1998 Honda Accord Reviews - Page 12 of 13

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 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.4 / 10
Distance when acquired10 miles
Most recent distance66000 miles
Previous carMitsubishi Galant

Summary:

Great!!! This Car is So Reliable

Faults:

Nothing at all. All I have to worry about is making sure the car have it's annual maintenance checks. This accord is such a great car. I will definitely buy another one.

General Comments:

I only have one complaint. I wish the paint job could have been better.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 5th May, 2002

1998 Honda Accord DX 2.3 from North America

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership1998
Engine and transmission 2.3 Manual
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.4 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance140000 miles
Previous carBMW 3 Series

Summary:

A expensive failure

Faults:

Engine block replace due to high oil consumpion at 20,000 miles. Catalytic converter replaced at 60,000 miles. Front brakes replaced at 100,000 miles.

Timing belt and pump at 90,000. Rings did not break in. New block, 4K for an new engine. Disappointed in this Accord.

Get one made in Japan is my advice, not Ohio, where the workers are...

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 13th January, 2002

9th Aug 2002, 00:39

Front brakes at 100,000 miles?!?! You should be lucky considering you went 100,000 miles for front brakes! Consider American cars for example, I have a friend how drives a 97 Jeep Grand Cherokee and he has to replace his brakes every 20,000 miles! If your brakes went out at 100K for the first time, I'd consider that QUALITY! Also, you mentioned the block went for high oil compsuption, did you change the oil yourself and overfill it? Also, the timing belt is a common thing with Honda's. It's reccommended to be changed at 75,000. I have owned a few Honda's and I NEVER had any problems with them whatsoever. Just oil changes and timing belt and pump at 75,000 miles (manual stated to be changed at 75K). All I ever owned were Japanese cars and I believe in there quality, I WILL NEVER BUY AMERICAN CARS EVER! The reason why I think your Honda was junk is that you never took care of it. Period.

1998 Honda Accord LX from North America

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership1998
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.8 / 10
Distance when acquired601 miles
Most recent distance0 miles
Previous carNissan Sentra

Faults:

At 30,000 miles, the Honda service center claims that the right front of the rotor needs to be resurfaced because it is wobbling. The Honda service center claims that it is because of the way I drive. If that so, both front rotors should be wobbling.

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

Review Date: 14th February, 2001

15th Feb 2001, 00:01

The fact that the rotor is warped due to your driving is pure "you know what...!" You're right, both rotors should be resurfaced if that was the issue. I have an '87 Accord LX, & I got both rotors done @ the same time!!!

With 30k miles on it, a brake job is normal, but there could be a loss of pressure on the other front brake, possibly the line has seized. Check it out with your dealer.

1998 Honda Accord LX Sedan 2.3L VTEC from North America

Year of manufacture1998
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 2.3L VTEC Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance20000 miles
Previous carGeo Prizm

Summary:

Best Accord ever built...

Faults:

Absolutely nothing. Neighbour's kid accidentally broke the driver side glass with a golf ball. Otherwise, nothing.

General Comments:

Great car. Great value for the money. Thousands cheaper than a Camry whilst providing similar room, a more powerful engine, better handling, and more attractive styling.

Though all of the above are personal opinions, I think the value of the car is a rather obvious one. Get the VTEC since there's really no need for a V6. Drove them both and like the VTEC better for its sound and power delivery. Yeah, the V6 is more of everything, as well as fuel consumption, so an I4 VTEC wins some points there.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd August, 2000

7th Dec 2003, 08:48

The V6 is also a VTEC. But I agree that both engines are very good. The 4 cyclinder almost seems more peppy to me from a dead stop, but the V6 will obviously win if you stomp on it. The 6 is a little quieter, and gives no vibration when you're in drive at idle. I can't hear either engine running at idle from inside the car. The only way to tell the car is on is to look at the Tachometer.

The V6 enables horsepower bragging rights for the male ego, too, but if that's not important to you, I would highly recommend either engine.

Average review marks: 7.9 / 10, based on 48 reviews