Seriously considering 2012 Accord 4dr EX-L V6 Navi

[Vikas]

Basic requirements were 4-door, automatic, 12yr-200K with zero drama (read: no unscheduled maintenance), want to keep under 30K and has to be brand new. The last edict from the boss ruled out other contenders such as any CPOs. When I visited Honda dealer to look at Accord LX or LX-P, I came across this one sitting in the showroom as "2012 manager special 28.2K". I thought it was demo/used but it is brand new. I got similar quote from another dealer, so the price looks real. This has all possible options. I compared this with Acura TSX (4cy auto with tech pkg) but I will be paying 3K more for a lesser, smaller and slower car except Acura will have HID lights and an Acura badge! I can not bring myself to go for it even though it looks lot better than the boring Accord.

There are lots and lots of interesting cars satisfying most of the listed criteria but very few can do it all. It is obviously my own bias which makes it difficult to take a gamble on any domestic or Mazda (rust) or Subaru (quirky) or Nissan (rust). With Germans, I know up front that they *will* need expensive (and complicated) repairs within the life of the vehicle, so those are out. Could I convince my family to take a chance on Kia or Hyundai? When they see their friends buying BMWs and MBs, that would be hard sell.

So I am essentially left with Accord, Camry, Avalon and Prius; all extremely boring cars but will satisfy the listed criteria. Between Camry and Accord, my family would prefer Accord. For me it is a wash. Between Avalon and Accord, I would go for Avalon if there is no price differential but I doubt if Avalons are being discounted that much as there is quite a difference on the list price between them.

From what I know 2013 Accord is not much different and besides I am not too keen getting in to first year model and the price is not going to be attractive.

Anybody wants to talk me out of this decision? Am I naive in assuming that after working on it for 13 years, Honda now knows how to make automatic transmission for their V6 engines? Surely, by this time all the regular glass components from that transmission must have been replaced by tempered glass at least

 

[SatinSilver]

I'd check the Camry out. No vcm issues, similiar price, the Accord trans still have issues with them. Many 08 V6's have had their trans replaced around 50k miles. No thanks. Thats a major component thats still not up to par. Check out driveaccord.net for more info.

 

[Danh]

Would you consider a 4 cylinder Accord? The V6 comes with Honda's "variable cylinder management", which shuts down 2 or 3 cylinders under light load. There have been reports of excessive oil consumption and premature wear in Honda V6s with this feature. The 4 cylinder should provide adequate performance and get better mileage and seems pretty bulletproof.

 

[SatinSilver]

It seems the V6 auto trans have been the ones with issues not the I4's. Plus the V6 has a timing belt to change which isn't cheap.

 

[bourne]

Dont Honda V6 still use a timing belt ?? Youll be much better off with a loaded V6 Camry SE or Optima 2.0T. The new Nissan Altima V6 is a good offering too , especially if you value driving dynamics. All fall in the same price range. Accord is on its last leg before a refresh, and IMHO falls far short of the rest in the looks department. Toyota/Nissan will be just as reliable, lesser maintainence cost and are newer so resale will be higher.

 

[itguy08]

I'd stear clear because of the transmission issues. From previous history they still don't know how to make a good automatic. And IMHO Honda's "quality" is more smoke and mirrors any more.

I've driven my Dads 08 Civic and that thing is a piece. Loud, underpowered, and ugly. I just don't get the love for Hondas. They are nothing special. But hey if you want to go the boring (and not better) Hondayota route, go for it.

I don't think there is a car out there that will go 200k without any unscheduled repairs. It's hard to buy a truly junk car today, buy what gets your blood running and enjoy it. I wouldn't rule out the domestics either. My Taurus at 41k has been as reliable than my previous G35 and the Taurus was bought as a brand new model (2010 SHO).

 

[Hokiefyd]

I would second the notion to get a 4-cylinder Accord. I absolutely LOVE Honda's V-6 engine, but in a somewhat light car, it's a little bit overkill for what it sounds like you need/want. You can get a loaded 4-cylinder EX-L with all the same trimmings. Honda's K24 is also a sweet sweet engine, and the 4-cylinder transmission is solid. The V-6 transmission is up to industry average now as well, but the 4-cylinder transmission has never been an issue in these. The K24 uses a timing chain and has a known history of being an excellent engine that will do 10,000 mile oil changes on any decent oil you put in.

If you like to do your own maintenance, Hondas are about as easy as it gets. Oil changes couldn't be much easier and a transmission drain plug and a real dipstick makes DIY fluid changes a piece of cake. The Accord uses a very nice wishbone suspension up front with a multi-link in the rear. It will deliver a very nice balance of ride/handling whereas other cars with struts won't feel as refined (I say that as a former 2011 Camry owner).

 

[NateDN10]

IMHO, I'd stay with Honda or Toyota. Kia/Hyundai may wind up being great, with all their significant reliability troubles behind them, but the fact is that we don't know yet. They do make some nice-looking cars though.

