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
13331 messages, Last post on Dec 04, 2009 at 8:09 AM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
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.
|
|
|
Replying to: pmerk28 (Oct 27, 2007 8:55 pm) People do seem to make rash and speedy purchase decisions without even comparing or researching any facts, figures, or vehicles. They just see something they like (the 1st car they look at) and are willing to get it, because undoubtedly a brand new car will most likely be much better than their old one. If their last Toyota was their first car to be absolutely flawless and a perfect ownership experience, then of course they'll go back and get another. No one besides Toyota and Honda have been able to retain the amount of customers they do due to quality. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Oct 26, 2007 9:34 am) "I just don't understand why they are so afraid of people knowing there is an engine in the front of the vehicle ..." Sorry, but I don't understand why people are so afraid of a "quiet engine". It obviously isn't necessary to have a noisy one. I know that any engine, when pushed, will make more "noise" than one at a nominal speed. I find no problem with that, however many seem to object to those that prefer the lessor sound. I enjoy being able to converse with my fellow travelers, or to enjoy the sound of the music without having to scream, or turn the volume up extra loud. This is one of those areas where each of us has to decide for ourselves. van
|
|
|
Replying to: pengwin (Oct 28, 2007 8:25 am) Good advice. I've learned a lot about potential car purchases by driving them as rentals. I'm fortunate to be able to drive many rentals at the expense of my employer though. 
|
|
|
Replying to: venus537 (Oct 27, 2007 10:21 am) My switching cars proves to me what I like, and of course it's an opinion like everyone else's. But when a lot of people share the same opinion then there has to be some fact in the matter. So we can now bring into this discussion luxury sports sedans? I hope an Audi is better then my Aura. Your paying 10-15K more for your car. And btw, I used to own a 330i ZHP and I test drove an S4 at the time which was a big disappointment.
|
|
|
Replying to: venus537 (Oct 27, 2007 10:53 pm) Nissans interiors were never pitiful. GM owned that category. They were average. Now IMO the Altima has surpassed the Camry inside. When it comes to interior fit and finish it still comes down to VW, then Honda and then the rest Yes, and both have gotten worse with the current generation of the CR-V/Accord/Passat/Jetta. 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. You are missing the point in some respects here. I drive my in laws 1996 Camry on regular ocassion. I have test driven the 2007 Camry and sat in them for as long as I wanted at dealerships and car shows. I have been in the cloth seats and the top of the line XLE with leather. Clearly the 2007 version is much roomier inside and I would estimate to be more comfortable on long trips. The 2007 is much better lit inside with the gauge cluster and the overhead lights. The interior layout is pleasing to the eye with a modern swooped dash and flowing center stack/console and an open feel. The colors inside are pleasing as well. The 1996 by contrast is a dull looking saddle brown with no offsetting colors. The gauges are the old back lit design and there is one interior dome light that cannot be turned on from a dash switch. The center stack/console is a plain square. It looks dated now and to be frank wasn't very exciting in 1996 either. HOWEVER, the material quality and fit and finish are superior in the 1996. The 2007 Camry has hard plastic door handles. The '96 are thickly padded as is the upper door pads and armrests. The 2007 foregos padding and inserts cheap plastic wherever it can get away with it. The carpeting and trim pieces in the 96 have held up remarkably well for 207,000 miles and counting. There is also not a rattle or squeak in the console or glove box door. The 2007 carpet is thin and you can see the staples coming up. I'd love to see it hold up half as well as the '96. The plastic door handles have plastic centers that clip into place which was already falling out of some of the cars I sat in. The center console does not line up on any of the 2007's I saw. I have read reviews on edmunds about squeaks and rattles in cold weather on 3 month old Camry's We expect a 2007 Toyota Camry to have superior design, comfort and functionality than a 1996 Camry. What I did not expect and what the car buying public should not tolerate is the downgraded quality and fit and finish for a car that Toyota is asking us to pay in excess of 30k for a loaded XLE V6. Just look online at many 2007 Camry reviews. Sure, there are plenty of positive ones but there is an astonishingly high amount of people complaining for a Toyota and the cheap interior comes up an awful lot. I never thought I would say this but I like the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan better. I have to eat crow on that one too because in the spring of 2006 I ridiculed the the upcoming Fusion saying no way it could be as nice as the soon to be launched 2007 Camry.
|
|
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
