2001 Honda Accord EX V6 from North America


Cost too much money, but you get what you pay for



General Comments:

I love the amount of all around vision, and light from the moon roof is great on a dull day.

AC works really well. Live in the south so that is a BIG plus.

My second Accord, had the 1994 for seven years, nothing wrong with it, just wanted a new car!!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 8th October, 2003

2001 Honda Accord EX-V6 3.0L V6 from North America


A good car, but don't believe all the hype, and beware of reliability problems on V-6 models


First off, this vehicle was a rattle-trap! The moonroof, passenger headrest, something inside the dash, center console, and rear seats all developed rattles at less than 10,000 miles. Coming from a nearly flawless 10 year old Toyota Camry with over 200,000 miles on it, I found this unacceptable.

Although this vehicle was totaled (not by myself) just short of 30,000 miles, there are also a few other major trouble areas with this car that I learned about via a major online web forum for these cars. Surely I would have encountered them had I had the car long enough.

Honda majorly screwed up the automatic transmissions on these cars. They have an alarmingly high failure rate for a Japanese vehicle. The failure rates were high enough that Honda offered a 7yr/100k extended warranty on the transmission only to maintain consumer confidence and resale values. The transmissions commonly fail at 50-70k miles. Sorry, when I pay extra for a "quality" Japanese vehicle, I exect the transmission to last the life of the car like a Toyota.

Another trouble area is the alternator. The Accord V6 does not get a quality Japanese denso alternator like the 4-cylinder models and the Acura 3.2TL get. They instead get a General Motors DELPHI alternator. You guessed it, the alternators have a tendency to fail as well in the 50-70k mile range. The 4-cylinders and Acura 3.2TL models with the Denso alternators do not have alternator issues. Go figure.

These problems are not isolated to just the 2001 model, but rather all of the 1998-2002 generation Accord V6's. These cars are not exactly the best examples of "Japanese reliability" and that is being extremely polite. :-/

General Comments:

I liked the exterior styling and body design a lot. It's much more exciting than a Camry and not as controversial as a Maxima. It is contemporary and non-offensive. The coupe models look awesome, but this was a sedan.

The interior ergonomics were very well done in typical Honda fashion with all controls logically placed and easy to get to. Seats were comfortable on long trips and there was plenty of room in the back seats. Quality and "rattle engineering" could have used a bit more work, though - see comments above on rattle issues.

Feature wise there is a very high bang for the buck factor. Leather, moonroof, power everything, 6 CD changer, automatic climate control, etc all for US $2-3k less than Camry and Maxima at the time of purchase. Although the stereo was a 6 CD changer, the sound quality was not very high, but oh well.

Handling was sloppy at the limit because of the luxury tuned suspension and high profile tires, but the car is very compliant and steady over bumpy roads. The fully independent suspension is very good at filtering out rough roads and the car is very easy to drive.

I'm sorry to say that the V-6 engine was a very big disappointment. You would think that a 200HP engine would be pretty powerful, but not this one. The engine has so little power below 4000rpm that it almost makes you think you're driving a 4-cylinder, because that's about what it feels like. There is some nice pull above 4000rpm, but this is a "family sedan". 95% of driving is below 4000 rpm so having lots of power above 4000 rpm is nearly useless and not what's needed. I think Honda really missed the point. Both the Toyota and Nissan V-6 engines have more than enough low-end and mid-range power and are simply better engines than this Honda. If you want an import V-6, stick with those and avoid this one. You pay $3000 extra for the V-6 engine in this car, and you certainly do not get your money's worth.

The last thing I'll comment on is mileage. Not once did I ever make the rated 28 mpg highway. The best I ever got was 26 mpg, even with cruising at 60-70 mph on the highway for long trips with the tire pressures cranked up to 36 psi. I have no idea why. Maybe it was related to the lack of torque and constant downshifting that was needed, but expect to be pumping lots of gas.

The Accord is not a bad car overall. It is a "good" car. But all the hype that surrounds it (Car & Driver 10 Best forever, countless comparison test wins, etc) makes you believe that it's a much better car than it really is. Excessive hype just leads to disappointment, and that is how I feel - disappointed. When it comes down to it, the Accord is just an ordinary unexciting family sedan that is really nothing special.

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

Review Date: 3rd October, 2003

20th Nov 2003, 19:03

I would agree with most of it. Just lost the alternator today in my 1998 Accord EX V6 (56K miles). The Delphi alternator is definitely a piece of crap. The automatic transmission has acted drunk since I bought the car. With the car going very slow (e.g. getting ready to make a turn), the transmission wants to stay in 2nd gear. Then when I apply the gas, it hesitates for a second and then decides to drop into first (incredibly annoying). I had transmissions 20 years ago that behaved better. Took it to the dealer a few months after purchase because I thought there was something broken. The service manager said there was nothing wrong with the transmission. That's just how it was designed and there was nothing he could do about it.

He mentioned that a lot of people were complaining about it.