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
13296 messages, Last post on Nov 30, 2009 at 4:56 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
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.
|
|
|
Replying to: pengwin (Oct 27, 2007 5:43 pm) The following is a list of cars whose quality of interior materials and or fit/finish is worse than the previous generation. This is based on my either have test driven them/ sitting in them at auto shows or reading reviews on them ( and seeing photos online or in magazines): 2008 Accord 2007 and up Camry 2007 BMW 5 Series 2006 and up VW Passat 2008 Mercedes Benz C Class 2008 Ford Focus 2008 Toyota Highlander Current Generation Toyota Corolla Almost all Dodges/Chryslers have terrible interior quality Only Nissan seems to have gotten better across the board.
|
|
|
Replying to: pmerk28 (Oct 27, 2007 8:29 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Oct 27, 2007 8:36 pm) Having owned a 2005 Camry, the minute I sat in the 2007 at the dealership I could tell in 5 seconds they cheapened it all over the place. The salesguy claimed Lexus complained that the top line Camry was stealing ES sales. Whatever the reason it still boggles my mind how people run to Toyota to A)trade in their current Camry for the new one and B)pay practically MSRP for it without noticing or caring about all the cheapness inside. The Ford Fusion and Nissan Altima use better material inside than the new Camry.
|
|
|
The northwest has many endearing qualities, but sunny fall weekends are few and far between. So with the sun out and many trees' leaves dressed in fall colors, I thought it would be well worth driving through the Columbia River Gorge with it's amazing waterfalls and scenic views connected with miles of twisty roads and loads of elevation changes. Unfortunately though, much of the old Historic Columbia River Highway is very narrow with the some sections having just a dividing line on one side and barely the width of midsize car away is a concrete wall. When going around a series of 20mph curves it occurred to me that I was lucky to have a car that had very precise steering and one that wasn't too wide. Having a large car or SUV would have made the drive not the joy that it was in the Mazda6 but instead an effort at accident avoidance. I know the trend is set that cars in this class will continue to get bigger in width and length and often in weight, but I can't help but think that maybe some cars are moving past what is necessary or needed to a size that is bloated and just an effort to achieve bragging rights.
|
|
|
Replying to: pmerk28 (Oct 27, 2007 8:29 pm) Perhaps, but only because they had a lot of room for improvement. When it comes to interior fit and finish it still comes down to VW, then Honda and then the rest. I got to say it cracks me up when I read that someone's 1988 Accord interior is better in some way then today's Accord. I've owned Accords from that period and their interiors were top notch for the day but by today's standards they're pretty dreadful. I can guarantee you that after a 4 hour trip your back is going to feel much better in a 2008 Accord then a 1998 Accord. One area where all the car manufacturers seem to be cutting cost is the protective moldings on the side of the car. At least Audi seems to be keeping to their expected standards.
|
|
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
