A newspaper reporter is hoping to interview a recent buyer who looked at a Honda but then opted for another make. Please send your brief comments about your decision along with your daytime contact info to jfallon@edmunds.com no later than Friday, July 16, 2004.
I'm fed up with this clutch -- very springy when releasing after shifting to 2nd gear. As the clutch is released, I can feel the car (or clutch?) either springs up or hesitates (just like having a hiccup), creating a rough, interrupted acceleration. It pisses me off big time! I brought this crap to the dealer one time, but they completely misunderstood my description of the problem so they ended up telling me there is no problem with the clutch. Damn it, I may need to bring this car to them again!
Has anyone heard about TSB 02-002 M/T Clutch Noise/Notchy Feel?
Hi ramida - you did the right thing when you found our Problems discussion and reposted there. Since this discussion is focused on comparing the Accord and the TL, I'll ask anyone who can help to follow this link to respond:
Yeah, we have a V6 coupe and have the same problem. I used to valet park cars when I was in college so I have driven litterally hundreds or even thousands of cars, many of them manual transmissions. However, I can't even drive this car without having it jerk into gear going into second.
We took our car into the dealer to have them look at the clutch as well and they also told us it was fine. Then I insisted that the car is not fine and there is a problem--after which they said "well, when we first got the manual V6 in, our service guys tried driving it and had the same problem". I think Honda is reluctant to fix an obvious widespread problem.
A few errors in you post... I've got the 2004 V6 EX with leather seats. Here are the things that you mistakenly listed as not included with the EX:
The EX V-6 DOES has driver and pasenger heated seats.. low and high settings. Just like TL
The EX V-6 DOES have an outdoor temp display next to odometer as well as two tripometer settings, just like TL
The EX V-6 DOES have a 5 speed auto transmission just like TL
The EX V-6 DOES have four wheel anti-lock brakes, traction control, and electronic brake distribution. Same as TL.
The EX V-6 DOES have an alarm system, two in fact, one for the car, and one for the stereo system.
The EX V-6 DOES have 16 inch (not 15") alloy wheels and top rated Michelin tires.
The EX V-6 also has two power points,just like TL, one below dash, one in console.
So basically, almost everything you list as an advantage of the TL over the EX V-6 is bunk.
You also neglect to mention the 6 CD in-dash changer on the EX.
It also has front double wishbone and rear 5-link double wishbone suspension, exactly like the TL.
And it runs on regular gas.
Bottom line, you pay roughly $10,000 for: -50 extra horsepower, -a year longer warranty, -zenon headlamps rather than high intensity halogen, - 60 more watts and one more speaker (4 more on the '05 TL) than the EX V-6 - less interior, backseat, and trunk room. - getting to pay premium prices for premium gas.
Of course, if owning a car that is less common with a slight advantage in build quality is worth paying $10,000 or more extra, then the TL is the car for you.
couple of things, bix. First off, I have no idea what post you are referring to. I scrolled back 3 pages looking for a post from "prov1632" before I gave up. If referring to something from that long ago, I suggest giving a post number at the very least.
Also, where do your numbers come from? 50 hp? You're talking about the 240 hp Accord vs. 270 hp TL, aren't you? And $10K?? Where did that number come from? This is the $26K Accord vs. $33K TL, right? But, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you are talking about a different car. I would assume from the list in the beginning of your post, you are comparing the Accord EX-V6 to the TL, but, then again, without knowing the post you are originally referring to, I don't know that for certain, I suppose.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
am trying to decide to keep my 2004 Ex Accord 4cyl or get a 2000 3.2 TL with Nav certifide. 48,000 miles on it Love the ride and power of the Acura TL. I need your opinions! feel free to email me at pwas77@yahoo.com or post it here. ASAP
Keep the Accord. It appears you want the perception of luxury, but really can't afford it. If you need a Navigation system, try Garmin portable system.
You got the warranty of the Accord, so keep it. There is a big difference in power and performance, but I doubt you would be able to take advantage of it.
