Small premium cars?

[ifcar]

No worries Tave, they is just beating up on the Accord because I own one (meaning, it's an attempt at punishment for my, uh, talent in spurring conversation). They've failed of course, but we'll save that for another post.

No, if you owned an Accord yet said that the Camry was the only car anyone should ever want to own, no one would mention the Accord.

[AutobahnSHO]

I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.

LOL

[Raza]

In line with that, when I was looking my freshman year of college, I looked at a Passat but then realized what a money pit they were

Hehe, other than scheduled maintenance, it didn't cost me a penny. 

[Galaxy]

A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.

There was no 7th generation Accord that could keep up with the Passat W8.


Plus I do think that for the most part VW AG does have "soul" as silly as that may sound. Yes the current Passat is a bit bland imo, and the Tiguan as well. However VW unlike most companies does things that  make no rational business  sense what so ever. Things that makes one believe that to a large extent the company is run by enthusiasts, who believe that they make something more emotional then a simply appliance.

Spending money on giving the Touareg`s lockers, a transfer case and disconnectable sway bars made no business sense.

The V10 TDI,  makes no business sense. They even skipped the more cost effective common rail system, and gave each cylinder it`s own independent diesel pump.

Spending money on the Phaeton as a bespoke car (VW of America missed this memo, they offered the Phaeton of the lot, like cheese sold at a super store) and the glass factory that can serve as a art gallery made no business sense.

Spending money on Lamborghini and Bentley probably makes no business sense.

Spending money on Bugatti and building the thing in a French castle  made no business sense.

Offering economy cars like the Golf with 38 different exterior colors (VW of America missed this memo as well) ,  makes no business sense, since the logistics will ballon the production costs.

VW Marine most likely makes no business sense.

What does Honda have on offer? The NSX is gone. The successor cancelled. The S 2000, gone as well. Well, they do have the upcoming small sports car that should be good, but VW should be able to beat it with the coming mid engined roadster.




Edit: To be fair I need to mention the Honda jet and the robots. Those are also enthusiast projects.

[GoCougs]

There was no 7th generation Accord that could keep up with the Passat W8.

Sure there was, at least in terms of acceleration; the AT V6 Accord was about its equal, and the MT V6 Accord a bit quicker.

[r0tor]

No one is bashing the Accord.

The USDM Accord is about a big of a POS as the USDM Mazda6

[AutobahnSHO]

Sure there was, at least in terms of acceleration; the AT V6 Accord was about its equal, and the MT V6 Accord a bit quicker.

I'd have to see numbers on that one, I'm dubious. Unless that Passat was hella heavy.

[GoCougs]

I'd have to see numbers on that one, I'm dubious. Unless that Passat was hella heavy.

2003 Passat W8 6MT: 0-60 in 6.4 sec and 0-100 in 17.2 sec.

2006 Accord V6 6MT Sedan: 0-60 5.9 sec and 0-100 in 15.0 sec.

[NomisR]

No worries Tave, they is just beating up on the Accord because I own one (meaning, it's an attempt at punishment for my, uh, talent in spurring conversation). They've failed of course, but we'll save that for another post.

 

No, because you claim the Camcord is the only logical choice for any buyer because of it's better performance to value to whatever arbitrary quality you decide to pick up at the time you make your posts vs any other car. 

By the way qualify cars, a Camcord is a better car, in your opinion, than a Ferrari  Enzo or McLaren F1 because it can carry more passengers and cargo, and is a better value.. and performance doesn't mean squat because your Camcord is still better performing than (according to you) 80% of member's car. 

This in itself is a retarded argument. 

[GoCougs]

 

No, because you claim the Camcord is the only logical choice for any buyer because of it's better performance to value to whatever arbitrary quality you decide to pick up at the time you make your posts vs any other car. 

By the way qualify cars, a Camcord is a better car, in your opinion, than a Ferrari  Enzo or McLaren F1 because it can carry more passengers and cargo, and is a better value.. and performance doesn't mean squat because your Camcord is still better performing than (according to you) 80% of member's car. 

This in itself is a retarded argument. 

No offense but this is a terrible post. I'll leave it to someone else to point out why.

[2o6]

Typical Cougs.

[NomisR]

No offense but this is a terrible post. I'll leave it to someone else to point out why.

I'm just responding in a typical Cougs fashion.

[Galaxy]

2003 Passat W8 6MT: 0-60 in 6.4 sec and 0-100 in 17.2 sec.

2006 Accord V6 6MT Sedan: 0-60 5.9 sec and 0-100 in 15.0 sec.

http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2003/full-test-2003-honda-accord.html

http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/2002-volkswagen-passat-w8

Accord V6 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 7.0s

Passat W8 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 6.8s





In my audacious opinion my auto samples are more accurate. Since I assume they just floored it. With you're 5.9s time I have a sneaky suspicion that Car & Driver abused the clutch.

[Tave]

the AT V6 Accord was about its equal, and the MT V6 Accord a bit quicker.

[Raza]

Sure people trade reliability for "fun to drive" (read: badge snobbery). Look how many people still buy BMW and M-B.

A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.

Japan got The Bomb Germany didn't.

No German makes are more reliable than VW save for Mini. I don't mean to offend or troll, just how I see it.

Okay.

When I look for advice on fun to drive, I won't ask the guy who doesn't think steering feel matters.

So, because we nuked Japan, you're okay with buying their cars?

When I drove both cars, I didn't want either of them, and had no feeling either way about the makes.  I wanted a WRX at the time.  If anything, I was biased against Volkswagen at the time, because I was a snob.  It was the Passat that won me over and created the Volkswagen bias we all see today. 

[MX793]

I'd have to see numbers on that one, I'm dubious. Unless that Passat was hella heavy.

The W8 Passat was a tank.  Just shy of 4000 lbs.

[MX793]

http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2003/full-test-2003-honda-accord.html

http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/2002-volkswagen-passat-w8

Accord V6 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 7.0s

Passat W8 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 6.8s





In my audacious opinion my auto samples are more accurate. Since I assume they just floored it. With you're 5.9s time I have a sneaky suspicion that Car & Driver abused the clutch.

It should be noted that Edmunds Inside Line tests 0-60 without "rollout", while all other magazines (R&T, C&D, MT) use rollout.  Thus, their times are significantly slower than other magazines.

C&D got a 6.9 0-60 time from their W8 Passat back in '02.  They got 6.6 for an '06 Accord V6 with the automatic gearbox.

[Vinsanity]

Point being, the W8 Passat doesn't accelerate any quicker than a V6 Accord. That said, even I can admit that the Passat has much more to offer than the Accord than straight-line acceleration

[AutobahnSHO]

2003 Passat W8 6MT: 0-60 in 6.4 sec and 0-100 in 17.2 sec.

2006 Accord V6 6MT Sedan: 0-60 5.9 sec and 0-100 in 15.0 sec.

wowsa.

[GoCougs]

http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2003/full-test-2003-honda-accord.html

http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/2002-volkswagen-passat-w8

Accord V6 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 7.0s

Passat W8 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 6.8s





In my audacious opinion my auto samples are more accurate. Since I assume they just floored it. With you're 5.9s time I have a sneaky suspicion that Car & Driver abused the clutch.

Nah, the Accord Sedan V6 AT is quicker than 7.0 sec 0-60. Of note, the AT has issues with launch and earlier tests (such as this 2003 test - the first model year) this was not realized. If you brake torque the ECU cuts power by 20% resulting in a bogged launch. The best launch measure is to stomp the gas (i.e., no break torque) and why later tests show quicker results in the mid 6 sec range.

It's much harder to abuse a clutch in a 2WD vehicle; you get little benefit from slipping it, and dumping it isn't really abuse. The W8 with its AWD is much more prone to clutch abuse owing to its traction (i.e., slipping the clutch would be more beneficial).

As more of a qualitative gut check regarding comparison between the two cars, the Passat W8 at 3850 lbs and 270 hp = 14.3 lbs/hp and the Accord V6 Sedan at 3350 hp and 244 hp = 13.7 lb/hp. Thus, given that each car has good gearing and traction and equivalent size and Cd, one should/would expect the Accord to be a bit quicker.

[Raza]

Very useful if you live on a drag strip, too.

[sportyaccordy]

I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.

Cougs.... just stop. You're in over your head.

*EDIT* This is your last warning.

[2o6]

What the heck did sporty say for it to get edited?

[GoCougs]

Okay.

When I look for advice on fun to drive, I won't ask the guy who doesn't think steering feel matters.

So, because we nuked Japan, you're okay with buying their cars?

When I drove both cars, I didn't want either of them, and had no feeling either way about the makes.  I wanted a WRX at the time.  If anything, I was biased against Volkswagen at the time, because I was a snob.  It was the Passat that won me over and created the Volkswagen bias we all see today. 

The only thing that turns me off a review of a car more than carrying on about "steering feel" is blathering about cup holders.

Yes, Japan got there's.

You have your reasoning for your bias, and I have mine.

[ifcar]

What the heck did sporty say for it to get edited?

Ummm....he edited himself....

[GoCougs]

'Cause I think he finally realized that I was and am correct.

[2o6]

'Cause I think he finally realized that I was and am correct.

Your argument would be more viable if you didn't have this high class air coming from each one of our posts. We all are (sort-of) functioning adults with different experiences. Why are yours worth more, and ours aren't? And don't give me that "good internetery" BS.

[Onslaught]

The only thing that turns me off a review of a car more than carrying on about "steering feel" is blathering about cup holders.

What? You don't care about that?

[MX793]

What? You don't care about that?

It's become pretty apparent to me that Cougs' definitions for "performance" and "fun to drive" revolve heavily around straight line acceleration.

[Onslaught]

It's become pretty apparent to me that Cougs' definitions for "performance" and "fun to drive" revolve heavily around straight line acceleration.

I don't know about the kinds of cars he likes.