Yes, cows do have digestion system. That is fact.

Teana 1795mm
Camry1825mm
Accord 1845mm
Sonata 1835mm
Optima 1830mm
Mondeo 1886mm
Mazda 6 1840mm

These are facts too. You open the door and check thickness pillars and frames, they aren't the same with Teana the thinnest with straightest flat sides is also facts. Teana is not qualified to be in global D-segment from 2007 onwards standard is also fact.

Your comment instead is more bullshit instead if you wanted to say others. You should look at mirror to look at yourself first before you judge others. If you want to stay dumb and get cheated or brainwashed by car companies, your choice but don't force others to be dumb like you. This is what we call consumer rights.

So you mean posting exterior width of cars are rubbish? Since you claimed to know so much to call measurement from specs rubbish, here's your topic to start with. Don't try to divert elsewhere or give excuse like wasting time to reply and answer your challenge.

Attention to all genuine forumners,
Please do not assist him or considered Volkswagen2 disqualified and lost admitting he's wrongfully judge my comment with much bias. Only these guys are allowed to help him, but if their comment resembles mine, they too are considered bias:
>>feelfree, jolokia, stix and 19 Degree South 

The rule is simple. Since Volkswagen2 talk like he's a pro pretend to be pro-VW but instead he's been siding with the N-brand bunch, I am hereby challenging him to post facts on Teana vs Passat sedan comparison. If any of his answers have similarity to mine that he called rubbish, considered Volkswagen2 lost and he must admit that he has been biased against my comment out of personal reason. If any of them posted foul language or offensive words rather than sticking to car talk, considered them lost

Here's the challenge for Volkswagen 2, you must answer by giving explaination:

1) Width Passat 1820mm vs Teana 1795mm, why Teana inside wider? Give 3 explanations.
>> My answer : Passat used the space on thicker door, chassis frame/pillars and angled body for safety/protection. Whereas Teana focus on flat straight sides with thiner pillars/frames to maximise interior space.

2) Kerb weight Passat 1.8L at 1517kg vs Teana 2.0 at 1455kg and 2.5 V6 at 1540kg. How come Passat 1.8 weighs heavier than Teana 2.0 and close to Teana 2.5 V6? Give 3 explanations.
>>My answer : Passat has the bigger heavier Multilink rear suspension, more metal materials from the chassis and also has the intercooler + turbocharger. Chassis that is wider would require more materials especially the metal and solid steel to hold the structure from the front all the way to the back. * Teana is not made of hot stamping technique using hot tensile strength by the way. It is still traditional much, it shows how much cost cutting there. Mazda 6 or Sonata, they are using newer lightweight yet stronger material to be light.

Fyi, Dimension (mm):
Passat 1.8 - length 4769, width 1820, height 1470, wheelbase 2712
Teana 2.0/2.5 - length 4850, witdh 1795, height 1480, wheelbase 2775

1. Actually compared the thickness of Teana doors, pillars and frame with other D-segment. It is thinner. Bottle holders? I didn't even include that in thickness measurement for other cars. People looking at the safety feature frame thickness.

2. No point having much space inside only by forgoing the present day required safety chassis compartment design. Others have smaller interior space because they have to build angled frames and chassis so that they don't absorb force of impact entirely. Also, the thickness is required to pass crash test safety rating in US/EU. If like that, Passat, Mondeo, Pug508, BMW, etc, why bother to use up much space on frame thickness safety? They can just cut cost with flat straight thin frame and get full size sedan interior.

3. & 4. If lightweight due to use of new hot stamping technique high tensile strength like Mazda 6 Takeri bigger but lighter than older Mazda 6 '08 is fine. But if light by cost cutting using cheap materials, that is not nice at all. Does Teana has tensile strength in the first place? Sorry, it has only tiny bits of that material but no hot stamping technique compared to competitors. There is no new technology found in Teana, everything traditional and cheap. In return, they give extra soundproof insulation.

5. The X-CVT (gear 2.349~0.394) in Teana is obsolete gearbox that was phased out by JATCO. The better ones with bigger stronger gears are fitted in Infiniti and also found in Mitsubishi Mirage (gear 4.007~0.55). Technical SC has confirmed the ATF NS2 fluid change in Teana/Sylphy depends on its density condition as diagnosed by diagnostic tool reading. If condition is not good, they'll advise you to change.
Looks like 19 Degree South, kcng, Volkswagen2 & feelfree confirmed have nothing to say in Passat vs Teana chassis design explanation. So where are the facts since you can call others measurement comment rubbish? There's nothing you can back up with? Only posted unrelated info? So declare you all eyesore and wanted to prevent owners & carbuyers from sharing info?

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.

Korean cars are much stable and because you don't feel fast, you think it's underpowered. Teana/Sylphy, they came up with more sensitive accelerator plate to give you the impression that it is very powerful in which, it is not. Meaning that you press 1/4 on Sylphy/Teana accelerator equals 1/3 pedals on Korean and conti cars already.

You want to be frog under the shade and shun knowledge especially safety, up to you. But don't go and prevent others from sharing info. Exora & Innova, both are not proper MPV for global market, therefore no comment. You want to talk about midi-MPV, kindly refer Toyota Wish/Verso, Kia Carens 2013, Mazda 5, Ford C-Max. Ok?

Altis '08/10 is about to phase out. At their time, they are qualified to be C-segment though legroom is less than Lancer. By overall, its width, length, wheelbase and height are qualified to be C-segment. Sylphy width 1695mm is B-segment, not qualified to be C-segment in the first place. Teana only 1795mm and not even a sports sedan is not qualified to be D-segment neither. Some C-segment are as wide as that and even wider also got. Sylphy can't even swerve safely cruising on highway. Does it mean you are willing to pay RM120k for C-segment that is so narrow at 1695mm and drive on left lane at 60km/h on 110km/h speed limit wide 3-lane highway?

Honda City '03 has poor legroom. If yours is Honda City '08, that legroom is just average but headroom is terribly low at the back. Civic rear headroom also bad as they wanted to focus on aerodynamic.

The worst handling must be Forte since it cock screw & turn turtle in Singapore road, in Malaysia I understand, but in Singapore where most drive defensively & law obedient, as the summons cost a bomb, something dead wrong with Forte.
Leg room are very crucial particularly elder passenger get in & out, more comfort for long distance ride, long wheelbase car also more stanble on straight road,
If your laoya KIAsu car come with long wheelbase sure u talk differently one, why you hyundai openly admit it's use Nissan Sylphy as benchmark in create a cost down version Sonata exclusively for China market.