I am looking to get a 4-door to replace my 3 door Integra. One of the main reasons for getting the 4 door is to have a comfortable easily accessable rear seat. The Accord is supposed to be "bigger and better" than ever for 2003. Why then is the rear seat leg room down an inch from the 2002. Does this mean that the Accord now is closer to the Corolla for rear seat leg room (Consumer Reports has the 02 Accord at 1" less than Camry, and the 03 Corolla at 2" less than Camry - so the 03 Accord might be near the Corolla) Or course the Accord is wider.
Why can't the Accord be packaged more effeciently?
I really like the new Accord overall, especially the better fuel mileage, and availability of the manual tranny in every trim line, but in my mind the Camry still has some advantages.
More rear seat room More trunk space CD and Cassete (for books on tape) standard Outside temp gauge on every car not just top of line (very handy when travelling in the winter)
Regarding power. I drove the 5-speed Camry 4-cyl, and could hardly tell it from my brothers 5-speed maxima (1998?) in terms of engine smoothness, and acceleration. (remember Camry weighs less than Maxima). If the new Honda engine is as nice (which it should be) I really can't see any need for a 6 cylinder engine, in fact I would go the other direction and say I would like to see a 2.0 liter engne that really gets great gas mileage, and still has the power of last years car (more than enough for me).
Let me remind you that I owned a 2k Accord EX for 52,000 miles, or 2.9 years. Here are a few of my observations (not reports) on that car; 1. faulty automatic transmission 2. cheap chipped and faded paint 3. cheap stereo 4. cheap alloy wheels that pitted after one winter 5. loud internal noises 6. loud wind noises (couldn't hardly talk on my cell on hiway) yes, the windows were closed 7. windshield wiper design that whirled noisily in cold weather 8. center armrest material wore down before 30k miles 9. slow (could'nt get out of its own way)until you really revved it). 10. strange off center steering wheel 11. ac was lousy (maybe from too much glass) Take a look at the thousands of unsatisfied Accord reports in the Maint and Repair section of Edmunds.
I replaced this overated car with a SUPERIOR Altima.
Look, I don't want to continue this import/domestic thing and further because its tiresome (i.e., Accord's have better resale vs. Impala's cost less with incentives or Accord's are more reliable vs. Impala parts cost less.) Its never ending. But, Intellichoice defines their estimates as follows:
MAINTENANCE COSTS: Assumes services performed generally at manufacturer's suggested intervals; other services done at selected intervals. Cost per service is based upon industry-standard service times and national labor rate averages for non-luxury cars and trucks ($75/hour) and luxury cars ($85/hour). Parts prices are based on manufacturer's suggested list price where available.
REPAIR COSTS: Repair cost is based on a $0 deductible extended service contract that will pay for repairs for 5 years or at least 70,000 miles. Figures used are averages from nationally available service contract providers.
I'd actually sit in each of the cars because the measurements can be misleading to evaluate space AND comfort. For example, an automaker can put the rear seat cusion on the floor to increase headroom and overall volume or make the cusion shorter and the angle of the seatback more vertical to incease legroom or volume again.
I have an MDX--I do not want perceieved status or another Acura like the TL. A lowly Accord EX V-6 is shy and anonomous. I travel a lot and really want no attention but a smooth nice semi performance car for getting around. (yes I would call the 03 Accord EX V-6 a semi performance car that uses regular unleaded fuel, has competitive insurance rates and performs in all areas competently. INKY
I completely agree that dimensions are misleading, and you have to gauge the space for yourself by adjusting the front seats as you would typically use them while driving. This is important for example in the Corolla that someone mentioned- the 2003 rear seat is roomy for many, but for my uncle whose legs are very long, tight foot/leg room up front forces him to position the seat against its backstops, severely limiting usable rear seat space. Our 02 Camry is very comfortable and feels cavernous inside, whereas our 00 certainly doesnt. I felt the 98-02 Accord was much more roomy/comfortable than the 97-01 Camry. -- It will be interesting to see how the new models compare. ~alpha
btw- i just (finally) read the article on the Accord by AMI Auto World. They are good for factual information, sort of. Overall, that mag is a piece of trash. They listed the "Average list price" of the new Accord at 16,000. Riiiiight. The average TRANSACTION price isnt even going to approach that.
"The latest edition of Accord is clearly an improvement over the '02 model, although it doesn't look or feel like as great a leap as the new Camry was a year ago. Nor does the Accord step too far away from its principal competitor, in terms of styling, features and performance. But it should wear well with previous Accord owners and Honda loyalists who've been waiting since model year 1998 for a major overhaul."
-Anita and Paul Lienert, Detriot News, July 31, 2002
Hello all. I am looking to purchase a 2002 honda accord 4dr auto DX with AC. I wanted to know what I should expect to pay out the door. I live in atlanta, GA. I can buy now and put in in my wifes name or I can save some more money and buy in NOV. Do you think that I will be able to find the above vehicle in NOV or do you think that all the 2002's will be gone by then?. I have heard that the 2002 accord should still be on the lots till DEC but am not sure if this is true. Any ideas?
The name calling is really tiresome and juvenile...
Most of my observations about the Altima are based on experience as well... it doesn't take more than an afternoon to determine that a car has a cheap interior, a cheap feel and a hard ride.
Give the Altima a year or two and you'll see tons of posts on problems as well... this brand new version is only in its first model year.
Funny... I've had a 2K Accord and my experience is much better than yours. Enough so that I'll be seriously considering a 2004 Accord. So I guess my positive report cancels out your negative report.
Anyway, I use reviews because they tend to filter out bias to a large extent, something that your posts clearly fail to do. (I'll admit that you can say the same about mine, which is why I posted quotes from reviews.) So pardon me if I don't fall over dead from the problems you allegedly had with your Accord... whether or not you'd like to believe it, you aren't the poster child for Accord quality.
ickes_mobile : Everything is foreign in Canada and I have owned Honda, Ford and GM. I see very little difference in reliability based on my experiences and maintainence is definitely cheaper at a GM dealer than it is at a Honda dealer. Like I said, take estimates and stats with a grain of salt.
bodydouble : Our Intrigue which replaced an Accord has so far (2 1/2 years in) been more reliable. Only repair was a faulty temp gauge. Best car I have ever had. GM is number 3 in initial quality and re-sale is no concern as I drive cars for 7-8 years. Like I said, everything is foreign in Canada so I don't carry any major bias (ie I am not flag waving)
talon - You're wasting your time. There are certain posters whose purpose for coming here is to simply troll. You just have to move on, as it's obvious that they don't have the refinement and tact to do the same.
I'd actually sit in each of the cars because the measurements can be misleading to evaluate space AND comfort. For example, an automaker can put the rear seat cusion on the floor to increase headroom and overall volume or make the cusion shorter and the angle of the seatback more vertical to incease legroom or volume again.
"But Honda engineers are so serious about putting more pizzazz into the Accord that the vehicle's project manager and a key powertrain engineer last February got a hold of a Nissan Altima and ran it in a makeshift drag race against their car in the dead of night. The results of the rat-racing in a parking lot behind the company's technical center in Torrance, Calif. : The 240 horsepower Altima was faster from the start to 30 miles an hour, but as cars zoomed to 60 miles an hour, the new Accord pulled ahead by a length."
Yeah, he is just defensive because he spent all that money on an inferior, noisy, ugly, cheaply built, pollution generating Altima that he is stuck with until all the payments are made.
Only kidding! The Altima is a great car and has helped transform this segment. I think the 2003 model (with the revised interior) will be a big hit. However, I think it will remain a niche player compared to the new Accord (which will be very successful) and the Camry.
I guess so. Civic and Pilot are made here also. My brother in law drives transport for Honda to ship parts to Ohio and Alabama. If anything, I should be a Honda fanatic I suppose. It's a mixed up car world these days!!
My guess is that you'll pay about 14,000-14500 or so before tax, etc. for a DX with AC (or a DX with an option pkg). I paid 15,665 for an LX 5 Speed. A good way to get a good price is to check the ads in your local newspaper. Often they list "1 only" at this price, and if you simply go down as soon as they open, and try to buy the car, you might be in luck. Another method would be to call up your local dealer and ask for a price. An Accord DX with auto and AC would probably list for nearly 17,000, but Honda is offering dealers incentives of 1250 for each Accord sold. You should be able more than $3000 off of the list price of any Accord. I got almost 4000 off of list on my LX. Happy shopping!
I provided real data from my own personal experience with the Accord, all you do is provide data that defends your needs. Again, take a look at the Maintenance & Repair section for the Accord, there have to be well over 5000 complaints in there. Now go and look up the Altima Problems (160 messages) and then, Get a grip dude!
Anyone have any recent (last few weeks) experience with 2002 Accord pricing in Canada? Also, I know its a bit early, but has anyone received any idea of where Canadian pricing may go for the 2003 model? Up? Down? Stay within a few hundred? Thanks!
Check out the article (two-page spread) on the '03 Accord in this week's Newsweek. It takes the angle that Honda, with this redesign, is trying to win back the younger customers that Passat has stolen away. It says the median age of Accord buyers is now 50.5, compared with 40 for Passat. The article is pretty neutral -- doesn't say the new Accord is good or bad, just points out what Honda hopes it will do in the marketplace while describing some of its new features. Except that it does call the car a "sleek new look" in the headline. It has a ridiculous comparison of Accord alloy wheels with those of the Passat. They don't really look very similar -- I could think of 10 cars that are closer than Passat to Honda's new alloys, so maybe the car acumen of Newsweek is a little suspect.
It also says that Car & Driver editor Csaba Csere gives the new Accord a "rave" in its latest issue. That must be the September issue, which I have yet to receive. Anyone seen it yet?
Honda has never offered a manual/V6 combo in the Accord, probably because they think not enough people want them.
Maple49 is right that the Altima raised the performance bar within the mid-size segment. Thank Nissan for the 240hp V-6 in the new Accord. With Camry at 192 and Passat at 200hp., Honda could have held the line on hp.
The same can be said about the Passat and interior materials...
Previour experience with Toyota - Corolla, Supra Turbo and 2000 Camry are all very positive. I purchased 2002 Accord 2 months ago, could not resist the low price and I knew Accord was a good car from 3 car magzines I subscribed. Unfortunately, the Accord experience is disappointing...
My comparison to 2000 Camry: 1. Accord wins in the performance and handling. 2. Interior and trunk is smaller with exterior dimensions comparable. 3. Too much noise from engine and moonroof. 4. Not as smooth and refined. 5. Poor gas mileage.
I also have a 2001 E320 and I have been used to the smoothness of Camry and E320 that I feel it is just different everytime I drive Accord. I purchased Accord for my wife that my daughter got the Camry. However, my wife really wants to hang on to HER Camry, which she enjoy drving.
Performance and handling is important, however, the smoothness is even more important. My daughter likes Accord and we'll give it to her 2 years later and shop for another Camry or a MB.
And of course, I'm supposed to accept the alleged "data" of a person with an obvious and proven bias over information from several highly regarded auto testing organizations. Sorry, bud, you don't even come close to having enough credibility.
Interesting... this is from your first message to me:
"Look at the Edmunds review on the '03 Accord and see for yourself -you are wrong."
So we obviously have a double standard here... reviews are great if they support your opinion, but they're garbage if they support mine. Typical of your so-called "logic".
I'm glad to see that YOU managed to change the discussion to suit your needs... my original comments dealt with general characteristics and performance, and had NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIABILITY. Since you had no ammunition to counter the legitimate quotes from reviews, you decided to try to change the debate from general characteristics to reliability, so you could squeeze in your complaints about your Accord.
So your comments about your reliability problems have no relevance to the discussion. Nor does your reference to the Edmunds boards. And trust me, if I wanted to carry this any further, I'd have no problem countering your nonsense about reliability. But I've already wasted way more time than I should have on this useless debate.
of the red sedan really helps show the detail in the front fender/hood design. I still think the sedan would look better with the side vents the coupe has under the bumper. However, if you look at the technical drawing, the front air dam looks much like the '98-'00 car from the front and profile.
Now that is what I'm talking about - those are some of the best pics I've see of the Accord. Really good - of course I still prefer the coupe but I think most people do style-wise. Maybe it's because it's been a few days since the production pics came out but I think this Accord looks pretty stunning.
I think the red/clear light treatment works well for the current Accord, but not for the 03. I hope an after-market light with red and amber turn signals will be available when I decide to upgrade to an 03.
I agree. The red/clear treatment is kinda old by Honda standards. I really liked the taillights on the previous gen Camry - hopefull Honda would upgrade to something more jazzy next year.
How could Honda design such a monster?! They've completely missed the mark this time. The front end looks cheaper than a Civic, the rear end of the coupe is an angry Mercedes wannabe, and don't get me started on the sedan taillights! Radically redesigning a boring but pragmatic family car is not going to work.
hey that's pretty nice. A little color adds a lot. Harks back to the 90 Accord, but with an edge - very cool. Actually it's something anyone can do - just get some of that yellow reflective tape and apply it to the factory lights :-)
Nice work. Its amazing how much your rear end treatment "spruces up" the tail. Its still droopy though. Can you work any magic with the downmarket front end that the Accord suffers from? ~alpha
I'm trying to like it, but the front end of the new Accord just doesn't work for me in these pictures. Perhaps I'll like it better in real life. The rest of it seems fine, but the nose...ouch. I just bought an 02 Accord, and so far I really like it. The handling, engine, and transmission are all great., and inside it's quite roomy. I test drove a Camry first, and I have to say I liked it slightly better. The handling of the Camry wasn't as sporty, which was a minus for me, but the interior was almost Lexus-like, and the bigger trunk was a plus as well. However, the best deal I could get on the Camry was about 2000 more than the Accord. I don't think the Camry is ultimately $2000 better than the Accord. I hate to be disloyal to the Accord, but I do think the Altima and Passat are the best looking cars in this segment now, followed by the Camry, with the new Accord a bit back. By all objective, performance standards, the Accord will be an absolutely outstanding car, with standard ABS across the line and more power. I think it will remain the best value for the dollar of any car in its class. The quality and reliability of Honda can only be matched by Toyota, in my opinion, although I suppose the others aren't far behind. But that nose...
-I wanted a 5-spd automatic in the 4 cyl - it's there.
-It needed a better driver's seat - looks like we got that, too, but of course driving is most important.
-Finally, it needed to be quieter and more refined at speed - again, the proof will be in the driving, but there's good promise on this issue, as well.
Sounds like a winner to me. And the more I see the car from different angles, the more I like the looks too, but I'll admit that is the least important part of this equation for me. I just don't get the raging debate on this topic...
Look at the pricing, the features, and the driving experience...lots of promising stuff here. We'll have to see in September, of course, when you can get some actual seat time, but for me, they seem to have hit all of the targets [except one - I too wish for wider availability of the head bags, but that will no doubt come in later model years - it always does].
Anyone venture a guess at what color options will be available? Sure hope Honda adds something new. The five standard Accord colors are getting a little old.
Like it more and more! Does anyone know what is contained in that area above the vents in the middle of the dash? Temperature gauge? Security system LED?
The '03 Accord is simply going to blow the competition off the sales chart!
I think that honda could have done a little better. The vehicle looks too similar and we are almost all tired of the current look. It has been overkill. They did not raise the bar they just barely made it to the bar. The new camary and corolla are truly works of art and people wanted a better look ..which they got. The accord also really needed a total overhaul and I am not seeing it. The civic is the same story. It is a tough industry and honda needs to get in on the action. I know that the accords sell like hot cakes but ho about a fresh look? I would honestly buy a camary instead of a accord if I had the green but since I do not, I will have to settle for a 2002 accord. I would imagine that toyota is doing well but if honda wants to be the second place, more power to them.
Comments
Why can't the Accord be packaged more effeciently?
I really like the new Accord overall, especially the better fuel mileage, and availability of the manual tranny in every trim line, but in my mind the Camry still has some advantages.
More rear seat room
More trunk space
CD and Cassete (for books on tape) standard
Outside temp gauge on every car not just top of line (very handy when travelling in the winter)
Regarding power. I drove the 5-speed Camry 4-cyl, and could hardly tell it from my brothers 5-speed maxima (1998?) in terms of engine smoothness, and acceleration. (remember Camry weighs less than Maxima). If the new Honda engine is as nice (which it should be) I really can't see any need for a 6 cylinder engine, in fact I would go the other direction and say I would like to see a 2.0 liter engne that really gets great gas mileage, and still has the power of last years car (more than enough for me).
1. faulty automatic transmission
2. cheap chipped and faded paint
3. cheap stereo
4. cheap alloy wheels that pitted after one winter
5. loud internal noises
6. loud wind noises (couldn't hardly talk on my cell on hiway) yes, the windows were closed
7. windshield wiper design that whirled noisily in cold weather
8. center armrest material wore down before 30k miles
9. slow (could'nt get out of its own way)until you really revved it).
