starting a new thread because the previous one got hijacked by some irelevant discussion that wasn't even about the models I was querying so let the golf war continue elsewhere .LOL!.
Anyway, I wanted to ask another question because I notice some models don't have cambelt which sounds good to me not having to replace them is expensive .but I don't know what that means as far as performance and reliability. Have not done any price comparison to see if they are cheaper or more expensive.
scotty20001,
Jan 8, 8:03am
if you really insist and i mean really insist on owning either of these over priced under performing vehicles go for the Mazda 6 it is a far better drive compared to the Accord (which are way way over rated)
gunhand,
Jan 8, 8:07am
Cambelts get changed on averge 80 to 100000kms so not that often at all. Yes it can be expensive depending on the make and model and the fact that they may change water pump and other items best done at this time as well. So if you look at a car with 75000kms on it or 95000kms on it it may well be due for a change. If it has 120000kms on it you would hope it has been done. Most have a label of some sort saying when and where it was done. Do not take a private owners word for it that it has been done unless they have receipts. Chains stretch as well and will rattle and as far as im awhere is can be a simalier job to a belt. Performance isnt any better or worse.
trdbzr,
Jan 8, 8:08am
Both are pretty good cars. I know the Mazda's have a chain but I think the Accord has a belt, but considering it needs to be changed every 100,000km I wouldn't really use that point to choose a car. Having driven both, they are both similar in terms of performance, handling, economy etc. It will most likely come down to a personal choice of which one you prefer visually and which one you get for the best deal.
kazbanz,
Jan 8, 8:11am
helen-look reality is that you are gonna spend 10k to buy a car. during your ownership you are going to do maybee 100000km if you own the car about 6 years. So replace the belt once. Lets be really negative and say you do the belt and waterpump--so $700 at a stretch.-$700 isn't a big factor over 5 years is it! Reliability -belt vs chain isn't really a factor -the modern cars YOU are concidering are all known for reliability AGAIN--I repeat the point I made to you in the hijaced thread--Go drive some cars and see what feels best to you. --There isn't a big enough difference to recomend one over the other.
skull,
Jan 8, 8:17am
Hi Helen, post #2 is the beginning of the next hijack unfortunately. I have a 2003 Honda Accord Euro L which is the one with sunroof & leather, it's an extremely nice car to drive and currently has cost zero in maintenance apart from normal servicing and tyres. We have done 40,000km in it, it's a second car so hasn't had the km's pumped up running around locally. It's very powerful for a 2.4 litre motor and reasonably economical, the auto has a sports type mode but I'm picking you don't want it for racing anyway. It handles well and has a firm ride and has all the bells and whistles you would expect on a 2003 model car, including cruise control.
andy61,
Jan 8, 9:17am
The Accord Euro uses Timing chain not cambelt.I had a 2003 Euro,totally reliable car,dont even a blown bulb in 4 years of owning it,make sure you keep up the auto tranmission maintenance(change fluid every 80000kms)or they can get shuddery changing into next gear .I found the seats and ride a little too firm,but an awesome car for long drives,and very economical.I was happy with my 2003 Euro and updated with the newer 2008 shape Accord Euro,
rayzor14,
Jan 8, 10:23am
I can offer nothing in terms of advice on costs of maintenance however having driven both over distance I would take the Mazda anyday. Better road holding, more feedback to the driver and better economy. Put simply the Mazda felt like it had a life, the Honda was akin to a Toyota Camry - lifeless.
vtecintegra,
Jan 8, 10:28am
Economy should be a bit better in the Honda though - mainly because of the extra gear in both transmissions (although it is fairly close)
trdbzr,
Jan 8, 10:57am
Also the Accords to avoid would be the 'sixth generation' Accord and the V6 one that had triangular headlights. The first had power steering problems and gearbox problems and the latter had gearbox problems.
kukupaenterpris,
Jan 13, 5:02am
Hi Helen, I posted asking a similar question around 6 months ago and ended up buying a Honda Accord Euro over the Mazda and I'm really happy with my choice. It took me a couple of months of looking and waiting to find a reasonably priced Honda, but it was worth the wait.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.