Honda Accord vs Toyota Camry
Welcome to the continuation of the Honda Accord
vs. Toyota Camry - Round Two topic. Those of you
joining us from that topic are welcome to continue
your discussion.
If you're new to this topic, you may want to
follow the above link for additional archived
posts.
Thanks,
L8_Apex
Sedans Host
vs. Toyota Camry - Round Two topic. Those of you
joining us from that topic are welcome to continue
your discussion.
If you're new to this topic, you may want to
follow the above link for additional archived
posts.
Thanks,
L8_Apex
Sedans Host
Tagged:
0
Comments
Now, back to the discussion ...
1/ Sportiness in a mid-sized sedan: I agree sporty coupes like Prelude, Celica ... are sportier than any of the mid-sized sedans, but that does not mean buyers in this market are not necessarily looking for some fun in their car. Sure, in an ideal world, you drive a sports car when you want to have some fun, and you drive the mid-sized sedan to go to dinner with your family, drive the jeep for camping trips, and van for long trips .... however, $$ is a limited resource for most ppl (if it's not for you, you should not be reading this thread - try 911 Carrera C5 ... that's one FUN car!), some ppl (like myself) do prefer a vehicle that has the convenience of 4 doors, practicality of useable backseat, yet does not give up their sportiness in their car. Thus sports sedans, which are compromises between sportiness and practicality.
2/ Continuing with that theory, all mid-sized cars are a compromise, somewhere in between sportiness and comfort, within a limited budget. The Accord has a heavier emphasis on sportiness, handling, while sacrificng quietness, comfort ... the Camry is designed to max out comfort, refinement, smoothness, at the price of sportiness. Can a car be all sporty while is also comfortable and quiet?? Sure it can, but not within this price range = )
3/ Thus, going back to square 1 - Accord is for those are looking for the practicality of a mid-size sedan, yet enjoys driving, and is willing to give up some comfort and quietness for it. Camry is for those who don't care much about driving fun, and would rather opt for the quietness, refinment, smoothness .... I think both are excellent vehicles, with different purposes in a relative sense. Obviously, both are built within the limitation of 'mid-sized sedans', so as sporty as the Accord is, it still is no Prelude. And as refined / comfortable as the Camry is, it is no luxury sedan.
I think most of us are in agreement on these 3 points .... and thus what continues to amaze me is ... why is the discussion still alive? = ) I thought these 3 points should be crystal clear.
#17
There is nothing wrong with prefering one way or the other. Everyone should buy what suits themselves.
Both cars have huge number of fans. Since these two cars (and brands) are arch rivals, that's probably why this subject dragged on so long.
both cars are great vehicles, but the main difference is
the accord is a drivers vehicle
the camry is a riders car
Heh, I like your style 1salesman1.
One thing though, if these two cars are arch rivals, yet their target driver consist of two different groups, then its feasible when Toyota and Honda design and market them, they knowingly avoid direct competition by doing so. I find that hard to believe, but its logically feasible.
Round Three? I thought we're in round fifteen by now. And still no signs of a decision. It's time for somebody to bite an ear off....
and about your cocky remark, i tell most of my customers that come in and look at the accord first to go drive a camry or drive them in one that i have on my used lot to compare. and guess what, i dont care if they buy a toyota, because they are good buys, and i wont worry about the sales that i lost when i go to the bank with my comm.
You cannot say AT Ferrari 456 GT is not a driver's car. It is just not as sporty as a MT one.
Honda's never developed the manual tranny for this 3.0L V6 engine since it debuted back in 94, I believe. THe V6 engine was deployed specifically for the NA market only, cos NAmericans feel that a 4cyc sedan is NOT a serious car, regardless of what kind of output the 4 banger can produce. Market surveys also show that NAmerican drivers DO NOT like shifting for themselves. As a matter of fact, only 5% of Maxima's are sold with 5sp MT even though it is an option. 95% are sold with AT. Thus it was a business decision to not spend the $$ on developing the MT for the engine made specifically for NA.
European Accords and Japanese Accords only have 4 banger engines. The Accord Type R has Prelude's 2.2L DOHC VTEC 4 banger, which produces peak of 210hp, and is available with an accurate and precise MT. It is a seriously fun to drive sports sedan.
#17
#17-they came out with the v6 in '95.
we sell on average 70% 4cly and 30% v6's.
The only question is then: How can Toyota offer a V6 camry with manual transmission? (I'm not suggesting that the Camry is a trye drivers car either) Bear in mind the Acuras of the 80's and early 90's with V6 and manual transmission.
Like I stated in my previous post, it probably has to do with engineering resources and associated business decisions.
However, I still don't think that the V6 Accord is a sporty car. Can't be with a slushbox.
discussion. By no stretch of the imagination can
Honda Accord V6 be compared to those hot italians."
I was not comparing Accords' to Ferrari. I was just pointing out that MT or AT is not the only determining factor in a car's sportiness. It is a big factor, I agree, but it is not the only factor.
Simple illustration - if Buick Century is offered with a 5sp MT, I'd still take AT Accord V6 as the sportier car any day.
"The only question is then: How can Toyota offer a
V6 camry with manual transmission? (I'm not
suggesting that the Camry is a trye drivers car
either) Bear in mind the Acuras of the 80's and
early 90's with V6 and manual transmission."
Keep in mind, the 3.0L Accord VTEC engine and 3.2L TL VTEC engine are not based on the 3.2L V6 engine used in the early - mid 90's Acura Legend V6 engine. That engine was non VTEC, and was relatively problematic, and though it was avail with a 6sp MT gearbox, it was probably the reason for Honda to not deploy the same engine.
The 3.0L V6 used in the Camry is a workhorse used in various other Toyota cars, and it was traditionally available with a MT. Toyota has offered the MT as an option on the Camry V6, but only for the lowest trim model. Equipping the car with any feature pretty much means you'll get a slushbox.
"However, I still don't think that the V6 Accord is a sporty car. Can't be with a slushbox."
If slushbox or MT is the only determining factor you are looking at here then I agree Accord is not a sporty car. Neither is a 456GT then.
It all depends on how you define as 'sporty car'. I'd love a V6-MT Accord, but its sporty driving dynamics makes it still sportier than most of its competitors, and thus I'd still consider it a sporty mid-sized sedan. But I agree without the MT, it takes away a lot of driver interaction and a lot of fun to drive.
#17
I was looking at an LE V6 before. It was loaded. Nice car, but then I got this super deal on a Volvo S70.
Other than that- good points.
I was just saying MT/ AT is not the only factor in determining if a car is sporty or not, and you seem to agree with me by saying a Ferrari can be sporty with AT.
In that case, the Accord V6 can't be 'unsporty by default' just because it has a slushbox.
Obviously, the lack of a MT is a big downside... and hence I'd look at the 626, Passat, and Maxima before I look at the Accord. Still, even with a AT it is still relatively sportier than most other mid-sized sedans .....
#17
ps - if the Mob come for me I'd have the Yakutza to backme up ... it's ok = )
Remember, The Mob rules
Honda doesn't have resource to spare like Toyota does, being much smaller and less wealthy. What Toyota can afford to support and spend, Honda might not be able to.
I think the Honda's decision not to make the V6 manual combo is a understandable, and probably a correct one. After all, look at how many people buy 5-spd V6 camrys are out there? Not many. The low production number means it doesn't enjoy the economy of scale, and you don't make as much money selling them. I'm sure Honda studied the cost-benefit relationshipe before deciding not to make 5-spd V6s.
Toyota is a different story, its cars may not look aggressive, but the company's capability is vast. Toyota, has about $16 billion in highly liquid short term marketable securities. That's more asset than the largest automaker GM can make in 4 years. That's enough money to buy more than 25% of Ford or Dailmer Chrylser, or buy a controling share (>33%) of GM or Honda. Wish I had some of that.
I'm sure Honda did some cost analyzing like you said, I'm just wondering if they're missing out on that market niche or there are other reasoning behind it.
In my opinion, the problem Nissan had/has started when they try leave their sports niche to go mainstream. Their Maxima got bland in the mid 90's in an attempt to take on the more established Toyota/Honda. Of course, they were bloodied, and lost marketshare/profit big time.
Current Nissan strategy is calling for going back to the sports niche. They heavily emphasize Maxima's sporty nature (note the comercials), the new Sentra is almost a minturized Maxima, again long on the sportiness.
For those who emphasize on sportiness, 5-spd manual is all but a must for a car. And Nissan is definitly trying to be heavy on the sportiness. Camry and Accord are the two mainstream products, sportiness isn't the biggest selling point, therefore no 5-spd isn't going to hurt the popularity very much.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Regarding Nissan, my family never own one so I dont have 1st hand experience with it (other than the occasional borrowing of friend/relatives car). In general I think their car provides the basic transportation with good reliability, and price to reflect that (early sentra and altima price much cheaper than competition). I dont know if Nissan really wants to go back to sportiness and abandon the family car niche concept, since that's where the money is (heck, a family must own a family car/suv).
I also think the Maxima will be a strong competitor against the Camry/Accord if Nissan can adjust it pricewise, to make it goes head to head with the other 2.
BTW, have chance to tried out that Taurus yet?
-----------------------
One more thing, in defense of the Max. It is NOT in the same class as the Accord or Camry, that's what the Altima is there for. Wait until 2002 for a new bigger Altima with a V6 to compete head to head with the Camry and Accord.
- Anthony
I'm not sure why people make a fuss out of it. Those who need it have choices available, right? I had. I needed a second car last year, and brought home the Prelude, with 5-speed manual tranny (and a great one at that), reasonable power, and nice handling, all that is needed in a good sports coupe. It was amazing to not find a Prelude at the dealer's lot equipped with manual tranny. I had to wait. Why should this happen if there are people desperate to buy manual tranny equipped cars? There isn't enough market for manual transmission out there in America.
Toyota and Nissan use their V6 engines extensively in Asia and Europe. This can be a good reason for them to be able to offer manual transmission equipped V6 (although rare) in the USA. It has nothing to do with resources. If Honda felt like there was a 20% market for manual tranny, they would do it. Look at the 'performance' Accords in Asia and Europe (Accord Type-R, Accord Euro-R, Torneo Euro-R), they don't come with automatic tranny (even a/c is a free option on Accord Type-R in Europe). Now, these are not V6s, but the 2157 cc/I-4 DOHC VTEC from Prelude. European Accord Type-R gets 210 HP/158 lb.-ft, the Japanese versions, Accord Euro-R and Torneo Euro-R get 220 HP/163 lb.-ft. Then, there is a AWD Accord Wagon Si-R, with DOHC version of the American Accord, 2253 cc/I-4 DOHC VTEC, eager to deliver 200 HP and 165 lb.-ft of torque. These are cars tailored to Asian and European markets. The American Accord is the largest, heaviest, and least sporty of these Accords (platform is same), and comes with a V6, designed for America, where only 15% of buyers opt for manual tranny (and most of them would be on sports cars/sedans/coupes, economy cars).
However, something strange is happening too! Recently, I noticed that Accord Si-R and Torneo Si-R (both offered with 2.0 liter DOHC VTEC), with the arrival of their Euro-R versions, do not offer manual tranny in Japan, but get automatic w/SportShift. That's probably where the future is headed to.
Personally, I'd like to see manumatics improve quickly, and allow to control the engine better than they do. I like the 5-speed SportShift on TL, except that it does not allow control any more on the first gear, if it did, it will be nice.
adg44:
Good luck.
steve
car is sporty, cause in all honesty, neither of
them are. I just sold my 2000 EX V6 Accord Coupe
(what a piece of junk) and purchased a 2000 VW GTI
GLX VR6. Of course that is a manual, and that is
sporty car. I guess that some car companies think
that if they take a 4 door sedan and slap only two
doors on it, they have a "sporty car." These cars
are both wanna-be cars. The Accord needs a
manual, and the solara is a boat. If you ask me,
Honda and Toyota need to work together and create
the ulitmate wanna-be sporty "
Wow interesting theory on wanna-be sporty.... but I'm just curious - how is that different for the 2dr Jetta HB called GTI?
GTI, Jetta, Golf ... are all built on the identical VWA4 platform. GTI and Golf and Jetta share the identical suspension setup, Jetta GLX and GTI GLX share the same VR6 engine. If you compare the suspension of the Accord to that of the GTI / Jetta/ Golf, I don't think the VW's have the slightest edge. Those VW's share the same boaty suspension setup, for 2000 models anyways. 2001 VW's can be upgraded to have sportys suspension, which is in essense stiffer Eibach springs. A welcome option, but will not change matters night and days. If you want to talk about sporty VW's, I'd agree the Passat / A4 / A6 (built on the same B5 platform) are sportier than the Accord, but defn not the VWA4 platform.
Not to mention, these cars are NOT even in the same class. GTI / Jetta / Golf are compact's, Accord, Camry's are mid-sized cars. If you want to compare compact sport coupes, there's the Prelude, which is clearly a much sportier car than the GTI.
"One more thing, in defense of the Max. It is NOT
in the same class as the Accord or Camry, that's
what the Altima is there for."
We see ignorance here. The Altima is a compact as well, though a big compact. It slides in between the mainstream compacts (Civic, Corolla, Sentra...) and the mainstream mid-sized sedans (Accord, Camry, Maxima) in terms of price, size ... You may stretch it to compare with the 4 cyc Accord and Camry's if spaciousness is not a factor. But we're talking about V6's here, and Nissan's solution for V6 Accord and Camry's is the Maxima, not the Altima. That's what Nissan's marketing says, that's what all car mags compare the Maxima against ... Accord and Camry V6! The Altima is actually just marginally bigger than a Civic! The new Civic will be even roomier, and can easily have more rooms than the Altima.
"Wait until 2002 for a new bigger Altima with a V6 to compete head tohead with the Camry and Accord."
That's only a rumor, that is not even remotely realistic. First of all, the current VQ engine will NOT fit in the engine bay of the Altima. From the marketing perspective, if they make the Altima bigger and fit in a V6 engine, it'll compete head to head with the Maxima, and makes no sense at all.
#17
manual combo is a understandable, and probably a
correct one. After all, look at how many people
buy 5-spd V6 camrys are out there? Not many. The
low production number means it doesn't enjoy the
economy of scale, and you don't make as much money
selling them."
I agree completely. The % of V6-MT Camry's is probably less than 1% in NA, thus it'd be a non-profitable decision to develop the MT tranny for the V6. However, I don't think the reason Toyota has a MT tranny for its 3.0L V6 and Honda doesn't is beacause of difference in resources as you've suggested.
I think it's mainly a historical thing. The 3.0L V6 Toyota uses in the Camry is a workhorse like I've suggested that have used for over 10 yrs now. It is used in various Toyota vehicles worldwide, and some of which see a need for a MT tranny. The MT tranny was developed before hand, and it was simply avail with the engine's used in the Camry. (and the one thing that gets me is with the MT being avail, Toyota doesn't offer it on the upper trim Solara, which is supposed to be a sporty Camry .. that's a sidenote though)
AS per the Accord, the 3.0L V6 was specifically developed for the NA market in 94/95 when the public wanted a V6 for the Accord. Not seeing a need for MT for a NA specific engine, Honda decided it was an unsound business case to develope a MT tranny for this engine, and I agree with that. The fact Honda developed a 5sp sport-shift AT tranny for the 3.2TL and CL (same engine, bigger bore and longer stroke for more capacity) proves Honda does have the resources to develope the tranny. They just saw more demand for semi-automatic tranny in that class than a MT, and I agree with that, though I'd really LOVE to see a 6spMT for the CL.
It is actually a similar case for the Maxima. Some might say Nissan wants to keep the sporty niche, thus offer a MT on the V6. To some extend, Nissan wants to get out of trouble being the sporty alternative in the mainstream market, as their marketing strategy shows. However, the main reason MT is offered on the Maxima is it has always been available. The VQ V6 engine is a workhorse, used in Maxima, Gloria, Cedric, Pathfinder .... and a MT has always been available. If Nissan had to invest capitals to develop a brand new MT for the VQ, they probably would choose not to do so, and would rather take the path of sportshift semi-automatic. (which is one thing they are missing on the I30). Afterall, only 5% of Maxima buyers take the MT. I mean, if Nissan is THAT SERIOUS about sportiness, they'd at least put a rear independent suspension in the Maxima, not a beam suspension. Like they suggest, it's more for 'bragging rights' sportiness.
#17
There goes the Maxima moving full-size rumor. Altima will keep its 4cyc engine, and its compact size. Maxima will remain a V6 mid-sized sedan.
I didn't say Accord can beat a GTI. I was responding to your "Accord coupe is a 2dr sporty-wannabe" criticism that so is the GTI (a.k.a. 2dr sporty-wannabe version of Golf/Jetta), thus a GTI is as sporty as a Jetta is, which is not sportier than the Accord at all. The VR6 engine is a gem, but Honda's 3.0L SOHC VTEC engine produces more hp. Accord V6 and GTI VR6 have similar power to weight ratio, and will have very similar acceleration performance for both being AT models. The Accord's suspension is also not as boaty as Jetta's, which is the same on the Golf. Clearly, in terms of sportiness, the GTI VR6/Jetta VR6 are in the same ballpark as the Accord.
And the point is - why even compare the GTI to the Accord? Like I said, they belong to difference classes. If you'd like to compare compact coupes, compare the Prelude to the GTI, and the 'lude is the much sportier choice.
Finally multi-link beam suspension - as good as it is among different variations of non-indepedent suspension, it does NOT compare to independent suspension. Nissan is the ONLY manufacturer (among japanese, korean, domestics, europeans) that does not deploy an independent suspension on their mainstream mid-sized sedan (for cost-saving reasons). Though you can argue a varied version of the beam suspension will make-do in normal driving circumstances, it is definitely against the image they try to portrait in their marketing strategies - serious sports car. Basically if you hit a mid-corner bump during hard cornering, with a non-independent suspension your tail comes out, and that is why people do not acknowledge it.
#17
I mean, if we are going to compare cars based on unfounded rumors, then I'd start comparing Accord V6 - 6spMT with sports suspension, sports package that includes 17" low profile rims, and a lower price than current MSRP.
#17
In truth, I don't think that the development costs for a v6 man. combo would be that high. Honda has manual transmissions overseas that can take 200+ hp. Maybe not the torque of a V6, but Honda's competence in manual transmissions should make it a breeze.
It would be sad if a glorified slushbox (automanual) would kill the manual.
"Accord V6 - 6spMT with sports suspension, sports package that includes 17" low profile rims, and a lower price than current MSRP."
I agree completely. Semi-automatics are gimmicks. They are not the real thing. But that's the way Honda sees the NA market, and you cannot wrong them, if you look at the % of MT Maxima / Camry / 626 sold ..... sigh =(
"I do not agree that the prelude would be a better
car than the accord to compare to the GTI. The GTI is a lot roomier than the prelude. Probably
pretty close to the accord coupe. "
Not true. In terms of roominess, the GTI fits in between the Prelude and the Accord. The Accord is quite a lot roomier than the Golf / GTI, especially if you consider the rear legroom. The reason why GTI compares to a Prelude is both are compact coupes.
Or put it this way - which is the most appropriate VW to compare to the Prelude?? I can't name a better match than the GTI - similar price range, similar size, same class (compact), and both cars go for the same market (sporty enthusiasts willing to dish out $25k).
I mean, too bad the Corrado has been canned =(
#17
amazon - I agree. Sportiness - each can have their own definition. Just don't send the mob's after me = )
the altima is going straight up against the camry and the accord v6's and 4cyl's. the maxima is going to go up against the avalon, 3series bmw, etc. it is in the works.
Again, I'll believe it when I see it.
First of all, Avalon is NOT in the same class as the 3series ... Avalon is in the same class of Crown Victoria, Impela .... full size sedans with heavy emphasis on comfort and safety. Boats. Tanks. Whatever you call them. 3-series on the other hand are sports compact sedans. They are in the same class as A4, IS300, argeuably S40 (half-hearted effort from Mistsubishi/Volvo) ....
So, lets first make up you mind if you want the MAxima to go bigger and roomier, or smaller and sportier in your rumor, cos it can't be both. = )
2nd of all, the Maxima underwent a major model revision in 2000 model, and you're saying a complete re-design is already in the works to move it away from its current class just 2 yrs into its new model?! What is the reason?? It can't be the increasing sale can it? = )
I mean, there are rumors, and there are EDUCATED rumors.
But let's focus on cars that are available, or verified news of near-future cars.
#17
maxima strenghts over the avalon:
-more front head and leg room
-more horses and torque
-larger trunk
-more standard features (gle)
-larger, wider wheels
-superior handling
****page 9 in the product guide if you still think its a rumor****