Honda Accord Throwdown
May 25, 2010 10:12 AM Subscribe
Should we take the Accord LX, or the Accord EX?
We are currently driving our fourth Accord LX. Lately we've been leasing them, and the lease is almost up.
We can get an Accord EX-L V6 for less than $50 more per month. I want to go for it, but CFO (and a lovely one she is, too) wants to stick with an LX.
I like the idea of a peppier engine, and the other bells and whistles that come in the higher-end version of the Accord. Then again, it'll probably use a bit more gas than the LX.
Can you Metafilter Accord drivers give us some tips to help us break the deadlock?
Thanks!
We are currently driving our fourth Accord LX. Lately we've been leasing them, and the lease is almost up.
We can get an Accord EX-L V6 for less than $50 more per month. I want to go for it, but CFO (and a lovely one she is, too) wants to stick with an LX.
I like the idea of a peppier engine, and the other bells and whistles that come in the higher-end version of the Accord. Then again, it'll probably use a bit more gas than the LX.
Can you Metafilter Accord drivers give us some tips to help us break the deadlock?
Thanks!
The one with the alloy wheels, not the steel ones with the ugly plastic wheel covers that they try to make look like alloys.
You're welcome.
posted by L'OM at 10:17 AM on May 25, 2010
You're welcome.
posted by L'OM at 10:17 AM on May 25, 2010
Oh, and: the "peppier" engine is overkill, generally. I drive one of the (as-tested) slowest car available in the US market, and I've done some auto racing (and am a bit of a speed demon type anyway) but it's more than good enough -- and even the four-cylinder Accord is much, much faster. Lower insurance, lower up-front cost, lower fuel cost, and less likely to get you into trouble.
posted by davejay at 10:18 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by davejay at 10:18 AM on May 25, 2010
Consider that $50/month adds up quickly - you're talking $600/year, so likely $1800 over the course of the lease. The difference in gas mileage is not that great when driving the car conservatively, but if you're interested in a "peppier" engine, aggressive driving can really kill your gas mileage. The difference between 25 mpg combined (4 cylinder, combined, from the EPA estimates) and 20 mpg combined (6 cylinder is 23 mpg combined, say 20 mpg when driven aggressively) amounts to $360/year if you drive 12,000 miles at $3/gallon.
So, the cost is $2880 over the course of three years for leather, a sun roof, and a V6. Would I do it? No. However, cars tend to induce irrational behavior in most anyone. This is likely not the worst decision you can make.
Perhaps you could consider an alternate car? Last I checked, a lightly equipped Camry V-6 was about the same price as a fully loaded Accord I-4.
posted by saeculorum at 10:22 AM on May 25, 2010
So, the cost is $2880 over the course of three years for leather, a sun roof, and a V6. Would I do it? No. However, cars tend to induce irrational behavior in most anyone. This is likely not the worst decision you can make.
Perhaps you could consider an alternate car? Last I checked, a lightly equipped Camry V-6 was about the same price as a fully loaded Accord I-4.
posted by saeculorum at 10:22 AM on May 25, 2010
FWIW - I have a 1998 Honda Accord EX with the 4cyl engine & stickshift, and it's a great car. It might not win a stop-light drag race with a Porsche, but damn, it's fast enough. That's now a 12-year old car. 3000 pounds and 150HP, to put it in perspective.
posted by swngnmonk at 10:34 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by swngnmonk at 10:34 AM on May 25, 2010
I have an EX V6 and I LOVE IT. Of course, I love it because of the bells and whistles and I am rather shallow about those things.
I've driven both LX's and EX's and the EX is more of a pleasure to drive, but both are excellent cars. As far as gas mileage goes, I average about 24 MPG.
posted by Leezie at 10:41 AM on May 25, 2010
I've driven both LX's and EX's and the EX is more of a pleasure to drive, but both are excellent cars. As far as gas mileage goes, I average about 24 MPG.
posted by Leezie at 10:41 AM on May 25, 2010
It isn't worth the $50, and it isn't worth leasing such a good value retaining car, either! You should just purchase one, as davejay initially suggested. They last FOREVER.
Fun anecdote:
I had an Accord LX as my first car. I got rear-ended, and had to get the back bumper replaced. A year later, I realized that when they had replaced the back end of the car, they had replaced the LX decal with an EX decal.
I only noticed this had happened because a friend of mine borrowed the car and told me she thought it was a better drive than her LX. I told her it was also an LX, and she pointed out the back bumper. I guess the power of suggestion was all it took for her.
posted by CharlieSue at 10:44 AM on May 25, 2010
Fun anecdote:
I had an Accord LX as my first car. I got rear-ended, and had to get the back bumper replaced. A year later, I realized that when they had replaced the back end of the car, they had replaced the LX decal with an EX decal.
I only noticed this had happened because a friend of mine borrowed the car and told me she thought it was a better drive than her LX. I told her it was also an LX, and she pointed out the back bumper. I guess the power of suggestion was all it took for her.
posted by CharlieSue at 10:44 AM on May 25, 2010
Until deciding on a CRV recently, Mrs. Dust and I were considering the LX-P. It has many of the nice features of the EX (including alloy wheels, L'OM) but not a moonroof. There are other differences but that's the major ones. Seems like a nice compromise for the money you'd save. Seconding the advice to buy and hold for five years instead of leasing, unless you drive very low miles per year.
Our previous car, a '97 Accord Special Edition, went for nearly 240,000 miles, BTW.
posted by dust of the stars at 10:48 AM on May 25, 2010
Our previous car, a '97 Accord Special Edition, went for nearly 240,000 miles, BTW.
posted by dust of the stars at 10:48 AM on May 25, 2010
The V6 has 271 HP. It's not "peppy," it's truly overkill for a family sedan (just 10 years ago, even high performance sports cars didn't have as much power). The 190 HP I4 in the EX is what I'd consider peppy.
posted by zsazsa at 10:52 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by zsazsa at 10:52 AM on May 25, 2010
From the perspective of someone who likes cars that drive well, I'd never pair a 4-cyl with an automatic transmission. NEVER. If it's going to have a slushbox, get the V6 for sure. I4's always feel wheezy and pathetic unless you're in charge of the shifting.
Automatic V6 vs. manual I4? I'd personally call the manual transmission'd car more fun. The fewer bells and whistles mean less weight, less crap to go wrong and less crap to distract you. It's a Honda, so you're not going to hurt anything by revving that engine almost to redline every shift.
Auto V6 vs. Auto I4? No contest, go with the V6 if you don't want to turn in your man card.
As for Honda vs Toyota? The Accord is a much, much nicer drive than a Toyota. Honda is a little boring, but still has some soul as an auto manufacturer. Toyota is like tofu. The whole idea is that it tastes like nothing. Hondas are like good vanilla. Never my first choice, but every time I taste it, I like it.
posted by pjaust at 10:54 AM on May 25, 2010
Automatic V6 vs. manual I4? I'd personally call the manual transmission'd car more fun. The fewer bells and whistles mean less weight, less crap to go wrong and less crap to distract you. It's a Honda, so you're not going to hurt anything by revving that engine almost to redline every shift.
Auto V6 vs. Auto I4? No contest, go with the V6 if you don't want to turn in your man card.
As for Honda vs Toyota? The Accord is a much, much nicer drive than a Toyota. Honda is a little boring, but still has some soul as an auto manufacturer. Toyota is like tofu. The whole idea is that it tastes like nothing. Hondas are like good vanilla. Never my first choice, but every time I taste it, I like it.
posted by pjaust at 10:54 AM on May 25, 2010
@zsazsa: 10 years ago, high performance sports cars didn't weight 3500 lbs. 270 hp is totally reasonable and puts it at about the same power/weight ratio as an early 1990's BMW 540i. Quick, but not fast by modern standards.
posted by pjaust at 10:59 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by pjaust at 10:59 AM on May 25, 2010
I have a 2000 Accord EX 4 cylinder, and when I test drove a recent EX 6, it didn't feel any different to me. The 4 cylinder is more than enough. I've also heard that the 6 cylinder is somewhat less reliable than the 4 (which is legendarily bombproof).
posted by deadmessenger at 11:01 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by deadmessenger at 11:01 AM on May 25, 2010
go with the V6 if you don't want to turn in your man card.
Note: if you're driving a Honda Accord, you should know that it isn't stick vs automatic that determines your "man card" eligibility. It's whether or not you're going to stop driving an Accord.
having said that, real men drive little four cylinders because they are not compensating.
posted by davejay at 11:33 AM on May 25, 2010
Note: if you're driving a Honda Accord, you should know that it isn't stick vs automatic that determines your "man card" eligibility. It's whether or not you're going to stop driving an Accord.
having said that, real men drive little four cylinders because they are not compensating.
posted by davejay at 11:33 AM on May 25, 2010
Like swngnmonk, I have a 1998 Accord EX 4 cylinder (although I have the automatic transmission). While the 0-60 time isn't anything to brag about, the 30-60/70/80 times have been plenty fast enough for my somewhat aggressive highway driving.
posted by mmascolino at 11:47 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by mmascolino at 11:47 AM on May 25, 2010
It used to be that a manual transmission was only available in the LX and not the EX. I generally prefer manual, and drove an LX for a long time, until an Explorer pulled out in front of me.
posted by electroboy at 11:55 AM on May 25, 2010
posted by electroboy at 11:55 AM on May 25, 2010
I come from a Honda family and drive an EX V6; my parents drive an LX 4-cylinder from the same year or next (2000). My dad is jealous.
