2008 Honda Accord EX from North America - Comments

"If the warranty and quality is as high as indicated then certainly a mfr. could match to ones you clearly state are crap."

I totally agree. All of our imports have cost far more to repair and maintain than any of our domestics. I also feel the warranty argument makes sense. If the cars are so good, why can't they match domestic warranties?

"Well, if you want to destroy the American economy, our rather generous laws allow you to do just that."

My wife just purchased Saturday, a 2009 Honda Accord EX-L. The dealer sticker indicates that the car is 65% American/Canadian parts and 20% Japanese. A 2009 Cadillac DTS Collection Series is roughly 75% American/Canadian parts. There is not a lot of difference. You cannot honestly believe that Japan is reaping the total profits from a vehicle that is 65% American. I told her about the debate on here and she laughed because her 2002 Chevy TrailBlazer LT was nothing but trouble almost from day one. Even the salesman at the dealer said that the U.S. will get most of the profit for vehicles built on our shores. She said she was silly for keeping it that long, paying for it long after the warranty expired.

"Of course if the country goes under (and if GM fails it WILL) then you'll certainly be in as much trouble as the rest of us."

I certainly will be, and I also am confident that I won't be the only one to have helped us get there.

"As for U.S. auto makers building "junk that should be in the salvage yard", please cite evidence before making such claims."

Previous ownership experience speaks for itself. Not only have I owned domestics, but imports as well, and from my experience, most domestic makes belong in the junk yard.

"Out of 35 vehicles owned in the last 35 years by our family, only ONE ended up in a salvage yard before 200,000 miles. It was a Honda with just under 100,000 miles that had totally disintegrated in a 6 year period. We have driven Fords over 300,000 miles, Chrysler products over 240,000 miles and GM products over 277,000 miles without problems. If this classifies them as "junk" I'll keep buying "junk"."

I'm sorry but if I have had to buy 35 vehicles in 35 years and 34 were domestics, I'd have to say they were junk. Talk about dependability, I bought my first brand new car right out of college in 1987 and was still driving it in 2008 (as a daily driver) with no problems until it was totalled and would be driving it in 2009. The vehicle of course was an import. I have no regrets at all by the purchase and would do it all over if I had to.

"The longest-lasting vehicle in Consumer Reports article (Oct. 2007) on long-lasting vehicles was a FORD. It had made (at that point) 488,000 miles without a problem. The Honda in the same article made less than HALF that."

Still not bad for the Honda, way to go! Fords are hit or miss. Sometimes you get a good one but more often you get a bad one, hence the acronym Found On Road Dead.

"If people insist on making statements attacking the U.S. auto industry, they should be able to back up such claims."

Ownership experience with poor service is enough to back up such a claim.

"Cadillac currently builds the fastest sedan in the world."

Wow, who cares, I certainly don't.

"Chevrolet builds a car that outperforms Ferrari."

This is strictly an opinion, Chevy does not compare to Ferrari and they target a completely different demographic from one another.

"Ford has a reliability rating equal to Japan's best (the Fusion is actually rated higher in reliability than both Camry and Accord)."

Yes, one vehicle and if you notice, the Accord scores 79 while Fusion gets 77.

"GM builds more 30mpg+ vehicles than Toyota and Honda COMBINED."

What's the point if they aren't worth anything? I look for dependability and good customer service at the service department, which I have yet to find with domestic dealerships.

Consumer Reports dropped its "recommended" rating for the Camry and Tundra last year due to quality issues.

Tundra is an American truck, go figure. Most Camrys are U.S. manufactured.

"A car review in USA Today (Friday Feb. 27, 2009) was titled "The Nissan Versa sings like a bird: "CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP", and discusses the rattles, squeaks and clunks in the test car as well as a "rock hard" rear seat."

Versa is a Mexican car.

"From such examples it is amazing for any person to call U.S. autos "JUNK"."

I still believe American autos are junk, otherwise, they wouldn't be skating on ice. Ford MAY be the only one deserving a look. You keep your junk and I'll keep my Hondas and Nissans.

"I'm sorry but if I have had to buy 35 vehicles in 35 years and 34 were domestics, I'd have to say they were junk."

I've made this point on this forum so many times that you'd think at some point people just MIGHT catch on, but, NO, so I guess I'll explain again, for about the 700th time.

I'm a mechanic and car enthusiast, and my wife and I have almost always owned anywhere from 3 to 5 cars at any given time, so 35 cars in 35 years DOES NOT add up to one per year for us. Some were kept a very long time (One Ford 325,000+ miles, one Dodge 240,000+ miles and one Buick 277,000+ miles). The total repairs for all three of those COMBINED would not total $1000. The Buick total repairs were ZERO. In addition we've owned numerous other domestics that made well over 180,000 miles before trading them. Not a single new domestic we have ever owned has ever required a warranty repair or ANY repairs before 100,000 miles. Any one of our imports required more in repairs than any 10 of our domestics combined before 100,000 miles.

That's why I don't buy imports any more. In addition, I have serviced these cars as well as just driving them. I've seen under the hoods, under the cars, and inside the brake assembles. I can assure you that the materials used on our imports was smaller, flimsier, and more poorly assembled than that of any of our domestics, regardless of what the ad hype says. I've seen bigger brake pads on motorcycles than our Honda had. I guess that's why they wear out in a third of the time my domestic's brakes wear out. My Mazda (built BEFORE Ford took over and upped the quality) could not be aligned after 80,000 miles because the incredibly flimsy from sub-frame assembly had bent JUST FROM THE WEIGHT OF THE CAR!! My tire store even had a NAME for the condition (since it was so prevalent). They called it the "Japanese Flimsies".

I also find it interesting that your wife's Chevy Trailblazer is cited as an example of an "unreliable" car. My brother-in-law is a doctor who has to be on call at times for emergencies. His medical group insisted that he purchase a very reliable 4 wheel drive vehicle to get to the hospital for such emergencies. His choice? A 2002 Chevy Trailblazer. He has never had one single problem with it, and last year gave it to his son. It had over 140,000 miles on it. And the replacement? An identical Trailblazer, just a different color.

His 2002 impressed my wife so much that after driving his she bought a 2003 GMC Envoy (exact same vehicle). It has 70,000+ miles and has never had a single problem. It could easily pass for new after 6 years. The same can be said of our 2001 Pontiac, 2007 Mustang and 2006 Fusion. All are showroom inside and out.

We hate having to hassle with getting rides to and from service departments to pick up our vehicles, so we drive ONLY domestics. Our GMC has ferried two of our Toyota-owning friends to pick up their cars, and my Ford truck (traded in 2007) once towed a friend's Civic home from a camping trip. None of ours have EVER been towed, nor do I expect they will be.

Just HOW have U.S. car companies "ripped us off"?

Do you know what the mark-up is on an American SUV, and has been for 15 years now? They are the biggest rip-off in automotive history because of the slick marketing that led U.S. consumers to believe they needed 4X4 vehicles on paved roads... and they needed bigger and bigger vehicles to cart around everything they own wherever they go. It was a niche the U.S. automakers capitalized, on costing consumers billions on vehicles that had a 50% margin of profit.

If a Crown Vic costs $9K to build and sells for the mid $20K's, how much do you think they are making for that Escallade or Navigator that sells for $65K. And STILL GM and Chrysler are about to fail and Ford isn't much better off. Talk about mismanagement. Why support that? If you fail at your job you should be fired and replaced... period! There will be others to come along and finally end the reign of the overblown oversized corporations. Sure it'll be a painful transition, but we'll all benefit down the road when things start over on a better track.

We need to get past this and stop avoiding the inevitable. These companies will not survive so dumping billions more into them is a waste of time and MORE tax payer money. If you support this idea, then don't complain when your taxes hit 50% or more because someone has to pay for this...

Well if you had 34 domestics without problems, that is a first. You stated that you are mechanically inclined too, which leads to much better maintenance and upkeep than the average person, which would extend the life of any car.

Our Trailblazer, which you stated is so unbelievably reliable, fell apart to the point where they would not let me leave the dealership, when I had them look at it, due to the fact that it was unsafe. Failed tie rods at 30,000 miles and the whole front end was falling apart. You could feel the steering wheel moving, it was so bad.

After that was fixed, the rear end started coming apart. Traded it in... My uncle had an Envoy... same exact thing happened to him at the same mileage interval. I also had an Old Cutlass that cost me about $6K in repairs in two years as everything was breaking or wearing out on it with way less than 100K on it.

Quality? I don't think so. In fairness, all brands have their strengths and weaknesses. Foreign car companies did not get their long lasting reputation building flimsy cheap cars as you state. Stats don't lie and foreign brands have always, until very recently, outweighed the domestics in all categories. Now, in a too little, too late effort, some of the domestic cars are finally to the level of the imports... but like I said it is too little too late, which is why they are on the brink of failure. Honda and Toyota don't seem to be failing do they? Hmmmmm.

"I'm a mechanic and car enthusiast, and my wife and I have almost always owned anywhere from 3 to 5 cars at any given time, so 35 cars in 35 years DOES NOT add up to one per year for us."

Well... mathematically it does :) It just means that, if you owned an average of 4 at a time, you owned each one for an AVERAGE of 4 yrs. Before trading it in. It still works out to 1 per year or 1 every other year if you count your wife separately.

The problem in the math comes in if you also claim that these vehicles were sold with over 100,000 miles on them (I've read other posts where you've also said that you put on well over that many before trading them in... you were responding to those who said that your vehicles were reliable because you didn't put on enough miles). The reason this is significant is that 35 in 35 years would REQUIRE you to drive 100,000+ miles a year. That's... Ahem... pretty darn impressive if you were also doing work. Your wife must be a serious driver 24/7.

Worse yet, the high mileage examples you cite mean that you would have had to have driven the remaining vehicles far less to make up for the afore-mentioned's long life, or... you drove even more than 100,000 miles per year. In fact, if you put 100,000 on the 35, your total mileage was 3.5 million miles plus the extra 500,000 miles you say you got out of your high mileage examples. 4 million miles? In 35 years? That works out to over 114,000 miles a year! And I thought we put on a lot of miles!!

I'm sure that you bought some of them used which helps, but you've also said before that you've been buying new because you're able to afford them now. You still had to have done some #$%^ serious driving (my best estimate is somewhere north of 75,000 miles AVERAGE a year). So either you bought only high mileage vehicles and drove them relatively few miles before trade-in (which is inconsistent with your stories) or you've actually been driving far more than most people consider likely. The average between the two mentioned scenarios is 94,500 miles per year. How did you do it?

"I've made this point on this forum so many times that you'd think at some point people just MIGHT catch on, but, NO, so I guess I'll explain again, for about the 700th time."

I wasn't the one who made the comment you were referring to, but I've been treated to the same reply in the past. Do you think that everyone just KNOWS who you are? Do you think that those who post are all regulars to this forum? How can anyone know for sure who you are? I recognize your story now because you must post more than anyone else. But a newbie won't. If you don't include part of your distinguishing story or prose, I won't either. So if you plan to continue to be the most prolific writer on these forums, you'll have to expect that there will be many more who don't recognize you and don't know your story...

"We need to get past this and stop avoiding the inevitable. These companies will not survive so dumping billions more into them is a waste of time and MORE tax payer money. If you support this idea, then don't complain when your taxes hit 50% or more because someone has to pay for this..."

If the U.S. auto industry doesn't survive, neither will the country as a whole. One of every 14 jobs in the U.S. is related directly or indirectly to the U.S. auto industry. A great example is parts provider Delphi, which was just bailed out by GM with part of ITS bail out money. Many false ideas are costing the U.S. dearly every day, and driving the entire country to the brink of bankruptcy. One of those ideas (promoted by import dealers) is that if a vehicle is built in the U.S., it is the same as buying a domestic. NOT TRUE. Only 9% of auto related jobs in the U.S. are tied to imports. That leaves 91% that ARE NOT. Also, only 1% of auto related jobs are supported by foreign auto makers. That means that 99% of indirectly related jobs are NOT supported in ANY WAY by any foreign auto company. That's 99 to 1 in favor of helping OUR OWN country by buying domestic products.

As for 50% taxes, I got a kick out of that. Studies have shown that the country with the HAPPIEST people is Norway. Its tax rate? 55%. Norway provides ALL its citizens (not just the wealthy) cradle-to-grave health care and free education for every child THROUGH COLLEGE. I'd gladly pay 50% of my income to be free of the stress of knowing I might be left to die outside an emergency room for lack of insurance, and with our outrageous college costs you'd come out better at a 50% tax rate. People want a free ride. They want roads, police, fire protection, etc., but don't want to pay for it.

