1998 Honda Accord Reviews from UK and Ireland

1998 Honda Accord 2.2 iVTEC 2.2 petrol

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.2 petrol Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired54000 miles
Most recent distance64000 miles
Previous carMitsubishi Galant

Summary:

Disappointing

Faults:

Central Locking started to play up, fault fixed at dealership.

No other faults as yet.

General Comments:

Performance is decent enough, but I would have expected a little more than 148 BHP out of a 2.2 litre engine, especially a Honda vtec.

The car seems to be very jumpy and jittery and jumpy, and coupled with an unrefined engine and slightly thrashy ride, make driving it to be somewhat unpleasant. It's fairly crammed with extras, however, including leather seats (not very good quality material, doesn't really feel like leather), cruise control, etc.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 4th May, 2003

7th Dec 2003, 17:05

I'm not sure how you could describe any Honda engine as "unrefined." All 4 cylinder engines vibrate inherently, and make more noise than larger engines, but Honda does them better than any I've ever experienced. If you're trying to compare it to a Mercedes-Benz at twice the cost, OK, but then that means there's no pleasing you.

1998 Honda Accord LS 2.0 16v petrol

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.0 16v petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.4 / 10
Distance when acquired20 miles
Most recent distance187000 miles
Previous carCitroen Xantia

Summary:

Good all round car with incredible reliability

Faults:

Sticking handbrake.

General Comments:

Amazingly reliable car. After 187,000 miles it has never broken down, never failed to start, and still drives like new, apart from a bit of play in the steering. It goes into the dealer for a service, comes out again, and runs happily until the next one.

The mileage is only noticeable in two areas. The engine sounds a bit rattly when cold these days, although is sweet as ever once warmed up. There's also a little bit of play in the steering around the dead ahead position which never used to be there. Apart from that, the car still feels as new.

After a Citroen Xantia which was nice to drive, but broke down every week, the Honda is a revelation. The only downside is that I can't currently justify changing such a faultless car, which means I'll probably keep it until it's done over 200,000 miles! I don't doubt it will still be faultless, but my feet are itching for something more exciting. A Type R maybe.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th October, 2002

27th Feb 2003, 04:37

If you want something more exicting, get a Rover 620ti - the accord and 600 are the same car underneath - but the rover, I think, shows a bit more breeding when it comes to styling.

16th May 2006, 15:46

Compare Honda's reliability record with Rover's, then say that again. In truth british cars have had a lot of criticisms where I live about build quality. Honda on the other hand, has made millions of their V-Tech engines and none have gone wrong. The accord came 18th overall in the Top Gear survey for reliability and quility. (note: do not confuse quality with luxury; luxury means a great ride and comfort, whereas quality means that the materials of the interior are well made and will not fall apart; it's a simple mistake to make).

Average review marks: 8.2 / 10, based on 2 reviews