Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
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
My dislike is with the color itself and has nothing to do with how clean people can keep it. If one were to really like Ivory and are worried about keeping it clean then they can buy one of the warrantied teflon packages that the dealer would be happy to sell. If you still get dirt they will clean it for you.
I think that Honda should offer more than 1 interior color so that people who dislike a particular interior color would still have an option. Due to the limited choices, I seriously considered a Camry but backed out after all the issues that people wrote about on the Camry thread.
I also have a Honda Pilot EXL with Nav and I like Honda Products but my only complaint is the lack of interior color choices.
Of course, color is one of those subjective things. I do agree that it would be nice if Honda offered a choice. It seems especially odd since they had other options on the carbon bronze for '06. Maybe you and I were the only ones who liked it!
Have of up grade to a Porsche BMW or Bentley if
you want a blue interior. Us poor folks must make due with these two colors...It is a common problem through out the auto industry, with accountants squeezing the options in order to survive. For example the Porsche 911 has 26 interior choices. Be interesting to know the last year one could actually order an Accord with the beloved blue interior?
Equally impressive was the Accord's 5-speed automatic transmission: It always seemed to be in the right gear, with no sign of hunting.
In a way, I almost wish I had bought the Honda, but it would have been much more $$ and no hatchback.
Higher pressures will increase tire life because it results in cooler running. With less sidewall flexing, handling will also be improved slightly because there'll be reduced tread squirm. Still doubtful? Check in with Tirerack.com for their advice on maximizing tire life. The only thing you got right was that the higher pressure will result in somewhat stiffer ride quality. (a very minor consideration I can live with quite comfortably at the 3-5 lb increase I run my tires at) Your inexcusable implication that I advocated running the pressure up to the sidewall maximum is reproachful and/or the result of poor reading comprehension.
If the sidewall maximum pressure was not part of your decision on tire pressure, why did you mention it? I didn't just pull that out of thin air. I will run my tires at the recommended pressures. I think the people who designed the car know more than you do.
I'd think so too. But for whatever reason, that doesn't seem to be the case at least 100% of the time. E.g. a while ago the Explorer/Firestone tire debacle. Ford ended up raising the recommended tire pressure from something like 25 psi. Personally I try to keep my tire pressures 2 or 3 psi higher than the recommended ones for easier maintenance and better gas mileage.
Today I talked to the service manager at the dealership where I bought the car last May. He was very well aware of the situation and printed a page from a Honda Service News dated December, 2000. The information applies to all Hondas except the Passport (that was made by Isuzu, I think).
The situation is caused by the Electronic Load Detector (ELD). The function of the ELD is to send a message to the ECM/PCM to lower the alternator's output when demand decreases. Its function is used to reduce engine load (saving gas) during low power situations.
I was told there is no "fix" for the situation. It's "not a fault, just a characteristic". An earlier poster said his dealer corrected the situation... I'm wondering what's going on. The condition is a little anoying.
http://www.alldata.com/tsb/Honda/1123052400000_1124089200000_05-034/
Mrbill
It didn't seem right that the millions of Honda cars on the road since the turn of the century would have this "characteristic" without some kind of fix for it. I'll be better armed when I go back to the dealership with a TSB number.
elroy5 is a lot smarter than me. He can fix his car... it's a good day when I can get inside and drive mine ;-)
Appreciate everybody's help.
Oh, I wouldn't say that. While I was learning (the little I do know) about cars, I'm sure you were learning something else, that was important to YOU. Different strokes
Grow up and get a clue, elroy5. I mentioned it in passing because there are morons who do run at the maximum sidewall pressure (and above...). That's a fact - not an endorsement of a dangerous practice. As to who may or may not know more than myself, it's both irrelevant and beyond your personal purview. I would note, though, that the Ford Explorer/Firestone tire multiple death fiasco had as one of its bases Ford's own written recomendations in the owner's manual that the tires be run at at a measly 24 lbs pressure - this in a high center of gravity SUV by "people who designed the car [and] know more than [I] do" and would knowingly be called on to carry up to eight people, their luggage, and their camping paraphenalia - some of which could be lashed to the roof, further exacerbating the rollover tendencies of an already top-heavy rig. Now, if my running my tires at 35 lbs instead of Hyundai's recommended 30 lbs bothers you so much, A) get over it, or don't read my posts - they're clearly identified.
You mentioned the sidewall max. pressure (in passing or whatever). I just told you that it had nothing to do with recommended pressure (for any particular car). What is your problem? You have a bad attitude, that needs adjustment.
We bought our 1st ESC-equipped car in '99, & it's saved our bacon a couple of times. I'm with woodcreek - I'd wouldn't consider a car without it. (IIRC, it added only $600 to the cost of our car.)
Agree.
That's why I'm giving the Sonata a more careful look. (Though I'd rather go with Honda.)
