Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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...
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:
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.
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.
Maybe that's because they are getting all those stolen body parts cheap .
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
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."
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
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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cutting back fleet sales to a total of 20% is not unrealistic. :P
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.
I think the Edge is essentially the Fusion wagon.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.