seems to be getting run down quite a bit (at least in comparision to the '06). But, I kinda like it. Someone I work with just got one, an EX 5 speed in a nice dark silver (maybe platinum?) color. Dashboard looks nice and clean too!
I haven't sat in one in a while (and don't think I ever drove any of that generation other than the Si), but it looks like something I could live with, if they wanted to give me a killer deal to take it.
Let's see, new is 18.8K, so how about 14K for an '05 EX? Or about an even trade for my tC.
Of course, there are no manual tranny 2005's left anywhere that I can find, otherwise I would take one for a spin.
Mrs. Varmint won't allow a minivan. Not only does she dislike the stigma (she even admits that), but she also doesn't like the size. She thinks her TL is kinda big.
And not to be nitpicky, but...
I like the coupe's nose because it looks sharper, perhaps it's the thinner chrome strip.
On most Civics, there's no chrome in there. The strip behind the H badge is body colored. An easy mistake to make since so many of the press pics are silver cars. Depending on the color, the strip fades into the background quite a bit.
I think the only one with chrome in there is the Hybrid.
I have to correct myself. It looks like the sedans have a chrome grill insert. The one on the Si is body-colored. The one on the coupe is just plain gray. Unless there's some sort of difference between the LX and EX models.
Well I didn;t like it. I did like however the headlights. The grille looked like it came off the Saturn Ion. The car looks too wide for its own width in my opinion. The tailights like look they are trying to seriously mock the tailights of the current Audi A4. The car would have looked better if it was shortened in terms of width and the A4 tailights would have worked in favor of the cars design instead of against it. Still the grille looks too Saturn-ish. I hope the grille on the coupe looks better. The look does have more of a prescence than previous Civics though but I still don't like it.
on the freeway yesterday. It looks a bit like a low-flying spaceship in the mirror. Once it passes you, I have to echo carguy: it looks just like an Audi A4's taillights.
Despite looking decent, and better than the last one, it is not a knock-out (the sedan, I mean), and there are so many cues from other cars that it looks a bit like it was just copycatting others' designs.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Just about everything on the road has been "inspired" by something else. I too think the new Civic look like a low flying "spaceship" moving along the road. I like it.
"Despite looking decent, and better than the last one, it is not a knock-out (the sedan, I mean), and there are so many cues from other cars that it looks a bit like it was just copycatting others' designs."
The reason why it don;t look knockout is 2 reasons. If they made a knock-out looking Civic Sedan it would take away from TSX and the TSX is a big profit machine for Honda in the US. Also, 2nd reason is Honda usually saves "the sporty looks" for the coupe model of the Civic.
Saw one the other day too. From the profile it looks like the last-generation Dodge Concorde, with the cab-forward look.
The styling doesn't bother me because the changes made it much more functional (longer wheelbase = more interior room), so I think the changes were good.
"Just about everything on the road has been "inspired" by something else."
I agree with your statement and I diagree with your statement at the same time. I agree alot of car makers to take idea's from other car makers. I diagree with you why did Honda have to have to make the A4 talights rip-off look so obvious? I mean thats like the 98 Lexus GS looking exactly like a Mercedes ad the Kia Amanti again looking like a Mercedes. A good exmaple of taking influences off a car but not ripping it off directly would be the current Hyundai Elantra. The back of the Elantra looks like it was inspired by Audi and the front looks saab-inspired like but it doesn;t look a direct rip-off of those two car manufacturers. Honda is starting to get like Toyota a few years ago and just copying off of what they see. Acura stylists do it alot better they use influence from European Cars but they don;t like a direct rip-off of European Cars except for the 04+ TL's door design along the side which resembles the 99-05 3 Series door design very closely. Honda stylists needs to adopt the same philosphy as the Big Brother Acura's stylists in terms of influences but at the same time not making the influence of another car company's so evident in my opinion.
Honda's run hasn't run out, and in fact they're just getting their second wind. There's a lot of evidence for this, including the fact that Honda beat *all* other brands of cars in the following poll of consumers:
The new Civic is selling at near list, Consumer Reports names the Honda Accord its top pick in the brutally competitive mid-size sedan segment, CR also names the Odyssey as its top pick minivan, sales are surging, profits are high, etc., etc.
Anyone think of a new title for discussing Honda that's more accurate. GM's run has run out, but Honda? I don't think so.
top scorers BY BRAND in the fuel efficiency category went to GM and Hyundai for 4-cyl cars, and BMW and GM for larger-engined cars. This, of course, is as gauged by the cars' owners. Makes you wonder just how hard people are driving their Civics and Accords (and RSXs too!), given the low EPA ratings of those other companies.
Of course, the individual models that led the fuel efficiency list were the Civic Hybrid and Prius, followed by the Mercedes and VW diesels. Honda needs to do a lot more advertising of the Civic Hybrid this time around, I think. They were sitting around a bit beginning last year, and there was very little TV advertising for them, just some print stuff.
And Honda's four overall winners by segment (out of 24) were not the ones I would have expected, except for one: the Odyssey. The others (Accord coupe, Element, and RL) are not particular stand-outs among Honda's vehicle line, IMO. Where are the TL, the Pilot, the CRV that I expect to see top these lists? I
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Honda can't get enough batteries as it is. If they start selling gobs of Civic Hybrids, they won't be able to meet demand. And since there's pretty much zero profit in hybrids, it would be a lot of work for nothing.
I agree that Honda could use more and better PR for building hybrids. Toyota is walking away with the hybrid market. Honda needs to get some respect for their efforts. But public relations is about the only reason for advancing the hybrid models at this point.
in that case they should limit production more. It is neutral to have no advertising and very few of the cars around. It is negative PR to have a ton of them gathering dust on dealer lots while Prius waiting lists just grow and grow and grow.
