Folks, you know the drill -- stop arguing about opinions. It is senseless to try to "make" someone adopt your opinion when that person's opinion is opposite of yours.
Calm down. As spleck said, the objective of this forum is to discuss issues, good and bad between the cars.
There are way too many heated opinions flying around here that are being stated -and argued over and over again - as fact.
Under normal driving conditions there is no torque steer, so under those conditions there is nothing to overcome. However, if one has the need to flat foot from a dead stop frequently then you best white knuckle that steering wheel 'cause it is squirrelly.
Neither vehicle, imo is a bad choice, both come from reliable makes. It all depends what you are looking for.
Are you talking about the 2002 tranny problem, which affects less 1.6% of all accords.If you consider 1.6% a high number, I reccomend you retake a few math classes.
Hmm, do the math, 1.6 percentage equates to less then 2 out a hundred cars that are affected, but yet you are attempting to make it an issue with potential accord buyers. Keep digging pal!
"However, what probably won't improve is the fairly pronounced torque steer that afflicted our car. Because the Maxima is built on the same front-engine, front-wheel-drive large-car platform as the Altima, it exhibits the same weaving responses to aggressive throttle application, and the same wheel-tugging steering fight."
"This sort of insolence cost the Altima dearly in our mainstream-sedan comparison test last month, helping relegate it to a sixth-place tie, and we're disappointed to see the same symptoms manifested so clearly in the new Maxima. Audi has a well-publicized suspension geometry that quells this kind of thing, and most of the other players in the front-drive, high-torque category have dealt with it to a reasonably satisfactory extent. So why not Nissan?It raises questions about possible cost-cutting measures necessary for an aggressive model-rollout strategy."
I owned a '95 Maxima for almost 5 years, and have also driven an '02 I30 extensively. We now have an '02 Accord V6. I can say the VQ has a nice muted moan to it when accelerating, and idles very smoothly. Well, the engine overall is very smooth. It is an excellent engine. Plain and simple. BUT, there is no way I can say it is appreciably better or more fun than the Accord V6. The VQ is more peaky, so it does come on with a rush, but you have to keep the throttle down and wait a bit for it. Maybe that's what some of you are calling fun. The Accord V6 delivers its power more evenly, but it is no less fun. In fact, our Accord feels every bit as powerful, if not more so, then the 190 hp Max AND the 227 hp I30.
Hmmm...let's see, what's more important to a consumer when buying a car. Torque steer or a potential transmission failure?. Geez...tough choice. Call me crazy, but I am taking the torque steer in this case.
BTW... show me any documentation that says that Honda/Acura has officially solved it's tranny problems. Without any "fix" or change, logic would dictate that Honda/Acura still has the problem with 2003 models. I dunno where you are getting your percentages, but from reading posts at Honda/Acura boards the number of tranny failures is large enough to keep me (and others like me) from buying the product.
I dont think anyone wants to go to reliability issues between the two brands... but by all means we want to hear every single problems of each. i.e. Nissan Maxima and HOnda Accord
I don't know if you meant to say torque steer is a more influential buying factor than a potential transmission failure, or you mistyped, but I would think that an aspect of the car that could leave you stranded is more important, than torque steer which occurs only when aggressively pushing the pedal, as has been mentioned before.
C&D always complains about torque steer because they almost always pick the winners of comparison tests that are the most "fun" to drive, not necessarily the cars that are the best for a certain segment. A recent example is a test of economy cars where the Protege won because it had the best handling , and most fun to drive, despite them saying it is a fair passenger hauler that has a hard ride for passengers, and is noisy inside ("We may say that we have your best transportation interests is mind, but when its time to vote, the winner is always the one that's most fun for us to drive"). C&D doesn't always look out for what is most important for buyers in a certain segment, and IMO is the least connected auto mag. when it comes to knowing what buyers find important.
