Acura TL vs Honda Accord

pg48477

Accord and TL are not build on the same platform, it's similar, TL platform is wider than Accord.

bodble2

I think this issue of platform-sharing is overblown anyway. It's so common now with just about every manufacturer.

dulnev

No, your experience is highly atypical. I've owned three Accords before switching to Acura and have NEVER been offered a loaner at Honda dealerships.

So far, I got loaners every time at Acura dealerships.

bodble2

My experience is about equal in terms of ease of getting loaners at my Acura and Honda dealerships. Of course, the fact that the 2 dealers are under common ownership may have something to do with that.

lelandhendrix

I know this is a bit off topic, but I just wanted to follow up.

My dealer is part of a huge autoplaza scattered across town that sells everything from Jaguar to Hyundai. My Honda dealership, however, is all alone in its location and I really can't imagine how I would be treated better.

When I pull up, they open a huge glass door so I can drive right in (great in cold or rainy weather). Then they either get me a rental or a loaner car. The last thing they put me in was a $30K truck from enterprise rental. I have to say, I've been treated like I bought a Lexus.

midnightcowboy

Dulnev,

I have two carbon fiber bicycles. Carbon fiber is a woven materail that is provides good strength for round type surfaces and it is very expensive. It doesn't make sense for Acura to put in fake wood and real carbon fiber; real carbon fiber is just too expensive and serves no functional purpose as trim other than looks.

While the TL carbon fiber look is pretty good , it still is not the real thing.

You seem convinced however that it is real. Do you have a source for your information ?

dulnev

You're right, I just went back an re-read the information. It's real aluminum and fake wood or carbon fiber. Sorry for the confusion.

03accordman

I own an Accord but have never got a loaner, I think all Acura dealers do provide them.

The 04 TL and 04 Accord are infact based on the SAME not similar platform, and that's the Accord platform. There is no wide platform, it is tha same platform. That said, the cars are different, with the Accord more of a value car, while the TL is more of a luxury car.

In the power sweepstakes, I think the 6 speed Accord does similar 0-60 times as a 6 speed TL, but I am not sure how much of an apples to apples comparison that is.

In pricing, real world prices of a non NAV EXV6 Accord are around 24K, while same are between 32-33k for the TL. Obviously, that kind of money gives you a lot more luxourious car

boysoccer3

I am in the market for an accord v6 manual transmission and have not had much luck. I suppose I will have to get a 4 cylinder manual, but has anyone else seen many?

pg48477

2004 tl does have a different wheelbase than Accord, check the stats.

lelandhendrix

V6 manual Accords do not exist outside the more rare performance-model coupe with 6-sp manual.

bodble2

I think the TL and Accord are based on the same platform. Whether one has a longer wheelbase, or wider doesn't mean it is on a different platform.

midnightcowboy

boysoccer3 - I am not sure where you live but if you live close to a major city you should easily be able to obtain a 6-speed with Nav at a reasonable price.

Houston was quoting $600 over invoice a month ago for a 2004 and invoice for a 2003 6-speed. The only real difference is the price went up about $300 and the 2004 has the XM radio.

By the way someone recently asked about 0-60 mph times

TL - 5.7
Accord - 5.9

midnightcowboy

Usually C&D reviews are pretty good. But, I test drove both the TL 6-speed and the Accord Coupe 6-speed pretty sporty and neither exhibited very much torque steer. Compared to a Nissan Maximua Manual or an Altima , The Acuras/Hiondas have almost no torque steer. Go drive a Nissan than drive a Honda Accord 6-speed or a TL 6-speed, you'll see what I mean!

joebo1

The price has gone down on the Honda Accord 1996 V6 to 8,000. I guess I am just wondering if That is a good price and if there are any upcoming maintanances that Ii should be aware of. I did talk to some techs who told me that at 90,000 miles I would need to do the timing belt and full service (they said it would be upwards of 800.00). I have tried to find out what other owners have experienced with the six cylinder but so far not luck. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Joebo1

motownusa

Now that midsize family cars pack 220+hp its about time the USA gets its own autobahn. 55-70 mph highway speed limit is too damn slow. All those horses are not getting a good workout.