Um, hey, let's not make fun of people who haven't yet figured out how the Town Hall works. Anyone who has participated in any other forum knows that we are ... how shall I put it ... unique in how we handle messages!
I heard a financial advisor say that you shouldn't buy more car than you can afford. Not afford today but afford in the long term. His point was that unless you're already solidly on track with your retirement funding, you're vastly better off putting an extra five, ten or even twenty thousand dollars into a retirement fund instead of into a car that's fancier than you need. For most of us, he'd no doubt recommend buying an EX-V6 and putting the extra $8,000 that you would have spent on the TL into an ERA or 401k instead.
And if you bought a TL, or even an EX-V6, while carrying massive credit card debit...
Well, I think that goes without saying. I personally try never to finance any car. I buy it if I have enough to pay cash, unless the finance rate is so low that I actually make money by borrowing and keeping my money in the bank.
Let's face it, cars are the ultimate consumption. They lose value the minute you take possession. And what other asset of that magnitude would you leave out in public, basically unprotected, where it is potentially subject to theft, vandalism, and other damages? People buy expensive cars for emotional, and ego reasons. I read somewhere that in actuality for 90% of the drivers, a Toyota Corolla is all the car they will ever need. The key word being "need".
I'm looking at an 04 TL navi with 10k miles on in - can probably get it for $29k vs a new 05 EX L v6 (invoices at $26.3).
I'm coming out of a 96 LX6 that has been very good to me for 142k miles. I was originally going to go directly into the next Honda, but everytime I pass a TL, I can't take my eyes off of it. I've never been vain about cars (note the 142k mi LX6), but that TL is gorgeous. The other thing that has hooked me is the sound system - I've heard the stereo in an 05 TL - is it the same in the 04?
Any chance someone out there can help with a comparison of these two cars? I've seen similar explanations, but not with these models. Also, I've seen some rumblings that milage on the TL is fairly weak despite the 20/28 rating. Can anyone confirm/deny?
There are several difference between the 2004 Acura TL with navigation and the 2005 Honda Accord EX V6.
The Acura TL has 30 more horsepower (unless you're talking about the 255 HP hybrid version), 26 more ft lbs of torque, a DVD-A/DTS sound system (best in any car IMO), memory seats, maintenance reminder, slightly bigger navigation system screen (8" vs. 7"), longer warranty (4 yrs vs. 3 yrs), a shiftable automatic, slightly bigger wheels (17" vs. 16", unless you buy the Accord V6 coupe), one more one-touch window (passenger side), heated outside mirrors, auto-dimming rearview mirror, stability control, xenon headlights, and a more powerful sound system. Other than the features listed above and some very slightly different interior dimensions, the cars are the same.
Now if you can justify $6,000 - $10,000 more the all these features (and better looks), then go for it. I couldn't justify the extra money for the TL. I thought the Accord had 95% of the same features of the TL for 81% of the invoice price.
The Accord was my first car out of college, so I wanted something practical, sporty (compared to my old 1989 Toyota Corolla), and something that cost less than $30,000 OTD. That being said, my next car will be an Acura of some sort, because by that time I will be able to afford one. I still love the look of the TL every time I see one.
Both are great cars in their respective price ranges. Personally I would prefer buying a new car rather than a one-year-old car. The 2005 TL should have some of the 2004 bugs fixed. Its got a couple of minor differences. The sound system is the exact same as the 04 model. Also you have to wonder why someone sold a car thats only one year old. Did they have major problems with it? Or did they just get bored/cant afford it anymore? How did they treat their car during the important 'break-in' period? These are questions you probably can't get answered in buying the used car. Also an 05 TL with nav should cost 33 -34k; and if I was dead-set on buying a TL with Nav I'd pay the extra ~4k for the new car. But thats just my thinking.
I personally think the TL is the best-looking model in the entire Honda/Acura line-up, and would rank as one of their best of all time. When comparing prices, I almost think you'd have to give the TL merit points for styling, and the Accord demerit points for its styling.
