ge5692742798568652589
ge5575729627074954504
ge4740167577783677268
ge5664519067207188800
ge4756933159450179129
Mike McCarthy1 Jul 2008
REVIEW

Ford Mondeo vs Honda Accord vs Mazda6 vs Skoda Octavia

Rising fuel prices frozen you out of a large six? The climate has never been sunnier among mid-sizers, where economy, space and dynamics meld in harmony

Tempters in the mid-fours
Ford Mondeo vs Honda Accord vs Mazda6 vs Skoda Octavia

Were this gathering of the latest four-cylinder mid-size models driven simply by the cars' looks and handling attributes, chances are the winner could be a foregone conclusion.

That's because few beholders disagree the new Mazda6 is easily the best-looking jigger in this size/price class. And it comes with broad expectations (based on earlier press previews) of above-average driving dynamics.

However, even conditionally allowing that the 6 has the more beguiling styling, an edge in performance and the more responsive handling, only compulsively one-eyed jurists can deny that the Ford Mondeo, Honda Accord and Skoda Octavia also have some commanding attractions.

Take fuel consumption, for example. On the official numbers, the Skoda is narrowly the most economical with an 8.5L/100km rating, to the 6's nominal 8.7 which pips the Accord's 8.8, leaving the Mondeo clearly fourth on 9.5L/100km.

Very remarkably, after nearly 1000km of peak-hour urban trundling, highway cruising, back-roads blasting, performance testing and photo shooting, the Accord, Octavia and Mondeo each exactly duplicated their respective official figures, while the Mazda6 overshot its number by just a proverbial drop in a bucket, using 8.9L/100km.

Not unimportantly, the Mondeo gets some redress at the pumps by stipulating 91RON fuel, as does the Accord, where the Octavia and Mazda 6 nominate the always costlier (and sometimes less available) 95RON.

On test, the 6 wastes no time stamping its authority on the performance charts. From a standing start, the 6 gets serious the instant you plant the pedal and step off the anchors. The tyres chirp cheerily for a moment as the autobox hooks up, launching the Mazda with perceptibly more thrust than the others.

Thus the 6 is away and gathering pace while its peers are still getting going, and the pecking order is pretty much set in stone by the time the field rushes past 60km/h.

Up to 100km/h, there's still only tenths of a second between them, but even at that point the Mazda leads clearly from the Accord which has the Mondeo and Octavia locked together on its back bumper. Beyond 100km/h the Mazda extends its lead as the Honda draws farther ahead of the Ford, which finally stretches away from the Skoda.

After nipping at the 6's heels throughout the standing-start tests, the Accord's persistence and beefy mid-range torque are rewarded in rolling-start exercises. The Honda's kick-down response narrowly trumps the Mazda's in a duel that pulls them clear of the Mondeo and the closely attendant Octavia.

True to the form guide, then, the Mazda6 is the group's most spirited performer overall. Moreover, its delivery is very impressive, especially for such a large four-banger. The engine revs fairly freely and very purposefully towards the top end, in no way feeling begrudging or sounding dissuasively grumpy even when flirting with the tacho redline.

And whatever the 6's mid-range response may lack in sheer muscle is largely overridden by its elastic tractability, while the creamy automatic masks the soft patch that's sometimes found in the manual version.

Considering the previous four-cylinder 'American' Accord's lack of effervescence, the latest model's ability to shadow the 6's performance may come as a surprise.

Although Honda, like Ford, hasn't yet adopted direct fuel injection, as Mazda and Skoda have, the Accord engine claims a little less maximum torque than the 6 but makes even more power and spins to seven grand if pressed. Even when putting in the hard yards, the Honda doesn't sound or feel unduly frenetic.

It's no secret the Mondeo's 2.3-litre engine is closely related to that in the Mazda3 SP23 and the previous 6. So it's a goodie. But while Ford's version is competitive for power-per-litre, hauling a lump of the Mondeo's size and mass is a big ask. Ordinarily, the Mondeo's performance seems a bit on the sooky side of average. To stir it along means using lots of pedal, and even then the response often comes across as a bit underwhelming. Yet it can in fact be deceptive because, given a heavy right foot, the Mondeo's performance is competitively brisk and its acceleration is certainly quicker than it feels.

Although the Octavia is the most compact and lightest car here, it can't fully capitalise on those assets. Despite the FSI engine having technologically advanced design, and while being as efficient as you could wish, its 2.0-litre capacity is always out-gunned and out-run by the larger rivals. The punchier 1.8-litre turbocharged TFSI Octavia could probably do something about that situation, but it comes only with manual transmission, whereas this test concentrates on automatics. And very good automatics they are, too.

The Accord and Mazda autoboxes have five speeds, the others six. The extra gear gives shorter steps between ratios, which is advantageous on account of the Mondeo's weight, and the Octavia's smaller engine. But the five-speed versions suffer nothing by comparison in terms of the smoothness and operational efficacy.

There are differences in the shiftings, however. The Skoda, Mazda and Ford allow manual sequential changes via the selector. Surprisingly, the Octavia and 6 automatically upshift from selected ratios if revved into the red sector. The Mondeo on the other hand devoutly holds manually engaged ratios until the driver makes the next selection.

The Accord eschews the floor lever for a shift system as slick as any this side of Formula 1. Well, almost. Behind the steering wheel spokes are two paddles; squeeze the right-side ear to change up, left to shift down.

Unlike some, Honda's paddle system operates in Drive, allowing positive shifts without kickdown or reaching for a lever. The transmission (in D, remember) reverts to automation when you've revved highly or backed-off. However, if you've previously snicked the floor lever sports mode, your paddled selection stays put with all the conviction of a dinkum manual, regardless of revs and load.

Wish the same praise could be heaped on the Accord's steering, which dilutes its basic precision and sense of connection with overly light and variable weighting. It's fine when pointed into corners, but at straight ahead and either side thereof it has the body and flavour of tofu.

The Mondeo and Octavia's steering are steps in the right direction. Besides being more consistently weighted than the Accord, and having no noticeable vacancy around centre, they keep you constantly updated about the state of the rubber and the road. The Octavia earns a point for the tightest turning circle here. The Mazda's helm is the group's keenest, however, thanks to its consistently median weighting and tangibly unfiltered, uncorrupted connection.

All four have amply powerful brakes which remain consistently strong yet progressive even in demanding driving conditions. But at low-ish speeds the Mondeo's pedal suffers a tad too much assistance and delivers sharper braking than you intend.

Given brisk cornering that puts high priority on chassis and driving dynamics, the Mazda6 excels. Although the Octavia, the Mondeo particularly, and even the formerly doughy Accord, can be wheeled through corners with serious intent and reassuring competency, only the 6 engenders a sense of genetically sporty handling.

The Mazda turns in a touch more promptly and precisely than the others, develops a degree less understeer, and less body roll, while settling with a noticeably well-planted feel and a very real sense of balance to its handling. It's a car that makes winding roads welcome.

Which isn't to say the others aren't talented. The Mondeo's skills are impressive for such a large, hefty car (1537kg). Demonstrating self-assured handling with measured body control and responsive directional integrity, the Mondeo feels lighter and more compact than its statistics suggest.

Given the Octavia's Volkswagen Jetta connections, the qualities of its adroit driving dynamics aren't surprising. The way the Skoda steers, stops and proficiently handles the twisty bits is positive proof that nothing (except price) has been lost in the translation.

Apart from its steering's under-weighted sense of connection and squeal-prone tyres, the latest Accord handles pretty damn well in general and certainly isn't out of its depth in this company for hustling along winding roads.

And then there's ride quality. Again, a case of Mazda6 and the rest. But not in a good way, as the Mazda is noticeably bumpier than the others, especially when lightly laden. Although not harsh nor wincingly aggro, the 6's jiggly ride is incessantly busy and registers even the smallest of bumps like a Braille reader.

In that respect the 6 is bettered by the Mondeo especially, because the Ford more effectively ignores small irritations and placates larger ones. The lightly-laden Octavia's ride makes disciplined body control a priority, though not at the expense of bump absorbency. The Accord comes at it from the other direction by promoting ride comfort while avoiding undue suspension waft and wallow.

The latest 6 brings discernible improvements over its predecessor in tyre/road/front-suspension noise suppression on rough or coarse surfaces, but (like the Mondeo and Accord) still generates enough whine or rumble to notice; if a little less so than the Octavia.

Each model's ride quality improves noticeably with four occupants, to the point where they're close to line-ball over the same roads. However the Mondeo gets the nod for rear-seat ride because it smooths the bumps a touch more amenably than the others. The Ford also gives rear passengers comfortably more legroom and footspace than its opponents, where they (including the shorter-overall Octavia) are entirely ample.

Slightly squeezy shoulder width marks the Skoda's comparative slimness. Otherwise the Octavia pampers rear passengers with not two but four coat hooks, central ventilation outlets (in Accord too, but not the Mondeo or 6) and by consensus, the second-best rear seat. Featuring a centre armrest with a ski port (to supplement the split/fold backrest) and cupholders, the Octavia's bench would vie for best-in-group if its cushion were a little less flat. To its credit, it's fairly high from the floor, combining with deep windows for airiness and vision; unlike the high-sided Mondeo.

For shape and support, the Accord's rear seat rates as best of the bunch, but incurs a couple of demerits for its lack of split-fold backrest (with only a ski port), and the rear shelf's buzzy running commentary on road roughness.

The 6 and Mondeo rank equal third in our rear passengers' estimation because although the squabs are well upholstered, both backrests are too reclined for unanimous comfort. Lack of rear ventilation outlets earns them a yellow card, as does the Mazda Classic's single seatback map pocket, and the LX Mondeo's manual rear window operation. (A $1500 options pack is needed for the LX to have power windows all round, along with cruise control, leather bound steering wheel and 16-inch alloys).

Each driver's seat has manual cushion height adjustment and only the Accord omits lumbar adjustment, but the Octavia alone includes both touches (and an under-seat parcel tray) for the front passenger too.

The Octavia also comes close to having the most comfortable and supportive front seats, but in the long run most preferences go to the Accord's slightly wider, slightly softer buckets. The play-off for bronze could be decided by your butt feeling because, especially after the Accord and Octavia, both the 6 and Mondeo could use more tilt in their slightly flat cushions. And more wrap-around in the backrests, too.

Taking stock of interior appointments, it's pleasing to find that the controls are conventional, apart from LHD column stalks in the Mondeo and Octavia. Convenient wheel-spoke buttons for audio, cruise control or trip computer selections are provided even at entry level, as on the Mondeo LX.

Eye-to-instrument contact is assured in the Octavia, 6 and Accord, for their brightly graphic dials are as attractive and easy to read as they are informative.

The Mondeo's pale faces are neatly styled too, but haven't anything like the others' presence until illuminated. The Ford can also be singled out for its murky low-contrast trip/odo display.

The Octavia has a large, bold white-on-black central display giving trip and odo info, plus the time, outside temperature, gear selection and fuel consumption. While the Accord VTi's compact white-on-black panel displays only the basic trip and odo numbers, there are no bigger, brighter, more legible digits on the planet.

But do such details and important but relatively minor practicalities really matter? If so, be prepared for some anguish trying to decide between these four models.

To summarise, the Octavia FSI handles pretty well, is slowest of the four in performance, marginally most economical, has the smallest cabin, the biggest boot, five-door convenience and brings more equipment and user-friendly features than its rivals.

The Mondeo LX is about size, and lots of it. Which will be its own reward if adult rear passengers are frequent or - with rear seat(s) folded - there's lanky cargo involved. The performance is better than it seems, the consumption a bit rich (unlike the price), and the handling first class. So although the LX equipment level is back to basics, this car is an honest effort and a handsome looker with it.

Don't judge the new large-car Accord VTi by its cover, nor by fall-out from its predecessor's reputation. Okay, the styling isn't even close to glamorous. But beyond the conservative skin you'll find inviting attractions abound. Over-easy steering weighting aside, the Accord's chassis dynamics are class-competitive and the can-do powertrain (including the excellent paddle-shift system) adds to the engaging driving experience. Makes the VTi seem all the more outstanding value at the price.

