Last post on Dec 10, 2013 at 5:10 AM
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
#829 of 20238 are more expensive cars cheaper?
May 10, 2007 (4:55 am)
I investigated the claim that cars with higher initial prices, such as Accord, cost less than lower priced alternative mid-size cars, when trade-in value is considered.
Since my recent purchase was a Mazda6i, I compared this to Honda Accord. I bought my SVE for $16,100 and at the time I estimated, based on invoice less a $750 incentive that an Accord would have cost me $3300 more. I think that I got a better than average price, if so, perhaps a more typical price difference may have been about $2500.
Then I looked at the price of a comparably equipped 2003 used Mazda6i vs. 2003 Honda Accord LX. The price difference with 60,000 miles ranged from $1400 to $1900, depending on condition and whether looking at private party sale or trade in.
For average condition, trade-in difference was about $1500. With the assumption that a buyer would on average pay about $2500 less for the Mazda, this still leaves an average net advantage of $1000 for the Mazda6.
Now, in any financial analysis, the time value of money should not be neglected. Today I can earn about 3.8% in a tax exempt money market account. $2500 invested at that rate, for 4 years will be worth $2800, so this increases the advatage of the cheaper car to $1300. The advantage would increase to more like $1800 for one who must finance the purchase at 7% interest.
Of course, there is a lot of estimating and gueswork involved in this, but I certainly see no evidence that an Accord costs less when trade-in is considered. The Accord might cost about the same, at best, for some buyers...but this is certainly no reason to fear cars like the Mazda6, Fusion, Sonata, etc.
#830 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [joe97]
May 10, 2007 (5:12 am)
Wrong on both counts. Fusion fleets are actually going up as we speak, while Hyundai's Sonata fleet initiative ended Q4 last year (a program lasted almost a year from early 06). Sonata sales will be down for the rest of this year because the majority of 06 included additional fleet units, which otherwise would not have skewed the YOY comparison
So do you have some links for all of us to see then? Instead of just telling people they are wrong and being done with it, how about you pass on some of your infinite wisdom?
I've read the opposite, albeit some time ago, and want to see the latest figures too.
#831 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [baggs32]
May 10, 2007 (5:23 am)
Here's an excerpt from a Hyundai press release that mentions the reduction in fleet sales:
HYUNDAI REPORTS NOVEMBER SALES
FOUNTAIN VALLEY, Calif., 12/01/2006 Hyundai Motor America sold 28,417 units during the month of November, down 14.9 percent compared with November 2005.
“Sales declined in November due to our strategy to reduce fleet sales in 2006 as well as the reduced availability of our new Elantra due to continued effects of the strike earlier this year. Improving availability of new models such as the Elantra and Santa Fe will help our year-end close on a very strong note. We are very encouraged by the sales of our new Santa Fe, which experienced a 52 percent increase in sales over last year,” said Mark Barnes, vice president, National Sales, Hyundai Motor America said.
Good enough for you?
#832 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [tenpin288]
May 10, 2007 (5:48 am)
Good enough for you?
Not really. It's from 5 months ago.
If you read the latest sales news from Ford, a quick search will take you to several of them, they are reporting that fleet sales are down 5% for either the year or the month of April, I can't remember which it is. How then can one state that Fusion fleet sales are climbing when the supposed Sonata fleet reductios are being based on a 5 month old statement that groups the manufacturers total fleet sales together?
Based on news that's only days old we can say that Fusion fleet sales are falling I guess? See where I'm going?
I know the Sonata is a great car, don't get me wrong. But if the American manufacturers start producing great cars, such as the Fusion, someone else is going to lose some sales. Looks like Hyundai might be the first victim IMO.
#833 of 20238 Re: are more expensive cars cheaper? [jeffyscott]
May 10, 2007 (5:49 am)
never said that the Accord costs less - only that at least a good portion of the initial price difference is recovered at trade in time, that 'false savings' I mentioned. Intellichoice 5 year cost of ownership is $2000 LESS for a 07 Accord LX vs. the 6s, but I rather suspect they are assumming a higher initial purchase price (for the 6) than what your actual experience was. From Intellichoice's perspective, they would have no way to forecast how much money Ford needs to discount to sell the 6 (or the Fusion). In any case, total cost of ownership which obviously plays on resale values very heavily is every bit as important in evaluating a purchase as initial purchase price which may turn out to mean very little. Cheap now will almost always equal cheap later, and the reverse is also true. Lease rates tend to be indicative of what a car actually costs to own simply because new and residual values are both considered and assumes cars are both returned in excellent and low mileage conditions. Don't have any numbers in front of me, but I might be willing to bet you lunch that the Accord (or Camry) would have about the same lease payment on let's say a 3 year deal as would the 6, the Fusion or the Sonata.
#834 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [scape2]
May 10, 2007 (6:23 am)
I am very very sure of that - I own one in the slightly larger and heavier Avalon now 50k miles old . And you can cruise any forum you would like and find folks that can't match EPA numbers, especially on the City side, on any car. In my case my 22/31 EPA turns into an honest 27 mpg overall. My wifes Altima 3.5 I think was rated at 18/27 and she ends up right at 25-26 overall although her hwy percentage is high, she is a little gentler than I on the accelerator, and the land down here in Texas is about as flat as those EPA laboratory floors. Which is the bottom line, if you really do spend much time in City gridlock and also enjoy mashing the accelerator on these wonderful new V6s, you will pay a price - this applies even to the 4 bangers. I would estimate that for the average driver in normal conditions the net cost between the 4 banger and V6 is likely going to be in the 3-4 mpg range overall and roughly correspondent to the EPA rating differences - meaning that those driver that can't get close to EPA numbers on the V6 won't on the 4 banger either! On the Camry specifically this translates into less than $20 a month assuming 1000 miles at $3 a gallon. Well worth it, IMO, if for no other reason than a 'grins' factor
#835 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [baggs32]
May 10, 2007 (6:38 am)
“the numbers are wrong”
OK, to make sure we’re on the same page, I’ll take the Fusion V6 0-60 number from MT, and we’ll look at C&D for the rest.
Fusion V6 6A – 7.2 sec, 21/29 mpg (MT)
Altima I4 6M – 7.2 sec, 24/31 mpg (C&D)
Altima I4 CVT – 7.4 sec, 23/29 mpg (C&D)
Accord I4 5M – 7.5 sec, 26/34 mpg (C&D)
Accord I4 5A – 8.1 sec, 24/34 mpg (C&D)
Fusion I4 5M – 8.1 sec, 23/31 mpg (C&D)
Fusion I4 5A – 8.8 sec, 23/30 mpg (est.)
“Your personal experience with the 5M in the Accord doesn't really matter when we're comparing auto trannies.”
Why can’t we compare an I4 5M Accord with the V6 6A Fusion? Look at the numbers, Fusion is very close to the import 4's. The manual-equipped Accord I4 is closer to the V6 Auto Fusion (0.3 seconds) than it is to the manual-equipped Fusion I4 (0.6 seconds). The Fusion V6 isn’t available in a manual, and can’t really be compared with other V6s as the automatic V6 versions of Accord, Camry and Altima are quicker by at least 0.6 seconds. It appears to me that the Fusion V6 is a very close match to the Altima 4 with either the 6-speed or the CVT and the manual Accord. The point was made that the V6 Fusion is considerably faster than competing 4-cylinders, and as the Accord 5M and Altima 6M and CVT show, that's just not the case.
Also, look at the Fusion 6A versus Accord 5M mileage penalty: 5 city and 5 highway! Those are EPA numbers, not even taking into account Edmund’s forums posts of poor city mileage in late-model DT30s and posts of higher MPG in Accord I4’s (my city average has been 28-29, and I don’t drive lightly).
So, it looks like choosing the V6 Fusion with the only available transmission (the 6A) over an I4 Accord with the 5M gives a less than 5% improvement in performance… but reduces fuel economy about 20%! At 15,000 miles per year, assuming gas stayes at $3, thats over $400 difference, or about $35 per month. That's if gas stays at $3 per gallon...
#836 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [baggs32]
May 10, 2007 (6:41 am)
That could very well be. With aggressive discounting by Ford/Mercury dealers on the Fusion and Milan (e.g. I recently saw a Milan advertised for under $15k) and the new, improved IIHS test scores for the Fulan plus positive reliability data from CR, they could very well be taking sales from the Sonata. Many people will choose an American brand over a foreign brand (especially one with a dearth of brand equity like Hyundai) without even trying the alternatives. Also there are Ford dealers in most small towns in the U.S.--not so with Hyundai dealers. For $15k, I would be very tempted to get a Milan over a Sonata if I were buying a mid-sized car right how.
#837 of 20238 Re: are more expensive cars cheaper? [captain2]
May 10, 2007 (6:41 am)
What you "said" was:
It is not generally good for...the car buyer...that they have to discount heavily.
What is the intent of this, if not to imply that the cheaper car actually costs more?
I've looked at intellichoice before and their data is just garbage...and not just based on my deal. They are more than $2300 too high on the initial price of the Mazda6. There has been $2000 in rebates available for at least 6 months, yet they have a "target" price of about $300 above invoice. This model can be bought effortlessly at invoice less rebates all day long. That site also can not account for the value of things like 0% financing that has been available from time-to-time on the Fusion.
Based on looking at edmunds predicted resale values for the 6 and Accord, I agree that on a 3 year lease the net cost is probably nearly the same. I'd assume the Sonata and Fusion would be similar as well. At more than 3 years, though, I think the lower initial cost models would have lower net cost.
My point is the higher resale value is not going to offset the higher initial cost. Therefore resale value should end up being non-issue for most.
#838 of 20238 Re: New motor for Fusion...Sort of [benderofbows]
May 10, 2007 (7:09 am)
Why can’t we compare an I4 5M Accord with the V6 6A Fusion?
Because you and I were originally comparing auto trannies. You threw a manual tranny Accord time in there saying it was for the 5A and it was way off. I'm also taking price into consideration. The V6 Fusion is more in line with an Accord I4 5A than the 5M when comparing an LX Accord to an SE Fusion. I'm leaving the Accord Value Package out of the mix because it is more or less a "stripper" model.
I get your point about the Accord 5M but the fact is, many more buy the ATX. I would buy the 5M and you would buy the 5M but when I address a broader audience, like that on these forums, I like to stick with what I think the norm is. So yes the performance hit isn't all that much with the Accord 5M but, given price to performance as the criteria, I can't see too many people cross shopping that with the V6 Fusion since it comes only in ATX flavor.
I also never like using numbers from different sources because there are too many variables that are different and can affect those numbers in big ways. So, if you average out the different times reported from different sources for the Fusion you get about 7.3 or 7.4 seconds. Agreed? That's nearly 1 second faster than the Accord which is "much faster" in my book.
I get fools trying to race my Mustang all the time so I am an expert in this field.