Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
I don't think you need to go to an SUV if you're 6'4". You may prefer a roomier environment than I do; if my wife would let me, I'd even attempt to squeeze into an MR2.
Have you tried the Passat? The rear will be tight for 3 across, but with 2 it's fine.
I find most European cars (the ones imported to North America) have good headroom. I have difficulties with some Japanese brands. Don't really look at NA cars or Korean cars.
There is an article on the 2005 Passat in Automobile Magazine, August 2003, P.20. Looks like another benchmark. The flagship model is powered by a low-end-torque six cyl good for 300hp!
This is our first VW and granted the Accord was three-years-old but these are remarkably different cars.
I really don't think this is a coin flip decision for anyone trying to choose between the two.
Roominess, comfort and utility are pretty comparable and I would give a slight edge to Honda for passenger cabin storage.
The similarities end on the road.
The Passat is just flat out fun to drive compared with the Accord. That little turbo engine in the VW has power everywhere, no matter the speed or gear. I shift a lot less in this car than I ever did in the Accord. The Passat also feels like a tank although it is not much heavier and at the same time handles beautifully while absorbing bumps and rough stuff.
This is subjective, but I also think the Passat is much better looking.
Only time will tell on reliability, but I will be surprised is the VW equals the Honda.
If you want trouble free operation from point A to point B, get the Honda. If you want more fun getting there, go with the VW.
I think it belongs here also.
http://money.cnn.com/2003/07/08/pf/autos/bc.autos.durability/inde- - - - x.htm?cnn=yes
According to CR, the 2003 Accord 4 outaccelerates the Passat 4 in every measurement except 0-60, in which they tie. This is with automatics in both cars, but there's no real reason to expect that the manual versions won't be equally competitive. And, from the aspect of the bottom line, CR picked the Accord over the Passat as their top 4-cyl family car. It was close, but still a win for the Accord. In the V6 category, the Passat had a similarly close win over the Accord.
Also, the Accord's suspension has been redesigned and retuned to provide a smoother ride with improved handling.
Fun to drive? I think both cars can make that claim. Most reviews that you can find (in particular, Car and Driver and Road and Track) come to the same conclusion. Road and Track even says that, in their opinion, the 2003 Accord feels more like a German car than the 2003 Passat.
All opinions, and everyone's can vary. The bottom line is that both are very fine cars. But I just wanted to point out that comparisons between the 2003 Passat and a '98-'02 Accord probably don't apply to a 2003 Accord.
I did not mean to criticize the Accord: I've been a loyal Honda owner for many years until a week ago. Seems strange not to have one in the driveway.
Based on my experience, the Passat and maybe VWs in general drive much differently than Hondas. It's more feel than performance numbers, though I suspect the widely available torque in the 1.8T (all 166 lbs. at just 1900 rpm)is the main reason. The Passat seems very quick and responsive relative to Hondas, which seem to require much higher revs to access the available power.
I'm sure you are right that both are very fine cars.
Our decision to buy the Passat was based on the fact that our growing family needed more cargo room. If Honda made a wagon (not an SUV or minivan), we would have bought one.
I do not know what a similarly equipped Accord costs since we did not shop it or compare it with the Passat, though I suspect we paid more for the VW than we would have for the Honda. Since I am new to Volkswagen, I don't know what to expect in terms of reliability. If we come close to our experience with various Hondas, I will be very happy and little surprised.
Happy Driving.
All I hear is how wonderful Honda's reliability is. I agree, it is pretty good. But, when my Wife's '98 Accords transmission went out at 75K miles, we didn't think that a "honda" should have transmission failure at such an early stage. So, my point, Honda's are not perfect. They have their issues. Actually, didn't Honda just announce that they were recalling over half million cars for various issues INCLUDING TRANSMISSION failures. So, go with your heart and do research and drive what makes you feel good.
motownusa- the 2.7L Hyundai V6 produces 173 hp in its most powerful current iteration. Hyundai does have a V6 that produces 195 hp, but its 3.5L in size, far bigger than the 2.8L that VW uses. I do agree in concept though, and hopefully the Passat that bows in the near future will have a larger V6 with more power and torque.
~alpha
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
PR Director
Edmunds.com
Yes, Honda did have some problems with their transmissions (no car company can make everything 100% reliable). But people need to understand that just because you buy a Honda that doesn't mean you're not going to have a problem with it - it just means your chances and severity of a problem are much less compared to other makes.
But what is amazing is how Honda handled this problem. As opposed to placing blame on the customer as Toyota did with its engine sludge problems, Honda was proactive and not only extended the warranty on it's affected transmissions to 7yrs/100,000 miles, but is actually recalling them to repair/replace them at no cost to the owner.
I think this is what separates Honda from other companies, and they are still considered the most reliable with Toyota overall.
For comparison, Chrysler has been making horrible tranmissions for decades and they still haven't fixed the problem. And it was just released that Volkswagen and Chrysler now have engine sludge problems as well.
But if it makes you feel any better, Lexus is having problems with their transmissions on their BRAND new RX330 and ES330s right off the dealer lot.
Thank you.
This is a point that gets lost too often during these discussions.
Well said...
As far as Honda handling the transmission problems: That's not entirely true. Honda only extended the warranty for '00 yr models and newer. Our Accord was a '98 and had the exact same transmission issues as newer Hondas, but ours would not of been covered. So, please tell me why didn't Honda include all ('98-'02) Accords in the voluntary recall?
Yes, VW recently advised owners of oil sludge issues. They also will extend the engine warranty to 7yrs or 100,000 miles(I believe). So they are proactively addressing this issue. To be honest, they don't want to run into another Coil recall situation.....
If you can't prove that you changed the oil every 5,000 miles than they don't care.
I have talked to 7 people in 5 days and have NO resolution.
Just my $.02!!
There have even been industry trade stories reporting that Honda used Volkswagen's Passat as inspiration on how to give the company's volume sedan an appealing aura that goes beyond pure logic.
It's amazing how some people slam the Passat while cars like the Accord, Maxima, and Altima have become "Passat-like" in appearance.
...as the saying goes: "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"
But the Altima and Maxima do have that roofline like the Passat
It's well known that Honda benchmarked the Passat for their current model Accord.
So VW can't be all bad...
Yeah, OK.
Before 2002, from 98'-01', the Accord has "significant" transmission problems, and the Passat has "significant" engine problems.
These reliability ratings are close to what Consumer Reports has been saying, and contrary to what some have been saying on this forum about the Accord being "bullet proof' and trouble free.
Here's the link.
http://autos.msn.com/home/reliability_ratings.aspx?src=URES
I guess there's just no getting around dealing with a few issues, even with well-made vehicles like these three.
Not from what I'm seeing from Consumer Reports. Looking at the 2002 engine problems stated above, Consumer Reports shows much better than average reliability for the engine. In fact, the Accord scored much better than average in every category except body integrity, in which it scored better than average. The Accord was given CR's highest overall reliability rating for 2002. As it did for all 8 years displayed in the chart. About as "bullet proof" and "trouble-free" as you can get.
So I don't understand how anyone can claim that what MSN said is close to what CR says... CR is definitely not showing the problems that MSN is showing.
As for the Passat, for the 2002 model year, CR reports much worse than average reliability for ignition, and worse than average reliability for electrical. Overall reliability for that model year is CR's lowest overall rating, worse than average. In the 6 model years on which they reported, the Passat scored worse than average for 4 of those years, and average for the other 2.
So it looks like MSN and CR agree on the Passat, but they're way apart for the Accord. And at least according to CR, the Accord is way ahead of the Passat in reliability.
I can't link to the CR ratings because it's a subscription site.
I believe that CR relies on member surveys, while MSN gets its info from Auto Information Systems, which answers queries from auto service technicians.
It seems like CR's ratings more accurately reflect the average owner experience, while the MSN ratings more accurately reflect minute issues with the cars.
For example, I participate in CR and other surveys and they are usually long and lengthy. Some of the questions are so vague and so categorized as to be meaningless. That being said, I am much more likely to fill out the survey on a particular item if I have had a bad experience with it. However, when I am pleased with a car or appliance or whatever, I tend not to bother filling out surveys. It is just human nature.
That fact alone, significantly skews the findings to the negative or to people with problems. Very few people complain about something being good or excellent.
Compare requested surveys with testimonial TV product advertising! The only way to obtain an accurate survey is to have an unbiased third party conduct a statistically valid survey on a valid sample set. Even so, answers can be biased on how the questions are phrased; thus the requirement for a third party unbiased survey. For example, if a Prius owner conducts a survey on Prius satisfaction, I would bet that the results come out postive. Just as if a diesel owner conducted the same survey the results would come out negative.
YMMV,
MidCow
There was a close to 5000 people lay off at VW a couple of months back, and things are not looking rosy at the moment.
I, for one, am waiting for the new Passat which is rumored to be one hell of a car with an engine that can finally hold its own with the Japanese offerings. The only problem is that with VW moving higher in pricing, it might be priced out of my and a few others range. Let's wait and see.
The Passat W8, the Phaeton and a few other decision have cost VW a lot in the market. The new golf is still not released in the US, while most other models in the VW line are pretty old platforms. The only success they have had in the recent past is the toureg. So, like I said earlier, let's wait and watch.
I 'm in the market for any of the referenced vehicles(V6's only) including the Mazda6 hatch. But while I am leaning towards the Passat, it's reliability issue scars the hell out of me. I test drove all 4 vehicles and I thought it was a "toss up" between the Mazda and the Passat in the "fun factor" department. The Passat definitely has the more upscale interior, but it also gets pricey when comparing similar trim levels. The Accord design has not quite grown on me yet. Though I felt it had the smoothest engine. I am trading in a 1999 Millennia S. Any insights would be appreciated
The Mazda6 is a great car, if you are looking primarily at handling. The V6 Accord provides the best overall balance, though I would give the 2005 Altima a serious look if I was you.
If you concerned about reliability, check out the maintenance section and input the information on the car that is of interest to you. You can go as far back as five years on a particular model. Look carefully at how many recalls and Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs). The TSBs will give you a good idea of how many annoying little problems the model may have. Granted, a lot of TSBs manufacturer's announcements to mechanics(i.e. new warranty, new torque setting). Read the TSBs carefully.
Secondly, read the consumer rating. Read only the one's under 9.0 because some owners like to talk up their cars.
Most of all, test drive the car.
Krzys
Her head hit something in the car causing multiple larcerations on her face and a hematoma the size of an egg inside her brain. She also suffered 3 broken ribs, a collapsed left lung and larcerated kidney. Her condition is stable after 4 days but she will be in intensive care for at least 2 weeks.
A year ago I came to the conclusion that I would not buy any future car without side and curtain airbags for both front and rear seats! These safety features are worth your lives, your limbs or hundreds of thousands of dollars in pain, suffering and lost wages!
When I was looking at the Camry 3 months ago, it was impossible to find any 04 Camry with side and curtain airbags at any trim level in Southern California! Honda made a great move making side and curtain airbags standard on the 05 Accord. I am very disappointed in Toyota for not making them standard on the 05 Camry.
I also wanted a SE but there were very few in California and the dealers wanted premium prices.
Toyotas produced a lot of 04 Camrys and Corollas with standard transmissions which the dealers could not sell and had to discount heavily!
By the way, the Accord has double wishbone suspensions, front and rear, which are only available in the upscale GS and LS Lexus, MSRP from $42K to $65K. In emergency maneuvers, the Accord's tighter suspension would probably beat the Camry by a wide margin with clear implications of better accident avoidance before one has to rely on airbags as the last defense.
I am not even talking about possible quicker throttle response, faster acceleration, better tires in an Accord if I have to dodge a big truck gunning for me!
Toyota seems to misread its customers' preferences or has little regards for their needs. Toyota also seems to try to sell cheap cars for higher prices with expensive options than competitors.
I am now convinced that Toyota is always behind Honda at least 2 years in all major and critical features, for example, ABS, 5-speed auto transmission, side airbags etc...
Why am I sounding like I am trying to talk myself into a Honda over a Toyota??? Would like to have more information re safety features and performance on these cars from memebrs of tis board.
I think that your concern about safety are justified. The IIHS side impact test of 10/4/04 indicates that the Mitsubishi Galant with side airbags rated the best along with the Saab 9-3, Lexus ES 330, and Acura TL.
Try this website for your research: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ratings.htm
It may be helpful. Good Luck
Starting a couple years ago, I began thinking about safety features. Like you, I have come to think that head-curtain airbags are essential (a big study found that they reduce serious injury by 45%). But I also concluded that another safety feature is essential - electronic skid control. A study at the U of Iowa found it reduces the likelihood of getting into an accident by about 30%; studies by VW and Toyota found about the same.
Back when I was looking (a year ago), finding a car in my price range with both features was difficult. Back then, the Accord (otherwise my favorite of the three) offered neither feature, so I crossed it off my list. I found that I could theoretically get both features on a V-6 Camry, but I couldn't find one that actually had them. Meanwhile, the VW Passat offered both features from the base level up - and that base model, the GL, was cheaper than the V-6 Camry. And it was available. And it handles better than the Camry too, at least subjectively, and is more comfortable to be inside. So that's what I ended up with.
I've enjoyed my 1.8T Passat (so far - 20,000 miles into it, I've had no problems with it). And I think the skid control feature (VW calls it "Electronic Stabilization Program") did save me once. I was forced partly onto the shoulder of the interstate at 70 MPH but had no trouble keeping the car going straight and in control. (If I had been in my old Saturn or Ford, i think I would have been toast.)
I think I heard that Honda will be making skid control standard starting in 2006. If so, it'd be my first choice, no question. If it already offers skid control (I haven't checked) I'd go for it. But if it doesn't offer skid control yet, you might consider that and look for cars that do offer it.
Hope this helps, and again, best wishes to your wife.