If you REALLY want to see high taxes, just wait until the U.S. auto industry folds and 1 out of every 14 workers in the country are put out of work. With the resultant double-digit increase in our already high unemployment, just where are the necessary taxes coming from? Those of us who will (hopefully) still be working will have our taxes tripled to make up the losses. There won't be any other alternatives.

"Just HOW have U.S. car companies "ripped us off"?

Do you know what the mark-up is on an American SUV, and has been for 15 years now? They are the biggest rip-off in automotive history because of the slick marketing that led U.S. consumers to believe they needed 4X4 vehicles on paved roads... and they needed bigger and bigger vehicles to cart around everything they own wherever they go. It was a niche the U.S. automakers capitalized, on costing consumers billions on vehicles that had a 50% margin of profit."

I too am baffled by the American consumer wanting to buy SUVs. They are a waste of natural resources and dangerous to other vehicles. But I can't bring myself to say they are a "rip off." The fact is people buy them because they want them. The auto companies offer much more sensible choices at lower cost. I feel like the auto companies are living up to that as an obligation, if indeed it is an obligation. And also, it is no secret what the SUVs are and what the mark up costs are.

I am equally baffled at what a nice sensible sized car the Toyota Camry was 15 years ago, versus the oversized pig it has become now. But it is the same with all the "family cars" both foreign and domestic. The last car I bought, I really wanted something 500 pounds lighter and 2 inches narrower and 10 inches shorter than what I ended up with. But all the smaller cars from every manufacturer, except the unreliable Europeans, don't have the nicer features.

Back when the Ford Explorer came out, my brother really wanted one. But deep down he knew that really it was a Ford Ranger pickup with a fancy cab on the back. So he bought the Ford Ranger.

It doesn't really make sense to criticize Ford, GM or Chrysler for making vehicles that people want to buy. That is their business after all and there is still no law against making a profit.

All I can really bring myself to think is, God bless all you people who spent $15,000 more than necessary just so you could pay the health care benefits and retiree pensions for union workers. The only thing I can really think of as unfair is all the regular workers in other industries that worked just as hard and have not enjoyed the same plush benefits that UAW workers have had.

The recent collapse of the car market has practically nothing to do with the auto makers themselves. It has to do with near criminal behavior by financial companies, politicians, bad government policies and common people getting sucked into land speculation. The billions the car companies have been tinkering with are small potatoes compared to the trillions in corruption and waste that was going on while in the financial markets when no one seemed to notice, not even our vaunted "free press."

I am interested in what you have to say about the "rip off" by the auto companies. I agree with some of what you say and the exchange is thought provoking.

"I also find it interesting that your wife's Chevy Trailblazer is cited as an example of an "unreliable" car."

She constantly had problems with it. The first of which was the radiator that blew just as we were leaving the cemetery to bury her mother who died in 2002. How sad is that for a bad experience. The O2 sensors failed, a head gasket blew twice, inner tie rods ruined and this was before 100K, need I go on?

"My brother-in-law is a doctor who has to be on call at times for emergencies. His medical group insisted that he purchase a very reliable 4 wheel drive vehicle to get to the hospital for such emergencies. His choice? A 2002 Chevy Trailblazer. He has never had one single problem with it, and last year gave it to his son. It had over 140,000 miles on it. And the replacement? An identical Trailblazer, just a different color."

Well I am glad he has had a good experience with TrailBlazers, unfortunately, as I stated before, I cannot say the same.

"His 2002 impressed my wife so much that after driving his she bought a 2003 GMC Envoy (exact same vehicle). It has 70,000+ miles and has never had a single problem. It could easily pass for new after 6 years. The same can be said of our 2001 Pontiac, 2007 Mustang and 2006 Fusion. All are showroom inside and out."

TrailBlazer/Envoy/Bravada/Rainier/Ascender are pretty vehicles but can be costly and problematic. My aunt has a 2001 Grand Am, and that is one of the few good experiences with domestics my family has had. A friend of mine currently has a 2006 Mustang and it's already peeling paint off the rear bumper, talk about cheap!

