By Michael Karesh
September 24, 2007 -
I remember sitting in a park with my father a quarter-century ago, pointing at a nearby car. “What do you think that is?” “A BMW?” Nope, but his guess was not without reason. The second-generation Accord lifted more than a few design cues from the storied German marque. The 1982 sedan was also notable for its astounding attention to detail, compactness and efficiency. For those “in the know,” the Accord revealed Detroit’s sedans as over-sized, over-powered and indelicate. Now that Honda’s eighth-generation Accord faces a supposedly chastened Detroit, does the new model maintain the mechanical high ground?
The new Honda Accord is 20 inches longer, eight inches wider, four inches taller and 1,000 pounds heavier than the motor my father misidentified. In other words, it’s larger and heavier than the ‘80’s Detroit iron reviled by Honda’s early fans. And yet the Accord has come full circle. After years of increasingly bland styling, the ubiquitous sedan once again begs to be mistaken for a BMW.
Looking at the new Accord from the rear three-quarter perspective, clocking the C-pillar kink and the wrap-around taillights (that continue to the roofline’s down-sweep), it’s a dead ringer for the current BMW 5-Series. From other perspectives, the Honda’s design is less derivative– and less eye-catching. This despite a swage line slicing downwards from the rear and a bit of Bimmeresque flame surfacing. A distinctly un-Honda abundance of front overhang does nothing for the proportions.
Still, overall, mission accomplished. The new Honda Accord looks much more expensive than both its predecessor and its classmates.
Inside, the Accord’s instrument panel sweeps across the cabin like a 5-Series’ dash. Unfortunately, this aesthetic “homage” extends to the Accord’s ergonomics. The new controls are just as complex as any Bimmer’s, with more buttons than a professional seamstress AND a large iDrive-inspired eight-way knob. So much for “We make it simple.”
The Accord’s front seats are well shaped for both comfort and [a modicum of] lateral support, especially when clad with grippy cloth. Thanks to the supersized external dimensions, the enlarged cabin is roomy enough for four Big and Tall preferred customers. The Accord’s rear seat folds in a single section to expand a class-trailing trunk; unusually intrusive rear strut towers defeat the purpose of a 60/40 split.
The 1982 Accord was motivated by a mere 75 horsepower. For years Honda refused to offer a V6 as a matter of principle. Gen 8 Accord buyers can still opt for a four-cylinder engine, with either 177 horses ( LX) or 190hp (EX). That’s plenty of poke for a family runabout, right? Wrong. Pitted against the upsized Accord’s 3,433-pound curb weight (EX-L with autobox), the four pot must rev its little 16-Valve DOHC i-VTEC® heart out to get the job done. The resulting 21/31 EPA ratings aren’t class-leading.
Enter the new 268-horsepower, 3.5-liter V6. Hello cubes, goodbye revs. Needless to say, the extra displacement works wonders in the oomph department, with minimal torque steer. The six may not deliver neck-snapping thrills or sing a lusty song, but it’s a refined piece that engenders mindless merging and perspiration-free passing.
These powerplants deserve better partners. When hooked up to either engine, the still-five-speed automatics didn’t behave well. They occasionally held a gear too long, or refused to downshift, or bumped when going from gear to gear. Maybe the transmissions needed more miles to adapt to my driving style. Maybe not. Fancy manually shifting the recalcitrant slushbox instead? Buy an Acura.
Though the Accord’s steering feels nicely weighted and precise, the suspension is tuned for touring, not sport. Going around curves, the double wishbones deliver most of the solid, tightly damped and thoroughly composed feel of a BMW– without the Bavarian’s sporting edge. Many competitors offer the option of firmer suspension tuning, but Honda doesn’t believe in options. The Accord’s suspension settings are a deft compromise between comfort and control. They are, nevertheless, a compromise. Enthusiasts will not be well satisfied; everyone else will be.
The Accord’s soft-core suspension settings does have its advantages: banishing the bump-thump busyness that sometimes afflicted the previous Accord on patchy pavement. There’s still more road noise than you’ll find in some Accord alteratives, but it’s much less pronounced than in many past Hondas.
The new Honda Accord is an impressive piece of automotive artistry. It’s well-built, roomy, properly-priced and (with the V6) powerful. It raises Honda’s trademark refinement to a new level, with much of the look and some of the feel of a base BMW 5-Series.
But part of the Accord’s appeal used to lie in Honda’s idiosyncratic insistence on engineering cars that followed the “man maximum, machine minimum” philosophy. The new Accord is large and in charge, but in seeking to provide a 5er for the masses Honda has forsaken much of the formula that earned the model its place in American automotive history.
4 / 5 Stars | Honda Accord rating summary and performance review
Subscribe to Newsletter
More Reviews83 Responses to “ Honda Accord Review ”
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 » Show All Reverse Order
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 » Show All Reverse Order
Leave a Reply 
Back to Top
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Digg
del.icio.us
Blinklist
Furl
Netscape
Google
NewsVine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Windows Live
POWERED
September 24th, 2007 at 8:00 am
First-year cars often have first-year issues.
The 2007 Camry is certainly having some. Will the 2008 Accord have them as well?
Through TrueDelta's research, I hope to have some quick results for the new Accord.
