Talk:Honda Accord/Archive 1

Archive 1

pricing info

i think all wikipedia car entries should include price range of the car. and another wiki that have a comparison table of prices

That wouldn't be a pretty good idea due to prices of cars going up and down (mostly down)and due to the ecnomy. (Agent Mr (talk) 23:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC))

Euro R

This article needs more information on the Accord Euro R and Torneo Euro R (JDM)

See the below discussion on including information on models unavaliable in the US. Perhaps a note that other models were avaliable in other countries would be appropriate if descrete; however, keeping this information in its respective country will keep down model confusion.

Insight

My english isn't too good, and I don't have enough insight in the structure of the article, but shouldn't a small paragraph be added about the famous cog commercial? Cog (television commercial)

It seems we are keeping the US and UK pages sepperate. Perhaps this would be appropriate for the UK Honda page, as this commercial never aired in the United States.

Well there are many varients of the model. The Euro R debuted in 2001 ending the multiple variations. As for such , in some parts of asia as Thailand where i was able to purchase an Accord SiR-T in 2001. I would love to show pic but have not learned how to yet. The Euro R would be the top sport model taking over the SiR , SiR-T /Torneo , and Type R lines . It debuted in 2001 with an H22A engine , using a higher flow intake plenum and nearlly teh same exhaust system and suspension as the US rebadged , Acura TL Type-S , White faced interior gauges as offered on the SiR-T and Torneo lines . Unlike the SiR-T/Torneo , the rear tail lights resembled more of a look and layout of the 1998-2000 USDM Honda Accord rear tail light design. As for the SiR-T and Torneo models had seperate assemblies on each side , as the Acura TL also shared this 2 seperate lamp design. Also the front bumper design was updated , with the front foglamp having their own cutout as per being merged with the lower air opening in the lower front bumper of the SiR-T / Torneo . As for many SiR-T were in performance white , Electric Blue was added to the Euro R versions. The New Euro R debuted in mid 2002 as the new CL7 Euro R using the venurable K series engine that replaced the B and H and F series engines. The K20A(3) was now used in the new Euro R . A very limited production CL9 SiR-T was offered also in various markets , sometimes with an SR badge moniker using the larger K24A engine , while most models were only available with an automatic transmission . the K24A initially producing a solid 200 then 210 , with alot more available tq than the K20A , which saw very limited productions.

(JDM )Accord Type R / SiR / SR (EUDM) Between 1990 and 1997 there were Type R and SiR models designated with the H22A for the Type R and the H23A and H23A VTEC for the SiR . SR models were UK assembled models on a different chassis using an H23A non VTEC. The SiR-T and Torneo were introduced in 1997 CL1 models and were produced until 2001 when all sub sport models were supercceded by the Euro R model.

Kongkit (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)KONGKITKongkit (talk) 00:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Wagon Variant

I think it'd be nice to see some mention of the Honda Accord wagon. Not sure of the exact years, but I believe in the USA the Accord wagon ran from 1991 to 1997. Smiller933 18:43, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

My name is Christian and I'm from Germany. I'm wirting the German articles for wikipedia.de about the cars of Honda (I began last month because the articles are ... sparse). So please excuse me, if my English is not the best.
You are right. The Wagon ran in the US only from 1991 to 1997. But it was sold in other countries before 1991 and after 1997.
The first Wagon appeared in 1985 in Japan. The car based on the 3rd generation (Type CA, 1985-1989) but wasn't available in Northern America. It was called Wagon and only in Europe Aero Deck (like all others too, except the 7th Generation - it's name is Wagon worldwide and Tourer in Europe). Then there was a brake of two years without a Wagon.
The 4th Generation: this was the first Wagon in the US like you mentioned. It was the Type CB in 1991. It was designed and produced in California and exported worldwide (built from 1991-1994). Also it was named Aero Deck in Europe, Wagon in the other coutries.
The 5th Generation of the Accord had also an Wagon (Type CE, 1994-1997). Also prodced in the US and exported worldwide. In Europe called Aero Deck again.
The 6th Generations Wagon appeared only in Japan - this car was awesome (my favorite one). Built from 1997-2002, Type CF/CH/CL. Honda decided with the change of the generations in 1997, that every region becomes their own car, based on the same platform. So at that time Japan, US and Europe got their own Accord Sedan but only Japan had the Wagon. On the other side the Coupe was produced again in the US and was offered worldwide (except Japan).
The current Wagon (7th generation, Type CM/CN) appeared only in Japan and Europe and based on the Japanese Accord sedan (which was offered as Acura TSX in Northern America). But: the US and Canada have the Accord Coupe which isn't available in Europe and Japan. That's a pitty. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.187.41.17 (talk) 08:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

The Accord coupe was not exported worldwide. It was never available in Australia, for instance.Davez621 (talk) 17:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You're right. There was only the hatchback from 1977 up to 1989. And to take it more precise, they just had the Aerodeck / Wagon only three years (1990-1993) Here you are CWeitzer (talk) 12:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

2000 LX photo

I have another photo of my Accord in Thai wikipedia. But it's 2000 LX model. If this article will say about the previous model, it might be used here.

Help wanted

Some of these paragraphs need help:

• I am not sure about the "enthusiast" car mentioned; it does not really make sense as written.
• no bullets between 1998 and 2003
• Bullet points from 2003 onwards are confusing.
• It would be great if this page had a table showing the evolution of the models like on the Acura page.

laurap414 00:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

1986-1997... adding more soon!

I will be completing 1998-2006 very soon. I spent quite a few hours adding the content for 1986-1997.

Well yes it is seperate , altho i do think that the pages should have had their diffrent sections that also would coincide with the proper ones. As for instance the 94-97 USDM Honda Accord was received in Japan and other asian markets almost 2 years ahead of the modified for USA model one. The Later Honda Accord which was introduced as a 96 in most parts (not america) would later come to the US market as the Acura TL , for this reason the pages should be seperate and the Acura TL second gen conincides with the Honda Accord and its sub models , the Type R , Euro R SiR-T Turneo (own one). The main accord page is and can be very confusing with mis-leading facts. As for the Accords after the 97 model was stopped were based on the Honda Inspire Model that was a seeminglly LUX alternative to the sportier Accord.

Lots more info , not enough time today , Kongkit : Baorice@yahoo.com

US/WORLDWIDE VERSIONS

The note at the top of the page that different versions existed after 2003 is NOT true.

The pre-2003 model available in the UK and Europe is very DIFFERENT to the US version.

I don't know if the US model has always been different to the European one, but it seems a pretty poor mistake - as well as badly written ("then" instead of "than") - to place so prominently.

If there IS a relevant point to be made here, please will someone who knows what they're talking about edit it accordigly? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.9.234 (talk • contribs) 14 May 2006

As a mergist, I would be content if there were a single Honda Accord article which accurately described the differences between regional models in each generation (whether it be sorted by generation, then region, or region then generation could be decided later). If we truly decide to split the article out by region, then this page should become merely a disambiguation page. Anyway, I put this article up on Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles as needing attention. --Vossanova ^o< 18:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not too sure about your suggestion, to be honest. If we were to include sufficient information on the European and Japanese Accords, it could make the article a bit too big or make it hard to read, like with the Toyota Corolla article right now, or with the old Chrysler minivans article. I suggest we make this page a disambiguation page, and make pages for the American, European, and Japanese Accords that will go from 1976 to the present day.--ApolloBoy 06:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe that there is not enough difference between the models until the 7th generation appeared. It is better to just include each of the versions with their respective differences. Most of the time it is just the engines and some cosmetic changes (except for the 7th generation which appears to be a different car). --Cirilobeto 06:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

You'd be surprised how many differences existed - for example: The Second Generation Accord in Japan from 1981 had Ride Height Control, a moon roof, aerodynamic headlights, rear view mirrors on the fenders, no side marker lights in the back, and a very different emission control system. I do, however, agree with keeping pages sepperate. I have no problem going to Wiki Japan, UK, Germany, etc... Nicholas SL Smith

