Edmunds-A surprising winner!

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

charbaby

Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
16,757
Location
ROCHESTER, NY
http://www.edmunds.com/nissan/altima/2013/comparison-test.html

So, I was quite surprised to see a different winner in this comparison test of 3 midsized sedans. I am not for/against any of the vehicles here as I really like the whole segment of midsized family sedans and would pick any of the 3 or, the many more offerings available in this class...after a full personal test drive of course!

With the new Accord and Mazda6 taking most of the Auto Press reviews as the winners in comparison tests amongst the rest of the pack, I was pleased to see a different view on these vehicles. I thought for sure(between the 3) that either the Accord or Mazda6 would be the winner, even by a small margin.

And a small margin it is still! But, this time it is the Altima 2.5 that won the hearts of Edmunds editors. And if you read the comparison test, you'll see why, as each car has it's strengths and weaknesses!

Hmmmm, I am pleasently surprised!
 
Last edited:
That is great news for Nissan.
I saw the new Altima and looked it over pretty good at the auto show in Detroit. A fine car indeed. I just wish they still offered a V6/6MT option. Would be on my list for a few years down the road (used)

All the 3 cars in this comparo are clearly the best in the segment.
 
I have driven the Altima and the Mazda 6. The Altima might be the better value but the Mazda 6 is funner to drive. I guess it depends what you are looking for.
 
I sat in the new 6 at the NYIAS. I didn't think the interior felt cheap at all. It was far more organic and interesting than the competition's, though it's definitely not a luxury car inside.

I'm hoping they bring back the Speed6. It would be cool to see a 300hp version of that thing.
 
Impressive.

Speaking of manual, our stickshift Camry I don't think has gotten over 32mpg. Maybe if we drove it at 55mph or something it could. So getting nearly 40mpg is impressive.
 
Just test drive an Altima and a 6. The Altima had more comfortable seats, but the 6 was a blast to drive. If you like a quieter "couchy" ride, I would prefer the Altima. The 6 is a more aggressive ride.

ref
 
I don't understand why they used 91 octane gas in the Accord (requires regular) and used 87 octane in the other two (also requires regular)

Just seems fishy to me. If the Accord's engine is tuned for 87 octane then 91 didn't do it any good and could have actually caused it the retard the timing and thus, get less gas mileage.

What gives?
 
The Altima looks like a Camry attacked by a swarm of bees. Very ungainly.

And the Mazda6 is made in Japan only. That strikes it off my list immediately.
 
Originally Posted By: kam327

And the Mazda6 is made in Japan only. That strikes it off my list immediately.



Why?
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: kam327

And the Mazda6 is made in Japan only. That strikes it off my list immediately.



Why?

"Buy American" probably. Altima and Accord are made in the US, IIRC.
 
Sounds like Mazda did what it does best, make a driver's car. It also sounds like the Nissan would be a fine interstate cruiser, but might get annoying with the CVT's attempts to drop revs all the time.
 
Originally Posted By: Artem
I don't understand why they used 91 octane gas in the Accord (requires regular) and used 87 octane in the other two (also requires regular)

Just seems fishy to me. If the Accord's engine is tuned for 87 octane then 91 didn't do it any good and could have actually caused it the retard the timing and thus, get less gas mileage.


If anything premium fuel may have allowed the Accord's engine to advance the timing, gaining it fuel economy. Even though the owner's manual recommends 87 octane, the ECU likely has capacity to advance the timing if it determines that it can.

My 2011 Camry was that way. The owner's manual recommended 87 octane, but that engine ran FAR better on 93 octane. It's all I used in it. I got better mileage, too, making the difference in cost mostly a wash. I have tried 93 octane in our CR-V, but it doesn't seem to make a difference either way.
 
That is surprising as the Alt's hasn't been on Auto Journalists radar too much. As for the results? It must be the CVT and mid-grade trim package, as opposed to 'fully loaded' on the Accord and 6. CVT programming for the Honda is probably a little less "soggy and boggy" than the Altima's traditional program.
One of its fuel-saving tricks is its constant attempts to drop the revs as low as possible as soon as possible, to the point that it often feels like it's lugging the engine.

Big surprise, lugging and chugging is the magic ingredient.

But still, the Altima to Nissan is an important car. I feel it gets more care and attention than the Maxima, Sentra that's for sure.
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Artem
I don't understand why they used 91 octane gas in the Accord (requires regular) and used 87 octane in the other two (also requires regular)

Just seems fishy to me. If the Accord's engine is tuned for 87 octane then 91 didn't do it any good and could have actually caused it the retard the timing and thus, get less gas mileage.


If anything premium fuel may have allowed the Accord's engine to advance the timing, gaining it fuel economy. Even though the owner's manual recommends 87 octane, the ECU likely has capacity to advance the timing if it determines that it can.

My 2011 Camry was that way. The owner's manual recommended 87 octane, but that engine ran FAR better on 93 octane. It's all I used in it. I got better mileage, too, making the difference in cost mostly a wash. I have tried 93 octane in our CR-V, but it doesn't seem to make a difference either way.

This too. Honestly, the Mazda would probably have benefited the most from premium, given it's compression ratio and there being more 'headroom' for the tuning based on fuel quality alone.
 
These all seem to be nice cars so I don't really think you can go wrong with any of them. I'm sure I'd probably lean towards the Mazda after a test drive, but the styling of the Honda seems to speak to me. They're all very nice cars to look at though.
 
Originally Posted By: kam327
The Altima looks like a Camry attacked by a swarm of bees. Very ungainly.

And the Mazda6 is made in Japan only. That strikes it off my list immediately.


And may put it at the top of other peoples lists immediately.
laugh.gif
 
I'd take a base model 6M mazda 6 any day!


Originally Posted By: sciphi
Sounds like Mazda did what it does best, make a driver's car. It also sounds like the Nissan would be a fine interstate cruiser, but might get annoying with the CVT's attempts to drop revs all the time.


I drove a Versa with the CVT. It had the opposite problem. Cruise control set at 55 on the flat highway, it would randomly shoot up to 4000RPM, then go down to 2000.

CVTs - Excellent idea! Poor execution ... horrible execution.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
Considering a small SUV
12 13 14
Replies
278
Views
9K
edyvw
pezzy84
Rental car review - 2025 VW Jetta 1.5T.
Replies
14
Views
1K
gregk24
Falcon_LS
Review: 2025 BMW 530i
Replies
6
Views
8K
bighead2586
edyvw
5,000 miles review of new to me 2018 Toyota Sequoia
2 3
Replies
42
Views
5K
edyvw
shortyb
Took a 2025 Ford Maverick Lobo for a spin (almost)
Replies
16
Views
2K
Number_35
Back
Top Bottom