[Scifience]

We are currently looking at buying a new car very soon. We have it narrowed down to two models, the Honda Accord EX, and the Ford Five Hundred SEL.

We keep our cars for a very long time (we currently have an 89 station wagon), so something with good reliability is important. Seeing as this is the case, the natural response would likely be to go with the Honda.

However, our choice is not quite as simple as this. While we love the reliability, gas mileage, emissions, and features on the Honda, we can't ignore the *much* larger trunk on the Ford (when we travel, we bring TONS of stuff along) and the fact that we know someone who can give gigantic (often $10,000) discounts on Ford vehicles (brand new).

The Ford would cost a good bit less than the Honda and have more trunk space, but the reliability of our current Ford station wagon hasn't exactly been the best (after around 1996, it started requiring repairs amounting to around $150 a month). It only has 130,000 miles on it now. We are also big environmentalists and appreciate the gas mileage and lower emissions of the Honda.

Any advice?

[ManOfSteal]

Honda Accord.

If for no other reason, I would truly be worried about a "first year" vehicle in the form of the Ford Five Hundred SEL. Just a thought.

[zerostar]

I agree with MOS above.

Also, what was disappointing about the Ford was:

The power source for every Five Hundred is the workhorse 3.0-liter Duratec V6. Output is only 203 horsepower, putting the cars at an immediate disadvantage alongside the powerhouse V6s offered by many competitors.
Even the accord has 240 horses and still a 3.0L

You can do a side-by-side comparison at: http://automobiles.honda.com/
Pick your car and click compare.

[the_glassman]

No question, Honda.

[ReggieX]

Test drive both, then get the Honda.

Honda Accord EX-V6. This is coming from an owner. Had mine for six months and couldn't be happier.

[OldManMac]

If I had a choice between those two cars, I'd learn how to pack for trips more efficiently, and learn to do with less when I'm traveling.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by Scifience:
�*much* larger trunk on the Ford�gigantic (often $10,000) discounts on Ford vehicles�cost a good bit less than the Honda�big environmentalists and appreciate the gas mileage and lower emissions of the Honda.

I'd probably get the Ford. Now we need a Honda owner to compare.
Don't worry about the "emissions". Your itsy bitsy car isn't going to make earth a living hell.

[Scifience]

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Don't worry about the "emissions". Your itsy bitsy car isn't going to make earth a living hell.

I am concerned about emissions. While one car might not make a substantial difference in air polution, if everyone replaced their high-emissions cars, trucks, and SUVs with low-emmisions ones, there would be a major difference.

One small step.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by Scifience:
I am concerned about emissions. While one car might not make a substantial difference in air polution, if everyone replaced their high-emissions cars, trucks, and SUVs with low-emmisions ones, there would be a major difference.

One small step.

We've gone 150 years and it has gone up 1 degree F. The government over-regulates industry to meet standards and environmentalists want to implement more. Your very small car isn't going to kill anyone. You would buy a car for at least $10,000 more just to avoid more emissions? Dude. That $10,000 could be used for anything�vacation, a G5, CD Donation Fund, etc.



Does anyone own a new Accord around here? It'd be better if we had someone who owned one talk about it.

[mitchell_pgh]

I generally buy Ford products and have been happy with them.

[cjrivera]

I've test driven the 500 SEL and was very surprised by it.
Very smooth ride, but still has suprisingly good handling.
It's based on a Volvo platform (S80 maybe),
A LOT of interior room.
Kinda bland exterior (but so does the Honda).
You could go with the Mercury Montego for a little different styling cues.


I'd at least check out the 500

[Sage]

I'm an interior nut, so I'd go for the Accord for the sole reason that the Five Hundred has some of the crappiest interior plastic I've ever laid hands on (which would be today, when I went to the L.A. Auto Show).

That aside, the safe pick is the Accord. You could go with the Five Hundred (the CVT should be interesting), but you'd undoubtedly be taking a bit of a gamble... no long term tests outside of the company, no indication of reliability, no clue what its resale value will be. With the Accord, the current generation has already been established.

So, I dunno... could I convince you to get a Subaru Legacy or Outback?

[powerbook867]

We have owned Hondas in the past and been very happy with them. I think the hybrid civic gets 47 mpg which is simply amazing.

I would get the Honda.

(the Subaru would be a good choice as well, but you have to take it easy driving it or the mpg goes in the crapper. My WRX is too easy to rev!!)

[macroy]

I think you'll be fine either way. Cars are pretty good these days as long as you keep up with them. I have friends who have Fords that run great, and I also have friends that have Hondas that give them problems.

Having said that, I own/ed both Acuras and Hondas (no Accords, sorry) - and have had very little problems that affect the drivability. Thus, I would definitely lean more towards the Honda because of that. I grew up with a Dodge, Lincoln, and Cadillac - and American cars just have not (in my eyes) earned enough respect to spend all that money on them.

Oh, and also consider the Accord's track record (and resale value)vs. the fact that this is a new Ford model. It may be a gamble that even a 10K discount may not cover in the long run.

Just my .02.

[iMOTOR]

Originally posted by Scifience:
I am concerned about emissions.

According to CARB , both cars qualify as lev-2. I am an environmentalist also, but I think vehicle emissions continue to be less and less of an issue. I think the big issue now is fuel consumption, which is not directly related to the emissions that a car produces at the exhaust pipe, but can cause an overall increase in emissions. When you use more fuel, then more fuel has to be pumped from wells, transported to a refinery, refined, and transported to a gas station, which all requires energy to be used to bring the fuel to you, which can also increase emissions. Also, when more fuel is being transported, there is a greater chance that more fuel will come into contact with the air, spreading unburned hydrocarbons. Using more fuel also increases the need for oil exploration and drilling, which has a tremendous negative impact on the environment and humans. Many suvs continue to get less fuel milage even though their emissions ratings improve. Ford's website claims the 500 gets 29 hwy, which is decent but not great. I couldn't find the accords milage on hondas website.


Environmental issues aside, I think it would be risky buying an american car in its first production year.

[CD Hanks]

Honda. Honestly, as long as you keep the oil changed at the right intervals, you'll never kill it.

[placebo1969]

I would definitely go with the Honda. I'm on my 4th Honda product. Loved them all. Utterly dependable. Fit and finish is excellent as well as resale, which is another thing to consider. Plus what does it tell you if a brand new model has rebates?

[TheBadgerHunter]

Honda.

[MacMan4000]

Originally posted by powerbook867:
... the hybrid civic gets 47 mpg ...

Why can't Jeep make a SUV like that?! I only get 13* MPG in my ride Sorry environment.


*If my mom drives it gets 16.6 MPG

[maxintosh]

Ford hasn't had a lot of luck with their "Euro-styled" US-bound cars. The Focus was recalled something like 14 times for all sorts of issues. Though the 500 is certainly a move in the right direction, especially compared with the heinousness that was the Taurus.

[maxintosh]

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
We've gone 150 years and it has gone up 1 degree F.

If that change is in fact because of our behavior on the planet, 1 degree in only 150 years is a HUGE deal.

[Sarc]

Honda, hands down. Japanese simply build better cars.

[demograph68]

"Feel the Ford Luke."

[Randman]

I try to never buy a computer that's rev a and I would never buy a car that is in its first year of production. Let them work out the kinks.

[olePigeon]

I'd go with the Ford...
























...2005 Shelby Mustang that it is.



God damn that's a sweet car.

[Lancer409]

Originally posted by demograph68:
"Feel the Ford Luke."

your bakery products are weak, old man....

lol

[rozwado1]

If you're an all-out treehugger, just take the next step and throw out your shoes. We had a bunch of treehuggers on campus who would never wear shoes - it's very Earthy. Anyways, if you don't wear shoes, that's less shoes to pack in the trunk and therefore --> less trunk space needed.

If you don't wear shoes, the Honda is the clear winner.

[angelmb]

The Ford 500 (new Mondeo over here) looks like a passat made by ford, and the new accord looks like an alfa romeo 155 made by honda I would think about that legacy someone have mentioned previously, anyway on such a big market like the american one, what other options could you have on mind?

[nerd]

I would go with the Honda any day. I got a Ford Escape (the V6 Duratech one) about a year ago and I'm now worried that I won't be able to offload it for what the book value is. Book is about $20k on resale but in the Autotrader they're only going for around $16k. I owe $18k. Get the Honda just because of this, they hold their value a lot longer then a year like mine.

Pack light. I'm getting rid of the SUV for a Mini. I do a lot of snowboading in the winter and I plan on getting by fine with the Mini. Now it's only my girlfriend and I, no family of 4 or something like that trying to fit in the Mini.

I've had 4 Hondas before the Escape and never had problems with them. My Escape's air conditioner broke last summer. I would hardly call this a problem with all Fords; things can happen with all of the manufactures but it still wasn't a good impression for me.

Brad

[IceEnclosure]

besides being a 'rev. A', I'd probably go with the 500. they can look tough.

Accords, pfft.

[Sealobo]

HONDA hands down.

[zigzag]

I like the Ford - it's basically a variation on the Passat (the designs were overseen by the same guy - J. Mays). I haven't driven one but it appears to be a nice car, and I particularly like the high seating position. But as a practical matter (especially since the Ford is in its first year of production), I'd lean towards the Honda for proven reliability. And although it doesn't sit as high and isn't as roomy, the Accord is very comfortable.

[KeriVit]

I have a Honda Accord EX-V6 (my second). No problems whatsover.

I also have a Ford F-150. For a while there, it was in the shop more than on the road. In fact, AAA cut me off on towing because it happened too much.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by Sarc:
Honda, hands down. Japanese simply build better cars.

Pure ignorance. One or two Japanese companies have higher quality that other countries, but as a blanket statement this is pure falsehood.

Read this article. It points out the fallacies in blanket statements such as your. In it it states that Cadillac is the second highest in a JD Powers survey. And also points out that quality surveys are not all about fit, finish, and function. But perceived quality based upon expectations.

And from this study there are 3 American brands that rank higher than Honda vehicle dependability.

BACK ON TOPIC: I'd chose the Honda over the Ford simply because I don't like first model year cars. Too many bugs to be worked out. I tend to buy at the end of a product's life cycle. You get the car cheaper and it is usually more dependable than a car that is newer to the market. Sure you don't get the sexy/cutting edge/hippest car, but I am pretty self confident and don't need approval from my peers.

Have you considered a Vovlo or Saturn station wagon? How about Subaru? Or, since you are going to get a huge discount on a Ford product, a Ford mini-van?

[OldManMac]

A $50,000 Cadillac, Lincoln, Lexus, or Infiniti should have a higher reliability than a $30,000 Honda. Let's compare oranges to oranges.

Even putting that aside, there's an old saying that Perception is 90% of reality, and the "Big 3" haven't gotten that concept down yet, as their market shares continue to slide. GM still has too many recalls, and their market share continues to slip lower (and will continue to do so), because of perception. If I were to buy another "American" car, which is not very likely, I would buy a GM product, but because of the perception, and experience, I have of the auto industry, it wouldn't be likely. So, what GM has to do is convince me that their product is going to meet my expectations, and that is the crux of the issue. I like my Grand AM, as far the ride, the handling (I'm not a race track driver), the acceleration, etc., but when I constantly have to put money into it, that I've never had to do with any foreign brand I've owned, at comparable mileage, it doesn't look so appealing. I'll soon be putting the fourth set of brake pads on the car, in 120,000 miles (as opposed to the second set on any foreign car I've owned at comparable mileage), the second set of lower control arms (the bushings wear out - a common problem on these cars, and I've never had to do this on a foreign car), the third AC compressor (never), the second set of rear brakes (once in the same mileage on a foreign car), an alternator at 70K (never under 125k on a foreign car), intake manifold gasket replacement at 84K (a very, very, common problem with the 31.L V6 that GM knows about and has done nothing to address, and which cost me $600. [my oldest daughter was a parts manager for a large independent repair shop, and she always stocked at least three sets of these gaskets, because they did several a week! She also developed, as a manager, a good working relationship with several Detroit area parts wholesalers, and this was a common stock item for them as well. They also stocked lots of brake pads for GM cars, and control arms.), and on the list goes.

So you see, if GM does build a quality product, the perception that they do, compared to the rest of the industry, isn't there and that's ultimately what counts, and what brings people into your showroom, versus your competitors.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by MacMan4000:
Why can't Jeep make a SUV like that?!

They sort of did. My XJ (chipped VM 2.5 TDi) runs about 35 mpg (UK gallons) - about the same as the 1.6 Ford Focus I'm tooling in at the moment.

On the subject of Fords and this thread, go for the Honda. Less than 2,000 on the clock of that Focus and it's rattling like crazy (tailgate problems). Ford's quality assurance didn't seem to be working for this particular example.

[Link]

SURE go with the honda, the only problem will be trying to find yours in the parking lot since everyone and their brother already HAS a honda.

[stevesnj]

I used to religiously buy American but no more...between the recalls and unreliability I can't take it anymore. My Toyota runs like a champ I will never buy American again expect for like a Vette or Viper but for everyday reliability and peace of mind I would go Honda or Toyota...don't waste your time with American cars they aren't worth the headache.

[Link]

In that case don't waste your money on german cars either

[effgee]

Originally posted by Scifience:
... The Ford would cost a good bit less than the Honda and have more trunk space, ...

I suppose this model of the Accord is not being sold in the US - right? That would alleviate most of your trunk space problems.

[zerostar]

Originally posted by effgee:
I suppose this model of the Accord is not being sold in the US - right? That would alleviate most of your trunk space problems.

I Wish, that would be my next Honda for sure.

[TailsToo]

Honda Accord! I owned a Ford once, and never will again!

[OpenStep]

Go for the honda, just make sure the timing belt maintenance is taken care of

[zigzag]

Forget J.D. Power - as the article suggests, it contains all sorts of uncontrolled variables. Refer instead to Consumer Reports, which surveys actual repair issues from a large sample. It's hard to argue with their numbers, and their numbers pretty much show the same old reliability trends in favor of Japanese makes and against domestic and European makes. It's no coincidence that the Japanese are stealing market share and that their resale values are relatively higher - that's the free market talking. There are always exceptions, but the odds favor Japanese cars.

I've owned both European and domestic makes. After one year, my first Japanese car has not only had fewer manufacturing defects - it has had zero defects, not so much as a stitch out of place. After my previous experiences, I regard this as nothing short of miraculous, and it will affect my future buying decisions.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I've owned both European and domestic makes. After one year, my first Japanese car has not only had fewer manufacturing defects - it has had zero defects, not so much as a stitch out of place. After my previous experiences, I regard this as nothing short of miraculous, and it will affect my future buying decisions.

Zero defects is "nothing short of miraculous"? Huh, I must be blessed from God when it comes to cars. My wife and I have owned 7 American/UAW made cars in the last 10 years and the only defect I had was a Goodyear tire that had a bulge in the sidewall. But the tire did have 65,000 miles on it so I guess that's O.K.

But then I am fastidious with maintenance and drive within safe limits. I don't hotrod my cars or drive too dangerously. I would expect nothing less of any car I buy.

A year with zero defects... pshaw! That's the break-in period!

[OldManMac]

You must be blessed, indeed, if you can tell us with a straight face that you've only had one defect in ten years on seven cars. I would call J.D. Power and Consumer Reports, if I were you, and while you're at it, I'd call the Guiness Book of Records as well, because you're definitely in a class by yourself. Also, being fastidious about maintenance doesn't in any way guarantee that parts aren't going to wear out or break; changing your oil regularly, or keeping your tires inflated properly, or making sure your belts are at the proper tension, etc., means squat if your AC compressor dumps some bearings or leaks, or whether your control arm bushings wear prematurely. My brother-in-law bought a new Buick LeSabre last year, and with only 15,000 miles on it, the alternator belt squeals like a banshee; that shouldn't happen that quickly. It's minor, but it's very inconvenient for him to have to take time off work to get this adjusted at such an early stage in the car's life. I spent many years in the car service business, starting as a mechanic, and working my way up to service manager, and, while it was a few years back, and quality has improved, there's a reason that car dealers still do warranty work.

Even GM's VP of North American quality seems to think they still have some room for improvement.

http://www.qualitymag.com/CDA/Articl...133927,00.html

2. General Motors

(Detroit)

Quality improvement has been a recurring theme for General Motors, the world's largest vehicle manufacturer-it even went so far as to launch a Road to Redemption ad campaign to convince consumers that it was serious about improving quality.

The company hired quality experts and adopted the mantra: Don't accept, build or ship defects. Find it, fix it, protect the customer. The company has created a quality gate system that is meant to catch problems before a vehicle moves onto the next stage of development. In addition, they appointed a quality team of workers with the power to stop a substandard design.

And, GM has succeeded in boosting auto quality relative to other competitors, and was the only U.S. automaker to perform above the industry average in a J.D. Power & Associates survey in 2003 and 2004. In June, J.D. Power released its vehicle dependability study, which measures quality after three years of ownership, that found that GM had 262 problems per 100 vehicles. GM ranks fourth behind Toyota, American Honda and Porsche Cars North America.

In April, GM ranked fifth in a J.D. Power initial quality study, which measures customer satisfaction after 90 days of ownership. The study found the company had 120 problems per 100 vehicles, which is slightly above the industry average of 119. This, too, placed GM as the highest rated U.S. auto manufacturer. (my emphasis)

The work toward improving quality came at about the same time as an aggressive new product launch. In 2002, GM launched 21 vehicles at 18 plants, accounting for 44% of its production volume. In 2003, GM launched 16 vehicles at 13 plants, accounting for approximately 40% of production volume. In conjunction with these launches, the company has upgraded five of its plants at a cost of about $2.8 billion.

While quality has improved, the company has been rocked by recalls in 2004. In February, the company announced three recalls totalling some 2.5 million vehicles. In March, the company recalled 3.66 million pickups because of a faulty tailgate cable and in August, the company announced a recall of some 250,000 Saturn SUVs.

Kevin Williams, who was named vice president of North American quality at GM in April 2003, said in a media briefing in May, that the company is not where it wants to be quality wise, but "the data are starting to show that we've improved quality drastically."

---------------

It's one thing to be a cheerleader for the company you work for (and that is admirable); it's quite another to deny reality.

[Rev-O]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
BACK ON TOPIC: I'd chose the Honda over the Ford simply because I don't like first model year cars. Too many bugs to be worked out. I tend to buy at the end of a product's life cycle. You get the car cheaper and it is usually more dependable than a car that is newer to the market. Sure you don't get the sexy/cutting edge/hippest car, but I am pretty self confident and don't need approval from my peers.

The 500 is a nice car, and share some degree of underpinnings as a volvo platform (as previously mentioned). The thing about the 500 that would worry me is that this is Ford's first production CVT as far as I know. That would worry me. That being said, I'd buy the Ford just because you can get AWD on it, and that is an absolute must for me.

As far as resale value goes: a car is the most expensive toaster you'll ever buy. It is an appliance. The only way to get your money's worth out of 'em is to drive 'em into the ground, then sell 'em for a couple of grand or trade 'em in and take the 'convenience' hit.

Whichever way you go, consider purchasing a dealer demo, one that a salesperson is driving. You can get one with a few miles on it with the remainder of the warranty left and save some big bucks.

[argod]

Acura TSX aka Euro Accord.

[RobOnTheCape]

If you must take a lot of stuff on trips, and that's what is holding you back from the Accord, maybe you should also invest in a roof rack.

I recently bought my first Honda, an Element, and have to say it's a great vehicle. Besides the space, everything seems to work as advertised, and moreover I just get the feeling of security sitting in the thing knowing that the rig isn't going to fail in the near future. Was considering Ford and Chevy cars, and was thrown all kinds of rebates and incentives, but one, I liked the roominess of the Element, but moreover I couldn't make the leap into either of the two American makes. This said, I did have two Saturns in a row. The last did me just fine for three years, needing only a brake job during that time.

btw - the Chevy sales guy mentioned how he had been selling Fords for years, and how the operation he was now working at was really on the up and up. He said that he got his sons and daughter in laws Fords, and they were constantly in the shop. Nothing but headaches. Now there's a guy who believes in what he's selling huh?

Get the roofrack.

Cheers