CD Article: 2006 Honda Accord EX-V6 6-speed coupe

[quadzilla]

Quad, I just checked before returning the car 2500rpm exactly

On my return trip to Ottawa from Toronto taking hwy 7 for part of the trip and taking the 401 for the other part, THAN also driving about 100km in the city I averaged 7.6L / 100km!!!

WOW!

Thanks James.  Those numbers sound better.  That is really good for hwy also!  Maybe the other tank was just one of those one offs as I can't see the Accord using a lot of gas until you are around 140+ kph.  Or maybe it was strong head winds the entire drive to Toronto?

[wing]

It was VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY windy on the way to Toronto!

[davidm]

Actually the entry to the rear seats is not difficult at all the back folds down in the traditional way without having to use the power adjustment, unlike hte G35 coupe which is a pain in the butt.

RE: The 1-2 stiffness of the shifter, yes it does do that, and so does my S2000 seems like a Honda thing.

1-2 stiffness is/was a very common problem with a cold Miata transmission.   Something about short throw or direct linkage transmissions with cold (ie. viscous) fluid?

[wing]

David, I don't think the Accord is direct linkage, I'm not sure but the shifter doesn't vibrate with engine movement upon acceleration.

[The Mighty Duck]

I think Chris hit the nail on the head when he said this car is meant for people graduating from subcompacts...  sounds like the perfect replacement for the modified Honda Civic - respectable, but still fun to drive without breaking the bank.

[Howswedeitis]

This car is an over rated piece of junk. My girlfriend had the previous generation
Accord Coupe and it was a lousy riding and uncomfortable car not to mention the
valve guides leaked oil at 45,000kms! It felt like it didn't have
much of a suspension to speak of as it "jiggled" over road imperfections. Of course Honda
changed the suspension design on this one from wishbones to more conventional
struts and we test drove the new one to see how much of an improvement
it would be. Suffice to say we weren't impressed considering what a "stellar"
reputation Honda has for it's "quality" products. Thankfully she leased the
tin box because Honda wouldn't fix the leaking valve guides so she just
gave back the keys at the end of the lease. She ended up buying a base
Saab 9-3 and is so very pleased as it actually rides very well, has a connected
to the road feel Honda could only dream of and looks as if it will be much more
reliable. I can see the Accord only being popular with the kids who want a
larger Civic...they can have it.

[Bullet Blue]

Wow, one bad experience and it sours our opinion of a certain car/brand forever.

[Shnak]

Wow, one bad experience and it sours our opinion of a certain car/brand forever.

He's not the first one who's had that happen to him... 

[Bullet Blue]

Yup. That's why I said OUR.

[Howswedeitis]

Point well taken...however, my opinion is based on more than one experience. One of my buddies had a 1998 Accord Coupe and his motor went at 98,000km's. The dealer rebuilt the motor and found that one of the pistons was 'slapping' at TDC. He took meticulous care of the car and changed the oil and followed the service intervals to the "T". The dealer admitted that 98-99 2.3 l engines had some problems...when his car went off warranty his automatic transmission module went south (seems this was a common problem) and he hit the roof because of the high cost of replacement.
His check engine light also came on all of the time...dealer reset it many times and then told him the
only solution was to replace the ECU...nice especially after the warranty is over. Suffice to say the check engine light is constantly on...
He also had various front end parts changed a few times and admits the car isn't solid...I have to agree. People think when they buy Honda that means the car will be "bullet proof" nothing could be further from the truth as they have their fair share of problems.

[Bullet Blue]

Point well taken...however, my opinion is based on more than one experience. One of my buddies had a 1998 Accord Coupe and his motor went at 98,000km's. The dealer rebuilt the motor and found that one of the pistons was 'slapping' at TDC. He took meticulous care of the car and changed the oil and followed the service intervals to the "T". The dealer admitted that 98-99 2.3 l engines had some problems...when his car went off warranty his automatic transmission module went south (seems this was a common problem) and he hit the roof because of the high cost of replacement.
His check engine light also came on all of the time...dealer reset it many times and then told him the
only solution was to replace the ECU...nice especially after the warranty is over. Suffice to say the check engine light is constantly on...
He also had various front end parts changed a few times and admits the car isn't solid...I have to agree. People think when they buy Honda that means the car will be "bullet proof" nothing could be further from the truth as they have their fair share of problems.

Good points. Honda And Toyota are touting their reliability a lot, but obviously, they are not bullet proof. And I can relate as I have had a very sour experience with a Chevy Malibu before, however, since then I have eased up a bit on my critisism of GM and their products. They are definately improving.

With that said, I gotta think that Honda has worked out a lot of the problems from their 1998 accord in the 2006 Accord.

[y2chuck]

Well 0-60 he claimed in 7 sec when it's 5.9

Also not sure what he's talking about the shifter being metal it is leather wrapped.

Both Chris and I noticed NO torque steer yet he claims the wheel was shooting all over the place.   He also claimed the buttons were hard to use and find they are huge and right in front of you.  Seriously he drove the same car but just ragged on it constantly.

It's easy to nit pick, there are faults with the Accord, the plastic cubbies are pretty cheapo feeling with the fake carbon fiber look, and the armrests and such could be a little more padded.  But besides that it's a pretty damn sweet car and at $34,900 a bargain IMO.

Chris got 1 fact wrong too though, below 2000rpm in 6th on the highway?  Nah, it's exactly at 2000 rpm at 90km/h I checked this morning

he said 0 - 100 km in "about" 7 sec (so about 0 - 63mph) plus he had winter tires on it so that probably attributed to lost time.

It's pretty obvious he's not a honda fan tho.  Lots of little jabs all over the article, but that's not uncommon for anyother biased review I've ever read.  Always have to take these reviews with a grain of salt.  Reviews like that just make me ignore that writer for future reviews since he's not looking at it objectively like the fine folks here.

[wing]

About 7 and 5.9 is a LARGE difference.  5.9s is VERY quick, close to 7 is average.

[y2chuck]

About 7 and 5.9 is a LARGE difference.  5.9s is VERY quick, close to 7 is average.

yeah, but winter tires and not knowing the exact time (> 6.6 < 7 is "about 7 seconds") likely makes up for it.  Plus 5.9 could easily be 6.0 or 6.1 depending on whos driving.

But like I agreed with you, he's obviously not a honda fan which is why he took every chance to bash it...

[Benhaze]

I thought it was a pretty good article and if you read the verdict, the conclusion is probably dead on the money and very favorable. I love Honda products but can't warm up to this one. I find it looks better in picture than it really is. I like the interior very much when looking at pictures, but it leaves me cold when I drive the car. The huge instrumentation seems appropriate for someone who can't see nothing pass his nose... The 1985-1993 Accords were more fun to drive than the later models.

That why I went with a Mazda 6 GT instead of the Accord!

[gosteelerz]

This car is an over rated piece of junk. My girlfriend had the previous generation
Accord Coupe and it was a lousy riding and uncomfortable car not to mention the
valve guides leaked oil at 45,000kms! It felt like it didn't have
much of a suspension to speak of as it "jiggled" over road imperfections. Of course Honda
changed the suspension design on this one from wishbones to more conventional
struts and we test drove the new one to see how much of an improvement
it would be. Suffice to say we weren't impressed considering what a "stellar"
reputation Honda has for it's "quality" products. Thankfully she leased the
tin box because Honda wouldn't fix the leaking valve guides so she just
gave back the keys at the end of the lease. She ended up buying a base
Saab 9-3 and is so very pleased as it actually rides very well, has a connected
to the road feel Honda could only dream of and looks as if it will be much more
reliable. I can see the Accord only being popular with the kids who want a
larger Civic...they can have it.

They still have double wishbones and no struts will not improve the ride.  You may be confusing the Accord with the Civic.

[y2chuck]

After checking one out at the show, I agree with his point about the look of the interior a bit.  It is kinda drab looking with the all gray/black interior.  Great quality materials, but I think the lighter interior looks better.

Don't agree with his assessment of the exterior either, it's a sweet looking car especially with the ground effect kit.

[Greg F]

I found this review to be spot on.  I don't read the anti-Honda bias, or barely anything negative.  The few criticisms the reviewer has are right on the money:
- The one-two shift is notchy.  I find the shifter to have a very mechanical feel to it.  It's certainly not the slick shifting transmissions I've enjoyed in other Honda cars. 
- If you're driving in sixth gear, you will have to downshift in order to pass quickly.  That said, I'm glad for a tall sixth gear that returns good fuel economy.  I don't mind downshifting and feeling the surge of V6 power as I pass someone.  This car is an excellent highway cruiser. 
- There’s really no torque steer, but at the same time there isn't much feedback from the road.  Choose your poison.
- The gauges are large, and the switchgear is clearly laid out.  Does something think this is a bad thing?  I always get oohs and aahs when someone sees it lit up.
- The engine is too quiet.  I never thought I would remark on this as a flaw.  At idle it's practically silent.  I still find myself driving in second gear at 60kph because I've forgotten to shift up.  It would be nice to have a real growl above 4000 rpm. 

I'd better stop there.  I did choose this car after all, so obviously I think it's a great car, and the best car for my money.  At this price I don't think anything can touch it: power to spare, plenty of room for my friends and all our stuff, reasonable fuel economy, and decent insurance rates. All that and it runs on regular gas.

[Benhaze]

Thanks for the input Greg; glad to hear from an actual owner. And welcome to the Forum!

[wing]

Greg, yes Chris' review is right on, the review we were talking about that was off base is on auto123.com  all it does is bash the car which is a great car.

My review http://www.cartalkcanada.com/blog/?p=71  has the same sentiments as Chris' review.