I just bought an Accord SE with the 4 cylinder, 5 speed. It's got tons of
power and is smooth as anything. The great part is how easy it is on gas for
the performance. It has a plush-enough ride and still feels sporty - you
sometimes forget that there is a back seat in it. Honda has done a great job
with this vehicle and, I suspect, the Civic is a super car too on a smaller
scale. You can't go wrong with a Honda.
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-ECAC68.07410325082006@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
> In article <1156504998.932409.62580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups. com>,
> bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
>> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
>> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>>
>> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
>> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute.
>
> I agree completely.
>
> I had the exact same opinion of my 2000 Accord 4 cylinder with manual
> trans. The new ones are even better.
>

 

I just bought an Accord SE with the 4 cylinder, 5 speed. It's got tons of
power and is smooth as anything. The great part is how easy it is on gas for
the performance. It has a plush-enough ride and still feels sporty - you
sometimes forget that there is a back seat in it. Honda has done a great job
with this vehicle and, I suspect, the Civic is a super car too on a smaller
scale. You can't go wrong with a Honda.
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-ECAC68.07410325082006@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
> In article <1156504998.932409.62580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups. com>,
> bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
>> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
>> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>>
>> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
>> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute.
>
> I agree completely.
>
> I had the exact same opinion of my 2000 Accord 4 cylinder with manual
> trans. The new ones are even better.
>

 

My opinion on the V6 Accord differs from yours. I've driven 2003-2005 4
cyl Accords and they do move out nicely(and I take your word on the
mileage since the 4 cyl's weren't mine so I didn't track mileage). But,
good as the 4 cyl is, the V6 is better overall in my experience. The
acceleration is noticeably better both at low and high speeds (and you
don't have to wind up the engine as much to do this), and my mileage
over frequent 275-300 trips(95% highway at a steady 70 mph) gets me a
consistent 32 mpg. Mileage not as good as the 4 cyl, acceleration
better. To me this is a good trade off. Others may differ.

Ken

bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
> harry wrote:
>
>
>>What is your opinion?
>>I have been driving trucks for more than 15 years, any modern sedan is
>>considered agile responsive car to me. Not like my wife, she can not settle
>>with Accord 4 cyl., must be a V6. to drive her 40mph top roads to office..
>
>
>
> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>
> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute. If I am
> running a little late and i need to make a banzai blast (75mph min. and
> occasionally touching 100mph) to work, I will get at least 32 mpg.
> This is with the A/C on. I never cruise any slower than 75 and with
> that, I am able to obtain 36 mpg. I am currently at an average of 34.2
> mpg for the last 9251.4 miles.
>
> I got a little sidetracked with the mileage thing, but that seems to be
> a fairly hot topic these days. In all seriousness, test drive a 4
> cylinder accord. You will be very surprised at how
> 'un-four-cylinder-like' this engine is. Nothing against the civic (my
> wife has an '05 Civic Si), but the engine just isn't as smooth.
>
> has something to do with the extra balance shafts and stuff...
>
> bob z.
>

 

My opinion on the V6 Accord differs from yours. I've driven 2003-2005 4
cyl Accords and they do move out nicely(and I take your word on the
mileage since the 4 cyl's weren't mine so I didn't track mileage). But,
good as the 4 cyl is, the V6 is better overall in my experience. The
acceleration is noticeably better both at low and high speeds (and you
don't have to wind up the engine as much to do this), and my mileage
over frequent 275-300 trips(95% highway at a steady 70 mph) gets me a
consistent 32 mpg. Mileage not as good as the 4 cyl, acceleration
better. To me this is a good trade off. Others may differ.

Ken

bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
> harry wrote:
>
>
>>What is your opinion?
>>I have been driving trucks for more than 15 years, any modern sedan is
>>considered agile responsive car to me. Not like my wife, she can not settle
>>with Accord 4 cyl., must be a V6. to drive her 40mph top roads to office..
>
>
>
> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>
> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute. If I am
> running a little late and i need to make a banzai blast (75mph min. and
> occasionally touching 100mph) to work, I will get at least 32 mpg.
> This is with the A/C on. I never cruise any slower than 75 and with
> that, I am able to obtain 36 mpg. I am currently at an average of 34.2
> mpg for the last 9251.4 miles.
>
> I got a little sidetracked with the mileage thing, but that seems to be
> a fairly hot topic these days. In all seriousness, test drive a 4
> cylinder accord. You will be very surprised at how
> 'un-four-cylinder-like' this engine is. Nothing against the civic (my
> wife has an '05 Civic Si), but the engine just isn't as smooth.
>
> has something to do with the extra balance shafts and stuff...
>
> bob z.
>

 

My opinion on the V6 Accord differs from yours. I've driven 2003-2005 4
cyl Accords and they do move out nicely(and I take your word on the
mileage since the 4 cyl's weren't mine so I didn't track mileage). But,
good as the 4 cyl is, the V6 is better overall in my experience. The
acceleration is noticeably better both at low and high speeds (and you
don't have to wind up the engine as much to do this), and my mileage
over frequent 275-300 trips(95% highway at a steady 70 mph) gets me a
consistent 32 mpg. Mileage not as good as the 4 cyl, acceleration
better. To me this is a good trade off. Others may differ.

Ken

bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
> harry wrote:
>
>
>>What is your opinion?
>>I have been driving trucks for more than 15 years, any modern sedan is
>>considered agile responsive car to me. Not like my wife, she can not settle
>>with Accord 4 cyl., must be a V6. to drive her 40mph top roads to office..
>
>
>
> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>
> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute. If I am
> running a little late and i need to make a banzai blast (75mph min. and
> occasionally touching 100mph) to work, I will get at least 32 mpg.
> This is with the A/C on. I never cruise any slower than 75 and with
> that, I am able to obtain 36 mpg. I am currently at an average of 34.2
> mpg for the last 9251.4 miles.
>
> I got a little sidetracked with the mileage thing, but that seems to be
> a fairly hot topic these days. In all seriousness, test drive a 4
> cylinder accord. You will be very surprised at how
> 'un-four-cylinder-like' this engine is. Nothing against the civic (my
> wife has an '05 Civic Si), but the engine just isn't as smooth.
>
> has something to do with the extra balance shafts and stuff...
>
> bob z.
>

 

My opinion on the V6 Accord differs from yours. I've driven 2003-2005 4
cyl Accords and they do move out nicely(and I take your word on the
mileage since the 4 cyl's weren't mine so I didn't track mileage). But,
good as the 4 cyl is, the V6 is better overall in my experience. The
acceleration is noticeably better both at low and high speeds (and you
don't have to wind up the engine as much to do this), and my mileage
over frequent 275-300 trips(95% highway at a steady 70 mph) gets me a
consistent 32 mpg. Mileage not as good as the 4 cyl, acceleration
better. To me this is a good trade off. Others may differ.

Ken

bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
> harry wrote:
>
>
>>What is your opinion?
>>I have been driving trucks for more than 15 years, any modern sedan is
>>considered agile responsive car to me. Not like my wife, she can not settle
>>with Accord 4 cyl., must be a V6. to drive her 40mph top roads to office..
>
>
>
> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>
> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute. If I am
> running a little late and i need to make a banzai blast (75mph min. and
> occasionally touching 100mph) to work, I will get at least 32 mpg.
> This is with the A/C on. I never cruise any slower than 75 and with
> that, I am able to obtain 36 mpg. I am currently at an average of 34.2
> mpg for the last 9251.4 miles.
>
> I got a little sidetracked with the mileage thing, but that seems to be
> a fairly hot topic these days. In all seriousness, test drive a 4
> cylinder accord. You will be very surprised at how
> 'un-four-cylinder-like' this engine is. Nothing against the civic (my
> wife has an '05 Civic Si), but the engine just isn't as smooth.
>
> has something to do with the extra balance shafts and stuff...
>
> bob z.
>

 

harry wrote:
> I drove many big SUVs before and am planning to get a fuel efficient sedan
> to commute to work (50% HWY, 50 % not so heavy local).
> My wife has a 06 Accord V6, I loved driving it but the gas mileage is
> terrible (17-18mpg). I may get up to 20mpg in my driving road condition but
> it is not a real saving in gas to me.
>
>
Civic should be adequate but they are selling for top dollar right now.
A 4 cylinder Accord is a far better deal. Also pays to test drive a 4
cylinder Toyota Camry.

 

harry wrote:
> I drove many big SUVs before and am planning to get a fuel efficient sedan
> to commute to work (50% HWY, 50 % not so heavy local).
> My wife has a 06 Accord V6, I loved driving it but the gas mileage is
> terrible (17-18mpg). I may get up to 20mpg in my driving road condition but
> it is not a real saving in gas to me.
>
>
Civic should be adequate but they are selling for top dollar right now.
A 4 cylinder Accord is a far better deal. Also pays to test drive a 4
cylinder Toyota Camry.

 

harry wrote:
> I drove many big SUVs before and am planning to get a fuel efficient sedan
> to commute to work (50% HWY, 50 % not so heavy local).
> My wife has a 06 Accord V6, I loved driving it but the gas mileage is
> terrible (17-18mpg). I may get up to 20mpg in my driving road condition but
> it is not a real saving in gas to me.
>
>
Civic should be adequate but they are selling for top dollar right now.
A 4 cylinder Accord is a far better deal. Also pays to test drive a 4
cylinder Toyota Camry.

 

harry wrote:
> I drove many big SUVs before and am planning to get a fuel efficient sedan
> to commute to work (50% HWY, 50 % not so heavy local).
> My wife has a 06 Accord V6, I loved driving it but the gas mileage is
> terrible (17-18mpg). I may get up to 20mpg in my driving road condition but
> it is not a real saving in gas to me.
>
>
Civic should be adequate but they are selling for top dollar right now.
A 4 cylinder Accord is a far better deal. Also pays to test drive a 4
cylinder Toyota Camry.

 

BWBrown wrote:
> I just bought an Accord SE with the 4 cylinder, 5 speed. It's got tons of
> power and is smooth as anything. The great part is how easy it is on gas for
> the performance. It has a plush-enough ride and still feels sporty - you
> sometimes forget that there is a back seat in it. Honda has done a great job
> with this vehicle and, I suspect, the Civic is a super car too on a smaller
> scale. You can't go wrong with a Honda.

disappointingly, the 2001-on civics just don't handle as well as their
older wishbone brethren or the wishbone accords. they drive well
enough, but if you want handling, the accord is superior.

> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-ECAC68.07410325082006@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <1156504998.932409.62580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups. com>,
>> bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
>>> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
>>> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>>>
>>> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
>>> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute.
>> I agree completely.
>>
>> I had the exact same opinion of my 2000 Accord 4 cylinder with manual
>> trans. The new ones are even better.
>>
>
>

 

BWBrown wrote:
> I just bought an Accord SE with the 4 cylinder, 5 speed. It's got tons of
> power and is smooth as anything. The great part is how easy it is on gas for
> the performance. It has a plush-enough ride and still feels sporty - you
> sometimes forget that there is a back seat in it. Honda has done a great job
> with this vehicle and, I suspect, the Civic is a super car too on a smaller
> scale. You can't go wrong with a Honda.

disappointingly, the 2001-on civics just don't handle as well as their
older wishbone brethren or the wishbone accords. they drive well
enough, but if you want handling, the accord is superior.

> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-ECAC68.07410325082006@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <1156504998.932409.62580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups. com>,
>> bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
>>> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
>>> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>>>
>>> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
>>> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute.
>> I agree completely.
>>
>> I had the exact same opinion of my 2000 Accord 4 cylinder with manual
>> trans. The new ones are even better.
>>
>
>

 

BWBrown wrote:
> I just bought an Accord SE with the 4 cylinder, 5 speed. It's got tons of
> power and is smooth as anything. The great part is how easy it is on gas for
> the performance. It has a plush-enough ride and still feels sporty - you
> sometimes forget that there is a back seat in it. Honda has done a great job
> with this vehicle and, I suspect, the Civic is a super car too on a smaller
> scale. You can't go wrong with a Honda.

disappointingly, the 2001-on civics just don't handle as well as their
older wishbone brethren or the wishbone accords. they drive well
enough, but if you want handling, the accord is superior.

> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-ECAC68.07410325082006@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <1156504998.932409.62580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups. com>,
>> bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
>>> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
>>> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>>>
>>> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
>>> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute.
>> I agree completely.
>>
>> I had the exact same opinion of my 2000 Accord 4 cylinder with manual
>> trans. The new ones are even better.
>>
>
>

 

BWBrown wrote:
> I just bought an Accord SE with the 4 cylinder, 5 speed. It's got tons of
> power and is smooth as anything. The great part is how easy it is on gas for
> the performance. It has a plush-enough ride and still feels sporty - you
> sometimes forget that there is a back seat in it. Honda has done a great job
> with this vehicle and, I suspect, the Civic is a super car too on a smaller
> scale. You can't go wrong with a Honda.

disappointingly, the 2001-on civics just don't handle as well as their
older wishbone brethren or the wishbone accords. they drive well
enough, but if you want handling, the accord is superior.

> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-ECAC68.07410325082006@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <1156504998.932409.62580@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups. com>,
>> bobzee1@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> My opinion is thusly: There should never have been a v6 accord or
>>> camry ever produced in america. Those people who believe they need a
>>> v6 have never driven a late-model K24 equipped 4-cylinder accord.
>>>
>>> My '04 accord ex-L coupe with the 4-cylinder and 5-speed manual tranny
>>> is untouchable anywhere during my daily 180 mile commute.
>> I agree completely.
>>
>> I had the exact same opinion of my 2000 Accord 4 cylinder with manual
>> trans. The new ones are even better.
>>
>
>

 

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:27:47 -0400, "harry" <harry_liuNOSPAM@lcc.com>
wrote:

>I drove many big SUVs before and am planning to get a fuel efficient sedan
>to commute to work (50% HWY, 50 % not so heavy local).
>My wife has a 06 Accord V6, I loved driving it but the gas mileage is
>terrible (17-18mpg). I may get up to 20mpg in my driving road condition but
>it is not a real saving in gas to me.
>
>Here is the dilemma, I like to save gas and I don't want to lose fun of
>driving and stability/performance. Owned a Civic in 80s and feel it "heavy"
>when two or three adult sit in, struggling when it is taking more than one
>adult passenger was my impression with Civic.
>
>This Civic/accord I4 will be 99% my commute car and at most with my teen
>daughter for local soccer practice.
>
>What is your opinion?
>I have been driving trucks for more than 15 years, any modern sedan is
>considered agile responsive car to me. Not like my wife, she can not settle
>with Accord 4 cyl., must be a V6. to drive her 40mph top roads to office..
>

The Fit is supposed to be great fun to drive as well as fuel
efficient.