The Subaru Legacy GT, Infiniti G35 and Acura TSX are paid-in-full members of the practical power automotive niche. They cater to financially responsible enthusiasts who want their reliability served with a supersized side of hoon and a la carte cog-swapping. Although Honda’s new Accord V-6 packs a 268-horsepower punch, the four-door’s a pedal short in the row-your-own department. Fortunately, the Accord EX-L coupe boasts a six-speed manual transmission. So is the EX-L a category killer or just another vanilla thrilla?
The EX-L coupe is a rolling homage to BMWs 3 through 8, adorned with a small sprinkling of performance cues: chrome door handles (ew), coffee can chromed pipes (huh?) and 18” rims (bow-chicka-bow-wow). And get a load of that teeny little spoiler– no compensating for anything here. In terms of sporting proportions, the EX-L is the automotive definition of cognitive dissonance: a two-door vehicle that stretches farther than a standard four-door. Clearly, this baby has a lot of ass to haul.
On the upside, the EX-L’s bootylicious bounteousness makes the rear seats roomy enough for at least two adults. Unfortunately the back seat is a journey, not a destination; ensconcing oneself in the EX-L’s rearmost chairs is a convoluted and agonizing process. Returning to the positive spin, the Accord's huge trunk compensates for the back seats’ limited access– especially for coupe drivers familiar with the fine art of securing grocery bags with shoulder belts.
The view from behind the EX-L’s wheel is strangely… feminine. Like the Dodge logo and the Subaru Tribeca, the EX-L’s interior offers-up a pistonhead paean to the female reproductive system. From the way the dashboard curves sweep inward like fallopian tubes into the uterus slash radio/climate control unit, to the oversized, top-heavy H on the steering wheel, Freud would have had a heyday.
Yes, well, the outward edges of the dash connected with my knees more than once while I was entering and exiting the vehicle, leading to some decidedly un-Ladylike cursing. (Take it from me, fallopian tubes are not known for their ergonomics.) As for the radio head unit (so to speak), Honda's answer to complaints of overly-complex controls is the engineering equivalent of talking louder. They've made the buttons bigger and the writing larger. It may be easier for fat-fingered folks to grope through the ICE menus, but it's no more intuitive than before– or BMW's iDrive.
Ergonomics be damned. Practical funsters focus on less prosaic matters, like sheer horsepower. Turn the key, fire-up the filly and slip into the bliss that is a well-tuned Honda V6. This mill’s got torque all over and horsepower galore, all mated to yet another blissfully smooth and easy-shifting Honda gearbox. Girth aside, Road and Track’s resident tire shredders mustered a very respectable 5.9 seconds on the zero to 60 sprint– a hair behind most of the competition. The EX-L won’t light your hair on fire, but at this price you’ll shut up and drive.
The ridiculous pipes provide a terrific aural balance between a savory exhaust note and cruising silence. Punch the gas and you’ll be cackling before you know it. The exhaust's sexy bwaaahhhhh is almost enough to drown out the unholy road noise those 18” tires unleash beneath you. (I had to double-check to make sure some bureaucrat didn’t accidentally ship a car with snow tires to the dirty South.) Charitable drivers should consider the EX-L’s din a not-so-subtle advertisement for Acura.
In a straight line, the EX-L coupe is silken joy. Try to throw this porker around a corner and you’ll get an abrupt reminder of why God invented rear wheel-drive. It’s like talking your inebriated, obese buddy into being the rear part of a two-person horse costume. No matter how hard you try, the EX-L's rear end is sluggish and unwieldy. Eventually you give up and just drag the stupid ass along behind you.
Honda’s point-and-shoot steering and crisp turn-in are also absent, sacrificed on the altar of a comfortably numb ride. Anyone wanting a manual EX-L is probably more interested in sampling some Si-style driving dynamics than keeping the cups in their holders; failing to tune the EX-L’s suspension to match the coupe’s demeanor one of da meanest things Honda’s done to enthusiasts in quite some time.
