Topic: Test Drive: 2012 Honda Accord EX-L

[Autos_Editor]

The Accord is still a serious player in the mid-size sedan segment, but is starting to show its age.

Read More...

[greengs]

Still an excellent car even though it's due for a redesign.  The 4 cyl version especially seems to get high praise as shown in a recent C&D comparo where it beat out all but the Passat in its class. 

[Mike]

Editor and author, please re-read the review (hint: it's hardly a review). There is not much value in listing features as the Honda website does a better job. The only real review was done by your wife (please thank her) in the last paragraph. I was optimist that we were going going to read comment about how the Accord stacks up against it's segment peers but alas, the only comparison was with the TSX which is not even a segment competitor!

Come on.

Hi Northernridge,

Welcome to the site.  Sorry you did not like the review.  What details/information would you like to know about the accord not included in the article?  I may be able to give you some more insight into the vehicle.  I gave impressions on driving position, seating feel, stereo sound, rear seat comfort, trunk space, observed fuel economy, engine response, engine feel, engine noise, transmission response, ride comfort and minor handling abilities.  I have yet to drive many of its class competitors so I did not comment on them in detail.  As well, we do not perform instrument testing at Autos.ca so I could not have added any details on performance.

Thank you for the feedback, always welcome.

-Mike

[redman]

Recently in a Honda Dealership the Accord has definitely gotten big.

When comparing the Accord 4cyl 9.0/5.8/7.5 to - 6cyl 10.3/6.5/8.6. per 100 km. The variance is not huge especially if doing mostly highway. I would lean towards the 6 considering the size of the Accord now.

[Jaeger]

Editor and author, please re-read the review (hint: it's hardly a review). There is not much value in listing features as the Honda website does a better job. The only real review was done by your wife (please thank her) in the last paragraph. I was optimist that we were going going to read comment about how the Accord stacks up against it's segment peers but alas, the only comparison was with the TSX which is not even a segment competitor!

Come on.

Hi Northernridge,

Welcome to the site.  Sorry you did not like the review.  What details/information would you like to know about the accord not included in the article?  I may be able to give you some more insight into the vehicle. I gave impressions on driving position, seating feel, stereo sound, rear seat comfort, trunk space, observed fuel economy, engine response, engine feel, engine noise, transmission response, ride comfort and minor handling abilities.  I have yet to drive many of its class competitors so I did not comment on them in detail.  As well, we do not perform instrument testing at Autos.ca so I could not have added any details on performance.

Thank you for the feedback, always welcome.

-Mike

Yeah but all of that is far less informative than your wife saying the car was easy to drive. 

Out of curiosity, what other segment competitors have you driven?

Jaeger

[SaskSpecV]

"It is a simple car to drive and perfect for those who are not “drivers” but need a good-sized family vehicle."

If this is the Accord's raison d'etre, why would buyers choose it over the Camry?  I thought that the Accord was always geared towards those drivers who wanted at least a little bit of driving pleasure (similar to an Altima or Mazda6), as compared to a Camry/Malibu.  Is this no longer the case?

I was tempted by the previous generation Accord (especially the coupe) when I bought in 2003, but this new generation just seems way too big.  On the bright side - at least they still offer a manual!

[Mike]

"It is a simple car to drive and perfect for those who are not “drivers” but need a good-sized family vehicle."

If this is the Accord's raison d'etre, why would buyers choose it over the Camry?  I thought that the Accord was always geared towards those drivers who wanted at least a little bit of driving pleasure (similar to an Altima or Mazda6), as compared to a Camry/Malibu.  Is this no longer the case?

I was tempted by the previous generation Accord (especially the coupe) when I bought in 2003, but this new generation just seems way too big.  On the bright side - at least they still offer a manual!

Compared to limit Accord history (two 95's and a 2002) I would say yes, this is no longer the case.  the coupes on the other hand.....that could be a whole different story.

[Jaeger]

I thought that the Accord was always geared towards those drivers who wanted at least a little bit of driving pleasure (similar to an Altima or Mazda6), as compared to a Camry/Malibu.  Is this no longer the case?

That's still the reputation, but it is no longer the reality.  Certainly not with this generation, and arguably not with the previous gen, either.  Whenever I read comments in mags about the Accord being the "driver's" choice among midsize sedans, I wonder a) what they have been smoking, b) if they have ever actually driven the Accord and c) if they have driven anything else in the segment.  I probably have more seat time in the current gen Accord than any other midsizer save the Altima and Sonata.  It's a good car in every respect, but a standout in none.  Don't even get me started on the whole "10 Best" thing.

Jaeger

[Blueprint]

"It is a simple car to drive and perfect for those who are not “drivers” but need a good-sized family vehicle."

If this is the Accord's raison d'etre, why would buyers choose it over the Camry?  I thought that the Accord was always geared towards those drivers who wanted at least a little bit of driving pleasure (similar to an Altima or Mazda6), as compared to a Camry/Malibu.  Is this no longer the case?

I was tempted by the previous generation Accord (especially the coupe) when I bought in 2003, but this new generation just seems way too big.  On the bright side - at least they still offer a manual!

...but that manual is only available on the base 177hp sedan.  Worst still: rumour is that the next-gen Accord, coming this Fall, is CVT-only.

When we were shopping for our 2nd car in 2008, the Accord was the only car in which my petite wife was perfectly at ease.  With my preference for a compact, I missed what might have been my last chance at a new manual Accord  ... and I would have gone for the 190 hp EX trim with sunroof, only slushboxed these days.

[Vanstar]

"It is a simple car to drive and perfect for those who are not “drivers” but need a good-sized family vehicle."

If this is the Accord's raison d'etre, why would buyers choose it over the Camry?  I thought that the Accord was always geared towards those drivers who wanted at least a little bit of driving pleasure (similar to an Altima or Mazda6), as compared to a Camry/Malibu.  Is this no longer the case?

I was tempted by the previous generation Accord (especially the coupe) when I bought in 2003, but this new generation just seems way too big.  On the bright side - at least they still offer a manual!

...but that manual is only available on the base 177hp sedan.  Worst still: rumour is that the next-gen Accord, coming this Fall, is CVT-only.

When we were shopping for our 2nd car in 2008, the Accord was the only car in which my petite wife was perfectly at ease.  With my preference for a compact, I missed what might have been my last chance at a new manual Accord  ... and I would have gone for the 190 hp EX trim with sunroof, only slushboxed these days.

I wonder how many manual Accords are sold in Canada a year? I'd wager less than the number of fingers on my hands. If gearheads want manual transmissions in family sedans to remain, they'd best get out and buy one. That is the best way to keep manual transmissions around.

I have had a many Altima rentals over the past few years and I have never had an issue with the CVT. Works fine for me and I would expect 99% of drivers, who never move the selector past "D" anyhow.

[dkaz]

I know someone in Mission, BC who owns a 2008 manual EX-L. A very nice vehicle indeed.

[greengs]

"It is a simple car to drive and perfect for those who are not “drivers” but need a good-sized family vehicle."

If this is the Accord's raison d'etre, why would buyers choose it over the Camry?  I thought that the Accord was always geared towards those drivers who wanted at least a little bit of driving pleasure (similar to an Altima or Mazda6), as compared to a Camry/Malibu.  Is this no longer the case?

I was tempted by the previous generation Accord (especially the coupe) when I bought in 2003, but this new generation just seems way too big.  On the bright side - at least they still offer a manual!

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2012-honda-accord-ex-l-page-6

Here's what guys who drove it and competition at the same time thought. 

[SaskSpecV]

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2012-honda-accord-ex-l-page-6

Here's what guys who drove it and competition at the same time thought.

I've been a subscriber to C&D for many years now, but when I read that article I took it with a hypertension-inducing side of salt.  I'm not saying C&D are bought off by Honda (maybe, maybe not - their recent Civic reviews have been pretty harsh).  But they've had the Accord on their 10 best list for so long, I think they are so reluctant to admit that Honda may have strayed from their original successful formula with the Accord.

