- Edmunds.com
-
Price Promise℠Get upfront pricing
Get Instant Pricing with Edmunds Price Promise℠
1Look for "Special Offers" on a specific car
2Get your upfront, locked-in price from the dealer
3Go to the dealership to buy your car with no haggle
-
Make
Tell us what Make you're looking for.
-
Model
Oops! First tell us what Make you're interested in.
-
Year
Oops! First tell us what Make you're interested in.
-
Car
Type -
Used
Cars -
Car
Research - Live Help
ADVERTISEMENT
Hybrid Sedan Comparison Test: Camry Hybrid vs. Accord Hybrid vs. Fusion Hybrid vs. Jetta Hybrid
- Full Review
- Pricing & Specs
- Road Tests (1)
- Comparison (1)
- Long-Term
ADVERTISEMENT
Which Fuel-Sipping Family Sedan Delivers the Best All-Around Package?
Published: 01/07/2014 - by James Riswick, Automotive Editor
- Comparison Test
- 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid Specs and Performance
- 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid Specs and Performance
- 2014 Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid Specs and Performance
- 2013 Toyota Camry Hybrid Specs and Performance
Tell someone you drive a hybrid and they will most likely assume there's a Toyota Prius parked out in your driveway. Generally, it's a safe assumption, as nearly 55 percent of the total hybrids sold in 2011 were Toyota Priuses.
Things are changing quickly, however, as an influx of new hybrid models from other manufacturers has cut deeply into the dominance of the Prius. In fact, more hybrids were sold in 2013 than ever before, showing that car shoppers are increasingly looking at hybrids as viable alternatives to more traditional vehicles.
Nowhere is this increased selection more evident than in the midsize sedan segment where hybrid versions are now available for some of the top selling models. With that in mind, we gathered up four hybrid sedans and set out to find how they compare and how much they'll really cost you.
To find out how they stack up, we subjected each hybrid sedan to 735 miles of fuel economy testing, with three different driving "loops" that simulated driving on suburban roads, rural highway and high-speed interstates. We also put them through our usual round of instrumented testing to get a complete picture of how these cars perform in the real world.
The Original: 2014 Toyota Camry Hybrid XLE
The Camry Hybrid established the blueprint for hybrid family sedans, bringing Toyota's fuel-saving gasoline-electric technology to the best-selling car segment in the United States. What was once revolutionary is now quite familiar, but let's briefly recap the basics.
What makes this Camry a hybrid is the presence of both a 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine and an electric motor powered by a nickel-metal hydride battery pack located in the trunk. An electronically controlled continuously variable transmission acts as traffic cop dictating how much power is doled out by each source. They can work alone, or in most instances, concurrently. The battery is replenished by the engine and by recouping energy normally lost under braking.
The 2014 Toyota Camry Hybrid has a base price of $26,950 and includes keyless ignition/entry, dual-zone automatic climate control, Bluetooth phone and audio, and an iPod interface. Stepping up to the XLE adds alloy wheels, heated front seats, a power driver seat and a leather-wrapped wheel, while our $35,170 test car came fully loaded (as all the cars save the Fusion were) with a sunroof, leather, navigation system, a larger touchscreen, a JBL stereo, a rearview camera and a blind-spot warning system.
Curiously, however, the XLE also comes with slightly lower EPA fuel economy estimates of 40 mpg combined (40 city/38 highway) versus 41 combined (43/39) for the LE. As we've previously documented, though, mpg is not the best way to calculate fuel economy. Instead, "gallons per 100 miles" is a more accurate method, as it more directly tells you how much it'll cost to fill up your car. The Camry Hybrid XLE is estimated by the EPA to burn 2.5 gallons per 100 miles in combined driving.
The Camry tested is a 2013 model, but there are no significant changes for 2014.
The Pretty One: 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid SE
Whereas the original Fusion Hybrid was a wallflower in terms of styling and sales performance, the new version is a knock-out. It looks fantastic and car shoppers have taken notice, with sales nearing (or even surpassing) the Camry Hybrid every month in 2013.
The Fusion's hybrid system operates in much the same way as the Camry's by combining a gas engine with a single electric motor. In the Fusion, the gas engine is a 2.0-liter four-cylinder while the electric motor is powered by a space-efficient lithium-ion battery pack.
A base 2014 Ford Fusion Hybrid starts at $26,995 and includes roughly the same equipment as the most basic Camry Hybrid. The SE trim and a slew of packages are available for maximum flexibility while the other cars here are largely pre-packaged when it comes to options. Our loaded SE offered everything our Camry did in addition to driver memory settings, adaptive cruise control, an automated parking system and a lane-departure warning system. There is a higher Titanium trim available, but it's really just a loaded SE with slight visual differences and a Sony stereo.
The EPA estimates the Fusion Hybrid should return a very easy-to-remember 47 mpg combined (47 city/47 highway) which equates to burning 2.1 gallons per 100 miles.
For 2014, the Fusion is mechanically unchanged, but package content is altered and a few new features are available like ventilated front seats.
The New Kid in Town: 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring
The 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid recently beat the 2013 Volkswagen Passat TDI in another comparison test of fuel-efficient family sedans. As we wrote then, "if fuel economy is the main priority of your next vehicle it's hard to do better?[it] is as impressive as a fuel-saving sedan as it is as a family sedan." Let's see how it does head-to-head with its hybrid competitors.
The Accord Hybrid deviates from the hybrid setups used in the Camry and Fusion. In the Accord there are two electric motors. One acts as a generator for the battery and various accessories, while the other powers the wheels in most driving situations. The 2.0-liter four-cylinder gas engine is mostly on hand to replenish the lithium-ion battery pack, but can directly drive the wheels when necessary — say, during a full-throttle launch or at freeway speeds when good-old gasoline power is more efficient. Yes, it's complicated.
Less so is the way Honda packages together content for the Accord Hybrid. For $29,945, the base Hybrid trim gets you roughly the same equipment as the Camry XLE, albeit with a standard rearview camera and the Accord's LaneWatch blind-spot camera. The EX-L adds on a sunroof, leather, heated seats, satellite radio, a touchscreen display and forward-collision and lane-departure warning systems. Our range-topping $35,695 Touring model added LED headlights, adaptive cruise control and navigation (the only way to get this popular option).
The EPA estimates the Accord Hybrid should return 47 mpg combined (50 city/45 highway) or the equivalent of burning 2.1 gallons per 100 miles.
The Welterweight: 2014 Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid SEL Premium
"But wait!" you're no doubt saying. "The Volkswagen Jetta is a compact car, the others are midsize! They don't compete at all."
A valid point, perhaps, given the non-hybrid's rock-bottom base price and significantly smaller exterior dimensions. However, the Jetta is not as small on the inside as the outside suggests, with a comparatively sized trunk and backseat legroom that trails the others by mere tenths of an inch. The other metric is price, as a similarly equipped Jetta Hybrid is only about $2,000 less than the others.
