Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Honda Accord Honda Accord (1990-1993) Maintenance and Repair
1435 messages, Last post on Dec 04, 2008 at 10:24 PM
You are in the Honda Accord Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jun 19, 2007 7:38 pm) As a certain ex-president used to say, I can feel your pain about letting that '93 EX get away from you. Your comments confirm my impressions from driving the '90 LX the other day. In spite of its slight front end vibrations, it was amazingly smooth and quiet at 70 mph. It just seemed so well put together, and this was a 167,000 mile car that needed a little TLC. I liked everything about it (except the mouse belt). The low cowl, the seating position, plenty of headroom. And the body design itself is very appealing to me. I think Honda just "got it right" on this generation. I envy those of you with a real nice model from this generation. I'm also driving some cars from the 1994-97 era, which I see you now have. Are you happy with that one? What would you say are the main differences from the 90-93 gen to the 94-97 generation, especially in terms of the "fun to drive" quotient? I'm driving an '04 Accord sedan, and my son has a '98 coupe with about 140,000 miles that we bought new for him, and it's still tight as a drum. But among those four generations, I'm still liking the '90 I drove.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: austinman7 (Jun 20, 2007 4:39 am) The 94-95/6 was available with VTEC (as was the '93 elsewhere), had a larger interior and trunk, and felt like it had a bit more shoulder room in the back. The later ones also had dual airbags vs the single driver airbag on the 92-93. |
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Jun 20, 2007 4:55 am)  
|
|
|
Replying to: elroy5 (Jun 20, 2007 2:32 pm) 
|
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (Jun 20, 2007 4:47 pm) You guessed it, 85. But the Shadow was fast enough for my first bike. I miss the car, more than the bike. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: elroy5 (Jun 20, 2007 2:32 pm) AUSTINMAN, I never drove the 1993 (I was 13 when we got rid of it), but my 1996 is still lots of fun, if not particularly fast (its the 130 hp LX, non-VTEC version). At about 2,800 lbs, it's more spry than my 2006 EX, however. With new shocks (mine have 173k miles on them) I imagine it would be a real fun ride!). I love my 1996, and it has been a wonderful first car for me. The best part is that it still gets 28 MPG in my mixed hwy/city commute. Can't ask for much more from a 12 year old car.
|
|
|
Replying to: austinman7 (Jun 17, 2007 7:27 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (Jun 20, 2007 7:00 pm) Well, if I lived in Austin you'd probably have a point, but here in Kentucky all there is to do is sit on the veranda, sip our mint juleps and wait for next year's Derby.  Hey, give me a break -- Edmunds is a place for people with above average interest in cars, right? I confess, that's me.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Jun 20, 2007 4:55 am) Thanks for your perspective on the 94-97 gen, which I'm looking at, but the overall design just doesn't appeal to me like the 90-93 gen. I agree with all your points about the 90-93 models. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jun 20, 2007 6:33 pm) Sounds like you have a nice 1996 model and are quite happy with it. As I said in the above post, I'm driving a few of those too, but the 90-93 gen has the styling appeal to me. Interesting that your 1996 Accord seems quicker than the 2006. Maybe the weight difference accounts for that.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Honda Accord Honda Accord (1990-1993) Maintenance and Repair
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Honda Accord
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
