You are here: Forums Sedans Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

6844 messages,  Last post on Mar 23, 2009 at 12:32 PM

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

What is this discussion about? Buick Lucerne, Chevrolet Impala, Dodge Charger, Ford Taurus, Hyundai Azera, Toyota Avalon, Nissan Maxima, Pontiac G8, Car Comparisons, Sedan

#6251 of 6844 is Buick going down? by alexstore Apr 21, 2008 (3:42 am)
Looks like sales of Buick are significantly down they are even lower than Oldsmobile before it was sold. Like many people on this forum will agree unfortunately Lucerne doesn't offer any advantages over Japanese and even Korean brands. Opel was used to improve sales of Saturn, Holden of Pontiac. If we follow this thinking Daewoo or some other brand should be used to improve Buick. I personally hope that it will be a western European brand. Opel was used and GM cannot use Saab since it competes for the same market as GM. My opinion get rid of Saab and use it to make Buicks even in Sweden. Place 3.6 with DI into Lucerne and detune it to produce around 290 hp and better FE. Also Make longer wheelbase version of Lucerne as well as use 3.6 without DI on entry level Lucernes Replies to this message: thegraduate (Apr 21, 2008 11:04 am)
#6252 of 6844 Re: interesting photo [alexstore] by captain2 Apr 21, 2008 (5:38 am)
Replying to: alexstore (Apr 21, 2008 3:30 am) yep there seems to be a correlation between the amount of technology in a vehicle (fancy dan 'thinking' trannies/hybrids/variable displacement systems etc) and the differences between actual and EPA FE test performance. Toyota, which has long been a FE 'leader' for example, seems to want to 'program' their trannies to hold onto the highest gear possible even on coastdown from a higher speed, thereby reducing engine speed and increasing FE, these manufacturers that use the variable displacement can shutoff some cylinders (also increasing FE) in lower load situations (let's say a 55mph level 'cruise') but then the systems become ineffective when speeds get up to more realisitic numbers. The EPA may 'think' that 55-60 mph is how fast we all drive on the highway (and it may, indeed, be the speed limit) but who out there is not driving along at 70 or 75 just to (safely) keep up with everybody else? These type of things are why I don't really like the EPA numbers and prefer real driving numbers from real people even though it is true that such things do introduce a number of variables in the results as one poster pointed out. EPA numbers are good only as they are relative to each other and not any indication necessarily of what any given driver can expect because some cars will do better in the 'real world' than others- and it's been this way for almost 40 years.
#6253 of 6844 Re: How stupid must you be to buy a Ford !!?? [kscng] by thegraduate Apr 21, 2008 (10:58 am)
Replying to: kscng (Apr 17, 2008 9:19 pm) How can these people keep a straight face and say that buying a Ford Taurus (ie 500) is good decision??!!?   The real question is how can we read the rest of your post with a straight face? Why wouldn't I recommend a car with best-in-class interior and cargo space, an engine with power and fuel economy competitive with others in the class, but at a price that, in the real world, is thousands less than the competition? For those looking for a big-car bargain, the Taurus is it.   I just recommended someone test drive a Taurus because of its Command Seating position (the shopper is a woman under 5' tall). Guess what? I didn't even crack a smile.   Here's one just for you, though.   The mainstream "junk" Ford Fusion has higher reliability ratings than the number 1 and 2 sedans in the country, the Camry and Accord.   If you haven't looked at Ford lately, look again. Replies to this message: smithed (Apr 23, 2008 4:52 am) thegraduate (Apr 23, 2008 7:32 am) allmet33 (Apr 23, 2008 7:37 am) captain2 (Apr 23, 2008 7:50 am)
#6254 of 6844 Re: is Buick going down? [alexstore] by thegraduate Apr 21, 2008 (11:04 am)
Replying to: alexstore (Apr 21, 2008 3:42 am) Heck, Buick doesn't even offer advantages over its own domestic competitors, Charger/300 and Taurus/Sable.
#6255 of 6844 Re: How stupid must you be to buy a Ford !!?? [thegraduate] by smithed Apr 23, 2008 (4:52 am)
Replying to: thegraduate (Apr 21, 2008 10:58 am) Agreed, that 500/Taurus is a good buy and fits a nice niche as a big (commodious, in fact) family car. Wife and I looked at a 500 before we bought, and liked everything except the 3.0. I think with the new engine, this car should be on shoppers' lists.   Bias against a certain maker can cause one to miss out on a good thing. Replies to this message: thegraduate (Apr 23, 2008 7:32 am) allmet33 (Apr 23, 2008 7:37 am) captain2 (Apr 23, 2008 7:50 am)
#6256 of 6844 Re: How stupid must you be to buy a Ford !!?? [smithed] by thegraduate Apr 23, 2008 (7:32 am)
Replying to: smithed (Apr 23, 2008 4:52 am) Bias against a certain maker can cause one to miss out on a good thing.   It sure can. Three Hondas park in my driveway, and many in the immediate family have them too (3 Accords - '96, '02, '06; 2 Civics - '97 and '07; and an Odyssey - '05, between all of us). It doesn't mean I don't look at competitors' offerings. Sure, I feel like the car I drive now was a winner from the competition, back in '05 when I got my '06 Accord, but how can I be sure it will be next time I buy a car unless I drive some of the competition? Replies to this message: allmet33 (Apr 23, 2008 7:37 am)
#6257 of 6844 Re: How stupid must you be to buy a Ford !!?? [thegraduate] by allmet33 Apr 23, 2008 (7:37 am)
Replying to: thegraduate (Apr 23, 2008 7:32 am) Actually Grad...yours is more a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". I can't blame you if you've had great experiences with Honda and the cars still appeal to you...stick with it. However, like you said...you can't ignore the competition as much as you could a few years back.
#6258 of 6844 Re: How stupid must you be to buy a Ford !!?? [smithed] by captain2 Apr 23, 2008 (7:50 am)
Replying to: smithed (Apr 23, 2008 4:52 am) Bias against a certain maker can cause one to miss out on a good thing agrred - however, many of us (and possibly even this poster) will have such a bias - for a good reason - past experience. In my case, I'll never ever touch a Chrysler product ever again - even if they start selling everything they make at half price. All reflective of some tranny problems I had (with a truck) and their refusal to stand behind their badly designed (IMO) product. I have no doubt that the 'American' products are improving and although this may really be a function of older technologies they might use, or FTM that they simply spend more time building a car (more time for QC) - it should make no difference to the car buyer. He/She is entitled to the 'best' car possible for the least actual cost possible - if that happens to be a Ford product (or whoever) so be it. Just don't ever ask me to spend any of my money on a Chrysler!
#6259 of 6844 Re: interesting photo [autokritiker] by captain2 Apr 23, 2008 (9:46 am)
Replying to: autokritiker (Apr 18, 2008 3:01 pm) It takes dozens of miles, at least, before the ECU can update the Avg fuel economy and display it on the LED. actually no - I checked, the Average FE displayed updates every 8 seconds, so that at the beginning of a tank it will change very rapidly (almost like an 'instanteous' display and then obviously slow down substantially later in the tank. The Av also resets its FE display EVERY tank - something I rather it didn't but also a reason for low mileage displays (something also true for the ES?). If your contention here that CR is fibbing about the way they test for FE and are instead basing their 'results' on a 3 mile test drive as opposed to the 195 mile one they claim, what could possibly be their motivation? And BTW under the conditions of acceleration & slalom testing any of these cars including a Taurus/Avalon/ES would do very well to be getting 15.7 mpg as would a Honda Civic!
#6260 of 6844 A week in a Max by tjc78 Apr 28, 2008 (4:54 am)
I just got back from a business trip in which I was pleasantly surprised to be handed the key (fob actually) to a brand new Maxima (SE model). I am used to getting a base Impala or something equally as dull. Anyway, I haven't driven a Maxima since '06 before I bought my Avalon. First off the interior though improved is no where near the Avalons. Its smaller and the overall feel just isn't there for me. Not that it is awful, I just feel the Avalon is nicer. As for the drive I immediately noticed that it is significantly stiffer than my Avalon. The car is much flatter in curves and the steering is great. The trans was a CVT which is just ok for me. Much better than the CVT in the Ford 500 because the VQ engine has enough power to make it work. I still would prefer a traditional 5/6 speed. One thing Nissan has improved through the tranny and computer programming (I would guess) is the torque steer issues. This car had some but not nearly as bad as prior years.   So... the verdict? I still would pick my Avalon over the Max by a slim margin. Although the Max is a better handler it still is a big heavy FWD car that suffers from the same set of problems as my Avalon. My Avalon feels faster (probably is by a few tenths) and is quieter on the road. The CVT is just plain weird, especially went stomping on it at around 55 and the engine hits redline and just stays there. The car continues to pull strong, but you are just waiting for a shift that never happens. However, there was a manual mode and I guess I could get used to it.   Having said all that, I am now anxiously awaiting the '09 Maxima. With more power and a much better interior it could serve as a replacement for my Av. Currently its a nice ride, built well, and there is nothing bad I can say about the VQ. Its a tick noiser than the 2 GR in my Av but at least it sounds good. Overall, MPG was a tad over 21 (per the computer) and included a mix of city/hwy driving and quite a few full throttle excursions. Replies to this message: tonycd (Apr 28, 2008 9:44 am) captain2 (Apr 29, 2008 5:25 am) tjc78 (Apr 29, 2008 6:30 am) captain2 (Apr 29, 2008 8:08 am) and 2 more...

You are here: Forums Sedans Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison