An accord is, by definition, a compromise. While enthusiasts bemoan the Honda Accord’s increased size and lowered fuel efficiency, in truth, the automaker’s done the right thing. They’ve relentlessly identified and ruthlessly removed every possible reason why a cost-conscious American car buyer wouldn’t sign-up for a four-cylinder Accord. In my responsibility to my readers, I can highlight a couple of places where they’ve missed the bloat, I mean boat. But it ain’t easy…
Style isn’t one of them. Unlike previous Accords or the current Civic, the newish Accord is solid without being stolid. The four-door achieves this gravitas via a blatant pastiche/rip-off of the Mercedes E-Class and BMW 3-Series sedans. From the Accord’s indented, downwards sloping side swage line, to its wide stance and beefy proportions, it’s quietly— though defiantly— not Japanese. Richtig?
More to the point, the Accord doesn’t look like an economy car. In fact, closing a door is an exercise in cognitive dissonance; everything about the Accord’s exterior leads you to expect a basso profundo Germanic thunk. All of which means that car buyers seeking to protect– or elevate– their position on the status-related automotive food chain can buy the Accord without the slightest tinge of badge-related remorse.
Once inside, the base model’s front seats serve the only reminder that you won’t be spending big bucks down at Fritz’ House of Pain. The LX’s lateral support-challenged, cloth-covered chairs are like a tiny stone in a pair of Cole Haan loafers; the proximity to perfection calls attention to itself. Meanwhile, the Accord’s newly enlarged rear accommodation– and attendant trunk space– is now that of a full-size sedan, for the cost of a couple of mpgs. You tell me: why not?
Because the AC is no longer powerful enough to cool the cavernous cabin quickly and efficiently? Anyway, although the Accord’s plastic fantastic controls and bin lids don’t respond with oil-dampened precision, the interior still manages to feel minimalist rather than miserly. Honda’s allocated resources where it counts. The large, silver-rimmed gauges are a study in muted elegance and ergonomic clarity. Soft touch polymers form the dash and the much-appreciated digital display rabbit hutch. But most importantly of all, the steering wheel.
This writer has long argued that the steering wheel is a car’s single most important design element; it’s the one control that puts you in uninterrupted contact with the machine. The Accord’s wheel is perfection. I’m not speaking of the cheap-feeling radio and cruise control buttons. Nor am I impressed with the helm’s faux aluminum TIE fighter insert. It’s a simple matter of size, diameter and feel. The Accord’s steering wheel instantly and constantly signals this is a car for driving, not mindless wafting.
And here’s where things get a little strange…
The last time I drove a base Accord, the over-boosted steering was as sharp as a crack dealer’s lawyer and twice as annoying. Turn the wheel too quickly and you’d have to turn the wheel too quickly again, guesstimating the car’s immediate and eventual direction. A single ill-timed sneeze could send the sedan into another lane. I found it difficult to believe that Honda would cater to American drivers— long known for their predilection for slow-acting Novocain steering— with a car that required so much vigilance.
Sorted. Not since BMW surrendered its best helm feel props to Porsche in pursuit of [realized] mass appeal has a mainstream motor provided such a wonderfully direct and satisfying steer. I don’t know whether it’s down to a software upgrade for the Variable Gear Ratio (VGR) Power-Assisted Rack-and-Pinion system, or the Dunlop Sport 7000 rubber. But what was a chink in the Accord’s armor has become a major selling point.
Mind you, the LX is no sports sedan. There is neither the power underfoot nor the chassis control needed for genuine hustling. The Accord’s 177 horsepower four-banger is willing enough— save an accelerative dead zone around 35mph— and the chassis is appropriately safety (i.e. understeer) biased. So let’s call it precision wafting. Yes but–
The Accord’s ride quality sucks. As the American-built whip has a double wishbone suspension up front and a multi-link deal out back, I blame the aforementioned cheap ass all-weather shoes for the fact that you feel every bump; whose suppression causes a low frequency concussion throughout the cabin. When I hit a rough stretch of road, I could almost hear David Byrne telling me it’s fa-fa-fa-fa-fa, fa-fa-fa-fa-fa better to run, run away.
How long before Honda addresses this econobox issue and eliminates yet another customer “objection?” Keyboards may already be clicking. Never mind. I doubt the broken pavement spinal assault is a deal breaker for the vast majority of Accord loyalists or defecting intenders. (Clever salesmen will know which roads to avoid.) There are simply too many reasons NOT to not buy it: style, safety, comfort, economy, reliability, depreciation, price, etc. And now one compelling reason why you should.
101 Comments on “Take Two: 2009 Honda Accord LX Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
In person, I think the Accord looks better than than the E-class or 3-series.
Thank you, Robert, for this review.
We tested an Accord (four-cylinder EX version) and a Camry SE (again, four cylinders) when we dumped our MB C320 a year ago. I too was surprised by the suspension on the Accord; the Camry SE was actually the better-handling of the two.
Is there an “American” car that comes close, in your view? Fusion? Malibu? (Full disclosure: We passed on test drives of both when we were in “search mode”; we’ve never forgiven Ford and GM their travesties of the mid-to-late ’80s.)
It has still become too large and overweight.
The spiritual successor to early Accords is the euro Accord (TSX) with cloth, manual transmission and a common rail diesel engine.
The Accord should be 1) economical 2) economical for something that seats 4 reasonably comfortably and 3) slightly fun due to quick and accurate steering
The version reviewed is less economical with numbed steering… not a good direction to take the brand.
One is reminded of press releases from a few years ago…there are now three distinct Accords loose in the world. One each tailored for the Japanese domestic, European and North American markets.
North America consumers seem to have spoken, and we are getting the cars we deserve. (Sigh)
I do agree that the new Accord is very stylish in the flesh, but I mourn the bloat and up-sizing.
If I were in the market for a new entry level full sized sedan I would purchase an Accord over anything else. The Camry (dare I say) seems to have a bit more style though…
Ryan
Honda has given lots of people a very big reason not to buy the Accord — it’s very big. Maybe most Americans associate bigger with better, but not everyone wants the largest car they can afford. What happened to the days when Honda made cars that actually made sense?
I see they still haven’t sorted out the ride from the previous generation. I had a 2004 V6 sedan model and most reviews, including the smooth ride loving Consumer Reports, said it rode well but I thought it rode rather tightly. It wasn’t obnoxiously bad or uncontrolled, I just expected it to be a little softer relative to its intended audience.
Mine was also riddled with problems. All four rotors and brake pads had to be replaced at 1,400 miles, they were an issue from day one. (yup 1,400) It would not start one morning, a trim piece needed to be replaced, the airbag light came on. The leather was cracking and looked bad at only 12,000 miles.
Obviously it did not scar me that much because I replaced it with a manual 2006 Acura TSX. The Acura has been great so far, although like the Accord, the brakes are barely acceptable for the weight of the vehicle. I know Honda likes to keep unsprung weight down but they need to do something about their brakes. The worst part though was seeing your car everywhere you went.
Why are you guys so obsessed with the increased size? The Accord is not a “driver’s car.” Maybe it was before, but it’s not now.
That said, as I said, the steering is sublime. So it’s a bit of a driver’s non-driver’s car. At slow speeds. And not around corners, at speed.
Besides, the average American enjoys interior space. Space = comfort. The mpg loss is no biggie (although it couldn’t have been timed any worse), as the Accord could now be called a full-size sedan.
The Civic can fill the abandoned slot, with the Fit taking the Civic’s place. Makes sense to me.
Because the AC is no longer powerful enough to cool the cavernous cabin quickly and efficiently?
It never was.
I think that upsizing it made sense. The Fit, while technically a subcompact, has as much space as the average compact, and so they made the Civic larger to the point where it could take family car duties. Given that, it makes sense to push the Accord into large car territory, where it can compete with the Impala and the like.
Edit: Dammit, RF beat me to the point.
I don’t understand. The review gave quite a bashing, yet the Accord received four stars?
I test drove the previous generation sedan in the EX-L V6 trim and was very surprised at the rough ride. I found the EX-L 4 cyl. coupe to be much better. I didn’t buy either one, though.
plunk10 :
Suspension issues. That’s it.
And if you think that’s quite a bashing, I can only conclude you haven’t read too many of my less positive reviews…
There are simply too many reasons NOT to not buy it
The double negatory? Really? You must have really liked this car.
I can think of a reason….the 4cyl is a DOG.
I tried the coupe auto 4cyl. With the air on the thing is slow. And it feels like its struggling. I tried a sedan with a stick, really no better. It reminded me of a Civic. I thought it’d be peppier than that Civic, but I guess the bigger motor with more power is offset by the fat curb weight on this thing.
Then to get a manual V6 coupe you gotta get the top line EX-L, for about 30 large.
I grew up in a 91 Honda Accord sedan with a stick. One of my all-time favorite cars. It was comfy, fun, zippy, got great mileage and actually felt special. This new one I walked away very very disappointed.
To me, Honda blew it on this car. I was actually saddened as those fond memories are no longer found in their current product.
Then again, the new Civic isn’t as much fun as the mid 90’s car. The RSX, while a better car, was never as much fun as the old Integra. The RL has never been as amazing as the Legend.
My wife’s ‘07 4 cyl Accord has more squeaks and rattles than my 2000 Crown Vic. It has far too much road noise at speed. The radio controls are not intuitive.
However, last month, in my seventh decade, I drove 600 miles of interstate, secondary and urban, got out, had dinner, got in and drove some more, left the car for the night feeling totally refreshed, and drove some more the next day.
And this was with arthritic lumbars, arthritic cervicals, and arthritic wrists.
I cannot figure out why. It must be that perfect steering wheel. Or maybe the perfect accelerator pedal. Or maybe the perfect tracking. Or maybe the perfect seat. Or maybe the perfect placement of mirrors. Or maybe it’s because the high and low beams are perfect, and the wipers work perfectly.
If my CV ever packs it in, I’ll buy an Accord for myself.
Another new wave reference? That’s 3 in 2 days! Psycho Killer is one of my all-time favorites.
I drove one of these some time ago and the new Mazda6 just last week (full review on the way). Now I need to drive them back to back, with an Altima thrown into the mix.
Until I do, my general sense is that the Altima is the softest of the three, but gets some points for feeling more agile–it’s smaller size pays off here. Meanwhile, the Accord has a tight, solid Germanic feel to it, while the Mazda has a lighter, more delicate feel, as Mazdas have tended to have. Both handle well for sedans of their size. The Mazda doesn’t ride any more smoothly than the Accord–both suspensions are biased towards handling.
On the reliability front, owners of the 2008 Accord have been excellent participation in TrueDelta’s research. While a few owners of the V6 have complained about an annoying resonance, probably a byproduct of the VCM, and at least one car was bought back as a result, overall 2008 Accord owners have reported few repairs.
http://www.truedelta.com/latest_results.php
Out here in left field, the thing that leaps out to me about the Accord is you can still get a proper manual transmission. Sure, you can’t get one with the V6, but with every four banger you can.
I wonder if this is another “issue” Honda will address.
The Accord is so well rounded, does so many things well that it is really impossible to ignore in the segment. If you need transportation that looks decent, drives reasonably well and can haul a family and serve as an efficient commuter, I just dont know that there is anything better. The two main ingredients that make the Accord great as a family hauler/commuter are mpgs and interior volume.
Certainly there are cars that handle better, that are more desirable, better looking inside and out, or even cost less. The Accord is simply a great combination of what people are looking for in a car even though it excels at nothing, it is far more than adequete in every department. Great recipe for sales success.
It is a shame Honda has chosen to cut costs in the interior. I think I prefered the previous Accord interior. Also, the exterior styling is decidedly anonamous in my opinion.
Call me a slow-to-the-party Accord loyalist. When the 2003 came out I hated it. Now I’m warmed to that model enough to consider replacing my 2000 with one of that style. But looking at the 2008, I’d much rather buy used to get the old look. I’m sure a few years from now I’ll like the new look, but not being a fan of the “german” style I’m not so sure yet.
As for the suspension, after about 140k in my 2000 model I put all new suspension, wheels/tires and brakes in mine. Lowered it about 1/2 to 1″ all around, wider low profile tires and bigger brakes, stiffer suspension.
Granted, I’m not racing Mustangs at stoplights, but dare I say it can out handle cars that cost twice what my Accord cost new for under $3k investment. And with a powertrain that can easily go another 100k why would I waste my money on a new and much more expensive car. Also, it’s super cheap to insure, not valuable enough to sweat a minor door ding or scratch, and still does over 30mpg on the highway.
Robert Farago said: Why are you guys so obsessed with the increased size? The Accord is not a “driver’s car.” Maybe it was before, but it’s not now.
“Driver’s car” or not, some of us think that there are enough large vehicles on our roads already. When a car that for years was one of the smaller family sedans available gets ever bigger (not that the word “bigger” even does its ridiculous growth justice) with every iteration, it strikes a nerve with some of us.
RF
You didn’t really mention two things that I always look for in a 4 cyl…the engine noise at take off or the noise (both wind and engine) at cruising speeds…unless I missed it.
And I am not really happy to hear about the feel of the bumps because that’s why we buy these larger family cars.
And that’s why Honda has slowly made this car larger.
We want to at least feel (pretend) we have class but in a value sort of way, and buyers equate quiet with quality.
I was very disappointed in the new Mazda6 4 just because of the feeling it might be underpowered.
It may or may not be, but the whine would eventually grow tiresome.
I realize I’m in the vast minority, as is usually the case, but I think the outside appearance of the new Accord is just awful. It only looks good in comparison to the new(ish) Camry. Or a Pontiac Aztek (but at least the Aztek has that Train Wreck “I can’t look away” styling). I agree that it looks, from the rear, somewhat similar to some newish Mercedes…but I consider that to be part of the problem.
Having not driven one, I can’t comment on anything else. I’ve owned a couple Honda products, and aside from a few horrific mechanical failures, I have very few complaints about them. My Integra was a wonderful ride.
It does seem awfully bloated, then again…the Civic is starting to loosen the belt too. I get that Altima/Maxima feeling. The Maxima must get bigger to stay in a different segment than the Altima.
I believe to truly appreciate the Accord it must be sampled in EX trim. The few extras over the LX make a hell of a difference. Equiped with the 17″ wheels and tires the EX handles much better than the LX which feels like it is overwhelming its 16″ A/S tires.
I just did a 1500 mile drive in a 4 cyl. EX-L Nav and must admit that I am very impressed by the Accord. When not at the wheel I explored and fondled the entire interior and could not find a single piece of cheap plastic. The seat leather was soft and comfortable, the faux leather door inserts looked and felt great. The much criticized center console was very easy to understand and the mini-manual was a quick, easy read. The Nav and sound system was top notch. I found the power driver’s seat and adjustable sterring wheel to provide the perfect postion.
The 190hp engine actually felt like a 190hp engine even though I never revved it past 5500 rpms! Whatever Honda is doing with its Vtec technology they are doing it right! Between the Vtec and the transmission the power was always on hand. Now if Honda would stop fooling around and give us a 6spd auto the drivetrain in the Accord would be perfect!
At a rest stop in North Carolina we parked between a BMW 5 series and a Toyota Avalon. Looking at all three cars the concept behind the Accord’s styling became crystal clear, it is a nice blend between the 5series and Avalon. It appears that Honda managed to combine the proportions of the Avalon with the styling ques of a Bangle BMW and it works very well! The burgandy and tan color scheme was also nice.
