2008 Honda Accord Coupe and Sedan

elroy5

I have a manual and an automatic. I would much rather drive the automatic. I don't get a big thrill out of exercising my left foot, and right arm, when it's really unessesary. I would rather relax and drink my coffee in the morning. Manuals are not the big thrill some people would have you believe. Drive what you want to drive.

blufz1

Agree. I do miss my manuals but when you have to choose bass fishing or manual shifting because of tendonitis in your right elbow it's an easy call. My compensation is my '84 V 65 Sabre with 4200 miles. Oh yeah,and my Fz1.

blane

Could that tendonitis in the right elbow have anything to do with rotating the wrist and lower arm WITHOUT Shiftronic?

blufz1

Too many big hooksets.......and too many power shifts as a child...Lol. I'm easy on the throttle on the bikes. Thanks for the cover.

andysd

Since I just bought an '07 Accord, I've mostly been reading the Buying Experience forum. I was determined to wait for the '08, but find I'm quite content to have bought an '07 (SE automatic silver/gray sedan). Since Honda improved the appearance of the rear lights, it's a beautiful car inside and out.

I got a good trade-in of an '04 Civic EX auto sedan which I also bought late in the model years, and a pretty good price on the new Accord.

I can always get the new model Accord later. Am wondering whether anyone else is thinking about '07 vs '08. The Buying Experience forum is very active so it appears many people aren't waiting for the '08.

blufz1

'07 will have less defects than 1st year car model run.

bvdj84

Hey "andysd"

I was determined too. I am in the same boat right now, trying to determine whether to wait for the 08 or get the 07, Being that I am in an 06 accord SE Silver/black, I simply want more options, absolutely love the car. No problems at all. I was just offered a lease deal on an EX-L with navi for about $320-340a month. Literally that is like $10-20 buck more than I pay now and I could have everything on the accord. Buy an 08 with all those options and your way up there in price, No deals, no budging on price for 08's. I feel I will keep the new car for about 2 years then trade in for the 08 when they offer better deals, and have all the bugs worked out. I'll stick with honda, First payment is due at signing, thats all. I have until the end of the month, when numbers change again. Should I make a move?

Any thoughts?

andysd

I suggest go to Temple of VTEC for '08 Accord photos and interesting comments (scroll down from the photos); also read the Edmunds Accord forum on Buying Experience to get views all over the lot. A lot of people are buying '07s, and there's a good selection now.

Like you, I wanted EX -L, but the cloth in our '04 EX Civic was still like new after 3 years and we never used the opening roof. Everying works so great in the SE, and the seats are comfortable. The SE has neat carbon fiber-look trim. So I decided to save a lot of money: $22,400 out the door (San Diego) and get the SE; others seem to get much better prices than I did. I have a Garmin C530 Streetplotter I can use in any of our 3 cars so did not want Navi.

Re-reading your posting, you probably can only go from lease to lease, so I guess it doesn't make sense to change to an '07 SE, too much the same as what you have. So maybe it does make sense to go to the top-of-the-line EX-L if the lease payment is virtually the same.

Please tell us what you decide!

kiawah

Put the initial payment and the increased payment into a 401K...that way you'll have something at the end.

bvdj84

Actually, If I were to get into an 07 accord SE, my payment would actually go down some. I could go that route, but would seem weird getting a new car, but be the same car, all the hassle. Although would be worth it. I love my honda! Love the 08 coupe, "Hot". Sedan is okay, its saturn like.

Also, Crazy question, but will my insurance go up, going from 06 SE to 07 EX-L? Dealer said no.

I'll let you know what I decide.

robr2

Leather isn't even a factory option for those cars, so they added it on after the car was built.
Toyota isn't doing that, the dealers are. Actually it's the distributor in the Southeast - Toyota stills deals through middlemen between itself and the dealer in some areas.

Subaru does the same in many regions.

andysd

Here's one more thought. Consider changing from lease payments to purchase payments. I paid $17,500 for my '04 Civic (excluding tax & license), and after 37 months received $14,000 as trade-in. You, on the other hand, pay $310 per month to lease which would be $11,470 down the drain after 37 months. Therefore, it seems to make sense to convert your lease on an '06 SE to purchase payments on an '07 SE. What do you think?

bvdj84

Yes, that makes sense, but there is a pay off amount that when you lease you continue to pay down. When signing for the car they let me know what my option to purchase price would be. For me, I really don't want some massive loan, it was easier for me to lease. Also if I did purchase my payments would be a bit higher. Leasing gets your more car for less money. My pay off for my car is now like $16.5. I was able to just pay the first payment and out the door. Your right though, In a "Technical" way I have nothing to show for my car. Waiting til Jan09 I could purchase it. Pay off being like 12k.Then I would have something to show for all my money in it. If I trade for the new 07 EX-L, Yes, I won't have anything to show on my 06, basically its like a rental car. Its okay for now. Still haven't decided. Almost too good a deal to pass up.

lweiss

I have heard such good things about the Accord and the pictures of the 2008 sedan look awesome. So I will buy the Accord when my present sedan finally gives up the ghost. Only thing is that I have a 1998 Volvo S-70 with 127K and it is still going very strong and it is really hard to exchange a car that is paid for and runs well (low maintenance) for a new car with big payments that starts depreciating when you drive it away from the dealer. But other Volvo owners tell me that with my attitude, I may be looking at the 2015 Honda Accord (Volvos last incredibly long!!!)

andysd

BVDJ -

Yes, I see how switching to lease the EX-L would be tempting, but it prolongs "nothing to show for it." And I see that purchase payments are higher which could force you to lease forever.

Isn't there some way to break that cycle?

If I take the rough number of $22,400 (the amount I paid out-the-door), and divide it by 60 months, that's $373 per month assuming zero per cent interest which is probably not realistic. But it would reduce the purchase payments to the order of magnitude of your lease payments, and you'd have significant equity at the end of the 5-year period - plus the pleasure of ownership.

You could switch from leasing to buying at the end of your current lease contract if that makes sense and you could get a very low interest rate...

Andy

bvdj84

Yes, you make some very good points. I guess I consider myself a person that would like to drive a new car often. I really see that making a car payment is always going to be they way of life. Sure, I could in 5 years have the car paid off, and never have to worry about a payment for a long time, but really right now it doesn't matter much too me. It would be hard to cycle off the leasing, but I am young, and like to have a little fun. My grandpa Co-signed for me, and now I am set for life as far as credit and also if I do get a new car, he would be off the lease, in a way, would be good for him. I am very picky about payments getting in on time. I still love my SE so much, and the fact he helped me get that. The EX-L navi deal is so appealing. Who can say after 1yr and a half, they can trade in without negative equity. Honda can. I could keep the 07 for about 2 years and be able to get an 08.

eldaino

its undoubtedly nice to have an easy to maintain paid off car.

but thats where you have to figure out what YOU want to do. the accord will depreciate; but so does every car; if thats what you are worried about a new car is not for you, as you should never purchase a vehicle based upon its 'depreciation' once its driven off the lot; its something you accept as soon as you decide you want a new car.

having said that, accords hold their value remarkably well, and you should have no problems keeping it as long as you have kept your volvo, and they are not difficult to maintain either. since you do keep your cars that long, resale and depreciation shouldn't really be that big of a deal!

thegraduate

having said that, accords hold their value remarkably well, and you should have no problems keeping it as long as you have kept your volvo, and they are not difficult to maintain either.

Sure aren't. I'm finding that it is costing me about $400 a year on average since I've passed the 150k mi/10 year mark in my 1996 Accord. It is from regular wear and tear items, nothing to leave me stranded like a transmission or anything - I'm still on the original tranny!

Thegrad
174k miles, 1996 Accord

robertsmx

You're in a position I was a few times. Bought 1998 Accord EX-L/auto just as soon as the new model came out and managed to pay it off in about two years.

