1998 Honda Accord Reviews - Page 10 of 13

1998 Honda Accord 2.2 iVTEC 2.2 petrol from UK and Ireland

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 LX 2.3 VTEC from North America

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.3 VTEC Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance78500 miles
Previous carPontiac Grand Prix

Summary:

I'm disappointed in the quality and think Honda is way overrated

Faults:

Paint defect on hood when new.

Emmission control problems times 4 at 20,000 miles.

Steering rack leak at 75,000 miles.

Power door locks & right side power windows stopped working - again.

General Comments:

Lots of road noise at highway speeds.

I should have bought the Camry.

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

Review Date: 21st April, 2003

1st Jun 2003, 20:26

This is a case of lets tag a company as being "overrated" due to the overall poor maintenance that I provided on my vehicle. Cars are machines (even Camry's) and they do break. If all the problems this consumer had were not do to lack of maintenance, Honda's original warranty would have easily covered them. With an invoice to the customer stating a balance of $0.

29th Apr 2006, 12:50

Funny how in Minnesota we have more 1980s cars made by Honda in the paper with over 200,000 miles. Nice try Ford salesman.

1998 Honda Accord EX from North America

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 1 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 kilometres
Most recent distance100000 kilometres
Previous carHonda Civic

Summary:

Overrated garbage

Faults:

Squishy, Buick-like handling

Demonic automatic transmission Unpleasant sounding engine, especially when cold

Shiny, cheap-looking dash plastic

Loose, floppy passenger seat

Very un-Honda-like reliability

Weak A/C.

General Comments:

My Accord must have been assembled on a Monday morning after a long 3-day weekend. The 4-speed automatic transmission was Satan's own: evil, ungodly up- and downshifts. The drivers side window fell into the door frame. The heat shield/mid-exhaust manifold rattled incessantly the entire time I owned the car. The odometer stopped working. At 60K the ABS computer module cratered to the tune of nearly $800. To make matters worse, Honda's "Customer Assistance" offered to reimburse 50% but then retracted their offer after I expressed disappointment that they wouldn't reimburse the entire amount. To be fair, it was a comfortable automobile as long as the transmission wasn't shifting.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 2nd January, 2003

29th Apr 2006, 12:56

Sorry, this must be a fake review. The Accord does not handle in any way like a Buick. You almost had me convinced that Honda's were bad cars and I should buy a Chevrolet or Buick cause they are SO good.

29th Apr 2006, 16:04

He probably meant the shocks or struts were gone.

28th Sep 2007, 01:48

More likely he meant that this car was abused in its past. You can hardly blame a car maker for a bad owner. It's a piece of machinery, and if you don't tune and take care of it, eventually it's gonna break... just takes longer for Hondas.

28th Aug 2008, 01:46

To the above commenter, 80k on a transmission is longer for a Honda? In what alternate universe? That is a typical failing time for the Accord transmissions. You can get that from any car brand, including the ones perceived as cheap like Chevy, Ford, and Hyundai.

A guy I work with has an '02 Sonata with 120k miles and complains because his transmission doesn't like to shift into 4th gear. Maybe he'll stop complaining if he buys an Accord and sees how much worse it could be!

1998 Honda Accord LS 2.0 16v petrol from UK and Ireland

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: 7.9 / 10, based on 48 reviews