People, please DO sign your posts! Anyway, this article is an article about the Honda Accord in general, and not just USDM Honda Accords. IMHO, it should discuss the model in general, and perhaps link to "generation" articles like in the case of many other cars (see Mercedes models for example). As concerns second-gen Accord, the "differences" are just either a longer equipment list or things that are quite common when comparing JDM/USDM/EUDM etc. models. Anyway, I believe the article should just explain the usage of the Accord nameplate all over the world and link to individual models, including e.g. the Honda Ascot Innova which served as the European Accord in mid-90s. Anyway, almost all Honda articles merit a complete rewrite, they are hopeless and often split in a weird way. Bravada, talk - 22:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

If the Euro Accord is included in this article, where does that leave the Acura TSX, which is identical to that model but not to the US model? It would leave the main article less cluttered to link to the Euro Accord / Acura TSX page, and the TSX information would need to be somewhere anyway. IFCAR 00:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, this article should outline the history of the nameplate over the years, with links to articles on particular models/generations. So, for the 7th generation it should link to the current USDM Accord/Inspire and the "world Accord"/TSX. But this requires a ground-up reform of all Honda articles, which is not likely to come soon... :( Bravada, talk - 02:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I disagree. In a link to the lower left, Wikipedia automatically maintains links to like aricles in different countries. Nothing prevents a user from using or modifying a page from a different country; if a user requires information from another country, he or she may simply follow one of these links. A complete knowledge base does not exist in this country regarding all models released across the globe. Is an Accord really an Accord to an American researcher if it is released in a different country on a different year with a different name and a different configuration, but same basic chassis? Perhaps a completely separate page for non-USDM automobiles would better serve the research community. A page which detailed every Accord model sold in every country, ever would, pragmatically, be prohibitive to maintain. An article, however, serving as an authority for non-USDM Accords, could be started and maintained in English, better serving English speaking researchers. I am more than willing to give this a try, and will even provide images and content for the first two generations of JDM Accords (see above comment by ApolloBoy, on 20 June 2006) . What do you all think? Nicholas SL Smith, talk - 10 November 2006

Actually, the links on the left are to articles in different languages. For example, you will not see separate links for US and UK, while obviously the Accord articles would be different for the two countries. This article is intended to describe the "Honda Accord" for speakers of the English language. Thus, it should include all information relevant to the automobile called "Honda Accord" world-wide. I'm sure an article like "Wolf" talks about both European wolves and American ones (disclaimer: I haven't actually checked this particular example). The question is whether all this information would make the article too big, in which case we should be deciding how to split it, e.g. by generation or by geographic region. Both approaches have pros and cons. Rlobkovsky 21:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

No need for sarcasm. I was under the impression, however, that the links on the side were for countries, not languages. If the links on the side were for languages only, articles would mirror each other, translated in their respective languages. Each article is unique because of its country of origin, and contains information not readily available in other countries (thus the power of this world international information community). I suppose I propose either separating each generation into separate US and foreign sections, or dividing the Accord article into a domestic and a foreign article. I understand that research in foreign languages can be cumbersome; and so, I don’t expect use to relegate foreign model information to other countries as I previously mentioned. I do, however, believe that it is important to separate this information to create an easily understandable and accurate historical resource. An example of how accuracy is lost in this page is the Second Generation section. Foreign models in the second generation had different release dates. In Germany, for example, the second generation Accord was introduced in 1981 (here is was 1982). The second series of the second generation was released in September of 1983 (1984 here). If we make this page out to be a resource for all countries of distribution, this information will be muddled and confused, Nslsmith - 4 March 2007

The US - Japan - Europe model of the Accord differs since 1997. My name is CWeitzer on wikipedia.de and I'm writing the Honda articles there. I had also the decission between only European Accords or the whole worlds Accord. I selected the whole width of the Accord and other models. Doesn't matter, if the cars are offered in Germany (Europe) or not. I'd like to show the German readers the varieties / flexibility of Honda as a product for the people . I want to make up their minds, to show them, that Honda cares about the needs of their costumers worldwide. Honda is not just a mass product in my view of sight but a product adapted to the needs of their costumers. That makes the different to the other producers ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.187.41.17 (talk) 09:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Please sign your opinions -- I can see your concern, I am not suggesting any sort of conspiracy to make Honda out to be an immoral company or to eliminate mention of non-US Accords; I simply wish to ensure clarity in this article. European/JDM/US models have differed since the onset of Accord production (long before 1997) A separate, cross referenced article or a unified but very well segmented article will achieve this. Let us steer clear of any intentions to portray the Honda Motor Company or the creation of the Accord as a humanitarian movement; this is not the "People's Car", or "Volks Wagon" in German (that is another company formed on another premse, Hodna was formed by Soichiro right after WWII to sell motorized bicycles). The HMC is a corporation which makes motor vehicles and arguably high quality engines, nothing more. Any discussion relating to the ethics of this company or model should be left to a philosophical or sociological article. This article is meant to record information about the Honda Accord only. Nicholas SL Smith 04:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I've gone back to one indent even though I am continuing the above discussion. Just to offer some perspective - this article is no good to me. I own a 1997 Honda Accord 2.0i LS, a perfectly standard, very common UK model. If this page is to be believed, my car doesn't exist. The alternative language links down the side cannot possibly refer to sites for different countries, since multiple countries speak the same language. Are there separate English and US English wikipedias? I would agree with the above suggestion that this page become a disambiguation page for links to pages about local Accord variants, or if there is significant commonality up to a certain point, then this page should link to variants pages at that point. As it is now it just doesn't do the job. Trent 900 15:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure whether your car is the Rover-600-related model or the newer one, but both are mentioned in the text. The article was originally written from a very US-centric perspective and it is slowly evolving to reflect the worldwide-view better, but it will take time. It would be mroe than advisable for you to contribute too! PrinceGloria 10:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Any readers who have informaion about models other than those described withn this article are very encouraged to add their information. It is important, though, not to add information in such a way that removes other information; for example, if one knows that a model or configuration was avaliable in an area that was not avaliable in another area (which is very common with internationally avaliable products), one outght to inform this community by contributing. After all, it is no wonder that this article has a US-centric point of view as more Accords have been sold in the USA than ony other country in the world (which is a reason Honda opened an Accord manufacturing facility in the US). This article does not say that any models don't exist; it simply describes models that have existed, and is under constant constrution. Nicholas SL Smith 23:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

You're absolutely right - as soon as I figure out a bit more information I'll add some more models to the list. Before doing that though, is there any consensus on whether the article should split out of not? Trent 900 12:42, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

As of now, no consensus to split. We might split it up into individual generations later on. Splitting by markets didn't work for the abovementioned reasons. BTW, please add MEANINGFUL information. Whether there was an LX with a 4-speed automatic and heated mirrors for 1996 is really not meaningful information. PrinceGloria 13:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

