Mazda 6 vs. Honda Accord
- Thread starter stogiedude
- Start date
- Status
Re-read my post.
To answer your question about how my opinion is different than yours, note that I did not say, "The Accord is better looking." You however, said the 6 is "the best looking of the bunch".
I do not speak in absolutes to answer another of your questions. I merely pointed out that looks are subjective. For example, I read a pub just this week (don't remember which) that said they do not like the appearance of the 6. To be fair, the same pub, as do others, criticize the Accord 's looks as being to conservative, bland, or plain. It's not for me to say whether it is or it isn't...beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
My point wasn't about which one is better-looking, but more about presenting opinions as absolutes. Your owning a Mazda 6 doesn't automatically make you less biased than me. Nor does the 6 being available in a hatch make it necessarily more appealing...only that it has more options.
I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I truly understand that some people like X over Y. I'm just saying that when people speak in absolute terms, they are usually challenged.
No offense intended...truly!
Sorry but I'm not going through life on a message board with IMO in front of everything I say when it's obviously an opinion whether shared or not.
Have a righteous day.
Quote:
I would say drive them both first.
I was dead set on an accord v6 despite the AT poblems in the past that are supposed to be "fixed" now, but after driving one I changed my mind big time.
1) I couldn't find a comfortabele seating position even with the power seat (I'm 6ft, 180lb)
2) With the 17' wheels it rode very rough, rougher than my '06 altima with Eibach -stiff, lowering springs.
3) Under braking there was an unreall amount of nose dive! I was waiting for the front end to touch the ground when braking half way hard
I'm thinking about an I-4 accord now with 5-spd manual trans. That is the 300k mi car you guys are talking about.
1. I'm 6'2, 285# and have had no problems. In fact, very comfortable. But everyone is different in this regard.
2. I agree...it does ride rougher on the 17" low-profile tires. And many say those tires are not that great performing anyway.
3. I've never noticed any nose dive, but I don't brake hard often. I DO know the Accord usually gets low marks for brakes when compared to others in its class. Some have blamed it on the OEM tires, but I think there's more to it than that.
You definitely can't do much better than that sweet 2.4L I-4 with the 5speed. A great engine and great combination with that tranny!
Quote:
Sorry but I'm not going through life on a message board with IMO in front of everything I say when it's obviously an opinion whether shared or not.Have a righteous day.
Hey, it's just a forum. Reasonable people agree and disagree all day long. We discuss our thoughts, ideas, and opinions. If we all agreed, no one would visit.
Take care!
gas mileage. honda seems too concerned with it and not enough with performance. of course their v6 engines aren't the most fuel efficient.
i own two honda products, but will most likely never buy another one. it's fine when the cars are reliable, but if something goes wrong, don't expect them to help at all. i.e. honda/acura transmission problem.
LowDawg... I thought I was nuts about my impressins of the SE v-6 accord since it is honda and it is supposed to be soo "refined"... than I went home and checked out yahoo and edmunds consumer ratings/reviews and many complained about the same exact problems I mentioned above. I will test drive an I-4 next, and if I fell the same I'm going next door and check out an tC as my second option. And with the tC I can go auto without worries
Quote:
LowDawg... I thought I was nuts about my impressins of the SE v-6 accord since it is honda and it is supposed to be soo "refined"... than I went home and checked out yahoo and edmunds consumer ratings/reviews and many complained about the same exact problems I mentioned above. I will test drive an I-4 next, and if I fell the same I'm going next door and check out an tC as my second option. And with the tC I can go auto without worries
No doubt...let me know what you end up with. Good luck on your search.
I never had one of the Accords with the tranny problem, but I heard they actually stepped up pretty good and made things right for a lot of people. I don't know that for sure, just what I'd heard. But it doesn't change the fact they've had more than their share of AT problems.
Honda did step up and help many customers with the tranny problems. Several of my customers that had the "problem" Accords warranties were extended to 150K miles. I think that is pretty fair considering what most car manufacterers have shown themselves to be willing to do.
Another example I can give you is a customer of mine that has a 97Accord. It's a 10yr old car with alot of miles on it. Anyway,the SRS light came on and after a few checks it was determined the SRS module had malfunctioned. This is a very expensive part regardless of what the brand of the car is. The local Honda dealer called upline to the district manager and since they had seen a few of these go bad they fixed it at no charge. Would this happen every time? Probably not,but I have seen Honda be very fair many times on cars that were out of warranty.
They definitely had transmission problems and they worked to correct the problem and extended warranties on many cars. In a perfect world there would not be any problems with cars but no manufacterer is there yet.
- Status
Similar threads
