Honda Accord vs Ford Fusion

elroy5

Engine is smoother per whom

"when you wind out the Duratec V-6 hard, it doesn't sound as pure as Honda's V-6".(per C&D)

Just one example, from Car & Driver. I'm sure I could find many more, if you insist.

My, and most reviewer's perception, is obviously different from yours. But then they are all bias, like me, right? I can understand why you would think I am bias towards the Accord (I own one). Why would Car & Driver be bias?

ctalk

You seem to always state, "pure perception" a lot.

You have to realize that what YOU perceive may be different than others (and reviewers). You seem to believe that what you perceive is RIGHT. Yes it is right, for YOU. But it may not be for others.

The Fusion to me does not offer the balance I wanted. If I wanted a performance car, I'd go out and buy the VW GTI (which I must say, I've fallen in love with!) I was looking for balance. The Accord offered an extremely comfortable interior, and yet great handling.

Don't get me wrong, the Fusion is a great car. Ford finally came out with a midsize that I respect.

scape2

I post "perception" quite a bit because..
There is a show on TV called Autoline Detroit. Don't let the Detroit part fool you. The host has all types of stories and guests from across the industry. On one segment he decided to do a show all about how many feel the Asian brands are just decimating the U.S. auto industry. In this segment he brought out facts about how quality/reliability/fit/finish ect of GM/Ford models have now risen and do equal Asian brands. He gave actual models, stats, showed door panels, fenders, interiors, engines ect.. and showed how far GM/Ford have risen to the challenge. Yet, Americans have been bombarded from the Media over the last 10 years that in no way, no how will a Ford or GM product ever meet or beat a Honda/Toyota. The hurdle Ford/GM now had to jump was how the consumer perceived the product.
Nope, I never said the Fusion/Milan were better than an Accord or Camry.. just equal..

ctalk

I do agree with you that the media needs to give Ford (and GM) a chance. The Fusion is a good car, and people should start considering it. It would be great if everyone would consider ALL the cars in this segment, and from there, chose the one that best fits your needs.

Also, you need to realize that Detroit Autoline is "one opinion". Edmunds, C&D, Motortrend, etc are also just purely opinions. For an example: Fit and Finish, Interior Design, Interior Comfort, Engine, are all subjective. You can't use one source, and use it as a fact. Whenever I buy a car, I consider these reviews and comparisons as opinions (or suggestions). But I never buy a car based on a reviewers opinion. I have to test drive it, and compare the cars myself.

On the subject of reliability, I am just wondering what "facts" did Detroit Autoline have to prove that Ford is at the same level as Honda (and Toyota).

Oh and is there any video online that I can watch of this show?

elroy5

There is a show on TV called Autoline Detroit.

Does the name "Detroit" mean something here? Of course it does. Every show I have seen is purely an effort to garner support for "Detroit" American made autos. Autoline (no doubt) gets all it's advertising dollars from the American auto companies. And you say auto review magazines are bias. That's Amazing. The name says it all.

deepdivot2

It's well known the domestics dug themselves a deep hole 25-30 years ago with poor quality vehicle, and many believe they haven't dug out yet. Here's an interesting tidbit, not scientific, but at least as meaningful as most drivel regarding car quality that one finds on the net and in popular magazines. In the Edmunds Problems and Solutions forums, the Honda Accord has more entries than Chevy Malibu, Volkswagen Jetta, Ford F150 and Ranger combined! Honda's are great cars, but they break just like all the others, and if these forums are any indication, perhaps a little more often!

scape2

"Does the name "Detroit" mean something here? Of course it does"

Wrong.. If you ever watched the show you would see the host has CEO's, Managers, Engineers, critics ect from across the industry spectrum. He has had Toyota/Honda/Nissan/BMW/Volkswagon you name the car company he has had them on the show. He even had Chinese automakers, managers, ect on in one segment. Very interesting I might add. I have to say.. Look out the Chinese are coming. Its inevitable..
Honda and Toyota make great vehicles no doubt. My whole feeling is perception is what Ford and GM now have to win the consumer with. It has been so beat into our heads by the media that Ford/GM cannot make good vehicles that some consumers will never even bother to even visit a showroom and miss out on what could be a great vehicle at a great value.

By the way.. what is it you have agains AMERICAN auto companies...??

tallman1

You've just posted a message that drives most people (including the hosts here) nuts. You cannot derive anything from the number of posts in a forum.

