1998 Honda Accord LX from North America - Comments

There is nothing seriously wrong with this car: just bought if off a dealer trade from an older couple. Never has had anything done in its life, but maintenance like oil changes. Tires may have been changed before.

Little stuff likes to squeak like the shifter and the little door under the cassette deck.

Obviously it has not been used much, so it squeaks a bit.

Little amount of oil showing up around valve cover gasket. Time for seal replacement.

Timing belt has never been changed/ car has a little vibration when at stop lights... never had any tune ups before?

Trunk may not be 110% aligned. Looks like it had been hit at one time. But paint is flawless. It is like a nanometer or two off. Not like my two other 99 Accords.

This car is in near mint condition, and I love the way it drives and it will be a good addition to the family with the other 5 Accords we have. Not a bit of rust anywhere and the paint looks show room. I saw only one dent on the whole car... bumpers do not have typical marks from older people rubbing against stuff.

Comfortable interior.

Engine is church mouse quiet.

Was going into dealer to buy a brand new Accord and saw this one, and thought it was the best deal.

I will update about anything that happens from now on. I have a past review on my 1994 Accord with 250+ thousand miles and I see this one may be like that car.

This is an early generation 6 Accord built in Marysville, October 1997.

Per Kelly Blue Book, value of a '98 Accord in "mint condition" is less than $9000.

Please let me know where I can buy an '98 Accord for that kind of money, thanks.

What? You think paying 7 grand for a 98 instead of a 2008 going for over 20 grand is not a bargain? In a society where we will never have as much money as our parents did, and where the quality of life is going down the tubes, I am happy with my purchase.

Obviously you believe in spending money and racking up credit card debt and spending all your money instead of saving. I do have funds to buy very expensive cars with cash, but why should I do that when I can save my money and buy a mint condition 98 Accord? I still fail to see why you are attacking me sir?

Original poster:

He is not attacking you.

You misunderstood what this person said. He meant

a. you got a great deal because

b. you pay $7000

c. this car is worth $9000 according to the blue book used car pricing guide.

Personally I also agree with your post about buying new car. I have never bought a new car in my 35 yrs of life on earth because.

1. it's the biggest waste of money

2. I hate payments and

3. I don't have a job :-)

Original poster here: I was getting ready for a barrage of comments from people who think I am crazy for buying an old 98.

Updates:

I have ordered a Honda CD player for 35 bucks. I decided against getting an expensive Alpine like my Civic.

Spending 7 grand on a 10-year-old Honda? You could have got the same year Taurus, Malibu, or Intrepid for less than half that, and had a more comfortable car.

In lamenting my choice of KIA, let me say a few words in praise of my Honda Accord LX.

I was homeless staying at L&F in Duluth and I got the car for $500, was wrecked front end, hood bungied down, but rad and engine OK. Man who sold it to me left it all winter as waiting insurance settlement I suppose. I had him drive it to me to be sure it would drive; he says he had to put a new battery in it (he said this grudgingly as he was advertising it for $700 as it was in the snow bank.)

Of course there were things wrong with it and every check I got from Labor Ready (before my husband died I didn't know places like Labor Ready existed--I watched the towers fall there---went to fixing little things like dying at stop signs, etc.

My wonderful repairman who must love his mother----I am single 60 widow) told me that he determined it was a vaciuum leak and could run into big money. I thought about this and decided I could afford $200. I said hunt for $200 worth; he found it at $150.

Afterwords, until 2 years later when the front wheel bearings went out and I was still without funds (my brother is a dentist) I never got in that car without knowing that I would get to where I was heading safely-----never once doubted it. Had my grandchildren in the car----without that car I would have missed two years of my grandchildren's life. Hooray for Honda!!!

There is no way I would put my family into a death trap Intrepid. The cab forward design will not be fun in a crash. Look at the crash test. You might be the best driver in the world, but someone else will hit you.

My sister will be the primary driver, but I maintain the cars. My friend has a 99 Concorde LXI and it is built with the worst materials I have seen in a car. I would not buy another Taurus because of transmission problems my family has had ranging from 1987 to newer fish bowl Tauruses. Well, yes I could have bought a 98 Taurus for 2 dollars, but why? I am not that frugal. We once had a 1987 Taurus that had the engine replaced three times in 13 years. Paid more to fix it than to buy it new. NEVER AGAIN!

This 1998 Accord is in mint condition. It can get up to 100 miles per hour and still be agile on the road. The LX offers great features and is a comfortable car. I routinely drive my other 99 Accord to Fargo, Chicago, Des Moine, Cincinnati, and Detroit and have had no problems. Next year I am going to Portland. I would never trust the LH's or Taurus for that rigor. The Accord is light years a head of the Taurus and LH platforms.

Having owned and enjoyed 4 Hondas in my life, I can attest to the inherent value in Honda Accord and Civic. They are worth the difference. Rarely did anything go wrong with the vehicle, other than normal maintance and age-related items, and they were very fun to drive. Honda, particularly the pre-2000 ones, are worth the used car premium that they command.

That's interesting. Do you think that post-2000 Hondas have seen a decline in quality or durability compared to pre-2000? I'm interested because now that it's essentially 2008, you can consider the 2003 models in the standard "used car" category being 5 years old, hitting the lots after they're being paid off or traded by the original owners. I'd like to know if there is some dividing line in quality at 2000 that would make a person be more skeptical of "newer used" Hondas.

That's funny you should say that about pre 2000 Honda - I had a 97 Accord LX and loved it, but we just test drove some new Accords this year and I don't know if it's because we've owned a Volvo the last few years or what but it seemed cheaper somehow than I remember my 97 being. Or maybe less solid in some way?? Nothing I can put my finger on but the older Hondas seem better somehow.