accord vs jetta vs camry
duff...@gmail.com
i am about to buy a new car and am debating between the accord the
jetta and the camry.
I want to buy a car that will potentially last me a while. I am not in
the market to buy a car and sell it after 3 years.
- The car has to be automatic.
- It has to be a four door with more back-room than our current car (a
2000 Corolla).
- I am not too good with cars so preferably something that I wont have
to tweak around too much, and hopefully will never need to pop the hood
unless I need a jump. And on that note can someone explain me the
differences between the various warranties? (powertrain, bumper to
bumper, corrossion perforation etc?) My thinking (although probably
flawed) is that I should just buy a hyundai since they have 'americas
best warranty' and I would be able to take it into them if there do
arise any problems w/it. Can someone please explain?
- A V6 would be nice but I honestly can't justify it, and a V4 would
suffice
- The car will be parked on the streets of NYC and will be driven
primarily on weekends.
- I am thinking of getting a used car (either a 2003 or 2004) to take
into account the major depreciation that I have heard about in the
first year of the car. Any thoughts on that? Any recommendations on a
good place to look for such deals?
- And finally what is a good place to check "prices" of cars? I have
seen various sites (kbb, edumnds, carfax).. can anyone recommend a
particular one or are they all good enoough?
Based on these criteria can someone please recommend the best fit based
on my needs and any reasons for doing so?
Thank you very much!
High Tech Misfit
> i am about to buy a new car and am debating between the accord the
> jetta and the camry.
First of all, avoid the Jetta. VW's are junk!
As for Camry and Accord, you can't go wrong with either one for reliability.
The only real differences between the two (other than appearance) are that
Camry has a slightly smoother ride while Accord has slightly tighter
handling. Test drive both and then decide which feels better to you.
Pars
itself is the significantly revised 2006 Impala. I'd get a color that's not
too flashy and keep it dirty.
Pars
<duff...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124068844.4...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
High Tech Misfit
> A car with good back seats that's not going to call too much attention to
> itself is the significantly revised 2006 Impala. I'd get a color that's not
> too flashy and keep it dirty.
Impala is a gas hog compared to Accord and Camry, regardless of engine.
Timothy J. Lee
<duff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>- I am thinking of getting a used car (either a 2003 or 2004) to take
>into account the major depreciation that I have heard about in the
>first year of the car. Any thoughts on that? Any recommendations on a
>good place to look for such deals?
Much of the "major depreciation" in the first year is the difference
between retail versus trade-in or private party value. You can only
buy new cars from dealers at retail (what a dealer is willing to sell
for, not necessarily MSRP), and sell at trade-in or private party.
If you buy an almost new used car at a dealer, you might not actually
save that much, particularly with cars that don't depreciate as much
(as with the cars named in your subject line). You may save more if
you find an almost new used car in a private party sale.
Of course, with any used car, you'll want to inspect the car's mechanical
condition and its service records carefully -- if you are not too
knowledgeable about such things, you may want to pay a good mechanic to
do so before you buy.
If you are not knowledgeable about car maintenance and repair, figure
out which brands have the best and most trustworthy mechanics' shops
(dealer or independent -- though dealer shops tend to be more expensive)
in your area. It is also good if there is a good selection of shops for
that brand, in case the good one you found closes shop, the good mechanic
retires, etc..
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
Pars
"High Tech Misfit" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1m3fgl5kyy5fs$.dlg@hightech.misfit...
The Accord and Camry have about the same fuel consumption. The 06 Impala
hasn't reported it's fuel consumption (time will tell), but I suspect it's
close to the economy of the 3.5L Malibu Maxx. If so, 3.5L Impala should only
consume about 10% more then Japanese rivals.
Pars
Keith J
Accord/Camry - Very worthy, V6 can be pricey.
Since you are going to keep it and you like warranty, you really can't go
wrong with the '06 Hyundai Sonata. I have an '99 V6 Accord and I really
enjoyed the Sonata V6. Gets the same gas mileage as all of the other V6's
plus, the truly fun part, you'll save many thousand dollars on the purchase.
I test-drove one for a $50 promotion and I liked it. Heck even the base 4
cyl comes with a crap-load of airbags (seat, curtain front and rear), ABS,
brake assist, stability control and traction control. If you just consider
the safety features, wait, you can't even option some of those features on
the Camry/Accord and certainly not at a decent price. I think Edmunds is
advertising the top-of-the-line, loaded with every option, Sonata LX V6 for
$24k. They also have a $1000 rebate if you finance through Hyundai. Not
bad. The base 4 cyl model with rebate is yours for ~$17k. Yes, they still
have the 100k mile warranty.
here are the trims:
http://www.hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/sonata/trim/compare_trim.asp
I know I will get spammed for that but DUFFFMAN, just go drive it, Hyundai's
deserve consideration, as they are not the same cars of even 2 years ago.
If you don't like it and think it sucks, at least you can come back here and
spam me :)
... back in the day, Toyota/Honda/Nissan (Datsun) were considered cheap,
suck-azz vehicles.
-keith
<duff...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124068844.4...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
duff...@gmail.com
2005 Hyundai Sonata. It has supposedly "overwhelmed" the Accord and
the Camry for the price. What do you guys think about that? I had
pretty much narrowed it down to the Accord adn the Camry, but is the
Sonata an option? I would love to hear some critics/praises about it.
Thanks,
High Tech Misfit
Although Hyundai's quality has greatly improved over the years, long term
reliability for cars 5-10 years old remains a question mark, especially
compared to Honda and Toyota.
Also, the Sonata is not as fuel efficient as Camry and Accord, regardless of
engine. So if you do a lot of driving, the savings in purchasing a Sonata
may be offset by higher refueling costs. Some Hondas and Toyotas are class
leaders for fuel economy (and that's not counting their hybrids).
slim
Hyundai Santa Fe.
--
"I'm the commander -- see, I don't need to explain --
I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the
interesting thing about being the president.
Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they
say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody
an explanation. "
- George "Dubya" Bush
LordFoul
High Tech Misfit <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> Also, the Sonata is not as fuel efficient as Camry and Accord, regardless of
> engine. So if you do a lot of driving, the savings in purchasing a Sonata
> may be offset by higher refueling costs.
2006 V6 Auto Sonata EPA MPG is 20 city/30 highway, according to specs
listed at hyundaiusa.com.
2006 V6 Auto Camry LE EPA MPG is 20 city/28 highway, according to the
eBrocure now at toyota.com.
2006 V6 Auto Accord EPA MPG is 20 city/29 highway, according to
brochures now in dealer hands (see the Accord forum at vtec.net for
scans).
I've heard this fuel efficiency statement before, but with the most
closely equal engines, it isn't true.
On the other hand, you can't buy a V6 Accord or Camry for the price of a
V6 Sonata, and the Accord and Camry 4 cylinder models are indeed much
more fuel efficient than the V6 Sonata. Much slower, too.
High Tech Misfit
> 2006 V6 Auto Sonata EPA MPG is 20 city/30 highway, according to specs
> listed at hyundaiusa.com.
>
> 2006 V6 Auto Camry LE EPA MPG is 20 city/28 highway, according to the
> eBrocure now at toyota.com.
>
> 2006 V6 Auto Accord EPA MPG is 20 city/29 highway, according to
> brochures now in dealer hands (see the Accord forum at vtec.net for
> scans).
>
> I've heard this fuel efficiency statement before, but with the most
> closely equal engines, it isn't true.
Hmmm, perhaps the new Sonata has made advances in Korean fuel economy. But
other Hyundais like the Accent and Elantra do not even come close to
matching their Honda and Toyota competitors for fuel efficiency. I don't
know how EPA rated those particular Hyundais, but I am just going by what I
have heard and read in the media based on actual road tests.
However, EPA figures tend to be unrealistic at times. I have a '93 Accord
automatic that EPA rated as 22 city/28 highway. Although I do average about
22mpg in the city, my highway mileage is usually 32-34mpg. And I have heard
of many other automatic Accords like mine getting similar mileage. So
perhaps the current Accord can get better highway mileage than EPA says.
Pars
> However, EPA figures tend to be unrealistic at times. I have a '93 Accord
> automatic that EPA rated as 22 city/28 highway. Although I do average
about
> 22mpg in the city, my highway mileage is usually 32-34mpg. And I have
heard
> of many other automatic Accords like mine getting similar mileage. So
> perhaps the current Accord can get better highway mileage than EPA says.
EPA figures doesn't account for your personal driving style or your area's
environmental & geographical variance. But, I"ve found the EPA figures to be
highly useless when comparing vehicle against each other.
Pars
Pars
contains would be a secondary factor. Also, many high quality 4 cylinder
engines (like Camry & Honda) are as balanced and have sufficient power to
stand up against a V6 (in regular driving situation/conditions).
Pars
Pars
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-26AAB1....@nntp3.usenetserver.com...
> In article <1124200039.1...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> duff...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I had
> > pretty much narrowed it down to the Accord adn the Camry, but is the
> > Sonata an option?
>
>
Yep, it seems like a very nice package. Rear seat room is suppose
to be better the Accord & Camry. I've already planned on taking a very
close look at the 06 Sonata, when I finally get around to buying a large
Sedan. In the large sedan market, (in which the midsize Accord & Camry are
not included) I think the 06 Impala seems to have all the high cards.
> Aesthetically, I think it's better looking than the Accord. Similar,
> but taken to where the Accord designers should have gone.
>
> Anyway, the Korean stuff is sleeper. People are still buying the Hondas
> because of reputation, but those in the know realize that Honda
> beancounters have taken over, the engineering is put on a back burner,
> and the accountants are slowly but surely ruining that hard-earned
> reputation.
With the deadly competition between the manufactures, the bean counters will
have to take a back seat, since it's starting to become a survival game.
Which has resulted in some very nice products. I especially like what Mazda
is doing....but, it's too bad they don't have an engine that can compare to
Honda's caliber... Imagine if the 06 Miata had an RSX-S engine power it....
Pars
>
Sparky Spartacus
> If fuel efficiency is a primary motivator, the amount of cylinder the engine
> contains would be a secondary factor.
Do you mean the displacement or the no. of cylinders?
noydb
First of all, the Jetta is much smaller than the Camry or the Accord.
The Passat is closer to the size of the latter two.
I test drove a Passat a couple of years ago and was absolutely blown
away. That beautiful, difficult to replicate German feel.
One thing killed the deal.
The Passat (and possibly the Jetta) REQUIRE premium fuel.
THAT is a deal breaker.
Look at the premium prices next time you fill up.
The Camry is about as perfect a design for what it is as I've ever
seen. But it's boring.
I ended up buying the Accord, mostly because of the 5-speed automatic,
which wasn't available on the Camry at the time.
That beautiful transmission remains my favorite thing on the car.
The Accord handles better than the Camry and the engine is more
responsive. Everything is just hair-trigger...the brakes, the
steering...I've really got no complaints.
However, in these performance related categories, the Accord just
barely beats the Camry.
But it must be said that the ergonomics of the Accord aren't nearly as
good as the Camry. Surprising actually, since Honda usually sets the
industry standard for such things...hell, they wrote the book.
The Camry interior is utterly perfect. Absolutely everything is
exactly where you expect it to be. The Accord interior is good, but
it has its quirks. The radio is just plain wrong. The volume button
belongs on the left, not the middle. The heating and ventilation
buttons are also wrong. You have to learn a new sign language to
operate them...there's no english explanation...just incomprehensible
diagrams that are supposedly universal. Stupid design.
All that being said, I'm still not sorry I bought the Accord.
It's still as tight as the day I bought it.
The 4 cylinder has an amazing blend of power and fuel economy.
There's really no need for the V-6.
You have to test drive both the Accord and the Camry.
One of them will feel just right.
Either one is a wise choice.
Cheers, --N
Pars
"Sparky Spartacus" <Spa...@universalexports.org> wrote in message
news:xLzMe.29$oK...@fe10.lga...
Yep, Number of Cylinders, which is usually porportional to displacement...
However, there are exception which was a flop (example, Mazda's V6 1.8L
Precidia).
Pars