I believe that it will grow on people. Many people did not like the 95ish style, or even the 98ish style when it came out, but people got used to it. I would take a wild stab in the dark and say that most people that buy Honda, don't buy it purely for looks. There are always lots of better looking cars out there for the same amount of money, just depends on what you want.
I look around at almost all the new cars Mazda 6, Camry, Accord, Taurus... they all are going in similar directions. The 6, Camry, and Accord have many exterior features that are alike. The front to rear slant, the "sleek" lines, etc. The '03 has a lower drag coefficient than the '02.. I believe its like .34 for '02 and .30 for '03.
The styling has sorta grown on me. Can't complain one iota about the interior styling on my EX. Very impressive. The exterior is very "euro" and the only thing I wish they had spent a little more time on is the exterior lights. But then again, lights are there for one reason, and they do their job. IMHO, there are very few affordable cars in the 20k price range that have the same features, power, reliability, fuel economy as the Accord. When was the last time you had the "perfect car"? Even if you did have one, there is always something that you wish was different... shifter, gauges, seats, brakes, etc. Some you can find aftermarket to help, some you can't. As long as the car looks clean and straight, a few "they shoulda's" won't break a sale for me.
IMHO I love 03EXV6 not as much when I test drove it but it was better than the others I drove in terms of driving and sophistication. After two weeks in the car and tested every aspect and this is one of the best buy in its class. The interior is magnificent. The seats are much better than the ones in TL. One of the best seats I sat in so far. The power delivery is so smooth that you have more chances of getting tickets in this. The exterior is a personal choice and as many of you mentioned everybody have their personal opinions. As tblazer mentioned it's difficult to build a perfect car which will make everybody happy. But if you take everything into considerationthe overall package then it definitely beats Camry and Altima.
As for the accessories try www.hondaacuraworld.com
Got Cu yesterday and surprise, surprise they rated it best 4 cyl mid sized sedan over the Passat and the Camry. They will rate the 6 in a future issue. The Mazda 6 was not ready for testing for this issue. They were really impressed with the Accord.
Saw the Coupe the other day and was disapointed in the door handles. In order to keep the sleek look of the car they used an older design door handle. It's not nearly comfortable to use as those on the four door sedan. I think, also, that the passenger seat is not powered.
I know this stuff gets repetitive, but we're here to bounce stuff of of each other, so what the hey . . .
I don't think the new styling is entirely successful, but I still regard it as progress. Not because the old model was bad, but because the new one is more sensuous and elegant. It does have a rounder, more "bloated" (as opposed to boxy) look, but it's partly a matter of what we're accustomed to. I think it'll make more sense to people as time passes.
The problem is that Honda wants the Accord to become more sophisticated, while not alienating its conservative customer base, and while remaining affordable, all at once. So the new design is a bit half-baked. But as sharp as the Altima is at first glance, I think the Accord is more elegant and will outlast it. The Passat still has the most sophisticated looks in the class.
Despite all the talk about "passion", Honda is obviously still aiming more for refinement than sport. Thus the car is more sedate than the Altima, Mazda 6, or Passat, while still more interesting than the Camry.
The interior is where the car really outdoes the competition, IMO. While I'm not entirely happy with the colors and trim in the non-EX models, the overall design and feel is superb. It makes the Passat's interior look dated, the Camry's like a Buick, the Altima's cheap, and the Mazda's overwrought. I still have mixed feelings about the exterior styling, but every time I sit inside the car, I'm sold.
The Accords seats are better. The Accords seats a great!
TL's seats, but we have a type S so maybe that is why, are a stiffer. They are nice seats to, and I never had any complaints. But now that I have the Accord I just find the Accord's seats way comfortable. I think the TL still has a few things over the Accord in some areas. Nicer leather, sound, suspension, but again, the TL-S is a 31,800 MSRP car, and the Accord a 25, something MSRP car. If I had to chose, boy would that be hard... as is said above, we are all diferent. You couldn't get it all in one car.
NAVI on the Accord kicks [non-permissible content removed].
Euro styling, Euro handling, Euro this, Euro that. I think Accord lost its identity. If I want Euro, I buy a European car. Being a fake Euro hurts Accord. Remember people buy Accord because it is Accord, a fine Japanese Car. That is probably why Camry sales up while new Accord sales down.
just purchased today 2003 EX-L I-4 with pin stripe and cargo net msrp 24160. total price 22200. No Doc Fees no other fees except 6% sales tax 175.00 app for licence paid to state. 412.00 over invoice. This is in South florida.
I know I am in the wrong place. will re-post. Dealer was sherwood in Del ray beach. Ignore his 1200 dealer installed extras and 399 dealer service fee.
I agree that most people buy Honda because it's a great Japanese car, rather than a Euro pretender. I bought my Civic because it is simply the best Japanese compact car, IMHO.
I'm also with you that calling other people's opinions stupid has no place in a mature discussion, and even more so on a Honda board. I've always appreciated the enforcement by the TH hosts to keep this is a civil place.
diploid I agree with you in regard to the "conclusions" being made (not the stupid part). Since when do any of us know why the sales are down one month and up the next? Yet we make opinions as if we know why it's the way it is. Lets just state the facts eg. "The sales are down this month." and move on. We don't have figure out why they are down and especially don't have to talk about how the accords looks, problems, tires, butt end, front end, european look, japanese look, salesmen and god knows what else is effecting the sales. Get on with it.
Everyone (me included) offers an opinion based on their personal bias or knowledge. "Car X is going to be hot in 2003 because it really zooms", or "Car Y is DOA because it is overpriced and looks dorky" or "Accord sales are down because of its styling" etc.
Opinions are what makes this board interesting. We all know these are not scientific conclusions. Customers knowledgeable about the auto industry (or even a good salesman) have gut instincts which are often correct compared to the results of the most expensive focus group studies. But these instincts or opinions may strike some as being illogical.
When the 2001 Civic was introduced, I was frankly underwhelmed by the evolutionary changes and felt that it wasn't going to do that well. I have no interest in trading up to one. Honda Chairman Yoshino said in an interview a few months after Civic launch that Honda was studying why Civic sales were flat to down. It is interesting to note that Honda has scrambled to tweak the Civic in various ways after launch as Civic sales have been below Honda's targets worldwide (including Japan and Europe), and the demographics have shifted to an older age.
If I remember correctly, Accord sales have been down for both Oct and Nov, and even though 2 months doesn't make a trend, I'm sure Honda is watching these results carefully. Even though the Accord is bought for its overall package by the vast majority, a steady drop in sales for whatever reason is a BIG deal for Honda. Speculating that the styling or Euro morphing could account for the *apparent* drop in sales is a valid opinion and not necessarily illogical.
Thanks for your valuable response guys, I had no idea about this torque converter and its locking. I will check with my mechanic about this. any ideas how much should it cost me to fix that torque converter ? thanks again !
You can call others stupid and jerks as long as you're a Honda fanatic. If you're appeared to be a "Honda basher" of any sort, your post will get deleted.
"I just offer a possible reason behind the sales number."
And I questioned that conclusion.
Now besides attacking the 'stupid' comment (which I still think it is), answer my question: if you think sales of the Accord are down because of the style, what's the rationale when sales of the Accord are up?
If you post an opinion that follows no logical reasoning, you shouldn't be surprised to get a response.
Add to the fact that competition from the domestic is extremely fierce: GM is offering 0% interest and 0 down payment. Some of their cars are "bloated" as well (read: Impala).
Everyone is entitled to his opinion, but I just don't see how one can conclude that the Accord is a failure based on its look simply by looking at the sales numbers without taking into account any external factors.
rates the 4-cyl 2003 Accord best family sedan, I'm sure car buyers will take a second look at the Accord. CR is the bible for some people, I also take their ratings very seriously.
I now have over 2000 miles on my new 2003 LX Accord 4cyl automatic and it runs beauti- fully -- plenty power and start-up speed, spontaneous control, and 27 MPG in city driving in Phoenix. I purchased it at invoice but had to pay $399 extra for the KARR Secur- ity System. Has anyone else had to pay extra for the KARR?
I wouldn't take CR too seriously. There are a lot of documented flaws in the way they test and rate vehicles. You are far better off reading a cross section of reports and then testing yourself to make a decision.
Look at all of the reviews and test it for yourself before you decide. I subscribe to CR but I almost never buy something without looking at a few more reviews, don't rely on one source. CR usually does well with electronics and appliances.
If I can interrupt this marketing seminar to answer your question:
If it is purely the electronic connection, the cost will probably be minimal. If they have to crack the transmission case, it could get very expensive. And remember, I am only theorizing based on your statements - there could be other potential explanations, and I would never substitute what we can do in these online discussions for having a qualified tech drive the car. You need to get to a service dept and take it from there...and that's assuming there is anything wrong at all.
C'mon, folks - the truth could be somewhere in the middle, and usually is. It could be partly because of external conditions, and partly because of the new styling, or neither. If sales go up, that could also be for one or both or neither reason. It's fun to speculate, just so we understand that it's all speculation at this point.
