2003 Honda Accord EX 2.4L from North America


The best all-around vehicle I've ever owned


Radio quit working at about 3000 miles.

General Comments:

I love my Honda Accord. It does everything well. I bought it to replace a 2dr Toyota Solara that was too hard to get kids in/out of. The Accord has a taut, but controlled ride, more rode feel than the cream puff road feel of the Camry. I bought the 4 cyl version because of the price difference. I've found it has enough power for my needs, but also gets exceptional gas mileage. On the highway I consistently get 35+ MPG.

Want a perfect car? The Accord blends sharp styling, performance, comfort, reliability at a reasonable price to buy and low cost to operate. What more could you want?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 31st March, 2006

2003 Honda Accord EX V6 5 Speed Automatic Displacement (cc): 3.0 from North America


Total nightmare and would never buy one again


Front Brakes and rotors replaced at 7K (warranty)

Front brakes and rotors replaced at 14K (warranty.

Transmission Service at 17K told nothing was wrong.

Transmission replaced @ 32K later told about recall (warranty)

All brake pads and front rotors replaced @ 87K (no warranty $432.00)

Radio/CD Changer replaced at 98K (extended warranty - extra $2K)

Other Services - 105K - replaced timing belt and pulleys ($1k)

No service from dealer (3 different ones) less than $120.00 even with warranty service (for parts and fluids)

General Comments:

This car is a horror, my first and last Honda.

The only real good news is the engine, very responsive, but a gas guzzler, I typically get 290 miles to a full tank (15 gals) 19.3 mpg - almost all Highway miles too.

My 1985 Toyota Camry lasted 17 years never cost me more than $300/year to sevice (averaged out), including timing belt change, brakes, tires, oil changes and a battery.

Honda has a lot of hype surrounding their vehicles and I don't see how this could just be happening to me and not others. It may just be the 2003 model year - but I'll never trust them again - I should have used the lemon law and will not hesitate to use it in the future.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 20th February, 2006

23rd Feb 2006, 12:53

So you put over 100K miles on this car in 3 years??? Seems like some pretty hard driving. I'm considering a 2003 used Accord from a friend of mine, it has 36,000 miles on it. I only put about 15K on my vehicles in a year. I'll consider your comments in my decision.

2003 Honda Accord ex 4 cylinder V tech from North America


The car looks great, but I am very disappointed in the ride and the stereo


My 92 accord rode better with 172000 miles. The road noise is very annoying and I can't drown it out with the stereo because most of the time the cd's will not play.

General Comments:

The car does handle well and has plenty of power.

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

Review Date: 26th January, 2006

2003 Honda Accord Sport Automatic 2.0 Sport from Portugal


Great car that's underrated rather than underachieving


Nothing so far.

General Comments:

As stated in several professional reviews, the Accord has always been underrated rather than underachieving.

I was looking for a second-hand car in the range of Volkswagen Passat, Audi A4 Tdi or BMW 320d.

I have a Citroen C4 HDI as a company car, and when I drove the Passat 1.9 Tdi (2002 Model) it felt like a car worse than the Citroen. Apart from the great power from the Tdi, there was way too much noise and vibration from the engine into the cabin.

I realized that the engine from the Passat was the same as the Audi, so the problem would be very similar.

I test-drove the Accord right after the Passat because my wife love it, and from the first meters of driving, i said “This is a proper engine and a proper car!”.

The engine and the automatic gearbox are very smooth and silent. It's the kind of car where you can't hear the engine when it's idling, nor when it's cruising at 120 /130 Km/h.

This car is very good at overtaking, specially considering it's size and weight.

On the other hand, the fuel consumption is OK, and i can average 7,7 litre /100 km on motorways and normal driving, which i find very good for a 2 litre engine with automatic gearbox.

The ride is firm, but comfortable, and the handling is very good.

This isn't a car for the fans of gadgets. It doesn't even have a trip computer, but i guess Honda spent the money on more important things, like the car itself.

There are another two factors that influenced my purchase decision:

1) This is my 4th Honda engine (including motorcycles). I still own my ’96 Civic with a history of absolute no failures (including headlamps).

2) At least where i live, you step every often into series 3 BMW's and Audi's A4. Strangely enough, it's much more exclusive to have a Accord than any of these German cars (the price is almost the same), and the engineering it's well up to it's German competitors standards, minus some bells, whistles and troubles.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 5th December, 2005

24th Feb 2008, 13:49

Hi, this is the original reviewer.

I sold the accord after 9000 kms.

I didn't have any problem with it, but around here petrol is very expensive and the normal fuel consumption of the accord with a VERY light foot was 8,8 litres /100 km.

The depreciation of this car in Portugal is amazing (because it isn't a diesel engine), so I had a good chance to sell it and I took it.

With time I became aware of some design faults, such as road noise which is unacceptable for a car like this.

On the other hand, the handling isn't that great. On tight corners, the tires reach the limit way too soon, and most smaller/modest cars can (at least) keep up with the accord on a twisty road.

This was a huge disappointment, because my '96 civic is still very fun to drive on twisty roads.

Another thing is the auto gearbox: It's smooth, but like most regular Honda's (the not sporty ones), it has long gear ratios. The top speed (220 km/h) can only be achieved in fourth gear. This means that the car isn't that fast after the first two gears.

I sold the Accord and bought a Audi A4 with a diesel engine and 130hp.

It is a lot faster (6 speed gearbox), handles like a small sports car on twisty roads, pulls at any rpm, and has a fuel consumption of 5,9 litres/100 kms.

The Accord is a good car for old people, and I have no doubts than it is more reliable than any Audi, but if you want a fun car, stay away from the Accord.

15th Aug 2010, 16:20

Since 3 months I have an 2003 Accord Sport automatic. Though 7 years old, it has only driven 44000 kilometers!

For me, it is a supercar. I don't agree that it is a car for old people; the fuel consumption is 1:13,5, it is a very safe car.

The reason for buying it is the reliability and the V-tec engine.