If you know someone who buys one, please let them know about this research. Details here: http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
September 24th, 2007 at 8:09 am
Had a chance to see one on a local dealer’s lot and it is a much larger car as mentioned. I expect the Honda faithful will purchase this current version of the Accord as though it was their “civic” duty.
September 24th, 2007 at 8:12 am
You forgot to mention the sticker shock. This is a MUCH less affordable car than anything in the Honda tradition that has gone before.
September 24th, 2007 at 8:25 am
I think it’s fairly attractive car in 2-door form, but the proportions are just plain odd in sedan form. the overhangs are just gigantic. Perhaps to meet pedestrian crash compliance?
I’ve yet to see one in real life, though, so i’ll reserve judgement for that.
It looks like despite have .5L more displacement and 30-odd more horses, the V6 version is slower than the current 244 horsepower V6 - Motor trend tested one against the new V6 Camry and got a 6.5 second 0-60 time (compared to the Camry’s 6.1… how odd that a Camry is the sportier in a comparison test, by the way!)
I wish that Honda had done the same thing they did with the CR-V - rather than growing it up and out and making it heavier, just keep it the same size and refine the design. I just don’t see this car doing will with so many other good choices in the market, which makes me sad! I love the current Accord; perfect size, silky powertrain, simple but beautiful interior. it’s the perfect daily driver. This new one is all huge and complicated and significantly uglier… It just doesn’t seem like an improvement and it certainly doesn’t have as huge of a leg up over competitors like Altima, Camry, Aura et al that the previous generation did.
/rant
September 24th, 2007 at 8:54 am
I must say I don’t quite approve of the new bigness of the Accord - it just seems wrong and against the ethos Honda was built upon. Of course, everybody’s growing their cars, and plenty of people are asking for it, so what do I know?
I think if Honda does offer this in a diesel in the US, it could change the American automotive scene. It’s a good looking enough car, full size sedan, and the diesel is reported to give something on the order of 55 mpg. I know diesel isn’t the solution we’re all looking for, etc, but that would certainly get this new big Accord some attention from yours truly.
September 24th, 2007 at 9:06 am
Two words for Honda: Diesel and Wagon
If they can manage these two in the same breath–without encumbering the buyer with a bunch of unnecessary frou-frou gadgets to help justify a bloated price–I will make my first foray into the brand for my wife’s next car.
Otherwise, the upcoming Jetta tdi wagon is looking might nice, quirks and all.
September 24th, 2007 at 9:14 am
It looks A LOT better in person, from all angles.
I saw it parked in with a row of 2007’s and the additional size is unmistakable. Whereas the current Camry looks smaller than the previous generation, this new Accord is clearly 1/2 size bigger - closer to a Maxima or Avalon. Given the growth in the Civic, which is now about as big as our 2001 Accord, the size of the new car is not surprising. That the trunk didn’t seem to grow in proportion to the rest of the car is odd, however.
I didn’t get a chance to actually sit in the car, but the interior looked more “Honda” than the 2003-2007 version. The new car’s dash is low and away, sweeping across the front of the car making the interior look much more open and airy.
C/D’s intial review of the Accord was by Patrick Bedard, who has always been a big fan of the Accord. His comments echo those above wondering if Honda is loosing its way. I’m anxious to drive it an find out.
September 24th, 2007 at 9:15 am
I wasn’t a huge fan of the pictures, but the car comes across quite stately in person. It has alot of road presence, and not just for it’s size. That being said, this is one big car.
Michael: you said the 21/31 EPA estimates for the four cylinder were not class leading. Are you sure? Are you sure they aren’t equivalent to offerings from the others? Are you comparing 2008 EPA vs 2008 EPA? I actually do think the 21/31 is equivalent to what other mfrs offer currently, in 2008 EPA format.
I’m curious if you drove the 5-speed 4-cyl 190 HP version. It seems like this would be a great all-arounder….but that being said, the engine is basically the same as last year (in terms of part-throttle mid-range response and over-all displacement) while the car is up several hundred pounds.
As an owner of a 2006 Civic SI, i think Honda has begun to move away from their roots. At 29k miles I have alot of build quality issues and, as of this weekend, a very serious A/C issue (water appears to be building up inside of the A/C Drain container…I can hear it sloshing around and occasionally splashing onto the A/C coils with a nice hiss).
The new Accord also embodies this to me. Honda could’ve helped break the mold with this new car and offered something with the same or less overall weight, greater efficiency, more acceleration, more “sportness” (as Audi likes to say), or some combination thereof….
Instead, they followed the now tired and true path. Bigger, heavier, about the same efficiency, maybe a little better acceleration, a little less body roll.
And then they bragged….BRAGGED…about how the new Accord now falls within the ‘Large’ car class. Honda. Bragging about how big they’ve made their car.
Ridiculous.
Joe
September 24th, 2007 at 9:22 am
Excellent review. It (fairly) lauds the Accord’s technical sophistication, and yet criticises the philosophy of building cars that get fatter, blunter and more Germanic in each generation.
September 24th, 2007 at 9:23 am
In reply to
“ash78 :
September 24th, 2007 at 9:06 am
Two words for Honda: Diesel and Wagon”
Honda does offer in other parts of the world an Accord wagon and a 2.2L Diesel. Toyota sells the Fielder, a Camry wagon. Too bad that North Americans have such a small selection of wagons and must choose from SUVS, many of which are merely wagons on stilts.