http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...o/viewall.html

Performance is close, interiors are similar, prices are similar...interior quietness makes them pick the Verano.

One thing that always baffles me about most of these car mag comparisons is they never seem to take predicted reliability or safety tests into consideration much if at all.

 

To be fair this was a "road" test. In terms of safety both vehicles are IHSS top safety picks. For reliability JD Power has only released initial quality results for the Verano:

http://www.edmunds.com/buick/verano/...317732&msite=w

The reliabilty results for the ILX will for sure be better.

But the extra sound proofing costs the Verano a couple hundred pounds in weight according to the article! I'd rather have a light nimble car than a heavy soundproof box...

 

Road tests usually do not cover reliability/safety...this is strictly performance-based review.

As for long-term reliability, it is hard to say IMO. I would like to say it is with the Honda car...but...you never know. Then again, my CL-S went through a few trannies.

 

They are comparing cars and making recommendations to people. If they fail to provide pertinent information about reliability and safety they aren't doing a complete job, as those are two very big factors when deciding to buy a car (reliability less so on a lease, of course). I would also add that I think safety and reliability are very key components to the performance of a car.

BTW those JD power results are next to worthless. They're based on surveys after something like 90 days of ownership. If brand new cars are screwing up after 90 days something is seriously wrong.

 

And sure, you are entitled to thinking that. But, the truth is, read ANY road test and you'll pretty much see safety and reliability not part of the evaluation.

A road test is on steering, handling, braking, acceleration...all derived from a test drive who the journalist then writes down his impressions. Not sure how you expect that test driver to be able to "test" out safety and reliability from a mere road test?



What you're thinking of is what is available on Edmunds.com: a long-term test which will then go into aspects like reliability. But, for safety, well, this is from the IIHS.

 

My point is it is not just a road test. It is an evaluation of the cars, comparing them, and offering recommendations to people. In general, these tests take into account road performance...but also price, other cars (past, present and future), brand image, personal opinions, pretty much everything except reliability and safety (eg. crash test results).

I am not saying they should evaluate safety and reliability in an afternoon of driving, I'm saying to make their reports complete they could reference available data on the subject, like the IIHS or Edmunds or Consumer Reports, etc, as they have no qualms about giving lots of other information on the cars, but suddenly they clam up when it comes to that information. It's just strange. It seems deliberate but I can't understand exactly why (particularly on the reliability front).

 

I understand your points, but in all reality, as I mentioned above, there are no major differences between the cars in terms of safety or reliability. In fact, I thought it was a pretty objective review. It actually praises the ILX many times. As you stated, the major deciding point between the cars was sound insulation. The Verano does have better sound insulation than the ILX, indisputable fact. The reviewers simply believe a marketed luxury brand car should be quieter than the ILX. Whether you mind the extra sound proofing is personal preference.

And to be fair, how many of us ILX owners have actually cross shopped the Verano? So as far as biases go, its us ILX owners/Acura fanboys who read this article with a subjective point of view.

Hey, but thats OK because the Verano is still an ugly, driving-Miss-Daisy, having-fun-at-the-Senior-Center box.

 

I agree with all your points. My comment about safety and reliability were not motivated by being an Acura fanboy, just a result of reading a thousand car reviews of all cars the past month or so and realizing that all magazines seem to fail to mention either, while listing everything else under the sun. For example, BMW/Mercedes/Audi get lauded left and right, but are still near the bottom of most reliability surveys.

FWIW, while safety might be similar betwen the ILX and Verano, I do believe Acura's reliability blows Buick out of the water. What that might mean in terms of this particular model (and for any specific car, of course) is still to be determined, but predicted/expected reliability has to be on Acura's side for any car.

 

I didn't know the Verano was based off the Cruz. The Cruz was probably one of the best handling small cars I've driven in a while. If the Verano really does offer that extra oomph the Cruz definitely needs, it should be a winner.

 

If it was my money and I was buying new, I would BUY the ILX.....

but..

if I was leasing, I would lease the Verano anyday. The styling is very luxurious (IMHO) for the price; the dual exhausts look great, as is the waterfall grille.

The ILX looks very civic-esque from the front end. The side and rear profiles are much nicer.


I think the Verano is the better car, but probably less reliable, although to be fair, Buicks have scored consistently well in reliability surveys.

Last point I should note is that the ILX can't be optioned with an automatic on its performance engine offering (the 2.4), whereas the Verano's turbo can be hooked up to a 6 speed auto (with manual shifting) or manual.

I've driven both, and prefer the Verano overall. And I'm a huge Acura fan. Now that's saying something about the progress GM has made in the past 2 years.

 

^^^ and let's not forget the Cadillac ATS. GM is sure making a lot of progress as many other car manufacturers (even Hyundai/Kia).

 

Said nearly every person on every car forum, ever.



and for what it's worth I would take the ILX but only in 2.4 form. Say what you will but from the articles it seems like the Verano is much more than a fancied up Cruze than the ILX is a fancied up Civic Si sedan.

I've had many discussions with real world Honda owners past and present and one universal thing that most of them complain about is road noise, easily warped rotors/poor brakes, and mediocre paint quality. Every manufacturer cuts corners somewhere - unless they are a hyper luxury or exotic manufacturer... and even then Ferrari does too - and it just so happens Acura got dinged for it in this test.

 

This.

It's so true, it can't even be disputed. Each of my Honda/Acura products had these problems. And I owned Honda's flagship (the Accord), and Acura's (the RL).

I will say this though-- the quality of paint on Honda's took a huge dive in quality around 2001-2002. The paint on my Accord and RL were not nearly as bad as they are on my TSX or my extended family's newer CRV, Civic, and Accord coupe.


But I continued to buy and will keep buying (for now) Honda/Acura because they are dependable, relatively luxurious, and fun to drive. If the latter wasn't important to me, I'd be driving a Toyota for its smoother ride (with the exception of the Supra, celica, XRS models, and the new FR-S)