Topic: Comparison Test: 2014 Mid-Size Sedans

[Solstice2006]

If that was the test it would have been a tie between the Prius and the GO train.  Luckily most of us don't spend two hours a day on the 401 so it does qualify.   

The vast majority of North American drivers spend their time locked in traffic.  Few ppl in this segment purchase a manual.   The Mazda should have been in automatic, obviously.  Otherwise, nice read and IMO, fair.

Yeah, but "most" dont waste 4 hours a day stuck in traffic......

Yup, sounds like an "ASSumption" to me...

[Jaeger]

Excellent review guys.  If I were buying in this segment right now I would choose the Mazda 6 without hesitation.  Drove it, loved it.  I can imagine the Accord inspiring respect.  But love?  Nope.

A few thoughts....

1. When did mid size cars get to be full sized? These things are huge compared to a few years ago

You're noticing this just now?  Been this way for a loooong time.  Compacts are the new midsize, midsize are the new full size, and subcompacts are the new compacts.

Hopefully, this can finally put to rest the fallacy that small 4 cylinder turbos are the way to achieve to best of both worlds - fuel efficiency and power on demand (please don't look at the cars I currently own). A well designed V6 can do everything so much better than a turbo four- hp, smoothness, sound, less complex, longevity, no premium gas required, towing, etc. There may be some exceptions, but in the real world, I'll take a nice 3.5 litre (or 3.0 or 2.5) over a smaller four. I think the same holds true for boosted sixes vs v8s. That being said, however, I suspect I would not think twice about choosing the new mini (3 cylinder turbo) vs the old 1.6 four.  I think weight of the vehicle makes a huge difference, but is, of course, only one variable.

Wrong.  A V6 will generally make as much or more hp, but less torque and at higher rpm.  My Sonata makes more torgque at 1800 rpm than my 3.5 Altima did at its ~ 4300 rpm peak - and makes it over a much broader rev range.  As a consequence, midrange response and highway passing are noticeably better in the Sonata.

And while the V6 will do just as well in fuel economy around town, it can't compete on the highway.  My Altima was pretty good in highway economy, but can't touch the Sonata.  It's not even a contest.  It's not even a fair fight.  Most highway crusing is off-boost, where I am running more like a normally aspirated 2.0L.  And since probably 85% or more of my driving is on the highway, that's a huge impact in fuel savings over the life of the vehicle.

And to tip the scales even further, the Altima required premium juice, the Sonata does not.

So much for the V6 doing "everything so much better than a turbo 4. 

[PJ]

If that was the test it would have been a tie between the Prius and the GO train.  Luckily most of us don't spend two hours a day on the 401 so it does qualify.   

The vast majority of North American drivers spend their time locked in traffic.  Few ppl in this segment purchase a manual.   The Mazda should have been in automatic, obviously.  Otherwise, nice read and IMO, fair.

Those who do think everyone does but the truth is most don't.  People just don't want to put the effort into it. A nation of couch potatoes.

[Solstice2006]

Hopefully, this can finally put to rest the fallacy that small 4 cylinder turbos are the way to achieve to best of both worlds - fuel efficiency and power on demand (please don't look at the cars I currently own). A well designed V6 can do everything so much better than a turbo four- hp, smoothness, sound, less complex, longevity, no premium gas required, towing, etc. There may be some exceptions, but in the real world, I'll take a nice 3.5 litre (or 3.0 or 2.5) over a smaller four. I think the same holds true for boosted sixes vs v8s. That being said, however, I suspect I would not think twice about choosing the new mini (3 cylinder turbo) vs the old 1.6 four.  I think weight of the vehicle makes a huge difference, but is, of course, only one variable.

Wrong.  A V6 will generally make as much or more hp, but less torque and at higher rpm.  My Sonata makes more torgque at 1800 rpm than my 3.5 Altima did at its ~ 4300 rpm peak - and makes it over a much broader rev range.  As a consequence, midrange response and highway passing are noticeably better in the Sonata.

And while the V6 will do just as well in fuel economy around town, it can't compete on the highway.  My Altima was pretty good in highway economy, but can't touch the Sonata.  It's not even a contest.  It's not even a fair fight.  Most highway crusing is off-boost, where I am running more like a normally aspirated 2.0L.  And since probably 85% or more of my driving is on the highway, that's a huge impact in fuel savings over the life of the vehicle.

And to tip the scales even further, the Altima required premium juice, the Sonata does not.

So much for the V6 doing "everything so much better than a turbo 4.
[/quote]

I would agree with you in your case.  But not everyone drives 85% highway, so there is more fuel savings in turbo 4 for you there.  Hey just take the TDI already....  And yes in your situation the Altima needed premium, most mainstream V6 don't.  Not a great move by Nissan, IMO... and many turbos perform better with premium, get the right fuel economy, performance.  Not saying in the Sonata case, just in general...

[Erik]

I drive many hours a day around the GTA with a stick, and I've got no issues. It's not that hard, or that uncomfortable

[mixmanmash]

I'm no gearhead, but I'd say that any turbo offered with a factory warranty will likely outlast the projected (15yr) life of a vehicle.  Past 15 years, the cost of a turbo would be more than the value of the car (in these, at least - we're not talking about $$$,$$$ supercars).

