In my opinion, the Camry, Altima, Passat, Mazda6, and Legacy are worthy comepetitors to the Accord and they're all better looking
If that’s the case, then the solution is easy go conservative. Except for the sagging tail lamps, I don’t see a reason to dislike Accord sedan’s styling. Coupe looks nice to me though.
Except for Passat, which I think defined a theme in terms of style, none of the other cars you mention do anything for me.
responsible for the style of the Suzuki Verona and Forenza? I think both of those are nice looking cars, although the central theme of the Forenza makes me think a bit of an Edsel (I'm sure they'd prefer you to think of an Alfa, though!).
Still, beauty is only skin deep, and I dunno if I'd take a chance on either of these.
I think my favorites are the Altima (especially with the'05 restyle) and Passat. Another one I like the style of is the Stratus/Sebring sedans, but they just don't have the substance to back it up. I kinda like the Mazda6, except that it seems a little tall for its length, giving a slightly stubby look.
I'm not crazy about the Accord's style, but it wouldn't be enough to scare me away! And I think style-wise, I would put the Camry below it.
the Suzuki Verona probably has about the same chance of making me go orgasmic as Mrs. Verona, my high-school geometry teacher! But I think overall, it's a design that's easy on the eye and pleasant.
That Zook looks respectable. But a BMW badge on the front and some would call it the best looking car in the lineup, LOL. Especially after what Bangle has done.
Any how, the Verona is a face-lift of the original Leganza design, which was better. Guigiaro penned that just after doing the original Lexus GS, and if you look closely you'll see a lot of similarities (C-pillar especially).
Accord looks like it melted. Altima looks trendy, but it'll look dated first. Camry just looks boring, inoffensive. Mazda6 looks sharp, IMO the best in class. Legacy looks almost as good as the Mazda. Passat led the pack in 1998 but the Ford 500 cloned it now. TL looks sharp to me, muscular. G35 coupe looks gorgeous, but somehow the sedan doesn't.
Funny thing is I saw a new and old TL next to each other, what stood out were the wide pillars on the new one. Visibility was definitely compromised for the blockier, more muscular look.
About a year ago there was an article stating 99% of Honda/Acura vehicles will have standard ABS/side curtains by 2007 and their light trucks will have standard stability control. This was someone from Honda who said this, and also the 99% figure excludes the Insight, S2000, and NSX. With the addition of standard side curtains on the Accord it looks like they may be living up to this promise.
Not sure if the Fit was factored in at the time but if this figure is true we can pretty much bet the Civic will have these things standard very soon. That alone is enough to bump the price up to move it "upmarket". I give credit to Honda for at least making these things standard. But I'm sure they don't want the price to get too high and IMO the Civic is far from a great value price-wise right now so with these things standard it makes me wonder if the rest of the car will be all that better. Maybe this time they'll at least try to make body-colored door handles, mirrors, and an armrest standard in the LX from the beginning. And if we're lucky 15" wheels will be standard too. Or how about 4-wheel discs on the overpriced EX trim?
When they add these normal things on the Civic everyone is going to praise Honda for moving "upmarket". Other than standard side curtains and ABS, all these other things are just normal stuff. The prices they charge for drum brakes, black mirrors, non-VTEC, steel wheel equipped cars is ridiculous.
It would be surprising if Toyota had VSC/Side Curtain airbags standard across a range. I fiddled with Toyota Sienna today, and even with the XLE trim, I had an option package to buy to get VSC, side airbags and side curtain airbags.
I expect these things to be optional at low end of the price range, but when the pricing creeps up high, as in this case ($29,055 is the MSRP for the Sienna), it would make sense to have these as standard, not optional.
In case of Honda, the difference is making the features standard (side airbags, side curtain airbags and ABS) even in the lowest trim levels.
Yes, Kia still wins out by being the first to market knee airbags. But they seem to take the money out of the drive train compartment.
"It would be surprising if Toyota had VSC/Side Curtain airbags standard across a range. I fiddled with Toyota Sienna today, and even with the XLE trim, I had an option package to buy to get VSC, side airbags and side curtain airbags."
Uh....the Sienna is a mini-van.
ateixeira was talking about SUVs and VSC specifically, not mini-vans and airbags.
Oh well, since Honda is expected to include the features “across the board” and this discussion (re)started with someone bringing up these features being in a Civic and that Kia Spectra ain’t an SUV, I assumed we weren’t limited to SUVs. But then, Sienna does appear under SUV/Van selection item. But then, as you say, it is just a light truck, not an SUV. So, let us look at an SUV.
I know Toyota well enough to have a direct hit. It took me just a few seconds to find out a vehicle.
I was referring to the Civic, when's the last time it won a comparison test? Or even finished in the top half?
"I for one am grateful for the fact that I have enough self-assurance that I can buy a car that does what I want, rather than feeling compelled to define myself by the car I purchase."
That's great that your car does what you want, I apparently want my car to do more for me. Its not a matter of a delusion, I want the best handling, best looking, and highest quality car I can afford. The Civic is none of those and the 3 is all of those. But let's be honest, buying a Honda is a boring choice of car. When's the last time a Honda got anyone excited about driving? Mazda is the one with the zoom zoom and rightfully so.
The 6 has never won a comparison against the Accord even with all of the "zoom zoom".
"But let's be honest, buying a Honda is a boring choice of car. When's the last time a Honda got anyone excited about driving? "
You can't make blanket statements about what others get out of their car. I LOVE driving our 04 EX-L stick. I also LOVE driving our 03 Si. Even our 04 Odyssey is a hoot. I dare you to tell someone their S2000 isn't fun-to-drive as well. If someone can say that the 3 excites them I don't find it to far-fetched to assume the S2000 excites it's owners as well. Same thing for the Accord V6 6-speed coupe.
"Oh well, since Honda is expected to include the features “across the board” and this discussion (re)started with someone bringing up these features being in a Civic and that Kia Spectra ain’t an SUV, I assumed we weren’t limited to SUVs. But then, Sienna does appear under SUV/Van selection item."
I assumed you were responding to ateixeira since your post was right after his and addressed something that he was talking about in his post. With regards to Toyota, ateixeira was specifically talking about DSC being standard on the SUVs. You responded "It would be surprising if Toyota had VSC/Side Curtain airbags standard across a range." and then went on to talk about the Sienna, which is obviously not an SUV.
Sometimes it seems like you don't read the posts that you are responding to.
"The 6 has never won a comparison against the Accord even with all of the "zoom zoom"."
IIRC, it came in 2nd in a Road and Track comparison, but Road and Track said in a later issue that they made a mistake with some numbers and that the Mazda6 actually tied the Accord.
" "I was referring to the Civic, when's the last time it won a comparison test? Or even finished in the top half?"
"IIRC, it came in 2nd in a Road and Track comparison, but Road and Track said in a later issue that they made a mistake with some numbers and that the Mazda6 actually tied the Accord."
That's one tie out of how many tests? At least 4 if I am not mistaken.
So if we are to believe the comparison tests the Accord is better than the 6 but the Civic is mid pack. Unless you want to say that they aren't fair because the 6 is really better which would mean that you can toss out the mid-pack showing of the Civic in that test. Guess the changes to the 03 Civic really helped since Edmunds placed it first.
Either way, both the first place Edmunds finish and the mid-pack Car and Driver finish prove birdman wrong. Thanks for the help newcar.
"So if we are to believe the comparison tests the Accord is better than the 6 but the Civic is mid pack. Unless you want to say that they aren't fair because the 6 is really better which would mean that you can toss out the mid-pack showing of the Civic in that test. Guess the changes to the 03 Civic really helped since Edmunds placed it first."
I believe the comparison tests. I really don't have anything against the Accord except for the way it looks, and that matters to me.
The Accord was available when I bought my 6. I didn't have to buy the 6.
I really don't have as much against the 6 as you like to believe. I think it's a nice car and it was a hoot to drive. The Accord just suited my needs a little better.
Besides, it's next to impossible to find a 6 equipped the way I would want it.
The 6 is a very nice car. I'm anxious to see what Ford does with this platform for the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr. The basic platform is great - if Ford doesn't "dumb it down," it could have a real (and sorely needed) trio of winners.
I stand corrected, looks like I missed one comparison test. The two comparisons I've read most recently are the Car & Driver trashing of the Civic and the Consumer Reports test with the 3 on top. It'll be interested to see if the car magazines agree with Consumer Reports and rate the 3 as highly. I'm very surprised CR rated it so highly considering its so sporty. They typically like the boring Camrys and can't stand good handling and a firm ride.
I find it amusing how devoted Honda owners are towards buying Honda. The brand loyalty is amazing. I've personally never been impressed with Honda. Rather than sticking to one brand, I typically enjoy driving the "hot" car of the times. My previous car was a 93 Saturn. They were the car to buy in the early 90s. Consumer Reports rated it as the best small car ahead of the Civic and Corolla. Saturns haven't kept pace since then so I now have today's "hot" car, the Mazda3. Again, rated ahead of the Civic and Corolla. I will admit, the Civic has always been a good car, but never the best. I guess I just like the best
I owned three Toyotas before I moved to Honda. That move, made exactly seven years ago has made me a Honda fan. And there are good reasons for it.
As for Civic, it has never been outstanding in anything but fuel economy and emissions. Same can be said for Accord. Their strength is the approach, and that is balancing the attributes rather than focusing on one or the other. And this is why Civic could end up as the best compact car if I had to buy another one today. And Accord definitely will, if I decide to not move up to Acura (TSX or TL).
Honda offers the best cars to me (I should say minivan and small SUV as well, since Odyssey and CR-V are my favorites, just not ready to hop into one).
"I find it amusing how devoted Honda owners are towards buying Honda. The brand loyalty is amazing."
I've had 5 of them, I know 15 others outside of work, and here at my company of roughly 60 people, we have 10 of them in the parking lot (Not as many as the 12 Toyo's, but still impressive ratio. Must be something to that...
I'm actually on the fence with my loyalties. To be honest, the last few years and some impressive new vehicles have stirred my interest in Mazda's. I like the "Japanese BMW" qualities that I see in their products, a trait that suited Honda's of the past, and the Miata is the only vehicle I'd consider if I couldn't get into an S2K. I have no loyalty to just one brand. I've had a Toyota, a Mercedes, and a Nissan that were all excellent vehicles. I'd buy another in a heartbeat, but it's very difficult to find a Toyo with a stick, Mercedes are quite expensive to get into and I'm not loving the current Nissan cost-cutting. When I bought my 02' Accord, the 6 wasn't on the market yet, and when we bought our MDX last May, we had nothing comparable in the Mazda stable to look at, but if they did, I'd give it serious look (given that it wasn't an Explorer knockoff). As much as I know there is a rivalry among Honda/Mazda owners, I think you'll find that as long as Mazda continues to build a reputation for quality, sporting vehicles, loyalties to just one brand are not as strong as you think.
I agree! If this were GM/Ford or Dodge it would be all over the news, in every paper! I still run across people who have never heard of this problem with the CRV in other chat rooms across the internet.
has some great product out now. When I was purchasing a Mazda product the salesperson told me the Mazda 3 is creating the most traffic at the dealership. He said they have on average a 1-2 week supply on hand, they cannot get enough of them...
"He said they have on average a 1-2 week supply on hand, they cannot get enough of them..."
As I posted uptopic, according to the data given Automotive News by Mazda, on August 1st they had 50 days supply of Mazda 3s... quite a bit more than 1-2 weeks.
It may be that it's selling better in some areas than in others. Or perhaps the salesperson is exaggerating somewhat.
And of course, that may have changed by now... figures for September haven't been released yet.
Honda had a nice batch of lemons in 1999 and 2000. Honda only looks good because GM, Ford, and Chrysler are just really that bad. Even factoring in fleet sales that don't go towards the lemon numbers, Toyota is just more reliable. And the European surveys and statistics I've seen Toyota is ahead of Honda. Honda is above average, but other companies have better values and cars with good reliability than Honda IMO.
"As I posted uptopic, according to the data given Automotive News by Mazda, on August 1st they had 50 days supply of Mazda 3s... quite a bit more than 1-2 weeks.
It may be that it's selling better in some areas than in others. Or perhaps the salesperson is exaggerating somewhat."
It's also possible that a large percentage of that supply is in transit, meaning sitting on big huge rafts floating their way to the West Coast.
Mazda is #1 3 years straight. Toyota was #4 in 2002 and 2003 but fell to #8 in 2004. Honda at #7 in 2002 and jumped to #3 the following 2 years. Hyundai has jumped to #4 and was #6 and #10 in previous years.
Note the average cost of repair for those brands. Mazda and Honda are almost identical, where as Toyota and Hyundai have very high average cost of repair, which drags them down in the rankings. This means though Hyundai and Toyota have less problems overall, but labor/parts are more expensive and most likely having more major problems.
Average repair bill
Mazda £275
Honda £277.31
Toyota £443.23
Hyundai £363.44
Subaru £1,038.99
"Subaru's dramatic fall of eleven places to 22nd in the table may surprise a few observers. However, costly repairs to the Impreza's engine and transmission units pushed the average bill to nearly £1,040 making it the most expensive model repaired."
"Toyota - With the high average cost of repair and quite a good index rating - Which means that the car fails infrequently but when it does then you will be in for a larger than average bill, however overall Toyota is a very strong make of car to buy."
LOL! Still trying to squeeze me into one of those, eh Juice?
The S2K doesn't have much footroom, either. But at least I can get my legs into it, and I don't poke out the top like a Toys-R-Us spokesanimal.
I can shoehorn myself into an MRSpyder, too. It's not as comfy (for me) as the S2k, but it's good enough. Problem is... I've never really liked the MRSpyder.
"I find it amusing how devoted Honda owners are towards buying Honda. The brand loyalty is amazing."
One of the reasons is that Honda's trying to stick to their reputation as a "friendly" company. They're as environmentally conscious as a car company can be, they've never tried to give off the "brute power" image (what they do with small engines has a bit of David and Goliath in it), and while they're not Volvo they visibly spend a lot of resources on safety and make it known. It's probably all silliness, but I find Honda very likeable.
Is there a list of CR ratings online? I haven't even looked at them lately. We get the Protege, Miata, etc. from the same factories as they do so it's the same car. The Protege has always been as reliable as the Civic, but I guess since it's a Ford you won't even consider it as reliable. The Honda badge hounds continue to prove my point time and time again. It's all about the badge.
"They're as environmentally conscious as a car company can be.."
It's all hype and marketing. They have plenty of LEV emissions cars. If they cared so much they would make the SULEV and PZEV vehicles that they offer in the green states standard in all 50 states, but just like every other company they don't.
Cost and Risk. PZEV involves an extended warranty as well. That said, one step at a time. Being conservative and consistent can help stay independent. ;-)
Honda is only moderately "green" at best these days...but they do stay away from really large engines to maximize efficiency and improve gas mileage in their fleet, which shows in high-in-class ratings for many of the vehicles they sell, especially Civic and many of the Acuras.
"The Honda badge hounds continue to prove my point time and time again. It's all about the badge."
For some people it's all about hating the badge too, or for some reason feeling that if Honda is successful it somehow diminishes THEIR favorite badge.
Mazda is on its way up for the first time in a few years, there's no denying it. While its sporty models are average to low in class for fuel economy, they currently have a line of exciting vehicles that offer good value for the dollar (excellent value, in the case of the 3). The first victim of Mazda's newfound glory will almost certainly be Nissan, if I have it figured right. But Honda has its work cut out for it to stay ahead of Mazda, and the 3 has set a new benchmark in its class.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
"The Protege has always been as reliable as the Civic, but I guess since it's a Ford you won't even consider it as reliable"
Interestingly enough, it's the Ford built Mazdas that do the worst for Mazda. According to CR, the Protege's up til 98 were average. Starting in 99 they have been a lot better. Coincidentally, isn't that the year Mazda went back to a Mazda-designed platform instead of sharing with the Escort? The Miata and MPV do well. Aren't they Mazda-built? The Ford/Mazda truck does only average. The one exception is the Millenia. It's record isn't stellar even though it is Mazda built and designed.
JD Powers rates Mazda 20th on their vehicle dependibility study. Honda is 6th. My Protege was reliable in the 7 months I owned it. The engine had a "death rattle" when cold and it suffered from a squeakly clutch but overall I would rate it as above average. I think the Ford influence is what brings Mazda quality down.
Oh, I think that Honda still has a decent lead in the environmental race. While some cars, such as the Civic, are not as green as they could be, the overall fleet is consistently good. Honda isn't green because they have the cleanest cars. They are green because they refuse to build dirty cars. The MDX and Pilot, as examples, are highly rated in a class of vehicles where emissions are not necessarily the top priority.
On the gas mileage front, Honda vehicles have consistently been at the top in terms of fleet average, and they are never far from the top in terms of class comparisons. They were the first manufacturer to tell congress that fuel economy can be pushed higher. Despite being a relatively small player in the industry, they offer a decent number of hybrids.
Overall, they have a good record. Sure, there are a few models here and there which best the Hondas (Prius vs HCH, for example). But I can't think of another company that is better when you look at the big picture instead of one car at a time.
They were the first manufacturer to tell congress that fuel economy can be pushed higher.
I think that says it all. I’ve never seen Honda whine about more stringent fuel/emissions regulations. Never. I couldn’t say the same for another automaker, including Toyota that tries to wear a mask. Even when it came to diesel engine in Europe, without having a first hand experience, Honda delivered one of the cleanest and most fuel efficient design in the market.
Get a grip on reality folks. If Honda had the resources of Toyota they would be cranking out the SUVs and V8 cars as fast as they could make them. 94% of their profits come from North America so Honda has to be selective on what they spend money on. They aren't eager to make that V8 or RWD platform for their "luxury" division so instead reskin Accords, add more options, and charge a premium. They use the smaller engines and play the "environmental" card making themselves come across as the environment comes first and they're more concerned about it than the next brand.
The poster above mentions "cost and risk". Well there you go. It's about profits people, they're running a business. Why did they decide to go with the V6 hybrid Accord instead of a 4-cyl hybrid Accord? Because they figure Americans care about power more than saving some MPG, so give them what they want. The Civic hybrid is their posterboy for being green yet it gets a wimpy ULEV emissions rating in non-green states and in most real world driving their regular Civics and regular Corollas and other cars are getting similar mileage, and these cars have the same emissions rating as well.
I'm just saying they've worked that into their image. And if you compare them to every other car company in the US, they probably ARE the greenest. i-VTEC, VCM in V6s, a line of hybrids... it's not like everybody has those.
what the end result would be if Honda did decide to make a V-8 engine. Since they tend to be at or near the head of the class in fuel economy in all the other markets, I believe that any V-8 model would also score similarly well, in comparison to its peers.
As for the Civic Hybrid versus a Prius, I think one of the main differences here might be that the Prius was designed from the ground-up to be a hybrid, whereas the Civic was more of an add-on job. The Prius is mainly electric, with the gasoline motor being secondary, where with the Civic Hybrid, I think it's just the opposite.
"Interestingly enough, it's the Ford built Mazdas that do the worst for Mazda. According to CR, the Protege's up til 98 were average. Starting in 99 they have been a lot better. Coincidentally, isn't that the year Mazda went back to a Mazda-designed platform instead of sharing with the Escort?"
Both platforms were Mazda designed, so Mazda didn't go "back to a Mazda designed platform". Just because Ford used it, doesn't mean they designed it. Recently, CR rated the Protege as being more reliable than the Civic. I believe it was for the 2001 model year. CR also has favorable ratings for the Mazda6.
"The Miata and MPV do well. Aren't they Mazda-built?"
Yeah, they're built in Japan, but the MPV still has the Ford Duratec V6.
was that the Ford Escort from around 1991 onward was essentially a 323/Protege with Ford sheetmetal and a Ford engine.
FWIW though, I thought the Escort in those years was pretty reliable? The one car I heard that was really bad was the 626 models that used a Ford automatic tranny.
Comments
If that’s the case, then the solution is easy go conservative. Except for the sagging tail lamps, I don’t see a reason to dislike Accord sedan’s styling. Coupe looks nice to me though.
Except for Passat, which I think defined a theme in terms of style, none of the other cars you mention do anything for me.
Still, beauty is only skin deep, and I dunno if I'd take a chance on either of these.
I'm not crazy about the Accord's style, but it wouldn't be enough to scare me away! And I think style-wise, I would put the Camry below it.
Any how, the Verona is a face-lift of the original Leganza design, which was better. Guigiaro penned that just after doing the original Lexus GS, and if you look closely you'll see a lot of similarities (C-pillar especially).
Accord looks like it melted.
Altima looks trendy, but it'll look dated first.
Camry just looks boring, inoffensive.
Mazda6 looks sharp, IMO the best in class.
Legacy looks almost as good as the Mazda.
Passat led the pack in 1998 but the Ford 500 cloned it now.
TL looks sharp to me, muscular.
G35 coupe looks gorgeous, but somehow the sedan doesn't.
Funny thing is I saw a new and old TL next to each other, what stood out were the wide pillars on the new one. Visibility was definitely compromised for the blockier, more muscular look.
-juice
It'd be nice if the next Accord borrowed some styling cues from the new TL or RL.
I remember in the early 90s when the Accord kind of looked like a mini Acura Legend.
That new RL is the best looking sedan Honda has ever made, hopefully it will rub off on the next Accord.
-juice
Not sure if the Fit was factored in at the time but if this figure is true we can pretty much bet the Civic will have these things standard very soon. That alone is enough to bump the price up to move it "upmarket". I give credit to Honda for at least making these things standard. But I'm sure they don't want the price to get too high and IMO the Civic is far from a great value price-wise right now so with these things standard it makes me wonder if the rest of the car will be all that better. Maybe this time they'll at least try to make body-colored door handles, mirrors, and an armrest standard in the LX from the beginning. And if we're lucky 15" wheels will be standard too. Or how about 4-wheel discs on the overpriced EX trim?
