Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Help Me Choose!

16869717374122

Comments

  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    edited April 2011
    You kept your last car for 11 years and 240K miles. Why wouldn't you consider an ex-program car or similar with 3-6K on it for the same price as a "new" Accord? As long as it's never been a rental, and is only a few months old, you'll never know the difference between brand new.

    http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp?tracktype=usedcc&csDlId=&csDgId=&listin- - - - gId=59562450
    With only 3600 miles on it, it's their loss of 5K in depreciation and taxes.

    http://www.edmunds.com/car-buying/used-car-deals-program-cars-rental-cars-salvag- - - e-titles.html

    Program cars are perhaps the best hidden gem in the industry that most people don't know about. They represent the best of the best CPO models as they were never used by a rental agency and were scrupulously maintained and used by some executive of the company or similar.

    Usually there are only a few hundred every year in the entire U.S., as well. They go quickly and are usually incredibly rare to actually find for sale.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    Don't worry about pressure to consider something else. No matter what advice people ask around here, there is always someone who wants to introduce something else into the mix... no matter how clear you make it. ;)

    One consistent thing most people say about mid-sized sedans these days is that you really can't go wrong with any of them. There are plenty of people who shake their heads whenever they hear someone complain about the Accord's alleged "slip in quality." There are others who say that the (fill in the blank) generation of Accord was the worst because they had a bad experience.

    Likewise, there are plenty who shake their head when they hear about the past reputation of anything made by Hyundai. And there are others who think their old model was the best car they ever owned.

    As I said before, ANY car can have problems. If I were in your shoes, I'd take reliability out of the mix at this point and really examine which car you'd rather drive for ten years. Perhaps that may help you know what will really make you happy, be it handling, comfort, looks, etc. The more I read and hear, the less I'm concerned about the reliability of most anything in this segment.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I really think Acura's perception as a luxury brand is overrated. They are nothing more than a glorified Honda and they do not offer much more in refinement or detail than a Honda does.

    Brands like Lexus and Infiniti are much different than their non-luxury counterparts.

    While an Acura is an excellent car and they do have good build quality, the price they command is not warranted, IMO.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    edited April 2011
    In Japan, all Hondas are sold as Hondas. They split the line into two for the U.S. market. But the cars are the same for the most part. The current Accord is the Accord in Japan and the TSX in the U.S.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Accord_%28Japan_and_Europe_eighth_generation%- - - 29
    This is what the rest of the world gets when they buy an Accord.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Inspire
    Since 2007, this is what we've had as the "Accord" in the U.S. It is a step down from the Accord in Japan and feels like a slightly cheaper car than the previous generation Accord to many.

    Honda Inspire "Accord" EX - 190 HP @7000, 162 lb·ft @4400 rpm
    Honda Accord "TSX" - 201 HP @ 7000 rpm, 170 @ 4300 rpm
    Better interior and better engine as well, as expected.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,837
    Question - have you driven either or both of these vehicles? I didn't go back to your original post, but taking a drive in each of them might swing your opinion one way or the other.

    If I knew I was likely to buy a new vehicle and keep it for many years, I'd probably be more interested in the Sonata just because of the long warranty.

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • get a 3 series BMW instead.
  • sjack1sjack1 Posts: 4
    I'm going to buy a brand new red 2011 Accord Ex-L. I'm paying $23,589 plus ttl. I'm told that is a good price. I'm picking it up tonight. I was seriously considering the Sonata and I do think it is a very good vehicle but I could get the Accord with the same trim level for essentially the same price. With the lower insurance costs and the .9% financing, and the higher resell value (should I ever decide to trade up), it just made sense to stick with Honda, which was my original plan. Just wish they had a better warranty, but one can't have everything. Thank all of you for your responses and input -- it really helped me make my decision.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,689
    Hope you get as many years of good service out of your new Accord as the old one! It does seem like a very good price for that car.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    I'm going to buy a brand new red 2011 Accord Ex-L.

    Congrats! And thanks for keeping us updated.

    You are paying below invoice and below Edmunds' TMV so it seems like a pretty good deal to me... unless there was a trade involved.

