Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
It's all very relevant to extending engine life. Many change at 10K whether it needs it or not and then trade the car at 80K. They've saved money but the next owner somewhere down the road gets a car with excess wear. I personally keep cars long enough that it matters. I've never had an oil burner because I keep my cars well maintained, as do some others on this board.
Happy New Year, to _everyone_ on the board.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
You may be right. I guess there aren't enough topics to support new areas for discussion on any given vehicle. That's why the same info keeps coming up.
Regarding engine life, can you produce any objective (i.e., not anecdotal) data that indicates more frequent (than the mfr's recommendation) oil changes extend engine life?
I'm going to unsubscribe. I don't want to annoy anyone else with my posts. See ya!
Very seldom are we in agreement, these forums should be open for any discussion and shorter oil & filter changes will extend engine life. I am presently changing at 5k or 4mos whichever comes first. Still, no additions of Marvel Mystery Oil.LOL.
Imadizol, as the one poster said, go to bobistheoilguy.com you will get all the info you need on what tests have bee performed on oil and oil filters.
"Happy New Year to all"
I don't find any where that they dissected oil filters to see how much is actually trapped...
Can you provide a link?
I did get lost again reading interesting and sometimes nonscientific 'testing' of parts.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It was a tough decision – the LX 4-cylinder was a very good car. The power was adequate – enough to make the car feel fairly fast. On the highway at 70mph (2,200rpm), I couldn’t have asked for a smoother or quieter engine. Even with drums in the rear, the brakes were excellent. With a manual transmission, this car could be a fun, almost sporty sedan. Unfortunately, the smooth but early-shifting automatic often left the engine in a rough band between idle and 2,000rpm. Keeping the revs above the roughness required using lots of throttle. Then too, engine noise was more pronounced than I would have liked and as a package my LX felt somewhat light and insubstantial (coming from a ’97 Mitsubishi Diamante with 3.5L V6 automatic). Too much “economy feel” for my tastes and not enough “luxury feel”.
In contrast, the V6 is dead smooth at idle and at every rpm. I’m surprised at how much heavier the steering feels but with the bigger engine, the overall effect is to make the car feel larger, more substantial and more refined. Power at all rpms is WAY more than I’d ever need and it’s smoothness is a speeding ticket waiting to happen. With the V6 underfoot, my sense is of driving a powerful and expensive car.
I’m 6’1” and in the LX 4-cylinder I drove with the seat all the way back yet wishing for more tilt in the seat cushion to support my thighs. The power seat in the LX-V6 moves back even farther than I need and the infinite adjustability makes it easy to find the perfect seat position.
I considered the EX-V6 – for about three seconds. For one, I’m not a fan of leather seats. I paid extra once for a car with a factory sunroof and then never used it except to vent the car when parked in the summer. Alloy wheels look nice but add nothing to my driving experience. The extra money wasn’t worth it just to get the integrated XM radio alone (nice feature though).
My original decision to by the LX 4-cylinder was based on too much reading and not enough test driving. I took a big hit trading in a new car but my mistake wasn’t getting any better as the weeks passed. Now I can stop agonizing over my decision and just enjoy owning my V6 Accord. I hope this helps someone else avoid making an expensive mistake either one way or another.
so i went with the EX V6. the EX V6 will probably have better resale value too.
for me, one of the advantages of the i4 accord is the "lighter" feel. it's not only the manual transmission that make the i4 accord more sporty but the lighter engine over the front wheels.
___First off, what did you pay for the 05 Accord LX I4 w/ Auto and what did the Honda Dealership give you for your 05 Accord LX in trade for the Accord LX V6? Was it in the area of 15 to low 16’s?
___Thanks in advance.
___Wayne R. Gerdes
Now it appears that both of you have found happiness.
But will you keep your new Honda as long as she will keep her current husband?
Will I be able to import and register this car in the States without converting the gauges (from kilometers to miles)? Thanks!
This has been a great resource that Edmunds has made available to us. I've spent a lot of time reading through all the posts in the various accord forums over the past months. Thank you all, I have found the information here quite useful. I'd like to now share with others how I came to bring the Honda Accord home to my family.
First, my history. S. California V-8 Pony guy all the way. All my cars have been Mustang GTs, manual transmission, V-8, etc..I've had four. Unfortunately, I started to realize that the Mustang was no longer fitting my lifestyle...and I wanted more.
I wanted a car that was less noisy, more economical (fuel, insurance), and more friend friendly (The 2 door mustang with a postage stamp backseat is not friend friendly). I also wanted something with some cool 'gadgets' and a more luxurious interior.
So, I turned my search towards:
Passat, Jetta, 3-series, C-class, TSX, Maxima, Mazda, etc. Being an engineer, I was very thorough and analytical. I created a comparison chart that took into account all the key properties, reviews and parameters of each of the cars in the class. When I had completed my research, the Honda Accord Sedan came out on top by far.
The Accord had the best features (performance, safety, looks, interior, etc) for the best cost.
I knew exactly what I wanted...almost. White, tan leather interior. The only question, V-6 or I-4. Hmmm...the only way to answer that...the test drive. And should I get the navigation? Hmmm...
I decided I wanted to get the car this weekend (New Years Weekend) to take advantage of the low 1.9% financing...so it was time to move.
First, I've heard (read) lots of good things about the I-4 manual transmission. I knew coming off of a life of V-8s there would be SUBSTANTIAL power loss but I was prepared. All in all, the I-4 was impressive and not nearly as powerless as I thought it would be. But what killed it for me was the noisy engine and the rather impotent shifter. I'll keep Freud out of this but the shifter in the 4 cylinder Accord was much too small for my liking...it made me feel like I was in a weak car. I also took out the 4 cylinder automatic. The constant shifting and reving during my brief test drive in city conditions killed the car for me. It wasn't for me.
OK, then on to the 6. After one right turn into traffic I knew this was the car for me. First, it was quiet, very quiet. Second, it had great power. Again, it wasn't a V-8 and I knew that, but I thoroughly enjoyed my ride. It went when I wanted to just fine and got me where I wanted to go. The interior was wonderful, I loved the dual power seats, the fine leather, and all the other appointments inside. I decided, I wanted this car.
So, 2 hours later, and at 1.9%, $26,641 OTD, I purchased my first non-sportscar, non-V-8, non-'American' car with 11 miles on the odometer (6 of which was my testdrive). And so far, two days later, I love it!
I know that there are people out there that got a better deal, there is a whole forum for it, but I had a good experience and am quite happy with what I paid...or perhaps overpaid.
So, we'll see how things go but I couldn't be any happier. I'm proud to now say I'm the owner of a beautiful 2005 Honda Accord Sedan...without integrated navigation. I've decided to purchase a Magellan instead.
Congrats on your new purchase.
As for warranty, as long as you are a Canadian resident and bought and registered the vehicle there first, you should not have any issues with warranty service.
If the caster was set one way, the car would be too hard to steer. If it was set the other way, it would have poor directional stability, like our 1970 Volvo.
I don't know how this relates to the modern FWD cars.
The situation you describe is, from what I have read, common for new Hondas. Other people have often mentioned it.
We will probably get a new Accord soon, and one of the main things I will check on the test drive is the directional stability. Thanks for the warning.
The 99 is rock-solid on the highway but feels much more stiff driving around town and manuvering through shopping centers.
Maybe with the new accords they went back to the way it was with the 97 model.
Have you checked your tire pressures against the specifications on your door frame label? Your symptoms seem like a clear case of overinflation.
I hope that your tires aren't inflated to the maximum burst pressure molded into your tires' sidewalls. That's a common mistake, and very dangerous.
After-market or tuner companies sell kits that allow adjustment of the Accord's camber and caster (ex: http://www.eautoworks.com/ORD-1-1-1-15679.cfm ).
The first time I went to the dealer, they wouldn't even write it up. They lubed it and sent me on my way with nothing. I just went back and got it documented, but still they just lube the clutch pedal. I'm getting a twangy spring sound whenever I depress the clutch pedal. Its worse when its warm out (of course its cold now). I'm at 35,500 miles so I'd like to get this issue resolved. I have the TSB, but the dealer says lubing it "is what they HAVE to do." I'm pretty sure the old TSB specified lubing the pedal, and that it was changed this year to reflect replacement of the cylinder behind the pedal.
Any thoughts?
Just started noticing a "click" noise when shifting from Park to Drive. Put shifter in D and 2 seconds later here this annoying "click".
Also rough going from Drive to Reverse.
Anyone else experience this? Thanks
For most people it would be a waste of money to use anything more costly than regular......Richard
Toyota has taken this line too with the newer engines. Honda seems to be rating the HP using regular, while Toyota is rating them using Premium, then noting that you can also run regular with decreased performance.
Unless the noise changed between the 03 and now, I doubt it's that.
Do dealers have good reputation of doing transmission work?
If a transmission needs major work, the dealer replaces it with a factory rebuilt unit. This is easier and cheaper than training mechanics to mess in the bowels of transmissions......Richard
Question : has anybody else gotten these done under warranty ? Did this eliminate the problem with vibrations at idle ? I am considering calling my daler to see if they can fix this under warranty, just wanted to check if anybody else has experience with getting this fixed. Thanks !
Sunil
http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/new/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/- 37579
However, the engine gradually developed a vibration at idle when in Drive. Our test ended before the vibration could be addressed, but Honda said the test car was subsequently repaired in accordance with a factory Service Bulletin. The bulletin recommends replacing the motor mounts and radiator mounts in Accords that develop the idle-vibration problem.
vibration: see above (if only I would remember to shift into neutral!)
brakes: rotors turned at 24k..Honda would not replace, only resurface.
Pulling right: Just had an alignment, no change, tire pressure OK. Requires constant left-ward pressure on the wheel. Thanks!
Sunil
Extended Use Report At 7500 mi., extended-use Accord EX-L sedan suffered a slight brake pulsation when slowing from highway speeds. The front brake rotors were resurfaced and the pads replaced under warranty.
Drive Slower!!
IMHO I think 27.5 mpg at 80 mph is pretty good!!
Thanks. I have wondered if that was part of the issue. When honda rates it at 30 mpg, it is probably running 55 MPH. I think I was disappointed b/c my 96 Chevy Lumina with a v6 got the same mileage at that speed.
Anyway, thanks again.
Actually it's the EPA that came up with the number - they test every car on a treadmill like device in a controlled environment. IMHO, it's a nice way to compare results against other cars but in no way is it a reliable real world number.
Good Luck.
I recall that early on the EPA rating was done at 50 mph with no air resistance compensation. Not realistic.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Thanks for everyone's input.