When they add these normal things on the Civic everyone is going to praise Honda for moving "upmarket". Other than standard side curtains and ABS, all these other things are just normal stuff. The prices they charge for drum brakes, black mirrors, non-VTEC, steel wheel equipped cars is ridiculous.
Toyota already has VSC on every SUV, MY2004 IIRC.
Subaru has had ABS in every vehicle since 2002.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think VW is ahead of everyone when it comes to ABS, stability control, and air bags.
It comes far too late for Honda to brag about it, IMO.
-juice
I expect these things to be optional at low end of the price range, but when the pricing creeps up high, as in this case ($29,055 is the MSRP for the Sienna), it would make sense to have these as standard, not optional.
In case of Honda, the difference is making the features standard (side airbags, side curtain airbags and ABS) even in the lowest trim levels.
Yes, Kia still wins out by being the first to market knee airbags. But they seem to take the money out of the drive train compartment.
Uh....the Sienna is a mini-van.
ateixeira was talking about SUVs and VSC specifically, not mini-vans and airbags.
I know Toyota well enough to have a direct hit. It took me just a few seconds to find out a vehicle.
"I for one am grateful for the fact that I have enough self-assurance that I can buy a car that does what I want, rather than feeling compelled to define myself by the car I purchase."
That's great that your car does what you want, I apparently want my car to do more for me. Its not a matter of a delusion, I want the best handling, best looking, and highest quality car I can afford. The Civic is none of those and the 3 is all of those. But let's be honest, buying a Honda is a boring choice of car. When's the last time a Honda got anyone excited about driving? Mazda is the one with the zoom zoom and rightfully so.
Not that long ago actually. http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/100022/page015- .html
The 6 has never won a comparison against the Accord even with all of the "zoom zoom".
"But let's be honest, buying a Honda is a boring choice of car. When's the last time a Honda got anyone excited about driving? "
You can't make blanket statements about what others get out of their car. I LOVE driving our 04 EX-L stick. I also LOVE driving our 03 Si. Even our 04 Odyssey is a hoot. I dare you to tell someone their S2000 isn't fun-to-drive as well. If someone can say that the 3 excites them I don't find it to far-fetched to assume the S2000 excites it's owners as well. Same thing for the Accord V6 6-speed coupe.
I assumed you were responding to ateixeira since your post was right after his and addressed something that he was talking about in his post. With regards to Toyota, ateixeira was specifically talking about DSC being standard on the SUVs. You responded "It would be surprising if Toyota had VSC/Side Curtain airbags standard across a range." and then went on to talk about the Sienna, which is obviously not an SUV.
Sometimes it seems like you don't read the posts that you are responding to.
IIRC, it came in 2nd in a Road and Track comparison, but Road and Track said in a later issue that they made a mistake with some numbers and that the Mazda6 actually tied the Accord.
" "I was referring to the Civic, when's the last time it won a comparison test? Or even finished in the top half?"
Not that long ago actually. http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/100022/page015- .html"
The same publication that picked the Accord 1st and the Mazda6 2nd pretty much trashed the Civic in that last comparo it was in.
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article- - - _id=2505&page_number=5
Here's "The Verdict" on the Civic:
Highs: Great-fitting cockpit, slick shifter, good control layout, adept in the twisties.
Lows: Way too many rattles, way too many shades of metallic in the paint, harsh ride, numb path control on the interstate.
The Verdict: Something new from Honda — a loser.
Remember, this publication is far from being a Honda hater. The Accord won the latest family sedan comparo and is always on their ten best list.
The Civic came in 5th place by the way.
That's one tie out of how many tests? At least 4 if I am not mistaken.
So if we are to believe the comparison tests the Accord is better than the 6 but the Civic is mid pack. Unless you want to say that they aren't fair because the 6 is really better which would mean that you can toss out the mid-pack showing of the Civic in that test. Guess the changes to the 03 Civic really helped since Edmunds placed it first.
Either way, both the first place Edmunds finish and the mid-pack Car and Driver finish prove birdman wrong. Thanks for the help newcar.
I believe the comparison tests. I really don't have anything against the Accord except for the way it looks, and that matters to me.
The Accord was available when I bought my 6. I didn't have to buy the 6.
Besides, it's next to impossible to find a 6 equipped the way I would want it.
I find it amusing how devoted Honda owners are towards buying Honda. The brand loyalty is amazing. I've personally never been impressed with Honda. Rather than sticking to one brand, I typically enjoy driving the "hot" car of the times. My previous car was a 93 Saturn. They were the car to buy in the early 90s. Consumer Reports rated it as the best small car ahead of the Civic and Corolla. Saturns haven't kept pace since then so I now have today's "hot" car, the Mazda3. Again, rated ahead of the Civic and Corolla. I will admit, the Civic has always been a good car, but never the best. I guess I just like the best
I owned three Toyotas before I moved to Honda. That move, made exactly seven years ago has made me a Honda fan. And there are good reasons for it.
As for Civic, it has never been outstanding in anything but fuel economy and emissions. Same can be said for Accord. Their strength is the approach, and that is balancing the attributes rather than focusing on one or the other. And this is why Civic could end up as the best compact car if I had to buy another one today. And Accord definitely will, if I decide to not move up to Acura (TSX or TL).
Honda offers the best cars to me (I should say minivan and small SUV as well, since Odyssey and CR-V are my favorites, just not ready to hop into one).
I've had 5 of them, I know 15 others outside of work, and here at my company of roughly 60 people, we have 10 of them in the parking lot (Not as many as the 12 Toyo's, but still impressive ratio. Must be something to that...
I'm actually on the fence with my loyalties. To be honest, the last few years and some impressive new vehicles have stirred my interest in Mazda's. I like the "Japanese BMW" qualities that I see in their products, a trait that suited Honda's of the past, and the Miata is the only vehicle I'd consider if I couldn't get into an S2K. I have no loyalty to just one brand. I've had a Toyota, a Mercedes, and a Nissan that were all excellent vehicles. I'd buy another in a heartbeat, but it's very difficult to find a Toyo with a stick, Mercedes are quite expensive to get into and I'm not loving the current Nissan cost-cutting. When I bought my 02' Accord, the 6 wasn't on the market yet, and when we bought our MDX last May, we had nothing comparable in the Mazda stable to look at, but if they did, I'd give it serious look (given that it wasn't an Explorer knockoff). As much as I know there is a rivalry among Honda/Mazda owners, I think you'll find that as long as Mazda continues to build a reputation for quality, sporting vehicles, loyalties to just one brand are not as strong as you think.
Funny. I'd own a Miata now if I could get into one. But I can't fit! So I have to save a few more years to buy an S2K.
I like most everything that has come out of Mazda in the past few years. But that doesn't change the fact that Hondas tend to be great cars.
As I posted uptopic, according to the data given Automotive News by Mazda, on August 1st they had 50 days supply of Mazda 3s... quite a bit more than 1-2 weeks.
It may be that it's selling better in some areas than in others. Or perhaps the salesperson is exaggerating somewhat.
And of course, that may have changed by now... figures for September haven't been released yet.
Honda had a nice batch of lemons in 1999 and 2000. Honda only looks good because GM, Ford, and Chrysler are just really that bad. Even factoring in fleet sales that don't go towards the lemon numbers, Toyota is just more reliable. And the European surveys and statistics I've seen Toyota is ahead of Honda. Honda is above average, but other companies have better values and cars with good reliability than Honda IMO.
It may be that it's selling better in some areas than in others. Or perhaps the salesperson is exaggerating somewhat."
It's also possible that a large percentage of that supply is in transit, meaning sitting on big huge rafts floating their way to the West Coast.
Mazda is #1 3 years straight. Toyota was #4 in 2002 and 2003 but fell to #8 in 2004. Honda at #7 in 2002 and jumped to #3 the following 2 years. Hyundai has jumped to #4 and was #6 and #10 in previous years.
Note the average cost of repair for those brands. Mazda and Honda are almost identical, where as Toyota and Hyundai have very high average cost of repair, which drags them down in the rankings. This means though Hyundai and Toyota have less problems overall, but labor/parts are more expensive and most likely having more major problems.
Average repair bill
Mazda £275
Honda £277.31
Toyota £443.23
Hyundai £363.44
Subaru £1,038.99
"Subaru's dramatic fall of eleven places to 22nd in the table may surprise a few observers. However, costly repairs to the Impreza's engine and transmission units pushed the average bill to nearly £1,040 making it the most expensive model repaired."
"Toyota - With the high average cost of repair and quite a good index rating - Which means that the car fails infrequently but when it does then you will be in for a larger than average bill, however overall Toyota is a very strong make of car to buy."
The numbers above were the average for 2003.
German JD Power 2002
http://www.toyota-scheidt.de/12-berichte-tuev-power/power-report/- 2002/bilder-1/05.jpg
German JD Power 2003
http://www.toyota-scheidt.de/12-berichte-tuev-power/power-report/- 2003/a-05.jpg
German JD Power 2004
http://www.toyota-scheidt.de/12-berichte-tuev-power/power-report/- 2004/2004-06-30-power-report/File0712.jpg
-juice
The S2K doesn't have much footroom, either. But at least I can get my legs into it, and I don't poke out the top like a Toys-R-Us spokesanimal.
I can shoehorn myself into an MRSpyder, too. It's not as comfy (for me) as the S2k, but it's good enough. Problem is... I've never really liked the MRSpyder.
One of the reasons is that Honda's trying to stick to their reputation as a "friendly" company. They're as environmentally conscious as a car company can be, they've never tried to give off the "brute power" image (what they do with small engines has a bit of David and Goliath in it), and while they're not Volvo they visibly spend a lot of resources on safety and make it known. It's probably all silliness, but I find Honda very likeable.
It's all hype and marketing. They have plenty of LEV emissions cars. If they cared so much they would make the SULEV and PZEV vehicles that they offer in the green states standard in all 50 states, but just like every other company they don't.
"The Honda badge hounds continue to prove my point time and time again. It's all about the badge."
For some people it's all about hating the badge too, or for some reason feeling that if Honda is successful it somehow diminishes THEIR favorite badge.
Mazda is on its way up for the first time in a few years, there's no denying it. While its sporty models are average to low in class for fuel economy, they currently have a line of exciting vehicles that offer good value for the dollar (excellent value, in the case of the 3). The first victim of Mazda's newfound glory will almost certainly be Nissan, if I have it figured right. But Honda has its work cut out for it to stay ahead of Mazda, and the 3 has set a new benchmark in its class.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Interestingly enough, it's the Ford built Mazdas that do the worst for Mazda. According to CR, the Protege's up til 98 were average. Starting in 99 they have been a lot better. Coincidentally, isn't that the year Mazda went back to a Mazda-designed platform instead of sharing with the Escort? The Miata and MPV do well. Aren't they Mazda-built? The Ford/Mazda truck does only average. The one exception is the Millenia. It's record isn't stellar even though it is Mazda built and designed.
JD Powers rates Mazda 20th on their vehicle dependibility study. Honda is 6th. My Protege was reliable in the 7 months I owned it. The engine had a "death rattle" when cold and it suffered from a squeakly clutch but overall I would rate it as above average. I think the Ford influence is what brings Mazda quality down.
On the gas mileage front, Honda vehicles have consistently been at the top in terms of fleet average, and they are never far from the top in terms of class comparisons. They were the first manufacturer to tell congress that fuel economy can be pushed higher. Despite being a relatively small player in the industry, they offer a decent number of hybrids.
Overall, they have a good record. Sure, there are a few models here and there which best the Hondas (Prius vs HCH, for example). But I can't think of another company that is better when you look at the big picture instead of one car at a time.
I think that says it all. I’ve never seen Honda whine about more stringent fuel/emissions regulations. Never. I couldn’t say the same for another automaker, including Toyota that tries to wear a mask. Even when it came to diesel engine in Europe, without having a first hand experience, Honda delivered one of the cleanest and most fuel efficient design in the market.
The poster above mentions "cost and risk". Well there you go. It's about profits people, they're running a business. Why did they decide to go with the V6 hybrid Accord instead of a 4-cyl hybrid Accord? Because they figure Americans care about power more than saving some MPG, so give them what they want. The Civic hybrid is their posterboy for being green yet it gets a wimpy ULEV emissions rating in non-green states and in most real world driving their regular Civics and regular Corollas and other cars are getting similar mileage, and these cars have the same emissions rating as well.
As for the Civic Hybrid versus a Prius, I think one of the main differences here might be that the Prius was designed from the ground-up to be a hybrid, whereas the Civic was more of an add-on job. The Prius is mainly electric, with the gasoline motor being secondary, where with the Civic Hybrid, I think it's just the opposite.
Both platforms were Mazda designed, so Mazda didn't go "back to a Mazda designed platform". Just because Ford used it, doesn't mean they designed it. Recently, CR rated the Protege as being more reliable than the Civic. I believe it was for the 2001 model year. CR also has favorable ratings for the Mazda6.
"The Miata and MPV do well. Aren't they Mazda-built?"
Yeah, they're built in Japan, but the MPV still has the Ford Duratec V6.
FWIW though, I thought the Escort in those years was pretty reliable? The one car I heard that was really bad was the 626 models that used a Ford automatic tranny.