Last post on Apr 26, 2010 at 5:30 PM
You are in the Honda Accord
What is this discussion about?
Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Volkswagen Passat, Sedan
Mar 03, 2003 (7:34 pm)
Don't know what happened to my post. It just disappeared.
The Passat was equal to the Accord after 98 according to CR? Then why did it receive a black check mark in 99 for the 4 cylinder and black check marks for 99 and 00 in V6 form? If it is equal in CR then why is the Accord (along with 6 other Honda/Acura models) listed as one of the best used cars while there is NO VW (or Audi) on the list at all? If it is equal in CR after 1998 why is the Passat given a clear circle for predicted reliability? Something isn't adding up here.
As for safety...why are you bring up statistics for the 98-02 Accord? I thought we were talking about 2003 Accords. All indications are that the Accord is a safer vehicle, there are no indications that VW's reliability is significantly improved from 98.
Mar 03, 2003 (7:37 pm)
The Camry's larger gas tank gives it a 28 mile advantage in range. The Accord actually gets 2 MPG better on the highway but the Camry has a 1 gallon advantage in tank size.
Mar 03, 2003 (8:04 pm)
"When another poster quoted some less than favorable Accord opinions from British motoring magazines, the respose was "what do they know?"
I don't believe that the comments were questioning the knowledge or skills of the British journalists. What they were questioning was the relevance of the reports, which is a reasonable question since they aren't testing the cars that are being sold here, particularly in the case of the Accord. We all know that the Accord sold here is designed specifically for the US and Canada, and the version sold in Europe is completely different. So posting reviews from those magazines in this forum is totally irrelevant.
I too could search around for irrelevant reviews of irrelevant cars from European magazines. I've already read some that favor the Euro Accord and some that favor the Passat. But we're not discussing the Euro Accord or the European spec Passat in this forum. Fortunately, the major US magazines that are testing the exact cars that we're discussing here provide sufficient relevant information about those exact cars. And they recognize the essential parity between the Accord and Passat, as well as the Camry, as they have for years. Each car has some advantages over the others, which gives each its own personality. Pick the combination of personality, value and features that appeals most to you. Each of these cars is widely recognized for excellence in a number of areas, and you won't go wrong with any of them.
As Pat asked, are we really accomplishing anything of value by continuing to beat this dead horse?
Mar 04, 2003 (6:18 am)
When I listed the feature differences between the BASE Passat and BASE Accord. I was responding to anonymousposts post #1073 in which he listed features that both base models had. He missed quite a few features the base Passat has that the base Accord does not, and shortly after that post #1073 was deleted. Maybe he realized there are many more differences, I'm not sure.
It's very interesting that when prices are compared, the price of base Accord is always mentioned, as if theres a HUGE price difference from the Passat. Then when I compare the features you get (or don't get) with that huge price difference on base models, everyone says "unfair!".
When you compare comparably equipped models, there is very little price difference, and as you said, the Passat has very good features you can't get on any Accord.
#1082 of 1838 whistling noise of the Passat when accelerating
Mar 04, 2003 (7:02 am)
Sweet sounds of the turbo. No worries on the 1.8T
#1083 of 1838 Camry different than Accord vs Passat
Mar 04, 2003 (8:10 am)
The Camry is a "family sedan". Softer ride, and all. It does not appeal to the car mags because they want the performance.
Accord and Passast go for the performance market.
So, today, if you want a moderately priced "family sedan" you can look at a Camry, Taurus, a variety of GM products, or a Chrysler Sebring. Of those, the Camry is (IMHO), vastly superior.
For "sports Sedan" under 30K, the market is
Accord, Passat, Altima, Mazda6, and teh SAAB 9-3 and 9-5 (which are discounted to under 30K).
I would argue that the SAAB 9-5 discounted to 29K is better overall than the 30K passat.
But a 25K accord vs 25 k passat, I am not sure.
Mar 04, 2003 (8:25 am)
"anonymousposts post #1073 in which he listed features that both base models had. He missed quite a few features the base Passat has that the base Accord does not, and shortly after that post #1073 was deleted. Maybe he realized there are many more differences, I'm not sure. "
I was comparing comparably priced cars. I was not comparing a base Passat to a base Accord. I was comparing a EX Accord to a Passat GLS. Kinda not the same as comparing a $22,000 Passat to a $16,000 Accord. What kind of new Passat can you get for $16,000? Answer is ... NONE. Can't compare features if VW doesn't have a Passat at that price level.
There is still a significant price difference. You can get a EX-V6 Accord for the price of a 4 cylinder Passat. As for 4 cylinders, as I demonstrated, a 2.0L Jetta is almost as expensive as a 2.4 EX-L Accord.
Mar 04, 2003 (9:04 am)
Once again,the comparably priced Accord has the six and the Passat has many other features which the Accord does not. They've all been listed in earlier posts.
#1086 of 1838 honda accord vs toyota camry vs nissan altima
Mar 04, 2003 (9:17 am)
I am planning to buy a car by this week ...and want to hear about your experiences ....regarding these three cars...
I had one camry 2000..and pretty satisfied with that..
but as I have a chance to make a better choice ...I am rethinking what will be best for me..