Howdy, Stranger!

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





Honda Accord vs Ford Fusion

1246714

Comments

  • pwaspwas Posts: 34
    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.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    have 11% with honda finance.

    11%!! :surprise: :mad: WOW, that's incredibly high.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    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).
  • 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!
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    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! :blush: 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: :blush:

    best,

    thegrad
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    "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:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    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!)
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    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.
  • 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.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    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. ;)
  • dlangdlang Posts: 59
    As long as you don't intend on driving heavily in Baltimore or DC, the atrocious subpar Milan urban mpg shouldn't affect you.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Posts: 2,915
    Before you get too happy, if you qualified for 11% with Honda, do you think you would qualify for 0% with Mercury? 11% financing from an auto manufactureer is awfully high. Also have to remember the depreciation in the Honda. Shouldn't be much but still an issue. 72 months is a long time to finance a car. I typically do 4 or 5 years to keep the monthly payments down and pay off early.
  • odie6lodie6l Hershey, PaPosts: 1,078
    I see the Frusion now has AWD, I wonder if Honda will add AWD to their upcoming redesign on the Accord. If they do, it will probably ONLY be available with the V6 and EVERY option under the sun.

    Odie
    Oide's Carspace
  • "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. "

    Incorrect. I owned a 2003 Accord and that car had a drive by wire throttle
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Incorrect. I owned a 2003 Accord and that car had a drive by wire throttle

    You are responding to a post from Aug 30. We have already established that there was no Vtec engine in an Accord in 92, and that drive-by-wire throttle was available on the Accord EX V6 model only, in 03. Try to stay in the present day please.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    That was answered over a month ago; I was referring to the I-4 models, which didn't get DBW until 2006 (I didn't specify that in the post though).
  • Wow. I had to sign up to post in this thread.

    I am the proud owner of both a 07 Fusion SE and an 07 Accord exl. Both 4 cylinders, both black with black leather interior and a power sun roof.

    Heres how I see it. The Fusion is fun to drive. The engine is throaty and the chassis is fantasic, best I have ever driven in a midsized sedan. I love it. It feels a lot faster than it is, but first gear wears out its welcome. This car loves the highway. The cabin feels huge and stays out of the way, though the seats are a bit uninviting. The stereo POUNDS!! and the trunk never ends.

    The Accord is entry level luxury. The engine is smooth and quiet with a psychic transmission. The cabin is as hush as a recording studio. The interior is stylish without closing in on you and the seats are buttery soft. If the Accord had the Fusions chassis, there would not be ANY competition.

    The Fusion is a great car. I drive it. My wife drives the Honda, but it IS out of its league against the Accord. I'm sorry, it is. Fit and finnish really creates the gap here and the Accord is just much more refined.

    Instead of getting defensive, think of it as comparing a great bone in pork chop to beef filet. They are both great in their own way but, most people will opt for the filet.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Welcome! Glad to have your perspective on this.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Fusion SE is not an SEL. Are you comparing apples to apples?
  • "You are responding to a post from Aug 30. We have already established that there was no Vtec engine in an Accord in 92, and that drive-by-wire throttle was available on the Accord EX V6 model only, in 03. Try to stay in the present day please."

    My bad; I didn't look at the date of that post; however I would have expected to see the 'establishment' posts right after that one, which I didn't.

    I still stand by my statement that my 2003 Accord LX (4 Cyl) had a drive by wire throttle - I will do some research and provide proof for this. In the meantime, please look at the link below from an Edmunds.com long term test of the 2003 Accord (4 door EX); reviewer Karl clearly mentions drive by wire throttle is standard on all 4 cyl Accords. Link below

    http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=98548/pageNumber=1

    Statement below is taken from the same link

    <<Meanwhile, Karl, who had already spent much time behind the wheel of an '03 LX V6 sedan, said his time with our long-term car only reinforced his affinity for the seventh-generation Accord.

    "I like this car more than I did before, which is saying a lot because I already felt it was one of the strongest cars in the category. My favorite aspects are the steering (great weighting and responsiveness), the throttle response (all four-cylinder Accords have drive-by-wire throttle), seat comfort (I know Honda really focused on that for this Accord) and overall refinement. Normally, I feel like Toyota has the edge on refinement and Honda has the edge on driver enjoyment, but otherwise the products from these two companies are nearly identical in most areas. It's likely the Camry would still feel more refined than this Accord if I drove them back to back but, barring that, I can't imagine a vehicle feeling more refined than this Accord. Everything from the drivetrain to seat comfort to overall quietness is at a level I formerly associated with pure luxury sedans." >>
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I still stand by my statement that my 2003 Accord LX (4 Cyl) had a drive by wire throttle.

    My dad's 2005 EX I-4 has obvious slack in the throttle pedal before hitting the "mechanical" throttle. It is not drive by wire, and the I-4 models weren't until the 2006 Mid-Model Refresh. The V6 models were from the beginning however.
  • Yes. Everything I mentioned is on both cars. Neither one is lacking something that would make a difference. The Ford is not an SEL but the engine, transmission, chassis, driving characteristics, and over all fit and finish are the same. The only thing the SEL has over the SE is bigger rims, a leather wrapped stearing wheel, dual zone climate, and a couple of chrome trim peices. Yes these are on the Honda, but are not an influence on my review. If the Ford were an SEL, my opinion would be the same, so I do beleive it is apples to apples.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    You fail to mention the price difference between an Accord EX-L to a Fusion SE? Why? I paid $23,000 for a loaded Fusion SEL V6 with every option available. A Fusion SE that you mention goes for about $20-21,000 in my region. Honda dealerships advertise cars like yours for about $23K, V6 Accord EX-L advertised for over $25K. The SEL does not have dual zone climate control. SEL also has traction control, SE usually does not.
    I guess you can say it is all in what you feel you want to pay. I bought my Fusion from a "Mega dealer". He had both Ford,Toyota, Honda, Chevy, Subaru, VW, Hyundia and I believe Suzuki. The Ford salesperson was so confident about the Fusion he acutally drove it to the Honda lot and parked it side by side to a like model. We went through it with a fine tooth comb. Along with other salespeople. Did the same with the 07 Camry. After looking at the price differences of $2-$4,000. I felt there was not a $2-$4,000 dollar justification in buying the Accord or Camry. Anyhoo.. to each their own.. ;)
  • I dont think the SEL has "standard" traction control. Are you sure the SEL does not offer dual zone climate, even with leather seats?

    Anyway, no I did not mention the price but that is part of my point. The Accord does cost thousands more but so does the Zypher. I guess I am saying that the Accord competes better against the Zypher.

    My point is that the Fusion is out of its leaugue against the Accord. Its beyond opinion.

    Listen, I love driving my Fusion. Its the best Ford I have ever owned (its #8 for me). Its an awsome car for the price. Its a great car. Best in this price point bar nun. Its better than the Mazda6, better than the Impala and the Altima, But I think saying its up there with the Accord is pushing it. The Accord and the Camry are a step above. Thats all Im saying.

    Did you drive the Accord or the Camry?
  • I drove all of the above when looking for my new car. I settled on the Mazda 6. When comparing these cars, you need to look at price point. I was looking for a car around 20k. I drove a 4 cylinder Camry. It was loud and sluggish. I drove a 4 cylinder Accord. It was better but around turns, its chassis is not very stable. I drove a 4 cylinder Fusion. I liked the way it rode and handled better than the Accord or the Camry.
    Saying the fusion is inferior to the Accord or Camry is saying that you believe the hype. I couldn't believe how much I hated those cars.

    I bought a Mazda 6s 6 cylinder. Saying its better than the Mazda 6 is purely subjective. The Fusion is softer riding than the Mazda, but the Mazda drives like a sports car which is more to my taste. The Fusion is a great car, it was my second choice, but because of the way that the Fusion is selling, it made the price higher than the 6.

    To say tha the Camry and Accord are "a step above" and "beyond opinion" is simply not true when price point is taken into consideration. I got my Mazda 6 6 cylinder for less than I could get a 4 cylinder Accord or Camry. Both of those cars are far inferior to the Mazda 6 in Acceleration and Handling. These assertions are supported by tests in Car and Drive and Consumer Reports. I could only get a 4 cylinder Fusion for the money I spent on my mazda. This is not because the Mazda is not a great car, it is because the automotive press's unconditional love of the Camry and Accord.

    Its also because Mazda has taken some risks with the 6 that make it appeal to a minority of people who are looking for a true sports sedan at an affordable price. By the way, the Ford Fusion is a slightly bigger, softer riding mazda 6.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    What does this have to do with the Focus?

    What do you mean by the Accord's chassis was "unstable?"

    The fact that you got a Mazda V6 for less than even a Fusion I-4 is a great deal!
  • I think your putting words in my mouth. I never used the word "inferior". I said the build quality of the Camry and Accord is unarguably better than the Fusion. All your comparisons are of driving experience. I said that I wished the Accord had the Fusions chassis, ie; handling. The Camry and Accord are not built to be performance cars. They are family sedans. The 6 is meant to be a sport sedan so I would hope it would out handle and out accellerate them.

    I drove the 6. The Fusion chassis is an updated version of the 6. It is wider and longer. The 4 cylinder engine on the Fusion is also smoother than the one in the 6. It is a different car. It is NOT a less expensive Fusion, but it is also a very nice car.

    "To say tha the Camry and Accord are "a step above" and "beyond opinion" is simply not true when price point is taken into consideration."

    This does not make any sense. You could say that about the Fusion vs. a Lexus. They have better build quality and that is part of the higher price.

    Listen, I already stated that I was in no way bashing the Fusion. I have both a Fusion and an Accord. The Accord is a better quality vehicle, period. But that does'nt mean I dont fully enjoy driving my Fusion or think that it is not a quality product.

    Im talking gray, and your hearing black and white.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668

    The Accord is a better quality vehicle, period.

    Im talking gray, and your hearing black and white.


    That first statement sounds pretty black and white to me!

    Some things may be better on the Accord, but overall I think you'll find that as far as problems reported, including TSBs and recalls, the Fusion is actually doing better than Accord and Camry.
  • That is black and white, but what I mean is that the Fusion is far from inferior. It is a great car. Its just not as well built as the Accord, thats all.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668
    Is that a subjective opinion or are you basing it on number of defects?
This discussion has been closed.