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
In my experience and I am sure others as well, this is quite an unusual situation. Unless she completely beat the bag out of it, such a problematic Yota is certainly not the norm. :sick:
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The two or three mpg may or may not be really 2-3 different in average driving. Some cars seem to easily reach the EPA rating for some drivers while others don't get that at all or even close. I'd have to get a feel for that subjective rating of how people who own the car feel they're doing in getting mileage compared to the EPA ratings and let that be a deal maker if it's really 2-3 higher.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
If I were choosing between two cars that I liked equally, but one got better fuel economy, THEN I would go for the one with the better economy. But I wouldn't make my choice based solely on economy. A co-worker of mine once said that life's too short to drive something you hate. And he has the negative equity to prove it! :surprise:
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
There is a link there titled "MPG estimates from users" anyone can set up an account and report their mileage for their car.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I don't think the EPA test is biased towards Japanese cars. You usually have to drive like an old grandma and catch all green lights (and avoid any traffic) in order to get the EPA ratings.
If anything, I've found that Hondas seem to get very close or even better than the EPA ratings at times, whereas the Dodge I had suffered from the upper end of that 20% BS margin of error from the EPA.
All things being equal in the grand scheme of things, I think the EPA is still a good indicator of relative differences in gas mileage between vehicles, even if the TOTAL gas mileage is inaccurate.
Also, when I lead footed that '95 Dodge, it seemed to suck gas faster than a 69 GTO! If I drove it like a grandma, it would do much better.
The test is allegedly supposed to be based upon driving conditions that were typical in Los Angeles during the seventies. FWIW, I've always found the EPA ratings to be somewhat accurate for my cars, so perhaps there's something to that ...
I bet traffic wasn't half as bad way back then compared to now in LA.
My mom has a saturn sl2, and she reports getting near 40 on the highway. However, i only got about 32 with my sl2 on the highway, about the same as i get with my bmw. I think there's some interface of motor/driving style that optimizes driving style.
My mom needs to replace her saturn in 2-3 years, and wagons are to be considered. I like the passat 2.0T wagon quite a bit. On GM's website, they don't even list "wagon" as a bodystlye.
I pretty much decided i can only go forward on fuel economy, unless i'm getting large and needed upgrades in other areas.
Also thanks for the summary of your experience with your Accord.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I first reacted to some of the minor issues my car had as (this is what happens when you let Americans build and assemble them) as my VIN starts with a 1 instead of a J :sick:
I actually will give my fellow American workers the benefit of the doubt, and attribute some of the minor issues I had to "first model year redesign issues."
Again, overall, I'd say my 2003 Accord has had HIGH average reliability. Not perfect, not great, but very good, and certainly light years better than my previous car. As far as driving experience, I've loved it, and the only reason I'm looking to sell is because I've found out I'm one of those people that just wants something new every 3 to 4 years.
By the way, there was a 2 year "interim" between my 95 Neon and the 2003 Accord, so I was driving a 95 Camry that went back to my parents. That thing is still running strong and went past 120K miles recently (parents don't drive it much, as they also have 2001 Camry). I believe the only repairs they've had to pay for are new motor mounts, and new exhaust seals. I don't think they had to do any warranty work, at all, ever. Also, that Camry has never had to be towed (almost crashed it once due to skinny 195/70R14 tires).
Rocky - face it, there's a reason. On the whole, the Toyotas are damn near flawless, and for a longer time.
But take heart, many GM models and Ford models are also getting flawless, and for longer times. So, if the Yotas are better, they're not that much better anymore, and nobody is making crap anymore. Daewoo is now banned from the country. :P
They are ? I thout the Aveo was a Daewoo with a Chevy emblem. :P Well actually it's a VCR on wheels. :lemon:
I agree with everything else you said though.
Rocky
Rocky
Seems to me that a reliability survey would want to make sure that it had weeded out any failure that could have been prevented by the maintenance schedule outlined in the owner's manual by the manufacturer. I don't think you can hold a failure against a manufacturer when it could have been prevented if the owner had done the required maintenance.
I know the response some of you will have to this is - well, there are probably not enough people that neglected the maintenace to significantly skew the data. That may be the case, but it may not. For instance, if adherence to maintenance was also surveyed, we might find that a certain make/model that is reported as "below average", may also attract a higher than average percentage of buyers that do not adhere to the maintenance schedule.
The other thing we might find is this: As tight as some of those CR brackets are in terms of percentage that Andre1969 attached to his earlier post several pages back, a vehicle may be able to move up with only a handfull of surveys eliminated because of failure to comply with maintenance - especially if it was only a tenth or two tenths below making it into the higher bracket.