The Jetta Hybrid also differs from the others in its hybrid technology. It, too, has a lithium-ion battery in the trunk, but features a seven-speed, dual-clutch automated manual transmission with an electric motor sandwiched in between it and a turbocharged 1.4-liter four-cylinder. It's wholly different in design, but similar in that it can operate using either of its power sources or a combination of them both.
The cheapest, $26,015 base 2014 VW Jetta Hybrid is by special order only, so instead consider the $28,080 SE to be the point of entry. The Jetta SE is mostly on par with the base Fusion and Camry, but gets six-way power seats (the others are eight-way), satellite radio and leatherette upholstery. Our SEL Premium stickered at $32,265, which included a Fender audio system, rearview camera and bi-xenon headlights. Advanced safety features like lane departure warning and radar cruise control are not available on the Jetta.
The EPA estimates for the Jetta are 45 mpg combined (42 city/48 highway) or 2.2 gallons per 100 miles for the Jetta Hybrid.
| Ford Fusion Hybrid | Honda Accord Hybrid | Toyota Camry Hybrid | Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid | |
| Price as Tested: | $35,010 | $35,695 | $35,170 | $32,265 |
| EPA Fuel Economy (Combined/City/Highway): | 47/47/47 | 47/50/45 | 40/40/38 | 45/42/48 |
| Suburban Driving Test (MPG): | 52.9 | 55.4 | 47.3 | 47.3 |
| Suburban Driving Test (Gallons p/100 miles): | 1.89 | 1.81 | 2.11 | 2.11 |
| Rural Highway Test (MPG): | 41.2 | 40.6 | 36.8 | 39.9 |
| Rural Highway Test (Gallons p/100 miles): | 2.43 | 2.46 | 2.71 | 2.5 |
| Interstate Test (MPG): | 44.0 | 46.4 | 42.2 | 47.7 |
| Interstate Test (Gallons /100 miles): | 2.27 | 2.16 | 2.37 | 2.1 |
| Overall Test (MPG): | 43.4 | 43.9 | 39.6 | 43.0 |
| Overall Test (G p/100 miles): | 2.3 | 2.18 | 2.55 | 2.32 |
| Overall Test (Cost): | $58.20 | $57.35 | $63.65 | $62.32 |
4th Place: 2014 Toyota Camry Hybrid
Even if we ignored fuel economy, the Toyota Camry Hybrid would easily fall below the Fusion and Accord when rating family sedans. Though nearly as quick (0-60 mph in 7.6 seconds) as the Accord, the Camry Hybrid is the least responsive and least enjoyable to drive. The steering is oddly heavy and exhibits an annoying reluctance to return to center. The regenerative brakes also make all sorts of odd noises.
The backseat offers space on par with the Ford and Honda, but the front seat doesn't adjust low enough for taller drivers. The cabin also suffers from cheaper-looking plastics, while the trunk is less useful than the Fusion's.
When fuel economy is taken into consideration, however, the Camry Hybrid manages to fall even further behind. It was the least efficient car in every driving situation and the most expensive to fill up, even though the Jetta requires premium fuel. The fact the Camry was the only hybrid here to meet its EPA combined estimate of 40 mpg is at least a moral victory.
If you were to drive 12,000 miles per year and matched our fuel economy, the Camry would cost you an extra $103 per year to fill up than the Accord Hybrid. That's hardly breaking the bank, but why pay extra at the pump when there are two superior family sedans with similar prices and more available equipment that cost roughly the same?
3rd Place: 2014 Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid
The Jetta Hybrid's turbocharged engine is ultimately its best asset and biggest detriment. Electric motors inherently provide a wealth of low-end power that push you into the back of your seat, and since turbocharged engines do as well, the Jetta constantly provides a neat 1-2 punch of torque. This not only makes it feel quick around town and confident during freeway passing, but the engine often sounds and feels less strained than the others. Its torque also helped it achieve the best fuel economy (47.7 mpg) on a hilly section of Interstate 15 between Las Vegas, Nevada, and San Bernardino, California.
Unfortunately, its turbocharged engine comes with the penalty of requiring 91 octane gas. Though the Jetta burned a mere 0.02 gallon more fuel than the Fusion Hybrid over the course of the test, it cost $4.12 more to fill up. Again, not the biggest of margins, but the Jetta lands in 3rd for other reasons.
True, its backseat and trunk give up little in terms of space, and it is $2,000 less than the others when similarly equipped. However, it feels like it should be cheaper still. The Jetta is significantly less substantial and refined, with an interior that, while well equipped, looks and feels Spartan. VW replaces the standard Jetta's hard, overly reflective plastic dash top with a soft-touch unit in the hybrid, but other materials pale in comparison to those in the Ford and Honda. The tiny infotainment touchscreen and its integrated rearview camera also drew complaints.
On the upside, the Jetta feels less hybridlike to drive and even sporty at times thanks to its peppy drivetrain, responsive brake feel and best-in-test stopping distance (117 feet from 60 mph). It also has smaller exterior dimensions and a quick-shifting seven-speed automated manual transmission (though the latter does cause the car to annoyingly roll back on hills). In this way, the Jetta at least offers unique characteristics the Camry does not.
2nd Place: 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid
It was clear from early on that this test was going to come down to the Accord versus the Fusion. The regular, non-hybrid versions are two of our top recommended family sedans and the hybrid models boasted the highest EPA estimates. Our first test, the suburban driving route, widened the gap with the Camry and Jetta even further.
When we filled up the Accord after 102 miles of mundane driving around Orange County, California, our calculations showed a wildly impressive 55.4 mpg. That was by far the best of the bunch, and it would come in 2nd on both highway segments. Overall, the Accord Hybrid was the cheapest to fill up, burning 2.18 gallons per 100 miles and costing $57.35. Yet, since most hybrids spend their lives commuting around suburbia, you may notice even greater long-term cost savings over the Camry and Jetta.
The Accord Hybrid boasts more than fuel economy, however. Its steering is direct and communicative, just like a regular Accord, instilling confidence whether we were driving amongst strip malls in Orange County or through volcanic peaks near Death Valley. The ride is also commendable, offering a substantially better blend of comfort and control than the Camry.
Two editors preferred the seats in the Accord to the Fusion's, with the backseat in the Accord feeling the most spacious. We also ranked its unique electronics interface the best of the bunch, though its combination of touchscreen, physical buttons and a multi-purpose knob still has some ergonomic foibles. We should also point out the Touring model's incredibly bright LED headlights, which trailed only the Luxor pyramid as brightest lights in Vegas.
Those attributes are very much intrinsic to every Accord, though. There are reasons the Accord Hybrid falls just a bit short. The main one is the engine, which loudly drones as it fights to replenish the battery under hard acceleration or when chugging uphill. Around town, the engine noise and your speed disconcertingly don't rise in step as you'd expect, pairing with a numb throttle pedal that offers unrelated engine vibration rather than feedback.
Furthermore, the trunk is also the least versatile and getting navigation requires the selection of the more expensive Touring trim. We still think the Accord Hybrid is as impressive as a fuel-saving sedan as it is as a family sedan, but it's outdone by the Fusion.
1st Place: 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid
As each editor climbed out of the Honda and into the Ford, it was a common refrain that the Fusion is much quieter, more comfortable and even more responsive from behind the wheel. Importantly, it draws less attention to the fact that it's a hybrid, doing without the Accord's excessive engine droning and the Camry's abundance of electric whirring noises. The fact that the Fusion is by far the best-looking and most involving to drive is icing on the cake.
Like the Accord, the Fusion topped the mighty half-century mark in the suburban driving segment at 52.9 mpg. It was also the most efficient on the rural highway route, returning 41.2 mpg, and a very respectable 3rd on the high-speed interstate leg at 44 mpg.
Now, the Accord was indeed cheaper to fill up overall, but the difference was a minuscule 0.5 mpg or 0.12 gallon per 100 miles of driving. That's a difference of 85 cents for the test or about $14 over the course of a typical year. As all things were essentially equal on that front, other attributes became the determining factor.
Among them was the Fusion's useful trunk layout. Though its numerical capacity in cubic-feet is actually less than the Accord and Camry (12.0 versus 12.3 and 13.0, respectively), there is more usable space. The battery chews up the lower quarter of the trunk's forward half, creating a shelf that a suitcase or other items can still sit atop. More importantly, though, the design allows for the 60/40-split rear seat to fold down.
The Jetta's does a similar trick but its shelf is bigger and the pass-through smaller; the second-best Camry provides the equivalent of a mailbox slot; the Accord an impenetrable wall. In this way, like the driving experience, the hybrid Fusion seems like less of a trade-off.
The cruise control was another best-in-test, fastidiously keeping speed both up and down hill. Less impressive is the Fusion's MyFord Touch electronics interface, but we've grown accustomed to it over time and preferred it to the Camry and Jetta's interfaces. In other words, we could live with it.
Which is a pretty good way to sum up the Ford Fusion Hybrid: for those who are new to hybrids, it'll be easy to live with. It feels the most like a normal car, while delivering the fuel economy you'd expect from a hybrid.
More to MPG Than Meets the Eye?or Wallet
Beyond our rankings, this test revealed other telling conclusions. First, only the Camry managed to meet its EPA fuel economy overall, while only the Jetta Hybrid managed to meet its EPA highway number.
Should hybrid owners be outraged or dismayed by this discrepancy? Not at all, because as this test's data shows and as we wrote in greater detail before, the differences in mpg of ultra-efficient cars like hybrids translate into minuscule monetary differences.
Therefore, it's important for car shoppers to note the "gallons per 100 miles" figure now found on every car's window sticker, and keep in mind that there's a lot more to consider when buying a hybrid family sedan than simply a number followed by the letters M-P-G.
The manufacturers provided Edmunds these vehicles for the purposes of evaluation.
| Vehicle | |
|---|---|
| Model year | 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid |
| Year Make Model | 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid SE 4dr Sedan (2.0L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) |
| Vehicle Type | FWD 4dr 5-passenger Sedan |
| Base MSRP | $27,995 |
| Options on test vehicle | Equipment Group 505A ($2260-Luxury package: 10-way power, leather, and heated seats with 3 memory settings, 4-way power passenger seat including power recline, leather wrapped steering wheel and gear shift knob, fog lamps, upgraded electrochromatic exterior mirrors with memory and electrochromatic rear view mirror), Driver Assist Package ($1140-Blind Spot Information System (BLIS) with Cross Traffic Alert, designed to inform you when a vehicle is in your blind spot as you change lanes or if a vehicle is approaching from either side as you back out; Lane Departure Warning with Lane Keep Assist and Driver Monitoring designed to help drivers remain attentive and in control; Auto high beams; Rain sensing wipers), Adaptive Cruise Control w/Collision Mitigation and Brake Support ($995-Adaptive cruise control with collision warning and brake support that automatically adjusts speed and slows the vehicle to maintain the set distance behind traffic ahead), SE Technology Package ($895-Rear video camera; 110V outlet; MyFord Touch system with 2 driver configurable 4.2" color LCD displays in instrument cluster, 8.0" color LCD touch screen in center stack, media hub with 2 USB ports, SD card reader and RCA video input jacks and 5-way controls located on steering wheel; SYNC voice activated communications and entertainment system that allows integration of mobile phones and handheld media players via Bluetooth technology and USB connectivity (Free three year pre-paid subscription for SYNC Services featuring 911 Assist, Vehicle Health Reports, traffic reports, GPS based turn by turn driving directions and information services for one phone/primary account)), Active Park Assist w/Forward Sensing System ($895), Voice-Activated Navigation System ($795), Reverse Sensing System ($295) |
| As-tested MSRP | $35,270 |
| Assembly location | Hermosillo, Mexico |
| Drivetrain | |
|---|---|
| Configuration | Transverse, front-engine combined with electric motor(s), front-wheel drive |
| Engine type | port-injected, inline-4, gasoline with auto-stop/start |
| Displacement (cc/cu-in) | 1,999cc (122cu-in) |
| Block/head material | aluminum |
| Valvetrain | DOHC, 4 valves/cylinder variable intake-valve timing |
| Compression ratio (x:1) | 12.3 |
| Horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 141 @ 6,000 |
| Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 129 @ 4,000 |
| Fuel type | Regular unleaded |
| Hybrid type | Series-parallel |
| Electric motor rating (kW) | 88 |
| Combined horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 188 |
| Battery type | Lithium-ion |
| Transmission type | Planetary gearset-regulated continuously variable transmission with console shifter |
| Chassis | |
|---|---|
| Suspension, front | MacPherson struts, stabilizer bar |
| Suspension, rear | Multi-link, stabilizer bar |
| Steering type | Electric power steering rack-and-pinion |
| Steering ratio (x:1) | 14.8 |
| Tire make and model | Michelin Energy Saver A/S |
| Tire type | Low-rolling resistance all-season front and rear |
| Tire size, front | P225/50R17 93V M+S |
| Tire size, rear | P225/50R17 93V M+S |
| Tire size | P225/50R17 93V M+S |
| Wheel size | 17-by-7.5 inches front and rear |
| Wheel material | Alloy |
| Brakes, front | 11.8-in ventilated one-piece discs with 1-piston sliding calipers |
| Brakes, rear | 11.8-in solid discs with 1-piston sliding calipers |
| Track Test Results | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) | 3.4 |
| 0-45 mph (sec.) | 5.6 |
| 0-60 mph (sec.) | 8.5 |
| 0-75 mph (sec.) | 12.3 |
| 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) | 16.3 @ 88.1 |
| 0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 8.2 |
| 0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 3.4 |
| 0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 5.6 |
| 0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 8.5 |
| 0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 12.4 |
| 1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) | 16.4 @ 86.1 |
| 0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 8.2 |
| Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) | 31 |
| 60-0 mph (ft.) | 123 |
| Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) | 63.0 |
| Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON | 62.6 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) | 0.78 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON | 0.79 |
| Sound level @ idle (dB) | 34.8 |
| @ Full throttle (dB) | 80.7 |
| @ 70 mph cruise (dB) | 63.9 |
| Test Driver Ratings & Comments | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration comments | Traction-control on or off, the Fusion Hybrid provides very consistent, very smooth acceleration. I would've expected the electric motor to have more of an effect on initial acceleration than it seems to have. No chance of wheelspin. |
| Braking comments | Pedal is a vague all the time and a simulated emergency stop like this one, it feels numb and then firm and highly responsive. Not quite what I'd call an intuitive pedal. Reasonable fade resistance despite the first (of four) stops being the shortest. |
| Handling comments | Slalom: Steering feel is lacking, but its response and precision are both good. It points confidently, yet despite what the weight distribution says on paper, it feels tail heavy in the cone-to-cone transitions. What's more is that the feeling translates into the rear of the car progressively moving around and eventually the electronic-stability control (ESC) system starts to intrude abruptly and linger there unpredictably. I had a hard time putting in consistent runs because of this. Still, this is a better-than-average performance. Skidpad: The front tires begin to lose grip and howl before the ESC begins to reign in first by dabbing a brake and then by reducing throttle response. Steering still remains precise and the simulated weight is appropriate for what the car is doing. |
| Testing Conditions | |
|---|---|
| Test date | 12/3/2013 |
| Elevation (ft.) | 1,121 |
| Temperature (°F) | 62.12 |
| Relative humidity (%) | 35.62 |
| Barometric pressure (in. Hg) | 28.69 |
| Wind (mph, direction) | 3.2, head |
| Odometer (mi.) | 3313 |
| Fuel used for test | 87-octane gasoline |
| As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) | 35/35 |
| Fuel Consumption | |
|---|---|
| EPA fuel economy (mpg) | 47 city/47 highway/47 combined |
| Edmunds observed (mpg) | 43.4 |
| Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) | 13.5 |
| Driving range (mi.) | 634.5 |
| Audio and Advanced Technology | |
|---|---|
| Stereo description | Six-speaker AM/FM/CD |
| iPod/digital media compatibility | Standard iPod via USB jack |
| Satellite radio | Standard Sirius |
| Hard-drive music storage capacity (Gb) | Optional |
| Bluetooth phone connectivity | Standard |
| Navigation system | Optional Hard Drive with traffic |
| Telematics (OnStar, etc.) | Standard |
| Smart entry/Start | Optional |
| Parking aids | Optional parking sonar front and rear perimeter + back-up camera system automated self-parking system rear cross-traffic detection |
| Blind-spot detection | Optional |
| Adaptive cruise control | Optional |
| Lane-departure monitoring | Optional departure warning |
| Collision warning/avoidance | Optional |
| Driver coaching display | Standard |
| Dimensions & Capacities | |
|---|---|
| Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) | 3,615 |
| Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) | 3,653 |
| Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) | 58.8/41.2 |
| Length (in.) | 191.8 |
| Width (in.) | 72.9 |
| Height (in.) | 58.2 |
| Wheelbase (in.) | 112.2 |
| Track, front (in.) | 62.3 |
| Track, rear (in.) | 62.0 |
| Legroom, front (in.) | 44.3 |
| Legroom, rear (in.) | 38.3 |
| Headroom, front (in.) | 39.2 |
| Headroom, rear (in.) | 37.8 |
| Shoulder room, front (in.) | 57.8 |
| Shoulder room, rear (in.) | 56.9 |
| Seating capacity | 5 |
| Trunk volume (cu-ft) | 12.0 |
| Warranty | |
|---|---|
| Bumper-to-bumper | 3 years / 36,000 miles |
| Powertrain | 5 years / 60,000 miles |
| Corrosion | 5 years / Unlimited miles |
| Roadside assistance | 5 years / 60,000 miles |
| Hybrid/battery | 8 years / 100,000 miles |
| Vehicle | |
|---|---|
| Model year | 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid |
| Year Make Model | 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring 4dr Sedan (2.0L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid Direct Drive) |
| Vehicle Type | FWD 4dr 5-passenger Sedan |
| Base MSRP | $35,695 |
| Options on test vehicle | None |
| As-tested MSRP | $35,695 |
| Assembly location | Marysville, Ohio |
| Drivetrain | |
|---|---|
| Configuration | Transverse, front-engine combined with electric motor(s), front-wheel drive |
| Engine type | Atkinson-cycle inline-4, gasoline with auto stop-start |
| Displacement (cc/cu-in) | 1,993cc (122cu-in) |
| Block/head material | Aluminum/aluminum |
| Valvetrain | Double overhead camshaft |
| Compression ratio (x:1) | 13.0 |
| Horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 141 @ 6,200 |
| Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 122 @ 3,500-6,000 |
| Fuel type | Regular unleaded |
| Hybrid type | Series-parallel |
| Electric motor rating (kW) | 124 |
| Combined horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 196 |
| Combined torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 226 @ 0-3,857 |
| Battery type | Lithium-ion |
| Battery capacity, rated (kW-hr) | 1.3 |
| Transmission type | Direct drive electric motor coupled to gasoline engine |
| Chassis | |
|---|---|
| Suspension, front | Independent MacPherson struts, coil springs, stabilizer bar |
| Suspension, rear | Independent multilink, coil springs, stabilizer bar |
| Steering type | Electric-assist rack-and-pinion steering |
| Steering ratio (x:1) | 13.36 |
| Tire make and model | Michelin Energy Saver A/S |
| Tire type | All-season, low-rolling resistance |
| Tire size | 225/50R17 94V M+S |
| Wheel size | 17-by-7.5 inches front and rear |
| Wheel material | Painted alloy |
| Brakes, front | 11.5-inch ventilated disc with single-piston sliding caliper |
| Brakes, rear | 11.1-inch solid disc with single-piston sliding caliper |
| Track Test Results | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) | 3.2 |
| 0-45 mph (sec.) | 5.0 |
| 0-60 mph (sec.) | 7.5 |
| 0-75 mph (sec.) | 11.3 |
| 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) | 15.8 @ 87.7 |
| 0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 7.2 |
| 0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 3.2 |
| 0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 5.0 |
| 0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 7.7 |
| 0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 11.6 |
| 1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) | 15.9 @ 86.1 |
| 0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 7.3 |
| Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) | 31 |
| 60-0 mph (ft.) | 122 |
| Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) | 64.1 |
| Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON | 62.8 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) | .80 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON | .79 |
| Sound level @ idle (dB) | 34.8 |
| @ Full throttle (dB) | 69.2 |
| @ 70 mph cruise (dB) | 64.3 |
| Test Driver Ratings & Comments | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration comments | Despite offering an "EV" button, the Accord Hybrid fires up its engine at wide-open throttle. Reasonably strong initial acceleration, though I'm also reasonably certain that the electric motor is not being allowed full-power until underway because there should be ample torque to at least chirp the front tires from a standstill, but it doesn't. Electric-shirring sounds are evident but not annoying. Extremely linear power delivery due to continuously variable transmission and highly repeatable acceleration runs despite battery gradually losing charge. Also, I noticed that the battery does appear to recharge quickly, more quickly than some others in this segment. |
| Braking comments | Consistent stopping distances and medium-soft pedal from first (and shortest) stop to last. Modest dive and good directional stability. Not as short a distance as we've seen in the past, but still better than the mainstream hybrid average. |
| Handling comments | Slalom: Steering is responsive if a little numb, but offers good precision. I was impressed at how well balanced this car feels in the side-to-side transitions. Where some other battery-laden hybrids exhibit obvious mass, usually in the rear, this Accord feels quite neutral. Skidpad: Again, well balanced and precise where one might not expect it. The mass feels as if it's carried very low in the chassis. Minimal electronic stability system (ESC) intrusion. Nicely done. |
| Testing Conditions | |
|---|---|
| Test date | 12/3/2013 |
| Elevation (ft.) | 1,121 |
| Temperature (°F) | 63.81 |
| Relative humidity (%) | 33 |
| Barometric pressure (in. Hg) | 28.69 |
| Wind (mph, direction) | 1.1, Cross |
| Odometer (mi.) | 237 |
| Fuel used for test | 87-octane gasoline |
| As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) | 33/33 |
| Fuel Consumption | |
|---|---|
| EPA fuel economy (mpg) | 50 city/45 highway/47 combined |
| Edmunds observed (mpg) | 43.9 |
| Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) | 15.8 |
| Driving range (mi.) | 711 |
| Audio and Advanced Technology | |
|---|---|
| Stereo description | 360-watt, 6-speaker AM/FM/XM/CD stereo with subwoofer |
| iPod/digital media compatibility | Single USB input, aux input |
| Satellite radio | Standard XM with three-month trial subscription |
| Bluetooth phone connectivity | Standard phone and audio |
| Navigation system | Standard with 8-inch display screen |
| Smart entry/Start | Standard ignition doors |
| Parking aids | Standard back-up camera |
| Blind-spot detection | Standard |
| Adaptive cruise control | Standard |
| Lane-departure monitoring | Standard |
| Collision warning/avoidance | Standard |
| Driver coaching display | Standard |
| Dimensions & Capacities | |
|---|---|
| Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) | 3,602 |
| Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) | 3,572 |
| Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) | 60/40 |
| Length (in.) | 192.2 |
| Width (in.) | 72.8 |
| Height (in.) | 57.5 |
| Wheelbase (in.) | 109.3 |
| Track, front (in.) | 62.4 |
| Track, rear (in.) | 62.7 |
| Turning circle (ft.) | 38.1 |
| Legroom, front (in.) | 42.5 |
| Legroom, rear (in.) | 38.5 |
| Headroom, front (in.) | 37.6 |
| Headroom, rear (in.) | 37.0 |
| Shoulder room, front (in.) | 58.6 |
| Shoulder room, rear (in.) | 56.5 |
| Seating capacity | 5 |
| Trunk volume (cu-ft) | 12.0 |
| Warranty | |
|---|---|
| Bumper-to-bumper | 3 years / 36,000 miles |
| Powertrain | 5 years / 60,000 miles |
| Corrosion | 5 years / Unlimited miles |
| Hybrid/battery | 8 years/100,000 miles or 10 years/150,000 miles per state of purchase/registration. |
| Vehicle | |
|---|---|
| Model year | 2014 Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid |
| Year Make Model | 2014 Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid SEL Premium 4dr Sedan (1.4L 4cyl Turbo gas/electric hybrid 7AM) |
| Base MSRP | $32,265 |
| Options on test vehicle | Platinum Gray Metallic |
| As-tested MSRP | $32,265 |
| Assembly location | Puebla, Mexico |
| North American parts content (%) | 16 |
| Drivetrain | |
|---|---|
| Engine type | Turbocharged, direct-injected, inline-4, gasoline with auto-stop/start |
| Displacement (cc/cu-in) | 1,395cc (85cu-in) |
| Block/head material | aluminum |
| Valvetrain | DOHC, 4 valves/cylinder variable intake + exhaust-valve timing |
| Compression ratio (x:1) | 10.0 |
| Horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 150 @ 5,000 |
| Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 184 @ 1,600 |
| Fuel type | Premium unleaded (required) |
| Hybrid type | Series |
| Electric motor rating (kW) | 20 |
| Combined horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 170 @ 5,000 |
| Combined torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 184 @ 1,000 |
| Transmission type | 7-speed auto-double-clutch manual with console shifter |
| Transmission ratios (x:1) | I=3.50; II=2.09; III=1.34; IV=0.93; V=0.97; VI=0.78; VII=0.65; R=3.72 |
| Final-drive ratio (x:1) | 4.44 |
| Chassis | |
|---|---|
| Suspension, front | Independent MacPherson struts, coil springs,lower control arms |
| Suspension, rear | Independent multilink, coil springs |
| Steering type | Electric-assist, rack-and-pinion steering |
| Steering ratio (x:1) | 16.4 |
| Tire make and model | Continental ContiProContact E |
| Tire type | All-season low-rolling resistance |
| Tire size, front | 205/50R17 93H M+S |
| Tire size, rear | 205/50R17 93H M+S |
| Wheel size | 17-by-6.0 inches front and rear |
| Wheel material | Alloy |
| Brakes, front | 11.3-in ventilated discs with 1-piston sliding calipers |
| Brakes, rear | 10.7-in solid discs with 1-piston sliding calipers |
| Track Test Results | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) | 3.0 |
| 0-45 mph (sec.) | 5.0 |
| 0-60 mph (sec.) | 7.8 |
| 0-75 mph (sec.) | 11.3 |
| 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) | 15.7 @ 89.4 |
| 0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 7.4 |
| 0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 3.1 |
| 0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 5.2 |
| 0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 8.2 |
| 0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 11.8 |
| 1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) | 15.9 @ 86.0 |
| 0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 7.7 |
| Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) | 31 |
| 60-0 mph (ft.) | 117 |
| Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON | 61.3 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON | 0.82 |
| Sound level @ idle (dB) | 34.8 |
| @ Full throttle (dB) | 68.7 |
| @ 70 mph cruise (dB) | 64.8 |
| Test Driver Ratings & Comments | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration comments | An interesting hybrid combination, a small-displacement turbo with an electric motor with a twin-clutch transmission. Due to that DSG, the Jetta is always a bit hesitant to leave the line, but especially so if you overlap throttle and brake (power braking). In fact, it hates that, to the point if you do so, it sits there for like 2 seconds trying to figure out what just happened. Once underway the turbo/hybrid/DSG combo works just fine, gets down the drag strip with good speed. Upshifts are on the slow side for a DSG. Traction control cannot be defeated, so there are no "TC off" runs, but rather the Best Run we achieved with TC on, as well as a basic first run. Even with TC on, it still allows for some minor wheelspin off the line. Our quickest time came by putting the console shift lever into Manual mode without any power braking. Shifts seemed slightly quicker and overall it was about 3 tenths quicker doing this. It still upshifts for itself anyway, a good thing since there isn't a tachometer. Downshifting is by pulling back on the lever, and it does not blip the throttle on manual downshifts. |
| Braking comments | Althought the Jetta's brakes can be touchy and annoying at low speed, in panic stop situations they work fine, at least in terms of feel and appropriate pedal travel. In other words, they don't have that wonky, dead-feeling pedal of so many hybrids. The first stop was the shortest at 117 feet, while the third stop was the longest at 124 feet. The fifth and final stop was 123 feet. |
| Handling comments | SLALOM: The Jetta Hybrid's steering has reasonably good feel and action, but this is definitely not a sportily-tuned chassis. Plus, the non-defeat stability control seemed even more intrusive than on the last regular Jetta we tested, the new 1.8T. So although it has some ability to snake around the cones with some verve, in the end the ESC system holds the car back. SKIDPAD: Yes, lots of understeer as expected. But the skidpad also showed that the Jetta Hybrid's chassis does have some fun in it, as it was pretty accepting of drop-throttle antics to let the tail come out slightly. |
| Testing Conditions | |
|---|---|
| Test date | 12/3/2013 |
| Elevation (ft.) | 1,121 |
| Temperature (°F) | 60 |
| Relative humidity (%) | 34.31 |
| Barometric pressure (in. Hg) | 28.71 |
| Wind (mph, direction) | 3.25, tail |
| Odometer (mi.) | 4,295 |
| Fuel used for test | 91-octane gasoline |
| As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) | 41/41 |
| Fuel Consumption | |
|---|---|
| EPA fuel economy (mpg) | 42 city/48 highway/45 combined |
| Edmunds observed (mpg) | 43.0 |
| Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) | 11.9 |
| Audio and Advanced Technology | |
|---|---|
| Stereo description | 400-watt Fender Audio system |
| iPod/digital media compatibility | Standard iPod via proprietary cable |
| Satellite radio | Standard Sirius |
| Bluetooth phone connectivity | Standard phone |
| Navigation system | Standard |
| Telematics (OnStar, etc.) | Standard |
| Smart entry/Start | Standard ignition doors trunk/hatch |
| Parking aids | Standard back-up camera |
| Blind-spot detection | Not available |
| Adaptive cruise control | Not available |
| Lane-departure monitoring | Not available |
| Collision warning/avoidance | Not available |
| Driver coaching display | Standard |
| Dimensions & Capacities | |
|---|---|
| Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) | 3,312 |
| Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) | 3,358 |
| Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) | 55.6/44.4 |
| Length (in.) | 182.8 |
| Width (in.) | 70.0 |
| Height (in.) | 57.2 |
| Wheelbase (in.) | 104.4 |
| Track, front (in.) | 60.7 |
| Track, rear (in.) | 60.9 |
| Turning circle (ft.) | 36.4 |
| Legroom, front (in.) | 41.2 |
| Legroom, rear (in.) | 38.1 |
| Headroom, front (in.) | 38.2 |
| Headroom, rear (in.) | 37.1 |
| Shoulder room, front (in.) | 55.2 |
| Shoulder room, rear (in.) | 53.6 |
| Seating capacity | 5 |
| Trunk volume (cu-ft) | 11.3 |
| Warranty | |
|---|---|
| Bumper-to-bumper | 3 years / 36,000 miles |
| Powertrain | 5 years / 60,000 miles |
| Corrosion | 12 years / Unlimited miles |
| Roadside assistance | 3 years / 36,000 miles |
| Free scheduled maintenance | 2 years / 24,000 miles |
| Hybrid/battery | 8 years / 100,000 miles |
| Vehicle | |
|---|---|
| Model year | 2013 Toyota Camry Hybrid |
| Year Make Model | 2013 Toyota Camry Hybrid XLE 4dr Sedan (2.5L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) |
| Vehicle Type | FWD 4dr 5-passenger Sedan |
| Base MSRP | $28,480 |
| Options on test vehicle | Champagne Mica , Premium HDD Navigation w/Entune and JBL ($2670-7.0" touch screen with split-screen functionality and AM/FM/HD radio and single CD player with MP3/WMA playback capability; HDD navigation system; 10 JBL GreenEdge speakers including subwoofer amplifier; Sirius XM satellite radio and XM Select Package including NavTraffic, NavWeather, Fuel and Sports & Stocks with 90-day trial subscription; iTunes tagging; Auxiliary audio jack and USB port with iPod connectivity; Vehicle information display; Hands-free phone capability; Phonebook access; Advance voice recognition; Text-to-speech with programmed and customizable text responses; Music streaming via Bluetooth wireless technology; Entune is a collection of popular mobile applications and data services, including Bing and Pandora, integrated with select Toyota vehicles. Entune includes three years of complimentary access to apps and services delivered via most smartphones connected to the vehicle using Bluetooth wireless technology or a USB cable. Entune's features are operated using the vehicle's controls or by voice recognition for some services.), Leather Package ($1185-Leather-trimmed Ultrasuede seats; Leather door trim with integrated armrests and seatback pockets; Multi-stage heated front seats; Four-way power adjustable front passenger seat), Power Tilt/Slide Moonroof ($915-Power tilt/slide moonroof with one-touch open/close feature; Dual illuminated visor vanity mirrors; Rear-seat reading lamps), Convenience Package ($695-Integrated backup camera; HomeLink universal transceiver; Anti-theft alarm system), Safety Connect ($515-Safety Connect includes Emergency Assistance, Stolen Vehicle Locator, Roadside Assistance, Automatic Collision Notification and 1-year complimentary trial subscription.), Blind Spot Monitor ($500-Blind Spot Monitor detects vehicles in the driver's blind spots and alerts the driver using indicators on the side mirrors. Rear Cross Traffic Alert warns driver of cross traffic when backing up. The system can be switched off if desired.), Carpet Floor and Trunk Mat Set ($225-5-piece set) |
| As-tested MSRP | $35,170 |
| Assembly location | Georgetown, Ky. |
| Drivetrain | |
|---|---|
| Configuration | Transverse, front-engine combined with electric motor(s), front-wheel drive |
| Engine type | Inline-4, gasoline with auto-stop/start |
| Displacement (cc/cu-in) | 2,494cc (152cu-in) |
| Block/head material | Aluminum |
| Valvetrain | DOHC, 4 valves/cylinder variable intake-valve timing |
| Compression ratio (x:1) | 12.5 |
| Horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 156 @ 5,700 |
| Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 156 @ 4,500 |
| Fuel type | Regular unleaded |
| Hybrid type | Series-parallel |
| Electric motor rating (kW) | 105 |
| Combined horsepower (hp @ rpm) | 200 |
| System voltage | 650 volts maximum |
| Battery type | Sealed Nickel-Metal Hydride |
| Battery voltage | 244.8 V |
| Transmission type | Planetary gearset-regulated continuously variable transmission with console shifter |
| Chassis | |
|---|---|
| Suspension, front | MacPherson struts, stabilizer bar |
| Suspension, rear | Independent multilink, stabilizer bar |
| Steering type | Electric-assist rack-and-pinion steering |
| Tire make and model | Michelin Primacy MXV4 |
| Tire type | Low-rolling resistance all-season front and rear |
| Tire size, front | P215/55R17 93V M+S |
| Tire size, rear | P215/55R17 93V M+S |
| Tire size | P215/55R17 93V M+S |
