Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2008 Honda Accord Coupe and Sedan

17273757778267

Comments

  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    are comparing the '08 Accord and '08 WRX:

    The first actual US-review (that I've seen) from an editor of a publication, vs. simple previews based on press information:

    http://blogs.edmunds.com/.ee9cc50
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    It looked like having acquired grill and headlamps lens from Acuras. As a result, it's front end didn't look much different from Acura TSX. "Bold" is an overblown term.

    I think a lot of people think use of clear lens or "Altezza lights" as bold. Having good lines isn't THAT to me. Bold is about doing something different from others. I didn't see that in Mazda6 or Altima. I do see that in CX-7 and Murano as they are not your typical box on wheels.

    BTW, do you find anything "bold and dramatic" in Mercedes E-Class? BMW 5-series?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    The 1998 Accord EX-V6 (under $25k MSRP) was cheaper than the previous 1997 model ($25k and change MSRP), if I'm not mistaken.

    Yes, and there was a reason for it. 1994-97 Accord chassis wasn't designed to carry V6. When Honda decided to offer that choice, they had to revise the chassis which also resulted in "longer" Accords which carried V6. Costs were passed down to customers.

    MY1998 Accord was designed from scratch to carry a V6. Savings were passed down to customers. So that transition was an aberration.

    With more features, and inflation being taken into account, 1-2% price increase virtually every year is the norm.
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    are comparing the '08 Accord and '08 WRX:

    The first actual US-review (that I've seen) from an editor of a publication, vs. simple previews based on press information:


    Edmunds just did a full blown review of the 2008 WRX and Motor Trend did as well. Edmunds whom I consider far more accurate and reliable compared to MT was not all that keen on the car. I think the Accord will offer more bang for the buck, although it certainly won't be as fast as the WRX.
    Read the article and decide. For me it told me a lot.

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=121788
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 16,895
    It looked like having acquired grill and headlamps lens from Acuras. As a result, it's front end didn't look much different from Acura TSX. "Bold" is an overblown term.

    Uhhhh... you do know the mazda6 came out a year before the TSX, don't you? So who was copying who? And if you want to look at just the grille, the mazda was using that shape back before the mazda6.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '08 Town&Country

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Mazda6 and Japanese Accord were launched at about the same time, late 2002. Acura TSX (which is basically Japanese Accord with a different interior) was launched in Spring 2003 as a 2004 model. One year?

    That said, Acura TSX evolves from 1998-2002 Accord. The grill comes off a family design element that Honda first showcased with 1995 Acura CL-X concept. The tail lamp came off 1985 Integra.

    Mazda6 got its grill from 1999-2002 626 and the tail mimics 2000+ Millenia. So, what exactly did arrive “new” with Mazda6? Clear tail lamps? “Ground effects”? To me, it brought a safe 3-box design with tasteful lines. That isn’t something I associate the word “bold” with. Bold would be going at least a bit out of the norm.

    Heck, Honda was one of the first to offer clear, single lens horizontal headlamp lens back in 1991 (Accord) or so. That wasn't a "bold" move, it was simply... more tasteful than what everybody else was offering.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 16,895
    if we want to break it down to such a great degree and take 1 element at a time, nothing is bold anymore.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '08 Town&Country

  • angelus1angelus1 Posts: 23
    i was all set on getting one but after hearing the bmw 1 series will drop soon. couple that with the fact that the g37 will cause a drop in used g35 prices. i might end up with a 2005 or 06 g35 coupe which will be roughly the same price as a accord coupe ex-l by the time options are done
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Or we can talk about it at an "overall level". A new design theme perhaps like never before? That is why I brought up 2003-2005 Accord. It wasn't a widely accepted design for a reason. The rear end was quite a bit different in profile from what typical buyers were used to. So, it was back to the basics via a rather expensive makeover with MY2006.

    For something to be bold, it needs to be... bold, in concept and execution. I would say Mercedes CLS is bold, C/E/S class (no matter how attractive one may find it) is not. Infiniti F is bold, G, M or Q aren't.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 16,895
    For something to be bold, it needs to be... bold, in concept and execution. I would say Mercedes CLS is bold, C/E/S class (no matter how attractive one may find it) is not. Infiniti F is bold, G, M or Q aren't.

    I would agree with those.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '08 Town&Country

  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    sorry to get off subject again, but how is the current accord more powerful? if you are talking hp then yes, the v6 has more, but the subie is noticably quicker; powerful means so much more than hp numbers.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    i'm wondering if the accord is going to follow suit with the civic in a change in suspension. (i know that this happened much earlier in the civic from 00 to 01).

    but do you guys think that honda will keep the double wishbones front and rear? or is the new accord destined to be a machpherson wonder? Still a solid choice, but not as cool or well handling as the doulbe wishbone setup.

    thoughts?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I haven't seen anybody complain about McPherson Struts in Altima. That said, it is highly unlikely Honda will change the formula on Accord. It should still be double-wishbone front and watt-link (5-links) double wishbone rear.

    In case of a compact car like Civic, space is at a premium, and not only does DWB add weight and cost, it is not optimal set up in terms of space (while ensuring safety). In a larger car like Accord, it isn't as much of an issue.

    Space would also be the reason why Odyssey (and all SUVs from Honda) have McPherson struts up front.
  • user777user777 Posts: 3,341
    The rear end was quite a bit different in profile from what typical buyers were used to. So, it was back to the basics via a rather expensive makeover with MY2006.

    i agree. i wonder if Honda used any focus group feedback. seems they would have saved some $$$ and kept some sales if they had avoided that one.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Yep. Forget study group, they could have showed it just to me (and given a fraction of what it cost them to revise the rear end, and lost sales). :P

    Seriously though, Honda does need to look beyond the styling approvers they have now. While it hasn't hurt CR-V sales (in fact they are at unprecedented levels and leading the SUV pack), the grill is ugly. They sure know how to mess up somewhere, somehow.

    But then, it also happens to be bold and different something Honda is not associated with. I won't be surprised if the "floating eye" look will become more common. Even Audi R8 has it.

    Floating eye: that would be my term for unconventional styling element Honda has used on CR-V, where the headlamp (or part of it) isn't "supported" by front bumper in a traditional way. But my problem with CR-V grill is the way it sits/protrudes at the top in a side profile.
  • user777user777 Posts: 3,341
    styling cues... i think they are getting confused: i personally think the CRV doesn't look as nice as it used to.

    they could make the CRV look so much better at the back end by dropping the hexagon punchout about the midsection of the hatch. yuck.

    and the bumpers on the CRV, the front one makes me think of a frog with an under-bite. yuck.

    the front end on the CRV looks much worse than it used to IMHO: why the deep cuts on the hood? yuck.

    MDX back end, oh my blood pressure is going up. :sick:
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Posts: 2,697
    They are not going to do anything about CRV styling since it is now the #1 selling SUV in the US.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    Dude,sometimes It's you,not them. :) #1 in suv sales.
  • fxguyfxguy Posts: 132
    CRV is #1?? Please link me to your source!
  • texasestexases Posts: 5,424
    Yep, just read it in the Wall Street Journal...I also have big problems with the CR-V's looks, and worry if they'll carry over to the 2009 Pilot...but, to get back on topic, I think both the new Accord coupe and sedan are major improvements. I'll have to see the sedan on the road to make final judgement.
Sign In or Register to comment.