    I'm sure you will be happy with your purchase. I hope we see you hanging around in the Accord forums. :)
  • dispencer2dispencer2 Posts: 299
    I have a friend who buys a new CTS every couple of years. His 2003 rode like a truck - very stiff. The later models rode better. He does road trips and rarely gets 25 mpg. I may consider the new XTS in a couple of years. The Accord is fine and so is a Camry. I have rented several Malibus in the last year and liked all of them. I never really had a problem passing as long as you plan where and when. It is not a Northstar but does the job. I like the Malibu because it has a smooth, soft, ride, is comfortable for a long 6 or 7 hour day on an interstate, and got more than 30 on the road.

    The new 2012 or 13 Malibu just shown at the NY Auto Show will probably cause me to wait until I can drive one before buying either it or a leftover 2011. Unfortunately it has that stupid touch screen for the radio. My wife's Traverse has one and I much prefer just a normal radio. I don't want Navigation anyway. I'll wait and see what models are available, options, prices, etc. Hopefully Chevrolet will release some information soon other than just photos.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,837
    could some of you with used vehicle purchasing knowledge/experience help out a new-to-the-US fella who's looking for a vehicle in the $8-10K range?

    He's over here: Purchasing Used Vehicles

    While he's not limited to sedans, I know that some of you are very good at helping others spend their money :) (wisely, of course).

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • angel1955angel1955 Posts: 2
    I have a 2005 Mazda 3 that seems to have a intermittent problem when starting. From time to time the car will not start, and yet at other time it crank up okay. The battery, and the starter have been replaced. One particular dealer where i had the car worked on stated that battery cable needs to be replaced. They are stating that someone cross the battery, and that this has blown the fuse in the battery cable causing the problem. Actually this is not true because the problem come and goes. The cost the dealer wants to charge me for the replacement of the cable is about $1200.00 big ones. There is an actual bulletin out by Mazda, Bulletin 01-037/08, not sure if anybody knows if this is a fix for the problem. It appears as indicated in the bulletin that its may cost last than $50.00 to fix. Please help.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,837
    Hi - this discussion is for people trying to decide which sedan to buy. You'll probably have better luck in our Mazda3 Maintenance & Repair discussion. Just click on my link to hop over there and post your issue.

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • djm2djm2 Posts: 705
    After owning this vehicle for almost a year, I have the following comments:

    1.) The "fit and finish" of the vehicle is outstanding.

    2.) The vehicle drives very much like my old 2003 4 cylinder Honda Accord.

    3.) There is "quality" in this vehicle!

    4.) The 6 speed automatic transmission operates very efficiently.

    5.) The engine has "adequate power," ---- but it could use a little more HP. (Maybe a larger 4 cylinder engine 2.7)

    6.) The engine could use a Turbo as an option.

    7.) The vehicle could use a bigger fuel tank.

    8.) The MPG are not as advertised. ----- The only way that I can break 30 mpg is by traveling at 55mph on the highway. ----- This is not always possible, when the posted speed limit is 65mph. ----- (My 2007 V6 Camry XLE get 30+ mpg at 65 mph easily.) ----- The four cylinder engine appears to be working hard at 65 mph. ----- While the engine is capable of powering the vehicle to 80+ mph, it is wound out at about 70 mph.

    9.) The Original Equipment Tires are not quality tires. ------ They a "cheap!" ----- I changed my tires to Michelin. --- Now the vehicle handles like a high quality vehicle!

    WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN WITH THIS VEHICLE!

    General Motors has done an outstanding job designing this vehicle, now they need to make some changes to make it an OUTSTANDING VEHICLE that could go "head to head" with with a Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry.

    General Motors needs to refine the four cylinder engine. ----- It needs more HP, and it must get better mileage. ----- It needs more "reserve power" in the "top end" for passing! ------ (GM needs to look at the four cylinder Honda Accord Engine as an example!)

    NOTE:
    I enjoy driving this vehicle, and I am not sorry that I made the purchase. (I have an outstanding dealer!) ---- I would look at another Malibu in the future, but I would hope that GM would make some changes. ---- The V6 engine would give the necessary power, but it does not deliver the mileage like the Camry. ----------- (QUESTION: ---- Why can't an American Vehicle Manufacturer design and build an efficient / powerful four cylinder engine like Toyota, & Honda?

    BEST REGARDS TO ALL!

    Dwayne :shades: :confuse: ;)
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 791
    I think GM's 2.4L (and Ford 2.5L, which is actually Mazda's 2.5L) are reasonably competitive, but they are hobbled by their 6-speed automatic transmissions! With anything less than a deliberately heavy foot on the gas, their only mission is to get into 6th gear and stay there! The last rental I had was a Chevy Equinox and it annoyed the crap out of me.

    For example, I could be stopped at a red light behind other cars. When it turned green, I could only start to ease forward at the rate of the idiot in front me. In a few seconds, he/she would realize that they're moving at a glacial pace and start accelerating like a normal person. By then, we're moving at 30mph and the Equinox was in 4th gear racing for 5th....it was caught flat-footed and the only remedy was to floor it...then start counting to pass the time, "one, Mississippi; two, Miss..." and finally, a downshift from 4th or 5th down 2nd, followed by varying degrees of forward thrust! That is, if you don't recoil in fear at the noise and vibration generated by the engine revving instantly to 6000rpm+...the Ford is even worse than I've described!
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    The normal solution for this is to put a small I-6 engine in it(2.5L or so) to give it better torque and more HP.

    The proper solution, though, is to get it with manual. This increases the driving characteristics and acceleration in traffic to almost twice as quick, especially when merging, passing, or zipping into a gap in traffic (which the automatic simply won't do at all, at least not safely) The automatic further complicates things with extra weight and a good 10-20% parasitic losses that the manual doesn't have.

    It's a typical GM automatic in that it has two modes: 0-60 in 15-20 seconds in normal driving and 0-60 in the advertised time only if you flog it as hard as you can. (ie - might as well have a toggle switch set at 25% and 100% for a gas pedal for all the good trying to get it to move quickly will do you)

    If you want your Cruze to feel like it has a turbo or a 6 cylinder engine, get stick.
  • djm2djm2 Posts: 705
    Having driven a four cylinder automatic 2003 Honda Accord, (for 3+ years), I have a basis of comparison between the Malibu's four cylinder and that of the Honda.

    The following are the keys points:

    1.) The four cylinder Honda could easily achieve 30mpg on the highway, at legal highway speeds. (My four cylinder Malibu requires me to drive at 55mph in order to break 30 mpg, yet it is advertised to get 33mpg. ----- This is not just my vehicle. ----- This complaint is all over the "net" with regards to this issue. ---- But GM does not seem to be concerned about this minor glitch!)

    2.) The four cylinder Honda had plenty of reserved power at highway speeds for passing. ------- (While the Malibu four cylinder is "adequate," it could use more reserve power for passing at highway speeds!) ---- The Malibu engine is not as refined as the Honda engine.

    3.) The seating in the Malibu is more comfortable than that of the Honda.

    4.) I have the LTZ Malibu. Since it has the four cylinder engine it only has one exhaust. From a design point of view, the vehicle would look much sharper if had a dual exhaust system. ----- (They could have split the single exhaust at the rear of the vehicle to get this look.) ---- A nice touch in terms of image, would be a "slight rumble in the exhaust," like a Ford Mustang. (Nothing too loud, just a little feel / sound of power!)

    5.) The design of the vehicle is outstanding. This is a "home run" for General Motor, and this could put them back into the automotive marketplace in a "big way!" ---- General motors needs to redesign / improve their four cylinder engine offerings. ---- (If Honda can produce a four cylinder that offers good mileage and performance, why can't General Motors accomplish the same goal? ----- Don't we have talented automotive engineers working for American companies? -----)

    6.) The original equipment tires on the Malibu are of a very poor quality. -- (They do not hold air!) ----- I replaced them with Michelin tires, and I no longer have the air loss issue. (The Honda Accord comes with Michelin tires.) ----- GM did nothing to assist me with the replacement cost of these defective tires, and I am NOT happy with this issue!

    Best regards.
    Dwayne :shades: :confuse: ;)
  • wik82wik82 Posts: 21
    Hi all I'm new here. I've been looking for a new car for about a month. I'm not in DIRE need (current car hasn't broken down or anything) but I am trying to narrow my choices. I had been holding out for a BMW 3-series but setting that aside, I came upon 4 cars I am considering (All are used models, from "07-'11):

    Cruze
    Jetta
    Altima
    Accord

    The cruze is just something I stumbled onto. I only added it to the list because I have yet to narrow it from the list lol. I have done zero research. The interior looks nice and the 36 MPG is attractive. That is the extent of my knowledge. Thing is, it is such a new model I don't know if I can realistically find a used one.

    The Jetta was the car I initially was looking at when I started poking around. I have heard nothing but good things about them. I like the looks, the apparent quality etc etc.

    Altima seems to be the top contender right now. I love the Jetta, but as far as gas...it can't compete with the Altima....right?! The Altima gets 3 more miles per gallon and has a 5.5 gallon larger capacity than the Jetta. Altima's also seem to have a good amount of bells and whistles but I REALLY want one with a sunroof as well and it seems to be more difficult to find these, especially compared to Jetta's which almost all seem to have sunroofs!

    I have a close personal friend who works at a Honda dealership. I don't know how much he can/will help me, but all that aside the accord doesn't seem to be much different than the Altima. Keep in mind i have not test driven any of these (yet). The accord edges the Altima in MPG but has a smaller gas tank. It seems the Accord has alot of nice interior stuff, leather seats etc but again, the question of the sunroof pops up...how common are they on Accords and how long am I going to be pulling my hair out looking for one. It SEEMS to me that the Accord and Altima are virtually the same cars, just depends on the selected features and such of each individual car that separates them...

    So, can anyone shed light on this? Make comments, give info and suggestions to me in regards to these cars? How they stack up with each other? Prior experiences. I have been doing alot of reading here as I just joined but thought I might as well make this topic to get specific feedback I am looking for. Also, can anyone comment on insurance costs? Thanks ahead of time for all constructive comments! Take care
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    edited May 2011
    Compared to a 3 series or even a used C class, these will all be a massive let-down because they are not really luxury brands, don't drive the same, and aren't RWD.

    IMO, instead of a 2007 3 series, you might look at a 2005 Lexus IS300. This was the last year and as such, it's all but bulletproof. With a ~3250lb weight, though, it drives like a late 90s 3 series, but with Toyota reliability. You'll never regret buying one. Assuming that you don't hold out for the 3 series, though the recent models are quite heavy. You might be better off with a used 1 series.

    note - an IS350 is a whopping 3650lbs, give or take. The newer 3 series are almost as heavy. They somehow lost that small sport sedan magic over the years as they got larger and larger.

    http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp?tracktype=usedcc&csDlId=&csDgId=&listin- - gId=53002483
    The same price as a typical entry level sedan. Given that the car was designed to last 250-300K+ miles, the mileage isn't even worth worrying about.

    http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=u&car_id=297865653
    This is what I'd chose, myself, but that's because with manual, these really are as close as Japan ever got to equaling a BMW.
  • wik82wik82 Posts: 21
    Thanks so much for the reply. I had looked at Lexus but was checking out the IS250 instead. Not much around me though. Thing is, I don't want RWD. I'm in Ohio where we get the worst of summers and the worst of winters. RWD is notoriously bad for the winter. FWD or AWD is the way to go, for me at this point.

    The BMW/Lexus issue is at the very top of my price range. So if I can get one, COOL. If not though, I don't want to pigeon hole myself into a massive payment with a car that has no or little warranty and something goes wrong, and suddenly it costs me $1,000 to replace a water pump, just as an example. That is why I listed the 4 other models above. I am calling to find out insurance costs for all of these models, to see if that swings the deal or not.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,837
    I'm not sure whether you're looking at new or used Jettas, but I would be wary if it's not new due to numerous electrical issues that we see reported over & over. I had one, and it was a BLAST to drive, and my individual vehicle had few problems (however, many owners reported pretty serious & expensive electrical issues... I got lucky). A new one might be better, and of course it comes with a warranty.

    Altima - make sure you drive the exact vehicle you're planning to purchase. We've seen a number of complaints about the performance of the CVT transmission. Not sure if it's a "problem," per se, or a dislike of how the technology causes the vehicle to perform even if it's performing normally.

    You're clearly a smart shopper. Don't see too many people who go into the process with so many practical considerations, and with the knowledge that there is no "one true car" - if you take your time, you'll find the right vehicle at the right price instead of getting your heart set on ONE car and sacrificing financial and maintenance considerations just to have it.

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • wik82wik82 Posts: 21
    edited May 2011
    Kirstie, thanks so much for the reply. In regards to the Jetta, I had been looking at the '07-'10 models of Jetta. I have heard that the new '11 Jettas are getting some real bad reviews. More or less that VW went cheap, the quality of the Jetta was severely compromised etc etc. Can anyone comment on that? That has been the real reason I didn't even consider a new one. Pretty much every car, with the exception of the Cruze would be all used. Cruze seems to just be too new to find used for any real "discount".

    I had heard the Altima having "performance" issues with the CVT transmission. But I also read that many think it works fine, just doesn't have the "punch" that some people THINK it should have. I meant a guy who works for an auto auction company and he specializes in cars coming off lease. He said he can find me pretty much anything I want in a fairly short period of time. Because they normally sell to the dealerships though, he also said he could offer a similar car at a much cheaper price. Seemed like a real straight shooter, but I always like to keep my guard up, just in case.

    As far as the "one" car for me. I don't think there is such a thing. From what I am finding out Altimas and Accords are pretty much the same, just different companies. A 3-series is great looking, in my opinion, but so is the Lexus IS250. I figure if I am going to get into debt, I might as well get what I want, within reason though. No point in not being able to buy clothes and food, just to have a BMW hahaha
  • wik82wik82 Posts: 21
    Just as an update, the insurance is leading me towards the Jetta, ALtima and Accord. BMW is much MUCH higher, more so than I expected and I didn't even bother asking about the Lexus after I heard about the BMW.

    Jetta came in at the lowest of the 3, Accord, then Altima. They are all close though and not a major difference that would force one of these models out of the discussion.

    Being that I have only ever had 2 cars my entire life, I am unsure about car buying etiquette. Is it normal, acceptable, standard for someone to go to a local dealership and ask to test drive a certain model, even knowing that they have ZERO intention of buying at that moment? I was considering going to test drives these cars but I am not yet in the position, 100% to buy yet. Is it poor taste of me to go try one and then just thank them and leave? Comments welcome...
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    the question of the sunroof pops up...how common are they on Accords

    You shouldn't have any trouble finding an Accord with a sunroof. Honda simplifies their trimlines to the point where there aren't really any options. If it is an EX, you have a moonroof.

    If you are looking at used, you may discover that the Accord will be pricey because Honda's have very high resale values. Be sure to compare it to new.

    I'm not so sure you will find the Accord and Altima all that similar when you take a close look and drive them. Good luck in your search! Let us know how it works out.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    I was considering going to test drives these cars but I am not yet in the position, 100% to buy yet.

    Nothing wrong with being honest. Just tell them that you are in the market and plan on buying within a month, two months, or whatever. There may be pressure from some sales people to "buy today" but a reputable store will respect your shopping needs.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    edited May 2011
    That's the problem, though. All 3 series are RWD or RWD biased by design, so you're kind of stuck. If you have to have AWD, be aware that only full-time 4WD/AWD systems are actually useful for bad roads as they react too slowly to deal with snow and ice and rain and so on at moderate speeds. They are designed to help get you un-stuck and that's about it. If it's part-time or transfers power back and forth, it's not going to make you one bit safer in the winter.

    But, that said, I've lived with RWD for years, and stability control is what saves your bacon. My best friend has a 4Runner with stability control and it will keep him from sliding out on gravel and loose dirt - stuff that is as bad as snow in terms of traction. You get about 20% side-ways and it reels you back in. On a 5000+lb SUV, no less.

    But it's nothing compared to what snow tires will do for you. Snow tires and stability control in a RWD car will obliterate any AWD system with normal tires.