"I've made this point on this forum so many times that you'd think at some point people just MIGHT catch on, but, NO, so I guess I'll explain again, for about the 700th time.

I'm a mechanic and car enthusiast, and my wife and I have almost always owned anywhere from 3 to 5 cars at any given time, so 35 cars in 35 years DOES NOT add up to one per year for us. Some were kept a very long time (One Ford 325,000+ miles, one Dodge 240,000+ miles and one Buick 277,000+ miles). The total repairs for all three of those COMBINED would not total $1000. The Buick total repairs were ZERO. In addition we've owned numerous other domestics that made well over 180,000 miles before trading them. Not a single new domestic we have ever owned has ever required a warranty repair or ANY repairs before 100,000 miles. Any one of our imports required more in repairs than any 10 of our domestics combined before 100,000 miles.

That's why I don't buy imports any more. In addition, I have serviced these cars as well as just driving them. I've seen under the hoods, under the cars, and inside the brake assembles. I can assure you that the materials used on our imports was smaller, flimsier, and more poorly assembled than that of any of our domestics, regardless of what the ad hype says. I've seen bigger brake pads on motorcycles than our Honda had. I guess that's why they wear out in a third of the time my domestic's brakes wear out. My Mazda (built BEFORE Ford took over and upped the quality) could not be aligned after 80,000 miles because the incredibly flimsy from sub-frame assembly had bent JUST FROM THE WEIGHT OF THE CAR!! My tire store even had a NAME for the condition (since it was so prevalent). They called it the "Japanese Flimsies".

I also find it interesting that your wife's Chevy Trailblazer is cited as an example of an "unreliable" car. My brother-in-law is a doctor who has to be on call at times for emergencies. His medical group insisted that he purchase a very reliable 4 wheel drive vehicle to get to the hospital for such emergencies. His choice? A 2002 Chevy Trailblazer. He has never had one single problem with it, and last year gave it to his son. It had over 140,000 miles on it. And the replacement? An identical Trailblazer, just a different color.

His 2002 impressed my wife so much that after driving his she bought a 2003 GMC Envoy (exact same vehicle). It has 70,000+ miles and has never had a single problem. It could easily pass for new after 6 years. The same can be said of our 2001 Pontiac, 2007 Mustang and 2006 Fusion. All are showroom inside and out.

"We hate having to hassle with getting rides to and from service departments to pick up our vehicles, so we drive ONLY domestics. Our GMC has ferried two of our Toyota-owning friends to pick up their cars, and my Ford truck (traded in 2007) once towed a friend's Civic home from a camping trip. None of ours have EVER been towed, nor do I expect they will be."

Fortunately, with my imports I've never encountered any situation where my vehicle stayed at the service department more than a few hours; thus forcing me to take a loaner. Even better is that I have never been left stranded in an import. Unfortunately, I was stranded several times with my domestic (once on a major highway where accidents and fatalities occur quite frequently) and it was at important times that I really needed my vehicle. The repairs were always complicated and costly. I never had the peace of mind not to worry when the vehicle would next leave me stranded. My friend's 1999 Ford F-150 quit on him recently in the middle of the road. My brother had to loan him his Toyota Tundra for two weeks.

Since this an Accord review... why not everyone buy Civics and get a bare boned DX model with the logic on here. Take away that some may have a family with teenage children or adult family members where a larger vehicle makes sense.

I have owned Hondas and Acuras... quite frankly why spend $15,000 more for an Acura mid size sedan that requires 93 octane? I have owned them liked them except we had mechanical issues drivetrain oriented. But you are correct, why not buy a plain Civic as it's cheaper. The same with Toyota, buy a Corolla and not even contemplate a high priced Lexus.

Why not actually examine actual driving situations before such broad sweeping comments? If you are a solo commuter that drives an hour to work, maybe a small car makes sense. If you live a few miles from work, I maintain any vehicle is satisfactory as you are residing near your employment. I find the rationale of a small car driving great distances each way daily to work ridiculous. I have co workers that drive over an hour each way rather than ever consider moving closer. At any rate, if everyone drove a Honda Civic instead of other Hondas-Acura Models you could perhaps cookie cutter everyone.

The issue I have is many like a nicer vehicle with great performance and handling in Acuras, Trailblazer SS Models, Cayennes if you can afford one that's your prerogative. I spent a lot on gas and 93 octane running my Honda TL VTEC models and large factory tires were high, headlight bulbs etc as compared if you buy a stripped bare bone Civic. Why are there many people out there that have spent $50,000 for Honda high end Acura RL sedans, are they worth it? I guess if you like, buy and enjoy them that's your prerogative to buy what you like.

"The recent collapse of the car market has practically nothing to do with the auto makers themselves. It has to do with near criminal behavior by financial companies, politicians, bad government policies and common people getting sucked into land speculation. The billions the car companies have been tinkering with are small potatoes compared to the trillions in corruption and waste that was going on while in the financial markets when no one seemed to notice, not even our vaunted "free press."

I am interested in what you have to say about the "rip off" by the auto companies. I agree with some of what you say and the exchange is thought provoking."

You are 100% correct. The current state of U.S. auto makers has virtually NOTHING to do with the cars themselves. GM alone builds more 30+mpg cars than Toyota and Honda combined, and Ford's reliability is on a par with "the BEST Japanese vehicles" (MSN, Feb. 2009). It IS true that domestic auto makers (AND Japanese auto makers) helped create the snob-appeal of SUV's. And yes, SUV's and trucks have HUGE mark-ups so they are profitable. I cannot, however, blame an industry for providing what the American public keeps buying. When gas was $4 a gallon you couldn't give an SUV away. Now that it is back under $2 a gallon those with a very short memory are buying them AGAIN. In a couple of years when gas goes back to $4 a gallon they will no doubt complain and blame the auto makers.

"The current state of U.S. auto makers has virtually NOTHING to do with the cars themselves. GM alone builds more 30+mpg cars than Toyota and Honda combined, and Ford's reliability is on a par with "the BEST Japanese vehicles" (MSN, Feb. 2009)."

This is a very misleading statement. SOME of Ford's cars have reliability that is on par with the best Japanese vehicles, namely the Fusion. Ford trucks have always been reliable for the most part but the gas mileage is poor. Also, it is partially the automakers fault for their collapse. They saw gas costs rising but continued building large SUV's and the hybrid models delivered marginally better fuel economy than the regular models.

Anyway, I believe it is dangerous to support companies that could fold any day now. A Saturn dealership in my area just closed this week, upsetting many customers. They're very concerned about how their warranties will be handled, rightfully so. Now they have to drive 90-100 miles for comprehensive service from a dealership. Why would I purchase a 2009 Chevy Impala when next week my local dealer may close business? What sense does that make?

"Why would I purchase a 2009 Chevy Impala when next week my local dealer may close business? What sense does that make?"

It makes a LOT of sense. You'd be helping your own citizens and you'd be getting a far better value, especially at this point. The reliability of the Impala is excellent. Also, restructuring laws for the auto industry under any form of bankruptcy require that all warranty obligations be met. Most people are not aware of that.

"It makes a LOT of sense. You'd be helping your own citizens and you'd be getting a far better value, especially at this point. The reliability of the Impala is excellent. Also, restructuring laws for the auto industry under any form of bankruptcy require that all warranty obligations be met. Most people are not aware of that."

I help my citizens by being a hard-working, law-abiding, responsible person. I am skeptical of the warranty conditions. My friend has a 2006 Dodge Stratus, and the dealer where it was purchased got into trouble for fraud and money laundering, and now the warranty is up in the air.

The 2010 Taurus is beautiful, if next year I can get a well-equipped SHO version for the same performance level as, but cheaper than the Maxima I have my eye hard on, then I MAY buy a Taurus.

"My friend has a 2006 Dodge Stratus, and the dealer where it was purchased got into trouble for fraud and money laundering, and now the warranty is up in the air."

The warranty is from Chrysler corporation, not the dealer. Any Chrysler dealer HAS to honor the warranty. I had this issue myself with a Dodge (the dealer refused to honor the warranty) and I took it to a local Chrysler/Plymouth dealership and they took care of it without a hassle. I have found, however, that in our area Chrysler tends to deny warranty service a lot. The two brands in this area that are notorious for poor customer service are Chrysler and Toyota.