I really, really like the steering wheel controls for the stereo. I love the moonroof. The leather gets cold in the winter (we live in Wisconsin), but I think it holds smells and schmutz way less than the upholstery in their car.
Re: gas mileage, yeah, the V6 is going to be worse. However, you also might consider how you drive. An old boyfriend used to needle me all the time about how he got better mileage with his V8 Grand Cherokee, and he was right.
I would definitely agree on buying over leasing. My car is doing much better than my parents', and it's got way more miles. It still feels pretty nice and luxurious, and I still enjoy driving it. You may be used to newer cars, so this may not have the same weight for you. But I'm really happy with it.
posted by Madamina at 12:04 PM on May 25, 2010
I really, really like the steering wheel controls for the stereo. I love the moonroof. The leather gets cold in the winter (we live in Wisconsin), but I think it holds smells and schmutz way less than the upholstery in their car.
Re: gas mileage, yeah, the V6 is going to be worse. However, you also might consider how you drive. An old boyfriend used to needle me all the time about how he got better mileage with his V8 Grand Cherokee, and he was right.
I would definitely agree on buying over leasing. My car is doing much better than my parents', and it's got way more miles. It still feels pretty nice and luxurious, and I still enjoy driving it. You may be used to newer cars, so this may not have the same weight for you. But I'm really happy with it.
posted by Madamina at 12:04 PM on May 25, 2010
As a tall person who likes headroom, I just want to remind you that a "moonroof" steals almost 2 inches from the ceiling height.
posted by agatha_magatha at 12:11 PM on May 25, 2010
posted by agatha_magatha at 12:11 PM on May 25, 2010
Quick, but not fast by modern standards.
Yeah, but still traveling on the same roads, similar distances. To compare, according to Car and Driver, a 2010 Accord EX 4-cylinder does 0-60 in 8.7 seconds. By comparison, the only 0-60 time I could find was for a 2006 Accord EX-V6, which was 5.8. In modern terms, that 5.8 is comparable to or better than a lot of the Accord's high-end competitors -- but a 2005 Corvette Convertible did it in 4.8, and the handling of that Corvette is a lot better than the Accord. By that criteria, the V6 Accord is a muscle car (a sedate family sedan with average handling, but with an engine that's very fast in a straight line.)
Still, the 4-cylinder in the EX is faster than the one in the LX, so if you're really hung up about that, you're still getting a faster car than you would with the LX -- with the same EPA highway mileage rating, and without the larger up-front cost of the V6.
posted by davejay at 12:37 PM on May 25, 2010
Yeah, but still traveling on the same roads, similar distances. To compare, according to Car and Driver, a 2010 Accord EX 4-cylinder does 0-60 in 8.7 seconds. By comparison, the only 0-60 time I could find was for a 2006 Accord EX-V6, which was 5.8. In modern terms, that 5.8 is comparable to or better than a lot of the Accord's high-end competitors -- but a 2005 Corvette Convertible did it in 4.8, and the handling of that Corvette is a lot better than the Accord. By that criteria, the V6 Accord is a muscle car (a sedate family sedan with average handling, but with an engine that's very fast in a straight line.)
Still, the 4-cylinder in the EX is faster than the one in the LX, so if you're really hung up about that, you're still getting a faster car than you would with the LX -- with the same EPA highway mileage rating, and without the larger up-front cost of the V6.
posted by davejay at 12:37 PM on May 25, 2010
We have the LX and my mother-in-law has the EX, so I've driven both (hers fairly frequently, actually, for irrelevant reasons). Both automatic. I do notice and appreciate the difference in pickup in the V6, especially when taking a specific highway entrance near our house that features a stop sign and no merge lane. I don't notice as much the luxury details, partly because her car is a mess, with papers and random items for the drycleaner and spare change and umbrellas and lone gloves and Christmas-tree needles everywhere, so ours feels a bit "nicer," actually.
Overall, because we live in the city, we don't do much highway driving anyway, so appreciating it once every two weeks or so wouldn't be enough to make up the difference in cost. If I had it to do over again, I'd go with the LX again. I don't drive stick, but if I did, that might be a nice way to get a little more power without going to the EX.
posted by palliser at 12:42 PM on May 25, 2010
Overall, because we live in the city, we don't do much highway driving anyway, so appreciating it once every two weeks or so wouldn't be enough to make up the difference in cost. If I had it to do over again, I'd go with the LX again. I don't drive stick, but if I did, that might be a nice way to get a little more power without going to the EX.
posted by palliser at 12:42 PM on May 25, 2010
Response by poster: Well now I'm thinking EX 4-cyl.
As was said above, it's a little more power in the engine (190hp vs. 177hp in the LX), more features, and doesn't cost nearly as much as the V-6.
Any input on that?
posted by SlyBevel at 12:52 PM on May 25, 2010
As was said above, it's a little more power in the engine (190hp vs. 177hp in the LX), more features, and doesn't cost nearly as much as the V-6.
Any input on that?
posted by SlyBevel at 12:52 PM on May 25, 2010
What may seem like a silly question: Have you driven the 4 and the 6, seen if the headroom-reducing sunroof makes a big different from y'all's perspective, etc?
In general, do you tend to load up the car (people and stuff), live/drive in areas with hills?
posted by ambient2 at 1:08 PM on May 25, 2010
In general, do you tend to load up the car (people and stuff), live/drive in areas with hills?
posted by ambient2 at 1:08 PM on May 25, 2010
I got a 2009 EX (4-cyl) -- better gas mileage than V6 for sure, but you do feel the lack of the pep. But, it has lumbar support, seat heaters, leather, etc.......and I feel slower accelerating cars keep my lead foot out of trouble -- statistically, your not going to be able to go as fast for as much of the time = less chance of tickets. I like the Accord but it's a "big" mid range car -- much more gigantic than Accords of past. Again, another reason to get that slower car.....less chance of hitting something. I think the EX even without navigation where your voice can control things like the temperature and radio -- it's a neat feature and if you get the bluetooth that seems to work well also. Good luck!
posted by skepticallypleased at 1:55 PM on May 25, 2010
posted by skepticallypleased at 1:55 PM on May 25, 2010
2008 EX V6 here. I like it for the bells and whistles, the extra torque when pulling into the freeway is nice (Houston, where people don't let you in). Yes, it has more gas consumption than the 4 cylinder but still good; I fill up every 2 weeks.
Consideration I had was that we'd just moved to the US so had to buy 2 cars (buy, don't lease) so I couldn't stretch to my preferred Audi, but the Accord is nice, reliable and the V6 is fun. Petrol is a lot cheaper in the US than Norway so I still came out ahead on fuel costs. It's 2 years old and the engine & car is as clean as the day I bought it.
Only issue I have is that the voice controls sometimes have problems with my English accent...
posted by arcticseal at 2:57 PM on May 25, 2010
Consideration I had was that we'd just moved to the US so had to buy 2 cars (buy, don't lease) so I couldn't stretch to my preferred Audi, but the Accord is nice, reliable and the V6 is fun. Petrol is a lot cheaper in the US than Norway so I still came out ahead on fuel costs. It's 2 years old and the engine & car is as clean as the day I bought it.
Only issue I have is that the voice controls sometimes have problems with my English accent...
posted by arcticseal at 2:57 PM on May 25, 2010
Take your CFO on a test drive of the V6 on a cold day and turn on the seat warmers. My CFO loves hers.
posted by banshee at 4:15 PM on May 25, 2010
posted by banshee at 4:15 PM on May 25, 2010
Learn to drive a stick. It can make driving a 110 hp 1991 Accord less boring, so surely it would do wonders for a 190 hp 2010.
And I'd take an Accord over a Vette any day in a rally race. ;)
More question-answerey, get the 4 cylinder. It's less expensive and it uses less gas. It's a bad time to be betting against rising gas prices. Do keep in mind that some of the bump from going to the EX 4 cylinder is eaten up by the extra weight of the extra options.
posted by wierdo at 7:53 PM on May 25, 2010
And I'd take an Accord over a Vette any day in a rally race. ;)
More question-answerey, get the 4 cylinder. It's less expensive and it uses less gas. It's a bad time to be betting against rising gas prices. Do keep in mind that some of the bump from going to the EX 4 cylinder is eaten up by the extra weight of the extra options.
posted by wierdo at 7:53 PM on May 25, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
Also, you can get all the bells and whistles, without the extra speed, by purchasing an EX 4-cylinder. This will save you money over the V6, up front and in gasoline costs as you go. Insurance, too.
Finally: since you obviously enjoy Accords, and they're among the longer-lasting cars out there, consider that if you do elect to buy a more expensive one, you should buy it instead of leasing it, and keep it for at least five years. You'll save money overall.
posted by davejay at 10:17 AM on May 25, 2010