For an out the door price of less than $29,000 the Accord EX-L NAV is a bargin and is unbeatable in its class. It is large on the inside, it looks classy, it is decently powerful, it handles well, it is feature rich, get good (not excellent) mileage, and is very comfortable. You really cant ask for more in a basic family car.
Tested the one with the 190-HP four cylinder. They didn’t have it with a manual transmission, but supposedly one is available. My head said, buy this car. My heart said, buy the CivicSI.
Vorenus
I told a car saleperson the other day how sorry I felt for them.
The auto sales world is the most competitive I have ever seen.
Test driving cars a lot, I actually have become amazed at how wonderful and competitive they all are.
This is a tough damn business.
And Honda sees this.
They see their #1 competitor in Toyota beating them, and always getting larger.
They see that nobody buys the Mazda6 because of its smaller rear seating.
So, they make the Accord keep up with the Camry.
Build the Civic to be the new old Accord.
And bring in the Fit to be the new old Civic.
This is called evolution in the auto jungle.
If you don’t evolve, you become extinct.
ppelico, I see what you’re saying, but where does it end? Do we need a 210″ long Accord next? How much room do people need to be comfortable?
Finally after years looking at the old Honda Accord.
I think it’s a classic look with a twist of retro.
We love our ‘08 EX-L. The ride seemed stiff during the test drive but no complaints since purchase… you feel the road but not harshly. The V6 is a very nice example of the genre, delivering smooth power without much fuss. It has a lot more room than our old ‘02 V6 coupe, weighs only 300lbs more, has ~70 more horsepower, and delivers almost the exact same mileage. Resale will hold up and so will the car. I’d buy it again tomorrow and I recommend the platform to everyone I can.
RF,
I think making the Accord larger will turn out to be the right call by Honda. At the same time, you must realize that your readers are all bemoaning the bloating of the American car. It’s a knee jerk reaction, and it will happen as long as every model gets heavier every year.
Perhaps moving everything up while sliding in a new compact works out okay, but I do wonder what the Germans will do in another 6 or 7 years?
I suppose that BMW and Audi can use decimals – “Introducing the BMW .5″, but Mercedes is in a real jam.
Vorenus
Its not Honda…its the American buyer.
Even Mazda did something to address the taste (and size) of the American family (butt).
They built 2 Mazda6…one for Europe and their love for all things small (and hard) and one for the US market.
They are completely different cars.
We love larger cars.
We love open road, long distant drives.
We love our fast food, 2000 calorier Whopper!!!.
There’s not much wrong with the Accord except:
1) Bland, derivative styling;
2) Big bloated size;
3) Button-crazy dash;
4) Gimmicky and power-robbing VCM that manages no better fuel economy than its non-VCM competitors (V6).
5) No stick with the V6.
6) It gets out-handled by a Camry.
The press fawn over this thing out of habbit, but I ‘aint buying (literally and figuratively). That isn’t some finely-woven cloth folks, the emporor is nekkid.
blatant pastiche/rip-off of the Mercedes E-Class and BMW 3-Series sedans
hmmm – first time I saw one I thought “VW Passat meets Saturn”
I must be in the minority then; I don’t want to feel like I’m driving a 3300 lb isolation chamber lined with pillows.
I don’t think that comfort necessitates hugeness or complete isolation from the road, but I guess that the American consumer equates both with comfort. *sigh*
cmus, you are not alone. Its the uglist of all the midsizers except maybe the Galant. The inside is ugly as hell as well. No matter how much quality goes into a car it wont matter if I cant stand looking at it inside and out. All of Honda interiors are ugly these days as well as the exteriors (ridgeline,Pilot).
Jerome10 “I grew up in a 91 Honda Accord sedan with a stick. One of my all-time favorite cars. It was comfy, fun, zippy, got great mileage and actually felt special.”
I had a 91 EX with automatic and I miss it dearly. That car was head and shoulders above every other midsize offering then. I wish I had a new 91 now.
Vorenus
Maybe the problem is the misconception that quiet means disconnect.
You should be able to do both.
