Comments on: 2009 Honda Accord Euro Review & Road Test

By: Fasthonda

Fasthonda — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:47:55 +0000

In America they have just released the V6 version of the Euro.I very much doubt that it will make it’s way here.The trade off is that the front end is a little “front(top) heavy” and some reports suggest it contributes to understeer.
I really don’t see Honda adopting a turbo or supercharger in their engines any time soon.

By: Al Juraj

Al Juraj — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:36:55 +0000

I’d still get the Euro as the Corolla is just nothing special. Just make sure the Honda drives like new and has no interior wear.

By: Al Juraj

Al Juraj — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:32:35 +0000

A $5000 price drop or a turbo engine would have made this my car now.

By: Shak

Shak — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:54:39 +0000

We have had an Accord(thai made) for over a year now and not one thing has gone wrong.love the interior, it drives well for a car of its size and the fuel consumption is brilliant, I just have one niggle. We have the VTEC 4 cylinder and while on highways and straight roads even with a full load it pulls very well, on a slight incline or even a small hill it takes time to spool up as if it is turbocharged or something. It sounds beautiful when u use the paddles and rev it to 6000rpm, but it takes it time and this is dangerous if you want to overtake on a small hill. Honda should either give it more torque or tune it to deliver its torque lower in the rev range. Just thougth id share

By: otto

otto — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 09:17:09 +0000

All very impressive indeed. Will anyone, (present or past owner) hesitate to make a choice between a NEW Corolla vs a low km Accord Euro (say 55-60K km)?
How’s this for apples and carrots?
That, is where I am at…
O.

By: Keith

Keith — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:40:10 +0000

I bought my 6 speed euro luxury 3 months ago. What a fantastic motor car. Before buying the euro I looked at a Lexus IS250, BMW 325i and the new Mercedes C280 elegance. What struck me most of all when looking at all these cars was the difference in price. I can’t for the life of me understand why the euro is so cheap, because in terms of luxury appointments, ride, handling, and power the euro wins hands down. Anyone who says there is a better handling car in the euro’s segment has no idea what they’re talking about. And as for the power, well, all I can say is getting from 0-100 in 7.8 seconds suits me just fine.

In terms of road noise; once you’ve got the euro’s unbelievable sound system on, the road noise disappears, and as you sit back in the magnificent leather seats life’s little worries just seem to vanish into through the sunroof.

I love the euro, it’s a remarkable car at an astonishingly low price. The car is loaded with an array of wonderful features such as front and rear parking sensors, automatic wiper and light sensors, automatic boot release, compartments everywhere. The list is endless, but don’t take my word for it; go drive it. Oh, and if you can, try to get a 6 speed manual luxury, the gear box is to die for.

One other thought; the resale value on the euro is very high when compared to other entry level luxury cars.

By: Jim Couper

Jim Couper — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 03:06:56 +0000

I have been a Honda Accord Euro owner since 2003. I am up for a new car and it will definitely be another Euro. Why? It is not ‘the’ perfect car but it comes closer to meeting all the criteria for a car in its class than anything else on the market. And that’s been true since its launch. If there is a problem with the Euro it is that nothing really stands out..it is uniformly good…to some people this equates with boring but you tend not to hear this from Euro owners. I conduct market research on car owners and recently looked at brand repurchase intention. Honda owners(overall)had the highest repurchase intention.

By: Gordon Lennox

Gordon Lennox — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 03:53:37 +0000

We just purchased a lux Euro in preference to the ordinary Accord which is built in Thailand compared to Japan (Euro). We have done 2500km so far and I love it. It is a manual and is a really engaging drive, it still cruises up hills easily in 6th but drop i back to 4 and it overtakes easily. My son and I are well over 6 foot and can fit in the back with headroom and reasonable foot space, most of the other makes were very ordinary in these areas. The test drive of the Euro showed it to be a step above the Mazda 6 for us, which also needs 95 fuel.
Also my wife thought while the ordinary Accord was a nice drive and had better interior space it looked a bit more conservative.
I can’t recommend these Euros enough
Gordon

By: russ christison

russ christison — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:15:40 +0000

have recently replaced my golf gti with an accord euro stantard, so far i have only travelled 1,000 klm but have been very impressed by the car over a variety of different road conditions, freeway, city driving and a wet drive through the royal national park. fuel economy so far has been 9.0l/100klm a little heavier than the golf. the car has a nice blend between handling and ride. my use of the the car is mainly as a 2 seater and occasionly 4 adults, and although lacking in touque compared to the gti the car preforms better than the figures suggest. a lot of the readers who critize the car appear not to have even driven the car. there are many good cars in this class, mazda 6, for example, my suggestion is test drive before buying,as stats dont always tell the whole story.

By: Nick Powell

Nick Powell — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 06:20:41 +0000

I have been reading the comments about the Euro with some interest. I like the interior and room (and power) of the Accord v6 Luxury but my wife likes the looks of the Euro Luxury.

I know that life will not be worth living if I come home in the v6 instead of the Euro but can anyone assure me I would be getting the same “value” car in the Euro given it has less power, less space etc.

Dollars are about the same for either car with all the add ons and protection packages ($52K).

By: Grumpy01

Grumpy01 — Mon, 11 May 2009 04:40:36 +0000

Just test drove a manual this morning. I was concerned about the lack of torque until I drove it. I found it to be really deceptive in this regard…really positive surprise. I’ve been looking for a mid size luxury car to replace my current work vehicle and have been looking at C220CDI Avantgarde mercs, 320ds, etc.
I have to say after today’s experince i would find it hard to justify the extra spend on the mercs or bmws; they are bloody good cars but they simply don’t drive $20k better…

By: LibSti

LibSti — Fri, 01 May 2009 18:57:18 +0000

the accord euro is sure a very nice car, just wanna to make a comment about a car that balances family needs/weekend fun/day to day drives…

unfortunately the car that fits into this category is limited edition but it does exist in several other forms….

Subaru Liberty GT Spec B Tuned by STi 2008 Edition, 250 Produced…

AWD, STi Suspension, Spacious Interior, Fairly good Mcintosh Sound System, Nice Exhaust Note, Power and Torque come smooth, Big Boot, brembo stopping power, wow factor, very good resale value…. Need i mention more?

and yes.. i drive one =) i have personally owned and/or driven most of the better larger and mid sized sedans, both japanese and euro and this is one that that i would say EASILY takes them all on, the BEST handling japanese sedan, outhandles almost all sub $150k Euro branded cars…

pity the new liberty looks like a POS =(

By: TopGearNut

TopGearNut — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 23:53:50 +0000

Paul,
After a bit more reading about. Torque etc. I see where you are coming from now and can see where the analogy I used with the VN was not a great choice…and that the difference in torque is quite considerable.
I do wonder though if Honda made their choice by the euro’s intended useage ?
Being a mid-sized family car would it not be adequete to get the family around the suburbs and to cruise along the highway with enough guts to overtake when required ?
Admittedly, mountainous travel or towing trailers would give added strain to the euro (compared to similar cars with more torque/power), however families that towed often (I would think) would look at a car better suited to that application.
I know in my situation, I rarely tow anything and 99% of my driving would be highway/city driving so, fo me, 234Nm might be ample, considering the fuel mileage benefit.

If this was Honda’s intention, then perhaps their design isn’t incorrect.

Just another point of view :-)

By: Hayzel

Hayzel — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:11:28 +0000

I believe they sacrifice torque in return of fuel economy and engine reliability? Personally I never like commodores or falcons in that regard due to their general negligence in improving fuel consumption among other things. I do agree that Honda should try and improve the amount of torques in their engine. Imagine a torquey Honda engine….

By: Paul Maric

Paul Maric — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 21:09:33 +0000

TopGearNut:

Interesting point TopGearNut, but I think you’re forgetting the most crucial part – torque.

Power in the grand scheme of things doesn’t really mean much in terms of driveability. It comes down to torque and the way the engine delivers it.

In the VN SS example, although the engine produced only 165kW of power, it made 385Nm of torque at a low 3,600rpm.

The Accord Euro on the other hand only makes 234Nm at over 4,000rpm.

Even the 125kW V6, VN Commodore made more torque than the Accord Euro.

When you consider the VN Commodore is some 20-years old, it makes you wonder why Honda chose such an under achieving engine for what is a technically superb car.

By: TopGearNut

TopGearNut — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 18:53:20 +0000

Just in relation to the “under-powered” notion of the accord, what strikes me as interesting is that 20 years ago, the VN commodore was running a 5.0L engine at 165kw and touted as the great all-round family car.

With the current model accord euro, it’s power-to-weight ratio isn’t far off this “great all-round car”, yet it is seen as under-powered.

Considering the euro is designed as a family car, does it really need to have WRX STi performance (which would come at a cost at the petrol pump), or have Honda been insightful in producing a great family car which has good (not sports) performance yet still delivers remarkable economy….similar traits to that VN commodore from 20 years ago ??

With speed limits the way they are in Australia, is there a real need for a 200kw+ sedan that most of the time cruises at 100km/h or well below ?

If you want a sports car, buy a sports car. If you want a well-rounded family car, I think the accord Euro is a worthy contender.

Just my $0.02 :-)

By: NotTheStig

NotTheStig — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 06:54:02 +0000

I can’t believe the differences in the Accords…

These look good but the “other” Accord is Ugly big time.

By: Ray Pooley

Ray Pooley — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 06:33:22 +0000

Having come out of Statesman’s along with Calais and most recently a Subaru Liberty Premium, the Euro Luxury just purchased is the only vehicle I have ever said, “I love”. I am not a ‘rev head’, drive only country k’s and for economy. One of my gripes is the road noise from those huge 18″ tyres. Only half as much as the Liberty and twice as much as a Statesman. Will sound deadner around the wheel arches help? I understand it’s a smaller car but it feels large inside with quality appointments including a superby sound system. Also, the reflection from the centre dash screen makes the readings sometimes impossible to read. Can anyone tell me if my car will run satisfactorily on standard un-leaded. I have had varying answers.
P.S. On straight highway running I can manage 6.2 l/100kms on 95 RON.

By: OSU811

OSU811 — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:39:42 +0000

nice car always liked and admired the euro!! anyone who buys the normal accord over the euro obviously doesnt enjoy driving or the handling of the euro.. my only problem with the new model is its no big improvement on the old euro and its heavier!!

By: J

Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:42:45 +0000

Thanks Paul.