You are here:
Forums
Sedans
Honda Accord
Honda Accord vs. Toyota Camry vs. Volkswagen Passat

1822 messages, Last post on May 11, 2008 at 7:24 PM
You are in the Honda Accord Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Other than what the press tells us is the case, the 03 Accord ("7th gen") seems like a totally new platform as indicated by wheelbase and track dimensions: 1) Wheelbase: 107.9 in. for 2003 vs 106.9 in. for 6th gen Accord (1998-2002) 2) Track: 61.1/61.2 for 2003 vs 61.2/60.4 for 6th gen The 03's drivetrain, which ultimately sold me on the car, is also practically new (4 cyl/auto as case in point) vs the previous model: 1) variable valve timing, intake & exhaust plus DOHC (previous: exhaust - or intake, not sure - only and SOHC) 2) 5-speed auto transmission (6th gen had only 4-speed). Todate, no same-class car has the 5-auto unless the Passat is included Honda's genius also comes to play with the engine reorientation, where the exhaust manifold points rearward - allowing cleaner emissions and less backpressure. 6th gen Accord - not so. All told, 03 Accord owners can probably rest easy with the thought that their cars are a new generation model. |
|
|
|
| I read it on Edmunds.com and somewhere else as well. It wouldn't surprise me. | |
|
03accordman. When you repeat the same articles over and over, you always forget to mention that the Passat was Editor's choice over the accord in Edmunds and the Passat was the winner in the Reader's choice in Edmunds and Automobile Magazine, and the V6 Passat was the choice in Consumer Reports over the accord . Deja Vu all over again. Enjoy your ride. I am. I also remember Edmunds saying that the Passat has the best resale value. That was one of many reasons I bought the car. |
|
|
Here it is. The top 10 cars with the highest residual value, from Edmunds: Compact Car: Mini Cooper Midsize Car: Volkswagen Passat Near Luxury Car: BMW 3 Series Luxury Car: Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class Minivan: Honda Odyssey Sub Compact SUV: Honda CR-V Compact SUV: Acura MDX Full-Size SUV: Toyota Sequoia Compact Truck: Toyota Tacoma Full-Size Truck: Toyota Tundra |
|
|
|
|
...there is a difference. Residual values pertain more to leased vehicles. As such, they are driven by 1) lease providers who estimate a car's worth at lease-end, and said estimate is in turn influenced by the 2) lease/purchase mix of that particular brand. Simply put, more expensive cars (such as the Passat) tend to be leased and at lease-end, who buys them back at a high price but that brand's dealer network. The dealer network can afford to do this because they resell the off-lease cars as premium-priced "used certified cars" with manufacturer-backed APRs. Hence, we'll see that the dealer's high buy-back price drives the car's residual value up - a misleading indicator of what the used car is worth. In the private party marketplace, it's quite different as per my post #1203. Thus, if one owns - not leases - a Passat, the residual value isn't the guide to the car's true worth; it's the resale value in the private buyers' market. And I believe the seller of a used car with a negative reputation behind it is going to feel that the hardest (e.g., a beautiful 45k/99 Audi A6, $35k when new, for $17k only - that must hurt). |
|
| Audi A6? I think you're in the wrong board. | |
|
|
|
I used the A6 to get the point across, being that it and the Passat are mechanical cousins, and both are in rough waters because of poor quality perception. Just lamenting that such greatly conceived and engineered cars are let down in execution. |
|
|
|
|
The Passat (’99 1.8T 5M) was my first European car in a long while. I didn’t like the way it felt at first, but once I got used to it, I couldn’t get enough of it. The Passat I owned was a driver’s car, and had zero problems during the four years that I had it. This time around I went for the Accord (’03 EX V6 Cpe 5A), because it made more economic sense when comparing similar levels of equipment. Plus, I wasn’t too thrilled with the cosmetic changes they made to the Passat during the ’02 model year. Also, I’d never owned a Honda product and I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. Obviously, a car with a manual transmission and a turbo charged engine will give a driver a completely different experience than a V6 automatic. However, I was not expecting it to be that different. I still miss some of the Passat’s driving dynamics. Below is a list of a few things that I miss and don’t miss from the Passat. From the Passat I miss: -The higher feeling of control I had over the car -The lack of rattles (the Accord has a couple already -– the Passat had none in four years) -The ergonomics (I haven’t been able to find comfortable seat position in the Acccord) -The engine response at freeway speeds I am glad I no longer have to deal with: -The higher road/wind noise -The lack of power at the low end (turbo lag) -Having to rev up the engine so high when going up steep hills -Having to remove the plastic cover from underneath the car before every oil change (the quick lube place would charge an extra $20 otherwise!). -Having to change light bulbs somewhat often -The excessive brake dust on the front wheels Overall, both the Passat and the Accord are great cars. I think they are targeted at slightly different types of drivers though. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans
Honda Accord
Honda Accord vs. Toyota Camry vs. Volkswagen Passat
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Honda Accord
2009 Toyota Camry
2009 Volkswagen Passat



Browse by Board
Browse by Topic