2003 Honda Accord Executive from UK and Ireland - Comments

Roof lining replaced

Off-center steering

Rattle/clicking sound from dash

Alarm fault (recall)

Engine breather unit (recall)

Windscreen washer jets fault.

I think as an overall package, the Accord is the best in the class.

Price/Spec

The Accord prices have jumped up quite a bit, this one will cost around £21000 new. But you get an amazing list of equipment including.

Leather/electric/heated seats

Dual zone climate control

8 speaker/ 6 CD changer

17" alloys.

Drive/Performance/Looks

Really quiet on all roads and cruises effortlessly on the motorway.

The 5 speed auto gearbox and super light steering makes it so easy to drive in all conditions.

I was really surprised with the responsiveness of the auto box, so much smoother and powerful than previous versions of the Accord.

The Accord also looks mean and aggressive from the front, with an EVO style grille. The rest of the body looks smooth and elegant.

Economy

The book says the Accord gives around 35 mpg which is not bad for this class of car. Insurance is reasonable, I paid around £300. Service interval is 12500 miles and you get a 3 year warranty.

Interior

Great seats, very roomy, much larger than the previous version.

Passengers will be comfortable on long

journeys.

Big boot, plenty of storage.

Interior trim seems to be really well put together.

For what you get, I think the Accord is a great buy for comfortable, reliable family car.

I purchased the new 2003 Honda Accord 2.4i Executive and have not had any problems yet other than the two minor recalls mentioned in other comments here. However, most new car models have recalls. This car really is comfortable, reliable and very well built. It's traction control ensures it handles really well in all weather conditions and the built in widescreen satelite GPS (DVD based) is great for all those business trips. Before buying I tested the Saab 93, Audi A4, Jag X Type and Merc C Class. Its the best car by far.

I cannot believe that we are talking about the same car, I traded from a Vectra on the basis of reliability, build quality and driving dynamics, but feel that the car is sorely lacking in all of these areas. It's 2.4 engine feels more like a 1.8, it has no torque, what power it has is in a completely unusable rev range (try doing 7500 in traffic). Reliability is on the wrong side of average, it has been recalled twice (as mentioned), the air-con failed and smells, the rear suspension has had to be replaced and the interior (which the motoring press says is well built) rattles like an old tin can, the "chrome" door handles have worn away to reveal some rather low grade plastic. From what I understand this is by no means an isolated problem.

I agree with the last comments on this car - it is a huge disappointment. I am on my second in 8 months! The first I rejected due to a number of faults: 1) Ignition cut-out, This happened at any speed and was completely random. Very nearly resulted in an accident on the motorway. My solicitor advised me the car was dangerous and should be rejected, which I did successfully. 2) Rattles here, there and everywhere. All door windows rattle incessantly. This fault has been reported on a number of web sites. The TSB that has now been issued to fix it does not work, as my replacement vehicle has the same exact fault even with the new seals. 3) Battery drained, probably as a result of unsuccessful attempts by the dealer to get ignition fixed.

I had a loan car (04 year) while replacement was on order - horrific vehicle. Everything rattled, including of course the door windows. The ride was rock hard (do not get 17" wheels with Yokohama tyres!). Complete noise box.

Replacement vehicle - headlight and transformer fill with water - being replaced. Auto box has some weird shift patterns at low speeds and whines at certain speeds, rattles have returned to plague me.

Conclusion - this car has not been developed properly and flatters to deceive. Interior looks good, but soon rattles, some components are just plain poor. Buying this car will give you nothing, but frustration.

Advice - do not buy one. I've concluded that the Germans do it better, though they sure charge you for the privilege.

Having had my Honda since March 04 and reading some of the comments above I must say that I have mixed views. Owning a Honda for the first time and from New I did not expect the level of recalls. The faults I have had are a New battery within first month, nearside headlight replaced due to fault in seam, and over the last few weeks the 5 speed auto gearbox has been doing some very unusual things which today led to 4th and 5th gears disappearing. Flashing green light on auto indicator and the malfunction indicator have both shown up. Car has done 33k Miles. Will wait to see what dealer has to say though the fault was reported just a few days ago with a test drive with a mechanic being inconclusive!

