Wow.... family cars nowadays are hitting supercar acceleration speeds 20 years ago!

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/23/h...rns-34-mpg-hi/

I can see this hitting a limit in automotive technology and seriously eat into the sports car market. I know us enthusiast value a lot over the whole driving experience and handling, but it's hard to ignore for the average joe that reads spec sheets with such impressive numbers.

This is heading towards the same way as the computer MEGAHERTZ wars, and the digital camera MEGAPIXEL wars...

In 10 years from now, all family sedans will be putting out at least 350 HP, and do 0 - 60 in under 5 seconds. Eventually it'll be a moot point to say that a $100,000 Porsche will do 0 - 60 in 4.0 seconds and a Toyota Camry V6 will do 0 - 60 in 4.2 seconds...

There has to be an end to the horsepower wars...

 

That end will be this whole fossil fuel "crisis" everyone is still debating.
Trust me, we won't be seeing any 4.2 seconds Camery's in the foreseeable future.

There will always be a niche market despite all these HP wars from all the manufacturers.

I can't wait to see Mazda's new direction. Emphesis on weight savings is key to getting better fuel economy, not to mention better handling.

 

Mazda is following the spirit of Colin Chapman!!! Superiority through lightweight engineering! Lotus has always been my dream car later on in life.

 

There's an Exige on sale for $46000, and yeah Lotus's have been my dream car as well!! Love the styling. I think I just don't like generic cars that you can see on the road a lot.

 

Most mid-sized sedan buyers opt for the 4-cyl base engines. I remember back around '06 Nissan sold only 5% of Altimas with the V6. Honda and Toyota sold a bit more, but not huge numbers. Most people who buy that sort of car couldn't care a less about V6 power when modern large 4-cyls provide more than ample thrust. (eg. 170-190hp) When was the last time you saw someone merge onto a 400 series highway at the same speed as the flow of traffic? Most people don't seem to be aware of the bottom 2/3rds of pedal travel.

Even BMW is an interesting case. The 323, 328 and previous 330 all produce rather low amounts of power compared to V6s found in more pedestrian vehicles. Power didn't seem to dissuade typical buyers of a performance oriented car.

Since the early-mid 80s power has been going up, but fuel economy has remained relatively similar and weight has been going up. To meet the new US fuel economy regulations a lot of manufacturers are going to downsize engines and start using more light weight materials.

 

The worst part is......that is SLOW. All times Car and Driver:

V6 Mazda 6 s- 6.1 secs
V6 Passat 4Motion- 5.9 Secs
V6 Accord EX-L- 5.9 Secs
V6 G6 GTP - 6.2 Secs
V6 Camry SE- 5.8 Secs
V6 Altima 3.5SE - 5.8 Secs

The new Turbocharged Buick Regal GS should be quick too. 2.0L Turbo with 295ft-lb to all 4 wheels. Rumour has it there will be a 6 speed manual too.

 

Mazda's are just as heavy as every other car out there.

3340lbs = Mazda 6 4 Banger (heavier then Accord, same weight as Fusion)
3620lbs = Mazda 6 V6 (heavier then Accord V6, Altima V6, Camry V6, etc)

3020lbs = Mazda 3 (about the same as the Civic, Corolla, Forte, etc)

 

Their initiatives are moving towards that direction is what I meant Mike... look at Mazda 2.

 

It's also heavy But yeah, I know what you mean. Nissan has down sized both the last gen Altima and the 370Z (from the 350Z). I hope the trend catches on.

 

Wanna know something scary.....................The V6 RAV4 runs the 1/4 mile in like 14.2 seconds, thats as fast as 4.6L Mustang GT lol. Oh and Footman...........................its still a HYUNDAI hahahahahahaha, you can say what you want about them improving etc, but other than a Chrysler product they are the fastest depreciating vehicles on the road.............well maybe Kia is a close 2nd. One thing we always talk about in the retail business is what would happen if they didnt have the cheapest cars in class with the most money thrown at them to sell them. They have 0% financing for 84 months and cash back on top. How many cars would they sell if they had a program that was equal to Honda or Toyota, and prices that were average as well? Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm

 

HYUNDAI won't earn any respect until it start winning more races...at least to me.

They are trying real hard though, both in drifting and pike's peak.

 

Hyundai makes a quality car. Most of their cars are competitive in their respective classes (average or better). Reliability isn't quite Honda/Toyota level, but it's very good to the point where I think it's no longer worth considering much. The CEO of Toyota has indicated publicly that Toyota could not build as good of a car as Hyundai does for the price Hyundai sells them.

Public perception still lags the reality of Hyundai, but I truly believe typical people have taken notice of the very real change.

IMO the art of buying a used car is finding something that is compelling to you, but where public perception of value is not in line with reality. The RX-8 is a great example of this.

 

Seeing the Hyundai's we get in on trade I would not agree with that statement. The cars need far more maintenance than a comperable Honda or Toyota at the same mileage. They also rattle and creak a lot more than most of the Japanese brands. I would rank their quality slightly above Chrysler and maybe even with GM.

 

you seriously believe that? i have never sat in a hyundai and thought anything other than **** i hate this thing.

my dad works at a ford dealership, i remember when their rental company bought a few hyundai's and people flat out refused to accept them as a courtesy car.

 

I know several years ago Al's statements were true, but I'm surprised it is still the case.

