At first I thought the Coupe was way too bland now it looks really nice to me. I can't find the word for the Coupe and how it looks so I'll just say "nice". Before I said it looked "gorgeous". It looks better than gorgeous now. The last generation accord Coupe I described its look as "sleek". The Sedan doesn't look as bad as it once did but still way too bland. Just don't like the blated look. I'll take the Coupe over the sedan most definately. I liked the Accord sedan's of the 1996-1997 and 1998-2000 models. I guess I really liked what Honda was doing at that time. I really like how I feel in my Acura Coupe. You just feel very safe in it and you actually feel like a part of the car. Can't wait for the next generation Accord Coupe. I'll be buying a car at that time. The only cars I would take over the Accord Coupe right now would be the Mazda 6 and VW Passat. Sorry to see the death of the Acura CL. I'll miss that car but I still own one.
I've noticed my wife's '03 4-cylinder Accord sedan had a speedometer that reads to 160mph. This seems optimistic to me, especially for a 4-cylinder. Does anyone know what the top speed might be in this car, and/or if it is electronically limited (governed) to a specific top speed? I think the speedometer in my 2000 Impala goes to 140, but I know it's governed to @ 108; just wondering if there was a similar cut-off on the Accord.
Top speed on the I4 would be close to 135 or a little more ungoverned. Of course if you are going down a slight hill or have a tailwind you could hit 150. I do think the car is governed to below 130 since it only has H rated tires. That will be your biggest clue - no manufacurer will put tires on a vehicle that are not rated for its top speed.
brozhnik The concern is: yes, I'm convinced the Accord chassis is remarkable, and will keep its structural integrity if it gets hit in the side (better than other cars of its type). But....that's small consolation if (during this collision) your head gets thrown at the side beam with intense force.
The first line of protecting the occupants is structural solidity and a good restraint system. They appear to have been addressed in the Accord already. Now, would it be better if Honda offered side curtain airbags on top of it? Probably. Would it be nice to have? Depends, and if one is willing to pay for it. Does that mean a car with curtain airbag is better even if it gives a little on the chassis? I don't think so.
Accord gets the best rating on side crash test because it managed to prevent those potential injuries that some others with curtain airbag did not. What consolation does a lower rating (meaning higher risk of injury) with curtain airbags provide against a higher rating without curtain airbag?
alpha01 However, with regard to your statment about the Altima, the stars are based on injury measures. Yes, structure plays a part in that, BUT the NHTSA frontal test is more demanding of the restraint system, while the IIHS offset test is far more demanding on a vehicles' structure, as the crash is highly concentrated on the driver's side. In that measure, the IIHS judged the Altima "Good", the highest rating, exactly the same as the Accord received.
Speaking of IIHS tests, I have not seen the side tests from them yet, but based on offset frontal impact, Accord is the best pick, Altima is not.
I just think its very hard to judge, based on injury measures, the solidity of a vehicles entire structure, especially if NHTSA does not include a "Structure" evaluation as does IIHS.
Much of the injuries are rated by either NHTSA and IIHS based on overall safety that the cars offer, so yes, a good restraint system would also help as it probably does to Accord. But, the other side to it is intrusion into the cabin when a collision occurs.
anonymousposts 3. If it's that big of a deal then glue a pillow to the side of your head. That'll protect you.
I was going to suggest a balloon, but you beat me to it.
emale i just read the latest CR. they aren't too keen on the element. gotta be the only honda they don't like!
A rare offering from Honda with love it or hate it emotions written all over. I can bet that was the point of Element in the first place. But then I hope to not have triggered this into an OT thread.
nosirrahg I've noticed my wife's '03 4-cylinder Accord sedan had a speedometer that reads to 160mph. This seems optimistic to me, especially for a 4-cylinder. Does anyone know what the top speed might be in this car, and/or if it is electronically limited (governed) to a specific top speed?
It is rare for Hondas to be governed (some lower Civics may be exception as they were governed at 112 mph). Top speed can usually depend on the speed rating of the tires. S-rated tires (as in the low-end Civics) are safe to a top speed of 112 mph. T-rated tires are capable of safely reaching and sustaining 118 mph and so on. If a car is capable of going faster (assuming that aerodynamics and chassis stability are not an issue), but has S or T rated tires, the automaker will likely govern the car to a lower top speed.