Again, I do not claim to have ever seen one of these surveys, I am just going on what Socala4 told me in his reply. I am also not claiming that these surveys are skewed because of lack of maintenance by owners, I am just saying it would be interesting if they would survey that so we would know for sure. As I also stated earlier, it would also be interesting to see if certian makes/models do in fact attract a higher percentage of buyers that do not perform regular maintenance.
Since trucks usually don't depreciate as quickly as cars, he might not have gotten burned too bad on that deal, although I know his monthly payment would've gone up. And assuming both vehicles achieved their EPA estimate, if gas is $3.00 per gallon I figure just on his commute, he's saving about $80 per month.
That wouldn't be my answer. There are a lot of reasons not to attempt this, but it largely comes down to this:
-The process of surveying is a compromise: Ask too few questions, and you don't learn much from your respondent, but ask too many, and the feedback may become less useful because the respondent loses interest or completes it more hastily, which will likely lower the response rate and yield answers that are more inaccurate. You have to make choices, and IMO, the CR survey is already long enough as it is.
-With that information, the surveyer wouldn't be able to do much with that data, even if they do have it, i.e. how do you adjust a survey result if you have this information? If the survey respondent indicates that he didn't follow the schedule, would you hold the owner responsible if the alternator stops working? This converts the survey into a finger pointing exercise, rather than a tabulation of flaws.
-Overall, if you use the survey as a relative ranking as is intended, it shouldn't matter. If you survey a sufficient pool of respondents for each car, you can fairly presume that the level of maintenance follows a normal distribution, i.e. some will adhere to it religiously, others will do nothing, while others will fall into the normal middle. The Corolla owner pool and Cobalt owner pool will probably behave fairly similarly, so in terms of this survey, it shouldn't matter.
Here's the survey. The red-and-black circle chart that you read in the magazine is derived from Question 13. Do notice that the problems reported are supposed to be "serious" and that numerous problem areas have been listed to help the respondent know what areas count toward being serious. The questions are neutral, nothing here that would indicate bias within the questionnaire.
Page 1
Page 2
SO, what I see here is definitely not the open-ended question I was led to think it was by their FAQ. Its simply a row of checkboxes. "have you had engine troubles? check or no check" etc, etc.
Of course, there is still that variable of what one person considers serious compared to the next. But looking at this now, I admit its not as much of a problem as I thought it might be. There is still plenty of room for needless bashing, but its not the free-for-all the question makes it out to be since the checkboxes reign it in a bit.
One question: what do they use those satisfaction scales for?
'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
They have some other results they report outside of the reliability charts. For example, they report seperately the percentage of respondents who say they would buy the car again.
Not sure about this, but I would assume that they are also looking for patterns that could help them to do follow-up research, i.e. if disproportionately large numbers of respondents feel strongly about particular aspects of the car, they might report this in the narrative summary that accompanies the reliability tables.
Hondas also have lower SAE horsepower than they claim. So I guess it is break even.
I want to give my hard earned money to a german automaker, as I've already paid Honda 25K out the door for that 03 Accord.
It's retroactive punishment to the Big 3 for me to spend all of my hard earned money on all of the others.
I love it when people who have no answers or rebuttals attempt to be dimissive of those who ask questions about some of the "facts" that are so quickly toutes by the media and the general import loving public. It all goes back to the mentality that those who love imports are somehow more intelligent and sophisticated than those who don't have an Accord parked out front.
I thought the idea was that people buy to suit their needs regardless of national origin.
The logic behind this statement is no different from some who says you should buy domestic for patriotic reasons.
At least the latter have the argument they are keeping the deficit in better check, such help as that may be.
"Okay, so the mileage is close... but not similar. Okay, so maybe the reliability gap is "close" but not similar. Fit and finish might be close, but not similar. When you add this all together, and the Honda keeps coming out on top in each and every category (even if you give the Lacrosse the benefit of the doubt) why would you not side with the import, it's clearly better in each and every way."
That is your opinion, not a fact. There is a difference between the two. The only area the Accord is clearly superior to the models I named is in mileage. There is no discernable difference between the fit/finish of a modern GM car and an Accord. Again, it would help if you got caught up on some the models that have come out in the last three years or so. The 2002 Cavalier isn't representative of modern American cars. It was a refreshed version of a 20 year old vehicle. In 2003 I have no doubt you lovely Accord was better than the cavalier and most other dated GM vehicles on the market at that time. Since the Accord was brand new that year I would hope it would offer more refinement and better build quality than stale GM products. Compare it to a Lacrosse, G6, Impala, Aura (when it comes out) or even Cobalt and I'm sure you will see (OK, probably not) that the difference is minimal, if there is a difference at all. Trust me, I look at these things when I walked past parked cars. I have noticed for example that the gaps around the trunk on the new camry are quite sizable and larger than any current GM car I've seen. I haven't heard that mentioned in any reviews thus far, but I have seen it on numerous '07 camrys and I assume it's standard across the board.
Now that I think about it, I would like for you to name one single category where the Accord is the leader. It doesnt lead in sales, hp, transmission technology, fuel economy, power, space, standard safety features, luggage capacity, features, styling or anything else I can think of. Maybe steering response, but that's about it.
Your assertion about maintenance costs make no sense. In general GM products require less maintenance than imports and typically maintenance and service is cheaper. My brother currently pays nearly $40 to get his oil changed by Mazda while I typically pay $25-$27. Gm products dont have timing belts, they were amont the first to establish 100K tune ups, the first to have 100K spark plugs, the first to offer oil monitors to reduce oil changes, etc. Where are you getting this higher maintenance cost idea from?
I don't have a problem with the Accord other than the fact that it's pretty dull looking. Its a fast car with a nice interior. I don't however find it to be heads and shoulders above it's competition. I wouldn't get one because it's ubiquitous, it's styling is lacking, it offers little torque compared to most of it's competitors, it doesn't offer 18" wheels, it's backseats is one of the tightest in it's class, no name brand uplevel stereo, no remote start and I hate the way Honda doesnt let you pick and choose the options you want. Other than that it is a perfect car. In fact, the 2006 model is the only accord I would consider because it FINALLY got 17" wheels, foglights, a better rear end (the old one was terrible) and stability control. People like you will deride GM for making 4 speed autos (which is fine) but the Accord just got stability in 2005, five years after GM offered it on a midsize car. It got 17" wheels 4 years after the Altima and two years after the Grand Prix and Impala.
Like I said before, to each his own. Just dont act like people who choose Honda or Toyota are superior to those who do not. I yet to understand why people who feverishly defend ToyoHonda are not fanatics, but anyone who doesn't care for their products is some out of touch, union lovin, flag waving idiot who just can't see the light. I'm glad that imports are built in the US now so some people down south can have jobs, but that doesnt mean I want to run to my local Toyota dealership. To some degree I don't care where they are made its the styling, overall blandness and the people that swear by them that really irks me. Besides, I do like some imports such as the old 330i, Audis, SL500 and the new '07 G35.
The RX8 and Miata duly excepted, I cannot think of any Japanese car I really like.
I few, such as the Honda S2000 and Lexus IS are true driver's cars and deserve a lot of praise. They sure do not do anything for me though.
On the other hand, I really like Mercedes' new look. The aluminum Jaguars are reall something. BMWs will always be gems. And even VW has quite a little charmer in the GTI. Has me saying, "where have you been the last few years, sweetheart?" everytime it drives by.
I want my dollars to say to them loud and clear "This is what you get when you sell a young man who will later become a college graduate a lemon"
I am young, and earning good money after graduating from college. How many cars will I buy in my lifetime? who knows, but by screwing me when I just started college, they assured that their competition (German and Japanese automakers) would get all of my business for the grand majority of my lifetime (and my biggest earning years).
Lessons the Big 3 should learn from my example:
Selling a lemon causes a lost customer.
Selling an inexpensive small car (which turns out to be a lemon) to someone in their teens or early 20's may cause you to lose a customer who's going to make a lot of money and buy a lot of good cars in their lifetime.
I would simply like other companies to benefit far more than Dodge did by selling me a single lemon. In the long run, Dodge will not get the last laugh. They may have made a ton of profit selling me a lemon, but they won't make a dollar more from me ever again.
Big 3's short term gains in selling lemons will be more than offset my long term lost sales!
Audi and Honda, take my money!
With Dodge being half German, why buy an Audi? Or will you buy it and cut it in half?
You bought three cars, one from GM, Ford and Chrysler just out of college? And they were all lemons? Wow.
Somehow, I think the argument is a lemon. But that is just me.
Back in the mid 90's Dodge was owned by Chrysler and no German companies had joined forces yet to be dragged down down down to American like reliability levels (poor Mercedes now, they do about as good in CR as Dodge). Seems like the incompetence wore off the wrong direction.
I believe someone that got burned decades ago has every right to still hold a grudge against that company. It's all in the degree of the burn. A japanese lemon might burn you to the 1st degree (1st degree burns aren't so bad, they heal faster). That Dodge lemon burned me to the 3rd degree, 3rd degree burns over 95% of my body, I can't believe I lived
I can totally understand someone holding a grudge against a company for 40, 50, even 60 years if they had a car perform as badly (and as costly) per mile as I did.
If you were burned mildly, and just had a car that was unreliable (but still within reason), then I could see forgiving and forgetting maybe 5, 10 years later. After all, those wounds heal and go away.
3rd degree burns leave scars that never go away.
Like I said, the EPA is genrally accurate across the board, you might get 10% less than the EPA states, but then again, you might get 20% less in that American vehicle than the EPA states. You will generally get better overall mileage (with all other things being equal) according to how the EPA rates gas mileage.
So while there's a chance you won't get 21/30 in a V6 Accord, there's an equal chance you won't get 18/28 in that American V6. I think you will generally get 2 to 3 MPG more from any car rated 2 to 3 MPG more on the EPA ratings. It's all relative.
I agree, the 03-05 accord sedans didn't have the best styling and back ends. Thats why I got the 2 door Coupe!
I think my 2 door was a much better buy than the 4 door, at least for my purposes. I also think it had better looks and styling in my opinion.
You can always get a better aftermarket stereo with a brand than anything dealers are putting into cars. BOSE is used by a lot of car manufactures, and frankly, Bose sucks. As I have done, just buy an amp, new head unit, and speakers for your Accord, for much less than that "sound package" option probably cost you from the factory.
You are right, after 3 years, the Accord is not a LEADER in many categories anymore. But it took the competition 3 or 4 years to catch up to the 2003 redesign of the Accord. Thats a long time to be uncompetitive. Now that the Accord design is 3 years old, the competition has caught up, but not surpassed (except Toyota with 2007 Camry).
Heck, it even took BMW 3 years to offer a 330i with more horses than my 03 Accord V6!
But I don't want more horses if you can't get me more MPG too. Toyota should be proud of their new engines, they improved in both categories. I want tremendous horsepower with tremendous gas mileage.
By the way, the V6 Accord has plenty of torque, you just have to know how to drive it, and its rated at 212 lb/ft at around 5,000 RPM. Thats still pretty darn good for 30 MPG on the highway.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Other than the obvious, the others either weren't here yet or had miserable records and qualtiy in the salt belt.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Thanks,
Chintan Talati
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
By all reasoned accounts, the drop in MB quality had everything to do with issues that arose solely in Germany, and nothing to do with the merger.
MB and Chrysler/Dodge are making a major comeback, primarily because the new company has stopped wasting time and money being 2 companies and is now becoming a global operation.
I can totally understand someone holding a grudge against a company for 40, 50, even 60 years if they had a car perform as badly (and as costly) per mile as I did.
If you were burned mildly, and just had a car that was unreliable (but still within reason), then I could see forgiving and forgetting maybe 5, 10 years later. After all, those wounds heal and go away.
3rd degree burns leave scars that never go away.
None of which provides even a smattering of rational explantion for including Ford and GM in your vendetta.
All rational sources show significant differences among brands with common national backgrounds in both approach to quality and quality results.
You are right, after 3 years, the Accord is not a LEADER in many categories anymore. But it took the competition 3 or 4 years to catch up. By the way, the V6 Accord has plenty of torque, you just have to know how to drive it, and its rated at 212 lb/ft at around 5,000 RPM
And now that the competition has surpassed Honda, it seems to be taking them a while to come out with a new model that will be better than the competition. Hmmmmm.
And by the way buddy, I GUARUNTEE you that you're not getting 30mpg out of a v6 unless you drive it like a granny, which means shifting at 1800 rpm. Shift at 5000, where the power is at, and youre getting in the 20's, low 20's, maybe.
I looked at a Mazda 6 V6 stick and it was knocking on 30k. Thats getting very close to G35 territory. The Ford Fusion stick only comes with the 4, and it stickers more than an Accord LX. GM doesn't have a midsize with a manual transmission (which is fine, I'm sure most people don't like to drive and want an auto anyway, and I would rather they concentrate on pleasing the masses than chaising after nitch markets like mine). I thought I was going to get a Jetta 1.8t, but now the new Jetta came out and I don't care for the styling. Maybe I will go used again, it has worked well for me so far.
I'm glad GM has people like Rocky cheering for them. They need some new, young fans.