Looking to replace my 1988, yes, 1988 Accord. I have my eye on an '01 TL certified. Trying to get a good feel for what I should pay. 52K on it. What would be a fair range to expect to pay? BTW the one I have my eye on has been on the lot at the Acura dealer over 75 days, which, I hear, is a long time. THX
These two were on my short list. I wanted a 6-speed so the Accord choice was the 6-speed Accord Coupe. The TLs without NAV are going for $31,700 with NAV are closer to $34,000 An Accord with NAV is going for $26,200. Therefroe the realworld difference is $7,800.
Anyway I just bougth a black Accord Coupe 6-speed with NAV. I gave up the memory seats, xexon lights and heated mirror. But I basically have the same performance, get better mileage, use regular gas and saved $5,000 after I added options: window tint, rear wing spoiler, fog lamps, roof rack, bike rack, day-night mirror, splash guards, premium floor mats and wheel locks.
I also found a Honda dealer that is president's level, car washes every service, loaner cars, 1 year free service and free towing within 50 miles.
You certainly may have gotten a better deal going with the Accord, but your explanation is not exactly accurate. You don't have the same performance b/c you don't have as much torque or horsepower, and your handling isn't as tight. You also had to give up the rear doors you'd get with the Acura. If you're a single guy who doesn't make use of the back seat, that might not be a big deal, but those two rear doors definitely add to the value of the TL.
Also, while style points might not matter to some, since you paid for a spoiler (which is pretty useless on these cars) you should calculate the coolness factor that a more-aggressive, better-looking Acura gives you over an Accord.
For only $5,000 more, you could've gotten a car that was much more fun to drive, "cooler" and more useful (with the four doors).
Look at the power to weight ratio between the TL and Accord. Almost identical!
Actually there are pople that don't like the looks of the Acura. I not sure what demographics thinks the Acura is "cooler" but it is not all.
Also I forgot the insurance cost on the Accord was extremely low as well as the maintenance cost.
You are somehow off target on single guy and backseat space. The Coupe meets and exceeds my needs. Handling , interesting , do you have any specifics. I didn't know the TL was a handler like its scrappy little brother the TSX.
You won't convince me and I won't convince you. Anyway Have a Good day.
Well said. They're both great cars, and you might be more knowledgeable than I - I'm relying solely on Edmunds for my Honda info, but in reading Edmunds, it looks as if your car doesn't come with traction control. Is that true? If so, you'd have to give Acura a significant nod. I can't imagine Honda not equipping all their Accords (and most of their Civics for that matter) with traction control.
In the interests of fair play, it looks like your rear seats fold down, which is a significant improvement on the pass through that comes with the TL (though I've never had use for either).
The TL gives its passenger power controls, too, which is a nice touch, and your side view mirrors don't tilt to help with parallel parking. Nor do you have an auto-dimming mirror, which to me is significant. I can't tell whether Honda has a thing that automatically turns your lights off if you leave them on like the TL. If they don't and your battery's ever gone dead b/c of it, you'll realize what a nice feature that is.
Edmunds says you don't have a trip computer - you know, an automatic calculation of mpg, time driving, distance to empty, etc. Is that true? It's not a necessity, but it's a nice feature, and it's the easiest way to determine if you're getting the mpg advertised.
Also, while both come with navigation, I don't know if yours works like mine. Can you get directions using just your voice if you know the destination's phone #? Can you select your radio stations and climate control settings with your voice, too? The TL's is a great system that I use even if I don't need a map. How about yours?
And yes, the TL handles great - like it's on rails! I don't know how the Accord handles from personal experience, but reviewers have indicated it's not as sporty as the Acura.
Regardless, I think we can all agree that when debating between the TL and Accord, there is no wrong choice... unlike those poor saps with the G35s!!!
"Regardless, I think we can all agree that when debating between the TL and Accord, there is no wrong choice... unlike those poor saps with the G35s!!!"
Now there's fightin' words if I ever seen them!
Someone recently described the G35 as a real sports sedan with a decent interior and the TL as a great interior in a sporty sedan. I'm still debating between the two (and the TSX) having ruled out the Accord sedan due to looks and the Accord coupe due to only 2 doors. I'm just happy to have success great choices to pick from.
