Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Count me in the group of Accord owners who have great luck with exhaust systems. My 95 EX I4 manual (that my son now drives) with 220k miles still has the original system, including the muffler. I'm sure it will go any day now.
I remember Accords always being discounted here in CA since the late 1980s. So, I don't share your experience as to paying above MSRP.
And so far, the people who own the Sonata seem to like it. I'm just surprised that sales aren't higher. Is it still the left over discrimination against cars in the late 80s and early 90s that weren't that good?
The Fusion is by far a better value, costing thousands less.
A .5 second difference?? is a whole lot faster?? can you count to a 1/2 second???
This room is turning into a joke. Once again the Honda fans get to bash away at the Fusion/Sonata or anyone else that differs on their opinion. I have threads taken off that are not near as bad as are posted on here! :mad:
Sounds like sour grapes to me.
I don't interpret it as bashing anything non-Honda, more like crowing cause the Accord is that good, even being a 6 year old model. Why take a chance on a Ford (weak reputation) or a Hyundai (unproven to the masses) when you can just buy an Accord and rest easy?
It will be interesting to see what happens if Honda drops incentives on the 2008 Accords and dealers try to sell them at or near MSRP, especially if MSRP goes up. Then it will be back to a $5000-6000+ difference between the Sonata/Optima and the Accord, if Hyundai/Kia maintain current levels of incentives.
Rocky
In the case of the Sonata two reasons immediately come to mind; price and warranty. Then there's the 5 year roadside service and features of each car.
We just bought an '07 Sonata SE w/XM for $3357 LESS than Edmund's TMV. What is the street price of a comparable ACCORD?
We may be looking at a real price difference of $5,000 or more right now. If the comparable Honda is the LX V-6, Edmunds says the TMV is $24,282 and there is a $750 to dealer incentive. If 100% of the incentive is granted to the consumer, the TMV price would be $23,532.
If I compare our actual Sonata purchase price to the TMV for the Accord, I'm looking at a savings of $6481 for the Sonata. Are Accords selling below TMV? If so, by how much?
...thanks for not going the personal route :sick: .
The 08' Accord, I think will indeed be a nice car. I like the pics I see as it finally has character. I being a former Acura TL, owner (a mistake) did like the product very much but hated the service. I however do think a SH-AWD Acura TL, would be a hit. It will need enough power to overcome the AWD problem if they aren't going to make it a RWD car. I think it would be more popular as a SH-AWD car anyways but it's going to have to come in with plenty of power and have the "gadgetology" to once again become a class leader. We will see.....This fall the best mid-size automobile even though I's perfer the Holden grill is the RWD Pontiac G8. If they make a HSV version of this car like they do in Australia, their isn't another non-lux car out on the market that will touch it's handling and power. It's basically a street legal race car in HSV trim. I however won't expect to see a HSV for a year or two. Acura, right now has the best chance to meet the G8's power. They better not under estimate the G8's impact on their own sales. I still think Acura, would be best to Twin-Turbo their V6 to make the power. Like I said we will see as more and more sporty and luxury cars hit this segment. The new Mazda6 and Mazdaspeed 6 is coming. Of course we have the Spec. B Subie. The RWD Impala in 2009. How bout the 2010 Buick Velite Sedan ? I'm just saying it's going to be a crowded field as more and more offerings hit the midsize segment.
Rocky
Rocky
Not according to Edmunds and other sources. There was no dealer incentive when I bought my Accord in March of 06. They started soon after, however,
the same will hold true if buying a car at the end of the year. If for example, you want an altima and they're still selling 25-30% over last years numbers, good luck getting a rebate. If nissan can sell them without one, they aren't going to offer one. ditto for any other car. If you want a rebate on a good selling car, you'll have to wait till jan, or feb, of '08 when they will want all the 07 cars off the lot.
I don't interpret it as bashing anything non-Honda, more like crowing cause the Accord is that good, even being a 6 year old model. Why take a chance on a Ford (weak reputation) or a Hyundai (unproven to the masses) when you can just buy an Accord and rest easy?
Considering this post blatantly breaks the guidelines established in the first post:
Well, duh, it's about midsize sedans. But here is what it is not about:
# manufacturers issues
# manufacturer vs. manufacturer...
Then yes, Scape does have a valid point.
You can always get my email address from my profile at the top of any discussion I host, but it's not too hard: pat AT edmunds.com
Thanks - I appreciate the assist, always!!
Where did you get your information about incentives on Accords appearing 2 years ago?
I purchased my Accord in April 2006 and there were NO incentives at that time. To my knowledge, incentives on the Accord were only made available within the last 6 months or so.
The Fusion is by far a better value, costing thousands less.
A .5 second difference?? is a whole lot faster?? can you count to a 1/2 second???
This room is turning into a joke. Once again the Honda fans get to bash away at the Fusion/Sonata or anyone else that differs on their opinion. I have threads taken off that are not near as bad as are posted on here!
-
Scape, I'll further support my case by asking you to look more closely at the performance numbers. In the Car & Driver article I referenced "The Quickest Cars of 2007: Less than $20,000," they clock the Accord 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. In the same article, the Mazda3 s, being smaller/lighter than the Fusion but having the saving engine, beats the Accord to 60 by 0.2 seconds.
However, look at the "street start" 5-60 mph numbers. In my opinion, this is a good measure of an engines' usable torque and makes a big difference in throttle response around town or in traffic. The Mazda3 s, although faster than the Accord 0-60, is SLOWER than the Accord from 5-60 by 0.8 seconds! (Accord 7.9 versus Mazda3 8.7 5-60 mph).
The 5-60 time of the Accord is only 0.1 second off from the faster, more powerful, 6-speed manual Altima! I think that's noteworthy.
According to C&D, the Fusions "street start" time is 9.0 seconds, or over a second slower than the Accord. That is a difference you can really feel when driving both cars.
AGAIN, does that mean I am "bashing away" at the Fusion? No! Most people don't care too much how quick their car will respond to throttle inputs. I'm just here to talk and compare midsize sedans. Can we do that? You are right, the Fusion is a great value, of course the resale value is less so it roughly evens out.
The Fusion is by far a better value, costing thousands less.
The media has somehow determined what an Accord is worth??!! Give me a break and the American autobuyer a little credit! Economics 101- it is the buyers that determine the worth of anything not scape2 and certainly not captain2. In this case it is several hundred thousand of buyers that determine what the Camcord and the Fusion is worth both now and later. Economics 102 - 'value' can have little to do with initial price.
No, your not the only one who feels that way. I know a civic is not an accord, but i was so unimpressed with my civic i never even seriously considered the accord when i made my last purchase. I pretty much was picking between the camry and altima. And to be fair, the civic runs great (although I do have to fork out the $$$ for the timing belt change that I never have to with chained nissans) but the interior is just so cheap, and poorly constructed that I wasn't even going to take a chance with the accord. I still can't believe the mid level trim came with a tape player instead of cd. But the problems you described are spot on. the damn texture to the plastics, inaddition to the scratching problem) are a pain in the [non-permissible content removed] to keep clean. and the cloth on the door pannel fell off durring year two. just a cheap glue holding it on.
And as I said, I know the accord is of much higher quality than both the civic and competition in its class. The catch, though, is the price. Out of all the midsize sedans out there, the accord is always the most expensive......and usally several thousand more. Sure, they're rebating the hell out of 'em now, and sales are way up. But, I'd be willing to bet when the 08's show up, the price rises, and the rebates dissapear; you won't get one off the lot for less than 23-24k. For any who doubt, look at the civic. redisgned in 06, much better, nicer car, and much more expensive. At my local honda dealer, the base models are starting at about 18,300. as a result, its the most expensive compact in market, and sales (so far this year) are down about 15%
I believe, that in general, the Fusion is viewed pretty favorably, perhaps the 'best' Ford product out there, which is definitely a relative consideration. Again, IMPO, I might look at it seriously once they can improve their engines and stop supporting the Mexican economy. Until then, it'll likely be the new Altima 3.5/CVT or possibly the new (09?)Accord (if it is as 'developed' as I think it will be) in my driveway.
This 9.0 sec time from 5-60 for 4 cyl manual transmission Fusion lacks credibility, since CR got 9.5 sec for 0-60 in a 4 cyl automatic (march 2006). And they do their test by just stomping on the gas pedal.
To return this to the midsize sedan topic, what valid statistical conclusion have you come to based on comparing the Fusion to the Accord in the magazine you reference? (I have not seen the issue.)
And since we ARE talking about Accords here and not Civics, readers would want to know that the I4 Accords have timing chains, not belts. :shades:
I see Honda is now offering low interest rates? Why? if their cars are selling so well? :confuse:
For me, the Fusion was by far the better value, better car than a like optioned Camry or Accord. It handles like its on rails. As far as road noise it matches the Accord/Camry in Db levels. Granted, you romp on the gas and it does get a little noisier than an Accord or Camry.
I don't see how you can discount actual consumers who buy and own these vehicles. And, the Accord/Camry has 3x as many reviews as the Fusion!!
Different strokes...
To paraphrase something I've heard... "can you really count 1 tenth?"
Here are some numbers for 4 cylinder automatics...edmunds expected total maintenance and repair costs for 5 years/75,000 miles:
Fusion SE = $4229
Accord SE = $4098
Camry SE = $5233
Altima S = $3039
Looks to me like Camry is the one to worry about, not the Fusion. Why does it cost so much more to maintain a Camry? And so much less for the Altima?
Huh? I was citing times from C&D... Car and Driver. They are very accurate, and I doubt CR just "stomps on the gas."
Remember, "street start" or 5-60 times are almost always slower than 0-60 times for the exact same car. This is because they are conducted from a rolling start which uses 2nd gear. It is desinged to measure the torque or low end (low RPM) power an engine has, kind of like the 50-70 mph tests conducted in a vehicles top gear.
The 'comparison test' was a Ford advertisment as clearly specified. It was a paid advertisment, pure and simple. I wonder if you had felt its significance if the Accord had won it.
Exactly. That's why Accords sell more than Fusions.
Opinion, not fact, as stated by your post.
I was aware of that. Point was the two sets of numbers did not make sense to me. But, I was not aware that the test you refer to is based on being in second gear at 5 mph.
Seems like that 5-60 test result could also depend on the 2nd gear ratio. The car with the lower ratio in second would have an advantage, provided a shift to 3rd is not required.
95% of people are buying automatics anyway, so all the tests of manual transmission equipped vehicles should not impact their decision.
willie8, "Honda Accord: Prices Paid & Buying Experience" #7911, 29 May 2005 5:51 am
If you look at the prices from that time, you'll see many way under invoice. I doubt Honda dealers would do that unless they had some incentives/rebates from the manufacturer. Unfortunately, not all Honda dealers choose to pass these incentives along to customers--which apparently happened in your case.