Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options

2008 Honda Accord Coupe and Sedan

1…1112141617…107

Comments

  • Options
    drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Definitely is attractive when paired with all the silver, gold, and moonstones I see all day. :)

    I see the Altima and Camry as similar in design. They're not different enough to say I love the Altima, but hate the Camry, or vice versa. They are two of the best looking in the class. ;)

    The Camry SE is the best, and I'm not in love with the Maxima front end on the Altima. But both are attractive.

    DrFill
  • Options
    elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    The Accord definitely needs some better colors. I ended up with Black. The only other color I thought was good was the Charcoal Gray. What ever happened to the famous Honda Green?
  • Options
    thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I know they had it as late as 2003/2004, but haven't seen any tropical green's lately. My grandmother's 2002 is that color, and a real bold beauty!
  • Options
    tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    I thought the Carbon Bronze and Graphite Pearl were fairly nice colors for the Accord. The Sapphire Blue Pearl is nice too. I don't think I've ever seen the Cool Blue Metallic

    However, for me.... it is great to have a silver car again. While some have said it is boring, I find it timeless and classy. And the best part is that it is the perfect color to have in the rainy Pacific NW. Those dark colors are soooo hard to keep clean around here. :shades:
  • Options
    dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    I have the graphite, but I think the cool blue is my favorite. My wife thought it was too close to the color of our Sienna though. :)
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    I liked the Ivory leather on my 02 exl so I got the color then called cashmere beige. It's beautiful on my car w/ 2 coats of meguier's. I prefer the Ivory interior so am limited as to exterior color. I pick the color inside out. I do like the silver. It would match my bass boat. :)
  • Options
    alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    The best Accord green ever - and very popular at the time -was the '94 "Malachite" Green. That was also my favorite gen Accord, although it had several misses given the changing mid-nineties market, I thought it had the most character.

    But I digress... where are the details on the '08! I need details!

    ~alpha
  • Options
    blaneblane Member Posts: 2,017
    What happened to any manufacturers' greens? They are becoming passe.
  • Options
    autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    as with the Cr-v, i don't think honda wants to win anymore HP wars. At most, the 3.2l v6 from the TL tuned for 260hp and the same I4 tuned for 170hp is all the accord needs.

    If honda can find a way to make the accord keep the same sporty handling and make a 6MT/Automanual honda will be fine. Maybe a sunroof, trunk brake light, and signal mirrors on the EX and the EX v6 w/ nav priced at $28k and the accord will sell well!

    -Cj :)
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    No,man. 3.5 AVTEC w/275 hp and 265 ft lbs. 2.4 AVTEC w/180.hp.
  • Options
    goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    No,man. 3.5 AVTEC w/275 hp and 265 ft lbs.

    That's too much hp for a FWD car. The TL's 258 hp is pushing it already (or should I say pulling it).
  • Options
    elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    The TL is now at 286hp (with the 3.5 liter), so 275 would be easy. I will probably be around 265hp for the first year model, it may go up more later on.
  • Options
    goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    So........what? You think that's not a lot of hp for a FWD? I do, as do most of the posters in the ELLPS forum.

    I'm sure the Accord will never be a RWD car. There will be a max hp for it tho and I think its already there at 244 hp.
  • Options
    autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    Well the 3.2l v6 from the TL will be the most likely choice. Honda doesn't want to lead the class, it just wants to be very competitive like the CR-v. 260hp is almost there with the camry and a bit behind the altima. Its still aways ahead of the fusion and sonata and its just there with fords 3.5l unit if they they use it in the fusion.

    260hp is OK for FWD as long as honda uses a limited slip. Also the 3.2l v6 in the TL gets the same MPG as the 3l in the accord. So 3.2l v6 is the most logical choice. The 3.5 is OK but I'm confident that honda doesn't want to pass the TL and RL in HP. 260passes the base TL but it may get changed the year after the accord (as history has it...)

    -Cj 3.2l v6 is my vote and IMO the best decision :)
  • Options
    jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    Since the TL needs premium to get the same mileage as the Accord does on regular, it will still cost you more to fuel it.
  • Options
    eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    i knew that everyone would go on about the 'bland' looks of the new accord...

    but what were you expecting?!

    I like it, has a sort of 5 series flare, and some distinct acura lines....honda is not going to make this amazing radical looking sedan, why would you put your hopes up for it?

    The last radical looking honda sedan (the new civic) gets critized all over this forum for its 'weird' looks, and i'm sure had honda given you a very original looking accord...those would be the kinds of comments that most here would have waiting for it.

    Get over it, it looks great, and will be an awesome mid sized sedan.

    I don't think 275 is pushing it for a fwd car...the mazdaspeed 3 has a little less, and the tl type s has more(but thats with a limited slip, something i don't forsee the new accord getting.) How much is the camry pushing? like 268? 275 is def. doable. And it will get great mileage for what it is. the 4 cyl will destory anything in the class when it comes to hp per litre as well. (and proably fuel economy too.)

