By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Now I know why I've always hated sheep!...... :sick: :mad:
Actually, any safety feature Honda wants to make me take, I'll gladly keep! Now, making me get leather to get Automatic Climate Control I wish wasn't the case (I HATE leather, but live in the south so it gets HOT in the summer). Safety features though? Yeah, give em to me!
I would also like to see a station wagon (or whatever they feel like calling it these days)
Imagine - SUV space with Prius fuel economy.
I would also like to see a station wagon (or whatever they feel like calling it these days)
Imagine - SUV space with Prius fuel economy.
IMO the above package with manual transmission sounds more tempting than any hybrid.
Why not just buy a Camry or Sonata or something from GM if you want a soft ride?
However, I agree it is a little harse. It would be nice if it had the same sportiness and handling but was less harsh such as the BMW 3 series.
Ugh soft ride is not the same as less harsh!
Cruis'n
MidCow
The current 4 cylinder engine has enought poop and produces impressive mileage. Our EX-L 4 banger has delivered about 29MPG during the first 2800 miles in rural driving with a little bit of time in town. I'm sure it'll improve as time goes on. Our '94 Toyota Tercel did just about the same MPG t 100,000+ miles and it has an 80HP engine.
I've never experienced a "harsh" or "noisey" ride in our Accord, tho' yesterday there was some wind noise coming from the driver's window. Cycling the window solved the problem.
This Accord is very smart. The climate control system is terrific, especially during the summer and autumn. The intermittent windshield wiper system is great here in the Pacific Northwest.
I added an auto dimming mirror to my Accord. It should be standard, at least at the EX-L trim level.
All in all, this is a great car.
Hope that Honda will atleast upgrade the Accord with the following...
Lower it.
More back seat legroom.
atleast 180ft/lbs per 3000lbs.
Bluetooth.
Auto dimming mirror.
Auto reverse mirrors.
Rear camera.
Finer suspension.
Impressed with their affirmation that the new 2008 crv is for women and reduced road noise. Honda is aware, impressive.
1. Older folks cannot get "up" into a ride.
2. Car seats/3 across back takes space.
3. A 4 can't get good mpg if its gassed always.
4. Shorter folks(females) can't see back.
5. Skip spoiler/install camera&mirror 4saftey.
6. Bluetooth.
7. Suspension? I could be pregnant again.
This summer I was looking for a car. I ended up with a old prelude. Why? The 2006 (read Bluetooth) TSX/RL/TL rear seat were too tight. And if its going to be tight it might as well handle. The accord had neither.
Honda knows we don't need flashy cars. But they have got to supply me with whats inside.
My husband does not want to drive me to work.
A vehicle must enable my efficiency therefore his state of mind.
Our other car is a C320.
Lower it.
That's bizarre that you'd suggest that the car sits too high, although not really wrong (you're just as entitled to option as the next person)... my aunt wanted an Accord, but hated the fact that she had to get "down" into it, and then get "up" out of it, whereas with her Odyssies (2000, 2005) and her CR-V (1997) she could just slide in and out.
She has a bad hip and is in her 60s, and wants the easiest entry/exit possible, which she found in the Odyssey and CR-V, but could not handle in the car because it was too LOW.
Lower it.
More back seat legroom.
...
Finer suspension." ((
Laudable suggestions, but if the car is lowered, it reduces available suspension travel which then necessitates increasing spring rates (ie, "firming" the ride) to minimize "bottoming" (abrupt slamming against the suspension's rubber bump stops) over harsh road irregularities. Increasing back seat legroom means lengthening the car - more weight, lower fuel economy. If you need more rear seat legroom, consider upgrading to a larger car than the Accord. Your last suggestion is in direct violation of the first for the same reasons given above. (Sorry - the laws of physics aren't ammendable - leastways in this universe...)
Why low and how low?
Attention backseat drivers? 1)Move the rear seats back and reduce trunk space. 2)Perhaps put them on rails to slide. 3)Hatch? How can I size up at honda without going to an suv Ray h1?
Finer suspension, what is that? I used to drive a raised toy85 22r. Harsh ride. Younger daze! :shades: Now I'm in a tricked out prelude. 125mm pipe, headers, adjustable springs... When the accord gets a bigger box it will need to be stiffer all over. In fact thats why I tend to purchase them over toyotas, nissans.... How about 1)front strut-type with two lower links, with coil springs, twin-tube gas shocks and an antiroll bar. Too expensive? 2) steel coil spring and shock absorber connected in parallel. Cheaper? 3) another rod?
