Honda Accord vs Toyota Camry

liufei · February 2001

I'm sorry if I missed something, there're over 400 new post that I scan through since my last visit here.
But who the heck would compare a Civic with a Camry ??? (happening in multitude of posts here)

bgabel1260 · February 2001

The EX V6 does suffer a weight penalty...250 pounds over the EX 5-spd. That's a lot when you consider that most of those extra pounds are for the V6 and slushbox, both positioned over the front axle.

The body roll in my EX is pretty well-controlled and the car doesn't have a wallowy feel at all during fast directional changes. That's the weight-efficient manual four for you. The car's biggest handling weakness is the stock tires...no surprise there. I'm not too happy about the gross understeer and sliding during higher-speed turning. Sometimes it's fun to engage in a mild 4-wheel slide, aggravated by throttle input, but one of these days I'm going to slide into the next county. This obviously won't do but I'm optimistic that a real pair of tires will make the Accord a very competent handler, perhaps even sport-like.

whichcar2 · February 2001

Please give me your opinion on which car to buy!! I have a Honda Civic 1987 with 185,200 miles! I know Honda is a great car but I have been swayed against a Honda simply because I can get more car for my money by getting something else!! Here is what I have it narrowed down to... Nissan Altima 2000 with 16000 miles for $13000 or a Toyota Camry LE 1997 with 24000 miles for $14700. For the most part the features are the same but I am concerned about the reliability and value of the car in years to come!! Any suggestions or questions I should be thinking of?? Thanks!

whichcar2 · February 2001

Sorry I got my pricing mixed up...Altima is $14700 and the Camry is $13400! Thanks

sobers · February 2001

If your final list has Camry and Altima(& not Accord), I would drive you towards Camry, although costlier than both Accord & Altima.

Altima is a poor design & sells mostly due to its low price. Poor crash test result & odd styling. It is also smaller than both Accord and Camry.

sebring95 · February 2001

The last Altima I drove was built pretty junky. Drove pretty nice, good power, kinda small. Local dealer has a 99 Altima SE loaded with 9,000 miles for $13,000. I would think you could get a better deal than $14,700 especially look at how much the new ones are selling for. I believe that have a big rebate and low APR financing plus you should be able to buy at invoice. We were considering an Altima for a another company vehicle because they are priced so cheap right now and we could use an extra vehicle. With gas prices though, I'm thinking about looking for a slightly used diesel Jetta and use it for loooong trips.

sobers · February 2001

2001 2000
1 Honda Accord 33,781 24,241
2 Toyota Camry 24,674 40,285

Prob'ly it has to do with the availability.

denniswade · February 2001

will be vying for the top sales figures for years to come, if the last ten years are any indication. They both make wonderful cars at a reasonable price, and more and more people buy them every year -- hence the Big Three's falling market share. The Koreans are starting to wake up too, though, and are starting to eat into the bottom end of the market big time. Just read an article in Business Week wherein James Hossack, an analyst with AutoPacific, said that domestic buyers tend to be more price-sensitive than product (quality) sensitive, so cars like the new Hyundai XG 300 appeal to them.

wenyue · February 2001

Those figures are pretty different. In either case, the figures differ by almost 50%.

Main reason is probably because Honda is doing a special low interest financing on their 2001 Accord 4 cylinders. That's kind of unusual since it's still too early in the model year. Toyota is suprising not matching it, and has no promotion on going.

It's strange, since Honda profit was hit hard (down over 25%, worse than the 14.1% predicted at the begining of the year), this promotion would only further errode their profit margin and hence profitability. It's odd.

http://www.theautochannel.com/articles/2001/02/15/014777.html

Maybe they are trying to shore up some defences for the up coming redesigned Camry.

As for Camry sales, I expect it to remain unchanged this year. The first 6 months will probably see a slight decrease overall from last year.

Some dealers have reported that they are only receive half as many Camry alotment for the first and second quarter as they use to last year. I don't understand the full logistical reasoning behind it. But it's my guess that (1) Toyota is rotating the assembly line off to retool them for the new Camry, resulting in lower supply than normal. (2) Less alotment means less left over when the new Camry arrives which means less costly promotions to get rid of them. (3) since the well known effects of dropping sales old models as we approach new model/redesign date means as more people are holding off to wait for the new model, there is less demand for the soon to expire existing models.

