Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
But I have yet to see more than three Camry SEs without one.
such as the blacked out headlight trim, black decals, etc.
I don't think there are any major(or minor) suspension improvements with the exception of the standard alloys.
As for the spoiler, even at 125MPH, it probably wouldn't help much since the Camry is FWD, and the main purpose of a spoiler being to add extra weight on the rear tires for enhanced traction. Most of the spoilers I see now aren't functional at all wanyway...
Perhaps you are thinking of the Corolla S models, which is only an appearance/content package.
~alpha
To my surprise I really enjoyed driving the Accord. It felt substantial, strong and smooth. Brakes very responsive, quick acceleration, quiet-- and it felt well made, had a nice thud when I shut the door. I was actually shocked at how much I enjoyed driving it (an experience made more precious by 3 straight miles of brand new 2-lane highway, a gorgeous golden red sunset and the most beautiful rainbow over cornfields you'd ever want to see!)
A few negatives for me were that the exterior styling didn't appeal to me and the interior didn't seem as high quality as in my Camry--cheaper more plasticky materials, leather, door pulls, not much real extension in the tilt/telescope of the steering wheel. Color choices seemed a bit dull.
Still, I liked the performance very much and thought the options/pricing were generous. I think in the 20Kish price range no car is going to be perfect, its all trade offs, and this one represents an excellent package overall.
(Unfortunately I won't buy one bec it wasn't a good fit for me physically.) Just a mention: hated the Nissan Altima, all show, no substance; very cheap feeling ride and quality. Liked the Passat V6 ok but eliminated it due to fear of reliability problems and the 05 redesign too close for comfort. Probably will end up with a Solara.
Unless you are a female, then its a perfect choice..
Just having fun.
I never test drive any Honda since my first new 94 Altima, as I knew Honda's old auto transmission is not so good (from my friend's 89 auto Accord), and it does not have a button for O/D. Now Accord would be the first one on my checklist if I were to buy a new sedan.
However, I couldn't be happier with the 7th generation's 5-sp automatic. Its probably the best auto I've driven, outside the Lexus LS's.
Quick example:
Accord EXV6 incl. desitination- $26,890
Camry SEV6 + Premium Pkg (leather, JBL/6Disc, sunshade, cargo net) VSC/Side Airbags, Heated Seats: $27,075
Some equip. differences are still present, but they are more or less the same.
The Camry LE V6 is a much closer match to the Accord LXV6. (FWIW, I am not a fan of the XLE model Camrys).
~alpha
PS-Thanks to all for keeping this board informative, fun, and civil. Interesting how you add one car to the Accord v. Camry debate, and the board gets closed down. My guess is it wasnt the Accord and Camry people....
Le DX
Se LX
XLE EX
Aren't you all forgetting the Accord DX. I know its basically a box on wheel but it is very reasonably priced. In fact, you can almost buy two Accord DX for the price of one fully loaded EXV6.
There is no, IMO, 'real' Camry, IMO, to compare to the Accord DX- all Camrys have items like air conditioning, power seats, keyless etc. standard, and Camrys start in the 19s at MSRP.
Based on the tuning of the Camry and Accord suspensions, I believe the best comparison is between Camry SE and Accord EX models of all mixes of transmissions and engines possible within that trim constraint.
The Camry LE vs. Accord LX argument is that of the so called "bread and butter" mainstream, high volume sellers, and one that is warranted on content and price. One quick drive will reveal the Accord LX to be a more engaging machine, with a very machined, precision feel, and the Camry to be the quieter, slightly more comfortable (and roomier) boulavardier of the two. (All Accords have better front seating, IMO).
Camry XLEs are overpriced at sticker, I'd go Accord EX. Perhaps selling prices are a different story, and then the decision boils down, once again, to the preferences tradeoff- isolation (Camry) vs. engagement (Accord).
~alpha
Since it's his car, he decided not to shop and negotiate more, and just agrred on the dealer's "best" price: $26900 plus whatever has to be on top of that. I figured he overpaid almost $900. I suggested he could at least make a few calls to other dealers and compare......well......
Hope your friend enjoys his Camry... very nice car!
It makes no difference to me even if the Camrys interior is slightly better quality-wise because I hate the design of the interior. I've had a 03 and a 04 Accord and neither one rattled or squeaked.
Overall though interiors aren't what they used to be. The 1990-1993 Accord and the 1992-1996 Camry both used plenty of soft-touch plastics. Something that is missing from even the new $35,000 ES300.
It is true the se has more power than the xle, handles better and is cheaper. It even seems cheaper than the accord and might handle as well or better than the accord. Unfortunately, it still has the low exhaust pipe and it is cheaper because it cut out many xle and or accord features that DW was unwilling to live without. She was also underwhelmed by white gauges of se.
Missing xle features in se: heated mirrors, power pass seat, complete security system, trip computer, lighted visor vanity mirrors, day night compass mirror (optional), driver auto up window, fake wood.
The EX v6 accord is also missing the heated mirrors, trip computer (w/o navi) and vsc (available on xle and se).
The Accord has been the highest selling car to PEOPLE for the last 10 years. Obviously most people realize they are buying a sedan. If you want a "softer" car with a split-folding rear seat and lackluster side impact safety ratings then buy the Camry. If you want the "firmer" Accord without a split-folding rear seat then buy the Accord. Obviously most people are choosing the Accord.
"Obviously most people are choosing the Accord anyway"
When you subtract out the 12-13% fleet sales for the Camry, and the 3-4% fleet sales for the Accord, consumer sales are still very close. That said, the sales charts do NOT, and HAVE NEVER dictated which vehicles are better and which vehicles are worse. Remember when the Escort was the best selling vehicle in the mid/late 80s?????
~alpha
Companies who want to be number one at the end of the year usually spend alot of money in incentives to get there so obviously it is important to someone, somewhere. If it's not that important then why does Toyota shout "number one selling car in America" in it's commercials. They don't sell 14% to fleets because it's good for resale value.
http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2002/pr120302.htm
"Honda Accord: Re-engineered for the 2003 model year, the Accord's bumper system doesn't include restorable energy-absorbing mounts, either. The bumper bars are attached with mounts that bend and buckle during impact. The damage has to be repaired, which increases the cost of owning this car. There's only foam to absorb the energy of minor impacts, "and the foam fails to keep the damage away from the car body," Lund says.
Like the Corolla, the Accord's rear bumper is reinforced in the middle to perform well in the Institute's pole test, so this impact was conducted off-center."
---------------------------------------------
And with regards to the NHTSA Side Impacts- You are correct. The Accord 2 door does score 2 stars higher than the driver dummy of Camry 4 door for side impacts. That is unquestioned.
HOWEVER it is a BIG problem that the NHTSA star rating DOES NOT include a measure of head injury, even though this is part of the test. The Accord 2 Door, according to the HIC number, poses risk of significant injury to the head of the rear occupant. That is unquestioned. Therefore, if NHTSA included HIC in its evaluation of side impact crashworthiness, the Accord 2 door would NOT be a 5 star performer for the rear passenger. The Camry's HIC for front and rear passengers is significantly lower.
Anonymous, perhaps youre different, but I'd consider the both the chest AND head to be vital regions of the body.
Why HIC is not included in the NHTSA eval is beyond me, and I hope this changes soon--I write another email saying the same thing about this issue to them each time a new round of side impact results is released.
~alpha
No, it's just that even when the Corolla and Accord were tested off-center they sustained relatively minor damages in the amount of $332. Not so for the Camry.
"Better bumper performances: The ES 300 and Camry are essentially the same cars with similar bumper systems, so it's not surprising that their performances in the 5 mph tests also were similar. The biggest difference was in the pole test. The rear bumper systems on both cars include steel inserts in the middle of the foam in the rear bumpers. This energy-absorbing insert, placed exactly where the car hits the pole in the Institute's test, would manage the energy of a low-speed crash in only a narrow range of impacts, so the pole tests of these vehicles were conducted slightly off-center. The result was a reasonable performance for the ES 300, which sustained $537 damage, the best performer in this test among the nine midsize cars. The Camry sustained $759 damage in the pole test. The difference in large part is because the Camry's bumper cover split (the cover on the ES 300 didn't), necessitating repair and refinishing."
http://www.hwysafety.org/news_releases/2002/pr052402.htm
If you want to go number by number the Accord 4 door tested has a lower HIC in frontal impacts, lower chest deceleration, and a lower femur load. For side impact you have to look at the Accord 2 door. The Accord 2 door has lower thoracic trauma index and lower pelvis deceleration. To be fair head injury ratings are not listed for the Camry so we shouldn't look down upon the Accord coupes HIC for rear seat passengers. If the Accord sedan or the Camry are tested lower then maybe it should be a topic of conversation. Until then it's irrelevant until the numbers are listed for the Camry and/or the Accord sedan.
My point was to show things missing and unavailable on the se that are standard or available one the xle or ex. I should not have mentioned the day night mirror, even though I did point out that it was optional on the se. To be fair I think Toyota dealers also offer a complete security system for the se as an optional accessory.
Btw, even though I bought an accord, this closer look at the se v6 vs the xle v6 and the ex v6 gave me a new found respect for the high content level of the xle. Unfortunately, its still pricey and the se is missing too many features. Both of them have other issues that also make them come in 2nd (xle) and 3rd (se) to the accord ex imho.
For the link to this PDF, Please see the referenced POST #732 by ssiu on the Mazda 6 vs. Honda Accord. vs. Toyota Camry board, copied below:
_________________________________________________
"You probably noticed that NHTSA has started giving side impact HIC information for recently tested vehicles (those tested within the last year or so, e.g. 2003 Accord coupe), even though the score is not factored into the star rating. You may not realize that you can download the full NHTSA crash test reports (usually 200+ pages of technical data and jargons) from http://dms.dot.gov The PDF file for 2003 Camry sedan side crash test is http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf85/243755_web.pdf and the HIC score is (see page 6, aka page 2-1) 434.5 front and 482.6 rear. They probably just "forgot" to put the figures in the main test scores page.
I agree that the IIHS side crash test is going to be of greater significance, with the proliferation of SUVs etc. "
--------------------------------------------
~alpha
~alpha
Did the Camry include side airbags? Is the Accord sedan designed differently than the coupe in this regard? Two major questions that need to be answered. In every other category the Accord performs better than the Camry. I would almost best that my Accord with side airbags and side curtains would perform just as well if not better than the Camry.
I guess it's safe to assume that you had nothing else to say about the bumper tests?
With respect to your other question: "Is the Accord sedan designed differently than the coupe in this regard?" This is precisely part of the argument I was trying to make in the first place. 2-door models may or may not perform the same in front and side impacts as do their 4 door counterparts. Thats why my contention was that you cant really base the Accord sedan's performance on the performance of the coupe.
There is no doubt in my mind that your Accord with side airbags and side curtains would be a better performer than an Accord OR Camry without side airbags.
With respect to bumpers; My point was that you seemed to unduely criticize Toyota for adding a bar in the middle of the Camry's rear bumper to do well in the bumper test, meanwhile, Honda does the same thing. You contend that the Accord does much better when the IIHS tested it offcenter, and that is marginally true. But in other tests, the Accord did not perform as well, and consequently, BOTH cars earn a rating of ACCEPTABLE.
~alpha
As for the bumper tests ... my point was that Toyota placed a bar for the sole purpose of doing well in the test and when tested off-center there was more than twice the amount of monetary damage to the Camry than there was to the Corolla or Accord. So it appears that while all three cars were "enhanced" the Corolla and Accord had the better overall designs and benefited less from the above-mentioned "enhancements".
Your statement: "The Camry has lower REAR passenger HIC than the Accord coupe. " is only partially correct; the no-airbag Camry has LOWER HIC for BOTH FRONT AND REAR passengers compared to the no-airbag Accord 2Door:
Front:
Accord: 628
Camry: 435
Rear:
Accord: 925
Camry: 483
Due to this information, it is my strong opinion that WERE NHTSA to factor in HIC to its star rating system, the Accord 2-door would not be a 5 star performing vehicle for side impacts, at least not without side airbags/curtains. I'd predict a rating for this Accord 2 door of 4 stars/ 3 stars were NHTSA to include HIC and measure it as it does for frontal impacts.
~alpha
Anonymous, my point is that the Accord 2 door without airbags scores 5 stars / 5 stars because it protects the dummies' thoracic regions extremely well. The Camry without airbags scores 3 stars/ 5 stars because of an elevated TTI for the driver (which is acually borderline 4 stars).
HOWEVER
The NHTSA ratings do NOT factor in HIC measures, even though these measurements are taken. IMO, this is a disservice to the consumer. Upon further review, the Accord inflicts significantly higher "injury" in terms of HIC to its dummies than does the Camry. The Camry's HIC in the side impact are lower than the Accords, where HIC for the rear passenger especially, indicates possibility of significant injury.
So, as tested, the Accord has an advantage in terms of the driver's TTI, the Accord and Camry score similarly for rear passenger TTI, the Camry has the clear advantage for front and rear passenger HIC.
Personally, I feel the two are very similar in terms of overall safety IN LIGHT OF HIC #s, and this is not indicated in NHTSA ratings.
~alpha
-------------------------------------------------
The above is from msn.com and it says the info is from Consumer Reports...
However, my main problem with the CR rating is that it takes into account crash avoidance, which, no doubt is important- but what about driver skill? Isnt that a factor in crash avoidance? I just feel such a measure cant be quantified.
~alpha
All other things being equal, for the same driver, his or her ability to avoid an accident should be better in the car with more capable handling. An excellent driver may be able to avoid an accident by a wide margin in the top ranked car for crash avoidance, and may barely avoid the same accident in the lowest ranked car. OTOH, a poor driver may just barely avoid that accident in the top ranked car, and may not be able to avoid it in the bottom ranked car.
Sure, it's not perfect, but their use of their handling scores is pretty much the same as all auto tests. They show each car's handling ability compared to the others under comparable conditions, including drivers. So believe it if you want, or discard it if you want... I'm sure many people will find the score to be useful.
As for the various Camry models listed, they're not saying that you should go out and buy an XLE, or implying that a comparably equipped SE wouldn't perform as well... they're just listing the model that they tested. They specify that the tested model would be representative of other models in the same car's lineup with comparable equipment, so LE, SE or XLE matter very little. And if you look at their ratings, they rank both the Camry V6 and the Camry I4 equal in crash protection.
~alpha
Anyway, as I stated, the crash protection scores are identical for the XLE V6 and the LE 4. They included those cars in their safety rating because those were the 2 Camry models they tested. The LE 4 scored lower than the XLE V6 in the crash avoidance test because the XLE V6 has better tires with better grip, resulting in higher emergency handling scores and shorter stopping distances than the LE 4. And the more powerful engine naturally resulted in faster acceleration figures for the V6, which is another factor in their accident avoidance score. So the LE 4's lower score was a factor of a lower accident avoidance score than the XLE V6, and had nothing to do with the crash protection scores, which were identical.
To reiterate, they only listed the XLE V6 and the LE 4 models because those were the ones they tested. They're in no way saying that an XLE in any form is inherently better than an LE in any form. The 2 cars are representative of 2 different available levels of equipment for the Camry (the volume seller and the top-of-the-line loaded version), and they state that models with comparable equipment should perform comparably.
As I said, I don't think these scores are perfect, but I also think that some of your criticisms of the concept are a bit unfair.
The best value Camry is the SE V6 - you get better handling than is available on the LE or XLE, avoid options which are not needed (e.g. automatic air conditioning, which still always needs to be adjusted, and leather seats, which are hotter and colder than cloth). The most expensive Camry of all is the Lexus ES330.
A 2004 Camry SE V6 with options GU (side air bags and stability control), XV (power pedal), PV (floor mats), CM2 (automatic day/night mirror with compass), DJ (premium sound system), W7 (subwoofer), and WL (wheel locks) has a sticker price of just $26,312, and an invoice price of just $23,259. It is a far better car than many which cost far more.
(Big Toyota shocker- Toyota 4Runner V6 rates "Much Worse than Average, while 4Runner V8 rates "Much Better than Average)
Also- I thought the moonroof was standard on all Accord EX models, not just those equipped with leather- did I miss something?