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

#4851 of 12297 Re: V6's [meateater] by autoboy16 Jun 27, 2006 (5:03 am)
Replying to: meateater (Jun 27, 2006 4:51 am) Speaking of inline engine, do you think that back in the early 1990s, honda should have used their 5cyl technology in the accord instead of that old v6? The hp numbers were about the same (5 had more) but the mpgs were the biggest difference. If not that, honda should make a small v8 as in 3.9-5.0 liters. Its time IMO its time for honda to move on from that 3.5 in those big models (the suvs and truck, rl and accord)   o please don't bring that up again . That was a big arguement a day or so ago and posts got deleted because of that. Remember the saying, you get what you pay for. If the sonata is a deal to the accord, than the Aura must be a show stopper/ heart breaker/ jaw dropper next to the sonata. Honestly i dont see the deal in that car. IMO the seats are uncomfortable and the ergonomics aren't great, their ok. But if you paying that much money for a sonata*, then why not just add the $3k for a comparibly equipped camcordtima and get more. o well thats my opinion. I have listened to people saying they "saved for buying a sonata" but i lost the little intrest i had in it and found a like for the passat and strangly the jetta TDI . I just don't see it .   *for 2007, hyundai changed the trims: now its GLS, SE and limited with SE and Limited being the v6s and GLS the 4.
#4852 of 12297 Re: Passat [autoboy16] by chidoro Jun 27, 2006 (6:11 am)
Replying to: autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 4:57 am) I'm pretty sure the re-tuned 2006 accord v6 got a 6.6 as well. It was a bit of a surprise from what I understand. I also think the new camry v6 is gutsy even if the rest of the car isn't really designed w/ the same misson statement as a passat Replies to this message: autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 6:25 am) chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 6:36 am) autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 7:20 am) and 3 more...
#4853 of 12297 Re: Passat [chidoro] by autoboy16 Jun 27, 2006 (6:25 am)
Replying to: chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 6:11 am) 6.6!!! MANY FULLSIZE SUVS ONLY GO UP TO 5.6!! I know i know that was a mistake. You ment 3.5 right?   The accord still has the same 3liter 240hp engine since 2003. But due to the SAE thing, it went up to 244hp. Hopefully it'll have the TL or rl's v6 next generation. Maybe a 4cyl tuned more like the tsx's . Replies to this message: chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 6:36 am) autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 7:20 am) chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 7:43 am) 6mt_jordan (Jun 27, 2006 8:48 am) thegraduate (Jun 27, 2006 5:22 pm)
#4854 of 12297 Re: Passat [autoboy16] by chidoro Jun 27, 2006 (6:36 am)
Replying to: autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 6:25 am) The SAE thing brought most of the japan hp numbers down, honda accord included. The increase in hp number for the accord v6 (which is still a 3.0 liter) was due to a retuning else it would have been rated at ~234hp.   i certainly hope you are aware that 6.6 was referring to 0-60 times Replies to this message: autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 7:20 am) chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 7:43 am) 6mt_jordan (Jun 27, 2006 8:48 am) thegraduate (Jun 27, 2006 5:22 pm)
#4855 of 12297 Re: Passat [chidoro] by autoboy16 Jun 27, 2006 (7:20 am)
Replying to: chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 6:36 am) Actually the accords HP ratings went up to 244 because of the SAE thing. BTW, the accords goes from 0-60 in like 7 something seconds. There is enought hp but not nearly enough torque to make it in 6.6seconds. The passat makes it in that time with 280 hp and the camry in 6.5seconds. Wow your numbers are close but off. I'm pretty sure Thegraduate can help you with almost anything honda and anything accord. Replies to this message: chidoro (Jun 27, 2006 7:43 am) 6mt_jordan (Jun 27, 2006 8:48 am) thegraduate (Jun 27, 2006 5:22 pm)
#4856 of 12297 Re: I'm Probably Buying a Sonata [djm2] by badgerfan Jun 27, 2006 (7:30 am)
Replying to: djm2 (Jun 26, 2006 6:25 pm) You are apparently very timid about driving a car beyond warranty.   I personally have never bought an extended warranty and have never had repair expenses on any vehicle for which the extended warranty would have been less expensive than just paying for the repair. I have driven many of these vehicles for many years and miles beyond their standard warranty. And this is with driving the supposedly "inferior" domestic brands!
#4857 of 12297 Re: Passat [autoboy16] by chidoro Jun 27, 2006 (7:43 am)
Replying to: autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 7:20 am) Actually the accords HP ratings went up to 244 because of the SAE thing.   I hate to be a stickler for detail, but that is not why the engine went up from 240 to 244. The difference between the 2005 and 2006 v6 was estimated to be 10 hp by honda, but since the SAE regs adjusted the hp of the accord (and many other japan cars as previously stated) down, the overall hp increase realized was 4 hp. if the old method of measuring was used, the hp rating would be 250, if the new method was used w/out any engine improvements, the rating would be ~234.
#4858 of 12297 HP wars by scape2 Jun 27, 2006 (8:03 am)
How much is enough here folks? I can still remember when 200HP v6 was all the rage in the Accord. Do you really need a 300HP family sedan? or a 500HP family sedan? We need to get back to function/style/fit/finish/quality. The basics of what make a great family sedan.   I noticed in a few posts the drum of Honda/Toyota's lasting longer, being better quality, ect popping up again. I used to subscribe to that mentality. I have owned 3 domestics over the last 15 years and all have been just fine.. explain why Honda/Toyota group? Replies to this message: beantown (Jun 27, 2006 9:44 am) badgerfan (Jun 27, 2006 10:07 am) autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 10:39 am) and 1 more... autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 10:47 am) and 1 more...
#4859 of 12297 About the Passat and Even Jetta by lweiss Jun 27, 2006 (8:08 am)
I looked at the Passat and Jetta (very roomy, priced better) to replace my Volvo S-70 and I rejected them because of the following reasons:   - Both the Passat and Jetta have very poor service records according to Consumer Reports (which take their ratings from reader input of owners) - The Passat runs on "recommended premium fuel" which adds 20 cents a gallon to already high fuel prices (none of the Accord/Camry/Sonata/Mazda6/Altima require premium in their base I-4 and standard V6 configurations) - Resale is not that great- so buy used if you want to.   But on the plus side, the engineering is wonderful- the real "European" driving characteristics along with some nice interiors and ergonomics. VW's are pretty popular on the East Coast. But I have had my fill of high maintenance costs with these European cars. Replies to this message: goodegg (Jun 27, 2006 9:30 am) bhmr59 (Jun 27, 2006 10:01 am)
#4860 of 12297 Re: Passat [autoboy16] by 6mt_jordan Jun 27, 2006 (8:48 am)
Replying to: autoboy16 (Jun 27, 2006 7:20 am) 7 something? I think not. The manual transmission V6 Accord can do it 5.9 seconds, and also by Car and Driver the automatic does it in 6.6. Sorry to burst your bubble. Here is the quote and link.   "The 2006 Accord ripped through the acceleration test to 60 mph in 6.6 seconds, a tie with the Sonata, then strongly broke to the front to clear the quarter-mile in 15.1 seconds at 95 mph."   link title

You are here: Forums Sedans Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread