accord v6 ex
 

Went to a honda dealer today and test drove an accord v6 ex sedan w/ navi and then coupe. I was curious to find out how the power was being that it's a 240hp engine. I read somewhere before in the forum that it's just as fast as an rx-8. Well, i'm here to report that it's not even close. I didn't drive the 6sp just the auto but man, i couldn't get the power i expected from it. The interior is pretty cool though, the voice navi was great. Has anyone else driven a v6 accord and felt that it didn't have the pull? It has like 40 more hp than my old bmw that i had and it felt slower. All i can though is you get alot out of an accord for the price. my wife liked how it had lots more legroom.

Check out the Mazda6, IMO its a better car than the accord :O

Drive the 6 speed, it felt to me like it pulls a little harder than the RX-8... Comparing an auto to a 6 speed just isn't very fair because of the extra drivetrain lose and the overall driving dynamic.

They only had 1 6sp accord and it was in the showroom. Ya, you're probably right, would have been a much better comparison.

Gearing's a lot different taller on the Accord automatic, too. It's much heavier than the RX8, plus the extra power loss through the torque converter, but the rated gas mileage is 21 city 32 highway.

I traded in my 03 Accord coupe V6 for my RX-8, tell you the truth, even w/the auto, the accord pulls harder. I love my 8, and dont regret anything but the Honda does pull harder, IMO.

That's intersting, i felt the exact opposite. I got to try an accord v6 ex 6sp and one thing I noticed is that the cluch is much more forgiving. It had power but it felt like I was foalting and it didn't have as much grip. I didn't like it's handling. I also like the feel of the steering wheel on the rx-8 a lot more.

How comeyou traded in your accord ?

I almost bought a 2001 V6 Accord before the new style. If I were to by a sedan today, I would go with the Mazda 6. The Honda might have better long term value (?), but the 6 just looks better. The new Accord just has too much body... no style to the sides... just long and flat. I just do not care for it. A neighbor recently bought a black 6, boy does it look sweet. Mazda really has some nice options, from the 6, the Tribute, to the beloved RX-8. It is good to see.

The Mazda 6 is somewhate similar to the Acura TSX. Both have distinctive taillights. Both have twin exhaust. I'm certain Mazda looked at the TSX or at least the European Accord when they designed the 6.

If you continue comparing the 6 to the TSX, you might find that the 6 loses out in the front end. The TSX has a stouter, better proportioned nose. My opinion is that Mazda curved the 6's nose inward a little too much, almost like a shark's nose tapers to a sharp point. A sloping hood is desirabale but not pulling in the left and right sides along the horizontal axis. If you pull it in this way too much, you produce a meek and weak (not to mention odd) looking front end. I think the 6's front end looks just a little too well done in this way. I also think the 6's C-pillar looks weak. I feel it should have been broadened and extended backward more, as in the TSX, Accord sedan, and Camry sedan.

The current Accord, despite what a lot of people want to think, is a very, very strong exterior design. It's stout and the silhouette from the side view is extremely well proportioned and quite impressive. Even a pic of the '05 or '06 Mercedes S-Class shows clearly that Mercedes has borrowed the Accord's silhouette. Interestingly, the pic also shows that Mercedes has borrowed the RX8's front and rear fender flares.

Contrary to what frog says, I think the Accord's sides are very stylish, showing the low horizontal door line running the length of the car that has been so hot recently in the trend toward a sportier, more aggressive type of sedan as seen on the Altima, Maxima, Accord, TSX, and Mazda 3. Traditionally, sedans either had no horizontal line or one that was placed much higher up. Unsurprisingly, we see the low horizontal line on sports cars (350Z) and sports grand tourers (RX8).

From the side, the Accord then looks exceptionally strong with its BMW 5-series raised hood side lines; a thick, graceful A-pillar; stout, extended silhouette; substantial and raked C-pillar that meets a stout, well-proportioned, well-sculpted, and high-set trunk; all accented by a low horizontal line running the length of the car that lends grace and a more aggressive attitude.

