As always, great comparo, ladies and gents!
The Fusion Titanium AWD 2.0T would have also been within the $ range of this test, assuming other ridiculous 'packages' were left unticked. $33,999 + $1,700 in Freight, PDI, and A/C Tax - within the cost of the pricier V6 Accord sans AWD. The 2.0T would be a much better engine and would probably return better fuel economy given the heft of the vehicle (and the autos.ca staff's breakfasts
![Grin ;D](https://www.autos.ca/forum/Smileys/CarTalk/grin.gif)
).
Just sayin'.
Accord should also have been dinged big time for not having 60/40 rear seatback. Also just sayin'.
My pick would probably be the Accord with a roof rack (thrown in for free since Honda made a stupid omission with the back seat).
My nit picks with many of the vehicles in this category relate entirely to intended purpose vs execution - an Accord without 60/40 split, a Mazda and a Kia with tight interior dimensions, a Ford with a puny, non-American engine (yes, 1.5L escapes Chinese taxes - so don't sell it here - yeah, yeah...global platform), etc. If I wanted a mid-size (laughs inside) car over a compact, then I am clearly getting it for the size. If it doesn't offer more interior space/luggage space, then why get it over, say, a Jetta, a Corolla, or Sentra for $10-15,000 less (depending on options)?
A claustrophobic rear passenger compartment (like my perception of the Mazda) pushes me away from even considering it.