Honda Car Forum

I have been looking at 03-05 Accord coupes, V-6, but have not yet driven one. The
interior is very comfortable.
Any thoughts about good, bad, future problems, etc?
How's the torque curve? Can I spin the tires from a standing start?
(I've done a bunch of reading but would like comments from real people.)

"« Paul »" <"=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul
=?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?="@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:44A6DBBA.22C7A9A4@houston.rr.com...
>I have been looking at 03-05 Accord coupes, V-6, but have not yet driven
>one. The
> interior is very comfortable.
> Any thoughts about good, bad, future problems, etc?
> How's the torque curve? Can I spin the tires from a standing start?
> (I've done a bunch of reading but would like comments from real people.)

What is going to make our responses any different from the reading that
you've done in the past?

« Paul »" <"=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul =?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?=
wrote:
> I have been looking at 03-05 Accord coupes, V-6, but have not yet
> driven one. The interior is very comfortable.
> Any thoughts about good, bad, future problems, etc?
> How's the torque curve? Can I spin the tires from a standing start?
> (I've done a bunch of reading but would like comments from real
> people.)

I have the '04 EX 6 cyl. Can you spin the tires? Have done so accidentally
a few times when taking off in tight spots. I'm sure if one wanted to leave
a good amount of their tire investment on the pavement, it could be done
(though the 6 isn't as good at it as my Vmax was).

When testing, the 4 was actually peppy, but the 6 could easily merge onto a
CA freeway with 4 or 5 people in the car easily (up to 75 mph well before
the end of the ramps).

Good torque at the low end, speeds through the gearing quite well. Good
performance, 29 MPG actual on the highway (driving at 70+ most of the time),
21-22 around town.

L Alpert wrote:
>
> « Paul »" <"=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul =?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?=
> wrote:
> > I have been looking at 03-05 Accord coupes, V-6, but have not yet
> > driven one. The interior is very comfortable.
> > Any thoughts about good, bad, future problems, etc?
> > How's the torque curve? Can I spin the tires from a standing start?
> > (I've done a bunch of reading but would like comments from real
> > people.)
>
> I have the '04 EX 6 cyl. Can you spin the tires? Have done so accidentally
> a few times when taking off in tight spots. I'm sure if one wanted to leave
> a good amount of their tire investment on the pavement, it could be done
> (though the 6 isn't as good at it as my Vmax was).
>
> When testing, the 4 was actually peppy, but the 6 could easily merge onto a
> CA freeway with 4 or 5 people in the car easily (up to 75 mph well before
> the end of the ramps).
>
> Good torque at the low end, speeds through the gearing quite well. Good
> performance, 29 MPG actual on the highway (driving at 70+ most of the time),
> 21-22 around town.

Thanks. That is the kind of info I was looking for. I have read that the Honda
3.0 has poor low end torque but your response says the opposite. Eventually I
will road test however I am still narrowing down between 6 cyl Accord, Camry,
Mazda, Nissan, etc.
I like the inside and outside looks of the Accord better than the others.Better
to spend a few minutes here rather then a few hours at the dealers.
Paul.

«» wrote:
> L Alpert wrote:

>
> Thanks. That is the kind of info I was looking for. I have read that the Honda
> 3.0 has poor low end torque but your response says the opposite. Eventually I
> will road test however I am still narrowing down between 6 cyl Accord, Camry,
> Mazda, Nissan, etc.
> I like the inside and outside looks of the Accord better than the others.Better
> to spend a few minutes here rather then a few hours at the dealers.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ah, so that's how people end up with crappy cars. Collect some hearsay
and
do the minimum amount of the legwork themselves.

Body Roll wrote:
>
> «» wrote:
> > L Alpert wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks. That is the kind of info I was looking for. I have read that the Honda
> > 3.0 has poor low end torque but your response says the opposite. Eventually I
> > will road test however I am still narrowing down between 6 cyl Accord, Camry,
> > Mazda, Nissan, etc.
> > I like the inside and outside looks of the Accord better than the others. Better
> > to spend a few minutes here rather then a few hours at the dealers.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Ah, so that's how people end up with crappy cars. Collect some hearsay
> and
> do the minimum amount of the legwork themselves.

So you are saying the Honda Accord is a crappy car?
Please give me an example of a good car.

«» wrote:
> Body Roll wrote:
> >
> > «» wrote:
> > > L Alpert wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks. That is the kind of info I was looking for. I have read that the Honda
> > > 3.0 has poor low end torque but your response says the opposite. Eventually I
> > > will road test however I am still narrowing down between 6 cyl Accord, Camry,
> > > Mazda, Nissan, etc.
> > > I like the inside and outside looks of the Accord better than the others. Better
> > > to spend a few minutes here rather then a few hours at the dealers.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Ah, so that's how people end up with crappy cars. Collect some hearsay
> > and
> > do the minimum amount of the legwork themselves.
>
> So you are saying the Honda Accord is a crappy car?

Accord is not bad, obese, but not bad. Camry is.
Former coworker's late model CE started to fall apart at 70k miles. Not
to mention
that the car itself is not good. Same goes for nissan. Same story:
another former coworker,
late model Nissan Altima: 70k miles and the car starts to go. He also
has an older Maxima
with 160+k on it though and it seems to hold pretty well.
Mazda 626 has Ford automatic transmission (Ford is known for crappy
automatics I think).

> Please give me an example of a good car.

Sure,
Lotus Elise & Exige
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution
Mazda RX-8
Civic Si
Mazda 3
Dodge Viper
Chevy Corvette
Acura RSX & TSX

About half of those can seat 4 in some kind of semblance of comfort.

If you look for a more comfortable ride Z350 and G35 are probably not
too bad.
There is probably more cars in GT category but I don't keep track of
those.

Body Roll wrote:
>
> «» wrote:
> > Body Roll wrote:

> > > > Thanks. That is the kind of info I was looking for. I have readthat the Honda
> > > > 3.0 has poor low end torque but your response says the opposite. Eventually I
> > > > will road test however I am still narrowing down between 6 cyl Accord, Camry,
> > > > Mazda, Nissan, etc.
> > > > I like the inside and outside looks of the Accord better than theothers. Better
> > > > to spend a few minutes here rather then a few hours at the dealers.
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > Ah, so that's how people end up with crappy cars. Collect some hearsay
> > > and
> > > do the minimum amount of the legwork themselves.
> >
> > So you are saying the Honda Accord is a crappy car?
>
> Accord is not bad, obese, but not bad. Camry is.
> Former coworker's late model CE started to fall apart at 70k miles. Not
> to mention
> that the car itself is not good. Same goes for nissan. Same story:
> another former coworker,
> late model Nissan Altima: 70k miles and the car starts to go. He also
> has an older Maxima
> with 160+k on it though and it seems to hold pretty well.
> Mazda 626 has Ford automatic transmission (Ford is known for crappy
> automatics I think).
>
> > Please give me an example of a good car.
>
> Sure,
> Lotus Elise & Exige
> Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution
> Mazda RX-8
> Civic Si
> Mazda 3
> Dodge Viper
> Chevy Corvette
> Acura RSX & TSX
>
> About half of those can seat 4 in some kind of semblance of comfort.
>
> If you look for a more comfortable ride Z350 and G35 are probably not
> too bad.
> There is probably more cars in GT category but I don't keep track of
> those.

I've looked at and test driven most of those in the last year.
Beauty and practicality are in the eye of the beholder. I would not consider any
of them good cars. I should mention that I will not have a little high winding 4
cyl with no low end torque and high wear breakdown probability. It will be used
daily in city traffic.

Lotus Elise & Exige - bizarre looking, too small
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution - shoe box, too small
Mazda RX-8 - nice but bizarre looking, too small
Civic Si - shoe box, too small
Mazda 3 - ok but I like the Mazda 6 better
Dodge Viper - nice but impractical, looked at one 7-1-06.
Chevy Corvette - already had several, want something else
Acura RSX & TSX - nice but small, I like the TL better.

Also looked at:
Z and G cars - nice, G is a good possibility, waiting on feedback from nissan ng,
have not test driven yet.
BMW 330 - nice, good possibility
Jag XKR - nice but poor reliability
Toyota - nondescript generic boxes
Audi A4 - high winding 4
Porsche Boxster - too small
All the above is a fraction of my "looked at" list.

> Mazda 3 - ok but I like the Mazda 6 better

Did you look at mazdaspeed 6 or you have made your mind and
the desire to get a 6 pot boat anchor is cast in stone?
Mazda is the only one that offers standard transmission with
any powerplant in case you like to row.
And according to the reviews their 2.3L 4s are silky smoooth.

Body Roll wrote:
>> Mazda 3 - ok but I like the Mazda 6 better
>
>
> Did you look at mazdaspeed 6 or you have made your mind and
> the desire to get a 6 pot boat anchor is cast in stone?
> Mazda is the only one that offers standard transmission with
> any powerplant in case you like to row.
> And according to the reviews their 2.3L 4s are silky smoooth.
>
mazda, like their ford brethren, use cast iron cranks. that's why their
2.4's are rated much lower in power per liter than honda or toyota.