Sign In Join 



Chevrolet Malibu vs. Toyota Camry vs. Honda Accord

630 messages,  Last post on Jul 19, 2009 at 5:49 PM

You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Toyota Camry, Chevrolet Malibu, Honda Accord, Car Comparisons, Sedan


Messages Page 54 of 64
1
...
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
...
64
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#526 of 630
Re: Accord vs a Camry [djm2] by imidazol97
Nov 14, 2008 (8:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: djm2 (Nov 13, 2008 8:23 pm)

>ip I now have a "BIG PROBLEM"!
 
You drive it after it comes in. If you don't like it you don't take delivery. End of deal!
That's the same thing as when you drive a car that's on the dealer lot.
 
>but I purchase vehicles on my terms not on the dealer's terms!
 
When you accept only the color or the package combinations left on the picked over dealer lot, you are buying a car no the DEALER'S terms, not your terms. Ordering a car puts you in the driver's seat.
#527 of 630
Re: Accord vs a Camry [imidazol97] by berri
Nov 14, 2008 (8:43 am)
Reply

Replying to: imidazol97 (Nov 14, 2008 8:18 am)

Ordering a car gets it how you want it and the dealer avoids flooring costs. However, the incentives may change by the time it is delivered and if you don't like it you may still be out the deposit you put down.
#528 of 630
Re: Accord vs a Camry [imidazol97] by elroy5
Nov 14, 2008 (2:30 pm)
Reply

Replying to: imidazol97 (Nov 14, 2008 8:18 am)

Ordering a car puts you in the driver's seat.
 
Not today. Maybe in a couple months.
#529 of 630
Re: Accord vs a Camry [berri] by dmathews3
Nov 14, 2008 (6:33 pm)
Reply

Replying to: berri (Nov 14, 2008 8:43 am)

I have purchased at least 30 vehicles in my life and ordered around 10 to 12 and never put down a deposit yet. Of course I don't mess with those little dealers. Have been using the same dealer for over 20 years. I even ordered my 02 40 foot 200K motorhome and never had to put down a deposit. Maybe I just have an honest face.
#530 of 630
by vanman1
Nov 16, 2008 (6:53 pm)
Reply
We ordered our van. It was 4 1/2 weeks and it's been perfect. Great thing is it is exactly what we wanted and we could choose incentives of the day we bought or the incentives at time of delivery. Great hedge I thought!
#531 of 630
Re:Fuel Mileage[djm2] by thegraduate
Nov 17, 2008 (8:32 am)
Reply

Replying to: djm2 (Nov 12, 2008 1:29 am)

I think the Chevrolet Malibu now has a 6 speed automatic transmission on both the 4 & 6 cylinder engines. If this is correct, I would like to drive both vehicles. If the mileage is very similiar, I would pick the 6 cylinder, because the American manufacturer has never made a four cylinder engine that I liked!
 
The mileage is dramatically lower for the V6 Malibu over the 4-cylinder Malibu, but better on the I4 models versus the competition in this forum.
 
Malibu
V6: 17/26 MPG (252hp)
I4: 22/33 MPG (169hp)
 
Camry
V6: 19/28 MPG (268hp)
I4: 21/31 MPG (158hp), same mileage for Auto and Manual
 
Accord
V6: 19/29 MPG (271hp)
I4 (Auto): 21/30 MPG (177-190hp)
I4 (Man): 22/31 MPG (177-190hp)
#532 of 630
Re:Fuel Mileage[djm2] [thegraduate] by iwant12
Nov 17, 2008 (8:47 am)
Reply

Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 17, 2008 8:32 am)

Looks like the Malibu I4 with the 6 sp trans is the clear winner of the three you listed. I wonder if it's made alongside the Saturn Aura at the Kansas plant? If my info is correct, the Aura made with 86% domestic parts (not bad, but we should be able to do a little better perhaps?).
 
I like the Malibu's looks (though I really like the dual exhaust of the V6's) and will put it on my short list for my next auto purchase. (Unless I can get a REALLY great deal on a Vette).
#533 of 630
Re:Fuel Mileage[djm2] [thegraduate] [iwant12] by thegraduate
Nov 17, 2008 (9:13 am)
Reply

Replying to: iwant12 (Nov 17, 2008 8:47 am)

Looks like the Malibu I4 with the 6 sp trans is the clear winner of the three you listed.
 
Indeed it is. Something to pay attention to though is the Camry's new 2.5L I4, which will debut in a matter of months. It'll offer close to 180hp, and if I had to guess, very competitive fuel economy.
 
Also noteworthy (although not in this particular discussion) is the Nissan Altima 2.5L, which manages the best city in the midsize class (23/32 with the 6-speed stick, 23/31 with the CVT).
#534 of 630
Re:Fuel Mileage[djm2] [thegraduate] [iwant12] [thegraduate] by bvdj84
Nov 17, 2008 (9:59 am)
Reply

Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 17, 2008 9:13 am)

With the increase of HP in the camry, aren't they just catching up to its competitors?
 I have driven the camry, I felt it was good power, but, the Accord 4cyl had a bit more oomph to it. Of course that was the 06 Accord. I am not sure how the 08 Accord and the newer increased Camry will compare. Both are great cars.
 
It is great that GM is offering a more competitive transmission. But, they need a bit more tweaking in their 4cyl to make it more refined, and relocating its power band in the right area. I think a little re-programming is desperately needed. Because, that leaves me to the question of why many are finding the have to opt for the 6cyl rather than the 4cyl on a GM product. I find my 08 GM 4cyl 4spd transmission to be very annoying! I currently have it for sale, for lease transfer. I am going back to Honda!
#535 of 630
Re:Fuel Mileage[djm2] [thegraduate] [iwant12] [thegraduate] [bvdj84] by thegraduate
Nov 17, 2008 (10:23 am)
Reply

Replying to: bvdj84 (Nov 17, 2008 9:59 am)

With the increase of HP in the camry, aren't they just catching up to its competitors?
 
Horsepower-wise, yes. But they'll likely leapfrog the competition (save for the Altima) in torque, which is where Honda still can't get much past the 160 lb-ft barrier.
 
It is worth noting that the current 2.4L Camry (actually the 155hp PZEV version)was tested to be quicker than the 2.4L 177hp Accord in standing start acceleration right here at Edmunds.
 
Edmunds had this to say about the Accord LX-P:
 
Low-end torque is not a strong suit of the Accord's 2.4-liter engine, which is rated at 177 hp at 6,500 rpm and 161 lb-ft at 4,300 rpm. In typical Honda fashion, though, power builds as you move up the tach, with the most dramatic change coming at 5,000 rpm when the variable valve timing switches over to more aggressive camshaft profiles.
 
This was evident during acceleration testing, where the Accord ran to 60 mph in 9.3 seconds, yet nearly caught up with the Camry in the quarter-mile traps with a run of 17.1 seconds at 81.9 mph.

 
And about the Camry LE:
 
And just like the V6 version, the four-cylinder Toyota Camry is quick relative to its competition. Our LE test car's 8.9-second 0-60-mph time is tops for this group, as is its 16.9-second quarter-mile at 82.3 mph (though the Accord, which has 19 more horsepower, nearly closed the gap).
 
It's no wonder the Camry produces such numbers, as our California car with its PZEV-rated 2.4-liter inline-4 produces 155 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 158 pound-feet of torque at 4,000 rpm. (The non-PZEV engine delivers 158 hp and 161 lb-ft of torque.) It felt more responsive in city traffic than the inline-4s of the Chevy and Honda. Power delivery is about as smooth as it gets with four cylinders.

Messages Page 54 of 64
1
...
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
...
64
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement