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
13143 messages, Last post on Nov 10, 2009 at 6:29 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: oldcoastie (Oct 26, 2007 9:00 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: chrono (Oct 26, 2007 9:44 am) You're basing that on that one article. What about all the other road tests that say the Accord is still the target to shoot for? The Aura couldn't even best the last Accord in C/D's last comparison test. I don't see Mr. Phelan being any more influential than the enthusiasts at C/D. Sales of the Aura are disappointing. Just because you went from an Accord to an Aura doesn't prove anything. I happen to test drive an Aura when I had my Audi in for service. I don't understand what all the hoopla is with this car; not only was it a big disappointment compared to my Audi, it was even one compared to my last Accord. Hey, you like the Aura and that's great.
|
|
|
Replying to: chrono (Oct 26, 2007 8:22 pm) Really? IMO, Aura's steering is one of its shortcomings. And which generation of Accord are you talking about that has, apparently, overboosted steering? Based on my experience, Aura is Pontiac G6 with additional frills/aesthetic fixes, much like Milan is to Fusion. The only thing I like about in Aura is its auto transmission, and it could use better (real world) fuel economy.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: robertsmx (Oct 27, 2007 11:08 am) that's like saying the Accord and Acura TL are the same outside of aestheic fixe/additional frills. The Aura is a far better and more refined car than the G6 is. |
|
|
here's my 2 cents. I have a 1994 maxima GXE (amazing car). I go out of town once in a while and i get a rental (my car isn't in the best of shape). Few weeks back, i got the saturn aura, picked it out just because there's soo much commotion about it, "best car from saturn yet", "north American car of the year (even though it's essentially European)". Any who, i took the saturn. Instantly found the seats to be hard, and the dash was made from what felt like melted down action figures. Absolutely terrible. If you don't believe me go to the saturn dealership and try it yourself. Maybe the seat is better for some of you but the dash and interior quality in general is pretty bad, just give the dash a slight tap with your nails. Its pretty sad if the aura is saturns "best car yet". I don't want to see what they made before. With that said, the aura did handle very nicely, but at the same time, im not going to a track, I'll take comfort over handling in a mid sized sedan. Two weeks ago i took a camry (very easy choice after the aura). The seats were wayy better than the aura's and initially i thought the car was pretty good. I saw why the camry is the best selling car in the US. So after about an hour in the car i started to fiddle with all the things. The more i fiddle the less impressed i was. The center stack was misaligned, plastics didn't feel that good, center stack felt like the plastic from a box of valentine chocolates. Overall, still felt very cheap, very cost cutting, not quite as much as the aura though. I even noticed the carpeting coming off the floor of the car, i could see the wiring and chassis. This car was motor trends "car of the year" This car had ~4k miles on it. Very disappointing. For those who have never sat in a 94 maxima GXE, find one and sit in it, feel the dash, feel the materials. My dash is literally as soft as a baby's butt. The steering wheel has actual leather with real stitching on it. edit: just thought about it and my 03 corolla has more rock scratches than my 94 maxima. the front hood of my 03 corolla has lots of tiny scratches from rocks that go all the way down to the actual hood. what has happened to paint? Frankly, I'll take an extra 2 or 3 layers even if my MPG drops a little due to the weight of the extra paint...seriously. New cars are disappointing. Where have cars interiors gone? I mean....do i need to buy a premium brand to get the luxury of a 14 year old nissan? my second thought is more or less a question. The camry is now off my list, so is the aura/new malibu. How is the passat and the new accord? anyone have either of the cars and wanna shoot me some feed back about quality of the materials/comfort/etc.