That makes absolutely no sense.  15 years 

Listen boys and girls, it's not specifically the TURBO.  It's all that friggin piping that cracks and generally wears out due to sub zero temps, road salt and the big one ..... VIBRATION.  Oil leaks, antifreeze leaks, sensor failures all repaired by one off parts that are nasty expensive.   Gear heads and performance ppl expect it, but mom and dad trying to keep their heads above water will freak and that will be the end of it.

I see your point.  It really depends on the piping and how they are joined.

Years ago on the Mazdaspeed Protégé, they glued the piping together.  That was a recipe for disaster as the glue did fail.  The piping should be clamped down.  Take for example a factory stock 300ZX.  The piping was clamped down.  Yes, sometimes the clamp gets loose but it can easily be tightened.  And clamps have gotten better since those days (90s).  I can't imagine a manufacturer gluing the piping together anymore.

As for sensor failures, what sensors does a turbo vehicle have that a naturally aspirated vehicle doesn't?

As for oil leaks and coolant leaks, with fittings used these days, it's pretty much a non-issue.  It's to the point where it doesn't matter if it is turbo or naturally aspirated.  Typically, most OEMs are using hard lines off of the turbo for oil feed, hard lines coupled to rubber lines for coolant, and hard lines to short rubber lines to the oil pan for oil return.  In the 9 years that I have owned a turbo vehicle, I have only had a main coolant hose fail, and that could have happened even on a naturally aspirated car.

Heck, weren't rubber lines for the variable valve timing failing on some Toyota/Lexus products a few years ago?  I bet that they either didn't secure the line or the material quality wasn't up to snuff.  They did solve it, didn't they?

[ArticSteve]

Yeah, but "most" dont waste 4 hours a day stuck in traffic......



Edmonton is not representative of the USA. 

[Fobroader]

Yeah, but "most" dont waste 4 hours a day stuck in traffic......



Edmonton is not representative of the USA. 

And neither is spending 4hrs in traffic.......

[Snowman]

I drive many hours a day around the GTA with a stick, and I've got no issues. It's not that hard, or that uncomfortable

Exactly!

[ArticSteve]

I drive many hours a day around the GTA with a stick, and I've got no issues. It's not that hard, or that uncomfortable

 

[Fobroader]

I drive many hours a day around the GTA with a stick, and I've got no issues. It's not that hard, or that uncomfortable

 

Why is that so funny??

[ArticSteve]

Yeah, but "most" dont waste 4 hours a day stuck in traffic......



Edmonton is not representative of the USA. 

And neither is spending 4hrs in traffic.......

2 hours each way?   Every major US metropolis is like that at peak times.  If you deny that you haven't traveled.

Regardless, it was just dumb to include one manual in a test of autos.

[Fobroader]

Yeah, but "most" dont waste 4 hours a day stuck in traffic......



Edmonton is not representative of the USA. 

And neither is spending 4hrs in traffic.......

2 hours each way?   Every major US metropolis is like that at peak times.  If you deny that you haven't traveled.

Regardless, it was just dumb to include one manual in a test of autos.

Yeah, but most people dont drive that far.....regardless, who cares if it was manual, it made the car better.

[ArticSteve]

who cares if it was manual, it made the car better.

You're finally catching on.

[Snowman]

Yeah, but "most" dont waste 4 hours a day stuck in traffic......



Edmonton is not representative of the USA. 

And neither is spending 4hrs in traffic.......

2 hours each way?   Every major US metropolis is like that at peak times.  If you deny that you haven't traveled.

Regardless, it was just dumb to include one manual in a test of autos.

Yeah, but most people dont drive that far.....regardless, who cares if it was manual, it made the car better.

Yes it did and was an unfair advantage over the others tested IMO. All the cars should have an auto to level the playing field.

[Fobroader]

who cares if it was manual, it made the car better.

You're finally catching on.

Wait....wait....because a car is available with something better it shouldnt be allowed?!?!?!?!? Which of the other cars offered this?? Sorry, this is like penalizing a car for not having RWD or AWD or having more power.

[Snowman]

All cars should be tested with the same trim and option level, that is how other auto sites and magazines test them. Like testing a Base V6 Mustang, Challenger SRT, and a Camaro ZL1.

[tortoise]

Which of the other cars offered this??

Well, the Accord 4 cyl. and Fusion (with the 1.5) can be had with a stick, making both cars much more fun.

This is like an AWD car winning a winter test because all the other cars were RWD even though AWD variants existed.

[Fobroader]

All cars should be tested with the same trim and option level, that is how other auto sites and magazines test them. Like testing a Base V6 Mustang, Challenger SRT, and a Camaro ZL1.

The horsepower was the same, pricing was the same.......this is nothing like SRT8/ZL1/V6 Mustang....this would be like a Boss 302, Z28 and SRT8 test and the Mustang having the only standard tranny in the test. I dont know why this is such a bad thing, it won the test for being the most fun car there. Isnt that a good thing, this is an enthusiasts site, isnt that what we look for??

[dragonfly]

 If the Mazda was equipped,like the others, with an automatic tranny, would it have won????I'd wager, no...Thanks   Jack