I've had this V6 Accord for 3-4 months and about 4K miles.
It's too quick. Because it's quick I enjoy stepping on the loud pedal and listening to that sweet engine suck up all my gas. Therefore, I get 14 mpg.
Please pity me.
Every manufacturer makes lemons. I used to have a BMW that gave me FITS. It was the BIGGEST piece of junk EVER. So I got rid of it. I highly suggest anyone who is not liking their current vehicle do the same.
It makes me kinda chuckle when people complain about the 'rattles' although I know it's semi irritating, it beats getting recalls for:
2002 Trailblazer(to list a few): front suspension A arm has weak weld, which may cause arm to break during driving, possibly causing driver to lose control of vehicle.
Fuel filter fitting can come off, causing loss of fuel pressure(while your gas is spraying about) and may cause fire or explosion hazard.
Transmission parking pawl does not completely engage, possibly allowing vehicle to roll while in park.
So at 13months and 9700 miles, I got rid of it... took a bath too(wayyy upsidedown)... but I think the problems with the Accord are significantly minor in comparison... I think the biggest problem I have with my accord right now is that it backfires through the intake... very interesting, and haven't had that in a FI car ... uh ever. especially at 11k miles(since 50miles) .... oh well... I be trading in 6mo anyways... lol
Have put 23k miles on my 03 Auto LX. No issues till date, no rattles either. Get 25-28MPG in daily driving, and 33-34 in Hwy. I follow the 5k mile dervice interval, and did not do the needless Dealer recommended 15k mile service ($198 worth).
Absolutely love the car, would buy another in an instant.
Hey Tblazer, I hear ya. I traded in my 02 TB as well. Weren't that many problems though, except for the recalls. One of which was the reason I traded mine in. I was one of the lucky ones that got a TB with a possible engine sleeve crack. They increased my warranty, but shoot, last thing I wanted was to be stuck somewhere in the middle of nowhere with an engine sleeve crack. So here I am over on this board reading and posting about about the accord. Honestly though, many more rattles here than the Trailblazer.
i'm not quite sure why you think the accord's design was rushed. it went from a four cycle to a five year cycle.
it's reliability did go from way above average to just above average in CR latest data. but for comparison, the camry went all the way to just average in its first year. to the camry's credit, the car is now at way above average. i suspect the accord will do the same. maybe.
determining a car's overall reliability from maintenance boards is just silly. the numbers are not weighted and has more to do with a car's popularity.
in terms of it's engineering quality, the accord is far from regressing and according to many publications it's the car to beat in its segment. before the tl was redesigned the current accord was actually a superior car. the accord and tl are made at the same plant so the argument that the tl is better assembled is riducilous.
people step up to an acura model because they offer more features and performance, not because they believe the car will be more reliable.
comparably the new accord is better than the last generation and is no less reliable. the last accord in its first year also had problems.
the ride on your accord became rock hard after 5000k miles. that doesn't make sense to me. the car definetly rides differently than a camry. it's designed that way! so in this one aspect, this is indeed not the car's fault that you find its ride too "hard".
the '03 does have a bit more rattles that I would have expected, but I hear that the '04 is much more solid. ... shoulda known not to get a 1st year vehicle(like the trailblazer...)... arrrgghh... still, it is minor problems versus the Trailblazer. In fact the trailblazer had the license plate frame that expanded and contracted in the heat, stripping the paint off the lift gate... that was pretty annoying.
IMO, at least the Accord lives up to most of my expectations. Especially the mileage(got an ave. of 10-12mpg on my trailblazer w/ EPA 19/26, get 25mpg on the Accord w/ epa 26/34something like that)....
-tim 2003 Taffeta White & Ivory AV6 EX Sedan w/Navi 3M Clear Protection Bra on all sides 17" Honda Rims / Michellin Pilots / Locking Lugs Injen CAI Catz Rising White 4300k HID's OEM Rear Wing Shaved Emblems but with Gold H's Door Visors, Moonroof Visor and Mud Gaurds Black Diamond Shaped Grille-Tech Viper Remote Starter / Alarm w/ Batt. Backup Eclipse Components & 6x9's w/Eclipse Amp & Stillwater 10" Solo-Baric Sub w/Stillwater Amp
I just wonder if I could pick the brains of some of you Honda owners...What does your owners manual recommend (if anything) regarding driving during the new car break-in period?
I'm still considering a new Accord but I'll be taking a 1000 mile round-trip over the Thanksgiving holiday. If I buy the car next week, it isn't going to have many miles on it by the 25th, when I'd be leaving.
Are high speeds (70 kph +) OK by Honda within the first few 1000 miles? Any other precautions I would have to observe? All the GM & Ford cars I've owned advised against sudden acceleration & braking but had no formal break-in procedure otherwise. Thanks for any advice.
The only recomendations I remember from my 04 Accord EX's owners manual is the no hard acceleration or breaking during the first 100 miles. Don't worry about the high speed. My 4-cyl cruises at 80mph at onlt 2600RPM. Just don't be in a hurry to get to your cruising speed for the first 100 miles, keep a safe distance between you and other cars, and don't do any aggressive passing and you should be fine.
I hope you meant MPH not KPH, as 70KPH is not high speed. Drummerboy is quoting the manual correctly, but the only thing that I have been told on break-in, is don't drive at one steady speed for any length of time. No one has defined "any length of time" to me, so I just never set the cruise control for more than 10 minutes during break-in. Good luck with new Accord!
My '04 Accord 4 cyl. owner's manual says to avoid rapid starts, etc. for the first 600 miles and not brake hard for the first 200 miles. Of course, 200 miles on the highway won't count toward brake use, so I suppose that implies city driving where brakes are frequently used and should be applied lightly.
The Honda manual didn't say anything about varying speeds during break-in. I think that in past years, accelerating to 60mph and coasting back to 40mph created engine vacuum that pulled oil to the tops of the cylinders to lubricate piston rings, etc. during the car's first few hundred miles when those parts are especially tight. I don't know if that is still true with today's cars...... Richard
beedublu - agree with drummerboy and dust90... alter speeds(engine)... supposed to help the sleeves and pistons seat tighter. Don't floor it, try to watch braking distances(try not to 'slam' on the brakes), and one more thing I would recommend, bring a lug crossbar. Many tire shops/installers I have talked to recommend retorquing the lugs at 100, 250, and 1k miles because during the driving, the vibration from the road will cause the lugs to seat in the rim, and they may start loosening.
Tlauro... yeah, seen ya around here a few times, but not nearly as much as in the Trailblazer forums, so wasn't sure it was you... =o)... I hear ya on the Trailblazer... I just couldn't deal with the recalls anymore... and I just keep getting them...
Most recent recalls for my Trailblazer- I/P cluster gauges inoperative and trans shift lock and ign key removal override... =oP sheesh.
all steel that is fabricated for automobiles sold in the US is pre-galvanized. this is done even before it is formed into the final shape. the value of undercoating is exactly zero nowadays.
When I'm retorquing my wheels.. what is the proper torque? (2004 Accord Coupe). I don't have a torque wrench. Do I just tighten the lug until it's "tight"?
I have a 2000 accord and the specs are 80 ft. lbs.. Look in your owners manual for the '04. If you can't get a torque wrench use the star pattern to tighten nuts as you say "tight". Lower tire and check again if nuts are tight. Every ones arm and body strength is different so using this method eliminates your need to know the torque readings.
Before moving to California I lived in Cleveland where roads were salted in winter and rust ate up cars within a few years.
Undercoated cars were the worst because the tar sprayed under the car pulled away after becoming brittle in the cold and formed pockets into which salt water and mud collected. After about 3 or 4 winter seasons there were baseball sized holes in the fenders.
Newer cars are better protected and spraying goo under the car won't help anything that I can think of. Don't pay for undercoat--you don't need it and it's likely to do more harm than good.....Richard
I am not sure how to describe 80ft/lbs. I guess with a regular tire iron, it would probably about 40-50 lbs of weight on the end of it...
Basically, lean on it, but don't jump up and down on the darn thing... I guess a fair comparison would be about the amount of weight you would need to put on your steering wheel to turn your tires with the engine off and the car immobile(roughly)... you can generally get a fair torque wrench for about 20-30 at the local hardware store... I have two, one from sears(digital; $99) and one from a tool warehouse for 29.
Nice tool to have if you plan on doing any fair amount of maintenance and want to do it 'right' as the manual has torque specs for the oil drain plug, spark plugs, etc, and I believe the lugs are 80-85 ft/lbs.
The torque spec is in the owner's manual. If you are concerned, buy a torque wrench. I spent about $50 on a good one from Sear's. It's paid for itself over and over.
