By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I'm not crazy about the Accord's style, but I love the interior. Seems like it's still pretty nicely put together, and reasonably plush, by today's standards. I don't like the Camry's interior at all, though.
As for the Altima, I've seen a few of the '05 models, and they do seem to have improved interiors. Less Playskool/Fisher Price/GM looking plastic. Still probably a few notches below an Accord's interior, though.
The Accords still outsell the Mazda6's by a wide margin and will command much higher resale values down the road.
Still, for those who just don't like the Accords, the Mazda is a good alternative in my book.
True, but I think the latest Accord redesign is more polarizing than previous redesigns. My brother doesn't even like it, and he won't buy anything but Honda.
If Honda had both versions of the Accord (TSX version and Buick version) available in their showrooms with the same powertrains and same prices, it'd be interesting to see which one sold better. It'd be a no-brainer for me as far as which one I'd pick, but I'm not sure about the average person.
The Accord, Camry, and Altima grew out of that class, and Chevy pretty much left it when it ditched the Corsica for the Malibu. Ford left it when they cancelled the Contour. Maybe the Chrysler Sebring could still be considered borderline compact?
And with small cars getting bigger, as the Corolla, Civic, Neon, Focus, Mazda3, etc are all bigger than cars they've replaced (I guess they're still considered subcompacts, maybe some of them aren't anymore) it just seems like there isn't much room anymore for a size class between them and the midsizers.
Length: 183.3"
Wheelbase: 105.1"
Height: 57.3"
Width: 69.4"
Legroom F/R: 42.4"/34.2"
Shoulder Room F/R: 55.4"/53.5"
Headroom F/R: 37.8"/37.3"
Trunk volume: 13 cubic feet.
Accord...
Length: 189.5"
Wheelbase: 107.9"
Height: 57.1"
Width: 71.5"
Legroom F/R: 42.6"/36.8"
Shoulder Room F/R: 56.9/56.1"
Headroom F/R: 38.3"/36.8"
Trunk volume: 14 cubic feet.
The things that would kill the TSX as a mainstream car is the shoulder room, skimpy back seat legroom, and small trunk. Those are things that most sport sedan drivers don't care about, but in mainstream family cars, they take more precedence.
Length: 186.8"
Wheelbase: 105.3"
Height: 56.7"
Width: 70.1"
Legroom F/R: 42.3"/36.5"
Shoulder Room F/R: 56.1/54.9"
Headroom F/R: 38.7"/37.1"
Trunk volume: 15.2 cubic feet.
When I sat in one though, it just felt cramped to me. And I'd LOVE to know how, exactly, they measure legroom. A Mazda6 with 42.3" of legroom feels cramped to me, but a Chrysler 300 with 41.8" feels comfy? Odd...
Good point about cars getting bigger. I think the Civic is as big if not bigger than an old Accord. Civics are still considered compacts. Sub Compacts aren't big sellers here so they get bigger if they are to survive.
I just wish the TSX was not an Acura. I'd love it if we were given the choice between the TSX version and the Buick version. In some parts of the world, you have your choice between the two at the same Honda dealer. The Accord would be covering all bases that way, but I guess Honda knows best and figures it's in their best interest to do it the way they do it now.
Length: 175.4"
Wheelbase: 103.1"
Height: 56.7"
Width: 67.5"
Legroom F/R: 42.3"/36.5"
Shoulder Room F/R: 52.6/52.0"
Headroom F/R: 39.8"/37.2"
Trunk volume: 13 cubic feet.
Civic offers a combined (front + rear) legroom of 78.8 inch which is a little less than Accord’s (79.4”), more than TSX’s (76.6 inch) and as much as Mazda6 (78.8 inch).
It almost appears that Honda made it a point to keep Accord’s length under 190-inch, and compared to the Nissans (Altima and Maxima) and domestic offerings, that is several inches shorter. I hope it stays where it is, in terms of size.
