Honda Accord 2.4 Type S

Author's product rating:   

Safety	Good
Comfort	Good
Road Handling	Excellent
Looks	Good
Features	Satisfactory

Advantages:	It's fast, superb gear change, rides and handles well
Disadvantages:	Tiring engine, lots of gear changing, high CO2

Recommend to potential buyers:

no

Full review

This is not an easy review for me to write. I am going to come clean in the first place and state that after thirteen months and 32,000 miles I know the latest model Honda Accord…..let's say intimately…..

…but not, fortunately as it turns out, this "hot rod" 2.4 cylinder petrol version.

Mine is a 2.2 i-CTD-i (diesel), a vastly superior car for reasons which I hope will become all to clear to you at the conclusion of this driving experience. Visiting the Millbrook Testing Ground in Bedfordshire for Company Car in Action last year, my wife and I drove up from the south coast in our own, company owned, diesel Accord.

Yes, mine was one of the first of this model on the road, but here at this event in June, Honda were taking the opportunity to 'launch' the diesel version of the successful new Accord to the all important fleet market. Having purchased mine in March, by the time we arrived at Millbrook, it had covered around 8,000 miles. To me it needed no "launching"!

The previous year I had taken the opportunity to try the base model 2.0 petrol, that car was returned to the salesman with a simple comment, 'nice car shame about the engine'.

Now, I'm going to guess that perhaps one or two of you reading this are going to be challenging me on that point. I drive a Honda XYZ and it has a GREAT engine I can hear you saying. Yes, Honda makes brilliant engines, but until they launched the diesel, most definitely not for me……

……let me explain.

I am a company car driver, fairly high up the tree of a 60 year old family business. Before you say it, no I'm not the average 80 year old Honda Accord driver! I am however a fairly mature early 40's guy with a slightly younger wife - oh lucky me! As a driver who covers anything up to 35,000 miles in an average year I have some fairly definite needs in a car, either financed by myself or the business.

In my 25 years of motoring I've been through a fair few cars, the Accord is actually the 16th or 17th, depending on counting a Fiesta (or not) that lasted less than a week……

The best of all my cars and the only one to last more than 21 months and 31,000 miles was my last, the Vauxhall Omega 2.5 V6, a petrol powered manual gearbox model. Many of you I am sure have listened to sad tales about Omega reliability but in four and a half years and 105,000 miles, mine was faultless until it passed the 100,000 milestone. However as a business driver, and now embarrassingly late in life, married for the first time, it proved the perfect transport tool on every occasion, we never cursed it for this or that, never did it leave us stranded. At four years old it coped with -28deg. temperatures in Poland at Christmas in 2002, I could barely breathe, the breath freezes in your mouth and nose, but the Omega just shrugged it off.

It was also, being a rare rear wheel driven car, a joy to drive. Not fast particularly but beautifully balanced.

However all good things have to come to an end and as they do so you are left examining your priorities. Just what am I looking for in a car that I am driving nearly three times the national average mileage in?

First and foremost it has to be comfortable. I have to arrive at an appointment three hundred miles away at midday in the north of England having set out from the south coast at around 5.30a.m. On many occasions having made that appointment, there is a meeting at 9.00a.m in the office the following morning, no choice but to return home through the rush hour then, 600 miles in a day, an eighteen hour day, in March of last year this happened three times in one month!

On top of that, adventurers that we are, we drive to Mrs Richada's family in the far south east of Poland twice a year. In the summer, driving east we do it in a day, 1250 miles, leaving home for Dover 80 miles away at around 4.00a.m and arriving in Mielec at around midnight, four times now that marathon has been completed, the first time I was on my own in the Omega too - there's a story!

So here comes my priority list and it throws up cars that you would not necessarily expect me to recommend for such journeys, strike off anything that covers less than 30 miles on each gallon of fuel for a start.

What is comfort?

1) Obviously a first rate driving position and an orthopedically correct driver's seat.
2) A fine ride along with flat cornering, German autobahns are nowhere near as straight as our M-Ways!
3) A good driving position with correct ergonomics (that is the positioning of all switches, levers and main controls gear lever etc)
4) A quiet and flexible engine, combined with well suppressed wind and road noise. The wrong kind of noise is extremely tiring.

How much performance is needed?

1) Not as much as you would expect me to suggest, anything too fast will use too much fuel requiring many, expensive, fuel stops. European motorways are also far more congested than people would have you believe.
2) It needs to be able to keep up a 100mph+ cruise on fairly twisty German autobahn.
3) There must be plenty of torque to save you changing gear all the time.

I apologise if you are already bored with this and have gone to the bottom of the page clicking "off-subject" on your way out, actually that was a waste of words because if you have you would not have read the apology!

The other important factor for any company buyer, like me, and let's face it most first owners will be a company is the CO2 rating. It makes a huge difference to the individuals cost of running the car. My diesel model has a CO2 level of 143, converting to 15% of its value declared annually for tax. The value of my car is £20,900 I pay only £1254 in tax a year for my company car. The 2.4 S, a cheaper purchase at £19,600 has a CO2 rating of 214 and will clobber you a substantial 28% of purchase price - I would be paying £2251. Yes it'll cost you £1000 more, nearly twice as much for a vastly inferior car! Incidentally, whilst on the subject, should I have continued running the Omega this year, it had a CO2 rating of 245, maximum 35% band now - it would have cost me £3416 this year. When it was sold it had a trade in value of only £2500. Lunacy!

What I am doing here is laying the ground work in order to explain to you why two cars that look identical, even wearing the same gorgeous "Indigo Blue" paintwork, can on the road be so totally different in use due purely and simply to the choice of engine.

Honda claims that they can provide a four cylinder engine with better performance, economy and refinement than a six cylinder. Having never been a fan of Honda's screaming petrol engines, I have always known them to be wrong, but then I have only driven the 2.0 petrol and 2.2 diesel Accords.

Here we go then, I have the key to a brand new 2.4 S. It has a lot more bhp, 187, against the 138 (diesel) but a lot less torque (that is the flexible stuff) 165lbs ft against a huge 251lbs ft in the diesel.

Obviously the interior and general appearance of this car was very familiar to us. Being the Sport model the interior trim was slightly different, the biggest difference inside was the rev counter - red lined at 7500rpm, that's twice as high almost as in my diesel model.

Sitting in it though, without firing up the engine your mind is naturally ticking boxes listed above. Superb seat, better driving position, there is no electric motor under the seat to adjust the seat which compromises the driving position on my leather clad "Executive" model. The ergonomics are identical and remain superb.

On the outside this car had the big 17" charcoal coloured alloy wheels that do so much to enhance the appearance of the Accord. Against my wife's wishes, I avoided optioning these onto our car, convinced that they would ruin both the ride and handling. For this reason alone this would be an interesting drive.

Starting up the 2.4 petrol unit you are immediately aware that this car could never be as refined as a decent 6 cylinder, let alone Honda's own 2.2 litre diesel unit. It has a tinny metallic sound to it which would in time become very wearing.

At low revs this is a very ordinary and docile car to drive, uninspiring even. It does not have the willing thrust of the diesel engine, nor anywhere near the refinement of the Subaru flat 4. But then that is not why people buy these cars. Above 5000rpm the engine note and driving characteristics change drastically, it takes on the persona of a racing car, screaming towards the red line and rev limiter. This does not make it easy or relaxing to drive on the hill route, the torque does not exist low down where you want it, so you are constantly required to use the gearbox to keep the engine spinning between 5000 and 6000rpm.

Fortunately it is equipped with one of the finest manual gearboxes on the market.

Whilst the handling and ride, even on those big wheels and rubber band tyres, are excellent, this car is hard work to drive, making demands on the driver that no other car driven here today did.

At 100mph, a speed to which this Accord rocketed to, the engine is screaming due to the low gearing. Being cynical I suppose I could comment that it drowns out less pleasant noises such as all the interior rattles and wind noise in my own car.

The 2.2 diesel is a much more relaxing car at all speeds. However, the biggest surprise was those wheels and tyres; the difference in ride quality was imperceptible whilst there was none of the tramlining that I had been expecting either.

Would I buy an Accord like this? NO WAY?

Go to Poland in it? You MUST be joking!