I had a 2003 EXV6 Accord auto that was a lemon, Honda had to repurchase and is the reason why I'm driving the RX8 G.T. today,I'm so glad! The Accord is in no way shape or form even remotely close in acceleration to the 8. I drove a bunch of them including the M.T. Accord which was very nice and was close in acceleration but the handling was not good, a lot of bodyroll. The Accord was a boring family sedan but filled it's purpose, The RX8 is the most fun car I have driven and still puts a smile on my face when I drive it, The point is I dont think I'll ever get complacent with this car!

The 6 (Atenza) was designed first, showed at auto shows first, went into production first, and hit the road first. Mazda didn't copy them. Simple as that.

Or you might not. The TSX doesnt have the sleek, aerodynamic look the 6 has. That stout nose you like is way too blunt and squared.

I'd bet 10 to 1 you're in the minority there. The sleekness was carried over there as well, something you can't say about the Accord, which has a humpback look to it.

Thanks for correcting me on the first point. I wasn't sure which came first. What that means logically is that Honda copied the Atenza with the European Accord, since there are just too many similarities, including something I didn't mention earlier- those rectangular lights in the rear end down by the tailpipes.

On the second point, I disagree with you completely. Proportional and gradual changes (with curves) are aesthetically important. The Mazda 6 nose really does look a bit weak. I feel a lot of peoples' brains register that. I then break it down and analyze why it looks weak, and I come to the conclusion that it has sharply sloping curves from two axes (vertical and horizontal) and that's just too much at once. At certain angles, under certain lighting, with certain exterior paint colors, and certain mods (like a big fat wide front spoiler), it's subtler such that the effect is sort of hidden. But if you go up real close, it's always there.

I'm looking at my dealership brochures right now. The TSX's nose looks like it was sculpted with just a bit more attention to detail.

I think your third point is your weakest. I believe the Mazda 6 and the Altima share the same weak C-pillar characteristic, and that is that their C-pillar trails INWARD as it meets the trunk top (you see this when standing directly behind the rear end). The Accord, Camry, and TSX C-pillars do not do this. That is why the bonnet/body/trunk interface of all three cars looks so strong directly from the rear (without factoring in taillights, mind you). Additional weaknesses of the Mazda 6's C-pillar are that it is thinner than in the rest of the cars AND slopes downward faster. These traits have their effects when looking at the car direcly from the side.

Check it out again. It's very easy to see. And I'm not talking about the massive bulky look of the Accord's body and trunk. The C-pillar effect can be seen on its own.

Let the pictures do the talking.


https://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos...exfrdrvr75.jpg
https://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos...exfrdrvr75.jpg
https://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos...4/exfrhead.jpg
https://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos...2/exfrhead.jpg

https://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos...exrrpass75.jpg
https://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos...exrrpass75.jpg

Thanks a mil for the design analysis, but the avg. joe will agree the 6 creams the two Accords in styling, despite all its "weaknesses."

First of all, those pics are not at the right angles. Don't you have the brochures? Scan some of those in.

Second, the Accord is a very strong design overall. I think most Americans will agree that the Accord looks better with a higher level of detail on the outside and inside. No question about it.

Your front end pic shows the shark nose effect to a certain extent. See how the tapering hood lines on the Mazda 6 come sharply to a point while the hood falls downward more quickly than in the TSX? Even the front bumper wraps inward. The only thing to attenuate this effect is a wide front spoiler. Sometimes, at some angles. the Mazda 6 even looks like it's got a beak. That ain't good.

Your 3/4-rear pics are kind of strange in that it appears the Accord's C-pillar is falling down more sharply. I don't think it really does that. The two respective pics are angled slightly differently. But even in your pic, you can see the effect of the Mazda's C-pillar. It doesn't really blend into the body that smoothly. I believe that sudden horizontal crease line at the top of the rear bumper (designed to pull the flanks inward) doesn't help. My opinion is that Mazda had to do it to match the "pulled-in" effect of the front end. It makes the overall proportions from the side view meek and weak, and everyday people can sense this (without being able to explain it).

