 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / August 2006'06 Accord EX vs '07 Camry LE: Power, Safety & Price
Because of my recent enhanced upderstanding of the safety features listed below, and how my '05 Accord LX doesn't have them ... Traction Control Stability Control Emergency Braking Assistance Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (newer Honda LXs have ...) Rear disks DRL I decided to take a hard look at the Camry LE, versus what I'd have to buy from Honda to get the features above. I already knew I couldn't get the features in any LX / Special Edition / Special Value models with a stick, and because I like a manual transmission, I'd have to go up to the the EX with V6 and 6M. Aside from power and handling, the Accord EX and Camry LE are very different in character because of differences between the two in handling, economy, convenience, and comfort, but controlling for as many factors as possible, the Camry i4/5M LE looks like a heck of a value. Beginning in 2007, Toyota includes so many of these features standard for the Camry that the single "VS" (vehicle stability / traction) option for $650 gets you all the safety features above. That means if you can live with an i4/5M versus a V6/6M, your MSRP savings for this level of safety is: $27,850 V6/6M Honda EX -20,680 i4/5M Camry (with VS option) ------ $ 7,170 or, 34.7 percent less for the Camry LE. And if you really have to have the extra power of the V6/6A, the Camry still wins as the 3.5L produces HP/Torque comparisons of: 268HP/248FT-LB, versus 244HP/211FT-LB for the Accord EX V6/6M And better fuel economy, and at MSRP of $24,270 with the VS option group included, is still $3,580 less than the EX Accord. But this is a digression, since you can't get the V6 Camry with a stick, (which I want), and don't want the extra horses if it means giving up up the stick. (If you like automatics, this could an even sweeter deal for you ...) Focusing on our original comparison, and limiting ourselves to how the cars are different ... Honda EX V6/6M More power, sportier handling Alloys Sunroof Remote anti-theft Leather seats & trim for doors, shifter, steering Heated seats & mirrors Folding rear bench w/ pass-thru Remote window operation Universal remote transmitter (garage/alarm) Dual climate control Illuminated vanity mirrors Floor mats EPA Mileage / Range, City/Hwy w/17.1 gallon tank 21 / 30 -- 359/513 and on the other side .... Camrey i4/5M LE Better fuel economy Smoother ride Quieter cabin 3.5 foot smaller turning circle Rear seatbelt pretensioners Tire Pressure Monitoring Split folding rear bench Rear center armrest storage Speed sensitive volume Aux mp3 audio input 15 vs 14 cu/ft luggage Dusk sensing headlamps EPA Mileage / Range, City/Hwy 24 / 34 EPA 444/629 Range with 18.5 gallon tank Average of 100 miles greater range! ------------ So the Accord is your pick if money doesn't matter, and luxury, sporty handling an power are tops, and, If $7,170 is a chunk of change for you, and, A smoother, quieter ride is important, and, Fuel economy and range matter, and, You can live with a butt-ugly grille, The Camry LE looks like a winner. +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+ > snip > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > The Camry LE looks like a winner. For about $2K more than an I4 Camry you can get the Camry Hybrid that should average something like 35 mpg. It has a much smaller trunk but more HP than the I4 Camry. I'm pretty sure the Camry Hybrid stacks up well in your comparison. We have one vehicle that is now used almost exclusively for short trips in town. A Toyota Hybrid could be a practical choice if we wanted that size car. But we're also looking at the new Civic. Not that much smaller, great mpg but perhaps $10K less expensive than the Camry Hybrid in another year or so. However, I worry about the short trips in town and what that might do to a new engine, especially in winter. > For about $2K more than an I4 Camry you can get the Camry Hybrid that > should average something like 35 mpg. The purchase of a hybrid has been criticized of late as offering a false economy. CR wrote that you almost can't drive enough miles for it to make ($$) sense, especially compared to the more parsimonious gasoline engine cars. But if it gives you a nice big environmental "warm and fuzzy", I guess that's something ... unless you start looking at the energy required to manufacture and recycle batteries, etc. I guess I would look at a Prius if I were going that route. > It has a much smaller trunk WAY smaller ... > but more HP than the I4 Camry. I'm pretty sure the Camry Hybrid > stacks up well in your comparison. Except for the biggie safety thing: You can't purchase vehicle stability control w/traction control even as an option on the Hybrid. It's also hundreds of pounds heavier than a regular i4, so I'm afraid it would corner like a pig and would not stop as short. Hmmm. Is the idea of suspension kit for a hybrid an oxymoron? +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+ Consumer Reports admitted a mis-calculation for the Prius and probably the new Civic would be a reasonable choice too. >> For about $2K more than an I4 Camry you can get the Camry Hybrid that >> should average something like 35 mpg. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | > +-----------------------------------------+ > Consumer Reports admitted a mis-calculation for the Prius and probably the > new Civic would be a reasonable choice too. I forgot: Is Accord Hybrid even available with stick? +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+ Nope and it doesn't pay for itself as a hybrid either. >> Consumer Reports admitted a mis-calculation for the Prius and probably >> the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | > +-----------------------------------------+ > Because of my recent enhanced upderstanding of the safety features > listed below, and how my '05 Accord LX doesn't have them ... [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > the stick. (If you like automatics, this could an even sweeter deal for > you ...) The only way I'd give up my stick is if my knees can't physically push down a clutch pedal anymore, haha. as for the safety features, I was suprised honda dind't offer it on the I4. I lot of peopel have made mention that it's not really needed with an I4, but living in new england, I would of liked it. that being said. I still managed to get an I4 EX manual with leather and NAVI for under 25k. It wasn't too bad in the snow either (although we got lucky with a pretty mild winter) I took a look at toyotas site, and I didn't see anyway to get a camry with navigation in a manual transmission. >> Because of my recent enhanced upderstanding of the safety features >> listed below, and how my '05 Accord LX doesn't have them ... [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > toyotas site, and I didn't see anyway to get a camry with navigation in a > manual transmission. Nice to see people still like to drive a stick shift. I've always loved the Honda (and Acura) manual transmission. Had an '89 Prelude Si stick shift and now have an '05 Accord LX stick shift. The traction control would have been nice but I've lived without it this long. Then again the whole EX package offers nice options for about 2k more. Test drove the Civic EX but got a really good deal on my Accord. Paid $16,945 + tax & tags. Trying to stay on topic, much of it depends on whether you like driving the Accord or Camry more. If you want a smoother softer ride, the Camry is the way to go. If you want something that is more of the driver's car w/road feel, get the Accord. Both are by no means sports cars but each gives value, depending on personal preference. Can't go wrong with either. -Dave > Because of my recent enhanced upderstanding of the safety features > listed below, and how my '05 Accord LX doesn't have them ... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Emergency Braking Assistance > Electronic Brakeforce Distribution I believe that the Acura TSX includes all of those features, and it is available with either a 6-speed manual or 5-speed automatic. Anyone looking at well equipped Camrys or Accords should at least check out the TSX to see if it is the best choice for you. Acura dealers are discounting TSX pretty agressively while the new Camry, especially with desireable options, can be harder to find a good discount on due to it's newness. John > I believe that the Acura TSX includes all of those features, and it is > available with either a 6-speed manual or 5-speed automatic. It does have an i4/6M configuration, and this engine variant puts out 205hp. Still not the 268hp of the 3.5L V6 Camry, which gets higher fuel economy. Go figure. > Acura dealers are discounting TSX pretty agressively while the > new Camry, especially with desireable options, can be harder to > find a good discount on due to it's newness. Edmunds reports MSRP w/dest of $28,505 and a TMV price of $27,652, still $4-7k more than a Camry LE. But it does have the i4/6M, and I'm guessing that the ride comfort / cabin noise compares favorably, with better handling. Comes down to the money and how badly you want the "Acura" label, which we know that anywhere else in the world is just a Honda. +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+ > snip > > Edmunds reports MSRP w/dest of $28,505 and a TMV price of $27,652, still > $4-7k more than a Camry LE. But it does have the i4/6M, and I'm > guessing that the ride comfort / cabin noise compares favorably, with > better handling. Once the price gets near $30K and sport enters into the equation there's no sense looking at modified FWD grocery getters when great RWD performance sedans like the G35, IS 250 and 3-series are available. IMHO, Accords and Camrys are good values at around $20K but not when they're over $25K. > IMHO, Accords and Camrys are good values at around $20K but not when > they're over $25K. Agreed. +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+ > > Because of my recent enhanced upderstanding of the safety features > > listed below, and how my '05 Accord LX doesn't have them ... [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > John Saw a TSX on I 75 a couple of days ago... seems about the size of a Civic. See very few of them in my area. Understand the car is based on the European Accord which is supposed to be smaller than the US version. Also, quite expensive at around 30k. > Saw a TSX on I 75 a couple of days ago... seems about the size of a Civic. Nope. It's bigger. It's the European Accord. Is yours only a 4 cylinder? I have a 2005 LX and it has everything but the stability control and it now comes standard on all the new (2006-2007) V-6 models >> > Because of my recent enhanced upderstanding of the safety features >> > listed below, and how my '05 Accord LX doesn't have them ... [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Also, > quite expensive at around 30k. >>Anyone looking at well equipped Camrys or Accords should at least check >>out the TSX to see if it is the best choice for you. Acura dealers are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > European Accord which is supposed to be smaller than the US version. Also, > quite expensive at around 30k. Our TSX is completely comfortable for four adults on a long trip. Interior space is much larger than it would appear to be from the outside. Actually selling price is around $26,750 for a fully loaded vehicle except for the Navigation sytem. The Navi upgrade adds about $1800-$1900 on top of that. One of the things I like about it is that you don't see one sitting next to yourself at every stop light :). John > >>Anyone looking at well equipped Camrys or Accords should at least check > >>out the TSX to see if it is the best choice for you. Acura dealers are [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > except for the Navigation sytem. The Navi upgrade adds about > $1800-$1900 on top of that. The Edmunds price for my area had the TSX with Navi and Auto for 29500. When you add the usual dealer fees and carpets I should imagine you would top 30k. Tax would add another 7% in my area. I was interested in the TSX for a while because I thought it would be a reasonable move from the 5 spd Prelude I had. But, it was not the Type R Accord sold in in Europe from what I could see. > One of the things I like about it is that you don't see one sitting next > to yourself at every stop light :). > > John Consumer Reports says... The Camrys are not getting anywhere near the EPA rated mileage in their V6 engines. Hondas do. So a V6 Camry should stay off your list, unless you want 80% of the promised mileage. Also, Toy V6 engines are known to have a nasty gelling problem. Change the oil quite frequently if you have a V6, or -- for once -- synthetic oil is worthwhile in this application. There is now a sports version of the Camry. The suspension may be a lot closer to an Accord than a standard Camry & I'm curious myself. I have a 2004 Accord, but if it were totalled tomorrow, I'd seriously check out the V6 Camry. > Consumer Reports says... The Camrys are not getting anywhere near the > EPA rated mileage in their V6 engines. Hondas do. So a V6 Camry > should stay off your list, unless you want 80% of the promised mileage. That doesn't sound right to me. The various factors that reduce fuel economy should affect Toyota and Honda engines equally - unless you know a significant difference between them I don't know. > Also, Toy V6 engines are known to have a nasty gelling problem. Change > the oil quite frequently if you have a V6, or -- for once -- synthetic > oil is worthwhile in this application. That's pretty out of date, and overblown even in its time (about 1 in 1000 was affected) http://tinyurl.com/7ox9s . Oddly, it was redesign of the valve cover that corrected the sludge problem. Mike > Consumer Reports says... The Camrys are not getting anywhere near the > EPA rated mileage in their V6 engines. Hondas do. So a V6 Camry [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the oil quite frequently if you have a V6, or -- for once -- synthetic > oil is worthwhile in this application. i thought it was decided that the gelling was due to neglect... mostly cars right off a 3 year lease that didnt have regular oil changes? my moms scion xA has a required interval of 5000 miles between changes. i thought itd be longer than that, personally. > There is now a sports version of the Camry. The suspension may be a > lot closer to an Accord than a standard Camry & I'm curious myself. > > I have a 2004 Accord, but if it were totalled tomorrow, I'd seriously > check out the V6 Camry. > i thought it was decided that the gelling was due to neglect... mostly > cars right off a 3 year lease that didnt have regular oil changes? Nope, poor head design when Toyota attempted to extract more mpg from their 3.0L V6. Created hot/cold spots and poor maintenance made the problem obvious. A new valve cover was followed by a better head design. Fixed years ago. By the way, I have 171K trouble-free miles on one of the sludge-prone 3.0L V6s. Still delivering better than EPA mpg. > my moms scion xA has a required interval of 5000 miles between changes. > i thought itd be longer than that, personally. 5000 is conservative enough that should she forget an oil change the car will still be fine. Can't say the same about Honda's 10,000 interval. Keep in mind that most people won't even open the hood between routine oil changes. >> i thought it was decided that the gelling was due to neglect... mostly >> cars right off a 3 year lease that didnt have regular oil changes? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > interval. Keep in mind that most people won't even open the hood > between routine oil changes. the cool thing about the scion is that the oil change indicator can be programmed to light up at intervals from 1-5k miles. standard is 5k. >> Also, Toy V6 engines are known to have a nasty gelling problem. Change >> the oil quite frequently if you have a V6, or -- for once -- synthetic >> oil is worthwhile in this application. > > i thought it was decided that the gelling was due to neglect... mostly > cars right off a 3 year lease that didnt have regular oil changes? TeGGeR has an eye-opener in this 2001 Toyota V6 with less than 9000 miles (probably without an oil change): http://tegger.com/hondafaq/sludge/cleaning_sludge.html Definitely a "come to Jesus" event. Mike > TeGGeR has an eye-opener in this 2001 Toyota V6 with less than 9000 miles > (probably without an oil change): > http://tegger.com/hondafaq/sludge/cleaning_sludge.html Would be interesting to know how many months the car had gone without an oil change. If this happened after 3 months I'd have a different opinion than if it happened after 3 years. If you search around you can find other equally well documented sludged engines from just about every manufacturer. > TeGGeR has an eye-opener in this 2001 Toyota V6 with less than 9000 miles > (probably without an oil change): > http://tegger.com/hondafaq/sludge/cleaning_sludge.html awesome! in a scary way, of course. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.