siegen

I mention the Accord because I can remember most of the numbers off the top of my head, and it is the main competition to the Camry. I know there are other midsize sedans out there with a V6, which will be even less expensive than the Accord, but I didn't feel like looking them up. Call me lazy. :AH-HA_wink: I don't understand what you're saying. I would expect to feel a difference between a 5at and 6mt. The 6mt will probably get better mileage too, being lighter and with less drivetrain loss (and having better gear ratio's to some extent). I'm not saying it would be a good idea or profitable, but I think it would be neat, if anything just so Honda could brag about having an even faster hybrid.

What is the average V6 then? Apparently much slower than the Accord, since even with a 5sp Auto, it lays down a quick 6.6s 0-60 (as does the new Sonata by C&D's test). The average of all of those Camry hybrid times comes to 7.88, which is almost into Accord 4cyl range with a 5sp manual trans. Sorry, I meant LX V6, which is $25,650 after destination. Unless Toyota made some sort of CVT break through, a 5sp Auto should still be more efficient. And a 6sp Manual would be even better. Come to think of it, Honda should offer the 6mt for the Accord hybrid. Now that would be a quick hybrid.

I wouldn't say no-compromise. It has the performance of a 4cyl, not a 6cyl. 0-60 in 8.6s? That's grandma speed. The Accord EX V6 6mt Sedan does that in 5.9s. Now there's a respectable family sedan. Maybe it's due to the 3,680 lbs curb weight of the Camry hybid, that's 100 lbs more than the V6 Accord hybrid! And it isn't exactly cheap, starting at $1,000 more than what the Accord V6 EX starts at, and then add on the probable dealer markup. I'm willing to bet Camry hybrids will start at $28,000 or so at most dealers (MSRP is $26,480 after destination). Then there's the plentiful transmission options for Toyota's hybrids... oh wait, you only get one option, a CVT. No 5at, no 6at, no 6mt. Too bad. Just a boring CVT.

Assuming that 32.6 figure included some performance runs, it isn't half bad. Although I'm sure they babied it considerably to get the 38/42 mpg figures. I'll bet the 32mpg combined is more indicative of real world conditions. And for a 190hp mid size sedan, it isn't bad at all. The Hybrid Accord on the other hand, doesn't have to be babied to get its fuel economy figures, which aren't half bad either (28 combined from normal drivers). Considering only 4mpg difference, and the Accord can be driven like a normal V6 sedan, I know what I would buy.

This isn't the first news of Honda's hydrogen cars. It's not like they just jumped onto the bandwagon all of a sudden. They have been developing hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for a while now, it just wasn't widely known or at least nobody paid attention. The FCX model is already on its 3rd revision and in use by select families in the U.S. More information on the FCX here and the Home Energy Station which "provides heat and electricity for the home as well as fuel for a hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicle." Honda first released information for the FCX in 1999, with its original concept car (very ugly). You can read more about it here.

I have hung around here long enough to find that a lot of members blindly defend GM, and accuse Honda and Toyota of getting away with murder without any sort of supporting examples (it's just a standard I guess, and doesn't need to be proven). And I notice a lot of members jump to conclusions very easily. This doesn't go for everyone all the time, but I notice it a lot. Just like supermoto thinking I am somehow bashing his domestic and praising the reliability of the import because I said his Taurus isn't a good example of reliability (did I say it was bad or even mention another car in comparison?).

Toyota, aiming for #1 in everything, including recalls.

Lexus, what's that? I thought the "L" stood for Lincoln... And it was Toyota's old-people brand.

I'm not saying that level of maintenance is unacceptable by any means. But, the alternator at least shouldn't have gone out that early. The O2 sensors I could see going out if you live in a very wet state that uses salt on the roads every winter.

I'm surprised the Accord isn't on there. But then again the stability control is only standard on the V6 models, not the 4cyl. The TL and RL are based off of the same platform, so I'm sure if the stability control was standard the Accord would be on there too. No stability control? From looking at the Ford site it doesn't look like its available. This wasn't just about how safe each car was when in an accident, it included the ability for a car to avoid a collision, or a roll over which accounts for (according to them) 28% of traffic fatalities.

AOL? Hey at least there's only one Toyota.

Good showing from both sides of the world. Full Aritcle

I just saw that this was only 1994 to 1997 Odyssey's. And 1994 was the first year for the Odyssey, surprised they would even recall such an old vehicle. From here. So even less than I original thought made it here.

If Toyota can build the same number of vehicles with 900 workers that took GM 3,400, then good job to Toyota for being more efficient. Sure we'd all like GM to be there to employ everybody and give everyone great benefits and lots of retirement money and really nice wages. But honestly, it's not realistic, and that's why GM is where they are right now, downsizing and streamlining production. That's not a very good example of a reliable car. Although it does put my friend's old 95 Cavalier to shame :AH-HA_wink:

Ok :AH-HA_wink:

Is that J.D. survey the 3 year one or the initial quality one?

Only a little over 10% of this recall effects North America (with an even smaller percentage effecting the U.S. as I'm sure some of the cases in North America are from Canada as well). So that leaves 60-80 thousand Odyssey's with possible faulty ignition switches in the U.S. Does the article say how many actual reported problems there were? Were there any? I don't even remember the last time I saw a recall notice on a news program or other media program on TV for any make. When you say it's "not in the media", well doesn't fox news count? I've never seen GM recall coverage be any more than Toyota/Honda etc, it might have been in the past though. It might mean the media holds (or held at one point) GM to a higher standard than other makes. So a problem will get more coverage because it's a bigger deal. A GM shouldn't have any recalls because it's made in America and perfect. When was the last time a Kia recall got any media attention? When GM recalls stop getting attention won't that put them on the same level as Kia? Just a thought.

In the current TL, yeh maybe, but that's about it. Never heard of torque steer in the TSX or RSX. This RDX uses a system similar to the SH-AWD in the RL, except it is a slightly toned down version. It can still transfer up to 70% of the power to one rear wheel, but it can't over accelerate a rear wheel like the RL can. SH-AWD is a very sophisticated AWD system, specially the one in the RL. Nobody really cares though because Honda has never put it into a sporty lightweight car.

The 2.4L TSX engine wouldn't be powerful enough for the RDX, and Honda will probably stick to their guns by only offering one engine per model for Acura (with the exception of the out-going RSX). And they could put the 200hp 2.4L into the CRV, but then they would have to charge more for it, consider upping the power of the Pilot to 270hp or so, and also most of that power is made in the upper rpm's, not where an SUV needs it (which is another reason why it woudn't be good for the RDX, and why the RDX 2.3L Turbo has a very low rpm powerband, resulting in lower peak HP but better power in the low rpms).

*Cough*Cough* MDX *Cough*. The 4cyl Turbo puts out the same amount of TQ as the V6 would have, but is more compact and fits with a smaller SUV better. Dag nabit! Look at them there WACKY interior buttons! Woowee! I'll take me 1976 Chevy truck over dat any day, only got one nob to control everything!

Do people really need a V6 in a small SUV like the CRV? The new 4 cyl will be bumped up to 170hp or more, and will probably have a modest tow rating for its size and class (thanks to the gearing). The RAV4 is just Toyota saying "Hey, we can shuv a giant V6 engine into a little SUV and make it go fast, why don't you buy it? It's only 30k".

Oh yeh Cadillac, who's base model vehicle starts at 30 grand. They better be more reliable than the thousands of sub $20,000 vehicles Toyota and Honda sell every year. I think it's safe to say the majority of people who own a Buick (specially a new one) are older and retired. I could probably look up a study to prove that, but I think it's pretty obvious. They put far less miles on their car than the average Civic owner.

Well I don't know about you, but what I was talking about wasn't an anecdote, it did happen, and in our almost new 2004 GMC Sierra with less than 20,000 miles on the clock (well taken care of, normal oil changes, and driven very nicely, mostly freeway miles). Thankfully it was only half a mile away from my house. The fuel pump was the problem, and had to be replaced. The dealer did do it on warranty and provided a nice little sh*tbox Kia while they were working on it though. Plus, nobody knew the cause of the Odyssey fire that was posted here a few weeks back. Could have been a poorly installed aftermarket head unit. Could have been a factory screw up. As far as the Camry and Prius go, well they're Toyota's.

What's worse is when your GM leaves you stranded half way into the road coming out of a parking lot, and needs to get pushed back out of the way of traffic, and get towed to the dealer. I REALLY wish the dealer would have fixed that problem during a routine oil change (must have been a cheap Chinese fuel pump)...

If you're referring to the American Accord, it is rebadged as the Inspire elsewhere (click). The Acura TSX is a rebadged version of the Accord used in Europe and Japan. Where DO the profits go?