I don't see how anyone but a family of midgets would consider this a family car with a 14 cu. ft. trunk. I guess they want you to move up to an Ody. At least the "bloated" Impala will hold a family's luggage and has a proven safety record.
My 99 Accord sedan had a 14.1 cubic ft trunk and it more than handled 4 adult's luggage and all the goodies picked up along the 1000 miles round trip we drove it. If you look at the Accord's trunk it is roomy and deep so it probably has more space that it looks like on paper. Honda saved the space for the interior where it is most needed.
Stopped in a dealership today and saw an 03 accord-guy selling it was brand new and knew nada.
couple of questions: The front suspension looks different-so does the rear. What did they change? Is it better or cheaper or both? Hate value engineering
The "spare" is no longer the stupid donut-it is bigger-will a regular tire fit in this space?
IS this the same engine block as before-the components are in different places. ALso does this engine (I4) have solid or hydraulic lifters? Does it require valve adjustments.
Anybody have one-the temp controls look a bit mysterious to me-are they hard to get used to and use?
Only potential negative I saw was the tail pipe and "first" muffler-these puppies are well below the rest of the car-I guess most people don't take these through the woods but all the crap on the roads-it sure sticks down-but easier to change and no more buzzing from the heat shields.
Oh one other observation-the accord I looked at was built in Japan-thought someone said they were shipping fewer of those over.
I was just relaying my opinion that for me 14.00 cubic ft of trunk space is enough based on my experience with an Accord with a 14.1 size. It may not be big enough for some people but that's what you have a choice when it comes to what car to buy.
For many people, even 13 cu ft of cargo area is good enough. Unless you're involved with the mob and transporting bodies, I don't see why all the Honda-phobes are taking issue with that.
It's not like you're driving our cars for us anyway.
Here's how CR rated the "small" 14 cu. ft. trunk in the previous gen Accord:
"The spacious trunk can hold five Pullman cases and one overnight case, or a folded wheelchair."
About the 2003 Accord:
"The trunk holds three suitcases and three duffels, or a folded wheelchair with room to spare."
CR, that bastion of practicality, rated the trunk spacious. The rating is equal to that of the Passat, the Altima and the Intrepid. Doesn't take a "diehard Honda fan" to say that's OK.
I'm going to leave this board for a few days and hopefully when I return the discussions will be interesting again and impalas and trunks will be history.
Comments
I look around at almost all the new cars Mazda 6, Camry, Accord, Taurus... they all are going in similar directions. The 6, Camry, and Accord have many exterior features that are alike. The front to rear slant, the "sleek" lines, etc. The '03 has a lower drag coefficient than the '02.. I believe its like .34 for '02 and .30 for '03.
The styling has sorta grown on me. Can't complain one iota about the interior styling on my EX. Very impressive. The exterior is very "euro" and the only thing I wish they had spent a little more time on is the exterior lights. But then again, lights are there for one reason, and they do their job. IMHO, there are very few affordable cars in the 20k price range that have the same features, power, reliability, fuel economy as the Accord. When was the last time you had the "perfect car"? Even if you did have one, there is always something that you wish was different... shifter, gauges, seats, brakes, etc. Some you can find aftermarket to help, some you can't. As long as the car looks clean and straight, a few "they shoulda's" won't break a sale for me.
As for the accessories try www.hondaacuraworld.com
George S
George S.
I don't think the new styling is entirely successful, but I still regard it as progress. Not because the old model was bad, but because the new one is more sensuous and elegant. It does have a rounder, more "bloated" (as opposed to boxy) look, but it's partly a matter of what we're accustomed to. I think it'll make more sense to people as time passes.
The problem is that Honda wants the Accord to become more sophisticated, while not alienating its conservative customer base, and while remaining affordable, all at once. So the new design is a bit half-baked. But as sharp as the Altima is at first glance, I think the Accord is more elegant and will outlast it. The Passat still has the most sophisticated looks in the class.
Despite all the talk about "passion", Honda is obviously still aiming more for refinement than sport. Thus the car is more sedate than the Altima, Mazda 6, or Passat, while still more interesting than the Camry.
The interior is where the car really outdoes the competition, IMO. While I'm not entirely happy with the colors and trim in the non-EX models, the overall design and feel is superb. It makes the Passat's interior look dated, the Camry's like a Buick, the Altima's cheap, and the Mazda's overwrought. I still have mixed feelings about the exterior styling, but every time I sit inside the car, I'm sold.
