I checked yahoo. Found lots of references to the 3-lobe system for mechanically changing valve operation on intake only above 4500 rpm!!! Found dual stage mentioned for induction (on marine engines). Found references to adding a knock sensor (didn't have one before or added additional sensor) but nothing about dual-stage knock sensor.
I'd still like to see the full horsepower curve for engine. Someone linked a curve from a source that starts at 4500. I want to see what the normal driver is using in normal driving. I don't spend much time above 3000-3500.
I doubt you will notice a difference in the claimed 10hp increase with premium fuel under "normal" driving conditions. The increase is measured at "peak horsepower" which is achieved at rpms much higher than 3,000-3,500. I would imagine the horsepower curves between 87 and 93 octane are almost identical under 3,500rpm. When an engine is dyno'd for max hp, the throttle is held wide open to redline. Unless you floor it every time you accelerate under your "normal" driving conditions, I doubt you will notice the difference. There would be a slight benefit of 93 octane under normal driving conditions for passing, entering freeways, etc. at high rpms, but under 3,500 there would be no benefit IMO.
I have an 2004 Accord V6, with about 1,200 miles and i just started noticing a noise on the initial drive off, after the car has been sitting overnight, it's kind of a one time quick grinding noise when i travel between 10 and 15 mph, mind you it's only early in the morning or after the car has cooled down after a drive (usually a couple of hours) after the drive.
I took the car to the dealer and the service tech said that it's probably the ABS systems doing a self diagnoses, and that it will get louder as i put more miles on the car, i left the car overnight with them and told them to drive off in the mowing, low and behold he called me back and said he coul not hear anything.
I've had a couple of people in the car and told them to listen very carefully, they all heard the noise, funny how the dealer can't.
Anyway i'am going back this evening to test drive it with a service tech. hopefully his hearing is better.
Has anyone else had a similar problem, with the noise.
I have to concur that I think it's the ABS. I didn't notice mine so much until just lately--likely b/c it's very cold and quiet here now and I have reached 12.5K.
I feel the problem with explaining and investigating the sound is because it is VERY difficult to describe, for me a least. I see it as a short buzz/hum/thump and I can feel a little vibration, always shortly after takeoff.
No, the noise comes from the transmission. You start the car, then you hear a clunk noise before you move, that is the abs self-check. Then you back out of the garage, and start to move forward slowly, you hear a clunk noise again that is from the transmission switching from the first gear to second gear.
I searched 'clunk' on this honda board, and found the following poster described a situation the same as mine.
I wrote to honda and have not heard anything back yet. I asked them to figure out a fix to prevent a potential premature worn-out of the transmission.
----- #4865 of 6600 Auburn Help!! 03 Accord EX-V6 trannyClunk noise by brandon19 Apr 17, 2003 (6:08 pm) Auburn, I just purchased a new 03 Accord EX-v6. I only have 150 miles on the car; I will back my car out of the driveway and put the car in Drive. I will accelerate slowly, BUT when it shifts between 1st and 2nd gear there is a slight clunk sound right before 2nd gear is engaged.
Is this the dreaded clunking noise that has occurred to soo many of the older V6 automatic transmissions? ---------
Wife's 03 EX-L (no TCS) doesn't make the "self-check" sensation felt through the brake and gas pedals that my 03 V6 (w/TCS) does, so I'm thinking it's probably the TCS.
On a recent trip in my 2002 4 cylinder Accord, I accidently filled up with premium gas (92), and actually got the worst gas mileage of the trip (28 mpg on the highway) on that tank of gas.
I’m in the market for a new car, and I’ve sort of settled between a 2004 Honda Accord EX V6 Nav and a 2004 Acura TL Nav. I realize these cars are not completely comparable (both based on my research and reading the posts here), but the Accord seems to have a lot of the features the TL has for a significant “rea’ world” price difference.
So, here are my questions:
1. What are ALL of the differences between these 2 cars? I’ve been able to find some of the obvious differences by reading the Honda, Acura, and Edmunds sites, but it seems like I always stumble across new feature on both cars I didn’t know existed. Has anyone complied a comprehensive list?