According to Consumer's Reports:
"Hyundai and Kia continue to make reliable cars. The Hyundai Elantra and Tucson, and the Kia Sportage got top marks. The new Genesis sedan was better than average with the V6, average with the V8. The only models that scored below average were the Kia Sedona minivan and Sorento SUV."

Different Consumers reports quote:
"The best vehicles overall are being built by Honda and Subaru, according to our latest automaker report cards. But South Korean carmaker Hyundai, which includes Kia, has shown the most dramatic improvement, jumping to fourth place from ninth last year.

Like the top Japanese leaders, Hyundai/Kia makes mostly well-rounded cars that excel in many areas, getting high scores in our road tests and at least average reliability Ratings. "

I can't find a link to the overall Consumers Reports brand reliability charts. Car magazine reviews are generally favourable to Hyundai vehicles.

 

How long ago was that nate? Hyundai/Kia from about 2006 + are much different. I'm sure those rentals were base models too. I have been in tons of rentals for work and a base Altima is just as bad as a base sonata or base fusion or base 6 or base 300, etc.

My parents have a 2008 Kia Rondo V6. It is over 40500KM and all they have ever done to it is change the oil. No squeaks, not rattles, it ges to Florida every winter, pulls a boat and a sea doo in the summer and carries 4-5 people quite often.

It is not my style of ride, but for the money and what you get, you can't beat it. That includes the Mazda 5 which can only seat 4 adults (try getting one in the back) and can't tow.

My g/f brother has a 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0T with the 6 speed. Although it is to new to know how it will do long term, I quite like it. It really just feels like a bigger heavier RX-8 with cheaper materials....as it should for only $25 000.

The resale value is still the biggest killer on these cars and will continue to be until peoples perception change.

But it did for Toyota and Honda after the 1980's.

Can anyone with an RX-8 really talk about resale value or reliability? Really?

 

yeah, Subaru's resale value is stupid. It is way too high. That is why I bought a new one. The used ones were too close in price for being used.

 

Mike you are making a case for 4wd turbo as my next car more and more appealing now!

 

I think that the media is what has improved Hyundai quality. In the case with the domestics, how can cars that havent changed in 4-5 years be any better than they were at tthat point? I know how, the media is telling you that. Go rent a new domestic car for the weekend and you will have your answers. I was in Vancouver about 2 weeks ago and rented a 2010 Chev Tahoe with 4000kms on it. It was a complete piece of ****. The window molding blew off on the highway at 100kmh, and it creaked and rattled etc. Find a 2006 Hyundai with 70000-90000kms on it and drive it. Then drive a 2006 Toyota or Honda or even a Mazda and you will see.

 

For 2011 the Sonata only comes with a 4 cyl. That's according to the dealer I went to last week to test drive for my mom. It's got 195 HP, a direct injection engine and a 6 speed auto. It didn't seem slow but it didn't seem that fast either. It was a nice car.

 

HP alone doesn't tell the story.. people need to start paying attention to the CURB WEIGHT nowadays.

I love to hear comments like, "oh why would you want a Lotus, it only has like 190 HP, my mom's grocery getter has 260 HP".... so ignorant.

 

it's okay, we'll just have to show them the difference between the lotus and their mom's daily drive. But don't the new lotus have around 250+ HP?

Edit: Sorry, only the higher model Exiges have around 250+ HP

 

The media hasn't really said much about the quality/durability of GM or Chrysler improving. They have said that GM's products are improving in terms of their general competitiveness, but not necessarily quality/durability. Based on objective information, I genuinely believe Ford is on the right track on improving quality/durability, but they still need to continue improving the competitiveness of their portfolio of offerings. Some stories have been written about the big 3 improving and I think Ford's reliability story is sometimes inadvertently applied to the other 2. By the same metrics Hyundai has improved. (based on above it sounds like there is still further to go) Vehicles do receive some minor improvements throughout their lifespan. eg. A '04 RX-8 seems to be less reliable than a '06/'07 (looking at age/kms at equal period of use).

I wouldn't consider Consumers Reports to be "the media." They are independent and have no ads, sponsorship, etc. While not perfect, their reliability ratings are one of the few tools out there to truly judge the longer term reliability of vehicles beyond their first year (ie. JD Power initial quality). I do think other publications are better at rating vehicle attributes as CR is exceedingly focused on practical attributes.

 

The question that I had posed was how can Fords reliability be improving when they are still selling the same cars with the same chassis and powertrain from 2 years ago when they were nailing the coffin shut? The only reason Ford didnt go broke was the CEO was smart enough to borrow billions before the banks stopped lending. Almost an insider trading type of manuver?

 

Some of the reliability ratings take a while to kick in because you cannot judge the reliability of a brand immediately. It's statistically difficult to distinguish any reliability differences between brand new cars, so it takes a while for these differences to become measurable. eg. The old Taurus was mediocre and it wasn't clear for a couple of years that the Fusion had class leading reliability. The '99 Focus was the best performing car in it's class but horribly unreliable, it got better in '00/'01, was refreshed in '04, slightly tweeked in '06, redone in '09. While it is no longer a competitive performer, it has become reliable. The vehicle was more or less the same during this period. Presumably Ford's minor tweeks addressed common issues with the car and low lying fruit, that bore results.

Yes Ford didn't go broke because they took on debt when it was cheap and available, and then repeatedly sold stock to pay down the debt when GM/Chrysler went under. A lot of it was luck, some correct decisions, but their product reliability has improved drastically over the last decade. Ford's CEO saw the writing on the wall and basically gambled the company when there was no other viable path forward. Part of the use of this money was to drastically increase their development budget.