First of all there is the number of cars sold.... the more that are sold, the more reported problems if all else is the same.

More important is the content of posts... a scratch on the dash can have 15 replies but a report about a bad tranny can have zero. That would be 16 entries vs. 1 entry. Which problem would you rather have? And how many posts go off on a tangent so that there may be entries that have nothing to do with a problem?

And yes, Hondas do have problems because no car is perfect. However, number of posts mean nothing.

scape2

Yes, number of posts may mean nothing, or maybe they do. It is touted over and over again how reliable and bullet proof every Honda and Toyota are. Yet, when you cruise the net, and visit rooms here at Edmunds, people are having problems.. Why? :shades:

tallman1

FOR ME, the 214k miles on my 95 Accord reinforce the reliability factor. So far, I'm impressed with the quality of my 06. I can only hope I get the same quality years out of it as my old car but I don't have a crystal ball.

I'm also aware that not everyone has had my experience and I'm aware that other cars may last as long as my 95. I wish that upon you, in fact. I'm just not going to worry about defending my decision to stick with Honda. Ya ain't draggin' me into any silly arguments. I'm happy, you're happy... all is right with the world!!

pat

Here is one of my (many) efforts at explaining why numbers of posts are totally irrelevant: pat, "Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread" #6046, 11 Aug 2006 7:49 am.

Here is a post a fellow Forums member made who explained it better than I did: snakeweasel, "Economy Sedans (~$16k-$20k)" #417, 11 Aug 2006 12:04 pm.

The numbers of posts in any given discussion mean absolutely zip. If we had a "My [whatever] is the best vehicle in the world absolutely, bar none" discussion for every single model of every make, the numbers of posts in those discussions would also mean zip. Honest!

:shades:

ctalk

Another reason for the greater number of posts in the Honda Problems forum may be the simple fact that there are more Honda owners out there.

The ratio between cars owned and the number of problems is more important than simply the number of problems

elroy5

By the way.. what is it you have against AMERICAN auto companies...??

You keep saying it is people's perception, that American cars are less reliable, and lower quality than Hondas and Toyotas. Perception comes from your own experiences, and your own reality. I drive other family member's cars (06 Monte Carlo, 06 Impala, 01 Malibu, 03 Grand Marquis, Dodge Caravan, Taurus, and Chevy Truck) . I have a Chevy Truck in the driveway right now. I have driven them enough to know the quality is not there. Something as simple as the way blinker switch operates, can tell a lot about how well a car is built. Until I bought my first Accord, I thought all cars were basicly the same quality. Now I know better.

deepdivot2

Sorry I hit a nerve, because I generally agree with you. That was why I stated it was not scientific. This is true of most reliability 'data' we have available to us, including CR Reports and JD Power as post #417 implied. My main point is that Honda's have problems too, and one of my pet peaves is having someway say "I gonna get rid of my %@%@#$(Fill in domestic brand), and get a (Fill in import brand) because all I've got to do is put gas in it and change the oil. See, CR says so." I've read that statement, or one very similar to it, many times, and as I'm sure you know, it's pure garbage.

I would dearly like to see warranty information made public, because that's about the only data that I would trust, being that 'operator input' is not needed. Of course car companies with good reputations would never agree, and those with high warranty claims wouldn't either. And who knows, they could be the same companies!

BTW, I'm not an import basher, having owned more import cars than domestic over the years, and current vehicles are a Subaru, a 1984 Chevy Scottsdale (Yes it's running fine, thank you. The tanks haven't even exploded yet!), and a 1999 Corolla for the daughter.

deepdivot2

You want to be a little careful with this argument, as the vehicles I mentioned outsold (in total) the Honda by a significant margin and for that matter, I believe more F150s are sold than Accords every year, and the trucks obviously live a tougher life than the Accord does. One might expect a ton more problems with F150s, but if there are, they aren't necessarily discussed on Edmunds. The only point I wanted to reinforce previously is that Honda's break, just like all other cars. Some people lose sight of that.

ctalk

The only point I wanted to reinforce previously is that Honda's break, just like all other cars. Some people lose sight of that.

I'm pretty sure no one on this forum stated that Honda's never break. I notice it's actually people who assume Honda owners believe that. There is no automaker that can make perfect cars.