Maybe they are worth investing more in: call it foundation work for perhaps two decades of hybrids in the market. Batteries, after all, will just get better and better even as they come down in price.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It would only be negative PR to have HCH models piling up on the back lot if...
a. That were actually happening on a large scale. For my part, I have not seen this phenomenon. I suppose it could be a regional thing.
or...
b. People other than wacky enthusiasts like ourselves were actually counting the cars on the back lots.
For my part, I think there's no doubt that Toyota has an early lead in buying public perception. And that should continue to garner more sales for them. But this is a marathon, not a sprint.
For example, you suggested that Honda might be well served by pursuing more battery technology. Well... what about ultracapacitors? The discharge rate for them is significantly higher than that of even the most modern of batteries. They provide more power and tend to be more compact. The biggest drawback is cost (already a hurdle for hybrids).
Picture a company (Toyota, Honda, Ford, whomever...) which has developed a fleet of hybrid vehicles developed around a battery-based design. That would require a huge investment in added manufacturing capacity and R&D into battery technologies. Now picture that same company when ultracapacitors or some other solution becomes economical and viable for use in hybrid transportation. Suddenly, the entire fleet is old tech in a segment that is currently powered by a high tech image.
Given that the technology for these vehicles is very much in its infancy, I can see why a company might be skittish about jumping in with both feet. Maybe Toyota will become dominant enough that any other design is suppressed (like Microsoft vs Apple). Maybe not.
Well, the new one goes up in price slightly, but it's both more powerful and more efficient. Plus they say it'll get closer to EPA numbers this time around.
Demand will increase steadily. This can be a halo car for the Civic line - draw buyers in, sell most of them on base models (30/40 mpg ain't too shabby). And they can make a profit on those.
I think the claim that the new HCH will get closer to the EPA estimates is more or less hype. The more the vehicle relies on the electric motor to propel the vehicle, the less EPA-like the real world figures turn out to be. The current HCH is already reasonably close to the EPA figures.
I suspect the Honda comes closer to the estimates because it's more like the traditional kind of car which the tests were designed to measure. This new one is less like a traditional car.
Not necessarily battery power alone, but also how often it uses the motor and engine at the same time.
Theoretically, the Prius is essentially an electric car with an engine assist. Meanwhile, the Civic is gas-based with electric assist, which is closer to the type of car the EPA tests were conceived to measure.
That database may not be the most accurate. The data is probably skewed by mileage-sensitive enthusiasts. But it does have a decent sample for each vehicle and that sampling flaw would apply to both. All things being as equal as I can make them, the Prius is off the EPA estimates by about 13.5%. The HCH is off by 5% for the CVT, or only 3% for the CVT and 5MT models combined.
When the 2006 Civic Hybrid comes, part of it's EPA rating will result from the ability to run on electric alone and the more powerful electric motor. That makes it more of a 50/50 hybrid than a gas-powered car with electric assist. Which means it may be subject to the same EPA testing advantage/discrepancy as the Prius.
small potatoes though: the '06 HCH can propel itself on electrics alone for a few seconds at a time at speeds of between 10-30 mph (never pulling away from a stoplight, like the Prius can).
On the flip side, the Prius claims to be able to propel itself on electrics alone lots of the time, but in reality, the battery pack is only big enough for it to run on electrics for 30 seconds or so, and the acceleration you get leaving a light on electrics alone is so little you have to kick it to get the gas engine to fire. But running slightly downhill, it will run on electrics for a long time, and I wonder how the new HCH would behave in that situation.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Right. It's not the same as a Prius. But it is a step closer in that direction. Just to put a number on it, I'd guess the new model might be something like 7-8% off. Still not 13%, but no longer 5%, either.
I have read that Honda plans to intro a tall wagon in the US called teh Lattitude. Is this to be based on the Honda FR-V sold in Europe or something else? And any idea when it is coming?
"By the way, I hate the new Accord. Just wanted to put that out there. The best one was the 03-04 with the yellow turn signals."
Gee, I'm not saying your wrong or anything but you thought the 03-04 Accords were the best looking Accord's ever? Every Honda fan complained about the 03 Accord redesign including me. I just think thats unique that you think the 03-04 Accord's are the best looking Accord's.
On another topic I am worried because I have heard people on these boards saying their tranny in the current generation Accord V6 models needed a new tranny at 70K. It looks like Honda still does not have a handle mechanically on their Accord V6 models. The 98-02 Accord V-6's also had tranny problems. I am not bad mouthing Honda but it still doesn't look Honda has a handle on their Accord V6 set-ups mechanical wise the way they do their Accord's with the 4 cyl engine in them. Is it the weight of the V6 engine that is causing these tranny problems with the Accord since 98 or is it the tranny itself can;t handle the V6 engine power. I am hoping the current TL and RL do not have the same tranny problems that the current Accord V6 models have.
Really, no offense, but I am bit leary of what I read on the Edmunds boards. Not too say that nothing here is legit, but anyone can post problems on a board to make a brand look bad. And with the tranny thing being known for years, it is an easy alibi against any future models. Funny how alot of the posts are from new members who post once or twice about a tranny problem and then disappear, never to be heard from again. Single post, bash fest and then nothing...
I've mentioned this before, I know 11 people (used to be 12 until the Highlander came out in 01, trade-in) with V6 Honda's and Acura's. 11 of them. High mileage well into the middle to upper 100k+ mileage with some approaching 200k. Never replaced a tranny on any of them.
I take that back, 1 guy here at work had a tranny replaced on an 04' Ody because when going in reverse, there was a high pitched whine. The van was a month old, and the dealer replaced it, no questions asked. Now it has 50k+ on it and never had a problem since...
varmint had his replaced, and my college roommate also had his TL's tranny swapped out. So it's not happening to every one, but it's not rare, either.
CR ratings are still high, and that's accounting for any tranny issues that exist.
Honda had been used to making lighter, smaller cars, so their engineers simply had no experience with the types of heavy duty the bigger models in the lineup tend to get (especially the Odyssey, since you can load those up). Imagine you've never built a vehicle over 3000 lbs, and suddenly your hottest model is well over 4000 lbs with a GVWR well over 5k lbs.
Any how, what counts is that Honda/Acura stepped up, aren't those being covered for 100k miles? And it's not like tranny failues aren't common on Dodge and Ford vans, and those are not covered. Sienna's 3.0l V6 had some occurenced of sludge, so noone in the segment has a perfect record.
Would I still get one? I think so, if the wife had her heart set on an Accord V6 we'd probably end up with one. I do think I'd spring for an extended warranty, though.
I don't deny that there was an issue. I truley believe that there were some issues out there. But, it is 2005 heading to 2006 and these issues still exist? I'm not buying it. I don't believe Honda would just sit back, deny it and allow it to keep happening. They have alot riding on their reputation to just allow something like that to keep going on. Also, there are millions of V6 Honda' models sold since the 98 Accord appeared. I would expect to see them littering the highways and roads if it was such an epidemic. I still have yet to see 1, and I live in N.E. where Hondas are a dime a dozen.
I don't know. I guess it all comes down to maintainence. I do my regular flushes at 45k on my MDX, my father did as well. The first sign of an issue is a burning smell or discoloration of the fluid. This was supposedly due to a second gear clutch pack that was starved for fluid. So in 03' when they figured this out, they started putting oil jets in the cars to pump oil into the starved areas. But just like an oil change, the tranny fluid isn't meant to last forever, and needs to be changed. So I change it. Never had a problem. Just says to me that the V6 tranny's are sensitive to maintainence.
My original point is that now that since the issue had surfaced "haters" will drum up the issue from here on out. Boards like edmunds are filled with opinions and problems for ALL makes and models. I HIGHLY doubt that every post you read is legit. And unfortunately on some other "Surviving" boards it becomes foder for some posters who use these posts to pose the argument that makes their brand look better. Probably the single most irritating thing on message boards IMO.
I've put forth my experience. Take it or leave it, I am convinced that buying a V6 Honda is NOT a risky scenario. ateixeira, and others hve put for theirs and I respect that as well. BTW, this post is not directed at anyone on this board, it is merely a generalization.
The original problem was an issues with lubrication. I think it was 2nd gear not getting enough oil. One of the fixes was to add oil injectors into the case.
I don't think "handling the power" was ever a problem. The way it was described to me suggests that the problem could be manifest even if mated to a 4 cyl.
All that said, if someone is having problems with a "new" V6 tranny, they should check to see what the root cause of it is before we automatically (pun not intended) link it to past problems.
I like the Accord's new look. It's not handsome, but I think the rear is much better suited to the rest of the car. Not exactly attractive, but far from ugly.
Also, the minor change they made to the grill actually does a good deal more for the car than I'd expected.
'06 Accord on the freeway at night over the weekend, and initially I thought it was a TL from the rear. Didn't realize the Accord has started using LED taillights?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And I don't fit in the new Civic. Even with the tilt/telescoping wheel. Tried it out yesterday and could not get comfortable. Guess there's so new SI in my future.
As far as people on Edmunds complaining. Looking at the type of people that post here, you have to take whatever is posted with a grain of salt. Considering Honda actually sells mostly LX 4 cylinder automatic Accords it's amazing how many people here either have V6's or wouldn't drive anything with an automatic.
As currently discussing, you'd think V6 Accords were dropping trannies all over the place if you were to read enough Accord posts. That's simply not the case.
First sedan I've seen on the road. Looked better from behind, again, less boring than the old one. It turned off before I could get a good look at the profile.
I still prefer the coupe.
Meaningless empirical data - there are already 2 new Accord sedans in my garage. Both automatic 4 bangers. Both had alloys, neither had a moonroof. I'm guessing LX and then LX with dealer installed alloys?
The new Civic look definitely works better on the coupe. I think that's true of most of the "modern" Civics (91+)... as if the designs always started as a coupe, and the sedan was just a stretched version.
The last generation was the only one with a truly unique sedan; a lot of people don't like it, but I thought it had some elegance to it, and not much awkwardness. The coupe was still better looking though.
On another item, I've seen a few RL's lately. I know the design is rather plain, but there's something about it... I think it's the stance. They got it just right, and it goes a long way towards making it look special.
That's 50% of what my dealer is now getting in Accords, and it is called the "LX-SE". FACTORY-installed alloys, no moonroof. They are trying to get a tweener price going for Accords. Shouldn't they just make alloys standard from the LX on up? Everything above that costs over $20K. They already have the attitude that anyone who wants a V-6 and a moonroof automatically wants leather, why not bring the LX 4-cyls into accord (pun intended!) with that notion?
I saw an EX 4-cyl stick shift at the dealer today (was down there for something else) - nice.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
As far as I can tell, with the advent of the new tweener trim level, an EX is just an LX-SE with a hole punched through the roof (maybe the rims are an inch bigger on the EX? not sure). The LX-SE also gets the better stereo of the EX (6-disc). I know what all this is a prelude to: they are going to make leather standard in the EX, then you will have to take leather to get a moonroof with the 4-cyl also. :-(
I have been down there twice since '06 Accords have been arriving, neither time did they have any 6-speed V-6s in stock. Lots of the autos though - big money maker for dealers.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The local Honda dealer has two Accord V-6, 6-speed sedans.
I like the new rump on the Accord sedans...it gives the car a more "finished" look.
I've seen one new Civic on the road - a silver coupe in Philadelphia. It does stand out in traffic. So far, I haven't spotted any Civic sedans. The dealers around here really don't have that many Civics - either coupe or sedan - in stock.
I'll be happy if they offer a true manual with SH-AWD.
Competitors don't, for the most part. G35x is auto only. So it the IS250 AWD. So it the GS300, the RL, the M35x. How sad!
Acura would have a unique powertrain combination among the Asian brands, I believe. V6 + Manual + AWD.
Even Subaru, AWD specialists, does not offer the H6 with a manual in the USA. You can get 4 banger turbos (Legacy GT, EVO, MazdaSpeed MS6), but no six.
"CR ratings are still high, and that's accounting for any tranny issues that exist."
Thats true that Cr ratings are still high even with the tranny problem. The 01-02 Acura CL had bad marks for the tranny in CR but the CL still ranked average in reliability because other than the tranny problem it finshed better than the "average model" in lots of other trouble spot categories in Cr's charts. Ditto fr the 01-02 TL which finshed with bad marks for tranny and like the CL. For the 01 TL and finished with above average overall in CR's ratings but if you remember right the 01 TL think had a shortened model year since the 02 TL's came out early in 01 with a mid cycle refresh and the new Type S trim. I think its interesting though the 99 TL which is the same model as the 00-03 finshed above average for the trouble spot of tranny in CR's ratings but the 00 model finshed average in the tranny trouble spot and the 01-02 finshed under average in the tranny trouble spot. That begs the question did Honda slip in a new Tranny in the TL's for the 00 model year after the last generation TL's was only on the market for only one year prior to the 00 model. The last generation TL came out new for the 99 model year. The Type S's for the 02-03 TL with all the tranny problems came out in early in 01 I think with the TL. I'm not sure when the CL came out with both the Type S and the base model. Didn't the CL come out early in 00 as an 01 model if I'm right. BTW, I have a base model CL(02) with 35,600 miles with no tranny problems. I guess I was one of the lucky people that hasn't had a tranny problem yet.
"Honda had been used to making lighter, smaller cars, so their engineers simply had no experience with the types of heavy duty the bigger models in the lineup tend to get (especially the Odyssey, since you can load those up). Imagine you've never built a vehicle over 3000 lbs, and suddenly your hottest model is well over 4000 lbs with a GVWR well over 5k lbs."
I agree with you but then I disagree with you. I agree with you on the point that Honda with bigger sized models that Honda doesn;t have the experience with but at the same time I hope they are learning fast on how to engineer bigger cars. I disagree with you in that Honda should have worked all the bugs out on their bigger models before putting them onto the market.
"Any how, what counts is that Honda/Acura stepped up, aren't those being covered for 100k miles? And it's not like tranny failues aren't common on Dodge and Ford vans, and those are not covered. Sienna's 3.0l V6 had some occurenced of sludge, so noone in the segment has a perfect record."
I agree with you Honda did step up to the plate on their tranny problem where as Ford and Chrysler did not and Honda did not blame its owners for a problem with cars like Toyota did with their sludge problem. BTW, I don't think Toyota will let a slip-up like they did with their engine sludge happen again. A sludge problem for a automaker like Toyota who is known for their quality is not a good thing for their reputation.
"Would I still get one? I think so, if the wife had her heart set on an Accord V6 we'd probably end up with one. I do think I'd spring for an extended warranty, though."
I'm stll cautious on the Accord V6 buying one brand new off the lot wise if I wanted one if I had a family. For a single guy like me though the 4 cyl is adequeate enough in the power category. Even though I do have a CL there were no 4 cyl model CL's so I couldn't purchase a 4cyl CL a few years ago. This was before the tranny problem caught wind though. I have like the new TL's I might buy oned used in a few years but I am going to look at CR"s reliability records of the TL in the next few years. I love the cockpit in the current TL"s. Its one of the best exterior designs that Honda has come out with in recent memory as well.
"I like the Accord's new look. It's not handsome, but I think the rear is much better suited to the rest of the car. Not exactly attractive, but far from ugly."
Yeah the 06 Accord looks better than the 03-05 models but the back doesn;t match the front end in my opinion. Also, when is a new Accord coming out? The next generation Toyota Camry that is coming out as an 07 model is getting an early launch next year so I think Honda has to do something to hold the sales of current generation Accord's afloat. In my opinion Honda should just release their 08 Accord's early in 07 rather than waiting for a September 07 launch.
On a side note should Honda be worrying about Toyota releasing models early in a model year and losing sales to Toyota because when Toyota launches early in a model year the excecs at Honda maybe worrying that they are losing sales to Toyota. For example the Toyota Sienna came out I think came out as an early 04 model in early 03 I think and by contrast the current Honda Oddessy mini-van came out in September 04. So in conclusion he last generation Oddy came out a year and a half after a new Sienna came out. I know Honda needs time to work on getting their bugs worked out on new models in their factory but Toyota is pushing the envelope in my opinion on getting new models out as fast as possible despite their recalls being up of late.
"I don't deny that there was an issue. I truley believe that there were some issues out there. But, it is 2005 heading to 2006 and these issues still exist? I'm not buying it. I don't believe Honda would just sit back, deny it and allow it to keep happening. They have alot riding on their reputation to just allow something like that to keep going on."
Yeah I know I would be hard to believe that Honda would just sit back and allow the tranny problem to keep on happening but it scares me I am seeing posts on this board with current generation Accord V6's with tranny problems.
"Also, there are millions of V6 Honda' models sold since the 98 Accord appeared. I would expect to see them littering the highways and roads if it was such an epidemic. I still have yet to see 1, and I live in N.E. where Hondas are a dime a dozen.."
I live in NJ and I have seen some 98-02 Accord's broken down but not a huge number on the highway with their tailights flashing or sitting on the shoulder.
The 1999 TL had a four-speed AT. In 2000, they switched to a 5AT.
The TL I drove to work this morning happens to be a 2001. We had the tranny replaced once. I think it was done somewhere around 50-60K miles. We've got 90K on the car now.
I'll be the first to say that the transmission is a concern now that the (free) extended 100K mile warranty is set to expire. But, then again, if the tranny goes at 101,000 miles, it will be a) expected, and b) the first real repair we've had to pay for. I could have bought something else and had the tranny go unexpectedly, not covered by a warranty, and with several additional quality or mechanical problems to boot. I have several friends who would gladly trade my tranny issues for the list of problems they've had.
On the Accord, I agree the new back end does not match the front. But I never thought the old design did either.
"Imagine you've never built a vehicle over 3000 lbs, and suddenly your hottest model is well over 4000 lbs with a GVWR well over 5k lbs."
Who originally wrote that? Was it you, Juice?
Honda never built a diesel engine before the award-winning 2.2 unit in the European Accord.
Honda had never built an exotic before the NSX (for it's time, it was a show-stopper).
Honda had never built a larger luxury car before the original Legend.
Honda had never built an American-style minivan before the 1999 Odyssey.
Honda had never built a jet engine before the record-breaking unit GE is so interested in.
Honda hadn't produced a roadster in something like 40 years prior to the S2000. You can bet the staff who developed the original S600 and S800 were no longer around to provide their expertise.
All I can say is, thank goodness they never had any experience building mid-size SUVs, because I'm looking at picking up a used MDX.
MDX is a great vehicle, I can attest to that. My dad put 135k or so on an 01' (probably one of the first ones sold) and never replaced a tranny either. It did go through a couple of EGR valves which was the biggest repair over the time he had it. But he also did the routine maintainence on it as well. Every 45k it got a tranny fluid flush and after the issues started popping up, he went to 30k flushes which is what I try to do with mine (30 -45k).
I've also replaced the EGR on mine and from what I've read Honda has warranted that item till 100k miles. The only other goof I have with it is the intermittent steering wheel Audio controls that go nutty on occasion. Love it though, awesome vehicle. :shades:
Comments
I haven't sat in one in a while (and don't think I ever drove any of that generation other than the Si), but it looks like something I could live with, if they wanted to give me a killer deal to take it.
Let's see, new is 18.8K, so how about 14K for an '05 EX? Or about an even trade for my tC.
Of course, there are no manual tranny 2005's left anywhere that I can find, otherwise I would take one for a spin.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
And not to be nitpicky, but...
I like the coupe's nose because it looks sharper, perhaps it's the thinner chrome strip.
On most Civics, there's no chrome in there. The strip behind the H badge is body colored. An easy mistake to make since so many of the press pics are silver cars. Depending on the color, the strip fades into the background quite a bit.
I think the only one with chrome in there is the Hybrid.
I have to correct myself. It looks like the sedans have a chrome grill insert. The one on the Si is body-colored. The one on the coupe is just plain gray. Unless there's some sort of difference between the LX and EX models.
That's what I like the least about the hybrid, well, 2nd least after those ugly rims.
The coupe looks about 400% better with that subtle change.
Nothing a can of spray paint can't fix. LOL
-juice
Despite looking decent, and better than the last one, it is not a knock-out (the sedan, I mean), and there are so many cues from other cars that it looks a bit like it was just copycatting others' designs.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The reason why it don;t look knockout is 2 reasons. If they made a knock-out looking Civic Sedan it would take away from TSX and the TSX is a big profit machine for Honda in the US. Also, 2nd reason is Honda usually saves "the sporty looks" for the coupe model of the Civic.
The styling doesn't bother me because the changes made it much more functional (longer wheelbase = more interior room), so I think the changes were good.
Bob
I agree with your statement and I diagree with your statement at the same time. I agree alot of car makers to take idea's from other car makers. I diagree with you why did Honda have to have to make the A4 talights rip-off look so obvious? I mean thats like the 98 Lexus GS looking exactly like a Mercedes ad the Kia Amanti again looking like a Mercedes. A good exmaple of taking influences off a car but not ripping it off directly would be the current Hyundai Elantra. The back of the Elantra looks like it was inspired by Audi and the front looks saab-inspired like but it doesn;t look a direct rip-off of those two car manufacturers. Honda is starting to get like Toyota a few years ago and just copying off of what they see. Acura stylists do it alot better they use influence from European Cars but they don;t like a direct rip-off of European Cars except for the 04+ TL's door design along the side which resembles the 99-05 3 Series door design very closely. Honda stylists needs to adopt the same philosphy as the Big Brother Acura's stylists in terms of influences but at the same time not making the influence of another car company's so evident in my opinion.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/11/0auto-342898.htm
The new Civic is selling at near list, Consumer Reports names the Honda Accord its top pick in the brutally competitive mid-size sedan segment, CR also names the Odyssey as its top pick minivan, sales are surging, profits are high, etc., etc.
Anyone think of a new title for discussing Honda that's more accurate. GM's run has run out, but Honda? I don't think so.
Of course, the individual models that led the fuel efficiency list were the Civic Hybrid and Prius, followed by the Mercedes and VW diesels. Honda needs to do a lot more advertising of the Civic Hybrid this time around, I think. They were sitting around a bit beginning last year, and there was very little TV advertising for them, just some print stuff.
And Honda's four overall winners by segment (out of 24) were not the ones I would have expected, except for one: the Odyssey. The others (Accord coupe, Element, and RL) are not particular stand-outs among Honda's vehicle line, IMO. Where are the TL, the Pilot, the CRV that I expect to see top these lists? I
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I agree that Honda could use more and better PR for building hybrids. Toyota is walking away with the hybrid market. Honda needs to get some respect for their efforts. But public relations is about the only reason for advancing the hybrid models at this point.
Maybe they are worth investing more in: call it foundation work for perhaps two decades of hybrids in the market. Batteries, after all, will just get better and better even as they come down in price.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
a. That were actually happening on a large scale. For my part, I have not seen this phenomenon. I suppose it could be a regional thing.
or...
b. People other than wacky enthusiasts like ourselves were actually counting the cars on the back lots.
For my part, I think there's no doubt that Toyota has an early lead in buying public perception. And that should continue to garner more sales for them. But this is a marathon, not a sprint.
For example, you suggested that Honda might be well served by pursuing more battery technology. Well... what about ultracapacitors? The discharge rate for them is significantly higher than that of even the most modern of batteries. They provide more power and tend to be more compact. The biggest drawback is cost (already a hurdle for hybrids).
Picture a company (Toyota, Honda, Ford, whomever...) which has developed a fleet of hybrid vehicles developed around a battery-based design. That would require a huge investment in added manufacturing capacity and R&D into battery technologies. Now picture that same company when ultracapacitors or some other solution becomes economical and viable for use in hybrid transportation. Suddenly, the entire fleet is old tech in a segment that is currently powered by a high tech image.
Given that the technology for these vehicles is very much in its infancy, I can see why a company might be skittish about jumping in with both feet. Maybe Toyota will become dominant enough that any other design is suppressed (like Microsoft vs Apple). Maybe not.
Demand will increase steadily. This can be a halo car for the Civic line - draw buyers in, sell most of them on base models (30/40 mpg ain't too shabby). And they can make a profit on those.
-juice
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Greenhybrid.com
I suspect the Honda comes closer to the estimates because it's more like the traditional kind of car which the tests were designed to measure. This new one is less like a traditional car.
It will be interesting to keep an eye on that site to see what owners report.
-juice
Theoretically, the Prius is essentially an electric car with an engine assist. Meanwhile, the Civic is gas-based with electric assist, which is closer to the type of car the EPA tests were conceived to measure.
That database may not be the most accurate. The data is probably skewed by mileage-sensitive enthusiasts. But it does have a decent sample for each vehicle and that sampling flaw would apply to both. All things being as equal as I can make them, the Prius is off the EPA estimates by about 13.5%. The HCH is off by 5% for the CVT, or only 3% for the CVT and 5MT models combined.
When the 2006 Civic Hybrid comes, part of it's EPA rating will result from the ability to run on electric alone and the more powerful electric motor. That makes it more of a 50/50 hybrid than a gas-powered car with electric assist. Which means it may be subject to the same EPA testing advantage/discrepancy as the Prius.
On the flip side, the Prius claims to be able to propel itself on electrics alone lots of the time, but in reality, the battery pack is only big enough for it to run on electrics for 30 seconds or so, and the acceleration you get leaving a light on electrics alone is so little you have to kick it to get the gas engine to fire. But running slightly downhill, it will run on electrics for a long time, and I wonder how the new HCH would behave in that situation.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Best I can say about it is that it is far from boring.
Let's see if the sedan grows on me.
-juice
PLENTY of everything else though.
By the way, I hate the new Accord. Just wanted to put that out there. The best one was the 03-04 with the yellow turn signals.
Gee, I'm not saying your wrong or anything but you thought the 03-04 Accords were the best looking Accord's ever? Every Honda fan complained about the 03 Accord redesign including me. I just think thats unique that you think the 03-04 Accord's are the best looking Accord's.
On another topic I am worried because I have heard people on these boards saying their tranny in the current generation Accord V6 models needed a new tranny at 70K. It looks like Honda still does not have a handle mechanically on their Accord V6 models. The 98-02 Accord V-6's also had tranny problems. I am not bad mouthing Honda but it still doesn't look Honda has a handle on their Accord V6 set-ups mechanical wise the way they do their Accord's with the 4 cyl engine in them. Is it the weight of the V6 engine that is causing these tranny problems with the Accord since 98 or is it the tranny itself can;t handle the V6 engine power. I am hoping the current TL and RL do not have the same tranny problems that the current Accord V6 models have.
I've mentioned this before, I know 11 people (used to be 12 until the Highlander came out in 01, trade-in) with V6 Honda's and Acura's. 11 of them. High mileage well into the middle to upper 100k+ mileage with some approaching 200k. Never replaced a tranny on any of them.
I take that back, 1 guy here at work had a tranny replaced on an 04' Ody because when going in reverse, there was a high pitched whine. The van was a month old, and the dealer replaced it, no questions asked. Now it has 50k+ on it and never had a problem since...
CR ratings are still high, and that's accounting for any tranny issues that exist.
Honda had been used to making lighter, smaller cars, so their engineers simply had no experience with the types of heavy duty the bigger models in the lineup tend to get (especially the Odyssey, since you can load those up). Imagine you've never built a vehicle over 3000 lbs, and suddenly your hottest model is well over 4000 lbs with a GVWR well over 5k lbs.
Any how, what counts is that Honda/Acura stepped up, aren't those being covered for 100k miles? And it's not like tranny failues aren't common on Dodge and Ford vans, and those are not covered. Sienna's 3.0l V6 had some occurenced of sludge, so noone in the segment has a perfect record.
Would I still get one? I think so, if the wife had her heart set on an Accord V6 we'd probably end up with one. I do think I'd spring for an extended warranty, though.
-juice
I don't know. I guess it all comes down to maintainence. I do my regular flushes at 45k on my MDX, my father did as well. The first sign of an issue is a burning smell or discoloration of the fluid. This was supposedly due to a second gear clutch pack that was starved for fluid. So in 03' when they figured this out, they started putting oil jets in the cars to pump oil into the starved areas. But just like an oil change, the tranny fluid isn't meant to last forever, and needs to be changed. So I change it. Never had a problem. Just says to me that the V6 tranny's are sensitive to maintainence.
My original point is that now that since the issue had surfaced "haters" will drum up the issue from here on out. Boards like edmunds are filled with opinions and problems for ALL makes and models. I HIGHLY doubt that every post you read is legit. And unfortunately on some other "Surviving" boards it becomes foder for some posters who use these posts to pose the argument that makes their brand look better. Probably the single most irritating thing on message boards IMO.
I've put forth my experience. Take it or leave it, I am convinced that buying a V6 Honda is NOT a risky scenario. ateixeira, and others hve put for theirs and I respect that as well. BTW, this post is not directed at anyone on this board, it is merely a generalization.
I don't think "handling the power" was ever a problem. The way it was described to me suggests that the problem could be manifest even if mated to a 4 cyl.
All that said, if someone is having problems with a "new" V6 tranny, they should check to see what the root cause of it is before we automatically (pun not intended) link it to past problems.
Also, the minor change they made to the grill actually does a good deal more for the car than I'd expected.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
And I don't fit in the new Civic. Even with the tilt/telescoping wheel. Tried it out yesterday and could not get comfortable. Guess there's so new SI in my future.
As far as people on Edmunds complaining. Looking at the type of people that post here, you have to take whatever is posted with a grain of salt. Considering Honda actually sells mostly LX 4 cylinder automatic Accords it's amazing how many people here either have V6's or wouldn't drive anything with an automatic.
As currently discussing, you'd think V6 Accords were dropping trannies all over the place if you were to read enough Accord posts. That's simply not the case.
I still prefer the coupe.
Meaningless empirical data - there are already 2 new Accord sedans in my garage. Both automatic 4 bangers. Both had alloys, neither had a moonroof. I'm guessing LX and then LX with dealer installed alloys?
-juice
The last generation was the only one with a truly unique sedan; a lot of people don't like it, but I thought it had some elegance to it, and not much awkwardness. The coupe was still better looking though.
On another item, I've seen a few RL's lately. I know the design is rather plain, but there's something about it... I think it's the stance. They got it just right, and it goes a long way towards making it look special.
I saw an EX 4-cyl stick shift at the dealer today (was down there for something else) - nice.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I'd want a V6, 6 speed, cloth, moonroof, SH-AWD please.
-juice
Except for the cloth seats, that ought to be the 2007 TL. Ya gots to pays if ya wants the goodies.
As far as I can tell, with the advent of the new tweener trim level, an EX is just an LX-SE with a hole punched through the roof (maybe the rims are an inch bigger on the EX? not sure). The LX-SE also gets the better stereo of the EX (6-disc). I know what all this is a prelude to: they are going to make leather standard in the EX, then you will have to take leather to get a moonroof with the 4-cyl also. :-(
I have been down there twice since '06 Accords have been arriving, neither time did they have any 6-speed V-6s in stock. Lots of the autos though - big money maker for dealers.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I like the new rump on the Accord sedans...it gives the car a more "finished" look.
I've seen one new Civic on the road - a silver coupe in Philadelphia. It does stand out in traffic. So far, I haven't spotted any Civic sedans. The dealers around here really don't have that many Civics - either coupe or sedan - in stock.
Competitors don't, for the most part. G35x is auto only. So it the IS250 AWD. So it the GS300, the RL, the M35x. How sad!
Acura would have a unique powertrain combination among the Asian brands, I believe. V6 + Manual + AWD.
Even Subaru, AWD specialists, does not offer the H6 with a manual in the USA. You can get 4 banger turbos (Legacy GT, EVO, MazdaSpeed MS6), but no six.
What a gaping hole of a niche, no?
-juice
..inasmuch as I jilted a Forester for an Accord EX V-6 Coupe 6-speed, I suspect we're still on the same page....
..the engineering on my coupe continues to impress...
..during the period October 10-17 - an AZ trip - I made a strong effort to obtain best MPG (still using 87 octane). The resultant really impressed me.
all the best, ez......
-juice
Thats true that Cr ratings are still high even with the tranny problem. The 01-02 Acura CL had bad marks for the tranny in CR but the CL still ranked average in reliability because other than the tranny problem it finshed better than the "average model" in lots of other trouble spot categories in Cr's charts. Ditto fr the 01-02 TL which finshed with bad marks for tranny and like the CL. For the 01 TL and finished with above average overall in CR's ratings but if you remember right the 01 TL think had a shortened model year since the 02 TL's came out early in 01 with a mid cycle refresh and the new Type S trim. I think its interesting though the 99 TL which is the same model as the 00-03 finshed above average for the trouble spot of tranny in CR's ratings but the 00 model finshed average in the tranny trouble spot and the 01-02 finshed under average in the tranny trouble spot. That begs the question did Honda slip in a new Tranny in the TL's for the 00 model year after the last generation TL's was only on the market for only one year prior to the 00 model. The last generation TL came out new for the 99 model year. The Type S's for the 02-03 TL with all the tranny problems came out in early in 01 I think with the TL. I'm not sure when the CL came out with both the Type S and the base model. Didn't the CL come out early in 00 as an 01 model if I'm right. BTW, I have a base model CL(02) with 35,600 miles with no tranny problems. I guess I was one of the lucky people that hasn't had a tranny problem yet.
"Honda had been used to making lighter, smaller cars, so their engineers simply had no experience with the types of heavy duty the bigger models in the lineup tend to get (especially the Odyssey, since you can load those up). Imagine you've never built a vehicle over 3000 lbs, and suddenly your hottest model is well over 4000 lbs with a GVWR well over 5k lbs."
I agree with you but then I disagree with you. I agree with you on the point that Honda with bigger sized models that Honda doesn;t have the experience with but at the same time I hope they are learning fast on how to engineer bigger cars. I disagree with you in that Honda should have worked all the bugs out on their bigger models before putting them onto the market.
"Any how, what counts is that Honda/Acura stepped up, aren't those being covered for 100k miles? And it's not like tranny failues aren't common on Dodge and Ford vans, and those are not covered. Sienna's 3.0l V6 had some occurenced of sludge, so noone in the segment has a perfect record."
I agree with you Honda did step up to the plate on their tranny problem where as Ford and Chrysler did not and Honda did not blame its owners for a problem with cars like Toyota did with their sludge problem. BTW, I don't think Toyota will let a slip-up like they did with their engine sludge happen again. A sludge problem for a automaker like Toyota who is known for their quality is not a good thing for their reputation.
"Would I still get one? I think so, if the wife had her heart set on an Accord V6 we'd probably end up with one. I do think I'd spring for an extended warranty, though."
I'm stll cautious on the Accord V6 buying one brand new off the lot wise if I wanted one if I had a family. For a single guy like me though the 4 cyl is adequeate enough in the power category. Even though I do have a CL there were no 4 cyl model CL's so I couldn't purchase a 4cyl CL a few years ago. This was before the tranny problem caught wind though. I have like the new TL's I might buy oned used in a few years but I am going to look at CR"s reliability records of the TL in the next few years. I love the cockpit in the current TL"s. Its one of the best exterior designs that Honda has come out with in recent memory as well.
Yeah the 06 Accord looks better than the 03-05 models but the back doesn;t match the front end in my opinion. Also, when is a new Accord coming out? The next generation Toyota Camry that is coming out as an 07 model is getting an early launch next year so I think Honda has to do something to hold the sales of current generation Accord's afloat. In my opinion Honda should just release their 08 Accord's early in 07 rather than waiting for a September 07 launch.
On a side note should Honda be worrying about Toyota releasing models early in a model year and losing sales to Toyota because when Toyota launches early in a model year the excecs at Honda maybe worrying that they are losing sales to Toyota. For example the Toyota Sienna came out I think came out as an early 04 model in early 03 I think and by contrast the current Honda Oddessy mini-van came out in September 04. So in conclusion he last generation Oddy came out a year and a half after a new Sienna came out. I know Honda needs time to work on getting their bugs worked out on new models in their factory but Toyota is pushing the envelope in my opinion on getting new models out as fast as possible despite their recalls being up of late.
Yeah I know I would be hard to believe that Honda would just sit back and allow the tranny problem to keep on happening but it scares me I am seeing posts on this board with current generation Accord V6's with tranny problems.
"Also, there are millions of V6 Honda' models sold since the 98 Accord appeared. I would expect to see them littering the highways and roads if it was such an epidemic. I still have yet to see 1, and I live in N.E. where Hondas are a dime a dozen.."
I live in NJ and I have seen some 98-02 Accord's broken down but not a huge number on the highway with their tailights flashing or sitting on the shoulder.
The TL I drove to work this morning happens to be a 2001. We had the tranny replaced once. I think it was done somewhere around 50-60K miles. We've got 90K on the car now.
I'll be the first to say that the transmission is a concern now that the (free) extended 100K mile warranty is set to expire. But, then again, if the tranny goes at 101,000 miles, it will be a) expected, and b) the first real repair we've had to pay for. I could have bought something else and had the tranny go unexpectedly, not covered by a warranty, and with several additional quality or mechanical problems to boot. I have several friends who would gladly trade my tranny issues for the list of problems they've had.
On the Accord, I agree the new back end does not match the front. But I never thought the old design did either.
Who originally wrote that? Was it you, Juice?
Honda never built a diesel engine before the award-winning 2.2 unit in the European Accord.
Honda had never built an exotic before the NSX (for it's time, it was a show-stopper).
Honda had never built a larger luxury car before the original Legend.
Honda had never built an American-style minivan before the 1999 Odyssey.
Honda had never built a jet engine before the record-breaking unit GE is so interested in.
Honda hadn't produced a roadster in something like 40 years prior to the S2000. You can bet the staff who developed the original S600 and S800 were no longer around to provide their expertise.
All I can say is, thank goodness they never had any experience building mid-size SUVs, because I'm looking at picking up a used MDX.
I've also replaced the EGR on mine and from what I've read Honda has warranted that item till 100k miles. The only other goof I have with it is the intermittent steering wheel Audio controls that go nutty on occasion. Love it though, awesome vehicle. :shades: