6UE5T,

Since there's no way we can get FC result here due to too new. Results from Aussies and Americans rated the Mazda 6 has slightly better FC than new Camry 2.5L dual VVTi. In down under, they rated Teana 2.5 V6 as most fuel guzzling in city driving, losing to Sonata/K5 2.4L, Camry 2.5L, older Camry 2.4L, Accord 2.4L, older Mazda 6 2.5L (rated great FC).
kimsim,

I don't stick to any brand. Which car good, I support. That's all. I never support K5 since the beginning, dislike its retro dashboard that reminds me of imported old Passat 1991 that is rarely available here back then. I prefer Sonata YF over K5. The Mazda 6 is most impressive in terms of tech and design, I give it higher practical score than Sonata/K5. Good thing about Mazda 6, Sonata and K5 is they all have split fold rear seats where I can use in case I buy something big such as from IKEA.

Teana, Sylphy, Almera all no split fold. These cars are meant for commoners (lower to mid income group) yet they don't seems to fit the requirements.

You don't represent carbuyers and car owners, therefore you can say FC is not priority. People are comparing D-segment vs D-segment here. Are you saying those who could barely afford Japanese/Korean D-segment have lots of cash to throw around? They too are tied to loan, forking out own hard earned cash and they too need to reserve extra cash for something else. FC is indeed a concern, that is why when comes to D-segment, they have to choose the most reliable, durable, practical with proper FC.

Larger household item such as folding mattress can't fit into Teana's boot and without splitfold. However, my Forte also can fit. Your kid buy BMW bicycle, you can't fit in Teana. However, I could do so with Forte thanks to split fold. Sonata, Optima and Mazda 6 have splitfolds too, no problem with these sized household items. At least that saves us the additional shipping cost that is not even necessary.

So you are saying, these common income group people can waste cash by paying delivery service over items that are just slightly bigger but not that big? By right could fit in the car with just splitfolds.

Almera can be sold at Preve price range because P1 finds it as lower level substandard quality product that is not threatening P1 sales. Those who buy Almera are mostly those who could only afford P1 therefore, the most they push could only go for Almera. Those who could fork out 10k more would choose either Vios, Forte, Fiesta already. Mind you, when your budget at max at RM70k only, pushing further even just few thousands could drive you dry.

Have you rectify the old engine blown issue due to abnormal overheat in previous models N16, Teana, Cefiro A33? Teana, Almera, Sylphy are all missing EGR sensor that in US said to prevent engine backfire. Could it be the cause that cause engine blown issues after warranty ended from 5years onwards?

seriously, in your every post you mentioned that cvt gearbox required maintenance every 20K km. where did you get your facts dude? And another thing is you complaining about high fc of sylphy but have you drove one before? The 8.9km/l is totally nonsense unless your car got problem or your right foot is really heavy.

That's why if you believe him, all the road has been replace with Forte at all.

Forte EX kosong comes with 16 inch stock rims still clock very poor in FC and can't imaging if he bought the SX comes with 17 inch lagi worst and maybe the history to be forte of Kia an not Nissan anymore... Lol

    u must be a very free person to track FC like that. Life is short la... Just enjoy your drive. Why make life so difficult?

always in the end TS also never comment, probably he bought a camry instead, because we all keep fighting MAzda vs Nissan. So he buy Camry no one will say anything.

Lol. Forgive that pathetic soul. He wants a conti but can't afford and start calling ppl using parents, wife money to buy car. He only Shiok sendiri that his sissy k car is a conti. Lol....can't afford fuel don't buy car la. Wat a loser!

Ofcourse, not just thicker doors but angled pillars, doors and frame to assist in deflecting impact rather than absorb everything. You should look into everything instead b4 come up with final conclusion. Check again, Teana doors, pillars and frames aren't thicker than quality C-segment unless you are comparing it with older '01/03 Japanese C-segment.

Also not to forget, angled pillars and frames with more aerodynamic sides determine safety rating. Quality C-segment Pug408/308 and Focus would score best whereas Civic, Forte, Elantra are scoring good. Not to forget, even Altis '08/10 passed US safety rating and it too has angled sides.

By the way, Teana is D-segment, aren't you supposed to compare it to D-segment instead? In US/EU safety rating, C-segment usually scored lower than D-segment in safety rating. You are not giving answers at all but trying to cover up the flaws.

Compared Teana vs old Mazda 6 '08 both exterior width 1795mm:
- Mazda 6 is sports sedan like Nissan Altima US therefore they are smaller than Camry '07
- Teana is not and it emphasized on maximise interior space and forgo the thick and angled frame/pillars/doors as cheap alternative suited for Japan local domestic market. It is not meant for global market in the 1st place.
- The interior space of Mazda 6 is less as it comes with angled and thick frames/pillars/doors to pass safety standard
- Mazda 6 comes with expensive conti style suspension setup to get proper handling, it is made for passion drive
- Also, Mazda has been known to use much high tensile strength material with proven safety on global and in here.

kongbingleek & Dwango,

Another fill in the blank with offensive word. Can't stick to point talk usually the loser.

Thickness of pillars and angle of the slope are vital in determining chassis survival rate.  Japan safety rating, what governs them in the first place? Do you think Japanese would play fair in their own domestic market? They tax non-local made worst than us, that is why they could barely afford conti, Korean or US made in Japan.

US and EU safety rating have to stick to facts due to very strong consumer rights law. 1 mistake could land them in lawsuit end up paying dearly. I praise the old Camry '07/09 that come with VSC standard. Same goes to old Altis.

The Altis FL dual VVTi, it is overall good car and passed C-segment category. Legroom is still acceptable for 5'10" adult unless he is the long leg short torso type. FC is truly exceptional. Vios does not have the interior width and legroom is still less than Altis. Besides, Altis has descent handling that passed basic requirement allowing it to turn at higher speed than Vios.

Sylphy &  Teana failed C-segment and D-segment category respectively. They have flat straight sides with thin frame and pillars yet no angled sides meaning that they'll absorb impact completely rather than deflect. Both never been through US/EU safety rating evaluation. Stop taking Japan NCAP into comparison, they are not even up to US/EU standard & strictness. So why want to waste your few years of saving to buy a car that failed C or D segment category end up sticking to wrong car for another 7 years of loan commitment?

I don't shoot Lancer because it passed C-segment standard and they give enough quality. Quality does not mean just interior, since it's more performance oriented, they gave quality multi-link and also, quality engine and angled body. That explains why lancer RV is still strong despite existence of Inspira. Sylphy RV dropped like flies when more owners and public knew it's nothing worth. Teana might end up the same anytime soon.

LD Jr,
The 20,000km service interval was applicable when Sylphy introduced in 2008 and early 2009. Later they followed Lancer at 60,000km service interval.

You can't calculate is it? If you are 5'10" with long legs type, then you'll find legroom not enough. 1 5'10" full size adults with balance torso & legs length, he could still fit in the Altis '11. Before you talk bad about Altis, the Sylphy has more defects and flaws in its grooves around between the rear doors, front headlamp, bonnet and bumper/grille. You are the only 1 saying Altis more cramped than Vios.

Yes, RV depends on demand for the used units. As Sylphy failed to meet C-segment requirements and its FC turned out only average like normal car (as opposed to lightfoot gimmick result), yet failed basic handling, its RV is weakest for C-segment today.

Altis 1760mm still has the angled pillars and the doors are pertruding out abit rather than flat straight. It does not have multi-link but it still pass handling with angled springs. The Sylphy's suspension setup is almost straight upright yet it's too narrow for its height + too light causing the car unstable at cruising and would easily go into understeer if you take emergency swerve in defensive driving while crusing at 90km/h, 100km/h or 110km/h adhered to speed limit. Conti, Toyota or Korean using torsion beam, their beam is not just 1 lousy beam like in your Sylphy.

jolokia,
US Altima with angled body + thicker frame also didn't score well on side collision. What makes the empty flat side with thin pillars and doors do better? Fail lor like that. Do you know the Teana 2.0 can't even take hard corner well? Torsion beam Altis also can beat Teana.

You can't calculate is it? If you are 5'10" with long legs type, then you'll find legroom not enough. 1 5'10" full size adults with balance torso & legs length, he could still fit in the Altis '11. Before you talk bad about Altis, the Sylphy has more defects and flaws in its grooves around between the rear doors, front headlamp, bonnet and bumper/grille. You are the only 1 saying Altis more cramped than Vios.

Yes, RV depends on demand for the used units. As Sylphy failed to meet C-segment requirements and its FC turned out only average like normal car (as opposed to lightfoot gimmick result), yet failed basic handling, its RV is weakest for C-segment today.

Altis 1760mm still has the angled pillars and the doors are pertruding out abit rather than flat straight. It does not have multi-link but it still pass handling with angled springs. The Sylphy's suspension setup is almost straight upright yet it's too narrow for its height + too light causing the car unstable at cruising and would easily go into understeer if you take emergency swerve in defensive driving while crusing at 90km/h, 100km/h or 110km/h adhered to speed limit. Conti, Toyota or Korean using torsion beam, their beam is not just 1 lousy beam like in your Sylphy.

jolokia,
US Altima with angled body + thicker frame also didn't score well on side collision. What makes the empty flat side with thin pillars and doors do better? Fail lor like that. Do you know the Teana 2.0 can't even take hard corner well? Torsion beam Altis also can beat Teana.

Wrong bro.. Wrong wrong wrong

What specs did you compare?
Teana 2.0? That is for entry level only, even when test drove I am feel that car body is heavy.. No pickup power at all, but quality of meterial sure is win.

Sylphy ? Why compare Sylphy original stock rims vs forte 17" with 215mm wide stock tyre?

Ha ha just go back and read more catolog again..

Even I drove my Sylphy after replace 17" rims with 215mm size that is "perfect" for cornering..
Torsion beam? No good? Who care.. Since the car susprnsion is good to support of absorber then you still mind of change into multi-link suspension.. Lol.

Hai specs can be cheated you guys.. What you feels and drive that is totally different thing..

Late reply, just came back from site. Any car that went up the ramp would end up with all sorts of flips depends on your approach angle and heading. If Singapore driving is that obedient, there won't be any accident in Singapore involving speeding in the first place. Fact is, there are many accident cases in SIngapore with some involving fatality in crash of over 160km/h, 200km/h and faster as they have many Ferrari and Lambo there.

hondafan,
Taking things personal and left out your brain?

Honda width:
C-segment - Honda Civic 1755mm
B-segment - Honda City 1715mm

Toyota width:
C-segment - Altis  1760mm
B-segment Vios 1700mm

N-brand:
C-segment Sylphy 1695mm
B-segment Latio 1695mm
cheaper alternative B-segment Almera 1695mm

Spot the BIG difference? There is serious issue here.

Correction to your comments.

1) Longer wheelbase better stability can be found in your standard guide for salesman. To be exact, not just wheelbase alone but the width & the suspension stance together determines stability in straight road. Narrow stance/width, high ground clearance & sits higher is giving the Sylphy unstable ride.

2) Sylphy is meant for Japan local domestic market with width 1695mm to enjoy tax exemption in Japan. By right, it is not meant for export market in the first place. Toyota too has narrow 1695mm version Altis but they don't sell it outside Japan. US Sentra B16 & the Altis we have here are meant for global market passed the C-segment category.

3) New Sentra 2013 you meant is for global market. Since you don't sell it here, shut up.

4) Nissan Versa US only passed the safety rating, not scoring full star. Only some C-segment and mostly D-segment get to earn full star score on the rating as only they have the excess space for additional thickness & length to absorb the impact before reaching passenger compartment.

5) Japan NCAP, there is no strict consumer rights group that carmakers that monitor and prevent carmakers in Japan from cheating. US & EU safety rating is monitored by strict consumer rights group with legal power.

You already said the same thing when Sonata & Optima were priced on Japanese quality car price range. You can still find many on the road today. Sonata YF F/L also many. Ends up you N-brand giving huge discount that end up 10-20% cheaper than Korean & Japanese made.