Older Honda Accords

fxashun · November 2001

that long warranty. Long term surveys show that Hyundai does not hold up as well over time. it seems that hyundai has gottn the "look" of it's cars better and with the warranty they have increased consumer confidence but the fact remains that they are near the bottom of nearly any initial quality survey. And they remain there for long term issues also.
The warranty goes a long way for people who want a new car but don't want to pony up the extra bucks for the CamCord duo but the fact remains that they put out over 800,000 of the best family sedans in the market today.
And as far as the 13,900 vs. 20,000 comparo. The TMV difference in Edmunds is around $3000. And i think that's about right. I wil admit that Hyundai is making cars that are better than they used to, but the market is still showing that a history of making "warranty proof" cars goes a much longer way than making cars that have a "super warranty".
Sure there are times when these cars may have problems, but for the number sold, there don't seem to be any glaring issues.

sobers · November 2001

Apart from the resale/reliability/quality etc the other imp things are the technology, chassis engineering, Steering feel, Safety, Seat comfort, Outward visibility.

Accord is VERY well engineered car right from the suspension, Vtec engine which revvvs to 5000RPM in the first gear & the 4 cyl engine which performs as good as Sonata's V6 ! Steering feel, Outward Visbility are also Accord's strong points. With 2001 changes they made an already quiete car more quiete to match with Camry. I guess it is up to the individual to test ride & decide what to buy.

oac3 · November 2001

thanks for the link and picture... but no picture or info on how the sedan will "look"... However, if the front look of the wagon is to be expected for the sedan, it isn't bad at all, maybe conservative, don't-break-an-egg kinda look, imo.

now my appetite is picqued to wait to see what the specs of the '03 sedan will be. Will it be built on the "Global Medium Platform" ? Sounds so to me... Already, even with the wagon, Honda is determined to improve the interior contents...this is a good sign that they meant to compete effectively in this market segment.... Nissan, are you listening ???

We'll see how the sedan turns out... any one with more pic's or info on the sedan should please post...

fxashun · November 2001

robertsmx · November 2001

At this point, discussing 2003 Accord would be no more than guesswork, but some of it will be close, for sure. Here are mine…
Platform
Possibly, a brand new global midsize platform. The current platform was launched with 1996 Acura TL, so I doubt it will continue for the new generation of models based on it. It could mean a shift away from double wishbones from front to mcpherson struts. The rear will definitely continue to have double wishbones (5-links) as it does now. Worldwide, there are three versions of ‘Accord’ (Euro, American and Japanese). With the new generation, the Euro and Japanese version will merge.

Dimensions
Current Accord has cabin volume of 102 cubic feet (Just 1 cubic feet less than 2002 Altima), that is about where I expect it to continue. May be 1-2 cubic feet more by way of space savings in the engine compartment and the front suspension. The exterior dimensions may be within fraction of an inch of the current model (possibly shrink!).

Drivetrain
2.3 liter SOHC VTEC (and non-VTEC in DX) will be replaced by a chain driven 2.4 liter DOHC iVTEC. Base power output could be 160 HP, but I would not be surprised to see Honda bring back the LX/EX distinction from the past in terms of power output, and get 190 HP or so from the 2.4/I-4. A 5-speed manual transmission will be offered for sure, along with, either a four speed automatic or a five speed automatic with SportShift (quite likely).
The V6 will be completely new as well, also with DOHC iVTEC design. Displacement could be 3.0 liters, or 3.2 liters, either way, pumping out atleast 200-210 HP. A ‘sport’ version model may sit on top with higher output variant pumping out 240-260 HP. Five speed automatic is going to happen for sure (if the new Odyssey and base RSX are any indication). Manual transmission may happen this time, but only if Honda sees enough market for it. I hope so!

Equipment List
Already a long list of equipment level exists in Accord. A friend of mine bought a 2001 Accord (EXV6), and the car has almost everything standard that one would expect for an automatic equipped model at just under $25K… traction control, ABS, Alpine 6-speaker AM/FM/Cassette/6-disc CD changer, remote keyless entry, immobilizer, floor mats, Moonroof, 8-way power seat with lumbar support, leather trimmed seats/shift knob/steering wheel, alloy wheels, smart side airbags, dual stage front airbags, homelink system, audio controls on steering wheel… The only thing I imagine could be added to this long list for a reasonable price tag would be electronic brake distribution (EBD, perhaps even the 2002 Civic Si has it), larger rims (16” on regular models, 17” on sport, if any). NAV is a possibility, but that would be an expensive option anyway.

Price Tag
May be within $500 of the current model, with more equipment level.

Styling
Most of the changes will be evolutionary. Traditional Honda cues will continue - subtle creases, pentagram grill, dominant eyes (head lamps), low beltline, and wedgy stance. The panel gaps will be minimized (as in 2001 Civic).

Miscellaneous
Improved fuel economy and emissions. Safer (expect a five star safety rating in all categories… front, front-side, rear-side, front-offset, rollover).

Now I’d be curious to compare my expectations with the real thing. This could replace my current Accord (1998), after all!

diploid · November 2001

Tried clicking on that new 03 Accord forum, but got an error message. Anyone else get this problem?

pat · November 2001

It's been moved here - you probably tried to access it while I was in the midst of moving it.

Please, carry on right here! :-)

Pat
Host
Sedans Message Board

jrct9454 · November 2001

And here is my personal wager that the wagon IS NOT HAPPENING FOR THE NORTH AMERICAN MARKET. But if you are chomping at the bit to know what the car looks like [the least interesting question in my view], then the front clip of the wagon drawing is no doubt pretty close.

tcpip1 · November 2001

And here is my personal wager that the wagon IS NOT HAPPENING FOR THE NORTH AMERICAN MARKET.

Any reasons for that? Is the wagon market too small to make a profit for Honda?

canadiancl · November 2001

One reason I can think of is that Honda, for whatever reason, always seems to react one step behind the competition when it comes to meeting emerging market trends. To wit, SUV; mini-van; V6 in the Accord; pickup truck (they still don't have one). So if there is a resurgence in the wagon market, I figure Honda will market one about 3 - 5 years from now.

veryrudedude · November 2001

I think your guesses are very realistic. I think every Accord model will get a 5-speed sportshift and 5-speed manual. And the V6 Accord Coupe(along with the sedan and wagon) will also get a 6-speed manual to replace the Prelude.

maxamillion1 · November 2001

I am actually 16 years old. I have sat in the new RSX and the Celica, an although they are nice cars, they are just too small for me. I need room, I play on the band at my school, and I often have friends in the car with me. I would much rather have a sedan for those reasons only. Also, I am NOT looking for a used car, if I can by a new car, why not. I'll be making the payments, NOT my parents, they are just signing.

Anywayz, has anybody found out if the new Accord will be released in the early part of 2002 or not? I meant to ask my aunt yesterday if she had found out any new info. If I get the Accord, I'll probably get the 2003 Accord EX with Leather with a manual transmission, a VERY hard to find combanation.

diploid · November 2001

So then how do you explain the Accord wagon that WAS here in North America for the Accord 2(?) generations ago?

basset3 · November 2001

As I've said in the past, I have a '92 LX Wagon and I'll never get rid of it...except for a new Accord wagon.

When I wrote to Honda asking them to kindly consider making the Accord Wagon again, I got the usual..."Thank you for writing to Honda. We will pass your letter on to the appropriate Honda personnel". Translated in Honda language..."Buzz off...don't bother us. Buy what we offer and keep quiet."

They don't seem to listen at all to their customers; but they do make the best cars on the planet!!!

diploid · November 2001

But I wouldn't go as far as saying the best...

jrct9454 · November 2001

On the wagon: My view is that Honda's view of the market is that you should buy the Odyssey or the CR-V or the upcoming Honda version of the MDX if you want room and utility. There is also the question of how many different models they want to source from the NA plants, and the perception on their part that the last wagon was too small a percentage of sales to be worth it. I too owned a '91 Accord wagon, and I too would welcome it back in the lineup - I just don't think it's going to happen.

Secondly, I see the VTEC site has made their predictions about the new Accord, and they've decided Honda is going to grab the market by the neck and shake it: 180 hp in the 4, 240 hp in the V6, 5spd automatic, 6 spd manual in at least the coupe [since the coupe is replacing the Prelude in the lineup, this is a credible prediction].

You need to put these predictions in context - they also still have the CR-V on the list with a predicted 170 hp and a 5 spd automatic at launch time, and we all know THAT didn't quite happen.

I'm content to wait for events to take all the fog out of this. My main goal for the new generation Accord has nothing to do with drivetrains - I want them to take the next step up in refinement and challenge Toyota for the quietest car in the segment...without losing the handling edge that they already have over both the old and new Camrys. If they do that, I won't care what's under the hood - all of their engines are the best around anyway, so I can afford to take it for granted they will do what they have to in order to stay competitive on this front.

canadiancl · November 2001

maximillion: please keep us posted when you have info from your aunt on the '03 Accord. If it is coming out in Spring of '02, then I am definitely going to wait to compare it to the Camry and Maxima.

diploid: With the last Accord wagon, I think Honda was off the mark too. They came out with it when minivans were hot and SUV's popularity was on the rise. I think that was part of the reason they pulled it off the market after only a few years.

canadiancl · November 2001

Were you referring to the vtec.net site (TOV)? That wasn't a recent prediction they made about the '03 Accord, was it?

jrct9454 · November 2001

If you go to their new models spreadsheet, all of this appears there.

canadiancl · November 2001

Does anyone know how the Accord's traction control system works? Does it apply the brakes or cut fuel to one or more cylinders?

auburn63 · November 2001

Hondas traction control uses the ABS (Anti-lock brakes) for the inputs and control of the traction control.

canadiancl · November 2001

Excuse me if this question is redundant, but when you said the Honda system uses the ABS for inputs, I assume the system will use the brakes to control wheelspin whereas other systems, such as Nissan's, limit wheelspin by cutting power?

Thanks again.

diploid · November 2001

I thought ABS, from any company, was basically where the car taps the brakes several times per second to avoid a skid? I didn't know they differed from one brand to another...

auburn63 · November 2001

Yes it does use the brakes to control the spin of the tires in an effort to slow them down and allow them to get traction.

robertsmx · November 2001

It uses ABS sensors to detect slippage, perhaps just like most other TCS systems. And then, it could be cutting off power (Nissan, GM) or applying brakes to do the job.

dudleyr · November 2001

I realize Honda thinks that people who want more space should just buy the CRV, but the CRV offers no more space than an Accord wagon would have. It also does not ride or handle as well as the Accord, and uses much more fuel 22/25 vs. 26/32. I would love an Accord wagon, but would not even consider the CRV.

alpha01 · November 2001

In case you didn't, the Accord beat out all the others (including Camry SE V6 and Altima SE 3.5) in an 8 car comparo. Interesting..
However, I have some contentions with the article. Primarily, I thought it silly to be comparing an SE V6 Camry to an LX V6 Accord... clearly, the LE V6 is more of a competitor to the LX Accord, especially considering the Toyota lost mainly b/c of its higher price tag. (The LE V6 would come in similarly equipped, very near to the Honda in MSRP). Also, they choose a Dodge Intrepid SE with the smaller engine, over the ES model. Poor vehicle didn't even come with ABS and accordingly, it slid 230 ft to stop from 70mph. How fair is that? C&D listed their requirements for the test as a V6 engine, interior dimemsions, and price tag from 23-25K. So that also left out the VW Passat, which is a perfectly capable vehicle with its 180hp 4clyinder. The Galant V6 should have also been entered IMO. The Accord is an excellent car, and it deserves its high placement. But next time, I'd like to see a more level playing field that includes ALL the players. Any comments?

ecarmack · November 2001

Only 1 point separated the Accord, Camry and Altima, so I'd say all three are pretty good depending on what traits you prefer in a mainstream sedan. However, it is impressive the 5 yr old Accord held its own against the newer designs. I was expecting it to drop, but C&D has always liked Accords.

