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

#12270 of 12297 Re: Ford Fusion Challenge [jaxs1] by neteng101 Feb 18, 2007 (7:17 pm)
Replying to: jaxs1 (Feb 18, 2007 6:23 pm) FWIW, the Fusion AWD system is not all that its made out to be. Its the cheap version that runs in FWD mode until slip is detected then some power is transfered to the rear. True AWD systems such as those in found in a Subaru are far superior in slippery snowy/icy conditions because you always have some amount of power to all 4 wheels at all times, not only when the sensors start to predict/detect slipping.   On a closed circuit with emphasis on handling, little things can make a big difference... wrong tire inflation pressures for example. People who take part in autocross events would know this but not the average person off the street. The Fusion could have been setup better than the Camry/Accord ie. "tuned" for this particular showcase. Replies to this message: thegraduate (Feb 18, 2007 7:23 pm) neteng101 (Feb 18, 2007 8:12 pm) captain2 (Feb 19, 2007 7:40 am) and 2 more... akirby (Feb 19, 2007 6:55 am) thegraduate (Feb 19, 2007 7:24 am) and 3 more... 03accordman (Feb 19, 2007 8:31 am)
#12271 of 12297 Re: Ford Fusion Challenge [neteng101] by thegraduate Feb 18, 2007 (7:23 pm)
Replying to: neteng101 (Feb 18, 2007 7:17 pm) Yes, but with full-time AWD comes a heavier fuel economy penalty. Honda's CR-V uses a similar setup to the Fusion AWD, and I've heard few complaints except that people wanting to "off-road" in the CR-V wanted a true 4WD system.   Downside to the Fusion's system? AWD won't do as much for everyday handling until slip begins to occur. Until that happens, it will still handle like a typical front-drive car, not like, say, and Audi A6 Quattro, which is very balanced with its AWD system, I believe. Replies to this message: neteng101 (Feb 18, 2007 8:12 pm) captain2 (Feb 19, 2007 7:40 am) jeffyscott (Feb 19, 2007 8:15 am) and 1 more... akirby (Feb 19, 2007 6:55 am) thegraduate (Feb 19, 2007 7:24 am) akirby (Feb 19, 2007 8:19 am) and 2 more... 03accordman (Feb 19, 2007 8:31 am)
#12273 of 12297 Re: Consumer reports on the Aura [scape2] by m1miata Feb 18, 2007 (7:44 pm)
Replying to: scape2 (Feb 18, 2007 1:00 pm) 3.6-liter XR's 6.3-second 0-to-60 Fusion V6 is 7.2 0-60 Yeap, both are quick enough. I have not personally driven the Fusion with a six yet. I did drive the Aura 3.5 and 3.6 and will tell ya, the 3.6 is fast, with lots of torque. The six speed works fine. I believe Intellichoice lists the Fusion SE V6 as worse than average value rating as in cost to own. The Aura is listed as average. The Honda Accord naturally is rated better than average. If I was buying a car, and was sure I would be happy with the car for at least seven years, and the car company is around to back the car, then yeap, no problem. Problems arise if you somehow get a car you wish to back out of, as in selling. Low resale could hurt. I have no problem with the Fusion in most respects. Not the fastest car, yet fast enough - price seems pretty fair when discounted - cornering ability and agility is good - looks pretty nice, and it appears that Mexico is putting out a car with good initial quality scores. The caveat of course is in the years to come, reliability, resale, and Fords health. If I am willing to assume some risk, and the price is right, I suppose I could venture in. A journey into the unknown. I am considering buying the Aura, which is made in USA, and is projected to have average resale value. Once again a leap of faith though compared to buying a Honda. Seems to be a little less with the GM vs. the Ford product, but once again things change. In 2005 I bought a PT Cruiser, which had an average rating for total cost to own. Now it seems to have fallen into a poor zone for total price, as resale is faltering. At least I bought the lowest end one, some I did not dive off into the high water.   It would be good for the US economy of course to see GM and Ford healthy once again. The Fusion though made across the border, throws some money Fords way, as would buying the Aura, which is made here in the States throws money into the GM pot. While I am impressed with the Accord SE V6 and i4 cars I tested, I was also pleased to find a good handling Fusion, with sharp looks, and the Aura having lots of the same attributes of an Accord. The total cost of ownership between the three cars mentioned appears to be all too predictable, and thus some sacrifice is required. -Loren
#12275 of 12297 Ford Fusion Challenge by virus Feb 18, 2007 (8:07 pm)
I'm not quite certain why they didn't test the Camry SE instead of the XLE which is not sporty at all.
#12276 of 12297 Re: Ford Fusion Challenge [thegraduate] by neteng101 Feb 18, 2007 (8:12 pm)
Replying to: thegraduate (Feb 18, 2007 7:23 pm) The fuel economy penalty is usually very small - like 1-2 mpg, and this partly is due to the extra baggage for the AWD drivetrain.   There is reason to believe that VSC is better than AWD as a safety feature while cornering. And Toyota's VDIM is even better than VSC, though its only currently available on some Lexus models. Check out this post that compared AWD+VSC compared to RWD+VDIM...   http://www.clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152498   The Fusion AWD will be useful in slippery conditions in a straight line (think traction control operation). It still will never have the ability to correct for cornering forces and compensate like VSC can. The VSC available in the Accord/Camry is a better safety feature IMO. And further evolutions of VSC (such as VDIM) could be better than lower forms of AWD (with VSC). Replies to this message: captain2 (Feb 19, 2007 7:40 am) jeffyscott (Feb 19, 2007 8:15 am) captain2 (Feb 19, 2007 8:40 am)
#12277 of 12297 Re: Awkward... [thegraduate] by backy Feb 18, 2007 (8:12 pm)
Replying to: thegraduate (Feb 18, 2007 7:15 pm) The Optima may be the sleeper here. Recently it's garnered very positive reviews from MT (a finalist for COTY), C/D (third to Altima and Accord, but not by a large margin), and CR. It's been praised for its strong I4, quality interior, and good blend of ride and handling. And it's one of the lowest-priced mid-sized cars. Even fuel economy (for the I4) is decent, with its 5-speed stick or slushbox. The major downsides are Kia's history of poor reliability and resale value, and ABS and ESC are both optional (and not even available on the LX MT). Also the IIHS side impact test scores aren't out yet. Otherwise it looks to me like a nice package. The styling is ho-hum, but nothing that is offensive. Replies to this message: elroy5 (Feb 18, 2007 8:37 pm)
#12278 of 12297 Re: Awkward... [backy] by elroy5 Feb 18, 2007 (8:37 pm)
Replying to: backy (Feb 18, 2007 8:12 pm) My sister has a new Optima. I asked her how she liked it, and she said the only real complaint she has is the seats (not enough cushioning). She sounded satisfied with it, for the price.
#12279 of 12297 Vehicle Stability Control by kyrpto Feb 19, 2007 (4:57 am)
VSC as Toyota/Lexus call it is the next big thing in safety. So much so thst the NIHS is reccomending that it be standard on all vehicles sold in America. It may end up saving more lives than seatbelts. Having owned a Highlander AWD, Tundra D Cab 4WD, Scion xB, and now a Camry, all with VSC, I have personally experienced VSC in action. My '05 Tundra SR5 was ordered with it - now it is standard on all Tundras.

You are here: Forums Sedans Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread