Honda Accord vs. Toyota Camry vs. Volkswagen Passat

treoster

The 2003 Accord is hands down a better value and performance vehicle comapred to the Camry or Passat.

Test drive the top of the line models for all three (V6; the Passat W8 doesn't count), and you'll see. And speaking from experience:

Accord will be problem free
Camry will have few problems, but performance is a bit subdued (which isn't too bad).
Passat is a joke; you will have problems mechianically, and the performance is sloppy. Add to that, they are overpriced.

Anyway, test drive, compare prices and options, and make your own choice.

ultima

Go to:

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/search.shtml

nippononly

there are no more transmission recalls, eh?!

anonymousposts

let's also hope that Toyota's sludging days are over.

cds12

nippononly

bowke28

on any honda trannies...there was an issue with a vendor's part, and honda has no way to tell if any particular car was affected, so they extended the warranty on all v6 trannies for honda and acura to 7 yrs/100k miles, just in case. if your tranny doesnt fail, then no harm, no foul. but if it does, then they know exactly what to do.

BTW...they no longer use that vendor.

babyb

Honda has issued extended tranny warranties to not only V6's but also 4 cylinders. Honda doesn't do recalls often, but they do have tranny problems on occasion.

bjbird2

Quote "Passat is a joke; you will have problems mechianically, and the performance is sloppy. Add to that, they are overpriced."

I guess that's why Edmunds, Consumer Reports and most of the Automobile magazines always rate the Passat as "Best Family Sedan". I guess you must know something they don't. Not to mention the excellent crash test performance of the Passat from both the government and insurance tests, and the fact that the Passat has the best resale value.

bowke28

are you nuts?!?! you must be trying to remember the commercial. however, it said it has ONE OF THE BEST resale values, which is true, but there isnt a vehicle on the road that has better resale value than any honda model. (excluding passport). heck, even odysseys start out INCREASING in value for about the 1st year! the honda accord has the longest life expectancy and the highest resale value in the sedan market. as a matter of fact, there is only 1 vehicle in the world that resells better than the accord.........the civic.

reidk

For person looking for family car comparo, try Feb issue of Car & Driver: 10 Family Sedans.

Goal was to get all 4 cyl, manual trans, (they failed on both) but some of the info should still translate to 6cyl versions.... (Based on their "10 Best" list, winners should be no surprise - but still not a clear cut as might have been expected.)

reidk

Actually, it depends on where you get your data (that 'lies, damn lies & statistics' bit again...).

According to CR 2003 Buying Guide, some of best vehicles for Resale Value include Corvette, Jeep Wrangler and the Chevy Suburban - along with, yes, the Honda Odyssey and S2000.

But the Civic actually falls 1 rank down - into the same category as Passat, CR-V, and Mercedes S-Class, among other vehicles.

Civic also has fallen 1 rank in "Predicted Reliability" - back to slightly above average. In fact, the Predicted Reliability records don't look all that great OVERALL - maybe companies are trying to cut costs too much: even the Camry has fallen all the way down to AVERAGE (!) - a far cry from its former position.

Of course, new models almost always seem to have more problems - wife's Highlander has more squeaks and groans than her '99 Camry did, and even that car was not without (minor) problems.

Also remember that CR is reporting on a nationwide average for resale (actually they report 'depreciation') - local or even regional areas may show different results.

fredvh

I am sorry to say that the VW Passat is NOT the "Best Family Sedan" according to "Consumer Reports" magazine. In the January 2003 issue they say "The 2003 Honda Accord outranked its competitors to become our top-rated four-cylinder family sedan". When they compared it directly to the Passat and the Camry they stated "the redesigned Accord provides the best overall balance of comfort, agility, roominess, and performance...". This was said about the 4-cylinder models of Passat, Camry, and the Accord.
They will be testing the 6-cylinder Accord later. They do say that these three (Camry, Accord, Passat) are so close in the ratings.

bjbird2

I have not seen the Jan. issue of CR, however the Passat is still the Edmund's editors choice for most wanted sedan under $25K. I'll have to go back and look at the automotive press.

nippononly

the current reliability of the early 90s versions of these 3 cars is anything to go by, then Accord and Camry will SIGNIFICANTLY outrank Passat for long-term reliability.

However it is possible that VW is making them better now, and it is also possible that Toyota and Honda are making them worse.

bjbird2

Here's what Edmunds said in their review of the 2003 Accord.

