YA WCSIBThread

[dave_the_nerd]

My '07 Focus rattles my teeth at highway speeds, when it can get going that fast, and the rear end squeaks like a bunkbed in a downmarket brothel. Otherwise it's fine. I commute ~2 hours a day.

I'm looking for a commuter midsize sedan. Budget is $15-$18k. Assuming $0 for trade-in. (I'm probably going to give it to my brother. He's got an '01 Saturn that's even worse and burns oil besides.)

So I'm looking at used/preleased 2013-2014 entry-level "fancy" cars, with 6-cylinder engines.

I've ruled out:

• Chrysler 200s are ugly. Sorry. 300s are too big.
• All the used Impalas I'm seeing are stripped "Fleet" editions.
  
• The Buick Lacrosse? Apparently a really nice car, but... Buick?
  
• GM's stylists apparently snorted a bunch of cocaine and jerked off to the swimsuit issue of Hot Rod before designing the Challenger/Avenger/Dart.
  
• The ATS is pretty cool looking, but apparently isn't super-reliable either.
• The CTS is out of my price range.
  
• Not interested in paying the German Engineering tax for a BMW/Mercedes/VW/Audi.
• I'd consider the Altima/Maxima, but I don't see a lot of those around. JD Power says they're only average.
  
• Infinitis are just out of my price range.
  
• I'm not a truck guy.
• No SUVs, please. I'm a bachelor.

So I've argued myself, unless I've missed something, into an Accord/Camry/Fusion with all the toys, or base model similar-size Acura/Lexus/Lincoln. I'm finding no shortage of cars in that price bracket. Mostly Fusions, but a fair sampling of other makes ones too.

I'm from Michigan, so I'm somewhat partial, in theory, to domestic nameplates. The way domestics depreciate doesn't hurt. (MKZs are usually priced in line with Fusions, and cheaper than Accords with similar mileage.)

But I'm finding a few 2013/2014 Acura TLs that are inexplicably marked down to $17k or thereabouts. (Most are >$20k.) They're from reputable dealerships, so I don't suspect they're absolute lemons, but they're not CPO either, which gives me pause. (Maybe somebody drove 'em hard and put 'em away wet? You can do a lot of damage in 45k miles if you drive like a douchebag.)

What do you guys think? Am I forgetting something important? Any of the possibilities I mentioned that I really ought to stay away from?

TIA

 

[Pulsar]

Doesn't seem like you're forgetting anything. I'm partial to the Taurus myself.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Test drove a 4-cylinder 2014 MKZ earlier today.

I like: crazy smooth ride. Went down a really nasty side street and barely felt the bumps. Even the 4-cylinder is a pretty peppy turbo. Tap the pedal and boom you're at 60 mph. Comfortable as hell, once I adjusted the seat right. Kinda hard to believe the same company made my Focus.

I dislike: Accelerator pedal is too sensitive. Tap the pedal and boom you're at 60 mph. I've been driving w/o cruise all my life, but forget about it in this car. Seems to idle forward at 30 mph - attempting to maintain 40 was a frustrating journey from 40 up to 50 back down to 40 and up to 45 and...

Split rear pillars are giant, rear visibility is poor - over-the-shoulder blind spot checks are almost impossible. My friend complained about this in his Prius. Other cars seem to have similar issues. I guess it's just how things are designed these days.

Neutral: Moon roofs eats headroom. (Easy answer: get car w/o moon roof or clean your head.) Lowering seat enough to allow for fat bald head made driving a bit more difficult.

Unsure: Entire car has a sort of delicate, detached feeling. Insulates you a little too well from everything you do. I suspect that was intentional, but it's weird for me. Seems like the design forces you to rely on the electronics. (Things like the blind spot checker, etc.) None of the buttons "press" - if they're tactile, it's at most a slight click. Even the blower control is touch sensitive. I like mechanical keyboards, and I like physical buttons. That you can find without taking your eyes off the road. Weird for me.

I kind of expected a 3800 pound car to be more... there.

Conclusion: If I could bolt the MKZ suspension and sound deadening to an '88 Volvo 850 I'd probably be really happy.

Will hit up the Honda/Acura dealership Saturday, I think.

 

[Pulsar]

Yeah, visibility to the rear corners and rear kind sucks in all cars since they share a similar shape. It's the 'big trunk' thing in part that raises the rear deck up to increase truck space. But at least it's not a camaro....

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/02/explained-why-the-chevrolet-camaro-has-such-poor-visibility/

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Buy an accord and be done with it imo. Nothing spectacular about it. Its a reliable point a to point b car. You'll spend little on maintenance and when you want to resell you'll actually get something for it.

 

[boomerang]

Why not Buick? Had a slew of them. Lucerne, LaCrosse (2 of these), Regal. Good cars all.

Hated the CTS, in fact I bailed early on the lease and got into a Malibu. Went from a Chevrolet ride and a Cadillac payment to a Cadillac ride and a Chevrolet payment too. One of my better decisions. Of course after the decision to get the CTS it could only be uphill from there.

(Oh, and uh, GM didn't design the Challenger/Avenger/Dart.)

 

[Demo24]

We picked up an accord v6 off lease recently and it's been great! Put some decent miles on it and it's a great highway cruiser as it's fairly quiet and gets around 36-38 hwy. Plus when you need it to, it will move out of the way impressively. Few engines are as smooth as these Honda v6.

Note: if you drive it and notice a vibration in the foot well and the engine sounding likes it's lugging, that's because it went into 3cyl mode and it's not well balanced in that mode.


From what I know the Acuras are pretty reliable, but have been taking some sales hits so their value from new drops. They are loosely based on various Hondas after all.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

Malibu and impala are fanstastic, the accord is good, lacrosse also has good ratings.
The impala should have some good deals that aren't base models, if you have time to look for those that would be nice.

I'd avoid the Taurus. They are based on an outdated platform now.

 

[snoopy7548]

How about a Mazda 3? The latest base model with a manual transmission is just under $18k. You could probably get up another level or two in trim if you buy a used 2015 or 2016 model. Very stylish and apparently has that fun Mazda feel.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

How about a Mazda 3? The latest base model with a manual transmission is just under $18k. You could probably get up another level or two in trim if you buy a used 2015 or 2016 model. Very stylish and apparently has that fun Mazda feel.

I'm looking for something midsize - a Mazda 6 maybe, but I'd kinda dismissed it because it looks like they stopped offering a V6 after 2009 or so.

That said, I'm kind of hoping for something a little less "fun" and a little more "driving a couch."

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Buy an accord and be done with it imo. Nothing spectacular about it. Its a reliable point a to point b car. You'll spend little on maintenance and when you want to resell you'll actually get something for it.

I'm definitely going to test drive an Accord.

I don't really believe in car resale value as a concept - I prefer to drive a car until it's basically scrap value, then drive it some more. I literally spent more on wood (not woodworking tools, just wood) last month than I'd expect to get as a trade-in on my Focus. (Which is why I don't intend to trade it in at all.)

 

[Pulsar]

I'd avoid the Taurus. They are based on an outdated platform now.

Can you give us something quantitative that would rule out the Taurus? The fact that it's build on a chassis that was design a while ago really doesn't say anything about the car's performance.

Really, it's tough to go wrong in this car segment. Just stay away from Dodge / Chrysler / Fiat. They have horrid quality. If you're buying a more recent model, even the Korean quality is on par with everyone else.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

The Accord actually is a little on the spectacular side. Not as smooth/quiet as the MKZ but I like the ergonomics better.

I'm definitely going to test drive an Accord.

I test drove a 2014 EXL today. The salesman said it had a 6-cylinder, but I honestly had a hard time believing it - it felt sluggish compared to the turbo-4 MKZ, and it shouldn't have. (More horsepower, torque, and displacement.)

• It may have been a perception thing (I couldn't really hear the engine in the MKZ. This one I could.)
• I may have left ECON mode on - I'm not used to having so many buttons.
• It may be gearing - it did start to pin me back in the seat a bit, but only when I got up past 30mph.

Since it was heavyish traffic, I wasn't able to go too fast on the highway.

Ride was not as smooth/quiet as the MKZ, but was still a damn sight better than my Focus, as expected.

Ergonomically, it was very superior. The interior felt less "fragile" than the MKZ, it had a "normal" shifter, I could kinda "feel" my way around the controls without taking my eyes off the road, and even with a moon roof it had a bit more clearance for the ol' noggin. Rear and over-the-shoulder visibility was better too.

So I didn't love it, but I liked it a lot, it's a damn fine car, and it does 'fix' my complaints about the MKZ. I'm a little excited about trying an Acura now.

I have time tomorrow; will try to hit Acura, Mazda, and Toyota. Might even try an Impala if I have time. (It looks like I definitely want the 2014+ tenth gen one, and not the 2006-2013 ninth-gen model?)

