My source for the information is edmunds .com. Here’s their listing of Accords offered by Honda in 2007. It could be wrong, but they are generally accurate.
Yes, the 50 series tires required for the 17" wheels are more expensive, and they give a slightly more harsh ride in exchange for slightly better handling. In my opinion, most of this low-profile tire thing is trendy nonsense. Some people think they “look” cooler. I’m old and crotchety enough that I think it looks dumb. I’d prefer a slightly smoother ride and slightly cheaper tires. Keep in mind, I’m not saying the ride is bad. I can drive my car all day with no discomfort, just that potholes are a bit more of a jolt than necessary and the 60 series tires would cost a bit less.
I’m currently trying to find some boy-racer type that wants to trade. The stock 16" wheels will fit, they just didn’t put them on the V6.
That’s helpful. I’ve always looked at Kelly Blue Book…this does look more “real life”. I “customized” the price and it still appears that the price is right! Thanks for telling me about Edmunds. Honestly, I was a little worried about why the price was so much LESS than the blue book price…sot his makes me feel even better about it.
Oh okay, interesting. Would never have thought about that! Well, my hubby is the boy-racer type, and he will probably love it…just as he loves the V6 engine! (Although he has his own sporty new wheels, so probably won’t even be wanting to drive this very much.) Figures the tires are more expensive. :<( The good news is, the tires have lots miles left in them.
Thanks for your comments. I know they are both “low mileage”. My last Honda had 50,000 miles on it when I bought it in 1996 and it has served me well. I don’t “scoff” at any aspect of the expense involved…it is just one factor that I have taken into consideration. And honestly in my mind, 28,000 miles IS significant, in that it potentially represents two years worth of driving…two more years before the timing belt needs to be replaced, etc.
I have also had V6 vs. 4 cylinder presented to me in a way that makes the case for there actually being less wear and tear on the more powerful engine (and therefore longer life for the engine). I posted the original question because I truly didn’t know which was the better choice. I’ve been reading everyone’s responses (all of which I appreciate, very much!) AND continuing to do my own research,so if at this point I DO want the V6, it’s because of all of that information gathering.
Thanks for your comments. I must admit, the V6 is an awesome car, and
I do really like it best. I’m a little nervous about it because it’s such a dramatic leap from anything I’ve ever driven before…but this has been a month of “firsts” for me, so this may be yet another!
Transverse V-engines (most FWD cars) are often a pain to service because they don’t leave a lot of space in the engine bay. DOHC makes it even worse. Actually, longitudinal ones aren’t that much better.
Inline forever.
Oh no, no factory warranty? How could anyone ever cope with that in a HONDA?
I have been buying Honda products for over 20 years, begining with an Accord in 1988. I’ve owned 3 Accords and 3 Acuras – all excellent vehicles. I currently own a '09 Accord coupe (V6) and my wife drives an '06 Acura MDX. I could go on and on about quality and reliability, but I’ll address janiski1’s question of 4 cyl. or V6. Well, I’m and old “car guy” who likes a strong engine, so I have a prejudice. But, I also want good mileage. I’m one of these obsessive types who continually monitors mileage and my V6 Accord gets 24 to 26 mpg all the time in the real world. On the highway at 70 mph plus it gets close to 30. My previous car, an '05 Acura TL, did even better. A 4 cyl. will have higher mpg, for sure, but the smoothness and power of the V6 is essential for me, and it’s no gas guzzler.
Speaking of timing belts, etc., have you had an independent mechanic (preferably your own person who has been working on Hondas for years) inspect the V-6? Very low mileage makes me wonder why previous owner sold. Given the V-6 is a zippy car, could some young person have been driving it a wee bit excessively, so that the clutch only needs a few more miles before it’s ready for butter and strawberry jam? If you’re spending $16K (and paying interest on most of it), take Click and Clack’s advice, and have an independent professional check it out.
“I’m a little nervous about it because it’s such a dramatic leap from anything I’ve ever driven before…but this has been a month of “firsts” for me, so this may be yet another!”
I believe you’ll adjust easily. I think most people who are good drivers to begin with, really don’t change for the worse with more power. They just learn to appreciate a little more control, and start thinking of it as a safety feature…not that the Honda 4 needed a lot of help.
Buy the car that that you want and don’t feel guilty. Gas mileage is part of your overall budget. If you are frugal with your expenses annually,you can spend money on your car as you see fit. I only drink water.I have plenty of gas money for my ‘vette’ You have already had a four cylinder. Buy the six.You only live once!
Oh No, They’re Used Hondas? If You’re O.K. With Spending 14 - 16 Grand On Anything Without A Warranty Then You Are Either A Gambling Man Or Very Foolish Or Both.
You were joking, right ?
Since everybody knows that the chances of a used Honda needing any kind of warranty fix is so extremely rare then why wouldn’t any seller just throw in a warranty ? Why would the car be sold “as is” ? Run that question by the seller !
One car was even in at least one known collision. That alone would void the factory warranty on any paint work done on the involved area of the car. Were any steering or suspension components repaired / replaced ? Did the independent mechanic that checked it out do a wheel alignment to be sure it was repaired properly and all is true ?
Give me a break. Just being a Honda or a Maybach or a Rolls Royce or a Toyota doesn’t offer much protection when one buys a used car, especially of unknown history.
I have been a body shop manager, service writer, parts department manager, hold several mechanic certifications, and wouldn’t buy a car with repaired body damage if there were any other cars available with factory paint, etcetera. Also, I always look for a little warranty coverage to take care of anything the original owner / owners may have been hiding or putting off and that a mechanic might not be able to check.
CSA
Uh, a Maybach or a Rolls Royce is about the only type of car where worrying about a warranty makes sense. Unless you can afford to buy two or three on a whim, the repair costs could ruin you. The same is not true of a popular car with few bespoke parts.
Also, if the original factory warranty is expired, and it isn’t CPO, there probably isn’t any warranty available that’s worth the paper it’s printed on anyway.
The money you’d spend on a warranty would be better off going into a CD or savings account.
Let Me Clarify A Little. The Point I’m Trying To Make Is That Once You’re Planning On Spending $16,000 For A Vehicle Just Out Of Warranty Or Possibly One With Body / Mechanical Repairs . . .
. . . Why not shop a little harder or expand your search area or possibly kick in enough to find a car that has . . .
[list]Documented maintenance[/list]
[list]No crashes or repairs[/list]
[list]A little factory warranty left (usually within 3 model years)[/list]
[list]Possibly better equipment / better price[/list]
Everyone sees this a little differently. I have purchased many pre-owned cars using this formula and it works for me.
CSA
A cost that you will incur every 105k miles with the V6 is expensive timing belt replacement. This runs about $800-$1000.
The I4 in 2007 has a timing chain and avoids the expense.
Good luck.
Get the V6,you know you want it.The four is more practical(I hate to think what a TBO would cost on the V6,but hey who worries about that now?)