I didn't mean it as an argument. "Another reason for the greater number of posts in the Honda Problems forum may be the simple fact that there are more Honda owners out there." I used it as an example of the many factors that may contribute to the large amount of posts on the Accord problems forum.

thegraduate

"I used it as an example of the many factors that may contribute to the large amount of posts on the Accord problems forum."

Exactly right. I post regularly in the Accord problems forum. I go between two different Accords in my daily driving (1996, 2006), and we have a third in our household. Do you know how long it's been since I reported a problem in that forum? QUITE A WHILE, and it was a simple repair do to old age and high mileage on my 1996 Accord (165,000 miles now). I haven't posted a problem there in, well, many months, with the exception of me asking how to change a certain light bulb in my 1996 (hardly remeniscent of a car "breaking," merely the car "aging," no?

deepdivot2

You're correct on this specific forum with only 60-some entries. But in Edmund's in general, statements like "only have to put gas an oil in it", or "Honda quality is light years ahead of ..." are quite frequent. Don't get me wrong, Honda builds some great cars, but they've made some serious engineering mistakes, too, just all other car companies. I owned an '89 Accord which was reasonably reliable, but certainly not light years ahead of the competition, if it was ahead at all. Like the HOST, I've got my pet peeves, and one happens to be people making silly reliability claims that simply are not true. Often the claims are based on Consumer Reports, which has one of the most unscientific surveys pulled on mankind, second only to the Truman/Dewey phone surveys made prior to the 1948 presidential election. But that's for another forum!

You can rest easy, I'm off my high horse now!!!

ctalk

I also owned a '89 Accord! I had some problems and bad luck with it. It got broken into twice :sick:, bumped into a few times, and left me stranded a couple of times in the winter at the subway station. That was about after 8+ years of ownership I started have problems. It could be because I took the Accord up in the winter to Northern Canada a lot. Overall, enjoyed the car. It wasn't perfect, but at least I was happy with it.

I decided to branch off to other brands after the car, but i'm back again with a 2005 Honda Accord EX V6 :shades:

I wonder what my next car will be...

I am still looking for a second car, but I've stopped looking for a while.

deepdivot2

Interesting! I test drove a new Accord with my son when he was car shopping and it was very nice. Not in the market at present, but it would be one to consider if I were. So would the Fusion. I haven't driven one, only sat in one at a dealership, and it appears to be a nice improvement over the Taurus, at least at first look.

andreasp

I posted this in the wrong spot!
Not being able to lay out lots of money for a new car I shopped around for month. I settled on the base model, the Fusion S 2.4 5 speed manual, which I bought about 6 weeks ago. I had the ABS & Side Airbags added which with discouts and Costco pricing made the drive-out price $18,100 (including sales tax). So far my experience has been positive (understanding that one cannot compare the car with other models that are $1000-$4000 more expensive):

1) Fuel Consumption (I have 1900 miles on the car):
Improving every time I fill her up. Started at about 22.6 mpg and am at 24.7mpg now. (I keep a spreadsheet). This is exactly what the manual says about mproving - I commute about 65 mile return every day.

2) Radio/CD: I have just the base model. It is great for a family car, remembering that I drive the base model, with the base model sound. (better than the so-called premium Monsoon system I had in my 2002 Jetta!). It also sounds better than the one in my wife's 2005 Honda CRV.

3) Looks: - Many people glance at the car. It has a great look - it stands out and has some presence. Yes it is not Lexus or a Cadillac etc.- but if I wanted that and could afford it I would have bought it.

4) Roadnoise: yes I can hear Roadnoise; yes I can hear the 2.4l engine, but no more than my wife's Honda-CRV or my old Jetta. I always remember this is not a Lexus/Mercedes/BMW etc. It is an affordable family car with great trunk space and seats a family of 4 comfortably.

5) Interior: - Seats are comfortable (not fantastic; but not poor); All the buttons are logically placed, although the light switch I find is a bit low. Everything else is functional and I got what I paid for.

6) What would I have liked to change - the feel of the Steering Wheel - I would have loved to have a softer feel (having a leather wrapped wheel would have been nice!) - I find the plastic really hard; but I resolved that with a really nice cover.

So what I suggest is - understand what you are getting. yes I could have purchased and Hyundai or Accord or a Camry etc. with more Bells and Whistles, but if you just do not have that extra $500 or $800 and want a new car there is very little that beats the Fusion in affordability.

Just my thoughts.

venus537

"Often the claims are based on Consumer Reports, which has one of the most unscientific surveys pulled on mankind..."