In response to the non-US Accord models, the general outlook is that there is no properly clean way to seperate or include them. The mid 90s EU Accord was a rebadged JP market Honda Ascot Innova, and its late 90s EU replacement was unique to the European market. The mid 90s Accords were pretty much the same in Japan and the USA, but in the late 90s the USA, as with the EU, got a unique version and in Japan the Honda Accord was a completely diferent model also sold as Honda Torneo and Isuzu Aska. After this in about 2002, EU and JP Accords were replaced by a single model that was sold in the USA as Acura TSX. The USA got its own Accord once again. For 2008, US Accord has replaced US Accord, and EU/JP Accords have been replaced with another model that will be sold in both and also in USA as Acura TSX. To add to the confusion, all US Accords have been sold in Japan as the Honda Inspire. However, I still agree that they NEED more coverage in order to have a fairer, more informative, and less USA-biased article. Joescotchman (talk) 19:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I think the 6th Generation section is particularly bad in this regard, with very different models (at this stage the USDM/Jap versions shared little more than the badge) all lumped in together. Also why exactly does Acura TSX have it's own article when it is merely a badge engineered version of the Japan/Euro Accord? Surely it should be merged with this article, or else the Japanese/Euro/US versions of the Accord split out into separate articles. RossTangye (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Because I found the article structure very confusing on this point, I made an effort to break out the Fifth and Sixth Generation into separate subsections by market, in order to match the Seventh and Eighth generations. However the existing article text is often unclear on what market it is referring to, and there's probably much more information which can be added about the JP and EU models. Also because these are really different cars, the infoboxes should be separated out by market as well.71.134.228.37 (talk) 18:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Good Job! This is a pretty clear way of showing market delineated configuration differences. I think this is the change that this article long needed to step to the next level of quality. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 20:58, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Also, I suggest you register for an account. If you plan on making further high quality additions to Wikipedia, it's nice to give credit to you instead of your IP! Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 21:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Please Note, I have a compelete diagram that explains how the Honda Accord for US and EU/JDM and acura TL. It's is on streetfire at the moment (http://videos.streetfire.net/photo/Honda-Accord-and-Inspire_1543356.htm). Although it's not very clean and quite judge mental, I do still have the resources(so I can make it clean and factual) to make it 1600x1200). I am pleading for guidance of how to get in on wiki (ie open a section and upload the picture). Many thanks. TangoR34 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.191.226.35 (talk) 05:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Accord vs. Camry

I removed this sentence from the 2nd gen section, and didn't see a better place to put it in the current structure: "Since 1997, its main rival, the Toyota Camry, has held the title of the best-selling car in America, with the exception of the year 2001."

Agreement - better for both pages, this page is not about ths Camry. Nicholas SL Smith

Fubaz 23:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

New Gen.

Will the 2007 model year mark gen 8 for the Accord? Since a new one comes every 3-4 years.

Actually, with the 6th generation, Honda started a lifespan of 5 years between each accord. Before that, it was 4 years. So there will be a new Accord in the year 2008. --Cirilobeto 06:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.

Similar cars

Allright, enough of the games. We all need to agree on a list here once and for all.

Bull-Doser wrote: "(Removed Taurus, because of its discontinuation.)" What rule says that a similar car must be currently in production? Must discontinued cars be compared to cars currently in production too? --Vossanova ^o< 12:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe that looking at the history of the Accord, how it was created as a "bigger variant" of a compact car and evolved into a large family car by European standards and recently a full-fledged mid-size car by American standards, it resembles the Mitsubishi Galant the most. I'd say a European car that's somewhat similar is Volkswagen Passat, actually created around the same time. American cars followed quite a different development path, with the Malibu nameplate "downsizing" (after quite a long gap) from an old-school large cruiser to a more moderately-sized car in the last decade. The Taurus has always been bigger than the Accord, only recently has the US Accord become comparable in size. So, I am for Galant and Passat in the "similar" section. Bravada, talk - 14:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Biased Uncited POV in Fourth Generation section

"To the cheers of many, the Accord loses the automatic shoulder belts used in 1990-1991."

Where's that information come from? I have a 1990 Accord and I like the automatic shoulder seatbelt. Even though what I like has nothing to do with the article, the 'To the cheers of many,' does not belong in that sentence.

Jason Wong's '89 SEI

Can anyone prove that this '89 SEI owned by Jason Wong with over 400,000 miles on it exists in the 'Honda museum'? I tried a search on the internet, out of curiosity to see if it was more beat up than my '86 LX. I found nothing even similar to the car. The closest I have found is the '86 in my yard. It simply bugs me. I've never been motivated to question any of wikipedia's content before, so excuse my lack of professionalism, I just simply cannot find proof of the cars existence. Lifeissomething 18:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

If no citations exist, this information should be removed. I suspect it is a vanity entry.Nicholas SL Smith 20:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Common Problems Section

I take issue with the Common Problems portion of the Accord article. The Accord article is not meant to be a discussion board for gripes of car owners. I understand that legitimate problems may exist, such as Intel's P60 FPU Error; but, the research community will be served better if we include problems that we know affect a significant portion of a production run. If we allow everyone who bas a bad brake booster, alternator, or carburetor to post that these cars, in general, have this problem, this article will be diluted. Keep in mind that, after twenty or thirty years, any car will have almost every problem. I propose removing this section, and requiring that legitimate problems be added to respective model year sections. Let us leave one-off gripes to automobile forums. Nicholas SL Smith 20:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Put it back

I remember the common problem section being there and it is important that common defects in certain generations be mentioned. For example, the transmission in the 6th generation Accord IS a common problem to the point where Honda of America offers free servicing and good-will service past warranty. The article is not a gripe for car owners and the common problems can be footnoted by actual TSB's from Honda. Just as a side note, I am an owner of the 6th gen Accord but have personally had no failures such as this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 38.117.131.2 (talk) 21:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

The problem is that that piece of information should be quoted and verifiable. If you find a website (not an owners' forum) with that explained, you could add that. But you can't say "that car is very reliable, but this one isn't" without proving it. -- NaBUru38 02:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It's fairly simple, actually. If you find a TSB stating that there are reliability concerns, that is a good reference in my book. --Sable232 02:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Unreliability concerns are sometimes quite easy to come by, sometimes not:

I have owned two Accords; a '90LX and a 92LX. I bought the closest thing to a "factory" manual for my '90 for $120. It is so full of information, that it seems to take me forever to find what I need, such as torque specs. I used the '92 manual to service the dashboard controls, (radio and heater). When I tried to use it for the '92, it did not work, so I had to shell out another $140 for the '92 manual(s).

I saw a repair manual which included a CD, and almost bought it until I read the sticker that said, "American Honda Motors would not share information to include it in this manual." This was when the Accord was the most popular car on the American road. I almost decided to abandon the line, but I am living with my '92 and am on the lookout for a '94EX.

I have checked the recall notices, for heater temperature control problems, exhaust system failure every other year, and fuel pump relay failure in very hot climates, which have occurred on both of my Accords, and have found nothing. I was enlightened about the last problem by "Klick and Klack, the Tappet Brothers", on NPR.

I would have no problem listing REFERENCED problems (those from bona fide owner complaints and factory recalls), if only separately--W8IMP 21:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely agree, but I don't believe problems should be sepperated from the sub article about the model in question. Any information reguarding each model should be in the model article, with footnotes to sourses. Nicholas SL Smith 02:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the one common problem mentioned for the 90-93 Accords (before reading all this 'talk'). Hope this doesn't cause anyone grief.

Having owned and worked on one extensively, I was non-plussed at the one issue that made it here (the VSS failing). There were several other well-loved, or at least well-discussed, very common failures that folks know about (news:RAMH, Honda-tech.com etc). Frequent failures included fuel pump relay, heater control knob, igniter module, 'dogbone' front engine mount, power steering pump front seal, front door weatherstripping "bunching up" etc.). In my opinion, the reasons these are so well discussed is that very few other things go wrong, so these relatively weak designs appear prevalent. I would actually recommend a FAQ page...there are enough enthusiasts that it would be populated. Russella (talk) 01:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the inclusion of common problems in the article (as was done with the Nikasil engine block issue for BMW in the '90s for example); but, gripes (every non-recall issue needing maintenance throughout the lifetime of a vehicle) ought not to be included in this article. These automobiles have aged a lot by now. Failure of the items listed, while annoying, is to be expected at this phase in a vehicle's life. In addition to Wikipedia's policy against origional research, including failures of this nature is actually misleading at this point; a reader would naturally believe that these failures occurred almost immediately. ALL vehicles of that age have failures of transmissions, bearings, relays, mounts, traction control systems, ABS, injectors, etc... Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 01:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Eighth gen. image needs to be replaced

Someone uploaded an image of the 2008 Accord coupe, however someone needs to replace it whenever possible, as infobox images are to be from the front end and the images should not feature people.Hondasaregood 15:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Why in the world can't you have a person in the shot? It will actually give you a sense of scale. What is the source of these rules?

