|
|||
![]() |
|||
|
|||||||
| General Automotive General automotive discussion for all model vehicles. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5
|
2004 Accord EX, V6, everything including NAVI, Dark Grey on Grey w. leather, moonroof, etc. Dont think anything omitted.
15,000 miles ... still smells new! - $13,000 + tax. Based on records in glove box had service at 5K, 11K and 14K Was leased by my company and ready to turn in ... I know its a great deal but more than I wanted to spend so looking for some encouragement here. Any comments on this year/model ????? thanks zig |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Geek In Training
![]() Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 891
|
Auto or stick? I think EX V6s were auto, so that would be in line with prices. A stick could be dealed down.
My mom has an '07 Accord, which is mostly the same. It is an extremely comfortable car, with lots of seat room, front and rear. The trunk is nice and big (I moved to college with that car). You can even tow small loads with it (600 lbs or less if you buy a hitch). Ours is the I4 manual, but that engine has lots of grunt for such a big car. Fuel mileage is pretty good for a car that size too. To be honest, you really can't go wrong with any Accord, especially as new as that. I don't know if this is of interest to you, but it was to my parents when they were looking: The Accord handles very well. Not in lateral grip or anyhting like that. The suspension is very taught, it doesn't roll over too far in turns, and it has very good steering feel. We test drove a Camry and it felt sloppy, wallowy, and didn't try to hide its size. Open up the Accord and it starts shrinking. The ride is not harsh, but it isn well controlled. Soft does not equal smooth. The Accord is smooth, but handles well at the same time. Honda did their work well on that car. The new Accord does not drive like that, which was always a selling point of the cars. It would have won multiple awards again if it had been crisper. The Accords all have tire noise on certain types of pavement. It's not too bad, and only pronounced on certain kinds of concrete. Go over that car with a fine tooth comb. You can probably get it for less. Do a KBB on that model and then look for any signs of wear (like cigarette burns, stains, tears, excessive seat wear. Just because people are told not to smoke in the car doesn't mean that nobody did). If that all checks out, then I would say it sounds like a good deal. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5
|
Its a lease being turned in by my company (Japanese mgrs car) .. so all car history is known -
KBB and Edmunds lists 14,600 to 15,400 as TRADE IN value. Pvt Party 16.5 -17.5 K I guess I keep answering my own question ... just didnt want to spend quite as much. Was looking at 2001 BMW 3 series for 11-12K |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Geek In Training
![]() Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 891
|
Well the Bimmer will definetely be more fun. However the Accord will have lower insurance, cheaper repairs, and probably use less gas. So it comes down to this: will the car be more for pleasure or more for commuting. If you do any real spirited driving, then the BMW is right for you. If you do a lot of commuting or daily driving, with little to no back road driving, then buy the Accord. The BMW is more luxurious, but their leathers show high wear (I know a guy who has a 1994 3-Series. The leather in his car is wasted, but I don't know how well he takes care of it).
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|