2. I can afford the TL, so price isn’t an issue; however, if the Accord has 90% of what I want, I’m not really comfortable paying the extra money for features which I may not appreciate. I don’t paying a little more for the Acura vs. Honda nameplate, but not much more, since it really doesn’t matter to me.
3. Has anyone else been in this situation, and if so, what were your reasons for deciding on either car? Or, are there others I should consider? Obviously, there is a lot of debate between the TL & G35 and the Accord & Camry. I’m leaning away from G35 because I desire interior quality over RWD (I’m sure the TL will handle all of my limited performance needs) and I’m really not a Camry fan.
The TL is a sports sedan with 275 HP, a 5 spd sport shift auto transmission or a 6 spd manual, a firmer suspension, a little better NVH damping, and slighlty nicer sound and leather. The TL also requires premium fuel. It also has the Acura name and warranty.
The Accord V6 is not a sports sedan. It is a very capable V6 family sedan for the masses. The Accord V6 runs on regular fuel.
If you aren't really into the sportyness of the driving experience go with the accord and save yourself 6 or 7 thousand $$.
The enhanced dealer experience, both in sales and service, coupled with longer warranty of the Acura, is enough to justify the premium for some.
The Accord EX V6 is an excellent family sedan. The Acura TL promises even better resale, and several trick features not available on the Accord, such as the (in my opinion) very valuable stability control system, and the ultra-sweet Bluetooth technology.
If you can settle for less tech, and lower dealer experience, the Accord will be a good, solid value. If you want a sporting flavor, more power, more safety features, latest technology... go with the TL.
For all the accolades it's gotten, the TL seems to have taken the most flak for its lack of folding rear seats, something the Accord has. Of course, the Accord itself has taken some flak for the fact that its folding rear seat isn't split. I guess nothing's perfect. But the reduced utility of the TL from that perspective could be a factor, depending on how important expanding the cargo capacity is to you.
By the way, Consumer Reports just tested what they call "upscale cars", and the TL was the winner of that comparison. They had lots of very high praise for the car. I don't remember their exact wording (and I don't have the magazine in front of me, and the article hasn't posted to their web site yet), but they said something along the lines that they would recommend the best of the mid-sized family sedans (that would include Passat, Accord and Camry, cars which are in a virtual dead heat for top family sedan) over the upscale sedans that they tested. The family sedans aren't as luxurious or well-equipped, yet they are quite luxurious and well-equipped all the same. You might want to look at the upscale sedan report as well as the mid-sized sedan reports (there are several of those) to get a pragmatic viewpoint of these cars.
The viewpoint on these cars from the enthusiast standpoint would almost certainly be different from the CR viewpoint.
Myself, I love my 2003 Accord EX V6, but the TL looks MIGHTY tempting... However, I find the level of luxury and refinement, along with the performance of the Accord to suit me just fine. There's no denying that the TL is an incredible car, but in my eyes, the Accord is so good in so many ways that you really have to want the increased luxury, performance and prestige of the TL pretty badly to warrant the price difference.
In the real world the difference is about 9K. There is a heavy cost to be first with the TL. I don't get any better treatment with my Benz than I do the EX at the dealer. In fact the Benz goes in way too much compared to the Honda. Before you get excited about bluetooth you might want to know that it doesn't work on many phones that claim to be compatible.(read the TL area missives on this) The horsepower spread is about 20 if you gas the accord with Premium (240 reg/ 250 Prem vs 270 prem). If you go overseas you will see the ACura TSX sold as the Honda Accord. In the states, many still do not know Acura as upscale though they had a good start with the now defunct Legend name, the went to the alphabet hodge podge. You can't go wrong with the Accord though the looks are less than stellar. Good luck!
In March 2003 I bought a 1999 Accord EX-L from a large dealer in Boston for a decent price. Part of the deal was that the dealer would certify the vehicle, and it would come with the 12K mile warranty and 100K mile pwertrain coverage (Honda Certified Program). The dealer kept up his end, but said I didnt need a carfax report because they couldnt sell a certified pre-owned Honda if it had been in an accident.
However, the car was clearly not checked out. I brought it back within 3 days with a list of about 40 items that were not checked, according to the inspection list provided in the Honda paperwork and with the Certified program. One nearly bald tire, squeaking brakes, a chip in the windshield, a faulty remote entry system,a CD player that wouldnt play CD's, a missing plastic cover for the panel next to the sunroof control..etc. Small little annoyances that clearly showed that this car wasnt checked out. The dealer fixed it all quickly and for free.
In November, with a new job, I decided to purchase a new Honda, and let a dealer look at the 1999 Accord. They told me the car had been in a severe accident and was worth about $4000 (which was about $7000 under book value). They showed me how all the panels save the left side doors had been repainted and replaced. And how the hood doesnt quite line up withthe fenders, and how the doors arent aligned properly. Three different dealers showed me the same thing. They all also said they couldnt tell if the frame had been damaged as well without putting it up on the list.
Corporate Honda says they can sell a used car as a Certified model as long as it hasnt been totaled or salvaged, and wouldnt provide any further help
I filed a complaint with the BBB, who contacted the dealer which said they had no comment. My options are to sell it on my own, which hasnt been too successful, or to get a written damage report from a body shop, and somehow pursue the dealer.
Anyone have any sort of experience with this? I dont live anywhere near the dealer, which further complicates matters. Thanks for any input.
After a torturous 8-month delay (it has been "under review" since May 9 2003), the side crash results for 2003/4 Accord Sedan was published today. The ratings are 4/5 for front/back-side. There was some expectation of a 5/5 like the Accord coupe, but 4/5 is not bad. However, the Head Injury Criterion for the front-side is a disappontingly-high 882 (about 13% probability of "AIS=>4 head injury"). This is similar to the high rear-side 925 HIC of the Accord Coupe. If the side rating takes the head injury into account (IT DOESN'T) then both results would be a 3-star performance.
Note that the tests were done without any side or curtain airbags. Persumably the results would be better in vehicles with those equipment.
Personal note: safety being very important factor to me, I've been waiting (and waiting, and waiting) for the Accord sedan side crash results. Finally broke down and bought one in December, and took delivery last Friday. Of course, the results appear 4 days later, the HIC result is disappointing, and you can't get side curtain airbags in Canada. Why do things like that always happen??
I'm also big on car interiors, and although I can't tell you much about the TL, I can tell you that the Accord's interior is fantastic, especially with the navigation system, and it is probably what sold me on the car. It absolutely blows the Camry's interior out of the water and it is one of the nicest interiors I have seen in a car in a while. The TL looks phenomenal, but it looks like it's about between 8K and 9K more than the Accord. I certainly couldn't afford that much of a price difference right now, but even if I could, it doesn't look like the TL offers that much more than the Accord. Yeah, it may have slightly better audio, power, leather, and that cool blue dashboard, but is that worth $9000? Maybe I'd change my mind if I drove one, but that seems like a big difference in price for small upgrades. The Accord EX V6 is a phenomenal car, with excellent build quality, power and a very good audio system. My '96 Taurus feels like it is ready to burst at the seams compared to the much tighter Accord. I love it.
I went to a couple of dealers to look at a few "potential" next car. First, the TSX, it is nice but a bit small (narrow) at the back seat, so I did not border to test drive it. Then the G35 sedan, the inside is nice (similar to TSX), and drove extremely well, only problem was the wind noise, and the 6MT clutch was very stiff. Then the Accord, the interior is a step down from the G35. The drive was nice, but boring. Then the TL, it drove extremely well, very refine, quiet, and luxury. The 6MT is light and smooth. To me, there is no comparision between the TL and Accord, the TL is much nicer in all areas.
If you cannot see and feel any difference between them, then I say go for the Accord because it is cheaper by about $8-9K, and that is a lot of $. But for me, I'll pay the extra $ to have the TL, especially the 6MT.
Even though I knew I wouldn't get better performance, I decided on a whim to put high-octane in my 2003 Accord on an all-highway jaunt. Of my five tanks of gas used, the premium fuel yielded 5mpg less.
You're saying the electronics are so well designed they allow an engine built for 93 to run on 87. Then in the next post it's the engine is as adaptable and you have to reset the computer or use several tankfuls.
My original fact was that people said the "knock sensors" allowed the engine to build up to be able to use 93 from normally running on 87 octane. That's not what knock sensors do; they retard the spark when knock from problems or octane occurs. That's the reverse. Got it?
Read through the sequence of posts again. Maybe that will help. EOD.
Calm down fellow. I don't even own a Honda product now (owned a 00 TL with Nav earlier). So I don't take these things personally. Basically I don't care a rat's rear-end if an Accord makes 240Hp or 300HP, or whether it requires premium or regular or whatever. I was stating some facts since it might help some others in understanding these things.
What you might be able to do is find an insurance report on WHEN the accident happened. Try to find someone to pull a NICB (insurance claim search) on the VIN. Dealers should be able to do this.
Honda Corporate told you a wrecked and repaired car could be 'Certified', which it was, and repairs were made as requested by you under the certifcation warranty.
You were unable to determine the car had been rather severely damaged and repaired, before buying the car. I don't think you are accusing the selling dealer of lying about this to you.
I don't see you have much you 'can do' about the car. As far as I know, a dealer is not required to disclose such things to a buyer (some states might require this, something you might check into). Except selling it privately and hoping you can get someone to make the same mistake buying it as you did - not noticing or researching it to find out it had been wrecked.
I plan to hand this car down someday for my daughter's first car. So I checked the side results every day since last spring. My old car gave out in July, so I bought a 2003 Accord. I was guessing they were haggling over a < 5 star rating, but I'm glad it wasn't 3 stars at least.
Sorry about your story. Unfortunately, I don't think you have many options. You should have insisted on the carfax report. The only advice I can give is to talk to an attorney since they did sell it as "Honda Certified" and my understanding is they can't if it has been wrecked, so it falls back on them.
why oh why is Edmunds not updating Long Term reviews of the Accord?
also, in the Long Term review section, BOTH Honda products and the applicable articles have been removed.
perhaps there is some legal issue? i know that Edmunds tech support has been aware of the issue for some time - easy fix - so now that i notice that the Honda Pilot link doesn't work, it makes me wonder......
Has everyone heard about the upcoming Hybrid 2005 Accord V6, that supposedly will get the same gas mileage as a civic, with the power of the V6? Does anyone know when Honda will begin selling it? Anyone know how much more expensive it will be? I wonder if the extra upfront cost will outweigh the potential savings in gas? Either way this seems like a big move by Honda and it seems like this trend is about to make a big impact on the industry as it goes mainstream!
I think it also suppose to turn off 3 of the 6 cylinders at times, maybe when cursing or idling? I vaguely remember that being tried years back but it didn’t work too well at that time. Maybe today’s technology makes that more feasible. Honda also hinted that the shutting down cylinders would be available in not hybrid Hondas.
Honda is usually very tight lipped about pricing. History seems to dictate that pricing is released when the vehicles are on the trucks.
I see the introduction of hybrid technology on the Accord as a means to bring the cost of the technology down. As volume increases, the development and manufacturing costs should decrease. Long term it should be a small premium.
One of the articles I read indicated that the hybrid Accord would be more powerful than the current V6 and would be placed as a premium model. I'm guessing that means a price over what a current EX-V6 runs.
What ssiu is saying though, is that although the NHTSA awarded the Accord 4 stars for driver in side impact, the agency does not factor Head Injury Criterion into the equation, which IMO, misleads consumers. I've emailed NHTSA several times to ask why the testing is done this way, and elaborating why I feel it should be changed, but to no answer or avail.
Look at this way, the 03 Camry (w/o side airbags) was rated 3 stars/5 stars for the side impact. HOWEVER, its HIC was 450, far out of the range of certain/serious head injury . Meanwhile, its TTI was only 4 pts higher than the driver of Accord, and it narrowly missed the 4 star rating. The Accord gets 4 stars but inflicts what might be a moderate to severe head injury in a human. How is that truly informing the customer or offering true comparison point? An interesting note is that the 2004 Maxima, which did have side curtains, also suffered from a high HIC for the rear passenger in a side impact. Again, that result was not noted or factored.....
The Accord is clearly one of the safer cars in its class, thats not in debate. But consumers are going to be misled for as long as NHTSA rates for side impacts in the manner they do.
Thanks for bringing the info about HIC to our attention. I guess it's always a good idea to learn about the methodology behind these tests and not just accept a vehicle's rating at face value. Thanks also for your postings in the Honda/Passat thread about VSC. When I'm in the market for my next car, I'll have two more bases for comparison.
Can anyone please assist me with the following situation. When placing the climate control on Auto, is this turning on the A/C, because when I hit auto button it states auto A/C? Although the vents blow heat into the cabin, I do however notice once the cabin is warmed the vents blow cool air. Then there is another button on the dash that says A/C, is this for turning on the A/C only, or am I doing something wrong? What is the correct way of just having heat come into the cabin?
Is there any comparison test in which the 2003/2004 Accord has not placed first place?
Edmunds, 12/03: 1st out of 10 Motortrend, 2/04: 1st out of 4 Motortrend, 4/03: 1st out of 3 Roadandtrack, 2/03: 1st out of 5 Caranddriver, 2/03: 1st out of 10
This kind of unanimity must be unprecedented, especially in this segment. What's even more amazing is the value that the Accord packs (EX-V6 for about $24,000). I really don't see the Accord losing its number one status until MY2007, when the next Camry and Altima come out. And even then it's a maybe.
When the climate control is on full auto, it will use the air conditioning as necessary to regulate the temperature, along with the heater. In cooler to cold temperatures, the system will still use the AC to control humidity, but that doesn't typically result in cold air because the air is still heated. You can turn the AC off by pressing the AC button, but from the perspective of the humidity control, I wouldn't recommend making a practice of this or you may end up with fogging problems. The only time that I turn the AC off is when it's moderately warm outside, and I want to have the windows and/or the moonroof open, or if it's cool enough outside that vent air is comfortably cool.
I believe the reason for the cool air coming in through the vents after the cabin is warmed is that when you have airflow through the vents and floor, the system goes into a bi-level mode. This is intended to deal with cool sunny days where you need some heat to keep your feet and legs warm, but some cooler air to the upper body to manage the warmth of the sun. If it's bothering you at any point, just turn off the airflow to the vents by either changing it to floor only or going back to full auto.
Slightly redesigned Altima is coming out in March or April. Interior has supposedly been upgraded. Spy shots of exterior look similar to current version.
I love the Accord's interior and overall quality, but like some others, I am not happy with the rear sheet metal, so I am awaiting the new Altima before making a decision.
Thanks for the input. Does this alternating of the A/C on and off cause MPG to be reduced? I had noticed this also with our RX300, when we pressed AUTO for the climate control the A/C light lit up, but I always hit the button off and kept the system on AUTO without having the AC on and had the fresh air entering the cabin always which eliminated/reduced the fogging of the windows. I'll try this the next time we go on a drive.
another slightly obtuse reason to let the a/c cycle automatically is that it will help the longevity of the entire a/c system. if the a/c isn't operated for long periods of time...the seals in the system can dry out causing leaks.
Yes, I agree with you. As per the manual the AC should be operated weekly. Personaly, thats too much during the winter months. I normally operate my AC for about 15-20 miles or 1/2 hour every month and when I notice the interior glasses/windshield begin to fog up. Do you feel I should do it more often?
Last night it was about 14F and the AC continued to cycle on and off. I will turn it off and keep the fresh air open all the time. If the glasses fog up only then will I turn the AC on. For the summer of course the AC will be in full use. For the winter I shall cycle the system as I previously discussed. Thanks everyone for the information and advice.
that's odd! the only time my a/c ever cycles when temps are below 35F is when i start the car in my garage. once it figures out how cold it is...it stops cycling. sounds like there might be something wrong with yours...especially if it runs at such low temps...
Comments
I checked yahoo. Found lots of references to the 3-lobe system for mechanically changing valve operation on intake only above 4500 rpm!!!
Found dual stage mentioned for induction (on marine engines).
Found references to adding a knock sensor (didn't have one before or added additional sensor) but nothing about dual-stage knock sensor.
I'd still like to see the full horsepower curve for engine. Someone linked a curve from a source that starts at 4500. I want to see what the normal driver is using in normal driving. I don't spend much time above 3000-3500.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I would imagine the horsepower curves between 87 and 93 octane are almost identical under 3,500rpm. When an engine is dyno'd for max hp, the throttle is held wide open to redline. Unless you floor it every time you accelerate under your "normal" driving conditions, I doubt you will notice the difference.
There would be a slight benefit of 93 octane under normal driving conditions for passing, entering freeways, etc. at high rpms, but under 3,500 there would be no benefit IMO.
I took the car to the dealer and the service tech said that it's probably the ABS systems doing a self diagnoses, and that it will get louder as i put more miles on the car, i left the car overnight with them and told them to drive off in the mowing, low and behold he called me back and said he coul not hear anything.
I've had a couple of people in the car and told them to listen very carefully, they all heard the noise, funny how the dealer can't.
Anyway i'am going back this evening to test drive it with a service tech. hopefully his hearing is better.
Has anyone else had a similar problem, with the noise.
Your feed back is appreciated.
Thanks,
Diego1369
it is the ABS self test....believe me...you'll get so used to it over time that you'll forget it even does that after a few months.
I feel the problem with explaining and investigating the sound is because it is VERY difficult to describe, for me a least. I see it as a short buzz/hum/thump and I can feel a little vibration, always shortly after takeoff.
I searched 'clunk' on this honda board, and found the following poster described a situation the same as mine.
I wrote to honda and have not heard anything back yet. I asked them to figure out a fix to prevent a potential premature worn-out of the transmission.
-----
#4865 of 6600 Auburn Help!! 03 Accord EX-V6 trannyClunk noise by brandon19 Apr 17, 2003 (6:08 pm)
Auburn, I just purchased a new 03 Accord EX-v6. I only have 150 miles on the car; I will back my car out of the driveway and put the car in Drive. I will accelerate slowly, BUT when it shifts between 1st and 2nd gear there is a slight clunk sound right before 2nd gear is engaged.
Is this the dreaded clunking noise that has occurred to soo many of the older V6 automatic transmissions?
---------
So, here are my questions:
1. What are ALL of the differences between these 2 cars? I’ve been able to find some of the obvious differences by reading the Honda, Acura, and Edmunds sites, but it seems like I always stumble across new feature on both cars I didn’t know existed. Has anyone complied a comprehensive list?
2. I can afford the TL, so price isn’t an issue; however, if the Accord has 90% of what I want, I’m not really comfortable paying the extra money for features which I may not appreciate. I don’t paying a little more for the Acura vs. Honda nameplate, but not much more, since it really doesn’t matter to me.
3. Has anyone else been in this situation, and if so, what were your reasons for deciding on either car? Or, are there others I should consider? Obviously, there is a lot of debate between the TL & G35 and the Accord & Camry. I’m leaning away from G35 because I desire interior quality over RWD (I’m sure the TL will handle all of my limited performance needs) and I’m really not a Camry fan.
Thanks in advance,
Mike
The Accord V6 is not a sports sedan. It is a very capable V6 family sedan for the masses. The Accord V6 runs on regular fuel.
If you aren't really into the sportyness of the driving experience go with the accord and save yourself 6 or 7 thousand $$.
Go test drive them and see what you think.
Where can I go to find more information on the Hybrid Accord?
Thanks
The Accord EX V6 is an excellent family sedan. The Acura TL promises even better resale, and several trick features not available on the Accord, such as the (in my opinion) very valuable stability control system, and the ultra-sweet Bluetooth technology.
If you can settle for less tech, and lower dealer experience, the Accord will be a good, solid value. If you want a sporting flavor, more power, more safety features, latest technology... go with the TL.
~alpha
By the way, Consumer Reports just tested what they call "upscale cars", and the TL was the winner of that comparison. They had lots of very high praise for the car. I don't remember their exact wording (and I don't have the magazine in front of me, and the article hasn't posted to their web site yet), but they said something along the lines that they would recommend the best of the mid-sized family sedans (that would include Passat, Accord and Camry, cars which are in a virtual dead heat for top family sedan) over the upscale sedans that they tested. The family sedans aren't as luxurious or well-equipped, yet they are quite luxurious and well-equipped all the same. You might want to look at the upscale sedan report as well as the mid-sized sedan reports (there are several of those) to get a pragmatic viewpoint of these cars.
The viewpoint on these cars from the enthusiast standpoint would almost certainly be different from the CR viewpoint.
Myself, I love my 2003 Accord EX V6, but the TL looks MIGHTY tempting... However, I find the level of luxury and refinement, along with the performance of the Accord to suit me just fine. There's no denying that the TL is an incredible car, but in my eyes, the Accord is so good in so many ways that you really have to want the increased luxury, performance and prestige of the TL pretty badly to warrant the price difference.
However, the car was clearly not checked out. I brought it back within 3 days with a list of about 40 items that were not checked, according to the inspection list provided in the Honda paperwork and with the Certified program. One nearly bald tire, squeaking brakes, a chip in the windshield, a faulty remote entry system,a CD player that wouldnt play CD's, a missing plastic cover for the panel next to the sunroof control..etc. Small little annoyances that clearly showed that this car wasnt checked out. The dealer fixed it all quickly and for free.
In November, with a new job, I decided to purchase a new Honda, and let a dealer look at the 1999 Accord. They told me the car had been in a severe accident and was worth about $4000 (which was about $7000 under book value). They showed me how all the panels save the left side doors had been repainted and replaced. And how the hood doesnt quite line up withthe fenders, and how the doors arent aligned properly. Three different dealers showed me the same thing. They all also said they couldnt tell if the frame had been damaged as well without putting it up on the list.
Corporate Honda says they can sell a used car as a Certified model as long as it hasnt been totaled or salvaged, and wouldnt provide any further help
Anyone have any sort of experience with this? I dont live anywhere near the dealer, which further complicates matters. Thanks for any input.
Note that the tests were done without any side or curtain airbags. Persumably the results would be better in vehicles with those equipment.
Personal note: safety being very important factor to me, I've been waiting (and waiting, and waiting) for the Accord sedan side crash results. Finally broke down and bought one in December, and took delivery last Friday. Of course, the results appear 4 days later, the HIC result is disappointing, and you can't get side curtain airbags in Canada. Why do things like that always happen??
If you cannot see and feel any difference between them, then I say go for the Accord because it is cheaper by about $8-9K, and that is a lot of $. But for me, I'll pay the extra $ to have the TL, especially the 6MT.
You're saying the electronics are so well designed they allow an engine built for 93 to run on 87. Then in the next post it's the engine is as adaptable and you have to reset the computer or use several tankfuls.
My original fact was that people said the "knock sensors" allowed the engine to build up to be able to use 93 from normally running on 87 octane. That's not what knock sensors do; they retard the spark when knock from problems or octane occurs. That's the reverse. Got it?
Read through the sequence of posts again. Maybe that will help. EOD.
Calm down fellow. I don't even own a Honda product now (owned a 00 TL with Nav earlier). So I don't take these things personally. Basically I don't care a rat's rear-end if an Accord makes 240Hp or 300HP, or whether it requires premium or regular or whatever. I was stating some facts since it might help some others in understanding these things.
Later...AH
You were unable to determine the car had been rather severely damaged and repaired, before buying the car. I don't think you are accusing the selling dealer of lying about this to you.
I don't see you have much you 'can do' about the car. As far as I know, a dealer is not required to disclose such things to a buyer (some states might require this, something you might check into). Except selling it privately and hoping you can get someone to make the same mistake buying it as you did - not noticing or researching it to find out it had been wrecked.
also, in the Long Term review section, BOTH Honda products and the applicable articles have been removed.
perhaps there is some legal issue? i know that Edmunds tech support has been aware of the issue for some time - easy fix - so now that i notice that the Honda Pilot link doesn't work, it makes me wonder......
I see the introduction of hybrid technology on the Accord as a means to bring the cost of the technology down. As volume increases, the development and manufacturing costs should decrease. Long term it should be a small premium.
Look at this way, the 03 Camry (w/o side airbags) was rated 3 stars/5 stars for the side impact. HOWEVER, its HIC was 450, far out of the range of certain/serious head injury . Meanwhile, its TTI was only 4 pts higher than the driver of Accord, and it narrowly missed the 4 star rating. The Accord gets 4 stars but inflicts what might be a moderate to severe head injury in a human. How is that truly informing the customer or offering true comparison point? An interesting note is that the 2004 Maxima, which did have side curtains, also suffered from a high HIC for the rear passenger in a side impact. Again, that result was not noted or factored.....
The Accord is clearly one of the safer cars in its class, thats not in debate. But consumers are going to be misled for as long as NHTSA rates for side impacts in the manner they do.
~alpha
Can anyone please assist me with the following situation. When placing the climate control on Auto, is this turning on the A/C, because when I hit auto button it states auto A/C? Although the vents blow heat into the cabin, I do however notice once the cabin is warmed the vents blow cool air. Then there is another button on the dash that says A/C, is this for turning on the A/C only, or am I doing something wrong? What is the correct way of just having heat come into the cabin?
Edmunds, 12/03: 1st out of 10
Motortrend, 2/04: 1st out of 4
Motortrend, 4/03: 1st out of 3
Roadandtrack, 2/03: 1st out of 5
Caranddriver, 2/03: 1st out of 10
This kind of unanimity must be unprecedented, especially in this segment. What's even more amazing is the value that the Accord packs (EX-V6 for about $24,000). I really don't see the Accord losing its number one status until MY2007, when the next Camry and Altima come out. And even then it's a maybe.
I believe the reason for the cool air coming in through the vents after the cabin is warmed is that when you have airflow through the vents and floor, the system goes into a bi-level mode. This is intended to deal with cool sunny days where you need some heat to keep your feet and legs warm, but some cooler air to the upper body to manage the warmth of the sun. If it's bothering you at any point, just turn off the airflow to the vents by either changing it to floor only or going back to full auto.
Hope this helps...
I love the Accord's interior and overall quality, but like some others, I am not happy with the rear sheet metal, so I am awaiting the new Altima before making a decision.
Thanks for the input. Does this alternating of the A/C on and off cause MPG to be reduced? I had noticed this also with our RX300, when we pressed AUTO for the climate control the A/C light lit up, but I always hit the button off and kept the system on AUTO without having the AC on and had the fresh air entering the cabin always which eliminated/reduced the fogging of the windows. I'll try this the next time we go on a drive.
Thanks Again
another slightly obtuse reason to let the a/c cycle automatically is that it will help the longevity of the entire a/c system. if the a/c isn't operated for long periods of time...the seals in the system can dry out causing leaks.
Yes, I agree with you. As per the manual the AC should be operated weekly. Personaly, thats too much during the winter months. I normally operate my AC for about 15-20 miles or 1/2 hour every month and when I notice the interior glasses/windshield begin to fog up. Do you feel I should do it more often?
Thanks
do whatever you feel is right. and keep in mind the a/c won't cycle on/off when temps get below freezing.
Last night it was about 14F and the AC continued to cycle on and off. I will turn it off and keep the fresh air open all the time. If the glasses fog up only then will I turn the AC on. For the summer of course the AC will be in full use. For the winter I shall cycle the system as I previously discussed. Thanks everyone for the information and advice.
that's odd! the only time my a/c ever cycles when temps are below 35F is when i start the car in my garage. once it figures out how cold it is...it stops cycling. sounds like there might be something wrong with yours...especially if it runs at such low temps...