Since CR only collects data from their subscribers, it's is unscientific. But the most unscientific?

I think for practical purposes, CR provides a fairly good gauge of car reliability. The demographics of CR subscribers as a group is not that much different than the driving population as a whole.

And if one would give any credence to the number of Edmund posts pertaining to car problems then one would have to come to the conclusion that Honda is the largest car company in the world since there seems to be more posts about Hondas than any other manufacturer.

"Don't get me wrong, Honda builds some great cars, but they've made some serious engineering mistakes, too, just all other car companies."

True, but it's a what's the point statement. It sure doesn't follow since all manufacturers have made mistakes they're are all on equal footing. I still say Hondas are engineered better than most other brands.

venus537

"If you ever watched the show you would see the host has CEO's, Managers, Engineers, critics ect from across the industry spectrum. He has had Toyota/Honda/Nissan/BMW/Volkswagon you name the car company he has had them on the show."

I watch Autoline Detroit too! I think it is a great show and I agree with you (gasp), it's a fair and informative show with interesting guests. I have yet to see an episode that had a representative from Honda though. Not that company representatives are very informative, they just spout the company line most of the time.

I do think the host is a bit of a cheerleader for the home team at times but overall he is very fair. Like a lot of others, he seems to think that reliability equals quality when reliability is only an aspect of quality.

The most interesting stat I remember from the show was the amount of R & D spent as a percentage of sales. The top three were Honda, VW and BMW. Those three just happen to be my favorite car companies.

theump

I see your point of your post.I 'myself' like to say "opinions are like a$$holes.... everybody has one!.I for one own a Fusion.It has everything I was looking for,but more importantly..... THE PRICE I PAID FOR IT!!!WOW!!!....Talk about affordability..... :shades:

neile457

The Fusion is a cheaper and sportier alternative to the Accord. Personally, I like most midsize cars compared to the Accord, because it is boring. But most people like the "boring" style of the Camry and Accord. That's why they sell so well. But I like the 6, Altima, and Fusion much better, because of their affordability and "personality". Heck, I was about to buy a 6, until the 0% came out for the Fusion for 72 months, now I am a Fusion owner! I am not worried about the reliability, I have had good luck with my old F150 and Taurus, and my old Mazdas (Protege and 323).

venus537

"But most people like the "boring" style of the Camry and Accord. That's why they sell so well"

Some automaker ought to hire you. What YOU deem boring will be a car that will sell. All your employer would have to is design a boring car by your standards and they'll have a top seller. Simple.

bristol2

I think the concept of boring in a car is interesting. I am in the camp that says the performance is the key and since the Ford doesn't offer a stick shift with the V6 (I still like the car) that seems to suggest that there is not the same commitment to performance as Honda shows.
I enjoy driving a 'boring' car that comfortably hits 100mph uphill without the engine even working hard. That's not boring.
The new Camry doesn't look boring on the outside. Again though a V6 without a stick option just doesn't make sense to me.

lemarjones

The writers and media say the Accord is the best. Why? Because it is true. The Accord engine is smoother, more powerful, and on top of that gets better gas mileage.

I've worked in an industry where I've had to drive different rental cars over ther years, and I've driven just about everything out there. And I've found this to be true about the above statement:

The Honda Accord is not the best. It maybe the most practical of the Plain-Jane sedans out there, but it is not the best. And neither is the Fusion for that matter. We all know, or maybe we pretend not to know, that everything that is written about a vehicle is perception. We also know that any 'true' test results are for one particular vehicle for one snapshot in time. Doesn't mean the next vehicle you test is going to give you the same results.

And guess what, if your favorite car is equivalent to you favorate breakfast of scrambled eggs, if given the choice of the old scramble with a different salt, or pepper, or cooked with a different skillet as opposed to the new over easy that's out there, you're always going to pick the scrambleds. If Honda radically changed the Accord or called it something else, it would end up in the garbage just like those new fangled over easies. Fact is, outside of adding gadgets and the expected interior changes and front/rear six changes, the car is almost the same as it was 15 years ago.

With that being said, in 2006 so far I have driven 30+ rental/loaner/lease cars, 4cly Fords, Toyotas, Hondas, etc. And one thing I've found to be true is this: They all end up in somebody's junk yard some day!!

You only live once. You'll only be blessed with a certain amount of money in your lifetime, and each and every car you choose to drive in your lifetime will end up either in somebody's museum or junkyard.

I drive a 5sp Saturn Vue. Out of my pocket, I wouldn't trade it for the world. I like the Fusion and the Mazda it's based on. I also like the Honda Accord. Bottom line, if I had to replace my Vue with either car, it would come down to price. Not crash ratings, not 0-60's, not stopping distance, but sales price, incentives, resale value, insurance, maintenance, and potential gas usage. In other words, price. Because, to be perfectly honest, I'M driving the car, and it's up to me to drive it safely and responsibly reguardless of the so called gadgets that are supposed to keep me safer than a car did 50 years ago. I'd take a crash in a 68 Galaxy 500 over a crash in a 2006 Ford 500 any day of the week.

Right now, for my money, and I don't trade cars in, (once I own it, the ony way I get rid of it is either passing it along to a young family member or, God forbid, a loss of some sort) I'd buy the Fusion I-4 SEL 5 spd. Why? The MP3 6-disk changer. Forget the hoopla. Forget the stats. Forget the perceptions. Forget the ratings. Being able to listen to my music the way I want to in the format I want to would be the only determining factor. Except for price.

Ford has always been on the edge when it comes to sound system function (although lacking in quality sometimes). And until I can get that out of Honda, Toyota, Buick, etc., make mine the Fusion.

elroy5

the car is almost the same as it was 15 years ago.

It's obvious, you did not own an Accord 15 years ago, and own one now. I owned a 92 Accord, and now own an 03 Accord. The Accord has grown much larger, and with "research and development" the car has been improved, with every new generation.

If you were talking about a Ford (Taurus) I would agree with you. The Taurus has had minimal improvements over a 10 year span. In my opinion, that is Ford's problem. Ford did not improve their cars, and they have been passed by Honda (among others), and the buying public.

scape2

Funny how people bash the Taurus. Yet, if you look under reliability data under MSN auto sight. The Taurus is a very, very reliable vehicle.. Hmmm.... Ford has tried to kill the Taurus. But, consumers are still buying them. Why? if they are so unreliable and unrefined as some say. As some may want you to believe all Taurus vehicles are rentals, this is not true. Granted, a large percentage to make it to rental lots, I cannot disagree. But overall the Taurus is a reliable, low cost 4 door family mover. Low cost is what Honda and Toyota seem to have missed the mark on.. and forgotten thier roots on...

elroy5

Funny how people bash the Taurus. Yet, if you look under reliability data under MSN auto sight. The Taurus is a very, very reliable vehicle..

Yes, it is a very reliable car. But if you think people are buying Accords and Camrys just because of reliability, that's only part of the picture. You have to keep up with the latest technology. More powerful and fuel efficient cars with updated styling and features have left the Taurus a dinosaur. You can hardly tell the difference between the 95 Taurus, and the 2005 Taurus. People don't want to buy the same exact car they bought 10 years ago. Which amounts to low numbers of repeat buyers. Ford really threw a good name out the window. It was a name with a good reputation, and Ford let it die of old age.

explorerx4

they don't want to drive what they did 10 years ago, but they do want to drive what they did 40 years ago, aka the new mustang.

thegraduate

they don't want to drive what they did 10 years ago, but they do want to drive what they did 40 years ago, aka the new mustang.

I know, aren't we (the customer base) fickle?

bristol2

I look forward to seeing the Taurus revival in 2020.

elroy5

they don't want to drive what they did 10 years ago, but they do want to drive what they did 40 years ago, aka the new mustang.

The 95 Taurus, and the 2005 Taurus, are basicly the same car. The Mustang of now, and 40 years ago, are only alike in nostalgic looks. People who owned a Mustang 40 years ago, are probably not still driving it, and looking to trade it for a new one either.

thegraduate

Perhaps, by then, the world will be ready for the 1996 Taurus' style?



Maybe not.

lemarjones

It's obvious, you did not own an Accord 15 years ago, and own one now. I owned a 92 Accord, and now own an 03 Accord. The Accord has grown much larger, and with "research and development" the car has been improved, with every new generation.

Well no, you're wrong. I've either owned or driven every, and I do mean EVERY, generation of Accord every built. I've passed on several '96-'97 models to family members with at least 2 still on the road.

Granted you can't parts swap a 92 with an '06, but purely from an engineering and assembly standpoint, there aren't too many fundamental design differences.

