Honda Accord vs Toyota Camry

richards38

The problem is that a car must be going well over 100 MPH for any of these wing or spoiler, things to matter.

As I see it--and yes, many people disagree--these things stuck on the trunks of cars add nothing to the style of the car and worse yet, some of these tacked-on appendages obscure rear visibility.

I have yet to see any car that looked better because somebody stuck a silly bar across the trunk lid......Richard

murray53

It seems like you got a very good deal on a reliable car. I bought a 2002 Accord SE 4-cyl last September for many of the same reasons. I didn't see the need for the latest styling or the added features of the newer models, plus I was afraid of some of the problems with the newer Accords (and Camrys too) which I have read about on the message boards here. I didn't save as much as you did because my car had less mileage on it (14,500) when I got it and I bought it from a Honda dealer, plus the SE has additional features such as a moonroof and alloy wheels which are not found on the LX. However, I did save several thousand dollars off the price of a new one. I see lots of 1998-2002 Accords on the road and it seems that the 2002 model does not have the transmission problems the earlier ones had. The only drawback would be that the ride is a bit firmer than on the newer models, but I have gotten used to it by now. I really don't care about the headlights not turning off automatically or not having an outside temperature gauge either.

midnightcowboy

Honda calls them "Rear-Wing Spoiler" and " Deck Lid Spoiler". And they are mainly for cosmetic looks but do provide some downforce at 60 mph and higher. Why does a Porsche Carrera have a built in spoiler that automatically raise and lowers at 45 mph ? I am not sure where Richards38 came up with the 100 mph speed.

Spoilers do enhance the looks of many cars. However, that is only my opinion and also the opinion of many others. Apparently there is at least one very strong exception.

The huge spoiler on the SRT-4 sometimes referred to as "basket handle" seems excessive to me as well as some of the larger aircraft looking rear wings.

To each his own, I personally like the looks of the "rear wing" on the 6-speed Accord Coupe.

Motor On,

MidCow

zitch

midnightcowboy: Exactly. To each his own. I'm actually with Richard in terms of look with the larger wings and spoilers on vehicles. Though I do like the look of the Accord's Deck Lid Spoiler. I'm considering getting it installed on my Silver LX Accord.

Richards38: Depending on the design, a wing can provide downforce as low as 35 MPH or lower. Wings do not provide traction for the rear tires, but stabilize the car at high speed. Most cars get a lift effect at the rear end at higher speeds, and a wing counter-acts that. Spoilers can reduce the drag-coefficient of a vehicle by 1% or so (maybe more). They also may reduce the amount of lift on the rear end. Neither is really particulary useful on a street car driving within legal limits.

Ok, now back to our regularly scheduled Accord vs. Camry... um... discussions.

richards38

There was a test several years ago by one of the Auto mags--Car & Driver, Road & Track, or other--that included a Porsche and a Mustang.

Tests with and without the spoiler showed no differences until speeds of about 120 MPH, and the spoiler on the Mustang slowed the car slightly with little or no handling benefit.

At any safe highway speed, there's no difference and the benefit or disadvatage is cosmetic only...Richard

midnightcowboy

Richards38 - couldn't find any reference in the online magazines, so I dug deeper and actually you appear to be correct.

Here is a good article that explains spoilers and wings:

http://www.se-r.net/body_trim/effective_real_wing.html

IMHO a rear wing or spoiler visually enhances a lot of cars, examples IS300, GSR, Accord Coupe.

YAMV (Your Aerodynamics May Vary)

MidCow

atlantabenny

With the maker of this car recently at the top of quality ratings, would the traditional Accord/Camry owner finally take a leap of faith with this car ?

http://autospy.dreamwiz.com/autospy/bbs/table/newcar/upload/Hyundai_Grandeur_TG_1.jpg

It's the 06 Hyundai XG350 ("350" - or whatever engine displacement will be on the car) probably launching this year in the US.

motownusa

I saw the front end of this car at another website. My personal opinion: front end copied from VW Passat, side profile looks like a Mercury Sable, and Honda must have built the tail lamp for them. It looks exactly the same !!!

But I have to admit the total package looks pretty good. Now if Hyundai can build a world class interior then the car could give the Camcords some serious competition.

atlantabenny

The front fender does hint of the Passat, and the tail section is Accord-heavy. Window profile reminds a bit of the Sable/Crown Vic, and there're subliminal touches of the Chevy Monte Carlo with the fender arches.

I think what makes this derivative design successful is the right proportioning of the car.

richards38

Best to stick with Accord or Camry until Hyundai has a few years of quality history. Initial quality is nice, but how will the Hyundai hold up over the years? Honda Accord and Toyota Camry have already shown that they're durable over the long term.

Just my opinion, but the new big Hyundai (called the Grandeur, I think) looks like both an Audi A6 and a Ford 500. Nice looking, but I'm tiring of the Audi look and prefer the Accord's style.....Richard

gevans17

After looking at Accord and Camry for the past few weeks, I was able to compare the 2 side by side at an auto show. I decided to go with the Accord. The deciding factor was front legroom. At 6'2", my knee was 1 inch away from the dash in the Camry, about 3" in the Accord. Something to consider for the taller driver.

richards38

A tall friend of mine almost bought the Accord (he's about 6'3" or 6'4") and didn't even bother to test drive the Camry after sitting in it.

The Camry didn't have a telescoping steering wheel and the stalk for the wipers (or whatever) was in the 4 o'clock position and his right leg hit it.

He was less than an inch away from buying the Accord but ended up with a Cadillac SRX in which a giraffe would be comfortable.....Richard

bizi

For many of us, the decision between Camry and Accord may be largely depend on the price. Here is the latest price quotes I heard from Northern California (in helping a friend): 2005 Camry LE with side airbags $173xx, Accord LX $176xx (normal rebates are reflected). Both are four cylinder automatic sedans. Note that side airbags are standard on Accords, so these are close competitors. These prices are internet quotes that I considered good. By no means I try to say these are the "best" prices or representative prices. I think they are good enough for a price comparison though if we don't stuck with a few hundred dollars of difference. On the other hand, simply relying on MSRP, invoice, TMV or hear-say, one may be misled these days.

lexusrocks

I currently own a 2004 Toyota Camry base model with a V6 engine. I am considering leasing or purchasing a new japanese midsize sedan. Which one do you think is the best of the Honda Accord, Nissan Altima and Mazda 6? I will be buying base versions of each of them.

pat

We have a couple of active Accord vs. Altima discussions, and a couple of archived Accord vs. Mazda6 discussions (the Make/Model search on the left side of the page will track them down) but not one that debates all three at the same time - maybe you want to fire one up?

Since this discussion is specifically comparing the Camry and the Accord, it's really not really a good place to pursue this question.

You can follow the link at the top (or bottom) of the page that says "Comparisons - Sedans vs. Sedans" and then click on the Add Discussion button to get it started.

motownusa

Hi PAT HOST:

Couldn't you just combine all of them into one single forum.

Thanks

pat

No, I can't combine the existing comparos, but let's start another!

lmacmil

I've narrowed my choices to the Camry SE-V6 or the Accord EX-V6. Drove the Camry for the 2nd time yesterday. Nice vehicle lacking only a couple of creature comforts: auto climate control and a power passenger seat. One big edge over the Accord is stability control. Also more torque available at lower rpms. MSRP is about $700 more but the spoiler and ESC easily account for that. Subjectively somewhat better looking. Longer powertrain warranty.

Taking my 2nd drive in the Accord today. I recall from my earlier drive that it is somewhat smoother during acceleration, the auto climate control is nice as is the power passenger seat and the telescoping steering wheel. Always beats the Camry in the car mag comparison tests (although only Edmunds has compared it to the latest SE-V6). I think I'll be able to get a slightly lower payment (I plan to lease).

I'll be re-reading John_f's very thorough comparison from a month or so back.

It's great to have two such choices available. Any additional comments/opinions are welcome.

Thanks.

nifty6

Just got back from a test drive of a Camry. And I didn't like 3 things about the Camry. First seats are too short, seat part, second the brakes are not very good, not 4 dics all around, and third and most important is the tranny that sucks.
It has been noted by auto journals that the tranny lags, when pushed it does not respond, it almost feels like it is slipping. This could be dangerous if you need a quick burst of power to merge into a highway traffic the Camry will let you down.
The Honda Accord's tranny and many others makes are far superior than the Camry. The bad tranny is the main reason I would not buy the car. The V6 is useless with the tranny. No difference than the 4 banger for take off power. So don't waste your money on a 6. All the power and no transmission to get you going smoothly. Only down side of the 4 cylinder is it is a little bit noisery on the highway. Don't know why people buy them, guess it's the quality, reliability and resale value.
The Mazda 3 or 6, Honda Accord, Chrylser 300 and even a Impala would be better choices.
Just my thoughts...

210delray

I think either the Camry or Accord are fine choices, and better than the Mazdas, Chrysler 300, and certainly the Impala!

Only the Camry Standard and Camry LE 4-cylinder models have rear drum brakes; all other trim levels and all V6s have 4-wheel disks.

Seats are a matter of personal comfort/taste; obviously try both and see what you think.

The 4-cylinder is quiet and smooth in my experience with my Camry LE 4.

I think this transmission hesitation problem is overblown - my 4-speed auto doesn't do it, and again, a thorough test drive of the current 5-speed on the actual car you plan to buy should determine whether the problem exists.

Camry and Accord with side airbags scored a "Good" overall rating in the IIHS's demanding side-impact tests, another plus for either car. And the Camry is available with stability control, something only the Chrysler 300 offers among the other cars mentioned.

petl

I see it the other way around. I don't know why anyone would buy a 6. I have a 2002 Camry 4cyl. This is one smooth, quiet powerplant. It has more than enough power to meet most individuals needs (unless you miss not having the v6 emblem on the trunk). It is also known for its quality, reliability and resale value.. oh, I think you just stated that. I'm not knocking the others, they are fine vehicles. However, other than the Accord, they are not in the same league. Just my opinion.

richards38

When I tested cars in Aug.,'03, I expected to buy a Mazda 6 because my previous car was a superb, 1991 Mazda Protege.

But the Mazda 6i accelerated sluggishly and the A/T was poorly matched to the engine. The car handled and braked very well, but its drive line was crude.

The Camry LE had a very smooth 4 cyl engine and A/T but the ride was too soft for me and the interior was blandly styled--no electroluminescent gauges at that time.

The Accord was the best balanced car and I ended up with an '04 EX-L sedan (4 cyl with A/T). The Accord has been very good and I'd recommend it to anybody.

In my opinion, the 4 is fast enough and it's smoother and quicker than some V6s according to Consumer Reports.

I drove a rented Chevy Impala V6 which was neither as smooth nor quick as the Accord 4 cyl. And the Impala's interior fittings were cheap--the Accord is a finer car IMO......Richard

viveks

I totally agree with you. Just last week I bought Camry with 4cyl and I find it powerful enough for everyday driving. Before making the decision for couple of weeks I did some research, test driving etc. Finally it was between Accord and Camry Nothing else came even close in this price range. Both are fine cars and in quite a few ways I liked Accord more than Camry:

-- More "sporty" feeling. A little more responsive transmission.
-- Side curtain airbags are standard.
-- Like some cool features such as able to open/close windows from outside, button for keyless entry are on the key itself.

What I didn't like or I should say found better in Camry:
-- Quiter, smoother driving.
-- 4 cyl is powerful enough for everyday drive.
-- Rear seats are more comfortable. Most likely tilt angle is little less in Camry.
-- Dashboard design is much cleaner in Camry.
-- I found the rear styling better as compared to Accord.
-- Also full size spare tire. Just recently A colleague described how he found it useful at 4 AM in Yosemite.

Overall I found camry slightly better/refined car as compared to Accord, but as it has been said quite often, it all comes down to personal choice. Interestingly price was coming same with side curtain airbags on Camry.

307web

Dashboard is much "cleaner." That is one way to put it.
A 4 cylinder Accord is too weak for everyday driving compared to a 4 cylinder Camry???!!
A mini spare is also useful in Yosemite at 4AM in the morning.

petl

Boy, are we a little touchy. I thought his posting was complimentary to both the Accord and the Camry. He selected the Camry for personal reasons. "Viveks" never stated that "A 4 cylinder Accord is too weak for everyday driving compared to a 4 cylinder Camry"? Take a deep breath and read his posting again. Although you may not agree, the Camry is a fine vehicle. Incidentally, it's not hard to see which vehicle you prefer.

307web

It was was just so odd that someone would actually point out the dashboard of a Camry as a plus point.
I like that the Camry is quiet and I'm not in love with the exterior looks of either.
A Camry with a more modern looking dash and interior (more similar to a Solara) and good steering would be more appealing.

moeharri

Obviously dash board layouts are a matter of personal preference. One main reason I chose the Camry XLE over the Accord EX was the beautiful chery wood style dashboard--there are few dashboard that I've seen in any car that I like more (well, at least for the price). The Accord's wood on the other hand was down right ugly to me (much like the trunk to me). I do agree that the non-wood Camry (and Accord for that matter) dashboards aren't as appealing to me, but I got exactly what I wanted, so I'm not concerned :-)

viveks

Looks like I found another Accord fan regretting his/her decision ... just kidding

>> Dashboard is much "cleaner." That is one way to put it.

Well as I said it is a matter of personal choice. But I liked that top part is all single piece which doesn't feel cheap ( accord has a plastic piece with little different texture in the middle).

>>A 4 cylinder Accord is too weak for everyday driving compared to a 4 cylinder Camry???!!

Did I say that ? But in my opinion, I prefer Camry 4cyl as compared to Accord 4cyl, main reason is quietness.

>> A mini spare is also useful in Yosemite. at 4AM in the morning.

Yeah but you can't be at work in San Francisco by 9:00, driving with a mini spare.

As I said there aren't that big differences between the cars... one should pick whichever makes them happier and I'm pretty sure the target buyers are also pretty same for both the cars.

richards38

I don't see how anyone could call the Accord 4 cyl. engine "weak" unless the car is full of rocks or hauling a trailer.

Of course, there are faster cars, but the Accord 4 goes as fast as it's safe to go in just about any situation.

The argument that a blazingly fast car will get you out of a jam is bogus because a REALLY fast car is just as likely to get you into that jam in the first place......Richard

pat

>> I don't see how anyone could call the Accord 4 cyl. engine "weak" unless the car is full of rocks or hauling a trailer.

No one did. There was a misunderstanding and I think you are reacting to posts that were reacting to the misunderstanding.

No one called the 4 cylinder Accord engine weak - go back and prove it to yourself.

alpha01

You're awesome. Thought you should know.

~alpha

richards38

Thanks, Pat. As you can see, I'm defensive about the Accord 4 cylinder engine which I really like.

A couple of friends of mine can't understand how I could have bought a 4 cyl. car. Of course, the last 4 they drove was probably a Pinto or Vega, so they don't know how good a 4 can be nowadays--especially when it's a Honda engine.......Richard

pat

>>...the Accord 4 cylinder engine which I really like.

Isn't that the most important thing?

Alpha - what do I owe you?

typesix

Minispares are not rated for full speed as the regular tires, the last one I saw stated 50 mph was the tops. Also minimal tread and tread life.

307web

Yes, they are not for driving at 80MPH and are not for driving thousands of miles.
You are only supposed to use them when you have a flat tire until you get the puncture repaired and then put the original tire back on (which will have matching wear levels with the other 3 tires).

ian721

The Camry's 160hp VVT-i I4 is more than adequate for the car. Acceleration from a standing start isn't fabulous, but acceleration at highway speeds is very good. And you can cruise at 90mph with a full load with no vibrations or excessive noise. I've never felt like the I4 couldn't handle what was thrown at it.

(This is not a comparision of Toyota v Honda)

midnightcowboy

Actually it is a comparison between the Honda and the Toyota, just specific models.

The I4 at 160 hp is adequate for both the Accord or Camry in the 5-speed manual shift models.

Where you notice a significant difference is in the automatics Honda( 5 speed auto) versus Camry ( 4 speed auto).

The 5 speed auto gives you a wider range of gears allowing both better performance off the line and better highway mileage.

Until and if Camry gets a 5-speed auto it is a no-brainer!

crus'n in 6th,

MidCow http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/emotorcons- /emo_shades.gif

P.S.- In most places 90 mph is over the speed limit

ian721

All Camrys sold today have 5-speeds, whether auto or manual.

alpha01

Welcome to April 5th 2005.

Voila! The Camry now uses a 5 speed automatic. And acceleration is definitely very acceptable, though about a half second slower to 60 than the Accords.

~alpha

carzzz

Even with the all the 5 speed auto, it still doesn't match up against the accord?

richards38

When I drag one of those Emotocons into a message panel the little image turns into a URL.
When copy + pasted into a browser address bar, the URL brings up the Emotocon.

Is that a common problem or do the Emotocons hate me? Enquiring minds want to know...............Richard

See below:

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/emotorcons- - /emo_confused.gif

alpha01

You needn't copy and paste just click on the Emotorcon at the place in the text where you wish it to appear.

For example, I want the smiling Emotorcon right here, so I single click on it:
It will show up in the text you are writing as a regular happy face. However, when the post actually hits the thread (by you pressing 'Post my Message'), it will show up as the similing Emotorcon.

Hope this helps!

~alpha

richards38

Success!
I'm so accustomed to dragging images around on my iMac paint program that I did that instinctively here and it created the URL.

Clicking worked as you said.

Thanks!........Richard

fitguy

I'm an owner of 3 Accords; each time I bought one I also drove a Camry as they are certainly fine family cars. The Accord always won because of the sportier driving dynamics and more interesting interior. All 3 Accords were textbook Honda reliable. It boils down to what floats your boat- if you have a good relationship with a Toyota dealer, that's important too. I will say the back end of the present Accord sedan takes some getting used to; I couldn't when I traded my '03 Coupe and bought a Mazda 6 instead, darn fine car, too.

307web

I see nothing wrong worth the back end of the Accord that takes time to "get used to." It's pretty plain and uninteresting, but not shocking. Looking vaguely like a Buick or Saturn is unoriginal, but isn't "bizarre"
I think the rear side fenders on side profile views of both the Accord and Camry are equally unattractive and then the Camry has ugly visible exhaust system hanging low in the rear, but the front looks better than an Accord.
Exterior styling leaves plenty to be desired on both.

midnightcowboy

The wind seems to favor Accord exteriors.

crus'n in 6th :shades:

MidCow

richards38

I agree. The Accord's smooth exterior cuts through the air and I've driven in some very windy areas without feeling cross winds or hearing any wind noise at all. The smooth exterior is also easy to wash.

The rear end has received much comment, but I see nothing wrong with the style which integrates well with the rest of the car. Even if the Accord isn't the most beautiful car on the road, it certainly isn't ugly and is definitely functional and safe.......Richard

alpha01

The Camry's coefficient of drag is actually lower than the Accords, .28 vs. .30, I believe.

~alpha

midnightcowboy

It started as a tongue-in-cheek because someone state dthat no one liked the exterior of the Accord .. and I said the wind did. Here are the CDs (Coefficient of Drag) of some different models:

Camry 0.28
Accord Coupe 0.29
Accord Sedan 0.30
HAH ( has spoler) 0.29

So yes Camry to Accord lowest CD, the Camry wins

Crus'n in 6th :shades: ,

MidCow

lmacmil

3 words: electronic stability control. There was only one version of each that interested me: the EX-V6 sedan and the SE-V6. With the Camry I gave up auto climate control and a power passenger seat but ESC was a big plus that wasn't available on the Honda.

I slightly prefer the Camry appearance, bland as it may be. The rear spoiler jazzes it up and the SE adds a few cosmetic treatments to differentiate it from the other models. I'm another one who isn't fond of the Accord rear end.

In the end, there is no right or wrong choice. Both are fine cars. The car mags all prefer the Accord but for the kind of driving I do, I won't notice the difference. I actually cross-shopped TLs and G35s but end the end I just couldn't justify the higher prices (and didn't like the idea of the dealer being 100 miles away). I ended up leasing so I'll be free to walk away from it in 3 years.