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
At the same time, Toyota is looking for US sources to supply their US domestic plants.
The 2003 Maxima, IMO, laid waste to the 2003 Accord V6. I drove them nearly back to back, and it wasn't close in any single area. If I had to stretch, I'd say the body panel gap tolerances on the Accord were tighter. I'm not trying to start a flame war, but I'm genuinely interested where you feel the Accord is a better car.
What basis do you have for making this statement? Most American makes meet or exceed their Japanese/German/Korean competition in build quality.
I hear you - maybe if AMC and Rambler were still around, we'd have even more choices and better overall cars as a result.
Personally, I think one of the best looking American sedans in the last 20 years is the Oldsmobile Intrigue. They STILL catch my eye on the roads, and it irritates me when I think about what the '03/'04 restyle would have looked like. I used to have one, but then traded in for a Maxima. Good job, GM.
Likewise, I thought the Intrigue was a really good looking car. My only complaint about them applies to all W-bodies. Cramped back seat. Still, I thought it was a looker compared to the Century/Regal, Grand Prix, and Lumina and Impala.
I think my favorite recent Olds was the '95-99 Aurora. Especially in that light silvery blue they offered. Whenever I see one, I actually get a tinge of lust, which is something that GM cars haven't been able to inspire in me in a long time. I didn't like the 2nd-gen Aurora as much as the first, but think I still would've taken it over the Bonneville or LeSabre.
Heck, even the 90's Olds 88 wasn't a bad looking car, especially once they gave it that facelift which gave it a Pontiac-ish looking grille. 1995 or so? I saw one on the road the other day. It had seen better days, as it was bruised and beaten, but underneath that abuse I still saw a fairly attractive looking car.
Unfortunately, if the Intrigue had stayed around, I don't think an '03-04 restyle would have done it much good. I imagine it would have gone to that same nose-heavy look that the LaCrosse and '04+ Grand Prix have.
Stylewise, I actually prefer the '97-05 Regal to the LaCrosse and the '97-03 Grand Prix to the new one. Although the new models do appear much better finished, with better materials, tighter, more even gaps, etc.
I think one thing that Rambler was always good at doing was keeping the Big Three on their toes with regards to smaller cars. While the domestics always did have to dragged, kicking and screaming, into the compact and subcompact arena, I'm convinced that, had there been no Rambler and AMC, that things might have been even worse off! When Rambler sales started taking off in 1957, that convinced GM, Ford, and Chrysler to sit up and take note.
AMC also tended to be at the forefront with innovations such as dual master cylinders, unitized construction, coil spring seats, etc.
Yeah but people who buy German Cars buy them for the "prestige factor" they don't buy them for reliability.
I've had two german cars thus far, a '90 passat and a '97 BMW.
The passat was indeed very unreliable, no doubt about that. However, it also got good fuel economy, drove and handled well, and was extremely roomy inside considering the exterior volume, and was very comfortable. I was glad to be rid of it, though i missed it as well. Reliability isn't the only positive merit a car can have, and i think it's weird that some people seem to think this is so.
The BMW has the preceding benefits but has been extremely reliable. It also is a riot to drive. It loses a few points to the passat for utility, as i can't stick bikes in the trunk.
Prestige has nothing to do with the probability that i will get a german car again. If someone offered the same merits but more reliable, i would get it, and i would be even more happy if i could provide the biggest boost to the american economy by doing so. But i like cars and i'm going to buy what i feel is the best car for me. Maybe i'd buy 5% of a lesser car if it was a much bigger help to the american economy. But i don't think that even this is the case in our global economy.
My last american car was a saturn. While it was a decent car overall, it was ready to fall apart at 100K miles. Ok, in the big picture i can live with this, you could look at it as a disposable car that was cheap to run, but when it was time to retire it, i didn't feel like buying another one. It wasn't powerful, fun, extremely utilitarian, etc.
dave
I never said that the survey is biased and any suggestion that it is biased is stupid. I stated that CR presents the info in a way that makes it easy for the cars they prefer to look good and American cars to look bad, I am not peeved that CR rates all American cars poorly, I am peeved that people see CR as the Bible of automotive reliability but ignore other sources that report contradictory results.
The differences you are talking about in panel gaps would be too small to discern with the naked eye. GM simply doesnt make cars with loose exterior tolerances anymore and even cheap cars like the Cobalt have competitive build quality. If you really think the Imapla and G6 have worse build quality than the Accord than I know you aren't being objective. There are few, if any, discernable gaps on the exteriors of either of those cars. The bumpers sit flush with the bodywork and the gaps between doors are minimal. You aren't being realistic. The 90s are long gone and so are the days of 2cm gaps in GM's panels.
And I've pointed out how that's not terribly relevant. Just as you likely attended a school that assigned letter grades, rather than numeric scores on a 1-100 scale, so CR uses five categories.
If a domestic auto exhibits fewer problems in the survey, then the circle goes from black to red. Same standard that is applied to the others.
I stated that CR presents the info in a way that makes it easy for the cars they prefer to look good and American cars to look bad
And you still haven't proven this. A black circle is a black circle, it doesn't look any worse under one nameplate than it does under another.
If the domestics want better reliability results, then there is a simple solution -- make the cars more reliable.
AMC and Rambler were nowhere near as big as GM is, and as such did not have the same negative effects when they shut down.
Many people feel the 2003 Accord was never really head and shoulders above the 2002 Altima so I dont know if I would say the competition took 3 years to catch up. The Altima had 245hp in 2002MY which is more than the Accord has now. It also had 17" wheels, 6M tranny with V6 and HIDs from the start. The Grand Prix GTP came out for 2004 and had 260hp, stability control, tapshift, 17" wheels, HUD display (now found on the 5 series) and a fold flat front seat for long items. The 6 came out for 2004 and was generally thought to be the best handling family sedan on the market. It offered everything the Accord offered except Navigation, but it was cheaper and better looking and offered stick with V6.
"ou 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."
Sounds like a lot of opinion to me. After shelling out big bucks for a new car I dont want to go out and get a real sound system and head unit. There is no reason Honda shouldnt offer a name brand high end sound system in the Accord. I think they wont do it because they dont want to tread on Acura's toes. "BOSE sucks" means nothing to me and I'm pretty sure if they were that bad MB, Cadillac, Audi and Infiniti wouldn't use them. The newer systems in Cadillacs and Infinitis are getting very good ratings from Edmunds.
I stand by my original statement, the Accord isn't really a standout in any one area. It's really just above average in several areas which apparently is good enough to get a free pass from most of the media. If the Accord was American it would be dismissed so fast for it's bland styling that the press wouldn't even bother to evaluate its positive attributes. I don't think great steering is enough to catapult a car to the top of it's class when there are so many competent products out there, many of which can be had for less. If your main concern is resale value and 2mpg better economy than the Accord is definitely the car for you. Personally, I dont see how resale value can be one of the first things someone brings up when describing why they like their car. I don't buy a car just so it can be worth more when I get rid of it in 5 years.
As opposed to Rocky, I no longer really feel that Chrysler is Domestic - they're about as Domestic as an american made Honda is to me.
More info is good. I suspect the domestics would show very well if only the actual collected values for PPV were given--along with how many samples for each vehicle are being used! grin.... We'll never get that, because, well just never. grin.... head twitch.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
>I never said that the survey is biased and any suggestion that it is biased is stupid. I stated that CR presents the info in a way that makes it easy for the cars they prefer to look good and American cars to look bad, I am not peeved that CR rates all American cars poorly, I am peeved that people see CR as the Bible of automotive reliability but ignore other sources that report contradictory results.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Always an alleged conspiracy, but still no proof.
The scale is on a bell curve, which creates a ranking of reliability -- it never claimed to be an absolute scale.
The better that cars get, the higher the bar that constitutes "average" is raised. I suppose that if we compared the reliability of today's cars to that of Model T's, the new vehicles would all have red circles. But if I'm buying a MY2006, it helps me more to know how it compares to cars that are being sold right now.
This illustrates the entire problem with the Big 2.5 automakers: instead of aspiring to be the best, they try hard enough to improve just a little bit as compared to the low place from which they came. If you insist on crawling while everyone else is running, you may make progress from where you started, but you'll still be behind the pack.
Rocky
Thought by who?
Rocky
Then don't read C & D. I expect a mag like Car & Driver emphasize driving dynamics and powertrain performance over how many golf clubs fit in the trunk or whether the rear seat has enough room. That's why it's called Car & Driver, instead of Car and Rider. GM might actually win a comparo in the latter.
If you want a big truck and lots of rear seat room buy a Ford 500. And we all know how many comparos it has won....
The TL, in spite of being a very competent and smartly styled car, hasn't run circles around anything in any comparison I've ever read.
Is that a correct comparo yet ?
Rocky
Now a $30k MazdaSpeed 6 will more than hold it's own;)
DaRock :shades:
The Mazda6 seems to me to be about the same size as the Subaru Legacy and the defunct Saturn L-series. It's not a bad car, but what constitutes the mainstream family car has been upsized, so the 6 is left in a bit of a niche market.
What basis do you have for making this statement? Most American makes meet or exceed their Japanese/German/Korean competition in build quality
Actually it is more like American cars beat the Koreans, are on even ground with the Germans, and occasionally knock out a car that compares to the Japanese. Unfortunately the best car out of an American plant in recent memory is the 300, but I guess we agree that Chrysler has went to the dark side too. Americans can build some fine trucks, but aside from the 300, they couldn't put a quality car on the market if their life depended on it (and it does).
Actually Rock, we Agree, but I seriously doubt a Mazda 6 & Acura TL are crossed shopped due to the minimum $5k price difference.
Comparing a Mazda 6 to a TL is basically the same as comparing a Pontiac G6 to a TL.
Sure the TL is worth $32k all day long, but if you budget a max of $25k-27k for a new car, you are not going to get a TL.
The old "bias" argument...that doesn't explain how the Accord is also the top pick of reviewers from Consumer Reports, USA Today, and even Motor Trend.
That must be one heck of a giant media conspiracy. Or maybe it really is the best.
1487: The Accord may have the smallest trunk, the highest prices, the tightest back seat, the plainest styling and the least amount of features and yet it magically comes in 1st because of steering feel and a great VTEC engine. Two things most family sedan buyers could care less about.
Really? Considering that the Accord is the number-one passenger vehicle for RETAIL sales (and number two if fleet sales are considered), I'd say lots of buyers must carefully consider those attributes when buying a new car.
1487: The differences you are talking about in panel gaps would be too small to discern with the naked eye.
I saw them with my naked eyes, and I'm not Superman or the Six-Million-Dollar Man.
What I am talking about is what consumers and reviewers use to judge a new vehicle. This is what is meant by the term "build quality."
1487: GM simply doesnt make cars with loose exterior tolerances anymore and even cheap cars like the Cobalt have competitive build quality. If you really think the Imapla and G6 have worse build quality than the Accord than I know you aren't being objective.
I don't "think it"...I know it because I've seen it. Interestingly, so have other testers. Read the Edmunds.com review of the Cobalt in the recent comparison test.
Maybe GM planned it that way. Trash Pontiac by eliminating the Bonneville and the GTO, while supplying them with the Cheapuinox copy, the G6 and the gawd awful Minivan (Excitement???) only to boast the Saturn line with the superior Aura, Sky, Outlook and Prevue? Maybe Bob figured that Pontiac was a dying cause and to give Saturn a fresh start (15 years later...) since it hadn't been tarnished too much (rather deprived, but not tarnished)?
Only fly in that conclusion is the Solstice.
As far as the Impala goes, it is a much more solid vehicle over the outgoing model. Bland, generic, as run of the mill as a Taurus, but still much more solid. Decent update.
1) Price - big time difference
2) Fit and Finish
3) build quality
4) reliability/dependability
5) Interior material quality
6) Gas Mileage
GM does not even have money and will to put unique lights on two different models from two different brands? Talking cheap here... :sick:
2018 430i Gran Coupe
I ignore other sources that report contradictory results because I don't believe them, I believe CR tells the truth, no matter how hard it is to swallow.
I think CR is objetive, honest, and truthful, whereas no one has given me any good reasons to believe any other sources are as reliable about accurate reliability data.
Now is your chance, tell me why I should look at other sources of reliability, and why they should and can be trusted?
CR's trustworthiness is well known, and their methods and means of computing data are published and documented, well known facts.
Yes... CR seems to care about reliability, comfort, gas mileage, and safty/crash test worthiness more than other magazines out there! But that is understood, and afterall, when you are being practical, reliability and safety should be your two biggest concerns with an automobile.
Well, you're going to believe that no matter what happens, aren't you?
There are two possibilities, that there are in fact, good cars, or that there is a vast conspiracy for no discernible reason. Think about it, what reason would the automotive press have to promote inferior cars? They would stand to lose a lot promoting bad cars however.
"If you really think the Imapla and G6 have worse build quality than the Accord than I know you aren't being objective."
That is not true. A person could be right, they may have seen individual cases in which the g6 was built poorly, they could be mistaken, they could have different criteria for build quality than you do, etc. It is also possible that the side that thinks the g6 is as good could be mistaken. It happens.
I once had a terrible "test drive" of a firebird years ago, and i posted about it on edmunds. I was accused by several people of "lying". So it goes.
Speaking of prestige and paying for the name plate and brand recognition, that is exactly what BOSE is for sound systems, and that is why "prestige" nameplates use them. Audi, Infinity, MB, and Acura are all dumb if they still use BOSE. It's simply overpriced and not great quality.
That is why you avoided answering my point that I can buy a really good highly rated AUDIO brand name amplifier, a great head unit, great POLK speakers (highly rated again), which I think most people who have listened to a lot of different sound systems would agree that factory systems can't compete with aftermarket systems (although they are getting better now that they use quality speakers and include amps and subwoofers, which factories used to leave out). Also, that SOUND package in your Audi that costs you $1,500 is twice as much as I'd have to spend on a sound system that would probably be twice as good.
Will you agree the manufacturer's tend to overcharge for their "special" sound package system options?
the Mazda V6 is too weak for my tastes, where's the zoom zoom?
The exterior styling was not pretty IMO, but the current iteration of the Accord is certainly my least favorite of the generations either. BTW, I've owned 3 Accords and am a big proponent of Hondas. But Nissan builds a heck of an automobile IMO.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But I think Toyota and Honda have earned a reputation for building "run forever cars" that surpasses all the other manufacturers out there, even the other Japanese labels.
So the difference between an Accord and Maxima may be small in terms of reliability, but I think there is still a difference. Part of reliability in my opinion is resale value, because part of resale value depends on how well a car is able to hold up to aging, wear and tear.
So when ranking reliability/dependability, their appears to be at least 3 leagues:
1) Honda and Toyota (Including Lexus and Acura) 2) Other Japanese cars 3) The rest.
There are other reasons but I can't go into them here.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1) Price - big time difference
2) Fit and Finish
3) build quality
4) reliability/dependability
5) Interior material quality
6) Gas Mileage
1. Price was the same. Nissan pricing leaves more room to move than Honda pricing.
2. Exterior fit, ok. There is something "off" about Honda interiors I've never liked, though. It's hard to quantify.
3. Build quality is every bit as good - if not better. At least Nissan knows to mate a beefy transmission to their V6, a lesson Honda only learned recently.
4. Reliability - the 5th gen Maxima is among the most reliable cars you can buy. Certainly on par with the Accord.
5. Interior material quality - here is where I call BS. In that specific model year, Nissan used soft-touch plastics everywhere, even leatherette in a lot of places. I guess the best phrase I can use to describe my feelings on Honda interiors is "sterile chintziness".
6. Gas mileage. You want an appliance or a rocket, chief?
Hopefully, when the next Max arrives, Nissan can regain their mojo with the Maxima.
Not the Mazdaspeed 6 I test drove today. Very quick with AWD and 270hp. I made the mistake of driving a regular v6 Mazda 6 with a manual after driving the Mazdaspeed 6 and was less than impressed. Great driving dynamics, but overall the car seemed on the cheap side and the v6 was a downer. The Mazdaspeed 6's turbo 4 was fast from 2500rpm to 6000rpm and handled great.
I also test drove an Acura TL today as well. Wow, great car. Unfortunately, the dealer didn't have a manual trans equipped TL, but I was more than impressed with the auto regardless. The TL has now moved to the top of my shopping list. That said, I have many more cars to drive.
Side note, how was the box in the Mspeed6? Can you really feel the weight of the AWD system? Please if you can, post up some of your impressions. Would be very interested in your feedback. Thanks in advance.
Infiniti would be smart to add the stick to the options list for the AWD G35x
The throws were short with positive feel, was a bit notchy, it certainly felt like a cable linkage, but certainly not objectionable (to me anyway). I never missed a gear and I haven't driven a stick in probably a year. The clutch was light with predictable engagement. I was a little jerky on the 1-2 shift, but I would attribute that to my being rusty.
I couldn't feel the weight of the AWD system. Maybe more seat time or running around a autocross track or thru a slalom would show the weight issue. Note, I test drove the Mazdaspeed 6 after driving my Suburban to the dealer. It was hands down a lot more fun to drive than the 6S with 5 speed stick, with it's long throws and need to rev for power v6. I felt it handled great and the car felt solid. I drove the Mazda 6S after the Mazdaspeed 6 and it felt slow and unrefined. Steering and brakes were great and it was still fun to toss around, but I certainly couldn't buy it after driving the Mazdaspeed version.
The 2.3 FSI Turbo is a gem and seemed smoother and quicker revving than the 3.0 v6. Lots of power between 2500-6000rpm, power fell off fast past 6000rpm. I didn't fine any issues with lag, it didn't have much power under 2000 rpm, but beyond that, lag was minimal and thrust was very strong. Would love to see this engine in a Miata, I mean MX5.
Overall, I really liked the Mazdaspeed 6. I had a ball hot rodding around town in it and thru some good S curves. It held lines well and I liked the weight and feed back of the steering. Brakes felt good with a positive feel and good feed back. Note, that it wasn't a real long test drive, about 20 minutes, I was pressed for time.
The issue is pricing. The Mazdaspeed 6 I test drove was round $28k, not bad, but didn't have leather or a Sunroof. They had one loaded up for $32k. I just don't know if it's worth that kind of money to me. If someone wants an AWD car that is a blast do drive, it's probably tough to beat, but I would certainly test drive a Suby Legacy GT as well.
Infiniti would be smart to add the stick to the options list for the AWD G35x
I agree, but I think we'll have to buy a car in the next 2-3 months, which leaves out the upcoming Altima, Maxima, G35, etc.
I was very impressed with the TL I drove today after the Mazda's. While not the sportscar the Mazdaspeed was, it was by far a much nicer car and still quick even with the auto. I don't particularly like autos, but the TL was always quick to downshift and didn't seem to detract from the car. I wish I could find a 6speed, I just don't see them around much.
I was told by Acura that the manual/stick TSX's were on backorder.... Autos are easy to find.
I was overly impressed, so much so, that I quickly went to Honda to see if they were close with the leather EX V6 versions. They are a definite step down at Honda from Acura when it comes to interior quality. Honda has top notch interiors for their price, but Acura is luxurious, and the TSX is a good example of Acura quality.
I think the TL was my dream car for awhile, but it was just a little too expensive for me right now. I'm going with the Audi A3 2.0T which will give me better mileage, utility, and I can get it adequately equipped 30K out the door, all taxes and fees included.
One thing I did notice that I liked about the TSX over the TL: build quality and fit and finish. The TL is top notch, but made and assembled in the US. The TSX is made and assembled in Japan.
I think their was a viewable difference, for what it's worth, and that is my opinion.
from reports, the TL also seems to have a couple more reliability issues than the TSX.