[Jaeger]

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2012-honda-accord-ex-l-page-6

Here's what guys who drove it and competition at the same time thought.

I've been a subscriber to C&D for many years now, but when I read that article I took it with a hypertension-inducing side of salt.  I'm not saying C&D are bought off by Honda (maybe, maybe not - their recent Civic reviews have been pretty harsh).  But they've had the Accord on their 10 best list for so long, I think they are so reluctant to admit that Honda may have strayed from their original successful formula with the Accord.

^^^ Agree completely.

Jaeger

[Oldsguy]

I don't mind the current Accord, though I think it has gotten far too big and moved away from what made it special a long time ago. The one thing that drives me crazy about the current model is the taillight design. It has a chromed divider that zigzags up and down and looks almost random. Can't stand it. I wonder what the designer was thinking?

[Gardiner Westbound]

I look for quality of design and manufacture, good driving feel, and superior customer care when researching a purchase.

My first resource is the owners' forums. What are the folks who bought them saying? Are the cars meeting their expectations? What, if anything, has gone wrong? Did the dealer and manufacturer accord them a quantum of respect? Were the issues satisfactorily resolved? Were the resolutions timely and cost-effective? Owners have been reporting worsening Honda quality and customer care for years.

I pour over professional used car reviews. How well a manufacturer's previous offerings stood up in owners' hands is a good predictor of future satisfaction. Chris Chase's excellent used 2003- 2007 Honda Accord review confirms it is not as reliable as its predecessor. Reported issues include:

1. The five-speed automatic transmission has a too-small bearing that can overheat and cause catastrophic transmission failure.
2. The automatic transmission torque converter does not always lock up at highway speed
3. The HVAC/radio display stops working.
4. The CD changers stop working and take CDs hostage.
5. A grunting or grinding noise that occurs as the car is driven away after being parked overnight caused by the anti-lock brake system performing a self-check, deemed normal by Honda.
6. Prematurely warped front rotors and, in cars with rear disc brakes, rear rotors that rust.

I discount new model reviews. They are typically puff pieces about manufacturer-supplied, specially prepared, non-representative cars. Criticism is constrained. Can the 2012 Honda Accord's transmission really be "tried and true" as the reviewer claims in view of the predecessor model's serious transmission issues?

Recent Hondas have trended to steadily worsening quality. The review would gain credibility if the correspondent spoke to the manufacturer's technical representative about the remedies Honda applied to the previous model's shortcomings and published the information.

Rejecting a car brand with a dubious reputation for quality, reliability and customer satisfaction is a shopper's best defence.

http://www.autos.ca/used-car-reviews/used-vehicle-review-honda-accord-2003-2007

[vaff3]

What is with the Honda seats?  It used to be a strong point of Honda.  The lumbar support in my '12 Civic is killing my back too.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

The Accord has dropped to an "average" reliability rating from CR. The Fusion, Camry, Altima, Mazda6, Optima, Legacy and even the Chrysler 200 ("Much better than average" WTF) all rate better.

For some reason, Car and Driver are able to find qualities in the Accord, that are pretty much impossible for me to find.

I guess the Italians do know a thing or two about reliability:

[Ex-airbalancer]

The Accord has dropped to an "average" reliability rating from CR. The Fusion, Camry, Altima, Mazda6, Optima, Legacy and even the Chrysler 200 ("Much better than average" WTF) all rate better.

For some reason, Car and Driver are able to find qualities in the Accord, that are pretty much impossible for me to find.

I guess the Italians do know a thing or two about reliability:

Did someone get fired because he trash the 200 ?
Also did not the reviews here hate the 200 also

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Did someone get fired because he trash the 200 ?
Also did not the reviews here hate the 200 also

The 200 is due for replacement, but people really do like to beat up on it. With the new V6, much better interior and discount pricing, I think it makes a case for itself.