The feel comes through the steering wheel.
A great driver’s car lets the driver connect to the road through the feel…not the noise.
Again, this is not for everybody.
But people like me, people who spend halves of days on long drives…sound is very, very important.
But I still would like to be part of the drive.
My last drive was in a 2008 Murano.
Drove nicely…but the breaks!
Every time I touched them, I scared the hell out of the family.
And the CVT…God, I thought I was flying.
The constand drone of the belt.
It wound down as we slowed…it sounded like a small plane taking of as we accelerated.
Sound IS important.
Yes, just as much as feel.
Robert:
“When I hit a rough stretch of road, I could almost hear David Byrne telling me it’s fa-fa-fa-fa-fa, fa-fa-fa-fa-fa better to run, run away.”
I think you’re referring to Richard Butler and the Psychedelic Furs with Run and Run, from Forever Now.
Or not.
Either way, in the great Accord/Camry/Altima wars, I always tell folks to go Accord. I think it’s the best car of the bunch. The Camry is more of an appliance, and the Altima has always felt cheap to me.
Every time I see one on the road I have to really look to tell it apart from a new Sebring, especially from the side, I can’t tell which is which.
Too bad to hear about the ride quality. I haven’t found Hondas to be very comfortable cars – they tend to have good handling and tight suspensions, which is good if you have sporting pretensions, but I think most drivers in this category are looking for a comfortable, quiet cruiser that they can stick a kid or two in on the way to Grandma’s house.
Also, I personally find the styling on this new Accord to be very awkward. In person, the headlight kind of sticks out from the side like a wart, and the whole thing just doesn’t mesh to me. Then again, this is coming from a guy who is slowly coming to almost appreciate the Focus’ styling, so my opinion likely counts for very little.
When my neighbor got a white Accord, I got so pissed and jealous because he interior seemed so much more airy and spacious than my Camry, as well as a better looking dash. As well as the more powerful engine.
But it’s also much more expensive than its main competitor, which I think is really important. Dealer prices, not MRSP, are consistently 3k more than a comparably equipped Camry.
But since the Accord is closer to the Avalon’s size than the Camry’s, I guess the higher price doesn’t sting as much.
Zarba: I’m with Agitated and Robert, that’s Psycho Killer!
Those ‘91 Accords some are so in love with? They had bland, plasticky, cheap interiors. They held up to scratches and dents well, but the single (ugly) color scheme from door to door and the lack of form killed it for me.
After reading this review I was thinking: “Man! I gotta drive this car!” But then reality hits, it’s not a driver’s car. It’s an Accord fer crissakes! There’s like a half million added to the roads every year, what could be so special about that?
And that, right there, my friends is what is missing in every GM, Ford, and Chrysler product.
ppellico,
There was no 2008 Murano. 2009?
From your impressions, I don’t think you’ll be happy with any four. I personally found the four in the Mazda6 to be more refined than most, but a four always sounds like a four.
The whole ride dynamic is interesting. In a family sedan I’d go softer. I’m not trying to out corner a Lotus afterall. With roads so bad it has changed the dynamic for me. I love my 06 Miata but commuting highway & City 50+ miles a day the roads take their toll – Couldn’t imagine that in a Lotus or Honda 2000. True my car is designed not for highway driving. My partners’ Forester (03) has a better ride though can’t corner as well — But that’s fine.
In the midsize family sedan world I’d look for the best ride without going the Crown Vic route. Passet? Lexus?
That said, There is something amost erotic about driving on a highway like the Taconic, Route 8 or something like that back east or highway 101 on the coast. Low to the ground, seeing how fast I can corner, keeping the Revs up. Fabulous in My TR, Miata and I can only imagine that in a Lotus
whatdoiknow1 :
For an out the door price of less than $29,000 the Accord EX-L NAV is a bargin and is unbeatable in its class. It is large on the inside, it looks classy, it is decently powerful, it handles well, it is feature rich, get good (not excellent) mileage, and is very comfortable. You really cant ask for more in a basic family car.
It is fine car – but let me make my case for the new Mazda 6. Yesterday, after months of shopping, my mother and I finally picked up her new 6s with every option (including navi) – one of the first to get off the truck in South Florida (literally – we watched it get unloaded). The joystick based nav in the Accord killed the car for her and made everything else a moot point, but I noticed a couple of other things:
They both (and we were looking at the Accord EX-L V6) handle pretty well for such large cars – far better than the Camry. The Mazda is actually quieter at 80 MPH than the Accord. Markedly so. The 6 speed automatic (with manual shift function) in the 6s isn’t bad for those of us who miss our old manuals but still have to slog through traffic – it held gears nicely in the only twisty road in Palm Beach County. The 2 tone interior (black carpet and panel accents with beige seating) looks much more distinctive than the Accord interior and is practical, too. The touch screen nav/stereo (far easier to use than the Accord) also supports Bluetooth AD2P, so besides phone calls, she can stream music and podcasts from any of the plethora of HTC devices our family owns.
I also think the back seat doesn’t “cheap out”. Am I the only person who’s noticed the budget accommodations in the rear seat trim of the new Accord, especially the door panels? The space is VERY nice, though – but the 6 just about matches it there (I’m 6′5″, 250, and I fit nicely in the rear of both even with the front seats adjusted all the way back).
And her fully loaded 6s, leather, nav, Bose, sunroof, etc. – with a fairly zippy V6 (not a 4), $29k plus tax.
She generally keeps her cars for 10+ years or so, so the depreciation difference won’t matter much. We’ve owned lots of Hondas and Mazdas – based on those, I don’t think either sucks in the reliability department.
I think Mazda has really put out a competitive car in this segment, with no excuses about being undersized this time.
From the Accord’s indented, downwards sloping side swage line…..
And at the bottom of the car, you get a styling defect best characterized as a bilge keel – copied from BMW and (maybe) Audi. I positively hate that lower sharp crease, but like some of the cars that have this defect. Oh, well, if I’m driving it, I’m not looking at it.
I’m not wild about the exterior either – the back really reminds me of a Sonata, and it seems oddly-proportioned from the side. The coupe’s front’s pretty decent, but the back end is nasty.
My overall favorite Accord, cosmetically, is still the 6th gen (98-02) coupe, of which I own an example.
My wife has a 2001 Civic which she’s quite happy with, and has been very reliable. Always hard to find in a crowded parking lot amidst a sea of other silver Civics, but that’s another story.
The recent addition of a baby seat in the back has rendered the front passenger seat useless. Now she wants a second rugrat, which would mean no room for other passengers (i.e.: me) at all. It would also necessitate a double stroller, which surely won’t fit in the trunk.
My wife isn’t an enthusiast as I am, but she’s not keen on replacing her Civic with a minivan. I haven’t sat in a 2007 Accord, but figured that they would still be too small. The larger 2008 Accord sounds promising. I’ve heard that they’re bringing a diesel-powered wagon version to North America for 2009. Even better! Hope it’s available with a manual trans.
I think the new Accord, especially in sedan form, is horrifyingly ugly. It’s not quite as ugly as the BMW 5-series it so slavishly apes, but its detailing makes my teeth ache. Worst feature is the “slashed” tail lamps, which have the bizarre effect of making the tail of this bloated and massive car look vaguely fragile, rather than solid.
The problem with the size: a lot of people who like big-ass American cars don’t think of the Accord in that sense. I had a hell of a time earlier this year trying to explain to my friend — looking to buy a new car to replace her mother’s Impala — that the Accord was now bigger than most of the Buicks her mom had owned in the 80s and 90s. I showed her the specs side by side, but she dismissed it as, “well, the Accord is one of those little imports, and she doesn’t want that.” Meanwhile, those of us who don’t say “super-size me” reflexively look at it with disdain.
I am left feeling that if I wanted a sedan that was a little bigger than the current Mazda3/Civic class, but not a boat, I would be SOL in the current market.