I'm sure some genius over at honda can figure out how to perfect what the americans and germans invented so that the system is more reliable. That is the strength of the folks (Wilson and Martinez and Ito) working at honda and toyota IMO and thats why I like to buy their cars.
Attention backseat drivers? 1)Move the rear seats back and reduce trunk space.
Trunk space is already at the bottom end of the class for Accords, something that most people would prefer not get even smaller.
How can I size up at honda without going to an suv Ray h1
You can't unless you go to the Odyssey, or another car company like Toyota and its Avalon, or Nissan and its Maxima.
Sure, childproof locks on rear doors are fine, as long as the owner/driver has the choice of flipping the latch to either the on or the off position.
Honda, the car maker that floored the world in the 1970s with the first gasoline engine to meet U.S. clean air guidelines without a catalytic converter, said it has developed a new and simple diesel power train that is as clean as gasoline-fueled cars.
The technology marks a big step forward for Honda at a time when rivals are racing to come up with ways to clear the world's strictest emissions regulations, called Tier II Bin 5, that the United States will usher in next year.
Diesel engines, which now power half of Europe's new cars, are slowly gaining traction with fuel-conscious consumers around the world since they typically get 30 percent better mileage than gasoline cars. Their weakness has been the higher exhaust levels of nitrogen oxide (NOx), a greenhouse gas.
Honda said on Monday its new diesel drive train features a unique method that generates and stores ammonia within a two-layer catalytic converter to turn nitrogen oxide into harmless nitrogen.
Honda engineers said the technology is superior to a process pioneered by Germany's DaimlerChrysler because the latter requires a complex system and heavy add-ons to generate ammonia from urea-based additives.
After I posted above, I read a more recent article in yesterday's NY Times. It indicated a "2009 model four-cylinder Honda" without identifying a specific model, so it could mean just about any of their vehicles. You may have to sign up for free to read here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/automobiles/25auto.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
A slightly smaller size.
A bit less weight.
HVAC and audio controls from the '98 generation.
No standard sun roof on the V6 Coupe.
Plastic wheel covers (rather than alloy wheels) standard on the V6 Coupe.
A 6-speed automatic equivalent to what Toyota offers on Camry.
As much horespower and torque as the 3.5L V6 toyota offers on the Camry
A firmer suspension.
For styling cues, they can re-use the previous generation.
Audio controls could happen, I guess.
Who doesn't want a moon roof? I love it in the winter (Louisiana winter, not so cold).
Plastic wheel covers, who wants that over alloys?
6 speed trans, a possibility.
Horsepower and torque, definite possibility.
Firmer suspension, than a Camry, is a given.
I do find that if I sit with perfect posture in the back seat, my hair brushes the ceiling, but I'm not HITTING the roof with my head.
Me...but then I recognize that I am an oddball as I do not want leather or wood in my car either.
You aren't an oddball there... I'll take cloth and metal-look over leather and wood anyday. In fact, I HAVE! :-)
It used to be just DX ,LX and EX, now they have SE and VP models too on top of transmission choices, engine choices, leather or not, navi or not.
Now people want an EX without moonroof. Just get an LX.
Next someone is going to want a VP with nav system.
Shoot, I'd get an SE if I didn't want a moonroof, it's a SCREAMING DEAL, and has 95% of the EX features at basically LX prices. A moonroof was a must for me though, so we paid more.
And where is it decreed in the great cosmos that the person p-a-y-i-n-g for the car shouldn't be entitled to get the equipment or color choices he/she wants on whatever trim level he/she chooses - including a cloth interior in an EX V6? I happen to like the appearance of polished wood (even faux wood if it's tastefully done) and the tactile luxury of soft leather. But to get those items in an Accord, Honda America's marketing morons have forced buyer acceptance of a moonroof, its attendant weight and mechanical complexity, and the prospect of eventual rattles and rain leakage. Undeniably, Honda engineers and builds great cars and power trains - the latter on a par with what used to be associated with the Germans. But the company's U.S. corporate arrogance may end up being a deal buster for me when my '03 Sonata and I part company in another year or two. Before you respond jaxs1, my beef is with Honda America, not with you.
BTW, today's moonroofs very rarely leak. I love mine. So do my kids.
You can take your personal snide comments about me somewhere else.
American cars still have lots and lots of options, but then they are doing so weil financially and quality wise.
It's your choice, the dollar speaks.
MidCow
Buying a Honda used to be an incredibly simple process.
Pick your model - Accord, Civic, Prelude...
Pick your trim - DX, LX, EX, Si
Pick your color
Pick your transmission
It was that simple; and Honda has held quite closely to that and still managed to compete with many car companies that have numerous option packages that seem to make trim-levels unimportant.
It's just a matter of preference, nobody is wrong.
Also, better exterior/interior color choices.
No reason that automakers can't make any option combination available - for a small fee and a longer waiting time.
My understanding is that in Europe ordering and waiting is the norm I don't know if they get more opportunity to pick and choose options. I know they do get more engine choices that we do on at least some cars.
I have too big fears about the next generation Accord:
1) Honda may add more worthless trash as standard equipment, adding unnecessary complexity, weight, and cost.
2) Honda will upsize the car to compete against the likes of the Impala.
I'm driving a '98 Accord LX/V6 and I have been shopping for a new car on-and-off for the past 4 years. I despise the current Accord so much that I spent over $3500 to repaint my '98 Accord rather than trade it for a new Accord. I suspect that I'll end up replacing it with a GM, Nissan, or Toyota in a year or two. I will never buy a 4-cylinder Honda or an EX-trim level Honda.
When I test drove the '06 Accord Coupe, I found its headroom lacking, so we'll have to disagree on that issue. However, the sun roof was only part of the problem. The major problem was the extreme rake to the windshield for the silly aero styling effect.
I must tell you, that after MANY years of keeping Hondas 7+ years (with sunroofs), we never had ONE to leak.
I know you don't like the roof, but I wanted to give you a little vote of confidence from my perspective.
Have you considered the SE-V6 Accord? It has a V6 and no sunroof, and costs much less than an EX-V6, but has cloth upholstry, etc...
It is not only your height, but your posture, your proportions, and even your weight (heavy people depress the cushion more).
I had a 92 EX Accord for 12 years and the moonroof never leaked. The moonroof is not made to seal out the water. The water goes right through, and is drained out through a sort of gutter system and hose. When I first shopped for cars in 92 I wanted an EX, but I thought the moonroof was a bad idea, just as you do. But believe me, these things don't leak. It's not like the old T-tops and domestic sunroofs.
When it is around 55-70 degrees outside the moonroof is great. You get air circulation, without all the wind blowing stuff around, and a lot less wind noise.
You wrote, "The major problem was the extreme rake to the windshield for the silly aero styling effect." You are misinformed. Windshield rake is a major factor in fuel efficiency. All manufacturers are designing vehicles with a eye toward maximizing their Corporate Average Fuel Economy to best comply with the Federal CAFE standards.
1) EPA tests are run dynamometers in laboratories. Aerodynamics will not affect test results in these conditions, and those will not affect the CAFE score.
2) In real world driving, aerodynamics has no meaningful effect below 40 mph, and not much effect up to sane speeds (75 mph).
3) Aero styling can actually hurt fuel economy in two ways:
3a) Weight - The sloping glass area can force the designer to increase the wheelbase and/or length of the car. This was a problem on the last generation GM F-body which causes those cars to have a hefty curb weight and a laughable ratio of internal-to-external volume. Further, steeply-angled roof pillars and quarter panels must be made thicker and heavier to create the same support for the roof as more vertical ones.
3b) Use of Air Conditioning -
All the extraneous vertical glass creates a solar oven effect that requires more use of the air conditioning. Ford (and others) ran into this problem back in the 60's with the fastback rooflines they got from their racing cars. The answer was to add a louvered cover for the rear glass.
ecmfw - I have to disagree as well. I guess it is all a matter of personal opinion, as I like the 06-07 Accord looks and do not like the previous models with the center tail light in the window. As far as the 4-cly, why wouldn't you buy one? I bought my 07 4-Cly EX, because of the added gas mileage. When I test drove the 6-cyl, I liked the handling and better power, but that was not what I was looking for. Also, I liked the EX navi package. I am 6'-1" and have no problems driving. Since we have different opinions, maybe you liked the 08 concept car...I did not, that is why I bout the 07.