I30? I35? Why get into semantics? It's a simple mistake.
speedracer: The new Accord does not even use the same transmission as the Accord V6 that was affected by the transmission problems. The new Accords use a 5-speed automatic while 98-02 Accords used a 4-speed automatic. So I guess logic dictates that the problem has been solved for the 2003 model year.
Regardless, there have been very few posts of transmission failures since Honda tracked the problem down to a supplier and began replacing the affected transmissions. Out of 1 million cars they say that maybe 2.0% will be affected, that's 20,000 cars, if even 1% of those people post here then you would have 200 complaints on Edmunds.
It is obvious that not only 4 speed automatics were affected by the failures, since Acura TL/CL owners were experiencing the failures also (TL/CL use 5 speed autos). Is 5 speed auto tranny in the Accord different (other than the shiftable option) that the one in the Acura TL/CL?.
There was a part that was supplied to Honda that was defective. The part was probably the same in the 4-speed automatic of the Accord and the 5-speed automatic of the TL/CL, Odyssey, etc. Honda changed vendors once they tracked the problem down.
As for the transmission being the same, I believe it is a mostly different unit but I could be wrong.
The transmission thing was covered relentlessly in the Accord forum back in 2000. You can search through the archives. Personally I am about to leave for the beach.
Even if the bad part affected 2% of automatic Accords, not all of them failed outright. I believe a majority result in rough shifting. While disconcerting, the number of people actually left stranded out on the road is much less.
A problem that a manufacturer acknowledges, extends the warranty, and repairs/replaces is much different than a cheap design that Nissan's marketing tries to tout as a superior design (rear beam) or the buyers ignore (torque steer--which as someone said above has been reduced by many other manufactures).
The tranny issue stems from a sub-standard part supplied to Honda that degrades quickly resulting in sub-par performance and sometimes failure. As you've heard, I believe this supplier accounted for a certain percentage of the parts (the 1.6% number?). Apparently, Honda now knows who the supplier is and either they have corrected their problem, or Honda no longer uses that supplier. Considering the part and supplier have never been officially named, I would imagine the problem was corrected and continued business was arranged (Honda most likely dictating new terms). Releasing the supplier's name would damage their business, lead to countersuits against Honda, and remove a potentially indebted source from Honda's pool.
In related news, Nissan has much of a head start on the fun-to-drive category as they have a V6 with MT sedan. It's nice that Honda is offering a V6 MT in the Coupe (which I bought), but you're right, the Max will win on fun-to-drive almost on that alone. Hopefully, Honda will recognize the demand, albeit small, for V6 MTs in their sedans.
First, torque steer is nearly inevitable in a front wheel drive car with a very powerful engine. Car manufacturers can try to control the amount of torque steer by tunning but after a certain point the laws of physics just take over. I think the biggest dissapointment for Maxima enthusiasts is that the 6th generation model will have a boost in power but will still be FWD. Nissan is supposedly working on a AWD version of the Maxima but no word if it will ever make it to production. Ofcouse, all RWD vehicles that Nissan makes are going to be marketed through the Infinti badge. It is a shame that Acura does not follow suit. BTW...the demand for 6 cylinder sport sedans with MT is greater than you think. I read somewhere that BMW sells more 3 series with MT than automatics.
From what I know of physics and what I've read about torque steer, it can be eliminated. Physics says if you put the same amount of power to both wheels at the same time, you'll go straight. Engineering and manufacturing on the other hand say "HOW are we going to do that?"
Using equal length half shafts seems to help. I believe Honda and Audi use unequal length halfshafts, but with different torsional rigidity so that the overall twist of the shafts are equal. The next problem is ensuring that both wheels have equal power applied, which often depends on traction. There are also a number of other techniques to help eliminate torque steer... I've heard proper placement of steering centerline, tweaks to power steering, etc (I've heard non-power steering is hardly affected?)
The point is that Nissan doesn't seem to be implementing as many techniques as other manufacturers. If you read Nissan forums, there's often quite a fuss about it. Just as in the Honda forums there's quite a fuss about transmissions, or rattles.
I believe in the US, something like 15% of cars sold are MT versus 50% in Europe. Considering BMW is the most popular brand in many parts of Europe, I think that would affect the ratio for their sales. Personally, I hope the demand in the US grows, despite the previous trends that suggest MT overall is on the decline due to vastly improved AT (5 and 6 speed ATs, CVT, sportshift, etc... for example the AT CRV gets better MPG than the MT) and increases in time spent in heavy traffic. Hopefully, the recent popularity of economy super cars (Turbo Neons, sport hatchbacks, etc) and the better MPG in most cases will bring about a small upswing in MT sales.
In any case, if Honda put a MT in the V6 sedan and Nissan fixes their across-the-line torque steer problems, we'd all be better off due to improved competition.
I recently read some second hand information that suggests Acura will NOT be going to RWD, which will disappoint many fans. However, there was some discussion about AWD, but no confirmation either way.
I think we'll see an RL with rear-biased AWD within a few years. If so, I'm positive that at least front-biased AWD will make appearances in the TL and the Accord (obviously only the V6).
Ive read numerous news reports in different sources over the past 6 or 8 months that have cited Honda as not seeing a rear-wheel drive platform as well as a V8 as necessary. With its usual "just enough" policy, they seem to think advanced V6's will compensate. They said this about the 4-cylinder engines when they didnt want to put a V6 into the Accord, and although the 2.3-liter engine was at the top of its class for 4-bangers, it will never be a V6. Today, A V8 can be fitted to a new RL, the MDX, the Pilot, and the NSX. Im sure the next generation i-vtec V6's will be plenty powerful, bu tthey will never be a V8. Same with the FWD and RWD; Honda seems to think that they can eliminate enough torque steer, which to their credit they are good at, that they dont need Rwd. BUt even the besthandling FWD cars will never be a G35 or 330i chassis. If Honda created one RWD chassis, they could make a TL/IS300 fighter, a CL replacement (330Ci fighter), a smaller 2+2 or 2+0 version (Prelude replacement, 350Z fighter), as well as even expand the platform for the RL (M45 & 540i fighter). Id much rather take this plaftorm than spin off Elements from the Civic platform.
I think Honda is afraid that if they spend 2 years to develop a production V8, then 2 years later gas prices will jump to $10/gallon.
The reality is that Honda doesn't want to spend the money to develop an engine that they won't sell in Japan, will have limited application in the US, would have different balancing issues than a 4/6 cylinder and other problems, and will damage their reputation as selling clean burning, efficient engines. I have no doubt Honda would do it right, but the press is not so rational and the public is finicky--that's what they're afraid of.
I think the RWD and AWD will come though... that's what the mass market is demanding... much more than V8s to replace 240-260 hp V6s.
I meant an '01 I30. Simple typo, as anonymous pointed out to you. And I know what the hp rating for the I35 is. And I have driven an I30 quite extensively, thank you very much.
I find it amusing that all these Nissan diehards are knocking Honda for the tranny problem. Is the Honda tranny more problematic than Ford's, or how about Chrysler's? Weren't trannies practically falling off of Caravans? I think the tranny problems with those other brands somehow get lost in the myriad of other problems they have, whereas Hondas are generally so trouble-free any problem becomes a news item. Actually, Nissan fans need look no further than at Nissan's recent history. It's been documented that Nissan's auto tranny used in the Quest and Maxima in the mid-90's was less than stellar. My cousin's Quest needed 2 tranny transplants in less than 5 years. And I don't believe Nissan offered any extended warranty on its tranny either.
along with the odyssey through '01, and the accord through the '02. and again, the affected trannies were only for v6 models. out of the 1 million v6 autos sold, maybe 250k were accords. you still have cl's, tl's, odysseys, and mdxs. as of now, ALL have gone to a 5-sp. version.
I don't get it there were also problems with Ford Tranny's in the 94-97 Mazda 626 and they were very problematic. Ford also has had that stalling problem with the Escape and streched into Mazda's line with the Tribute. I have heard about the Caravan's problems. What about Mercedes decling reliability especially with the M-Class? BMW: recalls with the BMX X5 SUV 11 times. Somehow the Germans don't take the scrunity that the domestic's and Japanese take. They sell less cars thats probably why.
I don't think there were alot problems with the base models CL's, and TL's. It was the Type S tranny that was all the problems. My aunt has a 2000 Accord EX V6 and the tranny is not problematic. I think Honda hurried out the Type S to heavily compete with BMW and it blew up in their faces in the end. Thats why Mazda has spread out their product launches with the 6, RX-8, and 6 Hatchback so all the kinks are worked out. I have an 02 CL base and the tranny is not problematic. One time the car did stall when I first had it and I couldn't move. Thankfully that happened only once.
Nissan has problems tranny problems in the mid 90's...that's recent to you?. That's nearly 10 years ago. Anyway...it is pretty well known that the 90's was Nissan's darkest period, it is a totally different company today.
The Type S trans has the sport shift auto. A 6 speed manual was not offered with the TL at all. The CL had the 5 speed manual for the 2003 model year only. Before that the CL was offered with the Sport Shift auto only.
have you gone off the deep end, buddy?? the cl-s has a 6-speed manny with the sport shift optional. the cl has both the sport shift and the 5-speed for the entire generation.
You missed the point. I wasn't debating whether Nissan has RECENT tranny problems, however you want to define "recent". I'm just saying people shouldn't jump on the anti-Honda bandwagon over this 1.6% of supposed bad trannies. Bad trannies happen from time to time with other manufacturers too, including Nissan.
Bad trannies can happen to any manufacturer. The smart consumer usually knows better to stay away from a manufacturer that is having "known" problems until the manufacturer gets them fixed. Ofcourse this relates to trannies or anything else. I for one was set on getting an Audi A4 for my next car until I found out the huge problem Audi/VW is having with their ignition coils (they are recalling over 500,000) cars. Call me cautious, but I would feel more comfortable when all these tranny troubles blow over for Honda before I start looking at the brand again.
I think the coil problems with the A4 is much greater (%-wise) than the Honda tranny problem.
BTW, I too was seriously considering the A4 until I sat in one. That car is tiny! The back seat is barely big enough for 2 people. And the way the centre consoles intrudes into the back really impedes movement in the back seat from one side to the other. I have trouble visualizing a family of 4 being comfortable on an extended trip in the car.
Yes, Audi/VW coil problem is larger than the Acura tranny problem. Personally, I'd rather go with a company that is having no "known" problems with their cars. My focus has shifted to the Infiniti G35 sedan. The A4 IS a compact car. If you were looking for a family car, A6 is the way to go.
From discussions here, maybe we can safely conclude that no vehicle make is exempted from defects.
What would interest me as a consumer is the philosophy of the carmaker when it does learn of its product's defects.
Typically car companies are in denial, then act only when complaints reach critical mass.
By then, they'll say something like "defect rate is only 1.6%, the industry average is 2.5%."
This mentality has the effect of institutionalizing mediocrity in the way we do things; sooner or later everyone - consumer and vendor alike - is thankful that "it's only 1.6%."
I believe as consumers we should not accept quality compromises. The quest for "zero defect" is something that should be sustained.
Hi all, just signed up for this one... I have a question: Why does everyone marvel so much about the HP for Accord: 240 HP, 212 lb/ft Torque. Do you people realize that when we talk about performance there are two different ways to measure it? First is stand still launch 0-60, and then the top speed, which is BTW limited for both cars. The torque my friends is the main important part that makes your car move from standstill, not your HP rating, HP is good to know when you need to find out how fast your car can go, provided all other factors are the same.
Too bad its not that simple....the thing to marvel aboput the accord engine is due to the fact it produces 212lbs of torque and 240 horses( 250 if you run premium) and its still manages an ULEV rating, and MPG rating of 21 mpg city driving and highway average of 32mpg which is exceptional. Many 4 cyclinders on the market cant achieve these emission levels and/or fuel economy levels.
In addition, Achieving those levels (hp, torque, emissions) with a displacement of 3.0 in comparison to the altima which has a displacement of 3.5 and achieves 5 more horsepower, runs on premium and gets worse gas mileage. Thats a technological feat to say the least.
CHeck out the RX-8, that puppy has a hp rating of 250+, yet produces a considerably less amount of torque 162lbs when compared to the acord. But when it comes down to performance, the rx-8 will beat the accord, yet lacks the torque, so your simple rationale in regards to torque is dismal at least.
It's all good and dandy that accord achieves ULEV standards and runs on regular gas - no argument on my side. However, did you notice that the same 3.5 VQ engine makes 290 HP and 280 lb/ft for the 350Z, marketing is the only answer for that. 3.5 VQ engine is by far more superior then the 3.0 VTEC from Honda, no argument there. As far as the Mazda RX-8 is concerned, did you happen to notice that it is a rear wheel drive car, with 50/50 weight distribution, wider performance tires, and most important - a lot lighter? No?, Oh well, lets stick to the Honda and Nissan discussion, no need to bring other "super" cars into it - this would be the same as saying that my Nissan 350-Z will blow the doors of your accord, but you already know that, don't you. I did not make an uneducated guess about the performance and the torque role in it, I happen to be a mechanical engineer and I can tell you, that when it comes to engines - the most important rating after HP, is your breakaway torque - which plays enormous role in the straight line startups. Mazda will be faster due to high rev range of 9000 r.p.m, just like Honda s2000, which is by the way beaten by 350-Z. P.S I like accords, I have driven couple of them and some camries, still Maxima is my choice, maybe when I'll get married and stop giving s..t of what I drive - I'll get the accord, for my wife, like most people on this forum do.
350Z Rocks!!!! I get so much attention - awesome. It's fast, but I had to put it in the garage and drive Pathfinder all this time - too much snow, plus I hate to get the salt on that beautiful black skin of my 350. Can't wait for summer time so I can take it on a highway and open it up..
A kid down the block from me had one till he crashed it, he said its nice, except in the snow and rain. The back end wont grip so he constantly fish tailed, but oh boy did it move...
In case anyone is still concerned (the topics of conversation seems to have drifted from the main subject) I wanted to put my two cents in about the Honda Accod. I currently own a 1994 Honda Accord LX 5 Speed with nearly 279,000 miles on it. I average about 500 miles a week on this car and it is still running very strong. This car was my father's car befor it became mine, and he put similar amounts of miles on the car. He went to purchase another Accord in 2001 and was planning on trading in the '94 but I purchased it from him with 230,000 miles on it. The '94 is and probably will always be the best car I have ever owned. The transmission and clutch work together very well, and the engine still sounds great. At this point I know the car owes me nothing, but I still have two complaints about it. There are several minor glitches in the electrical system (apparently this was prevalent in many Accord's in '94) and is beginning to show it's age with many rust spots. I will be replacing the car within the next few months, and will be considering either a 2001 Honda Accord EX 5 spd, or a 2000 Maxima SE 5 speed. It would be very very tough for me to switch from Honda. Not only are there cars solid and extremely reliable, but I swear they become a part of the driver. If you drive one on a daily basis you will understand what I mean. I will be very sad to see my '94 go but I feel that I cannot go wrong with either of those two cars. I hope this helps anyone.
I bought a 2002 Accord EX 5spd. It looks good and felt ok, but it was slow and aggravatingly slow. No torque. 6 months later, I went with the 2003 Maxima 6spd. Best decision and loss on a car I ever made. If you like the Maxima's power, you will start kicking yourself 3 months in on the Accord. Go Maxima!
I bet you will love your max in 5 years when it depreciates down to nothing, oh by the way, why would someone compare a 03 to an 02, especially considering the new model year of the accord. I bet you thoroughly enjoy the max's torque steer also? One more thing, you do realize that the maxima is being redesigned for 04. Hmm riding a brand new model year, or driving an outdated max?
Don't forget that while that Maxima has more HP it also has 2 wheels attached to a broomstick for a rear suspension. And with the Maxima's resale value already in the toilet the new Maxima (which has an independent rear suspension) will only serve to further flush what resale value the Maxima DID have down the toilet.
So the 2002 Accord EX was a mistake to YOU .. doesn't mean it's the wrong choice for everyone. Especially with gas prices going up the roof. I'd rather have money in my pocket than be able to boast a 1 or 2 second advantage to 60.
Hmm, someone's just a TAD bit defensive aren't they? No one said anything about any car being the wrong choice for "everyone". The word "everyone" was not even in his post, sheez. See this phrase right here: "If you like the Maxima's power", that specifically knocks "everyone" out of the equation along with the multiple times the word "I" was used. Read first... then spout.
The fact that the '03 Max can be compared to the latest and greatest Accord says a lot about the outdated blah blah Max to me. I personally wouldn't drive an 03 Accord if it was given to me because of the way it looks (Don't go saying I said *everyone* thinks it looks bad! Save your breath) I think the outdated Max looks better. The 04 Max looks better too although its supposed to be in a different league than both.
Comments
Folks, you know the drill -- stop arguing about opinions. It is senseless to try to "make" someone adopt your opinion when that person's opinion is opposite of yours.
Calm down. As spleck said, the objective of this forum is to discuss issues, good and bad between the cars.
There are way too many heated opinions flying around here that are being stated -and argued over and over again - as fact.
Lighten up.
Under normal driving conditions there is no torque steer, so under those conditions there is nothing to overcome. However, if one has the need to flat foot from a dead stop frequently then you best white knuckle that steering wheel 'cause it is squirrelly.
Neither vehicle, imo is a bad choice, both come from reliable makes. It all depends what you are looking for.
Hmm, do the math, 1.6 percentage equates to less then 2 out a hundred cars that are affected, but yet you are attempting to make it an issue with potential accord buyers. Keep digging pal!
"This sort of insolence cost the Altima dearly in our mainstream-sedan comparison test last month, helping relegate it to a sixth-place tie, and we're disappointed to see the same symptoms manifested so clearly in the new Maxima. Audi has a well-publicized suspension geometry that quells this kind of thing, and most of the other players in the front-drive, high-torque category have dealt with it to a reasonably satisfactory extent. So why not Nissan?It raises questions about possible cost-cutting measures necessary for an aggressive model-rollout strategy."
Hmmm, interesting...
BTW... show me any documentation that says that Honda/Acura has officially solved it's tranny problems. Without any "fix" or change, logic would dictate that Honda/Acura still has the problem with 2003 models. I dunno where you are getting your percentages, but from reading posts at Honda/Acura boards the number of tranny failures is large enough to keep me (and others like me) from buying the product.
C&D always complains about torque steer because they almost always pick the winners of comparison tests that are the most "fun" to drive, not necessarily the cars that are the best for a certain segment. A recent example is a test of economy cars where the Protege won because it had the best handling , and most fun to drive, despite them saying it is a fair passenger hauler that has a hard ride for passengers, and is noisy inside ("We may say that we have your best transportation interests is mind, but when its time to vote, the winner is always the one that's most fun for us to drive"). C&D doesn't always look out for what is most important for buyers in a certain segment, and IMO is the least connected auto mag. when it comes to knowing what buyers find important.
speedracer: The new Accord does not even use the same transmission as the Accord V6 that was affected by the transmission problems. The new Accords use a 5-speed automatic while 98-02 Accords used a 4-speed automatic. So I guess logic dictates that the problem has been solved for the 2003 model year.
Regardless, there have been very few posts of transmission failures since Honda tracked the problem down to a supplier and began replacing the affected transmissions. Out of 1 million cars they say that maybe 2.0% will be affected, that's 20,000 cars, if even 1% of those people post here then you would have 200 complaints on Edmunds.
As for the transmission being the same, I believe it is a mostly different unit but I could be wrong.
A problem that a manufacturer acknowledges, extends the warranty, and repairs/replaces is much different than a cheap design that Nissan's marketing tries to tout as a superior design (rear beam) or the buyers ignore (torque steer--which as someone said above has been reduced by many other manufactures).
The tranny issue stems from a sub-standard part supplied to Honda that degrades quickly resulting in sub-par performance and sometimes failure. As you've heard, I believe this supplier accounted for a certain percentage of the parts (the 1.6% number?). Apparently, Honda now knows who the supplier is and either they have corrected their problem, or Honda no longer uses that supplier. Considering the part and supplier have never been officially named, I would imagine the problem was corrected and continued business was arranged (Honda most likely dictating new terms). Releasing the supplier's name would damage their business, lead to countersuits against Honda, and remove a potentially indebted source from Honda's pool.
In related news, Nissan has much of a head start on the fun-to-drive category as they have a V6 with MT sedan. It's nice that Honda is offering a V6 MT in the Coupe (which I bought), but you're right, the Max will win on fun-to-drive almost on that alone. Hopefully, Honda will recognize the demand, albeit small, for V6 MTs in their sedans.
First, torque steer is nearly inevitable in a front wheel drive car with a very powerful engine. Car manufacturers can try to control the amount of torque steer by tunning but after a certain point the laws of physics just take over. I think the biggest dissapointment for Maxima enthusiasts is that the 6th generation model will have a boost in power but will still be FWD. Nissan is supposedly working on a AWD version of the Maxima but no word if it will ever make it to production. Ofcouse, all RWD vehicles that Nissan makes are going to be marketed through the Infinti badge. It is a shame that Acura does not follow suit. BTW...the demand for 6 cylinder sport sedans with MT is greater than you think. I read somewhere that BMW sells more 3 series with MT than automatics.
Using equal length half shafts seems to help. I believe Honda and Audi use unequal length halfshafts, but with different torsional rigidity so that the overall twist of the shafts are equal. The next problem is ensuring that both wheels have equal power applied, which often depends on traction. There are also a number of other techniques to help eliminate torque steer... I've heard proper placement of steering centerline, tweaks to power steering, etc (I've heard non-power steering is hardly affected?)
The point is that Nissan doesn't seem to be implementing as many techniques as other manufacturers. If you read Nissan forums, there's often quite a fuss about it. Just as in the Honda forums there's quite a fuss about transmissions, or rattles.
I believe in the US, something like 15% of cars sold are MT versus 50% in Europe. Considering BMW is the most popular brand in many parts of Europe, I think that would affect the ratio for their sales. Personally, I hope the demand in the US grows, despite the previous trends that suggest MT overall is on the decline due to vastly improved AT (5 and 6 speed ATs, CVT, sportshift, etc... for example the AT CRV gets better MPG than the MT) and increases in time spent in heavy traffic. Hopefully, the recent popularity of economy super cars (Turbo Neons, sport hatchbacks, etc) and the better MPG in most cases will bring about a small upswing in MT sales.
In any case, if Honda put a MT in the V6 sedan and Nissan fixes their across-the-line torque steer problems, we'd all be better off due to improved competition.
I think we'll see an RL with rear-biased AWD within a few years. If so, I'm positive that at least front-biased AWD will make appearances in the TL and the Accord (obviously only the V6).
The reality is that Honda doesn't want to spend the money to develop an engine that they won't sell in Japan, will have limited application in the US, would have different balancing issues than a 4/6 cylinder and other problems, and will damage their reputation as selling clean burning, efficient engines. I have no doubt Honda would do it right, but the press is not so rational and the public is finicky--that's what they're afraid of.
I think the RWD and AWD will come though... that's what the mass market is demanding... much more than V8s to replace 240-260 hp V6s.
Bad trannies can happen to any manufacturer. The smart consumer usually knows better to stay away from a manufacturer that is having "known" problems until the manufacturer gets them fixed. Ofcourse this relates to trannies or anything else. I for one was set on getting an Audi A4 for my next car until I found out the huge problem Audi/VW is having with their ignition coils (they are recalling over 500,000) cars. Call me cautious, but I would feel more comfortable when all these tranny troubles blow over for Honda before I start looking at the brand again.
BTW, I too was seriously considering the A4 until I sat in one. That car is tiny! The back seat is barely big enough for 2 people. And the way the centre consoles intrudes into the back really impedes movement in the back seat from one side to the other. I have trouble visualizing a family of 4 being comfortable on an extended trip in the car.
What would interest me as a consumer is the philosophy of the carmaker when it does learn of its product's defects.
Typically car companies are in denial, then act only when complaints reach critical mass.
By then, they'll say something like "defect rate is only 1.6%, the industry average is 2.5%."
This mentality has the effect of institutionalizing mediocrity in the way we do things; sooner or later everyone - consumer and vendor alike - is thankful that "it's only 1.6%."
I believe as consumers we should not accept quality compromises. The quest for "zero defect" is something that should be sustained.
I have a question:
Why does everyone marvel so much about the HP for Accord: 240 HP, 212 lb/ft Torque.
Do you people realize that when we talk about performance there are two different ways to measure it?
First is stand still launch 0-60, and then the top speed, which is BTW limited for both cars. The torque my friends is the main important part that makes your car move from standstill, not your HP rating, HP is good to know when you need to find out how fast your car can go, provided all other factors are the same.
In addition, Achieving those levels (hp, torque, emissions) with a displacement of 3.0 in comparison to the altima which has a displacement of 3.5 and achieves 5 more horsepower, runs on premium and gets worse gas mileage. Thats a technological feat to say the least.
However, did you notice that the same 3.5 VQ engine makes 290 HP and 280 lb/ft for the 350Z,
marketing is the only answer for that.
3.5 VQ engine is by far more superior then the
3.0 VTEC from Honda, no argument there.
As far as the Mazda RX-8 is concerned, did you happen to notice that it is a rear wheel drive car, with 50/50 weight distribution, wider performance tires, and most important - a lot lighter? No?, Oh well, lets stick to the Honda and Nissan discussion, no need to bring other "super" cars into it - this would be the same as saying that my Nissan 350-Z will blow the doors of your accord, but you already know that, don't you.
I did not make an uneducated guess about the performance and the torque role in it, I happen to be a mechanical engineer and I can tell you, that when it comes to engines - the most important rating after HP, is your breakaway torque - which plays enormous role in the straight line startups.
Mazda will be faster due to high rev range of 9000 r.p.m, just like Honda s2000, which is by the way beaten by 350-Z.
P.S
I like accords, I have driven couple of them and some camries, still
Maxima is my choice, maybe when I'll get married and stop giving s..t
of what I drive - I'll get the accord, for my wife, like most people on this forum do.
I get so much attention - awesome.
It's fast, but I had to put it in the garage and drive Pathfinder all this time - too much snow, plus I hate to get the salt on that beautiful black skin of my 350. Can't wait for summer time
so I can take it on a highway and open it up..
So the 2002 Accord EX was a mistake to YOU .. doesn't mean it's the wrong choice for everyone. Especially with gas prices going up the roof. I'd rather have money in my pocket than be able to boast a 1 or 2 second advantage to 60.
The fact that the '03 Max can be compared to the latest and greatest Accord says a lot about the outdated blah blah Max to me. I personally wouldn't drive an 03 Accord if it was given to me because of the way it looks (Don't go saying I said *everyone* thinks it looks bad! Save your breath) I think the outdated Max looks better. The 04 Max looks better too although its supposed to be in a different league than both.