Older Honda Accords

filod

bodydouble,
one of my subjective reasons for buying a car is that I usually buy one that is on its first or at least second model year. That way, I have at least 4 to 5 years to enjoy the way it looks until they come up with the new style.

This is the best year to buy where most of my choices have the new model year out… the Accord (fall), Camry, Altima.. usually in that order of preference depending on the budget…

If you were to ask me I will love to own the Acura TL S type, way beyond my budget because we need to have two cars in the family. And even if I can afford now, I think I will have to wait for the new style (I maybe wrong but I think the current one, with of course a lot of modifications in between years, came out after few months that the current Accord came out)

jfunk

Glad to see I wasn't the only one who felt this way. And by the way your post is perfectly rational/and or reasonable, if that makes me a tyrannical, contemptuous beast (like you) so be it, I don't care.
Everyone is perfectly entitled to disagree (or agree) with as much or more fervor, so long as it remains civilized.
It's soooo easy to criticize, and I for one am sick and tired of all the wishy-washy, whining, and complaining- "It doesn't do this" "It doesn't do that" "See, I told you it'd suck". We are so spoiled by what we have today and people are utterly unappreciative.(Subjective styling aside)
Admittedly, I am initially somewhat disappointed with the shape of the new coupe, that is IF it is in fact accurate. Regardless, I WILL reserve judgment until I see it in person and evaluate it quantitatively, that is in REALITY.

diploid

I have a strong suspicion (and hope) that it's not accurate. Never before has Honda given any photos of a soon to be released vehicle so many months ahead of time.

civicw

"Everyone is perfectly entitled to disagree (or agree) with as much or more fervor, so long as it remains civilized". I agree 100% with that statement.

But repeated suggestions that posters (likely Honda owners) who are critical, or otherwise dissatisfied with Honda for whatever reason, should take their money elsewhere are unnecessary and detract from the discussion.

diploid

jrct9454

Let me pose this question to this group of Honda enthusiasts:

When was the last time Honda introduced a Civic or an Accord whose styling was welcomed as a refreshing change, and enthusiastically embraced by one and all as a real style-setter?

And that's not an invitation to tell me which of their cars in the last 30 years was your favorite - the question is which of these was embraced at the TIME OF ITS INTRODUCTION as an original, trend-setting design?

In other words, does anybody ever celebrate the introduction of a new Accord as a great breakthrough in automotive style? If not, why are the expectations any different this time?

tanveerm

Hi all,

I'm in a bit of a dillema hear and wanted to get some expert opinions over here. I am trying to decide between buying a 2002 EX-V6 sedan or waiting for the '03. Styling is not an issue for me. Cost and content is. So here are my questions..

...anyone have any comments on what improvements to expect in terms of safety/luxury/mechanical features? I have already heard of the likely increase of 15-20 hp and possible increase in the V6 size. Anything new beyond that? ANy new standard gizmo's to look forward to?

...If I go into the local dealership in September, should I expect a waiting period of a few months for the V6 models? Here in Toronto, there's a 2-3 month wait for a V6 Altima this summer. I'ld hate to have to wait till Christmas.

...How is pricing on new Honda models on introduction? i.e. should I expect to be paying MSRP? Anyone have experience in a similar situation e.g. new Camry last year, current model Civic/Pilot/Oddysey when they were released?

Thanks in advance for any tips.

jrct9454

If your primary interest is in the V6, and the appearance of the car is not paramount one way or another, the economics certainly suggest buying a 2002 model. Here in the States, the dealers are currently getting $750 per Accord in incentives, and there are subvented financing rates available.

And yes, your concerns about early availability of the V6 certainly have some historic basis - when we went shopping for our '98, it was 6 months after introduction and the V6s were still scarce, with limited color choices and no price flexibility. By contrast, we got an LX 4 at that point at $700 over invoice.

A couple of other things to consider, though:

-V6 engine manufacturing capacity in NA has greatly increased since the intro of the last-gen Accord. There may not be the initial scarcity that was apparent last time.

-The 4 cyl car is likely to be a lot more lively than the current gen car, and quieter to boot, perhaps obviating the need to go to the 6.

-Price flexibility usually comes quickly in this class of car, but quickly is not instantly. If you can wait a few months, dealer supplies will build up and the usual rules will apply. If you must have a car in the first 90 days, expect to pay for the privilege. Certainly in the US, the new Camry VERY quickly became just another commodity as far as pricing was concerned - it took less than 4 months for that to be true here in Calif.

-Canada may be a different sort of market - can't say...but around here pricing will have normalized no more than 3-4 months after introduction. The current market continues to be soft, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

ickes_mobile

Honda's are known for conservative design. There known for conservative everything. The regional ads tout Hondas as being known for Reliability, Safety, and high resale value. They don't mention performance. In general, I think it is that design philosphy that makes them attractive for long term ownership, because they don't appear too dated in five years. Imagine if you will being the owner of a 1996-1999 Taurus! Honda has from time to time gone out on a styling limb - the last two Preludes, the Intergra, the second generation Legend, the CRX, and now the Element.

I think some of the caution or early critisim about the '03 Accord is that the spy photo of the coupe exhibits neither the timeless design of past Hondas nor does it appear to be an exciting new direction, such as established by Audi. It looks like a hodgepodge of elements taken from other cars including Nissan, Chrysler, Ford, Mercedes and others.

jrct9454

...and design, are all in the eyes of the beholder. Vive la difference....

civicw

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I am looking for distinctive styling (not any big styling breakthrough) that adds just a little pizzaz to the traditional conservative Honda look. After driving evolutionary Hondas for many years, the styling becomes boring because I've taken the reliability and quality for granted. Evolutionary styling is fine for someone escaping from an unreliable Ford, but what's there to motivate current Honda owners to buy another one?

tanveerm

Good to hear that I'm not being paranoid about pricing and availability in the first few months after model introduction. I guess paying MSRP or waiting a few months is a decision I'll need to to consider. I am sure I'll want a V6. I think it would be worthwhile to have the extra power for the Canadian winters, and my current Accord (a '93) is pretty loud at highway speed. I'ld like to be able to cruise on highways without worrying about the exertion on a 4-cylinder.

jrct9454

...and then I'll stay out of any further discussion about the way the car looks.

To answer the rhetorical question in the post above, if previous Accord customers could only be motivated to buy a new one if it looks snazzier than the previous car, then it seems they would have a hard time peddling 2 million of these things over a typical 5 year model run.

Every buyer brings a slightly different set of priorities to the table every time they go out to look for a new car. If new, edgier styling is what you need to be motivated to buy, and you don't see it in Car A, one presumes you'll do the rational thing and get something else. I can only speak for myself [not the other 1.99 million who bought copies of the current gen car], and for me, it was the combination of the way the car drove on the road, the interior functionality, the useable trunk, the promise of excellent reliability, and the extra edge in handling that it had over the Camry in particular...these are the things that sealed the deal for the '98. For the '01 V6, I was looking for extra refinement and a bit more ride comfort for long trips, and got what I wanted. In neither case was the appearance of the car vs the competition [Camry, 626, Altima, Sablelaurus] any significant factor at all. I like the way most of the Accords of the past 20 years have looked - I think some have aged better than others [disappearing headlights have proven to be a silly fad], but none of them were knock-dead gorgeous or eyesores. They are what they are.

In sum, sure I respect everyone's right to hold whatever opinions they want on this topic - I guess I'm just a bit taken aback by the presumption that ANYTHING in this class of car is going to make a big leap in the styling dept. The closest thing I can think of is the really strong difference between the old Altima and the new one - but even the new one has its critics, and I wouldn't buy one because the interior is truly below par in execution, and the on-road experience [beyond the extra hp] is actually nothing special. There ARE people who are buying this car because of the way it looks - I respect that. I doubt that Honda expects its repeat sales to be driven by styling differences - I think their main worry is the opposite, that they don't want to lose sales because they strayed too far from what the market sees as the norm.

Have they made a mistake with the '03? Is it a missed opportunity? I have my opinion, and apparently it's a minority view, that the new car looks great and will sell like mad, as usual. Just my opinion, and like any view about art and its commercial appeal, worth less than a cup of coffee at Starbucks, I'm sure...

OK, I'm done on how the car looks. Now I would like a lot more info on drivetrains, features, and how it drives. August, I guess...

ickes_mobile

Well said. I agree with most of your points and we bought our Accord for the overall goodness of the car. Much of the same applies to C&D picking the Accord first in a recent comparo. Honda's known for this almost to a fault. In reviewing the new Pilot, Automobile described the vehicle's appearance because the word styling would suggest more effort than had been applied.

However, just because its a mass market product and will sell millions over its life, does not mean that the subjective qualities of design cannot be discussed. Nor is wrong to hope for something well designed (not necessarily flashy) such as the 1998-2001 Passat, which was a major advance in mid-size styling and quality materials.

Design is about the only point of discussion we have here, especially given the lack of information currently available on the new car. My earlier comment was more about the rather unpolite tone of the poster's message. I've given up reading many of the discussions here because its so much of that type of rude back and forth.

I must also say that I agree with you that this is enought about this...

bodydouble

I don't think the new Accord would have significantly more power (at least for the V6). But it likely would offer the availability of a couple of worthwhile features, namely a 5-speed auto transmission and side head curtain airbags. If those are important to you, then you may want to wait. We went thru the same debate and ended up buying the SE-V6 for several reasons. First, the SE-V6 is a heck of a value. Secondly, the current model is a known quantity. Thirdly, we want to avoid the 1st-year syndrome with the new one. And finally, if the new one turns out to be great, we can always trade up in a couple of years.

stantont

Just about a year ago, I went looking for a new car to replace a 1991 Taurus SHO that was leaking oil, coolant, and Freon after about 140,000 miles (bought used, and the previous owner apparently didn't believe in preventive maintenance).

I put together a short list of: Accord, Camry, Passat, Taurus, Maxima, Subaru Legacy. I fully expected to buy the Passat after reading all the rave reviews in the car mags, and having a few family and friends who owned them. One afternoon I went out and test drove the Passat turbo4 with stick, the Maxima v6 with stick, and the Taurus v6 with auto. The wife hated the Maxima, and the Taurus felt a bit crude by comparison. The Passat was sweet: good ride and handling, sweet turbomotor, good performance and that farfergnugen (sp?) "feel". The only annoyances were a slight "bog" off the line until the turbo spooled up; and in 5th gear at 75-80 mph, it felt like it wanted one more overdrive gear. On the way home, I said, "I guess we should go back and get the Passat". My wife (wise woman!) replied, "Wait till tomorrow and drive the other three."

So the next day I drove the Accord EX V6 for several miles (freeway, city streets, and winding road), then drove a new Camry v6 over the exact same course. On the curves where I tossed the Accord around it it felt like it wasn't trying, the Camry rolled the tires over and squealed and REALLY didn't want to be driven like that. I gave the Camry keys back and told the salesman it felt like a Japanese Buick. Thanks, but no thanks. Finally I drove a Legacy wagon over the same route. The practical side of me said the Subaru would be best for carrying bikes and stuff, but that same wise wife said, "You are emotionally attached to your cars. Which one grabbed you and felt like you belonged in it?" "The Accord", I said. "Then that's an easy choice", she replied. "I like it, too."

The practical side of me said the Accord was as quiet as, or quieter than, the Camry at highway speeds (though not in town), it carried all the stuff in the interior and trunk we needed for even long vacation trips with bikes, etc. The interior was very plush, the 6-CD changer was nice. But more than that, everything felt precise: steering, controls, knobs, etc. Seats were the best of the lot, better than those in the Passat. Performance was not up to the SHO, but was far more than merely adequate. Ergonomics were superb: everything was in reach and relatively intuitive to operate.

So: 12 months and 20,000 miles later, I love the Accord. It has done everything we have asked, and more, and gracefully. Every time I get in it I have to smile. Is the styling cutting-edge? Nope. But it ages VERY well, like a blue pin-stripe Armani suit, and it will look just as classic when it is 10 or 12 years old. I've added a stiffer rear sway-bar to sharpen handling response, but that's it. At a stoplight it will surprise a lot of folks who don't realize that 10-15% of the Accords out there are v6's. The 4's aren't slow, but the 6's are pretty darned quick.

Last week, my wife's best friend went car shopping, and drove the Accord and the new Camry. She wanted a car that coddled her and made her feel luxurious. She got the Camry 4cyl.

As I said, Choices, choices....

strager

Just because the Accord has millions of repeat customers doesn't mean all of them think the design is terrific. Of course, they are looking at the overall package, and that's why they end up buying one. But that doesn't stop one from wishing that Honda should make more effort in the styling department. Passat is a good example, as mentioned by ickes_mobile. For me, the most stylish was the previous generation ('93-'97).

I really think Honda takes its owners for granted in the US because of the mediocre competition (Taurus, Camry et al) until now. Road noise and generic styling are two symptoms of that attitude. The US needs competition like in the Japanese market, where Honda is furiously battling everyone with a steady stream of hit models.

However, things may be changing. I read an article in the Detroit News not too long back that said that Honda is aware that their styling needs more emphasis in the US. Let's see what the sedan brings, although I really want a wagon or hatchback.

dtownfb

Honda takes our market for granted because of the mediocre competition. What have you been smoking? The mid-size sedan class is the best it has ever been. The Camry is as good as the Avalon and the Lexus ES300. The Altima and Passat are both beautiful cars. Don't forget about the Legacy. The domestic competition isn't too shabby either: Taurus, Malibu, etc. They may be a step down from the Accord but they can be had for a couple of thousand less then the Accord as well.

Honda needs to stay conservative and reliable. They sell over 400,000 vehicles each year and unlike the domestics, the majority of those sals are to individuals and not fleet or government.

ghomaz

I agree with "strager" that the 5th generation (1994-97) Accords were the best looking ones so far. However, the 3rd generation (1986-89) were also nice. Indeed, the pop-up headlights were quite "cutting-edge" for family cars at that time!

alpha01

Just curious... have you driven the new Camry SE? What do you think about it? I have yet to drive an SE V6, but you should know that even the XLE and LE handle with more precision and less roll than the previous generation, even if its not immediately noticeable. I'll be the first to admit that I agree with your assessment that the previous gen Camry didnt like to be driven hard, but on the same token, in nasty situations, it doesnt offer any freaky surprises (as did my stabilizer bar lacking 94 Civic DX).
~alpha

strager

You'll see that I said "mediocre competition until now".

There's a study done that shows that Hondas get cross shopped with Toyota first, 2nd Saturn (hard to believe), 3rd Nissan, and then all the rest. Until the 2002 model came out, the Altima was mediocre, Saturn still is, and the Passat and Legacy are either expensive or niche cars to be real competition for the Accord. Both Passat and Legacy are about 25% or less of Accord sales volume.

So until now, the only real competition was the Camry, based on the *specific* buying habits of Honda buyers. About 10% of Camrys are sold to rental fleets.

My point was that that the Accord needs to have the same level of competition, as do some of Honda's high volume models in Japan (Stepwgn,Odyssey). Models like those can see 30-40% drops in sales volume year to year with the intense competition. So to keep up its overall sales volume, Honda has to design superior cars and introduce new, innovative models with cutting edge styling (like the Fit).

stantont

No, I haven't driven the newest Camry. I drove the 2001, and my son's 1998 LE 4-cyl. I too have read that the new Camrys are more precise-handling than the previous generation. However, unless Toyota has radically changed their target market, I suspect the new one will still not be an engaging driver's car like the Accord (all these terms are relative, of course. BMW owners would laugh at the distinctions I'm making). And our friend's response to the new Camry reflected that: she said the Accord "demanded" things of her (like paying attention and actually driving!); the Camry just floated her down the road.
Car and Driver's road test comparison would seem to bear that out as well. Note, BTW, that C&D rated the 2002 (current gen) Accord over the brand new Camry SE, though not by much. And they tested an Accord LE, which costs several thousand less than the Camry SE. The Accord EX would have cost the same as the Camry, and offered leather, sunroof, etc.

stantont

C&D tested an Accord LX, not an LE (that's a Camry model designation). Sorry!

alpha01

I think the fact that they tested the LX actually played in the Accord's favor, for God's sake, hey lauded the "honesty" of the cars wheel covers as opposed to alloys..It is a GREAT VALUE an affordable family sedan offering quality and solid, refined, precisse driving experience. I almost wonder if an EX V6, at the same 26K MSRP (with a few more features) as the Camry SEV6 might have been displaced as the top spot. Conversely, I wonder how the Camry LE V6 would have matched up to the Accord tested. (Equipped the same, but with standard alloys, that Camry would be about 1K more expensive MSRP). Its all relative to your preferences, as you said, though I think after the Accord's 03 redesign, the Camry and Accor will be more similar in driving manners than ever. Regardless, they are both the best cars in the class... I drove the Passat, it FEELS great to drive, but IMO, VW/Audi reliability leaves alot to be desired. I also drove an Altima 2.5SL, it was strong, agile, roomy... but just as everyone else who decides against it, the interior turned me away.. felt no better than the 14K previous gen Corolla that my family has in its fleet.
Cant wait to see the new Accord Sedan (I'm a fan of the Coupe's styling),
alpha

strager

Since you mention the Camry SE, I couldn't resist saying that Toyota has made a mistake by putting a mandatory spoiler on that car. Kind of looks silly on a huge family car, IMHO.

alpha01

Obviously, I am a Camry fan. But I couldnt agree more about the spoiler. Should definitely be an option. On the gen. Camry that I drive, 97-01, I think the spoiler looks good, sharpens the rear styling, especially the 97-99 models. That said, I really LOVED a spoiler on the 94 and 95 Accord EX 4s. That was my favorite Accord.
~alpha

diploid

thecarconnection.com has a good article about Accords and Camrys finally offering some form of incentives for buyers. APR rates are basically 50%, but still no 0% financing.

ickes_mobile

90-93 Accords with a spoiler. They were one of the firsts to have the LED lights for the high mount brake light and looked really sharp. That said, the idea of putting a spoiler on a family sedan is pretty ridiculous. Just look how many spoilers you see on BMWs?

Stantont's comments had me thinking. Our Accord is my spouse's car, so I don't drive it regularly. When I just see the car, its nice enough, but I find myself wondering if we made the right choice. Its on those rare occasions that I get to drive it that it all come together and I couldn't be happier (ok, I'd be happier if there was less wind/road noise) with the car. That and throw in Honda reliability and how can you go wrong.

stantont

I haven't driven a new Altima, and the Maxima is rated a very reliable car. But my and my son's experience with Nissan products doesn't mesh with the CR stats: I owned an early '80's Nissan Stanza that was the most flimsy vehicle I have ever owned. The engine and drive train were okay (not great) but the body/chassis was so fragile it was laughable.
Shift forward about 18 years: my son owned a mid-90's (maybe a '97) Nissan 200SX (based on the Sentra chassis, I believe). The engine and drive train were pretty good, but the chassis and suspension were junk. He lives in Tulsa, which has pretty poor city streets; lots of potholes. The car ate struts, ball joints, tie rod ends, sway bar links, bushings, etc., etc., the list went on and on. Wheel alignment was becoming a monthly thing. He finally got rid of the car at about 70,000 miles. Admittedly a sample of two is not good statistics, but bitter experience is hard to forget or forgive.

Yesterday he called because a friend of his had bought a '92 Accord with about 110,000 miles on it, and it had a slight cam-cover oil leak. He changed the gasket with his buddy, then took the car for a drive. When he got back, he called to say he now understood the Accord: the '92 with 110,000 miles felt just as tight and precise as my 2001 EX. He said the car looked and felt literally like new. This was a one-owner vehicle with all service records, and the only suspension work the previous owner had done was a pair of outer tie rod ends after about 100,000 miles on those same Godawful Tulsa potholes. He was impressed, to say the least!

Road noise: Consumer Reports says road noise in the Accord is "pronounced"; I think they are parroting their test results from their 1998 car test, and ignoring the changes made in 2000. When I drove the '01 Accord and Camry back-to-back on the same roads, the Accord was (subjectively) at least as quiet as the Camry at 75 mph; and the C&D comparo test last Fall says the '02 Accord is actually 1db quieter at 70 mph than the '02 Camry. Admittedly, the Camry is almost eerily silent at low speeds, but at freeway speeds it is about the same as the Accord. I'm not knocking the Camry; in fact, it is my "gold standard" for automotive silence and luxury in its price bracket. But to call road noise in the Accord "pronounced" is just not true. It may have been true in 1998, but not in 2001 or 2002. The car is so quiet that it is the only vehicle we have owned where I can converse comfortably with a rear-seat passenger at 75-80 mph. Even at 110 mph (on west Texas highways, where the only thing from you to those mountains 40 miles away is barbed-wire fence on both sides of the road) conversation is pretty quiet, and the car feels stable and relaxed. On certain textured road surfaces the Michelins emit a roar, but the only reason you notice the noise is because the rest of the car is so quiet.

bodydouble

Our Accord is also my wife's car. Everytime I drive it, I too find myself thinking "This is a darn nice car".

vinney

If you have'nt heard there is a recall on accords and civics for the ignition switch. (1997-2000)
Car can stall while driving creating safety hazard. Does anyone know more about it since I have a 2000 accord and the bulletin says only certain 1997-2000 models.

daveghh

At http://www.collegehillshonda.com you can see a picture of the 2003 accord!

pkradd

Already's been posted here. Still none on the sedan. As far as 2002 Passat reliability, the new model has undergone major changes under the skin - some 2000 according to VW. Should be more reliable. Have had one for a year now with absolutely no problems.

net_guy

news:fVRG8.12413$z05.1217883@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com

Cut and paste this link into your web browser address bar and it should bring up your default news reader and download the message that has the pictures.

Hmmmm? Very interesting....

diploid

IE couldn't find it. Can anyone host the pic and link to it?

fredvh

On the above-mentioned post to the picture of the new 2-door what is the "stuff" on the bottom of the rear-end of the vehicle? It looks like it is hanging very low. I assume it is part of the exhaust system but it looks like there are a lot of things there.

andy911344

Here you go http://beta.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=12470

jvkalra

I'm guessing from those sedan pictures that the height is at least 58", on par with the Camry.

Had a chance to check out the picture of the coupe in Auto News at the local library. Looks like the headlamps are similar to those of the CR-V and the Civic Si, and I would expect the same for the sedan. Glad to see that Honda went to the more ergonomic door handles on the sedan.

bodydouble

I like the new door handles. But overall the preliminary impression is that the 4-door looks like a big Civic.

tiger8

Best pictures of the '03 sedan posted at #3832. Pictures must have been taken in Bland Diego, because that's the syling.

mike1qaz

Any info out there about whether accord might offer a CVT auto trans. It seems that these are preferable to current auto trans for shift quality and fuel economy.

cokane5227

it looks like those fixed up civic with clear tail lights, yr 93-95. the side looks good though, take off the nose mask and i think the front looks okay too.
god the back is ugly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Canyoncrest

I agree 94-97 version is the best-looking. The 98-02 one is not exciting, but ok. However, if the pictures really show the 2003 accord, it is really ugly.

tcpip1

It looks short to me. And the tail lights look odd...

They should replace the back with the 91-95 Legend's.

diploid

It didn't turn out as bad as I thought.
Looks much roomier than the current model, though the wheels, in relation to the overall size of the vehicle, are kind of small.

The taillights are probably masked. I guess it will look similar to the white drawing that we've already seen.

hawks1

You're probably right - on closer inspection the taillights do look like they're masked. This definitely detracts from the car's appearance. In fact, the same could be said for the front end with the black masking. Indeed, the car looks bigger than the '02's. The wheels appear to be 16-inchers' - not really that small. In a car unmasked and in perhaps a different color than white, this may be a very nice looking car.

diploid

Here's that white pic I was talking about:

http://www.mag-x.com/scoop/accord0202/index.html

I suspect the taillights will look similar to this, though toned down a bit.

maxamillion1

The sedan IMO looks better than the coupe. I'd prefer a Graphite Pearl EX-L with 5spd manual. If the materials of the interior and overall design of the interior of the new Accord exceeds the new Altima, I might just have to let the Altima go....although it has been confirmed that Nissan will update the interior for 2003 per Freshalloy.com and Altimas.net I would like to see a full shot of the front without the bra....hmmm it looks a lot like the new CTS, doesn't it? It's short-looking also. The new Camry looks MUCH bigger than this car, and actually to me it looks shorter than the current model, but it looks wider though. I must be the only one noticing how similar the alloy wheels on the Accord look similar to those found on the Nissan Sentra GXE and SE(2000-2001 models.) Those rims look EXACTLY like the rims of the GXE and SE Sentra, and they look small too. I bet they are 16 inch tires too.. Looks like I'll be looking at the Accord EX-L, Altima 2.5S with "2.5SL package"(2003 model), Camry XLE, Mazda 6(whatever model it is.) I cannot wait until this car arrives....the Mazda and Honda dealer are right beside each other.

jjman

from the spy shots it looks part evolutionary and part radical at the same time. I think a sedan should look stately anyway.
My hope is the for a strong quiet 175 hp 4 that is vibration free and as nice or nicer interior than the last generation. heated seats, mirrors wouldn't hurt

davied99

Hi. I'm looking at purchasing a used 1997 Accord. Does anyone know where on the net (or any store) I can find accessories for this vehicle, such as leather steering-wheel cover, leather shift nob (automatic), floor mats, and so on? Most web sites I've seen have the 98-02 accessories, but very little from the years prior. Thanks.