Your TB site rocked. Unfortunate for those TB owners who will not be able to access your site now. I got the idea to open up the airfilter box from your site. TB was good while I had it, but it's much more fun to drive the accord. Hope to get some ideas from you with regard to the accord as well.
for the accord. Injen has a mean sounding intake from their Race Division. Got a few decent exhaust systems(spendy, though), and eibach makes a use-specific set of springs for the cars that should tune the suspension a little better.
The Accord engine is under-tuned. The same engine in the TSX puts out 200HP so there is obviously some room for improvement. A freer exhaust and an intake would probably give you a noticable gain.
4500 miles on my 04 EX-L and the car has been great.
"The Accord engine is under-tuned. The same engine in the TSX puts out 200HP so there is obviously some room for improvement. A freer exhaust and an intake would probably give you a noticable gain."
The Acura has iVTEC on intake and exhaust. The Accord only has it on the intake. I beleave the Acura also uses a higher compression and can not use regular gas.
Well if the $10 isn't that important to your bank statement go for it with Acura. You know the guys and they are more convenient. Unless you are scraping for that extra $10 bucks every 3/4 months I don't see the harm.
Doesn't your Honda dealer have a Express 30Min service?
At this year's Tokyo Auto Show, Honda debuted the Japanese domestic market (JDM) Odyssey minivan that uses a drivetrain akin to the current Honda Accord's 2.4-liter I-4 drivetrain, but now offers a continuously-variable transmission (CVT) automatic that sports a special torque converter.
It makes you wonder is Honda seriously looking at putting in this CVT automatic into their four-cylinder US-market Accords; I think it will work because Honda's current CVT's are compatible with cruise control and now can handle the torque of the 2.4-liter I-4 engine.
I think the Civic coupe has offered the CVT for several years and GM and Audi currently use CVTs on several models. There's nothing new about the CVT which was used on a little Dutch car called the DAF back in 1958 (DAF was long ago bought by Volvo). The problem was making belts that could withstand the stresses and new materials can do that now.
I briefly test drove a Saturn VUE 4 cyl. which has a CVT and it was surprisingly quick--very smooth (reminded me of the early Dynaflow Buicks and Chevy Powerglides with no gear changes (yes, I am THAT old!).
One great feature of the new Accord is its smooth 5 speed automatic transmission. The CVTs are simpler and if performance and durability can be built at lower cost, you can expect to see CVTs on more cars in the future.......Richard
Seems the first were limited to very small engines-saw a pic of a CVT belt-very shiny and metallic appearance. If they are reliable and efficient-what a way to go for a tranny.
I'm old enough, too, to remember those big Dynaflow Buicks. "Flow" is a good word -- they just moved from 0 to 60 with no perceptible mechanical changes -- just that characteristic droning of the engine.
I also had a litte homemade go-kart as a kid with a centrifugal clutch. As the motor RPMs increased, a little spring-loaded plate moved out from what looked like an ordinary pulley and increased v-belt tension, thus increasing the go-kart's speed. As a 12-year-old, I was fascinated by that technology -- seemed so clever. I'm wondering if modern CVT has any relation to that principle?
If the Buick accelerated that well, why would I have to reach for the $10? Think about it....
Anyhoo, I have ridden in an Audi with a CVT and really liked the seamless ramp-up of speed. Interestingly, instead of the engine remaining at a steady RPM under WOT it varied the RPM's up and down to simulate shifting. A step in the opposite direction?
I look forward to Honda engineers refining this technology. More power from less displacement is always a good thing in my book.
The Accord should not be one of the first Honda vehicles to get a CVT though. They should put it on their biggest vehicles first (Ody). Bigger vehicles consume more fuel. CVT is billed as an energy saver.
Never heard of the $10 bill trick with respect to Dynaflow acceleration but in Dynaflow's first year, 1948, that $10 had the purchasing power of about $76 today! Richard
The dynaflush buicks barely moved but a olds v8 had some pepper in the 50's. Remember when buick/bucket came up with variable pitch dynaflow-late 50's maybe-they had a tv spot demoing how the dynaflush with variable pitch could actually peel a wheel-had smiling Jack Lescouli (sp?) be the talking head for that spot.
I am asking other owners of the 2004 accord if they have found that the COLOR of their car has a "hazed" look and does not let the true "deep green" come thru. My dealer is supposed to order a new hood because according to them, they cannot buff the haze out. As time has passed and no call from my dealer has been forthcoming, I started looking at the car very closely. I have had it cleaned and washed several times and now it appears that both front fenders are also hazed. My salesman told me that they had received another accord with this green color, and it ALSO had this hazing problem. Is this a batch of bad colored cars, I ask??? So I am asking the readers here that have this color car....Is it sparkling and deeply green OR does it look like the clearcoat is fogged up?? Please let me know either way....I love the car, but something is definitely up. Thanks, FOGBOUND!!!!
Yes, The left most bar on the volume in the setup screen tourns off the voice directions. The other bars on the volume line changes the volume and beeps at the new volume when touched.
I will be going to my local Honda dealer to pick out my black LX tomorrow (buying on Thursday). If there are any green ones on the lot I will look at them and see if there is any 'haze'.
CVTs will appear on more Hondas. A small car called the Honda City (built for Asian markets) offers a CVT and if you want to see a video of how it works, go here:
Comments
It's too quick. Because it's quick I enjoy stepping on the loud pedal and listening to that sweet engine suck up all my gas. Therefore, I get 14 mpg.
Please pity me.
Every manufacturer makes lemons. I used to have a BMW that gave me FITS. It was the BIGGEST piece of junk EVER. So I got rid of it. I highly suggest anyone who is not liking their current vehicle do the same.
It makes me kinda chuckle when people complain about the 'rattles' although I know it's semi irritating, it beats getting recalls for:
2002 Trailblazer(to list a few):
front suspension A arm has weak weld, which may cause arm to break during driving, possibly causing driver to lose control of vehicle.
Fuel filter fitting can come off, causing loss of fuel pressure(while your gas is spraying about) and may cause fire or explosion hazard.
Transmission parking pawl does not completely engage, possibly allowing vehicle to roll while in park.
So at 13months and 9700 miles, I got rid of it... took a bath too(wayyy upsidedown)... but I think the problems with the Accord are significantly minor in comparison... I think the biggest problem I have with my accord right now is that it backfires through the intake... very interesting, and haven't had that in a FI car ... uh ever. especially at 11k miles(since 50miles) .... oh well... I be trading in 6mo anyways... lol
Absolutely love the car, would buy another in an instant.
it's reliability did go from way above average to just above average in CR latest data. but for comparison, the camry went all the way to just average in its first year. to the camry's credit, the car is now at way above average. i suspect the accord will do the same. maybe.
determining a car's overall reliability from maintenance boards is just silly. the numbers are not weighted and has more to do with a car's popularity.
in terms of it's engineering quality, the accord is far from regressing and according to many publications it's the car to beat in its segment. before the tl was redesigned the current accord was actually a superior car. the accord and tl are made at the same plant so the argument that the tl is better assembled is riducilous.
people step up to an acura model because they offer more features and performance, not because they believe the car will be more reliable.
comparably the new accord is better than the last generation and is no less reliable. the last accord in its first year also had problems.
the ride on your accord became rock hard after 5000k miles. that doesn't make sense to me. the car definetly rides differently than a camry. it's designed that way! so in this one aspect, this is indeed not the car's fault that you find its ride too "hard".
IMO, at least the Accord lives up to most of my expectations. Especially the mileage(got an ave. of 10-12mpg on my trailblazer w/ EPA 19/26, get 25mpg on the Accord w/ epa 26/34something like that)....
guess there are more than a handfull of us who have traded up so to speak
I've gotten so many emails still about my Trailblazer I had to remove the entire site.
Haven't started one for my accord, but here she is so far. Pics are okay but better ones soon to come.
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp/my_cars&page=all
-tim
2003 Taffeta White & Ivory AV6 EX Sedan w/Navi
3M Clear Protection Bra on all sides
17" Honda Rims / Michellin Pilots / Locking Lugs
Injen CAI
Catz Rising White 4300k HID's
OEM Rear Wing
Shaved Emblems but with Gold H's
Door Visors, Moonroof Visor and Mud Gaurds
Black Diamond Shaped Grille-Tech
Viper Remote Starter / Alarm w/ Batt. Backup
Eclipse Components & 6x9's w/Eclipse Amp & Stillwater 10" Solo-Baric Sub w/Stillwater Amp
I'm still considering a new Accord but I'll be taking a 1000 mile round-trip over the Thanksgiving holiday. If I buy the car next week, it isn't going to have many miles on it by the 25th, when I'd be leaving.
Are high speeds (70 kph +) OK by Honda within the first few 1000 miles? Any other precautions I would have to observe? All the GM & Ford cars I've owned advised against sudden acceleration & braking but had no formal break-in procedure otherwise. Thanks for any advice.
The Honda manual didn't say anything about varying speeds during break-in. I think that in past years, accelerating to 60mph and coasting back to 40mph created engine vacuum that pulled oil to the tops of the cylinders to lubricate piston rings, etc. during the car's first few hundred miles when those parts are especially tight. I don't know if that is still true with today's cars...... Richard
Tlauro... yeah, seen ya around here a few times, but not nearly as much as in the Trailblazer forums, so wasn't sure it was you... =o)... I hear ya on the Trailblazer... I just couldn't deal with the recalls anymore... and I just keep getting them...
Most recent recalls for my Trailblazer- I/P cluster gauges inoperative and trans shift lock and ign key removal override... =oP sheesh.
Good luck with your accord Tim, looks good...
Undercoated cars were the worst because the tar sprayed under the car pulled away after becoming brittle in the cold and formed pockets into which salt water and mud collected. After about 3 or 4 winter seasons there were baseball sized holes in the fenders.
Newer cars are better protected and spraying goo under the car won't help anything that I can think of. Don't pay for undercoat--you don't need it and it's likely to do more harm than good.....Richard
Basically, lean on it, but don't jump up and down on the darn thing... I guess a fair comparison would be about the amount of weight you would need to put on your steering wheel to turn your tires with the engine off and the car immobile(roughly)... you can generally get a fair torque wrench for about 20-30 at the local hardware store... I have two, one from sears(digital; $99) and one from a tool warehouse for 29.
Nice tool to have if you plan on doing any fair amount of maintenance and want to do it 'right' as the manual has torque specs for the oil drain plug, spark plugs, etc, and I believe the lugs are 80-85 ft/lbs.
dust90--
I just realized my metric goof. No, I'm not in Canada and yes, I did mean 70 MPH. :-)
4500 miles on my 04 EX-L and the car has been great.
Reason I am asking is- I know the service guys at my dealer(ACURA) and their hours are more convenient to me.
I know it might be around $10 more for an oil change but is it worth it? Or should I just stick it out with the Honda service.
The Acura has iVTEC on intake and exhaust.
The Accord only has it on the intake.
I beleave the Acura also uses a higher compression and can not use regular gas.
Doesn't your Honda dealer have a Express 30Min service?
Anyway I just found out that I get a 10% discount on ALL service because I bought the car from them.
I guess I can kiss Acura goodbye.
Kinda like the GS and GS-R engines back in the day... Honda has to have something to beat themselves with.. =o)
Can I turn OFF the voice prompts during directions. That is, I want ONLY the screen directions.
Can't seems to figure it out...any help would be appreciate.
(I'm using Nav '03)
It makes you wonder is Honda seriously looking at putting in this CVT automatic into their four-cylinder US-market Accords; I think it will work because Honda's current CVT's are compatible with cruise control and now can handle the torque of the 2.4-liter I-4 engine.
I briefly test drove a Saturn VUE 4 cyl. which has a CVT and it was surprisingly quick--very smooth (reminded me of the early Dynaflow Buicks and Chevy Powerglides with no gear changes (yes, I am THAT old!).
One great feature of the new Accord is its smooth 5 speed automatic transmission. The CVTs are simpler and if performance and durability can be built at lower cost, you can expect to see CVTs on more cars in the future.......Richard
http://ca.autos.yahoo.com/030402/11/shs1.html
.......Richard
I also had a litte homemade go-kart as a kid with a centrifugal clutch. As the motor RPMs increased, a little spring-loaded plate moved out from what looked like an ordinary pulley and increased v-belt tension, thus increasing the go-kart's speed. As a 12-year-old, I was fascinated by that technology -- seemed so clever. I'm wondering if modern CVT has any relation to that principle?
The acceleration was so strong they couldn't reach it after you floored it.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Are you sure it turns off the voiced directions?
Maybe my system is kaputt.
Anyhoo, I have ridden in an Audi with a CVT and really liked the seamless ramp-up of speed. Interestingly, instead of the engine remaining at a steady RPM under WOT it varied the RPM's up and down to simulate shifting. A step in the opposite direction?
I look forward to Honda engineers refining this technology. More power from less displacement is always a good thing in my book.
The Accord should not be one of the first Honda vehicles to get a CVT though. They should put it on their biggest vehicles first (Ody). Bigger vehicles consume more fuel. CVT is billed as an energy saver.
Richard
http://asia.vtec.net/article/2003City2/DSCF0003.AVI
If possible, let it load fully into your video player before starting--it crashed my browser twice.
Richard