At 100K mile mark, I considered replacing it, only to be overruled by my logical side. It happened again around 150K miles, but why? That car had ZERO issues. Other than brakes, lamps, battery like items, plus regular maintenance, the only issue I had was with a small piece of radiator hose that had cracked.

But new car virus had struck me, it got worse when I saw a real good deal on a 2006 TL (was considering TSX until that time). Went for it, but the Accord stays. It just got past 177K miles. Had I not purchased the TL, the Accord may have gone past 200K mark already. Besides, getting 26-27 mpg in mixed driving (50-50) isn't too bad either.

lweiss

Right, impulse buying (or making up some good logic to enjoy a new car) is part of the economy for sure- which is why stores put up enormous displays of merchandise/food items to catch your attention and make the buying decision a little more inviting (haha- it works). But I least I am not impulsive enough to go for one of these $45K-$60K vehicles that truly can't be justified functionally for me.

My friends ask why not another Volvo, but since 1998 many other manufacturers now get 5 star ratings (including the Accord, right?) Plus a new Volvo S60 nicely equipped is at the $33K level- about $10K more than I would spend. And then you still have to deal with those snotty Volvo dealers...

qbrozen

well.... actually, the 2.5T is about $6500 off sticker right now if you finance. If you lease, on the other hand, its MUCH less. I'm not even sure what they are up to, but I think its about $10k off. So I advise those shopping volvo to lease it and buy it out. It would save money in the long run.

I miss my S70. But I don't miss it when it was getting worn out. I miss it when it was at its peak and everything was perfect on it.

blueiedgod

My compensation is my '84 V 65 Sabre with 4200 miles.

I have an 83 Magna V45 6 spd, 12,000 miles. Drive it almost every day from April through October...

My CR-V, a 2005, only has 10,000 miles...

So, what do you think of these new bikes that have automatics? Pretty pathetic, ain't it? Those guys are too ashamed to show up at any of the bike rallyes I have been to. Even the guys on scooters (automatic) are less ridiculed than guys on bikes with auto.

blufz1

B. Cool. I really enjoy shifting and just would not want an auto bike. Bad news is, I damaged a ligament in my left index finger changing the plugs on my outboard. Haven't ridden in several months net of the rain we've had down here and the clutch finger injury. Bummer. Stay safe,man.

biker4

Did I miss something or is there any other bike besides the FJR 1300A with an "automatic" - more like DSG really?

Biker, who rides just about all year but manages to put the same amount of miles on bike and Accord.

lweiss

Good views- and Volvos are being discounted now. But I don't particular like the styling of the Volvo S40/S60/S80 (not boxy enough, haha) and I don't like the idea of having to buy the Turbo on the S60 (for my driving, I would rarely use it and it adds another measure of complexity and requires premium fuel). But the main thing is maybe I am ready for something else. Some people are brand/model loyal and for them just a new model suffices. But I went Toyota Camry to Chevy Lumina to Ford Taurus to Volvo. And I did buy one Honda in my life- a Honda CB350 Motorcycle for $720 back in the 1970's- what a ride!!! Wish I still had it.

bristol2

I find it really hard to stay with one brand also.

I must say that the Accord is incredibly hard to find fault with. The only complaint I have is that it's not a pick-up. That 'complaint' is absolutely the twisted kind of internal logic that got me through 5 cars in 6 years as a younger man.

I hope that a couple of years from now I will have the necessary maturity not to convince myself that I need a change!

blufz1

I'm just the opposite. Honda is the only brand with which I'm happy and I keep them for a long time. But, I go thru 5 or 6 women per car. What does that say?

bristol2

But, I go thru 5 or 6 women per car. What does that say?

Depends on how long you keep the car

blufz1

Lol. Think I'll go car shopping.

lweiss

I have changed women (divorce and all) and can say with certainty that changing car brands is cheaper and more straitforward (golly, can you imagine going to a dealer and trading in the one you have for a much younger model- haha).
I've heard that Volvos in general are "chick" cars- maybe Honda's are too. Nothing like a guy's thing like a Hummer or real chick car like a small Saturn. I've heard that the VW Jetta is a chick car too. But if you want a "chick magnet", forget the Accord, you would probably want a BMW Z4!!!

blufz1

I always done extremely well regardless of the wheels. Just call me,lucky,lucky,lucky.

