Tell Me About... 2003+ Accord Type-S

[TW]Fox · 27 Oct 2008 at 22:28

jamoor said:
I would say more reliable.

Based on what?

digisatman · 27 Oct 2008 at 22:35

Honda's variable timing kit is so reliable that they
have *never* had a failure ascribed to it.

kthnxby

jamoor · 27 Oct 2008 at 22:40

[TW]Fox;12782181 said:
Based on what?

It being a honda n stuff.

Which car would you put £50 on for being the most reliable?

[TW]Fox · 27 Oct 2008 at 22:41

jamoor said:
It being a honda

Thought so. The ST220 is not an unreliable car, and I've not seen the Honda Accord at the top of the JD Power Reliability Survey lately either - it's likely they are both more or less the same in that regard.

MarkDavis · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:40

[TW]Fox;12779982 said:
What benefits does this Accord offer over a Mondeo ST220?

It's not a Mondeo.

cymatty · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:41

MarkDavis said:
It's not a Mondeo.

So instead its a taxi, sorry Accord.

[TW]Fox · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:45

MarkDavis said:
It's not a Mondeo.

This would be an advantage where the alternative choice was not, say, a Honda Accord.

MarkDavis · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:48

There are definitely more Mondeos used as taxis than there are 2003 on Accords.

That may change in 5/6 years time, but that's only because any Mk3 Mondeo will have broken down by then and will be so tatty that no self-respecting taxi driver would have the gall to pick up a passenger in one (unless you're a Leeds Taxi driver)

In Taxi / Mini-Cab Land Central (ie Leeds), they all drive Octavias :rolleyes:

cymatty · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:50

MarkDavis said:
In Taxi / Mini-Cab Land Central (ie Leeds), they all drive Octavias

Look as fox has said its mondeo vs accord not mondeo vs dodge viper.

So whichever you pick its a taxi/ fleet managers special with a powerful engine and a bit of cosmetic touch ups.

ChrisD. · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:51

Buy one and mate a K20 head to it. That's be epic. You'll lose about 1000rpm though.

MarkDavis · 27 Oct 2008 at 23:55

There are billions on Mondeos on the road, and they have an awful image as something that 'Kevin' or white van man would drive when he doesn't have the van. Driven by the sort of bloke who goes to a nightclub with his mate but spends all night looking at women in short skirts but never having the gumption to speak to them. Bog standard Mondeo = complete fail in the image stakes, unless you bought it simply because you have a wife, 3 kids and need a big boot to carry their junk around, or you need a car where you need a lot of space to move chests of drawers around.

The ST220 is v.good though.

[TW]Fox · 28 Oct 2008 at 00:00

MarkDavis said:
Bog standard Mondeo = complete fail in the image stakes

I agree. But you could accurately swap 'Mondeo' for 'Vectra' or 'Accord' or 'Passat' or any other mid sized mid range mid manufacturer saloony thing. This only becomes an issue if the thread is 'Should I buy a Mercedes Benz or a Mondeo'. It is not. The alternative car is a Honda Accord, the only difference in image between a Mondeo and an Accord is there is a 56.54% higehr chance you are collecting a pension in a Honda.

ie - image doesnt matter or you'd not be considering either.

The ST220 is v.good though.

So why cut off nose to spite face?

ChrisD. · 28 Oct 2008 at 00:00

MarkDavis said:
The ST220 is v.good though.

It is A LOT of car for the money you can get them for now.

MarkDavis · 28 Oct 2008 at 00:10

[TW]Fox;12782730 said:
But you could accurately swap 'Mondeo' for 'Vectra' or 'Accord' or 'Passat' or any other mid sized mid range mid manufacturer saloony thing.

Not at all. Both the Accord and the Passat have a better image than the Mondeo. The refreshed 2008 Accord is pretty sensational in the looks department, and the 2005 on Passat looks classy for a motorway barge. The number of black Passats you see on the motorway is quite extraordinary.

