Just test drove the 2013 Accord EX-L V6

[krispykreme]

We are shopping for new car again to replace my wife daily driver.

We were looking at another Passat VR6, Camry SE V6 or an Accord Touring.

We went to Honda first.

Pro-
- Steering réponse- Accord steering response is quiet nice and linear. Although not as good as Passat (which my daughter currently drives one). It felt nature except a little over boosted at parking lot speed
- The engine is quiet.
- Transmission is smooth (first for me in a honda).
- The camera blind spot monitoring is excellent.

Con-
- Rider is very jittery. We were driving on 880 north from milpitas. The car rides too rough thru concrete and rough surfaces.
- Sound insulation is extremely poor from underneath the car. Same with my old odyssey. The new accord is extremely loud on concrete and rough surfaces. On smooth surface, the car rides beautifully and absolute quiet. But rough and concrete surfaces, the car rides extremely bad and loud. Very different car.
- The midi for apps/phone screen is cheap. I can't stand the shiny plastic trim around it.
- Brake seems a bit weak in stopping the car.
- The chassis/body flexed on rough surfaces. Both my wife and I can hear little squeak from trim pieces going thru rough roads.

Overall impression was okay but not spectacular.

We haven't driven the new camry SE yet. Will update later on that.

Coming home, we took daughter's Passat SE VR6 out for a spin.

Both wife and I liked the Passat steering response better as compare to accord. The biggest difference is with ride and handling. The passat ride is much smoother in handling the rough concrete road and bad pavement on the same stretch of 880. The other big difference, the Passat felt much more stable at highway speed as compared to Accord. The passat chassis and body felt just more tight. Brake feedback and stopping power all felt better as compare to Accord. While the Passat does not have fancy blind spot camera, nor fancy interior, Passat just felt like a more well put together car.

Overall accord is a decent car and the progress from 12 is evident. But felt short of passat's confidence.

[benjaminh]

Thanks for this review. The Passat is indeed a worthy competitor, and one of the best cars in its class.

It seems that maybe the ride of the 2013 Accord was compromised a bit by getting rid of the double wishbone suspension.

Anyway, a few of things to keep in mind.

First, the Passat V-6 gets lower mpg (23 combined) and requires premium fuel. The Accord V-6 gets higher mpg (25 combined) and doesn't require premium. That's a difference of about $400 a year. Not huge, but it's something.

Second, Honda's quality and reliability are generally considered to be superior to VW's. VW has made major improvements, but most would say that there's still a significant difference. I owned a VW long ago and it was a nightmare. Many can tell you about being on a first name basis with their VW service rep and helping to pay for their boat. Again, VWs are better now, but there's still probably a gap there which can matter, esp. once the warranty ends.

Third, it may be a small point, but the rear windows on the VW roll down only halfway. The Accord's rear windows will roll down almost all the way. I think most rear passengers want to be able to roll down their window if they feel like it in slow driving when the weather is fine, esp. on a scenic drive.

Fourth, the Accord has better visibility. Forget the cameras and try this: look immediately behind you while passing. The Passat, I believe, has a small but significant blind spot right behind the driver because that small window in the far back is essentially unusable from the driver's seat. The Accord has no blind spot back there. I know it's a pain, but maybe take another test drive and check that out??

Fifth, the Accord has been designed with best-in-class safety with the new Advanced Compatibility Engineering II body with super high grade steel never before used on any Accord. The 2013 Accord is probably the only car in its class designed to help passengers survive a common kind of collision called a small offset crash. The IIHS has just started testing cars for this, and I'll post a link below, which shows several cars like Lexus and VW's Audi not passing this test. The 2013 Accord is about to be tested along with lots of other midsize sedans in the next couple of months. Honda's own internal testing at its crash center using the small offset crash methods shows that the new Accord is expected to pass this test.

www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr081412.html


It does seem like the Passat is better than the Accord in some areas. But no car is perfect, and I just add these points into the mix because they are probably things to think about.

