2004 Accord 4 cyl & 5 spd Auto

Well, did some test drives...

Well I had a chance to drive a few vehicles today.

1. Subaru Impreza TS Wagon (auto)- Nice enough but quite gutless considering
it is supposed to be 165hp.

2. Subaru Impreza WRX (std) - OMFG! This is one VERY fast car! I just can't
see spending an extra $12,000 over the non-turbo TS Wagon. Did I mention the
thing is really fast?

3. Forester Turbo (auto) - seemed a little too tipsy (truck-like) but wow,
lots of go-straight-fast performance with the turbo. Damn thing was $37,000!
Again too much to spend.

4. Acura EL (auto) - I didn't bother test-driving it. I sat inside and found
it a little too small for our primary family vehicle.

5. Honda Element (auto) - don't ask.... Damn nice utility on the inside,
ugly as sin on the outside, terrible driving dynamics (especially with
today's cross winds) I went two blocks and took the thing right back to the
dealer.

Which leaves me with the last test drive...

6. Honda Accord (auto) - Wow, what an impressive car to drive. 160hp 4 cyl
and 5-speed automatic. The car was smooth, quick, quiet... I'm sold! My wife
actually did 30km/hr above the average speed on highway 400 and the motor
wasn't even breathing hard. Rated at 44mpg on the highway too.

Now to sign up to the APA, Car Cost Canada or similar organization to get
the real cost of the car to start negotiations.

 

Just wondering.... why did you not try out a Toyota Camry.... much nicer
ride than the Accord, better pick up, smoother, far quiter and better
looking too!

 

Just an after thought.... I will say that i would take a civic hands down
over a corolla, as the ride is much nicer (sportier) in the civic, and a
prelude over a celica... but when it comes to Accord vs Camry.... Camry is a
much nicer car.... no comparison in my opinion

 

44kpg? I think it's 34mpg highway.

But you're right, it is smooth, quick, and quiet, zips zero to eighty
(mph) without any fuss at all.

J.

 

You're kidding? I have a '01 V6 Accord (auto), and I get (summer months)
between 38 and 42 mpg highway.

 

Nah, he is Canadian. They get bigger gallons up there (20.1% bigger to
be precise) 44 mpg Imperial is about 36 mpg US.

 

Hey Ron, to be honest I never test drove the Toyota. The Toyota uses
MacPherson Struts and the Honda uses multilink suspension. Also the Toyota
doesn't come with ABS standard on the 4cyl model like the Honda.

As far as the ride and looks... the Toyota is closer to something my mom
would like. I've always driven smaller cars so I kinda like a firm ride.

 

bingo. 44mpg (imperial) 6.5l/100km = 44mpg

 

The accord definatly has a more "sporty" feel to it than the camry, but
typiclly i thought that accord buyers were looking for luxery, not something
sporty, and i thought the camry was more luxuries.... in any case, both are
awsome cars

 

Sonofagun, bigger gallons! But the same size miles?

So the 36 still sounds high, but maybe different pollution
requirements, or ... different engines up there, or is the Canadian
Accord even the same vehicle as the US or is it the smaller TSX model?

Well, it explains how Brian Smith gets those MPG on his V6.

J.

 

Litres and Kilometres are the same in any country... do they list the fuel
economy in L/100KM south of the border?

 

For luxury, there is the V6 EX model with full leather an navigation
system.....

 

I totally agree that the 2004 Accord engine is smooth and quick. I was test
driving the automatic version several weeks ago, was entering a highway,
stepped on the gas to accelerate from 45mph to 70mph and the engine didn't
need to down shift at all.

In comparison, I did the same with the 2004 CR-V EX, and the engine
immediately down-shifted when I stepped on the gas to accelerate. The 2004
CR-V engine was also rated at 160hp 4-cylinder. I thought it was the same
engine as the Accord. I wonder why the performance was different, maybe the
CR-V was heavier?

(I also noticed that the 2004 Honda Pilot has a 240hp V6 engine. I wonder
if that's the same engine as the Accord V6 which is also 240hp.)

I ended up buying the CR-V anyways, not for the engine, but for the space.
After driving my '91 Accord for so many years, I wanted an SUV for a change.

- Dave

 

Maybe the 5 speed Automatic tanny...

 

No. The Pilot/Odyssey/MDX share a 3.5 liter engine, while the new
Accord V6 engine is 3.0 liters.

 

Thanks to those Imperial Gallons I assume.

 

Damn, if you are expecting 44 mpg on the new Accord you will be grossl
disappointed. I have an '04 Accord and the measured mpg is about 27
with about 70% freeway, 30% local, little traffic jams. Nontheless, i
is a GREAT car!

It is a heavy car so that's why.

-
GusTheCa

 

I ain't clued out... I know I'll never get the rated economy of 44mpg (imp
not USgal). The car is rated at 9.8/7.1 city/highway. The last take of
fuel I got 8.3L/100km with a very heavy foot. Who can complain about that?

 

I ain't clued out... I know I'll never get the rated economy of 44mpg (imp
not USgal). The car is rated at 9.8/7.1 city/highway. The last tank of
fuel I got 8.3L/100km with a very heavy foot. Who can complain about that?