DownUnder

I'll add more to the Altima pro's:

Has a longer powertrain warranty then the Accord.

20 gallon gas tank for longer drives, whereas the Accord only holds 17.1 gallons.

You can get 8 way power driver's seat on the base Altima, the Accord you have to step up to a V6 model.

Base Altima comes with standard 16” wheels, Accord comes with 15” wheels.

Base Altima has rear disc brakes, base Accord has drum rear brakes.

Altima handles better then the Accord.

phile

And more for the Accord:

-dual illuminated vanity mirrors (Altima is non-lighting)
-4-wheel ABS for 4-cylinder models
-standard dual front side airbags
-120 watt stereo standard
-Altima may handle better, Accord has a better ride...it's a trade-off.

Habiib

This is a no brainer. The accord has to be the ugliest car in its class. So I'd suggest the Altima.

Ken1997TL

Much smoother engine, more economical and about the same power (K24 engine is heavily underrated)

As for the rest of the car, its subjective but I'd say the Accords interior is superior.

I hate the exterior styling on both.

DownUnder

LOL, I see more riced out Accords, Civic's, and CRX's more then anything else. Ricers choice of cars.

F23A4

I take exeption with the following:

....subjective but, having a QR25DE motor with 19lb-ft more torque than the Accord's K24, I beg to differ on that one.


Only an issue on the V6 models. Unless you're a true Honda-phile, torque is your friend with any NA 4 cylinder

If the AV6 sedan had an MT, it'd still get beat by the Altima SE-R. Even with the AT, the SE-R will still walk the 5AT AV6 silly.

But I can agree with the rest of your post.

phile

Here ya go:

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0304_fam/

"The new autobox is the Accord's secret weapon, using its preponderance of closely spaced ratios and a numerically higher final-drive ratio to make the four-cylinder's 160 horses run the quickest of the cars in this test."

You're relying on Nissan's torque number, but you forget the Accord has a 5-speed automatic over the Nissan's 4-speed.

"If the Camry consistently stays below the radar, both the Altima and Accord ping loudly on the enthusiast driving screen. The Altima, with its brassy good looks, roomy cabin, and snappy performance, misses greatness by the narrowest of margins, due to its preponderance of less-than-premium interior materials and sound-deadening attenuation.

The new-generation Accord, on the other hand, takes the honors in this hotly contested three-way based on high-quality presentation, sharp road manners, and generous interior accommodations. This is a fine, dual-purpose car that can double as a family hauler and a sport sedan."



Not true. You can get torque steer on any FWD car, regardless of whether it's a 6-cylinder or a 4-cylinder. It's not a matter of the torque numbers per se, it's the mere fact that the torque is going to the front wheels with unequal balance shafts (kinda an oxymoron...how can balance shafts be uneven). And as you've just listed the Altima's healthy 19 lb-ft of torque advantage, I rest my case.



You only need to look at the numbers for the Accord coupe, which has a manual transmission, to see that the Altima isn't that much faster. As for the 5AT V6, Edmunds got a 7.0 second flat for the EX model they tested. I'm too lazy to look it up for you, but you can find it on Edmunds. That's not too far behind a V6 Altima with the 4AT.


EDIT: Here's Edmunds family sedans test:

Altima V6 4AT - 7.3 seconds 0-60
Accord V6 5AT - 7.5 seconds 0-60

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...6/page023.html

And here's the first review of the Accord from 2002:

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/hond...ntent...Honda*

Again, Altima V6 is not that much faster. I haven't seen any tests for the new 5AT V6, but judging at how close the Accord's 5ATV6 was in 0-60 times for the Altima's 4ATV6, while the gap would widen with an extra gear, I doubt it'll "walk the 5AT V6 silly," as you said.

DownUnder

HA, the Altima has a smoother ride and handles better. Camry owns them both in NVH though.

phile

I like how you zeroed in on that but conveniently ignored the link to Edmunds, though, which says something different in terms of performance. Not to mention the quote I posted:

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...6/page026.html

jayhawk815

These charts you posted are not exactly what I'd call conclusive evidence one way or the other.

MADCAT

Quoted from a senior reviewer on Car and Driver television show: "He was hard pressed to find ANY faults with the Accord. If there was a fault, we aren’t seeing it.”

I say most manufacturers don't dare go against the Accord, because they'll sure lose. If the 300C were built as well as the Accord, it would cost $15,000 more.

DownUnder

I'm correcting you about which one rides smoother. Where does performance fit into this equation?

DownUnder

I'm sure if it was in favor for the Accord you wouldn't say that.

phile

And did I not show you the quote from Edmunds about the Accord's ride, where it reads "Ride quality is smooth..."? Where are you confused....

EDIT: Now I remember, I also threw in the performance because you also mentioned the Altima's handling.

phile

Regardless of all the nitpicking, the majority of the auto sources out there favor the Accord over the Altima. I've supplied two sources already, feel free to discover the rest for yourself.

F23A4

[QUOTE=phile]Here ya go:

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0304_fam/

"The new autobox is the Accord's secret weapon, using its preponderance of closely spaced ratios and a numerically higher final-drive ratio to make the four-cylinder's 160 horses run the quickest of the cars in this test."

You're relying on Nissan's torque number, but you forget the Accord has a 5-speed automatic over the Nissan's 4-speed.

"If the Camry consistently stays below the radar, both the Altima and Accord ping loudly on the enthusiast driving screen. The Altima, with its brassy good looks, roomy cabin, and snappy performance, misses greatness by the narrowest of margins, due to its preponderance of less-than-premium interior materials and sound-deadening attenuation.

The new-generation Accord, on the other hand, takes the honors in this hotly contested three-way based on high-quality presentation, sharp road manners, and generous interior accommodations. This is a fine, dual-purpose car that can double as a family hauler and a sport sedan." [?QUOTE]

As with the G35 vs TL styling debate, subjective at best.





Torque=The moment of a force; the measure of a force's tendency to produce torsion and rotation about an axis, equal to the vector product of the radius vector from the axis of rotation to the point of application of the force and the force vector. A turning or twisting force.

Torque Steer=the tendency of a front-wheel drive car to try to steer itself when you are accelerating.

You can have T w/o TS but not TS w/o T. T He 2.5S has the former.


The SE-R is a new beast that'll probably smoke the current AV6 6MT

DownUnder

So by going by that mentality is like saying the BMW 3 series, which most auto sources favor it over every car in it's class, usually beats the Acura TL in every comparison tests. Does that automatically mean the BMW 3 series is a better car then the TL? To me it doesn’t and most likely no one on this forum thinks so either. So I could careless what car ends up in which place in a magazine comparison test. At the end of the day the car that you prefer ultimately is the best car for you regardless of what the major auto sources think.

jayhawk815

Not necessarily. It's just that those charts aren't comprehensibly conclusive. Also, don't SPECULATE that I'm biased towards the Accord just because it's a Honda product(although this is a Honda site, it's to be expected).

DownUnder

I still don't understand why you say it's not conclusive. They tested all three cars the same day on the same roads and averaged the results. And they used equipment to measure NVH they didn't go by opinions.

jayhawk815

First thing, showing the rate at one speed is not necessarily an accurate indication of what is experienced at all speeds. Second, all things being equal I would certainly go with the Honda. I no real incentive to go with Honda, I certainly would go with another brand if they offered a superior product for the price.

heyitsme

If she likes both, let her drive both and decide. I can't see either car having any real problems and I think it comes down to whoes driving the car.

phile

Hey guys, I'm about tired of this thread...aren't you? I don't think we're going to change each other's opinions.

DownUnder

You're right enough bickering, in the end 2003TLSNKC's girlfriend's sister is the one that chooses the car she likes better. IMO you can't go wrong with either the Accord or the Altima.

fla-tls

Guys - remember the original person of interest in this thread, "My girlfriends sister is in the market for a new car..."

I imagine (though I could be worng) that she doesn't give a crap about HP or torque. She needs to test drive them both, get a feeling for the driving, be made aware of the technical issues on each car (HP - torque - 0-60 - 1/4 - etc - if she even cares) and choose for herself.

They are both good cars - all pros and cons combined...

F23A4

That's how we guys are. As such, I'd select the Accord over the Altima.

MADCAT

I think most of us agree the Accord is better choice overall.
Heck, I have a cousin who still drives her 1990 Accord. She can afford a new car but her current 1990 Accord still drives so well and looks great. No reason to get a new one yet.

Shoofin

Compare Apples and apples.....Altima and Accord are very very similar. Long term: Altima's 3yr/36k bumper to bumper and 5yr/60,000 mile powertrain warranty owns the accord's 3yr/36k mile bumper to bumper and powertrain warranty. Pricing is very similar, but subjective.

F23A4

If I was to think long term in this category, I'd personally pick the Camry LE. $.02

blacknight

Go with the accord. Although the Altima does have more power. But obviously she's not into power if she's interested in the 4 banger

MADCAT

From USA TODAY:

New Accord: Nicest mainstream car on the market

STOCKPORT, Ohio — The 30-mph corner slipped past at nearly 60 without a ripple of concern from car or driver. It took a moment to remember it was a Honda Accord four-door sedan taming the turns.

Accord's always been a feisty one among mainstream sedans, and the redesigned 2003, on sale Sept. 9, plays deliberately to that trait. "We tried to make a serious sport sedan out of the Accord," says Charles Baker, head of Accord development.

"That's not based on any market research whatsoever. It just seemed like a fun thing to do," he says.

Before you go goggle-eyed thinking Honda gambled its premier model on a roguish hunch, consider this Honda research: Only one-fourth of Accord sales are to families, a category that has abandoned sedans in favor of sport-utility vehicles. Half of Accord sales are to empty nesters, and one-fourth are to singles or kidless couples. With such a profile, why waste effort making the seventh-generation Accord a family car at the expense of sportiness?

So Baker and the Accord team targeted BMW specifically, German cars generally. "We wanted that same intimacy with the road," he says. At the same time, the '03 Accord was to have a premium feel, as if it were "a class above where the current Accord is." And, just to be clear, it is supposed to beat the snappy Nissan Altima.

Baker claims that — based on what we'll call field research by him and Honda V-6 engineer Yasuaki Asaki — the four-cylinder Accord, rated 160 horsepower, accelerates head-to-head with the four-cylinder Altima, rated 175 hp. And the 240-hp Accord V-6 outsprints the 240-hp Altima V-6, he says.

"It's nice to be a target of Honda instead of the other way around," says Jed Connelly, senior vice president for sales and marketing at Nissan North America. "If I saw a third-party validation and it was a tenth of a second different, I guess I'd believe it," he says. "We didn't go after horsepower for horsepower's sake. Our vision was a total package of performance."

And that, too, is like the '03 Accord. "The message of this Accord is that you can have it all," Baker says.

You can, it seems, come pretty close.

That's based on time in pre-production models along winding two-lane roads here, plus a week around home commuting and running errands in a pre-production, midlevel, LX sedan.

There are nits to pick, but the overall package probably is the nicest mainstream car on the market — assuming Honda keeps prices close to the current Accord's, as promised. Does nicest mean it'll top everybody's shopping list? Hardly. Nobody about to buy a rear-wheel-drive, high-status BMW will veer to a Honda store for a front-drive Accord, sporty or not. Nor will the Volkswagen Passat cabal suddenly throw down the keys, decide there's no value to VW's tasteful trim and delicious execution, and capitulate. Subaru partisans, scoffing at Accord's lack of all-wheel drive, aren't likely to be the first to trade. And so on.

But open-minded shoppers ought to have the '03 Accord in their cross hairs, even if they have been aiming at a different size or style. It's a very, very good car. Salients:

* Powertrain. The V-6 engine storms. It produces less leap at low speed than you get from the thick torque in the Nissan Altima but otherwise is glorious. It revs so fast to the redline that it'll beat your reflexes, leaving you scrambling to shift the manual transmission to the next higher gear in time.

Torque is the key to quick starts from dead stops. Accord's 240-hp V-6 is rated 212 pounds-feet of torque. Altima's 240-hp V-6 is rated 246 lbs.-ft.

The Accord V-6 ratings assume regular-grade fuel, and Honda will market it as a regular-fuel engine. But — pssst — it's good for another 10 hp and 10-plus lbs.-ft. on premium, acknowledges V-6 engineer Asaki.

* Transmissions. The automatic is a five-speed in a category dominated by four-speeds. The new gearbox shifts quite nicely — not always a given among Honda automatics. The five-speed manual seems well tailored to the four-cylinder's power curve, and the clutch usually operates smoothly. A slick-shifting, six-speed manual will be available in the coupe later.

In graceless moments, though, clutch engagement can be jerky, giving either engine an on-off, lunge-halt personality that's awkward in stop-and-go traffic.

* Interior. Coupe seats are very inviting up front, perhaps Honda's most-comfortable ever. And the back isn't too bad, but it requires a contortion to enter, as most two-door cars do, and once seated, back-benchers must splay their legs around the back of the front seat.

Sedan seats are more comfortable than usual for Honda, though not as good as the coupe's front seats. There's good leg- and headroom in the sedan's back seat as well as in front. The middle, rear slot remains too narrow for all but kids.

Gauges glow with Lexus-style lighting that makes them easy to read, day or night. Audio controls have fun, graphic displays that show how far around the dial you've turned them. But why? In case your ears can't tell you? The gray interior is relentless, almost depressing for want of a brightener.

* Details. Doors covering storage nooks glide open with luxury-car finesse. The steering wheel's fat and grippy; no need to buy the leather to get something that will make your hands smile. Underbody components are tucked up out of sight for a clean look. Wind noise is all but gone. Doors are (successfully) engineered to have a satisfying sound and a pleasant feel.

"We spent hours, dare I say days, fussing about the door handle, the feel of the door handle, the sound of the door closing," Baker says.

* Features. Small things make a big difference. The steering column now telescopes as well as tilts. Anti-lock brakes and a CD player are standard. The cup holder's better. Remote lock controls are built into the key; no separate fob is needed.
* Styling. The front's low, mean, businesslike, accented by a wheel arch that flares just so. The silhouette's engaging, handsome. The back's ... Did we mention that the front's low? It's kind of chunky in back. Some folks like it. The coupe's hindquarters are more graceful than the sedan's, not surprisingly.

The styling theme is supposed to be "cheetah," Baker says, chosen for the muscular image of that cat. Cheetah's also an endangered cat, becoming sadly inbred, just as Honda rumps seem to pick up the questionable genes of their forebears. But surely Honda had cheetah's more heroic image in mind.

At least the trunk under that high, chunky backside seems quite roomy, and the seat can fold for even more room.

A spiffy sports car or a nasty truck can make an easy impression, bowling you over if well done. A four-door sedan is an amalgam of subtler delights or disappointments, so a good sedan can be overlooked and taken for granted. Don't expect the '03 Accord to steal your breath. But don't be surprised if the light bulb above your head flashes on: "Oh, wow: This is how a car is supposed to work and feel."

The '03 Accord: What a gem.

2003 Honda Accord

* What is it? Full-blown redesign of Honda's best-seller; midsize, front-wheel-drive car available as a sedan or coupe, manufactured in Ohio and Japan.
* How soon? On sale Sept. 9.
* How much? $15,000-$26,000, Honda says. Exact prices will be announced mid-August. Current Accord price range is $16,000-$24,000. Edmunds.com forecasts selling prices at full window-sticker price the first two months or so, dropping to $1,000 less than sticker after the initial rush is over.
* What's the powertrain? Base engine is 2.4-liter, four-cylinder rated 160 horsepower at 5,500 rpm, 161 pounds-feet of torque at 4,500 rpm; five-speed manual. Optional 3-liter V-6 is rated 240 hp at 6,250 rpm, 211 lbs.-ft. at 5,000 rpm.
* What's the rest? Base DX sedan comes with anti-lock brakes; power steering, brakes, windows; AM/FM/CD stereo; telescoping and tilt-adjustable steering column; height-adjustable driver's seat; rear-window defroster; folding rear seat; 195/65R-15 all-season tires on steel wheels with mini spare. LX sedan adds or substitutes air conditioning; cruise control; power mirrors and locks; remote-control locks, windows, trunk release; map lights; variable-interval windshield wipers; 205/65R-15 tires. EX sedan adds or substitutes this equipment vs. LX: sunroof; side-impact airbags for front-seat occupants; six-CD changer; driver's seat adjustable lumbar support; steering-wheel audio controls; security system; fake-wood interior trim; 205/60R-16 tires on alloy wheels. LX V-6 is equipped like LX but adds or substitutes: V-6 engine; five-speed automatic transmission; power driver's seat. EX V-6 is equipped like EX but adds or substitutes: leather upholstery; side-curtain head-protection air bags; heated seats; power passenger's seat; dual-zone climate control. Coupes are equipped roughly similar to sedans but will offer six-speed manual transmission.
* How big? Similar to previous Accord, within fractions of an inch of Toyota Camry in most dimensions. Accord sedan is 189.5 inches long, 71.1 inches wide, 57.3 inches tall on a 107.9-inch wheelbase, weighing about 3,100 pounds. Coupe is 187.6 inches long, 71.3 inches wide, 55.9 inches tall on a 105.1-inch wheelbase, weighing about 3,100 pounds. Passenger space is listed as 91.3 cubic feet, trunk as 12.8.
* How thirsty? Four-cylinder, manual transmission models are expected to be rated 26 miles per gallon in town, 34 mpg on the highway. Four-cylinder automatics are expected to be rated 24/33 mpg. V-6, automatic models are projected at 21/30 mpg. Coupe V-6 with six-speed manual is expected to be 20/30.
* Overall: Almost unbelievably classy and competent, surprisingly fun.

phile

I will say this about the Altima - the bigger cabin and bigger trunk are very tempting in considering between the two cars if you actually have a family.

slvrbllt

accord

JediMindTricks

nice "bring back the thread from the dead"

stright-(paint)balling

i vote Altima.
and this is coming from someone who owned 3 Accords
the 08 styling of the Accord=

Moog-Type-S

^^^ You're just in time to give great advice

BENDER08

08 accord



lol

JediMindTricks

will you guys stop getting off topic?

we're comparing '04 accords vs. '04 altimas.

BENDER08

Sorry sorry sheesh i mean it is 2007.


but Fine


i love the accord more except the taillights and the altima offers ummmm


pick the accord

stright-(paint)balling

still 04 Altima for the win

zamo

08 Accords are leasing better than the Altimas, just in case you wanna go that route.