Last post on Dec 10, 2013 at 5:02 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Hyundai Sonata, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, Volkswagen Passat, Mazda MAZDA6, Ford Fusion, Chevrolet Malibu, Kia Optima, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#15304 of 20239 The cliche quandary
Jul 23, 2010 (7:39 am)
I'm choosing between a 2010 Fusion, 2010 Accord, or a used Fusion/Accord.
I am having a REAL hard time figuring out why I wouldn't choose the Fusion in either case here. If Consumer Reports and Edmunds user reviews are to be believed, used Fusions have been much more reliable than their Accord counterparts...Honda seems to have been phoning it in reliability-wise on the Accord for the last couple of years. As for the new cars, I love the look (well, at least the front end) of the 2010 Fusions and their interiors are fantastic...style, fit and finish is more European than...well...Ford-like. The Accord, on the other hand, feels too over-the-top on the inside for me. If I go new, with the deals Ford is throwing around ($2500 incentive in my region) I can basically get one with a V6, leather and Sync for under $24K...$22K if I opt for a 4-banger. Honda's prices are competitive as well currently, but...dang. And they don't offer anything like Sync.
Why do I even consider the Accord? Power. I love their V6s, both old and new. LOVE them. Have warm fuzzy DREAMS about them. Plus we're the happy owners of a 2009 CR-V. So there's some brand loyalty at play. Before I looked into Fusions just a few weeks ago, I never would have even considered a Ford. It's been tough to "free my mind" as it were. Plus, on a shallow note, Accords don't carry that Ford stigma.
So...New Fusion vs. New Accord vs. 2007 Fusion vs. 2007 Accord...help me...someone...
#15305 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [chinorth]
Jul 23, 2010 (8:13 am)
For my money I'd go with the Ford easily and I'm not a Ford guy. My dad and sister in law have the 2010 Accord, and it's a nice car. We have the 2008 CR-V and we love ours as well. The Fusion though gets fantastic reviews, has the SYNC, has the nice V6, great interior. My only problem with the Fusion is it's a bit bland looking for me, but it's better looking than the Accord so even there I give it the edge in this match up.
#15306 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [chinorth]
Jul 23, 2010 (9:21 am)
If power is your thing, have you looked at a Mazda 6 with the 3.7L V6?
The new deals are excellent now, and since used-car prices have recently risen with lower supplies of them, IMO buying new is the way to go.
Before buying my 6, I drove a Fusion SEL and Sport (both with V6) and an Accord V6. The V6 is nice in the Accord, but the package wrapped around it disappoints. The styling is too frumpy and bulbous and the interior is too button-happy for my tastes. The Fusion was an impressive package overall, but IMO the 3.5L V6 in the Sport is smoother and more flexible than the 3.0L, and handling was more positive as well.
My advice: Get the Fusion Sport.
#15307 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [mz6greyghost]
Jul 23, 2010 (10:30 am)
I'm torn with the Mazdas. I like their body design, but I just don't feel comfortable in them...maybe it's the seats. They sure handle nicely though.
I like the Fusion Sport but not sure I could get one and stay in my budget (and get leather ). Also, the 3.5 takes quite a hit on fuel economy...at least according to the EPA numbers. The 3.0 is a nice compromise.
#15308 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [chinorth]
Jul 23, 2010 (10:46 am)
I too like Mazda body styles but I know what your talking about in regards to the comfort factor. While they are stylish as hell, what has kept me from getting one is the uncomfortableness of the seats and ride quality. Its definitely designed for the more sport/firm oriented people and I would like it for an hour or two a week but not for everyday commuting driving. That bumpy ride would get to me after a while.
But for some people that floats their boat!
#15309 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [mz6greyghost]
Jul 23, 2010 (10:48 am)
I'd throw a better option that both into the mix.(more on that later)
But first, I wanted to mention getting a 1-2 year old car versus new. I know a lot of people get weird about this, but the simple fact is that you can save yourself 5-10K off of a new vehicle by doing this when you add in registration, insurance, tax, and the price difference. These days, even the cheapest car are good for 100K+ miles, so getting a car with 10-20K on it isn't a factor, really. As long as the original warranty in is force, you should buy something used or certified if it makes you feel happier(though the 2-5K difference between private party and dealer buys a LOT of detailing).
So on to the car I recommend. The best car that I've driven for the money in the last year was the Pontiac G8/Holden Commodore. Used, these are enormous bargains, and quite honestly, the best vehicle GM has made to date(or to be more accurate, their Australian division). It's still made and for sale over there, and is planned to be a full-cycle vehicle as well(5-8 years), so parts isn't an issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_VE_Commodore - mainstream line since 1978. This model was introduced in 2006, so it's still in the middle of its production cycle.
The pros are that it has RWD(handles more like a CTS* or 5 series than a FWD sofa on wheels), tons of power, a great interior, and well, there's a reason that it's by far the best selling car in its segment over there. GM had rocks in its head when it stopped selling its #2 car worldwide in the U.S.(the CTS being its #1, but at 40K, it's stupidly expensive)
* The asterisk is because it has the same engine, and nearly the same suspension as the previous generation CTS. If you're thinking "Pontiac - ecchhh", it's only "Pontiac" because GM stuck the wrong badge on the back (should have been a Chevrolet G8, because it's FAR better than the Impala). Note - many people order the Australian badges and replace them on the car. Saves confusion and looks better, IMO.
And it's cheap to buy one a year used.
$22K, 3K miles, certified(dealer program car most likely with that little mileage - not a rental). This car originally sold for almost 30K. That represents a 10K total savings for a car that will drive and look exactly like new.
And it is a better car than the Fusion, Mazda 6, or the Accord V6.
#15310 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [plekto]
Jul 23, 2010 (11:55 am)
Regarding new vs. used: agree. That's why I'm looking at the 2007 Fusions as well. The catch here is that the 2010s are a grade above in terms of styling and fit/finish. There are some used 2010s out there, but with the deals available, they cost MORE than new.
Now, as for the G8:
Oh, believe me, I know all about the G8. I'm half Aussie...I covet those cars.
What holds me back is it would require snow tires in winter (it snows where I live...a lot), my wife will be driving it from time to time (RWD may scare her in bad weather), and the prospect of dropping $20K+ on a used vehicle...the latter sounds silly but it's just me.
But yeah, G8's are awesome, and on a different plane than the Accord/Mazda6/Fusion/Malibu/Altima/etc. G8's are more in line with G35s and 3-series bimmers, but for the more budget conscious. They also share the G35's thirst for gas.
I also worry about parts...yes, the Holden Commodore isn't going anywhere, but whether or not parts will be in ready supply state-side is a different issue. And the body style is completely different (edit: ok, somewhat different and perhaps interchangeable), so that's an additional issue if one has a fender bender 2 or 3 years down the line.
Won't argue though. G8's fecking rock. GM was foolish not to hand it off to another badge when they shutdown Pontiac.
#15311 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [chinorth]
Jul 23, 2010 (12:24 pm)
New 2011 Kia Optima, turbo. I'd wait for that before I bought if you're unsure. Assuming you like the look of it.
#15312 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [smarty666]
Jul 23, 2010 (1:01 pm)
The prior version of the Mazda6 was sporty. I can't say I'd describe the new version that way.
I happen to have a 2009 as a loaner in place of my 2007. I don't like what they have done to the ride and handling at all. I'd have to say it seems more similar to a 2007 Taurus than a 2007 Mazda6.
To me the seat in the 2009 is plenty comfortable (I assume the current model year has the same seat), but the side bolsters are designed for people much wider than me. I like the 2007 seat back much better, it fits me. I did sit in one with leather seats in the showroom a while back (probably a 2009) and I did not find that seat to be comfortable, it seemed like the cushion was shorter than it is with the cloth seats.
#15313 of 20239 Re: The cliche quandary [jeffyscott]
Jul 23, 2010 (1:31 pm)
What's up with your '07?