Honda Car Forum

Cars in general were getting bigger, especially with the SUVs. Guess Honda
wanted to keep up and give the general public what they wanted. All about
the (not so mighty) dollar. Some of us don't need or really want these
things getting bigger (and uglier). Unfortunately we're in the minority.

Everyone I know of who bought the new Civic loves it and quickly got used to
the tiered dash. I don't care for it either - but normally if someone is
looking at a Civic, they wouldn't be looking at a TSX! If cost wasn't an
issue I'd go TSX. It's a sharp looking car.

-Dave


<nick@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:k2p0o3hlk06dif6fu3hanlbs0v2nil2mgq@4ax.com...
>I agree with you. Why does Honda think we need larger size sedans? I
> have never heard anyone complaining about the size at least in the
> past gen 6 and gen 7 Accords. The 08 is longer than a Honda Pilot and
> Ford Explorer too big for me.
>
> Honda has me in a dilemma at the moment. I really hate the two tiered
> dash on the Civic but at the same time do not want a TSX because of
> leather seating. Do I buy a Civic with a interior I don't like or a
> TSX with everything that I like except the leather seats?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 22:59:51 -0500, "Dave L"
> <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>>news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd
>>>>auto
>>>>I
>>>>daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What bothers
>>>>me
>>>>is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>>Accord
>>>>is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>>indicative
>>>>of change in company policy.
>>>
>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>
>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>
>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>
>>> J.
>>
>>I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked. They
>>are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>>(practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>>was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>>conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>>Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>
>>I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>>has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp
>>drop.
>>Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it
>>was
>>only minor other changes done...
>>
>>-Dave
>>

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:2rKdnU9_Iu-s-x3anZ2dnUVZ_sKqnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Dave L wrote:
>> "JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>> news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd
>>>> auto I
>>>> daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What
>>>> bothers me
>>>> is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>> Accord
>>>> is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>> indicative
>>>> of change in company policy.
>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>
>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>
>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>
>>> J.
>>
>> I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked.
>> They are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>> (practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>> was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>> conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>> Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>
>> I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>> has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp
>> drop. Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal
>> since it was only minor other changes done...
>>
>> -Dave
>
> focus on horsepower is meaningless without also correlating it to weight.
>
> example:
> 1989 civic dx, auto trans, 2,138lbs. engine output is 92hp iirc.
> 2000 civic dx, auto trans, 3,330lbs. engine output is 106hp iirc.

Exactly why I mentioned weight, although I didn't realize the 2000 Civic's
have gotten so hefty! But isn't 3,330lbs more than an ACCORD???


> now, despite the fact that engine management on the 2000 is significantly
> more advanced than on the 89, both return pretty much the same economy
> cruising on the freeway. and off the line, the 89 is quite a bit faster.
>
> why?
> 1989 = 0.043 hp/lb
> 2000 = 0.032 hp/lb
>
> now, why not ask your congress-critter why they keep insisting on stricter
> and stricter "crash protection" for cars that already perform excellently,
> when all they're really doing is blunting the sword of fuel efficiency.
> [and, coincidentally, ruining dynamic safety too - heavier cars are harder
> to stop and steer out of collisions.]

"Dave L" <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:UtydnbuEttgRjBzanZ2dnUVZ_qKgnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Cars in general were getting bigger, especially with the SUVs. Guess
> Honda wanted to keep up and give the general public what they wanted. All
> about the (not so mighty) dollar. Some of us don't need or really want
> these things getting bigger (and uglier). Unfortunately we're in the
> minority.
>
> Everyone I know of who bought the new Civic loves it and quickly got used
> to the tiered dash. I don't care for it either - but normally if someone
> is looking at a Civic, they wouldn't be looking at a TSX! If cost wasn't
> an issue I'd go TSX. It's a sharp looking car.
>
> -Dave
>
The TSX (Euro Honda) is the right size for me, but I sure don't want to pay
the 30k for the car. The old I4 EX ran around $22k -- . Even now, the 190
hp EX runs considerable less than the TSX.