"Actually there are pople that don't like the looks of the Acura. I not sure what demographics thinks the Acura is "cooler" but it is not all. "
After a struggle deciding between the TL and the EX-6, I just got the Honda......and while I'm very happy with it, damn if I don't think the 04/05 TL isn't the nicest looking car on the road!
As for my final decision, I think it was a combination of not having an endless supply of money and "gatrhumpy"'s post here (message 689), where he summed it up by saying the Accord gave you 95% of the features for 81% of the price. Yeah, the TL looks a lot niceer, but I couldn't get past the 95/81 analysis.
I don't know if the better looks of TL inside and out than Accord and a few extra features/ponies of TL's over Accord's are worth $7-8K, but if I let value win me over every time I'd be moving from one Accord to another until I die. I am not even sure if God thinks that makes me less sinful....
"95/81 is a subjective assessment. What if it was closer to, say, 85/90? I mean, how do you really pinpoint these numbers? "
well - the 81 isn't really subjective - thats just a $ comparison, but you're right, that first number is completely subjective and I was quoting the original poster......and now you have me wondering if maybe I didn't make the right decision....thanks ;-)
Car buying is typically not a rational decision based on totally objective criteria. If it was, we'd all be driving Civics and Corollas and people wouldn't be spending $35K on pickup trucks that they drive empty 95% of the time.
The TL vs. EX-V6 is a tough choice for many of us. If everyone were to evaluate the marginal utility of the TL over the Accord, no one would buy the TL. However, subjective factors such as styling, prestige, power (whether needed or not), and features persuade many buyers to spend the extra $7-8K on the TL.
Ten years ago, facing 8 consecutive years of college expenses, it would have been no contest for me. Today, with the youngest out on his own, and having never owned a real "luxury" car, I'm willing to spend the extra bucks even though I know it's not an economically sound decision.
First your choice of the TL is an excellent one also!
The EX Accords come with traction control.
The Accords have automatic light shut off and also the 30 retained power. But like the TL the don't have fully automatic lights that will automatically turn on in low level light conditions.
The TL comes with a trip computer even if you don't get the NAV. When you get NAV with the Accord you get a trip computer. The NAV in the Accord and the TL are the same eletronics, but I think the tL display is 8" compared to 7" in the Accord. Both have voice commands (Accord has climate, audio, navigation just like TL), but I don't think bluetooth for wireless phones, etc. is enabled in the Accord. That is okay I rarely talk on my cell phone in the car; I think it is distracting and probably one of the major causes of accidents that happen even the hands free.
The TL is more sporty that most Accords true. The Accord V6 makes the front end a little heavy. The 6-speed has tower struts and larger wheels and handles the best of the Accords and is almost on par with the TL.
I completely agree that the TL and Accord are both great choices.
However, I am curious about you statement "...unlike those poor saps with the G35s" Except for getting pretty bad mileage (around 17 mpg), I thought the G35 was a pretty good car.
I don't know if the number is exactly 95%. Heck, it could be 97%, 99%, or it could be 85% or even 80%. It was a somewhat subjective number. You have to divide the number of same features by the number of overall features, and there's no way to do this unless you work for Honda.
If I could have afforded (logically) the TL, I would have gotten it. But I wanted to start saving for my two retirement plans and I also had a mortgage.
The Accord (for me) was the perfect choice. It's pretty good for a first car out of college, with a wife, mortgage, and three retirement plans between the two of us. Besides, with a real world price difference of anywhere between $5,000 - $7,500, you can add that amount of money to the Accord and get Bluetooth, tighter suspension, bigger wheels, better sound system, more power, HIDs, etc (maybe not all of this stuff, but at least some of it).
In the ultimate decision, you have to weigh what you want and what makes you happy. I WANTED a 2004 TL, but it made me happy to get a subjective better value in the Accord sedan EX V6 Navi vs. the TL Navi.
Go with what works for YOU, and only YOU. Don't let others tell you how to live your life.
Actually moving from one Accord to another may not be as bad as you think. If someone is 25 years from retirement and buys a new Accord every 5 years instead of TL, he will have almost an extra $200K by the time he retires (assuming a 7.5K price difference and he puts the money in a stock fund that earns an average 10% annual return):
That should be enough for him to buy a Porsche for himself AND another Porsche for his wife.
Well, maybe not everyone can live long enough to enjoy retirement, but chances are that most of us will. Also, the calculation may be over simplified. But you got the picture...
Oh I never it's bad financially, in fact what's what I meant. It makes more $ense to get X (every 5 years maybe too wasteful actually too) Accords in his/her life vs. jumping to some luxo ones along the way. Just that I had one Accord for more than 10 years already. It's daunting to me to drive another one, albeit much better one, for another 10+ years, vs. trying something different. And waiting until retirement to drive some nicer cars is not very encouraging either.
I just thought that having $200K at the end of the rainbow might make it less painful for you to drive another Accord.
On a somewhat related note, a recent study puts the emotional value of a happy marriage as the same as having $100K in the bank. So, the $200K saved by driving an Accord will allow people to endure 2 bad marriages. Or, at least one (since the first wife probably will take $100K away from the pot).
"On a somewhat related note, a recent study puts the emotional value of a happy marriage as the same as having $100K in the bank. So, the $200K saved by driving an Accord will allow people to endure 2 bad marriages. Or, at least one (since the first wife probably will take $100K away from the pot). "
I have a very happy marriage....any chance I can get an equity loan against it to pay for a TL??
Don't worry. You couldn't go wrong with either one. I have new-found respect for the Accord's structural integrity. My wife just got into an accident in her 2002 Accord where the car on her right changed lanes into her and bumped her into the oncoming traffic. She glanced off the first vehicle, hit the second vehicle (left front corners hit), went airborne and did a 180 mid-air roll and landed on the roof. She walked away with nothing more than some bruising around the left eye, a bit of a sore neck and upper back and bruised hip from the seatbelt.
I was just throwing the G35 reference out there to cause a stir! The TL, G35 and Nissan Maxima were my finalists (remember, I need 4 doors). They're all good cars, but frankly, I got really turned off by the fake metal in the G & the Nissan. Even if it's real alum., it looks and feels cheap, and my in-laws who have it say it scratches very easily.
Well I picked up the Accord last night. I am really pleased with the 6-speed and NAV system.
My other candidate, which was a four door was the Nissan Altima SE-R 6-speed. The interior, even though supposedly improved for 2005, was just not in the same class as the Honda. Also, the FM radio on the Atlima was terrible; it has been noted as a problem in several Edmund forum discussions.
Congratulations, Cowboy! Hey, I didn't realize you were in the buying process - I would've been more objective and less defensive with my posts. I enjoyed reading your description of the Altima's shortcomings. Enjoy!
I recently got a new Accord, and I came from a '92 Accord. I thing I notice right away is that the new Accord drives "tall." I actually feel like I'm driving a SUV/mini-van. I think if the Accord is couple inches lower, like the TL, it would probably be easier/more fun to drive...
Comments
Wow, is that for the fully loaded EX/V6 (Nav/Leather/XM) at invoice of $26K?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
PR Director
Edmunds.com
Has anyone heard about TSB 02-002 M/T Clutch Noise/Notchy Feel?
What does notchy mean?
Thanks!
ramida
ramida "Honda Accord Owners: Problems & Solutions" Oct 6, 2004 5:35pm
Good luck!
We took our car into the dealer to have them look at the clutch as well and they also told us it was fine. Then I insisted that the car is not fine and there is a problem--after which they said "well, when we first got the manual V6 in, our service guys tried driving it and had the same problem". I think Honda is reluctant to fix an obvious widespread problem.
ramida "Honda Accord Owners: Problems & Solutions" Oct 6, 2004 5:35pm
Hope everything works out well for you.