The EX-L coupe is a conflicted vehicle. It’s got a powerful engine with a snick-happy transmission mated to an average suspension. It’s got all the appearance of a luxury vehicle, with none of the quiet and little of the luxuriousness. It’s fun to drive, but not REALLY fun.
Yes, the EX-L's a strange offering, given Honda aspirations for the Accord as the nü full-size family sedan. With a sport-tuned suspension, SH-AWD and a few more toys, the EX-L would blow its competitors into the weeds. As it is, the EX-L is… um… I’m sorry. What were we talking about?
77 Comments on “Honda Accord EX-L Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Megan: Nice review, but for us 6′4″ male pistonheads on a budget out there (I would be considering the 190HP 2.4), how do you (and anyone else who has driven the Accord Coupe), think that it stacks up to the competition, say the Camry Solara, Pontiac G6 GTP, Altima Coupe, etc.
I know that the major complaint for the new Accords is the “spare tire” that they’ve gained in middle age, but for those of us who share the same morphology, the roominess may offset the slight worsening in the twisties…
Great review Megan! I enjoyed it. Too bad it’s for a car I’ll never own. I’m more a member of the practical power automotive niche (with an SUV on the side).
Honda is struggling so much to be TOYOTA that its CLOUDING THEIR MOTORING MANUFACTURING CAPABILITIES. Nice car anyway only the competition (read SOLARA) is far MUCH better
I really wanted to like this car; i haven’t driven one yet, but it sounds like it is less fun than the last EX V6 manual coupe, which was a very refined and mature hoonmobile. If they had gotten the suspension right this would be on a lot of people like mine’s shortlist for next purchase. I’ll have to try one anyway, of course – but i’m disheartened to read this kind of stuff!
While I find this vehicle too vanilla for my tastes I can certainly appreciate that Honda is offering an Accord coupe. Does anyone else see hints of the last few subaru legacy generations here?
Oh how I relish the idea of buying a mazda 6 coupe or better still, a legacy coupe (especially with the frameless glass). What’s Chip Foose’s phone #?
musah:
The market doesn’t agree, the Solara is in its last model year and is rumored to be replaced with a crossover very similar to this vehicle.
They can’t go too far with it, not with the TSX and TL hovering just above it.
I really don’t like the way Honda is going lately.
They’ve gotten too carried away with filligree in their interiors. When I checked out the new Civic Si, I couldn’t understand why it replaced the previous generation’s simple knob with 10 buttons. The new Accord’s dash looks about straight forward as a tax return.
What happened to Honda being about simple refinement?
I’m also finding it hard to get excited about that 268hp engine… Who needs 270 hp in a FWD family sedan?
The new Accord is another step in the (wrong) direction of heavier, bigger, more powerful and more complicated.
For around 2K more I can buy a new Mercedes Benz C-Class or a BMW 3 series. This car is way overpriced at 31K. Lackluster performance for over 30k is not worth it to me.
Hmmm…. I just bought a 1998 Lincoln Mark VIII LSC a week ago for $2600 that is in immaculate shape. At least on the used side, touring coupes are having a lot of difficulty in the marketplace.
Your review was very reminiscent of my experience driving the Mark VIII, sans the 6-speed and feminime interior. I think these vehicles are excellent choices for those who do a lot of highway and country driving. But they usually have about 75 to 100 horsepower that you can’t really use around the twisties due to the bulk of the machine.
Side reference here, I actually drove a red 1994 Camry Coupe for 12 years and 239k. I also drove a 2003 Solara to the sale last night (another dealer owned it). A good four cylinder for a touring coupe is a perfectly fine choice and you’ll usually end up with around 30 to 34 mpg overall. As a ‘personal’ car for the highway driver they’re worth the money. But then again, you can get a perfectly good T-Bird with low mileage, a V8 and all the options for around $1500 to $2500 these days.
This Accord may be a four star vehicle. But compared with the bang for the buck you can get in the used car market (which offers magna cum depreciation in this particular segment), it’s not really a good choice.
Samir is right, Honda is afraid of competing with itself in the form of the TSX – TL. (The obvious solution is to put the V6 – 6 speed combination in the TSX.)
Really though, a harder edged version of this car WOULDN’T be competing with any of their other current products.
With the trend towards big, soft cushy vehicles (new Accord, SUVs and pseudo pick up trucks) and away from smaller, more agile ones (RSX-S, S2000) there’s a growing void in the product line. I think there’s absolutely room for an Accord Si coupe.
Sad to see Honda – Acura abandon a segment of the market they once excelled in.
Guess there’s just too much profit to be made in mini vans and SUVs.
“As it is, the EX-L is… um… I’m sorry. What were we talking about?”
yes you still give it four stars . . . .
Girth aside, Road and Track’s resident tire shredders mustered a very respectable 5.9 seconds on the zero to 60 sprint– a hair behind most of the competition. The EX-L won’t light your hair on fire, but at this price you’ll shut up and drive
I haven’t yet owned a car that can beat 8 seconds to 60. I imagine that 5.9 would at least put a few sparks in my hair.
Great review. I enjoyed the reading.
Lets keep in mind that Honda isn’t building cars for the enthusiast, but rather, for the masses. If this review was of a soft S2000, it would be more on track.
Wanting a stiffer suspension isn’t a dealbreaker. Go aftermarket, and tune it to your exact specifications.
Sorry Megan, I think you missed the point. This is the NEW ACCORD. Coupe. With leather. Its fraternal twin brother is a family sedan. They have a lot in common, just not number of doors.
Shaker is right, this is a large coupe that will also accomodate those of us that are taller than 5′10″. Honda was not going after the G35/37 coupe, or the 350Z crowd. They are evolving the Accord for the Accord crowd, and maybe some Camry/Solara/Altima owners.
We need to stop reviewing vehicles from the perspective of, “are they what WE want them to be?”. It’s not that difficult. If Honda was going to blaze a different trail with this coupe, they would NOT have called it an ACCORD.
ye[t] you still give it four stars . . . .
I can see that. Mostly she’s complaining about Honda’s decision to put lipstick on a Clydesdale. It’s still an impressive beast if you need a draft horse. The lipstick just makes you want to look the other way in spite of its innate goodness and suitability to task. Or something.
Shaker:
Someone else reviewed the more ‘vanilla’ Accord, so you may want to reference that. I specifically picked this one because it can be had in a manual, whereas most of the cars you mentioned cannot. As for being 6′4″, the new Accord has quite a bit of room (the coupe more so than the sedan), so you may want to give it a sit-in first. Lots of leg and head room. Though it seemed the passenger side seat was shorter and not as comfortable.
pb35:
Look for my upcoming Subaru Forester review… well, next year. Someday. ;)
Mrb00st:
Give it a drive, you may find it acceptable. It was to me, but to my husband, it was not… he’d still rather have the LGT or something tighter. I actually appreciated the softer suspension to some degree, though the cornering… yikes.
Samir:
I would rather have one of these than a TSX. The last one I drove was incredibly, incredibly cheap on the inside and not half as fast. Technically this is ‘below’ it, but if you’re willing to ’step down’ to the Honda badge, the Accord is a MUCh better deal than the TSX.
Blunozer:
No one *needs* 268HP in a family sedan. But it sure as hell is a lot of fun.
partsisparts:
It starts at $28k… the only real option is Nav. Depending on how these sell, you can probably get it for less.
cretinx:
It’s a great car. I’m just not sure what Honda was trying to do with it.
There is a Honda behind,right side,left side and in front of me.
Blunozer
What are you doing on this website if you don’t thing a fam sedan should have 270 hp?
Hey all,
I own a Honda Civic SI and, after 34k miles, I’m happy with it. I probably won’t purchase a Honda again in my lifetime (maybe an Acura, depending on where they go in the next 5 years).
The engine in this car is a bewilderment for Honda. It came out 1+ years after the directly comparable Nissan Altima 3.5 and Toyota Camry 3.5, and yet does not exceed either in anyway (I’ve heard refinement, but I’m not so sure…).
Honda used to be known as “the engine builder”. They built engines more powerful and just as efficient as Toyota, and a few steps above “the others” in the same class. Not anymore.
What exactly is a 3.5 liter engine doing in the front end of a front wheel drive family sedan…or coupe for that matter. It’s too much engine for the car.
Why is Honda/Toyota only “maintaining” their fuel economy figures, instead of improving. I understand that each respective model is getting bigger and heavier and more powerful. But for manufacturers that proclaim their dedication to fuel economy and efficiency, they sure are staying static.
Just a quick poll, from those interested in giving an answer: If you were shopping for a family sedan in today’s market, and one of the V6 models offered 30 less HP than it’s competitors but a combined average of of 3mpg better on the EPA cycle: would you buy it?
Joe
P.s. Sadly, I still think Honda will sell a ton of Accords due to the fact that the interior is fantastically roomy and, aside from it’s center console mass-o-buttons, an ergonomic and design feast compared to it’s competition. But they’re just glowing with the flow, and doing a good job at it.
11.9 Cubic Feet is a huge trunk?
Joe, answer to your question:
Yes, I will choose the 2.4L 190hp engine.
Thanks for the reply, Megan…
The 2.4 190HP 5-Speed in EX (no leather) trim can be had for less than 24K — though with 17″ wheels and less “bling” than the V6, it’s a bit more plain. Still, less “jelly bean” (no offense) than the previous gen.
The real selling point on this would be the “real-world” MPG numbers; but it seems that Honda has placed low exhaust emissions as a higher priority for this engine lineup.
Starlightmica,
Toyota is replacing the Solara with a Japanese soap opera about 4 astronomers driving at night fantasizing about women?
Anyhow, good review. Although I love Hondas and Accords, I understand the confusion over what a 268hp FWD coupe is all about. I’m more of an I-4 sedan/wagon kind of guy.
I’m with you, Joe. A four banger with a stick shift is all one needs in life provided they actually know how to *drive* a car.
It’s like talking your inebriated, obese buddy into being the rear part of a two-person horse costume.
Hi-larious!
Excellent review. For the money, I’ll take a right-wheel-drive stripped G35 sport, thank you kindly. For 35 more HP and the ability to Tokyo Drift, Honda has a lot of catching up to do.
By the way the Corolla S pictures is not the 2009 Corolla it looks totally different on AUTOBLOG.
especially the dash board and gauges.
With a sport-tuned suspension, SH-AWD and a few more toys, the EX-L would blow its competitors into the weeds. As it is, the EX-L is… um… I’m sorry. What were we talking about?
With a sport-tuned suspension, SH-AWD and a few more toys, we would have a much more expensive car that would now be competiting with some very serious machines like the 3series coupe and the G37. Would this not put the front heavy Accord coupe at a major diasadvantage?
Look what is wrong with accepting the Accord Coupe for exactly what it is, a very good car, loaded with a lot of toys, equiped with a powerful engine, sold at a rather reasonable price.
It is NOT a BMW or even an Acura. It is an Accord, a car that have managed to maintain a consistant personality since its inception over 30 years ago. Notice the simple fact that there has NEVER been a “performance” version of the Accord sold in the USA. That has been keeping with the consistant image of the Accord.
The Accord, no matter which model year you choose has always had very good handling, NOT sports car handling but very good natural dynamics. This is the trade-off for a decent ride using the Honda wishbone suspension. It is quite easy to make an Accord handle like a rally car and numerous aftermarket firms are in the business of doing so.
In truth the majority of folks that will buy an Accord coupe will think of it as a modern day Cutlass Supreme or Regal. It will be equiped with an autobox and will make a EXCELLENT highway and Blvd cruiser.
Megan, I love reading your reviews and I had a few chuckles while reading this one. I can’t wait for your next one.
I will have to say I am with the crowd that thinks 4 cylinders and more mpg suits Accord best. After all these are practical people movers that are easy to drive and economical to maintain. There are more than enough rally cars for the few that race on back roads. For the majority of us its on and off ramps and traffic lights. For that the ride and comfort become more important. Honda seems to understand that.
