• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

2003 Honda Accord Coupe

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
There really aren't a lot of bad things to say about the Accord. The new styling is... safe, but Honda's just not going to mess with a truly winning formula. The coupe looks better than the sedan, though.

All things considered, I don't think you can go wrong with an Accord. Other cars may do certain things better but overall it's a great package. It's like using Mario in MarioKart. 😛
 

It's too bad they don't make say an LX sedan V6 stick. Any hope a year or two down the line?

Also, I was talking to my dad and he's like if you're buying an accord as a keeper, you should get the I4 over the V6 because repairs go easier. Like when the water pump goes bad or something. I want a V6 though.
 
Originally posted by: OS
It's too bad they don't make say an LX sedan V6 stick. Any hope a year or two down the line?

Also, I was talking to my dad and he's like if you're buying an accord as a keeper, you should get the I4 over the V6 because repairs go easier. Like when the water pump goes bad or something. I want a V6 though.
Click to expand...

I'd want the V6 too! 😀
 
Also, I was talking to my dad and he's like if you're buying an accord as a keeper, you should get the I4 over the V6 because repairs go easier. Like when the water pump goes bad or something. I want a V6 though.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I4 might run you less in the long run. Take less oil, two less spark plugs, easier on fuel, and most importantly much easier to work with. Many V6 engines are shoehorned into the engine bays. The I4's in the same car leave LOT's of room for you to work inside of there. A V6 may require you to spend an hour or two taking things apart to repace a bad par, and then you have to put it back together - while the I4 may leave enough room for you to reach down into the engine bay to fix it.

Just a guess.
 
Originally posted by: vi_edit


I dunno. I4 might run you less in the long run. Take less oil, two less spark plugs, easier on fuel, and most importantly much easier to work with. Many V6 engines are shoehorned into the engine bays. The I4's in the same car leave LOT's of room for you to work inside of there. A V6 may require you to spend an hour or two taking things apart to repace a bad par, and then you have to put it back together - while the I4 may leave enough room for you to reach down into the engine bay to fix it.

Just a guess.
Click to expand...

Yeah, on my last accord 100K+ miles down the line, stuff like the water pump, alternator, master brake cylinder started going bad.

There is seriously no space under the hood of V6 FWD cars, so fixing that stuff is a bitch. I4s of the same model are easier to repair.

I guess I could always just sell off the car before it hits 100K. 😀

 
I can damn near stand inside the engine bay of my 4 banger camry. Not the same for the V6. I could probably swap out the alternator on my camry in a matter of minutes with the 4 cylinder. The V6 would be an absolute bitch to get to.
 
Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Suckas and your cramped FWD engine bays!
Click to expand...

Gee, I'm sorry the 2.4L in your car is dwarfed by the 3.0L w/ 2 more cylinders in the Accord.
rolleye.gif
 
Originally posted by: vi_edit
Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Suckas and your cramped FWD engine bays!
Click to expand...

Gee, I'm sorry the 2.4L in your car is dwarfed by the 3.0L w/ 2 more cylinders in the Accord.
rolleye.gif
Click to expand...

Well, consider that Honda does have an engine that's ~2.2L and only 4 cylinders that will put out nearly as much horse... though not nearly the same torque (H22A)
Hopefully they do bring over the Euro Accord here as an Acura as planned.

I also liked the old front facia better... it's a good buy, I'd still buy the Altima or Maxima for performance though. They handle better than the Accord.
 
Well, consider that Honda does have an engine that's ~2.2L and only 4 cylinders that will put out nearly as much horse... though not nearly the same torque (H22A)
Click to expand...

It ain't about about how much power you make. It's how readily available it is IMHO. Gimme 200HP/240 ft-lbs available at 3000RPM's over 220hp/180 ft-lbs available at 7000RPM's any day.
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: conjur
Nah...these new Accords are SWEET! Everyone coming on the lot (well, one guy didn't...was driving a 90s Accord) loves them. Much roomier interior, better-looking, and definitely more powerful. Sold an LX V-6 sedan yesterday and the guy floored it and we were at 100mph in no time! 🙂

What I'm hearing is each dealership gets only one Coupe V-6 with the 6-speed manual this year. Ours will be black with black leather and Navigational system....supposed to be in in April sometime.
Click to expand...

One per dealer?

That has to be BS, no way an Accord would be such limited production.

That coupe is damn nice though, I loved my '89.

Viper GTS
Click to expand...

Each dealership's allocation is based on their 2002 coupe sales, they are NOT limited to 1 or 2. One dealer in Atlanta will be getting 2/month. All dealers are getting one coverage unit.

link

 
The 4 cylinder accord might be underrated

BTW, and I'll be doing a write up on this with dyno sheets, the K24 in the Accord is way, way, underrated. I put the auto on the dyno and it put down 146 hp and 150 lbs-ft to the wheels.

By comparison, a stock MT Base RSX puts down something in the low 130s, and a stock 02 Civic Si puts down high 130s. I've never dyno'd a stock auto base RSX, but fully modded they're only putting down 140 whp, which is probably a 15-20 hp gain over stock.

Both these 160 hp (rated) manual transmission cars are putting less to the wheels than an auto Accord also rated at 160 hp! I'd estimate the Accord is making more than 170 crank hp, probably closer to 180 hp, with torque in excess of 170 lbs-ft. This would explain how Motor Trend, in their COTY testing, was able to flog a 5-spd I4 Accord to acceleration times right on top of a Civic Si - despite the Accord weighing some 250-300 lbs more.




146 WHP, working backwards at a 20% drivetrain loss for autos, is a little over 180 crank HP. 😀

It's rated for 160.

 
Originally posted by: OS
The 4 cylinder accord might be underrated

BTW, and I'll be doing a write up on this with dyno sheets, the K24 in the Accord is way, way, underrated. I put the auto on the dyno and it put down 146 hp and 150 lbs-ft to the wheels.

By comparison, a stock MT Base RSX puts down something in the low 130s, and a stock 02 Civic Si puts down high 130s. I've never dyno'd a stock auto base RSX, but fully modded they're only putting down 140 whp, which is probably a 15-20 hp gain over stock.

Both these 160 hp (rated) manual transmission cars are putting less to the wheels than an auto Accord also rated at 160 hp! I'd estimate the Accord is making more than 170 crank hp, probably closer to 180 hp, with torque in excess of 170 lbs-ft. This would explain how Motor Trend, in their COTY testing, was able to flog a 5-spd I4 Accord to acceleration times right on top of a Civic Si - despite the Accord weighing some 250-300 lbs more.


impressive🙂


i think honda designs their rear lights ugly on first generation to give themselves room to spiffy it up as the years go on within that generation. atleast thats the way it seems with past civics/accords i remember.



146 WHP, working backwards at a 20% drivetrain loss for autos, is a little over 180 crank HP. 😀

It's rated for 160.
Click to expand...

 
Finally...a Honda with some fscking torque. I think the car looks nice. If I didn't just order a VW GTI VR6, I'd get one of those.
 
Originally posted by: RossMAN
Originally posted by: MaxDSP
they shouldnt have messed with the current design (high back, triangle brake lights, etc)

EDIT: as far as the exterior design goes
Click to expand...

I like the interior but I agree, the previous exterior was better.
Click to expand...

I agree also, interior = nice, exterior = :frown:
 
I am so Jeleous of people that can afford the 6sp coupe :frown:

Here in Panama City, our dealership sold it's 6sp in less than a day. It was beautiful too - Blue with black leather, spoiler, splashguards, sunroof visor, and the AWESOME rims that the 6sp gets 😀 I saw it the day it got off the truck, and a few hours later I wanted to stop by and test drive it, but the salesman told me that they JUST sold it :frown:
 
Originally posted by: kadajawi
The interior looks cool (the huge display, the round instruments... not bad 🙂 ), but the outside... no.
Click to expand...

That's production? I thought that was just a in the concept cars? SWEEEEEEEEEET!

Not that I like the exterior design to much, but the interior digital display just makes it taht much more cooler!
 
Why the hell did Honda have to f!ck up on the designing. I swear, the 1999 accord looks sooooo much nicer than these new 2003 ones. Sure they are more powerful but that's why you put a 2003 engine into the 1999. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top