Honda Accord Changes through the Generations

I began this thread to mention how the Accord has changed (in some ways for the better, and in some ways for the worse) since 1976. That led us to how the new and old Accords compare to the my recent TL, Azera, and Magnum. Jncars was kind enough to bring the sad news that the Magnum may be discontinued. In my sadness at the news I pointed out how, in ways important to me, the Magnum has been superior to the TL and even the FX. ( In case you didn't know it, the TL is made by Honda as an upscale alternative to the Accord.)

Which brings us to you jumping in with absolutely nothing positive or constructive to say about anything except that you don't like the direction that the thread has gone! This thread is open for comments, hopefully of a useful or informatative nature. However, if you only want to whine, please do it somewhere else!!

Anyone with interesting or humorous info about old Accords or related info, or even unrelated info, are more than welcome, but please keep your whining to yourself!!

I just read a review about the new Smart ForTwo, and that it does 0-60 in the 12s, and how that was so glacial! I wonder how many "76 Accords, which did 0-60 in the 15s, would be sold today if Honda was building them today!!?? As benjaminh pointed out, in those days anything below 12 was "considered almost sports car territory"!! Today's tiny ForTwo only weighs about 200# less than the '76 Accord! Does anyone have the weight and other specs for the '76 Civic??

We could increase MPG today by cutting weight, size, and horsepower, but would a light, small, slow car sell?? The new Accord is heavier and more powerful than my '95 Pontiac Gran Prix GTP, which was a big, high performance car only a few years ago!!
.

Replies to this message:

pat (Jan 07, 2008 9:47 am)
- thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:49 am)
  - pat (Jan 07, 2008 9:50 am) and 2 more...

#22 of 26 Re: H U G E Changes in Accord [fourteen14] by pat

Jan 07, 2008 (9:47 am)

Replying to: fourteen14 (Jan 06, 2008 6:57 pm)

Actually, since the subject has been defined as Accord Changes Through the Generations, we should keep to that. Other vehicles don't really fit, ya know?

And yes, I realize that the topic was slightly altered from when you started this, but the point of that was to make the conversation more inclusive and more sustainable. So that's where we need to focus.

Replies to this message:

thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:49 am)
- pat (Jan 07, 2008 9:50 am)
  - thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:55 am) and 1 more...

#23 of 26 Re: H U G E Changes in Accord [pat] by thegraduate

Jan 07, 2008 (9:49 am)

Replying to: pat (Jan 07, 2008 9:47 am)

Can we speculate about what we may see for 2010/2011 Accords? I'm curious about some thoughts on that, but don't know where to put it!

Replies to this message:

pat (Jan 07, 2008 9:50 am)
- thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:55 am)
  - tankbeans (Jan 07, 2008 10:34 am)

#24 of 26 Re: H U G E Changes in Accord [thegraduate] by pat

Jan 07, 2008 (9:50 am)

Replying to: thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:49 am)

Please do!

Replies to this message:

thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:55 am)
- tankbeans (Jan 07, 2008 10:34 am)

#25 of 26 Mid-Cycle Changes by thegraduate

Jan 07, 2008 (9:55 am)

Replying to: pat (Jan 07, 2008 9:50 am)

Does anyone want to speculate or throw out some ideas for changes we may see over time in the future of this generation Accord?

I'd think they'll eventually have just one version of the 2.4L. Either that, or up the power of the EX model when the new TSX is introduced, upping the EX to 205 or so, with the LX getting the 190hp version. If it is cost effective, it would be a likely change I believe.

I'd also like to see LEDs reintroduced to the Accord.

Replies to this message:

tankbeans (Jan 07, 2008 10:34 am)

#26 of 26 Re: Mid-Cycle Changes [thegraduate] by tankbeans

Jan 07, 2008 (10:34 am)

Replying to: thegraduate (Jan 07, 2008 9:55 am)

Personally, I think the new exterior is all wrong. Not trying to offend anyone here, but I think it looks like it doesn't quite know what it is.

If I were to buy one, affording it is another story, but I'd take the taillights on the sedan and match them with the headlights on the coupe. My preferences are just that preferences, but other than that I'll be curious to know how mileage will be when they bring the diesels over here. Although diesels aren't really a good fit for the midwest, diesel tends to get up in the winter if you're not careful. Maybe that's changed can't be sure.

Anyway as for changes I'd like to see, other than those pointed out above, would perhaps be stupid, but I think they might get some sales out of it. Anyway my idea would be to do what Ford did and badge a crossover, as well as the car itself, with the Accord name, well Ford did it with the Taurus, but you know what I mean. The mechanical aspects should stay the same or similar, but I know that crossovers can get decent mileage. I've seen people in here talk about more versatility, what could be more versatile than a crossover, slightly larger than a CR-V, but smaller than the Pilot and not as weird as the Element.

Again I'm not trying to offend anyone, but ideas are ideas.

« Previous
1
2
3
Next »
Last

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Forum Tools

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s):

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic

View All Topics

Learn More, Do More

Edmunds Community

Explore Edmunds