By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Camry 32190 + 6.1%
Altima 14777 + 3.9%
The percentage changes above are in the daily sales rate (DSR) compared to Nov 2001, the way the auto industry tracks sales.
This is the second month in a row that Accord sales are down compared to Camry. I'm not surprised. While I was expecting Honda to make the usual improvements for 2003 in NVH, power, and offer more features for less money,etc, I was disappointed with the fat, bloated exterior styling and the high cowl (very unlike a Honda).
I think there's a lot of Honda owners like me who don't like the Accord becoming 'American' or 'European', whatever spin they want to put on it. Honda needs to look at what made the Accord popular in earlier years: sensible proportions with contemporary Japanese styling (while offering Honda refinement and the best value in the market).
I still cannot like it exterior style at all.
In addition, I noticed that November sales of the Civic were actually lower than those of Corolla - don't recall that ever happening. My understanding is that the Civic has been selling below Honda's targets, the Accord is probably going to do the same based on early sales. I can't get used to the Accord's bloated styling either, like some others on this board.
Good Driving!
I'd agree that the supply isn't fully up to speed yet. The selection at area dealers has been pretty limited, especially if you want a manual.
Likewise, I'd disagree with the assessment that the new car isn't significantly improved over the previous generation. I haven't driven it, but the new interior materials and seats are tops. I'm somewhat disappointed by the higher belt line and cowl, but that's the trend as evidenced by the Passat, Altima, and Mazda6.
Judging by the comments in the new MT, the Accord came pretty close to COY honors (for what thats worth) with more significant mentions in the accompanying story than the Mazda6.
And why are sales for VW, with its non-bloated Passat, down also?
http://www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=4025
2>Jethro... I believe the TL premium is running at 240HP and the TL-S is running at the 260 mark. So it should be comprable HP ratings w/ the V6 Accord, and you have a hair more TQ if I remember correctly, but the TL also wieghs in at a hefty 400# more.
While we are on TL's the way they are going to make it "worthwhile" is simple. 3.5TL and I belive the RL is going to a V8 model. Of course the bigger question is with the TSX which has the k24 engine and has a base HP of 200 or so.
Only thing I would trade my Ex for is an EX-L. hehe =o)
In the current marketplace, the fact that the Accord nearly matched last year's sales is quite an accomplishment. I think it's extremely premature to draw conclusions on the success of the Accord redesign, based on 3 month's sales in an extremely depressed market.
My point was that for a recently launched model, the Accord seems to be doing not so well when compared to Camry and Altima, not compared to GM and Ford. For all the hoopla about this being the 'most dramatic' change in the Accord, one would have expected otherwise.
I'll admit my conclusions about Accord sales are based on my bias against its bloated look, and don't care for the direction that Honda has taken with the styling of the 01 Civic or the 03 Accord (I know both cars offer the usual Honda evolutionary improvements and added features). My hunch is that this 'dramatic change' in the Accord is not going to be a hit with many Honda owners like me and particularly younger owners.
Also keep in mind that Honda had special value and SE packages to shore up sales of the last year of the generation, plus greater incentives in the wake of 9/11.
Accord 30058 - 1.5%
Camry 32190 + 6.1%
Altima 14777 + 3.9%
According to those numbers, the Accord is outselling the Altima 2:1 and despite sales going down, it's only ~2,000 units behind the Camry, which went up by 6.1% while the Accord went down by 1.5%.
A dramatic increase for the Camry, but not so dramatic for the Accord's decrease.
didn't say too much that hasn't been discussed previously.
i have observed it is running at higher rpm that
other V6 accords
on a plain straight road
at 60 mph - 2000-2100 rpm
70 mph - 2500-2700 rpm
80 mph - 3250 rmp
85 mhp - 3500 rmp ..
I compared it to my friends V6 accord and these
RPM's are atleast 1000 more than his car !!
why ?
I've owned and [mostly] enjoyed the products of all of the Japanese Big Three, in some cases long before many posters in this forum were breathing on the planet. Each car at any given time in the market has had advantages and disadvantages, just as they do now. But I can't ever remember worrying much about what others thought regarding my choices at any given time. By all means, state your opinions, and if necessary restate them...and again...and again. The ongoing debate about how this car looks is a particularly useless discussion, it seems to me - this is always in the eye of the beholder, and you might as well debate the value of Picasso vs Rembrandt. OK for awhile, but it gets tiresome.
Bring on more opinions and experiences on the actual owning and driving of these cars, and less hair-splitting about the sales numbers. Ultimately, the one number that matters is the sale you decide to make yourself, for whatever reasons - I could never buy a car because 400,000 other people had done so, or NOT because only 375,000 had made this same decision - each for many different reasons that may or may not be relevant to me. What am I missing?
This suggests a torque converter lockup feature that is not working properly [ the torque converter is slipping instead of being firmly locked to the output shaft ]. This is an electronic feature that is easy for a tech to test, and yes, it can fail. Happened at much lower mileage than yours on a '92 Sable we had. It may not be the problem, but that is where I would start.
Auburn, do you read this forum...your opinion?
[And not to be argumentative, but if your friend's car is actually turning "at least 1000 rpm less" than these cited numbers, I will eat this computer. Do the math, not possible on an unmodified '96...tires would have to be several sizes larger, too large to fit in the wheelwells].
Do u know what u are missing now, jrct9454 ???
He is a fanatic, but I like him anyway.
;-)
Do the 2003 radios have noticebly better sound quality than a 2002?
Accord is a smash hit. Almost all of sales of last months are either close or at MSRP. Once they get to the level of 500-700 over invoice we would see much bigger numbers & also: limited avaiablitiy is still an issue. 2 Doors are almost nonexistent right now.
And, by the way, the TL has one of the best sound systems in any car. The Bose system sounds great, we have an 02 TL-S and that thing has so much power, bass, and yet clarity. I do agree that the 03 Accord's system isn't as good, and maybe not even great vs. other cars like it, but I'm not sure if it's just that I'm comparing it to our TL's Bose system which I think really rocks!
got Consumer's reports today...they loved the 03 comparing it to the legacy outback and the saturn...we also have an 00 outback and they seem to be pretty much on the $...not a lot of zip w the 4, not as good mileage. Despite the fact that my husband doesn't like hondas or toyotas...I think the camry's, accords, civics and corollas are some of the best values for the $-- you just have to decide whether quiet or fun to drive is more impt. and whether mileage/ trunk space is a consideration. toyotas have better drivetrain warrantys.
Secondly, I know the 5th gear in the new one is long, but it is NOT 40 mph per 1000 rpm. Car & Driver's road test had it at 31.4 mph per 1000 rpm on their '03 EX V6 sedan, and that sounds about right for the new trans: 80 mph would translate to 2550 rpm, which is a useful reduction from the 2700 or so that was the case with the previous-gen 4 spd automatic [I owned both a 4 and a V6].
On all of the 4 spd automatics of recent vintage, road speed vs rpm ratios in high gear range in the 27-30 mph per 1000 rpm [with the torque converter locked, of course], depending on which engine and which generation car you're talking about. That's very long-legged, especially for the 4 cyl cars; the new trans improves that by about 5-10%, again depending on which year and engine you're using as the benchmark.
The numbers posted in the problem query suggest to me, as I said, a torque converter that isn't locking up in high gear as it should: his rpm at 60 mph is right on for that car, but inexplicably high as speed increases, clearly suggesting a problem.
With the torque converter locked, the ratio of rpm to road speed should be constant.
Expressing opinions about styling, even a year from now is not bashing. Regardless of how smooth the 5 speed automatic is or how quickly you can get from 0-60, some buyers are fixated on the styling because they take refinement and the other Honda attributes for granted. The days when a new car was a rough machine went away long ago with Yugo. If everyone is allowed only to say how wonderful the Accord is, that would make this board really boring. JM2C.
While the Accord may not be styled to everyone's satisfaction, it is almost with certainty that more people enjoy the overall car than the overall styling; that is where the new Accord differs from the ovoid Taurus. Otherwise, I doubt 30,000 people would've bought it over the stylistically superior Altima.
Is it the same one as in the Cl-S 6 Speed?
When looking at whose sales are up and whose are down you gotta remember that the Accord outsold the Camry by a hefty margin in 2001. So while it might look strong on paper actual sales numbers are very close. I too can attest to certain Accord models being in low supply. I have yet to see an Accord Coupe 5-speed with leather... heck I haven't seen an Accord EX 5-speed coupe at all. I've also noticed that there don't seem to be too many EX's left on dealer's lots. Maybe due to the extra features over the LX (dual climate, heated seats, etc) the EX is the more desirable model and there just aren't that many of them around. It's way too early to start making judgements or coming up with theories. Let's wait a few months into 03 and see what happens.
The reason why they are hard to find is not because there are hoards of people lining up to buy them.
The dealers don't want to be stuck with too many so they are careful not to over order models that do not sell in the same volume as LX automatics or even EX automatics.
More people buy LXs because they cost less.
Even though they might want the extra luxury features of the EXL, most people don't want it enough to pay the extra money.
If Honda feels they have made too many or too few of some model or trim level this year, they can adjust the production to match what people want later.