But the sales should increase significantly with the new and improved Camry release late this summer. The early drop will off set the later increase, resulting in a relatively neutral year in term of sales (maybe just a slight increase).

I noticed that the Accord and Camry sales are both down from a month before (Decemeber 2000), same thing for Taurus. Not only that, sales of the Civic, Focus, Corolla, ect are all down from a year ago. Another sure sign that the economy is slowing down.

denniswade · February 2001

in sales -- particularly in the midwest. Nervousness about the economy, a huge increase in utility bills, etc., all combine to make people a little skittery about getting themselves into new debt.

bgabel1260 · February 2001

In Yahoo! Finance today, I saw an article stating that new car sales in Feb (or Jan) are down 15% over last year. That's pretty darn significant...and a possible explanation for why I got my Accord for practically invoice. It's a buyers market.

Sobers: are those figures sales or production? If Toyota is slowing the Camry production - subsequently lowering Camry sales - they are basically handing Honda a free lunch.

wenyue · February 2001

funny you should say that. While I was at my barber couple of days ago, talking about the possible tax cut, he went off cursing and complaining about how Bush could keep his trillion dollar tax cut, and just give us a $&#ing break for the energy bill. He was telling me how his heating bill for the barber shop and home has doubled, and it's tough on small private business like him to take up such increase. I sympathized and gave him a big tip.

Yup, the economy is slowing down, and the automotive sector are usually pretty quick to feel the affects as buying a new car isn't a nessesity. In times like this, trying to hold on to the original buyers are not enough to boost the company performance. To increase profit and sales, you need to have new products that reach new buyers that you didn't have access before.

sobers · February 2001

Accord sales include almost 7000-8000 Accords imported from Japan. Camry sales would look better as do Taurus dues to sales to Hertz in coming months of March etc. I read that Taurus for 2000 had 40% sales to fleet !!! They have two factories for Taurus while consumer demand only needs one. Used car market must be pretty bad for Taurus due to all the rental cars flooded to market within a 8-10 months, at the most a year. Rental companys don't keep cars more than a year I guess. (25K miles) i.e selling it when there are still a few thousand miles left in warranty.

wenyue · February 2001

Got any insider news as why Honda is starting to discount their model so early this year? It's almost un-heard of for Honda to start going national incentives on their cars so early in the model year. The Accord and Camry are not distress items, they sell themselves, I don't fully understand why Honda is putting incentives on the 2001 Accord only 3 months after they hit the market. Honda (and Toyota) don't usually do those kind of pushing until towards the summer when the model year is about to end.

sobers · February 2001

I think Hondas current special financing wouldn't necessarily hurt them. Otherwise they would not do it. I guess it is more related to the economy and product-sales achievement. One more point is that Honda Finance gets more customers due to this !! I guess, they migth have taken care of the credit history/ratings before approving. (Hyundai was in a deep trouble to due giving loans to people with not so good track record: The ended upw oth unpaid loans, legal actions, used depreciated cars with mechanical problems !!)

denniswade · February 2001

have risen to the point that they cover your average car payment -- making a new car purchase simply out of reach for a lot of people. It's not really the economy per se -- it's the cost of living.

enternamehere · February 2001

"Got any insider news as why Honda is starting to discount their model so early this year?"
Since the discounts are geared towards the i4, it would seem that Honda may have produced more i4's than they needed, or the public is only willing to purchase v6's this year.

bgabel1260 · February 2001

Honda usually gives incentives on the 4-cylinders late in the model year, so starting the promotion cycle so early is a surprise, especially since 2001 saw a refreshened (and better) Accord. I'm not complaining...I think I got a very good deal.

Honda will be in trouble if they start giving out rebates. All the domestics are doing the fire sale strategy, and some models are getting thousands in rebates...even in February. Honda made a big stink a few weeks ago about breaking 1,000,000 in annual sales in 2000. I suppose they want 2001 to at least beat that figure, and the easy way to help sales in a weak selling market is incentives. In the interest of brand preservation, incentives come in form of APR reductions, not cash.

sebring95 · February 2001

A large chunk of the resale value a Toyota/Honda retains is because they don't give many rebates. Even the financing will effect the resale on one to two year old vehicles though. If you can get a lower payment on a new one or can invest the difference in APR and come out even why buy used?

wenyue · February 2001

Low interest APR fiancing on cars could often be cheaper than putting out rebates. But not always the case. Normal financing rate for a person with good credit is about 7-9% APR. For a $20K (before tax) car, that roughly translate into $5000 in interests (profit for the company) over 5 years. By decreasing the APR to 3.9%, the interest is only little over $2000 over 5 years. The difference in profit for the automaker therefore could be as high as $3000.

I'm sure they have hired hundreds of accountants to figure that out. But rebates are not always more costly to do than low APR fianancing. But I would agree with who ever said that low APR financing might have less impact on the car's resale (ones older than couple of years) than a rebate.

wenyue · February 2001

I just got this news:

Toyota had a better year (2000) than was I thought.

http://www.globaltoyota.com/globaltoyota/corp_info/pr/2001/0125.html

The company grew by 9% to make 5.888 million cars last year (the original plan was to grow to 5.7 million last year). Now dominates 43.25% of Japan's market, up from 42% last year.

Daihatsu was not in a great shape before being bought by Toyota. Now it seems like Toyota's capable management has turned them around. I personally think the stategic skill is Toyota's greatest asset. Maybe instead of spending money on costly rebates, GM should use that money to hire Toyota managment advisors.

sebring95 · February 2001

Or Toyota could use some of those billions laying around in cash to leverage a buyout of GM. I know some people that would start forming malitia groups to defend 'merican soil LOL!

enternamehere · February 2001

"$5000 in interests (profit for the company) over 5 years"

When I purchased my 2k Accord the Honda rep. resourced quite a few financial institutions for me and none of them was Honda. So I doubt the low APR really plays any major role here. I think it's supply and demand i.e. too many i4's and not enough buyers. The low APR is just used as an incentive to the buyer.

wenyue · February 2001

Hehehe,

I don't think Toyota wants to buy GM. Ok, so Toyota has over $20 billion laying around in highly liquid funds, but there is a historical reason for that.

In the beginning of in 1950's, Toyota was just a little nobody in the bombed out post war Japan. Sold a grand total of 250 cars (no joke) for the first post war car model, the SA. Nissan (Datsun) and Mitsubishi dominated what's left of the Japanese automobile marke. Toyota was near bankrupcy by 1952, was a major take over target (kind of like Honda in the early 1990's, but Toyota was in deeper).

By some miracle, it survived. I think it was the Crown model sedan that saved the company. (Interestingly, "Camry", in Japanese means Crown). Anyway, after that close call, Toyota was determined never to be on the take over list again, and has ever since kept a large chunk of liquid fund read to fight out any possible take over.

1 or 2 billion dollars for that is fine. But even with the purchase of Daihatsu, Hino Motor and a chunk of Yamaha, $800 million for production increase in 1999, the cash reserve kept on growing in size. Now at over $20 billion, I can joke that maybe Toyota doesn't know how to spend it.

What is exact plan Toyota has for that money, I don't really know. But I can see some possibility and the effects it has.

(1) Initiative: By have enough money for a take over against any automaker means all of the competitors must divert resources to plan against a take over, and react to Toyota's moves.

(2) Acqusition: Toyota rencently have made major efforts towards a hipper image. Toyota maybe wishing it had bought BMW earlier, and may do so next time it is offered. It maybe other companies, but that's all guessing.

(3) New brand: recent news say that Toyota might establish a third brand. Centered around the Genesis group, it will comprise the new cars such as the Matrix, possibly RSC and the upcoming Supra successor (4000GT with 400 hp). Toyota has denied it, but I wouldn't put it past them.

(4) Non-automotive expansion: Toyota group now comprise of 425 subsidaries. In part to prepare the future "digital cars", Toyota is backing Japan's 2nd largest telecom company. Being the largest investor, BusinessWeek say Toyota may put invest over $1 billion a year into it. Other expansion maybe into other market sectors, as recent alliance between Toyota and SONY. Online expansion, creating Japan's Yahoo/Amazon equivalent (called Gazoo). Who knows? I can't possibly track all the things Toyota has in Japan. Looking at the 425 subsidiaries and 130+ affiliates, it feels almost like Toyota is Japan.