10. strange off center steering wheel
11. ac was lousy (maybe from too much glass)
Take a look at the thousands of unsatisfied Accord reports in the Maint and Repair section of Edmunds.
I replaced this overated car with a SUPERIOR Altima.
MAINTENANCE COSTS: Assumes services performed generally at manufacturer's suggested intervals; other services done at selected intervals. Cost per service is based upon industry-standard service times and national labor rate averages for non-luxury cars and trucks ($75/hour) and luxury cars ($85/hour). Parts prices are based on manufacturer's suggested list price where available.
REPAIR COSTS: Repair cost is based on a $0 deductible extended service contract that will pay for repairs for 5 years or at least 70,000 miles. Figures used are averages from nationally available service contract providers.
A lowly Accord EX V-6 is shy and anonomous. I travel a lot and really want no attention but a smooth nice semi performance car for getting around. (yes I would call the 03 Accord EX V-6 a semi performance car that uses regular unleaded fuel, has competitive insurance rates and performs in all areas competently.
INKY
This is important for example in the Corolla that someone mentioned- the 2003 rear seat is roomy for many, but for my uncle whose legs are very long, tight foot/leg room up front forces him to position the seat against its backstops, severely limiting usable rear seat space.
Our 02 Camry is very comfortable and feels cavernous inside, whereas our 00 certainly doesnt. I felt the 98-02 Accord was much more roomy/comfortable than the 97-01 Camry. -- It will be interesting to see how the new models compare.
~alpha
btw- i just (finally) read the article on the Accord by AMI Auto World. They are good for factual information, sort of. Overall, that mag is a piece of trash. They listed the "Average list price" of the new Accord at 16,000. Riiiiight. The average TRANSACTION price isnt even going to approach that.
http://detnews.com/2002/autosconsumer/0207/31/g01-549838.htm
"The latest edition of Accord is clearly an improvement over the '02 model, although it doesn't look or feel like as great a leap as the new Camry was a year ago. Nor does the Accord step too far away from its principal competitor, in terms of styling, features and performance. But it should wear well with previous Accord owners and Honda loyalists who've been waiting since model year 1998 for a major overhaul."
-Anita and Paul Lienert, Detriot News, July 31, 2002
Interesting.
~alpha
Most of my observations about the Altima are based on experience as well... it doesn't take more than an afternoon to determine that a car has a cheap interior, a cheap feel and a hard ride.
Give the Altima a year or two and you'll see tons of posts on problems as well... this brand new version is only in its first model year.
Funny... I've had a 2K Accord and my experience is much better than yours. Enough so that I'll be seriously considering a 2004 Accord. So I guess my positive report cancels out your negative report.
Anyway, I use reviews because they tend to filter out bias to a large extent, something that your posts clearly fail to do. (I'll admit that you can say the same about mine, which is why I posted quotes from reviews.) So pardon me if I don't fall over dead from the problems you allegedly had with your Accord... whether or not you'd like to believe it, you aren't the poster child for Accord quality.
bodydouble : Our Intrigue which replaced an Accord has so far (2 1/2 years in) been more reliable. Only repair was a faulty temp gauge. Best car I have ever had. GM is number 3 in initial quality and re-sale is no concern as I drive cars for 7-8 years. Like I said, everything is foreign in Canada so I don't carry any major bias (ie I am not flag waving)
Given that the Impala is made in Canada, doesn't that make it like an Accord built in Ohio?
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020730/200207301610000828_1.html
"But Honda engineers are so serious about putting more pizzazz into the Accord that the vehicle's project manager and a key powertrain engineer last February got a hold of a Nissan Altima and ran it in a makeshift drag race against their car in the dead of night. The results of the rat-racing in a parking lot behind the company's technical center in Torrance, Calif. : The 240 horsepower Altima was faster from the start to 30 miles an hour, but as cars zoomed to 60 miles an hour, the new Accord pulled ahead by a length."
Only kidding! The Altima is a great car and has helped transform this segment. I think the 2003 model (with the revised interior) will be a big hit. However, I think it will remain a niche player compared to the new Accord (which will be very successful) and the Camry.