The main thing I want to say is that all the comments about Honda reliability being a myth are untrue - up to a point it seems!

You guys are all, I believe, talking about the current generation of Accord (2003 on)? I cannot comment on this car as I've never owned or driven one, although I am strongly considering one for my next purchase - this will now certainly make me look very carefully first.

I currently own a previous generation (98-03) Accord on an 02 and it has been faultlessly reliable and suffered no rattles or squeaks.

This is my 6th Honda (the newest 11 months old at purchase, the oldest 10 years old at purchase) and they have all been the same - absolutely no trouble with any of them. Other members of my family have owned 4 Honda's amongst them and had the same experience as me.

This is where Honda's reputation comes from and it is fully deserved - it will be a crying shame if the current generation of cars do not live up to this, as all your experiences would seem to suggest they don't.

To the person from 4th May 2004:

I can't comment on your problems with recalls or unreliability except to say that I've had 6 Hondas, none new, and they've all been faultlessly reliable and well built.

I AM however going to respond to your comments about the performance. I have a 2.4 Tourer, so I speak from direct experience.

I think one of 3 things is appropriate; either you had one that had engine problems, or you usually drive a diesel, or you are coming from driving more powerful cars.

Regardless of whether you like them, Honda have a world-class reputation for their engines. That doesn't count for much if your own experience has not been good, which is why I think one of the above may be the case.

I have owned a number of cars that were more powerful and faster than my current 2.4, so it's not like this is the fastest thing I've ever owned, but there's NO WAY you can realistically say this feels like a 1.8 (unless yours had some engine problem).

Although the on-paper torque figure isn't particularly great, I think it feels more torquey than the figure would suggest. I have no problem with the mid-range pull on mine. In fact, I recently had a spontaneous race along several stretches of empty dual-carriageway, including accelerating away from roundabouts, against an Accord 2.2 diesel (current shape). That packs 258 lb ft of torque and yet he was not pulling away from me at all at low-mid range revs, and I had the legs on him at high revs, which you'd expect. But you would expect the diesel to have had the advantage lower down, but it didn't.

Your comment that you can't use a 7,500 rpm rev range in traffic and the power is not accessible, is what leads me to think that maybe you're used to diesels, which typically pull really well from low revs, but are all done by about 5,000 rpm at most.

I don't drive like a lunatic (race mentions notwithstanding - I only do that if I'm on my own and the roads are pretty clear), yet I can comfortably use all the revs without any problem, and without going mad.

A lot of people are not comfortable revving an engine hard because they are not used to it - most petrol engined mainstream cars don't go much beyond 6,000 rpm.

But Honda VTEC engines are designed for it. The VTEC system thrives on revs. It's not like you're harming the engine, or even sound as if you are - mine sounds great at the top!

What is so problematic about hanging onto a gear and revving an engine hard? It's fun! If that's not your thing, OK, stick to a more normal (boring) engine or a diesel, but don't criticise something that's good just cos you don't get on with it.

In the past I had a Civic VTi that would rev to 8,500 rpm and I had no trouble using the full range in that either - maybe just doesn't suit your driving style.

Final comment on the performance; I've just been on a long trip in convoy with my brother-in-law who has a BMW 330i Touring. Repeated blasts on the motorway and away from roundabouts along dual-carriageways proved to my surprise that although he would pull away a bit at first (ie low revs) the gap would quickly stabilise and from about 4,000 rpm onwards there was nothing in it.

Capable of holding onto a hard driven 3.0 litre BMW - sound like poor performance to anyone?!

Last thing, and I can't finish without saying this; Whatever problems/faults you unfortunately experienced with yours, you want to try and say that you prefer the driving dynamics of a Vectra??? A VECTRA!!! Oh please If that's the case, all the above will be wasted words...