This is simply etiquette which has formed across automobile entries in Wikipedia (not a bright line rule). Think about an encyclopedia - usually it would show an image of the article subject only - if the only image available had people or other things in it, it would be acceptable. Please sign your additions. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 21:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge suggestion

I noticed the {{Globalize}} template on the page, so I'm proposing that Honda Accord (European) be merged to represent a worldwide veiw on the subject.Hondasaregood 04:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

How shall we go about assembeling this information? Shall we segment this article into European/JDM/American sections? I'm concerned about ambiguity about model year sepperations, trim levels, etc... and so, am aganst complete integration of models. Please see <US/WORLDWIDE VERSIONS> above Nicholas SL Smith 04:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The stuff about the 2003 to present Euro Accord is already covered in the article. Just add the stuff about The different naming conventions and body styles.Hondasaregood 14:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The second generation section is coming along nicely (concerning the addition of worldwide Accord information). Does anyone know about first generation Accords in the world wide market? Nicholas SL Smith 19:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

These articles have been merged -- Nicholas SL Smith 19:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I believe they shouldn't have merged. Its actually really confusing to me. Anyway shouldn't their just be a link to the European Accord? (Agent Mr (talk) 23:53, 30 November 2008 (UTC))

In what way is this article confusing? Help us understand so we can fix it. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 05:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Options

'''I just want to say that I love my 96 accord. But I was wondering if anyone could tell me if the 96 accord was offered with keyless entry''' —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.70.192.153 (talk) 01:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

KEYLESS ENTRY

one of my neighbors (a Honda loving traitor, just like you) once locked his keys in his accord in a drunken stupor. I was able to devise a unique "keyless entry system" by using a ball bat to gain entry through the side window. He later lost his job due to unfair trade and shot himself in the head with a "high quality japanees made" revolver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaltenborn (talk • contribs) 22:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The '96 Accord wasn't offered with keyless entry.^[1]Hondasare^{GOOD (talk)} 14:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

This illustrates a point from the US/Worldwide versions section of this talk page. The 96 (and indeed much earlier model, like my fathers '87) were available with keyless entry, at least in Japan.

Specifications, engines (and much more from 97 onwards) were not consistent across different countries. RossTangye (talk) 11:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Special Edition

The page said that 2002 was the last year of the special edition but the official site says otherwise - hence deleted that line

Concept

It states that the Accord was "originally planned as a V6-powered car".
Since it does not specify which generation it applies to, I would presume that it's meant to be the 1st generation, but I highly doubt that is what's in the mind of Honda as it was developing the car in the early 70's.
At that time, Honda was basically a one car company (Civic, if we do not count those niche models like N360/S500) and, I think, the biggest engine they produced was the 4 cylinder engine in Civic (~1.2 litre).
Furthermore, the first generation Accord came out as a 2 door hatchback first (with a relatively small [when we look back] 1.6 L engine, the 4 door sedan only came about 3 years later.
(Actually, Honda engineers strongly resist adding a V6 engine even as the car grows after evolving generations, they did not give that up until they had to rush out a V6 version for M/Y1995 re-using the 2.7 L engine from Acura Legend)
Can this statement be clarified or citation added? North wiki 08:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Using verbiage such as "resistant" is inappropriate unless we have reference for this. Simply because engineers don't do something doesn't mean they don't want to. It may make more sense to stick with a four cylinder platform. Engineering decisions that cost millions of dollars are rarely made on a whim; engineers take into account many factors when going forward with a design. At any rate, this article is not the venue for speculation. Nicholas SL Smith 19:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

engine size

In south east asia there is the 2.0 model. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.121.89.107 (talk) 09:35, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