Kirstie_H

back to the Accord, please.

eldaino

some vw's and honda's are 'chick' cars.

older mkiV jettas are def chick cars, but the more performance oriented ones are guy friendly.

i see girls driving the new jetta, but a healthy mix of men too. (again especially in performance models)

pretty much any civic coupe from any year is a big contender for a chick car. ( i know, i used to have a red 01 ex coupe, the biggest chick car of possibly all time.)

most accord coupes that are newer i see are being driven my girls too.

eldaino

yeah, where did that motorcyle stuff come in for?

sorry kirstie, its not like my post was really on topic either!

Kirstie_H

I think we have a motorcycle topic for those interested. Just use the search box at the left and type in "motorcycle."

user777

those Z4s are ugly. magnet? i think it telegraphs something else entirely.

accord has always been a value-leader. if you want something more, than go for it. but the thing is, realistically, you don't need anything more than the value leader vehicle. :shades:

do you?

robertsmx

Interestingly enough, median household income is highest for Honda owners in the USA. I'm not sure how JD Powers arrived at that conclusion, but they did, unless they were considering only mainstream buyers (but then, they did include Mercedes Benz for Chrysler numbers so they apparently didn't leave out the luxury brands from impacting the equation).

jchan2

the embargo date for 2008 Accord information? Apparently the press' first drive event has happened already, so we should be getting close to that date...

blufz1

8/21.

dolfan1

Problem is they keep coming out with something new.
I was extremely close to pulling the trigger on an '07SE-6, but stalled wanting to see what the '08 had to offer. Now, I find myself wanting to wait for the diesel.
Anyone else having the same problem?
How do you suppose the diesel would fair performance wise?
Somewhere between the I4 and the V6?

biker4

Doubt the diesel would be any quicker than even the I4 - it's not supposed to be - it's supposed to get really good mileage. Good mileage comes at the expense of performance.

You're bound to have the same good deals in another month when most of the info for the 08 Accord should be out. Heck, you can even wait about 2 months and have a side by side comparison.

robertsmx

Don't expect diesel to be a better performer than I-4. Its effectiveness will be in fuel economy. Diesel is unlikely to show up for at least two years (just a guess).

I don't if anybody has mentioned here yet, but Insideline has a video of masked Accord sedan on the home page.

blufz1

Smart to wait for the diesel. Fuel savings and greater projected resale value than a gasser as fuel costs rise. It has over 250 ft. lbs. of torque so it's quicker off the line and up to legal speed limits.

stevecebu

Problem is they keep coming out with something new.
I was extremely close to pulling the trigger on an '07SE-6, but stalled wanting to see what the '08 had to offer. Now, I find myself wanting to wait for the diesel.
Anyone else having the same problem?
How do you suppose the diesel would fair performance wise?
Somewhere between the I4 and the V6?

My work offered me an out of the country job and I went for it. I had a diesel Landcruiser OMG! Power galore but no fun at all on the highway with 36" tires! So i bought a new 2005 Honda Jazz known as the Fit in the US. It was ok but economy wasn't there about 24mpg in the city. Kinda spunky little car tho lots of utility. I had to move far from where I was so sold that due to the roads up here being awful and lots more potholes and homemade speed bumps everywhere. I drove a bunch of cars and tried out a Toyota Hi-Lux diesel. Lots of power down low where I like it, easy as anything to drive at speed and hills and you're laughing! It's a breeze to drive. My wife can't really even stall it because of the torque and this is 102HP and 200ft/lb of TQ! I don't really bother trying to get good economy with it due to the crazy way people drive here. But when I go back to the US I'll have to buy a gasser and I'm not happy about that! I drive a diesel everyday and it's great! If Honda was releasing the Accord diesel I'd buy it in a second! You have to drive a diesel to really appreciate the power where it matters. Diesels you CAN shift low without feeling like its going to stall. you only use fuel when you put your foot into it as diesels rely on fuel intake. Me I have to buy something and I want the diesel. You won't be able to get up into triple digit speeds like a gasser. High revs like a Civic Si? Nope not a chance. But you don't look at a steep hill and think you can't make it either. So smooth to drive. If I could take my truck back to the US with me I'd do it but it's not rated for US roads partly because of the dirty engine not the super low sulphur and it also has no heater. We'd never use it as we use A/C all year round day and night.
Oh and economy I get better economy in my 4 door pickup truck than I did in my Honda Jazz/Fit! Pus I have plenty of power. Lately my wife has been driving in it and practicing her shifting and she's getting better but that really lowers my economy and I will sit and wait 30-40 mins for her while she's running errands and the truck will be running and the A/C is on. Plus I'm almost never on a highway maybe 3% of the time over the life of the truck. In 14 months I've been on the highway maybe 10-12 times. But wow does my economy go way up when I do. It's never for long so it's combined but medium to heavy traffic with all the waiting with /C and stop and go traffic I get an easy 28-30 mpg depending. If I drive it just myself and my wife doesn't and not too many waiting for long periods in it it's 30mpg in the city with heavy traffic. I can post a pic if you want to see how BIG this is yet it gets awesome economy! The Accord diesel will have more power and better economy. The truck is an aerodynamic brick compared to an Accord!
I think the biggest problem will be buying a Diesel Accord for the first year what with high demand and dealer gouging! :sick:

biker4

The sad thing is that it will take the avg consumer some time to get as educated as you are about diesels - but when they do, look out - imagine diesel levels in the US like in Europe (2-3% vs. 50+%).

qbrozen

Doubt the diesel would be any quicker than even the I4 - it's not supposed to be - it's supposed to get really good mileage. Good mileage comes at the expense of performance.

But it doesn't HAVE to be that way. You can have your cake and eat it, too. Just look at the Benz diesel. It just barely loses in a race to its larger-displacement gasser counterpart, yet gets 30% better mileage.

stevecebu

The sad thing is that it will take the avg consumer some time to get as educated as you are about diesels - but when they do, look out - imagine diesel levels in the US like in Europe (2-3% vs. 50+%).

Well living outside the US is a real eye opener. The US is very myopic when it comes to many things which is why so many people don't like Americans. But with cars my gosh you have to have a 300HP car capable of 200mph in the US or no one will buy it. Forget useable hatchbacks and wagons in the US, virtually non-existent. But the torque of a diesel will convince a lot of people that the diesel isn't a wimpy smoky loud obnoxious vehicle. Too many people associate diesel cars with Mack trucks and 18 wheelers.
The biggest problem with diesel is going to be people new to diesel is putting in Gas instead of diesel and ruining their motors. They NEED a different filler nozzle so that diesel cannot fit in a gas filler tube and vice versa.
Nothing will kill the love of a diesel like a $5,000 engine repair and weeks in the shop!
But diesel is so much better than gas and yet it's still going to take time since all the money is on Ethanol and Hybrids. The greenies can't see that diesel is now clean. So they back only things with the word electric in them.

bristol2

I think you can reasonably expect a stronger take-off (low-end torque) but less high-speed acceleration (fewer hp) from a diesel vs. gas.

Not sure how that stacks up in I4 vs. v6 terms because I've never driven the I4. I will say that at lower speeds you have to hold the v6 in gear for a while before you have enough revs to really move.

qbrozen

I think you'd be surprised at the highway power of a diesel. The big difference is, as you point out, the gasser needs to be in a particular power band, a diesel is ALWAYS in that band.

eldaino

i'd say that performance wise, the diesel will out do the 4cyl version, at least with regards to low rpm power, given the colossal torque it will have.

it will be decent on the highway, but probably breathless at higher rpms. (whats the most the redline will be? given its a honda, i'd say that 5500 rpms would be about right. maybe right at 5k.)