Some people posted on another topic that the Accord and CL are the same car basically. I refuted that they are not the same car, although built on the same platform, and some even put up a hissy-fit when I presented the RX300 and camry as an example of cars from the same platform that are different.

I'm not trying to start any arguments, but I'd like to know what the reasons are that some people consider them the same car and some don't, because the posters in the other topic just maintain they are the same car without any reason to support that conclusion.

And the new accord and current CL are NOT the same car. You will understand the logic behind this because the current Accord and previous Accord are NOT the same car, and the current CL is based off the previous accord.

My opinion is weighted more towards mechanical differences rather than cosmetic. The engines offered on the current CL are different from the offerings of the previous Accord. They may be in the same family, but are significantly different. The tranny is also different (4spd Accord vs. 5spd, again same family but different). And the body panels are 90% different. Cosmetically, they may be close as they use some of the same switchgear and door handles and mirrors and stuff.

To contrast, the I35 and Maxima are the same car, because about 50% or so of the body panels are the same, same 4spd tranny, same engine. Most of the I35 is only cosmetically/aesthetically different than the Maxima, but mechanically are the same.

And for all you who accuse me of hating the new accord, I NEVER said anything of the sort on ANY topics. I like the new Accord, it's just not my cup of tea.

Without putting up hissyfits, what are your opinions on the previous Accord and CL being different or the same?

 

I happen to have BOTH car sitting in my garage. I have inpected both with a comb. They are NOT the same, but do share some parts. Comparisons are BOTH STOCK:
Accord Coupe: Doors seem light, tin canish, hollow. Driving the car, ROAD NOISE BIG TIME. Launch doesn't compare. However, the brakes SEEM better than the CLS. AC doesn't blow like the CLS'. Seat are more couch feeling (they are leather EX-V6). Windsheild wipers are noisey, Sun roof motor is LOUD. Door locks are LOUD.
CLS:
Doors are rock heavy solid. Very little road noise if any. CLS seats are the best out there. AC WAY better. Windshield wipers are quiet. Sun roof motor is quiet. Door locks are quiet.
Results: CLS is way better made.

HANDS DOWN TO THE CLS.

Why do I have a Honda Accord, why NOT ? They are both paid in full and will remain with me for a very long time.
BTW: my accord coupe just turned 103,00 miles and still runs like a champ.:P :P

 

The cars are more mechanically similar than Cosmetically. We share many mods and stock parts. Anything that would be considered interchangable would support the idea that the CL and the Accord are the same car. For instance, we share suspension: sways, shocks, springs, whatever else you can do to the car. Although the engines are different, they are built on the same block: J30 and J32. The reasons for the HP difference are in a few internal engine parts. The headers and exhuast systems are almost identical. The ECU's are nearly identical also, being that i know people have used the Accord ECU diagram to hook up VAFC's. The brakes in the front are the same accordig to part numbers. A good number of parts in the engine bay are the same exact ones as the Accord. This is compared the the V6, not hte I4.

 

I may be able to shed some light here for you. I worked in Marysville and East Liberty plants for a few years as a process engineer. Specifically, I supported the welding departments of both plants, and held responsibilty for, among other things, the production equipment. Those are my credentials.

My input is this: The cars are built on the same lines, on mostly the same jigs (welding fixtures), with parts that are stamped by the same machines and welded by the same robots that do the Accord/CL/TL. Now, that doesn't mean that the robots don't get their program changed, or that the stamping dies don't change, but consider this: The difference in DNA between a human and a mouse is on the order of 1%-2%. Little change, big difference.

The cars are all engineered to work on the same "platform". This simply means that each cars floor comp can ride on the same manufacturing equipment as its' cousins. That means that key dimensions must be the same. However, humps, bumps, ridges, offsets and such can change, and they do.

Obviously the doors and side comps are different. The engines are VERY similar. A con rod here, a crank there, maybe a new head or exhaust, and viola - a few extra ponies! Does the v-tec change? Not really. Headlights? Yes, obviously.

In conclusion, the real cost to build a car is in the manufacturing equipment. By using the same basic design across the Accord/CL/TL, Honda saves a bundle of cash in overhead costs. Tweaks can be made to each design, and that's what gives the each vehicle its' own personality.

 

But going by your reasoning that:

"Anything that would be considered interchangable would support the idea that the CL and the Accord are the same car. For instance, we share suspension: sways, shocks, springs, whatever else you can do to the car. "

This will mean that the G35/350Z, TT/Beetle, A4/A6/Passat, Element/CR-V, CLK/C-Class, and many other, are the same car, because most of those share major mechanical components also. And most of those even share the SAME engine, not to mention family of engines. I still do not consider these the same cars because they are markedly different in that they required REAL additional engineering to design/produce them. I even consider the Accord Coupe and Sedan different cars because it took REAL engineering to create the different wheelbases and body panels. Even Toyota considers the Solara and Camry separate models (No mention of "camry" anywhere on the Solara), although they class them together "officially" so that it adds to the sales of Camries.

The previously mentioned I35/Max, along with the Rodeo/Passport, SLX/Trooper, I consider the same car because they required less than 10% more engineering to produce... they had to engineer the badge. The I35/Max at least has a lot of different body panels, but most are still the same.

 

I couldn't say this any better myself.

But you did not anwer "Are they the same car?"

I'm inferring that the answer is "no".

Just as a Maxima and I35 is the same "personality" in a slightly different dress, the CL and Accord are different personalities in similar yet different dresses.

 

I heard that the basis for the CL is an Accord with a 2" shorter frame. Don't know if that's so... but the CL sure has a different PERSONALITY!

 

The Highlander is built on the new Camry platform while the 2003 RX300 is from the old Camry. The Highlander is smoother and more rigid and almost as plush as the Lexus for $5-10000 less. Also the ES3000 and Camry are more similiar than any Honda/Acura in IMO. Just take the wood out and they're the same. The CL/TL are much bigger and more powerful and refined than the Accord. The CL looks like the Coupe but they are totally different. I have owned both of them so I have some basis for my opinion. I am convinced that the Acura is more of an upgrade from a Honda that Lexus is from a Toyota if you compare similiar models.

 

Actually the Highlander is a downscale[current] RX300 (like the Pilot is downscale MDX), and both are based on the old camry platform. It probably rides very much the same though because most of the underpinnings are the same. The Pilot is tuned plusher than the MDX though, so it rides plusher than the MDX.

The only cars on the new camry platform are the camry and es300. The next RX(330?) will be the next.

 

There really is no criteria on all the examples given to justify how different/similar a car is. You can use your judgement to determine whether it would be wise to cross the similarity line by purchasing the mate. Would you purchase an I35 if you owned an auto Max? Probably not since they are so similar. Definitely less likely than from an Accord to a CL or CL-S since the Nissans are so close. There really is not set percentage on how close they are. It's all judgemental.

The point is its a case-by-case answer to decide if the car in fact is the "same." For example, I would not purchase a 2003 CL-P nor an auto CL-S because even though they're more upgraded, in my opinion, it's too close to justify the added cost in cars that I believe are very similar. When I sit in a CL, I feel I'm in an Accord with modded interior. Call me crazy or whatever but everyone will have a different reaction. Now it would be more likely for me to purchase a manual CL-S or a 6spd 03 Accord, although similar (yes the 7th gen is still similar to the 6th) due to the added performance, manual tranny, and revised cars (03 CL-S is slightly different than 02). Basically my reasons to change may differ for everyone else here on this post. I chose something newer, more performance, and a good reason for added cost (i.e. higher payment, higher insurance, etc). Whereas someone may choose to a totally different car, make, or same thing.

 

...and runs on regular gas.

 

I think you're wrong. The car critic in USA TODAY made a big deal about the Highlander being built off of the NEW Camry plaform unlike the RX300. I have one and it's much roomier than the RX300 and seems more solid IMO.
"Highlander is tallish, squarish and SUVish, atop mainly Camry hardware. You can regard it several ways: a sporting Camry wagon; an upsized Toyota take on the Subaru Forester; a downmarket version of the Lexus RX 300 SUV sold by Toyota's luxury brand. In fact, Highlander is more vehicle than RX 300 for less money. When it's time for the inevitable RX re-do in a year or two, it'll go on the chassis that Highlander uses today, which means more space and refinement."
USA TODAY--HEALEY--FEBRUARY 2001

 

I am 95% sure that USA today is wrong.

The Pilot is also more roomier than the MDX.

I will search around for the info, but I'm sure it is the old camry platform.

 

From Edmunds:
"The Toyota Highlander (no relation to Christopher Lambert) debuted in 2001. It was one of the first midsize "crossover" SUVs to appear, and Toyota designed it complement the more rugged and trucklike 4Runner. Built at the Toyota Motor Kyushu Inc. plant in Japan, the Highlander is based on the same platform that is used for the Lexus RX 300. This means that, like the Lexus, it has a carlike unibody design (unlike the 4Runner's body-on-frame design), which leads to better handling, less cabin noise, improved crash worthiness and easier entry and exit for passengers."

This review states that it is built from the RX300, not the Camry. Since the RX300 is built off the old Camry, then that would infer that the Highlander is also.

From Carpoint:
"Built on the same platform as the top-selling Lexus RX 300 and using the same V6 and the same basic interior look, the 2001 Toyota Highlander can, in many ways, be thought of as a less-expensive RX 300."

"...Starting in calendar 2001, they finally get it in the form of the Highlander. The new, midsize SUV joins Toyota's other midsize sport utility—the long-running 4Runner—in showrooms, marking the first time Toyota has two midsize offerings. "

The Highlander started selling as a 2001 MY (intro. spring '00?) The new Camry did not debut until late 2001 as a 2002 MY.

I'm am very sure the Highlander is based on the old Camry/RX300 platform and that USA Today is wrong. And I expect Carpoint and Edmunds information to be more accurate than an article from USA Today.

I will continue to search for info on this.

 

I find mistakes in Carpoint and Edmunds frequently and I'm no expert on cars. The USA TOday critic, Healey, actually talked to the designer of the Rx and Highlander. His article seems to be more credible and the Highalnder is so much bigger and more modern looking IMHO.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...highlander.htm

 

If you find frequent mistakes in Carpoint and Edmunds, then it's MORE likely that USA Today is wrong because they are not dependent on auto reviews. And just because the editor interviewed the engineer doens't mean he specifically asked that or that it was mentioned. One of the 2 (forgot which one) review I provided also had quotes from the RX300/Highlander engineer.

And bigger and modern looking does not mean anything. Pilot is bigger than MDX. Modern looking has to do with body panels and cosmetics. The TL is more modern looking than the old Accord, yet are based on the same platform. The I35 looks more modern than the old Maxima. Looks and size doesn't mean anything.

I found 2 sources and I can find many more that show theHighlander is built off the current RX300. I'll take the word of sources from industries that are focused on automobiles any day over a general newspaper review.

I'd be interested in finding new info about this, so I'll keep looking.

 

mrdeeno, the wheelbase on the new camry and highlander are w/i
2/10 of 1 inch of one another while the lexus Rx3000 wheelbase is 4 inches shorter than either. I know that's not definitive but it's something.

 

I am confused about this. After searching around, I did find some sources that say it is based on the new Camry, but most of them say it is based on the rx300 (not rx330).

 

I thought we were discussing the similarities/differences of the Accord/CL...