My guess is that you'll pay about 14,000-14500 or so before tax, etc. for a DX with AC (or a DX with an option pkg). I paid 15,665 for an LX 5 Speed. A good way to get a good price is to check the ads in your local newspaper. Often they list "1 only" at this price, and if you simply go down as soon as they open, and try to buy the car, you might be in luck. Another method would be to call up your local dealer and ask for a price. An Accord DX with auto and AC would probably list for nearly 17,000, but Honda is offering dealers incentives of 1250 for each Accord sold. You should be able more than $3000 off of the list price of any Accord. I got almost 4000 off of list on my LX. Happy shopping!
It also says that Car & Driver editor Csaba Csere gives the new Accord a "rave" in its latest issue. That must be the September issue, which I have yet to receive. Anyone seen it yet?
Maple49 is right that the Altima raised the performance bar within the mid-size segment. Thank Nissan for the 240hp V-6 in the new Accord. With Camry at 192 and Passat at 200hp., Honda could have held the line on hp.
The same can be said about the Passat and interior materials...
Previour experience with Toyota - Corolla, Supra Turbo and 2000 Camry are all very positive. I purchased 2002 Accord 2 months ago, could not resist the low price and I knew Accord was a good car from 3 car magzines I subscribed. Unfortunately, the Accord experience is disappointing...
My comparison to 2000 Camry:
1. Accord wins in the performance and handling.
2. Interior and trunk is smaller with exterior dimensions comparable.
3. Too much noise from engine and moonroof.
4. Not as smooth and refined.
5. Poor gas mileage.
I also have a 2001 E320 and I have been used to the smoothness of Camry and E320 that I feel it is just different everytime I drive Accord. I purchased Accord for my wife that my daughter got the Camry. However, my wife really wants to hang on to HER Camry, which she enjoy drving.
Performance and handling is important, however, the smoothness is even more important. My daughter likes Accord and we'll give it to her 2 years later and shop for another Camry or a MB.
Interesting... this is from your first message to me:
"Look at the Edmunds review on the '03 Accord and see for yourself -you are wrong."
So we obviously have a double standard here... reviews are great if they support your opinion, but they're garbage if they support mine. Typical of your so-called "logic".
I'm glad to see that YOU managed to change the discussion to suit your needs... my original comments dealt with general characteristics and performance, and had NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIABILITY. Since you had no ammunition to counter the legitimate quotes from reviews, you decided to try to change the debate from general characteristics to reliability, so you could squeeze in your complaints about your Accord.
So your comments about your reliability problems have no relevance to the discussion. Nor does your reference to the Edmunds boards. And trust me, if I wanted to carry this any further, I'd have no problem countering your nonsense about reliability. But I've already wasted way more time than I should have on this useless debate.
Find someone else to harass, will you?
~alpha
http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/2002/020730honda-accord/index.html
I believe this material was released just today. Includes very detailed, expandable photos.
Now that is what I'm talking about - those are some of the best pics I've see of the Accord. Really good - of course I still prefer the coupe but I think most people do style-wise. Maybe it's because it's been a few days since the production pics came out but I think this Accord looks pretty stunning.
Thanks for those pics again.
ickes- I think the Accord would look better if the air dam was a bit wider (bigger smile?). But I think it can do without the side vents.
J/K ..
A monster? Whoa that's pretty rough assessment.
Nice photoshop diploid.
Heh the photochopping has begun!
~alpha
-They needed more power - we've got it.
-They needed better fuel consumption - yep.
-ABS needed to be widely available - it's std.
-I wanted a 5-spd automatic in the 4 cyl - it's there.
-It needed a better driver's seat - looks like we got that, too, but of course driving is most important.
-Finally, it needed to be quieter and more refined at speed - again, the proof will be in the driving, but there's good promise on this issue, as well.
Sounds like a winner to me. And the more I see the car from different angles, the more I like the looks too, but I'll admit that is the least important part of this equation for me. I just don't get the raging debate on this topic...
Look at the pricing, the features, and the driving experience...lots of promising stuff here. We'll have to see in September, of course, when you can get some actual seat time, but for me, they seem to have hit all of the targets [except one - I too wish for wider availability of the head bags, but that will no doubt come in later model years - it always does].
It needed a more competitive safety package (Vehicle skid control, side curtain airbags for ALL models) - It didn't get it!
It needed a more attractive exterior - It didn't get it!
It needed a stick/V6 combo for this "more sensual, aggresive Accord" - It didn't get it!
It needed to prove it is the best. Well, guess what? It didn't get it done!
The '03 Accord is simply going to blow the competition off the sales chart!