The 2.2 liter VTEC engine is fast! I like the roomy interior with all the luxurious amenities like leather seats, rear reading lights, wood trim and a 6-speaker audio system with a 6-disc CD player.

Well, unlike other cars in its class (with the same price range), the Honda Accord does not offer V6 power, climate control, and standard fog lamps. The service, by the way, is terrible. This particular car met an accident once. The car spent 6 months in the showroom just to be fixed! This, even if there was not much damage. Even if the damage was at the front, the Honda and VTEC emblems in the rear were stolen! Furthermore, the paint finish deteriorated as it was parked under the sun for so long. One more thing, the rear wheels (maybe because of its age) now sounds like its wobbling. Sitting in the rear seat, it's a bit noisy.

I still recommend the Honda Accord because of its high resale value. Also, even with its age, the car has a nice shape comparing it with its newer peers. I still consider this as a luxurious executive sedan.

Similar Products Used:

Nissan Cefiro (Infiniti I30), Toyota Camry, Mitsubishi Galant and Opel Vectra.

Accord is a much better engineer car. The Accord has much better electrical system. The Accord breaks down less often and is cheaper (and easier) to repair if there is actually a problem. As an engineer, I can tell you that the Accord is definitely designed by detailed engineers. My next car is definitely a Honda Accord, NOT a Camry.

Name recognition is still weak among Toyota fanatics.

I have both the Camry and the Accord, same year, similar mileage. My wife and I switch the car from time to time so the load between the two cars are quite similar. Both of them are regular 4 cylinder (not V6). I paid $18000 for my Accord LX and have not had any major maintenance issues. I paid $22000 for my Camry LE and have had major major MAJOR maintenance issues. The repair for Toyota seems a lot more expensive too. I hate the Camry. I am never going to buy it. My next car is definitely a Honda Accord.

Similar Products Used:

Toyota Camry is an inferior car.

Very sound proof, drives smooth, seats are Comfortable. The climate control is real nice. Looks sharp with the tail too!

Sound system is bad! NO bass! No mute botton on the stering wheel, which was great when talking on the cell! The interior lights, BAD, no map light? How do I dail my cell phone in the dark? Sunroof, with it open fully there is about 4" of sun roof! You should at least have close to a foot! The Mirrors are lame, cheap looking, my Mitsubishi was much nicer! The overdrive is called D2, there is no botton so if you hold your hand on the shifter as I do sometimes it slips into regular drive, very lame design!
Why not a botton like everyone else?

You get what you pay for, $22,900 as apposed to $37,000 for
the MIT... I guess I'll give this one to the wife and get me something FAT! It's not bad for the money, I see nothing
better! Maybe a 6cyl Galant! Only thing, the Honda looks better! -Charles

Similar Products Used:

Mitsubishi DIA. which was $37,000 totally different price range! I've had a Galant 4cyl. which was nice!

acceleration, reliability, roominess

automatic transmission is the worst in the business for shift quality. At least it should be reliable!

Paid 23,500 for it last year when they were scarce... DOH! OH well. Still love it. Been on four 1000+ road trips and the car is a great tourer. Have gotten 32mpg on the highway with the V6.. not bad! The one big gripe... GIVE ME A 5spd V6 HONDA!! Yes, you will sell them. Looked at everything in it's class and this was still the cheapest despite the slim discounting at the time. The V6 is a MUST in this car. You get 50hp and lose 2mpg at the most. Test drove the 4 cyl... they are very loud and irritating during acceleration by comparison.

Similar Products Used:

'92, '95, '98 Civics

Upscale interior looks/feel, reliability, occasional passerby head-turning for its (gulp) looks, pretty quick acceleration if pressed hard with occasional tire screeching

Are they kidding me? Did I really pay almost 30 grand for a loaded Honda with ground effects and rear wing? What are you getting for that money? I think I made a mistake...

