Older Honda Accords

1226227229231232389

Comments

  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Um - that recall article is over a year old.
  • mikek37mikek37 Member Posts: 411
    My bad.
  • stragerstrager Member Posts: 308
    Looks are subjective, but regardless of dimensions, the Accord looks really bloated like a Buick, IMO. As someone said earlier, the Mazda6 looks designed for the college crowd, the Accord for the 50+ age group. No offense meant to Accord owners.
  • anonymouspostsanonymousposts Member Posts: 3,802
    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I find the 03 Accord classy and believe that it will age well versus the racer boy look of the 6 which already looks dated. Same goes for the Camry, it may not turn heads now but if you still own the car in 8 years you won't wonder what the heck you were thinking when you bought it.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,700
    Comparing the accord to a Buick is touchy. The Buick looks like it has a trunk and
    doesn't look like a Corolla on steroids with a rear that has already been pushed in
    by a collision. The proportions just _don't_ look right. Earlier Accords had a pleasing balance
    and aged well.
    I don't think this one's going to make it no matter how often the cheerleaders
    keep saying it looks great.
    Camry is balanced and has proportions including a trunk...

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • lichtronimolichtronimo Member Posts: 212
    I didn't like any of the generation changes except from the 3rd to 4th. However, the appearance of each successive generation grew on me to be quite attractive especially over time. The same is true of the new 7th generation. There is one in a park and ride lot I go past every day, and I find the overall look very progressive. Given the Mazda6's similarity to the 1st generation Audi A4, I'd agree that its look is dated and that it may be more of the "conformist" choice than the Accord.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    "I'd agree that its look is dated and that it may be more of the "conformist" choice than the Accord."

    So True.
  • rcf8000rcf8000 Member Posts: 619
    I was recently shopping Accord against Camry. I really like the Accord styling--even the rear, which has taken a lot of flak. However, in the end I bought a Camry XLE. It's about the same price as the Accord EXL, but has a lot more luxurious interior, a lot more luxury features, and a smoother, quieter ride. I did like the handling of the Accord better, though, and its 5 speed transmission is a big plus. A lot of people have complained about the Accord's ride, but I was pleasantly surprised in that regard; I thought it was just fine. I had some driver seat comfort issues with the Accord.
  • talon95talon95 Member Posts: 1,110
    Funny how when Infiniti and Audi go with the shortened trunk look (G35 and A4/A6), people are falling all over themselves to rave about how edgy their styling is, but when Honda takes a similar approach with the Accord, it looks like "it was pushed in by a collision".
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    i think the Accord is one of the classier looking sedans on the road. to me, it is a bigger version of the TSX, especially from the side. with my EX-V6 wheels, it really has the TSX look. crisp lines. the Camry trunk is definitely bloated, though the front end is quite pretty, if they would only place the Toyota "T" in the CENTER of the grill. now, it looks like Toyota just throws the T symbol on as an afterthought.

    and, imo, the camry interior is awful. awful fake wood, no proper waterfall style console, and to reach the HVAC/Radio, you have to reach across the car.

    the 6 is good looking, but it still looks like a Mazda. i am not sure, that at the end of the day, Mazda does anything BETTER than anyone, except for the Miata vs. the MR2.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    i agree, BMW's 7 series and upcoming 5 series all look just like the Accord to me....of course, some people are saying that the 7 isn't selling because of that very fact.
  • talon95talon95 Member Posts: 1,110
    I'd have to disagree that the Camry XLE has a "lot more luxurious interior" when compared to the Accord EX-L. I think they both have quite luxurious interiors for their class... essentially a wash, IMO. I chose the Accord for its sportier chassis and also because I prefer the Accord's more sculpted dashboard to the Camry's "flat expanse" approach.
  • talon95talon95 Member Posts: 1,110
    I think the big problem with the styling on those cars is that the trunk lid looks like it's sitting on the car rather than being integrated into the cars' lines... at least the Accord doesn't share that questionable styling cue.
  • emaleemale Member Posts: 1,380
    i don't think the accord looks anything like a bmw. anyway, all honda would have to do to fix the accord's styling would be to fit nicer looking taillights on the car. not too hard a task...and it'll probably be done for '05...?
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    I agree. The tail lights were done well on the Accord coupe but some how Honda screwed up the sedan. I otherwise thing the car looks pretty good.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    i don't really complain about BMW's new approach either. at least the cars will start to have personality. the black 325Ci that sits in my garage is often mistaken for a Civic coupe! the only thing that makes a real difference are the bigger wider tires, longer hood, and chrome around windows. of course, the inline 6 and suspension matter too, haha. i think BMW started to realize that they needed to take some chances and actually STYLE the cars. i think they went too far with the Z4 though. what is that supposed to be???