    I think it looks awesome! :)
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    Come on,man. Horses are like women. You can't have too many.
  • Options
    dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    The Speed3 has to reduce engine torque for the first two gears so it does not melt its tires.

    Lets put all this hp talk into perspective. In 1991 the Corvette had 245 hp and weighed about the same as the Accord. Read a review from back then. It will be all about how fast the Vette is/feels.

    Has the human perception of speed changed since then, or just the desire for a higher number on the spec sheet?

    Also keep in mind that, unlike torque, if you don't get the engine up near the redline, then you are not getting that hp you paid for.

    How fast do we need to go, and is the Accord the appropriate platform for all this hp. What about Acura?
  • Options
    eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    true...i would agree that people do like numbers...even though i'm past that already.

    But thats not to say that it wont have horsepower around there...even if its 270, its not that bad...

    acura can worry about rwd or at least an shawd with some serious power...but that is for another thread.
  • Options
    maxpower02maxpower02 Member Posts: 103
    Keep the 2.4/3.0 in the next Accord. We have to stop the HP wars. Make them more efficient and if they can squeeze a few more hp out of them, so much the better. I have a 03'EXV6, it has amazing power, but with gas in the 3.50-3.60 gallon range, I would like better mileage with that power. Honda is one of the better engine builders, they can do it. The 2.4/3.0 platforms still have life in them. Unfortunetly, it becomes a marketing problem if the Accord has less engine displacement and horsepower than the competition.
    I have the Graphite Pearl, nice color, but Honda needs to get nicer colors for the next Accord.
  • Options
    goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    Premium fuel is .20c more a gallon. Say you fill an Accord with 15 gallons, 5 times a month. That's $15. Hardly a consideration when you consider what you pay for the car in the first place.
  • Options
    andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Actually, premium fuel is typically running 24 to 26 cents more a gallon, so if you add 20-30% to your mathematical computations, you'd get up to about $19/mo, or around $225 a year, which if put in the bank during that time to earn 5.36% at a certain online account available today, would earn you even more money. Also, this is an expense that doesn't go away, you're stuck with it for the life of the car.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • Options
    goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    Wow - pinchin' them pennies bro?
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    No. He's compounding them. :)
  • Options
    elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I'm sure the Accord will never be a RWD car. There will be a max hp for it tho and I think its already there at 244 hp.

    The TL is not RWD, and it has 286hp. If you don't agree with the HP wars, get the more economical 4 cylinder (which most people do). I predict the V6 Accord will have about 265hp, or somewhere between the Camry and Altima.
  • Options
    andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Yes, the V6 Accord should be sporty and hence have more than 270HP (or 270 HP exactly). The 4 cylinder can be the economical choice for 100HP less. Why have anything in between. If the V6 doesn't add 80 or more horses, then why bother getting it over the lighter weight I4?
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • Options
    dolfan1dolfan1 Member Posts: 218
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the competition already has cars in the Accord's class with hp of around 260 to 270, and I don't remember reading any stories about people wrapping them around telephone poles, etc in large numbers.

    We're not talking about a 60's technology 427 Cobra here.
    Safety is in the hands of the driver. A goof-ball behind the wheel of 4 banger can do a lot of damage.

    Honda must keep up with the competition. That's the way it is. Again, 21st century vehicles are light years superior to the old "muscle" cars in safety advances. Don't lose too much sleep over the new hp.
  • Options
    autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    You loose that by getting the V6 anyway!

    Remember, HONDA, the MOST fuel efficient company in america? I'm sure that .2 liters and regular gas may still be 260hp. They can work it out. Not to mention in torque. Plus this new accord's aerodynamics look pretty good!

    -Cj
  • Options
    thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Honda doesn't want to lead the class, it just wants to be very competitive like the CR-v.

    I thought business was about being ahead of the class? The CR-V is the number one SUV/CUV on the market sales-wise, so I guess it leads the class in popularity. I'd bet Honda would take "class-leading" wherever they could get it!
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    "You can't handle the truth!!!" In my best Jack Nicholson. :)
  • Options
    jchan2jchan2 Member Posts: 4,956
    I think 270 is plenty horsepower for the Accord V6 model.
  • Options
    thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Heh, I remember 8 years ago when the "new for '99" Maxima had 222 horsepower. That was when I remember the "200 horsepower" line being crossed (the Taurus and Accord had 200 hp, the Camry had 194). That seemed like an unreal amount for a sedan to me. Now, you're hard pressed to find a V6 making LESS than that.

    By the same token, my 4-cylinder 2006 Accord makes the same horsepower as the V6 Accord from 9 years ago (and offers 8 MPG better to boot). I'll take that!
  • Options
    biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    image
  • Options
    biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    image
  • Options
    biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    image
  • Options
    goodegggoodegg Member Posts: 905
    The TL is not RWD, and it has 286hp.

    Drive a 286 hp FWD TL and you'll see what goodegg is talking 'bout. There are times (accelerating hard when turning))when you really have to hold on tight to the steering wheel or the car will get away from you from the torque and wheel hop. Compare that sensation to a G35 or a 328/330 (both RWD).

    Of course the G and BMW also cost a lot more coin.

    I too think 286 hp is too much for a FWD. But I suspect most of the people buying a TL-S are prepared to hold on.
  • Options
    bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    I am still not sure I like the look of the 08 sedan, I would rather it look more like the coupe, because the coupe looks pretty hot. I was actually considering getting a black car this time around, and really I still don't know about this change at all. Although many cosmetic features are hidden right now, it stills looks tame. I do see what people mean about how it does look like a BMW somewhat. I am still excited about it, and will wait to give my final opinion when its on the showroom. Wow, but this is awesome though. I still want pics of the interior.
  • Options
    biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    You are pretty much looking at how the EX (sunroof) model will look. The interior is probably finalized also but apparently folks have yet to be able to get close enough for a pic.
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    You've just got to feather the throttle. What's so hard about that?
  • Options
    07pilot4me07pilot4me Member Posts: 52
    i am actually liking the new stiling, kinda looks bimmerish. might have to turn my house into a honda house when the new sedan comes out (just bought a pilot, need sedan b/c of kids).

    question: how come when spy photos come out the cars have tape on them, what does the tape accomplish. any MSRP's on the 08's yet??

    on second thought, might have to wait till late 08 to purchase, wait for the demand to cool down and the new Gen issues to get worked out :)
  • Options
    jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    You've just got to feather the throttle. What's so hard about that?

    Where's the fun in that? When you suggest feathering the gas, you're more or less admitting that the FWD configuration can't effectively put the extra horses to work. Powerful engines in FWD cars amount to lipstick on a pig. If you like power (most of us do), do it right & pick the layout - AWD or RWD (my choice) - that will do the best job of delivering that power to the pavement.

    FWD has its virtues - notably interior space utilization & low cost - that make it the configuration of choice for mass-market cars. But it's never been a favorite with driving enthusiasts.

    Anyway, if gas stays above $3/gallon, the great horsepower war will end abruptly. A lot of folks who are on the fence will decide that 4 cylinders is just fine, thanks.
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    The tape is to disguise the details.
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    John Force feathers his throttle. His car is RWD.
  • Options
    gwilsongwilson Member Posts: 46
    Sorry if this has been discussed - I can not find anything recent on it.

    Anyway, does anyone know what type of MGP increase we could possibly expect from adding VCM on the six cylinder Accord for 2008? Would it be in the 10%-20% range? Anyone have any details on this? Does VCM only help only on the highway or does it also help some on city driving?

    Thanks
  • Options
    andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,729
    Or you could get wider and/or stickier better tractioned tires for your FWD setup, thereby increasing your ability to corner, accelerate, brake, or do all at the same time (and put that power to the pavement).

    True, you can't just gun it turning sharply in FWD from a slow to 0 MPH speed, but you sure can gun it once the turn is complete. You just have to know how to drive... when to slow down, take the turn quickly, slow down at the last minute, then boom. I would say that you have to drive a FWD somewhat differently than RWD, but not necessarily all at a disadvantage to speed.
    '15 Audi Misano Red Pearl S4, '16 Audi TTS Daytona Gray Pearl, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • Options
    eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    there was a test on road and track where the tl came second place amongst the new g35 and is350; and it put up better handling numbers than both of them. It was the type s though.

    I think the new accord looks great, and exactly how it needs to.

    With regards to the vcm, it will be hard to guage how much more of a percentage it will increase the fuel economy by; simply because its not going to be an l series v-6 anymore. If it was the same v-6, with the vcm added, then it would be easier to guage; and if i'm not mistaken, it deactivated 2 of the cylinders on highway cruising.
  • Options
    jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    With the right tires & some practice, you can certainly improve the handling characteristics of any front driver. But the final result will not be as entertaining. It simply won't feel as good as a well-balanced RWD car.

    I'm familiar with the Acura TL because my daughter owns an '05. It's a 1st-rate highway cruiser. But pushing it rapidly through the twisties is hard work. It's no fun at all.
  • Options
    eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    oh i know what you mean, i was just throwing that in there, rwd is better than fwd when you start getting into numbers such as those that the tl type s and g35 push, but i think for an accord sedan/coupe, the estimated numbers will still be fine.
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    VCM is + 2-3 MPG on the highway. It's only operating when you are cruising smoothly w/light load on the motor.
  • Options
    eldainoeldaino Member Posts: 1,618
    thanks for the clarification! ;)
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles