mmarshall

Given the interest in the new Accord that is shown in the forum, I was going to sample one today....not a full review, but a quick check-out and test-drive. When I got to the dealership, however, (an enormous complex, covering many acres, that is one of the largest Honda shops on the East Coast), and glanced at the row after row of MANY new Accords they had on the lot (they had several dozen vehicles just in the huge showroom alone, along with some Accords), I noticed that they had some Accord Sport models with the 1.5L turbo engine and 6-speed manual transmission in stock....yes, a traditional three-pedal manual. So, for three reasons, I decided on a one of those. First, manual transmissions in mid-size family sedans are all but dead, although the upcoming 2018 Mazda6 will still offer one with the non-turbo four....but, in general, there aren't many chances to sample them anymore. Second, there were several two-lane and four-lane test-driving roads near the dealership devoid of the usual D.C.-area wall-to-wall traffic....that encouraged a drive with a manual transmission. Third, how long the Accord's stick will be offered is anybody's guess...I guess it will depend on sales. The ideal combination, of course, would be the stick with a V6, but Honda doesn't offer a V6 on the Accord any more.


https://automobiles.honda.com/accord...specifications


One problem with the new 2018 Accord is that, because of the way it has recently shrunk in size, and the way the Civic sedan and Clarity Hybrids have both grown, It is difficult to tell the three from each other in size or shape....they are all three similarly-shaped sedan-fastbacks, and even the front ends aren't that different. You pretty much have to depend on the exterior name-badges until you look inside, where is a little more differentiation in the interiors. There was a nice black-on-black Accord Sport model, with no options, sitting on the lot, that listed at a quite-reasonable $26,670. It had the 1.5L turbo four...a 2.0T is also available wth the manual, but the base 1.5L is quite attractively-priced. Well, right then and there, I knew which car I wanted to check out...that was it. It was unlocked, so I was able to check out the interior, underhood, and cargo area....there was at least a temporary spare in the trunk, instead of a compressed-air can. So, I took down the stock number, went inside, got the fob and a dealer-plate, took a quick look to make sure oil, coolant, and tire PSI was OK, and took off.

Since the main purpose of the test-drive was to check out the 6-speed, I won't spend much time on the rest of the car, since much has already been discussed in the forum about that. I will note, though, a few things. Underhood, the turbo 1.5L four and its associated equipment fit in somewhat on the tight side, though the lack of any engine cover at all was a real blessing, allowing free-access to everything on top. The interior did not impress me as much as with past Accords...although there was adequate room for a person my size, cost-cutting is evident in trim and materials, the video-screen is mounted on a klutzy-looking, stick-up frame, and some of the controls/levers/***** don't operate with the precision they used to. Sad, because Honda, up to just a few years ago, used to be one of the best manufacturers in the business in material quality. The trunk was not finished particularly well, though there is at least a temporary spare tire under the floor instead of the ridiculous compressed-air can.

OK...to the road manners. The turbo 1.5L is not a powerhouse, but its 192 HP and 192 ft-lbs. of torque (which comes on at a low 1600 RPM), particularly with the efficient manual transmission, has enough power to get out of its own way. It idles and runs with typical Honda smoothness and refinement, at least by four-cylinder standards. The engine's ECO-driving mode (when selected) limits its output some. The clutch also has the usual Honda butter-smoothness (though almost all modern hydraulic-clutch assemblies with manual transmissions are smooth), and the clutch pedal starts to engage just a couple of inches up from the bottom of its travel. The shift-linkage was not the equal of what we've come to expect from FWD Hondas in the past, with their short throws and precise action. The linkage on the new Accord wasn't bad (believe me...I've driven lots worse).....but it had noticeably longer throws and a more notchy feel than in the past. I didn't experience any mis-shifts going up, but one or two coming down....at lower speeds where it wouldn't damage the engine or clutch. The position of the brake pedal made for fairly easy heel-and-toe shifting, but most drivers aren't fluent in that technique...it saves wear on the transmission's synchronizers and jerks to the drivetrain while downshifting. The Nissan 370Z sports car has a nice feature that, by computer, automatically matches engine/transmisson RPM while downshifting (I've sampled it), so that heel-and-toe shifting is not needed,...but I don't think Honda uses that feature. Underneath, the chassis is generally well-designed, and the suspension, 19" wheels and low-profile tires produce a reasonably comfortable ride for that tire-type, good steering response, and lack of body-roll. Wind noise is well-controlled, but some of the typical Honda road noise is evident, especially on coarse road surfaces.


VERDICT:......not a bad car by any means, but clearly not the superb Accord of the past.

Toys4RJill

Odd. Does not make sense. The new Accord has won accolades and is critically acclaimed.

mmarshall

Good car, yes (I'm not denying that), but IMO the materials are not as solid as in the past (where Accords really excelled), and the manual shift-linkage has lost some of its former crispness. And you can get virtually the same size sedan (now) in a Civic.

MattyG

Thanks for the quick review mmarshall. See? You're not just a stodgy ole Buick driver. You know how work a three pedal car and a turbo motor! I think it's still about the bigger Civic vs this Accord, as others are saying but time will tell. Somewhere there is a Honda executive deciding if they're going to start some lease/finance deals sooner rather than later. And yes, I drive a six speed Accord coupe

Toys4RJill

Really strange that you feel that way. Motor Trend claims it feels like a class above.

Anyhow, only real issue I saw was that there were no plastic covers on the metal hinges for the trunk. Otherwise the interior was pretty solid.

mmarshall

Glad you enjoyed it.

True. Once, at age 19-20, I was a young stodgy Buick driver LOL.

