I'll be getting the sedan. I'm keeping the Trans Am, so I need the versatility of the 4-doors.

 

It's fun to drive the 2.4 after driving around the old 2.2 huh?

My wife is next up to purchase a new car, and she's already talking about a Honda again. I told her about the new Civic SI that's coming out, and that's piqued her interest (and mine). She loves the look of the new Mustang too and I have to agree that it looks good. However, she still remembers the pile of junk her '82 'stang was, even though it's not in the same universe mechanically as the newer cars. Once someone has a bad experience, no matter how long ago it was, it still influences purchase decisions later on. She'd be hard-pressed pick a Ford over a Honda now.

 

It's fun to drive the 2.4 after driving around the old 2.2 huh?>>

There is almost no comparison. The K-series is better in just about every way. The F-series is, however, a proven engine and I've had absolutely no engine trouble in 164,000 miles of driving...so in that respect, I do hope the new engine provides the same service (although I see no reason why it shouldn't)

She loves the look of the new Mustang too and I have to agree that it looks good. However, she still remembers the pile of junk her '82 'stang was, even though it's not in the same universe mechanically as the newer cars.>>>

The new Mustang isn't even comparable to the latest generation it replaces... much less the 82. I was very impressed with the new Mustang...especially on the inside. Much better materials, fit and finish and design. Almost an exact opposite of what the previous generation was. I was disappointed that Ford decided against IRS and the use of a modified T-bird/Lincoln LS platform... but I doubt the typical Mustang buyer will miss them. The car felt solid (MUCH more so than it's predecessor that felt like an old 70's sedan that it was based upon) and handled much better too. Both engine choices are proven to be durable/dependable...so there should be no reliability problems with the car. I'll strongly consider one if and when I decide to replace the Trans Am.

 

Of course the deal with the live axle is cost and of course the fact that the IRS couldn't really deal with a whole lot of power. I've read stories online about 03 Cobra owners taking their cars to the track, launching off the line and breaking some vital components of the IRS. A live axle rear suspension is a whole lot stronger and is basically what the real Mustang freaks are looking for, especially if they're looking to put a lot more power to the pavement.

The reason I bought my Honda was for the style, the decent power, and the impeccable reliability(automatic transmission excluded). I just fell in love with my car the day I saw it on the lot and knew I had to have it. Two weeks later I bought it and despite a nightmarish situation with the main relay that almost made me total the car for the insurance, it's been a solid performer and I don't regret the choice I made to buy my car. I just love watching myself drive in the reflection of windows and hearing the leather squeak beneath my behind and know that it's all mine. Now if only they could make one RWD.......

 

I had an 84 Accord LX before my 98 Accord LX-Turbo Then I got the Tahoe for play n a CBR600 when I get back.

 

I had an 83 Accord SE, talk about a nice riding car. Never had any trouble with it either. Those early carbureted E-series engines were bullet proof. The stock carburetors usually were the only thing to start causing problems with old age and high mileage, but Webers made a great replacement.

Unfortunately, rust has killed off most of them. I was fortunate enough to find rust-free cars. Having owned both an 81 Civic wagon and then the 83 Accord, I can definitely say that if it hadn't been for the rust... these cars would still be on the road today running just fine.

 

sounds like my wifes aunt, biggest pos

 

...for an '03 Accord EX Coupe.....

..don't know where I got it......

..went to nearby Honda dealer and the test drive did it.......NOW I"M THE NEW GUY.

..10/7 - 10/17/05 did a N. Cal - Luke AFB (AZ) road trip:

1. 1810 miles on about 57 gallons of 87
2. Between Gila Bend - Yuma (hot strait desert): 39.32 MPG. Initially, I could not believe it. I tried again: Castaic to Stockton: 37.99.

Mileage not always that good. Fuel econ requires effort: 2100-2200 RPM, c/c, patience, ignoring other dufus-types looks (and flips)...hey, I'm on vacation here (well, almost).......

Senor Honda, you got my vote..........

best, ez.....

2005 Accord EX V-6 6-speed Coupe
Taffeta White/cargo net/7-24-2005

 

You got 38 MPG out of a NEW Accord V6?

WOW. I know it's flat out there, smooth roads, etc., but that is smoking on the mileage. Yes, I know it must have taken some patience to baby the throttle like that.

 

Just bought my 96 accord with 142K miles on it and it's in @ least twice the shape of any other car i had, even the 2002 grand am gt i got rid of with only 70K miles. Just for the record, it's even documented that European autos are more problematic than American cars, but of all, Asian autos are better. Look @ some of the American cars and you can see that they're just not built like Hondas and Toyotas are (wheel gaps, door gaps, various other tolerances). When you build something better, it lasts longer, that's all there is to it. One car that has surprised me is Saturn, though. Interiors are typical GM fashion, but the drivetrains are pretty good. My trans went out on my last saturn @ about 220K and that was with very much abuse from me since it was only a 500 dollar car. I once done a comparison between a civic and ford zx2, which was rated very good reliability, and after 5 years the zx2 came out costing about 30K and the civic was closer to about 22K i thinik. it was 8K cheaper in the long run to buy the more expensive civic... Sorry so long, but for money and peace of mind, best buy will be, now and for a LONG time in the future, Asian is the best choice.