Topic: 2002 TL or 2003 Accord

[macsp]

Hi all,

I haven't talked to you for some time. I am sure a lot of you still remember. I was discussion about buying a 2002 TL at that time and guess what...got laid off from work. Everything is on hold till I find something.

Well, I just want to take your thought on this. The 2002 TL and 2003 Accord EXL cost almost same price (~25K). What will be your take in terms of maintenance, insurance and gas consumption?

[Keith_moon]

Honda will be cheaper on all 3 terms. 4 cylinder uses less gas than the 3.2 V-6 in the TL. Labour and parts are cheaper for a Honda than Acura. Insurance will also be slightly less for the Honda as it is a family sedan, not a near luxury vehicle like the Acura. Both are good choices.

[Mdxtasy]

If basic transportation is your main objective, the Accord will suit you very well.  If you want luxury for your tushie....get the TL.  The Accord will do everything well....the only difference is the TL gives you plush.  Like Keith said, it'll cost you more in TCO with the Acura.

[Snowman]

Macsp..the Accord has my vote also….It will be more economical in all categories.  

[johngenx]

The TL is a better deal, having lost more depreciation, but running costs will be higher.  The TL is a very nice car, and the V-6 will outrun the Accord 4-banger in a big way.  Insurance will probably be higher on the TL, and fuel consumption will be more too.

Why will the TL cost more long term?  Well, though they're cousins, the Acura dealer sees you coming.  Parts are more, service is more, and you end up paying for the nicer dealer environment.  Also, the V-6 begs to be pushed, and so you'll probably eat more tires and brakes.

What do you want?  If you're brand conscious, you'll be better off in the Acura.  If you want ease-to-sell (NOTHING goes faster than a 4-cyl AT Accord) and fairly low operating costs, then the Accord without a doubt.

Before making your choice, drive 'em.  Before people run down the Accord's four, drive it!  The engine is nicely mated to either tranny, and it's surprisingly spunky.  I really like the way the 2003- Accords with fours feel.  If I were buying, I'd prefer the four for the better fuel economy and the better "balance" of the chassis.  While the 240hp is nice, it gets lost in the Accord unless it's the manny-tranny version.  The V-6 just does not feel that much quicker.  The V-6 6M Coupe is the exception.  It feels like all 240hp are right there.

[inco]

I'm curious - is the EXL a four? or could it also be a V6?

[Giant Dwarf]

Nope, the EX-L is the 4-banger. EX V6 is the 6.

[redmeth]

yup Jeff is right. Having tested both cars, if I had a choice and money wasn't an issue, most here would agree with me by picking the TL. But since this is the real world, and money is an issue, I believe the accord is a better value. You will probably get lower if not similar mileage in a newer car with a longer warranty for a price similar to that of a TL. The Accord is quite different than the 02 Accord too. The interior, expecially the EXL which i had tested, is surprisingly plush, probably not as much as the TL. But it rides very very quietly, a little agile for the size, and extremely good fit and finish. The interior is just one of the best that Honda has put in their cars IMO. Of course they might have put better materials in they're Acuras, but just test the Accord EXL. It's a pretty amazing family sedan for the price when you take into account the luxurious interior, interior space and well rounded 160hp refined engine.

[macsp]

Thank you for all your comments.  I also think Accord EXL may be better deal since I may need another car in two years. At that time, I can buy a V6 model. I don't think it is wise to have two V6 models in a household. That is the main reason why I want a V4 and selected the Accord.

I will let you know when I buy the car.