(first posted 2/29/2018) Think about a bowl of hot oatmeal for a moment. It’s easy, affordable, good for you, gives you what you need and can be satisfying…. but it’s utterly unmemorable. No pizzazz, no spark, just unadulterated competence to get the necessary job done. Kind of like the 1998 Honda Accord. Let’s go back to see how road testers loved—and lamented—Honda’s new 6th generation Accord.
Like clockwork, for 1998 Honda introduced a thoroughly redesigned Accord to start a new 4/5-year design cycle. Like each preceding (and award-winning) generation of Accord, the 1998 version was refined and enhanced to meet evolving market needs and to ensure that the product was as fresh as could be, with up-to-date technology and enhanced packaging. It didn’t matter if the car being replaced was still very good—the Japanese were relentless in continuous improvement. Little wonder that the Accord earned a spot on 11 of the 15 Car and Driver “10 Best” lists since the first one in 1983.
Honda also was looking to recapture lost ground in the sales race. The Accord had toppled the Ford Taurus as the best selling car in America, from 1989 through 1991. Ford regained the crown for 1992, reflecting the popularity of the conservatively restyled 2nd Generation Taurus. But for 1997, America would get a new best selling car: the Toyota Camry (the radically redesigned 3rd Generation Taurus fell to 3rd place, despite enormous sales incentives).
With the Accord seemingly stuck in 2nd place in the U.S. car sales race, Honda adopted the old Avis Rent-A-Car advertising motto: “We’re #2, we try harder!” The answer was to make a new Accord that was bigger, softer and more “American” to better compete in the ferociously contested Mid-Sized segment. The strategy also included offering a more uniquely styled 2-door variant—shades of the old Mid-Sized Personal Luxury segment that had dominated U.S. sales charts for years—to attract Baby Boomers who were becoming Empty Nesters as their kids left home. This newly differentiated Accord Coupe was the first of the new 1998 Accord line that Car and Driver reviewed in October 1997.
Though the new Accord Coupe had its own shorter wheelbase and unique styling, Honda was careful not to sacrifice too much practicality for style. The net effect was adding just a bit of flair to a still very functional package.
The truth comes out: for years, one of the great things about Car and Driver was the bluntly honest “counterpoints” section that accompanied test drive articles. As far as the Accord Coupe was concerned, C&D’s editors were lukewarm. The car neither excelled as a style statement or sporty performer, nor was it as functional as the Accord Sedan.
That’s not to say that the new Accord didn’t have many virtues. As usual with its generational redesigns, Honda made the Accord better from stem to stern, with a stiffer body and increased interior roominess. Powertrains were better than ever, offering stronger, smoother performance with lower emissions—including the first mass-produced engine to meet California’s more stringent ULEV (Ultra Low-Emission Vehicle) requirements. High efficiency was retained, and all engines ran on regular unleaded.
The profitable, high volume Accord was Honda’s “bread and butter” in the U.S. market, but while the Coupe was mere “butter,” the sedans represented the “bread.” The 4-doors accounted for the majority of Accord sales, and it’s the model that showcased Honda’s conservative take on the needs of buyers in the American Mid-Sized segment. So naturally Car and Driver was soon back with a full road test on the V6-powered Accord Sedan.
Once again, Car and Driver noted the abundant improvements that made the new Accord a stronger contender in the core of the American family sedan market. But there was a huge caveat: the dishwater-dull styling did the car absolutely no favors. Whatever dynamism the car possessed was suffocated under the ultra-conservative skin. Not helping matters was the fact that the test car was painted Heather Mist Metallic (a generic “Champagne Beige” that was the “Harvest Gold” of the 1990s), a color that was seemingly ubiquitous on these cars, as well as similar shades on all its competitors. This “beige-ness” came to define the Mid-Sized sedan market—and would ultimately lead to a slide in segment sales as buyers seeking more style and flavor would begin to gravitate to SUVs/CUVs and luxury brands.
Other than the crazy-looking 3rd Generation Ford Taurus with its oval overdose, all the mid-sized players were highly pragmatic but conventional and unremarkable designs that satisfied the left-brain “logical” buttons but inspired little of the right-brain “creative passion.” In other words, perfect for the auto testers at Consumer Guide.
Sure enough, the Accord was awarded a “Best Buy” honor by Consumer Guide, and praised for its value, comfort, quality, solidity, performance and even handling. The problem was, the same could pretty much be said for the Accord’s arch-rival, Toyota’s Camry.
Also praised as a “Best Buy,” the Camry very closely matched the Accord against all criteria. And the sedans even looked more similar than ever. Thus began the “Camcord” era, when popular Mid-Sized sedans really blended together in a sea of anonymous conformity. Granted, it was better than the “OldsmoBuick” approach that GM applied in the 1980s—where identical platforms and powertrains were given minor cosmetic tweaks and cynically pawned-off as being “different” brands/models. In this case, Honda and Toyota were fierce competitors who studied the American market closely and independently developed very similar answers to Mid-Size customer desires. But the net effect was stultifying homogeneity.
