If you want the Honda - looks like it's winning the votes, so far - with your budget, you'd be just about into this one, of a dozen or so, lateish examleas on Auctionview...
HONDA ACCORD 2.0 VTEC SE Saloon, SILVER, 4 Doors, Manual Transmission, Petrol, 13957 Miles, Margin.
DV06NDE Registered 10-04-2006
So with something like this, why you would need to go the dealer, route, is well worth asking yourself!!
VB
|
>>The Honda is great to look at, and nicer inside than the Mondeo.>>
Depends on the respective models / specs in both respects.
|
>>the massive value-for-money of the Mondeo outweigh the perceived quality advantage of the Accord<<
I would not say that there was any 'perceived' quality with the Accord.
It is real quality designed in from the outset - in an engineering sense - made from parts that will easily last 200K+ miles with very few problems.
Honda don't go in for too much rubber coated door handles and damping on the glovebox to give a feeling of perceived quality (although every thing is nicely damped) - they are the real Mccoy IMO.
(I am not saying the Mondeo is not a good car either).
|
It depends how long you intend to keep the car.
The only time a Mondeo makes anything close to financial sense is if you buy an old one, or buy a nearly new one and "run it into the ground" so to speak. The depreciation curve remains steep on these until they drop into £1500 territory - the early 2001/2002 mk3's are down to a couple of grand now. To put that into perspective, my brother in law has just sold an 80,000 mile 2001 Passat for £4,700
My personal preference would be the Mondeo because I like the way they drive, but the Accord will be worth a lot more in say three years time. Mondeos are also a complete PITA to sell used unless in exceptional condition or a rare spec, as buyers can afford to be incredibly picky. If yours is no good, there are 30 similar ones within 40 miles on Auto Trader.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
97 Ford Fiesta 1.4 16v Chicane (for sale)
|
The depreciation curve remains steep on these until they drop into £1500 territory - the early 2001/2002 mk3's are down to a couple of grand now. >>
Depends, a 150k miles 1.8 LX maybe though even a 5 year old 100k Zetec / Ghia etc TDCi in good order will go for around £5k still it seems, quite reassuring for me, and a 5 year old 100k 2.0 petrol Zetec etc will make at least £3500 if in good order.
In a few years time a 5 year old Mondeo is likely to be worth more tham an equivilent 5 year old Accord.
Not a direct comparson though I not someone who has changed an Accord 2.2 CT-Di for an X-Type 2.0d (based on Mondeo, same engine) and is very pleased.
|
>>in a few years time a 5 year old Mondeo is likely to be worth more tham an equivilent 5 year old Accord.>>
Sorry that is meant to be "In a few years time a 5 year old Mondeo is likely to be worth more tham an equivilent 7 (seven) year old Accord."
|
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more, Pendlebury. It depends on whether you care enough to want an engineer's car or a bean-counter's car.
The Mondeo is a good car, dressed up to look more than it is, to give satisfaction for the first four or five years of its life.
I cannot believe that, in later life, any reasonably-kept Accord will ever be worth the same as or less than a Mondeo two years younger.
|
Couldn't agree more Pendlebury. It depends on whether you care enough to want an engineer's car or a bean-counter's car.
That's a bit harsh.
Have you driven a Mondeo? The bean counters didn't have much influence in the chassis, that's for sure.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
97 Ford Fiesta 1.4 16v Chicane (for sale)
|
Couldn't agree more Pendlebury. It depends on whether you care enough to want an engineer's car or a bean-counter's car.
>>That's a bit harsh.>>
More than harsh, it is utter carp, the difference between a Honda and a Ford in engineering terms are minor, pluses and minuses in both directions though both ultimately built to a cost. Honda have a well justified reputation for great petrol engines though even there they are not universally the best. The (Yamaha designed) VVT Puma was as good an application of V-Tec type technology as in any Honda, also the system on the VFR800 is carp simply keeping one inlet valve per cyl closed at low revs without any adjustment to valve timing. Furthermore they dont seem to be able to offer as long valve clearance intervals on high revving bike engines as Yamaha, nor does the latest Fireblade rev as as high or produce as much power and torque as the Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki and MV Augusta equivelents (that being said the 07 Fireblade has a great chassis).
I have Honda lawnmower and it is great., seven years old now, always starts first or second pull even after a winter lay off though there is no sign that it is an enineers lawnmower more than any other, again it is built to a cost.
I reckon Honda and Toyota are where VW was a few years ago, a reputation the ultimately wont be able to sustain.
|
Thanks for all the replies, especially to Pologirl and Seant for their experiences with the Accord.
I guess the next step is to actually drive both cars and see what I think.
I take Vansboy's point that it would be cheaper to buy from outside the main dealer network. But I am not particularly mechanically-minded, so will want the reassurance of buying from a main dealer. Also, I do want a very specific car (ivory leather, wood inserts, spoiler - yes, I know those extras aren't for everyone, certainly SWMBO is not impressed with them), so it will be easier to locate through the Honda network.
Can I just follow up with Pologirl - what sort of mpg did your other half get? Did he have the 2 litre petrol engine? Also, if you don't mind my asking, your reply seems to imply that he got rid of the car after a year - why did he do this if he had no complaints?
|
Hi Primera
I should have said, sorry, the Accord was a diesel - the better specced sporty one but I can't remember the exact term. The only reason he now has a Passat is that he changed jobs, needed an estate and didn't want to have the same car two in a row.
As far as we know, the Accord is still with one of the other staff at his old job.
I think you'll know which is for you when you take them out.
|
Also, here's the thread that explains what he ended up with: www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=36386
It did take aaaages to arrive (hence the nasty mondeo). He had an Octavia while waiting for the current Passat to arrive, and that was lovely, even on the basic hire car spec. Considered one of those?
|
|
They're both good cars. Personally I would go for the Mondeo but a 3 year old one and keep the rest of the cash in the bank.
I've had a similar decision to make recently too. I couldn't face the boredom of spending the next four or five years with the innocuous boredom of a Mondeo and so I've decided on a five year old BMW 530d for the same money instead!
|
>>I reckon Honda and Toyota are where VW was a few years ago, a reputation the ultimately wont be able to sustain. <<
That is an interesting point cheddar - what makes you say that ?
I have not noticed Honda doing anything differently lately in terms of reducing costs by sub-standard engineering whilst trying to make it look good which is what VW did.
VAG for instance employed the likes of Lopez from GM to drive down supplier costs etc which ultimately cost them on the relaibility stakes because the suppliers still have to make a profit for example.
I would be interested if you have heard that Honda are going the same way - I just don't see it.
I see them venturing into aircraft and aeroengines and also ASIMO as a test bed for their car technology but I would like to be educated on why they are following in VW's footsteps.
|
>>I reckon Honda and Toyota are where VW was a few years ago a reputation the ultimately wont be able to sustain. << That is an interesting point cheddar - what makes you say that ?
Fair points about Lopez and VAG. It is Toyota that are heading for a fall in reputation terms, their current actual reliability is not meeting the percived Toyota bullet proof reputation, customers expectations are not being met, when that happens there is only one way to go, their reputation is on the slide, it wont be a crash like VW though.
Honda also have a high reputation and are in danger of going the same way, particularly when people read that a Honda is an engineers car and a Ford is not and such carp, then they get out of their fine handling and reliable Focus or Mondeo into a Steve Jobs Civic or wallowing Accord and wonder what the fuss was about - expectations not met.
|
Well I just had the same sort of choice as Primera Man and got rid of my Civic and went for the 2.4 Executive Tourer Auto on an 04 plate.
No brainer as far as I'm concerned. I've had Fords in the past and would take some convincing to buy one now. I am not saying they are bad cars , just not me.
I have to say I'm pleased with the level of quality of the Accord, leather throughout , Satnav, Cruise Control, Alloys, Traction Control etc etc but the main reason I bought is the Honda reputation for reliability. I have not had it long enough to give a full report but I got two years parts and labour warranty from the main dealer and have already had two new headlights fitted without a murmur when I pointed out the misting on the glass which should have been fixed in an earlier recall.
I also did not like the fact that you do not get a spare in the tourer so have purchased a space saver instead of the gunge and compressor they supply.
Go for the Honda , push the dealer for two years parts and labour warranty and sit back and enjoy trouble free motoring.
|
My point was that age treats a Honda better than a Ford, therefore if you don't buy new or very young buy a Honda.
This isn't 'carp', it's long experience by me and, yes, I have driven Mondeos - even been paid to.
I have a 15-year-old Accord that lives out but is clean as a whistle, sweet as a nut and drives like it was maybe 12 months old. And even in France I see similar ones around all the time. Even the Honda dealers over here are happy to service them at a reasonable price!
When was the last time you saw a 1993 Mondeo?
|
I still think that Honda and Toyota are head & shoulders above Ford in reliability and it looks like it'll remain this way for quite sometime!
Here're couple of links to prove that.
www.reliabilityindex.com/top10.html?apc=3128339010...1
Honda and Toyota at number 3 & 7 respectively whereas you can't see Ford anywhere in the list.
www.reliabilityindex.com/tophundred.html?apc=31283...1
Honda and Toyota have got 2 cars each in top 10 but Ford's highest ranked car is Ford Ka at number 22.
www.whatcar.co.uk/news-special-report.aspx?NA=2255...#
JD Survey - Lexus, Honda and Toyota 1st, 2nd and 4th whereas Ford is at number 18.
As I've said Ford still has got to do plenty of hard work in reliability and customer satisfaction field before they could get anywhere near Honda or Toyota!
|
Re reliabilityindex.com, much better to compare models, where the Mondeo (00-03) beats the Avensis (97-03) and the Focus (98-04) beats the Civic (96-01).
Re manufacturers the lates Which reliability places Honda (86%) and and Toytota (85%) at the top though Ford (78%) are 10th, ahead of BMW, Mini, Skoda, Audi, VW and Mercedes Benz to name but a few.
|
>>Fair points about Lopez and VAG. It is Toyota that are heading .......................<<
In response to your post above cheddar - I can only agree with you - I think you have it hit the nail on the head although I do think Honda will hold it together in terms of long term reliability.
|
The Accord may well be reliable but every one I have seen at auction looks abnormally tatty. The mechanical bits may stand up well but I'm far from sure the cosmetic parts do over any moderately high mileage.
The values also seem to be dropping quite quickly. The trade (CAP) value of a typical 04 plate CDTi has dropped 15% since April but the guides haven't caught up as auction prices are only 89% of CAP Clean for the last month. Whatever Honda tries to pass them off at the market seems to have decided that Accords are fleet fodder along with the Mondeo and Vectra.
As cars, the Honda probably has more showroom appeal but the Mondeo is better to drive. Frankly, out of a 3 year old Accord and a 1 year old Mondeo I would buy a 3 year old Mondeo and spend the balance on a holiday.
|
Interesting to see the comments on how most think the Accord will last better. I actually think the Accord is the first Honda the bean counters really got hold of over the engineers and is really built to do a job and the be disposed of (apart from perhaps the Rover 600 generation Accord which went tatty and worthless very quickly).
It is well built for sure but it is not over engineered in any way shape or form. The paint is pretty terrible and shows any and every chip and mark once past about 50k.
To be honest, in 5 years time, a 6 year old Mondeo with 100k on the clock or a 8 year old 100k Accord will both be effectively worthless and both be 2 or approching 2 generations out of date.
|
|
My 52 plate Mondeo has rusting rear doors (no accident damage). Leaseplan stratching their heads as they now think Ford is responsible.... but Leaseplan did not pay for the necessary body/paint checks each year to save money :-) Makes me smile anyway.
|
snipquoteIt is well built for sure but it is not over engineered in any way shape or form. The paint is pretty terrible and shows any and every chip and mark once past about 50k.
I can concur with that - the three year old examples I saw with any kind of mileage had nasty chips and rust spots on the bonnet. Looking at Passats, Mondeos, they didn't suffer it.
|
"Looking at Passats, Mondeos, they didn't suffer it."
Of my Mondeo, a couple of stone chips on bonnet are starting to look like they might rust. Rear doors are rusting... Car newly built in October 2003. And it did not sit in a field as it was a Euro IV diesel around the time they first came out from Ford.
|
In response to your post above cheddar - I can only agree with you - I think you have it hit the nail on the head >>
Thanks Pendlebury.
|
Just to pick up on a couple of the points above.
Helicopter, thanks for your comments. It's helpful to get feedback from someone who has an Accord.
In response to Pologirl's suggestion of an Octavia, I have had one before. It looked great, but I got fed up with all the squeaks and rattles and eventually part-ex'd it.
I guess I am slightly obsessive in not wanting to have any squeaks or rattles. I would assume that a premium car such as an Accord should be entirely squeak-free, but, if anyone has found them to squeak or rattle, please let me know.
|
I guess I am slightly obsessive in not wanting to have any squeaks or rattles. I would assume that a premium car such as an Accord should be entirely squeak-free but if anyone has found them to squeak or rattle please let me know.
As I say it is all about expectations - perhaps get an Octavia, at least then if it squeaks you will be expecting it and if it doesnt you will be well pleased though if you get an Accord and it squeaks you will be livid!
|
Yes, thanks for that Cheddar. Made me smile!
I guess that buying an Accord should minimise this risk, and that there is a slightly higher risk of squeaks in a Mondeo, it being a less upmarket car.
|
I'm not sure what is "premium" about the Accord except perhaps the marketing. It is a perfectly decent car (a very good one in fact) and a good choice but it's not significantly different to the Avensis, Vectra etc. in any significant way.
I'd also look at the Volvo S60 - no more reliable than the Accord (probably less so) but a more comfortable drive and very well equipped.
|
Actually, could I address the above query to those with personal experience of the Accord (Pologirl, Seant and Helicopter). I suspect from reading your earlier replies that you have found your Accords to be quiet, with no squeaks or rattles, but I should be grateful for your confirmation.
Thanks
|
had my 03 2.4 type S tourer for about 18 months and they are good cars. I would recommend the exec spec over type s, and probably avoid the 17" alloys. Mine is on 80k now and i suspect it had a hard life before i bought it. It has been sound, but did need a new driveshaft recently. no squeaks or rattles.
Tourer is very versatile, not so sure about saloon (depends on what you need though).
When i bought i was very anti rep-mobiles, so went for the honda as it doesnt really have an image as such. Now, i would prob have a harder time choosing. (realised the mondeos are really good cars, we have two older ones im my mini-fleet) A 2.0 tdci titanium X spec would prob be tempting now. Our mondeos have been reliable, in fact my car has probably cost more in repairs than both mondeos this year!
as mentioned above, why not get a slightly older mondeo and save a few quid?
|
Hi primera man
my wifes 05 (55 plate) Accord 2.0 sport is certainly quiet, well built and rattle free, but then again so is my 03 (53 plate) Octavia vRS !
|
Hi again
as far as the tyres go I understand 17" tyres tend to tramline and give quite a hard ride. Our Accord sport rides on 16" alloys and is firm, but not too uncomfortable.
|
Mondeo rusting doors are a known fault - 2002-2003 versions seem particularly prone. On the other hand Accord bonnets all rust after about 40k. Both are fundamentally good cars but fleet fodder built down to a price.
The Mondeo is, IMO, by far the nicer car to drive but the Accord has more static appeal. Don't get me wrong - the Accord is a good car and a good choice but don't fall for the Honda marketing that it is anything special.
Image wise I reckon they're about equal - the Mondeo will depreciate down to nothing as the previous model did and the Accords will all end up as mini-cabs as every previous Accord has.
|
|
Just another thought: I was at an auction today where there were loads of Pug 407's. They all had about 100k on the clock but all looked pretty fresh, interestingly they all looked to have stood up to 100k miles of fleet abuse far better than the average Accord (or most Mondeo's). Maybe when Pug's are lasting better than Ford's or Honda's Ford and Honda should take a look at their material quality.
|
|
A few mass generalisations there pd though I dont think Messers Honda or Ford are unduly worried about the 407 because it is bleedin' ugly and souless, inside and out. That being said 2.0 HDi 407s at 100k would have had a mainly m/way life so should be fresh and might be good VFM. I should say re freshness that my Mondeo feels much as it did when it was new, now nearly 120k.
|
A few mass generalisations there pd though I dont think Messers Honda or Ford are unduly worried about the 407 because it is bleedin' ugly and souless inside and out.