Anyone interested in Gazoo, feel free to go to http://gazoo.com/

Have fun.

louie57 · February 2001

I know I am slightly off topic but would appreciate your thoughts on the last 2 cars on my short list. I have owned 2 Accords, both purchased new; a 1991 which I sold to buy a BMW, and a 1985 which I still own. I have narrowed the choice to a 2001 Accord LX(G) which in Canada is the 4 cylinder with power windows, locks, ABS and alloys OR a year 2000 Passat GLS, also 4 cylinder demo with 8000km (4800 miles). The Passat seems to have more features such as 4 wheel disk brakes, standard ABS,trip computer, traction control (not available on Honda). They are both 150 HP @ 5700 rpm. The Passat is a 1.8 liter engine, the Accord 2.3 liter, the torque on the Passat is 155 @ 1750-4600 rpm; the Accord is 152 @ 4900. The Passat is a 5 speed auto and the Honda a 4 speed automatic. The Accords brakes are front disk and rear drum. The Passat also has keyless entry, alarm system and side impact air bags. The ACcord LX does not have these features. The Passat's MSRP is approx $30,780 qnd would be discounted to $25,130 for an on the road cost after taxes of $28,900. The Honda on road cost is $28,200 (which is discounted about $2,000). The Honda pricing was not broken down for me. The issue is not the cost defferential. The Passat is discounted more heavily...about 18% off MSRP. The Honda is discounted somewhat, and more than any other dealer would offer. I recognize the dfference in the model year 2000 vs 2001 and the demo vs new. The VW dealer will add 6 months to the warranty and 10,000 km because it is a demo with 8000km. The net result is the demo will have an unreduced and slightly enhanced bumper to bumper warranty. Normally 2 years or 40,000km, in this case becomes 2 years and 2 months (since car on road from Nov. 00) and 50,000km (40 plus 10). The Passat power train warranty is 5 yr/80,000km vs Honda's 5yr/100,000km. Honda's comprehensive warranty is better at 3yr/60,000 km. Corrosion warranty is 12 yr unlimited mileage for Passat; 5 yr unlimited mileage for Honda. Passat has 2 year 40,000km Road side assistance; the HOnda does not. The Passat has a trip computer; the Honda does not.I drive about 15,000 km per year 30% city, 70% highway and plan to keep this car about 10 years if possible. The Passat looks and sounds good; my reservation comes from the short warranty which makes me feel that Volkswagen lacks confidence in their product. All comments welcomed!

enternamehere · February 2001

It does sound like the VW dealer is really trying to give you a good deal. Have you had the car checked out by a third party to see if it's been in an accident etc. Past history of maintenance may be worthwhile and can be furnished if you ask the dealer to provide you with warranty repair history (should have VIN included) made to the vehicle.

Personally I think that over the long run the Honda is going to hold up better than a VW, but If all looks well with the Passat and you prefer it over the Honda then go for it and enjoy.

sobers · February 2001

If I were you, I would do a THROUGH mechanical checkup on the Passat. Get its VIN and run a COMPLETE check on CarFax.com or related site. Passat though a good car has low comprehensive warranty & attracts more costly repairs and maintainance than Accord. I would also think of having an extended warranty.

The most important point about 2000 Passat is that it should be considered 20-30% depreciated. Which makes me nervous. The same dealer would offer you what you paid minus 30% NEXT day of your purchase. So in this case I would like you to get it atleast 20-25% below INVOICE. I would also suggest that if you HAVE to get passat get the 2001 model year. The same engine now has 170HP and the same mileage. Everybody on this forum knows my 'bias' towards Honda but still I think 2001 Accord would be better buy than the 2000 Passat any day if you are not getting a HEAVY discount on the passat.

In short I would suggest that STAY away from 2000 Passat which is a demo having some crude-miles on it and get the new 2001 Passat or Accord.

Hope this helps.
For Honda canada is a VERY SERIOUS market I saw a very large amount of Honda/Acuras in Canada than any other make in my short period there. They are doing many things right there I guess. Last 3 years I saw a handfull of RLs in USA. In 3 days in Toronta/Niagara I saw a bunch of RLs.... Don;t know why is so.

sobers · February 2001

My friend wanted to perform 75K mile service on his 93 Taurus. There was an old couple doing first oil change on their Toyota Camry LE. I had a small talk with her, she said it was their second toyota first one being 82 Sxxxx(?) which they dumped after 238K miles ! She hoped this Toyota would also run forever !! She also mentioned how she liked the quite ride the toyota gives!!

liufei · February 2001

30% depreciation on Passat?? Are you sure? I thought that car is one of the
few car that the dealer usually has the advantage since the supply and demand
are pretty even out (lots of demand for it).
If I'm not mistaken, didn't VW has a 10yr factory warranty of some kind? Or is
it that for their Audi brethren?

hunter001 · February 2001

One significant difference between Low APR financing and Cash Rebates/Cash Back is that for the Low APR Financing, YOU HAVE TO QUALIFY through a credit check. It is not mandatory that you will get it, just because you bought the car.

In other words, if you have a not-so-impressive credit history, you almost definitely WILL NOT QUALIFY for the Low APR financing. If you need the car, and your credit rating is not tops, you either walk or get financing at a higher/lower rate from a different source. In case of cash back/Cash rebates, regardless of your credit rating, YOU WILL DEFINITELY/MANDATORILY get the "Cash back"/"Rebate" from the manufacturer.

Later...AH

wenyue · February 2001

Hey, thanks for the compliment. Honda is a very reliable brand itself.

Sorry that I couldn't check the forumn yesterday and today (and throw in a few cents in your debate at the news and views confrence), got struck down by the flu.... Thanks. The day doesn't look so miserable now.

liufei · February 2001

hehe, take a good rest. You going down with a flu
probably gives a moral victory to anyone who've been
taking a friendly jab at Toyota and its product. :-)

sobers · February 2001

30% is a common figure if you went to dealer. Thats because dealer HAS to make profit on everything. So sombody debating 2000 Pasat and 2001 Accord I would adsvise him to go with 2001 Car or if he likes passat go with 2001 Pasat: 20 HP more wouldn't hurt !!

VW has 2-24 compr and 10 year powertrain. Eventhough supply wasn't good for 99, it was ok for 2000 and 2000 swa some subsidized APR/Lease for end year Passat. 2001 supply will be even more

denniswade · February 2001

I don't believe the third brand thing has been denied, and in fact I think it is still being seriously considered. What was rejected is the concept of a third channel -- meaning a completely different sales and service network, like Lexus. Reasoning is that a third channel is expensive, would add many more layers of management, and would sever the connection of the third brand from Toyota, hurting both in the process. Of course, everyone (most everyone, anyway) knows that Lexus is owned and operated by Toyota, so I'm not sure that holds true -- but it would be far simpler to have a third brand with a dedicated showroom and shared service, say, than a whole new dealer network.

enternamehere · February 2001

Looks like the dealer has already calculated depreciation. I compared a 2001 Passat GLS to the Accord LX and the Passat goes for close to $5,500 more.

louie57 · February 2001

Thanks for all your advice and counsel. I have made my decision and I have chosen the 2000 Passat. I took alot of your advice. I checked the car out carefully with a friend and there is no evidence that it was in an accident. I also asked directly and they said no. Also checked the service record, only oil changes over the 8000 km, no other warranty work done.I ran a check on the VIN and this verified the date the car was put in service, which coinciced with what the dealer had told me, and the fact that the car had not been registered to anyone else. I read the recommendation in the Lemonade book...and they advised an extended warranty. So I negotiated a reduced price for an additional 3 years warranty for a total of 5 years or 100,000 km. The insurer is a company called Autoshield, which the dealer said is good to deal with. No deductible if I bring the car to the selling dealer for extended warranty service, otherwise $50 per occurance (if I am out of town or in the USA). I hope I did not miss anything. I know the Honda would have been a good choice too but I was ready for a change. Hopefully it will turn out to be a good choice. One last thing...they want to sell me rustproofing and a teflon coating for the paint. I said no to the rustproofing. Does anyone have any experience with this teflon coating for the paint? I am a bit skeptical...$250 seems a little pricey (it also includes scotchguaring the interior) but I can do that myself for the cost of a couple of cans of Scotchguard! But the teflon? Anyway, thanks again to all for your valuable input. I will keep you posted.

