SSFTSX

http://www.whatcar.com/car-review-fu...x?RT=2855#Road

ON THE ROAD

Performance
There are three engines to choose from - a 154bhp 2.0-litre petrol, a 198bhp 2.4-litre petrol and a 148bhp 2.2-litre diesel. All are smooth and strong. A six-speed gearbox is standard, and the petrols offer the option of a five-speed automatic.

Ride & handling
Honda reckons Accord owners will do long shifts on motorways, so it has set the suspension for comfort rather than sharpness. The ride is quiet and compliant. Push the car hard through bends and it will start to run wide, but it holds on well. The steering, with electronic power assistance, can be numb but weights up (artifically) once you start to turn.

Refinement
The engines are audible when driven hard, but only enough to keep you in touch with what's going on, and the absence of road and wind noise is highly impressive. The engines and gearshifts are wonderfully smooth, as we've come to expect from Honda.


Ownership | In the cabin | Back to top



OWNERSHIP

Buying & owning
Do you see the Accord as a rival to an Audi A4, or an alternative to a Ford Mondeo? Depending on the answer, prices are either quite cheap or outrageously expensive. On the positive side, resale values are expected to be up there with those of BMW and Audi now.

Quality & reliability
Few cars are as trouble-free to own as a Honda. The Accord won't break down or start to fall apart as the miles mount, and trim quality is high. However, it lacks the depth of quality of some rivals, and the dash looks cluttered and fussy.

Safety & security
The Accord has all the latest electronic braking and anti-skid features, including trailer stability assistance, and there are six airbags and anti-whiplash front headrests if the worst happens. Diesel and 2.4-litre petrol EX models offer the option of a lane-change warning system and cruise control that brakes the car in emergencies. Deadlocks and an alarm are standard.


On the road | In the cabin | Back to top



IN THE CABIN

Behind the wheel
Honda is justifiably proud of the Accord's comfortable, all-enveloping, multi-adjustable seats, and the relatively slim pillars are another boon, particularly when it's difficult to see out of so many rival cars. The dash layout is less successful, presenting you with a vast array of identically coloured and similarly shaped switches. It's hard to remember what is where.

Space & practicality
There are bigger family saloons than the Accord, but few that are more spacious, and the seats in the back are almost as comfortable as those up front. It's not quite so competitive for boot space, although few people will find it inadequate. Being a saloon rather than a hatchback also restricts what you can get in.

Equipment
There are effectively two trims in the Accord, with the option of a GT bodykit that makes the car look as though it's on the way to a club race meeting. Entry-level ES models have one or two gaps in their specification - no front foglights, automatic lights and wipers or Bluetooth connection, for example, which you might reasonably expect in a car costing over £19,000. However, EX models are loaded to the gills.

davidspalding

MMsTSX

there's like 33-34 buttons on the dash for the new Accord/TSX interior.

wow...

wasn't it overwhelmingly decided years ago that this was the wrong way to do it?
other companies such as BMW went this route before, only to retract and do it
a better way.

guess honda isn't too keen on accepting wisdom from others.

jwaters943

Very few people consider I-Drive to be a "better" way. I say bring back the touchscreen and do away with the knob (and while they're at it, improve the screen resolution/graphics). Otherwise, I don't mind buttons.

spurfan15

I don't understand the harsh criticism of the buttons either. I like having a tangible button for each feature of the car. The wheel knob is fine for navi stuff, and the touchscreen good for navi and is OK for features, but I really prefer buttons over anything else for AC temp controls, seats, etc... (voice commands work pretty well too)

These magazine reviews are short sighted, because the reviewers spend hardly any time behind the wheel. After a while you just memorize exactly what every button does, and you don't even have to think about it. The buttons allow one touch commands, whereas menu systems require navigating menus for simple functions like turning on the AC. No matter how well you know the system, you still have to navigate. I'd much rather have lots of buttons than some stupid i-drive system.

Colin

It's a case of 'damned of you do and damned if you don't' If you take away the buttons, people complain that you have to use the wheel or learn VC. You put the touch screen back in and people complain that there are smudges on the screen or that you have to take your eyes off the road to use it or have to scroll through menus.

I have yet to see a reviewer point to a car and proclaim that "This is the only way to integrate all the telematics" and that everyone needs to copy this. Because the next reviewer will have a different opinion and complain about something else.

jwaters943

I think Colin hit the nail on the head.

dom

Hmmm, don't ever recall hearing any complaints about the first gen in that respect.

davidspalding

Neither do I. I complained (mildly) that the older NAVI seemed to replace a number of hard buttons that I have in my non-NAVI 2006 with soft keys, and I prefer the hard keys. I think the complaint here is that there are SO MANY buttons, and they are alike in feel and labeling (I can't say without seeing one in person). At least on my 2006, there aren't more than 20 or so buttons, and they are laid out in a rather intuitive fashion. Compare with the 2009 dash, and I think you'll see what I mean. Looks like some buttons are smaller, too, but ... again, I'd defer to someone who actually has his/her hands on the car.