By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
On my 2004 Accord 4 cylinder auto - I never got better than 28 Mpg. However, I never did just all/mostly all highway driving - so I don't know the MPG. To get the 28 mpg, it was 60% to 70% freeway driving and the rest city.
On my new 2006 Accord SE 4 auto - first tank got me 30.1 MPG @ those same ratios.
2nd tank - was over 24 miles but this time mainly city driving 75% and city 25%.
We shall see with the third tank - I am now at over 800 miles with the car.
I can't wait to take it on all/mostly all highway trip.
The car is not yet broken in and the mileage should stabalize at about 5k miles.
Anyway, I never got the same mileage indicated on the window stickers. However, I live near SF, so there are a lot of hills, traffic, etc. Driving from my residence to Burlingame, CA (which is 15 miles) via freeway, once took me 35 minutes! I have always bought Accords though because for fuel economy they can't be beat IMO.
81 MPH = 2,700 RPM in an automatic Accord (80 = 2,666 RPM).
ps. going with 10w30 high mileage
-Cj
Over pothole, I hear metal dropping sound around driver side suspension.
The suspension is bouncy, it is nothing like the suspension system of my 94 Prelude.
Anyway, for the price it is one of the best out there.
Your owner's manual might give a better description and more accurate information.
------------------------------------------------------------
Drive over and visit me at:
http://www.carspace.com/master1
Mrbill
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I guess this is a personal problem rather than Honda's problem, but my Camry's fuel empty light went on at about 2 gallons left — which was cause for concern. The Honda's fuel empty light coming on at ¾ tank seems like a false alarm. I worry that one of these days I'll ignore it and run out of gas.
It's the ONLY thing I dislike about my Accord.
thanks for letting me rant — and for the initial post with the specs.
ps, I'm getting 30-32 mpg, with most of my driving at 40 mph. about ¼ driving is highway. Still: $42 to fill tank each week; gas was $3.03 at cheapest Mobil station today...
For me, when the light comes on, I figure that I have 100 miles (with a little buffer) before I need gas. It's a nice round #, easy to remember, and easy to add to the current milage.
Mrbill
Mine has 2 protrusions off the back with a hole in each. When held up to the bumper, the protrusions go under and in the opening of the face (mouth) of the bumper. The screws go up into the plastic on the underside of the bumper, with the plate holding section covering the face of the bumper.
I would think that if you look under the bumper, you would see a couple of holes or dimples in the underside.
Mrbill
It's interesting that you say that, because the tires are actually very high quality Michelins. The problem is that they are more performance oriented (V-rated tires, meaning they are approved for rather high-speeds) tires. They cost over $800 to replace on our 2 EX I-4 Accords (16"), so my father switched to top of the line Goodyears on his 2005 ($500+- a few bucks) and the ride is a little better, but the steering feels a little mushier to me.
Simply put, I think it is that the tires are too sport-oriented for many owners, but they compliment the suspension tuning and make for a great-handling car. It's no Buick in the ride department, but that's a tradeoff many of us want to make. Unfortunately, it turns some people away.
This is always the age-old comparison, especially between the Camry and the Accord. If you want the sportier ride, you get the Accord. It isn't for everyone, however... as you and your wife can attest.
Again, thank you both for your answers.
******************************************
larouse,
It's nitrogen, not hydrogen and it is being used at such places as Costco tire departments because tires maintain a more constant pressure as temperature varies when filled with nitrogen vs. air. It doesn't cost me any more at Costco either. P.S. Unlike nitrogen, hydrogen is extremely explosive. It would not be a good idea to fill your tires with that. Remember the Hindenburg blimp? That was hydrogen. Blimps are now filled with inert Helium.
I think I will try the nitrogen thing.
Thanks
Your tire's inner liner is made to resist permeation by gases and deterioration from oxygen for the time period during which you'll own the tire.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I could spend time looking up the mixture of gases and their ratios at sea level, nitrogen, carbon dixoide, oxygen, and a few trivial others, and seeing what their compressibilities are in the Chemistry Handbook. But I don't need to waste my time.
A local franchise chain started doing nitrogen inflation. They used to have the schtick that they give a free alignment with purchase of four tires, but if you checked price with other stores there was a pad in there to pay for the alignment. The ads make all kinds of claims for the nitrogen inflation benefit. Of course if you add air at a service station you're going to have a mixture in there.
Their ad spokeman said the molecules are smaller so better; then another time he said larger molecules and therefore they're better. Again I'd have to look in the Chemistry Handbook to find out which is true. But it doesn't matter.
I don't put nitrogen in my tires. My Michelins have quality innards and don't lose air!!!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
IMHO, if you want to try it and if it makes you feel better about the ride, go for it.
As were mine. I had to reduce mine by about 4 PSI.
2006 Accord EX-V6 was tested in a comparison with Camry, Sonata, and Fusion, and got 0-60 in 6.6 seconds according to both Car and Driver, and Motor Trend.
First, the VP sedan has gone up in price $400, from 18,225 (for the manual) to 18,625. The car still represents a great deal at that price, but take a look at the standard equipment. The 2006 VP had an AM/FM CD player. It seems that for 2007 they have stripped that off of the car. That's something that's worth probably $200, and perhaps more to get installed. So the price increase is really something like $600. I think Honda may have realized that at the 2006 prices there wasn't much incentive to get a Civic LX, because for not much more you could have the Accord VP (esp. since the Civic is selling near list, while the Accord is heavily discounted).
The other great deal in 2006 Accords was the LX SE. The price increase there is only $100 for the 2007, but again they've taken out something that really made that model great—the 6 CD stereo changer (basically, it was the EX's stereo unit). Again, they may have realized that with all that the LX SE came with they were stealing too many sales from the EX models.
The peculiar addition to the lineup, and possibly a great value, is the SE V6, listing for just 23,550 (if I'm remembering correctly) with auto transmission. That means that with discounts this might make available a V6 Accord for just 22k. If only they'd put a manual in that model!
The EX V6 MT only goes up $100 in price, and so now lists for $27,400.
Anyway, for those waiting on the fence, it may make sense to grab one of the last of the 2006s out there. They are going fast.
Sorry!
Heres a link.
-Cj :shades:
It depends upon what you are used to. Other cars may have overly light or sensitive "feel" to their steering. (I don't care for such vehicles.) Others may have over or under inflated tires that affect steering "feel". Different brands of tires may affect steering "feel" too.
Personally, I am very satisfied with the "feel" of the steering in my 2004 Accord V6 Coupe. Honda has designed-in a fine combination of vehicle handling and "feel".
I just got my car and drove the first tank of gas to nearly "E" and the light didn't come on. I filled it up since I didn't know how much was left in the tank and I didn't want to take the chance of running out of gas. I assume I didn't let it go far enough since I only had to put in about 13.5 gallons.
I think the user's manual said the light should come on when there is 2 to 3 gallons left.
When does the light come on?
Not sure if u have also noticed this , any suggestions.
Fusion: 23/31
Altima: 24/31
Sonata: 24/34
Camry: 24/34
Right now, even the closest are 2 mpg behind the Accord. I read somewhere that Honda is hoping for about an 8% improvement in mpg in the next generation of Accord, which will come out about a year from now as a 2008 model. If they get that improvement, that might mean figures of about 28 in the city for the Accord, and about 36 on the highway. Back when gas was 1.25 a gallon, which seemed to last from about 1986 to 2003, an increase of a few mpg didn't seem like a big deal. But with $3+ a gallon gas, this really seems to open up a competitive advantage for Honda.
Honda's very secretive, and I don't think many outside the company have much of an idea of what the 2008 Accord will look like. But the runaway success of the Civic makes it more likely that Accord will follow the styling of its little sister (brother?). I did find this quite interesting styling study from Honda, which seemed quite good-looking:
http://www.vtec.net/forums/one-message?message_id=435221&page_number=1
Other things we might expect on the next Accord would be Vehicle Stability Assist, which is now only available on V-6 models. Since the Sonata now has stability assist across the line, it seems possible that Honda would put it on all models (esp. because of their emphasis on "safety for everyone"). Studies seem to show that VSA significantly decreases accidents.
Any other thoughts or guesses about the 2008 Accord?