Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Malibu Chevrolet Malibu vs. Toyota Camry vs. Honda Accord
643 messages, Last post on Nov 29, 2009 at 6:32 AM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: iwant12 (Nov 17, 2008 8:47 am) 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).
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 17, 2008 9:13 am) 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! 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bvdj84 (Nov 17, 2008 9:59 am) 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. |
|
|
Replying to: pao (Feb 15, 2007 6:06 am) I do not think the Malibu should be compared to the Camry or the Accord! --- The Impala would be a better comparison. As far as the problems with the V6 2007 Camry, I own a XLE / 07 / V6 Camry with 46,000 miles, and I DO NOT have any of the problems that you see posted on these boards! This vehicle is a "drive by wire vehicle" and many of the owners are not comfortable with that system. ----- Since I am in sales, I do an extensive amount of highway driving. On long trips I easily get 34 mpg at 60 to 65 mph. If I lower the speed to 45 / 50 mph I have seen 38 mpg. (Not bad for a full-size vehicle with a V6! Show me an American vehicle that can give those numbers! Best regards! ------ Dwayne  
|
|
|
Replying to: djm2 (May 08, 2009 1:56 am) All of these cars have their +/-, but I think they are all decent cars. I still prefer the Camry though! |
|
|
Replying to: djm2 (May 08, 2009 1:56 am) You do not hear people talk about GM's engines, other than if its a sports car. But, you do not hear people say the V6 is smooth and refined, or you can get by with a 4cyl because it is so smooth and efficient. Why do you see most people opt to get the V6 in a GM car? The 4cyl cannot cut it. My 06 Accord 4cyl engine would blow the G6 4cyl I have now off the road!!! Not to mentions its crappy transmission. I would love to have my Honda back, but the Camry looks nice too. As long as its suspension isn't soft. |
|
|
Replying to: bvdj84 (May 08, 2009 5:05 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: berri (May 08, 2009 10:09 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: bvdj84 (May 08, 2009 5:05 am) I would NEVER purchase a 4 cylinder American vehicle! ------- American car manufacturers cannot build a quality four cylinder engine!---- I was comparing the V6 Impala, to the V6 Camry, to the V6 Honda Accord! Best regards to all! ----- Dwayne
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: djm2 (May 08, 2009 4:08 pm)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Malibu Chevrolet Malibu vs. Toyota Camry vs. Honda Accord
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Toyota Camry
2010 Chevrolet Malibu
2010 Honda Accord
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
