2008 Honda Accord EX from North America - Off Topic Comments

Yes, 19 mpg with an Accord is normal for many. Sadly, Honda, like Toyota, has dropped the ball on quality, efficiency and reliability.

My family has had past experience with both Honda and Toyota, and will never purchase another one.

As for rattles, none of our domestics purchased since 2001 have developed a single rattle or squeak. The quality of our GM cars is amazing.

Our 8-year-old GM rides, runs and drives as if it just rolled off the showroom floor, and at 75,000 miles has never had a single problem.

Our 6-year-old GM has 65,000 miles and is likewise perfect, with nary a rattle or squeak, and no repairs.

Our 2007 Ford is thus far perfect, but doesn't have enough miles to make an objective comment on it yet. Based on one of our previous Fords that was traded at 325,000 miles, I expect good service from the new one too.

We've owned several imports, and none has ever been as solid or reliable as any of our Fords, GM's or Chrysler products.

The problem with the Trailblazer must be fairly rare. My brother-in-law is a doctor and is required by his medical group, who are on call for emergencies at all hours, to own a dependable 4-wheel drive vehicle. He purchased a new 2002 Trailblazer, and after way over 100,000 miles passed it on to his son and bought another one. Neither ever had a single problem.

Our GMC Envoy (same vehicle as a Trailblazer) has never had any problems either. The only vehicles my family has ever had any serious problems with were a German built VW, a Japanese built Honda and a Japanese built Mazda (before Ford took over and the build quality improved drastically).

The most poorly built and unreliable vehicle I ever had the displeasure of having to put up with was a Honda.

Honda and Toyota vehicles today are not likely to last as long as they have in years past. These companies have outsourced much of the production on the cars to the US and Mexico and Canada. The same quality controls are not used here as they are in Japan. Technically even though these models are dubbed imports, most are domestic makes just like Chrysler, Ford, and GM.

All cars can last a long time, but I do believe foreign vehicles do last longer.

I owned a 1996 GMC Sonoma pickup that lasted 225,000 miles with me before blowing a head gasket. After selling the truck, the new owner has it back on the road today. The whole time I owned the truck I was forced to pay costly repairs quite frequently. My axle once fell apart, the hood jammed, air and heat went out, electrical system was poor among other things. Routine things like timing belt and alternator caused fairly expensive repairs.

As far as engineering is concerned I do not believe there is an extreme difference for the most part. The biggest difference is build quality. A vehicle not well built will nickel and dime an owner, parts will fall apart, odd things will break on a regular basis. This is what category "domestic" vehicles fall under and they typically have poor resale value.

Foreign cars' build materials hold up far longer and things like door locks aren't likely to break as easily as domestics. With regular maintenance the motors last far longer than those of American cars.

My 1987 Nissan Maxima was perfect in every way for 21 years. The car in its entire life only needed brakes, tires, alignment and the usual oil changes and the like. Even after it was more than 20 years old, it performed well on the road with NO problems that weren't ordinary. The car was far less costly overall than the Sonoma pickup. It was totaled but was worth every penny I spent on it.

My Sentra, which is four years old, is a good car but I doubt it will last as long as the Maxima. It shows how much quality is compromised when cost-cutting strategies are implemented. I'd take a foreign car, one that is truly foreign (actually manufactured in the foreign country) any day over American makes.

Actually the Trailblazer I had that fell apart was not that uncommon according to the dealer that fixed it. My uncle had an Envoy at the same time and his whole front end came apart as well at about the same 30K mile range. He now drives a Ford. As to the comment about the economy... This is a car rating site not an economic forum. They are just stating their opinion of the quality of cars. Lighten up already!!

After 3 Explorers, we traded for a 2003 GMC Envoy in June of 2003. The Fords were totally reliable (never a problem with any of them), but the Envoy has sold us on GM. It is awesomely powerful, incredibly smooth and accelerates faster than lots of cars. At nearly 70,000 miles it has had one battery and NOTHING else. It still has the original brakes and Michelin tires. This has been one of the most reliable vehicles our family has ever owned. I've never heard any of our friends who own Trailblazers, Envoys, Rainiers, Ascenders or Bravadas (all are the same vehicle) complain. They all love them and have had no problems at all with them.

Just goes to show there are lemons in every car line. We actually traded the Trailblazer for an Ascender which is a 2004 and have had no other issues as far as falling apart. I was hoping it was a fluke of a problem and so far it has turned out to be so. My uncle did have the same thing happen on his Envoy but his was a 2002 or 2003 as well so I was thinking it may have been an earlier problem with the trucks. The dealer was kind of annoyed with the quality issues when I got mine fixed and they said it was not an uncommon problem. I never saw any recall though so it couldn't be too wide spread. Maybe they were just built on a Monday!! We are having the stalling issue with the Ascender, though, which seems to be common on the Trailblazer line across the board but it seems a simple computer fix so I am hopeful it will be remedied shortly.

The 2002 Trailblazer and its clones were plagued with TONS of computer-related problems. As a mechanic (who is NOT computer-qualified) I was well aware of this issue. When we bought our 2003, I sought out a dealership that had a very well-trained and highly computer-qualified tech staff. From day one we have had great service from this dealership, and have encountered only ONE very minor glitch. At 56,000 miles (out of warranty) the computer decided to re-route the air flow from A/C from the dash to the floor only. Our dealership repaired this minor issue free of charge in less than half a day. Other than that, no problems of ANY kind in 6 years. Good dealer service is a important as buying a good vehicle.

Modern domestics are more reliable than imports. Even older domestics were more reliable. My oldest domestic is a 2001 and my newest is a 2007 (we also own a 2003). None of them has ever had a single problem. Not even so much as replacing a light bulb.

By 40,000 miles our last Honda was plagued with clattering CV joints, worn out brakes and excessive oil consumption.

I have never worried about domestic vehicles wearing out.

My extended family currently owns a 54-year-old Pontiac, a 39-year-old Dodge, a 42-year-old Dodge, and a 32-year-old Buick. They all run great. The Pontiac has had one set of rings at 150,000 miles, each of the Dodges has had one engine rebuild, and the Buick has never had ANY problems. Why on Earth would I want a cheaply built and overpriced import?

If the American auto industry goes under, my 2007 Ford will outlive me, so I won't be needing another car anyway. How many 30-year-old Hondas or Toyotas are still used as daily drivers?

I highly recommend Peter DeLorenzo's book "The United States of Toyota" as a MUST READ for all of those who flippantly dismiss the disastrous results of destroying the American auto industry. Read it and then tell us "It doesn't matter if I buy a Toyota (or Honda, Nissan, etc.)".

"If you read the book cited in comment 21:28 you'll find that destroying the U.S. auto industry by buying from foreign-based companies will potentially wipe out ONE IN EVERY FIFTEEN jobs in the U.S. You may not even realize your job in such varied fields as finance, healthcare or insurance are even RELATED to the U.S. auto industry until you get you pink slip. Happy Depression."

You misunderstand my meaning. I was already aware of how profound a loss of EVEN ONE of these companies would likely be. But simply arguing that that is the case won't convince someone to buy... someone who thinks that their purchase won't forestall the inevitable collapse because as many have inferred, it isn't strictly based on sales. Their point (valid or not) is that the collapse is GOING to happen... either because of mismanagement, union pressure, poor products, or some combination thereof. It's simply a matter of time. They don't think their purchase will make any difference. Until you can find quantitative evidence that the mentioned factors have been fully addressed, they will continue to argue that, no matter what they buy, Detroit will fail for systemic reasons.