Mid 90's Camrys vs Accords

[mjk]

I've heard it said that the 90-93 generation may have been the best Honda built. I also like those years, but it is next to impossible to find them in the upper midwest - unless they moved here late in life from southern climates.

Originally Posted By: dnastrau
I agree with "jrustles" assessment based on personal experience. I owned a '90 Accord LX 5 speed coupe and a '94 Accord LX 5 speed wagon. They were much more fun to drive than a friend's '95 Camry LE 4 cylinder automatic, but the Toyota was quieter and more refined. All 3 were very reliable and in general running costs were very low.

The '90 Accord was one of my favorite cars owned in the nearly 30 years that I have been driving. I did like the '90 - '93 Accords better than the '94 - '97 because I felt that the interior on the '90 was nicer than the one in my '94 and I liked the boxy styling better.

I paid over $400 to have the timing belt and water pump changed along with a valve adjustment on my '90 back around '97 by a Honda indy shop so the OP's $300 estimate for a timing belt is probably light these days IMHO. I changed the belt and water pump myself on the '94 and it was not a fun job. I vowed that I would have a Honda shop do it the next time (but I sold the car before it was due again.) If I ever see a clean '90 - '93 Accord 5 speed I will be all over it. Sadly, most of the ones left around here are pretty rough these days and have tractor trailer-type mileage on them.

Andrew S.

 

[SLCraig]

Back then they were both equally well made I would have to say from what I remember, but I do love the 93-96 Accords, one of my favorites of all time. My boss had one that he sold to someone who was going to use it as a DD with 430,000KM on it and it was still running well. Dead A/C was the only problem with it supposedly.

I really like that era of cars. It's also hard to go wrong with a mid 90's Maxima. Just as bulletproof as the others.

 

[Nick1994]

I've got a 97' Camry I bought in November. Timing belt wasn't too bad at all to replace, mine lasted until I changed it at 186k miles, probably ready to break. These Toyota motors, also the V6, are non-interference motors as well. The 2.2L is gutless, not much power but it's able to keep up. The V6 is awesome, my brother has a 96' Lexus with the V6 that's basically a Camry. The 2.2L is a little noisy at idle, not really to worry much. I bought mine for $1,700 because it had an oil leak, (pan gasket). It also doesn't burn any oil. Rides great and it will keep going! I do wish it were a stick though but oh well. I get 24-25 mpg in town with a little bit of highway and my best tank was 36.72 mpg at 60-65 mph and speeding up real slow. Also was in the mountains a bit on that tank.

 

[hattaresguy]

My 93 Camry was a good car but I owned it 10 years ago. I suspect today if it was still on the road it would be like any other beater past its prime.

 

[dareo]

I would have to say Toyota was slightly ahead of Honda in terms of sheer longevity. Although a well cared for and driven Honda of the era would make it into the 300k range no problem.

The brand is nothing compared to the actual treatment of the vehicle in this case.

 

[Vikas]

My advice:- Buy the first one which you come across which satisfies the condition and the price. I am assuming those sell fast.

I am always amused by buyers of older used car who wants to hold out for say right interior color. Don't be one like that.

 

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
My advice:- Buy the first one which you come across which satisfies the condition and the price. I am assuming those sell fast.

I am always amused by buyers of older used car who wants to hold out for say right interior color. Don't be one like that.


+1

You're not going to be able to consider the finer points like Motor Trend evaluating new cars. Finding either one in good enough condition at the right is going to be the deciding factor.

 

[gofast182]

I have a Honda bias but since I appreciate driving and engineering I'd say Accord. Look at the double wishbone suspension, the engine, etc. They represent the best you could get at the time. Not to mention the interior has nice soft-touch materials throughout.
My dad had a '97 Accord that he drove to 220k miles with zero issues before giving it to my stepmom. After that the car survived having diesel put in it by mistake at 240k miles (did take a $1200 engine repair) and ran perfectly up until 270k miles when it was totaled. My stepmom walked away with minor cuts and bruises from a pretty significant hit. They replaced it with another '97 Accord (V6 this time) and it has been running perfectly for the last 5 years she's had it.

 

[mcrn]

1200 to fix diesel being accidentally put in? What did it do? I would think you could just drain the tank and purge the system and you would be ok.....I guess not.....why $1200?

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: gofast182
I have a Honda bias but since I appreciate driving and engineering I'd say Accord. Look at the double wishbone suspension, the engine, etc. They represent the best you could get at the time. Not to mention the interior has nice soft-touch materials throughout.
My dad had a '97 Accord that he drove to 220k miles with zero issues before giving it to my stepmom. After that the car survived having diesel put in it by mistake at 240k miles (did take a $1200 engine repair) and ran perfectly up until 270k miles when it was totaled. My stepmom walked away with minor cuts and bruises from a pretty significant hit. They replaced it with another '97 Accord (V6 this time) and it has been running perfectly for the last 5 years she's had it.


While we really liked our '97 and '99 Accords, I have to take exception to the "double wishbone" suspension lore one hears about so often.
First of all, our '76 and two '86 Civics had better turn in and less understeer than either Accord and neither pretended to have "double wishbone" front suspension.
Second, if you take a look, all of these Hondas use front struts and I suspect that the struts do more to determine front suspension geometry than does the addition of an upper arm.
Our old Civics also had much better shifters than our later Accords, since they were rod operated rather than being cable operated.
You could shift any one of the Civics with one finger and they were pretty easy to shift sans clutch.
Through the mid 'eighties, when our last Civics were built, anyone buying an automatic Honda got laughed at, while by the time our first Accord was built, automatics were the norm.
The engines are very good, but then Honda engines always have been, or at least we've found that to be the case in every one of the eight Hondas we've owned, from our first in 1976 through our current '02 and '12.
No other mass-market four cylinder is as happy to rev as a Honda, and the '12 even has some low-end torque, unlike every other Honda we've had.

 

[Errtt]

I bought a very nice and clean low mileage 97 Camry some years back for my youngest to get to/from school.
That car still today has not had a single issue. And between semesters and/or weekends, he drives the thing from Sacramento to either Reno or Tahoe, many many times, winter & summer.
The thing is tight and quiet, smooth, although I did put new struts on little over a year ago. I wouldn't hesitate to turn the key and take off anywhere with it.
It's been a great vehicle, reliable. Still no leaks and no oil added between OCs.
One of, if not the best used vehicle buy for me.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Yes teacher, we'll discuss.

But first may I ask why we are instructed to discuss this? These cars are all old, rusted out and in the junkyard now. I rarely see them on the roads anymore.


Maybe true where there is salt, state inspections, or both. Here in AL, the land of no inspections or salt, I see a lot of these cars still kicking, though many are in rough shape.

Both were pretty solid, but at the age and miles these cars have, anything could go wrong.

Things that are common across the board are oil leaks and failing rubber parts, sometimes caused by the oil leaks. For example, hemorrhaging oil all over some rubber part that is not supposed to be coated in oil all the time, like a engine mount or inner tie rod boot, can lead to it eventually coming apart.

Both are bad about valve cover gaskets in particular, the Hondas are probably worse. Also on 4 cylinder Hondas, there is an o-ring that seals the distributor shaft that is prone to leaking. Not only does it make a mess, but there is some wiring just below the distributor that ends up covered in oil. The good thing is the most common leaks are quick, cheap fixes.

The Camry was sludge prone at that time, but that's nothing good maintenance can't take care of.

The Camry seems worse for body part failures...door handles (inside and out), plastic pieces breaking, etc.

Either way though, you are looking at cars up to 20 years old, so anything can go wrong. The cleanest example of either with the most thorough maintenance records is the best bet.

 

[Spazdog]

I used to work for a used car lot run by two Iranian brothers.

One would only buy '90-'97 Accords and '91-'96 Camries at auction

The other would buy anything that was cheap. He would come in with everything from an Eagle Premiere to Tempos, to Grand Ams with the engines that no one wanted.

The first brother's logic was simple: He virtually always made money on those Accords and Camries. They would last long enough to get paid off, traded in and possibly paid off again before the credit damaged rednecks and ghetto dumb-dumbs could destroy them.

The other brother did not see it that way...too much initial investment. The cars were no better than that weird French/Swedish powered Canadian built Eagle (which did have a fantastic sounding engine but was a piece of junk)

I would like to tell you who had the better argument from that point but it quickly escalated into a Farsi screaming match and I don't speak Farsi.

But I can say, both those models did last a long time with what may have been the worst owners.

I still have a CB7 Accord or XV10 Camry come in once a month or so. Still running strong over 20 years.

But if I was looking for something like that that old? Neither. I would find a Camry in black tie. A Lexus ES300. Everytime I install on one, I am surprised at how well they have held up. Interior is remarkably intact. EL displays still work, audio still works, Leather is worn but still intact.... if the 1MZ is sludge free, it's good to go

 

[artificialist]

Have you considered a Toyota Avalon? They are good cars, and you might be able to get a good price. They share many things with the Camry, and that keeps repair costs low.

 

[mjk]

How prevalent is the head bolt issue on the 2.4L in the 2002+ Camrys? What exact years were affected? I found an older thread from Tundrasolutions (2009), and am wondering if Toyota ever finally addressed this concern...

Thanks.

 

[Turk]

Originally Posted By: Errtt
I bought a very nice and clean low mileage 97 Camry some years back for my youngest to get to/from school.
That car still today has not had a single issue. And between semesters and/or weekends, he drives the thing from Sacramento to either Reno or Tahoe, many many times, winter & summer.
The thing is tight and quiet, smooth, although I did put new struts on little over a year ago. I wouldn't hesitate to turn the key and take off anywhere with it.
It's been a great vehicle, reliable. Still no leaks and no oil added between OCs.
One of, if not the best used vehicle buy for me.


Yep, same here. My Wife LOVES her '97 Camry.

Great cars.

 

[DutchBrad]

I just bought a 1996 Accord 4 cyl auto with 216k for $700. The previous owner let the timing belt break, but it only came out of that issue with a slightly bent valve. She does not idle, but just off idle she takes right off. That is why you have two feet! One on the brake, one on the throttle slightly to hold the RPM around 1000. This is a car for my son when he starts to drive this fall. In the mean time it is now my new daily driver. It is tight, has hardly any rust (and has lived in salty Michigan its entire life), and is a blast to drive. Coming from minivans, the car is a go-cart. Best money I have spent in a LONG time. Found receipts for nearly all the front suspension, brakes, calipers, brake line, rear drums, etc done 3000 miles ago. If only they would have replaced the timing belt...they would still be driving it. Has a killer Pioneer stereo in it too. I love that car.

 

[dohnuts]

I've owned a few Camrys and Accords. I like them both, as they are good transportation, wherever you want to go, will be reliable with good maintenance. I tend towards the obsessive side, although not as much as some BITOGers.

Of the two - and I like them both, have contemplated buying in those model year ranges, what I would buy is a Camry V6 with a manual. While they can sometimes be harder to find, if it's been decently maintained, it will be slightly more involving and still be just as reliable/durable.

The Accord of the same vintage is good, a little more "fun" to drive, but the Camry has a little better road isolation and smoother suspension. YMMV, of course.