I'm not saying that either of those cars are better than the Mondeo to drive - only that image and looks sell and both are noticeably ahead of the Mk3 Mondeo in that department (with the exception of the ST220).

richolmes72 · 28 Oct 2008 at 00:20

I have driven 2003 Honda Accord 2.4 Executive and own 2003 (facelift) Mondeo 2.5 Ghia X.

My opinion was that the Honda accord was a tiny bit faster when ragging it but no different in normal driving. Honda rode a bit better but probably because the mondeo is on 18's. Apart from that, mondeo was as good as or better in all other areas and was substantially cheaper. Mondeo interior in particular is much nicer.

[TW]Fox · 28 Oct 2008 at 00:23

MarkDavis said:
Not at all. Both the Accord and the Passat have a better image than the Mondeo.

I don't think this is really the case, but if it is, it's a matter of opinion. They are mass market rep-mobiles and will always be thus. Frankly the Mondeo is a better car than anyone will ever give it credit for, but there is no denying its crap image. You dont buy these cars on image, if you do then you are a fool.

The refreshed 2008 Accord is pretty sensational in the looks department, and the 2005 on Passat looks classy for a motorway barge. The number of black Passats you see on the motorway is quite extraordinary.

Neither of these are 'in budget' - the OP is after the 2003-2008 model Accord not the 2008 onwards example.

I'm not saying that either of those cars are better than the Mondeo to drive - only that image and looks sell

Is that why the Accord was a rip-roaing sales success and the Mondeo struggled?

I notice you keep 'excepting' the ST220 from every point you make against the Mondeo. Why is this, given its pretty obvious the ST220 is the alternative recommendation and not a 1.8 LX? If you dont feel the points you are making apply to the ST220 why make them?

If you want image, buy an Audi/BMW/Jaguar/Mercedes/Lexus (Although you may find the image you get isn't quite the image you'd expect). If you want a decent car, then test drive the ST220 and the Type-S Accord and buy the one you like best. If you would like to buy a car which offers a driving experience akin to eating wallpaper paste, buy a VW Passat.

ZXSpectrum · 28 Oct 2008 at 08:47

Guys... This isnt a Mondeo Vs Accord debate... Both are very good cars. I know they are both decently powerfull and either would be a great car. But i prefer the looks and styling of the Accord so thats the car i would eventually go for. If it was about performance i would keep my 200SX that walks all over both for performance...

I am seriously considering the Derv version now as they seem to be a great compromise between Econemy, looks and comfort. I would consider a Mondeo ST Derv but they are out of my price range and i still prefer the looks of the Accord.

May get it remapped.. just to be naughty..

[TW]Fox · 28 Oct 2008 at 12:42

Are you seriously picking a car like this based on looks alone? Its a family car not an Aston Martin. The Honda is no oil painting is it, lol. Buying a car you dont like the look of is pointless, and styling is important, but to completely rule out any other car because of the way the Honda looks is a bit weird, really.

Not going to win any beauty awards is it

Firestar_3x · 28 Oct 2008 at 13:03

My parents have a 2005 2.2iCDTI Sport Accord, looks alright imho better than the mondeo interior build quality is fine, we have the carbon trim instead of the horrid wood which looks foul.

Try and get one with builtin satnav its well worth the extra, other than that we've had no major issues, biggest ongoing problem is the stupid climate control system.

MarkDavis · 28 Oct 2008 at 13:05

What and the Mondeo is a thing of beauty?

http://www.ukcar.com/road_tests/Ford/mondeo-zetec/small/ford-mondeo-zetec.jpg

Even Ford acknowledge that the Mk3 Mondeo (and their other cars from that era) got hit the ugly stick so many times that they had to go in a new design direction, and incorporate more design elements from their concept cars into production.
http://www.caradisiac.com/media/images/le_mag/mag276/ford-mondeo-2-big.jpg
http://images.drive.com.au/drive_images/Editorial/2007/12/06/06FordMondeo1_m_m.jpg

He prefers the Accord. Get over it.