shehzad · February 2001

this is my first time on this thread, but I just wanted to see what people were saying about the camry, which I own. I have a 2000 LeV6, but have never driven a Honda-unless you count the Acuras, but that's another discussion. I generally own european automobiles, but bought the camry as an extra car to just leave outside and use as a weekend workhorse for carrying junk and not worrying about getting dinged up in the mall etc. Anyhow, my opinion on the camry itself is this. It's truly like an appliance-ie a toaster or an oven. It requires no maintainence, but at the same time attracts no attention. It is truly just a functional automobile for those who do not enjoy driving, but need something to transport them from destination to destination. Whenever I start it, it starts. Whenever I need power, it gives me a relatively smooth onslaught. Whenever I touch the plastic, it feels like plastic. It does nothing whatsoever for my senses, as a leather interior would do on the smell, finely knotted interior carpeting would do on the legs, and fine grained wood would do on the eyes. That said, it works, but doesn't inspire any emotion in me. It's really just a very plain, very functional car. This leaves me torn, as I truly consider myself an automobile lover, and this car works perfectly in every sense of the word-which should make me love it, but somehow, its fundamental lack of idiosyncratic behavior ends up annoying me to no end. I don't know anything about the accord, so I can't really comment on it, but my question to all of you that read this thread is, does this total perfection affect your perception of your automobile? And that said, a more probing question. What do you consider an enthusiast? Someone who enjoys total perfection in an automobile or someone who seeks out the imperfections? I don't want to rub anyone the wrong way about this-I'm a Camry owner myself, and would not have bought it were it not for the "perfect" reputation it has. But, as I alluded to before, it peturbs me that it brings out no emotion in me, and I just want to know if any other owners feel this way.

210delray · February 2001

Skip the "teflon," it's just a gimmick. Just wash and wax your car as needed.

in2dadark · February 2001

When I was 23, I bought a 1980 limited edition black , MOB. An emotional purchase if ever there was one. Three windshield wipers??..CO.. COOL makin akiny more ??? even better!!Love soon faded..I'mfaded.. I'mif it was when it stalled in the middle of the George Washington Bridge in the middle of a full gallop or when I flipped it (convertable convertiblear) on its side in the middle of February.Ahh love, emotioAshuickly turned to contempt...Give me a reliable, functional Asian over an emotional flakey European or aflakyn N e time..!American thIse days , I think an automobile bringing you attention is a BAD thing, at times possibly deadly..A future Camry owner...In keeping with the Carry.. I'm going to buy a foreign car for the first time in a while. Like the Acura TL's ...but I think Camry rides better than Accord or the TL...If I wanted to feel every bump in the road I would have kept the MGB...

maryg2 · February 2001

I drop in here once in awhile because I debated between the o1 Camry and the 01 Accord LX-6. I knew all the reasons to buy a Camry, but I could just not get excited about buying that car. I really tried, kept test driving it. At the time I had a 96 Accord LX. I finally went to look at the new Accord EX, and my heart skipped a little beat. The leather, sunroof, CD changer, dashboard, etc. all said this car would be luxurious and fun to drive. And I do love it. I know the Camry would be quieter and smoother, but I don't care!!!

denniswade · February 2001

and you are happy -- nothing at all wrong with that!

sobers · February 2001

It seems you had your mind set on Passat !! N'joy your car. I myself considered Camry/Passat before getting my Accord SE. Though reliability(electrical components) for Passat has been a mixed bag, I think it rides on a good platform (chassis).

driver55 · February 2001

I recently did the "Camry vs. Accord vs. Passat" drill for about 5 weeks off and on.
First just a bit of background so you know where I'm coming from: I have been a Toy. owner and admirer since I got my first license over 15 years ago. I haven't owned them exclusively, but have a had a few in that time including a Celica, 4-runner, Supra and a 1/2 ton Pick-up.
The point is, I knew that Toyotas have a bullet proof, nuclear war-proof engine, and it always offered a strong "piece-of-mind factor" when considering the purchase of what was already a wonderful, well-designed car.
However, now, especially with the Camry, I feel that the bulletproof engine is not "one of its many strong features, but instead one of its "only" strong features. While I would say that Toy has been successful in creating a 3-tiered strategy of Sedans (Camry, Avalon and Lexus), the result, in the Camrys case, is a strong, efficient, relatively affordable, yet plain vanilla, no frills, boring car. It has become your father's Oldsmobile, only without the retractable antenna and curb feelers.
So yes, the Camry, like the Accord is becoming even more competitively priced, however, it doesn't deny the adage, "You get what you pay for."
Personally it was a big shift for me to move away from Toyota. There is nothing wrong with the car. It's a safe, conservative purchase (in terms of reliability and depreciation). But I'm at the point where I still can't afford a $30-40k car, but would like to enjoy the experience for the next 3-5 years, not simply tolerate it. So I passed on the Camry...
In case you are interested, I passed on the Accord as well for similar reasons, although I think it has slightly better styling than the Camry. But, my sis-in-law has a '96 Accord and is experiencing tranny problems, which I have heard echoed on these boards as well.
Oh, a final word (from me, anyway) on the Camry. One of the reasons I considered it to be a "safe" purchase was the limited downside risk of depreciation. That said, a body style change is just around the corner, which made me more leary of purchasing a Camry new at this point. So many have expressed disappointment about the "boring" Camry that the next body style is bound to be in higher demand, effectively putting greater downward pressure on depreciation of the current model Camry.