Dear Anandtech: that you for letting me use your forum to take notes.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Hmmm...

Why is Used Car Brand X always $2-3k more at Brand X Dealer than at Brand Y Dealer?

 

[Bubbleawsome]

Can you give us something quantitative that would rule out the Taurus? The fact that it's build on a chassis that was design a while ago really doesn't say anything about the car's performance.

Really, it's tough to go wrong in this car segment. Just stay away from Dodge / Chrysler / Fiat. They have horrid quality. If you're buying a more recent model, even the Korean quality is on par with everyone else.

Before I get into the Taurus, now Hyundai is actually pretty good. I would've gotten the new Sonata but for two reasons. Cost and it was a bit too small for me. I'm 6'2" though.

Once a household name, the Taurus is now on life support and in critical need of resuscitation; its uninspired design, cramped cabin, and lackluster performance do it no favors.

It got 2 out of 5 stars and was rated lowest in full-size sedans.

The 2017 Ford Taurus ranks 11 out of 11 Large Cars. The 2017 Ford Taurus isn’t as bad as our large car rankings would suggest. What holds its ranking low is its dated cabin design, ponderous handling, and poor fuel economy. Still, things like an available state-of-the-art infotainment system and driver assistance features keep it competitive.
+Impressive trunk space
+Smooth and quiet on the highway
-Meager fuel economy with V6 engines
-Bulky size compromises maneuverability
-Thick roof pillars restrict visibility

Why You’d Consider One
The full-size Taurus appeals to those who want a higher-riding sedan with a cavernous trunk.

Why You’d Look Elsewhere
Despite its exterior dimensions, the current Ford Taurus has a cramped interior that isn’t much larger than the midsize Ford Fusion.

2.5 out of 5 stars

The 2017 Ford Taurus has some appealing qualities. You'll like its big trunk, for instance, and its safety scores are top-notch. But some rival large sedans offer newer and fresher designs that you might find more appealing overall.

pros
Excellent results in crash tests
Rides comfortably and quietly on the highway
Giant trunk is one of the roomiest in the large sedan class
Available all-wheel drive for enhanced wet-weather traction.

cons
Interior doesn't seem as airy or spacious as it should
Feels slow and ponderous when driving around turns
Performance SHO model lacks the punch of big engine rivals.

what's new
The 2017 Ford Taurus is unchanged.

MORE TAURUS-

Spoiler

Taurus exterior size - 203″ L x 76″ W x 61″ H.
Front Headroom 39.0 in.
Front Legroom 41.9 in.
Front Shoulder Room 57.9 in.
EPA Interior Volume 122.3 cu.ft.
Cargo Capacity, All Seats In Place 20.1 cu.ft.

Accord Exterior - 193″ L x 73″ W x 58″ H
Front Headroom 39.1 in.
Front Legroom 42.5 in.
Front Shoulder Room 58.6 in.
EPA Interior Volume 119.0 cu.ft.
Cargo Capacity, All Seats In Place 15.8 cu.ft.

MKZ Exterior - 194″ L x 73″ W x 58″ H
Front Headroom 37.9 in.
Front Legroom 44.3 in.
Front Shoulder Room 57.7 in.
EPA Interior Volume 107.6 cu.ft.
Cargo Capacity, All Seats In Place 11.1 cu.ft. (or 15.4 on the non-hybrid.)

Taurus - 3969lbs or 4343lbs with a 3.5l v6 making either 288hp/254tq or 365hp/350tq. MPG 18/27 or 16/24. 0-60 is ~7s or 5.2s. 1/4th in 15.5s or 13.2s. Turning Circle 39.5 ft. Also a 2.0l i4 turbo that's even slower and still only gets 20/29mpg.

Accord - 3239lbs or 3543lbs with either a 2.4l i4 or a 3.5l v6 making either 185hp/181tq or 278hp/252tq. MPG 27/36 or 21/33. 0-60 is ~7-7.5s or 5.7s? 1/4th in 15.5s or 14.2s. Turning Circle 38.1 ft.

MKZ - 3871lbs, 3739lbs, or 4191lbs and makes 188hp/129tq, 245hp/275tq, or 400hp/400tq (Wow!). MPG 41/38, 21/31, or 17/26mpg. 0-60 is 9.3s, ~7.3s, or 4.8s. 1/4th is 17.0s, 15.5s, or 13.4s. Turning Circle 38.0 ft.

Obviously there are many other variations on the cars.