>
> <nick@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:k2p0o3hlk06dif6fu3hanlbs0v2nil2mgq@4ax.com...
>>I agree with you. Why does Honda think we need larger size sedans? I
>> have never heard anyone complaining about the size at least in the
>> past gen 6 and gen 7 Accords. The 08 is longer than a Honda Pilot and
>> Ford Explorer too big for me.
>>
>> Honda has me in a dilemma at the moment. I really hate the two tiered
>> dash on the Civic but at the same time do not want a TSX because of
>> leather seating. Do I buy a Civic with a interior I don't like or a
>> TSX with everything that I like except the leather seats?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 22:59:51 -0500, "Dave L"
>> <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>>>news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com ...
>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd
>>>>>auto
>>>>>I
>>>>>daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What
>>>>>bothers
>>>>>me
>>>>>is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>>>Accord
>>>>>is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>>>indicative
>>>>>of change in company policy.
>>>>
>>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>>
>>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>>
>>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>>
>>>> J.
>>>
>>>I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked.
>>>They
>>>are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>>>(practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>>>was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>>>conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>>>Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>>
>>>I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>>>has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp
>>>drop.
>>>Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it
>>>was
>>>only minor other changes done...
>>>
>>>-Dave
>>>
>
>

Unless I am looking at this incorrectly, the 2000 Civic Sedan DX only
weighs 2339 lbs (I think that's for an auto). The 08 Civic auto weighs
2806.



On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:25:05 -0800, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

>Dave L wrote:
>> "JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>> news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd auto
>>>> I
>>>> daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What bothers
>>>> me
>>>> is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>> Accord
>>>> is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>> indicative
>>>> of change in company policy.
>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>
>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>
>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>
>>> J.
>>
>> I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked. They
>> are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>> (practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>> was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>> conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>> Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>
>> I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>> has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp drop.
>> Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it was
>> only minor other changes done...
>>
>> -Dave
>>
>>
>
>focus on horsepower is meaningless without also correlating it to weight.
>
>example:
>1989 civic dx, auto trans, 2,138lbs. engine output is 92hp iirc.
>2000 civic dx, auto trans, 3,330lbs. engine output is 106hp iirc.
>
>now, despite the fact that engine management on the 2000 is
>significantly more advanced than on the 89, both return pretty much the
>same economy cruising on the freeway. and off the line, the 89 is quite
>a bit faster.
>
>why?
>1989 = 0.043 hp/lb
>2000 = 0.032 hp/lb
>
>now, why not ask your congress-critter why they keep insisting on
>stricter and stricter "crash protection" for cars that already perform
>excellently, when all they're really doing is blunting the sword of fuel
>efficiency. [and, coincidentally, ruining dynamic safety too - heavier
>cars are harder to stop and steer out of collisions.]

nick@nowhere.com wrote:
> Unless I am looking at this incorrectly, the 2000 Civic Sedan DX only
> weighs 2339 lbs (I think that's for an auto). The 08 Civic auto weighs
> 2806.

i got those numbers from the honda factory service manual spec sheets.

they list for 2000, the lightest at 3290lbs for the 2 door hx coupe and
3460lbs for the 4 door ex.