"For 2003 Honda has suggested a new direction for the Accord. The company tells us the car is now more "passionate" and "emotional." Its styling and demeanor are supposed to capture the spirit of a cheetah. There have even been industry trade stories reporting that Honda used Volkswagen's Passat as inspiration on how to give the company's volume sedan an appealing aura that goes beyond pure logic.

A week spent driving the 2003 Accord confirmed two things. It is still the segment benchmark in terms of ergonomic design, interior roominess and overall ride quality; the Accord still won't derail Passat intenders."

This sounds like the Passat is still the benchmark for Edmunds...

bowke28

i'm in the midwest, and the accord, civic, and odyssey FAR outrank all other models...including corvette, suburban, and wrangler. we have 2 ford plants here, and still, hondas are far more sought after than fords here. i get people in telling me, "i work at ford, and just bought my car to drive to work...now i need something for the rest of the family."

nippononly

that Edmunds review of Accord. While they decided it stopped far short of the cheetah-like performance it was supposed to have, they still liked it a lot for its smooth quiet acceleration and handling.

I think it is uncontested that Passat has the best interiors, and that performance-wise Camry is the quiet one bringing up the rear, but in terms of ownership costs Passat is a stand-out, for repairs, maintenance, and insurance. In fact, they can be more expensive to purchase new too, since Toyota discounts so heavily on Camry (advertised at $17,500 here locally this very weekend).

As far as exterior styling, they obviously disliked it in the Edmunds review, and it seemed to affect their whole way of thinking after that, but that is purely subjective. I certainly agree that Passat is the best-looking of the three, but unlike most, I would say Camry is a very close second. I am definitely cold to the new Accord's looks - what folks are saying about Honda kidnapping Buick designers seems right on the money to me.

bjbird2

The repairs and maintenance are not really a major issue with the Passat 4 year warantee.

bowke28

almost exclusively, people tell me the car looks FAR better in person, and after driving it, they tend not to even continue objection to styling.

bjbird2

I'm a product designer and I've seen the Accord in person. They still look like a non-descript Japanese sedan.

bowke28

thats what they are meant to be. thats what they always have been, and most likely, thats what they always will be. thats what sells accords. not too wild to scare off conservative buyers, yet not too boring to scare off enthusiasts.

bribaby

In MHO the passat is small (skinny especially), expensive and most importantly very, very unreliable. Does anybody disagree ?

toyotaken

I'm trying to be objective here, so please feel free to comment about my observations. First of all, I truly think that the Camry and Accord are the best values in the marketplace today for a family sedan. Both have the reliability, safety, and space that a family sedan needs to have to be competitive and lead the industry. In fact, I honestly tell customers that while the Camry and Accord are similar in many ways and the best way for me to describe them in a short synopsis is: I agree with many others that the Camry is the "Buick" of Japanese car companies. Quiet, soft rides with lots of room to stretch. The Accord is basically a sporty version of the Camry. Still very reliable, sits a bit lower, with a bit more "feel".

Now when I've taken a look at the new accord, these were my impressions. First, sit in the rear seat of both. The Accord sits you almost on the floor to give you a bit more headroom. I'm 5'9'' tall and between the lack of room under the driver's seat and the low seat cushion I felt like my knees were under my chin. The body-side moldings were so low on the door that other than the occasional civic or MR2 Spyder parked next to you, it wouldn't protect your doors from any other doors in the parking lot. The rear head-rests were much larger, impeding the rear view where the Camry's recess into the seats further. I still prefer a full-sized spare that the Camry has. The trunk on the Camry is fully lined including the trunklid and the space is much more "usable". The shape of the Accord trunk seemed a bit harder to use to accomodate larger items. The accord has the pass-through armrest or a fully-folding rear seat, where the Camry has the option of folding either part of the rear seat or the whole rear seat. This seems a bit more flexible for larger items as well.

On the plus side for the Accord, the handling is a bit more crisp. Also I like that fact that at least in this area, Michelin Tires are OEM for the car. Styling I can't say anything about as that is a personal choice.

Hope this helps, at least for what I see to be the differences.

Ken

anonymousposts

Anyone notice that in TOYOTAken's review he never sat in the front seat? He went from the back seat to the body-side molding. Not to say he's biased or anything but .....

As for the Passat being the benchmark. Usually benchmarks don't place last in comparison tests as the Passat did in Road & Track's test. Nor midpack as it did in Car & Driver's test. The Passat is a nice car but is no longer the benchmark that some people are making it out to be. It's performance is mid-pack, it's price is top-pack, and it's quality is low to mid-pack. The car can't maintain it's recommended status in CR to save it's life.

cds12

hey the back seat and the side body moldings are always the first things i check out along with the length of the turn signal lever, of course. these are my top 3 deal makers or breakers

toyotaken

The reason that I didn't say anything about that was that I thought that the front seats of both vehicles were about the same for comfort. That is at least for me. I know that for the most part, that is very subjective as well, so some may be more comfortable in one vs. the other. I do like the newer design on the dash of the Accord, but similarly, I think that both are very easy to find everything on, so subjective as well. A couple other differences. The Accord did not include a cassete deck as standard equipment vs. the Camry's standard cassette, but the Accord has the transponder key security standard vs. security being optional on the Camry.

So as I said, very comparable cars, just differences in "personality". The accord is a bit sportier at the expense of a bit of comfort for the rear passengers and trunk space, the camry is a bit softer in terms of ride.

atlantabenny

accord won out for us because of its tech features, like:

1) 4-wheel wishbone suspension - better handling, comfort, road feel (camry has regular macphersons in front)
2) 5-speed auto tranny - camry and all others in the same price class have 4-speed. benefits fuel economy and responsiveness
3) reverse engine orientation - less exhaust backpressure/higher hp and faster emission processing by catalytic converter

camry's upsides are many too, as we carbuffs already know, like the superior quietness/isolation and the passenger conveniences that toyotaken mentioned.

well, the family (actually more of my) scorecard gave more weight to the "this car's high-tech" criterion.

andys120

if you read it you'll find that the Passat's last place finish was a kind of mathematical anomaly. The testers actual comments reveal that several of them preferred the Passat to all others. They were nearly unanimous that the VW had the most distinctive and attractive styling.

Bribaby, I disagree with all of your points. "Skinny"? what's that mean?

anonymousposts

Good styling does not make for a great car. They also said the steering was rubbery and vague, the brakes have poor modulation, it exhibits more body roll than the Accord, the 2.8 was the smallest and least powerful engine of the group. In summary they said "It's a strange world we live in; the Accord feels like a German car, and the Passat doesn't"

So if styling is your only basis for buying a car then buy the Passat but in every other category the Accord trumps it.

atlantabenny

passat was top in 4 (in & out styling, ride and seats) and ranked low if not last in 16 of r & t's other categories, with raw numbers supporting the place it earned.

that the testers said so much about its appeal, i believe, was more in wonderment of the passat's gap in subjective (styling & character mostly) and objective scores.

if ever there was a message in the article, it looks like "the passat is good for your mood, the accord is good for your wallet."

andys120

I'd buy an old Tercel and forget about anything new, Accords and Passats included /;^)

maxamillion1

Overall, I like the Passat's styling and interior better than the Accord or Camry, but the Accord is clearly a better choice IMO.

bowke28

tested the 6, the passat, and the altima. they said criteria was 200+ hp, and a manny tranny with 4 doors. i was rather upset that they didnt include the ex-l, even though hp is 160. only my opinion, but i think it would have still beat the rest in everything but straight line acceleration. even though i like the accord better, the camry should also have been in it.

atlantabenny

referred obviously to best value-for-money a new-car shopper stands to obtain among the alternatives within the set tested by r & t, and not to other vehicles...which squares with the topic of this thread.

talon95

Wasn't that the Jetta, not the Passat?

bjbird2

From Edmund's, this also confirms that the Passat has better resale than anything in it's class.

"The Volkswagen Passat was given Automotive Lease Guide's Residual Value Award for the Midsize Car segment — meaning that it holds its value better than any other car in its class. Volkswagen of America also received the Industry Brand Residual Value Award from ALG."

anonymousposts

The marginal percentage advantage (if any) that the Passat has over the Accord is not worth mentioning when the Accord has more features for a lower price, more power, and better driving dynamics than the Passat.

maxamillion1

Not the Passat, because it only makes 190 hp. I kinda wish the Accord could have been in the comparo as well. I have looked EVERYWHERE for the Car and Driver mag for this month, and I haven't found one yet. I've got R&T and Motortrend here now. I'll try to find the C&D Wednesday.

I went by the VW dealership in my area Friday night. They have a big sell going on "Ten cent over invoice" I want to cut them a check for a Passat GLX so bad, because they are so PRETTY. I wanted the 5spd manual, and he still was offering "Ten Cent over invoice" He stated that it would take about 90 days for the car to reach me. It's worth the wait IMO. Oh boy this is a tough decision, especially for someone as young as me. I basically don't know what to do. I like the Accords price, features and value, but I like the styling of the Passat and EVEN the Camry SE better (not much better though) The Altima is my favorite style-wise, but I cannot deal with the interior. One guy over at Freshalloy.com believes the interioer will be updated for 2004 (since the Maxima is out in March) I don't know about that since the Maxima's interior is a step down now. He also believes that the Altima will get the new "tooth" grille. I believe it will as well. So it looks like the Altima is out! I HATE THAT. Why oh why does Nissan do this to me.

8u6hfd

BMW's & Porsches uses MacPherson struts also. But no-one complains about their handling, right? You don't really get complaints about BMW's blend of ride and handling, right? The WRX uses struts also.

It's about how the suspension is tuned. The Camry, is tuned more for comfort than handling else.

The Passat uses the double wishbone suspension also, but it's tuning (like the Jetta, GOlf, & New Beetle) is more for comfort than handling.

atlantabenny

the mcpherson system is more widely applied for cost-driven reasons, where the performance/cost result is acceptable.

the double-wishbone, on the other hand, offers better performance but is more expensive.

true, suspension tuning can erase user-discernible differences especially for mainstream cars (unaware though why porsche or bmw would opt for mcpherson other than for drivetrain packaging considerations).

all things being equal for everyday use, personally it makes sense to prefer a car that has technologically better DNA than one that doesn't. sort of like wanting an overhead cam versus a pushrod engine even if both produce the same horsepower.

here's a link that compares the 2 suspension systems, and excerpts from that website.

the lexus website, incidentally, acknowledges the superiority of the double wishbone system versus the mcpherson in its ls model.

http://satoauto.com/november.htm

"With a McPherson strut, a control arm is used to support the suspension at the bottom and a spring-over-shock as the suspensions upper mounting point. The advantage to this type of suspension is the ease and low cost of manufacture. The problem here is the "shock absorber" not only damps the spring action, but must also act as the steering pivot and must absorb acceleration and braking forces as well. Perhaps more important, is the loss of tire contact with the road as the wheel moves in a big arc in response to road irregularities."

"Acura’s racing inspired suspension uses "wishbones" or "A" shaped control arms to support the suspension at both the top and the bottom...This sophisticated design frees the shock absorber to perform its primary duty of damping spring action without having to absorb driving forces. This also means that each tires contact patch is consistent, providing more traction for accelerating, turning and braking"

atlantabenny

from previous post, fwd cars evidently need a double wishbone system to manage the multiple forces on the front wheels.

rwd cars, or where the driving wheels are not the steering wheels, can have the mcphersons with less tradeoffs.

8u6hfd

my dad's old Pinto had double wishbone suspension.

I guess the Pinto had a race-inspired suspension after all (don't fall into the whole advertisement hype)

I don't recall seeing how on the strut body where it would act as a steering pivot, may the source is referring to some special strut that has this feature. The pivot point is located on the hub.

It's true the the MacPherson design does not allow for a wide range of instant camber adjustments for road irregularities.

One thing that is missed is the packaging of the MacPherson strut design is more efficient (less space), one of the reasons why it's used.

Though what's interesting, the design of the the SLA suspension in racing cars, especially in the very tight, twisting road courses, you'll see the wheels bouncing off the ground every now and then. But the design of the SLA details are a bit different from what we see in a street car.

8u6hfd

if fwd cars evidently need a double wishbone system to manage the multiple forces on the front wheels, then why did Honda MoCo switch to a MacPherson front suspension design for the Civic platform?

Did the honda engineers have some sort of brain fart, where they forgot that a double wishbone suspension is absolutely mandatory for the Civic platform?

If the MacPherson design is so inadequate in FWD cars, why do we still see MacPherson design? Are engineers that stupid?

Both designs have their advantages and disadvantages. Just because the double wishbone suspension has the marketing hype of race-inspired, doesn't mean it's automatically better.

Are Subaru engineers allowed to call their MacPherson strut suspension Rally-inspired? Since it's rally-inspired, is it inherently better than a double wishbone design?

atlantabenny

well, i know what you mean here but as a practice i investigate the merits and demerits of an ad claim before offering an opinion, particularly that related posts here are taken as buying advice by some.

that said, it looks like we agree that the wishbone system is a better set-up and that it gave a point for pinto rather than the pinto taking something away from it.

talon95

An extremely theoretical situation... if you had two comparable cars, one with a MacPherson strut suspension and one with double wishbones, and each was tuned to its maximum potential by experts who were equally skilled in one design or the other, the double wishbone suspension should provide superior handling. The difference most frequently cited is the superior camber control of the d/w, which helps keep the tire patch in better contact with the road.

This isn't "the whole advertisement hype"... you can find sites that deal with suspension engineering that are completely independent of any automaker, and they'll confirm this. It's not advertising hype, it's an engineering reality. The d/w suspension have inherent design characteristics that CAN BE leveraged for superior handling over other designs. That being side, it doesn't mean that these characteristics are always taken advantage of.

Atlantabenny probably should have added "for optimal handling" to his statement "fwd cars evidently need a double wishbone system to manage the multiple forces on the front wheels'. I don't know exactly what prompted the switch to struts on the Civic, but clearly it wasn't a "brain fart" or stupidity on the part of the engineers, because a d/w suspension is not "absolutely mandatory for a Civic". Even Honda/Acura can design great handling performance into strut suspensions, as evidenced by the accolades for the Acura RSX.

The reality of all this is that much more is dependent on the skills and goals of the suspension design engineers than it is on struts vs. d/w's. Many, if not all, tests of the new Accord have praised it for its excellent balance between ride comfort and handling prowess (not sports car, "zoom zoom" handling, but it still can handle the twisties with plenty of confidence.) I think it's fair to say that much of this balance has to do with the engineers' effective use of d/w suspension. Also, with Mazda's decision to market their midsized car to sports enthusiasts, they've used a d/w design to come up with what is arguably one of the best handling FWD designs ever with the Mazda 6.

On the other hand, BMW (and Acura, as mentioned above) have developed some of the most heralded suspension designs among production cars based on struts. On the other hand (I guess we're up to 3 hands now... ), the ride-oriented tuning of the d/w suspensions on the Hyundai Sonata and Kia Optima yielded the poorest overall handling scores in the recent C/D test of midsized cars. And of course, we have your Ford Pinto example...

So nothing is automatic... lots depends on the skills of the engineers and the target market of the car.

talon95

As for the Pinto, double wishbone designs were very common among American cars prior to the MacPherson strut becoming the predominate suspension design among production cars. That happened when FWD became so common. Ford didn't put double wishbones on the Pinto so that it could tout its "race-inspired handling prowess". They did it because pretty much everyone else did at the time. These double wishbone suspensions were ride-oriented "workaday" designs that exhibited no discernable effort to leverage the inherent advantages of their design choice.

BTW, "rally-inspired suspension".... now THAT'S advertising hype.

atlantabenny

as the less expensive system, and with car makers striving to maximize profit, it's not hard to see why mcphersons were given to the civic.

the main point of this exchange, i believe, is for forum readers to know is what is the better suspension system and how does it weigh in on their choice between the accord, camry and passat.

and before the message gets lost, maybe i should restate that publicly available information support the superiority of the double wishbone system. and if there are facts to controvert this, then let those facts be presented.

that consumers can fall for ad hype is a very good point, but advertising intensity per se doesn't mean that a product claim is false - which evidently was your concern.

and from what i've read and seen, it's not the case with double wishbone systems.

atlantabenny

your posts enhanced understanding there, thanks.

chillenhonda

Honda has gotten a lot of negativity towards its use of struts replacing the wishbones on the latest Civic and RSX. It claims to have done it for simplicity, lower cost, space savings, crash protection, and a lower hoodline. A lot of tuners noted that it was harder to work with and tune the struts versus the wishbones onthe previous model. I think though, that the engineers have achieved the goals they set out for (see above) while notexactly making the Civic a terrible ride or bad handler. This is evidenced even better in the RSX. So, while in publications it may sound like the Civic went downmarket, I think that a lot was and can be achieved with good engineering.