| Wheel size | 17-by-7.0 inches front and rear |
| Wheel material | Alloy |
| Brakes, front | 11.65-in one-piece ventilated discs with 1-piston sliding calipers |
| Brakes, rear | 11.06-in solid discs with 1-piston sliding calipers |
| Track Test Results | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) | 3.0 |
| 0-45 mph (sec.) | 5.0 |
| 0-60 mph (sec.) | 7.6 |
| 0-75 mph (sec.) | 11.0 |
| 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) | 15.6 @ 90.6 |
| 0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 7.3 |
| 0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 3.2 |
| 0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 5.2 |
| 0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 7.8 |
| 0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) | 11.1 |
| 1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) | 15.7 @ 90.6 |
| 0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) | 7.4 |
| Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) | 31 |
| 60-0 mph (ft.) | 122 |
| Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON | 60.0 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) | 0.77 |
| Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON | 0.77 |
| Sound level @ idle (dB) | 34.8 |
| @ Full throttle (dB) | 70.3 |
| @ 70 mph cruise (dB) | 63.3 |
| Test Driver Ratings & Comments | |
|---|---|
| Acceleration comments | Nice and strong off the line, and even though it's a CVT without any stepped shift points, the engine's high-rpm running isn't obnoxious or thrashy. This car must have good sound deadening. Was impressed with its power and smoothness, although this particular example wasn't quite as quick as the last Camry Hybrid we tested. Battery seemed to run down to two bars quite easily, needed to take some "cool down" runs to regenerate power. Quickest runs came by using brake/throttle overlap at launch so the gasoline engine was fired up. Still, even though there's good power here, never any wheelspin off the line. There is no manual shifting ability, only D and B modes on the shifter. |
| Braking comments | Brake pedal felt pretty normal in panic situations for a hybrid, reasonable firmness and an intuitive amount of travel. Plenty of strange mechanical and ABS-type noises going on during the stops, along with much tire screech. Decently stable stops, with just a bit of sideways squirm. The first stop was the shortest at 122 feet. Good consistency, with the fifth and final stop at 124 feet. |
| Handling comments | SLALOM: I like the heft to the steering, but beyond that it doesn't communicate much to the driver and is pretty slow, though intuitive, on its turn-in. Although the suspension is on the soft side, it's far from wallowy and you can place the Camry where you want it pretty easily. Ultimately it's held back by a stability control system that's overly intrusive. SKIDPAD: Still reasonable steering effort in this lower speed environment, but the Camry is hampered by an obvious lack of grip along with a chassis that's not particularly responsive to drop-throttle antics. Plus, the throttle can be pretty abrupt. |
| Testing Conditions | |
|---|---|
| Test date | 12/3/2013 |
| Elevation (ft.) | 1,121 |
| Temperature (°F) | 63.62 |
| Relative humidity (%) | 29.06 |
| Barometric pressure (in. Hg) | 28.76 |
| Wind (mph, direction) | 1.56, head |
| Odometer (mi.) | 5,445 |
| Fuel used for test | 87-octane gasoline |
| As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) | 35/35 |
| Fuel Consumption | |
|---|---|
| EPA fuel economy (mpg) | 40 city/38 highway/40 combined |
| Edmunds observed (mpg) | 39.6 |
| Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) | 17.0 |
| Driving range (mi.) | 646 |
| Audio and Advanced Technology | |
|---|---|
| Stereo description | Six-speaker AM/FM/CD/AUX |
| iPod/digital media compatibility | Standard iPod via USB jack, aux jack or Bluetooth audio |
| Satellite radio | Optional XM |
| Bluetooth phone connectivity | Standard phone and audio |
| Navigation system | Optional with traffic |
| Telematics (OnStar, etc.) | Optional |
| Smart entry/Start | Standard |
| Parking aids | Optional back-up camera |
| Blind-spot detection | Optional |
| Adaptive cruise control | Not available |
| Lane-departure monitoring | Not available |
| Collision warning/avoidance | Not available |
| Driver coaching display | Standard |
| Dimensions & Capacities | |
|---|---|
| Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) | 3,525 |
| Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) | 3,495 |
| Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) | 59.5/40.5 |
| Length (in.) | 189.2 |
| Width (in.) | 71.7 |
| Height (in.) | 57.9 |
| Wheelbase (in.) | 109.3 |
| Track, front (in.) | 62.0 |
| Track, rear (in.) | 61.6 |
| Turning circle (ft.) | 36.7 |
| Legroom, front (in.) | 41.6 |
| Legroom, rear (in.) | 38.9 |
| Headroom, front (in.) | 38.8 |
| Headroom, rear (in.) | 38.1 |
| Shoulder room, front (in.) | 58.0 |
| Shoulder room, rear (in.) | 56.6 |
| Seating capacity | 5 |
| Trunk volume (cu-ft) | 13.1 |
| Ground clearance (in.) | 6.1 |
| Warranty | |
|---|---|
| Bumper-to-bumper | 3 years / 36,000 miles |
| Powertrain | 5 years / 60,000 miles |
| Corrosion | 5 years / Unlimited miles |
| Roadside assistance | 2 years / 25,000 miles |
| Free scheduled maintenance | 2 years / 25,000 miles |
| Hybrid/battery | 8 years / 100,000 miles |
ADVERTISEMENT
''The fact that the Fusion is by far the best-looking'' Excuse me... what??? Fact established by who? People who dine out at Mcdonalds, dress at Walmart and live in a doublewide? Its by far the most hideous sedan to hit the roads since Toyota Echo.
@nuieve Troll much?
nuieve is entitled to his opinion, even though I don't get the white trash angle of it. The fusion has too high a beltline, leading to a slab-sided and overly tall look in lighter colors. I think it's styling is overrated, but I thought that about the Sonata too. Speaking of which, interesting that the H/K siblings weren't included. Previous reviews suggest they underperform relative to the Camry, so I suppose their ranking could be inferred. Kudos to Edmunds for a fine test, and to Ford and Honda for taking the lead in the field Toyota has dominated. Honda has been floundering around in the hybrid field with uncompetitive offerings for awhile, it looks like the Accord finally got the formula right.
Of the four cars, the one that is most likely to look like crap in five years is the Ford. They don't age well.
Might be worth mentioning: the Camry and Jetta hybrids have a (compact) spare tire, while the Fusion and Accord hybrids only offer a repair kit. While I understand that ditching the spare gives them more flexibility when balancing trunk vs. battery space, and maybe saves a little weight, personally I'd rather have the spare.
So now it's OK to realize that a car that says it's going to get 47 mpg and gets "only" 44 mpg is still fabulous on gas? What a concept and how long it's taken for Edmunds to arrive at it.
Of the sedans discussed, I would pick the Honda. During several tests at C/D and M/T, the Accord hybrid yielded the best track times, and appeared to be the most fun to drive out of the bunch. The Fusion looks great in dark colors and I think the interior is underrated. In addition, the H/K twins are not mentioned, probably because their hybrid power-trains are being updated, and their current offerings no where come close to EPA estimates in terms real world fuel economy.
Still trying to be different for the sake of being different and push "gallons per hundred miles"? Didn't your editors take note of the feedback in the other article on the topic and in other reviews when it has been brought up? Consumers who really care aren't stupid and can run the math both ways, and in America we're all used to miles per gallon. Take an amount of miles driven and divide by gallons used. Simple. I could understand if the site catered primarily to Canadians since they use the metric "L per 100 km" system for most trip computers but it doesn't make sense to push it here.
No surprise - Ford has been doing great. Keep up the good work!
nuieve, since you feel so strongly that the Fusion is ugly, maybe you could let us know what you think is a good lucking sedan...
Excellent write-up. Really interesting the comments about comfort. As a Fusion Hybrid owner, I can attest to its comfort! Much better than the Camry Hybrid. However, the Fusion Hybrid & Camry Hybrid also have two electric motors, like the Accord Hybrid. The Fusion Hybrid actually uses its gas engine much like the Accord does. The Camry Hybrid works the same as the Prius, just larger.
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but don't you rate the Fusion hybrid a "B" and the Accord hybrid an "A". If I didn't misread something, aren't you contradicting yourself, especially since you say that the 2014 Fusion hybrid has hardly changed from 2013?
I may be wrong, but I think Edmunds gave the FFH its "B" before testing one that had last summer's software update. This change made a 6 mpg difference in my Fusion.
Good article and respect the viewpoint but I'd humbly submit that my voting would be Honda first and Ford second for a few, simple reasons. First, Ford's electronic interface is terrible, IMO. Your own experience with vehicles like the Focus ST prove this and this would irk me every single time I drove the car. Increased engine drone wouldn't piss me off anywhere near as much as system crashes and an inability to complete simple tasks like making bluetooth phone calls reliably. And less important to me, but still worth mentioning... which car do you think will depreciate more? My guess is that in S. CA, the Ford will cost more to own primarily due to increased depreciation relative to the Honda. I'm not Ford bashing... I think the Fusion is a really good car and Ford has come a long, long, long way. But the new Accord Hybrid is better and would earn my $ if I were in the market.
Fusion is the best looking by far. In fact it's better looking than the BWM 3 or Audi 4, both vastly more expensive. The Fusion looks like it should cost more.
First off I will say the Ford Fusion is not an attractive car. I do not think the styling is anything but flashy and leads to a dated look. Like the Sonata and Optima, the Fusion will not be able to hold its own on looks. The other three vehicles are classic in design and pretty timeless. Having driven all, but the Jetta Hybrid I will say the in my opinion that the Accord is by far the most un-hybrid like. The Fusion was fine, but the MyFord Touch is a disaster and I could not get used to it. The leather in the Ford is very thin and seems prone to aging. I do think that people looking for a Hybrid are not going to cross shop the Fusion with an Accord, Camry or Jetta. Fusion buyers like "Merican" products
I own the previous generation Fusion Hybrid (mine's a 2010 with just under 100,000 miles). Just letting everyone know that I am receiving this range of real world fuel economy. Averaging 40 mpg in winter, 48 mpg in summer, with several runs up to 53 mpg in summer. Rated for 41 city/39 highway. I noticed fuel economy improved as more miles accumulated. With that said, I would be buying the new Fusion - if I had to buy any of these cars. Accord would be second choice.
I think this was a reasonable review. All the above choices seem fairly close and depends upon personal tastes. I have a 2013 Jetta Hybrid with about 6K miles on it. From my experience, mpgs has a lot to do with where the car is driven and driving style. For my commutes to work in town and secondary roads, I can easily get >50 mpg. In subfreezing temps with snow tires on, that falls to low 40s, generally. I have only had 1 long highway trip of 350 miles, with snow tires on and temps 25 deg F with 4 people and luggage in the car. That trip netted me 44 mpg each way, according to the computer and hand calculated. The batteries make packing the luggage for 4 a challenge, I admit. I don't drive with a heavy foot and I do try to maximize electric only driving. I don't drive below the speed limit, though. No matter the car, technique and weather conditions play a significant role and, clearly, results will vary. So far, my choice has worked out well for me. I do wish the Jetta did not have the cheap plastic interior on the doors. If the interior material were the same as my 2010 Jetta TDI, it would be outstanding.
Another useful bit of information is to look at what kind of mpgs real world drivers are getting. If you check Fuelly.com, you'll find that most people get well below EPA mpg estimates. There are some high outliers, but some of those people have made errors logging their mileage. Experience with hybrids in cold weather does demonstrate significant reduction in mpgs, but that happens with all cars, at least to some extent. It does show that results will vary quite a bit and driving technique plays a huge role.
I wouldn't call the Fusion hideous. But it does have a cheap look to it. 5 years from now it will look hideous though.
For me the Fusion and the Accord are non-starters as they have no spare. The Camry is clearly falling behind in this rapidly advancing market. That would leave me with the Jetta. I like the idea of the turbo motor as I travel at altitude quite often. This comment had me rolling my eyes : "...and a quick-shifting seven-speed automated manual transmission (though the latter does cause the car to annoyingly roll back on hills)." Errm, really? Is the next article "Motoring Journalism and the Lost Art of Driving"? The Jetta operates in a particular way, so do it right or take the bus.
Sorry, I think the Fusion is the ugliest of these four vehicles.
I would have liked to see the 0-60 times posted for all the vehicles as times in the 9 second range tend to make entering highway and intersection crossing a harrowing experience. Reliability should also be included in this comparison. The Camry also has a B setting on the transmission to help regenerate electricity and this was not mentioned.
Edmunds, the Camry was not the "original". The Accord Hybrid was. Remember the V6 Accord Hybrid!
I agree with the comment that projected reliability needs to be included in the scoring. In that aspect, the Accord and Camry would most likely win hands down. VW and Ford just do not have a reputation or history for producing trouble free cars.
Research Models
New Car Resources
Most Researched Vehicles
Most Researched Vehicles
Best Cars List
Top 14 Sedans With the Smallest Turning Circles for 2014
Vote Now: Best Cars and Trucks To Be Thankful for
Deals of the Month — Cars
Deals of the Month — Trucks, Minivans and SUVs
More Best Cars Lists
More on the 2013 Fusion Hybrid
More on 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid
Automotive Website”
Help | About Us | Contact Us | Careers | Affiliate Program | Dealer Center | Privacy Statement | Visitor Agreement | Membership Agreement
Your Ad Choices | Site Map | Glossary | Mobile | Developers
Follow Edmunds
© Edmunds.com, Inc.
† Edmunds.com received the highest numerical score in the proprietary J.D. Power 2014 Third-Party Automotive Website Evaluation Study℠. Results based on responses from 3,381 responses, measuring 14 companies and measures third-party automotive website usefulness among new and used vehicle shoppers. Proprietary study results are based on experiences and perceptions of owners surveyed from January 2014. Your experiences may vary. Visit jdpower.com.