Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
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
The reason I picked the Camry over the accord was for the nicer ride, comfort, and quietness and not to race other cars. If I wanted to race other cars, my pick would be the Mustang or the Infiniti G35. I am not even going to get into the exterior looks department.
I have said it more than once. They appeal to different audiences. To say one is ugly is personal preference and really has no place in this forum. I happen to think the Camrys rear could be better along with the interior. That doesn't mean that there aren't some of you who love the Camry interior and rear-end styling.
The average age is just that, an average. That doesn't mean that there won't be people who fall below or go above those averages. I was 19 when I bought my first new Accord and we bought a Honda Odyssey last year when I was 24. I would be willing to bet the average new Accord buyer isn't 19 and the average Odyssey buyer is probably a good bit older than 24. So take the average age data with a grain of salt but realize that an average is just that, an average.
To make the information more useful, I'd suggest that we state model and trim in comparisons, unless the information apply to all models and trims (most information probably won't apply across "generation" of models). I found that Accord DX and Accord V6 coupe, or base Camry LE and Solara (even V6 SE) appeal to very different markets, and have diffrent characters. I for one, think that Camry has more merit in one trim, but Accord is a step up in the other. If you are cross shopping, it would help to test drive the both models that you are trying to make a decision from and the trims close to that (decision is hard for many of us:-).
The second purpose is to provide information for prospective buyers of both cars. Is there anything wrong with that?
Some of these guys are bashing the Camry and the spoiler as ugly. Do you see any Camry owner getting upset?
I suggest that we all debate the facts and figures like intelligent, civilized people, and stop harassing other posters.
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050128/laf046_1.html
Bizi, that is phenomenal commentary, and captures my sentiment exactly.
Note that recently, I'll try and find the post number, that someone did compare his 04 Accord EX V6 to his new Camry SE V6. (He owns them concurrently).
-alpha
Edit: Its POST 1800 on this thread.
I did some basic research before, and I didn't find a clear answer on the question. I was able to reaffirm, however, they are both good in this area. I'd be interested in more data from other members too.
1. The discussion boards you mentioned. Pat (the host) already pointed out that we shouldn't read too much into the number of complains here. I read those boards to learn what kind of potential problems to expect, and assess if there is a potential (common) problem that I cannot tolerate. There are quite some complains about Accord "rattles, creaking", and some said that it happened more in '03 (the first new generation) models, and improved in '05. Not sure. On the other hand, there is a discussion board named "Camry Rattles" here in Edmunds which I'm sure you saw already. Depend on your sensitivity, these may or may not be a significant problem.
2. "Scientific" data. It's surprisingly hard to find online statistics on past repair or problem complaint records. Some Canadian data: http://www.caa.ca/e/automotive/pdf/autopinion-03.pdf
Between Accord and Camry, one can read either way, Accord's data is excellent for '98-'02, but that's last generation (no current gen data). If you compare both Accord and Camry to many other vehicles listed there, then things are in perspective: both Accord and Camry are good.
I believe Consumer Report keeps track of repair survey data, but I don't have current subscription. From memory of past data, again, both are good. Also, we all know that there are other customer satisfaction surveys (e.g. JD Power).
3. Neither of them can make every car trouble free. As good as the reputation of both of these cars are, some people get the impression that the next Accord/Camry he/she purchase will be trouble free. That's probably an expectation set too high. I had one Camry that had leaking transmission oil while brand new. I didn't think that's a general problem with Camry though. It's just an individual car, a small sample. It is good enough to say, however, not every Camry is trouble free (we already knew that:-) Sometimes, it just depend on individual luck. I'd believe that the chance of a problem to happen in an Accord or Camry is more depend on individual car than the brand (obviously, some parts are more likely to fail in Accord, but other parts are more likely to fail in Camry, I'm talking about overall chance here, i.e. deviation vs. difference in average)
A side comment: there are some surveys indicate that the Accord/Camry build quality advantage over some domestic cars are dwindling over years. I tend to believe that. Coincidently, in my memory, our 1990 Camry was trouble free. To be fair though, at that time, driver's air bag was a novelty (what is ABS?), and my expectation of a car was much lower. You know, good old days:-)
And thanks to all of you who have pitched in to get this discussion back on track!
In 2002, the current Camry's first year, it's reliability was only "average" which was low for a Toyota. The Accord has been "above average" for 2003 and 2004, the first full years of the current model.
The Camry is currently statistically superior in reliability to the Accord but not enough to make a significant difference. Both cars are excellent but they do have different driving characteristics.
People who like their cars to be soft and quiet are better off with the Camry and those who like a firmer riding, "driver's car" will probably prefer the Accord. This was my observation when I tested cars 17 months ago and chose the '04 Accord EX-L.
Styling differences are a matter of personal preference and aren't worth discussing.
Fortunately, both cars are superior to most other cars--certainly for the money, both cars are good choices. Just drive them first to experience their differences........Richard
That order in CR is for how they rate the cars overall and not specifically the interior. i know you personally like the camry's interior more than the accord's interior. i was pointing out that the consensus of opinion from auto publications don't share your opinion as you indicated.
perhaps you're right. but keep in mind that it's normal and expected for the accord to receive these changes at this stage of its current design. the camry had some changes/improvements for 05. the accord is a year behind the camry in the design cycle.
Since the regular tire wouldn't fit in the space for the donut spare. Where would I put it. The truck is full of luggage, and we had four people in the car. Camry has a full size spare as you probably know. That's the only reason I chose Camry (plus I never had a problem with the other two. My present car is 2004 Model Camry.
The full-size spare vastly improves the safety, range and utility of the vehicle. It makes the vehicle a lot tougher. You can go on long trips, or trips to isolated places, without worrying that you may get stuck, or get reamed with expensive tire repair bills.
Do you ever see a Hummer, a Land Rover or any SUV with a compact spare like the Accord, or a tire repair kit like the Honda Accord Hybrid?
This kind of cost/corner cutting is not very smart and not very considerate of consumers' needs for safety, security, economy...
For readers didn't follow the previous discussion, this is about the issue that some people think that the Accord's rear end design is less than appealing.
not that this is even close to a deal maker in my purchasing of a car.
Capo
Camry also has the GU option for $1000, which includes all side and curtain airbags for front and rear seats, plus electronic Vehicle Stability Control, which Accord does not even have, option or not.
The VSC is a very important safety feature, which prevents vehicle skidding, spinnning, roll over... which can cause single-car or multiple car accidents.
I suspect Toyota will make the side and curtain airbags standard for all camry in MY 06.
In rather short experience I had in comparing Camry SE V6 and Accord V6 EX (both '05 models), subjectively, I wasn't able to detect much difference in cabin quietness. Accord may let in a tiny bit more of road noise (I'd rather call it road feel). When engines rev up, on the other hand, I could actually hear more engine sound in the Camry ( both engines are very quite at low rpm). Reading other publications, it seems that it was a change of character in the current generation of Accord. Camry has kept or improved its quiet tradition.
Perceived quietness is a kind of personal matter to certain degree, so may worth a personal experience if one is shopping between the two. There are some "objective" sound level measurements, and some even suggested buying a sound meter to measure. Others had pointed out in the past, however, that these numbers may not be too useful due to technical details (e.g. what frequency is more sensitive to people etc.), as long as the numbers are not hugely different. Actually, these days, many sedans are pretty quiet, I had a few rental cars that are not too far away from Camry (although overall not as smooth).
___The 05 Accord’s are already equipped with SAB’s and Curtains as std., not a $1,000 add-on. As for VSA, in an SUV, this is very handy. In a sedan, less so. It is to bad Honda does not add this to the Accord nor TCS in the I4 based Accords however
*****************************
NHTSA
05 Honda Accord/04 Toyota Camry (05 Camry has yet to be completely tested)
Driver: 5*/4*
Passenger: 5*/4*
Side Front Seat: 4*/4*
Side Rear Seat: 4*/3*
*****************************
IIHS
05 Honda Accord/05 Toyota Camry
Frontal 40 mph offset
Structure/safety cage: G/G
Head/neck: G/G
Chest: G/G
Leg/foot, left: G/G
Leg/foot, right: G/A
Restraints/dummy kinematics: G/G
Side Impact Driver/Rear Passenger
Overall: G - G
Head protection: G/G - G/G
Head/neck: G/G - G/G
Torso: G/G - G/G
Pelvis/leg: G/G - A/G
Structure/safety cage: M - A
*****************************
___In terms of actual safety during the 2 types of crashes as shown above, I would much rather take my chances in a Honda Accord vs. the lower scoring Toyota Camry.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
Also, the cars scored the same in the NHTSA frontal tests. I would not even consider the NHTSA side tests as significant, in light of the fact that NHTSA uses a carlike barrier (in terms of height) to impact the test vehicle. Much more important, the NHTSA side tests do not record ANY forces on the dummies' heads, and head injuries are the leading cause of death in side impact crashes. The IIHS test uses a higher barrier contoured to represent the shape of a typical large pickup or SUV, and head injury results play a major role in the tested vehicles' ratings.
___If you are taking bits and pieces of the NHTSA and IIHS tests to say they don’t count or they do, then either they are significant or they are not? I tend to think they are and the NHTSA giving the Accord 5 * vs. the Camry’s 4 (Frontal) and the Accord’s 4 * vs. the Camry’s 3 (Side - Rear) says something very significant to me.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
Still, I stand by what I said before. I'm not trying to convince you, but assure others in Edmunds that either car is a fine choice as to crashworthiness. 4 stars vs. 5 in the NHTSA frontal test is not all that significant; both scores are good. I'd be concerned about 3 stars or less.
The NHTSA side impact tests are far inferior to those of the IIHS because head impact forces on the dummies are NOT recorded, and the impacting barrier is shaped like a flat-faced car. Cars today are tapered, not flat; the IIHS by contrast uses a contoured barrier with a height and shape that is a composite of late-model large pickups and SUVs on the road today.
The NHTSA barrier is so low that it can't hit the dummies' heads. The IIHS barrier is sufficiently high that it can, and does, directly contact the driver dummy's head, as occurs in actual SUV-into-car side-impact crashes. Side airbags provide a cushion between the impacting barrier and the dummy's head, often providing the difference between life and death in regard to the forces recorded on the dummy's head.
And the resulting head-impact measures on the dummies contribute heavily to the ratings, as they should. Not only that, but the IIHS records many more injury forces on the dummies' bodies than does NHTSA in its side impact tests.
Technically, the Camry with side airbags scored slightly better than the Accord in the IIHS test, but slightly worse in the IIHS frontal test -- the overall result is a wash. However, these small differences aren't really meaningful. Both cars earned Good/Best Pick ratings for frontal performance and Good ratings for side-impact performance.
You can buy either car with confidence -- just be sure to insist on side airbags on the Camry.
http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2004/pr102804.htm
Someone commented on VSC availability on the Camry- in most regions, its not hard at all to find a V6 SE or V6 XLE with the option. On the other trim levels, it becomes harder. Still, there are significantly more Camrys on the road with stability control than Accords on the road with stability control (as its not available).
210delray- I entirely echo your sentiment with respect to NHTSA side impact testing (check out the Accord 2 doors near 1000, ie, severe head injury rating.. that doesnt get represented in the 'Stars'.). With respect to frontal impact, from what I read on the webpage, NHTSA intends to test the 2005 Camry once again.
~alpha
___I only said VSA is less important in a sedan then in an SUV, not un-important as I wish Honda offered it in the Accord’s along with Brake Assist, 4-wheel discs and EBD on the LX’s, and TCS on the I4’s.
___In a frontal or side impact, I would rather be in the Accord. The 05 Camry has been side tested by the NHTSA with the same results as the 04’s (a notch below that of the Accord). The NHTSA frontal impacts have yet to be performed as of this writing and they don’t create their * ratings out of thin air.
05 Accord: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars/3325.html
Frontal HIC: D=245/P=334
Chest Decel: D=41/P=39
Femur Load L/R: D=194/257 // P=826/317
Side HIC: F=216/R=397
TTI: 62/61
Pelvis Decel: 65/58
04 Camry: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars/2960.html
Frontal HIC: D=549/P=430
Chest Decel: D=44/P=45
Femur Load: D=694/488 // P=356/190
Side HIC: F=399/R=999
TTI: 70/74
Pelvis Decel: 82/101
___Bold is where I would rather be
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
The tested 2004 Camry in the same test DID NOT have the optional side airbags!
As I said before, side airbags make a BIG difference in the results!
Please look at the IIHS side-impact tests in which BOTH cars were tested with side airbags. The Camry scored a touch better than the Accord, but there were no real significant differences - both were rated Good.
The frontal NHTSA tests show no significant differences either (HICs in the 200s and 500s are both quite good, and the other injury measure differences are inconsequential, considering the average driver + passenger femur loads are similar).
The IIHS frontal tests show basically the same thing - somewhat better structural intrusion measures for the Camry and somewhat better injury measures for the Accord. Both cars are Good/Best Pick according to IIHS.
Bottom line (again): Both cars are fine from a crashworthiness standpoint, but get side airbags in the Camry.
IIHS links:
Accord:
http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0220.htm
http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0319.h- - - - - - tm
Camry:
http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0202.htm
http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0315.h- - - - - - tm
To get the detailed intrusion and injury results for each car, click on
"Table of frontal offset crash test details (technical information)" and
"Table of side impact crash test details (technical information)" within each link.
1) stability control (which reduces injury/fatality in many types of accidents in which drivers lose control by preventing loss of control) is unavailable at any price on the Accord.
2) the 05 Camry has not had frontal NHTSA tests performed (and the 02 and 03 did better than the 04, despite that there were no design changes???)
3)NHTSA may not create the * rating out of thin air, but its not very useful for side impacts, as it doenst include HIC.
4)Honda should be commended for making side airbags and side curtains standard on the Accord.
5)Optioned with side airbags and side curtains, there is little difference in the crash worthiness between Camry and Accord.
-The Accord has an edge in the NHTSA frontal (based on 05 Accord vs. 04 Camry).
-The Accord has a slight edge in the IIHS frontal offset (though its injury measures to vital areas are slightly higher than the Camry).
-The Accord has a clear advantage in the NHTSA when comparing an 05 Accord to an 05 Camry with no side airbags.
-There is no apples-to-apples comparison for NHTSA side impacts (Camry tested with curtains).
-The Camry with side curtains performs better than the Accord with side curtains in the IIHS side impact (the Camry's structure is rated Acceptable, Accord's, marginal).
~alpha
http://69.93.188.20/~tundraso/fleet/showroom.php
Out of 129 Camry 4 cyl AT in their inventory, 33 or about 25% have the GY option, which is all side and curtain airbags for front and rear seats. This is a very good percentage of GY option for the sun belt. I think all XLE and V6 have these airbags standard.
The option costs an extra $650,pushing the MSRP to $21,351. Dealers in So Cal have been advertising LE's AT 4 Cyl for about $16.5K after rebate, so one should be able to get a Camry LE AT with GY option for about $17K.
Toyota will most likely offer all side/curtain airbags as standard features in MY 06.
Good Catch.
Alpha01, 1. Previously mentioned more then once. 2. Posted previously as well. 3. NHTSA’s side impact HIC was posted. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars/3325.html. Were you speaking of some other HIC? 4. Agreed in full. If only Honda would have followed though with VSA, TCS, and BA :-(
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Yes, I understand that NHTSA records the HIC for side impacts. However, the HIC for side impacts IS NOT a factor in the determination of the star rating. The Ford Focus is an example of what I am speaking of: http://www.safercar.gov/NCAP/Cars/3305.html
4 star rating, leathal blow to the head noted only as a 'Safety Concern'. IMO, if the driver is killed, the vehicle doesnt warrant a 4 star rating.
To summarize my sentiment even further:
The crash test differences between like equipped Camrys and Accords are neglible. However, a bigger safety issue is that the Accord does not come with VSC.
~alpha
If the difference between the two were negligible, why does the NHTSA rate the 04 Camry with only 4 *’s in the frontal vs. the Accord’s 5 *’s?
05 Accord
Frontal HIC: D=245/P=334
Chest Decel: D=41/P=39
Femur Load L/R: D=194/257 // P=826/317
04 Camry
Frontal HIC: D=549/P=430
Chest Decel: D=44/P=45
Femur Load: D=694/488 // P=356/190
I can’t do anything about VSA but at least if you are in an accident, the 05 Accord appears to be the better of the two to me given the above.
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Since the year doesnt seem to matter to you, I'm going to use the 2003 Camry instead of the 2004. There were no design changes.
Frontal Camry
HIC D=340 P=446
Chest Decel D=42 P=45
Femur Load D=95/221 P=906/766
So, I ask you, why are the Camry's scores so different from 2003 to 2004 when no design changes were made?
The side impact rating is different between 2003 and 2004 as well, with the 03 earing 3/5 and the 2004 earing 4/3?
Because of this large test to test varience, I personally dont place much weight on the NHTSA test.
So, for me, the small differences between the Accord and Camry in the IIHS testing (and NHTSA testing) are more than offset by the fact that a Camry with VSC is less likely to be involved in a single vehicle accident with injuries or fatality than is an Accord.
~alpha
Since the year doesn’t seem to matter to you, I'm going to use the 2003 Camry instead of the 2004. There were no design changes.
Frontal Camry
HIC D=340 P=446
Chest Decel D=42 P=45
Femur Load D=95/221 P=906/766
And the Accord is still better.
So, I ask you, why are the Camry's scores so different from 2003 to 2004 when no design changes were made?
Why would you ask me? The Camry is the one scoring lower then the Accord so I would assume you would want to ask Toyota?
The side impact rating is different between 2003 and 2004 as well, with the 03 earing 3/5 and the 2004 earing 4/3?
And the Camry still scores behind the Accord.
So, for me, the small differences between the Accord and Camry in the IIHS testing (and NHTSA testing)
Small differences? The Accord is the better vehicle in terms of its crash ratings unless you want to throw out NHTSA’s test results altogether? I would not do that myself but that is just me.
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Furthermore, the IIHS tests show that there are no significant differences between the 2 cars in either frontal offset tests or side impact tests (when both cars have side airbags).
According to Honda, there were no significant design changes affecting frontal crash performance among 2003-05 Accords. According to Toyota, the same is true for the 2002-05 Camry.
I think this is the 3rd time I've said this: Bottom line is that both cars are fine choices as far as crashworthiness.
Now, can we move on?
Let us please move on. The NHTSA gives the Accord higher scores including better HIC’s for frontals. What is there to debate? Both are fine in terms of crash worthiness. The Accord however has better crash scores or there wouldn’t be this discussion. You do know about the NHTSA’s 5 *’s vs. 4 and 4 *’s vs. 3 right?
Let us all move on.
Wayne R. Gerdes
~alpha