In case of Accord, the four cylinder models may go past 130 mph, and V6 models should be capable of 145-147 mph. Once again, you can estimate that (not trying, I hope), by looking at the speed rating of the tires that came with the car.
1000-1500 lb. would be a conservative guess, in line with Honda’s practice in North America, with 100 lb. tongue weight. By comparison, the current Accord in Europe is rated to be able to tow upto 1500 kg (3300 lb.).
I'm trying to bring an awareness to the lack of side curtain airbags in the 4cylinder accords, hopefully Honda has representatives here who can pass the word further. A lot of you seem to have the impression that the accord is the best there is and no further improvements are needed. While I agree it is a good car (better than most), certain features are more important to others. So spare us (those who are interested in safety) the cheap-shots about pillows and balloons. Those of you who are not interested in safety are probably already taking unecessary risks in your life everyday and don't even know it, and just because you are alive today does not mean your living style is better than others. Ignorance is not something to be proud of. As someone else already elegantly pointed out, this is "natural selection working at its best". I can think of a lot of similar cheap-shots at moonroof, leather seats, NAVI, or even a V6 engine. We all have our own personal preferences.
So far nobody has given a good reason why Honda did not offer side curtain airbags WITH the side airbag option for $200-$300 more (side chest airbags are already an option), which seems like a very reasonable decision instead of keeping it exclusively for the EX-V6 model.
I don't feel that the Accord is the best there is and that there's no room for improvement... but my posts regarding the side curtain airbags was to address the opposite opinion that seemed to become common... that the Accord was not worth considering if you couldn't get one with side curtain airbags.
I don't take unnecessary risks, and I felt that my 2000 Accord with side airbags was very safe. I got the 2003 EX V6 for the total feature set... the side curtain airbags were a welcome addition, but far from a necessity, because I think Honda has done its homework with the safety cage.
Can we spare each other the broad brush characterizations and below-the-belt shots from both sides of this issue? That is, wearing balloons and "natural selection at its best". To butcher a phrase, "2 cheap shots don't make a right.". And as I've learned from Pat, cheap shots are not a good way to make your position seem credible.
1. Can you explain why a car with Side Curtain Airbags gets 4-stars and another without gets 5? 2. Which of the two cars do you consider better, and why?
So far nobody has given a good reason why Honda did not offer side curtain airbags WITH the side airbag option for $200-$300 more
I'm not sure if this reason would be a good reason for you, but IMO, they will, when marketing dictates the need to. It could be offered on more trim levels with the usual 3rd-4th year makeover of the current model (MY2006) along with some cosmetic changes and addition of VP/SE model(s).
Until then, Honda is already offering one of the best rated car (by NHTSA and IIHS).
the rating that CR gave the element has nothing to do with emotions or love/hate styling. it has to do with poor ride...lousy back seats and marginal max weight loads.
Your unwillingness to see anyone else's point of view is frustrating. We are only pointing to the fact that, whether or not the Accords structure and star rating are the most outstanding of any vehicle EVER, there is no airbag offered on any model EXCEPT the EX V6 that protects the head in the event of a side impact that involves a larger vehicle with a higher stance. That's it. Nothing more than that.
"1. Can you explain why a car with Side Curtain Airbags gets 4-stars and another without gets 5"
Here's you're explanation: The side impact STAR RATING, which you quote incessantly, DOES NOT take into account the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) number recorded on the dummy, EVEN THOUGH this number appears on the NHTSA website. The 2003 2-door Accord's side impact rear passenger HIC of 925 would earn ONLY 3 stars if this same number was measured in the frontal impact (HIC of 1000 is the threshold for earning two or few stars in the frontal test). THAT IS WHY CURTAINS WOULD BE A NICE OPTION for people who can't afford a $26,000 EX V6!
I dont know how to be any more explicit. (The NHTSA side impact test is flawed, IMO. If it werent, NHTSA themselves would not be looking to change it. In actuality, waaay more cars should be flunking NHTSAs test- likely including my own Camry w/o side airbags, the Altima, and the non-airbag Accord, as I have just demonstrated. But NHTSA, for whatever absurd reason, simply doesnt include HIC in the star eval- IMO, who cares if you have no chest injuries if your HIC is around 1000, indicating significant risk of severe or fatal injury.)
I don't see the need to get frustrated about anything. I'm making a point and so are you. This should not be about being unwilling to give in to assumptions. Let us argue with facts, not words.
The side impact STAR RATING, which you quote incessantly, DOES NOT take into account the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) number recorded on the dummy, EVEN THOUGH this number appears on the NHTSA website.
NHTSA Star rating is a consolidated rating of all injury measurements for that test. Where does the HIC come from if it is not measured? We can discover flaws in just about everything, or can use it to make a point for what it is. Euro NCAP also follows star rating, which, just like NHTSA rating, is also based on injury measurements.
What I am saying is that HIC IS MEASURED (as of recently) but not factored into the star rating. Reference the rating for the 2002 Suzuki Grand Vitara, which ears 5 STARS, but indeed includes a side note which states "High risk of Head Injury", and then elaborates on the Details Page with "During the side impact test, the head of the left rear passenger dummy struck the side upper interior structure (“C-pillar”), causing a high head acceleration. Head impact events resulting in high accelerations have a higher likelihood of serious head trauma".
Excuse me, but if there is a "high risk of head injury", then how is, as you put it, "NHTSA Star rating is a consolidated rating of all injury measurements for that test"
???????????
(Also reference the myriad vehicles which receive high marks, mainly SUVs, in side crash, but are noted" High likelihood of thigh injury" and the frekin Tacoma, which got a high rating, DESPITE A FUEL LEAK!!!!)
You may not believe it, robertsmx, but I do use my head in daily activities (thinking, eating, speaking, etc.). Isnt it a bit misleading to give rate a car 5 stars, even though that car inflicts serious head injury upon its occupants?
My Final point: I would prefer a car that protects me from head to toes, with or without all the airbags around. Let us see how Accord Sedan performs in side crash tests, until then, 5-stars the coupe yielded would be better for me than cars that have more airbags but have increased chance of serious injuries.
The following question might appear to be a petty issue. If the answer has already been asked and answer in this forum, I do humbly apologize. However since this an important issue to me I will ask the question. Since the trunk hinges are the old fashion type and not the piston style do they take up alot of room and restrict the either the volume or type of cargo you can place inside the trunk, such as golf bags (2 sets). Has there been any talk from Honda that in the new 2004 model they would change the hinge type. Also is there an email address that I would be able to send my question to. Thank you for any input to this question. Since I am in the process of narrowing my selection down I will have more questions after this.
Since the 2003 Accord is the first year of a newly designed body. I believe that it would be an exercise in futility to expect that Honda would make such a drastic change in the trunk hinge configuration after one model year. In fact, I wouldn't expect them to even consider such a design change until the next major body change four or five years from now.
Thank you for your input. I did not know that this was the first year for the trunk hinge design. Knowing that I would have to agree with you. What a shame that they would go that route rather then the more modern way with the piston style. Do you have iput regarding the storage capacity.
I spent a week driving a 2.5 Altima with 4 speed auto. The car was a rental with 22K miles. Compared to the super smooth Accord EX 4 cylinder we own, the Altima seemed rather crude. It was fairly quite at 70 MPH and seemed to have reasonable throttle response but anytime you started from a dead stop the 4 speed auto was not a good match to the power band of the motor. The Altima had good steering feel, probably better than the Accord, but the suspension was not as controlled as the Accord so it made hustling the Altima on a curvey road a little less fun that the Accord. I think I find the stock suspension on the Mazda 6 to provide better steering feel and balance over the Accord but the 4speed/4cylinder is not as refined as the Accord.
I was impressed at how tight the Altima seemed though. Rental cars have a tough life and after 22K miles this car didn't have a rattle or squeak of any kind and everything worked. The interior materials seemed to be holding up well also but over all the interior appearance/materials seemed cheaper than the Accord or Camry.
You could buy worse cars than the Altima but you could also buy better cars for the same price. The Accord is still the pick of the litter in IMHO.
Nissan should install the 5spd auto in all Nissan models that have the auto. At least in the Altima. I hope the Altima gets the 6spd. manual with the facelift. I doubt it.
My 2003 EX-V6 sedan is not yet ready for the first oil change (am trying to adhere to Honda initial interval)I do my own changes and usually change more often. My question is about Brand of oil to use. There are few choices of 5W-20 in my area thus far. Dealer uses Mobil Drive Clean (bulk). Have never used this oil before, anyone have knowledge of quality? Have traditionally used Fram filters but am thinking about Purolater or Wix. Would appreciate comments/advise.
We've only got @ 500 miles on our '03 Accord, so I haven't really thought about oil changes (and have never used 5W-20, so I can't offer much in terms of brand help, other to say that I've been using Mobil-1 synthetic/filters in my 2000 Impala, and been very pleased).
One question: If I read my manual correctly, Honda doesn't recommend changing oil in the 4-cylinder until 6 months or 5,000 miles (based on the "severe" schedule). That seems like a long time to me; am I missing something, or is it really okay to run that long without changing oil (especially at break-in, when there's apt to be more debris floating around in there)?
I think what you're saying is that you'd rather have a broken foot than a broken head.
Me too.
Also, what you're saying is the NHTSA doesn't factor in the HIC with their star rating. This is very flawed, but I assume they did this so they wouldn't have to re-rate all the previous cars they've rated. And then it would throw off "comparison" shopping for safety (looking at a car 3 years old vs a new one - the new one might have a worse star rating if HIC was included only on the new one, giving people a false sense of security on their "old" car).
Alpha01, you provided good information about how the NHTSA comes up with their star rating.
I always wondered how Ford got 5 stars out of their Windstar minivan, which we all know is pretty low on the food chain.
I get very frustrated by the information presented by the NHTSA, ESPECIALLY with respect to side impacts.
It is a step in the right direction that for the newest tests, NHTSA is including the HIC measurement (as in the case with the Accord 2-door). But it will take a very savvy consumer to dig that far and see that even though the frontal impact STAR RATING includes HIC and Chest Load figures measurements, the side impact only takes into account the TTI, NOT HIC. As an example, I again cite the Accord 2-Door rear passenger's 5 star rating, despite an HIC of 925, which, were it considered, would yield very near a two star rating (3 at best) which indicates "high likelihood of severe or fatal injury" (how Consumer Reports calls it).
NHTSA plays itself off as this outstanding organization of the Government, looking to provide consumers with information- but are doing so correctly?
Since the trunk hinges are the old fashion type and not the piston style do they take up alot of room… Has there been any talk from Honda that in the new 2004 model they would change the hinge type.
I doubt. There are advantages both ways. Struts will save space but hinges last longer, and are easier to operate upon. It is also easier to power hinges, if the need be, one of the reasons it is likely that you will see hinges in expensive cars that come with power trunk. I would like to know if Accord uses the special hinge setup (like it is in TSX) that actually moves towards the cabin instead of downwards. Struts probably made more sense in vehicles like Element and CRV. Also, in Japanese Accord Wagon, the rear hatch is powered, and it appears to use hinges as well.
nosirrahg If I read my manual correctly, Honda doesn't recommend changing oil in the 4-cylinder until 6 months or 5,000 miles (based on the "severe" schedule).
I would follow the manual especially since it is that specific. They must have a reason.
outrun I think what you're saying is that you'd rather have a broken foot than a broken head.
Don't forget the thoracic cage. Here is what the NHTSA says about side crash ratings:
"Side-collision star ratings indicate the chance of a life threatening chest injury for the driver, front seat passenger, and the rear seat passenger."
Which means, a 5-star rated car is better, with 5% or lower risk in the measured category.
"Head injury is not measured in these tests."
Interesting, isn't it?
alpha01 I again cite the Accord 2-Door rear passenger's 5 star rating, despite a theoretically near "fatal" HIC of 925.
So, a 4-star rating (going just by HIC, nothing else) is near fatal. Yes, that is what 925 HIC would correspond to. If 4-star is so dangerous as you just made it out to be, should we start talking about 3-stars, and cars that get overall protection (note: against life threatening injuries) of only 4-stars?
Which vehicle with 900 HIC gets 4 stars in the frontal crash?
I actually corrected my statement upon review of NHTSA graphs-900 plus is usually two stars or max 3 in the frontal.
Another example- the 03 Hyundai Accent, while it only earns 2 stars for rear passenger based on its TTI, the HIC of 1260 should really kncok it down to one star, but instead its just a footnote.
