Honda Accord 2011 vs Toyota Camry 2011

[buckeye]

If Honda and Toyota are Tinkertoys, a Grand Marquis is your grandfather's worn-out Lincoln Logs.    When it comes to people of large stature, I know a few that can't ride or drive anything smaller than a '72 Electra and a few that are plenty comfortable in the '06+ Miata.  It's very individual.

HoneySuckle, you should drive as many cars as you can stand and form your own opinions.  Everybody has his favorite carmaker and if you try to listen to all the voices, you'll never buy anything.  (Personally, I recommend the Mazda 6 - but it's more sporty and less buttery, you probably wouldn't like it!)  They say that the Korean cars are much better than they used to be.

Toyotas are not "deathtraps", that's absurd, wild hyperbole.

Consumer Reports does have a certain slant and it seems they view a carmaker's history with more attention than they do the actual, current car on their test bed.  I'd stay away from their new car reviews.

Rentals are often beat like the neighbor's chihuahua when he's not looking - you might not get a very good idea of what that model is really like.


Let me say again - try a bunch of cars and see what you like.   

[SDTULSA]

Not to knock the Mercury but you are way off.  The V-6 Accord is rated at 29 Highway and has 271 HP compared to the 224 Hp small V-8 and only 19 MPG highway. The LX has 177 HP and is rated at 31 MPF highway but most get much better.   Also the Accord is a full size car.  Here are the compared specs Below.  The Merc is a larger car but not by as much as you think and the resale of the merc is rated at only 30% after 3 years. The Honda will have resale after 3 years in the over 50% range so thats adds up to a savings in the long run of thousands.   

   Model
    2010 Honda Accord Sedan LX Automatic Transmission   2010 Mercury Grand Marquis LS
   

  Curb Weight (Automatic, lbs.)    3289        4094   

  Ground Clearance (in.)    Not Listed             Not Listed   

  Headroom (Front, in.)    41.4                        39.5   

  Headroom (Second-Row, in.)    38.5              37.8   
 
  Height (in.)    58.1                                  56.3   

  Hiproom (Front, in.)    56.6                      58.0   

  Hiproom (Second-Row, in.)    54.3              58.7   

  Legroom (Front, in.)    42.5                  41.6   

  Legroom (Second-Row, in.)    37.2             38.0   

  Length (in.)    194.1                              212.0   

  Cargo Volume (cu. ft., mfr.)    14.0    20.6   

  Passenger Volume (cu. ft., max.)    106.0    107.5 

[Townsend]

                           2010 Honda Accord Sedan LX         2010 Mercury Grand Marquis LS

  Cargo Volume (cu. ft., mfr.)    14.0                                          20.6   

IOW, if you have a larger dead body...the Merc is your obvious choice...or average sized dead body and clubs.

[Hoss]

IOW, if you have a larger dead body...the Merc is your obvious choice...or average sized dead body and clubs.

that's why none of the cast of "The Sopranos" would be caught dead (no pun intended) driving a Honda or a Toyota.

[nathanm]

IOW, if you have a larger dead body...the Merc is your obvious choice...or average sized dead body and clubs.

Or if, more mundanely, you unexpectedly have to fit four people's (3 women!) luggage in the back of your rental. The Grandma Quis is great for that. The only things I've seen in a rental fleet short of a van that come close to comparing are the Cadillac STS and the Chrysler 300, which both appear to have less trunk space, although still ample by today's standards.

I think I've mentioned that the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis are great for driving in Boston, also. It's one of those places where you can't get anywhere unless you make other people think you're a cop.

And BTW, some of the newer foreign cars really do have nearly as much legroom as one of the land yachts. They are not as wide, though. The best legroom I ever saw in the rear seat of a sedan was an '88 Mercedes 420SEL.

Seriously, though. You can fit a pretty useful amount of luggage or other "stuff" into any modern mid-size or full size car. Given that the only thing I haven't been able to haul in my 20 year old Accord (which is much smaller than those of today) is large furniture and mattresses, I'd say it does pretty respectably. They probably aren't going to fit four sets of golf clubs, though. They will fit up to one large body and folding burial tools, though.

[bugo]

What is wrong with the post is a total lack of understanding about cars in general and Toyota's specifically.  There is no "terrible design flaw".  Or if the trivial little problems they have ARE that, then every GM, Chrysler, and Ford are indeed the death traps mentioned and are criminally negligent for building any cars at all.

I've probably forgotten more about cars than you'll ever know.  And there is indeed a design flaw that has caused 89 deaths already.  EIGHTY NINE.  That's pretty terrible to me.

Have you ever actually driven a Toyota??  And if so, who messed with the driving mechanism to give you that feel??

Yes and I nearly fell asleep driving it.  The steering feel is numb, and the handling wasn't nearly as good as the Honda CR-V that I put several thousand miles on last summer.  Nobody "messed with the driving mechanism" (what is a "driving mechanism" anyway?) but rather the car was designed that way.  Toyota's engineers have removed most of the steering feel.  Not a fun car to drive at all. 

If Honey's 6'2" kid is going to be around a while, you should actually be looking at a Grand Marquis.  Same price, same reliability, same gas mileage.  Bigger car that anyone will be comfortable in.  Not a little tinker-toy car like the Honda/Toyota's.  (No, I am not a horse size - not as big as her kid, from the sound of it.)  Have an '88 that gets 18mpg.  A '97 that gets 22-23 mpg.  And a 2007 that gets 26mpg - all highway.  All get around 16-19mpg city.  SAME with a V-8 as Camry and Accord with V-6.  And very nice on highway.

If she's worried about her son having enough room, she should look at the aforementioned CR-V.  I'm the same height as her son and weigh around 250 and never got uncomfortable driving it on two 1300 mile long trips.  It got 27 MPG at 75-80 MPH.  It felt very steady and stable on the highway and handled like a much smaller car.  Just the opposite of a Toyota.  If you're in the market for a small crossover, you could do much worse than the CR-V.

[nathanm]

The steering feel is numb, and the handling wasn't nearly as good as the Honda CR-V that I put several thousand miles on last summer.  Nobody "messed with the driving mechanism" (what is a "driving mechanism" anyway?) but rather the car was designed that way.  Toyota's engineers have removed most of the steering feel.  Not a fun car to drive at all. 
If she's worried about her son having enough room, she should look at the aforementioned CR-V.  I'm the same height as her son and weigh around 250 and never got uncomfortable driving it on two 1300 mile long trips.  It got 27 MPG at 75-80 MPH.  It felt very steady and stable on the highway and handled like a much smaller car.  Just the opposite of a Toyota.  If you're in the market for a small crossover, you could do much worse than the CR-V.

The CR-V is a nice car (I drove my sister's EX a bunch over the winter), but if you want to talk about numb steering feel and mushy shifting, using it as an example of something better probably isn't the best choice. It drives the same as a RAV4. (My grandma had one for a while before she died, and again, I got to drive it quite a bit)

The Accord definitely has a stiffer suspension than the Camry, though, so it's more entertaining through a corner. The Camrys will handle themselves admirably, however.

[SDTULSA]

Yes the last few CR-V's were a bit underpowered but the new 2010 has the new 180 Hp engine and it does help.  I woud love to see a nice 200HP 4cyl in the new model in 2012, that would be nice. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

Ooooo... hit a nerve!  Yep, GM used car salesmen.  That "good GM feeling" will make one forget what they knew about cars, all right.

Actually, all other rhetoric aside, sounds like there is going to be larger people at least from time to time, so I would change the recommendation to either the Honda Odyssey or the Toyota Sienna.  Lots of room.  Just as good on mileage and both excellent vehicles.  Both as dependable and both about the same kind of price - sort of.  Only difference I can really tell is the Odyssey will accept a full sheet of plywood laying flat, while the Sienna won't quite.

Oh, well, if you gotta move that much plywood, get a pickup truck.

As far as the "comparing sizes" (horsepower, not volumes), anything beyond good acceleration for highway driving is just wasted horsepower and people worrying about "mine-is-bigger" syndrome.  And any of the mentioned are more than adequate for highway driving.  Kind of like the frame of mind Corvette owners are in all the time...

You gotta go with what YOU like!
So try them all.

[Red Arrow]

A car should have enough torque/horsepower to accelerate to expressway speed on a reasonable length entrance ramp without holding the accelerator pedal to the floor the whole time.  

A little engine with a "big" horsepower number can be deceiving with respect to highway maneuvering power.  If you are cruising along at 65 mph and about 2000 rpm and need a little acceleration but your "big" horsepower number doesn't happen until 6500 rpm you/your transmission will have to down shift a gear (or maybe two) and then you may not have much rpm left before you have to shift up again.  There are exceptions like the BMW 3.0 Liter, 300 HP engine with twin turbos that has 300 lb-ft of torque from about 1500 RPM and up. Most of us won't have (and may not want) that kind of performance. (I would prefer a Roots type supercharger to the turbos.)  With modern engines I have settled on about 1 liter of engine displacement for each 1000 lb of car empty weight, 3500 lb car: 3.5 liter engine. My other preference is no more than 15 lbs of car per HP,  3500 lb car: at least 230 HP.

Handling is a personal preference too.  Some "drivers" like the numb totally isolated ride of the 50s and 60s US made Land Yachts.  Fortunately, the poor control they typically offered is a thing of the past even in the more numb of today's cars.  I don't want to feel the tar strips on a concrete road but I appreciate going around a corner without the tires squealing or having the feeling I will either roll over or continue straight through the curb on the outside of the corner. A Corvette or Porsche would be fun but I'm happy with a good sport sedan.

[Townsend]

pssst...I think she stopped letting us help her.

Good luck Honeysuckle.  Let it be fun.  If it isn't fun for you, take a break and start up later.  Remember, it's supposed to be fun and exciting.  It's a new car...HELL YEAH.

[Conan71]

IOW, if you have a larger dead body...the Merc is your obvious choice...or average sized dead body and clubs.

It keeps you from having to cut it up into smaller pieces...so I hear

[HoneySuckle]

pssst...I think she stopped letting us help her.

Good luck Honeysuckle.  Let it be fun.  If it isn't fun for you, take a break and start up later.  Remember, it's supposed to be fun and exciting.  It's a new car...HELL YEAH.

Nope, I haven't.

Tell me something.  If I did choose the Hyundai because from what I've read, you get more bang for your bucks, should I be concerned about resale value?  I don't generally get rid of cars that easily.  My Accord is a 2002 and will be handed down to my daughter probably.  The Civic is a 2003.  We are not a family that changes cars every year or two.  We don't care what's new the following year, as long as what we're driving works!

Another thing I noticed is the way salesmen ask if we're trading in our Honda.  I had no idea (before reading) that there was something that great for them.  Now I know they tend to make more off trade-ins than they do the new cars!  At least that's what I saw somewhere.

[Townsend]

Nope, I haven't.

Tell me something.  If I did choose the Hyundai because from what I've read, you get more bang for your bucks, should I be concerned about resale value?  I don't generally get rid of cars that easily.  My Accord is a 2002 and will be handed down to my daughter probably.  The Civic is a 2003.  We are not a family that changes cars every year or two.  We don't care what's new the following year, as long as what we're driving works!

Another thing I noticed is the way salesmen ask if we're trading in our Honda.  I had no idea (before reading) that there was something that great for them.  Now I know they tend to make more off trade-ins than they do the new cars!  At least that's what I saw somewhere.

Resale doesn't seem to be a big thing for you then.

Yes, Hondas are sought after.  They tend to be in the top 5 searched for sedans online.

Yes, the money made on the trades is very important to a dealer.

Since you've opened up your search a bit I'd be remiss in not suggesting a couple of American brands, Ford and GM.  I have a GM and something I don't know if I could live without anymore is the remote start feature.  When it's cold or hot out and you can start your car from inside, how great is that?  Just a suggestion.

[HoneySuckle]

I am very open to suggestions.  The reason I thought to check Toyota (being a Honda fan and all that) was because someone suggested it.  Then the same happened with Hyundai.  I realise that everyone will have a favourite, but I am willing to read up, check out, and think this through.  I have time on my side which is a good thing.