The higher price of the SE Camry could have swayed the final tally, but even if a less expensive LE was included, it still may have lost against the Accord (regardless of LX or EX) because of its softer suspension (it is C&D, after all).

cyranno99 · November 2001

In the past comparisons, I've read that magazines editors get the most compatible models as possible. Sometimes they can't and they mentioned that in the articles about the reasons that they could not.

However, if you can keep in mind the possible performance differences between the trims then you can go on to compare other areas such as fit and finish.....

canadiancl · November 2001

I think the C & D test (which I haven't actually read yet) highlights what an excellent design the current Accord is when at the end of its cycle it is still more than competitive with new models. Is it any wonder every Tom Dick and Harry seems to have one!

robertsmx · November 2001

Interesting results. While I love Accord, I was expecting that 3.5SE, and/or to lesser extent the new Camry, would impress C&D reviewers enough to move from a design that is the oldest of the bunch. They have always favored a good mix of sportiness with practicality in family sedans (perhaps a reason why SE V6 was chosen for Camry). And that could be a big reason behind Accord's another win in a comparo. I'm waiting for my C&D issue to arrive though.

lsc · November 2001

what were the individual rankings? i.e. engine, transmission, ride, etc.?

Maybe I should just subscribe to C&D. :-)

canadiancl · November 2001

black01coupev6 · November 2001

Maybe the Galant missed out because of it's interior dimensions. If I'm not mistaken it's a little smaller inside than the others tested and they had a minimum interior capacity requirement which also disqualified the Pontiac Grand Prix.

Also, they had to compare the SE V6 Camry because equipped with it's LE suspension the Camry might have ranked even lower.

ecarmack: I was expecting the Accord to drop too. However, out of all of the vehicles tested my nod would still go to the Accord because of it's overall package. It has plenty of power, comfortable, nice suspension, quality, and a design that promises (and already has) aged well.

ecarmack · November 2001

Yes, it has aged well. I'm tempted to sell my 99 4cyl 5spd sedan next year, and get an 02 V6 coupe. Especially if Honda starts increasing the promotions once the 03s start arriving. But, it would be hard to pass up the 03 V6 if it is offered with a 5 spd. We can hope, but if not, there is always the CL (and maybe TL?).

talon95 · November 2001

Sorry I couldn't make this easier to read... the fonts here aren't monospaced, so columns wouldn't line up.

Accord - Altima - Camry

Engine: 9 - 10 - 9
Transmission: All 9's
Brakes: 8 - 9 - 9
Handling: All 9's
Ride: 9 - 7 - 9
Driver Comfort: 9 - 8 - 9
Ergonomics: 9 - 8 - 9
Features and amenities: 5 - 9 - 4
Fit and finish: 9 - 8 - 9
Styling: 8 - 9 - 8
Value: 9 - 8 - 8
Fun to drive: 9 - 9 - 8

Overall Rating: 96 (1st) - 94 (3rd) - 95 - (2nd)

The Passat fell out because the model that would fit in (V-6 automatic) is on the high end pricewise for this group. Although the turbo four would be fairly competitive, V-6 auto was the established condition of this test.

BTW, I don't think the Camry "lost" because of price. They use "value" to express how much car you get for the money. This helps to diminish disparate trim and price levels. The Camry did get lower marks for this because they apparently felt it was expensive for what you got, not solely because of high price. Kind of an inexact value, but I think it allows them to make this somewhat subjective, which a strict price comparison would not allow them to do.

mirth · November 2001

What great features and amenities did Altima have over Accord and Camry?? Except for a trip computer, I can't think of anything that would account for that scoring.

black01coupev6 · November 2001

The Altima they tested was a 3.5 SE with leather, bose stereo, and sunroof. But it was also $27,000 vs. $23,000 for the Accord and $26,000 for the Camry. Seems like they would've tested an EX V6 but it really doesn't make a difference because the Accord still won.

mirth · November 2001

Given the prices, I had assumed it was an EX. Now I get it (kind of).

sgiurlando · November 2001

Test drove an 02 Accord V6-EX. Dealer quoted me $23605 ($400 over his cost of $23,205). Can this be beat?

alpha01 · November 2001

Everyone is making very good points about the comparo, this is a great thread.
I don't really understand how the Accord got a 5 on the features content and the Camry had a 4... at just over 26K, the Camry was most likely equipped with the options package that includes the Side Curtain Airbags, JBL, and (as shown in pics) comes standard with the alloy rims....
I still feel that the Intrepid could have been better represented by the ES 3.2 liter ABS equipped model, which would have fallen in price contstraints..... I can't really believe that the hideously styled Hyundai is a better car....(I realize styling is subjective, but still....)
~alpha

lsc · November 2001

Don't pay a penny over invoice. Well, maybe $50 over but nothing more than that. I could have bought the EX-V6 for $22,500 and this was in the newspaper at this price for all Accord 4dr EXV6s. Now the price is at $23,000 in the papers, again for all the Accord EXV6s.

The Accord as you know is in it's last model year and comparo winning car or not, it's body is looking very, very old. The '98 Accord's body looked old right when it came out, but the refreshing job wasn't bad and was badly needed.

With the '03 coming out in the fall, the '02 is going look very old! That's why you'll be able to get a good deal. Just wait until the end of the month.. good luck

fxashun · November 2001

I think the Accord looks fine. But then again I still like the 1990-1993 ones too.

canadiancl · November 2001

IMHO the current Accord still looks fresh IF ONLY they had put a little chrome on the front grille so it wouldn't have that cheap rubbermaid look. Even the Civic's got a strip of chrome, for Chrisake! Honda's marketing agency must have thought the same thing. In the '02 brouchure, they didn't have one shot of the front end of the sedan.

black01coupev6 · November 2001

The Accord still looks great to me too. At least it still looks like an Accord and not copied after some other car. Let's hope it stays that way and doesn't go the way of the Camry which cloned the Taurus.

canadiancl · November 2001

If only they had cloned just the Taurus, everyone would be happy. The problem is they cloned alot of different cars---the rear looks like a Taurus, side profile and C pillar has a little of the old MB S class, front has a bit of Solara. Then to top it off they've adopted the "tall sedan" look which makes the whole thing looks ungainly. And putting a spoiler on the SE must have been a cruel Japanese joke!

fxashun · November 2001

But do the tires on the Camry look too skinny and small?

sobers · November 2001

That Accord can't be beat at the price ! For 98 Generation Honda made the MAX number of changes in Accord's history ! This design has aged really well & I think with 2001 changes to reduce noise, they did a very good job ! Back to Back drive of Camry & Accord (2001+) doesn't give away anything to camry in quietness. (Smooth vs Sporty suspension & steering difference will always be there)

bolivar · November 2001

Exactly what city are you in - where newspapers ads say $22,500 for EXV6. This is under invoice by $700.

jfavour · November 2001

I came out of the grocery store last week to find a 2002 Camry parked next to my 2000 Accord Sedan. I was amazed how much larger the Camry appeared sitting next to my Accord. It seemed huge. So, later that week I went to a local Toyota dealer and sat in a new Camry. I was not impressed. It feels somewhat cheap and inelegant inside, and didn't seem to have much space advantage over the Accord. This camry had the JBL stereo, cloth seats, a V6, etc. It was an average Camry. It felt like the last rental Camry I had. I can understand why C & D may think the features in the Accord were better than the Camry. It just feels that way inside.

Older Honda Accords

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy