Honda Car Forum

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 05:08:40 GMT, SA <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

>In article <_a4Jb.19629$IM3.7935@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink .net>,
> lcopps <LC@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The 4 Cylinder strait drive is no dog. It is also not nose heavy like
>> the V6. It has no mushy torque converter. If you drive an automatic, you
>> might as well drive a Buick.
>>
>> Chris Aseltine wrote:
>> > "Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> writes:
>> >
>> >
>> >>I walked into the dealership planning on trying out the I4 and then trying
>> >>the V6. I was so impressed with the 4 that I didn't even test drive the
>> >>V6. I couldn't believe I was driving a standard, non-souped-up 4. It even
>> >>felt like it had more low end torque than the version in the TSX,
>> >>although this could be my imagination.
>> >
>> >
>> > Come on, the 4 is a dog. Have you ever even driven a V6? Give me a break.
>> >
>> >
>>
>Have 2 second, the 4 cyl is a dog.

Utter rubbish - get a manual and learn to drive properly.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

In article <mk57vvg9j0chorttr2lp2u2tip8j7j2h3t@4ax.com>,
Milleron <millerdot90@SPAMlessosu.edu> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:15:52 -0000, "Joshua J. Belsky"
> <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote:
>
> >I test drove a Honda Accord EX with the I4 this past weekend and I loved it.
> >Although it doesn't have the refinement of the Acura TSX, (which I am also
> >interested in) the features are all there and the price is far lower. After
> >my test drive, I had really been won over, and I left the dealership having
> >about 95% decided on getting an '04 Accord.
> >
> >Then I started reading online consumer reviews, and my mind started to
> >change.
> >There are *so many* negative reviews of that car. It seems that people have
> >been having lots of mechanical and quality problems with their 2003 Accords.
> >On the other hand, the negative reviews of the TSX just complain about
> >performance and styling, not quality. But even the positive reviews of
> >the Accord mention rattles and engine trouble.
> >
> >Now, I know that people who are upset about their car are more likely to
> >post a review than people who are happy with it. People who have lemons need
> >to blow off steam. But compared to other models of car on the road, the
> >2003 Accord had *way* more negative reviews, and a much higher percentage of
> >the reviews were negative. (This, by the way, was true on every consumer
> >review site that I checked.)
> >
> >So, I read the Edmunds.com three-month road test. They loved the car. But in
> >those three months, they had to take the car back to the dealer twice.
> >The first time was the gas-cap/engine-light issue, which I know has been
> >visited time and again on Usenet. But the second was a loose clamp on a hose
> >that caused the engine light to come on. I know that this is minor, and
> >free to repair, but it is still a warning sign. As far as I'm concerned,
> >if a car has to go to the dealer even once in the first three months, that's
> >too many times. The fact that even in a glowingly positive review, there
> >was a mechanical problem with the engine, worries me.
> >
> >So my question is this: Has Honda lost its way? Are they resting on their
> >laurels? Is the quality still there? Also, all of the reviews I read were
> >of the '03 model. Were the quality issues with the '03 addressed in the '04
> >update?
> >
> >I know that Honda can make quality cars. The TSX seems to be really well
> >built.
> >But that thing is made in Japan, and the Accord is made in the USA. Is that
> >what the problem is?
> >
> >Thank you for your opinions.
> >
> >-Joshua
>
> My '03 EX V6/Nav spent about twelve days in the shop within it's first
> four months getting a steering-fluid leak diagnosed and fixed. In
> spite of that, I have been extremely happy with my car that's now
> twelve months old with 9,400 miles on it. The repair was perfect, and
> there have been NO other problems, not even a minor rattle or squeak.
> I have zero buyer's remorse, and I recommend this automobile highly.
> Ron

Did Honda provide a loaner car for the 12 days your car was unavailable?

--
Do not email if posting response. To email, replace x with 4

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 10:15:57 GMT, riccardo@smile.org (Ric) wrote:

>In article <vva5e21bnf2s8e@corp.supernews.com>, "Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote:
>>
>>When I got home from the dealership, I read the Edmunds.com Long-Term Road
>>Test, and they spent more than a page on a glowing endorsement of the
>>suprising power of the I4. So even if you disagree, you must concede that
>>it is a matter of opinion. And I'm not alone in mine.
>>
>
>Naturally the V6 will have more power, and it is expected that v6 owners would
>know this and, of course, look down their noses on the i4. However for many
>the i4 is more than sufficient, and if one's recent experience is with an even
>smaller engine the i4 can be quite impressive. I bought a 98 Civic after
>driving a van for 10 years. The Civic was a great car to drive, but it was
>underpowered. After 5 years of this I went to the Honda dealer expecting to
>test drive a v6 Accord. However after driving an i4 /5 speed I realized that
>this engine had sufficient oomph to move me and I never even drove the 6. No
>need to step up to the increased power of a v6 -- or the higher insurance,
>fuel and car payments.

I agree. I thought the i4 Accord had plenty of power and worked well
with the AT. (I agree that MT is generally better, but for those who
prefer AT, this car is great.) It is hardly a dog, just because it
isn't a sports car. Most buyers chose the 4 because it offers
significant advantages to them (including lower cost).

I have a '98 Odyssey with an i4 and AT and I think it is very well
suited to this car. (Even though I would prefer an MT.) More power
would be writing a check that the chassis can't cash. I suspect that
the same is true to a lesser extent with the Accord.

That being said, if I were shopping for an Accord I would be looking
at the v6 6-speed. Is that available on the sedan?

In article <3FF32CDC.430F4BC@mailcity.com>, BenDover@mailcity.com
wrote:

> The Accord is one of the better quality vehicles in its
> price range. Quality is s function of management, I doubt
> one assembled in Japan would be significantly better than
> one assembled in the US. Not every vehicle built by every
> manufacture can be completely problem free every time, that
> is why they all offer a warranty, not to worry. If I were
> purchasing an Accord, I would spend the extra bucks and buy
> a V6 over the 4.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
I am in the process of making that decision now, so I'm interested to
know why you suggest the V6 over the 4. From what I've read in Consumer
REports, if I'm understanding it correctly, the mpg doesn't seem to be
much different. The cost of the car (4) is significantly less expensive
(am I correct, by about $4000?). My current and last car have been
Accord EXL V6's. I live at the top of a hill, not an exceptionally
steep one, but concerned what the difference might be getting up that
hill with a V6 vs 4.
Robin



>
> Hubbub wrote:
> >
> > I was looking at Accords over the weekend, and the ones I saw were all made
> > in Maryville, OH. I wonder if they have a different track record than
> > Accords made in Japan.
> >
> > Where are these negative reviews and articles? I could not find the review
> > on Edmunds that Joshua referred to about trips back to the dealer within the
> > first 90 days. In fact, of the 900 or so consumer reviews of the '03 Accord,
> > the average score is around a 9.2 which seem to be very good. I spent about
> > half an hour and could not find anything about reliability issues. If more
> > details could be provided where all of these negative reviews are, I would
> > like to read them.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > "A-MAN" <admin@a-man.org> wrote in message
> > news:bst7fc$c7i@dispatch.concentric.net...
> > >
> > > "Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote in message
> > > news:vv3jn8jv5d3i93@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > I test drove a Honda Accord EX with the I4 this past weekend and I loved
> > > it.
> > > > Although it doesn't have the refinement of the Acura TSX, (which I am
> > also
> > > > interested in) the features are all there and the price is far lower.
> > > After
> > > > my test drive, I had really been won over, and I left the dealership
> > > having
> > > > about 95% decided on getting an '04 Accord.
> > > >
> > > > Then I started reading online consumer reviews, and my mind started to
> > > change.
> > > > There are *so many* negative reviews of that car. It seems that people
> > > have
> > > > been having lots of mechanical and quality problems with their 2003
> > > Accords.
> > > > On the other hand, the negative reviews of the TSX just complain about
> > > > performance and styling, not quality. But even the positive reviews of
> > > > the Accord mention rattles and engine trouble.
> > > >
> > > > Now, I know that people who are upset about their car are more likely to
> > > > post a review than people who are happy with it. People who have lemons
> > > need
> > > > to blow off steam. But compared to other models of car on the road, the
> > > > 2003 Accord had *way* more negative reviews, and a much higher
> > percentage
> > > of
> > > > the reviews were negative. (This, by the way, was true on every
> > consumer
> > > > review site that I checked.)
> > > >
> > > > So, I read the Edmunds.com three-month road test. They loved the car.
> > But
> > > in
> > > > those three months, they had to take the car back to the dealer twice.
> > > > The first time was the gas-cap/engine-light issue, which I know has been
> > > > visited time and again on Usenet. But the second was a loose clamp on a
> > > hose
> > > > that caused the engine light to come on. I know that this is minor, and
> > > > free to repair, but it is still a warning sign. As far as I'm concerned,
> > > > if a car has to go to the dealer even once in the first three months,
> > > that's
> > > > too many times. The fact that even in a glowingly positive review, there
> > > > was a mechanical problem with the engine, worries me.
> > > >
> > > > So my question is this: Has Honda lost its way? Are they resting on
> > their
> > > > laurels? Is the quality still there? Also, all of the reviews I read
> > were
> > > > of the '03 model. Were the quality issues with the '03 addressed in the
> > > '04
> > > > update?
> > > >
> > > > I know that Honda can make quality cars. The TSX seems to be really well
> > > built.
> > > > But that thing is made in Japan, and the Accord is made in the USA. Is
> > > that
> > > > what the problem is?
> > >
> > > In all the negative posts you see, you also have to keep in mind that the
> > > Honda Accord is one of the best selling cars in America. By sheer numbers
> > > alone, they are bound to issue cars with more quality problems, but I
> > would
> > > be willing to bet the percentage is still amoung the lowest of all
> > > manufacturers (in fact, numerous magazines make just such a reference).
> > >
> > > I am extremely happy and have had no trouble with my '03 EX with 7,000
> > > miles.
> > > The Accords are made in Japan as well. Mine was built there.
> > >
> > >

--
Do not email if posting response. To email, replace x with 4

In article <robinxjoy-3F14FF.09493002012004@news.west.cox.net>,
Robin <robinxjoy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I live at the top of a hill, not an exceptionally
>steep one, but concerned what the difference might be getting up that
>hill with a V6 vs 4.

When test driving cars, drive them up that hill or one of similar
grade to see how the cars do. Bring the expected number of passengers
on the test drive as well.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

"Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote in message
news:vva5e21bnf2s8e@corp.supernews.com...
> Chris Aseltine <ophidian@newsnation.com> wrote:
> > "Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> writes:
>
> >> I walked into the dealership planning on trying out the I4 and then
trying
> >> the V6. I was so impressed with the 4 that I didn't even test drive the
> >> V6. I couldn't believe I was driving a standard, non-souped-up 4. It
even
> >> felt like it had more low end torque than the version in the TSX,
> >> although this could be my imagination.
>
> > Come on, the 4 is a dog. Have you ever even driven a V6? Give me a
break.
>
> You found me out. The biggest engine I've ever used is the one cylinder
> two-stroke that I strapped onto my bicycle. Hence, the I4 felt like it was
> running on jet fuel to me.

Don't knock one cylinder two-strokes until you've ridden a one-cylinder
two-stroke snowmobile at 95 mph.

"Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote in message
news:vva5e21bnf2s8e@corp.supernews.com...
> Chris Aseltine <ophidian@newsnation.com> wrote:
> > "Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> writes:
>
> >> I walked into the dealership planning on trying out the I4 and then
trying
> >> the V6. I was so impressed with the 4 that I didn't even test drive the
> >> V6. I couldn't believe I was driving a standard, non-souped-up 4. It
even
> >> felt like it had more low end torque than the version in the TSX,
> >> although this could be my imagination.
>
> > Come on, the 4 is a dog. Have you ever even driven a V6? Give me a
break.
>
> You found me out. The biggest engine I've ever used is the one cylinder
> two-stroke that I strapped onto my bicycle. Hence, the I4 felt like it was
> running on jet fuel to me.

Don't knock one cylinder two-strokes until you've ridden a one-cylinder
two-stroke snowmobile at 95 mph.

As you've probably already read in this newsgroup, my '03 six-cylinder
six-speed coupe has spent a total of almost three weeks in the shop since I
bought it in October. I'm on my second transmission, they've fixed three
rattles inside the car and the electric door locks still don't work if it's
below -5C (around 20F) outside.

I do still like the car - I just don't know if I will ever buy a Honda again
(this is my third Honda in a row).

"Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote in message
news:vv3jn8jv5d3i93@corp.supernews.com...
> I test drove a Honda Accord EX with the I4 this past weekend and I loved
it.
> Although it doesn't have the refinement of the Acura TSX, (which I am also
> interested in) the features are all there and the price is far lower.
After
> my test drive, I had really been won over, and I left the dealership
having
> about 95% decided on getting an '04 Accord.
>
> Then I started reading online consumer reviews, and my mind started to
change.
> There are *so many* negative reviews of that car. It seems that people
have
> been having lots of mechanical and quality problems with their 2003
Accords.
> On the other hand, the negative reviews of the TSX just complain about
> performance and styling, not quality. But even the positive reviews of
> the Accord mention rattles and engine trouble.
>
> Now, I know that people who are upset about their car are more likely to
> post a review than people who are happy with it. People who have lemons
need
> to blow off steam. But compared to other models of car on the road, the
> 2003 Accord had *way* more negative reviews, and a much higher percentage
of
> the reviews were negative. (This, by the way, was true on every consumer
> review site that I checked.)
>
> So, I read the Edmunds.com three-month road test. They loved the car. But
in
> those three months, they had to take the car back to the dealer twice.
> The first time was the gas-cap/engine-light issue, which I know has been
> visited time and again on Usenet. But the second was a loose clamp on a
hose
> that caused the engine light to come on. I know that this is minor, and
> free to repair, but it is still a warning sign. As far as I'm concerned,
> if a car has to go to the dealer even once in the first three months,
that's
> too many times. The fact that even in a glowingly positive review, there
> was a mechanical problem with the engine, worries me.
>
> So my question is this: Has Honda lost its way? Are they resting on their
> laurels? Is the quality still there? Also, all of the reviews I read were
> of the '03 model. Were the quality issues with the '03 addressed in the
'04
> update?
>
> I know that Honda can make quality cars. The TSX seems to be really well
built.
> But that thing is made in Japan, and the Accord is made in the USA. Is
that
> what the problem is?
>
> Thank you for your opinions.
>
> -Joshua
> --
> -Joshua Belsky
> jjbelsky@yahoo.com
> http://belsky.net
>

As you've probably already read in this newsgroup, my '03 six-cylinder
six-speed coupe has spent a total of almost three weeks in the shop since I
bought it in October. I'm on my second transmission, they've fixed three
rattles inside the car and the electric door locks still don't work if it's
below -5C (around 20F) outside.

I do still like the car - I just don't know if I will ever buy a Honda again
(this is my third Honda in a row).

