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
http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2003- - 028
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The concern is: yes, I'm convinced the Accord chassis is remarkable, and will keep its structural integrity if it gets hit in the side (better than other cars of its type). But....that's small consolation if (during this collision) your head gets thrown at the side beam with intense force.
The first line of protecting the occupants is structural solidity and a good restraint system. They appear to have been addressed in the Accord already. Now, would it be better if Honda offered side curtain airbags on top of it? Probably. Would it be nice to have? Depends, and if one is willing to pay for it. Does that mean a car with curtain airbag is better even if it gives a little on the chassis? I don't think so.
Accord gets the best rating on side crash test because it managed to prevent those potential injuries that some others with curtain airbag did not. What consolation does a lower rating (meaning higher risk of injury) with curtain airbags provide against a higher rating without curtain airbag?
alpha01
However, with regard to your statment about the Altima, the stars are based on injury measures. Yes, structure plays a part in that, BUT the NHTSA frontal test is more demanding of the restraint system, while the IIHS offset test is far more demanding on a vehicles' structure, as the crash is highly concentrated on the driver's side. In that measure, the IIHS judged the Altima "Good", the highest rating, exactly the same as the Accord received.
Speaking of IIHS tests, I have not seen the side tests from them yet, but based on offset frontal impact, Accord is the best pick, Altima is not.
I just think its very hard to judge, based on injury measures, the solidity of a vehicles entire structure, especially if NHTSA does not include a "Structure" evaluation as does IIHS.
Much of the injuries are rated by either NHTSA and IIHS based on overall safety that the cars offer, so yes, a good restraint system would also help as it probably does to Accord. But, the other side to it is intrusion into the cabin when a collision occurs.
anonymousposts
3. If it's that big of a deal then glue a pillow to the side of your head. That'll protect you.
I was going to suggest a balloon, but you beat me to it.
i just read the latest CR. they aren't too keen on the element. gotta be the only honda they don't like!
A rare offering from Honda with love it or hate it emotions written all over. I can bet that was the point of Element in the first place. But then I hope to not have triggered this into an OT thread.
nosirrahg
I've noticed my wife's '03 4-cylinder Accord sedan had a speedometer that reads to 160mph. This seems optimistic to me, especially for a 4-cylinder. Does anyone know what the top speed might be in this car, and/or if it is electronically limited (governed) to a specific top speed?
It is rare for Hondas to be governed (some lower Civics may be exception as they were governed at 112 mph). Top speed can usually depend on the speed rating of the tires. S-rated tires (as in the low-end Civics) are safe to a top speed of 112 mph. T-rated tires are capable of safely reaching and sustaining 118 mph and so on. If a car is capable of going faster (assuming that aerodynamics and chassis stability are not an issue), but has S or T rated tires, the automaker will likely govern the car to a lower top speed.
In case of Accord, the four cylinder models may go past 130 mph, and V6 models should be capable of 145-147 mph. Once again, you can estimate that (not trying, I hope), by looking at the speed rating of the tires that came with the car.
So far nobody has given a good reason why Honda did not offer side curtain airbags WITH the side airbag option for $200-$300 more (side chest airbags are already an option), which seems like a very reasonable decision instead of keeping it exclusively for the EX-V6 model.
I don't take unnecessary risks, and I felt that my 2000 Accord with side airbags was very safe. I got the 2003 EX V6 for the total feature set... the side curtain airbags were a welcome addition, but far from a necessity, because I think Honda has done its homework with the safety cage.
Can we spare each other the broad brush characterizations and below-the-belt shots from both sides of this issue? That is, wearing balloons and "natural selection at its best". To butcher a phrase, "2 cheap shots don't make a right.". And as I've learned from Pat, cheap shots are not a good way to make your position seem credible.
2. Which of the two cars do you consider better, and why?
So far nobody has given a good reason why Honda did not offer side curtain airbags WITH the side airbag option for $200-$300 more
I'm not sure if this reason would be a good reason for you, but IMO, they will, when marketing dictates the need to. It could be offered on more trim levels with the usual 3rd-4th year makeover of the current model (MY2006) along with some cosmetic changes and addition of VP/SE model(s).
Until then, Honda is already offering one of the best rated car (by NHTSA and IIHS).
the rating that CR gave the element has nothing to do with emotions or love/hate styling. it has to do with poor ride...lousy back seats and marginal max weight loads.
"1. Can you explain why a car with Side Curtain Airbags gets 4-stars and another without gets 5"
Here's you're explanation:
The side impact STAR RATING, which you quote incessantly, DOES NOT take into account the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) number recorded on the dummy, EVEN THOUGH this number appears on the NHTSA website. The 2003 2-door Accord's side impact rear passenger HIC of 925 would earn ONLY 3 stars if this same number was measured in the frontal impact (HIC of 1000 is the threshold for earning two or few stars in the frontal test). THAT IS WHY CURTAINS WOULD BE A NICE OPTION for people who can't afford a $26,000 EX V6!
I dont know how to be any more explicit. (The NHTSA side impact test is flawed, IMO. If it werent, NHTSA themselves would not be looking to change it. In actuality, waaay more cars should be flunking NHTSAs test- likely including my own Camry w/o side airbags, the Altima, and the non-airbag Accord, as I have just demonstrated. But NHTSA, for whatever absurd reason, simply doesnt include HIC in the star eval- IMO, who cares if you have no chest injuries if your HIC is around 1000, indicating significant risk of severe or fatal injury.)
~alpha
The side impact STAR RATING, which you quote incessantly, DOES NOT take into account the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) number recorded on the dummy, EVEN THOUGH this number appears on the NHTSA website.
NHTSA Star rating is a consolidated rating of all injury measurements for that test. Where does the HIC come from if it is not measured? We can discover flaws in just about everything, or can use it to make a point for what it is. Euro NCAP also follows star rating, which, just like NHTSA rating, is also based on injury measurements.
Reference the rating for the 2002 Suzuki Grand Vitara, which ears 5 STARS, but indeed includes a side note which states "High risk of Head Injury", and then elaborates on the Details Page with "During the side impact test, the head of the left rear passenger dummy struck the side upper interior structure (“C-pillar”), causing a high head acceleration. Head impact events resulting in high accelerations have a higher likelihood of serious head trauma".
Excuse me, but if there is a "high risk of head injury", then how is, as you put it, "NHTSA Star rating is a consolidated rating of all injury measurements for that test"
???????????
(Also reference the myriad vehicles which receive high marks, mainly SUVs, in side crash, but are noted" High likelihood of thigh injury" and the frekin Tacoma, which got a high rating, DESPITE A FUEL LEAK!!!!)
You may not believe it, robertsmx, but I do use my head in daily activities (thinking, eating, speaking, etc.). Isnt it a bit misleading to give rate a car 5 stars, even though that car inflicts serious head injury upon its occupants?
~alpha
Sometimes it's best to a) agree to disagree and/or b) just ignore messages that tend to raise the blood pressure.
Points can be made without directly addressing the poster of such a message.
My Final point: I would prefer a car that protects me from head to toes, with or without all the airbags around. Let us see how Accord Sedan performs in side crash tests, until then, 5-stars the coupe yielded would be better for me than cars that have more airbags but have increased chance of serious injuries.
Has there been any talk from Honda that in the new 2004 model they would change the hinge type.
Also is there an email address that I would be able to send my question to.
Thank you for any input to this question.
Since I am in the process of narrowing my selection down I will have more questions after this.
Any suggestion on possible locations on Long Island New York?
Thanks fellow Honda owners!
Since the 2003 Accord is the first year of a newly designed body. I believe that it would be an exercise in futility to expect that Honda would make such a drastic change in the trunk hinge configuration after one model year. In fact, I wouldn't expect them to even consider such a design change until the next major body change four or five years from now.
Do you have iput regarding the storage capacity.
According to www.honda.com, the sedan trunk holds 14 cubic feet, the coupe trunk holds 12.8 cubic feet.
The trunk hinge design is one that Honda has used in it's sedans for many years.
I was impressed at how tight the Altima seemed though. Rental cars have a tough life and after 22K miles this car didn't have a rattle or squeak of any kind and everything worked. The interior materials seemed to be holding up well also but over all the interior appearance/materials seemed cheaper than the Accord or Camry.
You could buy worse cars than the Altima but you could also buy better cars for the same price. The Accord is still the pick of the litter in IMHO.
One question: If I read my manual correctly, Honda doesn't recommend changing oil in the 4-cylinder until 6 months or 5,000 miles (based on the "severe" schedule). That seems like a long time to me; am I missing something, or is it really okay to run that long without changing oil (especially at break-in, when there's apt to be more debris floating around in there)?
The vast majority of my customers DO NOT SEEM TO CARE if their Accord has side curtain airbags.
This may seem strange to someone obsessed with safety as you seem to be.
For what ever reason, safety seems to be way down the list of priorities for most shoppers.
Of course, I do run in to a few, not many, where every other question has to do with safety.
But, I would guess that it won't be too many years before the interiors of every car are one giant air bag.
Me too.
Also, what you're saying is the NHTSA doesn't factor in the HIC with their star rating. This is very flawed, but I assume they did this so they wouldn't have to re-rate all the previous cars they've rated. And then it would throw off "comparison" shopping for safety (looking at a car 3 years old vs a new one - the new one might have a worse star rating if HIC was included only on the new one, giving people a false sense of security on their "old" car).
Alpha01, you provided good information about how the NHTSA comes up with their star rating.
I always wondered how Ford got 5 stars out of their Windstar minivan, which we all know is pretty low on the food chain.
-Craig
It is a step in the right direction that for the newest tests, NHTSA is including the HIC measurement (as in the case with the Accord 2-door). But it will take a very savvy consumer to dig that far and see that even though the frontal impact STAR RATING includes HIC and Chest Load figures measurements, the side impact only takes into account the TTI, NOT HIC. As an example, I again cite the Accord 2-Door rear passenger's 5 star rating, despite an HIC of 925, which, were it considered, would yield very near a two star rating (3 at best) which indicates "high likelihood of severe or fatal injury" (how Consumer Reports calls it).
NHTSA plays itself off as this outstanding organization of the Government, looking to provide consumers with information- but are doing so correctly?
~alpha
I doubt. There are advantages both ways. Struts will save space but hinges last longer, and are easier to operate upon. It is also easier to power hinges, if the need be, one of the reasons it is likely that you will see hinges in expensive cars that come with power trunk. I would like to know if Accord uses the special hinge setup (like it is in TSX) that actually moves towards the cabin instead of downwards. Struts probably made more sense in vehicles like Element and CRV. Also, in Japanese Accord Wagon, the rear hatch is powered, and it appears to use hinges as well.
nosirrahg
If I read my manual correctly, Honda doesn't recommend changing oil in the 4-cylinder until 6 months or 5,000 miles (based on the "severe" schedule).
I would follow the manual especially since it is that specific. They must have a reason.
outrun
I think what you're saying is that you'd rather have a broken foot than a broken head.
Don't forget the thoracic cage. Here is what the NHTSA says about side crash ratings:
"Side-collision star ratings indicate the chance of a life threatening chest injury for the driver, front seat passenger, and the rear seat passenger."
Which means, a 5-star rated car is better, with 5% or lower risk in the measured category.
"Head injury is not measured in these tests."
Interesting, isn't it?
alpha01
I again cite the Accord 2-Door rear passenger's 5 star rating, despite a theoretically near "fatal" HIC of 925.
So, a 4-star rating (going just by HIC, nothing else) is near fatal. Yes, that is what 925 HIC would correspond to. If 4-star is so dangerous as you just made it out to be, should we start talking about 3-stars, and cars that get overall protection (note: against life threatening injuries) of only 4-stars?
I actually corrected my statement upon review of NHTSA graphs-900 plus is usually two stars or max 3 in the frontal.
Another example- the 03 Hyundai Accent, while it only earns 2 stars for rear passenger based on its TTI, the HIC of 1260 should really kncok it down to one star, but instead its just a footnote.
Please note that I am not personally attacking you, or anyone else, OR the Accord. All I am saying is that the NHTSA side impact star rating does NOT take into accout Head Injury, and therefore, is misleading. You originally stated that the star ratings take into account all measurements, which is erroneous with respect to side impacts, and I simply looked to correct that. I will completely agree that a strong structure is very important- but if side curtain airbags were as trivial as you seem to make them, we could all drive 1989 Volvo 240DLs and be satisfied.
~alpha
That assumes that passive safety is your #1 concern, overriding all others, and you're willing to forego all of the advances in active safety, comfort, performance, etc. that have come since that car's heyday. I'd be very concerned about the advances in the active safety... nothing protects you from injury better than not being in an accident in the first place.
The supply theory is shot since VW has been putting them in their cars for years.
The "design" theory is shot since Honda is putting them into the very same Accord, but only at the EX/V6 level.
The "V6 is faster" theory is shot since the LX/V6 doesn't get them.
Back in the Volvo 240 days, there were NOT millions of gas guzzling SUVs on the road, with their drivers gabbing on the cellphone, not paying attention to the road ahead. The times have changed DRASTICALLY in the past 10 years.
I would truly feel unsafe in a car without at least front air bags these days, meanwhile I drove a '90 Honda CRX Si without any air bags for 4 years (from '90 to '94).
NHL goaltenders used to play without a mask back in it's early years. Has the puck changed since then? Now it's mandatory for all player to wear helmets, nevermind the goalie wearing pads and masks up the ying yang.
-Craig
If they can offer Navigation as an option, they can surely offer curtain air bags as an option.
Heck, they should raise the price of the car $300 and INCLUDE curtain air bags across the board.
-Craig
And the top-line model will probably come with a new safety feature that we don't know about yet, and the other models won't, and a similar discussion will start all over again.
You either believe curtain airbags are important or you don't, but I would bet that they'll be standard on most cars soon enough.