You are here: Forums Sedans Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread 

Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread - READ ONLY

12297 messages,  Last post on Apr 13, 2007 at 11:55 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Hyundai Sonata, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, Volkswagen Passat, Mazda MAZDA6, Ford Fusion, Subaru Legacy, Saturn Aura, Sedan

#12198 of 12297 Re: Saturn - What Exactly Does It Stand For? [kyrpto] by rockylee Feb 16, 2007 (12:33 pm)
Replying to: kyrpto (Feb 16, 2007 7:47 am) I think he was referring to BMW's   Rocky
#12199 of 12297 Re: New Ford 3.5 V6 [whahappan] by jeffyscott Feb 16, 2007 (12:33 pm)
Replying to: whahappan (Feb 16, 2007 12:11 pm) These are numbers for 2006 and 2007, so what does a change that affects 2008 models have to do with it? Replies to this message: whahappan (Feb 16, 2007 3:00 pm) jeffyscott (Feb 16, 2007 4:36 pm)
#12201 of 12297 2008' Malibu........ by rockylee Feb 16, 2007 (12:39 pm)
Well next year IMHO, the Malibu will set the bar for the midsize sedan segment with it's very broad configuration, quality, price, and new design. The 08' Malibu, should at least be crossed shop by the camcord crowd because it will make dollars and sense.   Rocky Replies to this message: captain2 (Feb 16, 2007 1:16 pm) rockylee (Feb 16, 2007 1:41 pm) captain2 (Feb 16, 2007 2:11 pm) neteng101 (Feb 16, 2007 2:57 pm) and 7 more... ggesq (Feb 16, 2007 5:57 pm) m1miata (Feb 16, 2007 6:34 pm)
#12202 of 12297 Re: Saturn - What Exactly Does It Stand For? [lilengineerboy] by benderofbows Feb 16, 2007 (1:00 pm)
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Feb 16, 2007 7:53 am) lilengineerboy, what car did you have a 2.5 Duratec in? I have always wondered about the similarities between that engine and the 2.5L V6 I had in my 1998 Mazda 626 ES (leather, bose, alloys, moonroof).   That was a fun car, mostly because it didn't redline until 7,000 RPM, weighed only about 2,700 pounds and the 5-speed manual was geared very, very low (5th gear was 4,000 RPM at 80mph). I think it was rated for 170hp and 160lb-ft. It didn't have variable valve timing, but it did have some sort of variable intake manifold. It would run to 60 in about 7.2 seconds.   My new Accord I4 5-speed drives almost exactly the same way, except for just slightly less low end torque and a little more top end with the VTEC. Maybe slightly slower to 60, I'm thinking 7.5 secs as an Automatic 4-cyl Accord has been clocked at 8.1? Probably the same quarter mile.   I never modded my 2.5 V6, but I kinda wish I had. I know it would have sounded better than the new 2.4 4-cyl would if I were to put a coffee can on it (definately not) Replies to this message: lilengineerboy (Feb 16, 2007 1:31 pm)
#12203 of 12297 Re: Saturn - What Exactly Does It Stand For? [1487] by captain2 Feb 16, 2007 (1:09 pm)
Replying to: 1487 (Feb 16, 2007 5:58 am) If you really care about resale than you need to get a German car. while it is certainly true that a 5 year old 530, for example, will fetch a lot more dollars than a 5 year old Accord - the fact is that in terms of gross dollars spent (a TCO type number) the BMW is much much more expensive to own (as it should be). TCO of that $50k 530 (according to Edmunds) for 5 years is $65 grand (with 29k depreciation) the Accord is $35k (with $12k depreciation). So yes the resale value is high mostly becuase the 530 costs so much new, but so is the gross dollar hit in resale value.
#12204 of 12297 Re: 2008' Malibu........ [rockylee] by captain2 Feb 16, 2007 (1:16 pm)
Replying to: rockylee (Feb 16, 2007 12:39 pm) devil's advocate here - why should the Malibu 'set the bar' when the Aura, as good as it may be, hasn't. Replies to this message: rockylee (Feb 16, 2007 1:41 pm) captain2 (Feb 16, 2007 2:11 pm) neteng101 (Feb 16, 2007 2:57 pm) rockylee (Feb 16, 2007 3:26 pm) and 6 more...
#12205 of 12297 Re: Saturn - What Exactly Does It Stand For? [benderofbows] by lilengineerboy Feb 16, 2007 (1:31 pm)
Replying to: benderofbows (Feb 16, 2007 1:00 pm) Bender, I had a '96 Contour SE V6/MTX with 170hp/165 lb ft torque and 2900 lbs or so. It did 0-60 in about 7.5 or so. The car was actually geared pretty tall in 4th and 5th, and I usually got 28 or 29 mpg. The motor seems similar, no VVT but it did have the dual intake runner thing (which was one of two repairs the car needed while I had it). The car was loaded (lthr, roof, alloys, htd mirrors, etc) and it had the greatest, most comfortable supportive bolstered seats...they de-contented those seats in '98. The 95-97 SEs actually had more aggressive suspension tuning than the later SVTs. That car was 155k of smiles and chuckles.   I had a KKM intake and a Borla exhaust and it sounded beautiful (although it probably wasn't any more powerful), and the only other "modification" was Brembo rotors and KVR brake pads, which I need for the track events as R-compound tires are very hard on brakes (moves the weakest link upwards in the system). I still miss it.
#12206 of 12297 Re: 2008' Malibu........ [captain2] by rockylee Feb 16, 2007 (1:41 pm)
Replying to: captain2 (Feb 16, 2007 1:16 pm) Malibu, will be able to conquest Accord buyers something the Aura, isn't designed for. The Aura, is more of a Camry fighter.   Rocky Replies to this message: captain2 (Feb 16, 2007 2:11 pm) neteng101 (Feb 16, 2007 2:57 pm) rockylee (Feb 16, 2007 3:26 pm) goodegg (Feb 16, 2007 3:56 pm) and 5 more...
#12207 of 12297 Re: 2008' Malibu........ [rockylee] by captain2 Feb 16, 2007 (2:11 pm)
Replying to: rockylee (Feb 16, 2007 1:41 pm) so you are assumming the Malibu will be a little 'tighter' and the Aura, I guess, must already be, a little 'softer'? A good portion of Toyota's success has always been based on correctly understanding that we Americans prefer 'soft' to 'hard'. A Malibu setup like the Mazda6 may not have the broad appeal that you think to the average midsize sedan buyer.

You are here: Forums Sedans Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread