October 5, 200718 yr Anyone can comment on which of these cars is "better" 2006 Accord or 2004 Camry second hand prices are roughly the same Fuel consumption? I dont know
October 5, 200718 yr If you'd said 2007 I would probably have gone with the Camry, it has changed a lot with the last model, however, the Accord is virtually unchanged since 2004. Generally Honda is more fun (drivers car) and Toyota more comfortable (passengers car).
October 5, 200718 yr Author If you'd said 2007 I would probably have gone with the Camry, it has changed a lot with the last model, however, the Accord is virtually unchanged since 2004. Generally Honda is more fun (drivers car) and Toyota more comfortable (passengers car). Agreed! New camry looks awesome- Although I think it is overpriced I am looking at spending under 900K for a used Camry or Accord
October 5, 200718 yr Author If your budget is 900K I'd get a brand-spanking new Civic 1.8 I dont like the new civic-- friend of mine bought one and he is not totally happy with it I will, however, wait and see what the new corolla/altis is like--
October 6, 200718 yr If you're in the market for a Camry or an Accord, can't see why you'd be interested in a Civic. Different size, different class. I used to love the Accord, but the latest face-lift has done it no favours, particularly at the back. The latest Camry is beautiful, overpriced or not. Anyway, regarding choosing between the 2004 versions of both models, my money is firmly on the Honda.
October 6, 200718 yr If you look at the high second-hand prices here there is virtually no point in buying a card thats 3 years old. I don't know any reason why someone couldn't make do with a Civic over an Accord, I don't think the difference is that big.
October 7, 200718 yr Author If you're in the market for a Camry or an Accord, can't see why you'd be interested in a Civic. Different size, different class.I used to love the Accord, but the latest face-lift has done it no favours, particularly at the back. The latest Camry is beautiful, overpriced or not. Anyway, regarding choosing between the 2004 versions of both models, my money is firmly on the Honda. Size matters -- I have 2001 civic now and would prefer something bigger. For under 900K it is possible to find something in very good condition, low mileage and full of options. Wont be long before a second hand 2.0 new camry gets to around 900K--I would like to see mileage figures for all of these models.
October 7, 200718 yr What options do you need on one of these cars over what they're delivered with from the factory? Seems to me Thai's love to add tacky racing stuff such as a row of gauges, an oversized speaker system and an oversize airline spoiler - even to cars like Camry 2.4. Of course if you like this style you should be ok, but I'd prefer a stock standard car which electric system hasn't been hacked to pieces by some local Somchai, causing headaches for the rest of the cars usable life. I also think, for a car in this class (Camry, Accord) I'd much prefer the 2.4 engine. I also find low mileage very difficult to find around here. Usually a 3 year old in this class will have done well over 100K km, and these are not BMW/Merc engines.... Each to his, but I repeat, the high second hand costs combined with low care make me prefer a new car in this country.
October 8, 200718 yr 3 years should be way way below 100k. The catch might be that you are buying a fleet car, which is just tad better than a used taxi. They usually come with 2l engines. I've never seen anyone driving Accord as if it was some sports car (apart from some 3l monsters). Their drivers are usualy timid people incapable of producing adrenalin, same for Camry. Camry looks more spacious inside.
October 8, 200718 yr Author 3 years should be way way below 100k.The catch might be that you are buying a fleet car, which is just tad better than a used taxi. They usually come with 2l engines. I've never seen anyone driving Accord as if it was some sports car (apart from some 3l monsters). Their drivers are usualy timid people incapable of producing adrenalin, same for Camry. Camry looks more spacious inside. If I wanted a sports car I would buy a BMW. I want a comfortable, spacious, and quiet vehicle. Something that I can enjoy while stuck in traffic. I tested a 2003 Camry of dubious mileage and it totally outclassed my Civic. They were asking 750 K for that one. BTW What kind of car do adrenaline producing people drive? Fortuner? 55555 Options? Does the 800K Civic have parking sensors? Electric shades? Navigation system? Steering wheel controls? ECT?? Eyeglass holder? Xenon lights? Rich Corinthian Leather?
October 8, 200718 yr We were talking 900K Civic and the short answers are: 1) yes 2) don't know what that is or why I would need it 3) No, nor would I want it (spoke to owners of the 1.3M 2.0 model who has it and they told me after a week they considered it an unnecessary toy) 4) Why would you need ECT with a front wheel drive car? 5) Yes 6) No, and nor do I think it's worth the hype - used to have it in my BMW back in Europe. 7) Leather, again, I think the rest is marketing hype. Anyway, you should of course buy what you prefer, we're just talking opinions here, no need for arguments.
October 9, 200718 yr ECT in Toyotas controls gear shifts in automatic transimissions - it takes the engine to nearly redline before shifting. I saw a middle ages man in a souped up Soluna today. He was driving like a maniac, sometimes cuting through three lanes at once, speeding and breaking, and making god awful noise. I thought he would really outrun me on that 5 km long road but it was not meant to be. Those racing types are funny people. Their goal seems not to get from A to B in a shortest time possible, but to make a bold statement and revel in experience. >>> Camry is totally adequate, people voted for it with money. That particular model was the first that trounced Accord in the showrooms. Before that Accord was the king in this class.
Create an account or sign in to comment