Please note that I am not personally attacking you, or anyone else, OR the Accord. All I am saying is that the NHTSA side impact star rating does NOT take into accout Head Injury, and therefore, is misleading. You originally stated that the star ratings take into account all measurements, which is erroneous with respect to side impacts, and I simply looked to correct that. I will completely agree that a strong structure is very important- but if side curtain airbags were as trivial as you seem to make them, we could all drive 1989 Volvo 240DLs and be satisfied.
From reading certain posts, you'd think that some people would rather be bungee jumping without an elastic than be riding a car without side curtain air bags. The fact is that a very small minority of the cars riding in our streets right now do have side curtain air bags and those complaining have been riding in cars without them for years and probably still do. You could make a point that reinforcing your car with steel roll bars and always wearing a full face helmet while driving will be much safer in the event of an accident, but no one does. Not that long ago, driver's air bags were an expensive option on luxury cars, now they are standard on all, the same will apply with side curtain air bags. While we wait until it happens, don't get to obsessed with safety and live your life.
"we could all drive 1989 Volvo 240DLs and be satisfied.
That assumes that passive safety is your #1 concern, overriding all others, and you're willing to forego all of the advances in active safety, comfort, performance, etc. that have come since that car's heyday. I'd be very concerned about the advances in the active safety... nothing protects you from injury better than not being in an accident in the first place.
Why didn't Honda at least OFFER curtain air bags in all models?
The supply theory is shot since VW has been putting them in their cars for years.
The "design" theory is shot since Honda is putting them into the very same Accord, but only at the EX/V6 level.
The "V6 is faster" theory is shot since the LX/V6 doesn't get them.
Back in the Volvo 240 days, there were NOT millions of gas guzzling SUVs on the road, with their drivers gabbing on the cellphone, not paying attention to the road ahead. The times have changed DRASTICALLY in the past 10 years.
I would truly feel unsafe in a car without at least front air bags these days, meanwhile I drove a '90 Honda CRX Si without any air bags for 4 years (from '90 to '94).
NHL goaltenders used to play without a mask back in it's early years. Has the puck changed since then? Now it's mandatory for all player to wear helmets, nevermind the goalie wearing pads and masks up the ying yang.
I have been buying Accords since 1981 and Honda basically has kept the same philosphy about their models all these years. The DX, LX, EX, EXV6 come with certain items and if you don't want them, you can go down one level. Honda's slogan of the 80's was "We make it simple" and they must feel that keeping the choices to a minimum simplifies purchasing a car. Their success with cars, owner loyalty and resale value point to the fact that they are still running the business right.
Because by the next redesign, Honda will undoubtedly offer curtain airbags as an option on all of the Accord models, if only because the Accord's main competitors do so.
And the top-line model will probably come with a new safety feature that we don't know about yet, and the other models won't, and a similar discussion will start all over again.
You either believe curtain airbags are important or you don't, but I would bet that they'll be standard on most cars soon enough.
Comments
http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2003- - 028
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The concern is: yes, I'm convinced the Accord chassis is remarkable, and will keep its structural integrity if it gets hit in the side (better than other cars of its type). But....that's small consolation if (during this collision) your head gets thrown at the side beam with intense force.
The first line of protecting the occupants is structural solidity and a good restraint system. They appear to have been addressed in the Accord already. Now, would it be better if Honda offered side curtain airbags on top of it? Probably. Would it be nice to have? Depends, and if one is willing to pay for it. Does that mean a car with curtain airbag is better even if it gives a little on the chassis? I don't think so.
Accord gets the best rating on side crash test because it managed to prevent those potential injuries that some others with curtain airbag did not. What consolation does a lower rating (meaning higher risk of injury) with curtain airbags provide against a higher rating without curtain airbag?
alpha01
However, with regard to your statment about the Altima, the stars are based on injury measures. Yes, structure plays a part in that, BUT the NHTSA frontal test is more demanding of the restraint system, while the IIHS offset test is far more demanding on a vehicles' structure, as the crash is highly concentrated on the driver's side. In that measure, the IIHS judged the Altima "Good", the highest rating, exactly the same as the Accord received.
Speaking of IIHS tests, I have not seen the side tests from them yet, but based on offset frontal impact, Accord is the best pick, Altima is not.
