2006-08-22 19:52:14 · 15 answers · asked by zarry 1 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Car Makes ➔ Toyota
toyota, lower gas consumption.
2006-08-23 06:22:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, my dad owned a 1990 Honda Accord 2-door and he said he liked it a lot. The a/c went about 9 years after owning the car. He got into two accidents. He survived with no injuries in both. One was where he went through an intersection and a pick up truck hit the passenger side at 35 Mph because they ran a red light and he walked away with no scratches or bruises. His wendy's soft drink didn't even spill, and it was a large, and full glass. I would say it was a safe car. He had the manual version.
The car went over 300,000 mi.
I haven't really seen a Toyota corolla from that year but it is pobably a good car. So thats my opinion but I'm sure they are both good cars.
If I were you and because I'm more familliar, I'd go wtih the accord, even though I have a 2005 Toyota Camry.
2006-08-25 17:48:38 · answer #2 · answered by zachash1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The corrola gets better ratings but I like the accord's style. I am looking at the same cars but I want a 95-97
2006-08-23 02:55:14 · answer #3 · answered by willberb 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you're comparing two cars with 100,000 miles, the most important consideration is how well the previous owners took care of them. As previous answers have noted, both cars could easily go another 100,000 miles if well looked after. Since it's bigger, the Honda will probably be a bit more comfortable and use a bit more gas.
2006-08-26 14:50:57 · answer #4 · answered by stream of consciousness 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hi we have a 92 corrola now and it is great we also have a 2000 corrola and love it no problems with either the 92 has 95,000 miles and the 2000 has 120,000 miles. my mom also has the 92 with almost 250,000 miles still in great shape toyotas have a great mechanical reputation. in our family including parents we have 6 divided among 4 people Great cars!!!
2006-08-27 00:17:05 · answer #5 · answered by jo_jo_baby2004 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion, you can't go wrong with either. Both Honda and Toyota don't do the greatest job in properly primering the bodies of their cars (and they don't use the best steel for the bodies to begin with), but they sure are reliable, and will keep on running (over 300,000 km on my brother-in-law's Toyota; 265,000 on my Honda...a 1985 from B.C.!!!) Just maintain them (change oil & filter, etc., etc.). That's all these cars seem to ask for!!!
2006-08-23 03:03:02 · answer #6 · answered by vortexx 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Auto go with the Toyota
Manuel go with the Honda
Toyota makes better auto trainne back in those days and Honda has better manual shifting...
Both engine will last as long, if they both have the proper maintenance before and after.
Accord has more room and more stable on the highway of course...
Then the rest is up to you.
2006-08-25 18:55:22 · answer #7 · answered by 991 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1992 Corolla's came with the rubber timing belt, not a chain. I know because I used to own one. Had it for 437000 miles, regular maintenance,same engine.. So,I would go for the Toyota.
2006-08-23 20:51:07 · answer #8 · answered by Jordan L 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Toyota has a steel timing chain. It cost alot to change a Honda rubber belt.
2006-08-23 06:46:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
All things being equal, I'd say the Toyota, but that depends on how well each car has been maintained ...
2006-08-23 02:57:35 · answer #10 · answered by Smotter 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