Ask the Car People.SM


Midsize Sedans 2.0

18205 messages,  Last post on May 22, 2013 at 3:13 PM

You are in the Sedans Forum.

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

Messages Page 1755 of 1822

#17532 of 18205 Re: Motorweek comparison test [benjaminh] by bb49

Feb 18, 2013 (3:52 am)

Replying to: benjaminh (Feb 17, 2013 7:46 pm)
The C/D 0-60 test is suspect as far as I can tell no one else has been able to duplicate this result. I also take any review from this publication on a Honda product with suspicion as it is clearly biased towards Honda products.

#17533 of 18205 Optima blind spots. by bb49

Feb 18, 2013 (4:08 am)

The Optima blind spot (in fact all cars, except maybe a convertible with the top down, (even the Accord) has rear blind spots because of the C pillars) really is not a problem for me and for that matter any driver who properly adjust his or her side view mirrors and rear view mirror. Thus the Accord's better rear visibility really is no value to me and I would rather have a car with stunningly attractive styling that makes me happy when I looked at it.

#17534 of 18205 Re: Back to midsize sedans [gogophers1] by bb49

Feb 18, 2013 (4:23 am)

Replying to: gogophers1 (Feb 17, 2013 9:50 pm)
Right now Mazda only offers the manual in its lowest trim (Sport) but will soon be offering the manual with the better equipped Touring trim level. I have driven the Accord and overall I find the Mazda to be a better driver's car with more responsive handling and of course, there is really no contest when comparing the styling of the Mazda 6 to the bland Accord. If you have a chance you should also compare the fold down rear seats of the Accord to the superior Mazda 6 fold down seat. The Accord has a one piece fold down rear seat and to make matter worse the opening is small and rounded at the top corners making it even less useful. Whereas the Mazda is nice bigger rectangular opening and it is split 60/40 giving you the option of carrying a passenger. The Mazda also have a better rear trunk hinge design as it slides into housings on the top of the trunk shelf thereby avoiding any possibility of the hinges damaging any cargo in the trunk which could be damaged by the exposed hinges on the Accord.

#17535 of 18205 Re: Back to midsize sedans [gogophers1] by cski

Feb 18, 2013 (6:05 am)

Replying to: gogophers1 (Feb 17, 2013 9:50 pm)
Man, it sounds like you want a drivers car with controls that make sense. At least give the Optima Turbo a shot. 274hp with regular unleaded and paddle shift is very satisfying. The dealer will work with you on price, and you can get one 5 miles away, not 500. The controls and center stack is totally intuitive. 100k warranty and killer looks to seal the deal. Fyi. Lastly, every car I owned with a manual required more repairs and less value when the time came to sell. I would love a manual car.... Parked right next to my sensible daily driver sedan.

#17536 of 18205 Re: Back to midsize sedans [gogophers1] by benjaminh

Feb 18, 2013 (7:35 am)

Replying to: gogophers1 (Feb 17, 2013 9:50 pm)
Thanks for your reviews as you decide which midsize sedan to get. Seems like each of us who own our particular car want to put in our 2 cents for our brand. Nothing wrong with that, and I'm going to do the same.
 
Over the last 13 years I've owned one new Ford (a 2000 Focus ZTS 5 MT), one new Mazda (a 2010 Mazda5 5MT), and two new Hondas (a 2002 Accord LX 5 MT and a 2008 Accord EXL Navi 5 MT). They were all good cars from a performance perspective, and even in term of the "shift feel" of the manuals. I slightly prefer the Honda manuals, and generally reading reviews you'll find that most reviewers agree. Mazda is a close second or maybe equal. When you drive the new Accord manual I think you'll find what I think of as an almost "jewel-like precision" to the manual.
 
For acceleration 0-60 with the manual the Accord seems to have a real advantage. Here are the times I've found with the site 0-60:
 
2014 Mazda6 Sport 6MT: 7.3
 
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Mazda-0-60-mph-Times.html
 
2013 Ford Fusion 1.6 0-60: 7.9
 
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Ford-0-60-mph-Times.html
 
2013 Honda Accord Sport 6 MT 0-60: 6.7!
 
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Honda-Vtech-0-60-mph-Times.html
 
In other words, the 2013 Accord with the manual beats some of the competition by about a second. That's huge in my book, and about as fast as most 6 cylinders of just a few years ago.
 
In terms of reliability my Hondas were equal to the Mazda—very reliable high-quality vehicles.
 