>
>
>
> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:25:05 -0800, jim beam
> <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Dave L wrote:
>>> "JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>>> news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd auto
>>>>> I
>>>>> daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What bothers
>>>>> me
>>>>> is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>>> Accord
>>>>> is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>>> indicative
>>>>> of change in company policy.
>>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>>
>>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>>
>>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>>
>>>> J.
>>> I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked. They
>>> are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>>> (practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>>> was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>>> conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>>> Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>>
>>> I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>>> has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp drop.
>>> Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it was
>>> only minor other changes done...
>>>
>>> -Dave
>>>
>>>
>> focus on horsepower is meaningless without also correlating it to weight.
>>
>> example:
>> 1989 civic dx, auto trans, 2,138lbs. engine output is 92hp iirc.
>> 2000 civic dx, auto trans, 3,330lbs. engine output is 106hp iirc.
>>
>> now, despite the fact that engine management on the 2000 is
>> significantly more advanced than on the 89, both return pretty much the
>> same economy cruising on the freeway. and off the line, the 89 is quite
>> a bit faster.
>>
>> why?
>> 1989 = 0.043 hp/lb
>> 2000 = 0.032 hp/lb
>>
>> now, why not ask your congress-critter why they keep insisting on
>> stricter and stricter "crash protection" for cars that already perform
>> excellently, when all they're really doing is blunting the sword of fuel
>> efficiency. [and, coincidentally, ruining dynamic safety too - heavier
>> cars are harder to stop and steer out of collisions.]

"tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote in message
news:46bgj.4165$M24.1171@newsfe17.lga...
>
> "Dave L" <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:UtydnbuEttgRjBzanZ2dnUVZ_qKgnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Cars in general were getting bigger, especially with the SUVs. Guess
>> Honda wanted to keep up and give the general public what they wanted.
>> All about the (not so mighty) dollar. Some of us don't need or really
>> want these things getting bigger (and uglier). Unfortunately we're in
>> the minority.
>>
>> Everyone I know of who bought the new Civic loves it and quickly got used
>> to the tiered dash. I don't care for it either - but normally if someone
>> is looking at a Civic, they wouldn't be looking at a TSX! If cost wasn't
>> an issue I'd go TSX. It's a sharp looking car.
>>
>> -Dave
>>
> The TSX (Euro Honda) is the right size for me, but I sure don't want to
> pay the 30k for the car. The old I4 EX ran around $22k -- . Even now,
> the 190 hp EX runs considerable less than the TSX.

My sentiments exactly about the size of the TSX. Very nice car with a steep
price tag to go with it. Same parents but more finesse in the Acura.

-Dave

Who can post the Consumers Report article ?...... Don't make me go to
Borders . Too damm foggy out .

"tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote in message
news:GtTfj.16258$hO4.4597@newsfe19.lga...
>
> "Justbob30" <NoThank@you.com> wrote in message
> news:QL6dnXgD5_OATeLanZ2dnUVZ_tSknZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Are you reading a different Consumer reports than I am? I see the Accord
>> received an overall rating of 88, the Altima 85......how is that better?
>> it does mention the Accord gets slightly worse gas mileage than the
>> Altima but that is not the total rating....
>> Don't get me wrong, I still think the new Accord is just about the
>> ugliest car Honda has produced in recent memory and the Altima is better
>> looking but, in MY opinion I would not buy either of the gas guzzliers
>> cause I like my Civic Hybrid too much to consider either.
>>
> Must be -- the Feb 08 CR rates the Altima as #1 and the Accord (LX P) as
> 2nd. Similarly, the Altima V6 is rated #1 and the Accord V6 #2.
>
>
>
>> "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:cbAfj.5522$R55.1923@newsfe13.lga...
>>> The recent Consumer's Report review of the 08 Accord was a little
>>> surprising to me. While they liked the car, they rated it below the
>>> Altima. Comments were that the new Accord "is not as quick" as the old
>>> Accord and that the gas mileage is down. They tested the 177 hp LX - P
>>> and a V6 model. I suppose the bigger car weighs more hence the
>>> degradation is performance and handling. Of course, I have no reason to
>>> trade my 06 coupe I4.
>>>
>
>

I pulled my data from Edmunds.com, but I wouldn't doubt they were
wrong. But the 2008 model is direct from Honda's website. I think
there may be a typo in the factory manual. I wouldn't believe that the
2008 weighs less then a 2000.


On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:08:50 -0800, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

>nick@nowhere.com wrote:
>> Unless I am looking at this incorrectly, the 2000 Civic Sedan DX only
>> weighs 2339 lbs (I think that's for an auto). The 08 Civic auto weighs
>> 2806.
>
>i got those numbers from the honda factory service manual spec sheets.
>
>they list for 2000, the lightest at 3290lbs for the 2 door hx coupe and
>3460lbs for the 4 door ex.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:25:05 -0800, jim beam
>> <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Dave L wrote:
>>>> "JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd auto
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What bothers
>>>>>> me
>>>>>> is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>>>> Accord
>>>>>> is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>>>> indicative
>>>>>> of change in company policy.
>>>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>>>
>>>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>>>
>>>>> J.
>>>> I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked. They
>>>> are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>>>> (practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>>>> was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>>>> conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>>>> Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>>>
>>>> I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>>>> has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp drop.
>>>> Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it was
>>>> only minor other changes done...
>>>>
>>>> -Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>> focus on horsepower is meaningless without also correlating it to weight.
>>>
>>> example:
>>> 1989 civic dx, auto trans, 2,138lbs. engine output is 92hp iirc.
>>> 2000 civic dx, auto trans, 3,330lbs. engine output is 106hp iirc.
>>>
>>> now, despite the fact that engine management on the 2000 is
>>> significantly more advanced than on the 89, both return pretty much the
>>> same economy cruising on the freeway. and off the line, the 89 is quite
>>> a bit faster.
>>>
>>> why?
>>> 1989 = 0.043 hp/lb
>>> 2000 = 0.032 hp/lb
>>>
>>> now, why not ask your congress-critter why they keep insisting on
>>> stricter and stricter "crash protection" for cars that already perform
>>> excellently, when all they're really doing is blunting the sword of fuel
>>> efficiency. [and, coincidentally, ruining dynamic safety too - heavier
>>> cars are harder to stop and steer out of collisions.]

This is very true, but I was looking for size more than cost. I'll
hopefully find a car rental place that has the Civic and test it out
for the weekend. If I don't like the dash, I'll suck it up and buy the
TSX even though I really don't care for leather.




On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:36:10 -0500, "Dave L"
<davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Cars in general were getting bigger, especially with the SUVs. Guess Honda
>wanted to keep up and give the general public what they wanted. All about
>the (not so mighty) dollar. Some of us don't need or really want these
>things getting bigger (and uglier). Unfortunately we're in the minority.
>
>Everyone I know of who bought the new Civic loves it and quickly got used to
>the tiered dash. I don't care for it either - but normally if someone is
>looking at a Civic, they wouldn't be looking at a TSX! If cost wasn't an
>issue I'd go TSX. It's a sharp looking car.
>
>-Dave
>
>
><nick@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:k2p0o3hlk06dif6fu3hanlbs0v2nil2mgq@4ax.com.. .
>>I agree with you. Why does Honda think we need larger size sedans? I
>> have never heard anyone complaining about the size at least in the
>> past gen 6 and gen 7 Accords. The 08 is longer than a Honda Pilot and
>> Ford Explorer too big for me.
>>
>> Honda has me in a dilemma at the moment. I really hate the two tiered
>> dash on the Civic but at the same time do not want a TSX because of
>> leather seating. Do I buy a Civic with a interior I don't like or a
>> TSX with everything that I like except the leather seats?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 22:59:51 -0500, "Dave L"
>> <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>>>news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.com ...
>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd
>>>>>auto
>>>>>I
>>>>>daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What bothers
>>>>>me
>>>>>is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>>>Accord
>>>>>is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>>>indicative
>>>>>of change in company policy.
>>>>
>>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>>
>>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>>
>>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>>
>>>> J.
>>>
>>>I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked. They
>>>are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>>>(practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear end
>>>was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>>>conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>>>Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>>
>>>I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and '07
>>>has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp
>>>drop.
>>>Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it
>>>was
>>>only minor other changes done...
>>>
>>>-Dave
>>>
>

A car rental place with a Civic?
Good luck!


