By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
What planet have you come from? The Golf/ Jetta is actually world recognized as one of the finest handling chassis packages today.
The next generation Passat will be introduced next fall as a 2005, so it's not 2 years away. VW and Honda are not in sync with new generations, so with the current generation Accord, they are close to VW performance, although Accord does not have all the nice features available on the Passat. With the next generation Passat, I expect it to be a significant improvement not a step backward, otherwise what's the point of a next generation when the competition is playing catch up? Honda will have to catch up again.
I think everyone acknowledges that BMW has some of the best handling automobiles, and they are now the benchmark for Passat. Audi is chasing Mercedes. Although both are fine German driving machines, Mercedes and BMW have different driving attributes. VW/Audi wants to develop Passats that are competitive with BMW and an Audis that are competitive with Mercedes. I don't think the different chassis for the Audi/VW brands are inferior/superior as you seem to think, or lesser in any way, they are just tuned to different attributes for different performance.
Take it easy.
"Volkswagen and Nissan cornered the market at the high midsize sedan track as well, with Passat and Maxima essentially tied for first. Disdain for American makes was eerily evident here, with Ford Taurus, Oldsmobile Intrigue, Dodge Intrepid and Saturn LS2 lagging far behind. The vanilla Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, fittingly, placed right in the middle. Many of the people who had come to test the two sales leaders were wooed by either the lovely Passat or the sporty Maxima"
Here is what "Car" magazine from UK (printed edition) opines about the Accord coupe -
"Looks nice, in a rather boring way, and goes well. Predictably solid construction, safe dynamics and practical, durable interiors. Designed for the laid-back American market and rather missing the point over here; who wants a large sports-free coupe?"
To be fair, here is the comments on Camry and Passat and Accord Sedan (future Acura TSX)
Passat
The class leader in terms of quality, and one of the upper medium saloons that make any sense for a new private buy. Unsensational dynamics feel solid and mature, but Mercedes-beating build integrity is the main proposition. Estate handsome and useful
Camry
Oh dear, another new Camry and absolutely no lessons learned from the outgoing model. Big, ugly, cheaply constructed and ditchwater dull dynamics. Smooth ride, lots of room and high reliabilty the upsides. But it's not even close to being close
Honda Accord Sedan(Acura TSX)
Awkward looking new saloon puts quality and low running costs ahead of a dynamic driving experience. Well behind the Mazda6 in terms of driving fun, the Accord nonetheless successfully mimics VW and Audi levels of interior quality. On the right track, but not quite there yet
Check out the scores for the interior materials -
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43901/page022.- html
Editor's Evaluations - Drive
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43901/page020.- html
Editor's Evaluations - Ride
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43901/page021.- html
Buy british and buy a piece of unreliable U.K crap. Hmm.. images of borken down jaguars and problem plagued land rovers come to mind.
Both of these debates have more than run their course, and there's really no point in continuing them. It's time to move on, at least in my opinion. My apologies if they got too personal, especially to kartez.
By the way, the civic si is built in the U.K.
I believe the accord will still have to play catch up, seeing how it just got rear headrests and ABS standard in 2003. Even the lowly jetta has had these important safty features STANDARD since 1998.
One last item before i bake some bread, that FAKE wood trim has to go if the accord wants to catch up to the passat in interior materials quality.
Base model Passat for 2003 is the GL. There's not GLI model, that's reserved for the Jetta.
Some mistakes earlier...(features)
-GL model does not have foglights (GLS and up)
-There's no oil temp gauge, just fuel & coolant temp (unless the oil temp is part of the MFA, which I doubt)
-Rear sunshade (optional on the GLS with Leather Package)
Overhead airbag, as Side Curtain Airbags and Side front seat mounted airbags standard.
Traction control is standard (with the "Electronic Differential Lock")
Me personally, I wouldn't hesistate to get a Passat...even better with the TDI that's coming. The 2003 Accord sedan....I hate the way it looks from the B-pillar and back. The Camry is still a viable option for me.
I'll have to wait and see if the new Passat will be still built on the "B" chassis or the "A" chassis
Accord just caught up with the current generation B5.5 Pasatt, and they are now equal in most respects, although there are many options that Passat has either standard or optional that you can't even get on the Accord (find my earlier post).
The next generation Passat will be out late next year, and all reports say it will be improved in every aspect, so we'll have to wait and see instead of speculating.
My point is that the current Passat and Accord are very close in performace today, the next generation Passat will be out next fall, and the next generation Accord will probably will be a year or two behind the new Passat.
I'd like to find out how the global sales compare for the Accord and Passat. An earlier post said that the Accord is designed for American driving while the Passat is basically the same worldwide.
8u6hfd, I listed features that I believe are either optional OR standard on the Passat that are not even available on the Accord.
i have seen my replies about VW and other german cars being compared with respect to the camry and accord.
what i dont see is the VW or any of the other greman engineered cars listed on the annual 5yr report - or Inital Quality Report, JD Powers.
Granted, you might have your handling and spruce up styling, but what good is that on the side of the road, with flashers on?
There is only two company that dominates the inital and more so on the 5yr report - that is toyota and honda! end of discussion...
You buy a camry for the smooth ride and the bullet proof reliablity, if you want sport i ll go after the celica, mr2 or the spura - s2000.
However, if you consider a family car to have frim, close to back breaking suspension, then your VW and other german affilates would be a better choice.
Buy the camry for a life long worry free drive and the butter smooth suspension...
And the Honda Accord, for a bit more sporty feel with also, bullet proof reliablity..
Sorry you german and britih cars aren't really cars but over price box on wheels. , and more than anythign else -unreliable.
Powa' by "JAPAN" - TOYOTA!!!
----
Most British car magazines are better than the American car magazines simply because they test automobiles that are built for the world and represent a wider audience than just the North Americans. The cars that are available in the UK are usually identical to the cars that are available elsewhere in Europe, Asia and Australia. The BBC program Topgear and its host Jeremy Clarkson are very popular all over the world. Majority of the American reviewers/magazines/programs are not known outside this continent.
BTW, check out a few reviews by Jeremy Clarkson at www.topgear.com and then go read articles by reviewers on Carpoint, Car and Driver etc.
#991
----
All of my Accord vs. Passat posts started with my statement that Y2K Passat that I have handled better than the same model year Accord. Hence, most of all my posts refer to Y2K MY.
------
Like bjbird2, I have neither the patience nor the inclination to quote various articles to support my argument. I posted a few just because you said talon95 was backing up his statements and I wasn't. I quit as soon as I realized that this argument was going nowhere.
You know what the big thing in car theft is, its stealing luxury cars, shipping them overseas and selling them for an outrageous price. Want to know why, because the cars that are made in America, arent sold in other countries. AS with many other things in the US, we are the highest consuming nation in the world, therefore we, as a whole, demand the biggest and the best. That is why our cars have outrageous HP levels , and insane torque bands. Everyone in this forum can agree with me on this single point, the camry, accord and maxima are very popular cars, on average they push around 200hp (v6 verison) and the 4 bangers get around (150hp). These are everyday people, just like you and I driving these cars. Go take a look in Europe, or even Asia, their equivalent mass produced popular vehicle is one which produces about 100 hp at most. Want to know why our cars are different from theirs, mainly because we can afford the gas prices. Thats the bottom line. The cars here are totally different from the cars in other areas of the world. Our demands are different.
The last time I checked , most drivers especially those in asian countries ( and exception can be made to australia) and even a majority of those in Europe could never afford to drive a majority of the cars that we as a nation have the luxury of purchasing.
For one, I am an American, I drive in the United States, and could care less how well my accord has fared or is judged in another countyr; especially by pompous british automotive journalists.
P.S : I did read a few reviews of the Euro accord, and , well suprise surprise, its fares better then the Passat that is available abroad. Due to your reccomendation I will not be posting articles to prove my point.
In regards to your 2000 passat versus a 2000 accord, lets try to catch up to the times. 2003 vs 2003!
Kartez' "recommendation" notwithstanding, if these are available online, could you at least post the links? I'd be interested in reading them.
Topgear has a comparison between base model Mazda6 and Euro Accord and the Accord won. Infact quite a few a Euro magazines have praised Accord for its improvements.
mikek37 -
Europeans (and others) pay more attention to handling than sheer HP. Also, European(and other countries) car reviews are relevant if the cars tested are available here. The comments I posted here are very relevant for the same reason.
I agree that the NEW Euro Accord has received better press than the Passat and the Type-R Euro Accord has always been considered the best handling car among its class. However, its (older Euro Accord)lesser siblings have had a less than stellar reputation in all aspects other than reliability. Meanwhile, the ageing Passat has always been regarded a terrific all rounder in other countries and the sportiest in NA. Atleast, until now.
You are absolutely right when you say that we talk about the latest car models. But if you realize, all this racket started with talon95's reply to my post #938(posted in reply to 03accordman's previous 3 posts) in which I compared my Y2K Passat with Y2K Accord. I would have stopped with that single post if talon95 had not barged in. Anyway, let's move on.
Yes, I agree, would you please get over it and move on? Either point out the "barge in" clause in the Members Agreement (hint: there is none...) or stop throwing frivolous accusations around. As a member, I have every right to respond to any post as I see fit, as long as I obey the rules, which I have. You have absolutely no basis whatsoever for your constant complaining. If a member exercising his rights to comment on any other message is so incredibly distasteful to you, you can exercise your option to stop posting.
I expect this onslaught of personal sniping from you to stop immediately.
The European Accord basically comes here as the TSX.
Didn't get around to responding to this until now.
Whether or not you have the time or inclination to research and post quotes doesn't speak to the validity and value of doing so. I've done plenty of research papers, and quoting supporting opinions from highly regarded sources is a staple of such projects. I find that the quotes do a good job of supplementing and supporting your own opinions or refuting the opinions of others. If you don't prefer this approach, that's your call. I find it useful, and I'll continue to do so when I deem it appropriate.
As for your assertion regarding "out of context", that certainly is a possibility, but that's not how I operate when I post. Any quotes that I post are fully in synch with the overall opinion of the writer about the topic covered. With my earlier quotes about interior quality and structural integrity of the Accord, the articles from which I took the quotes were clearly extremely impressed with the Accord's performance in these areas, so the quotes were absolutely not "out of context".
If I see a section of a review regarding handling, for example, if it goes:
"Not great thing; not great thing; not great thing; good thing; not great thing."
I don't pull the "good thing" out of that review by itself and claim that the car in question has great handling. This would not be a positive review regarding handling, and I wouldn't dream of representing it as such.
As for my recent posts to you (now deleted), the comments about handling for the Turbo Beetle and the TT Quattro were essentially the entire section on handling in the referenced reports. These were from comparison articles where they dedicate 6 or 7 paragraphs to the entire car, with usually only 1 devoted to handling. So again, these were not out of context in any way, shape or form.
While I agree that it is possible to manipulate quotes to misrepresent the context of the whole article, I haven't done so... that's not how I operate. And while you say that they rarely prove anything, I've gotten many positive comments about the thoroughness and validity of my quotes from other members... apparently they help to prove something to them.
I'm not trying to start another debate with you... I recognize the fact that you have every right to feel the way you do and to share those opinions in your posts. My viewpoint is obviously somewhat different, and I'm just presenting that alternative viewpoint on the use of quotes in these forums.
8u6hfd,
I'm curious, how are the US and Euro Accords tuned differently? What do you mean by the the Euro version being "sportier". Do the Euro versions handle better, and are the American versions biased for better ride at the sacrifice of handling?
That's interesting because the Passat is basically the same regardless of where it's sold, except for right hand left hand drive, and minor details such as headlight switches.
Way to go Honda, Car & Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend, WOW what a record. And yes, the Passat was one of the losers in 2 of the publications. And did someone mention peace of mind with the Passat? Please make sure you carry enough coils, AAA membership and infact a code setter to reset all the codes that go awry in the Passat.
And now we will hear things like "US Mags are junk, we like British mags) HA HA HA HA HA
And please spare us, don't compare the Passat to the 1998, 1994, 1990, 1986 etc Accords. Lets comapre the present models. (That is if Passat owners get time off at the dealer/mechanic). Doubters please go to the Passat problems forum.
There you'll notice the Accord there will be the TSX here. The tuning is suspension tuning, ride versus handling, as well as the engine choices.
Notice, that I didn't mention tuning differences between the Passat, since they are virtually the same (except for lighting and gauges)
Why don't we wait and see until the cars are actually available for testing before we state this as a done deal?
And I've seen your "it follows that the next one will be superior" arguments. Doesn't change a thing, because it's still speculation.
Also, the news articles are simply reporting what they're told, so the articles making these claims have no proof of it either.
If you have the 1.8T (4 cyl) engine, it's called a "turbo". It's a little device that jams a lot more air into the engine to create more power. It spins at very high rates, resulting in a slight whistling sound when accelerating.
The same is true of Honda and most other manufacturers. They're all trying to refine and improve their designs to give customers the best product they know how to build. VW hardly has a monopoly in this area.
Will the new Passat be a better car? Most certainly. Will it be a "new benchmark"? Well, we'll see... the competition in the midsized market has never been more fierce, and the designs coming from competitors are dramatic improvements over their predecessors.
Spin it all you want, it's still speculation.
You can say the Passat won this test or that test but the truth is for every test the Passat has one there is probably one or more that the Accord has won. Far from your 10-1 ratio. Here is one person who test drives over 100 cars a year, this is what he had to say when someone asked for his opinion regarding Passat vs. Accord.
http://www.usatoday.com/community/chat/2002-09-27-healey.htm
"LA, CA: I am considering buying either the new 2003 accord LX or the 2003 VW passat GLS. I test drove the accord, and it felt good. But, I am not sure about the new styling. Passat, on the other hand, looks good. I am basically wondering if Passat can be as reliable as accord and last the next 10 years with minimal maintenance problems.
James Healey: No. Passat in all likelihood won't be as trouble-free as Accord. It looks very good and is a joy to drive. But the independent surveys suggest you'll have more gremlins to deal with than you would with the Honda. And the Honda's no slouch to drive after its redesign, so you're not giving up tons of driving fun, as you'd have been with the '02 Accord."
Add that to the test which said "it's a strange world when the Accord feels like a German car and the Passat doesn't"
Seems like there is no solid reason to buy the Passat over the Accord other than pure preference. Which is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But your opinion of a car does not change the facts. When the facts are looked at the Accord is more reliable, roomier, and just as safe as the Passat, and that's what most people buying these cars are looking for.
Yes, I agree, I went for the good looks and joy to drive choice. I'll put up with minor gremlins, and there have been very few at 10k miles, no more than my Infiniti.
When James Healey states "you're not giving up tons of driving fun" by choosing the Accord, I have to assume he thinks you are giving up some driving fun.
Read the review... he loved driving the Accord, and had nothing but high praise for every aspect of it. No ambiguity there.
"The same is true of Honda and most other manufacturers. They're all trying to refine and improve their designs to give customers the best product they know how to build. VW hardly has a monopoly in this area."
Then why did the 5 year old 2002 accord lx lack rear disc brakes, standard ABS, rear headrests and side airbags?
"Honda knows who its volume buyers are, and so the well-equipped LX is a decent handler and is also quiet, peppy, refined and quite comfortable. Not terribly exciting, but perfect for the average American family."
For the Consumers Choice, they said about the Passat.: "Garnering almost twice as many votes (1,030) as the next contender, the Honda Accord (564, quite an impressive number for a vehicle due for a complete redesign next year), the Passat proves that you can't go wrong with a functional car that's also fun to drive"
We could continue quoting articles that support our choices, and this could go on forever.
When someone wants to quote a review that is tepid or critical about the Accord, the only one that EVER comes up is Edmunds. I don't think that Edmunds is any more astute than these other sources, so I wonder what this suggests? No, I don't... it suggests that, when it comes to NOT liking the Accord, it's "Edmunds... party of one."
Don't get me wrong... all of these publications like the Passat as well... they just don't see much if any of a gap between it and the Accord, unlike Edmunds.
And you talk about the Accord as a deary family choice, all the while quoting from deary family sources like Consumer choice etc. Look at RT, CD, MT, Autoweek.
And you also mentioned in your post to me that the Passat is a 7 year old platfrom. Why for heavens sake would you be buying such an old design in the first place. And while it is true that every Passat has been an improvement over the earlier one, thats because there was a whole lot of room for improvement, since the days that VW was being kicked out of the US marketplace by consumers.
I would suggest stop dreaming, and welcom eto the real world. And don't retort with "oh what do US customers know, eurpoeans are the best". Understand, this is the US, we are talking about cars in the US and 400,000 Americans can't go wrong every year. And if you but an expensive car with standard features, that does not mean that other cars are cheap as they don't offer those features as standard. You probably don't know it, but VW does charge extra (built in price)for all of those features that you think are free.
and
I bought a seven year old platform because it was way ahead of it's time, and competition is just now catching up. If you don't believe they are just catching up, all the publications mentioned above have consistently picked the Passat over most other cars in all the comparison tests until 03'. I bought my Passat in 02' and nothing compared to it for the price. I've driven my daughters Accord and I still don't think it is better in all respects, although it is close. For Years, Consumer Reports favorite family sedan was the Passat . I think that history will continue with the next generation. We'll see..
Surely you must realize that the statement "they're all trying to refine and improve their designs to give customers the best product they know how to build" would have to include the provision "within its price range and intended market." Your reply about the Accord implies that you think VW did so without considering those factors, therefore making the Passat the best car available regardless of price. Which is clearly total nonsense. Is the Passat the best midsized car in the market, regardless of price? Hardly. Even if you want to ignore the Japanese makes, there's the Mercedes E-Class, BMW 5-series, etc... all of those cars have features that the Passat lacks. And you pay for them, just as you pay for the Passat's additional features over the Accord.
With the exception of the rear headrests, all of those things were available in the 2002 Accord. In a more expensive model. More expensive. Just like the Passat. Don't delude yourself... VW isn't giving you any of these things for free. Don't lose sight of the fact that the Passat is quite a bit more expensive when you're talking comparable equipment.
Honda was providing the best car that they could design that was competitive in its intended market, equipment-wise and price-wise. And exactly how competitive in the marketplace is your reference vehicle (obviously the Passat) as compared to that "woefully equipped" Accord? Since the Accord LX outsold ALL versions of the Passat, I guess that question is answered.
And don't give me the old "higher sales doesn't mean it's better" rhetoric. That's not what I'm saying... I'm saying that Honda gauged the market for the Accord, and supplied the best product that they could offer in that price range. Did the lower priced versions have every feature that the higher priced Passat offered? No, but with the Accord you weren't forced to pay for them either. Unless you wanted to.
And all of the rest of them liked the Accord better. Your point?
No one is saying you made a wrong choice, you liked it as a personal preference so bought it. That does not mean you run down the stellar Accord. I am requesting you, please read the review of the Accord in the latest MT, they have even called it a car that ever since its launch in 1976, has been a car that is regularly taken apart by rival manufacturers to see how Honda did it.
But by comparison to those other reports, Edmunds review was a pan.
Have you actually ever sat in or driven a passat?
You are talking like you think its comparable to an 85 citation.
My point is that it took seven years for the Accord to be considered as a close competitor, and then, only in the last year(or two depending on how you look at it) of the current generation Passat. So who's leading the pack?
And I'm not a she...