The EX V-6 DOES has driver and pasenger heated seats.. low and high settings. Just like TL
The EX V-6 DOES have an outdoor temp display next to odometer as well as two tripometer settings, just like TL
The EX V-6 DOES have a 5 speed auto transmission just like TL
The EX V-6 DOES have four wheel anti-lock brakes, traction control, and electronic brake distribution. Same as TL.
The EX V-6 DOES have an alarm system, two in fact, one for the car, and one for the stereo system.
The EX V-6 DOES have 16 inch (not 15") alloy wheels and top rated Michelin tires.
The EX V-6 also has two power points,just like TL, one below dash, one in console.
So basically, almost everything you list as an advantage of the TL over the EX V-6 is bunk.
You also neglect to mention the 6 CD in-dash changer on the EX.
It also has front double wishbone and rear 5-link double wishbone suspension, exactly like the TL.
And it runs on regular gas.
Bottom line, you pay roughly $10,000 for:
-50 extra horsepower,
-a year longer warranty,
-zenon headlamps rather than high intensity halogen,
- 60 more watts and one more speaker (4 more on the '05 TL) than the EX V-6
- less interior, backseat, and trunk room.
- getting to pay premium prices for premium gas.
Of course, if owning a car that is less common with a slight advantage in build quality is worth paying $10,000 or more extra, then the TL is the car for you.
Also, where do your numbers come from? 50 hp? You're talking about the 240 hp Accord vs. 270 hp TL, aren't you? And $10K?? Where did that number come from? This is the $26K Accord vs. $33K TL, right? But, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you are talking about a different car. I would assume from the list in the beginning of your post, you are comparing the Accord EX-V6 to the TL, but, then again, without knowing the post you are originally referring to, I don't know that for certain, I suppose.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
You left out the memory settings in the the TL.
Bix, you are four years late on your reply. You are talking about a 2004 Accord today, he is talking about a 2000 TL back in 2000.
Keep the Accord. It appears you want the perception of luxury, but really can't afford it. If you need a Navigation system, try Garmin portable system.
You got the warranty of the Accord, so keep it. There is a big difference in power and performance, but I doubt you would be able to take advantage of it.
ROTFLMAO!
BTW, I say keep the Accord too. It's newer platform is superior to the prevous generation TL.
It takes some time to figure it all out.
And if you bought a TL, or even an EX-V6, while carrying massive credit card debit...
Let's face it, cars are the ultimate consumption. They lose value the minute you take possession. And what other asset of that magnitude would you leave out in public, basically unprotected, where it is potentially subject to theft, vandalism, and other damages? People buy expensive cars for emotional, and ego reasons. I read somewhere that in actuality for 90% of the drivers, a Toyota Corolla is all the car they will ever need. The key word being "need".
I'm coming out of a 96 LX6 that has been very good to me for 142k miles. I was originally going to go directly into the next Honda, but everytime I pass a TL, I can't take my eyes off of it. I've never been vain about cars (note the 142k mi LX6), but that TL is gorgeous. The other thing that has hooked me is the sound system - I've heard the stereo in an 05 TL - is it the same in the 04?
Any chance someone out there can help with a comparison of these two cars? I've seen similar explanations, but not with these models. Also, I've seen some rumblings that milage on the TL is fairly weak despite the 20/28 rating. Can anyone confirm/deny?
Thanks so much,
Rich
The Acura TL has 30 more horsepower (unless you're talking about the 255 HP hybrid version), 26 more ft lbs of torque, a DVD-A/DTS sound system (best in any car IMO), memory seats, maintenance reminder, slightly bigger navigation system screen (8" vs. 7"), longer warranty (4 yrs vs. 3 yrs), a shiftable automatic, slightly bigger wheels (17" vs. 16", unless you buy the Accord V6 coupe), one more one-touch window (passenger side), heated outside mirrors, auto-dimming rearview mirror, stability control, xenon headlights, and a more powerful sound system. Other than the features listed above and some very slightly different interior dimensions, the cars are the same.
Now if you can justify $6,000 - $10,000 more the all these features (and better looks), then go for it. I couldn't justify the extra money for the TL. I thought the Accord had 95% of the same features of the TL for 81% of the invoice price.
