We are aware of the login problems affecting the forums, and appreciate your patience as we work on a fix.
Did you recently purchase a new Tesla, Rivian or Lucid vehicle directly from the manufacturer and willing to share how your experience compared to previous vehicle purchases made through a traditional dealer? A reporter would like to speak with you; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 2/19 for details.
Acura TSX vs Honda Accord vs Volkswagen Passat
I am considering all three of these vehicles and trying to make a final decision. I appreciate any comments and suggestions.
0
Comments
I adjusted your title slightly - let's not limit the discussion itself to the Accord coupe and the Passat 2.0. Certainly we can work with you on those specific vehicles, but let's make the focus a little broader so it will benefit others as well.
And just for future reference - when you create a discussion, it's very important to categorize the vehicles you wish to discuss. That's what makes the discussion show up when people do searches with the Browse by Vehicle option on the left. I added them for you.
Anyway, thanks again! Good luck.
I have decided to buy the TSX, though my considerations were with other vehicles. However, I can tell you why I did not consider the other two mentioned in your title.
First, I don't want a coupe. Two-door cars are not for me: the doors are heavier and longer, leaving you more prone to bumping cars in the narrower spots in parking garages.
Secondly, I find the styling and amenities much more sophisticated in the TSX than the Accord, and I am a much bigger fan of the 205 hp I4 engine than the 6 in the Accord.
As far as the Passat is concerned, I'm bored with the styling frankly. It doesn't have that sporty stance that I enjoy with the TSX. Anyway, I hope my thoughts lend some light to your decision-making process. I think more than anything your decision will come down to what 'kind' of car you want... a family-type sedan, reliable tried & true sorta sport car, or an entry-level luxury sedan. I think value rides with the Accord and TSX (which is based on the European Accord).
Krzys
The Passat with similar equipment was more expensive than the TSX, at least in terms of real-world pricing. Styling wise I like the TSX better, and as far as reliability goes, VW's recent track record is poor.
The Accord is a good second alternative, but lacks the handling finesse of the TSX.
John
I don't think there's a "wrong" choice between the TSX and the Accord V6. Two outstanding automobiles in my book. Which one is "better" is just a matter of personal preference. However, if you "prefer" superior handling feel (and it's all about the feel, as the two cars put up remarkably similar subjective handling numbers), expect to pay a premium for it. Yes, there's an extra year of warranty and a few electronic gizmos thrown in, and the TSX is a more "exclusive" ride, but it comes at a pretty steep price, especially given you lose 40 hp and 50 torque.
If economy is a factor, both manual transmission cars get the same projected EPA mileage. I figure it's likely the TSX could be "babied" up beyond the 30 mpg highway figure a lot easier than the Accord's six, but Car and Driver got 24 out of each car in their recent five-way comparison test (February 2006 issue).
This is a good decision to be facing, because you can't be wrong whatever you decide. :shades:
Or was that the Rsx?
they're practically the same car, but I miss the RSX' with its nice head and taillights before they cut the cute little teardrops from the bottom of them.
RIP RSX.
I just assumed it was the same frame.
Maybe not Civic Si
but I saw a Civic, and I saw a TSX parked right next to eachother
and they were so nearly identical in width and length and windshield rake, etc etc, that I just assumed they had the same frame
Maybe not, Im just confused now.
Try getting some automotive clay and lubricant and try that.
Janl
Just some tips, Good Luck!!
back to the passat 2.0t though....in a manual (who would want anything else), it is extremely quick..handles great and is unique....combine that with great incentives you cuold get now and a passat configured like a tsx feature wise would prob be cheaper..not to mention roomier and better on gas
the v6 accord while reliable is just bland styling wise not to mention way way too common for me
You mentioned the Passat and Mercedes 230 as being desireable due to their German engineering . That's all well and good, but the reliability problems that VW and Mercedes owners have widely reported in the past several years must also be considered. Your VW may have been satisfactory so far. But the statistics speak very loudly and I choose to read them carefully and spend my money as wisely as I can. No German cars for me until they improve their quality and reliability.
You wrote "in a manual (who would want anything else)". Apparently, even though most of the vehicles that I've owned have been manuals, the statistics (There's that word again.) are clear. Only about 5% of US buyers want manual transmission automobiles.
Style is in the eyes of the beholder. But I find the looks of the Passat to be quite "bland".
I'm actually with ya on that one blane. The previous Passat looked like a more expensive car than it actually was. The current one is the other way around.
And, "German Engineering" is all I need to hear to know that I don't want that car. I need to spend time IN my car, not looking at it on a rack at the shop. I haven't driven, MB, but I have driven VW and Audi, and there was less responsive handling than I expected in both of these car brands (The Audi was an A4). I'm going into a field of work in which I'll likely not make a lot of money for starters, and I don't need to spend all my dough on repairs, something my friend with the VW has done ($2,200 by 40k miles).
People have bad experiences with all types of cars. I am just saying the difference in the ride between a camry and the passat I got were completely different. I went straight to the VW dealership afterwards.
We'll see how the reliability is for the new passat generation in a few years, but I will continue to enjoy my car.
That's the thing about cars, everyone has their own opinions. I'm attempting to share mine and the reasons for going VW
I am down to a decision between an Acura TXS with Nav and a Passat 2.0 Turbo with Nav as my new car.
On paper, by my own criteria the Acura wins hands down: better reliability ratings, a little cheaper, built-in bluetooth, just as luxurious, I even like the slightly smaller size. Also, the Acura will need less maintenance, with oil change every 10,000 miles (vs 5000) and no tune up for 100,000 miles, and thus total cost of ownership will be lower for Acura.
On the side of the Passat, I come up with only 3 tangible positives to list: Parking Assist (which I like), a smaller turning circle and a slightly more responsive engine from a dead stop.
So why am I even still considering a Passat? I don't know. Help me cure my madness someone, please. For some reason I do like the Passat, but I can't define it (and thus I am afraid it will go away once I buy). Maybe it is the rebel in me, I have never chosen a car that "didn't make sense" before.
Stop me before its too late! Or else defend the Passat. Please, folks, comments please?
Ron Stephens
Ron
The poster is looking for feedback, not necessarily "praise", for both cars, so your input is very helpful.
purchase a VW Eos (wanted a convertible) and went so far as to get pricing
quotes: The Eos isn't exactly a Passat, but I believe it shares some common
components: 2.0 turbo engine & transmission. The car was fun to drive and I
liked the engine and DSG transmission, but what killed the purchase was the
dismal VW reliability ratings and even worse dealer service rating for VW.
I switched gears and considered Volvo S40, Audi A4 & the TSX. I also think
the Audi A4 2.0 turbo engine is similar to VW's (same company). Very fun car
to drive, but from the Audi forums, it seems to spend a lot of time in the
service dept. Also more expensive when considering features. The TSX
simply seemed to be a bargain considering all it comes with.
As a final note, a good friend of mine owns a Passat with 150000+ miles on it -
mid 1990's, I think - and he told me that he had a lot of reliability issues with
his car over the years and felt I'd made a good choice with the Acura.
What you may like about the Passat is the European design that I liked a lot
about the style/interior of the Eos/Audi/Volvo. But I think the TSX is a
tremendous value and the style has grown on me and it is very nice to drive.
All said, I traded it in on a 2008 Passat Wagon (lease). I'm hoping the 2008 has all the bugs worked out. If I had wanted another sedan, however, I would have gone with the TL or the new Accord, which is a lot of car for the money).
If you are interested in keeping your car beyond the warranty timeframe, definitely go with the Acura. Resale value is also going to be better on the Acura/ Honda.
One other perk with Acura service: loaner cars! VW won't give you one unless the car is deemed mechanically dangerous to operate.
My final opinion... even though I love the way my Passat drives, it sounds like you should go with the Acura (although I'd really suggest you test drive the new accord V6... tons more power than the TSX, more space than the TL , AND takes regular unleaded vs. 91+.) Good luck!
Acura is a near luxury / luxury brand. VW is not.
Acura's competitors: Audi, Volvo, Lexus, Saab, Mercedes, BMW, Infiniti
VW's competitors: Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc.
Acura's level of service tends to be better - especially if they want to keep pace with said competitors.
While Acura may be a luxury brand, the TSX is an Accord at heart. The Passat feels more like a luxury brand in ride, handling, power than the TSX , but a navi-equipped Passat costs the same or more than the Acura, so the trade-off will always be Acura reliability and service vs. Passat's Germanic driving experience. All said, I think the Acura or Honda will be better for him since he wants to keep the car for the long haul. In my opinion the new Accord is more car for the $ than the TSX and is still reliable, just don't expect free loaners from Honda...
The Passat has a lot more back seat room.
The TSX has:
Rear Leg Room: 34.2 in.
And the Passat has:
Rear Leg Room: 37.7 in.
That is a huge difference. Between being able to let a full grown adult in the back seat. And only being able to put a bag in the back seat.
I wish the TSX would add 3 inches to the back seat.
Is the seat all the way forward? Or all the way back? To measure.
Acura has a great warranty. And great cars. I wish they would add some space in the back seat. Just a little
TL:
Rear Leg Room: 34.9 in.
TSX:
Rear Leg Room: 34.2 in.
I don't use my car for that. I drive with no one else in it 98%+ of the time. I need the back seat to be useable for that other 2%, but it's not as if I'm hauling them to the East Coast. It's for a few miles.
In an earlier life, I played a mid/senior manager type and needed to take "clients" to lunch from time to time. Then it's important to have a "worthy" vehicle with a proper back seat.
I don't do that any more.
34.2" -- 2008 Acura TSX
34.9" -- 2008 Acura TL
37.7" -- 2008 VW Passat VR6
37.0" -- 1995 VW Passat VR6 (You'll see why I've added this car in a moment)
By the looks of things the Acura TL only has seven tenths of an inch more rear leg room than the Acura TSX. By the same token, the new Passat looks like it beats the Passat from two generations ago by that same seven tenths of an inch. Right? Nope, wrong.
Why wrong? Because that measurement is taken with the front seat all of the way back, and as such, a car with greater front seat travel will (theoretically at least) will leave the remaining space in the rear when not used by the front seat occupants. Consider the following:
- FR ---- RR ---- Tot
42.4" -- 34.2" -- 76.6" -- 2008 Acura TSX
42.8" -- 34.9" -- 77.7" -- 2008 Acura TL
41.4" -- 37.7" -- 79.1" -- 2008 VW Passat VR6
45.1" -- 37.0" -- 82.1" -- 1995 VW Passat VR6
Interesting difference huh?. With the two Acuras, the TL ended up extending its legroom advantage from 0.7" to 1.1", not too shabby. On the VW front, we see a reversal of fortunes with the 1995 erasing the 0.7" lead that the 2008 had and blowing by it by another 3.0".
FWIW, I used to have one of those old Passats, and I've got to tell you, a freaking giant would have been able to find a comfortable seating position in that car, and since I'm only 5'8", when I positioned the front seat all of the way back to the stops, I wasn't able to reach the steering wheel, the stick shift, or any of the three pedals. Conversely, when I positioned the front seat so that I could drive comfortably, there was so much rear seat legroom that even my 6'6" business partner could sit back there and cross his legs comfortably.
Best Regards,
Shipo
In a VW or Honda, most don't always opt for a V6. Though the VW V6 has a huge premium, wouldn't always be practical. Why do you think a bigger car like the passat has a 4cyl engine, turbocharged, but excellent. Others could take pointers with this method. The 4cyl are tuned so well that its plenty powerful to get around with some fun. I love VW's approach, putting the most power within the speeds used most. I love it!
Most OTHER components have been electronic for 30 years.
Cars don't "grip the road" at lower torque.
I'm not sure you have a clue - or a point.
thanks..