Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Midsize Sedans 2.0
13306 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 10:18 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: autoboy16 (Aug 15, 2008 5:40 am) While on the VW subject, we may as well stop talking about the passat 3.6 as vw as dropped it. Not sure where you get this info from  . VW website still lists the 3.6.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 14, 2008 7:04 am) I generally read the messages on this board but don't post. I couldn't really resist replying to this one though. Still, if I'm having to choose between a Ford and a VW, I'd actually take the Ford. Would you really go from a Honda to a Ford? That's quite a jump there going from a brand that makes great engines to another that is at least a generation behind the rest of the industry. And Ford is nowhere close to VW in terms of engine technology either. Reliability wise, Ford is only slightly better than VW and that is only if you consider North America. Ford and VW are pretty much on par reliability/sales wise everywhere else in the world. BTW, I've had my B5 Passat for nearly the same amount of time as my friend who owns a 99 Accord. We've compared the costs of maintenance and the Passat has cost me about 350 more (mainly due to the dealership). Our fuel costs are more are less the same since the VW gets better mileage than the Honda both in city and on the highway. My friend says he would not buy a VW for exactly the same reasons you gave in spite of my experience  . He concedes a couple of things without hesitation though - after nearly a decade, his car feels and looks like a Grand Am and that his car has always drove and handled like an old person's car.
|
|
|
Replying to: kartez (Aug 19, 2008 9:19 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Aug 20, 2008 5:07 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (Aug 20, 2008 5:21 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kartez (Aug 19, 2008 9:19 pm) My folks have already made the leap. Their new Taurus is a fantastic buy; 3.5L 263 hp, 18/28 highway on regular fuel(pretty good for the power and large amount of room it has). This 3.5L was on Ward's 10 Best Engines List, I believe, so it can't be lagging behind the industry TOO bad. Add in Sync Media Controller as a low-cost option, and you have quite a nice, competitive car in the low $20ks. Honda's customer service isn't what it used to be, and Ford's quality isn't what it used to be either (thank goodness). He concedes a couple of things without hesitation though - after nearly a decade, his car feels and looks like a Grand Am and that his car has always drove and handled like an old person's car. Old person's car? No, that'd be a Camry. I have a '96 and an '06 Accord, and another relative drives an '02 Accord. All three are a hoot to drive, but my favorite is still my old one, which now has 183,000 miles on it. It handles very nicely for this 20 year old car enthusiast. It's not quick, but quick doesn't equal fun. Fun does.  As far as looking like a Grand Am, I'm really not sure where this comment comes from. The rather vanilla styling that Honda put forth is a LOT less dated than Pontiacs from the same era, and no more dated than VW. Generally, more conservative designs (like the Honda and VW pictured) wear better over time.   
|
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Aug 20, 2008 5:52 am) I know that a platform has nothing to do with reliability, and they are not clones but, I find it very hard to believe that there is really a big difference between reliability ratings. If you look at CR, the Mazda6 4 cyl has never had anything but great remarks. I do know that since Mazda has a much younger customer base, that may have an influence on perceived reliability since younger people tend to have less toleration for any potential glitches. Also, they tend to drive their cars harder.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 20, 2008 6:26 am) If you would consider the 2010 Fusion, would you consider the 2nd gen Mazda6? I agree with you about the Taurus, it really is one hell of a car for what you pay. I just can't get past the styling...
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aviboy97 (Aug 20, 2008 7:22 am) If you would consider the 2010 Fusion, would you consider the 2nd gen Mazda6? Definitely, and I should've mentioned it in my post. Mazda's characteristically low gearing hurts fuel mileage though, so the Ford might suit me a little better (I'm loving averaging 37-38 MPG on trips in my Accord right now). Of course, if I treat the Mazda the same way as I treat my Accord on those trips, I'm liable to see numbers well above EPA also.  I do like the new Mazda 6 design a LOT; better than most all the other entires out there for sure.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 20, 2008 7:25 am) About the FE in the Mazda6. I would suspect you should be able to get 32-33 possibly driving conservative. I just got 32mpg's on a trip to Maine this weekend going 70-75 with the a/c on with my car full of luggage and my pregnant wife in my 05 4 cyl. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Hyundai Sonata
2010 Toyota Camry
2010 Honda Accord
2010 Nissan Altima
2010 Volkswagen Passat
2010 Mazda MAZDA6
2010 Ford Fusion
2010 Chevrolet Malibu
2009 Saturn Aura
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
