Toyota plants are not of the same breed. Ford is now finally converting it's plants to support flexible manufacturing which will also lower re-tooling costs and time. Right now that's just not the case. Did you read that article I posted about the PIP D30? It is going to take them a little over a year to re-tool the Cleveland engine plant #2 to prpcude that engine. Toyota does not have to deal with such downtime because their plants are much newer.

    FWIW, the other DT35 engine plants are set up to switch between building the DT35 and DT37 variants with little or no downtime as I understand it. They are taking their sweet old time with the new engine but I think we can all agree that they have to to get it right. And should.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    "I think the Edge is essentially the Fusion wagon. "

    Yes true, but the 4-cyl is borderline for mpg. The V-6 just uses way too much fuel, and I require a stick shift. I am also not interested in the whole crossover thing - just a regular wagon with all the advantages of a sedan, but more room.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    Mazda did but I don't know that Ford will.
    having never driven a 6 but obviously with a lot of bad taste in my mouth for the Ford DT3.0- correct me if I'm wrong, - except for the blown 4 banger, Ford and Mazda drivetrains are identical, even to the point of coming out of that same Ohio factory?
    Ford can't do what it wants or needs to do because of some nasty labor contracts as well as horrendous losses in the last few years. Toyota can do and did obviously what it needed to for pretty much the opposite reasons. It takes money to make money, and Toyota sure has beaucoups of that. If it takes Ford another year or two to get a lousy 240hp V6 out, it will be too late, as usual and the Fusion (so equipped) will be a market afterthought - if it isn't already.
    Remember that when the 500 came out hampered by the same engine, Ford promised then that they would have a better engine for it for the 06 model. Didn't happen, of course and now even the renamed Taurus which was promised for last month, is still not here. Promises come from the sales depts., real cars are what the bean counters allow to be built.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    The key word in your proposal is "if" though. Did Hyundai cut Sonata fleet sales back by 60%? I'm not saying they didn't, but did they? History would tell us that they didn't.

    That history you speak of would be the purposeful program Hyundai had for a good part of 06 on the Sonatas. Aside from that, Hyundai's fleet figures are average at best. The purpose of the Sonata program, and I'm paraphrasing Hyundai officials' words - to get as many butts in the Sonata as possible ;)

    Most automakers do not have fleet/retail split model-by model readily available, and for good reasons ;) But, I will try to see if I can get confirmation from one of my buddies who works for Polk. For now, based on my conversations with various industry professionals, Sonata fleet units have been reduced since the purposeful program ended, while Fusions went up.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Didn't happen, of course and now even the renamed Taurus which was promised for last month, is still not here. Promises come from the sales depts., real cars are what the bean counters allow to be built.

    I thought the new (2008?) Taurus (nee Five Hundred) was supposed to get the 3.5-liter V6. No? I though I also read where FoMoCo's bean counters were going to be shoved into the background for a change. No?
    Boz
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    "I think the Edge is essentially the Fusion wagon. "

    Yes true, but the 4-cyl is borderline for mpg. The V-6 just uses way too much fuel, and I require a stick shift. I am also not interested in the whole crossover thing - just a regular wagon with all the advantages of a sedan, but more room.

    ditto. But I know I am not typical and I would say others on this forum, just by the fact that they are here, are not typical either.

    I am less excited about added vehicle height and center of gravity, reduced maneuverability, and harder entry and exit for children.
  • captain2captain2 Member Posts: 3,971
    yes, the only thing I've seen on the 3.5 engined 500 are car show photos and a promised April 07 date as apparently an 08 model. In the meanwhile dealers continue to give away 500s off their lots at $5000.00+ discounts. The Five Hundred, IMO, is in much the same situation as the Fusion, a good overall design courtesy of somebody else, but both saddled with an outdated powertrain. Whether the bean counters are now in the background, I don't know, but it sure doesn't seem like it. And I'm also not so sure that the 'Taurus' name will solve any problems either - a car that had a good name 10 or 15 years ago, that quickly degenerated into the definition of a rental car.
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    but it sure doesn't seem like it. And I'm also not so sure that the 'Taurus' name will solve any problems either - a car that had a good name 10 or 15 years ago

    In the end, the taurus didn't have that good of a name. the last few years it was arround, ford pretty much neglected it, and its reliability ratings kept dropping, along with its sales. thats why ford canned it. but, the replacements (fusion/500) combined sales are even less than the taurus was in its last year. which is why they want to try and bring it back.
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    So something good has to be going on in a CVT. I've never driven a CVT equipped vehicle, so I can't attest to the magic they perform.

    I wouldn't call it magic, its just more efficent. it's kind of like comparing and overhead cam setup with a pushrod/lifter one, or fuel injection to carburation. there's less moving parts, so less loss of energy. I'd be willing to bet the difference in the alti 0-60 time (and other speed tests) is entirely because of that. and on a separate note, with a lot less moving part, and generaly simpler design, repair/replacement costs are much lower.
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    I'm pulling for GM tho with its new models - the Aura, the new Malibu, and the new CTS. C'mon GM.

    I think GM will be alright. the impala seems like a good car that is selling well. with the addition of the impala ss, it should only improve. Also, the aveo seems to be doing fairly well. I actualy see as many of them a i do yaris's. that gives GM a dominant position in truck/suv's, and a competitive midsize and sub-compact. If they can just come up with a decent compact (cobatl doesn't impress me)and a crossover or two, they should be fine.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Spy Shots

    image

    image

    image
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    I think the 2007 looks better
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    "I think the 2007 looks better"

    I wouldn't say that my 2007 looks "better," but I don't have to worry anymore about seeing a new 2008 and feeling buyers remorse for not waiting. They are both nice looking cars. I wonder what the interior looks like. Judging from the shot of the coupe with the door open, it might have those uncomfortable side armrests like the new Camry (slanted and sloped with a big grab handle).
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    This looks to be a low-end model. Note the cloth seats, modest tires, and lack of a sunroof.

    One tailpipe indicates the 4-cylinder model.

    Notice, there's no body-side moulding. I like the door handles, they seem sculpted to a design, not just basic handles.
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    Before I say this, don't get me wrong. I think the car looks fine, I think the 2007 is a very nice looking car, and I have absolutely nothing against honda:

    but, the three things I don't like about the 2008 are
    1. the tail. I don't know if its shorter, or lower or what, but doesn't look as good to me as the 2007. The most notable of it, the tail lights. I always thought that made the accord's rear end look much better, the triangular taillights.
    2. the headlights. hard to tell exactly, but look like the stick out from the fender.
    3. the door pannels look flat. no creases or design to them. kind of plain jane looking.

    I know its just a couple of spy shots, but thats my impression.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Member Posts: 6,311
    Overall, I think I like it. But...the front end reminds me a little of a Saturn L series, the side of a BMW 5 series, and the rear pillar of an Altima. Not bad. The grill seems tacky and cheap--black plastic of a not particularly pleasing shape. Like a Fusion without the chrome. Frankly, I think the current Fusion may be a nicer looking car, because it's more coherent and less fussy. But my guess is that in terms of performance and quality, the Accord may have the edge.
    2018 Acura TLX 2.4 Tech 4WS (mine), 2018 Honda CR-V EX AWD (wife's)
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    having never driven a 6 but obviously with a lot of bad taste in my mouth for the Ford DT3.0- correct me if I'm wrong, - except for the blown 4 banger, Ford and Mazda drivetrains are identical, even to the point of coming out of that same Ohio factory?

    I will correct you. ;)

    The Mazda version of the DT30 in the Mazda6 V6 has a Mazda exclusive VVT system and uses different heads and intake among other things. It is quite smooth when compared to a Ford DT30. I have not driven a Honda or Toyota lately so I can't compare unfortunately.

    The motor is mfd in the same plant as the Ford DT30s but it is different in several key ways. I have to wonder if the PIP D30 motor I speak of is in fact some newer version of that Mazda V6 as the next Mazda6 will get the DT35, and a good bit of length added, from what has been printed several times. If it has an MTX it might be quite appealing.

    of course and now even the renamed Taurus which was promised for last month, is still not here.

    Where on earth did you hear that? Ford's official press release from the Chicago auto show states summer availability.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Not sure what everyone is commenting on. All I see are 3 boxes with red X's in them. :(
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    and isn't captain's impression of the DT30 based on the Ford Five Hundred, a car that weighs 500 pounds more than the fusion or 6? If I remember correctly, his comments from several months ago were about a different car that may or may not have similar characteristics as the Fusion or the 6. Try driving a Honda Pilot or Nissan Xterra and tell me you can't hear that the engine is stressing a bit more pulling all that extra weight compared to the sedans with similar engines.

    To give you an idea of how smooth the mazda6 engine is, today I accidentally drove about 10 miles in 4th going around 70mph before noticing and shifting up to 5th. 4k+ rpms does sound more aggressive in the mazda, but the thing is, I WANT IT TO SOUND LIKE THAT WHEN I REV IT UP THAT HIGH. Passionate driving should involve your senses; what you hear influences what you feel. If you exceed 4k rpms, you're doing it for a reason, and an aggressive sound simply is expressing your intentions. But when I want to be serene and smooth, I will keep the engine below 4k and get comments from people like my uncle who drives a lexus saying that they are surprised at how quiet the Mazda 6 is.
    That, to me, is one of the great things about the 6...it can be quite civil when you want it, but when you're in the mood for fun, it has great grip and balance through curves, amazing brakes along with an engine that propels the car nicely. Oh yeah, for 5k less than an Accord.
  • zzzoom6zzzoom6 Member Posts: 425
    try this link:

    link title

    yeah, not too impressed with the sedan. the profile looks a bit too generic still. in some ways it reminds me of the Sonata from the side view. I do like the front though, especially the headlights. I wonder if they will have that TL type line down the side like the coupe had...

    one thing though notice the last pic of the front quarter of the accord with the older accord behind it? and notice the last car in that same picture has the same wheels as the 08 accord coupe in it's spy shot? looks like they are doing some comparing the old vs the new.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    The wife and I bought a 2007 SEL AWD V6 6-speed automatic Fusion on Dec. 4, 2006. The MSRP was $27,105. Other than the standard SEL equipment and the AWD, it has heated leather seats, anti-lock brakes, and a moon roof.

    My wife refused to consider Asian cars and the only one I was really interested in was the Honda Accord. My question is: How much Accord could I have gotten for $27,105? A V6? Moon roof? AWD is not available, of course. The Fusion comes in three models, the S, SE and SEL and there is a choice of two engines, the 160-horsepower I4 2.3 liter with either a 5-speed manual or a 5-speed automatic. The 3.0-liter V6 only comes with a 6-speed automatic.

    My wife and I, to some extent, believed the Accord to be priced out of our range for the options we wanted and the standard SEL features on the Fusion (too numerous to list all).

    This car has been delightful so far, 3,000 miles and no squeaks or rattles, no breakages, nary a problem EXCEPT for very poor (14.8 average) in-city gas mileage. Unfortunately, 95 percent of our driving in in the city, stop-and-go, short hops.

    I am having second thoughts now. I am wondering how much Accord can be bought for $27,105. The Fusion's bold, distinctive styling and superior handling qualities were big selling points as was having a top-notch Ford, Lincoln, Mercury dealer, Sherwood of Salisbury, Md.

    Granted, now is not a good time to go shopping but I might be in the market for an Accord within a year or so.
  • jd10013jd10013 Member Posts: 779
    Sounds to me like you got your fusion fully loaded. an accord fully loaded would have problby run you about 32k.
  • urnewsurnews Member Posts: 668
    Yeah, JD, everything but Sirius radio, navigation system and the audiophile sound system. Our radio is the premium version though, with 6 CD player and six speakers (eight on the audiophile version). Those missing options are not something that we would order. Then again, neither is the AWD.

    32K for a fully loaded Accord? That's steep in my book. Plus the Honda dealer is only so-so, carries too many other brands. Has a mini conglomerate.

    Thanks for the reply. Our fully loaded Fusion will be just fine for awhile. I was afraid that the Accords were priced like that.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Check the Accord prices paid forum right now. The most I can find anyone paying for an EX-L V6 Accord with Navigation (not avail on Fusion yet) is $26k or so. That is the most Accord you can buy. You'd be hard pressed to spend $27k for an Accord unless you just didn't shop around much.

    People are paying $1,000-$2,000 under invoice for Accords. The reason is the more 2007 models dealers sell now, the more highly profitable 2008s they will be alotted.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    The only Accord that may cost 32k is the hybrid V6. I think you could get any other Accord for 27-28k easy.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The Accord EX-L might be a good fit for you. With today's incentives, you could probably get one for under $23k. It has leather, moonroof, and alloys. Its I4 is peppy and all that you need for 95% in-town driving, and it will deliver a lot better fuel economy than a V6.

    If you are serious about being in the market for an Accord soon, you might be able to take advantage of model close-out pricing that is likely this fall once the all-new 2008 Accords roll out. But you would take a bath on your Fusion, just as you would selling any car that is less than a year old. If you can find a hungry Honda dealer this fall, maybe they would trade you straight up for a 2007 Accord EX-L, and if you are really lucky maybe one with nav.
Sign In or Register to comment.