2007 Honda Accord Reviews

2007 Honda Accord i-CTDI Sport Tourer 2.2 turbo diesel 16v from Spain

Model year2007
Year of manufacture2007
First year of ownership2008
Most recent year of ownership2011
Engine and transmission 2.2 turbo diesel 16v Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired0 kilometres
Most recent distance195000 kilometres
Previous carLancia Lybra

Summary:

Reliable overall

Faults:

- Transmission boot broken at 60000km approx. Changed at Honda's cost.

- Not a single bulb since then.

General Comments:

Dislikes:

- Very noticeable turbo-lag.

- Some noises in the interior (glove box, speakers and right seat). Not so loud, but annoying.

- Handling is like you are driving a truck. It feels nose heavy and disappointing on mountain roads.

- Not the prettiest rear out there.

Likes:

- Handle on highways is OK, very stable and comfortable.

- Has good performance for the 140HP.

- Great fuel economy (6.8 liters/100 km, cruising at about 140 km/h).

- RELIABLE. Only a transmission boot broken in 195000km, and I suspect that wasn't a car fault exactly.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 29th September, 2011

2007 Honda Accord CTDi EX 2.2 turbo diesel from UK and Ireland

Model year2007
Year of manufacture2007
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2010
Engine and transmission 2.2 turbo diesel Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 2 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance154000 miles
Previous carPeugeot 405

Summary:

Reliable, but dangerous when the manifold cracks

Faults:

Exhaust manifold cracked, don't know when, because there was no change in exhaust note, but when I notified the Honda dealer, they knew all about these manifolds cracking, as they had sent a bulletin to all dealers on 22/01/08 re HUK1079.

This is a dangerous fault, which is only evident when you realise that the exhaust fumes in the vehicle are not coming from the vehicle in front of you, but being pumped into your vehicle through the heating and ventilation system (no need to connect a pipe to the exhaust if you want to end it, just buy one of these faulty Accords).

I have just had the manifold changed, at my own expense (£650), as Honda don't consider this known inherent fault to be their problem. The new replacement part is one piece cast iron, the faulty ones are two piece steel welded; with so many welds, no wonder they fail.

Having worked for the AA as a Patrol mechanic for 27 years, I knew Honda to be 2nd to none for reliability and safety; when did it all go wrong!

If Honda had covered the cost, I would still be recommending them, and would have definitely replaced it with another Honda, but due to their dodgy dealing over this dangerous fault, how can I recommend them to other people?

Must just finish by saying that I intend to recover my cost through the small claims court, as I feel I have a good case, as Honda are fitting a totally different manifold. If the cracked one was not a problem, why change it, and why warn dealers there's a problem?

Michael Rooker.

General Comments:

Reliable, cheap to run, hard ride, paint work thin, not as perfectly built as they used to be, just another motor. Seems Honda have lost their way

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

Review Date: 28th September, 2010

2007 Honda Accord SE 3.0 V6 petrol from North America

Model year2007
Year of manufacture2007
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2010
Engine and transmission 3.0 V6 petrol Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired22000 miles
Most recent distance26000 miles
Previous carVolvo 740

Summary:

Nice car with a solid engine

Faults:

Nothing has gone wrong mechanically. Although, the transmission is a bit and when I mean a bit, I mean like 1 percent of the time if not less... funky. It's hard to explain but it miss-shifts? It might be all in my head. A few squeaks and rattles, odd for a recent vehicle...

General Comments:

It is pretty quick. It has good acceleration. Honda makes very good engines. It is not designed for racing, but man that Vtec kicks in good!

The ride is good although the seats could be more comfortable. It gets decent gas mileage. The driving position is not so good, a weird angle if you're a tall person like myself.

It handles well.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 12th August, 2010

2007 Honda Accord EX-L 3.0 V6 from North America

Model year2007
Year of manufacture2006
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2010
Engine and transmission 3.0 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired27000 miles
Most recent distance32000 miles
Previous carToyota Avalon

Summary:

Great car with significant shortcomings

Faults:

After I purchased the car as a certified used car, I found out that a torque converter had been replaced. I only found out because I requested the dealer to check the transmission, because in my opinion it did not shift according to factory specifications. Shifts were accompanied by the feeling of pull or lurch, and on occasion jerks, and this is usually most prominent in cold weather. Of course the answer was that there is no error code. Honda of America wasn't very helpful either, they told me to go to another dealership. The problem in New York City is that honesty is a commodity in short supply, so not much choice. There is a significant discrepancy (>15%) between official fuel consumption data and real world data (16/25 vs 20/29). I suspect Honda just can't make transmissions than can be smooth, which is partly to blame on the design. I am yet to see a Honda transmission that can change gears without jerking and whining.

General Comments:

My second car is 1997 Toyota Avalon. It is old, but frankly I haven't really noticed any significant leap forward in technology (apart from the satellite radio or sheet metal structure). The Avalon had 4 gears, no grade logic control, but it still changed gears in a silky smooth fashion. The engine was quiet, 31 mpg on highway and 3.0 200hp/200 torque V6, impeccable car.

I admit the handling of the Accord is superb and it drives as if made out of carbon fiber, but it comes at a price. The suspension is stiffer, and will likely cause the driver to attend physical therapy in the future.

The aesthetics of the interior is nice, almost Teutonic, suits my taste. I admit I had great expectations before I bought this car, and Honda let me down again. My very first car was an 1991 Accord and its Achilles heel was the transmission. I see that despite 16 years Honda still doesn't know how to make good, reliable transmissions. Their engineers' diplomas should be revoked. This is my 2nd and last Honda.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 21st June, 2010

21st Jun 2010, 20:30

I've owned 6 Honda's, 4 of which had automatic transmissions (my first Honda was a '76 Civic, it had a "Hondamatic" transmission). I never once had any transmission problems with any of my Honda's, and they all shifted smoothly and quietly, to the point that sometimes I wasn't sure they had shifted at all. The "Hondamatic" made shifts noticeable, but they were barely anything to complain about (and they felt the same throughout the entire 500,000 miles I owned it).

Only vehicles I've had transmission problems with were a Toyota and a Ford (well, 2 Fords to be exact).

Average review marks: 8.3 / 10, based on 16 reviews