But both cars are good choices, and I wish you good luck and happy motoring whatever you decide.

Hope you'll share with us your other test drives and final decision.

Best wishes, +++

[benjaminh]

http://www.hondanews.com/channels/ho...-accord-safety

"High-Strength Steel
The 2013 Accord unit-body uses 55.8-percent high-tensile steel, more than in any previous Accord. In addition, 17.2-percent of the steel is now grade 780, 980 and 1,500 – extremely high grades that have never before been used in any Accord. This contributes to higher body rigidity and reduced weight, which directly benefits ride and handling, interior quietness, performance and efficiency and long-term durability.

The measured improvements in rigidity are significant. In static tests, bending rigidity is up 34 percent and torsional rigidity is up 42-percent compared to the previous-generation Accord. In dynamic tests, front lateral rigidity is up 16 percent and rear vertical rigidity is up 39-percent....


Collision Safety
Collision safety capability is enhanced in the 2013 Accord, thanks to the newly revised Advanced Compatibility Engineering™ (ACE™) body structure, while the more extensive use of high-tensile steel allows protection to be provided with less weight. While official testing had not been completed at press time, internal Honda results indicate that the Accord will earn 5 Stars (the top rating) in federal NHTSA crash testing, along with Good crash ratings (the top level) and a TOP SAFETY PICK rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).
Projected test results include:

NHSTA

Projected Rating

Overall Vehicle Score

5 Star

Overall Frontal Crash Safety rating

5 Star

Overall Side Crash Safety rating

5 Star

Rollover rating

5 Star



IIHS

Projected Rating

Frontal collision rating

Good

Side collision rating

Good

Neck protection rating

Good

Roof strength rating

Good

Narrow offset frontal collision rating

Good

Advanced Compatibility Engineering™ (ACE™)
The 2013 Accord utilizes the latest version of Honda's proprietary Advanced Compatibility Engineering™ (ACE™) body-structure technology to enhance occupant protection and crash compatibility in frontal collisions. Like the original ACE, the new ACE utilizes a network of connected structural elements – with an improved design and a greater use of high-tensile steel – to distribute crash energy more evenly throughout the front of the vehicle. This enhanced frontal crash energy management helps to reduce the forces transferred to the passenger compartment and can help to more evenly disperse the forces transferred to other vehicles in a crash. Additionally, ACE helps minimize the potential for under-ride or over-ride situations that can happen during head-on or offset frontal impacts with a larger or smaller vehicle.

Unlike most conventional designs that direct frontal crash energy only to the lower load-bearing structures in the front end, ACE actively channels frontal crash energy to both upper and lower structural elements, including the floor frame rails, side sills and A-pillars. By creating specifically engineered "pathways" that help distribute these frontal impact forces through a greater percentage of the vehicle's total structure, ACE can more effectively route them around and away from the passenger compartment to help limit cabin deformation and further improve occupant protection. Integral to the ACE concept is its unique front polygonal main design structure. (See Body section for more information.)..."

[benjaminh]

PS What year is your daughter's Passat? Is it a 2012?

If by any chance it was built before that, it's a car of a different design than is available today. You should drive a 2012 or 2013 Passat in that case to do a direct comparison.

[bc626]

Thanks for the review! I can't wait to test drive a 9th gen once they arrive in Australia!

[HADriver06]

Good posts guys!

It's interesting to learn the + and - of the new Accord.

It seems that Honda still hasn't gotten rid of some of the Accord's bad characteristics concerning its ride quality. The ride being quiet and smooth on smooth roads is a given, but it's surprising to learn that the 9th gen, a brand new design, STILL rides poorly over roughly paved/concrete roads! My 7th gen also rides like this to some extent. It rides well on smooth (not quite as smooth as the 9th gen) roads but the ride ****s when I go over concrete/rough roads. Both in noise level and ride response. I think it's more an issue of cost-cutting than suspension being replaced. Now, to be fair, I did not notice this in my test drive (maybe because I drove on smooth roads)... and as this has been one of the Accord's traits, not solely the faults of designers of this gen, but one would expect they would've figured out a way to solve this by this gen.

I did not experience issues with ride stability in my test drive. Although I did find my current Accord to be more "tossable" which could be attributed to the change in suspension setup, I suppose. That said, I did not really push the new Accord the way I do mine in the test drive and I did not take the car on the highway. But a few other posters have also commented on the highway stability and if true, this would be something that Honda needs to address if they wish to retain its status and reclaim the crown in this segment.

I also did not find the brakes to be weak in my test drive. I actually found that the brakes were one of the strong points of the new Accord. The brake feel was good and it was definitely more than adequate for this car. The car I drove was the 4 cyl though, so it might not be the case for the V6.

[krispykreme]

Originally Posted by benjaminh

PS What year is your daughter's Passat? Is it a 2012?

If by any chance it was built before that, it's a car of a different design than is available today. You should drive a 2012 or 2013 Passat in that case to do a direct comparison.

My daughter passat is 2012. So its the bigger than Europe US version.

So far she has about 8k miles. Not a problem.

We originally bought the passat because it comes with 3 year free maint. plus loaner. Good for college kid.

The accord does have a lower belt line so visibility is indeed better.

[fw_fw]

Keep in mind that the ride quality is directly in proportion to tire air pressure. I have *never* bought a car in my almost 30 years of car buying that had the correct pressure in the tires when it came off the lot. It is always high. Even my new Accord, it had 40-42 psi on the tires. Factory recommendation is 33, and when I corrected the pressure the ride went from good to great.

[pretzelogik]

Even though they do not have a V-6, and are just now becoming available, I would be interested in feedback on how the 2013 Fusion fits into the mix. Most initial reviews seem favorable in many areas.

[benjaminh]

Originally Posted by pretzelogik

Even though they do not have a V-6, and are just now becoming available, I would be interested in feedback on how the 2013 Fusion fits into the mix. Most initial reviews seem favorable in many areas.

I do think the Ford Fusion is a very good looking car. And Ford, like VW, has improved a lot in recent years when it comes to quality and reliability. But just as many people have had bitter experiences with VWs in the past, many have also had some difficult experiences with Ford. My experiences with a brand new top-of-the-line 2000 Ford Focus ZTS was what drove me into the hands of Honda. That Focus had—I kid you not—something like 15 recalls, including finally one for possible engine fires, which caused me to get rid of it and get an Accord asap in the summer of 2002.

You might say with some justification that Fords are different and better today, and I'd agree with that. But the brand new 2013 Ford Escape has had 3-4 recalls already, including one for a possible engine fire! Below is an article on it.

http://www.therealtruthaboutcars.com...e-risk-update/

I just trust Honda quality more. I think Honda really tries to be the best non-luxury brand when it comes to quality and reliability. Do they always succeed? I'm sure there are cases where they don't. And even Honda once in a while makes cars that have problems. But for me it's worth the peace of mind to start with a brand like Honda first. I'm 47, and I've just had too many painful experiences with cars in my life. I got my first Honda when I was 37, but I wish I'd just started with Honda back when I was 27 or 17!

More on the good and not-so-good points of the Fusion in another post soon.

[benjaminh]

Many people think Ford's new Ecoboost engines are great, and I would tend to agree. I think they are well engineered, well build, and durable.

And the 1.6 ecoboost in the 2013 Fusion with the manual trans even gets 1 mpg higher combined epa mpg than a 2013 Accord with a manual. But with an auto trans on both with the 4 cylinder, which is the way most people get these cars, the 2013 Accord gets c. 2-4 higher mpg than the 2013 Fusion.

The base 2013 Fusion 2.5 auto gets 22 city/34hwy, compared to the base 2013 Accord LX 2.4 auto which gets 27/36.

Plus the 2013 Accord in all its variants has significantly faster acceleration than the 2013 Fusion.

Here's an example from testing by Motor Trend:
2013 Accord 2.4 Sport 6MT 0-60: 6.8 seconds! Wow.
2013 Fusion 1.6 6MT 0-60: 8 seconds. Meh.

And the Ford costs about $1000-3000 *more* than the Honda when comparably equipped.

The fast Fusion is the 2.0 Turbo. But it also has significantly slower acceleration than the 3.5 V-6 Accord. Again here the Fusion does get 1 more mpg than the Accord. But the Accord costs less when equipped the same way.

In addition to this stuff, the Fusion does something with its design that is also found with the Sonata, Passat, Optima, 2013 Altima, and probably others too. All of these cars have poor rear visibility for the driver because of thick rear roof pillars, as well as tiny back windows that in fact are unusable by the driver.

The 2013 Fusion, like a lot of those other cars, also has rear windows that roll down only half way. That's a pet peeve of mine that my 2000 Focus also had. On nice days on slow drives sometimes people in the back want to roll down their windows.

But the Ford Fusion does have some good points, probably some of which I've neglected. As you can tell I'm a Honda fan. But I like to think that I'm working from real evidence in comparisons, and that I can admit it if Honda is not quite as good on some things as its competitors. It sounds, for instance, that maybe the Passat has better ride quality. I don't know if that's true for me, since I haven't myself driven either car yet, but I admit it's a possibility.

All of the major car magazines are probably right now doing big shoot out comparisons between all the major midsize sedans. Probably the 2013 Fusion, 2013 Altima, and 2013 Passat will be near the top. But my guess is the 2013 Accord is going to win almost all of these comparisons, in part for some of the reasons above. We'll soon see!

[molson.david]

Overall accord is a decent car and the progress from 12 is evident. But felt short of passat's confidence.

+100
I like new passat too. passats interior sure looks less sophisticated, but it is leaves better built car impression.
vs accord it is much quieter and more comfortable riding car. I'm in TX and all roads around here is concrete, so difference in ride is very notifiable.
like some one mentioned above, unfortunately pretty low resale and historical low reliability drove me away from passat.
see if you would like camry XLE V-6,try XLE hybrid too, it is well in the same price range as LX-V6 accord. you might get pleasantly surprised. in addition 2-2.5k off camry's MSRP, (1K off hybrid) easily achievable.
not sure about accord but 2010 and up camry got 2years free maintained too.
I even heard about some dealers (after negotiation of course )providing 5 years free scheduled maintained (no tear and wear, only maintenance) for camry.

[mitchflorida]

I have always thought buying a 6-cylinder Accord or Camry is overkill. They are both basically family cars. A 6-cylinder Accord is still an Accord. If you want something sporty, look elsewhere.

[benjaminh]

Originally Posted by molson.david

+100
I like new passat too. passats interior sure looks less sophisticated, but it is leaves better built car impression.
vs accord it is much quieter and more comfortable riding car. I'm in TX and all roads around here is concrete, so difference in ride is very notifiable.
like some one mentioned above, unfortunately pretty low resale and historical low reliability drove me away from passat.
see if you would like camry XLE V-6,try XLE hybrid too, it is well in the same price range as LX-V6 accord. you might get pleasantly surprised. in addition 2-2.5k off camry's MSRP, (1K off hybrid) easily achievable.
not sure about accord but 2010 and up camry got 2years free maintained too.
I even heard about some dealers (after negotiation of course )providing 5 years free scheduled maintained (no tear and wear, only maintenance) for camry.

I think the Camry does have good points, like reliability equal to Honda, and perhaps a more comfortable ride. They are different cars for different kinds of people.

The Camry is more about a comfortable suspension. The Honda Accord is more about sporty driving dynamics.

Edmunds.com has a section called Inside Line. They recently did a comparison of a 2013 Accord EX vs a Camry LE. To them the Accord was the clear winner:

http://www.insideline.com/honda/acco...ison-test.html


"....Now the Honda Accord is back at the beginning, and it wins this test easily. As usual, it's the total package that makes this car special. The new four-cylinder engine and CVT work incredibly well together, providing usable performance and a real-world improvement in fuel consumption. Honda also improved the look and feel of the cabin, while adding the tech features that have become important in this class. In the midst of checking all those boxes, company executives didn't lose sight of details like handling and steering feel — key ingredients in the character of Accords past and present.

Next to the Accord, the 2012 Toyota Camry LE is down on flavor. It's every bit as useful as the Honda on the inside, but on the road, it's slower and wholly uninterested in doing anything other than taking you to work in comfort. For some, that's enough, especially given this LE model's competitive price tag.

But we'll pay a bit more for the 2013 Honda Accord's tastier brew. For the moment, it's the car to have in the four-cylinder midsize sedan class."

[benjaminh]

Originally Posted by mitchflorida

I have always thought buying a 6-cylinder Accord or Camry is overkill. They are both basically family cars. A 6-cylinder Accord is still an Accord. If you want something sporty, look elsewhere.

A 4 cylinder is all I need. But the 6 cylinder takes the car closer to BMW levels of performance. Can it handle the way a BMW does? No. But it's pretty good and costs c.15-20k less than a BMW 3 series with the same stuff.

Here's part of a a rave review of a 6 cylinder 2013 Accord from Inside Line. They say it goes 0-60 in about 6 seconds:

http://www.edmunds.com/honda/accord/...oad-test1.html

"The Four-Door Gold Wing
By John Pearley Huffman
Published: 09/10/2012

Honda has finally come up with a four-wheeled analog to the legendary Gold Wing touring bike. What's surprising is that it's the new V6-powered, 2013 Honda Accord EX-L V6 sedan.

Now in its 38th year of production, the Accord has always been the sort of car you never have to justify to your neighbors and family. Everyone knows it's low-key, high-quality, long-value transportation so you get a nod for being sensible, and that's about it.

But this latest V6 Accord isn't the appliance you were expecting. It's the best mix of luxury, comfort, performance, fuel efficiency and unpretentious style that Honda has ever offered — other than the super-smooth, easygoing Gold Wing....


The Velvet Freight Train
Press the red start button and the 2013 Honda Accord's 3.5-liter V6 whirs to life almost silently. It now makes 278 horsepower, up from 271 hp in 2012. At idle you have to check the tachometer to make sure it's running at all....

Honda has revised the V6 so that, the company claims, the torque production is better down low. That's despite the fact that peak torque is actually down 2 pound-feet from last year's 254 lb-ft at 5,000 rpm to 252 lb-ft at 4,900 rpm now.

Toe into the accelerator, though, and the grunt is immediate and immersive. With the traction and stability control systems left on, the big sedan simply punches a hole in the atmosphere with no drama and practically no noise. Switch the nannies off and pedal it a bit, and it delivers you to 60 mph in 6.1 seconds (or 5.7 seconds with 1 foot of rollout as on a drag strip). The quarter-mile goes by in a swift 14.3 seconds at 98.1 mph.

Not only are these outstanding numbers for a family sedan, they represent a huge improvement over the previous-generation Accord V6 sedan, which took 7.0 seconds to reach 60 and covered the quarter-mile in 15.3 seconds at 95.4 mph. They're also right in line with the V6-equipped 2013 Nissan Altima, which turned in a 6.2-second 0-60 time (5.8 with rollout) and a 14.3-second quarter-mile at 99.8 mph.

Along with the new transmission, friction-reduction measures in the engine contribute to the 2013 Honda V6 Accord's lower fuel consumption. It's rated at 21 city/34 highway and 25 mpg combined versus last year's 20 city/30 highway/24 combined. Our test car averaged 28.7 mpg over 191 miles of mostly highway driving; the last time we tested a V6 Accord, we couldn't do better than 22 mpg...."