"J. Perry" <j_perry@musicians.net> wrote in
news:10rflmmiheo6rd4@corp.supernews.com:

> "Cosmin N." <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:C-mdnZEBut4xkyjcRVn-3Q@rogers.com...
>> N.E.Ohio Bob wrote:
>> > Cosmin N. wrote:
>> >
>> >> So if you can find a mint 94-97,they are great cars.
>> >
>> >
>> > I never did like the '95 that Mom bought. The car wasn't as
>> > comfortable as my '92, and the armrest was tilted so my arm slid off,
>> > and the clock was in the radio instead if up on the top edge of the
> dash.
>> > The whole car was designed to be cheaper to build, and it showed.
>> > Honda didn't fix all the cheapness till the '98's came out. bob
>>
>> I almost positive the clock was not in the radio, although the radio
>> might have had its own clock (my aftermarket one did, I replaced the
>> stock one 4 years ago). It was at the top edge of the dashboard, like in
>> all Hondas I've been in.
>>
>> I'm not sure why you had a feeling they wre cheaply made, especially
>> when compared to the 98-02. I had a top of the line 94 EXR with leather,
>> so I don't know what were the fabrics Honda used in that generation, but
>> pretty much everything else I can think of was better than on the 98-02.
>>
>> In any case, the op asked which Accord to buy, and quite frankly, they
>> are all great cars. I preffer the 94-97 and 03-05 generations, but there
>> isn't much wrong with any other Accord.
>>
>> Cosmin
>
> Didn't the automatic transmission problems begin with the 1998-2002
> generation Accords?
>
> J. Perry
>
>
>

the euro 98-02 models (1.6/1.8/2.0) are known for their bad fuel
consumption

marcel

 

"J. Perry" <j_perry@musicians.net> wrote in
news:10rflmmiheo6rd4@corp.supernews.com:

> "Cosmin N." <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:C-mdnZEBut4xkyjcRVn-3Q@rogers.com...
>> N.E.Ohio Bob wrote:
>> > Cosmin N. wrote:
>> >
>> >> So if you can find a mint 94-97,they are great cars.
>> >
>> >
>> > I never did like the '95 that Mom bought. The car wasn't as
>> > comfortable as my '92, and the armrest was tilted so my arm slid off,
>> > and the clock was in the radio instead if up on the top edge of the
> dash.
>> > The whole car was designed to be cheaper to build, and it showed.
>> > Honda didn't fix all the cheapness till the '98's came out. bob
>>
>> I almost positive the clock was not in the radio, although the radio
>> might have had its own clock (my aftermarket one did, I replaced the
>> stock one 4 years ago). It was at the top edge of the dashboard, like in
>> all Hondas I've been in.
>>
>> I'm not sure why you had a feeling they wre cheaply made, especially
>> when compared to the 98-02. I had a top of the line 94 EXR with leather,
>> so I don't know what were the fabrics Honda used in that generation, but
>> pretty much everything else I can think of was better than on the 98-02.
>>
>> In any case, the op asked which Accord to buy, and quite frankly, they
>> are all great cars. I preffer the 94-97 and 03-05 generations, but there
>> isn't much wrong with any other Accord.
>>
>> Cosmin
>
> Didn't the automatic transmission problems begin with the 1998-2002
> generation Accords?
>
> J. Perry
>
>
>

the euro 98-02 models (1.6/1.8/2.0) are known for their bad fuel
consumption

marcel

 

Heard it many times 98-02 had issues, atleast the one I have 02 EX
Manual Accord, had the moonroof unit replaced while it was still under
warranty, it still rattles, replaced air vents **** a few times, still
rattle. There is just continuous noises in the car all the time from
the doors...

 

Heard it many times 98-02 had issues, atleast the one I have 02 EX
Manual Accord, had the moonroof unit replaced while it was still under
warranty, it still rattles, replaced air vents **** a few times, still
rattle. There is just continuous noises in the car all the time from
the doors...