Hello:

Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.

Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ? Why
?

Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats, since
they are both so similar ?

Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc. ?

------------
BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?

Much thanks,
Bob

 

Your in a Honda Newsboard. I have owned 10 honda over the years. Love em to
death. nuff said.

"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote in message
news:-MydnTkSb9ZHm0XfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
> Hello:
>
> Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
> Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>
> Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ?
> Why ?
>
> Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats,
> since they are both so similar ?
>
> Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc.
> ?
>
> ------------
> BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?
>
> Much thanks,
> Bob
>

 

Your in a Honda Newsboard. I have owned 10 honda over the years. Love em to
death. nuff said.

"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote in message
news:-MydnTkSb9ZHm0XfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
> Hello:
>
> Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
> Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>
> Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ?
> Why ?
>
> Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats,
> since they are both so similar ?
>
> Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc.
> ?
>
> ------------
> BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?
>
> Much thanks,
> Bob
>

 

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:56:25 -0400, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
wrote:
>Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
>Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>
>Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ? Why
>?
>
>Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats, since
>they are both so similar ?
>
>Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc. ?
>
>------------
>BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?

The 4-banger is just fine, and the Accord in particular seems designed
for the 4 first, the 6 as an after-thought, if you ask me. In fact,
the kind of power and drivability you get with these modern 4's is
some kind of techno-miracle, a feeling I don't really have for the
6's.

Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy. Sheet
metal is about a toss-up. Price and reliability are very, very close.
They are both frankly marvelous cars.

The Honda line is having troubles with their automatic trannies, I
don't know what the noise is on the current Toyotas, there's probably
some little thing isn't doing quite right.

HTH,
J.

 

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:56:25 -0400, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
wrote:
>Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
>Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>
>Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ? Why
>?
>
>Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats, since
>they are both so similar ?
>
>Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc. ?
>
>------------
>BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?

The 4-banger is just fine, and the Accord in particular seems designed
for the 4 first, the 6 as an after-thought, if you ask me. In fact,
the kind of power and drivability you get with these modern 4's is
some kind of techno-miracle, a feeling I don't really have for the
6's.

Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy. Sheet
metal is about a toss-up. Price and reliability are very, very close.
They are both frankly marvelous cars.

The Honda line is having troubles with their automatic trannies, I
don't know what the noise is on the current Toyotas, there's probably
some little thing isn't doing quite right.

HTH,
J.

 

Hello:

Thanks for reply.

Might you be able to add anything more on the Accord 2005 trans problems
that you mentioned, please ?

I remember they had trouble in 2004, but figured by 2005 they
would have solved it ?

Thanks,
Bob

-------------------
"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:6migd1hjdcjk39q2mn3uqfvl32bf1r0ku5@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:56:25 -0400, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
> wrote:
>>Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
>>Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>>
>>Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ?
>>Why
>>?
>>
>>Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats,
>>since
>>they are both so similar ?
>>
>>Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc.
>>?
>>
>>------------
>>BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?
>
> The 4-banger is just fine, and the Accord in particular seems designed
> for the 4 first, the 6 as an after-thought, if you ask me. In fact,
> the kind of power and drivability you get with these modern 4's is
> some kind of techno-miracle, a feeling I don't really have for the
> 6's.
>
> Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy. Sheet
> metal is about a toss-up. Price and reliability are very, very close.
> They are both frankly marvelous cars.
>
> The Honda line is having troubles with their automatic trannies, I
> don't know what the noise is on the current Toyotas, there's probably
> some little thing isn't doing quite right.
>
> HTH,
> J.
>

 

Hello:

Thanks for reply.

Might you be able to add anything more on the Accord 2005 trans problems
that you mentioned, please ?

I remember they had trouble in 2004, but figured by 2005 they
would have solved it ?

Thanks,
Bob

-------------------
"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:6migd1hjdcjk39q2mn3uqfvl32bf1r0ku5@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:56:25 -0400, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
> wrote:
>>Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
>>Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>>
>>Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ?
>>Why
>>?
>>
>>Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats,
>>since
>>they are both so similar ?
>>
>>Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc.
>>?
>>
>>------------
>>BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?
>
> The 4-banger is just fine, and the Accord in particular seems designed
> for the 4 first, the 6 as an after-thought, if you ask me. In fact,
> the kind of power and drivability you get with these modern 4's is
> some kind of techno-miracle, a feeling I don't really have for the
> 6's.
>
> Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy. Sheet
> metal is about a toss-up. Price and reliability are very, very close.
> They are both frankly marvelous cars.
>
> The Honda line is having troubles with their automatic trannies, I
> don't know what the noise is on the current Toyotas, there's probably
> some little thing isn't doing quite right.
>
> HTH,
> J.
>

 

>Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy<


That pretty much defines the main difference, other than looks. Camery
definately has a smoother ride, and Accord leans a little less in the
curves. A matter of taste, I guess. Most other factors are a wash.



Bob




"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:6migd1hjdcjk39q2mn3uqfvl32bf1r0ku5@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:56:25 -0400, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
> wrote:
>>Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
>>Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>>
>>Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ?
>>Why
>>?
>>
>>Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats,
>>since
>>they are both so similar ?
>>
>>Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc.
>>?
>>
>>------------
>>BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?
>
> The 4-banger is just fine, and the Accord in particular seems designed
> for the 4 first, the 6 as an after-thought, if you ask me. In fact,
> the kind of power and drivability you get with these modern 4's is
> some kind of techno-miracle, a feeling I don't really have for the
> 6's.
>
> Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy. Sheet
> metal is about a toss-up. Price and reliability are very, very close.
> They are both frankly marvelous cars.
>
> The Honda line is having troubles with their automatic trannies, I
> don't know what the noise is on the current Toyotas, there's probably
> some little thing isn't doing quite right.
>
> HTH,
> J.
>

 

>Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy<


That pretty much defines the main difference, other than looks. Camery
definately has a smoother ride, and Accord leans a little less in the
curves. A matter of taste, I guess. Most other factors are a wash.



Bob




"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:6migd1hjdcjk39q2mn3uqfvl32bf1r0ku5@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:56:25 -0400, "Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com>
> wrote:
>>Trying to decide on a new Accord or Camry.
>>Probably the 4 cyl, LX model.
>>
>>Anyone have any reasonably strong convictions on one over the other ?
>>Why
>>?
>>
>>Or, is it simply a matter of price and how you fit in the front seats,
>>since
>>they are both so similar ?
>>
>>Any meaningful differences in overall quality, engine, transmission, etc.
>>?
>>
>>------------
>>BTW: Do most folks still go with the 4 cyl. ? Strong "enough" ?
>
> The 4-banger is just fine, and the Accord in particular seems designed
> for the 4 first, the 6 as an after-thought, if you ask me. In fact,
> the kind of power and drivability you get with these modern 4's is
> some kind of techno-miracle, a feeling I don't really have for the
> 6's.
>
> Honda is a smidge sportier, Toyota drives a bit more cushy. Sheet
> metal is about a toss-up. Price and reliability are very, very close.
> They are both frankly marvelous cars.
>
> The Honda line is having troubles with their automatic trannies, I
> don't know what the noise is on the current Toyotas, there's probably
> some little thing isn't doing quite right.
>
> HTH,
> J.
>

 

In article <AeudnQEZR6HvyEXfRVn-1w@comcast.com>,
"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote:

> Might you be able to add anything more on the Accord 2005 trans problems
> that you mentioned, please ?
>
> I remember they had trouble in 2004, but figured by 2005 they
> would have solved it ?

That *seems* to be the case; in addition, Honda's automatic trans
problems are related to their V6 vehicles and not at all, to this point,
to any 4 cylinder vehicles.

 

In article <AeudnQEZR6HvyEXfRVn-1w@comcast.com>,
"Robert11" <rgsros@notme.com> wrote:

> Might you be able to add anything more on the Accord 2005 trans problems
> that you mentioned, please ?
>
> I remember they had trouble in 2004, but figured by 2005 they
> would have solved it ?

That *seems* to be the case; in addition, Honda's automatic trans
problems are related to their V6 vehicles and not at all, to this point,
to any 4 cylinder vehicles.

 

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 00:40:08 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>> Might you be able to add anything more on the Accord 2005 trans problems
>> that you mentioned, please ?
>>
>> I remember they had trouble in 2004, but figured by 2005 they
>> would have solved it ?
>
>That *seems* to be the case; in addition, Honda's automatic trans
>problems are related to their V6 vehicles and not at all, to this point,
>to any 4 cylinder vehicles.

I disagree with that, maybe the malfunctioning 4's don't leave you
stranded, but mine has the same gooey failing-torque-converter feel
that my 1999 CL 3.0 also had. Neither was ever officially recalled,
but I'm guessing the malfunctions are very, very wide and people
just live with them.

J.

 

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 00:40:08 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>> Might you be able to add anything more on the Accord 2005 trans problems
>> that you mentioned, please ?
>>
>> I remember they had trouble in 2004, but figured by 2005 they
>> would have solved it ?
>
>That *seems* to be the case; in addition, Honda's automatic trans
>problems are related to their V6 vehicles and not at all, to this point,
>to any 4 cylinder vehicles.

I disagree with that, maybe the malfunctioning 4's don't leave you
stranded, but mine has the same gooey failing-torque-converter feel
that my 1999 CL 3.0 also had. Neither was ever officially recalled,
but I'm guessing the malfunctions are very, very wide and people
just live with them.

J.

 

I bought my 05 Accord LX-G 4 cyl, 5 speed manual on May 27th. For me one of
the main reasons to go with the Accord as opposed to the Camry was the front
suspension. Accord has double wishbone on all 4 wheels, Camry has struts
all around. Struts tend to break sooner the a double wishbone suspension.


Hope this helps?

Skipper

 

I bought my 05 Accord LX-G 4 cyl, 5 speed manual on May 27th. For me one of
the main reasons to go with the Accord as opposed to the Camry was the front
suspension. Accord has double wishbone on all 4 wheels, Camry has struts
all around. Struts tend to break sooner the a double wishbone suspension.


Hope this helps?

Skipper