    the Accords rear lights will probably change in 05 or 06 - they always update the Accords lights about 2 or 3 years in.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    the coupe version has issues too. the doors are too big, no body side molding. they look too cheap. and the taillights are a MB design trademark. Honda must be paying big time to the German makes. the swiped the 5 series side mirrors, and the MB tail lights for the coupe!
  • emaleemale Member Posts: 1,380
    justin,

    are you saying that the japanese have a hard time being original??.... :)
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    never thought of it that way. i think they are definitely original with regard to engines. but, perhaps they do like to be inspired by German cars, styling-wise. which isn't an awful thing.

    i must say my 82 Tercel had a style all its own though! ;)
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    " japanese have a hard time being original"

    Not as bad as Hyundia/Kia.
  • tblazer503tblazer503 Member Posts: 620
    that is true, but I was comparing the 4cyl models... that is why I brought up the EX-L, and why I didn't mention the Leather, dual-zone climate control, 4-way passenger seat, home-link system, exterior temp sensor, and side curtain airbags in the comparison.....

    The 4cyl LX does come with the 15" wheels, and another difference is the drums in the LX on the rear vs the 4 wheel disc brakes. Unfortunately, akasrp did not specify the V6 or 4cyl model, and just wanted to know the differences, and since akasrp is a "DX and LX man" the v6 does not come in a DX trim, so I figured 4cyl was the way to go....

    The Les Schwab around here will give me about 65% of their cost(why would they pay me more than they can buy a brand new one for w/ a warranty?). for this tire, they pay about $40-50 for it, so I get a ~$100 credit on my purchase of $600-1000.... that's half the cost of the upgrade from LX to EX, and there is no real resale value difference for having "rims."

    I did check my brochure. =o)
  • berbelberbel Member Posts: 167
    talon:

    I agree wholeheartedly with your above posts,esp.
    your comments about the German v. Japanese trunk
    styling cues. My son had an A4 and traded it for
    a G35 so I am particularly acquainted with both
    of these cars.

    lelandhendricks:

    Since you asked............

    The Mille Miglia wheels I bought are the MM 11-3's.
    They are available in 16x7.5 and naturally are the
    proper fitment for my EX V-6. I gravitate toward
    5 spoke wheels as there is plenty of room between
    the spokes to keep the insides of the wheels free
    of that nasty brake dust and tar. (Yes, I'm anal
    about those sorts of things and freely admit that!)
    I had a set of Turanza LS-V's mounted on them. Good
    luck with your search!

    berbel
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    "...and the MB tail lights for the coupe!"

    If you look closely, the Accord Coupe's rear is an evolution of the first generation Acura TL. Similar shape to the tail lamp and similar horizontal crease running through the middle. Just a little more rounded (if not as much as the 2001-2003 Acura CL, which actually followed the same styling cues). Oh, and there is a little S2000 as well (notice the shoulder line and how it runs into the tail lamps).
  • akasrpakasrp Member Posts: 170
    Yes, I was comparing 4cyl LX to 4cyl EX and specifically wondering about sound (cabin) insulation.
    Thanks to all for your input. I do believe, especially with the Accord, the step up from LX to EX is EXcellent bang-for-the-buck.
    Am hoping the I4 will not leave me feeling the need for power (driving a 97 V6 Camry now). I4 will be a bit more agile and fuel efficient.
    And it may be a moot point to some, but almost all I4s here in SoCal are Made In Japan (all V6 in Marysville).
    My Made In Japan 87 DX 5MT Accord Hatch gave me the best 100K problem free miles of any car I have ever owned. Still looked showroom when I sold it 12 years later!

    damn Hondas get in your blood ;-)

    srp
  • ken972ken972 Member Posts: 162
    HI, I just went from a 99 LE 4cyl camry to a 04 EXV6 Accord. I would definitly suggest you do a good test drive of the 4cyl accord. I just went froma 4cyl to a V6 and dont know how I would go back to a 4cyl. Im giving up a little efficiency but enjoying the smoothness of the V6. Im not sure power is the issue as much as refinement. Though the power is fun. I havent looked yet..but a v6 accord may be more fuel efficient as your 97 Camry.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    ...back to back. bought the V6 Accord. four cylinder would have been fine with the 5 speed manual, but i require automatic for my daily driver, and it was just too slow/noisy/rough.

    i say, if you are shopping for the 4 cylinder, DO NOT test drive the V6 :)
  • mikek37mikek37 Member Posts: 411
    Thats what happen to me too Justin. I drove the 4 cylinder, thought it was nice, then hoped into the V6, after that I will never buy a 4 cylinder again!

    Why not the 4 for me:
    1) Yes its refined but its noisy
    2) Not as smooth as the V6
    3) Most importantly its not as quick

    But you cant go wrong iwwth either engine!
  • ken972ken972 Member Posts: 162
    funny, i agree completely with both of you. I test drove a v6 tnen a couple of weeks later drove another one. For the heck of it I asked the saleman to let me drive a 4cyl. I just wanted to make sure I needed the 6. I got out and pretty much had the same 1,2.3 opinion mike just stated. And echo what justin says...if you really, really have to have a 4cyl and are not on the 4cyl/v6 fence at alll..it would probably be best to keep your butt out of a v6.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    i think the reason i thought the 4 cylinder was noisy and rough is because i had to keep it high in the rev range to get it to move. the 6 cylinder is obviously easier on your gas pedal foot, because you just tap it and it flies.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    i would LOVE to get my Mom in a basic Accord LX 4 cylinder. but as it is, she won't drive anything less than a 6 cylinder. so since she won't spend Honda V6 money, she is looking at Mazda 6s and her old standby, Grand Am (gasp!)....
  • mikek37mikek37 Member Posts: 411
    Exactly Justin, its only louder when you rev it around 3k or higher.
  • ken972ken972 Member Posts: 162
    which is where i would have it most of the time..just not for me. v6 is effortless..you tap the gas..like you say...and it goes
  • stringreenstringreen Member Posts: 17
    I have an 03 Accord V6 Coupe that came with Bridgestones. I thought the tire was wonderful - quiet, cornered wonderfully, etc., except when you hit a pothole you need a new tire. A bubble forms on the sidewall, and now, this is the second 200 dollar tire. Has anyone else found this problem?
  • jebinc1jebinc1 Member Posts: 198
    ...drove both back to back. Had a loaner I4 auto for a week before my EX V6 w/Navi arrived. I4 was plenty peppy even with the auto. It was also lighter and easier to throw around. The V6 is awesome, however for power, quietness and smoothness. I get 27MPG (60% highway) and over 30MPG (90%+ highway) on my V6.
  • anonymouspostsanonymousposts Member Posts: 3,802
    I find my 03 EX-L manual to be just as quick as my 01 EX V6. Against the 03 V6 I am sure the V6 is the faster/smoother one but people in the 4 cylinder Accord are hardly in a penalty box. It's one of the smoothest 4 cylinders I have ever driven with great linear power when mated to the manual.

    I can't tell you guys how much I dread selling my coupe. It's going to be a semi-sad day in my household.
  • emaleemale Member Posts: 1,380
    stringreen,

    YES, i had to replace one of my front tires already too!! however, i hit a pretty darn big hole...now i take it a little easier...and watch a little closer.
  • dardson1dardson1 Member Posts: 696
    The 6 is mighty fine and at 240 hp it should in a car this size. What surprised me was the 4. It's not as smooth, quiet, or quick as the 6, but it does a very fine (and way more than adequate) job of moving the Accord around.
  • akasrpakasrp Member Posts: 170
    Drove the AT 4 banger (04 EX). Quite impressed with the responsiveness (power and handling) but found while merging, lane-changing on freeway, climbing hills (salesman had it just redlined while getting me up over a freeway pass as he drove off the lot) I was often revvving very high (5K+) to get up and get moving moving. I was not racing mind you, just doing what I do everyday. Not that high revs are a problem - just not what I'm used to. Noise of the 4 revving is very muted.
    Again owning a V6 Camry now and having recently driven the (Wild!) 03 V6 Accord Coupe - I think I'd be hard-pressed to move back to a 4...
    That being said that I4/5speed AT set up is impressive - great little slushbox and it does feel lighter on its feet (especially in the nose) than the 6.
    FWIW, I found the headroom in the EX with sunroof marginal. I'm only 6' and had to take off my cap as it brushed the headliner...I'd hate to lose that tilt roof...

    2¢: In any flavor, the Accord is a steal...

    srp
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    With 175hp, the 4 banger is best for most people. Better mileage and plenty of power.
  • abc44abc44 Member Posts: 11
    To all,

    In message #11673, qgu described a Honda recall. I received the same notice from Honda automobile division, Torrance, CA. The letter is entitled:"Product update: Intake air breather and no-reverse condition." The content is the same as what described in message#11673. I wonder if anyone knows what is the work to be done. For the intake breather pipe, can I inspect by myself? As of the 2nd problem, is it serious enough for me to spend the time/effort? Our local Honda dealer is apparently incompetent. Not only the receptionist doesn't know about this recall, she said they have open time slots the very next day --- but still fail to tell me that the work would be done in one day. I am afraid to send in a perfectly running new car to this garage. Any advise?
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    The new BMW line of Chris Bangle styled cars looks gimmicky and overstyled. The 99 3 Series was sweet looking in the color black. The new BMW's looks like Pontiac's of the 90's.

    As for the Accord Coupe the 98-02 Accord Coupe was sleek. The new one's alright but the 98-02 had a good thing going for it with the standard rims and the timeless look of the car.

    As for the Mazda 6 you either love or you hate it. It looks good with out being in your face kinda look to it sort of like the 96-97 Accord was styled. As for the 6 looking like an 4 the A4 is "elegant" its not "sporty" like the 6. The 6 does not look like the 96-01 A4 at all. Those 2 cars go in different styling directions. As for the 6 looking like a Corolla the 6 came out before the Corolla even came out. All manufacturer's copy off of each other in some way or another any way.

    The Camry I don't think I will ever buy one. I prefer the older models to the new one's anyway.
  • justinjustin Member Posts: 1,918
    the 4 in the Accord is 160 hp for 2003 anyway..
  • jvkalrajvkalra Member Posts: 98
    That's what I remember some auto magazine calling the Accord. Honda wanted to give the Accord's interior a European flavor to compete with the Passat, and also attract the mainstream American buyer. Maybe that's why they gave it the Buick look at the back and a Japanese look in the front.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    See thats what I was saying before how Honda took styling cues from an American Car to attract American buyers. I don't like that. The Accord got to where it was by being a Japanese Car inside and out. Now with the 03 they took some of the Japanese styling out of it to appeal to people who like Gm and Ford. Honda has to remember in the last 20 years the Accord has sold well because it is a Japanese Car not a German or American Car.

    Now they got the TSX that looks Japanese that takes the spot of the old Accord(pre 03.) The TSx costs too much money for what Honda is asking in my opinion. Honda gets the best of both worlds: appeal to Domestic Big 3 buyers and make extra profit by selling TSX's and putting more Acura branded cars on the road. I don't like that move at all. It was a business decision and thats all it was by Honda with the Accord/TSx thing.

    The Accord is still a good car but don't like that business decision that Honda made.

    I'm just stating my opinion and I'm not mad at anybody on this board.
  • jcrobertsjcroberts Member Posts: 54
    I am the happy owner of a 2003 Accord and 1999 Odyssey. I would like to know where I can find on the WEB a listing of Honda recall and extended warranty notices. My service manager tells me there is no extended warranty when I have been told by other reliable sources, another Honda service manager, that there is a extended warranty (8yrs or 80,000 miles) on the Odyssey for an EGR system problem. Thanks for your help.
    I have been a long time Honda owner of a 1987 Accord which we gave up for the Odyssey. I can't say enough about how much I like our newest arrival, the 2003 Accord. Even my wife freely gives up her dearly beloved Odyssey when I need it and drives the Accord.
  • jebinc1jebinc1 Member Posts: 198
    ..pair of Hondas
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Ooops, I think I was thinking about the Altima.

    160 is still lots for most.
  • anonymouspostsanonymousposts Member Posts: 3,802
    we finally made our decision while we were at the dealership.

    There is now a 2004 EX-L automatic Accord in silver parked in our driveway. Already love this car. Went in with the intention of buying a 2003 Element 4WD but after a test drive with 3 people and the AC on decided to give the Accord sedan another look. Glad we did. It made parting with my 03 EX-L 5-speed coupe that much easier.

    LOVE the XM Radio. That will be an easy $10 per month to spend. Also like the ride, engine, space, safety, and even the automatic transmission. It's a major improvement over previous Honda automatics.

    We paid $22,945 including decklid spoiler, fog lights, splash guards, and fenderwell trim. Got $17,100 for my 03 coupe with 15,600 miles. Not bad for a black car that happens to be a stick in Atlanta.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    You may not have been been too far off by quoting 175 HP for Accord I-4. A few dynos suggest that the engine may be underrated.
  • dardson1dardson1 Member Posts: 696
    Not sure what you mean by Japanese styling. Almost everything I can think of from Japan for the last 30 years has been very conservative.....designed from the inside out instead of from the outside in (too often typical of American cars). Toyota/Lexus and Honda/Acura have been consistently criticized for bland cars. Both seem to be addressing that complaint for better or worse.
         I'm pretty sure both will continue to do well as long as they make very good cars that hold up better and have less problems than American or German cars. We all buy them for their bullet-proof reputations and not because they're the lastest and greatest fashion statement.
         IMHO Toyota is making the ugliest bunch of vehicles in their history. That high belt line, slab side, monochrome look that prevails across their line from the tip top Lexus to the homely Echo will test their ability to sell great vehicles no matter how butt-ugly.
          Honda has remained loyal to their conservative roots until now. Their latest generation certainly looks "contempo" but I prefer the old Honda that made great cars that didn't try too hard look cool. I also prefer the Honda that made evolutionary moves instead of quatum leaps. We shall see. Perhaps they know exactly what they're doing.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

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.