But I will admit that, minus the inward trailing C-pillar, the Mazda 6 looks pretty special from directly behind. I have also seen many women who have this trait.

Let me add that your 3/4-front view of the TSX shows clearly what a superior design it is. The 3/4-front view of the Mazda, like the other pic, also shows how the trunk seems to just sit there, almost like it was tacked on and isn't a part of the rest of the car BECAUSE of the quickly-falling C-pillar. Sure, the Mazda 6 is full of curves, front and rear, but the parts don't blend in as smoothly. Your pics show that pretty well.

Do you think the inability to put biases aside (e.g., I like Mazda or I like Honda) and denial are diseases?

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised, since Americans are pretty stupid. But I guess every editor to sit behind the wheel of one isn't American since they all diss the styling.

As for the rest of your gibber-jabber and bullshit, like I said before, whatever. I should have left well enough alone and not ever wasted my time, but my insomnia got the best of me. I am done now; there's no reasoning with anyone dumb enough to think an Accord looks good.

You tell me.

You seem to be angry. But I would say that you only have yourself to be angry at.

My acumen is right on and at the highest level, in everything that I do. Yours is, shall we say, a little bit off.

Very few people have "it." Very many people just don't.

Not angry....tired.

You think you're something special because you have a bunch of opinions about a few imports that very people share? You are quite full of yourself, no? Your acumen isn't on a high level, you just have preference for vanilla and the bland. And mine isn't off, I just know what looks good TO ME, and in this instance, I know I'm not alone.

Oh, I really truly believe you are not alone. That much is for sure.

The consensus I get from our customers is that the Accord V6 Coupe is one of the nicest and best designed coupes out there for your money. It also have a great engine and performance for the 6 speed version

As for comparison, guys put it this way.. its all about perception. Its what you are looking for, and what you like and want, that makes that car for you the best

As for the guy who created this post, I dont agreebecause Ive slammed on a an automatic, and their was pull. The manual was even more stronger, and IM not saying this cuz I sell hondas...Ive driven s2ks, nsxs, vettes, even a shelby cobra (which I LOVE !!! ) but anwyas my pt is ..

If you want the Accord coupe, its a great car for the price, the interior is by far beyond the standards in the industry and as an overall call price and perf.. there is no other in that class imo

Z

I have to disagree with you, arXate.

The 2003-2004 Accord is a hell of a car for the money, but I personally find the styling bland or maybe even silly. I've spent a lot of time looking at the thing from all angles, because my wife and I were in a Honda dealer a lot while deciding to get her CRV.

I also like the Mazda 6 much more than the Acura TSX not because of the nose, but the trunk. In my humble opinion the styling in the back of the TSX looks like they got bored when they were about 4 inches from finishing the back of the car and just stopped there. In the front, I think they're even.

I think you're off. I have much more to say about the styling but have refrained. LOL.

Can you be MUCH more specific in your comments?

He could, but he probably won't. YOU'RE the only one around here with the desire to give page long reviews that no one even cares about.

if your wanting a 30k drag car go buy an 2004 Acura TL you will not be dissapointed. It will for sure smoke the rx-8 in a drag race but it wont touch the car on any given windE road or AutoX

The Mazda 6 can't hold a candle to either the Accord or TSX. The level of refinement in either car far outweighs the 6. I was very dissapointed after driving the 6. It just felt cheap and it was overly loud for a non sportscar. And the engine felt like every other mazda engine, about 20hp short of the advertised power.

I haven't driven any of them, so I can't comment on the refinement. I was speaking purely in terms of appearance - I think the Mazda6 looks much better than either of them.

My wife's CRV has the Honda 2.4 liter 4 cylinder, and it feels a lot more powerful than the size or 160 horsepower/160 torque numbers suggest. Since the TSX is lighter and more aerodynamic than the CRV, and it uses a Honda 2.4 liter 4 cylinder with 200 horsepower and 160 torque, I bet it feels substantially faster than the numbers would indicate.