What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - Corporal_Jones

Hi Guys

Was after some advice, I've currently got an Accord 2.2 Ex 2006 manual which i'm happy with and has been super reliable, the only reason I'm after a new car is because I desperately want an automatic.

I was considering a 3 series or 5 series however the repair bills seem very high, also the reliability reports are not as good as the Accord so i'll stick with it for a few more years.

I do about 15000 miles (mainly motorway), been looking at the newer accords (2009) and the ones within my budget have done on average 100k miles however I have a few concerns:

  • Are there any big costs after 100k that I need to be aware of, e.g clutch life or timing chains etc, if I have to spend £1-2k replacing wear and tear items I'd prefer just to spend a bit more and get a lower mileage one to start with.
  • MPG, it looks like you can expect only about 35-40mpg on the automatic, I get 48 on mine however with the auto I might just have to take the hit, under real mpg the diesel has 41.2 vs 36.2 for Petrol, maybe I should consider Petrol?

Advice would be much appreciated as i've been going round in circles trying to make a decision! :)

Edited by Corporal_Jones on 11/10/2013 at 19:54

Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - coopshere
First things first; an automatic gearbox will be very expensive to repair/replace, much more than an old fashioned manual, so you should give that consideration in your decision making. But then again a modern engine replacement is also very expensive and probably the same price. With modern diesels you also have to cover the cost of likely DPF, fuel pump and turbo failure.

You would seem to be a person who would prefer Japanese style comfort and reliability over Germanic product overpricing.

So for an automatic take a look at the Toyota Avenis from mid 2009. It has a CVT gearbox rather than the conventional auto in the Accord but if you research it you will be unlikely to find any known major problems with it. It is a knats whisker off the economy of the manual petrol versions, it is cheaper to buy than the Accord and overall is quieter, more comfortable and has more room inside. The CVT box is a dream to use with options for tiptronic style, paddle shift and sport mode.

How do I know? Well until 18 months ago I had a late 2003 Accord 2.4 EX Auto which I loved, smooth, effortless, powerful(enough) and a joy to drive. But it was time for change and I wanted either a hatchback or estate. I had set my mind on a 2009 Accord estate. But then came the test drives. It was much harsher than my 2003 model, wife didn't like the passenger seat comfort but most of all found it very difficult to get in the back seats of the estate version(a major requirement for me). So to cut an even longer story short test drove a couple of 2010 Avensis 1.8 CVT estates. Found them at least the equal of the Accord for quality, ride comfort and drive-ability. I get a constant 38 to 39 mpg no matter how I drive it and coupled with the remainder of a 5 year warranty it was a no brainer.

Go try one out.
Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - RT
First things first; an automatic gearbox will be very expensive to repair/replace, much more than an old fashioned manual, so you should give that consideration in your decision making.

But few people ever need to repair/replace an automatic gearbox so the comment is a bit theoretical - and needs to be countered by the fact that most manuals these days have DMFs which are prone to expensive failure, probably far more often than automatics.

Edited by RT on 11/10/2013 at 21:33

Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - Corporal_Jones
Thanks for the replies so far, I did consider an avensis but just didn't like the look of them, I really like the interior of the accord, saying that the exterior looks Pretty sporty to me too.

A friend of mine did say I can get a 5 series for the same sort of money (8-9k) but I'm sure it would probably end up costing me a lot more in a 3 year timespan, still leaning towards the accord but also still confused with the same questions as in first post.
Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - Corporal_Jones
To throw a spanner in the works what are the views on a E class, 2006 onwards? Seems to rate quite high in the reliability index (not sure how accurate that index is)
Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - Avant

Any of the Germans will cost more than a Honda of equivalent vintage, and not necessarily be any more reliable. Japanese petrol cars do have a very good reputation, diesels less so.

The Mazda 6 is another one you could look at, but stick to petrol as the diesels have had some expensive problems.

Don't ignore mainstream cars like the Ford Mondeo or Skoda Octavia: there are lots around and because of that they should be cheaper than an Accord.

Edited by Avant on 12/10/2013 at 20:58

Honda Accord - Honda Accord 2009 2.2 Automatic with 100k+ miles? - mike hannon

The auto box in my 2010 diesel Accord saloon is the best I have ever had in any car, and I've had many, including several other Hondas. We find the front seats very comfortable, although the engine is a bit agricultural when stone cold.

Average fuel consumption is 45-48mpg, rising to over 50 on a motorway run, when the adaptive cruise control seems to improve it even further.

We live in France, where the practicalities of running a modern DPF-equipped diesel seem to be easier than in the traffic-choked UK.