I just think its very hard to judge, based on injury measures, the solidity of a vehicles entire structure, especially if NHTSA does not include a "Structure" evaluation as does IIHS.
Much of the injuries are rated by either NHTSA and IIHS based on overall safety that the cars offer, so yes, a good restraint system would also help as it probably does to Accord. But, the other side to it is intrusion into the cabin when a collision occurs.
anonymousposts
3. If it's that big of a deal then glue a pillow to the side of your head. That'll protect you.
I was going to suggest a balloon, but you beat me to it.
i just read the latest CR. they aren't too keen on the element. gotta be the only honda they don't like!
A rare offering from Honda with love it or hate it emotions written all over. I can bet that was the point of Element in the first place. But then I hope to not have triggered this into an OT thread.
nosirrahg
I've noticed my wife's '03 4-cylinder Accord sedan had a speedometer that reads to 160mph. This seems optimistic to me, especially for a 4-cylinder. Does anyone know what the top speed might be in this car, and/or if it is electronically limited (governed) to a specific top speed?
It is rare for Hondas to be governed (some lower Civics may be exception as they were governed at 112 mph). Top speed can usually depend on the speed rating of the tires. S-rated tires (as in the low-end Civics) are safe to a top speed of 112 mph. T-rated tires are capable of safely reaching and sustaining 118 mph and so on. If a car is capable of going faster (assuming that aerodynamics and chassis stability are not an issue), but has S or T rated tires, the automaker will likely govern the car to a lower top speed.
In case of Accord, the four cylinder models may go past 130 mph, and V6 models should be capable of 145-147 mph. Once again, you can estimate that (not trying, I hope), by looking at the speed rating of the tires that came with the car.
So far nobody has given a good reason why Honda did not offer side curtain airbags WITH the side airbag option for $200-$300 more (side chest airbags are already an option), which seems like a very reasonable decision instead of keeping it exclusively for the EX-V6 model.
I don't take unnecessary risks, and I felt that my 2000 Accord with side airbags was very safe. I got the 2003 EX V6 for the total feature set... the side curtain airbags were a welcome addition, but far from a necessity, because I think Honda has done its homework with the safety cage.
Can we spare each other the broad brush characterizations and below-the-belt shots from both sides of this issue? That is, wearing balloons and "natural selection at its best". To butcher a phrase, "2 cheap shots don't make a right.". And as I've learned from Pat, cheap shots are not a good way to make your position seem credible.
2. Which of the two cars do you consider better, and why?
So far nobody has given a good reason why Honda did not offer side curtain airbags WITH the side airbag option for $200-$300 more
I'm not sure if this reason would be a good reason for you, but IMO, they will, when marketing dictates the need to. It could be offered on more trim levels with the usual 3rd-4th year makeover of the current model (MY2006) along with some cosmetic changes and addition of VP/SE model(s).
Until then, Honda is already offering one of the best rated car (by NHTSA and IIHS).
the rating that CR gave the element has nothing to do with emotions or love/hate styling. it has to do with poor ride...lousy back seats and marginal max weight loads.
"1. Can you explain why a car with Side Curtain Airbags gets 4-stars and another without gets 5"
Here's you're explanation:
The side impact STAR RATING, which you quote incessantly, DOES NOT take into account the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) number recorded on the dummy, EVEN THOUGH this number appears on the NHTSA website. The 2003 2-door Accord's side impact rear passenger HIC of 925 would earn ONLY 3 stars if this same number was measured in the frontal impact (HIC of 1000 is the threshold for earning two or few stars in the frontal test). THAT IS WHY CURTAINS WOULD BE A NICE OPTION for people who can't afford a $26,000 EX V6!
I dont know how to be any more explicit. (The NHTSA side impact test is flawed, IMO. If it werent, NHTSA themselves would not be looking to change it. In actuality, waaay more cars should be flunking NHTSAs test- likely including my own Camry w/o side airbags, the Altima, and the non-airbag Accord, as I have just demonstrated. But NHTSA, for whatever absurd reason, simply doesnt include HIC in the star eval- IMO, who cares if you have no chest injuries if your HIC is around 1000, indicating significant risk of severe or fatal injury.)
~alpha
The side impact STAR RATING, which you quote incessantly, DOES NOT take into account the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) number recorded on the dummy, EVEN THOUGH this number appears on the NHTSA website.