pat

joebo1, click here and copy your message(s) into that discussion.

jhm4111

joebo1,

I've got a 95 V6. When you replace the timing belt be sure to replace the water pump at the same time. Save going back in to do it later. When we did the 95 it was between $1100 - $1200, but that included all of the 90,000 mile maintenance, as well. I live in the DFW area.

mwaddo

I’m in the market for a new car, and I’ve sort of settled between a 2004 Honda Accord EX V6 Nav and a 2004 Acura TL Nav. I realize these cars are not completely comparable (both based on my research and reading the posts here), but the Accord seems to have a lot of the features the TL has for a significant “rea’ world” price difference.

So, here are my questions:

1. What are ALL of the differences between these 2 cars? I’ve been able to find some of the obvious differences by reading the Honda, Acura, and Edmunds sites, but it seems like I always stumble across new feature on both cars I didn’t know existed. Has anyone complied a comprehensive list?

2. I can afford the TL, so price isn’t an issue; however, if the Accord has 90% of what I want, I’m not really comfortable paying the extra money for features which I may not appreciate. I don’t paying a little more for the Acura vs. Honda nameplate, but not much more, since it really doesn’t matter to me.

3. Has anyone else been in this situation, and if so, what were your reasons for deciding on either car? Or, are there others I should consider? Obviously, there is a lot of debate between the TL & G35 and the Accord & Camry. I’m leaning away from G35 because I desire interior quality over RWD (I’m sure the TL will handle all of my limited performance needs) and I’m really not a Camry fan.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

kdshapiro

It all depends if you are comfortable spending $7K more on a car that won't give more than 5% over the Accord. This is part of the value equation and I think the only way to decide is to drive both vehicles and determine if the extra $7K buys you $7K worth of benefit.

dbruland

I recently went through the same dilemma as you. My previous car was 2002 Infiniti I-35.

After test driving and researching the Acura, Accord, Nissan Maxima, Infiniti G35, I came to conclusion the Accord EXV6 was far and away the best value. (Infiniti is not going forward with I35, opting not to offer FWD sedans in the future). I bought the Accord last month and am extremely happy with it.

The biggest negative for me for the Acura was the lack of fold-down rear seat and small trunk (12.5 vs 14 cu. ft. Also having driven the I35 with 17" wheels and 40' turning radius made me appreciate the 36' in the Accord. I believe the Acura also had 40'. The Infiniti G35 also offered no fold-down rear seats and small trunk, in addition to no FWD.

Now there are a few amenities that I do miss from the I-35: Heated steering wheel (nice feature for SE Wisconsin), more powerful audio system (200 watts with 7 speakers), speed sensitive volume control, and standard anti-glare rearview mirror. These issues (and others not so important to me)would be nicely addressed in the Acura, but not for another $7K. And I can add the anti-glare mirror for about $300 if I choose to.

Some nice pluses in the Accord I didn't have in the Infiniti I35 include better seat comfort (and I thought the I35 was comfy), use of regular unleaded fuel and better MPG (with no noticeable difference in power), dual climate control, better trip computer. And of course the navigation system and voice recognition system. I am pretty sure it is identical to the one offered in the Acura.

I had an after-market XM radio (Pioneer)in the Infiniti. Now having the integrated system in the Accord makes this feature even nicer.

Hope this helps!

bodble2

I think if the consideration is STRICTLY value, there is not much out there that can beat an Accord V6 (excluding Korean brands).

pg48477

TL has a slightly wider wheelbase, it has better interior quality, it handles better and has more HP, plus costumer service is better than Honda.

Plus for Honda is the price, trunk space, it has almost every useful option that TL does.

I also like looks of TL better, but that just my openion.

kdshapiro

Yes, but the question is, to the buyer is it $7K better?

fredvh

Why did you get rid of the I35? Any troubles? What kind of mpg were you getting? I have heard that the I35 gets worse mpg than the older I30.

bodble2

That's a question only the buyer can answer. For me personally, if nothing else, I would pay a premium of $2K just purely for the styling of the TL over that of the Accord. Just can't warm up to the styling of the Accord sedan. And probably $1K premium for the richer interior. So right off the hop, $3K is accounted for.

saugatak

If you need nav, my opinion is the accord with nav is the better value with a real world price difference of $7k.

If you don't need nav, where I live, the real world price difference between accord non-nav and tl non-nav is slightly less than $4k. At $4k, it's a pick 'em. I'd go for the TL non-nav, but I can understand why some people would prefer the Accord non-nav.

Another consideration is if you drive a stick and need to do business on the phone in your car, might want to go with TL because you have handsfree voice (pick up calls by punching buttonson steering wheel or say "call office" and the car will do it for you.).

kevd

A 4k price difference?? If you bought an Accord EX V6 for $500 over invoice, which is typical in my area, and the TL at $500 over invoice, you'd be looking at 24,800 vs 30,800. I would say it's realistically between $5500 and $6500 of a difference.

saugatak

my apologies. i got my figures wrong, but i'm not off by a lot.

where i live, it's possible to get an accord ex v6 non-nav for $600 over invoice and a TL auto non-nav up to $2,500 off msrp.

that gives you a price difference of $4.5k.

whether the $4k to $5k is better spent on the tl is up to you of course. i think at this price differential you can't go wrong with either choice.

kevd

I hate to beat a dead horse, but your numbers are off. Invoice on the Accord is like $24,300 and the MSRP on the TL is $33,200. So your #'s should be 30,700 minus 24,900 = $5900. Maybe your working with different figures, but these are the published ones including destination.

billyperks

Price or no price the TL just outright feels like a more solid car than the Accord.

I can speak on this because I have them both in my Garage.
My wife has the 04 accord sedan with the leather and the satallite radio,I have the 03 TLS and my car just outright feels more solid.
Imagine when I trade up for the new TL.

Guys- don't get me wrong, the Accord is a Spectacular car but for some unexplainable reason the TL just feels better when it comes down to driving dynamics.

Bottom line- I think it comes down to personal finance.

PS-I spend more time in her car because of the Satallite radio.

kdshapiro

"bttom line- I think it comes down to personal finance."

Isn't that what it all is about. To me the TL for $7K offers no compelling reason above the Accord. But that is me. In fact, I made that recommendation to a friend who ended up with a new Accord. Saved $7K and was very happy.

billyperks

If they can afford the TL go for it-if not, the Accord is a good runner up.

Just don't hang your basket where you can't reach it.

boe_d

Thanks - I have contacted them but I'm sure it wouldn't hurt to have more than one person inform them.

Also it would be great if they didn't have any flash on pages where you type in information on these forums - really causes an unpleasant lag. Don't get me wrong edmunds is great and I really appreciate it but their web designers should know better.

saugatak

i'm working off of edmunds figures. ain't gonna do the math again. a few hundred bucks one way or the other isn't going to swing the difference for me at least.

dulnev

It never ceases to amaze me that people try to compare cars from completelly different categories. Acura TL is a luxury sports sedan while Accord EX V6 is a loaded family sedan. Different level of luxury, performance, comfort, almost everything!

I'm a big fan of both the Accord and the TL. When I was making quarter of the money I make now, I drove a five year old Accord. When I was making half the money I make now, I drove a new Accord EX. With the money I've been making in the last three years, I've been able to afford to buy a TL. It's a much better car than Accord and it's just as great a value as Accord, BUT IN ITS OWN CATEGORY, which is different from Accord's!

bodble2

So, how much money are you making now?

surferdude1

I own an '03 Accord and I just purchased a 2004 TL and there is no comparison in quality. The TL performs better, drives smoother and more quiet, and it exudes quality. One has to only open and close a door to feel the difference in craftsmanship between the cars. My point is that you are paying $6,000 more for the TL, but you are getting plenty more for your money. To even somewhat suggest that you can inter-change the TL and Accord and say they are the same cars is ridiculous at best. Don't misunderstand me because I wouldn't own an Accord if I didn't like the car, but one car is defintly a premium product while the other is a very above average product. You are comparing filet mignon to flank steak. Hmm, I'm starting to get a little hungry

saugatak

I agree with both of you gentlemen. Problem you have is that a MB, BMW or Lexus (with GS and LS) owner can say there is no downmarket version of my car and use that to justify their purchase.

In contrast, if you buy a TL, ES330 or an MDX, there is a pretty good downmarket version of the car (v6 Accord, v6 Camry or Pilot) so to a certain extent, you have to ask yourself am I getting more car for my money?

I think Acura has done a great job differentiating the TL from the v6 Accord. They really do feel like 2 different cars. And I don't think anyone seriously disputes that the TL is a nicer car, but the debate is really about how much more you are willing to pay for the TL.

mwaddo

Thanks for all of the responses. They have been really helpful.

dulnev - I don't really think these comparisons are "silly". All of the automobile classes are really somewhat artificial, don't you think? Do you really think all cars within a class are the same? I personally didn't think there was all that much difference between a 2003 Accord and a 2003 TL, and the "real" price reflected this. I'm just trying to find out if the price difference between the current Accord and TL is real, or the result of the TL being a brand new, relatively low volume car. Three or four years from now will the price differential between the Accord and TL be the same as it is today? Probably not. Does that mean the TL will suddenly become not as nice? No.

I don't think it's inappropriate to cross shop between classes of car. Most people shop within a particular class because they are typically spending as much as they can afford. I shop for what I like. If I have to spend less than I can afford, that's OK. I currently like a bunch of different cars, for a variety of dfferent reasons, and their prices are all over the map. I can afford a 5-Series BMW...should I buy it because I can afford it? I personally don't think it's worth the money TO ME.

I do see most of the advantages of the TL over the Accord; however, there are not all that many, and I'm not convinced it's worth the extra money. I may buy the TL anyway, but I was hoping to find out a few extra features about the TL which may not be as heavily advertised which would help me decide. For example, Bluetooth is really cool, but heated mirrors are more important to me over the long haul. No fold down rear seat is a problem, as I have used the fold down rear seat on my current Accord many times.

Again, thanks to everyone.

kdshapiro

mwaddo - You hit the nail on the head with your post. Very well stated. You look at your priorities, how much money you want to spend, and is it worth it. To ME. Not what CR says, not what CD says, not what RT says...etc.

exb0

If you look at the issue strictly from the practical point of view and set your emotions aside, Accord is much better value and makes more sense than TL. If you take everything under consideration: price, performance, reliability and the resale value; the Accord is the best value on four wheels, period. Most of the additional features on the TL are toys that most people happily drive without.

Having said that, I must say that “I love my TL!!!” I love the ride, nicer interior, better looking exterior and the awesome sound system. Also, and I will be the first one to admit that it is very shallow of me, the TL has more snob appeal, it turns more heads. Most of my neighbors have premium sedans and I felt like a Shmuck driving the 2000 Accord LX. The Accord is the most boring looking car on the market, and there are so many of them. I can’t tell you how many times I tried to open somebody else’s Accord with my key because it looks just like my car.

I know what these comments make me sound like, but I can’t help but to feel this way. The TL just makes me happy. Is my happiness worth 6 to 7K? You bet.

billyperks

Okay-Mr. keep up with the Jones.

mwaddo

Yeah, that's what I'm going after. There are some things I will gladly pay more for in a car, and some I'm not interested in at all. If the Accord had just a few of the TL features (heated mirrors, manumatic, quiter/smoother ride, maybe a few more), I'd gladly pay $30K for the Accord.

The main point of my post was to see if anyone had compiled a list of features for the 2 cars. For example, I didn't see on the Honda, Acura, nor Edmunds sties describing the cars that both cars had the auto window and moonroof control from the key fob...I found out here on the discussions. So, are there other "hidden" nuggets of information? These may be enough to swing my vote.

Right now I'm leaning towards the TL, especially since it looks like there are a lot of people getting >$1K off MSRP for a TL-Nav.

Thanks

dulnev

There was not that much difference between 2003 Accord and 2003 TL, I agree with that. But there is a deep canyon separating the 2004 Accord and 2004 TL. Simply enumerating the features that are not there in the Accord is NOT going to get you to the comparison point. One just has to drive the two cars to understand what I mean.

exb0:"If you look at the issue strictly from the practical point of view and set your emotions aside, Accord is much better value and makes more sense than TL."
I could not disagre more with you! This statement is as false as they come. Only someone who considers cars to be no more than ways of getting from point A to point B can make such a conclusion.

Again, these cars are in completelly different categories so one cannot say that Accord is a better value. Accord is the BEST value in the family sedan market. But it is NOT a LUXURY SPORTS sedan. So when one is looking for a LUXURY SPORTS sedan, it is the TL that is the best value and Accord doesn't even enter into the decision process. I don't think I can make my point any clearer that that.

Of course it's appropriate to shop accross the vehicle classes, but you keep missing the point that other people are trying to make: if one wants a LUXURY SPORTS sedan, one would never look at Accord. He/she would look at BMW 3/5 series, Infinity G35, Nissan Maxima SE, Acura TL, Volvo S60R and couple more cars. Not the Accord or Camry.

dulnev

"The main point of my post was to see if anyone had compiled a list of features for the 2 cars. For example, I didn't see on the Honda, Acura, nor Edmunds sties describing the cars that both cars had the auto window and moonroof control from the key fob...I found out here on the discussions. So, are there other "hidden" nuggets of information? These may be enough to swing my vote."

Too bad I didn't see this "nugget" of information here. I wouldn't have bothered with the previous long post. It's obvious that your value scale does not in any way overlap with mine. If having an ability to close windows from key fob could make the choice of car for you, we would never be able to agree on this topic...

surferdude1

I don't thinks these discussions are really about comparing the 2004 TL and the Accord EX V6 because they really don't compare as automobiles. If you are looking for "Value", the Honda Accord is arguably the best car across all segments of the marketplace. It's price combined with it's dependability make it most likely the best choice for the money of any car available. I guess the question is more about yourself as a person and what you are comfortable driving. Lets face it, a car is an adult toy and not a good investment for your money so it shouldn't be viewed this way (especailly if you are looking at an entry level luxury car or above). Once you enter these categories, you are trying to put a price tag on emotions like fun, excitement, prestige etc... and I don't think this is possible. It is expensive to move to the next level of cars, but I think the intangibles are worth the extra money if you can afford it. I love my Acura TL and how it makes me feel and how much I paid for the car is not even on my mind when I'm driving down a nice winding road or freeway.

This commentary is alittle deep, but this is coming from somebody who has driven Accords, Camry's, VW's for many years.

dbruland

I did note a slight reduction in MPG on the 2002 I-35 versus my previous 2000 I-30, but that was not a major factor. Actually I never had any problems with either car. I would have strongly considered a new I-35 had one been offered. I frankly was disappointed Infiniti had abandoned all FWD vehicles from their offering.

I didn't even have the 2004 Accord EX V6 on my list of FWD sedans as I began to research replacement vehicles. I test drove the new Acura TL and was blown away with all the amenities, etc. that many have elaborated on this board (with the important---to me---disadvantage of no fold-down rear seat). Then drove the new Maxima but felt it was overpriced and had too small trunk and trunk opening. I also didn't care for the standard grille, although did see one on the dealer lot with a $400 custom version that looked $4000 better.

Just for the heck of it, I tested the Accord and was amazed how "luxurious" it was. Yes, I realize the exterior is virtually the same for all Accord sedan models. But once you get inside and actually drive the EX V6 and experience all the amenities (especially the nav and voice-recognition), it's hard to believe this car has a MSRP of $28400. PLUS IT HAS A FOLDDOWN REAR SEAT. And then when I was able to easily negotiate the price to $600 over invoice, I did the deal. No regrets.

Still disappointed in Infiniti's no FWD decision (my wife drives a 2000 G20 which replaced a 1993 G20, so they will likely lose another sale when she is ready for a replacement).

bodble2

"If you look at the issue strictly from the practical point of view and set your emotions aside, Accord is much better value and makes more sense than TL."

Read his statement again carefully. He is 100%absolutely correct. The key point is that you have to "set your emotions aside". ie. treat cars like they are appliances. Which a lot of people do, BTW.

kdshapiro

I beg to "diffa". If you are spending more than $10K on a car, you are not treating it as an applicance.