<nick@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:m5e5o3hutk1f07g8virv4gginvbhdqmbao@4ax.com...
> This is very true, but I was looking for size more than cost. I'll
> hopefully find a car rental place that has the Civic and test it out
> for the weekend. If I don't like the dash, I'll suck it up and buy the
> TSX even though I really don't care for leather.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:36:10 -0500, "Dave L"
> <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Cars in general were getting bigger, especially with the SUVs. Guess
>>Honda
>>wanted to keep up and give the general public what they wanted. All about
>>the (not so mighty) dollar. Some of us don't need or really want these
>>things getting bigger (and uglier). Unfortunately we're in the minority.
>>
>>Everyone I know of who bought the new Civic loves it and quickly got used
>>to
>>the tiered dash. I don't care for it either - but normally if someone is
>>looking at a Civic, they wouldn't be looking at a TSX! If cost wasn't an
>>issue I'd go TSX. It's a sharp looking car.
>>
>>-Dave
>>
>>
>><nick@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>news:k2p0o3hlk06dif6fu3hanlbs0v2nil2mgq@4ax.com. ..
>>>I agree with you. Why does Honda think we need larger size sedans? I
>>> have never heard anyone complaining about the size at least in the
>>> past gen 6 and gen 7 Accords. The 08 is longer than a Honda Pilot and
>>> Ford Explorer too big for me.
>>>
>>> Honda has me in a dilemma at the moment. I really hate the two tiered
>>> dash on the Civic but at the same time do not want a TSX because of
>>> leather seating. Do I buy a Civic with a interior I don't like or a
>>> TSX with everything that I like except the leather seats?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 22:59:51 -0500, "Dave L"
>>> <davelieuREMOVEME@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:97svn3h53gk5envim8phrqnsa23uerl61d@4ax.co m...
>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:41:40 -0500, "tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>While the V6 Malibu may be a winner, the 4 cyl version with the 4 spd
>>>>>>auto
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>daresay is not. The I4 Accord would be a better selection. What
>>>>>>bothers
>>>>>>me
>>>>>>is Honda's apparent move away from handling. The comment that the V6
>>>>>>Accord
>>>>>>is Honda's version of a Buick is almost insulting -- but perhaps
>>>>>>indicative
>>>>>>of change in company policy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yah, it's been forty years since GM had a car with the kind of good,
>>>>> solid reputation they mean to imply.
>>>>>
>>>>> I see what Honda is attempting with the 08 Accord, but, I dunno.
>>>>> OTOH, maybe it just takes time. I like the "visual excitement" from
>>>>> the front quarters, but Honda has had styling issues with the tail for
>>>>> a long time. Took me until the end of the lease, before I appreciated
>>>>> the 04 styling, but I finally bought into it by then.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to say, making the Accord ever larger and heavier is NOT a good
>>>>> idea. I may go TSX next time, or even Civic (or even - gasp! -
>>>>> non-Honda!). And even at the same weight, I still don't get the
>>>>> mileage on my Accord I4 07 that I got on the 04, I attribute it to
>>>>> engine and computer changes. Maybe it does drive a little better, but
>>>>> it shouldn't cost 10% in mileage, and it seems to.
>>>>>
>>>>> J.
>>>>
>>>>I have an '05 Accord and it was even larger that I would have liked.
>>>>They
>>>>are getting too large and dare I say, less soul. Before I bought it
>>>>(practicality steered me to the Accord) - a friend also said the rear
>>>>end
>>>>was ugly - looked like a Buick. IMHO, they've gotten too large and
>>>>conservative looking. I actually liked the design of some of the older
>>>>Accords, but I definately didn't buy this car based on its looks!
>>>>
>>>>I know the '04 and '05 I4 Accord has 160hp, but I believe the '06 and
>>>>'07
>>>>has a little more at 166hp. I assume this would contribute to the mgp
>>>>drop.
>>>>Weight wise I haven't checked them out. Should be very minimal since it
>>>>was
>>>>only minor other changes done...
>>>>
>>>>-Dave
>>>>
>>