NHTSA Star rating is a consolidated rating of all injury measurements for that test. Where does the HIC come from if it is not measured? We can discover flaws in just about everything, or can use it to make a point for what it is. Euro NCAP also follows star rating, which, just like NHTSA rating, is also based on injury measurements.
Reference the rating for the 2002 Suzuki Grand Vitara, which ears 5 STARS, but indeed includes a side note which states "High risk of Head Injury", and then elaborates on the Details Page with "During the side impact test, the head of the left rear passenger dummy struck the side upper interior structure (“C-pillar”), causing a high head acceleration. Head impact events resulting in high accelerations have a higher likelihood of serious head trauma".
Excuse me, but if there is a "high risk of head injury", then how is, as you put it, "NHTSA Star rating is a consolidated rating of all injury measurements for that test"
???????????
(Also reference the myriad vehicles which receive high marks, mainly SUVs, in side crash, but are noted" High likelihood of thigh injury" and the frekin Tacoma, which got a high rating, DESPITE A FUEL LEAK!!!!)
You may not believe it, robertsmx, but I do use my head in daily activities (thinking, eating, speaking, etc.). Isnt it a bit misleading to give rate a car 5 stars, even though that car inflicts serious head injury upon its occupants?
~alpha
Sometimes it's best to a) agree to disagree and/or b) just ignore messages that tend to raise the blood pressure.
Points can be made without directly addressing the poster of such a message.
My Final point: I would prefer a car that protects me from head to toes, with or without all the airbags around. Let us see how Accord Sedan performs in side crash tests, until then, 5-stars the coupe yielded would be better for me than cars that have more airbags but have increased chance of serious injuries.
Has there been any talk from Honda that in the new 2004 model they would change the hinge type.
Also is there an email address that I would be able to send my question to.
Thank you for any input to this question.
Since I am in the process of narrowing my selection down I will have more questions after this.
Any suggestion on possible locations on Long Island New York?
Thanks fellow Honda owners!
Since the 2003 Accord is the first year of a newly designed body. I believe that it would be an exercise in futility to expect that Honda would make such a drastic change in the trunk hinge configuration after one model year. In fact, I wouldn't expect them to even consider such a design change until the next major body change four or five years from now.
Do you have iput regarding the storage capacity.
According to www.honda.com, the sedan trunk holds 14 cubic feet, the coupe trunk holds 12.8 cubic feet.
The trunk hinge design is one that Honda has used in it's sedans for many years.
I was impressed at how tight the Altima seemed though. Rental cars have a tough life and after 22K miles this car didn't have a rattle or squeak of any kind and everything worked. The interior materials seemed to be holding up well also but over all the interior appearance/materials seemed cheaper than the Accord or Camry.
You could buy worse cars than the Altima but you could also buy better cars for the same price. The Accord is still the pick of the litter in IMHO.
One question: If I read my manual correctly, Honda doesn't recommend changing oil in the 4-cylinder until 6 months or 5,000 miles (based on the "severe" schedule). That seems like a long time to me; am I missing something, or is it really okay to run that long without changing oil (especially at break-in, when there's apt to be more debris floating around in there)?
The vast majority of my customers DO NOT SEEM TO CARE if their Accord has side curtain airbags.
This may seem strange to someone obsessed with safety as you seem to be.
For what ever reason, safety seems to be way down the list of priorities for most shoppers.
Of course, I do run in to a few, not many, where every other question has to do with safety.
But, I would guess that it won't be too many years before the interiors of every car are one giant air bag.
Me too.
Also, what you're saying is the NHTSA doesn't factor in the HIC with their star rating. This is very flawed, but I assume they did this so they wouldn't have to re-rate all the previous cars they've rated. And then it would throw off "comparison" shopping for safety (looking at a car 3 years old vs a new one - the new one might have a worse star rating if HIC was included only on the new one, giving people a false sense of security on their "old" car).
Alpha01, you provided good information about how the NHTSA comes up with their star rating.
I always wondered how Ford got 5 stars out of their Windstar minivan, which we all know is pretty low on the food chain.
-Craig
It is a step in the right direction that for the newest tests, NHTSA is including the HIC measurement (as in the case with the Accord 2-door). But it will take a very savvy consumer to dig that far and see that even though the frontal impact STAR RATING includes HIC and Chest Load figures measurements, the side impact only takes into account the TTI, NOT HIC. As an example, I again cite the Accord 2-Door rear passenger's 5 star rating, despite an HIC of 925, which, were it considered, would yield very near a two star rating (3 at best) which indicates "high likelihood of severe or fatal injury" (how Consumer Reports calls it).
NHTSA plays itself off as this outstanding organization of the Government, looking to provide consumers with information- but are doing so correctly?
~alpha
I doubt. There are advantages both ways. Struts will save space but hinges last longer, and are easier to operate upon. It is also easier to power hinges, if the need be, one of the reasons it is likely that you will see hinges in expensive cars that come with power trunk. I would like to know if Accord uses the special hinge setup (like it is in TSX) that actually moves towards the cabin instead of downwards. Struts probably made more sense in vehicles like Element and CRV. Also, in Japanese Accord Wagon, the rear hatch is powered, and it appears to use hinges as well.
nosirrahg
If I read my manual correctly, Honda doesn't recommend changing oil in the 4-cylinder until 6 months or 5,000 miles (based on the "severe" schedule).
I would follow the manual especially since it is that specific. They must have a reason.
outrun
I think what you're saying is that you'd rather have a broken foot than a broken head.
Don't forget the thoracic cage. Here is what the NHTSA says about side crash ratings:
"Side-collision star ratings indicate the chance of a life threatening chest injury for the driver, front seat passenger, and the rear seat passenger."
Which means, a 5-star rated car is better, with 5% or lower risk in the measured category.
"Head injury is not measured in these tests."
Interesting, isn't it?
alpha01
I again cite the Accord 2-Door rear passenger's 5 star rating, despite a theoretically near "fatal" HIC of 925.
So, a 4-star rating (going just by HIC, nothing else) is near fatal. Yes, that is what 925 HIC would correspond to. If 4-star is so dangerous as you just made it out to be, should we start talking about 3-stars, and cars that get overall protection (note: against life threatening injuries) of only 4-stars?
I actually corrected my statement upon review of NHTSA graphs-900 plus is usually two stars or max 3 in the frontal.
Another example- the 03 Hyundai Accent, while it only earns 2 stars for rear passenger based on its TTI, the HIC of 1260 should really kncok it down to one star, but instead its just a footnote.
Please note that I am not personally attacking you, or anyone else, OR the Accord. All I am saying is that the NHTSA side impact star rating does NOT take into accout Head Injury, and therefore, is misleading. You originally stated that the star ratings take into account all measurements, which is erroneous with respect to side impacts, and I simply looked to correct that. I will completely agree that a strong structure is very important- but if side curtain airbags were as trivial as you seem to make them, we could all drive 1989 Volvo 240DLs and be satisfied.
~alpha
That assumes that passive safety is your #1 concern, overriding all others, and you're willing to forego all of the advances in active safety, comfort, performance, etc. that have come since that car's heyday. I'd be very concerned about the advances in the active safety... nothing protects you from injury better than not being in an accident in the first place.
The supply theory is shot since VW has been putting them in their cars for years.
The "design" theory is shot since Honda is putting them into the very same Accord, but only at the EX/V6 level.
The "V6 is faster" theory is shot since the LX/V6 doesn't get them.
Back in the Volvo 240 days, there were NOT millions of gas guzzling SUVs on the road, with their drivers gabbing on the cellphone, not paying attention to the road ahead. The times have changed DRASTICALLY in the past 10 years.
I would truly feel unsafe in a car without at least front air bags these days, meanwhile I drove a '90 Honda CRX Si without any air bags for 4 years (from '90 to '94).
NHL goaltenders used to play without a mask back in it's early years. Has the puck changed since then? Now it's mandatory for all player to wear helmets, nevermind the goalie wearing pads and masks up the ying yang.
-Craig
If they can offer Navigation as an option, they can surely offer curtain air bags as an option.
Heck, they should raise the price of the car $300 and INCLUDE curtain air bags across the board.
-Craig
And the top-line model will probably come with a new safety feature that we don't know about yet, and the other models won't, and a similar discussion will start all over again.
You either believe curtain airbags are important or you don't, but I would bet that they'll be standard on most cars soon enough.