There is a big difference between any change to a vehicle being revolutionary as opposed to being evolutionary. Mechanically, the parts of a Honda are pretty much the same way they were with the early 90's (3rd generation?) as they are with a 2003 (6th Gen?) Door hinges? Same. Under pinnings? A bit different but fundamentally... same. Brake design? Same. HVAC system design? Same (you still have to turn the A/C on to prevent your windows from fogging up). Engine management? Subtract VTEC and vacuum lines...same.

Nothing really revolutionary. Everything has been evolutionary. Nothing out of the ordinary, unexpected, or in short, risky. You expect minor changes like interior design, and front/rear six. (for those of you who don't know, front/rear six is basically the front and rear six inches of the car. The headlights, grill, tail lights, and trunk lid) You can also expect wheelbase changes and interior volume changes. Even height and stance changes. But even though the engines from 3rd to 6th Gen are different, they are still based on the same design. Same for the interior. Honda has an interior 'formula' and they won't get away from it. I don't blame them. It works.

Now you show me a Honda Accord that is absolutely nothing like anything that came before it, and I'd gladly and completely agree with you. The Fusion isn't like anything Ford has produced in about 9 to 12 years if at all.

I would agree with you about the Taurus, although the 96 Taurus could be considered revolutionary since the building and assembly techniques were radically different than the previous 2 generations. Not to mention that silly overall oval design. I honestly don't doubt your perspective on a 92 Accord when compared to an '03 Accord, either. I just simply eyeball change a little differently.

The only company these days that truly makes revolutionary changes in their vehicles is Chrysler. They don't build a single car (no, a minivan is NOT a car) that is anything like what they offered 15 years ago.

thegraduate

The only company these days that truly makes revolutionary changes in their vehicles is Chrysler. They don't build a single car (no, a minivan is NOT a car) that is anything like what they offered 15 years ago.

It's a darn good thing. Our Chryslers of 10 years ago (LeBaron Convertible, based on the K-Car; Sebring Convertible) were total garbage from a reliability standpoint. Our Ford and Hondas always backed up, something both our Chrysler's seemed to hate (three transmission rebuilds between our two Chryslers - had each less than a year!)

elroy5

Now you show me a Honda Accord that is absolutely nothing like anything that came before it, and I'd gladly and completely agree with you.

Ok, you got it. In 92 the Accord was much smaller (about the size of today's Civic). You could not get a 92 Accord with a V6 engine (would not fit under the hood). The 92 Accord 4cyl. had a distributor, and no V-tech. In the 03 Accord 4cyl. the engine is all electronic (even the throttle is drive by wire). But I guess both engines had pistons, so that makes them the same, please. In 92 the EX Accord had 140 hp. The 03 EX V6 has 240 hp. With Honda's technological advancements, the V6 engine gets better hwy mileage than the 4cyl. did in 92 (refinement at it's best). In 92 the auto transmission had 4 gears, the 03 has 5, and shifts much smoother. In 92 the Accord had one airbag (driver). The 03 Accord has 8 airbags. I could tell the difference with my eyes closed.

thegraduate

The 92 Accord 4cyl. had a distributor, and no V-tech. In the 03 Accord 4cyl. the engine is all electronic (even the throttle is drive by wire).

The 140 hp Accord of 1992 did have VTEC, and Drive-by-Wire Throttle didn't come to Accords until the 2006 model year. Just a few minor corrections.

A brief synopsis of VTEC engine application to Honda Accord Inline-4s:

From 1991-1997, the top-of-the-line 4-cylinder Accord got VTEC (EX and SE traded spots as top-models from 1991-1993, though both models received the VTEC - 140 hp '91-'93; 145 hp '94-'97) and the DX and LX models made do without Variable Valve Timing (125-130 hp).

In 1998-2002 models, all 4-cylinder engines except for DX and Value Package Accords got the 150 hp VTEC engine, while the DX/VP Accords got a 135 hp version of the engine, without VTEC.

2003 was the first year that all models, DX included, got a VTEC engine (i-VTEC by then), with 160 hp.

Accord V6 models since 1998- have had VTEC.

Hope this little history helps.

pwas

Im thinking about trading our 06 Honda accord 4cyl exl for a Mercury Milan v6 fully loaded. I can save almost $200 per month with the 0% for 72 months with mercury. I have 11% with honda finance. Plus im getting a V6 with the milan. Please give me some feed back.

thegraduate

have 11% with honda finance.

11%!! :surprise: :mad: WOW, that's incredibly high.

elroy5

The 140 hp Accord of 1992 did have VTEC, and Drive-by-Wire Throttle didn't come to Accords until the 2006 model year. Just a few minor corrections.

Wrong, sorry but I had the "Top of the line" 92 EX Accord (there was no SE in 92) and there was no VTEC engine available in any Honda in 92 (maybe Prelude, but I doubt it). My 03 Accord has "Drive by wire" (it is also the "Top of the line" for 03 model year). I should know, I owned both cars.

If you see a 4th gen Accord with a VTEC engine in it, it was swapped in. (Very common practice).

deepdivot2

Since CR only collects data from their subscribers, it is unscientific. But the most unscientific?

You're right, there are worse. Look at any political survey. But the effect their survey has is more than most others, which seems to demand they try to improve their methods. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be so inclined.

The demographics of CR subscribers as a group is not that much different than the driving population as a whole.

There are those that disagree with this assessment, especially when considering the very small percentage of those subscribers (6% or so) that respond to the CR survey questions, many of them more than willing to agree with CRs opinions. CR has always had some credibility problems, but IMHO, it reached a head in 1967 when Ralph Nader joined their board of directors, only 2 years after penning "Unsafe at Any Speed". Talk about the fox guarding the hen house! I don't think they've recovered since.

I apologize to the HOST for discussing this so much in this forum, so I won't say anything else. You're welcome to have the last word if you choose!

thegraduate

Going by my father's 2005 Accord EX, it is definitely not drive-by-wire... there is now a little play in the throttle pedal. Not-electronic. You are referring to a V6, I presume?

We have had a 90 LX, 92EX, 93EX, 96LX, 00LX, 01LX, 03EX, 05EX, and 06EX Accords (all sedans, I-4, Autos)in the last 16 years, so I'm pretty well acquainted with them myself. (I also drive two nearly everyday (at least one daily)). I don't know what apparently got into me today; I guess too much stress from school getting to me, b/c I RARELY post info without double-checking my facts. Of course, the day I choose to, I'm wrong! So it goes...

As I checked for myself to respond to your claim about no VTEC, I am sorry for my false claim. I honestly believed the 140 hp models had VTEC (which is a logical thing to assume i guess, since it had the same size power bump (125-140 hp) as the 94 model (130-145) which DID have VTEC. I stand corrected. VTEC, according to Edmunds.com, debuted on 1994 Accord EX models, with its 2.2L 145 engine.

Once again, sorry I doubted your info, and I'm quite surprised at myself for doing so without checking my own facts. Forgive me? :sick:

best,

thegrad

scape2

"Im thinking about trading our 06 Honda accord 4cyl exl for a Mercury Milan v6 fully loaded. I can save almost $200 per month with the 0% for 72 months with mercury. I have 11% with honda finance. Plus im getting a V6 with the milan. Please give me some feed back.
Replies to this message:"

You have hit it right on the money where Honda has fallen flat on its face.. VALUE for your hard earned dollar. Go get the Milan premium with the v6 its a great car for your hard earned dollar..If you get black leather, I recommend you get your windows tinted.. they get hot!.. :shades:

thegraduate

Shoot, at 11%, I'd be unloading that car and shopping for a lower rate. I can't believe ANY car maker would use a rate that high!... Do you (pwas) have decent credit (that's kinda personal, so I understand if you choose not to respond, but that rate is AWFUL!)

elroy5

Im thinking about trading our 06 Honda accord 4cyl exl for a Mercury Milan v6 fully loaded. I can save almost $200 per month with the 0% for 72 months with mercury. I have 11% with honda finance. Plus im getting a V6 with the milan. Please give me some feed back

Consider this. You may be saving $200 per month, but paying an extra 12 months. And if you drive a lot of miles each year, some of that savings will go into spending on gas, if you switch from a 4cyl. Accord to a 6cyl. Milan.

snowman89

11%? Are you serious? No way...if the Milan works for you, get it. With the new powertrain warranty extended to 5/60000 there's little to worry about. I love my Fusion, excellent car. If you plan on keeping this car for 7 years, definetely get the Milan, but hurry as dealers are running out and they aren't as willing to haggle with limited inventory. Keep us posted.

pat

The Rules of the Road explain some things that were questioned in a couple of posts that seem to have been relocated to that great bit bucket in the sky.