ItsaHonda

Unless if you got ripped off, a 2003 Accord cannot compare to a much more expensive car>>>

Then lets go ahead and say its in a class of its own, between an Altima and a BMW 5-series...because no other mid-class car even comes close. Can't get navigation in a Malibu or Grand Am (nor can you get a 6-speed) Can't get self-illuminating LED guages in an Altima (which are very Lexus-like) and comparing Accord to the others, no other car in this clas segment has more comfortable, higher quality feeling leather seats, nor do they have switchgear that feels as rich as the Accords. Again, perhaps these details are much better in a Mercedes or Audi, but these are NOT qualities normally associated with mid-class automobiles. So where does that bring us?

Ownership of Caddy kind of explains why you cannot tell between quality>>>

Cadillacs quality is lacking, especially compared to Lexus and the European marks, but my original point was that I have driven cars that were twice as expensive as the Accord, yet I was still impressed by the craftmanship.

Don't get me wrong, Caddy make good cars, just that they are not really able to compete anymore, everybody has gotten much better>>>

Well, the Cadillac CTS is setting new sales records for General Motors, and if it still ranks high in a few years...I may consider one.

While it is also known that you don't get quality mateiral and assembly with Cadillac>>>

But you do with a 20k Accord, so what does that say for Honda?

Itsahonda, I would also advise you taking a test drive on any of the luxury sedens before commenting. You clearly have not had a luxury car or have not paid attention to what makes a luxury car a luxury car>>>

I think what this is boiling down to is that I need to drive a European luxury car (Mercedes, BWW) since that seems to be where this comparison is going. Let me start by saying I have nothing against European luxury cars, and always believed their build quality to be superior in the past. I would never compare my 96 Accord EX to a Mercedes, I'd be an idiot. But since my 96 Accord was assembled, Honda has improved their products ten fold. They exceeded the big two (Ford and GM) in the early 90s, and now they are focusing on Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc. The newest Accord drives and feels more Passat-like than any other Accord I've driven. Look at the TSX, aimed straight for BMW, as is the Lexus GS300/400 and Infiniti G35. Comparing the 7th gen Accord to a new Passat (thats fair, isnt it?) I found the materials to be nearly identical, and both cars give you a feeling of solid construction. I found the Passat to also be very elegant for the mid-class arena, and with just a few more luxury touches...it can pass as a Audi A-series.

Accord interior is cheap as it is in its range. Repeat the following when you drive your accord again then see if Accord is near luxury>>>

I would never consider my Accord to be near luxury, as I stated earlier, I'd be an idiot if I did. My generation Accord was actually a few notches behind the mid-class competition (particularly competitors from other Japanese and European makes) While the Accord recieved a makeover in 1994, it was still pretty much a 1990 car and it shows. However, it was still very well put together and materials were much better than average during that era. Panels fit together properly, and the car still feels relatively solid after 7 years.

I expect leather shifter knob>>>

I have a leather shift knob in the Trans Am, and I do not associate that with quality, especially since an F-body has close to none.

I expect same feel of bottoms when pressed>>>

The switchgear in the 7th gen Accord felt very refined, more Lexus-like than any other mid-class car I can think of.

I expect same ilumination intensity on all bottons in the night>>>

I cant comment on this since I havent seen the new Accords interior backlighting at night, but I have heard complaints of the steering wheel audio controls not illuminating. Since the steering wheel audio controls in my Trans Am light up, I would have to question Honda on that one...but the switchgear itself is of MUCH higher quality than that in the Fbody.

I expect to open the hood without the prop rod>>>

Lexus IS300 uses a prop rod, without much complaint. My Trans Am doesnt, so again...what does that say for quality?

I expect a full size alloy spare tire, I expect not seeing screw holes any where, I expect soft material around the center console. I expect real wood if I am willing to pay. I expect flawless assembliing quality where no stitch is out of place, no panel has ripped edges>>>

And I can go back to my original point by saying, the 7th gen Accord will meet your expectations better* than an Altima will...or any other mid-class car. A shopper who would normally laugh at the thought of owning a mid-class car, might actually give the Accord consideration. End of discussion.


The amount of hard plastic in Accord is unacceptable. When I am in the Accord, I am constantly reminded that I am in a sub $30k car; quality of material is not there>>>

I assume you are referring to the 1996. In that case, the quality is there...but you are trying to get a BMW 7-series out of a 5th gen Accord.

Yes, it has improved for instance finally the trunk lid finally has linent>>>

I dont recall an Accord never having trunk linen.

I would assume that the big 2 you are talking about are Mercedes and BMW>>>


No, Ford and GM.

As you said, the only flaw of your car is that it is not a 2003, however 2003 has smooth transmission. What do you actually like?>>>

I dont care for the smoother shifting automatics, but I suppose if I've driven them for as long as I have, I can continue to...especially since the rest of the car more than makes up for it. What is it I really like about the 7th gen Accord? A number of things, it combines the ride quality, comfort, and luxury amenities that I had with the Cadillacs with the reliability and craftmanship of the Honda.

This is not the first time that people admit that Honda has jerky shifting on their automatic transmission>>>

A lot of people complained about it, which was why Honda designed the shifts to be much smoother in later models (beginning with the 6th generation) Honda's previous automatic transmissions were specifically designed to have hard shifts, to give the car a sportier feel (since Honda is a performance oriented brand) Performance modifiers pay money to have their automatics shift harder.


Either I was pampered really well by me Lexus or the Accord has transmission problem>>>

No, It's just the nature of the car and was either a hate it or love it feature. In your case (and the majority of initial Accord buyers) hate it.

Even the ES300 rental I got has smoother shifting than Accord; yet ES300 is merely a Camry>>>

Camrys are some of the most pillowy Japanese cars on the road, considered to be the Buicks of Japan. Maybe thats your cup of tea, but I like crisp handling, and like to feel my car do it's thing. That is one of the many reasons I got tired of owning Cadillacs (another was the quality issue)


I am not sure if my car has problems, I got two dealers to test drive it and a family friend who is a mechanic to drive it. All of them told me that the car is running in very good order. When I comment on things I don't like, they pretty much told me that Honda is pretty much like that>>>

What problems have you specifically had or are having? Yes, my engine vibrates when AC compressor kicks on (as does the steering wheel) but I consider that to be very minute in comparison to the car's overall stance. Its gone nearly 100,000 miles with nothing more than fresh fluids, ONE set of brakes, a battery (the original lasted 7 years) spark plugs (which were not required) and a set of tires. I do a lot of highway traveling (averaged 52,000 miles this year alone on the Accord) and it has never let me down, and provides a solid comfortable ride on the highway. After 7 years, I am not annoyed with rattles and squeaks and interior/exterior still look new. I attest that to quality.

vinz

so the point is, if you got the 25K or less go for the accord with

standard quality and everything, if you got the 50k or less go for

the bimmers or mercs. you know, imo honda really did well in their

2003 accord, even my cousins and friends who owned audis ,

bmws and benzs say they are impressed with the quality and

everything that im getting from my accord with what i pay.



as for comparison, the top of the line accord ex v6, imo, can be compared to the cheapest a4 , cheapest bmw 325 and the cheapest benz c-class. i say the cheapest of the 3 because if you got the money or at least the down payment, the most you pay for the most expensive accord is more or less 25k but with the 3 other cars, you can go well over 40k. money talks and it takes you to different dealerships.



one last thing cjamie, you are posting in a honda/acura forum, of course the replies you get will be in favor of them both and not the rest.

vinz

and dont even mention american cars, remember history they even need the japanese and german automakers to voluntarily limit the number of cars they export to the us to make sales.

Shifty_Rick

Just one added comment to cjamie...The new Accord does not need a prop rod for the hood, a small detail which surprised me, after driving Toyotas for 30 years and always needing it. I guess that luxury is different things to different drivers. For me it's a that car seems to become an extension of of my own body. It drives like a dream, and has more than enough in the way of creature comforts to satisfy most people.

And for me the greatest luxury of all is that I can afford to own this car, unlike all those IMO, overblown European types.

cjamie

the no need for prop rod I think only applys to v6 model; that's what they should have done. I do agree that top of the line accord will compare really nicely (price & equpiment level) with bottom of the line a4 and bmw3; however the craftsmanship and material selection is still on the low side. I too was impressed by the contains level for the $, assuming V6 leather w/ navi for $23K. Otherwise a rip off...

The whole point I am arguing is that Altima is not that much worse than Accord. The same arguement you guys are using on the Altima can be used when I argue Accord with A4, 3 series..etc. However, what I see is that while everybody bashes on Altima, people get mad when I argue that Accord is not on par with A4/3 series. Be fair you guys, Altima compares well with Accord!

vinz

if we wanna compare the top of the line altima with the top the line accord ( without the navigation on both). we have to add 4k of more cool stuff into the altima, as it is that much cheaper. i dont think nissan priced the top of the line altima 3-4k cheaper than the accord for nothing.

ItsaHonda

It's obvious we (me and CJamie) arent going to convince eachother of anything,which is fine, we all have a right to our opinions. The best thing to do in this matter is drop the discussion and move on with our lives

ODUB

ACCORD, the altima is ugly, it's a piece, and it's not a honda...the only nissan i could ever see buying over a honda is the skyline....altima cant **** with the accord....and that maxima is like a rock on wheels...it's got more power than the AV6, but the AV6 will dust it...NISSAN BURN IN HELL

03accordcoupe

Wow this threads been dead for a while. The AV6 will dust the Maxima? Umm...no? Maybe a 6 speed vs an auto Maxima, the 6 speed would win. Manual vs Manual and auto vs auto its a drivers race, small edge maybe to the Maxima.

ODUB

the accord would win because the maxima is a brick...it's heavy and not really made to move...it's made for people who wanna put 20's on a car and drive slow