“Hey! What is Klockau doing writing up an ’80s Super Mario Brothers-era Japanese sedan?! Where’s the ’87 Town Car Signature or ’89 Electra Limited?!” Yes, yes, I am much more well-known ’round these parts for American fare, the Broughamier, the better. But still, this car was just too clean and interesting to ignore.
Seen at the annual Hooters Car Show in Davenport, this car was most definitely NOT in the show. It was parked behind a favorite Italian restaurant of mine, Lunardi’s, and judging from the decal in the rear window of this white Accord, the owner must work there. But it was so clean, and the dark red interior was a nice break from tan, black, light gray, medium gray, and beige interior palettes!
My only direct experience with these was one owned by my grade-school principal. He had had a burgundy FWD X-body Pontiac Phoenix, and after what was likely a less-than-desirable ownership experience, traded it in for a brand-new, top-of-the-line gunmetal gray 1986 Accord LX-i sedan, with alloys, color-keyed bumpers and a nice interior. They kept it well into the ’90s.
This ’88 or ’89 DX isn’t quite so fancy, but it was a real clean car!
Great that its owner has kept it so nice, but it’s so…anonymous!
I’d say it only has a PARTIAL dark red interior. From the outside it looks like dull old grey. At least out 1994 Taurus is ALL BLUE.
I think you’re seeing some reflections. That is, or at least should be, a red dash. Honda did a color-keyed interior as well as anyone else back in the 80’s, before slipping into black/gray/tan blandness at the end of the 90’s when everyone else did too.
The entire dashboard, door panels, carpeting and seats were red in the ’86-’89 Accords with the ‘red’ interior. Other interior colors on various colors were Ivory (beige) with a black upper dashboard (Green and Black exteriors), Gray, Black (on Bright Red DX Hatchback only) and Blue (with blue exteriors). Only the LX was available in a Gold exterior with a tan interior that also included the dash.
I had an ’89 Accord LXi 4-door in Polar White, just like the DX shown here. The LXi had 14″ alloys, body-color bumpers, mirrors and door handles, moonroof and power everything. It also had a fuel-injected version of the 2.0L engine, upping output from 98hp to 120hp.
But the interior on the Polar White LXi models was slightly different, with more of a brownish tint (and the interior fabric was upgraded as well). Honda called the interior either ‘Brown-Red’ or ‘Red-Brown’, it’s been 20+ years and I forget which. But it had the red dashboard as well. Only the Polar White and Seattle Silver LXi had that interior.
Looks like it’s had some rust repair around the rear wheel wells, which no longer have their rubber trim. Someone loves this car.
If I could find one and swap in a manual steering rack (I *think* the ones from the first gen car fit easily, but don’t quote me on it), I’d happily daily it. The other alternative is to fit bigger wheels and tires and a small steering wheel.
Nope you’d be stuck with the over boosted PS unless they sold them in other countries w/o PS and you imported one from there. Even if you fit really wide tires you are still not going to get any road feel and you won’t get a work out unless you go for one of the chrome chain wheels designed so you can steer with handcuffs on.
A friend’s one had aftermarket 17×7 alloy wheels and was heavily lowered; it was still the factory steering wheel and PS. Yes you felt every road imperfection and it seemed to torque steer more, but the changes gave it much better steering feel than my standard one.
This Accord and the immediately following generations are probably the best Accords, in the sense that everything was “just right”. The 1990-93 was certainly a little more grown up, which is why I like the sportier wedge-shaped profile of this one. It looks a lot like the first generation Acura Legend sedan. And you can’t beat pop-up headlights on a sedan!
The pop-up headlights always made me think of a 4-door Prelude. With the low cowl and huge ‘greenhouse’ (glass area), visibility was exceptional. The low slung dashboard also gave it an almost go-kart-like feel. I loved mine!
I saw an ’85 Accord SEi sedan today. The California sun had played havoc on the top of the rear seatbacks, but other than that it looked pretty nice. I also saw a Chrysler Lebaron K-wagon covered in plastic wood and sporting fake wire wheel-covers. It’s hard to believe they were on the market at the same time.
A nice find in good shape. I’d love to find one of these myself. I can’t remember the last time I saw one that wasn’t a useless rustbucket.
I’ll keep my eyes peeled in Bloomington. They’re all but gone here, though someone drives a black ’88/’89 LXi manual and there’s another pristine ’86/’87 DX (auto sadly).
Here in New England, I think the last time I saw one was around 2010, with Canadian (!) plates. It stood out, since it was the first I’d seen in years. The 1990-1993 has gotten VERY rare (all rust buckets or modified show cars) – the 1994-1997 is still fairly common.
The 1992-1996 Camry, in contrast, is the ultimate cockroach. They just don’t die!
A few months back, there was a 1986-1989 Integra for sale in my area. That stood out, too, since I hadn’t seen one in years, either.
Ha ha, now that I’ve seen Tom I can recognize his reflection!
Been a while since I’ve seen one of these. Back in uni there was an exchange student who drove a brand new 88 Accord, I was jealous of his budget, but not his car. 🙂
Shouldn’t Perry have discovered this one? I mean, it’s white!
A nice car, deservedly well maintained. This is the first Accord that fully lived up to the promise of the 1st generation
Like you, I ignored this generation of Accord when the cars were new, but unlike you, I have a great deal of experience riding in them because where I lived everyone’s parents had one in the 1980s, and it seemed that all of my friends had them as much-used hand-me-downs during the 1990s and into the early 2000s. At the time they seemed to be boring appliances, but in retrospect they were very well designed and built and deserved their praise and high sales. Every one that I can remember lasted at least a decade, gave their owners very little trouble, and drove very well with amazingly smooth engines no matter how badly beaten up by careless owners they were.
For many people, these Accords are what a Tri-Chevy would have been to a young man in the 1960s. Just a couple of weeks ago, one of these drove up to my house, driven by the late-teens buyer of a 1980s Acura Legend roof rack (left in my mother’s garage since new, for over 20 years) that I was selling on Craiglist. It was all finished in primer, with a lot of obvious amateur bodywork, and the driver explained that his father, who was riding in the passenger seat, was teaching him to repair the body and had already helped him to put a hotter used engine into it (can’t remember what he said it was from). It was just as much a cheap, hot-roddable classic to him as a Tri-Chevy would have been to someone in 1965.
Like Perry, I would happily drive one of these as a cheap not-yet-classic, perhaps with some cheap junkyard/Craigslist inexpensive OEM part modifications to sharpen its handling a bit.
I have always liked that generation of the Accord. I mean come on, pop up headlights on a sedan? How many entry level sedans can you get that feature on? The only thing that I dispise on this generation is the carb version and its box of vacuum hoses. What a pain in the ass.
When I had an Accord of this generation I soon learned to let the service station guy replace headlights on it. The first time I did it I found out that it was far too easy to drop the little screw into some dark recess under the light from which it was nearly impossible to fish it out even with a grabber – clamp or magnetic – and using a good flashlight. Other than that one minor problem we thoroughly enjoyed the car.
Three letters solved that carb problem- LXi (and SEi in ’89).
Ah, my favorite generation of Accord! Still not uncommon around these parts, though most do sport a little rust around the rear arches–I imagine in salt country that was probably the cause of death of most of them. But these were such good cars–small but not uncomfortably so, solidly built, extremely reliable, and one of the best styling jobs to come out of Japan in the 80’s. As has already been mentioned, pop-up lamps on a sedan? Who would have thought? But it works so well. These cars looked fresh well beyond their production and I still think they look clean, light, and even a little bit sporty today.
I’ve actually never driven one of this generation, but we had an ’84 LX in the family and I owned a ’91 LX, so I can probably derive the driving quality and that it would be entertaining, at least for a sedan. Leave the Camry for those who want a pure appliance, and take the Accord for a sharper edge, if not exactly a sports car. Make mine an ’89 SE-i with the unique alloys and bronze-tinted glass, please!
With mirror-image directional wheel covers! Unfortunately carelessly installed in this case, perhaps after a tire rotation.
Mine was an ’87 LX 4 door, stick, with optional front cassette holder/cubby, painted in “sonic blue” with blue fabric interior. Smooth ride, smooth engine, roomy for 4 people. At the time, I narrowed my choices to the Accord or and Integra LS, but selected the Accord as a more practical and roomy vehicle. I sold it waaaay too soon, as a trade in on an ’89 Probe GL stick, black exterior, red interior, no power windows or locks, or even a clock. Dumb move…should have kept the Accord.
I also chose the Accord over the Integra, a white ’88 DX hatchback (with maroon interior) from Diamond Bar Honda. Sold it after 150Kmi & 16 yrs. of enjoyable, almost trouble-free motoring. Main annoyance in its old age was battery acid destroying headlamp retractor-arm clip, & worn synchros. It had a better balance of virtues, & higher quality, than my ’10 Civic, which BTW, hasn’t yet beaten its best MPG of 41 on I-8. Backseat room, & power-to-weight, is the only real improvement.
Maybe it’s me, but if I maintained a nice car in this great of shape for so long, I think I would have had the bumper covers painted white by now. 😉
Don’t tell anyone Tom, but my secret shame is that I once owned one of these…! Mine was a 1986 JDM used-import. A friend owned one, and I’d always thought it looked great, so bought one around 2001 as a cheap daily-driver after accepting an unexpected offer for my previous DD.
My flip-light Accord was bronze with brown interior and proudly badged as an EXL-S, which in JDM-speak meant 1800cc twin-carb auto, with all the fruit. It was the first car I owned with air-conditioning, the first with cruise control, and the first with a sunroof powered by electricity instead of my arm. It was also the first car I owned with precisely no handling prowess as the suspension travel was far too limited and the front and back ends felt like they were designed by different people who never communicated with each other.
Among the other ‘firsts’ this car foisted upon me was it was the first I owned to expire expensively. The oil pump – deep in the bowels of the engine – stopped working one day, so the oil stopped circulating… Honda NZ told my mechanic “You’re in luck, we have a new-old-stock long-block available for cheap because we’re getting rid of parts for that model.” So out came my engine off to the scrap yard, and in went the new one. Except it didn’t…as Honda had the replacement engine incorrectly labelled. It was 1800cc all right, but was a different engine and was incompatible with my Accord… So the engine went back, and I now had an Accord that I’d just paid for the engine to be pulled out of and scrapped instead of fixing the oil pump in situ… Long story short, a used engine was sourced and installed, and the whole saga ended up costing 50% more than I’d paid for the whole car… So in disgust I sold it cheap (with full disclosure) to an acquaintance who promptly destroyed it by failing to give way at an intersection… Meanwhile I swore off Hondas forever, bought my first RWD Nissan Laurel, and have lived happily and Laurelly ever after!
Despite my flip-light Accord experience being about as bad as you could get, I still admire them. The styling was excellent (such superb all-round visibility!), it was ergonomically great, and build quality was on another planet to the British Fords I’d previously owned. The overall packaging of the car was really rather exceptional too. To me, the Accords/Civics etc Honda produced in the late 80s/early 90s were brilliantly designed and executed, reflective of a company that knew who it was. With a couple of exceptions, nothing Honda has done since matches that ethos.
I wonder if yours being a JDM model had to do with the “no handling prowess”? I’ve heard that the Japanese domestic preference is for a softer ride at the expense of handling (assuming it’s not a specific performance car), so perhaps that had something to do with it…
I wondered about that too. No complaints about my ’88s handling, nor had I any trouble with its carb’d 2L engine, other than the regular hassle of replacing its firewall-facing oil filter, typical of Hondas apparently. Toyotas are a cinch by comparison.
A possible explanation for your car’s handling: when I replaced Pirellis with Bridgestones, the handling became terrible, totally unacceptable; it felt like it wanted to swap ends on me with any maneuvering. Took ’em back, bought Michelins, & all was well again. And I checked the inflation pressure, twice. I still can’t believe a street car can be that sensitive to tires, but from now on, it’s Pirellis or Michelins for my Hondas.
Tyres would have contributed – I had no money then, so although I always insisted on the same brand on all corners, it wouldn’t have been a recognised brand.
I concur with Chris M that it being JDM-spec would also contribute. Honda Japan weren’t thinking that 15 years later their local-market car would end up on the other side of the world with winding bumpy hilly roads! It was nice on straights, it was just when being cornered enthusiastically that it turned into a torque-steering under-steering wallowy bouncing monster – like the shock absorbers were worn out (they weren’t).
A close friend had an identical JDM-spec Accord, but his was manual trans, had huge exhaust, 17″ wheels and had been lowered to within an inch of its life. It was the opposite of mine: great handling but no ride quality.
I think the main contributor was that I went to the Accord from a RWD Ford Sierra, which handled beautifully. I went from the Accord to a RWD Nissan Laurel which also handled beautifully. So I came to the conclusion that I just prefer RWD handling characteristics in my cars. Of course I got a Mazda6 new in 2005 and learnt that a really good FWD car can feel like a RWD when driven enthusiastically! 😉
Somehow I managed to never drive one of these Accords. What a shame.
An aside: Tom, is that a Pella Summer Sausage on the dashboard?
Well, not sure what to say, because these cars are a cornerstone of my whole automotive life! I never had one (yet), but probably will, and I always wanted one. I was of driving age when they were introduced, and wanted one badly from the start. Let me say that the interior is most definitely burgundy all the way, except for maybe the steering wheel and a few dash pieces. I was looking for one of these when I found my most recent classic, a 1986 Prelude that I love and that may keep me from wanting one of these as much for a while. I wouldn’t pick the DX with its black bumpers, but thanks for posting this clean example! To me, these “pop-up” Accords are really one of the greatest hits of the 20th century. They were kind of the opposite of an ’80s mullet hairstyle — sports car in the front, practical family car in the back, and sort of perfect to these eyes.
I’ve always thought that the Ford Taurus stole the 3rd generation Accord’s thunder. They were both introduced for 1986 and the Accord with pop-up headlights was just a blip on the radar of the automotive media compared to the freakin’ Taurus. How many 1st-gen Tauri do you see now???
This is my favorite generation as well. It was very modern for its time, the gen 4 that followed a little dated, though I like it too. Everything was so slick, the door closing, the ride and the interior. The only bad thing about the feature car is that it’s a DX trim which means cheesy black door handles and black bumpers.
Back in 1988 I was looking for a new car and was considering an Escort (preferably a GT) which it turned out I could not fit into when my “chauffeur” for the day drove us to 1 of the local Honda dealers. I had long admired Hondas but at the time was still a big booster of Detroit. The saleswoman had us drive a new 2 door “coupe” Accord, a white one, with a manual transmission. It struck me as Honda’s answer to a 70 Monte Carlo, nice but not exciting. Even so, I sometimes regret my decision to buy a Civic instead of that Accord.
This past week I ran across a CL ad for a 78 Accord hatchback in that medium blue they all seemed to be painted back then. It even had a manual transmission and was priced at DD levels. My local CL also has an ad for an 80 Accord…unfortunately that one is an automatic, it’s “double gold” in color.
A motorcycle dealer about 45 minutes away has a 90 Accord DX 4 door. I know it’s a DX because aside from the charcoal colored bumpers, it lacks a rear view mirror on the passenger side door.
Pop-up headlights! I can’t say there’s a Honda of this era that I don’t like.
As a Honda fan, I can’t say that these were my favorites. I prefer the generations of Accord that bracket this model. Pop-up headlights were okay on a Prelude, but by the mid-1980s I preferred flush-mounted headlights on this type of car.
BTW,
For the poster who thought the owner of this car should have painted the bumpers, I am probably mistaken but the plastic used on these grey bumpers, and pretty much ANY Honda product with grey bumpers does not EASILY “accept” paint. Heck, like some folks, I once tried to apply a coat of Armor-all to my Civic’s grey bumpers. The pores in the plastic sucked most of the A-a up and instead of darkening the grey….the bumpers got LIGHTER. I would assume the same would happen with paint. MUCH easier to find white bumpers from a NON DX Accord and swap them.
My brother-in-law began his career as a painter in the largest Honda body shop in Atlanta back in 1988. In 1991, my sister bought a white Accord DX with black bumpers, door handles and mirrors. He painted the bumpers and mirrors white (the door handles were too much of a hassle). About six months later, I was washing the car at the local car wash (with high water pressure) and I blasted a tiny stone chip on the front bumper….the paint peeled off like ripe peach (primer and all).
The black bumpers on these Hondas had a finish designed to handle time and weather without fading. That finish made it next to impossible for them to hold paint for very long. The only legit option was to buy the bumper covers for an LX model and paint them to match the car. Or just buy an LX model to being with and avoid the problem altogether! After adding the dealer-installed A/C and stereo in a DX, an LX only cost about $1200 more and had power windows, locks and mirrors.
I owned an 1987 for a long long time (230,000 nearly troublefree miles), and the one thing I loved most about that car was how low you sat to the ground. It felt like you were driving a sportscar.
In California these things never got the rustbug and are still seen frequently. They were built to never break. (As long as you changed the timing belt, that is).
I see some mention about these not being good handling cars but they were fantastic for the era. Low center of gravity, not much body roll and a well planted feel from the long WB. Yes the suspension travel was short but you didn’t feel that every day. I like light steering and had no issue with the PS either, except for the sudden and unnatural transition to low assist. This was just a very unique car, remember how hard the seats were?
I mentioned the black bumper but not to paint them. If I had this car I’d leave them the way they are because painted would never look right to me. Just saying if I had a chance new I would have sprung for an LX. Honda was frugal back then with the unpainted bumpers and carbs. The A/T was a bit whippy too now that I think of it.
The DX’s black plastic never bothered me much, though it did start fading after many years of Sunbelt UV. OTOH, the couple $K price premium the LXi commanded *did* bother my frugal tendencies. I never missed fuel injection (the hatchback had no LX trim level), body-color trim, or the other fruit.
That was the neat thing about Japanese cars: even the basic models had enough goodies to make you think you got value for money. And you could get dealer or aftermarket accessories if necessary.
That’s a good point that I hadn’t thought about for some time–the fewer trim levels on the hatchback. DX or LX-i only, no LX or SE-i.
While in my area these 3rd-gen sedans are still fairly common, and the coupes are occasionally seen, the hatches have all but disappeared. I’m sure some of that is age–didn’t the coupe replace the hatchback for ’88? Or did they run concurrently?
I think they were concurrent starting that year. Perhaps the hatches have been less desirable as used cars or they weren’t popular in your area; generally hatchbacks have been abandoned by buyers, except in the smallest cars.
The sedan (DX, LX & LXi) and hatchback (DX & LXi) were introduced in 1986. The coupe (DX & LXi) were added in ’88 but the hatchback continued. In 1989, the sedan and coupe were also available in top-of-the-line SEi trim. The hatchback didn’t get as many time levels because it didn’t sell nearly as well as the sedan. Once the coupe was introduced, the hatchback sales dropped substantially. An ’88 or ’89 Hatchback would truly be a rare find.
A little trivia, if anyone cares- the Accord Coupe, introduced in 1988, was the first car built in right- and left-hand drive models for the world market in the U.S. The Marysville, Ohio Honda factory was the sole production site for the Accord Coupe and they were shipped back to Japan and other markets.
10 years ago, I wouldn’t give one of these a second look, now that I hardly see them anymore, I find them quite interesting.
At the time I remember these cars being incredibly smooth. Very nice five speed, refined four cylinder engine, smooth ride, and as mentioned low center of gravity. But they were a touch bland in my view, compared to the car I had at the time, a base 1988 Saab 900. The saab stick was a notchy cable linkage, the Saab engine was rougher and slower to rev and the Saab had plenty of body roll. And yet the Saab was so much more fun to drive. Reving the engine was more fun, pushing in the corners more rewarding and the steering was indeed much more communicative.
I had a gen 1 accord hatch and liked that model and the gen 4 my dad had better than these silly smooth, unfortunately bland but very nice Hondas.