2008 Honda Accord LX 4-door from North America - Off Topic Comments

"6th Dec 2008, 00:50.

My mother owns a 2004 Honda Accord, purchased brand new. She has not had a single problem with it other than routine maintenance (oil change, tires, etc.), the car runs the same as it did the day she bought it. Before she owned a 2000 Odyssey and didn't have any problems with it. Japanese vehicles do have bland designs many times but the fit and finish are unbeatable. They are built for the long haul. With American makes, one can expect only a few good years out of it before the problems begin.

Also, no one really knew which cars were the best before the 1970's since domestics were the only ones built. They had little competition and consumers had little choice other than an American offering. True, Japanese makes were cheaply made before the 1970's. They sent engineers and designers over to study the manufacturing process, went home, perfected it and left American manufacturers in the shade at their own game. Since owning my 1987 Nissan Maxima that lasted 20 years with relatively minor problems, I can never see myself owning another American vehicle."

That's great, but I can tell the same story, just replace "Honda" with "Mercury" and "Nissan" with "Ford". My 2002 Ford with 100,000 miles has never required a single repair. Not one. How do you beat that for reliability? My parents' 1997 Mercury with 180,000 miles has also never needed a single repair. Tell me, why would I buy Japanese? I honestly don't get it. How do you improve on perfect reliability?

"5th Dec 2008, 17:28.

Yes, but the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry & Corolla are built in the USA, while the Chevrolet Impala & Chrysler 300's are built in Canada. The PT Cruiser is built in Mexico. So just what is YOUR definition of an American car?"

No, a FEW Honda Accords, Toyota Camries, and Corollas are ASSEMBLED in the USA from foreign made parts by workers paid half as much as Detroit, and with no benefits besides. That's why the Japanese build plants in economically depressed areas, to attract those desperate enough to work for $12/hour and who will not dare to unionize or complain. They are the Wal-Mart of the auto industry. The manufacturing, design, and profits return to Japan. Do you honestly believe that Nippondenso is an American company?

"No, the arguments never end because there are a handful of people who are so fanatical in their support of Japanese marques that they will not accept the validity of reviews that truthfully report problems with Toyota and Honda."

Incorrect. The argument is based on which manufacturers in general build better vehicles. All manufacturers build the occasional bad car or truck. It's just that the big Three build MORE bad cars and trucks than Honda or Toyota, hence their gradual decline in sales and the reason the CEOS of the Big Three are now begging for Congress for my tax dollars. Let them go bankrupt for all I care. They make garbage and everyone knows it.

One last thing - agreed that American car companies make cars in the USA (Along with Honda and Toyota) and those profits go to an American company. But when I watch TV and see that the CEOS of these American companies blow the money on fancy private jets on their way to beg for money... I can think of much better uses for my hard-earned money.

To 17:28: Please READ the first paragraph of comment 17:04.

To 00:50: Well, I could likewise say that our experience with our 53 year old Pontiac (totally original and running flawlessly still) and our 32 year old Buick (recently sold, never had a single problem) trumps your one Nissan.

I could also mention our 1975 Ford that was traded at 325,000+ miles (with never a major and very few minor repairs) or our 1990 Dodge that was sold at 240,000 miles with NOTHING but routine maintenance and still running perfectly with no oil usage.

I might also mention our family's 1983 Chevy Silverado that is still in service as a company truck, or our neighbor's 1985 Ford F-150 that was bought new and is still in use.

Then there's my former boss's 1985 Dodge pickup that is still in use (never a problem). Probably the highest mileage vehicle I l know of personally is a co-worker's Plymouth (1963 or '64, I'm not sure which) that made 410,000 miles before being traded.

Then there is the famous 1934 Ford with 1,000,000 plus miles and the 1953 Cadillac taxi that made 1,000,000 miles in CITY TRAFFIC.

Domestic unreliability is a myth. Pure and simple. When I was a kid my dad bought a 1951 Ford Flathead V-8 and was told the speedometer had already tripped TWICE (200,000 miles). We drove the car until it had tripped AGAIN and put another 15,000 miles after that. That adds up to 315,000 miles on a 1951 vehicle. During the last 3 years of its life the oil pressure gauge indicated a mere 3 pounds of oil pressure, yet we never had a problem with the car... at all. Now what was that about reliable IMPORTS??

Well, I could likewise say that our experience with our 53 year old Pontiac (totally original and running flawlessly still) and our 32 year old Buick (recently sold, never had a single problem) trumps your one Nissan.

Actually your story does not trump anything. First off, the Nissan was INVOLUNTARILY retired due to an irresponsible, 16-year old inattentive driver. The car had over 360K miles on it anyway. Took the car to my mechanic afterward and he said there was NO problem AT ALL with the engine. Just a minor power steering issue which was unrelated. The car was DRIVEN daily, up to 160 miles half the week until the day it totaled. I would have rather driven that old car rather than ANY new domestic vehicle. Also, I believe the story about the 32-yr. old Buick but do not believe it about the 53-year-old car at all. The car has probably been driven periodically over the last 20 or 30 years. You can keep telling that story and I will keep saying American cars are crap with low resale values.

My aunt had a 1992 Dodge Dynasty LE brand new that constantly stayed in the shop before it was FIVE YEARS OLD. She was such a loyal owner she bought a 2002 Dodge Intrepid SE. guess what? That piece of crap lasted 5 years. Guess what she's driving now? 2007 Nissan Altima, the car has given her absolutely NO problem at all.

My brother is tired of his 1995 Chevy Silverado pickup that has barely reached the 200K mile mark and is pulling his hair out. He has had to replace the engine, head gasket, radiator, fans and belts all within the last FOUR months. I can attest to the fact that domestic vehicles are nothing but useless pieces of crap that don't deserve to be on our precious roads. Taxpayers who don't drive crap should have the option of how their money is being spent. Personally, I'd rather give my money to a favorite charity than to an ailing car company whose best days are far behind. I agree that there are some bad imports of all makes, but that won't stop me from being a faithful owner.

"How do you improve on perfect reliability?"

Toyota sells more Camry's than any other car in the U.S., Honda is not far behind. They would not rank so high if they weren't at least a little bit dependable. Ford Fusion does not rank even close to Accord or Camry or even Civic or Corolla in that matter in terms of annual sales. Your argument isn't holding up. American cars for the most part are crap, and annual sales numbers show that many consumers would take my side over yours in this matter of fact.

Sure - I also agree that it's possible to have a 53 year old Pontiac, but I am not buying that the car NEVER had a problem.

I myself own a 1955 Mercury Monterey four door. Its almost 54 years old. The car is a survivor and has not ever been restored. It runs decently and has only broken down on me once in 7 years of ownership. But I wouldn't say that this car is reliable by any means.

The fact is that components on these older cars wore out fairly quick. I've replaced the water pump three times, the exhaust manifolds twice, the voltage regulator twice, had the radiator first patched then rebuilt, the windshield wiper motor was replaced, and a whole long list of procedures that never end.

The engine in it now replaced the original leaking 392, and the transmission came out of a Fairlane.

I will say that the car is easy to work on and parts are generally inexpensive. But it was made in a different era when cars were traded every few years and seldom expected to last even 100k. It was expected for Fathers to spend Saturdays maintaining the family car doing maintenance that would be considered minor repairs today. I do the same thing now, and if this were my primary car to drive, I'd be spending a lot of my free time keeping it going. These cars were pretty to look at, but by and large disposable.

The fact that American cars were built as mere replaceable commodities for decades, explains why they have never fully adopted the manufacturing principals or rigorous attention to detail as their Japanese competitors.

A lot of people here seem angered that Japanese companies have had such success here. But we have ourselves to blame (if that is to fulfill some sort of closure) for none other than ignoring the very tactics used in WW2 developed by a man named Edward Deming. He was an American Statistician who after WW2 suggested statistical quality control to Japanese manufactures. He worked closely with Japanese companies to close tolerances, improve logistics, and streamlined manufacturing. Ford, GM, and Chrysler ignored these policies and subsequently were caught off guard when Japanese cars became a hit in the 70's. So for those who are all angry about "imports", blame the Big Three for failing to acknowledge implementing quality and discipline.

"8th Dec 2008, 04:00

"How do you improve on perfect reliability?"

Toyota sells more Camry's than any other car in the U.S., Honda is not far behind. They would not rank so high if they weren't at least a little bit dependable. Ford Fusion does not rank even close to Accord or Camry or even Civic or Corolla in that matter in terms of annual sales. Your argument isn't holding up. American cars for the most part are crap, and annual sales numbers show that many consumers would take my side over yours in this matter of fact."

Sorry, all you've done once again is to deftly shift your ground in attempt to use a new argument to avoid admitting the failure of your old one. Regardless of how many Camries or Accords are sold, it doesn't change the fact of personal experience that a 1997 Mercury with 180,000 miles and a 2002 Ford with 100,000 have never needed a repair. The question remains unanswered, if the Ford and Mercury have never needed a repair, where is the incentive to buy a Honda or Toyota? And since you love sales figures, why were Ford's sales down less than any other auto maker in the crash last month, including Honda and Toyota? Could it be that consumers are realizing what J.D. Powers has been saying, that Ford equals Toyota and Honda in reliability and quality?

"Could it be that consumers are realizing what J.D. Powers has been saying, that Ford equals Toyota and Honda in reliability and quality?"

No, you need to understand what those reports are saying. JD Powers gives most domestic automakers high marks for initial quality. Initial meaning what is the overall fit, finish, and driveability of a new car. Most consumers are more concerned about long-term quality, as in how long a car lasts 10-15 years. In that measure, Ford, GM, and Chrysler fail miserably. Thus its easy to read a report such as this and make generalized statements that Ford and GM are better overall than Toyota and Honda. But the standard remains. Ford and GM build vehicles that don't have the same long term quality standards as Honda or Toyota. That's what consumers already know and why the Big Three keep losing ground.

The 53 year old Pontiac mentioned in comment 03:45 had the rings and inserts replaced at 150,000+ miles (in the 60's) due to slight smoking.

The water pump is original, as are the carburetor, starter, distributor, and virtually all other engine parts. It has had the generator replaced. The 4-speed hydramatic transmission has never been touched. Nothing on the body (except the paint) has ever been touched. All windows, hinges, latches, etc. are 100% original. Although used regularly until 1988, the car has had an easy life since then, being used only in shows, movies or parades (it was used in one movie). Still, at over 250,000 miles, it has been incredibly reliable.

The 1977 Buick LeSabre (recently sold) was even MORE reliable. At 277,000+ miles it had had virtually NOTHING done to it except brakes and batteries.

I tend to think the older GM cars were probably better built than Fords, although our highest mileage vehicle EVER was a 1975 Ford with 320,000+ miles and very few minor repairs and NO major repairs.

My Dodge (sold at 240,000+ miles) had had exactly TWO brake jobs, TWO timing belts and ONE hose in that 240,000 miles, and absolutely NOTHING else.

With the above experience with all 3 of the Big Three you'll have to excuse me if I'm a bit skeptical of the "superiority" of Japanese cars. With my driving needs drastically reduced now my 2007 Ford will easily last me a half century. Why buy a noisy, flimsily built Japanese car when I can drive a real car??

180K miles, 100K miles??? Big deal! I would be upset if any car I bought today couldn't last at least 200K miles. A car should last that long at the very least with the investment one has made on it. Even my crappiest American vehicle went 225,000 miles before I finally had sense enough to stop pouring money into it and let it go.

Also, if a person wanted to sell their Camry/Accord/Altima/Taurus/Fusion, the Japanese names would give the highest return with the American makes depreciating by as much as half when they are only a few years old. A company that is confident in their product simply does not let this happen.

Just in case you didn't know, Ford sales are calculated by the totals of all the brands they own. That's at least five I can think of while Toyota and Honda only has/have three and two respectively, meaning that Ford both makes and sales more cars altogether than Toyota and Honda. That's not to say it's more dependable by any means, simply that they have a larger market share and consumer base than the other two.

We must remember that Ford sells large trucks, small trucks, cargo vans, police interceptors and taxi cabs, etc. Japanese brands sell mainly to families and commuters who need a dependable car that will last many miles.

Despite what J.D. Power and Associates may say, Ford is still crap. Many reviewers are biased in that they want consumers to shop American. I am about to purchase a compact car soon and the brands I will cross shop from are Nissan, Honda and Toyota. I will not even step foot on the lots of GM or Ford, and certainly not Chrysler. Keep driving your domestics and telling yourself they represent "perfect reliability."

"The question remains unanswered, if the Ford and Mercury have never needed a repair, where is the incentive to buy a Honda or Toyota?"

This is a very good question. Since we've put well over 200,000 miles on Fords, GM's and Chryslers, and since we no longer have to keep a car more than 100,000 miles, WHY BUY A JAPANESE CAR? I greatly prefer the style, comfort, quiet and reliability of domestic vehicles. With a 100,000 mile warranty, that's no worries for the life of the car for us. What would be the possible reason for paying thousands more for a car that is not as well built and has a very poor warranty?

Here's the irony here. I've seen comments from Pro-Domestic posters who make claims that the Chevy Aveo is fantastic. That and the Fusion is "Award-winning". I've even seen comments that the Pontiac Vibe is a great car. I wonder if they also thought the 80's Chevy Nova, and Dodge Colts were also great. Ironic since the Vibe is built by Toyota as was the 80's Nova. Mitsubishi built the Colt. The Aveo is a re-badged Daewoo made in Korea. The Fusion is a re-badged Mazda.

In other words, as long as it has an American name slapped on it, these people don't care nor know the difference. This goes to the root of the entire "debate": People who don't buy Japanese cars aren't doing so because domestic cars are better. They do it mainly because the other car has a Japanese name. That's it. If you all would admit it, that would end the debate for good.

Domestic vehicles offer longer warranties because they don't last as long. I keep my vehicles until they fall apart (200K miles+), not because I have to, but because I see no need in purchasing a new vehicle every few years.

All my imports have run good long after the warranty expired (with NO extended warranty). My domestics however, have not lasted the term of the warranty. It's just my opinion from experience that domestics are shoddily built and use cheap materials and focus more on cost-cutting, whereas domestics are built for long-term usage and reliability.

I love how a lot of anti-Japanese car people here call them "flimsy". Have you actually looked under the hood of any number of Ford or GM cars? I rented a NEW Malibu about a year ago. The trunk on the thing was so thin that when opened, the sheet metal actually flexed back and forth. I kid you not. THAT's what I would call flimsy.