Older Honda Accords

ickes_mobile

the car sketched in MT a few months ago will be the new Acura code named "UD" that Dudley mentions above.

The sketch of front of the car shown in grey had appeared in a German magazine prevously and was ID'd as the new Euro Accord. It certainly had more of an Acura look to it than the current direction being taken on Hondas.

Hopefully, we'll get the rumored 220hp. VTECT 4cyl with a 5spd. in that car...

diploid

220hp would be nice for that car, but I think a 5-cylinder engine would be a nice way to position it above the RSX and below the TL. Forget that the CL ever tried to replace the Vigor. This would be the Vigor's reincarnate.

venus- I sense sarcasm...

diploid

Yeah, they can believe its safety with the 6 airbags and VSC all they want.

Just don't tell them that the Camry received 2 stars in the side impact ratings from the feds, compared with a 3 for the Altima and a 4 for the current Accord. It had received better ratings in the past.

davied99

The new Accord isn't that bad looking. I remember thinking that the 94-97 was big and bulgy, and now I OWN one and I think it's pretty sharp. I'm not a fan of the 98-02 because I think the grill looks cheapy. This one looks a little too much Ford, little too much Infiniti for me, but I think I'll get used to it.

For what it's worth, let me echo the recent comments that Honda should stop following the "slightly bigger, wider, etc" crowd and try to lead in the opposite direction. My family has had three Accords, but my personal favorite is my brother's hand-me-down 1987 edition. That car still is (at 160k miles) an honest-to-God low-riding sportscar compared to the recent models. And *gasp* it was fashion-forward, with flip-up headlights! Let's get innovative again, folks!! I hope Honda realizes that it's headed into Buick country at its current pace. (Toyota too, for that matter, but to them I say good riddance)

cardinal5

I think the 03 sedan is an improvement over the current design. I am waiting to see the interior and take a test drive before I make any commitments, but it is my opinion that this model is exactly what Honda needs to re-capture the best seller crown. As long as the new Accord has a conservative high quality interior, a modest hp increase, good fuel economy, best-in-class safety and high value pricing it will continue to be the market benchmark.

jrct9454

...which is why I find it amusing that the Altima is held up as such a great benchmark. Yes, the car is nice to look at, and yes, the V6 is a superb piece of work, but how many here have ACTUALLY DRIVEN or even sat in the Altima?

I've done both, and I can tell you that Honda has nothing to have its "hands trembling" about here. The interior of the Nissan is clearly inferior in execution and materials [they are said to be scrambling to fix the worst of it], and the ride of the 6 cyl car is like having rocks in the tires. The best car is the 4 cyl "S", but it too shares the weaknesses of the interior and general lack of refinement.

Bash away, gang - lay into Honda for its grievous errors. Just be sure you have actually driven and spent time in ALL of the competitors before drawing conclusions. It's the combination of all the attributes [see post above] that ultimately sells the car and keeps people happy.

The beauty of the marketplace is that you get to put your money wherever you want it to reside, for whatever reasons move you. I can't imagine making such a judgment solely on the basis of the photos we've seen, without looking at and sitting in the car, much less driving it to see how the on-road experience compares to the competition...but then I continue to be mystified by the tone of this discussion for the past couple of weeks.

I'm not a huge fan of the look of the new Camry, but I would NEVER make a buy-no buy decision based on that limited observation. I have driven both the six and four cyl Camrys, and am impressed by the usual Toyota attention to refinement and good ride. I was tempted by an XLE 4 cyl, but ultimately decided to hold off buying in this class until the Accord, Mazda, and ultimately the BMW 1er are on the road.

Yes, those of you who want a different look, decent performance, and a moderate price tag might want to wait until 2004, when the BMW 1-series will be around to compete in the $18-$25k segment. It's a smaller car, RWD, and very different from the Accord/Camry/Altima/Mazda6, but is a car that interests me a lot because we only need the back seat for occasional use. But how the car looks [beyond its obvious generic BMW family traits] is absolutely the last thing on my checklist. Oh, well...maybe I'm too easy to please - I don't find any of the cars in this group unacceptable to look at.

canadatwo

2002 Camry weaknesses:
1. UNACCEPTABLE 2-star side impact rating
2. sludgy, 10 year-old, premium-fuel, V-6.
3. blah buick-like styling
4. smally and poor fitting drivers seat for MANY.
5. Floaty, near buick-like handling (SE is a bit better)
6. Fit & finish issues

2003 Accord Weakness:
1. Lack of information
2. blah styling with a hint of class (waiting to see it in person though)

2003 Accord Expectations:
Great ride, power, interior, drivability, fit & finish
Good Handling
Good to Excellent Safety Ratings

csandste

I especially don't like that swollen C-pillar. Not as ugly as the Avalon, though-- that's hideous. Buick-y styling clues but carried out worse than any Buick. Previous gen. Avalon was much sweeter.

Just don't know what's going on with Japan's big two-- more and more conservative. Very sad considering where they were fifteen years ago--especially Honda.

bklynguy

I looked at the following cars and here are my impressions :

02 Accord - could be better, I hope the 03 Accord gives us a better ride, less road noise and handles like a BMW ( or close )

02 Camry XLE V6 - should handle a little better, needs more HP ( about 25 ), styling so-so

02 Altima 3.5 - the ride could be better, interior quality should up to Toyota/Honda standards, wide turning radius

03 Avalon - nice but not my style, floats too much

02 525i - expensive ( cost,maint.,insurance,etc.)

02 Maxima - could be better ( the Altima handles better ) The Infiniti I35 is really a Maxima in my eyes.

02 Lexus ES300 - only slightly better than a Camry XLE V6.

02 Passat - nice car ( electrical problems ? )

civicw

I'm sure the new Accord will be all that most baby boomers expect, but Honda seems to be missing out on what most younger (< 35) buyers want, IMO. Young people don't want to drive a full size car, that's really what the Accord is. I'd like to see Honda bring the Civic 5 door to the US right now, not a decade from now.

coolguyky7

ES300 slightly better than Camry XLE V6? Haha... The styling of the ES is much more radical and the interior is one of the best around.

diploid

ES looks like a fish.

bklynguy

the ES300 has a nice interior but as far as handling / ride goes not much better than a Camry XLE V6 ( Consumer Reports agrees on this )

bamacar

Accord 03 looks a little strange in the back. The front looks to me as a combination Civic, and last generation Taurus. I am sure it will still sell by the boatload, but possibly not overtake the Camry.

The original ES300 looked way to much like the Camry. Over the years the ES continued to improve its looks slightly while the Camry reached an all time boring low in the 97-01 generation. The gap between the cars became very wide during those years. I agree the 02 ES looks okay, but the Camry, although no looker improved immensely from 01 to 02. Thus the ES300 is now just slightly better than the Camry.

ickes_mobile

The car Honda should really bring here is the Jazz as a entry level car below Civic...

I agree with davied99 that the grill on the '98-02 car was a let down from the '96-'97 car (I never liked the '94-'95 either). It was a little more conservative, but classier. The '01-'02 front end was supposed to look sporty'er, but I don't think it quite made it. It always buggs me that the Civic has a better front end around the grill with some chrome and a mesh backed "H" logo.

civicw

would be great if they brought it here, but I'm not sure Honda has production capacity to meet current demand in Japan and Europe, leave aside the US. My guess is that it'll be here by Summer 2004, to compete with Toyota Scion. Until then, the Civic 5 door would do a good job in competing with the Toyota Matrix and Mazda P5.

Both the Civic 5 door and Jazz/Fit would really attract younger buyers, and be a refreshing alternative to the boring Civic and Accord sedans for those who want a Honda.

ickes_mobile

was due to come here soon...

civicw

Did you read that somewhere - about the Fit being here soon? I've read an interview with Tom Elliott of Honda, where he talked about cars like the Fit having a potential market in the US, but there was no mention of any timeframe. Toyota won't have a complete US rollout for Scion until Summer 2004, that's why I was thinking that we won't see the Fit here till that time. From what I've seen, Honda lets others first establish the market (in this case, for smaller cars), and then comes in with a superior product.

mustangdrew

I am curious, on the recent Accord's, mainly EX's and V6's, do the steering wheel controls like the cruise and audio buttons light up when the headlights are on and/or at night? Also, the brochure says the window buttons light up, but do the door lock buttons also? Thanks

th83

I have a '02 Accord V6 and have found that once you get used to them, backlighting is not really necessary.

What's so crazy about the next Accord having 240HP? Look at where it was 10 years ago when the most powerful Accord had 140HP, then look at it now with 200HP. There is no reason why Honda wouldn't add 40HP to the V6. They added 30HP in the last redesign so 40 shouldn't seem so far fetched. They could very well do that with the current 3.0 V6. All they have to do is fit it with the technology used in the TL Type-S 3.2 V6(mainly the variable-resonance intake system which gives a supercharging effect)and it could have that much power very easily.

torque_r

While rumors talk about 240hp, many expect the Accord to retain the same 3.0 V6 with more power. The point I am trying to make is: For a family sedan, it's not wise to sqeeze 240hp from a 3.0L engine. This is not a sports car. The engine would have to rev high to achieve the 240hp. That's because the other factor of the equation, torque, will be limited by engine displacement. The most torque produced by a 3.0 V6 in the market today is 222 lb-ft from Toyota's V6. If the engine will indeed be a 3.0L, don't expect more than 225hp, which is still quite good.

fwatson

Most of these threads on Edmunds seem to have a common theme. Mostly under 30 yr olds complaining about the lack of power, and godawful styling of whatever car is in question.

I have to admit, in the 50's, 60's, and 70's I suffered from the same testosterone driven malady.

The Detroit muscle car phase of the late 50's through about '73 (Arab oil crisis) was a result.

This is shaping up as the Japanese brand version of that phenomenon. I suspect after the SUV's and overpowered Nissans etc have a high enough percentage of vehicles on the road, we will see a repeat of '73. Then about 30 years later history will repeat again.

We better hope for quick development of alternative fuel sources soon.

davied99

I am 25, and though I wont complain about the power in my Accord, I do think the car is getting too big and bulgy. Hopefully not like me in a couple years.

jrct9454: I've ridden in a couple Nissan Altimas. One friend (24yo) has a 2000, another (27yo) has a 1997/98. I'd take my 1997 Accord over either one. I find the interior cramped and interior materials cheap compared to the Accord, and the ride slightly more harsh. The styling doesn't do it either (esp. the weird shaped trunk). I'd take my Accord or my roomate's 1999 Ford Contour over the Altima anyday.

alpha01

As a driver a 2002 Camry, I would certainly agree with some of your weaknesses listed. First, the 2 star drivers rating is no doubt, unacceptable, and Toyota needs to lose the arrogance and realize its going to have to ante up and better that rating if it wants to stay in the race in this ultra competitive field. If it doesnt, the Camry will be a Taurus, not a Buick- meaning unloved by the auto world and big incentives, all the time.
Second, well the sludge issue- not really an issue anymore seeing as how mods have been made as of April on all V6 engines (supposedly), and the fact that sludge occurs in something like less than 1% of said engines.
Third, styling- obviously subjective, but I like our dark Camry with accessory (not factory) Toyota alloys. I don't see the Buick resemblance, but thats your opinion, and I completely respect it. (I should note that I'm 21...and I might fall out of the norm since I think that Buicks are nicely styled for their intentions... Chryslers are another ballgame).
Fourth- the drivers seat. I can't really comment on this one, it tends to be the larger frame/taller people that have problems..I'm neither. Just took the car on a 480mile round trip, had no problems.
Fifth- Buick like handling. Well, the 02 LE 4 that I speak of is my parents'. My car is an 00 Camry LE, and I feel the new one is more precise and agile, rolls less in turns, and the ride is more controlled.... Still, if these cars had been paid for by my money, this is where the current Accord would really have given me an issue- I do prefer that car's sharpness. My parents, however, preferred the ride and quiet of the Camry.
Finally- Our car, obviously just one of what? 365K to be sold this year- has a flawless fit and finish, especially the interior, which is VASTLY improved over our previous gen in design and execution. (proud to say our 2002 is built by Americans). On what are you basing fit and finish issues, and what makes you think they wont be an issue for the new Accord? Both the Civic and Ody dropped in their reliabitly rating from CR when redesigned.