My 2000 Ford Focus was a nightmare with literally two dozen recalls, including one for possible engine fire. I know Ford has improved, but the recalls and problems with the new Fusion (including a recall for engine fire) seem to show that Ford still has some work to do.
 
Of the cars you're considering, the Honda is made right here in the USA at their factory in Ohio. They've recently released a factory tour video that shows step by step how your Accord is made:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBluTaWjPIU
 
I've owned two Accords built at this factory, and am now in negotiations to try to get a third. Those Marysville Honda Associates do very good work imho.
 
The Fusion is made in Mexico for now. Nothing against our good neighbors down south, but I personally prefer made in USA by relatively high wage workers.
 
The Mazda is made in Japan. The yen has been quite high until recently, and that has hurt Mazda. I think they've had to cut costs by cheapening some things in their vehicles. Probably the Mazda6 has not been affected by this, since it's a new signature model to get them back in the game, but my 2010 Mazda5 does seem cheap in some areas (like dashboard plastics and standard tires) that I don't find on my Hondas.
 
My experience with the Mazda, in other words, good though it's been, has convinced me to go back to Honda.
 
Just my 2 cents. Hope you'll let us know how it goes and what you decide.

#17537 of 18205 test drive impressions for 2013 Accord by benjaminh

Feb 18, 2013 (7:28 am)

Yesterday I did a test drive on a loaded Accord EXL. Having owned two previous Accords from past generations I could immediately sense that Honda has upped its game for this generation. This leather model seemed almost Audi-like in refinement and luxury. The technology was not just amazing, but seemed useful too.
 
The 2013 Accord seems significantly quieter than my 2008 EXL. The road noise, one of Hondas weak points for many years, has finally been addressed. The fit and finish was impressive, and all that I'd been expecting from the good reviews.
 
Even though on the test drive I went on the Interstate and some winding two lane roads, I can't say for sure if the handling and steering were better or worse than the 2008 Accord (which has hydraulic steering and double wishbone front suspension).
 
I would say for now it was just as good, if not better, but different in feel.
 
Trying to negotiate now for a 2013 EXL navi in red. It's a very rare model, and so not sure how it will go. I'm not in a place where I have to buy a car, and so if we need to wait until summer for it to work we can do that....

#17538 of 18205 Re: Motorweek comparison test [ivan_99] by backy

Feb 18, 2013 (7:54 am)

Replying to: ivan_99 (Feb 17, 2013 11:11 pm)
Image the 88 accord with 98hp and 4) 200 lb people in it
 
You are missing the point. What was the 0-60 time of that 1988 Accord, even with the LX-i's fuel injected engine? Nowhere close to 5.6 secs, no matter how light it was. Yet people loved that car, and managed just fine.
 
My wife's 2007 Sonata had "only" 162 hp and a 4-speed slushbox. Yet it was more than quick enough to move out when needed. Her new 2013 has 198 hp, but the car is about the same weight as the 2007. And of course the Sonata can be had with over 270 horses.
 
Do people buy these mid-sized sedans to take them drag racing on weekends, or schlep from home to work to the mall? I think mostly the latter. Not sure how all that power helps there.

#17539 of 18205 Re: Back to midsize sedans [gogophers1] by scwmcan

Feb 18, 2013 (7:59 am)

Replying to: gogophers1 (Feb 17, 2013 10:29 pm)
I agree it would be a hassle, it was more a tounge in cheek comment. I really don't know why they would offer it here and not there, my guess would be the dealers say nobody buys them, so they aren't offered ( proving their point as they are not available, like wagons etc. )

#17540 of 18205 Re: Back to midsize sedans [benjaminh] by akirby

Feb 18, 2013 (8:26 am)

Replying to: benjaminh (Feb 18, 2013 7:35 am)
Ford's Hermosillo plant leads the company in manufacturing quality. High USA wages don't guarantee anything.

#17541 of 18205 Re: Back to midsize sedans [akirby] by benjaminh

Feb 18, 2013 (8:37 am)

Replying to: akirby (Feb 18, 2013 8:26 am)
That might well be true. But some people, like me, would somewhat prefer if more of the money they spent on a car stayed in the US working here. But for many that's not a consideration. Everyone gets to make their own choice....+++ And the Fusion is a great looking car with a lot of plusses, including the best braking time that I've seen.

Messages Page 1755 of 1822

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement