When the Altima debuted with a size larger than the Maxima and a 240hp engine, the thought was that the Maxima was dead. To the contrary, I read somewhere that the Maxima's sales have been sustained to some extent by people coming in to shop the Altima and being turned off by the cheap materials.
"The Altima's style isn't wearing off anytime soon (like Accord's did!). "
That's your opinion.
" And Nissan can add 10-45HP whenever they want to their 3.5L V6. Honda won't because they will lose their cherished ULEV rating. "
Um .. ULEV is a good thing. Lower emissions is a good thing. Do you care about breathing?
" Nissan's "cheap interior" (you want cheap, look at Pontiac Grand Am/Prix, now THAT'S CHEAP!), can be fixed quickly. Not Honda's Suzuki Aerio exterior treatment. "
If the Altima's interior can be brought up even to the 93-97 Accord's quality that would be great. Please tell Nissan to do it .. Do they really want to have the Altima compared to a Grand Am? Geez.
I was there looking at the C&D site and the new Accord. Now keep in mind that I own a 2000 Accord and my other vehicle is an Ody so I would not be in the Honda bashing camp. That said.
1. Why after all the build up do I look and say "Well, it looks like an Accord." To me this is neither good nor bad but if they are looking to lure the Passat crowd over I think they laid an egg. It still looks fine to me but not breathtaking by any means.
2. What the heck is it with Honda and manuals only available on 4 cyl engines? I'd buy a V6 in a minute if it had a stick. So my 4 will do for now. I know they say they offer a V6 with a 6 speed (!) later - but only on the coupe! I'm a sedan guy. Don't they think we can drive?
3. I haven't seen a review so I'll reserve judgement but if this has the same basic feel as the current generation the question is why does Honda feel you have to make a choice between a noisier but good handling car like the Accord and a quiet as a church spongy thing like a Camry? I test drove a Passat and it outhandled the Accord and was very quiet indeed. Only reasons I didn't buy it were the requirement of premium fuel and the fact that VW had not proven at that time that they really meant to clean up their reliability act on this one. I had a Rabbit once and am very sensitive to this one. This is my third Accord so I guess I played it safe.
I was waiting on something that was so much improved that I'd go against my better judgement and trade the current car in for the new one. From what I see so far I won't be doing that. I do like my current one just fine.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I believe that every engine/transmission/body variant requires testing and approval from the regulatory bodies. If research/analysis shows that sales of a certain combination would not be worthwhile, then it's not made.
Personally, I would love it. I've been in an auto for 4 years now and am itching to get back into a stick, but I really want a 6 cylinder if available.
Good response to whotheman. I was going to say the same thing. And whotheman, please note the Altima's engine is a 3.5. You don't think Honda can match or beat the HP and torque if they increased engine size? They've already got 260 HP from 3.2L.
fezo: you wondered why no V6 sedan with stick? No enough demand to make it commercially viable.
I just read the Edmunds review. I have no doubt a lot of it is correct. It was my first impression just looking that they have clearly come down more on the side of keeping current owners than rather than attracting new buyers. That said it looks better to me all the time....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
sd1228, (post 4998) you're not the only one who feels that American cars are getting bloated. As you said, auto manufacturers are designing new cars with total disregard for garage width. This includes the upcoming Honda Element, with it's 72 inch width and suicide doors.
The supersizing is one reason why I won't be getting the new "Saturnized" Accord. The new Latitude (66.7" wide) out next year will be the right-sized Honda for me.
One more thing. This never ending thirst for more horsepower has me convinced that there is a gas crisis around the corner. I think we are overdue for one.
the reason cars are getting bigger is because people are getting bigger...and it's about time the auto industry is catching on.
i'm only 6'1" and can easily count on one hand the number of cars where i can sit in the back seat and be very comfortable with plenty of legroom and enough headroom (a precious commodity in very low supply if you want a sunroof). now keep in mind i'm talking about sub 30k cars, not your typical s-class mercedes or 7 series bmw.
so, even though i'm no fan of the new accord's styling, i'm glad they are trying to make a comfortable car; and not just for front seat passengers, but also for those back seat drivers!!
Since the Altima vs. Accord bashing is getting to the point of Lunacy - both cars are great in their ownright (including the new Accord) and both do/will have a good reputation in Quality.
The Camry's interior is very drab, and think the Altima's interior is a little classier. Even the Leather option on the Camry is a low quality Leather!
O.K., I started the Camry bashing (had one, loved it). What do you guys think?
In my opinion, the evolutionary design of the new Accord befits its standing as an affordable, reliable, efficient, quality engineered, quality built, & sporty means of family transport which does well at splitting the difference between good ride & handling at a price point most average people can afford to purchase. The Accord has a history of satisfying most of those mentioned categories-- it may not have been the best in every category-- but it sure comes close. That is the beauty of the Accord-- it is the "Swiss Army Knife" of the Automotive World. Even if its styling is highly conservative, the quality of its design and contruction compensate for it. It is best to have a conservative design that will endure and age well vs. a styling theme that will most likely be short lived-- the Cadillac CTS comes to mind--and I actually LIKE that car--- the wife is repulsed by it--doggone her time!! I digress...
Bottom line is that trying to be all things to all people can be a tricky thing to do. There has to be a compromise in design to ensure most of those desirable traits get engineered into a vehicle where cost is a major concern, especially in such a competative market segment as the midsize sedan. I think Honda has made all the right compromises with the new Accord. Besides, if they made it TOO good, then why pony up more ca$h for an Acura??
I like the new Accord's interior very much, and certainly think its one of the cars (many) selling points. I dont exactly understand why Honda has elected to continue the peculiarly large sizing of the speedo, but its an attractive guage setup. I think the center stack is trendy/futuristic-not a bad thing. That said, I really like the 02 Camry interior as well... so easy to use, and the gauge setup is an appropriate size-the bluish white hue and orange pointers at night seem very elegant,as does the chrome steering wheel logo. Definitely an improvment over the last Camry and better than the Altima. And I actually like the plood on the XLE (The Accords isnt bad, either). Just my .02 Btw- I am NOT a fan of the new Mazda 6's interior-a bit too much of the "sports" look cliche (same goes for Camry SE), and I dont like the stereo/HVAC display separated from the actual controls. ~alpha
I think the Camry has a nice interior, especially in an XLE model with leather. It looks like a Lexus inside.
Altima-My aunt has a new 2.5S that she just got back in April and I have about 200 miles of experience with it. I wanted one at first but as I drove it more I realized that it wasn't the car for me. I couldn't get comfortable in the driver's seat so I'd find myself squirming around a lot. The tilt/telescopic steering wheel aided my discomfort somewhat but I still couldn't get comfortable enough. I was impressed by the gauge cluster at first, but after several miles of night-driving I found it to be irritating because it was either too dark or too bright, depending on the setting. The interior materials were not that bad but there was a slight feeling of cheapness in some areas. For example: 1)The headliner was like peach fuzz glued to cardboard, 2)certain plastic pieces weren't low quality but they were cut very sharp and didn't look like they were cut exactly the way the designers intended(the trim piece around the power window switches on the driver's door)and 3)the sunglass storage compartment and center console were flimsy and felt like they would probably break easily. The cloth upholstery was of decent quality and everything else seemed okay.
actually i'm surprised that honda hasn't developed a car that is one size larger than the '03 accord...rather than continually making the accord incrementally larger with each redesign. where i live i see lots of geriatrics driving 4 door accords (i'm not kidding!). this is the crowd that typically drives a ford crown vic or some hideous similar car. anyhoo, i think now that honda has captured the 60 plus crowd, they'd do well to introduce a larger car for those folks...and even tho i'm not ancient, that is a car i might be interested in...
strager- That is true. I think you can randomly pluck a European and he/she will be just as big as an American. But more realistically, the majority of Americans are bigger than Europeans, as well as the rest of the world.
Damn smiley faces. The bashing battle that has been going on between the Altima and Accord crowd has been pretty funny, so I felt the Camry was left out. :-(
fasterthanu : Problem with the quality arguments for your Lexus is the numbers are significantly better than say the fifth or eighth best car to warrant that to be your choice. You said yourself style factored into your choice. Lots of people who know nothing about cars (and don't care to) look in a magazine and see Camry as the least trouble and buy it. People who know a little more realize there is MUCH more to a car choice than quality number in Consumer Reports.
RE : SUPERsizing : I think it's good. Cars were getting too small in the 80's. Who wants to be cramped?? As longs as mileage/ performance doesn't suffer.. bring on the big!!
Maybe the difference is most americans want or expect more personal space in their cars..we lived in sicily for 2 yrs thanks to the Navy and I don't think I'll ever forget seeing 5,6, 7 Italians in a fiat or smaller car...and enjoying it I might add...
not too many recent reports of seeing how many college students can fit in a VW bug either.
Whatever the prestige factor may be, and with it aside, the vast majority of people who buy Lexii rank quality and reliability as their prime reasons. They KNOW the RX and ES are based on the Camry and are therefore reliable. When you step inside the Lexus you feel the quality. That's my argument about the Accord - not only is it a solid car with great materials, fit and finish, it's also economical. Honda simply gives you more for the money - how else to explain the lines of people willing to pay MSRP for the CR-V, Odyssey, Pilot and MDX? That the CR-V is the best-selling import SUV (well, a cross-over in any case), that the Accord and Civic are the best-selling import cars?
Sure, styling sells. But trouble-free and long-term ownership of a car demands more.
I first want to share some thoughts about your forum. It helped me greatly make a final selection on a new car. I had two cars narrowed down, different in scope, but both met my needs. I logged on to the model’s forums and read the threads. What a difference. One car was larger and better looking, but the enthusiasm, questions about small issues, dealer concerns, and longevity were so different from the threads in the Accord forum. The information was truly between the lines, and extremely valuable. Better than could be obtained anywhere.
Today’s topic is tires. I am looking to replace tires on both a 2000 Accord EX V6, and a 2001 Accord EX V6. Naturally we are replacing Michelin MXV4 Energy 205 65 R15. The size is the easy part.
I like the energies, but they are expensive. Not only that, they come in H and V ratings with prices to match. I had a grand prix with BFG Touring TA’s (H rated) that I was very pleased with. I found that there is also BFG Touring TA’s that are V rated at a very reasonable price. Another alternate is Michelin Pilots, or Goodyear Eagle Aquatread III’s. Michelin X-Ones are also on the list due to great ratings and long life, even with only a T rating.
My driving is mostly in North Eastern Ohio, mostly highway. This means cruising at 70 to 75 mph, four seasons, flat highway, hilly twisty back roads.
So . I have a few questions for the powers that be. 1) Thoughts on any of the above tires? 2) Thoughts on V rated vs H rated for the driving type? 3) Alternate tire suggestions for an Accord EX V6? 4) Sources for tires that balance price and services? 5) Alternate widths and profiles, such as 215 or 60 series tires, or 215/60 tires? 6) Good web sites that review this sort of thing?
you may be the only person in the world with this opinion.
dindak: in terms of problems per car, GM is closing the quality gap with Honda. I believe they're achieving this by not updating their designs (Buick in particular) and they should eventually get it "right". however the quality gap in terms of engineering is still significant. items such as quality of materials, fit/finish, panel gaps and evenness, engine refinement, interior design and so on ...
Thats strange, I have never heard a negative comment concerning setup and design on the speedo/tach/fuel/temp/odo on this generation Camry EVER. Personally, I hate white with white pointers, so whether its LED (like the new Accord or Lexus RX) or plain analog (like in the last generation Camry)..its not my game. Plus, the there is no need for the speedometer to be sized such that even Stevie Wonder could probably see it(referencing Accords since 98) ~alpha
Hello all. I am looking to purchase a 2002 honda accord 4dr auto DX with AC. I wanted to know what I should expect to pay out the door. I live in atlanta, GA. I can buy now and put in in my wifes name or I can save some more money and buy in NOV. Do you think that I will be able to find the above vehicle in NOV or do you think that all the 2002's will be gone by then?. I have heard that the 2002 accord should still be on the lots till DEC but am not sure if this is true. Any ideas?
You are missing my point. I don't disagree that quality sells. What I am saying is that if you dig a little deeper you will see that the quality/reliability in the best car (say the Camry) is not that much better than the 2 or 3 cars that follow. Paying huge premiums for Honda Pilots right now to me makes no sense when there are other vehicles in the class that are just as good, reliable and cost lots less. Honda/Toyota fanatics love their cars just like GM/Ford fanatics love theirs. Nothing wrong with it's just not me. I tend to look for the best value in a car (considering all factors). To me Honda doesn't win here BUT, this new Accord is catching my eye and for the first time I may consider a Honda if the price is right in a few years. I suspect the real Honda fans will line up to pay list + when it comes out in the fall but after a few months I'm sure dealers will deal. I am still enjoying my 00 Intrigue right now though as it's only 3 years old.
No one should pay anything over MSRP for a car that sells 400,000 units per year. Even if it is a Honda. I would think that with the intense competition (Camry, Altima-which is supposed to have improved interior materials for 03, Passat, and new 6) all of the midsize makers in this segment will be competing to win car shoppers' dollars (and most importantly it seems, hearts!)
There is a big difference is buying a Honda or Toyota beyond the intital purchase price. Long term ownership costs such as depreciation, maintenance, and repairs are typically much higher for the domestics versus T/H. (See Intellichoice). Better make sure you get that Taurus or Impala well under MSRP with all those incentives.
Front Head Room: 38.5/38.3/39.2 Front Hip Room: 54.9/54.6/54.4 Front Shoulder: 56.9/56.9/57.5 Front Leg Room: 42.1/42.6/41.6 Rear Head Room: 36.0/36.8/38.2 Rear Hip Room: 54.1/53.5/54.1 Rear Shoulder: 56.156.1/56.7 Rear Leg Room: 37.9/36.8/37.8 Trunk Area: 14.1/14.0/16.7
The Camry actuall appears more efficent with its size based on some of these measurements. For reference, the European Accord's exterior dimensions are about the same as a NA VW Passat, except that it is 8-inches shorter (euro bumpers). There aren't any interior measurements on the euro Accord on the UK website, and I'd be to lazy to conver metric to english anyway.
Well, incentives hurt re-sale, pay less and sell for less. As for repairs and maintainence, domestics cost lots less to fix (cheaper parts). I'm not a big fan of the Impala, but the car is reliable and well built at the most efficient plant on the continent in 2001. If they fixed the interior and the tail lights it would probably compete much better with Accord and Camry.
I don't see what is so great about the Passat's interior. I hate the dashboard design. European cars have too many buttons and the dash and console form an L shape. I don't like that. I like the smoothness of the new Accord's dash. Lexus vehicles along with the Avalon are good at this.
Intellichoice lists maintenance and repairs of an Impala LS as $3,302 over 5-years. Maintenance and repairs on an Accord EX-V6 is estimated at $1934 over 5-years. If those Impala parts are so much cheaper, it must mean you need a whole lot more of them...
I don't know what their number's are based on. Parts for domestic cars are well known to be cheaper. Take it all with a grain of salt like any other statistic / estimate.
Your research is, once again pathetic. Tell me. What is "cheap platic" and when you are comparing V6 engines why would you quote an article on an inline 4? Are you sure the test drive you took in an Altima wasn't a i4? Seems that would be more competitive to the Honda V6.
I agree that paying MSRP for a car is nutz. I certainly would not pay that for an Accord. But fact is, a lot of people DID pay MSRP for the new Altima but that died down since. Nissan was forcing a lot of options down their throats too, which is sad.
I mention that people are paying MSRP for the Odyssey, MDX, CR-V and Pilot because the demand outstrips the supply and even at MSRP, they are a good value. When the MDX came out, we considered it and even at sticker was comparably priced with the RX300's negotiated price. If not for the 8 month waiting list, we may have gone with the MDX instead.
Now the Accord can't command MSRP for long, perhaps for the first few months or so due to over-eager buyers, but it will taper down. After 2/3 years in production, the Odyssey is STILL selling at MSRP ... and now it's really simply due to supply/demand, with no ridiculous forced options.
and try to buy the only example of ANY all new model on the showfloor that day you will pay at or above MSRP. Not even GM is giving away their all new cars. Any 2002 model is a different story...
For one thing, let's keep the cheap shots ("pathetic") out of this, or this exchange is done.
If you can't figure out what "cheap plastic" is, ask Consumers Guide... they made the comment, not me. I don't think that most people would have trouble figuring out what they meant, because I've seen similar comments (such as the Automobile editorial) that say exactly the same thing. Just because you don't understand the concept doesn't make it irrelevant or "pathetic".
The interior and build comments were for all models, so your big concern about I4 vs. V6 is unwarranted about those comments, which are to me the most key.
Yes, the engine noise comment was about the I4, which Nissan predicts will be in 80% of Altimas. So it has great relevance. I even went the extra mile to note that they made a different comment about the V6, so you seem to be REALLY hard to please.
I know what I was driving, and it WAS a V6, thank you. I have enough knowledge about cars to know that, so please spare me the patronizing remarks. My initial comments were not targeted specifically towards an drivetrain (check it out yourself if you doubt me), just the Altima in general. The article I quoted (Consumers Digest) dealt with both the I4 and the V6... how do you think I came up with the additional remark about the V6 otherwise???? At any rate, your concern about that comparison is just a smokescreen. I wasn't comparing V6 engines, just Altimas in general.
So, the refinement comments, the interior comments and the ride comments all apply, regardless of engine. The only comment that applies only to the 4 is the engine coarseness comment, which applies to 80% of Altimas. Regardless of what you thought, my comments were not intended to be limited to Altima V6 models. So my research is very applicable... if it makes you feel better to call it pathetic, knock yourself out. Just shows how transparent YOUR wrap is.
Finally, since this is now about Altimas exclusively, that makes it off topic. What is an Altima enthusiast doing spending so much time in a Honda forum anyway, when the sole intent is obviously to rip on Hondas? I'm not spending any time in any Altima forums... perhaps you should do us the same courtesy.
At any rate, since it's OT, I think we should end this. If you feel compelled to "put me in my place" one more time, go for it. I'm done.
I agree - brand new models that are high in demand will get customers willing to pay MSRP if the price is reasonable. I do think Honda has done a lot of great engineering in the MDX, Odyssey, Pilot and CR-V to the point where they sell at sticker in sustained rates. Evidently there are a lot of satisfied Honda owners. My neighbor just got an Odyssey too - nice minivan. Even at MSRP, the Honda prices are still reasonable because they undercut the competition to begin with, yet offer high value content.
acmeroadrunner:
Cheap plastic can be hard to define - you shouldn't get on talon's case for it. I can offer you comparisons:
The plastic in my 1990 Legend feels better than in the 2002 Altima. The 1993 Accord's plastics were similar in texture to the Lexus of the time. The plastic in the 02 Altima is cheaper than in the 01 Altima or the current Maxima. It's actually comparable to the plastic that surrounds the seat rail in my Legend, except my plastic is molded better with no sharp edges.
I don't see how you can question the Altima's quality considering the Altima owners themselves complain on the Nissan boards and sites. And that Nissan quite plainly said it was cost-cutting on materials.
Comments
That's your opinion.
" And Nissan can add 10-45HP whenever they want to their 3.5L V6. Honda won't because they will lose their cherished ULEV rating. "
Um .. ULEV is a good thing. Lower emissions is a good thing. Do you care about breathing?
" Nissan's "cheap interior" (you want cheap, look at Pontiac Grand Am/Prix, now THAT'S CHEAP!), can be fixed quickly. Not Honda's Suzuki Aerio exterior treatment. "
If the Altima's interior can be brought up even to the 93-97 Accord's quality that would be great. Please tell Nissan to do it .. Do they really want to have the Altima compared to a Grand Am? Geez.
1. Why after all the build up do I look and say "Well, it looks like an Accord." To me this is neither good nor bad but if they are looking to lure the Passat crowd over I think they laid an egg. It still looks fine to me but not breathtaking by any means.
2. What the heck is it with Honda and manuals only available on 4 cyl engines? I'd buy a V6 in a minute if it had a stick. So my 4 will do for now. I know they say they offer a V6 with a 6 speed (!) later - but only on the coupe! I'm a sedan guy. Don't they think we can drive?
3. I haven't seen a review so I'll reserve judgement but if this has the same basic feel as the current generation the question is why does Honda feel you have to make a choice between a noisier but good handling car like the Accord and a quiet as a church spongy thing like a Camry? I test drove a Passat and it outhandled the Accord and was very quiet indeed. Only reasons I didn't buy it were the requirement of premium fuel and the fact that VW had not proven at that time that they really meant to clean up their reliability act on this one. I had a Rabbit once and am very sensitive to this one. This is my third Accord so I guess I played it safe.
I was waiting on something that was so much improved that I'd go against my better judgement and trade the current car in for the new one. From what I see so far I won't be doing that. I do like my current one just fine.
I believe that every engine/transmission/body variant requires testing and approval from the regulatory bodies. If research/analysis shows that sales of a certain combination would not be worthwhile, then it's not made.
Personally, I would love it. I've been in an auto for 4 years now and am itching to get back into a stick, but I really want a 6 cylinder if available.
fezo: you wondered why no V6 sedan with stick? No enough demand to make it commercially viable.
I just read the Edmunds review. I have no doubt a lot of it is correct. It was my first impression just looking that they have clearly come down more on the side of keeping current owners than rather than attracting new buyers. That said it looks better to me all the time....
The supersizing is one reason why I won't be getting the new "Saturnized" Accord. The new Latitude (66.7" wide) out next year will be the right-sized Honda for me.
One more thing. This never ending thirst for more horsepower has me convinced that there is a gas crisis around the corner. I think we are overdue for one.
i'm only 6'1" and can easily count on one hand the number of cars where i can sit in the back seat and be very comfortable with plenty of legroom and enough headroom (a precious commodity in very low supply if you want a sunroof). now keep in mind i'm talking about sub 30k cars, not your typical s-class mercedes or 7 series bmw.
so, even though i'm no fan of the new accord's styling, i'm glad they are trying to make a comfortable car; and not just for front seat passengers, but also for those back seat drivers!!
The Camry's interior is very drab, and think the Altima's interior is a little classier. Even the Leather option on the Camry is a low quality Leather!
O.K., I started the Camry bashing (had one, loved it). What do you guys think?
BTW, the new Accord's interior looks amazing.
Bottom line is that trying to be all things to all people can be a tricky thing to do. There has to be a compromise in design to ensure most of those desirable traits get engineered into a vehicle where cost is a major concern, especially in such a competative market segment as the midsize sedan. I think Honda has made all the right compromises with the new Accord. Besides, if they made it TOO good, then why pony up more ca$h for an Acura??
As for size, I like bigger cars for convenience. But like the nimble feel of a smaller car. which is one of the reason I am driving an accord.
Btw- I am NOT a fan of the new Mazda 6's interior-a bit too much of the "sports" look cliche (same goes for Camry SE), and I dont like the stereo/HVAC display separated from the actual controls.
~alpha
"'The V-6 was built to beat Altimas,' says Charlie Baker, head of Accord development."
I don't know Charlie...the manual V-6 Altima is pretty quick.
Altima-My aunt has a new 2.5S that she just got back in April and I have about 200 miles of experience with it. I wanted one at first but as I drove it more I realized that it wasn't the car for me. I couldn't get comfortable in the driver's seat so I'd find myself squirming around a lot. The tilt/telescopic steering wheel aided my discomfort somewhat but I still couldn't get comfortable enough. I was impressed by the gauge cluster at first, but after several miles of night-driving I found it to be irritating because it was either too dark or too bright, depending on the setting. The interior materials were not that bad but there was a slight feeling of cheapness in some areas. For example: 1)The headliner was like peach fuzz glued to cardboard, 2)certain plastic pieces weren't low quality but they were cut very sharp and didn't look like they were cut exactly the way the designers intended(the trim piece around the power window switches on the driver's door)and 3)the sunglass storage compartment and center console were flimsy and felt like they would probably break easily. The cloth upholstery was of decent quality and everything else seemed okay.
strager- That is true. I think you can randomly pluck a European and he/she will be just as big as an American. But more realistically, the majority of Americans are bigger than Europeans, as well as the rest of the world.
i'm not sure what the dimensions are of the euro spec accord, but from sketches it definitely better fits my personal definition of stylish...
does anyone know if there is a huge difference between euro and north american accord interior measurements...?
Hoping you can buy side air curtain on all models...
RE : SUPERsizing : I think it's good. Cars were getting too small in the 80's. Who wants to be cramped?? As longs as mileage/ performance doesn't suffer.. bring on the big!!
not too many recent reports of seeing how many college students can fit in a VW bug either.
Sure, styling sells. But trouble-free and long-term ownership of a car demands more.
I first want to share some thoughts about your forum. It helped me greatly make a final selection on a new car. I had two cars narrowed down, different in scope, but both met my needs. I logged on to the model’s forums and read the threads. What a difference. One car was larger and better looking, but the enthusiasm, questions about small issues, dealer concerns, and longevity were so different from the threads in the Accord forum. The information was truly between the lines, and extremely valuable. Better than could be obtained anywhere.
Today’s topic is tires. I am looking to replace tires on both a 2000 Accord EX V6, and a 2001 Accord EX V6. Naturally we are replacing Michelin MXV4 Energy 205 65 R15. The size is the easy part.
I like the energies, but they are expensive. Not only that, they come in H and V ratings with prices to match. I had a grand prix with BFG Touring TA’s (H rated) that I was very pleased with. I found that there is also BFG Touring TA’s that are V rated at a very reasonable price. Another alternate is Michelin Pilots, or Goodyear Eagle Aquatread III’s. Michelin X-Ones are also on the list due to great ratings and long life, even with only a T rating.
My driving is mostly in North Eastern Ohio, mostly highway. This means cruising at 70 to 75 mph, four seasons, flat highway, hilly twisty back roads.
So . I have a few questions for the powers that be.
1) Thoughts on any of the above tires?
2) Thoughts on V rated vs H rated for the driving type?
3) Alternate tire suggestions for an Accord EX V6?
4) Sources for tires that balance price and services?
5) Alternate widths and profiles, such as 215 or 60 series tires, or 215/60 tires?
6) Good web sites that review this sort of thing?
I appreciate any feedback the forum provides.
you may be the only person in the world with this opinion.
dindak:
in terms of problems per car, GM is closing the quality gap with Honda. I believe they're achieving this by not updating their designs (Buick in particular) and they should eventually get it "right". however the quality gap in terms of engineering is still significant. items such as quality of materials, fit/finish, panel gaps and evenness, engine refinement, interior design and so on ...
Altima to upgrade their cheapo interiors and for the Camry to increase their HP's.
The New Accord is a balance of the three (passat, camry, altima).
~alpha
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020730/200207301610000828_1.html
interesting read.
I would think that with the intense competition (Camry, Altima-which is supposed to have improved interior materials for 03, Passat, and new 6) all of the midsize makers in this segment will be competing to win car shoppers' dollars (and most importantly it seems, hearts!)
02 Accord/03 Accord/02 Camry
Length 189.4/189.5/189.2
Width: 70.3/71.5/70.7
Height: 56.9/57.1/58.3
Wheelbase: 106.9/107.9/107.1
Weight: 3075.0/2989.0/3142.0
Front Head Room: 38.5/38.3/39.2
Front Hip Room: 54.9/54.6/54.4
Front Shoulder: 56.9/56.9/57.5
Front Leg Room: 42.1/42.6/41.6
Rear Head Room: 36.0/36.8/38.2
Rear Hip Room: 54.1/53.5/54.1
Rear Shoulder: 56.156.1/56.7
Rear Leg Room: 37.9/36.8/37.8
Trunk Area: 14.1/14.0/16.7
The Camry actuall appears more efficent with its size based on some of these measurements. For reference, the European Accord's exterior dimensions are about the same as a NA VW Passat, except that it is 8-inches shorter (euro bumpers). There aren't any interior measurements on the euro Accord on the UK website, and I'd be to lazy to conver metric to english anyway.
I mention that people are paying MSRP for the Odyssey, MDX, CR-V and Pilot because the demand outstrips the supply and even at MSRP, they are a good value. When the MDX came out, we considered it and even at sticker was comparably priced with the RX300's negotiated price. If not for the 8 month waiting list, we may have gone with the MDX instead.
Now the Accord can't command MSRP for long, perhaps for the first few months or so due to over-eager buyers, but it will taper down. After 2/3 years in production, the Odyssey is STILL selling at MSRP ... and now it's really simply due to supply/demand, with no ridiculous forced options.
If you can't figure out what "cheap plastic" is, ask Consumers Guide... they made the comment, not me. I don't think that most people would have trouble figuring out what they meant, because I've seen similar comments (such as the Automobile editorial) that say exactly the same thing. Just because you don't understand the concept doesn't make it irrelevant or "pathetic".
The interior and build comments were for all models, so your big concern about I4 vs. V6 is unwarranted about those comments, which are to me the most key.
Yes, the engine noise comment was about the I4, which Nissan predicts will be in 80% of Altimas. So it has great relevance. I even went the extra mile to note that they made a different comment about the V6, so you seem to be REALLY hard to please.
I know what I was driving, and it WAS a V6, thank you. I have enough knowledge about cars to know that, so please spare me the patronizing remarks. My initial comments were not targeted specifically towards an drivetrain (check it out yourself if you doubt me), just the Altima in general. The article I quoted (Consumers Digest) dealt with both the I4 and the V6... how do you think I came up with the additional remark about the V6 otherwise???? At any rate, your concern about that comparison is just a smokescreen. I wasn't comparing V6 engines, just Altimas in general.
So, the refinement comments, the interior comments and the ride comments all apply, regardless of engine. The only comment that applies only to the 4 is the engine coarseness comment, which applies to 80% of Altimas. Regardless of what you thought, my comments were not intended to be limited to Altima V6 models. So my research is very applicable... if it makes you feel better to call it pathetic, knock yourself out. Just shows how transparent YOUR wrap is.
Finally, since this is now about Altimas exclusively, that makes it off topic. What is an Altima enthusiast doing spending so much time in a Honda forum anyway, when the sole intent is obviously to rip on Hondas? I'm not spending any time in any Altima forums... perhaps you should do us the same courtesy.
At any rate, since it's OT, I think we should end this. If you feel compelled to "put me in my place" one more time, go for it. I'm done.
I agree - brand new models that are high in demand will get customers willing to pay MSRP if the price is reasonable. I do think Honda has done a lot of great engineering in the MDX, Odyssey, Pilot and CR-V to the point where they sell at sticker in sustained rates. Evidently there are a lot of satisfied Honda owners. My neighbor just got an Odyssey too - nice minivan. Even at MSRP, the Honda prices are still reasonable because they undercut the competition to begin with, yet offer high value content.
acmeroadrunner:
Cheap plastic can be hard to define - you shouldn't get on talon's case for it. I can offer you comparisons:
The plastic in my 1990 Legend feels better than in the 2002 Altima. The 1993 Accord's plastics were similar in texture to the Lexus of the time. The plastic in the 02 Altima is cheaper than in the 01 Altima or the current Maxima. It's actually comparable to the plastic that surrounds the seat rail in my Legend, except my plastic is molded better with no sharp edges.
I don't see how you can question the Altima's quality considering the Altima owners themselves complain on the Nissan boards and sites. And that Nissan quite plainly said it was cost-cutting on materials.