In anycase, I really cant wait to see the Accord in person. I'm a Toyota fan by nature, but when the lease is up on the 2000 Camry, I'M going to be the one spending money this time, so its going to be interesting. (Our 2002 is ours for good, not a lease). Time will tell.

~alpha

diploid

I think the sludge problem is just overblown by Toyota haters (very evident in the News & Views forums).

I just find the 2 star side impact rating (especially since Camrys in the past have scored better than that) unacceptable, perhaps even a bit negligent on Toyota's part.

Otherwise, the Camry is a solid car that is levels above in refinement compared to any Buick.

timadams

Hmmm. Three words come to mind: Yada yada yada.

canadatwo

1. lot's of complaints about the seats. A lot of people don't notice it right away, while some do.
Like alpha01 said, it mainly taller & larger people. Toyota shortened the seat by an inch or two to create the appearance of greater interior space or something. Just plain silly. Lot's of Camry owners are also trying all kinds of seat covers to get a more comfortable seat as well.
Once you have dropper $20K+ on a car, you just gotta learn to live with things like bad seats.

2. Yeah, fit & finish on the initial batch of Camry's was not up to snuff. lots of complaints about litte squeaks & rattles. It sounds like they MAY have gotten better lately on the newer built cars.

3. Read lots of reviews. Including the C+D one where the 2002 Accord (5-year old design) BEAT the 2002 Camry (brand new). Most reviews agree with my take on the Camry & Accord.

4. Those 200,000 people bought the 2002 Camry before the terrible side-impact crash test results were release a couple weeks ago. This issue is gonna explode in the media real soon now. My hope is a testing or report error. Can't beleive that Toyota would screw up so bad.

lenscap

The Camry safety issue is being blown out of proportion.

First of all, the Camry that got the 2-star side impact rating for the front seats was on a car without side airbags. The 2002 Lexus ES 300 with side air bags received a 5-star rating. Since the cars have similar structures I would guess a side-airbag-equipped Camry would score about the same. If somebody is that concerned with safety then they should get the side airbag option.

Second, take a look at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety ratings. They do the 40 mph offset crash, the cause of over half of all auto deaths. The 2002 Camry got the highest rating on all but left leg/foot, in which it got the second highest rating. Overall, the Camry was a "best overall pick." The Accord did not test as well and was not a best pick.

I like both the Accord and Camry. My point is that from a safety standpoint each car has its own merits. My bet is the Camry and Accord are fairly equal overall.

diploid

I don't think the issue lies with whether or not the car was equipped with side airbags.

Instead, it is a salient anomaly that the rear passenger can receive 5 stars while the front passenger gets only 2. And compared with the excellent frontal tests that the Camry received, the 2 really stands out like a sore thumb.

carguy000

I also agree that the side impact crash test on the '02 Camry is VERY disappointing. Mainly because the previous generation did better WITHOUT side airbags. So I think it doesn't really matter that it didn't have side airbags. I, too, am hoping for a retest. Also, the 2003 Corolla scored four stars for the front and rear passengers in the side impact test. That's not a bad rating for a small car. It doesn't say whether or not the Corolla had side airbags.

While we're on the topic of safety, I'd like to say that Honda has really inproved. Every new Honda vehicle that NHTSA has tested recently (CRV, Civic, Accord, Odyssey) has gotten at least a double five star safety rating, if not a quadruple five star safety rating. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the new Accord received a "best pick" rating from the IIHS, and I'd be very surprised if it didn't receive a quadruple five star safety rating. If they can make the two door Civic (with side airbags) receive full marks in the side impact crash, then they can just about do anything. My .02

I hope you guys have a great day!

alpha01

One final point about the camry- about the reviews. nope sorry. Car and Driver is the only one I have read that picks the Accord over its comparable Camry. Consumer Reports, Motor Trend, Motor Week, etc. all favored the Camry. I very much value and enjoy Car and Driver, but I dont think the playing field was very even- specifically the Intrepid should not have been the SE model, it was very underequipped (Car and Driver complained about Braking but didnt bother to obtain an ABS test sample, like the other models), and since the editors lauded the simplicity and honesty of the Accord design (as I said once before, praising its WHEEL COVERS), they could have tested the Camry LE V6 which would have been a better price match, and given the Accord a better run for the money.
-otherwise, I agree with most of what you say.
~alpha

cajun626

This may be a dumb statement, but what the heck does the lack of side airbags have to do with the Camry getting 2 stars on the side impact test? Two stars probably means that the Camry lost its' structural integrity in the collision, and a little balloon popping up beside you won't help if the other vehicle's bumper is sitting in your lap.

hbund216

But the side air bag will help keep your head from leaving an imprint on the grill of the car that might hit you.

dragonfire

The side curtain air bag will prevent the front driver and passenger from hitting their heads on the bumper, but the regular side air bag is what is being tested in this situation. There were conversations on the camry board regarding the high forces in the thorax region. I can't see that the arid bag would be that effective to up the 2 star rating to a five star rating (that of the similar lexus es300). It does not make sense. Has anyone noticed the change in the side profile of the vehicle? The side profile is almost straight and vertical.. i.e. no humps or bumps like in mots vehicles. would this be a factor? just a thought

alpha01

And apparently, since the Lexus ES and the Camry have the same structure, the side airbag does a good job (for the front seat)- The Lexus, tested with the SRS, got 5 stars, while the Camry got 2. I do wonder if the Camry test is anamolous- the rear passenger in the Camry received 5 stars- what is so different between the two door structures? The other oddity is that the Camry with 5 stars for the rear passenger outscores the Lexus rear passgener rating (remember, the Lexus has Side Curtains), the Lexus earning 4 stars.

Rice Dragon- the side curtains come with a side airbag mounted in the seat as well... why would you think that these two in conjunction would not yield an improvement in the rating? And as opposed to contours, I WOULD HAVE thought the higher belt line would benefit the car more than it apparently did.

~alpha

bklynguy

Will HID/Xenon headlights be available as an option on the 2003 Accord ? Is it true that Honda will offer iVES ( inVehicle Entertaiment System ) as an option on the 03 Accord ?

bodydouble

Where would they place it?

dragonfire

alpha - I don't mean to say that the side and curtain air bags would not help.. they must.. but I would be nicely surprised if the airbags did indeed improve the rating by 3 stars. good spot with the higher beltline.. I didn't think of that. anyway, I hope the results are an anomaly. I would hate for the current camry owners to live with a 2 star rating. well.. I guess that may be enough camry talk on the accord site.. see you later...

bklynguy

Honda would place the LCD in the center right behind the sunroof ( the LCD would drop down ) Does anyone know if HID/Xenons will be available as an option on the EX V6 ?

benzrules

Just bought a Honda Pilot and this is my first Honda to own (have owned other Japanese cars but no Honda). I am really enjoying it so far, but had a question. I purchased the 7/100 extended warranty, but of course have 60 days to cancel. My question is for the longtime Honda owners, what problems are typical after the factory 3/36 expires. I have never purchased the warranty for other Japanese vehicles, but have for the Mercedes I own as these repairs can get wickedly expensive. Would appreciate feedback from other long-time Honda owners as to basic repair items and costs further down the road. Thanks for your help.

Stephen

bodydouble

I think that would create a blind spot when it's deployed.

diploid

I believe it's possible for you to purchase the extended warranty any time while you're still covered under the standard warranty. Am I correct Honda owners?

If so, and if you're reluctant to pay the extra dough at this time for the extended warranty, you could always reconsider later on down the road after you've had extensive road time with your Honda. Our family has had the good fortune of not buying a lemon in the 3 Hondas we own. Doesn't mean that they don't exist.

yugoboy

Life is just not fair if you live in North America, I would encourage everyone to take a look at the photo's of the euro accord!!!! God why is it that we always must get all the crap here!!!! The best part of the euro addition is that honda got rid of that nasty crome around the window's, much more sporty look without it!!! Anyway's check it out at vtec.net

ickes_mobile

We didn't opt for the extended warranty. The salesman was pushing it, but I just kept saying "Its a Honda, isn't it?" Anyway, it basically an insurance policy. Figure the cost of $$$ over the life of the warranty and it usually doesn't work out for the buyer unless the engine shoots itself out from under the hood.

As for the euro accord, the car is supposed to be coming here as an entry level Acura sedan to replace the deceased Integra sedan. The best of both worlds it would seem. After checking out the photos, it looks a lot like the Mazda6. Maybe my decsion on my next car isn't made after all, especially if they bring the 250hp Type-R! Mazda of course, it promising a 250hp MazdaSpeed version. Things are getting interesting... BTW, here is the link...

http://sohc.vtec.net/pics/03/accord/0611autocar.jpg

heisnstein

So, it looks like Honda is going to try and do it BOTH ways, i.e., do a traditional Accord for the "masses," and then treat those more interested in a "sporty" version to the Euro Accord when and if (oh, please, oh please) it comes stateside as the Acura TSX.

As noted in the VTEC forums, the smart idea would be to price this BMW competitor between the TL and the Accord. Assuming Honda does this, the potential downside is that many more people than Honda expects may turn their noses at the "Buicky" Accord and go for the TSX, which could force the market price upward to BMW range.

diploid

I hope they bring over the 250hp version upon its introduction, instead of introducing it later on like they're planning to do with the RSX type-R.

ahossa

Benzrules:My advice is to get it. Make sure it's a Honda Warranty because you can transfer it to a new person should you sell for a $50.00 transfer fee charged by Honda. If you should sell the Pilot within the period you can get a pro-rated refund. However,the pro-rated amount starts from the day you bought the car. I had a Toyota Camry and I did not get the extended warranty and believe me I had tons of problems after the 4th year of that Camry. After that I had a 96 Concorde and I spent another ton fixing every thing on that damn car after the 4th year again. I had the Odyessey but had no problems but I took the warranty on that Vehicle because of my previous experience and I was able to transfer it to a new owner when I sold the Odyssey. I have an MDX 2 years and no problems with 22300 miles.

benzrules

Thanks for the reply. I will most likely keep it, though I may cancel it now and repurchase it later when I determine how many miles a year I will put on the Pilot. I imagine the 7/100 will still work best as it is a third vehicle. Like I said before, I have never purchased it for the other Japanese cars that I have owned, but did buy it for the 2 Mercedes I currently own. How do you like your MDX? I have a friend who bought one about 8 months ago and loves it. I test drove them a few times and thought it was an exceptional vehicle. But with the waiting list and higher cost, I opted to go with the Pilot. Either way, you can't go wrong. Good luck with your MDX.

Benz

bodydouble

I personally don't really find the Euro Accord that attractive. Still got the trademark Honda conversatism in it.

maxamillion1

We'll get it as the Acura TSX? Looks bland to me, actually I like the American version better.