I'm also curious as to why you're focusing on the V6? Better deal? Like the power? Since the requirements seem to be "boring but reliable", the I4 seems to fit the bill better.

I'd go for a Honda over a Toyota, but that's just my preference. I've never liked Toyota's exterior or interior design.

 

[Chris Meutsch]

Get the 4-cylinder and drain-fill the A/T every 30k and you'll do nicely.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: itguy08

I don't think there is a car out there that will go 200k without any unscheduled repairs. It's hard to buy a truly junk car today, buy what gets your blood running and enjoy it. I wouldn't rule out the domestics either. My Taurus at 41k has been as reliable than my previous G35 and the Taurus was bought as a brand new model (2010 SHO).


41k, is that enough time to rule it "reliable"? I guess I have a warped view, as I've gotten my yearly milage down to 25kmiles (from 32k). 41k is less than 2 years old for me. I'd be rather upset at unscheduled repairs at only 2 years!

But I hear you on the "unlikely" to get 200k with no repairs on most anything. I think we can only hope for "not too expensive" or "didn't require a tow" repairs before 200k. After that it becomes "well I'm not surprised, it has 200k+ after all."

 

[Colt]

I'd go with the TSX and the Accord second.
The Camry is so ugly.

 

[Coprolite]

I owned an '08 Accord and a 2010 TSX. The TSX is worth the extra price. The 4 cylinder was great and very peppy. The TSX was also quieter than the Accord.

 

[BrianWC]

IMHO the transmission stuff is overblown as is the vcm stuff. Both my brothers and my parents have bought Accords (based on my initial CR-V purchase) and my parents' 04 v6 is still going strong, my brother drove his 05(?) 4 cyl into the ground at somewhere north of 250k miles and only topping up oil after he got out of warranty, and my other brother's more rational maintenance schedule on his 07 v-6 has netted him absolutely no issues at all. My own 09 VCM Odyssey hasn't had a hiccup in 77k miles of mostly in-town driving. Forums highlight all car's flaws. Not saying there aren't any...

I'd be torn about getting a 2012 model, though. It's at the end of its life and it's been refined and refreshed, yes. And bad part about buying a 2013 is Honda is notorious for releasing a model then doing fairly quick "mid cycle" refreshes. But at the same time, the 2013 looks like a better car in every way (except for copycat Hyundai styling).

The TSX IS nice. My brother that ditched his 4 cyl Accord traded up to an 09 TSX w/ tech package and has loved it. He got it one year used or cpo or whatever Acura does for $29k. But honestly, if you like the styling, I had some pretty good offers on the TL from my local dealer that put it in Accord territory. But...I just look at Acuras and think...expensive Honda.

 

[KrisZ]

Go for it!

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: supton


41k, is that enough time to rule it "reliable"? I guess I have a warped view, as I've gotten my yearly milage down to 25kmiles (from 32k). 41k is less than 2 years old for me. I'd be rather upset at unscheduled repairs at only 2 years!


By 41k both cars have had to be back to the dealer for things. In both cases, little things and nothing to worry about. Considering the SHO was brand new for 2010 - new engine, transmission, body, etc. it's been running fine and I'm perfectly happy with it. No show stoppers and nothing that will affect its reliability going forward.

The G35 went to 98k before I got tired of driving stick. I have no doubts the Taurus will make it to 150k plus. My wife's Escape is at 118k and has been doing fine.

 

[4x4chevydude]

I own an 09 Sonata with 78k on it and have been pleased so far with it....I would reccomend them for sure but if Honda floats your boat more than go with a 4 cylinder accord...I think v6 cars are kinda overkill usually they have more power than you need from a car and just get worse MPG....the 4 cylinder accords are a bulletproof setup so why not?

 

[hypervish]

I think both the Accord and Camry are great options. I suggest just having your parent's test drive both, and see which one they prefer.

 

[HerrStig]

Honda makes some good engines, and I really like their "non-strut" wishbones in the front. On the other hand, Toyotas are reliable as well, and there may be more out there to choose from.
The 2013 Accord is actually supposed to be smaller. I thought the last version was getting a bit bloated. Honda does not have an Avalon sized choice.

 

[tdpark]

does it have to be an auto? Honda makes great manuals and the clutches are like butter. I would get either a 4 or 6 with a manual.

 

[BrianWC]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Honda makes some good engines, and I really like their "non-strut" wishbones in the front. On the other hand, Toyotas are reliable as well, and there may be more out there to choose from.
The 2013 Accord is actually supposed to be smaller. I thought the last version was getting a bit bloated. Honda does not have an Avalon sized choice.


I really thought Honda was going to "Avalon" the Accord. It would have made sense-Toyota and Hyundai both have cars slotted above their bread and butter midsize. I thought maybe they would have beefed up the Civics to be Camry fighters and expanded the Fit lineup to compensate...