Also, Honda doesn't provide a grey interior with a black car.
I've got a bad attitude? Do you have any idea how immature that initial outburst makes you look? As far as attitude, better re-read your first post to my initial comments about tire pressure, bud. Your advice was not only wrong (others have subsequently pointed that out, too), but personally argumentative and demeaning. Doesn't appear anything's changed in your subsequent posts, either. I'll allow you the unearned privilege of one last childish retort to finish what you started. Will that satisfy you?
Thank you.
Anybody who is concerned about sliding off of the road should certainly have 4 snow tires on the vehicle in the winter time. They are much cheaper than VSA and give a much greater benifit as they actually increase available traction. I have run 4 snow tires for 15 years in South Dakota and the benefits are astounding. The VSA while usefull does not offer as much of an improvement in my opinion.
To sum up - having both is an incredible safety advantage. I was stuck in a blizzard last year (6 up to 18 inches of snow and steady 50 mph + winds from the side) and the car was so stable the kids in the back did not even realize the weather was bad (when we started the trip it was 50 degrees and raining - SD weather is unpredicatable). They were just happy it was taking longer so they could watch another movie.
My '96 Accord did the same thing for the entire six and a half years I owned it. So did a '73 Ford I owned. My current '03 Sonata did it, too. But, several months into ownership I received a letter from Hyundai explaining the "problem" and inviting me to return the car to my dealer to have the engine idle speed checked against specifications, and if correct, install a slightly smaller pulley onto the alternator. This was done under warranty and seems to have fixed the headlight dimming issue.
The best thing about synthetic is it protects better in the extreme cold because it flows better, and you can safely use the manufactures oil schedule (or extend it further). 3,000 mile oil changes are a thing of the past - they do no harm, but serve no real purpose unless you really are going to try and put 300,000 or more miles on the car.
I have a 17 year old Integra that has had synthetic since 3,000 miles (it now has 218,000 miles) and the engine looks like new inside. The problem is the rest of the car is starting to fall apart (hard life with three young boys - seats are stained and worn down, rust is starting, original clutch is wearing etc.), so what benefit does the clean engine give me?
Today, at Honda service dept, I heard my car might have a serious problem. They couldn't figure it out after two hours working on it. They said they need to tear my car down to find the problem. If they do, my car won't be a new car any more. I need your advice how to handle this situation. If it's indeed a serious problem, is it possible that I can get it replaced with another new car? I am so frustrated. Please help me out. Thank you in advance.
From Austin, TX.
But there also are dozens of other things, rather than a 'ruined' motor, that could cause a no-start condition.
What I would do, with a car with only 650 miles and will not start, firmly demand, and if unsuccessful, then rant and rave, for a very nice car to drive while Honda is working on your car.
Excellent point. Besides presumably better efficiency and reliability in those 218K miles, you'd have saved a ton of time since you only needed to change the oil maybe twice a year as opposed to 4 times a year?
There is no chance you will get a replacement car. Replacement engine maybe, but a new car, no way. I hope there are some competent techs working on the problem. How far from the dealership do you live? Good luck
PS: Please wait and see if the problem can be resolved to your satisfaction, before going off the deep end.
One thing that happens occasionally is a glitch in the imobilizer key system. If the car's brain decides that the key isn't correct, it can shut down or not start (although I am not sure if it would be dead vs. cranking but not starting).
SOmetimes problmes like this can be difficult to track down, but very simple when they do (loose wire, bad ground, something like that). So, in terms of demanding a new car, give them a chance to diagnose and fix the problem, and make sure to carefully inspect the car (and take a test drive) when you get it back to make sure that nothing was screwed up in the process.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
The engine could still be breaking in...
Also, what are the mileage figures according to the EPA for those vehicles? Are they essentially the same?
Your 2003 did NOT have a 4-speed, all 2003-current model Accords have had 5-speed Automatics or manuals.
You were getting great mileage on your old one; remember that as cars break in, mileage improves. Mine has improved about 2 MPG average on my 4-cylinder 2006 Accord since I purchased it. Started out getting 26-28 MPG, now I'm consistently at or above 30 MPG.
Also, since you recently changed cars, gas companies have also recently started using their "winter" formulas, which lower mileage by about 10%, IIRC. You were likely getting those 30+ MPG numbers from summer-formula gasoline.
The engines are NOT the exact same, in case you didn't know. Your 2003 had 240 horsepower, the 2006 has 244 horsepower (actually, the increase is closer to 10 horsepower, but new horsepower testing regulations hit at the same time as the horsepower bump - on the old scale, your new Accord would have 250 horsepower, Honda has said).
Notice too, that with that increase in 10 horsepower, the EPA numbers on your window sticker dropped by one MPG each, from 21/30 to 20/29.
All of these factors (mainly the winter gas and unbroken-in engine) are likely to blame for your reduced mileage.