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
I'm 6'2" and my wife is 5'11", and we have absolutely no problems fitting in our 04 Accord EX with sunroof. Admitedly, I do lean the seat back a little, but I've got a good 4" of head clearance. Was the seat height adjusted all the way up?
I actually went to the site because I thought that I had read that the LX V6 was going to have side curtains available as well, which of course wouldn't have a moonroof... guess I was wrong on that too. Strike two... I feel like the Cubs in the NL playoffs...
drummerboy - I'm only 5'6", but a 6'1" friend has driven my 2003 EX V6 several times, and he fits just fine as well. And he doesn't even recline the seat much, since he likes a very upright position.
JDPower site:
http://www.jdpa.com/awards/industry/winners.asp?StudyID=625
CR reliability news-bite:
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B2633FF62%2D67CE- %2D491D%2DAF5C%2DF77FF5919B99%7D&siteid=mktw
Some of the other recommended reliable vehicles include other Buick LeSabre and Saturn L-Series.
While Camcords continue to be some of the best mid-size sedans available in the market, Big-3 is indeed is catching up with Camcords. Reliability was the main factor on which Big-3 used to be beat up a lot. Looks like things are getting better..
~alpha
How abt Saturn L-Series which has been "recommended" along with Camcords by CR. Or for that matter Ford Focus again getting to "recommended" status among compact size sedans ? Both these vehicles are fairly new in re-design. Infact, Saturn is a 2003 re-design (even Camry had poor ratings for it's 2002 re-design model!). Focus, as you be already be aware, is a pretty recent model.
When I say "poor" that is in comparison with their own standards. For Camry to come "average" , that is a letdown from their yesteryear performances. Besides Camry's 2002 version did not get a "passable" grade from the "crash" testing. For me, a less safe vehicle is a "reliability" problem;
Still - no response as to why you guys concentrated only on Buick when there were other models infact mentioned. Are you In Denial ? Just wake up to the facts. CR just following what JDPower always said two years back in 2001. That some Deteroit models are better value than Camcords in the mid-size category. Again, see my link abt JDPower..
The wagon, however, is recommended, something of which I wasn't aware. I didn't know that CR tested that version. Recommendation comes solely by virtue of its reliability improving to average. It still is near the bottom in test scores in its class, with below average owner satisfaction and depreciation.
So I'm not sure what the quoted article is claiming. But I do know that as long as a car doesn't exhibit any dangerous behavior and has average or better reliability, they'll put it on their recommended list. This doesn't change the fact that both Saturn L-series cars are at or near the bottom of their classes in test results. So we have a low-scoring car (L300) with average reliability vs. top scoring cars (Camry, Accord) with above average to much above average reliability. Based on this, it's a BIG stretch to imply that Saturn has caught up with Camry and Accord.
The JD Power report is of very limited usefulness. First, we have the Achille's heel of JD Powers, their advertising and marketing driven approach. They work for the automakers, while Consumer Reports works for the consumer. Also, initial quality is a very poor indicator of long term reliability, which is the real key measure of overall quality and owner satisfaction. For example, their top mid-sized car (Malibu) has shown an alarming trend to become far more problematic in its second and third year, and that's after being in production since 1997. One would hope that they'd have gotten it right by now. Finally, keep in mind that both the Camry and Accord have had complete redesigns over the past two years. And there have been a few teething problems, but both cars have higher reliability scores for the long term than the Malibu from CR, and also have consistently high scores as they age, unlike the plummeting scores of the Malibu over the years. Finally, the Malibu scores much worse than average in owner satisfaction, while both Camry and Accord score much better than average. So I find it hard to believe that the Malibu owner experience will even begin to approach the Camry or Accord owner experience.
It'll be very interesting to see how Chevy does with a complete redesign of the 2004 Malibu. Hope it doesn't take them 7 years to catch up with new designs from competitors.
Additionally, the 2003 Toyota Camry (without side airbags) scores the SAME 3stars/5stars in the NHTSA side impact test as does the Saturn L-Series WITH its standard side curtains. The Camry is rated higher (along with the Accord) in the IIHS offset test as a "Good-Best Pick", the highest of IIHS's 5 rankings, to the Saturns ranking of only "Acceptable".
Finally, I'd like to reiterate that both the redesigned 2003 Accord and the second year 2003 Camry score higher in Consumer Reports reliability rankings than does the L-series, with the Accord at "Better than Average" and the Camry at "Much Better than Average".
~alpha
Bugs me that (especially with the Nov. $750 incentives from Toy) I'd have to 'special order' Side/Curtains.
Bag that dated, goofy tacked on spoiler (seems to be the included option du jour in these parts) and give me the (safety!) Curtains.
Buying an Accord V6 EX is just a lot easier...
-srp
Second, when I say CR, which for the first time, has said some of the Detroit could be equal/better than Camcords in "reliability" - again, it is not accepted -- by saying that their reliability is upgraded to "average" and so "recommended". I am not stating Saturn L/Buick Regal is better than Camcords. I am just saying that Detroit is catching up with Camcords - these JDPower / CR results - are providing an irrefutable proof that this trend is infact occurring.
I am not trying to put my own spin on the newsbite from CR. Am just stating what the facts are that some Detroit models are indeed getting better at what Toyota/Honda are all about i.e. "reliability". As for fun to drive - I will anyday pick Saturn L 'casue it is modeled on an Opel platofrm and German cars are always fun to drive compared to the Camcords. VW Passat is always a better fun car to drive than Camcords (but may not be as reliable).
CR website may not be updated with the latest results as it came out only y'day. Probably, you can see the updates in future. Look out for the results a few weeks down the line at their site OR in their future magazine issue.
I may not come back here again. Just wanted to provide the information here in the forum. Take it or not OR continue to be in denial - that's your prerogative.
Good luck.
Thats a lot of incorrectness. The folks on this forum simply wanted to set the record straight.
~alpha
--------
You incorrectly thought the L was redesigned for 2003.
>>>It may NOT be a full-scale re-design, but, yes, it is a re-design. The look of the model was changed. The backlift has been changed. Some of the internal content was changed. Basically, it is not the same car as it was in 2000. You may not agree to the degree of re-design, but, it's a mini re-design nevertheless.
You incorrectly stated that the L sedan was "Recommended" by CR.
>>>Go to the link I had given above on the newsbite. It clearly states L300 has been "recommended". Talon95 has agreed above that L300 has been recommended.
You incorrectly stated that the Camry had poor crash scores, which are actually equal or better than that of the L's (even with its side airbags).
>>>>I never mentioned abt L crash tests. Some of the others did. Pls read who said what. I just said Camry's 2002 re-design did not get good crash scores. Which is a fact.
And FINALLY, you incorrectly stated that L series is the equal of the Camry and Accord in reliability, which according to Consumer Reports 2004 New Car Preview (just hit news stands) its not.
>>>>I never said L is equivalent of Camcords. Heck, this is not even a comparison bet Saturn L and Camcords. All I said above is, Detroit is catching up on Camcords on "reliability" front, and CR survey results just provide an irrefutable proof to the same.
---------------
The fact is JDpower (even as far as two years back) and recent Consumer Reports continue to reflect that Detroit is catching up Toyota/Honda and their survey results reflect the same.
Heck, people did not accept Toyota/Honda during 1970s - saying they were bad! When indeed they were good & better in Quality. It took a while (nearly a decade) till middle/late 80s for Camcords to be accepted as superior. Times are changing NOW. The trend in survey reuslts prove the same. You can either wake up to the facts OR continue to live in denial - that is entirely upto you.
Good luck (and BTW don't twist or put a spin on others statements or facts).
A redesign is one that begins with a clean sheet of paper and includes a new *platform*, thereby making the NEW car have VERY little similiar with the previous one.
The L-series got new lights (front and rear) and some interior trim pieces.
I am glad to see the domestics catching up though.
Isnt only the L-wagon "Recommended"? Not the sedan? The redesigned Camry crash scores are at or near the top of its class, so I dont know how much better you want to get than that. NHTSA front: 5 stars/ 4 stars, NHTSA side w/o airbags/curtains: 3 stars/ 5stars, IIHS Front Offset: Good-Best Pick. Really, only the Accord scores higher, as the Altima and 6 both score lower in Side Impact and Offset.
I apologize if I misunderstood some of your other comments. I just wanted to make sure we all had the facts straight.
~alpha
"Good luck (and BTW don't twist or put a spin on others statements or facts)."
You'd do well to follow that advice yourself.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_- id=437&page_number=1
Agreed Accord is fun-ner car to drive compared to Camry. But not when compared to VW Passat. (In fact, just to address this phenomena -- Accord ads came out with German-type ads - 'cause they wanted Accord to be viewed as Passat equivalent - that by itself proves who is trying to piggyback whom).
Good luck with ur Camcords.
Also, we 'camcord' owners don't need luck with our cars, we KNOW that they will perform exceedingly well. Its people who drive POSs that need the luck, and need to justify their purchases.
I have never trashed Camcords. In fact, I have said Camcords continue to be some of the better alternatives available. It is just 'you' can't take when somebody says Domestics are moving up the chain and catching up with Camcords. PLS READ BEFORE WHAT YOU STATE. It's like 70s when public were in denial that Camcords were indeed good! It took a decade for public to accept that.
WAKE UP. Accept the trend in survey results coming out of CR and JDPower that domestics are catching up.
You may be living in fool's paradise (sorry for the strong words but I had to state this - again, just being courteous with sorry) trying to think Honda is trying to compare itself to BMW / Mercedes (Honda itself doesn't). May be Acura, but not definitely Honda.
Again, GOOD LUCK with your Camcords.
I personally feel that they have stepped up a bit, although I still wouldn't buy a ford "family" car, or probably a GM for that matter, but I would most certainly compare their full size trucks up against a Tundra for consideration...
It's people like Kidomo who compares Honda with BMW/Mercedes , who put me off. Now, you tell me - is that really a comparison ?
Good luck, guys. Checkout the new 2004 Malibu - getting good reviews. Again, I am not saying they are equivalent to Camcords. But it seems, they are right up there!
I think I'll reserve judgement until I start seeing some comparisons against Chevy's claimed benchmarks. Sometimes a comparative look turns out very different than a solo road test.
BTW, I would recommend to Chevy that they do a little more fact checking before they include comparisons in their ads. For example, they claimed that the Malibu has both tilt/telescope steering wheel and a power outlet in the console, while Accord doesn't. Actually, Accord has both.
FYI, I also own a 2000 Nissan ALtima, that has 66k miles on it, and it has needed only scheduled maintenance till date, not even one unscheduled visit, and that's Japanese reliability. I am looking forward to the same reliability from my new Accord.
Secondly, this is a 'cam' vs 'cord' debate, so your posts are in the wrong place.
As for improving domestics, I drove a Saturn L recently, and believe me, that was a piece of s***. I was sooo glad that I never even considered these antiques of engineering. Regarding the Malibu, it seems to be a much better attempt from GM, but its not going to win any 'camcord' drivers heart. Maybe 5-10 years down the line, domestics may be able to compete with the Japanese, but not right now. Just look at the segment, Accord, Camry, 6, Altima etc. Where would a relic like L series compete with these? And don't tell me that you still don't understand the difference between a redesign and a mid cycle refreshing.
BTW, Good Luck to you too.
Overall, I would say that most of the reviews of the Bu that I have read said that it wouldnt dethrone the Accord and Camry, but offers a good alternative, especially one from a domestic make. Yes, I do agree that stiffer competition for the 'Bu comes from well equipped versions of the Korean makes.
~alpha
This, along with other "legacy systems," makes it extremely difficult for GM and the other domestics to appropriately invest in R & D, materials quality and other factors necessary to make their vehicles compete with the import brands.
In this light, it'll probably take a few more years for a Chevy to be as appealing as a Honda.
Alpha, Atlantabenny: I agree that competition form Chevy/domestics will take to come upto terms with Camcoards. What I am trying to say is - the 'trend' has started. And CR & JDPower results prove the same. It all starts like this.
As much time as it took almost a decade from 70s to middle-80s for Camcords to be accepted as superior. It takes time. But, yes, things are chaning slowly.
Good luck, guys.
What you mean to say is that Honda, that sells more than 400k accords, planned the marketing campaign of their bread and butter car to cater to a miniscule audience (Passat buyers), isn't it? You really can't be farther from the truth.
Bob lutz is the first car guy in years at the helm at GM, that's why you are seeing a flurry of interesting product introductions from GM. Whether the accountants who have to take into account the huge incentives that people haev come to expect from GM, will allow him to do that is a question that can be answered only in teh future.
WRONG!
First comes MindShare, and then Marketshare! Accord is trying to appeal to the "Mind"share of an audience which views Passat as better! That may include people who actually buy Passts OR who think ("Mind"share) Passat as better!
Heeding Pat's request, I am outta here!
Best of luck , guys.
Honda Accord EX, leather, 4 cyl, manual transmission $21500
Toyota Camry SE, leather, 4cyl, manual transmission $20000
Tried the Mazda 6, a hoot to drive, but too small and thristy with the 6 cylinder.
I drove the Accord, very nice, but with an auto. Acceleration was OK. I drove the Camry, but an LE model which is boring as dirt. Pokey, and handled like mush. I tried to see an SE model, but the dealer kept pushing used demos. Neither dealer had a stick to demo-the Toyota dealer couldn't find the key. Neither automatic was very good in my opinion, Mazda 6 was better but it doesn't matter to me since I will get a stick either way.
I know the Camry is a little slower with acceleration, and to me is not really appealing visually inside or out(neither Accord nor Camry up to the Mazda 6). How is the Toyota stick? How do they compare in handling? Are there any other reasons to pick one over another? Is the Accord worth $1500 over the Camry?
~alpha
ps- gibber- neither the Accord nor Camry sounds like it is right for you, and certainly not the Camry. Perhaps you should visit your Nissan dealer and see the Altima, which handles similarly to the 6 (though not QUITE as crisp), is larger, and performs well with its 175hp 4 cylinder.
Also, is 21500 for the EX 5 speed leather a good price? Thats what carsdirect said, which is about the same as edmunds or kbb invoice.
Yes, 21,500 before TTL is a great price for Accord EX 5 speed leather. Carsdirect seems to be very dead-on with what actual buyers can do.
1. Too small-the backseat is noticeably smaller, not really much different than my Protege, and I have a 16 year old. It seems smaller than the measurements would indicate.
2. Mileage isn't too great with the 6.
3. The 6 is a Ford engine-like my mechanic said 1.8, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.8, all crap. He said its not the engine design but the poor quality parts. The 6 cylinder is also made in what sounds like a Ford plant.
4. Even with pretty big rebates, cost is not that low. I was looking for one with a 6 and curtain bags, which makes you jump into the full option bandwagon(Accord is a little like that too).
5. Interior seemed, although cool looking, a little cheap-that paint on the center console is definitely going to wear off. The Accord was well ahead in this category-it seems like a luxury car.
6. Nearest dealer is 20 miles away and is a poor one for service, this has been a real hassle with the Protege.
7. Getting one with the right options and NOT the bloated "Sport" package is tough. Anything that has the leather also has the fiberglass junk.
I suppose I should consider the 4 cylinder, that would be a significant cost saver, although it gives up power and some economy to the Accord. At least you get a real Japanese engine and I understand the 6is are made elsewhere.
I also don't want a 2003 at the end of the year-rebates are much smaller for 2004.
I really like Mazda. The longer warranty is great. The dealer was much lower key, not too pushy. The Protege is fun to drive and reasonbly reliable. The 6 was much fun to drive(6 cylinder) and emotionally I really liked it. Maybe I'll test drive the 6i, and reconsider it. Or maybe when the Protege dies I'll buy a real sports car. Does anyone know what the RPM at 70 mph is for the 6i? My Protege is not tall enough at that speed.
The purpose of this discussion is to compare the Accord to the Camry.
Thanks for keeping that in mind.
gibber- I'd hardly call the Camry "gutless". Perhaps the one you drove needed some more break in or something, but MT's best time for a Camry 4 auto was 9.2 seconds to 60. The only 0-60 which I know of for the 2.0L 130 horse Protege MANUAL is 9.0 seconds, as measured by Car and Driver in the Nov. 02 issue. So I'm not sure what you're talking about. I've driven both the Accord 4 5AT and the Camry 4 4AT(AND BACK to BACK at that), and there is a marginal difference off the line, but they felt similar in passing scenarios, so I'm not sure the gap is as big a deal as you think it is.
(FWIW, Car and Driver can usually get quicker times out of vehicles than can MT, IMO).
Perhaps its part of the Camry's charm (which does not appeal to you)- it is so smooth and isolated that you dont realize the engine is working hard, and high speeds (at least in my experience) are very serene and dont feel high at all. Cruising at 90MPH in our Camry FEELS NOTHING LIKE cruising at 90MPH in my more power Sentra 2.5, for example. The Camry does not make any pretenses of sport, except in the SE model, which you did not drive. It does sound like you had an absolutely idiotic salesman, btw. Best of luck!
~alpha
If It was me to buy a sedan, man that's tough to choose between these two. Wish I could buy both.
I knew Camry was quieter than Accord, now with 2004 model they are both the same quiet. Without another test comparison, I'd probably select Camry just because it's a little roomier...
That's all I meant.
If you or anyone has any other questions, feel free to email me. This is disruptive here, obviously.