Look what is wrong with accepting the Accord Coupe for exactly what it is, a very good car, loaded with a lot of toys, equiped with a powerful engine, sold at a rather reasonable price.
I did accept it for what it is. I gave it 4 stars overall, right? It’s not a bad car, it’s just a bit of an odd duck in Honda’s lineup. A jack of all trades and a master of none, if you will. With better handling, it’d be a total killer. Honda has the tech, just wish they’d used it.
Great review. Agree with all those who stated that Honda is trying to be Toyota. I am a Honda fan and have owned two Honda Accords – a 1992 sedan and a 2001 coupe.
Beginning with the launch of the 6th gen. Accord in 1998 (when North American got its own version, vs. the “TSX” in Europe and the JDM), the Accord has become bigger, heavier and softer with each generation, i.e., more like a Camry. My 2001 coupe would groan and creak softly whenever I drive it on some slightly uneven incline, e.g., parking lot ramps, because it was just so big that the steel used was just not stiff enough.
Imagine the outcry if the Civic was made to be more and more like a Corolla.
Yes, appealing to the masses probably produces more sales. I don’t think that the average buyer can tell that the styling, as a whole, seems disjointed.
Furthermore, why must every new Honda or Toyota product borrow cues from BMW and Audi? Japanese cars have proven themselves in the marketplace, so why can’t we get some original styling?
I know, BMW doesn’t have a patent on the “Hofmeister kink,” but the c-pillar on this car is nearly a complete facsimile.
“With a sport-tuned suspension, SH-AWD and a few more toys, the EX-L would blow its competitors into the weeds. As it is, the EX-L is… um… I’m sorry. What were we talking about?”
It would also cannibalize Acura’s sales with that stuff, and would probably be quite a bit more expensive which would again put it squarely into Acura’s territory and turn off buyers looking for a cheaper car. SH-AWD alone would add a few grand to the final cost
f8:
SH-AWD would also add weight. As a result, they should have added the SH-only system from the now defunct, front-wheel driven Honda Prelude.
I think that the Accord Coupe is an excellent car that does enough of the little things properly. I’m the owner of a 2002 Accord Coupe with 127,000 miles, and if I lacked the societal pressure to “upgrade” to an expensive European car, I would definitely buy this new model with V6 and Nav.
Megan, your reference in the checklist to the rattles is telling.
I remember reading someplace that the design process for the ‘03 Accords was to start by redesigning the core of the car to slice out something like 17% of the cost, then putting the cost back in by adding feature content. The resulting Accord and TL both have been widely reported to be more rattle-prone by far than any predecessors. Yours isn’t the first mention of rattles I’ve seen on this new gen, either.
I sat in one of these at a dealership and was startled at the further decline in the look and feel of the materials. The seat leather is fine, granted. But the electroluminescent gauges are gone, and the new ones have cheesy shiny rings around them. The door armrests on both the coupe and the sedan have what look like dollar-toy plastic rocket ships on their facings. In the back, the coupe – even in EX-L trim – has completely padding-free “armrests” molded right into the hard one-piece side panels, just like the lowliest Cavalier.
Given that the new model has even more content (more airbags, ESC, more engine, variable displacement on V6 sedans) and size at nearly the same price, it appears the process continues. I’m gathering this is a competitive response to Camry’s former size advantage. Seems competition doesn’t always improve the breed.
Megan, there is something I do not understand. You complain about the Accord understeering and mention that that is “why God created rear-wheel drive”. Yet during your opening salvo, you mention the Subaru Legacy GT (AWD and a corner pusher) and the TSX (FWD and, again, a corner pusher) as embedding themselves as pratical hooners delights.
that first picture is gorgeous, but then #4 and #5 are awful. that butt is just all wrong and the way the shape of the car sweeps back toward it just looks.. broken. the solara and the current accord coupe have the same problem.
but when you look at the first picture you can almost imagine for a minute you’re seeing a RWD sports coupe. or the new hyundai thingy.
Megan, there is something I do not understand. You complain about the Accord understeering and mention that that is “why God created rear-wheel drive”. Yet during your opening salvo, you mention the Subaru Legacy GT (AWD and a corner pusher) and the TSX (FWD and, again, a corner pusher) as embedding themselves as pratical hooners delights.