It has to be said that the Mazda6 Classic isn't quite perfect. There's room for improvement in the ride quality particularly, and ideally in road-noise suppression as well, not to overlook the just-average seats and the equipment levels. Still, there are valid overriding compensations. Every time and everywhere the 6 comes into view you can appreciate that it's anti-average.

And the implication of something-special is reinforced each time you drive it. That's when you know, yet again, you're on a winner.

SPECIFICATIONS:
  FORD MONDEO LX HONDA ACCORD VTi MAZDA6 CLASSIC SKODA OCTAVIA ELEGANCE
Price: $29,990/As tested $30,340* $29,990/As tested $29,990 $35,940/As tested $35,940 $33,290/As tested $33,290
 
Body: Steel, 5 doors, 5 seats, sedan Steel, 4 doors, 5 seats, sedan Steel, 4 doors, 5 seats, sedan Steel, 5 doors, 5 seats, liftback
Engine: In-line 4cyl, dohc, 16v In-line 4cyl, dohc, 16v In-line 4cyl, dohc, 16v In-line 4cyl, dohc, 16v
Layout: Front engine (east-west), front drive Front engine (east-west), front drive Front engine (east-west), front drive Front engine (east-west), front drive
Capacity: 2.261 litres 2.354 litres 2.488 litres 1.984 litres
Power: 118kW @ 6500rpm 133kW @ 6500rpm 125kW @ 6000rpm 110kW @ 6000rpm
Torque: 208Nm @ 4200rpm 222Nm @ 4300rpm 226Nm @ 4000rpm 200Nm @ 3500rpm
Redline/Cut-out: 6300/6500rpm 6750/7000rpm 6200/-rpm 6500/6500rpm
Transmission: 6-speed auto 5-speed auto 5-speed auto 6-speed auto
Dimensions (L/W/H): 4844/1886/1500mm 4945/1845/1475mm 4735/1745/1440mm 4572/1769/1462mm
Wheelbase: 2850mm 2800mm 2725mm 2578mm
Weight: 1573kg 1515kg 1450kg 1335kg
Fuel/capacity: 91RON/70 litres 91RON/70 litres 95RON/64 litres 95RON/55 litres
Fuel consumption: 9.5L/100km (test average) 8.8L/100km (test average) 8.9L/100km (test average) 8.5L/100km (test average)
Boot capacity: 535 litres 450 litres 519 litres 560 litres
Warranty: 3yr/100,000 km 3yr/100,000km 3yr/unlimited km 3yr/unlimited km
Redbook 3-year resale: 57% 59% 61% 56%
NCAP rating: ????? (Euro) Not available Not available ???? (Euro)
 
For: Roomy cabin; big boot; talented handling; slick transmission Transmission; front seats; capable chassis dynamics; value for money Accomplished driving dynamics, outstanding styling; performance Driving dynamics, fuel economy, equipment/features, boot size
Against: Fairly weighty, needs option pack to rise above basic spec level Steering a touch light; cornering tyre squeal Busy/hobbly ride; seat shape/support; still too much tyre noise Comparatively compact cabin, firm seats, tyre noise
  *Includes metallic paint      
Share this article
Written byMike McCarthy
See all articles
Our team of independent expert car reviewers and journalistsMeet the team
Stay up to dateBecome a carsales member and get the latest news, reviews and advice straight to your inbox.
Disclaimer
Please see our Editorial Guidelines & Code of Ethics (including for more information about sponsored content and paid events). The information published on this website is of a general nature only and doesn’t consider your particular circumstances or needs.

If the price does not contain the notation that it is "Drive Away", the price may not include additional costs, such as stamp duty and other government charges.
Download the carsales app
    AppStoreDownloadGooglePlayDownload
    App Store and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc. Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google LLC.
    © CAR Group Ltd 1999-2024
    In the spirit of reconciliation we acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of Country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their Elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.