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
10567 messages, Last post on Aug 21, 2008 at 3:05 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: moocow1 (May 20, 2008 12:36 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: moocow1 (May 20, 2008 11:18 am) My answer is smaller, more fuel efficient engines - with lighter cars. Today's midsizers as so heavy; we may soon have the compact class cars going to midsize. If I had to buy today, I would look at a Civic or 3, though with the 3 you want to get the 2.3 and that hurts economy. But both would be on my shortlist. Is the civic more spacious than the 3 (sedan) in practical terms, or are they similar?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 03accordman (May 20, 2008 12:43 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: 03accordman (May 20, 2008 12:43 pm)  We'd be looking at 35/45 or even better. And I think the reason diesel prices are so ridiculous is just because of price gouging. It's not popular enough to be on par with standard gas.
|
|
|
Replying to: moocow1 (May 20, 2008 12:36 pm) You're comparing the manual I4 mpg to the auto 6cyl mpg. I was apples to apples with the auto comparison. Used Edmunds comparsion tool so it's their numbers. I assume they are accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: m6user (May 20, 2008 12:52 pm) 2.4L Manual - 21/32 3.3L Automatic - 19/29 * From www.fueleconomy.gov |
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2008 12:57 pm) 
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2008 11:11 am) There are 4 bangers and then there are 4 bangers, despite what aviboy's spec sheet analysis might tell us. It is engines like the Honda 4 (followed by those efforts by Toyota and Nissan) that easily lead the pack - refinement wise. This is the same situation that we find in the V6s as well - only in a slightly different order. Recently shopped some small S/CUVs - there is no way, for example, that even the 'blown' 240hp Mazda engine (CX7) approaches what's in a CRV/RAV/Rogue for example - 'zoom-zoom' for sure but irritating to say the least. and I would add to that 'comes up short' list those efforts by GM, Hyundai, Chrysler as well. In my shopping I was most surprised (and unimpressed) by the Hyundai version of its 'world' engine (rough in a Tucson), and the Mazda turbo 2.3 in the CX (rough, turbo lag and bad FE). Right number of cylinders but NOT the same engines, and the differences are more than simply HP/torque..... |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (May 20, 2008 1:27 pm) I understand what you are saying, its logical, and I appreciate your responses. My question lies in that, for example, if we had a 2GR scaled down to 3.0L, could we not have a 230 hp car that got better mileage than the current 2GR? Obviously the engine would still have nearly the weight of the 3.5L model to pull around, but it seems like if it operated as efficiently as the 3.5L does, it would get better mileage, especially in town. I know it can't be nearly so simple, which is why I'm asking and not doing the telling!
|
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (May 20, 2008 1:27 pm) |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Hyundai Sonata
2009 Toyota Camry
2009 Honda Accord
2009 Nissan Altima
2009 Volkswagen Passat
2009 Mazda MAZDA6
2009 Ford Fusion
2009 Chevrolet Malibu
2009 Saturn Aura
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