|
|
|
Replying to: pengwin (Oct 27, 2007 4:07 pm) Cost cutting. Automakers are under extreme price pressure. That's why you don't see things like soft-touch materials everywhere any more. But to be fair, I think the automakers are trying their best to put the money into the important things on a car. For example, all those airbags cost money. So do high-powered, efficient, low-emissions engines. (How much power does that Maxima of yours put out? I'll bet there's some I4s in the mid-sized class today that would top it, or come close. And what's its fuel economy, and emissions?) When you think about it, how often do you touch the dashboard--except to find out if it's padded? Even the new Accord has a lot of hard plastic in it--less so as you move up the trim lines. But it's quality plastic, for this class of cars. I think the Passat has a very nice interior for this class (VW does interiors well in general), but it's also one of the most expensive cars in this class, if not the most expensive. So it should have a great interior. If you're looking at a car like the Passat, you can afford to look one class up, e.g. Avalon, Azera, Lucerne, Taurus/Sable. Or maybe a slightly used luxury sedan? As for paint, the automakers are using water-based paint now (less pollution), and that might partly account for the drop in paint quality. And of course, thinner paint means lower cost.
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Oct 27, 2007 4:46 pm) avalon is a little too big and ugly, looks like a whale, massive overhang. also the avalon is closer to 30k than 20k. still skeptical on hyundai/kia's. No good long term info on them. I can get a VW 2.0T for 22ish, a well equipped accord is 22ish too. as i see it, the same thing that happened to American brands is happening to Japanese brands. GM and ford used to make properly great cars like the 72 monte carlo (i had one and loved it). They mass produced cars and quality and reliability suffered. At the same time the Japanese slowly nudged into the market. Americans couldn't turn around fast enough and have always been behind the Japanese. With the new CTS and the upcoming G8 i can see some turn around happening. But until interior quality gets better americans wont flock to GM and ford dealerships like they do to honda and toyota's now people say "if we up quality we won't make a profit". subject A. Chevrolet Impala. Rebate: $4700 (friend of mine bought one for 17,xxx). Get rid of the 4700 dollar rebate and use it to build a car with newer technologies, better looking and feeling interior, more powerful engine. GM and ford are huge companies and if they cant make cars that are at the same level of quality as a toyota or honda. Here's and idea GM has like 18 brands, if they start cutting those 18 down to maybe....2. A mainstream brand and a premium brand they'd save money and they could concentrate on making a decent car. instead they choose to use the same car for 4 brands and spend all their money on making it look different.
|
|
|
Replying to: pengwin (Oct 27, 2007 5:43 pm) Ditto. Too many designs, competing for the same midsize buyer. Since Chevy is the most popular brand, Saturn, Pontiac, and Buick would have to go. At least two of those three. And isn't the Saab 9-3 competing for the same customers too? Way too much spent on one size platform, IMO.
|
|
|
Replying to: elroy5 (Oct 27, 2007 5:57 pm) better yet, combine Saab and Cadillac and form one brand, Caddy could learn a lot from Saab. Like how to install a decent turbocharger. |
|
|
Replying to: pengwin (Oct 27, 2007 5:43 pm) If you can get a 2008 Passat 2.0T for $22k and like the car, why not just go ahead and get one? You said you were concerned about reliability (wrt the Korean cars). Have you taken a look at the reliability record of the 2.0T? For example, CR won't even recommend it because of poor reliability. On the 2008 Accord, good luck getting anything more than an LX-P AT for $22k right now, until the new-design hoopla wears off. Have you seen the lease ads for the Accord lately? A few months ago they were $199/month for either an LX or SE-V6 (2007 models). Now they're $259/month for an LX, with about the same money down. I haven't seen a hard plastic steering wheel for a long time--maybe not since my mom's 1980 Omega. That wheel was not only hard, but shiny, with faux wood trim.  Cars today (the cars in this class at least) either have padded plastic or leather-covered wheels. Re profit and quality: Toyota is a very profitable company. But you used the Camry as an example of slipping quality. If any company could afford to put a few more bucks into quality interiors, it would be Toyota. But it's not a priority for them. Why? Because look how many people buy the Camry with its interior with ill-fitting seams--an interior that was compared unfavorably to the less expensive Optima's in C/D's last mid-sized car comparo. As long as so many people flock into Toyota dealerships to buy cars like the Camry in huge numbers, why should Toyota put their profits into improving interiors? Maybe when more car buyers take notice and start looking elsewhere, as you have done, Toyota will do something about it.
|
|
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