Does any of this ring true with anyone else?

take care.

wenyue · February 2001

New model will most likely bring down ward pressure on the current generation car.

I agree with you, and it usually holds true for almost any automobile.

The new spec usually has more power, better fuel efficiency, greater room, quieter, better looking.... ect. All of this tend to makes the older product looks less appealing. And tend to direct the demand towards the newer design.

97 and 98 Accord is a prime example. The 97 is classified is much smallers, and has a less powerful engine. Basicly can't not compete with the 98 in the ability to perform as a family car. The price between the 4-cylinder EX model between the 2 years (cross generation) are $2000. The difference between the same model 99 and 98 EX (same generation) is $1400.

97 and 96 Camry is the same way. 1 year difference, 2 different generation. Value differ by $1400 right now. But 97 and 98 Camry LE (same generation) differ by only $1100 right now.

I guess it's not hard to understand why each redesign (if it's an improvement) tend to cause a more significant price difference.

in2dadark · February 2001

Also the BEST time to get a new (2001) Camry is when they are rolling out a new model. WHy?Because I'm sure dealer will want to clear the decks to get as large and allotment of the new (high demand = high price) design. I'm looking for some special incentives on Camry between now and July...I'LL take a known winner n e time...Besides I have been drooling over Camry and similar autos from my 13 mile per gallon blazer for the last 4 years or so....They say they don't know what incentives are coming if any..I think they do .. Am I wrong?

liufei · March 2001

Its more likely to happen as you stated (the incentives,etc). But on the same time, your car will be obselete (in term of model) in a few months due to the release of the new model.
Besides, the new model should offers more advantage over the old one, just like Wenyue stated. As long as Toyota keep their
"decontenting" to a minimum.

denniswade · March 2001

to repeat a quote from Jim Press at the Outlook meeting last month -- "Better sell your Camry now, before the new ones come out!" I think he's right. The new one's a beaut.

wenyue · March 2001

denniswade:

The suggestion to "sell your Camry now" for the newly redesign model isn't exactly suttle.

And I know he said it jokingly.

But I can see where it's coming from. The new Camry will represents a 5 year advancement in technology, and will be totally up to date. And most people will have a hard time telling whether you are driving a 97 or a 2001 model Camry, but they WILL be able to that you are driving a new 2002 Camry. This will result in a greater depreciation gap between the new and old model.

Buying an 2001 isn't totally without virtue. Since it's a proven model, it won't experience any teething trouble like those associated with first model year (even Toyota can run into one or two in the first year). Also, dealer tend to charge a lot more for the brand new model. This coupled with the incentives to move the older model could very well translate into $2000-$3000 differ in price.

My strategy is: wait until the new Camry comes out, and see if Toyota kept up it's usual quality job. If not, you can take advantage of the incentive to buy a 2001 model cheaply. Or Toyota has done a good job (most likely case), then wait couple of months for the first wave of rush buying to subside and buy the car closer to the winter for a more reasonable deal.

This way, you have the option to pick and choose between the cheap and the new.

in2dadark · March 2001

What is a Jim Press. I once executed one of those with sweat pants once I think...??You all r probably right..But I have a dying relative in my driveway ...tick tock...If I see a 1k rebate I goin back...I just missed one on the ce .but the saleperson only told me about the 500 on the le...what else is new...

liufei · March 2001

Personally, I would rather wait (if I can) and wait some more until a model is at least 1 year old. No manufacturer is immune to problem, thus giving me some buffer and more insight of possible problem area. Hopefully the manufacturer will do something about it in the next model year.
After seeing what happen to the Focus, I'm convinced this is the way to go for me, as long as my self discipline holds up

Honda Accord vs Toyota Camry

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles