@texases - Perhaps the seat was not adjusted properly. There is a large adjustment for seat height in the 6. I keep mine fairly low but, when my daughter drives it, she keeps it up high and the headroom is severely constricted. Because they disconnect the battery at car shows I will bet that the seat adjuster would not work for you so you got stuck with whatever setting the last person used. I drove a 3 for two years before I bought my 6 and I can tell you they feel the same in the headroom department. Specs show a difference of .2 inches between the 3 and 6 (that is one fifth of an inch).
I made sure it was adjusted properly, fully down (it wasnāt disconnected). For whatever reason, the specs are wrong. The roof of the 6 drops slightly right over where my head went, causing the problem.
Great suggestions everyone, and much appreciated. @DrRocket, I spent a day in the Accord - itās fine, but not up to Euro standards in comfort. I havenāt tested the Volvo yet but will eventually. I am concerned about Volvo reliability, but only to a point. I donāt like to keep cars past 200k miles, which I will reach after ~ 6-7 years, so as long as it lasts at least that long, I should be okay. I drive 90% highway, so I donāt see much going wrong mechanically apart from routine stuff (breaks, tires, etc.). I spent a weekend in a Ford Fusion and found it okay, but if I have to choose between Accord Hyb. or Fusion Hyb., Iād go Accord for the extra 5 mpg. Iāve read that hybrids donāt make much difference on the highway, but my experience with my Civic Hyb. is that is where I get my best mileage, though never better than 37 (I hear the latest model year is around 43). As far as Mazdaās go, I had a Millennium years ago and found them to be made out of cheap recycled metal and rusted out long before its time. It left me with a bad feeling. @db4690, good point about the resale value. I compared them on kbb and yes, the Honda does hold its value longer, surprisingly. Everyone is tipping me in favor of the Accord Hyb.
Mazda is a lot better than it used to be. My daughter has a CX-5 Sport with the 2L engine. It gets great gas mileage and the acceleration is better than I thought it would be. If you want more luxury, the Touring and Grand Touring versions only come with the 2.4L that has good acceleration and gets a few MPG less than the Sport. If you are interested in a small SUV, itās worth a look.
My '03 Honda Civic EX with 5 spd manual gets 38 to 40 mpg on expressway trips. 32 when driving mostly around town with lots of stops and goās. And 35 in mixed driving. I donāt think the Civic Hybrid from '03 did much if any better. If your driving is 90% highway I donāt think you really benefit much from a hybrid and risk the expensive ābatteryā replacement costs which is more an issue with Honda hybrids compared to Toyota and Ford.
@busstoppest The Volvo will be a money pit FAR sooner than 200K
Itās not the age/mileage that will make it unreliable. Itās the fact that itās a Volvo
Sorry if I donāt share your enthusiasm for the brand
Iām not surprised the Accord holds its value better than the Volvo. Thatās because I already knew it before you mentioned it. There are many factors involved, such as reliability, reputation, image, etc.
For the record, Iām not a Volvo hater. I just know that . . . in general . . . european cars are less reliable and donāt hold their value like Accord and Camry
Amen, DB. I laughed when I saw OPās comment about 200K.
But, it seems apparent to me that he has his heart sit on a Volvo, and hoped we would agree. So, though he seems to want to be frugal, it also seems that he can afford to trade after, oh, say 60,000 miles when he has learned his lesson. Then, he will be out shopping for the Lexus.
To be honest, I havenāt known that many people who bought Volvos.Those who did were sufficiently loud about their experience that other folks were not too interested.
I think either of those two will serve your purposes well. You might can get a little better deal on parts and service with the Honda, but thatās a minor point since you say you have extra dough to spend.
If I were in your situation those are not the cars Iād be looking at though. If I was in a Euro mood Iād be thinking BMW or Porsche. Iād probably go w/a Porsche Boxster, has good rated reliability and is quite economical as far as Porsches go anyway.
@texases - I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Having owned both a 3 and 6, and looked up the specs to confirm, I would have to say that both (with sunroofs) have the same headroom. But you have to go by your own experience and you certainly canāt drive a car that you are not comfortable in.
@irlandes, Iām actually being persuaded to ditch the Volvo. Itās a nice looking car, but Iām more about value than looks. @UncleTurbo, I had an '03 Civic Hybrid that got about 45 mpg. I was pissed when I found out the next gen plummeted to 37 and wonāt go back. I know the latest model yr gets ~ 43 mpg, but there are better hybrids on the market. Frankly, I would have dropped Honda all together, but then the Accord Hybrid came outā¦ @GeorgeSanJose, money IS a factor. A Porsche would be nice, but over my budget, even starting at in the low $40ās, I still have to factor in maintenance, operating costs, etcā¦ theyāre not for me. BMWās? Maybe, but then I start having that style vs. value debate again.
Someone above mentioned a Ford Fusion Hybrid which I admit Iād forgotten about. I just looked online at the Fusion Energi which really turned my head. www.hybridcars.com says it gets 88 mpg, relying heavily on its electric motor, and at $35k it deserves some attention. Iāll add them to the short list.
Plug in hybrids are very expensive for the added gas savings. Going from 44 to 88 mpgs sounds like a lot, but it reduces gas consumption by about 114 gallons per 10,000 miles. You get much more benefit from the smaller cost of the regular hybrid option.
As for the Accord hybrid, it sure sounds good, but Hondaās ongoing issues with their hybrids failing to deliver the expected mpgs would have me considering the Camry or Avalon hybrids. Any reason youāre excluding Toyotas?
If you are considering plug in hybrids, you might look at the Chevrolet Volt. It has the longest all electric range currently available in its price range. If you commute less than about 40 miles each day (total), then you wonāt use gas most of the time. The EPA rates it at 98 MPGe, better than all but the new hybrid Accord.
You should look at the Camry XLE Hybrid.
Chevy Voltās are quite popular in the SF Bay area. I see a lot of them on the road. Iām not enamored by their styling, especially the bizarre front grill. But thatās something a person could get over I expect. They are very quiet, which is a big positive in my book.
Just out of curiosity . . .
How does Chevy Volt hold its value, versus the other hybrid cars on the market?
By the way, Iām quite pleased that @jtsanders called the Volt a hybrid
Thatās right . . . call it what it is
If somebody wants to call the Nissan Leaf an EV, I will agree with that
@texases, with the notable exception of the Prius, none of the Toyota hybrids have high enough mpgās for my taste. The Camry Hybrid tops out at about 37 mpg but costs the same as the Accord. Honda and Toyota are otherwise Coke vs. Pepsi. From a cost vs. benefit standpoint, the Accord Hybrid is just more car (mpg-wise) for the money. Otherwise I have no problem with Toyotas. (I had a Corrolla years ago - the piece of shit lasted 16 years!) At 47 mpg the Fusion Hybrid (non-Energi) deserves a look too. So thatās what this has turned in to now: Accord vs. Fusion.
Look up the prices on parts for the Volvo. It is a great car in many ways, however I recently heard a scary story about the S60. Apparently one can ruin the a transformer in the engine compartment if one drives through a puddle at too high a speed. This transformer runs the headlights. The cost to replace? $4,000.00. Thatās right, a broken headlight, caused by a design flaw and the guy had a 4 thousand dollar bill! Volvoās are safe, but many exotic (if this is exotic) models cost fortune to repair. That is why they depreciate so fast. Iām not sold on the Honda Hybrid either. Expensive technology to repair. Why not look into the Volkswagen diesel models? The are great highway cruisers and get over 40mpg, will run forever, and be more reasonable to repair I believe.
The Volvo may be comfortable, but I think they only make sense if youāre someone who routinely trades in your car by five years or 75,000 miles, and youāre not. The maintenance costs tend to be high and they just arenāt very reliable, mostly an issue as the mileage climbs. To drive a Volvo for 200,000 miles could prove expensive and frustrating, as it will be in the shop regularly.
There are any number of good Asian cars with similar comfort and amenities and much better reliability and durability. The Acura TLX (replacement for both TL and TSX) has been getting good reviews. It is new, so there reliability is not certain, but Acura has been a solid brand. Lexus, likewise. The ES is based on the Camry, but spiffed up a bit, and it comes in a hybrid. The Camry hybrid has been exceptionally reliable. The larger GS and full zoot LS also come as hybrids, but I suspect youāre not looking for something that large. Infiniti has a hybrid version of the Q50. They are also still selling the Q40, the model the Q50 seemingly replaced. The Q40 is what used to be known as the G37. Infiniti has the stupidest numbering scheme imaginable, but the cars are nice. A bit of an unusual choice is the Hyundai Genesis Sedan. This is part of Hyundaiās luxury car line and is very nice and a good value.
Those were all cars from premium brands (and Hyundaiās premium sub-brand), but there are any number of good cars from Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Kia, etc. Honda hybrids have not been quite as reliable as Toyotas due to a higher rate of battery problems, but they are still OK. The Accord hybrid will likely be very nice.
The Ford Fusion is very stylish and supposedly drives well, but Ford has been having reliability problems with many of their models the last few years. A shame, as the Fusion is so stylish.
" I am concerned about Volvo reliability, but only to a point. I don't like to keep cars past 200k miles, which I will reach after ~ 6-7 years, so as long as it lasts at least that long, I should be okay."
ANY modern car will be durable enough to ālastā until 200k milesāunless it rusts-out.
Or, in other words, as long as the owner is willing to continue to sink money into repairs, modern cars can keep going almost forever.
What separates one make and model from another is how much money is necessary to keep said car operating over the passage of the years. Historically, the more reliable makesālike Honda and Toyotaāwill require you to spend far less in order to keep one of their vehicles going through 200k miles, as compared to Volvos and other European makes.
And then there is the question of reliability. A friend of mine was amused recently when I pointed out all of the places where I had been stranded when my Volvo broke down.
The words āVolvoā and āreliableā are not usually used in the same sentence, unless āreliableā is preceded by ānotā.