Sure, sure, I can read hundreds of reviews about this car...and I bought it based on the reliability of my 94 Coupe (which wasnt that hot to look at either)..but, my heart was set on a Camaro Z28 or Firebird Trans Am, and I couldnt get one because GM was on strike back then. So, I ordered my 99 Accord EX V6 in San Marino Red based on preliminary reports on the car, early sketches in car magazines which made the car look really aggressive and sleek...the car was ordered loaded for nearly $28k up here in New York, and that included the rear wing, under body spoiler kits, fog lamps and little trimmings like a cassette player and stainless steeled tail pipes. Since having it and feeling ripped off by Honda and my dealer, the car does not get the kind of "visual respect" I was hoping to get in the Camaro or Trans Am...people still cut me off, tailgate me, race up to me at red lights to beat me off the line and all sorts of stupid situations...the car looks really good when Im done detailing it in my driveway, and I do get alot of compliments certain times because of all the extra looks the body kit gives it, at red lights, getting in and out at a parking lot, etc..but I was hoping for something more out of all the cash I paid for this. And the 200-horse VTEC V6? Where is the power? Dont get me wrong...I have stomped on the gas pedal and took off like a banshee with the front tires spinning madly to blow the doors off some shmuck in a Maxima or Volkswaggen Golf who wants to cut me off or something like that...and I have won lots of off-the-line races, but there are times this car hesitates to accelerate...it downright sucks sometimes. It DOES NOT by any means feel like a 200-horsepower car, at all. The car is not worth the money, period. I would give this thing back in a heartbeat to buy a 300-horsepower Camaro or Firebird...for less money!! Does Honda understand tha value/price relationship? What are you getting for almost 29/30 grand? Reliability? The factory body kit was a rip off, it looks nothing like the ground effects they drop on a GM sports car...nothing. I dont know what I was thinking buying another Honda. And I dont understand this fascination with kids and their Civics...those cars are so ugly and slow to begin with....why soup those things up? How can you compare a GM F-Body with an Accord? The main selling point for someone in my age bracket (26) is looks...this car has nothing that would make a person in the car in the next lane stop and give the Honda driver respect of any kind...nothing. General Motors sports cars like Camaros and Firebirds DO demand respect on the road...thats the difference. Other wise, whats the point of paying all that money? If you are not getting looks, what are you paying for, as a younger buyer? Why not buy the Accord Sedan? Cant wait for this thing to start having problems so I can buy my Mustang, Camaro or Firebird.

Who to recommend this vehicle to? Who should buy it, who shouldn't? If you are looking for a luxerious interior with an exterior that will not stop people in the street to look, this is for you. Its for wanna-be sports car drivers, those caught in the yuppie-generation who find cars like this and the similar Toyota Solara "fun and fast"....thats a complete joke. Try a muscle car and tell me what's fun and fast.....

Similar Products Used:

1994 Accord EX Coupe, 1991 Nissan 240SX

Honda reliability

4cyl. engine, no manual with V6
Styling- Japanese must be VERY boring people
automatic transmision
Seats are sooo uncomfortable

$27,000 Canadian, '99 LX sedan, 4cyl w/auto trans


Sure this car will never break, but the styling is horrible, it's the same cookie-cutter Japanese.
4cyl and, automatic should not be put together. Engine not strong enough (two lane highway taffic passing can be a bit hairy) and the automatic does not know what it is doing. Downshifts are very sluggish. Another bad part is the seats. OUCH!! Fronts are too flat and wide. Seats in the old Civic much better. Back seats are reclined so much, that to look out the windshield you need to lean forward. After an hour back there you prey for a chiroprator.

Similar Products Used:

'92 Honda Civic Sedan
'92 Mercury Tracer-YUCK!!!

None really. Since I bought the car in Dec of 1999, it has been in service 6 times! True it has a great engine, but to chessy still for me, need more HP! Over rated Japanesse car.

Bad Transmission, at 24K it hit high Rpm before shifting, being a woman I tought that was normal untill I rided in my co-worker 2001 Taurus SES, that car was beauitful, great power on the highway a big change from 1999 and before! Also the Accord has a poor safty structure and to me safty is my concern with 2 kids. The Taurus has a state of the art safty design which surpasses any Japanesse car. It also handle badly in the rain.

At the time of purcahse the Accord caught my eye, because of the looks and what people would say about Honda. I have read the new reviews about the 2000 and 2001 Taurus which have a higher rating than the Accord, the car has changed dramaticaly since the bettle eye look in the late 90's. Iam very upset with Honda thinking that I was spending my money wisely, but what iam thinking about doing is tradeing in my 2000 Accord for a 2001 Taurus SES, you sure get alot more, and the thought of your money staying in America!

Similar Products Used:

1992 Ford Taurus- It was a nice car, I had no compliants. It got me where I needed to go. In November of 1999 it was totaled in a ugly head on accident with a semi, at the time I had my kids. None of us where hurt! The Taurus's crumple zones is what took most of the impact! The reason why I did not buy an other Taurus was because of the stlye change in the 1996-99 years which I must admit was ugly!

Very reliable.
Excellent gas mileage (4 cylinder).
Fine acceleration.
Precise handling.

Seatbacks not adjustable.
Some minor maintenance annoyances (e.g., changing front headlamp, heater control dial broke prematurely).
Cruise control not real precise.

Vehicle was purchased brand new for around $16,000 in late 1995. Aside from some damage done due to the poor driving habits of its owner (and his family, I might add), the only maintenance has been a new battery and a new headlamp bulb in late 1999. The passenger side lamp needs removal of the windshield fluid tank, a real design faux pas. Fortunately, my local dealer performed the service free of charge (it pays to patronize one garage!). The car accelerates like many 6 cylinders, handles well, gets terrific mileage, and runs like a top. Braking is always well controlled. The cruise control sometimes varies by as much as 5 MPH +/- in hilly terrain. This may not be that unusual, but I compare it to a 1994 Nissan Qust, which is much better controlled in this feature. The seatbacks also only have 1 position; again, not as versatile as my Quest. I have no problem getting comfortable, however.
Otherwise, I have absolutely no complaints. Compared to the Nissan, it has been much more reliable and resilient. I even feel the Quest, with antilock brakes, isn't as controlled as the Accord, although this may be a function of size. I drive both city and highway with the Honda and never get fatiqued. The sound system is basic and quite good, although the AM reception is sometimes lacking (this was the 1st model year the antenna was built into the rear window). I compared the Honda to Subaru and Toyota at time of purchase and found the Subaru rougher and the Toyota more expensive. I think it appeals equally to men and women. The back seat is not the best for carrying adults; the Camry would be better, but the Taurus is worse.
As a family sedan with a fair amount of "fun to drive" quotient, I find the Accord very hard to beat for the price.

We like driving a manual, and the Accord was 'way more fun to drive than the Camry, Mazda 626, or Subaru Legacy. Plus the LX has everything standard that we wanted--cruise, power locks, fold-down rear seat. We've had it 2 years today (December 17, 1999).

The only thing that bugs us is, we drive with headlights on, and that dims the displays so much you can't see if the AC is on.

A wonderful car, especially for $15,500. Roomy, responsive, comfortable, convenient. We love it.

Similar Products Used:

Always drove Toyotas and Mazdas before.

Great looking. Smooth ride, quiet, shifts gears easily, speedy, roomy, great gas mileage.
Beautiful blue paint job. More space in the engine compartment-->when you need to do
maintenance it is easy to get around. The engine is well laid out. I like the access to the
air filter, it is much easier to replace (4 clips instead of the 4 screws they had on older
models). When the sunroof is open you don't get that buffeting wind noise. No ashtray,
no cigarrette lighter. Great stock stereo. I like the way the tools for changing the tires are
stored in the trunk. Reading lights on either side of the rearview mirror. Nice looking
stock alloy rims. Security system, keyless entry, car won't start without your specific key
(computer chip). Great price.

Not enough head room for a 6' tall man, there is maybe 2" between the top of my head
and the ceiling of the interior of the car-->the driver seat has that toggle that raises and
lowers the seat straight up and down, mine is all the way down. I also keep banging my head on the grip that they have placed above the driver side door, they shouldn't have put that there. Defroster for the windshield automatically turns on the ac and opens the outside vent when you activate it. I don't like the cloth on the
roof of the interior, when you ride with the sunroof open road grim and dust collects in
the cloth in the after part of the ceiling-->they should have kept vinyl or any type of
product that you would not have vacuum. I also don't like the cloth on the upper portion of
the doors, you can easily create wear spots in it, for example, where you might rest
you arms. The power windows are noisier than in older models, they sound cheaper. The
process of actually purchasing the vehicle was a miserable experience.

What an incredible car. Overall I am really happy with this vehicle. Many advantages
over my older Accord, although, there were some features that car had that I wish were in
my newer Accord. Because of these two vehicles I will probably own many Hondas in
the future. Quality, well built, well thought out. You get what you pay for. This is a great car for commuting, around town driving, or weekend trips for two or three people. If you like to drive, this is a great car for just driving around, whether it be highway or backroads.

Similar Products Used:

1994 Accord LX 4 Dr. 5 Spd.