The Accord was my first car out of college, so I wanted something practical, sporty (compared to my old 1989 Toyota Corolla), and something that cost less than $30,000 OTD. That being said, my next car will be an Acura of some sort, because by that time I will be able to afford one. I still love the look of the TL every time I see one.
1. the TL has a tighter suspension
2. you can't get an accord with a 6 spd manual transmission, v6 engine and 4 doors
I went and got a used 6-spd TL w/ nav for only 1 or 2 thousand more than a new 4-door accord with nav would cost, and I'm glad I did.
05 Accord 4-door EX V6 w/ Auto and NAVI: Best ~ $25,500
05 TL w/ Auto and NAVI: Best ~ $32,500
04 Used TL or Accord, a lot less with similar deltas.
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Real-World Trade-In Values
make sure you follow the template provided at the bottom of the forum as best as possible with the information you have available.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Anyway I just bougth a black Accord Coupe 6-speed with NAV. I gave up the memory seats, xexon lights and heated mirror. But I basically have the same performance, get better mileage, use regular gas and saved $5,000 after I added options: window tint, rear wing spoiler, fog lamps, roof rack, bike rack, day-night mirror, splash guards, premium floor mats and wheel locks.
I also found a Honda dealer that is president's level, car washes every service, loaner cars, 1 year free service and free towing within 50 miles.
In addtion I got 2.9% financing for 60 months.
YMMV,
MidCow
Also, while style points might not matter to some, since you paid for a spoiler (which is pretty useless on these cars) you should calculate the coolness factor that a more-aggressive, better-looking Acura gives you over an Accord.
For only $5,000 more, you could've gotten a car that was much more fun to drive, "cooler" and more useful (with the four doors).
Look at the power to weight ratio between the TL and Accord. Almost identical!
Actually there are pople that don't like the looks of the Acura. I not sure what demographics thinks the Acura is "cooler" but it is not all.
Also I forgot the insurance cost on the Accord was extremely low as well as the maintenance cost.
You are somehow off target on single guy and backseat space. The Coupe meets and exceeds my needs. Handling , interesting , do you have any specifics. I didn't know the TL was a handler like its scrappy little brother the TSX.
You won't convince me and I won't convince you. Anyway Have a Good day.
Cheers,
MidCow
In the interests of fair play, it looks like your rear seats fold down, which is a significant improvement on the pass through that comes with the TL (though I've never had use for either).
The TL gives its passenger power controls, too, which is a nice touch, and your side view mirrors don't tilt to help with parallel parking. Nor do you have an auto-dimming mirror, which to me is significant. I can't tell whether Honda has a thing that automatically turns your lights off if you leave them on like the TL. If they don't and your battery's ever gone dead b/c of it, you'll realize what a nice feature that is.
Edmunds says you don't have a trip computer - you know, an automatic calculation of mpg, time driving, distance to empty, etc. Is that true? It's not a necessity, but it's a nice feature, and it's the easiest way to determine if you're getting the mpg advertised.
Also, while both come with navigation, I don't know if yours works like mine. Can you get directions using just your voice if you know the destination's phone #? Can you select your radio stations and climate control settings with your voice, too? The TL's is a great system that I use even if I don't need a map. How about yours?
And yes, the TL handles great - like it's on rails! I don't know how the Accord handles from personal experience, but reviewers have indicated it's not as sporty as the Acura.
Regardless, I think we can all agree that when debating between the TL and Accord, there is no wrong choice... unlike those poor saps with the G35s!!!
Now there's fightin' words if I ever seen them!
Someone recently described the G35 as a real sports sedan with a decent interior and the TL as a great interior in a sporty sedan. I'm still debating between the two (and the TSX) having ruled out the Accord sedan due to looks and the Accord coupe due to only 2 doors. I'm just happy to have success great choices to pick from.
After a struggle deciding between the TL and the EX-6, I just got the Honda......and while I'm very happy with it, damn if I don't think the 04/05 TL isn't the nicest looking car on the road!
As for my final decision, I think it was a combination of not having an endless supply of money and "gatrhumpy"'s post here (message 689), where he summed it up by saying the Accord gave you 95% of the features for 81% of the price. Yeah, the TL looks a lot niceer, but I couldn't get past the 95/81 analysis.
well - the 81 isn't really subjective - thats just a $ comparison, but you're right, that first number is completely subjective and I was quoting the original poster......and now you have me wondering if maybe I didn't make the right decision....thanks ;-)
The TL vs. EX-V6 is a tough choice for many of us. If everyone were to evaluate the marginal utility of the TL over the Accord, no one would buy the TL. However, subjective factors such as styling, prestige, power (whether needed or not), and features persuade many buyers to spend the extra $7-8K on the TL.
Ten years ago, facing 8 consecutive years of college expenses, it would have been no contest for me. Today, with the youngest out on his own, and having never owned a real "luxury" car, I'm willing to spend the extra bucks even though I know it's not an economically sound decision.
First your choice of the TL is an excellent one also!
The EX Accords come with traction control.
The Accords have automatic light shut off and also the 30 retained power. But like the TL the don't have fully automatic lights that will automatically turn on in low level light conditions.
The TL comes with a trip computer even if you don't get the NAV. When you get NAV with the Accord you get a trip computer. The NAV in the Accord and the TL are the same eletronics, but I think the tL display is 8" compared to 7" in the Accord. Both have voice commands (Accord has climate, audio, navigation just like TL), but I don't think bluetooth for wireless phones, etc. is enabled in the Accord. That is okay I rarely talk on my cell phone in the car; I think it is distracting and probably one of the major causes of accidents that happen even the hands free.
The TL is more sporty that most Accords true. The Accord V6 makes the front end a little heavy. The 6-speed has tower struts and larger wheels and handles the best of the Accords and is almost on par with the TL.
I completely agree that the TL and Accord are both great choices.
However, I am curious about you statement "...unlike those poor saps with the G35s" Except for getting pretty bad mileage (around 17 mpg), I thought the G35 was a pretty good car.
Thanks,
MidCow
If I could have afforded (logically) the TL, I would have gotten it. But I wanted to start saving for my two retirement plans and I also had a mortgage.
The Accord (for me) was the perfect choice. It's pretty good for a first car out of college, with a wife, mortgage, and three retirement plans between the two of us. Besides, with a real world price difference of anywhere between $5,000 - $7,500, you can add that amount of money to the Accord and get Bluetooth, tighter suspension, bigger wheels, better sound system, more power, HIDs, etc (maybe not all of this stuff, but at least some of it).
In the ultimate decision, you have to weigh what you want and what makes you happy. I WANTED a 2004 TL, but it made me happy to get a subjective better value in the Accord sedan EX V6 Navi vs. the TL Navi.
Go with what works for YOU, and only YOU. Don't let others tell you how to live your life.
7.5k x [(1.1)**25 + (1.1)**20 + (1.1)**15 + (1.1)**10 + (1.1)**5] = 195K
That should be enough for him to buy a Porsche for himself AND another Porsche for his wife.
Well, maybe not everyone can live long enough to enjoy retirement, but chances are that most of us will. Also, the calculation may be over simplified. But you got the picture...
On a somewhat related note, a recent study puts the emotional value of a happy marriage as the same as having $100K in the bank. So, the $200K saved by driving an Accord will allow people to endure 2 bad marriages. Or, at least one (since the first wife probably will take $100K away from the pot).
I have a very happy marriage....any chance I can get an equity loan against it to pay for a TL??
;-)
I have a very happy marriage....any chance I can get an equity loan against it to pay for a TL??
Probably not but I can think of a place where you might be able to sell your soul for one ;-)
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Well I picked up the Accord last night. I am really pleased with the 6-speed and NAV system.
My other candidate, which was a four door was the Nissan Altima SE-R 6-speed. The interior, even though supposedly improved for 2005, was just not in the same class as the Honda. Also, the FM radio on the Atlima was terrible; it has been noted as a problem in several Edmund forum discussions.
Thanks,
MidCow