It’s a turn of phrase. And if you were to try to throw the Accord around a corner, you’d heartily agree that while the configuration of the LGT and TSX suit those vehicles just fine, the Accord suffers for it. I can’t think of any other car I’ve driven that really made me go, “You know, maybe all those RWD fanatics have a good point.” I personally prefer AWD, but YMMV.
Sorry to echo other poster’s comments, but when will this ridiculous family car arms race end??? My ‘99 Solara has a 190hp V6 and I can’t imagine any empty-nester or family (in Camry form) needing more power in a non-sports car. It gets from 0-60 in 7.0 seconds.
Thankfully, the vast majority of Accords will be sold in 4-cylinder form. However that begs the question WHY are we only getting reviews of the rather overpriced and impractical V6 from all auto publications? This is especially relevant here since, from what I father from the review, the only real shining dynamic point of the car is the engine and transmission (only available w/V6).
After reading the review I was surprised to see four stars instead of three. Anyone else have the same feeling?
Seems like a pretty damn flawed vehicle to me.
keepaustinweird, I believe it should get 5 stars, since it beats all the competitions.
In comparison, I am really surprised that the Lamborghini Gallardo got 5 stars. A ridiculously high mark for a car that can only transport two.
I think it got four stars by comparing it to the rest of the mid-sized (priced) cars. If it is broken down:
Many car buyers use the bible of Consumer Reports to assist in their car shopping. When the cover is splashed with “Toyota has models on the Not Recommended List,” people will probably hesitate and check out the competition before signing the papers. The Camry has also lost some of the mainstream style that it once had, especially when it had the “Baby Lexus” look down.
The Altima fits the price range quite well and seats 5 without too much “Stop Touching Me” in the back seat! It might be a little too hard edged for some buyers and while the interior materials are improved, more work is needed. This continues to be Nissan’s best-seller so Honda should sweat the Altima.
The Mazda6 is due for a redesign next year and is a bit smaller than the others, but the deals should be excellent. Of all of the mid-sized family cars, in these eyes, the 6 is still the best looking one.
GM finally gave us the Malibu, but Healey in the USA Today just thrashed it today (especially the transmission issues and dirt-poor hybrid mileage) in a national newspaper and GM might have to do damage control to sell the cars without too much cash on the hood.
Ford has the decent Fusion – that counts.
Chrysler might as well dump the Sebring into the closest river and forget it.
So, almost by default, the Accord wins. It still has a huge Honda following, reliability, and a decent feeling interior. I’m not alone in saying that I wish Honda would have stopped the insanity with the “each generation gains a few hundred pounds” new models and I cringe even more if Honda makes the next generation even larger!
I live in Honda country where at every intersection in downtown Cincinnati, there are at least several Hondas, but very few new Accords. That surprised me a bit – and I’ve seen far more new Altimas than before.
I think Mazda has a lot to gain as the 2009 6 is very sharp looking, not bloated, and will still cater to those who like to drive…like Honda used to. Honda might have to sweat this one out.
It’s kind of like the Mazda RX-8. From some angles, it looks really, really good. From other angles, you wonder if the designers were talking to each other. That might be OK for a limited-run sports car, but not a mainstream sedan.
I’m glad to see this car reviewed; I will probably replace my current car within the next 12-18 months, and the Accord coupe is on my list. However, I’d like to add my voice to the chorus calling for a review of the four-cylinder automatic model. That’s going to be the most common configuration, and speaking for myself, I think 268 horses and 248 lb-ft are too much in a wrong-wheel drive car. (Surprised there was no mention of torque steer – did they actually manage to tame it?)
I really wish somebody made an affordable RWD coupe that wasn’t a Mustang. I’ve driven a 1992 Thunderbird (V-6, auto, crowding 200K, 30mpg hwy observed) for almost ten years. As Steven Lang mentioned, there are still plenty of solid T-Birds out there, but I don’t think I want another one. Not because I don’t love them – but because I love my old Thunderchicken too much. It wouldn’t feel right to have another one.
But nobody makes such things today. If the Accord coupe was RWD, there’d be no contest – but it’s not.
Where’s the turbodiesel 4 with 300lb ft of torque and 45mpg?
I’m not sure if everyone has read it yet, but TTAC already reviewed the 4-cylinder basic sedan version of the Accord. I picked this one out specifically because while the majority of people are going to get that one, there’s a good-sized enthusiast base that wants to see how this car stacks up, since manual transmission cars are getting fewer and further between. I know it’s hard for some of you to believe, but there are people out there that enjoy driving, and want 250+hp in their family sedans. I didn’t realize the Altima V-6 could be had in a manual, so I’m probably going to be checking that one out shortly.
Torque steer — not a whit of it. Okay, maybe a hair, but Honda tamed it very, very nicely. The Mazdaspeed3 was much, much, MUCH worse.
Try to throw this porker around a corner and you’ll get an abrupt reminder of why God invented rear wheel-drive.
I thought it was Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot who invented RWD. (google him if you don’t know the name, but every car lover should know this name)
Oops! Cugnot’s Fardier a Vapeur was FWD, not RWD.
I’m not an Accord coupe fan (or a Solara buff, either) but I have to admit this new one has a certain gravitas when seen in the metal. It is a pastiche of many others’ styling cliches, but by George, the old girl somehow manages to carry it off. Being a Honda, they will sell a whole bunch of ‘em.
Megan mentions the Coupe’s excessive road noise. Isn’t this a Honda sine-qua-non? I recall a US auto scribe’s long-ago pan of a 70’s Renault or Peugeot, that he had found smooth riding, but noisy. When reminded that it was a very popular car in France, the writer rejoined, “they must be deaf and have super-sensitive derrieres.”
Curious about this statement as I’d say that the Mazdaspeed3 doesn’t have nearly as bad torque steer as you seem to make it out to be, especially considering since the car has a boost limiter in 1st and 2nd gear and has other electronical nannies to prevent it. It was one my primary worries before I got the car, coming from a rev-happy torque-less engine (Integra GS-R) and I was quite shocked as torque steer was surprisingly minimal. Not going to say there is no torque steer cuz there is, but nothing drastic like both hands white-knuckle gripped on the wheel as I slam the pedal to metal, even over uneven surfaces. A gentle grip is enough to quell it.
Johnson Schwanz:
“SH-AWD would also add weight. As a result, they should have added the SH-only system from the now defunct, front-wheel driven Honda Prelude.”
That’d be nice. Would the system do any good for a larger, heavier car such as Accord though? I think Honda could fine-tune the suspension without it as well, they did it for RSX and previous-gen Integras after all
Also, from the review:
“adorned with a small sprinkling of performance cues: … coffee can chromed pipes (huh?) and 18” rims (bow-chicka-bow-wow)”
The same exact exhaust and similar large wheels were available on the previous Accord. They’re nothing new.
I also like how Accord’s 0-60 is “a very respectable 5.9 seconds … won’t light your hair on fire”, while over in the Dodge SRT review 0-60 comes in “5.8 ear-pinning seconds”. Wow, guess it takes just one-tenth of a second to go from boring to ear-pinning excitement
After having read the review of this car in Road and Track, I ordered one at my local dealer. With regard to your review, your comment about the Auto-Eroticism of the dashboard prompts me to paraphrase Freud: A Curvy Dashboard is really only a Curvy Dashboard. I have a 6 speed coupe. After driving away from the dealership, I thought to myself, big mistake. As you describe, big, sloppy, understeering mushbucket. R&T in their review criticised the stock tires. I swapped the Michelin Grand Touring mush donuts for Falken FK452 ZR rated high performance tires. I expected a slight improvement in steering response. What I got was a shock. There was a dramatic improvement in feel and responsiveness. To be sure, the ride did deteriorate, but the virtues of the EXL are now more apparent: very little torque steer which is not true of the Acura TL. The EXL with the new rubber emerges as a very fairly priced near German level sports sedan.