TL's seats, but we have a type S so maybe that is why, are a stiffer. They are nice seats to, and I never had any complaints. But now that I have the Accord I just find the Accord's seats way comfortable. I think the TL still has a few things over the Accord in some areas. Nicer leather, sound, suspension, but again, the TL-S is a 31,800 MSRP car, and the Accord a 25, something MSRP car. If I had to chose, boy would that be hard... as is said above, we are all diferent. You couldn't get it all in one car.
NAVI on the Accord kicks [non-permissible content removed].
I'm sorry, but some of these illogical conclusions are downright stupid.
I'm also with you that calling other people's opinions stupid has no place in a mature discussion, and even more so on a Honda board. I've always appreciated the enforcement by the TH hosts to keep this is a civil place.
Opinions are what makes this board interesting. We all know these are not scientific conclusions. Customers knowledgeable about the auto industry (or even a good salesman) have gut instincts which are often correct compared to the results of the most expensive focus group studies. But these instincts or opinions may strike some as being illogical.
When the 2001 Civic was introduced, I was frankly underwhelmed by the evolutionary changes and felt that it wasn't going to do that well. I have no interest in trading up to one. Honda Chairman Yoshino said in an interview a few months after Civic launch that Honda was studying why Civic sales were flat to down. It is interesting to note that Honda has scrambled to tweak the Civic in various ways after launch as Civic sales have been below Honda's targets worldwide (including Japan and Europe), and the demographics have shifted to an older age.
If I remember correctly, Accord sales have been down for both Oct and Nov, and even though 2 months doesn't make a trend, I'm sure Honda is watching these results carefully. Even though the Accord is bought for its overall package by the vast majority, a steady drop in sales for whatever reason is a BIG deal for Honda. Speculating that the styling or Euro morphing could account for the *apparent* drop in sales is a valid opinion and not necessarily illogical.
idea about this torque converter and its locking.
I will check with my mechanic about this.
any ideas how much should it cost me to fix that torque converter ?
thanks again !
And I questioned that conclusion.
Now besides attacking the 'stupid' comment (which I still think it is), answer my question: if you think sales of the Accord are down because of the style, what's the rationale when sales of the Accord are up?
If you post an opinion that follows no logical reasoning, you shouldn't be surprised to get a response.
Everyone is entitled to his opinion, but I just don't see how one can conclude that the Accord is a failure based on its look simply by looking at the sales numbers without taking into account any external factors.
fully -- plenty power and start-up speed,
spontaneous control, and 27 MPG in city
driving in Phoenix. I purchased it at invoice
but had to pay $399 extra for the KARR Secur-
ity System. Has anyone else had to pay extra
for the KARR?
If it is purely the electronic connection, the cost will probably be minimal. If they have to crack the transmission case, it could get very expensive. And remember, I am only theorizing based on your statements - there could be other potential explanations, and I would never substitute what we can do in these online discussions for having a qualified tech drive the car. You need to get to a service dept and take it from there...and that's assuming there is anything wrong at all.
And despite the Accord's 14 cu. ft. of trunk space, normal sized humans can still fit inside it. I'm sure the midgets would have no problems either.
If the Accord had a 20 cu ft trunk, then everybody would be bashing the competition for their small trunks.
But since the Accord's trunk is smaller than the competition, then "that's all the average family really needs". Right?
Just like "horsepower". Before the Accord didn't have it so nobody needed it.....
Seems to be a pattern here.
I guess what goes around, comes around.
couple of questions:
The front suspension looks different-so does the rear. What did they change? Is it better or cheaper or both? Hate value engineering
The "spare" is no longer the stupid donut-it is bigger-will a regular tire fit in this space?
IS this the same engine block as before-the components are in different places. ALso does this engine (I4) have solid or hydraulic lifters? Does it require valve adjustments.
Anybody have one-the temp controls look a bit mysterious to me-are they hard to get used to and use?
Only potential negative I saw was the tail pipe and "first" muffler-these puppies are well below the rest of the car-I guess most people don't take these through the woods but all the crap on the roads-it sure sticks down-but easier to change and no more buzzing from the heat shields.
Oh one other observation-the accord I looked at was built in Japan-thought someone said they were shipping fewer of those over.
thanks
It's not like you're driving our cars for us anyway.
"The spacious trunk can hold five Pullman cases and one overnight case, or a folded wheelchair."
About the 2003 Accord:
"The trunk holds three suitcases and three duffels, or a folded wheelchair with room to spare."
CR, that bastion of practicality, rated the trunk spacious. The rating is equal to that of the Passat, the Altima and the Intrepid. Doesn't take a "diehard Honda fan" to say that's OK.
Let's move on...
Obviously, someone is very bored.