Looks are, as I'm sure you know Cheddar subjective. Out of the three, for looks I'd rate them 1- Accord; 2- 407; 3- Mondeo. (Not sure what you mean by souless btw!)
|
Looks are as I'm sure you know Cheddar subjective. Out of the three for looks I'd rate them 1- Accord; 2- 407; 3- Mondeo. >>
www.specsavers.co.uk
;-)
|
|
I'm not a big fan of the 407 either. It was just an observation that at first glance they seem to be lasting better than some Pugs from the past.
|
|
Primera man - Why don't you test drive a Mazda 6 to see if you like it or not, because it'll be as reliable as Honda Accord and it looks quite good too!
|
Well just to answer your question primera man, certainly no squeaks and rattles noticed as yet in my Accord but I have only had it since the end of May.
Its only done 24 K in three years with one preious owner so its had an average but not hard life. Its got no noticeable paint chips. If it had any I would have had them done when I bought along with the offside rear bumper scratches they sprayed foc.
The 2.4 petrol is quite thirsty but generally I'm very pleased with it.
Hondas do hold their value well.
My Civic was seven years old when I traded it in and I got the book price . It did have full service history and 42 k on the clock. Cars that age generally go straight off to auction.
Mine however went on the dealers forecourt at what I considered a stupidly high price but was sold within a fortnight.Of course that was with a full main dealer parts and labour warranty.
I do like the look also of the Mazda 626 but the local Honda dealer is so good on the details and sorts out problems without arguments I just do not want to change.
|
>>>The 2.4 petrol is quite thirsty but generally I'm very pleased with it. >>>>>
Helicopter, I have been considering a 2.4 EX saloon and would be interested to know how thirsty your car actually is.????
Thanks.
|
Well as I was away on holiday for a couple of weeks in June and only bought the car in May I cannot really give a true indication as have only filled up once since I bought it but that was 50 litres or so.£49 at the pump when with the Civic 1.6 engine I would get away with £35 or so to fill up
Its had a couple of longish Motorway runs but generally has only been used for the daily commute of eight miles each way, the climate control is on all the time at the moment which does not help the consumption .
I estimate very roughly at the moment 28 mpg or so.
Certainly notice that the gauge sticks on full for quite a while then suddenly seems to start moving down very quickly when I let all the horses loose......
|
And that doesn't seem so bad for an automatic tourer when you see the government figures of 30 mpg as per this link to Parkers. Its just a bit of a shock after the Civic and the Legend that I drive in the Middle East when I'm working out there .
You can fill up the Legends tank for the price of a gallon here....
tinyurl.com/23f6s4
|
Primera man my Accord is now 2 years old and totally rattle free.
I know some people query it's premiumness but what makes a premium car ? - the badge ?
I have been daft enough to buy many cars from new and the Honda's are the only ones that have never ever been back for any warranty or repair work.
The thing with the Accord (or any Honda I have owned) is that nothing really stands them out over and above other brands - other than reliability and customer service. It just seems to be that everything works well all the time (the cog advert summed it nicely for me). Nothing is any effort - it all seems that every part of the car is made to a level of precision that I do not find in other cars. I have the 2.4 and it pulls like a train in a very refined manner - especially for a 4 pot. The 6 speed manual (although I think I will go for a slush box next) is probably the best manual gearbox on the market and I am just convinced it will probably stay like that for 200K+ miles.
|
Thanks for the further replies. At this stage, I think I would favour the Honda, but clearly I need to arrange some test drives.
In reply to Love-Mazda, I did think about a Mazda 6 a few years back (when they first came out). I actually regret not buying one, as I went and bought a Skoda Octavia instead, but that's a different story!
My current car has a leather interior and I'm very keen for my next car to have leather as well. Leather is standard on the Accord exec model, whereas I don't believe it is standard on any Mazda 6. So it should be much easier to find an Accord with a leather interior than a Mazda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