In South East Asia there is a 2.0 model of what? Are you addressing a particular model or year? Please sign your comments. Nicholas SL Smith 19:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Sales figures source

I was wondering if the person who put up the sales numbers could also add the source of that information--it'd be nice to be able to go to that source and find this info for other cars... Jrbbopp 22:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

In addition, the one Canadian sales figure given is way off. Are we expected to believe that 1 in 15 Canadians bought an Accord that month? If it is not changed soon, I feel that it is my duty to delete it as it is misinformation. (Tal123 (talk) 23:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC))

Accords are also built in Thailand

This article does not list Thailand under the list of countries that produce the Accord, yet Thailand has been building them for about 10 years now. They are exported to Australia, New Zealand and numerous other countries Davez621 (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

If you know what models and years of Accords were produced where - please add them and include citations. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 17:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Best generation of Accord?

I vote 5th generation (Japanese built). Still runs perfectly with 180k. The 5th generation also had a much classier (fluid) interior than the boxy/cheap-looking dashboards of the later generations. --75.22.30.212 (talk) 06:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Voting for the "best" generation of Accord is original research and does not belong in an encyclopedia entry - if a reputable outside source has made a determination it might be appropriate to include such information. As a matter of good form, encyclopedic articles should stay away from qualitative and judgmental or editorial content. Information conveyance is the objective; interpretation and qualitative judgments should instead be left to the reader. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 21:11, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Weasel words,

NPOV, lacking sources. This article is a mess... Binarypower (talk) 18:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Anything in specific? Care to be constructive? Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 05:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Model-year differentiation

There are nice pictures for each generation, but I would like to see pictures to allow differentiation of model years. For example, the 1994 had no chrome around the front grill but later gen-5 Accords did. Similarly, the gen-7 years seem to be differentiated by tail design. I can't find any web pages that describe these differences explicitly. —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Model-year differentiation, World Wide Release Years

In the push to give this article a world wide POV, model years have begun to be muddled. In many countries a model year is released the year prior, but still named as the approaching model year (in mid 2008, one can buy a 2009 model year automobile). In other countries, the actual sale date of an automobile dictates the year of its release. Where this causes problems is where a model revision sold in Europe is referred to as a 2008, and referred to as a 2009 in Canada, even though it is manufactured and sold in 2008. How should we solve this potentially confusing issue? Shall we refer to models sold primarily in 2009 as a 2009 model, even though they began selling them in 2008?? Shall we refer to them as a 2008 model? (even though the primary version sold that year was the 2007 model)? Any suggestions? Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 05:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Problems Occuring in Many Accords

Just for a little bit of information. Some Accords in the 1990-94? year were experiencing problems starting. Out of the blue you would try to turn it on, then it would stutter then die. Wait a few more minutes and then it would turn on. There are countless videos on Youtube such as DavidsFarm trying to turn his Accord on. (I can give you the link to that video) All fingers point to the Fuel Main Relay. I'm just saying shouldn't we just include that into the article. Anybody who wants to argue you or clarify you can. (Agent Mr (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC))

As a rule, common problems have no place in encyclopedic articles. Unless an automobile model is known for its problems (perhaps early models from Citroën, from which the term lemon was coined). The problem with including common problems, is that it turns articles into gripe pages, and overall textual and reference quality deteriorates. If a problem is so prevalent that is warrants mention, it would need to be backed up by very high quality sources (ie, not forums or gripe pages, but news articles and book sources). This fuel problem was not that prevalent. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 04:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Eighth generation production

Honda doesn't produce 8th Accord Euro in Guangzhou China but produces USDM accord there.Allenwml (talk) 00:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Are there any cite-able sources for that? If so, let's get it in there and referenced! Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 03:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I made a guess about production locations when I separated the infoboxes between JP/US. Go ahead and fix if you know the real locations. 71.134.245.164 (talk) 10:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Let's try to cite as much as we can though. This page has real possibility of improving in quality if sources back it up. Nicholas SL Smith^chatter 20:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1