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
#5936 of 20239 Re: What if [urnews]
Sep 27, 2007 (7:40 am)
They are a loyal base for good reasons. I wasn’t a Honda guy but the Accord experience changed it all. Now, it is a tall order for any other brand to get my $$$. Is it a perfect car? I can see things Honda could (and should) have done differently or better. But as a package, it is a great car. I haven’t seen the new Accord in person, yet, however.
As a brand, Honda is seen as one of the best in quality not just here in America, but also in Europe. If you look at Top Gear’s compilation of best to worst brands, Honda is at #3 behind Skoda and Lexus. But these studies and surveys aren’t the reason for setting the benchmark, they backup personal experience. Outside of lifestyle buyers (who want to buy something unique/different for the sake of it), I can see why it would be a tall order to sway a lot of buyers. For that, GM, Ford and Chrysler will not only have to deliver cars like what you suggested, they will have to do it on a consistent basis for some time.
The problem with these three is that they rely too much on flash, little on substance. They try to match or beat existing Toyota/Honda products, but with every redesign, they get left behind. The idea should be to set benchmark, than follow one. And it won’t happen overnight. There was a time (1960s) when Chevrolet was selling Impala in numbers that combined sales of Accord and Camry (today) can’t match. What happened? GM didn’t keep up with the times. Accord, and then Camry, arrived. The rest is history.
My car ownership history:
1982 Celica Supra (bought used, served the purpose well)
1988 Corolla GT-S (bought used, served the purpose very well)
1992 Camry LE (bought used, had a few issues)
In fall 1997, I was ready for my first new car. I liked older Camry but hated the way 1997 was designed. Taurus and it also were the rental queens, and after plenty of seat time, I figured out that I couldn’t live with either of them. So, I didn’t even test drive these two, but considered plenty of others (Altima, Maxima, Intrigue, Grand Prix and Passat). 1998 Accord emerged as the winner, partly based on reputation and rest on driving experience, as well as it meeting my needs and the budget. Cars since then,
2006 TL (shares time and garage with my 1998 Accord)
So, I did give a chance to others. In case of Intrigue, it was supposed to be an extremely competitive product, and it was. But it didn’t last. I travel and rent cars a lot. And after driving them all, I see no reason to get anything but another Accord. Although, the next Fit is a contender now, since I could use a frugal car with hatchback utility, with a sedan already in the garage.
#5937 of 20239 Re: What if [urnews]
Sep 27, 2007 (7:41 am)
You forgot one. Had a history of producing reliable cars and worked hard to earn their customers business. Yes, I would buy from that manufacturer.
#5938 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [thegraduate]
Sep 27, 2007 (7:42 am)
I would consider Passat to be a contender in this thread. I loved it in 1997, and after observing quality issues am wary of owning one. But thats another story.
#5939 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [robertsmx]
Sep 27, 2007 (7:56 am)
I would consider Passat to be a contender in this thread.
I had it pegged as a solid Avalon/Maxima contender based on price and available features. The V6 model STARTS at over $30k. A model with dual climate control and leather will be in the $33k range.
#5940 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [thegraduate]
Sep 27, 2007 (8:06 am)
V6 is unnecessary in Passat. It is very well equipped with a nice 200 HP engine for $24K. Thats right about the average transaction price of an average car in America, and can be had for less. If not for my observations in friends' cars, seeing how they have aged (especially the drive train), it will be a while before I show my faith in anything VW. Because the way I drive, it won't take long to be out of warranty.
Same with Accord. If I do go for one, it will be another EX-L for me (with NAV this time).
#5941 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [robertsmx]
Sep 27, 2007 (8:09 am)
In a 3400 lb car, some people will deem a V6 necessary, regardless of how nice the 4 is. That's why they offer one. Same is true in Camry, Accord, Fusion.
I've got a 4-cyl Accord and it has plenty of power, and is smooth to boot. Other people will still want more of each.
#5942 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [thegraduate]
Sep 27, 2007 (8:16 am)
My 1998 Accord is ~3200 lb, and going by current standards, it has only ~145 HP (150 HP by old standard) and a 4-speed automatic. But it drives like a more powerful car, loaded and is very smooth. I deemed the 200 HP V6 unnecessary ten years ago.
The key to performance is in gearing and how it utilizes the power curve. Passat has both. While most people are fixated with 0-60 runs (which largely explains the quest for more and more power), for me it is all about rolling acceleration.
#5943 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [robertsmx]
Sep 27, 2007 (8:24 am)
I agree, but the premium sedan customer will be a little different I believe. Some people buying a sedan won't settle for a 4-cylinder for pure reasons of it not being "the best."
I have a 130 hp Accord and find it plenty for my needs. Not 'fast' but adequate.
See it here:
#5944 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [thegraduate]
Sep 27, 2007 (8:34 am)
That is the problem. A lot of people seem to buy based on nomenclature… “So, it has got a V6 or a four banger?” Two possible responses:
“It is a V6 sire”… “I will take it”
“It is a four cylinder sire but see it performs like a V6”… “four banger, eh?”
I decided to look at C&D road test for Passat 2.0T and they have it for wagon (3492 lb). They did one for sedan but with the 280 HP/V6.
“Sixty mph arrives in 7.2 seconds. That’s 1.3 seconds slower than the V-6 Passat sedan, but it’s still quicker than a V-6 Ford Fusion.”
And it is not just 0-60 where it does well. Its 5-60 acceleration is impressive too, 7.7 seconds.
I value 5-60 more (and other rolling start acceleration tests that virtually no American automotive pros seem to care about) since it is more telling of a drivetrain's elasticity. Some European magazines will go as far as testing acceleration in different gears for same range of speeds (with manual transmission). We get 0-60 with high rpm clutch drop for armchair bragging rights.
#5945 of 20239 Re: Mid-Size Warranties Increase, but does Quality? [robertsmx]
Sep 27, 2007 (8:39 am)
Very true, and that was sort of my point in my previous post.
Another reason is that some people don't want to rev their engine beyond 3,000 RPM. Me? I'll take it to 4k on a daily basis if I need or want to. In my youtube video, I am taking an interchange ramp (a 30 MPH ramp) and accelerating back to my cruising speed on the other interstate. I hit just under 4,000 RPM, but its no biggie in a Honda 4.