The Accord actually is a little on the spectacular side. Not as smooth/quiet as the MKZ but I like the ergonomics better.

I test drove a 2014 EXL today. The salesman said it had a 6-cylinder, but I honestly had a hard time believing it - it felt sluggish compared to the turbo-4 MKZ, and it shouldn't have. (More horsepower, torque, and displacement.)

• It may have been a perception thing (I couldn't really hear the engine in the MKZ. This one I could.)
• I may have left ECON mode on - I'm not used to having so many buttons.
• It may be gearing - it did start to pin me back in the seat a bit, but only when I got up past 30mph.

Since it was heavyish traffic, I wasn't able to go too fast on the highway.

Ride was not as smooth/quiet as the MKZ, but was still a damn sight better than my Focus, as expected.

Ergonomically, it was very superior. The interior felt less "fragile" than the MKZ, it had a "normal" shifter, I could kinda "feel" my way around the controls without taking my eyes off the road, and even with a moon roof it had a bit more clearance for the ol' noggin. Rear and over-the-shoulder visibility was better too.

So I didn't love it, but I liked it a lot, it's a damn fine car, and it does 'fix' my complaints about the MKZ. I'm a little excited about trying an Acura now.

I have time tomorrow; will try to hit Acura, Mazda, and Toyota. Might even try an Impala if I have time. (It looks like I definitely want the 2014+ tenth gen one, and not the 2006-2013 ninth-gen model?)

Dear Anandtech: that you for letting me use your forum to take notes.

The new Impala seems like the new sedan to have honestly. All I can say about the Accord is that the v6 should feel fast. The one I rode in felt very very quick honestly. They are a little slow from a stop though due to being a little lower on torque than other v6 and i4 turbo sedans.

 

[Yuriman]

Not a mid-size, but I personally found the Volt to be plenty roomy for driver and front passenger, and I don't typically drive 4 people around so I don't give a damn about the backseats. You're not going to hear the engine at all most of the time because it won't be running, which also means zero vibrations (I was surprised how much these add to fatigue and discomfort once they were gone), and you get all of that delicious electric torque from zero RPM. It's basically an EV with all of the benefits, and without the range problems.

 

[XavierMace]

Lexus ES.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Okay, so today:

Camry - nice car. Everything that the Accord is, but slightly more refined and solid-feeling.

Maxima - "sport sedan" and knows it. Stiffer than the Accord - not a car to drive througha field of potholes in. The salesman let me take it around the block to show off the V6, since there weren't any V6 Altimas in stock. Dat Engine. Hubba hubba.

Altima - Somewhere in between the Accord and Camry for road feel. Interior looks a LOT like the Camry. Runs a couple thousand less. Between the Camry and Accord, I'd probably pick the Altima.

Also tried a 2014 Malibu. The 2.0 Turbo I4 was peppy, once it revved up, and the road feel was very comfortable, actually. Masked bumps about as good as the Lincoln. Louder interior, though, and the steering felt like a drunk guy, weaving around. It was too... springy? I gotta learn more about this mechanical engineering stuff.

I have also come to the conclusion that I despise high pressure sales tactics. Fortunately, all the salesmen were ridiculously obvious.

The Toyota guy was all about FOMO - there was a Camry on the lot that would have been a good fit for me, an I admitted as much, but I'm not interested in buying yet, until I try the other cars on my list. He told me that it was really rare to get a V6 lease return and I might never ever get one. (Carsoup shows 7 in my price range, within 75 miles.) I told him I had faith.

The Nissan guy figured out what I was up to and was cool with it. He seemed pretty chill, which I appreciate. I'm also chill - one must, as a sales professional, read the situation.

The lady at the Buick dealer, basically told me to fuck off if I wasn't going to buy something. I didn't even get to test drive. :-(

The Chevy dude basically shoved a purchase agreement in my face and said I should sign. I laughed at him; he didn't take it well.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Bought a 2012 Acura TL this morning. Basic options, for the most part. (No nav, no remote start or push-button anything.) But the price was right and it only has 21k (21k? 21k!) miles on it.

I test drove it, and compared to the other cars, this one just felt "right." Hard to describe. The suspension wasn't super-gooshy, but it was still very smooth, the seat felt good, the car had lots of pickup, visibility was excellent, etc. Maybe I just have a funny shape, and maybe I was sick of shopping, but... yes.

It's maroon, tan interior.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Price? Pics?
Sounds like a solid choice though. Honda reliability and buying used is always the way to go financially.