"Joshua J. Belsky" <belsky@brionne.cyberverse.com> wrote in message
news:vv3jn8jv5d3i93@corp.supernews.com...
> I test drove a Honda Accord EX with the I4 this past weekend and I loved
it.
> Although it doesn't have the refinement of the Acura TSX, (which I am also
> interested in) the features are all there and the price is far lower.
After
> my test drive, I had really been won over, and I left the dealership
having
> about 95% decided on getting an '04 Accord.
>
> Then I started reading online consumer reviews, and my mind started to
change.
> There are *so many* negative reviews of that car. It seems that people
have
> been having lots of mechanical and quality problems with their 2003
Accords.
> On the other hand, the negative reviews of the TSX just complain about
> performance and styling, not quality. But even the positive reviews of
> the Accord mention rattles and engine trouble.
>
> Now, I know that people who are upset about their car are more likely to
> post a review than people who are happy with it. People who have lemons
need
> to blow off steam. But compared to other models of car on the road, the
> 2003 Accord had *way* more negative reviews, and a much higher percentage
of
> the reviews were negative. (This, by the way, was true on every consumer
> review site that I checked.)
>
> So, I read the Edmunds.com three-month road test. They loved the car. But
in
> those three months, they had to take the car back to the dealer twice.
> The first time was the gas-cap/engine-light issue, which I know has been
> visited time and again on Usenet. But the second was a loose clamp on a
hose
> that caused the engine light to come on. I know that this is minor, and
> free to repair, but it is still a warning sign. As far as I'm concerned,
> if a car has to go to the dealer even once in the first three months,
that's
> too many times. The fact that even in a glowingly positive review, there
> was a mechanical problem with the engine, worries me.
>
> So my question is this: Has Honda lost its way? Are they resting on their
> laurels? Is the quality still there? Also, all of the reviews I read were
> of the '03 model. Were the quality issues with the '03 addressed in the
'04
> update?
>
> I know that Honda can make quality cars. The TSX seems to be really well
built.
> But that thing is made in Japan, and the Accord is made in the USA. Is
that
> what the problem is?
>
> Thank you for your opinions.
>
> -Joshua
> --
> -Joshua Belsky
> jjbelsky@yahoo.com
> http://belsky.net
>

PMFJI, I previously owned a manual I4 Prelude and an auto I4 Accord EX.

I test drove a 2003 I4 EX and then a V6 EX Accord. The 2004's are mostly
the same. I wanted auto for those stop and go days on the interstate and
power for when the traffic moves. I had the salesman and two other
adults with me (4 adults).

The V6 is quiet. It revs lower and is so quiet you will wonder where all
the power is coming from. Engine noise is much less than the I4. The V6
also has more sound deadening insulation . (For example, look at the
underside of the trunk door.) Road noise is better muffled.

The people riding with me said, "No contest." I thought so too. I bought
the V6 and love it!

The V6 has more weight up front. This can be good if you drive slowly in
snow and want more weight over the drive wheels. This can be bad if you
want to drive at high speed down twisty back roads. (Been there done
that with the Prelude. Get a sports car if your really do that often.)

The V6 is outstanding at acceleration from the onramp to the highway and
providing power for passing at highway speeds. It can be a much more
refined highway commuter.

One reason to get the I4 is money. Another might be if you are not able
to control yourself when faced with more power than you will need. After
all, the V6 is said to do 135 MPH but I have never tried to go that
fast. In the wrong hands, it could be trouble.

I think the V6 is better for what most commuters encounter every day.

I also liked: Pistons hold up the hood when you open it rather than a
manual rod. Side curtain air bags are standard. Traction control is
standard.

Nobody needs a V6. We need a base Toyota Corolla or Civic. After that
it's about what you want. I want a more refined ride when I pay more
than $20000 for a car.


Robin wrote:
>> I would spend the extra bucks and buy
>>a V6 over the 4.
>>
>>
>>mike hunt
>>
>
> I am in the process of making that decision now, so I'm interested to
> know why you suggest the V6 over the 4. From what I've read in Consumer
> REports, if I'm understanding it correctly, the mpg doesn't seem to be
> much different. The cost of the car (4) is significantly less expensive
> (am I correct, by about $4000?). My current and last car have been
> Accord EXL V6's. I live at the top of a hill, not an exceptionally
> steep one, but concerned what the difference might be getting up that
> hill with a V6 vs 4.
> Robin