Honda Car Forum

"Sara" <zzz@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:4068b223.4112400@news2.cybercomm.net...
> I'm trying to decide between the 2004 Accord EX and EX-V6. The car
> will spend part of its life in the mountains of Pennsylvania. The 4
> cylinder EX would do just fine in most regards, but I am wondering if
> it would be wise to upgrade to the V6 to get traction control. I'm
> planning to get good snow tires for the car also. Would like to hear
> from anyone who drove this past winter in snow & ice in hilly or
> mountainous terrain. Which would you choose?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Sara

For '03 you could only get traction control on the V-6 model. I don't know
if this is still true on '04.

Personally I much prefer traction control for snow driving. Also the V-6
is heavier up front, which *might* make a difference in snow handling.

The best advice is to spend the time and money to get a set of high quality
snow tires mounted on some steel rims and run those in the winter. The
difference in safety and control in the snow will be a revelation.

John

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:106u3p1eb67h5eb@corp.supernews.com:

> The best advice is to spend the time and money to get a set of high
> quality snow tires mounted on some steel rims and run those in the
> winter. The difference in safety and control in the snow will be a
> revelation.
>
> John

I agree. The best bet is to get a good set of winter tires on steel
wheels for winter. I've got a 1995 Accord Wagon. I ran 6 years on a set
of Yokohama GuardX 600 winter tires and those were great. Now I've got 2
years on a set of Nokian Hakka 2s and they are even better. They don't
feel as soft and mushy on pavement as the Yokos, they handle better in
corners.

I went a winter with the factory Michelins. To this day I don't know how
or why I managed to get through it. I got stuck a lot. I slid around a
lot. Putting the winter tires on made such a huge difference in safety
and confidence. The extra traction is like night and day, and goes far
beyond what traction control and ABS can offer.

Nokian also makes an all-season that actually meets full winter tire
specs too. That's what I would get if you feel you could be entertaining
snow at any time without a chance to switch to snow tires. They are now
called the "WR". The _best_ snow / ice traction is to be had with a
studded tire like the Hakka 4.

http://www.nokian.com/wintertyres_en

Because I live close to the mountains and go up there frequently, I'm
going to get WRs for my "summer" tires. They have good wear and good
snow traction. We can get dumped on at any time here so it's nice to
have some insurance. Many times I've been caught in May or August in
the mountains in a freak snow, and been struggling with the Michelin
"all-seasons" which are just terrible in any amount of snow. In the
winter I'll put back on the Hakka 2 dedicated winter tires, which are
much softer and wear faster, but offer even more traction.

I would still want the Accord V6, but not to get traction control. I'd
want it because I just like the extra torque and smoothness the V6 has
over the I4. Now I've had my accord is almost 10 years old, and I love
it. It can go when I want to push it. But in comparison, my friend has
the 95 sedan with the V6. Effectively the same car except for the
engine. And I've taken it out on the highway and it's almost effortless
driving in comparision. Same goes for mountain climbs. You don't have
to downshift as much and the engine just pulls easier. Necessity? No,
the I4 will get you wherever you want to go, in a hurry too. The V6 just
does it a lot quieter and with less fuss. If you're satisfied with the
I4 performance, don't mind shifting down to pass or get where you're
going, and don't mind going 5k rpm or higher to get some grunt out of the
engine, and want to save some coin, you'll be happy with the I4. It's
simple and dependable. The handling of the I4 cars does feel somewhat
ligher than the V6s too, at least comparing my friends 95 to mine.