I was driving stick-shifts (three-on-the tree and three or four-on the floor) and a clutch long before many of the people in Car Chat were even born. My dad had one back in the late 60s.

I also owned, at one time, a new 1980 Chevy Citation 4-speed MT...but I was sorry I bought it. It had the reliability (and the drivability) of a piece of crap. As a car...brilliant idea, but terrible execution and engineering.

The two of them have gotten the point where IMO it is difficult to tell the difference. It even shows in their pricing.

Though they aren't unheard of, Honda traditionally doesn't like factory incentives. For decades, they have sold from repeat-buyers, reputation, and word of mouth....but those days, on some of their vehicles, may be coming to an end as some of their sales fall.

The coupe is now history. It was dropped this year.

mmarshall

I respect MT, but don't always agree with them. And, yes, I respect your opinions, too.

In general, I respect Alex Dykes the most, who I consider the best reviewer in the buisness. I don't think he's checked out the new Accord, though. I looked his website (Alex on Autos) and didn't see it....but I might have just missed it.

Like I said, it wasn't bad. But I've been checking out Accords for years, and notice the difference on the new one. IMO the best Accord in history, hands-down, as with the 4Gen 1992-1996 Camry, was the superb 3Gen 1990-93 model. That thing was built like a tank. A co-worker of mine had a 5-speed model which went some 300K miles. I remember test-driving one new...felt like it was carved out a block of granite. EVERYTHING on it fit tight as a drum.

RNM GS3

MattyG

Very much so. My cousin was a Honda dealership mechanic and then went independant. He owned the 1970s, 80s, 90s versions as used cars. Why would he need to pay new car prices when he could just buy them used? Lol.

I drove those with him. Astonishing quality. Even my 7th generation coupe doesn't quite feel the same, but it is easily a Honda in every other respect. During his time as an independent I had a chance to take a customer's MB 190 out, that was a 1988 but used at the time. Now that was a tank and precision assembled. I also had a 4 cylinder 1996 Camry sedan, again - astonishing quality.

oldcajun

Mike,
The Accord has more than 2" more legroom than the Civic so they are not quite the same size. Honda's 6 speed manual is not as crisp as on previous cars which is a disappointment. The star at Honda is the Accord with the 2.0T engine and the 10 speed auto. I find it a direct competitor with the LaCross in the Touring trim and significantly nicer than the Camry or Malibu. It has a big back seat, nice interior, and is faster than the GM V-6. It is also, smoother without the course vibes of the 3.6 at high rpms.

Gojirra99

Johnhav430

Do you know if it has a hill holder (I don't like those), and is there a engine stop/start with the stick? On a scale of 1-10, what would you rate the tranny alone? My thing is if I knew that "this is it," as of 6/1/18, no car mfg. on earth will be selling any sticks, I'd likely get a loan at the CU and put 50% down on something like this car.

Maybe I should drive one, but I'd want an incentive of $50 or more lol And we don't have any room for any more cars.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

as you say, these are your opinions and i remember those accords from almost 30 years ago too and they're NOTHING remotely similar to accords of today, but to say the old ones were 'built like a tank', 'carved out of a block of granite', 'tight as a drum' and the new one is 'not as solid as in the past' is 'IMO' absurd.
​i remember the paper thin seats on those '90s accords, the solid plastic one piece dash that was functional and easy to figure out, but hardly very 'solid' or 'carved out of a block of granite'. they were reliable sure, very well designed and assembled, and very light vehicles, so fuel efficient too.​​​​​​
but to say a new one's materials are not as solid etc. seems purely subjective... what do you mean by 'solid'? is the new accord 'liquid'? i'm sure the new accord has a much higher tortional rigidity (and is thus more 'solid'), is vastly safer, rides quieter and better, is faster, yet still somehow gets incredible gas mileage, and will last as long as an owner wants to keep it.

mmarshall

Well, your opinion noted. I respect the opinions of others, but I also clearly remember those earlier Accords...I didn't own one, but looked and and test-drove quite a few, and helped a number of colleagues buy them (along with the Taurus and Camry, it was an incredibly popular car in the 1990s). In general, I was more impressed wth the materials and construction Honda used then..and still feel that way today......although there little doubt that today's Accords are safer in an accident.

mmarshall

Yes, Honda lists it with the specs. Sorry....perhaps I should have mentioned that.
That feature, BTW, contrary to popular opinion, is nothing new in the auto industry. Subaru used it for a number of years, and it actually dates back to Studebakers built during the early 1950s.

I did not notice one on my sample car, even in the Eco driving-mode.

Clutch gets a 9 out of 10. Most manual clutches today, wth the hydraulic-assist operation, dampen out the vibrations and shudder that once characterized them, and make it more difficult to stall the engine while letting them out. I'd probably give it a 10 out of 10 except that the pedal itself (with the sport-aluminum trim on it) is offset just a little to the right for my left leg.

The shift-linkage itself gets a 7 out of 10....not as precise, more notchy, and longer shift-throws than on previous FWD Honda manuals.

One thing I'd like to see on manuals is a physical confirmation of what gear you are in before you let out the clutch....that would prevent errors and mis-shifts. Ferrari, of course, solves that problem by using a gated pattern for the lever, and another method would be a light on the dash showing what gear you are in, similar to the sport-mode on automatics. But comparably few vehicles with manual transmissions do this.

It's nice to get a gift-card or other incentive for a test-drive, I'll admit. Several manufacturers do it each year at the D.C. auto show..and (presumably) at other shows as well. But a true auto enthusiast will not do it just for the money or incentives, but out of sheer love of cars....or as a (possible) future purchase himself/herself.