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
13288 messages, Last post on Nov 30, 2009 at 5:10 AM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: robertsmx (Oct 24, 2007 12:22 pm) I think this has been clarified by others already. The Focus had the highest score in their testing, this has nothing to do with reliability. On the pricing I was talking about the actual net transaction prices, not artificial figures like MSRP. By your own numbers Fit is comparably priced to Focus, since the rebate exceeds to $2000 price differential that you came up with. so far the Fusion has not required large incentives, but still selling prices are, I think, closer to the civic than to the Accord. Will the lower prices for comparable cars mean that Ford can still not afford to invest as much in upgrading the Fusion as Toyota and Honda can for the Accord and Camry??? BTW, you mentioned somewhere not subscribing to CR, I don't either, my library provides free online access (available from home with my library card number) to CR as well as hundreds of other magazines. In the case of CR there is a 3 month embargo. Check your library website, if my library that serves a population of only about 20,000 provides this access, I'm sure many others do also.
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Oct 28, 2007 7:02 am) I have read that there will be a hybrid Fusion in 2008,but I seriously doubt that anyone will be able to find one at a dealer showroom. 
|
|
|
Replying to: zzzoom6 (Oct 27, 2007 10:15 pm) Its not the size, rather how cars drive. Some big cars drive small, and some small cars feel bigger than they are. This goes beyond spec sheet. |
|
|
Replying to: backy (Oct 27, 2007 8:11 pm) true, sadly, CR recommended the Camry, which I rented from Alamo. I drove it from STL to chicago, along the way, low tire pressure light came on, then off, then on, then off... Engine light came on for about 15 mins along the way. And my favorite feature would easily be the gasoline air refresher that they installed in the car. Revs go above 3000 and the refresher kicks in. For those of you who didnt pick up on the sarcasm. When you go to pass someone and the revs go above 3000 a very big whiff of gasoline scent tingles your nose hairs. After that, i stopped listening to CR and the like. I'll read them and take it for what they are, words. Honestly though, before you buy a car go rent it. Pay the 100 bucks or 200 bucks to rent it for 3 or 4 days, it's the ultimate test drive you can see how the car takes abuse (everyone abuses rentals), you can push it to the limits, etc. I had the Mazda 6 for a week while my car was getting fixed, someone decided they wanted to use my corolla's front left bumper to stop them rather than their brakes. I believe it was an 80's caprice, huge metal bumper, tore right through my poor little corolla's front fender/bodypanel. Back to the mazda. I did like the dash, was made from the "BMW dash" material. Nothing felt "cheap" but nothing felt expensive, and the car felt sluggish and the precise steering didn't help speed the car up so i found that useless. What i hated the most was the material used on the doors. Mazda used like a cloth mixed with rubber...it wasn't like the VW fake leather but its more rubbery and clothy?(sp). Im not sure how to describe it but it was soft to the touch but irritating to my arm. On a slightly different note, i owned a 1989 toyota corolla, tranny went bad in the first 30 days but the replacement lasted 230k miles. I never changed the timing belt or anything else but oil, air filter and brakes. At 230k miles, my car was stolen and crashed into the back of a truck.  So it led me to buy a new car, a corolla. I wasn't a fan of the interior but if it was gonna last as long as the old one, i wouldn't mind. At 63k miles my dealership said my tranny was bad. They didn't catch the problem when i was still under warranty...odd. It was going to cost $5k to repair a $15k so i decided not to. My car is now at 140k miles, its an 03 corolla and compared to my 89, its interior quality went down, doesn't feel nearly as fast as the old one, 89 blew colder air, was easier to see out of, had better paint, better seats, cheaper tires (25 bucks a tire!)...come to think about it my new corolla doesnt have anything different from my old one (on the center stack). 89 and 03 both have radio's, air con, defroster etc, clock, no CD player in the 89 or fancy stero. Well, atleast the new one still runs.
|
|
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
