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
1> Suspension. As far as I can tell, it is the same double wishbone suspension that Honda is famous for. It still has the infamous forks and socket. Now the Civic... that has the cheaper stuff on it. BTW, my Accord handles very well, so I don't see much of a difference.=o)
2>The new spare is a full size. Don't understand the question well enough to answer it completely.
ie. fit a full size alloy, or just a full size tire?.
3>Nope, not the same engine block as before. The '03 has the K24 engine while the '02 had the 2.3L I4. The K24 is also an iVTEC and not a VTEC engine. There is a long story behind this, essentially, there is a rumor that they went to this type of engine design to sell engines to other manufacturers. They couldn't do it with the old ones because they turned the opposite direction, etc. This is why the engine has moved from the drivers side to the passenger side. The engine does require a valve adjustment somewhere near 100k mi. The engine also has a timing chain instead of belt now. I believe it is a solid lifter off the double over head cams... definitely not hydraulic I don't think Honda ever had hydraulic lifters/valves.
4>temp controls... are interesting. Not too difficult to navigate though.. If you are changing from defroster to foot and front vents etc, it does require a look-see for a sec. The far left control is for the fan, and the far right is for the temp. The center is the audio volume control. Overall, not too bad, the big plus is that at night all the gauges are very easy to see... nice white backlights, not green or orange or yellow. Very clear and crisp.
Wish you luck... love mine.
Keep us posted on what you do.
As for the fan and temp dials, they're also smooth as silk - I love them.
Unlike the LX, the EX has buttons for fan speed (both of the dials are temp dials because of the dual climate control feature). I'm still not crazy about using buttons for fan speed but at least they're high-quality.
Just like "horsepower". Before the Accord didn't have it so nobody needed it.....
Accord had 200 HP before any Japanese competition, but most people don't buy Accords for HP anyway.
As for trunk, I think a lot of Honda fans will take objection to use of cheaper but space efficient MacPherson struts (like in Camry and Impala at all corners, and Altima upfront) just like they did when Honda redesigned Civic. For them, trunk space is not as important. And without compromising rear suspension geometry, it would not be easy to increase rear seat legroom and/or trunk size. And Accord uses Watt-link double wishbones in that regard (5-links, also used by E-class and up Mercedes). A way to improve the size would be to make the car as bulky as Altima (which is about 3" longer than Accord) or Impala (about 8" longer than Accord).
Now, that is something a Honda fan would look for in the Accord before how 14.0 cu. feet translates to useful trunk space. And from my experience (98 Accord, 14.1 cu. ft), that is good enough to swallow enough luggage.
bburton
I believe your questions have been answered, but I will add something. The four cylinder is now a DOHC engine and uses timing chain. I don't think valve adjustment is needed before 105K (or 110K) miles.
And the suspension is the same. No changes in the layout, but they are apparently using stiffer springs and may have been tweaked slightly in terms of their geometry for a flatter dynamics.
Honda now has one of the most advanced vehicle safety test and research facility where they not only test cars to meet NHTSA and IIHS requirements, but also Euro and Japanese standards, as well as real world scenario of two vehicles colliding on the road. I remember reading this in one of the magazines, I believe it was either R&T or C&D. They had a picture of a 2600 lb. Civic sedan running into a 3900 lb. Legend.
Mark.
It's like the kettle calling the pot black.
Besides, per the editors, Edmunds will do a comparison test in the future ("We'll be doing a comparison test on this class of vehicles in the future, so look for those numbers to more accurately measure interior sound levels. — Ed.)
. From the first drives of the Accord and Mazda6 done by Edmunds, there's a good chance that they'll favor the Accord over the Mazda6.
Audi A4: $216
VW Passat: $315
Honda Accord: $339 (subjected to offset testing)
Toyota Avalon: $501
Toyota Camry: $528 (subjected to offset testing)
Nissan Maxima: $648
Nissan Altima: $805
Hyundai XG350: $830
Here are some numbers compiled for minivans...
Honda Odyssey: $274
Nissan Quest: $348
Ford Windstar: $509
Toyota Sienna: $583
Dodge Grand Caravan: $1,110
Mazda MPV: $1,284
These are average cost of repairing damage. Audi A4 was praised for its excellent bumper design but it actually suffered more damage than Accord's bumper under different circumstances. The Audi performed exceptionally well with flat barrier. However, it sustained more damage with 'angled' barrier compared to the Honda.
Oh, and the terrible ones from the latest test...
Mini: $800
Aerio: $1,131
I don't understand why would IIHS change testing standards if they thought a car's rear bumper was reinforced in the middle to sustain less damage? Why not do it all for all cars? I believe they did the same with Camry.
I think it was a pretty good call on IIHS's part. The 3 cars reinforced the middle of the rear bumper primarily to ace the IIHS test.
It wouldn't make any sense for them to do the same with other cars whose bumpers weren't reinforced in the middle - most likely because the results would've been the same, regardless of which part of the bumper was crashed.
"The Accord's secret has been a combination of solid construction, agile handling, optimal use of interior space, flawless ergonomics, and outstanding powertrailns."
"...the new Accord maintains these traditions."
"In the competitive world of midsize sedans,, it just doesn't get any better than this."
Accord's styling may not be appealing to you, I find it refreshing and in some ways, an improvement over the previous generation. If people are calling it 'Buicky', they must be the same ones who called 98 accord 'Buicky' as well. I remember those comments from five years ago when the Accord was redesigned and I bought my first Honda.
All I can say about them is, they have no sense of style, and that C&D (or anybody) could care less about what some people think of "style". This new Accord is far more detail oriented than any Accord in the past, my only disappointment is the higher cowl, thats it.
http://he.honda.ca/models/accord_sedan.asp
LX add Air, Power locks, Keyless, Speakers to DX. I think I can settle for DX if it had Air.
Any expert opinion?
DX Accords are VERY slow sellers. Most people want AC and by the time it's installed the price is close to an LX.
03 Accord EX-L Coupe 5-speed with spoiler, fog lights, splash guards, and paint protectant on a 36/15 lease with $637 out of pocket for $325 p/month.
What I did say is: 5 letters out of 6 from readers to the C&D Editor were down on Accord styling and one called it "Buicky". Maybe 5/6 is significant, maybe not. In my post above I also said that "perhaps C & D readers don't represent the reaction of the Honda buying public".
The DX in Canada has A/C, pwr windows/locks, 15" steel wheels w/wheelcovers.
The LX has Leather and alloys
Then there is the V6 DX and V6 LX (I think)
BTW, Honda's logo in Canada is on a red background, unlike on blue like in the US.
Dinu
Dinu
Even though I'm a Honda owner, I find the Accord/Camry/Altima to be all bloated, but the Mazda 6/Passat/Acura TSX more my style.
I think the Altima has a very good chance of aging well. With the exception of the rear taillights, its overall look is pretty generic.
I read C&D and I drive a Honda.
More often than not, you're going to see disappointed people writing letters, very few would send a letter of appreciation. That is how it works.
Said that, I find comments like 'Buicky' styling quite amusing.
Well, I would blame your eyes.
Again, styling is subjective, but only the Camry looks worse. The 6 and Altima are better looking.
Altima's front end... a mix of 96-00 Civic sedan and Passat.
Mazda6's rear end... '03 Corolla.
Accord's front end... a mix of 92-93 Accord (grill) and 96-00 Civic (head lamps) and S2000.
Accord's rear end... mix of 98-02 Accord and 92-95 Civic sedan.
2003 Accord looks more upscale (albeit rounded) than 98-02 Accord which was boxier (squarish), in and out. It does not possess, the boy-racer look that comes with, say, a Mazda6 and Corolla.
Wowee kazowee... I guess the "ugly styling" threads will move over to the Nissan forums. Man, is that thing homely!
Sorry for the OT...
Dinu
dinu01,
Thanks. You wouldn't know. :-)
The Accord is not the best looking car in the world. Nor is it the worst looking car in the world. It is handsome enough not to disuade someone who appreciates it's other virtues from buying it. The interior more than makes up for any problems I see with the exterior. And to me the coupe is one awesome car .. but then again, I am biased right now.
That Maxima is just wrong. Will have to see it in person before I call it ugly but that's the way I am leaning. And I don't even know if it's ugly .. it's just borrowed too many cues from the Altima but yet Nissan tried to make it look like it didn't.
I did see pics of the Mazda 3 wagon that will replace the P5 and was pleasantly surprised by those looks.
So who knows. I have to agree with you that the Accord's interior is nice, but I like the boy-racer look of the 6 (bring on the chrome exhaust tip, spoiler, skirts).
Dinu