I must say that if all Honda’s are like this new Accord, I will NEVER go back to Toyota again. Compared to the Camry, this car is in a totally different league. I was so dead set on the Camry SE too, but I can’t buy one anymore… not after I test drove the Accord. There’s about a $1000 premium for getting an Accord EX over a Camry SE… and it’s totally worth it. The Camry felt sluggish and plushy, while the Accord felt very light, nimble, and quick. I loved how you could feel the road through the wheel, but not so much in the cabin. My mom riding in the car with me said she was very relaxed on the ride, but I felt so in control. It’s a complete “180″ from the Camry.

The Accord is around $1000 more for the same equipment as the camry, and that gets you a better engine, larger car, better interior quality, more steering feel, and better acceleration and stopping power…. I’m sold.

Here is the Edmunds full test of the Accord sedan:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=122825?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..2.*#2

Edmunds makes a point about the V6 Accord Sedan being slower than a V6 Camry.

It might be silly arguing over this, but fact is the Accord is no longer the clear performance choice when compared to the Camry. Things have changed, and Toyota has stepped up it’s game in the performance category.

Unless we’re just being gearheads for the sake of it, I agree with you. In terms of the business of selling cars, the track numbers don’t mean much. Assuming that a buyer isn’t predisposed to go with or against a certain brand, for whatever reason, the sale will be made on some combination of the intangibles, from service to convenience to that feeling you get behind the wheel that makes you happy to be there or not.

At the same time, if we’re going to cite sources, I would ask that we strive for accuracy and for putting the data in perspective. Overall, the magazines tell you that the cars in this class are all so quick that they are more similar than they are different. I don’t see any one nameplate dominating this field.

If someone mentions skip pad numbers, I’m going to cry.

Having looked at Edmunds Inside Line, I can find only “first drives”, not track testing of the new Accord, so no data is available. It did previously get a V-6 Camry to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds, but it also got a Nissan Altima SE-R to the same speed in 6.4 seconds.

Car and Driver’s results for the 2008 Accord put its 0-60 time at 5.8 seconds. In a 9-car comparison done earlier this year (which would not have included the new Accord, obviously), C/D also put the Camry at 5.8 seconds, which was slower than the Impreza WRX at 5.6 seconds and tied with the Mazdaspeed 6.

Interestingly enough, the bottom place finisher in that 9-car comparison test was the Pontiac G6 GT, which came in at 6.2 seconds. So the spread between the leader and the loser was a mere 0.6 seconds. Similarly, the gap in quarter mile times is only 0.6 seconds as well. All in all, say what you wil about them, but all of these cars are pretty damn fast.

The point is that the Camry is not the clear winner. It is certainly competitive, but to claim that it dominates the class is grand overstatement not supported by the articles I’ve found. Suffice it to say, all of these cars are quick, but I wouldn’t be shipping off any speed competition crowns to the denizens of Toyota City that can’t also be handed to a number of other automakers.

The reality is, most publications have obtained a faster time with a Camry V6 SE than they have with an Altima V6, or Accord V6.

This has nothing to do with brand loyalty; it’s just the reality of things.

I would expect different publications to obtain different results, but according to Road and Track, the Camry SE 6-banger gets to 60 mph in 6.1 seconds, while the new Accord, Mazdaspeed 6, Nissan Altima SE-R and the Saturn Aura all get there in 5.9 seconds.

While I would say that they are all fairly comparable, to proclaim the Camry a clear winner among that field when it placed behind several other vehicles strikes me as being more than a bit of a stretch. While we can all appreciate some degree of brand loyalist enthusiasm, I think that we’d be best to curb it if we are going to pursue the truth that this website encourages.

That being said I think it’s a major stretch to say Acura is copying pre-Bangle BMWs. No matter what you think of Chris Bangle era Bimmers they are the likely the most imitated design in the automobile industry. Acura’s take a lot of design cues from the Germans, not just BMW, but I think it’s a stretch to say any of them are from the pre-Bangle era.

The evolutionary similarities between the last gen 5-series and the current TL can be attributed to the fact that Acura and Bangle actually share many of the same design philosophies, but Acura simply executed theirs with considerably more restraint.

But is there a rational person on earth who can say Acura isn’t doing its best to copy pre-Bangle BMW design? It took me months of double-takes before realizing the new TL wasn’t a redesigned 5-series.

Maybe I’m the crazy one, but I always thought it was general consensus that the Japanese have copied German styling for well over 20 years, usually staying one generation behind (sometimes doing it better, often doing it worse).

Cyrano de Bergerac, or Pinocchio?

Why do they keep making them bigger and heavier???

From Motortrend:
The Honda, on the other hand, strikes a better balance between providing tactile road feel and eliminating harshness, a compromise that, as with the BMW 3 Series, the Accord seems to have mastered. Presented with bends in the road, the Camry quickly makes it known it’s the hungrier of the two, devouring turn after turn with minimal fuss and surprisingly brisk speed. If Toyota claimed its TRD racing arm had created the family man’s dream driver, you’d believe it. The Accord, while not as lively through the turns as the SE, still feels buttoned down and competent in the curves, offering crisp, communicative steering, and the flattest handling traits of any Accord sedan to date.

So according to Motortend, the SE V6 Camry handles better than the Accord.

Pch101:
I understand that. My point was to correct the statement made by another poster that claimed that the new Accord was slower than the existing Camry, when those who have tested them with instruments have determined otherwise. I have not yet driven the SE variant of the Camry nor the new Accord, but based upon the reported stats, the 4-cylinder Accord is faster than the 4-cylinder Camry (0-60 times are about one second less for the Honda), and the 6-cylinder Accord is slightly quicker as well.

I was in-fact talking about the SE V6, not the 4 cyl model. I have no doubt that a 4 cyl Accord is faster than a 4 cyl Camry.

And you are incorrect. The new V6 Accord is NOT faster than the V6 Camry. The V6 Camry STILL remains the fastest V6 midsize sedan in the class. Even a V6 Altima is fractionally slower than a V6 Camry.

I really like the look of the 08 coupe…the sedan never does much for me on the surface…but that’s not why we (America) buys honda or toyota anyhow. :)

Here’s the coupe look: http://automobiles.honda.com/images/2008/accord-coupe/exterior-gallery/gal_lg1.jpg

Back in the mid ’90s, the 5th generation Accord — hailed on this board as an ideal never reached since — got smaller than its predecessor. It was a controversial decision at the time, perhaps anticipating further fuel shortages that didn’t materialize, and it lost ground to the larger Camry. Honda responded with a vengeance next go-round with car that added a bunch of length, all in the back seat. They’ve done exactly the same thing this time, and for exactly the same reason.

What bugs me is that the added size seems to have come at the cost of quality details. The gauges aren’t electroluminescent anymore, and they’re surrounded by cheap-looking brushed metal rings reminiscent of a last-gen CR-V. Likewise, the fake brushed metal on the armrests, dash and steering wheel looks much cheesier than the rather convincing stuff used last year. It’ll be interesting to see if Honda has invested the effort and money to fix the last gen’s biggest flaw: the cheapened interior construction that turned many Accords and TLs into a concerto of rattles and squeaks. I don’t see initial grounds for optimism on this score.

I remember seeing the same critics of the new RAV4 when it also grew. Guess what the new larger RAV4 is selling like hotcakes because the feed back Toyota recieved on the last RAV4 was to make the new one larger.

The Accord has grown because that is what folks actually want. Like it or not the Accord is the standard for passanger sedans in the USA today like the Taurus was 25 years ago. Today Honda is killing one of the last advantages the domestic used to have, size. 10 year ago it was a given that GM or Ford would sell you a bigger car for the money, compare a Lumina, and Taurus with an Accord of that era.

Smallest to Largest:

Fit
Corolla
Civic
Camry
Accord
Avalon

Rav4
CR-V
Highlander
Pilot
FourRunner

Tacoma
Ridgeline
Tundra

Isn’t it too risky (from a multi-billion dollar manufacturer’s standpoint) to size their cars EXACTLY THE SAME as their competition, thus eliminating one of the distinctive characteristics of the car in its segment? With two or three identically sized models (including a Nissan or Mazda), what then becomes the deciding factor in the consumer’s mind? Only Price? Style? Convenience of Dealership location?

Michael please correct this generalization if it’s incorrect, but like for like, isn’t a Honda
generally a bit more expensive than a Toyota? If that’s the case, Honda doesn’t want to go toe-to-toe with the Camry…it would rather be in its own segment: larger than the Camry, and less expensive than the Avalon. Another way of saying, the new Accord gives you attributes of both those competitors (meanwhile acknowledging that the new Accord is NOT the old, minimalist Accord; that is now the Civic, or TSX).

In regards to another poster’s comments about this Accord having been ’sized three years ago’, I don’t believe Honda couldn’t have made adjustments over the last three years. When I was shopping for a people mover two years ago, I read that the Odyssey launch was delayed six or eight months because the new Sienna had just launched, and Honda wanted to make some changes to the new Odyssey so that it would launch as the best van on the market, not just ‘as good as’ the Sienna. Meaning, probably twelve to eighteen months prior beginning the manufacturing of the new Odyssey, Honda must have gotten some specs on the new Sienna, and the decision was made that a six month delay was worth the marketshare/pricepoint/whatever advantage that they were focused on.

Sure, I’m disappointed that the Accord is getting away from its heritage, but that only means that those Accord lifers are going to have to consider a different model name in their garage, not a different make. And this change to the Accord should bring about new potential, as in “wagon” and “diesel” potential. I personally can’t visualize a 2007 Accord as a wagon….but I can see the 2008 as one….and getting 30 mpg! And maybe 40mpg by way of a diesel! (okay, maybe 35mpg, but still!).

A larger Accord does not the end of the world make.

When it happens, someone’s gonna have a serious competitive advantage.