I think there are several reasons the current Accord might look a lot bulkier than the previous model. First, the aforementioned high cowl/beltline and high decklid, with smallish windows, give it more visual mass. Also, overall length inclusde the bumpers, but the current model seems like it has smaller bumpers. That is, the nose and tail of the car stick out further. That also adds more visual bulk than, say, if the car had a 5 inch shorter body but then made it up in the bumpers, which would net you the same overall length.
In contrast, the Camry felt big enough for my tastes back in the '92-96 generation. Somehow they screwed up for '97 though, giving it some of the most uncomfortable seats my hiney has ever graced! And somehow it felt like it lost legroom as well. Maybe not however they might measure it, but how I feel it! And now the current Camry is even worse. The seat feels like it sits a little higher, but it's still uncomfortable. Feels about the same as a Gran Fury copcar (a feeling know only too well), minus the legroom.
I think the Altima is still my favorite in this class though. Feels like it has some of the best front legroom of any car I've been in, at least in recent memory. I love its looks, too. Only the cheapish interior hurts it, IMO. Now if they could get the Altima up to the Accord's reliability and refinement (or just find a way to clean up the Accord's looks a bit and give it a bigger trunk) I think they'd have a car that's darn near perfect!
The TSX (minus some of the luxury, though there is a Type R version) is sold as the Accord in Europe and Japan. It's the size that's defined as "midsized" in most of the world, and the Mazda6 is in the same size class. Strangely, the Japan/Europe Accord (TSX) looks more like the progeny of the previous American Accord than the new American Accord does.
And in Japan, the American-market Accord (with a few cosmetic differences) is sold as the Inspire.
Maybe they read forums like this one, where everyone complained that the Accord was too bland. But they were only bold on the front styling, and there's nothing special about the rest of the car. And since the front end is unconservative, it's not going to be universally accepted.
Can't speak for its other qualities though... not my market. And in compacts, Honda has been a bit disappointing. The current Civic is a great passenger car, but the value is disappearing and so is the fun. Just my luck... the generation that they bring back an Si hatchback, the steering and deftness disappoint...
It's the same story with the Subaru Legacy also. It's a "World Midsize" car as opposed to a specialty model for the US. The thing is, it's also very popular, as is the Mazda6. Seems like Americans are really starting to go for that sort of car, and Honda may be well-advised to bring the Euro Accord here and sell it alongside the US Accord. Maybe call it the "Accord Sport" or something like that. See how the sales stack up. THe Euro version IS more true to Honda's roots, after all.
Then you call the base RSX a Civic SI, and the RSX-S a Civic Type-R. That would make the TL the entry model for Acura, and the sky's the limit for them! Not to mention, it would give the Honda line back a sport coupe priced less than $30K.
They need to bump the line up if they are ever going to place Acura with the big boys of the premium world.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It is only logical to design a vehicle to fit the needs of the market. There is a reason Accord and Camry sell at a pace of 375-400K units/year each in an extremely competitive class.
I've read for years that Honda will slot in a subcompact to capture that bit of the market they lost when they moved the Civic up. With the success of Scion and some of the other small vehicles I bet they do it soon. And since that vehicle will most likely be made in Japan I would probably consider it (getting harder to find a Japanese built Honda).
I guess I'm in the minority. In addition to that generation of Accord (3G) my favorite is the 5G ('94-'97). I also had an '01 Accord. Liked the styling of that gen also. The current Accord didn't thrill me initially but it's growing on me.
Is that a misprint or am I to understand that Honda builds cars for Buick? I thought someplace else I read that the Saturn VUE uses a Honda V6. Hard to tell anymore who builds what.
FWIW, there's an old lady at work who had a '93 Regal. Recently bought a new car...a Camry. So it must be working. But I also still see plenty of younger people driving Accords and Camrys, so they haven't totally degenerated into an old people's car. I guess they're still kind of in the same category as what the likes of Buick and Olds were in the 70's...cars that still had a broad appeal. They just have to be careful though, not to alienate the younger buying base as Buick and Olds did.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If TSX were to be used as a baseline to draw a line between “Buick-y” orientation or not (in terms of size and ride quality), all family sedans will fall on the “wrong side”. I don’t see how anybody could compare ride quality of an Accord to a typical Buick. Camry yes, Accord NO. I see more people complaining about Accords riding “hard” than calling it cushy. But then, exaggeration is the way of discussing things anyway. Speaking of exaggeration, numbers should help (cars listed by length since they differ minimally in width and height)
Buick Regal
Length: 197"
Width: 73"
Height: 57"
Wheelbase: 109"
Nissan Maxima
Length: 194"
Width: 72"
Height: 58"
Wheelbase: 111"
Nissan Altima
Length: 192"
Width: 70"
Height: 58"
Wheelbase: 110"
Honda Accord
Length: 189"
Width: 71"
Height: 57"
Wheelbase: 108"
Toyota Camry
Length: 189"
Width: 71"
Height: 58"
Wheelbase: 107"
Mazda6
Length: 187"
Width: 70"
Height: 57"
Wheelbase: 105"
Acura TSX
Length: 183"
Width: 70"
Height: 58"
Wheelbase: 105"
So newcar31, Mazda6 is Buick-y in size, eh? It is almost as big as Accord and a “whopping” 4” longer than TSX.
Regarding tail lamps, however, if they are stretched across the width, it is Buick-y. If it is at the corners, it would be Cavalier-ish, right?
The rest of the Accord styling is nice, IMO. A mix of muscularity, and grace. 2003+ Accord is the best Accord, IMO.
I called it the Buick version because it's Buick-y compared to the TSX, not necessarily Buick-y in size. It's just a softer version of the the platform.
"I am really sorry that you do not like the rear end styling of the Accord. Especially since it is what you will see the most of considering that a lowly 4cylinder 5-speed Accord is faster than all but the 6s 5-speed."
Who cares? I don't like the way it looks and that's my opinion. Tenths of second aren't enough to make up for the styling for me. Car and Driver tested both of them at the same time.
IIRC, the Accord 4 cyl 0-60 was 7.5 seconds, the 6i was 7.9. Big deal.
Hey, maybe an Accord hatch or wagon's taillights would look better? If they made any...oh, wait, Honda only makes sedans. After all, no one wants wagons, right? Those guys in Legacy and Outback wagons aren't REALLY buying wagons, they just couldn't find a sedan and got confused, right? Right?
From the Philadelphia newspaper:
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/business/9257999.htm
Probably. But like one of the reviews quoted in favor of Accord along the lines...
"Mazda6 feels faster around a corner, but the Accord goes faster"
Now, I will try to dig up find out comparison if I can, but it is one statement I always remember when I see statements like you just made above.
For instance, my roommate's '98 Tracker feels like reckless driving at 45 mph, but my '79 NYer feels like it's about to stall out!
I don't know how the Mazda6 is geared, and the only new Accord I've ridden in is Grbeck's 4-cylinder automatic, but his is really quiet and low-revving at highway speeds. I think it's comfortable and smooth riding, too. In some ways I think it is kind of Buick-y, but in a good way. And if only some Buicks could be this Buick-y! My Dad's '03 Regal isn't as nicely, plushy trimmed, and the only reason the Regal rides so smoothly is that it rides on archaic 70-series tires!
It is softer because it has to be, to balance the ingredients that is necessary, but calling it Buick-y in that regard is an indicator of being too biased against it, or being misinformed.
Tenths of second aren't enough to make up for the styling for me. Car and Driver tested both of them at the same time.
Obviously, styling didn't end up being a determining factor in the Car and Driver test either. The following sums it all pretty well (from the same test that you mention)...
"If superiority in the mid-size family-sedan market is about sweeping excellence — and we think it is — then the Accord has come through once again. This is a vehicle that can reconcile conflicting requirements — seamlessly"
“What else can we say? If car design is a compromise, Honda has achieved a nearly perfect compromise with this Accord.”
And while C&D may have tested Mazda 6i to be only half second slower in 0-60 run, there is more to a car and its drive train than that. Here is an excerpt from the same test
“The Honda's i-VTEC four puts out the same power as the Mazda's engine, but it feels much more flexible at low revs, with immediate throttle response. It revs smoothly to the redline and then picks up the next gear without missing a beat.”
There we go. I couldn't disagree more, a good reason for me to have liked Accords over any other car in its class.
And obviously I was talking about me, not Car and Driver's comparison conclusion. I just needed their test numbers. Did you read what I wrote? Apparantly not. I'll repeat it for you:
Tenths of second aren't enough to make up for the styling for me.
With emphasis on ME.
The Accord may be a few tenths quicker, but it is light years uglier IMO. In MY OPINION. I've already said that I know the Accord has best in class powertrains. I'm not sure why you're trying to make that point as if it's something that I am debating.
BTW, thanks for regurgitating pieces of that article, but I have the magazine at home.
Well, if Accord's styling works for 30-35K people every month, the "me" aspect becomes pretty much useless.
To me the Accord Feels like it is a better car than the Camry. To the consumer the Camry seems to prove me wrong.
What a crock - if a certain group of people, or persons individually, have worse credit than another group of people, they're going to pay more interest.
Car loans are based on beacon scores and pre-agreed charts developed by the lender - if you have a 600 beacon and have 5 derogatory accounts, you'll pay a higher down payment (less risk for the lender), a higher interest rate (for taking the risk), and a shorter term (less risk for the lender)...
Ironically, Honda Finance is very picky and doesn't do "C" and "D" level paper (loans)....how can a lending company discriminate in that manner? They don't do "sub-prime" lending.
They set their standards, indicating that if you have a 700 beacon, you get great rates and terms, because you're not a credit risk, and if you have a 575 beacon, you get a high rate and short term, because you ARE a credit risk, easily read and understood in your credit bureau report(s) because you've failed to meet previous obligations that you promised to meet.
I don't car if you're purple with pink polka dots, or your name is Smith, Rodriguez, Washington, or Patel - your credit score sets all of the parameters for how you get a loan.
That "professor" needs to talk to someone with car business and auto loan experience, instead of jumping on the "I'm a victim" bandwagon.
Honda Finance indeed.....
soapbox mode - off
Then why did you chose to counter my obviously opinionated statement with comments from Car and Driver? Trying to prove my opinion "wrong"? I was only responding to anonymousposts stupid comment about seeing the Accord's tailights in a race. Yeah, because I line up against manual transmission 4 cyl Accords at stoplights all the time and challenge them to race. Matter of fact, that's why I bought a Mazda6 with the 4cyl, because speed is my main priority.
"Well, if Accord's styling works for 30-35K people every month, the "me" aspect becomes pretty much useless."
What 30-35K people chose to buy is pretty useless to me.
Here's a quote from the article ..
"American Honda Finance Corp. discriminated against African American and Latino car buyers from 1999 to 2003 by letting Honda dealers charge them higher car-loan costs than they charged comparable white buyers, according to a study by a Vanderbilt University business professor."
American Honda will "let" the dealers mark up the interest rate, as will every other finance company in the US. Why the emphasis on Honda? Mark Cohen must drive a Mazda 6.
"They say the rate increases are subjective and used disproportionately against blacks, Hispanics, people with limited education, and those with bad credit."
If someone's own inexperience causes them to pay more is it the finance company's fault? Is it even the dealerships fault? They are in it to make money. If someone in the socioeconomic groups above pays more for a TV at an electronics store does that mean they should be able to sue the store just because they didn't know better? An uneducated person is the US economy's best friend.
If anything, the people in the groups listed above should be insulted at the suggestion that they are uneducated and have bad credit.
I suggest that Mr. Cohen target the buy here/pay here lots, the check cashing shops, credit card companies, rent-to-own furniture shops, and title pawn places cause they all exist to make money off of poor, uneducated people regardless of race. And I am sure the penalty is much greater than the $400 over 6 years he is claiming the Honda dealerships made.
The "payday loan" shops were the ones that really got me laughing and worrying - you take someone who is already short on cash and can't handle a budget, loan them money based on their post-dated check, then charge them 30-40% interest!
Perhaps. But not to Honda (or any automaker for that matter).