    Get RWD. Get stability control. Get winter tires. You'll be fine. And you'll have your 3 Series that you want. :P

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlYEMH10Z4s
    10mph on ice - 47ft vs 21ft stopping difference. Why I also chose this was because they happened to use a modern 3 series. With the right tires, a 3 series is perfectly safe. After all, Germany has.. um.. yeah, winters that are easily on par with Ohio. And you don't hear about Mercedes and BMW owners crashing all the time over there.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGfvyPtYR0Y&NR=1
    More BMW 3 series fun in snow.
  • djm2djm2 Posts: 705
    Hi All:
    I have looked at the Nissan Vehicles a number of times over the years, but pushed them to the side for two reasons. ----1st.) The CVT transmission. ----- and ----- 2nd.) The quality of the Nissan Dealers in my part of the country. ---- The Nissan dealers are one step up from a Chrysler dealer, (both are "bottom feeders" in the automotive retail business, with VERY poor service reputations!) ----- If I cannot get "high quality service" in a timely manner, I do not want to own the product! ----- While the Malibu could use a more powerful 4 cylinder engine (169hp), like the Buick Lacross (182hp), it is a very nice vehicle. ------- My LTZ four cylinder Malibu is almost one year old, and it has 13,000 miles. ------ The original equipment tires were of a VERY POOR QUALITY, and I replaced them with Michelin Tires. ---------- This eliminated the "air leak problem," and improved the handling quality of the vehicle. ------- (General Motors knows about the "quality problem" of the original equipment tires, but chooses to do nothing about it, which is what I will remember when searching for a replacement vehicle for my 2007 XLE Camry in late 2012. ---- "IF" I purchase another GM vehicle, the dealer will install Michelin tires as part of the deal, or there will be no deal! ------- I will walk, and purchase another Camry! ---- (The Toyota Dealer has already contacted me and wanted me to trade for a 2011, but I am not ready at this point in time) -------- Best regards. ------- Dwayne :shades: :confuse: ;) :)
  • wik82wik82 Posts: 21
    Thanks to everyone who has put together the excellent info/opinions and feedback.

    I am curious if anyone can explain the CVT issue? I have read that some people don't like it. Feel it is not responsive. Stuff like that. Dwayne, is that specifically what you are referring to, or...???

    I hear alot about the CVT trany, but if I go with an automatic, doesn't that solve the issues? Or IS the CVT the automatic? I will admit, that has been one thing I didn't do much research on...please please please, someone let me know about this!
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,689
    edited May 2011
    I have a 2010 Sentra with the CVT and overall I like it, for two reasons:

    * Smooth driving: almost a "turbine" feel--no perception of shifting as with a conventional automatic.

    * Low revving: This is the only car I've ever owned that revs lower while in gear than in idle. When puttering along around 35-40 mph, it will be at about 1100 RPMs, but in idle it's around 1200 RPMs. This translates to very good fuel economy--better than the EPA estimates. I can hit 40 mpg on the highway at 65-70 steady cruise, and low 30s in town in good weather (I'm at 33.6 mpg right now on a half-tank). At 70 mph, it's at 2000 RPMs--very low for a 2.0L, 140 hp engine. And low revs translate to low noise when cruising along.

    The CVT has a 10-year, 120,000 mile warranty. Not sure when that was put into place, however.

    If you want responsive shifting, get a 2007 Accord with the 5-speed stick. Great shifter, and IMO more fun to drive than the 2008-present generation.
  • wik82wik82 Posts: 21
    guys, I just got back from test driving an Accord. A good friend of mine is a Honda salesman so I went to talk to him and took one for a test drive. It was very nice, the interior was great. Seemed to have pretty friendly controls.

    Tomorrow or Wednesday I will go try the Altima.

    One "wild card" that came up though, was the Kia Optima. It was something I had not really looked into but before I get any sneering people who won't consider Kia as a possibility just because they aren't in the annals of car history, it seems to be pretty solid. The MPG for the automatic (34) is similar to Altimas(32) and Accords(34).

    Lots of features you can add. The Optima has 15-25 more HP in the engine than the Accord and Altima (Optima is 200, Altima is 175 and Accord is 190).

    The sunroof that I desire that seems to be a gamble to find on Altimas is ever present in Accords and Optimas. The local Kia dealership has a professional review that was done for Optimas which gives it very good reviews and suggests that it is, without doubt, rival to an Accord, or Altima.

    Can anyone support or dismiss this? Preferably someone with experience and not just "I have an Accord, it is better than an Optima because it's Honda". I would love to hear tangible, constructive opinions. Thanks!
Sign In or Register to comment.