When it comes to oatmeal, the brand most often associated with a steaming bowl of porridge is Quaker Oats. Likewise, when it comes to benign and competent cars, it’s hard to dethrone King Toyota. And such was the case in 1998, despite Honda’s best efforts.
Though it sold very well, and easily eclipsed the Taurus (especially if retail versus fleet sales are taken into account), the 6th Generation Accord was unable to knock out the Camry as the best-selling car in America but for one year—2001, when Toyota sold down inventory in anticipation of the all-new 2002 models (and the Camry would regain the title in 2002 and has remained #1 in U.S. car sales to this day).
So Honda is still #2 in the Mid-Sized segment, and once again seems to be trying harder with the introduction of the all-new 2018 Accord. With the 10th Generation Accord, Honda appears to be rediscovering its dynamic roots: the newest Accord is sleeker and more memorable-looking than its recent predecessors, plus it has been praised for offering more enjoyable driver engagement than is typically found in a mid-sized sedan.
Unfortunately, the character injection may be too late. Mid-Size segment sales have been dropping significantly in recent years (2017 was down 16% from 2016, which in turn was down 11% from 2015) as buyers migrate to other segments, particularly CUVs and SUVs. After 20 years of bland mid-sized automotive oatmeal, as epitomized by cars like the 6th Generation Accord, it seems that buyers are clearly quite hungry for something with more flavor. Even at Honda, the Accord now trails both the CRV and Civic in sales volume, moving 322,655 units versus 377,895 and 377,286 respectively.
And as for the 6th Generation Accord itself, keep a lookout for them while they’re still around. Like so many once popular but totally boring cars, this generation Accord—for years seemingly everywhere but completely invisible in all their Taffeta White, Satin Silver and Heather Mist glory—are starting to vanish from American roads. Other than us CCers, will anyone even notice or care?
I found some of the counterpoints on the Accord sedan funny. Little did they know that 2 generations later, the Accord would actually grow to Buick Lesabre proportions, and that the current Civic is as big as this “too-big” 1998 Accord.
I would say this was peak Honda, were it not for crossovers dominating the US market and the (then-recently-introduced) CR-V coming to occasionally dominate that market.
I never really found this Accord to be as bland and boring as the the reviews would have you believe. The Accord was never going to be a BMW, but as far as mainstream midsize family cars go, I always found this generation to be the sportiest in its class in both image and actual driving dynamics.
My aunt got one of these when they first came out in 1998, a “Heather Mist” (champagne gold) EX-L V6 automatic. It was sure quick with its high-revving V6, and she and my older cousin certainly drove it like a sports sedan. Especially as a child, I was pretty impressed with it, particularly the quality finishes of its interior. I always compared it to my other aunt’s 1997 Camry, which I found and still find an inferior car.
While I cannot personally comment on this generation of Honda, since I was born in 2001 and my mother’s Civic Si Hatchback had already been traded in for an A6 Avant to shuttle me around in, I do recall my dad’s 1995 Acura Legend LS Coupe (4AT). We sold that car in 2005, and I still have fond memories of it. I recall the Pearl White paint always was gleaming, and to this day I have a fondness for Peal White. The car was amazingly reliable and the quality was excellent. We finally sold it in 2005 since it had over 310,000 KM on it, and my dad needed something new to commute to work in. (Ontario to Connecticut, a bit of a long commute, so an Infiniti G35 was bought). I think that it is the one car my dad is sad to have sold. We also had a 2007 TL Type-S, which we liked quite a lot. Recently, we bought a new car. The first stop we made was the Acura dealer. We really wanted to like the TLX (SH-AWD Elite), but we didn’t like it enough to buy one. We ended up with a 2016 A7 instead. I think it is telling that my father, who has never bought a new car and hates the idea of doing so, told the Acura salesman that “If you offered a car as good as my Legend I would walk in tomorrow and order a brand new one without hesitation!”. Perhaps, yes, times have changed, but still, I think Acura at least no longer is as good as they once were, and that makes me sad because I really want to love their cars.
Count me in as another who believes this car was not bland, but was peak Honda. My wife had a 2002 and when we sold it with 176k, it was running perfectly. The spunky VTEC made the car far zippier than either of the two Saabs I owned concurrently (even the turbo), and it was an attractive car for a sedan. As mentioned, the build quality was very good for the money, far better than that of the 7th gen Civic which we replaced it with. These cars certainly were ubiquitous. The fact that they looked like sleeker, more aerodynamic versions of the 5th generation Hondas may have added to the illusion that they were around forever. At one point, there were four silver ones in my subdivision alone.
So I am not the only one who thinks that the 98-02 Accord looks like a nicely refined 90-93?
I always thought that the 98-02 Accord coupe was a much sportier 2 door than the Solara 2 door. (The Solara actually looks a bit too much like an Avalon for my tastes, and I considered the Avalon to be a Japanese Buick Roadmaster.)
Ironically, Toyota would eclipse Honda with a Camry that I have often thought followed the Ford sales philosophy : that is, after you get buyers lined up for the first year of a new model, de-content each successive year…they won’t notice.
I thought these Accords were the start of Honda’s bad reputation for automatic transmissions?
We had 2 ’98 Accords: I had a V6 Coupe, she had a 4 banger/AT sedan. The coupe was fine except for 1 mistake: I bought a black metallic one. It looked GR8 for the 3-5 minutes it was clean!
The Sedan I purchased at lease end, another mistake. I seldom drove it and my wife is as “sensitive” to a car as I am to atomic physics. It seems that it was about 3-4 shifts away from having the transaxle lubch itself; which was a PLAGUE with these 🙁
However, Honda stepped up and replaced the transaxle, labor and all, free of charge when ours had 78K+ miles.
I do keep buying Hondas! My 2018 Sport 1.5L turbo has been GR8 so far; my best Accord yet!! Only caveat: lake heat on feet when temps are below 20F…:( DFO
The one beef I have with the latest Accord is that they didn’t have the guts to make it a liftback like the latest Buick Regal (of all things!) OTOH, kudos to Honda for sticking with a manual transmission.
I think we’re a bit past Peak Honda here, the styling hasn’t aged as well as the previous generation Accord.
Quality also didn’t seem quite as good. I also know of two people who had 4cyl/5 speed Accords and the engine died because of porous head or block castings. Who screws up major castings in 1998?
keep a lookout for them while they’re still around
The last time I was in NA, I visited Québec and California. In the former, these were already quite sparse back then – this was late 2013. Wonder how many are left there today.
I owned a 98 Accord that lived in Quebec from new until 2004. When I acquired it, road salt had already taken a toll, the alloy wheels were all pitted, and the body was a bit rough. The windshield had been sandblasted and could have been replaced. I found the transmission weak (slippery?) in its shifts. The leather seats were comfortable, and the seat heaters were nice. However when the brake lines failed, first one, then another, I decided it was time to trade her in, and we got an 04 Civic. It was then that I learned the Accord had been in a crash and had had some remedial paint and body fill work. Not the most positive experience for me.
There still seems to be plenty of them around in salt country, though the numbers are thinning. They actually seem to be disappearing faster than the previous 5th generation, which if I had to guess, is due to transmission issues.
I worked with a guy who was ready for a new car after a couple of hot Integra coupes. Somehow he got an Accord coupe. Even in red, he never liked the car and considered it boring. He replaced it with an Acura TL sedan that he liked much better.
I liked the styling of the sedans a lot, finding it much more satisfying than the prior version. I got to drive one (with a 5 speed, even!) for a weekend when one of the scoutmasters borrowed my Club Wagon for a weekend scout campout. Yes, it was Heather mist. It was a car that I could have been very happy with and could be still. But then I had a bowl of oatmeal this morning, so what do I know. 🙂
Who screws up major castings in 1998?
Sadly, the answer is always GM
“GM’s LS Engines’ Problems with Porosity
Porosity was a major problem for GM on its LS V8 engines made between 2004-2011 that used aluminum blocks. There were so many failures with this engine that GM issued a TSB, 05-06-01-034. On inspection, the oil leak may appear to be a failed oil pan gasket or leaking rear main seal, but the source of the leak is actually the oil crossover port above the camshaft that is sealed by the rear cover.
https://teresasgarage.com/automotive-411/engine-block-porosity/teresasgarageonlinestore
http://www.cadillacfaq.com/faq/tsb/data/05-06-01-034c.pdf
BMW. Don’t forget the porous castings on that 4.0L V8. About the same timeframe too, as I recall.
I was working for BMW from ’93 to ’97 and ordered many 4.0 V8 replacement engines, often still under warranty with low miles, 3.0 V8’s also had problems as well. The M60 blocks used nikasil, which breaks down from fuel sulfur and corrodes the cylinders, destroying the block, BMW did extend the warranty to 100 k miles and fixed the problem with blocks using alusil, which did not corrode.
The porous castings were part of GMs revolutionary lightening program to reach performance and fuel efficiency targets. Engineers were paid as much as $1,000,000 per ounce of weight shed from the empty weight of the car. They estimate the pores alone saved as much as .002 ounces of weight per engine. Other extreme measures included filling the tires with hydrogen, substitution of compressed and formed rust electroplated with steel powder for the quarter panels and other non-weight bearing parts in the structure, deletion of that very heavy glue in the headliner, and most interestingly, a system where the key could be detached from the ignition switch after the car was started and tossed outside the car for an additional savings.
My ’91 Calais, which was part of the beta testing program for this project had all of these but I chose to fill my tires with an 80/20 mix of nitrogen and oxygen since hydrogen was so expensive.
I badly wanted a new Accord V-6 5-speed coupe when the 1998 models were introduced – unfortunately I couldn’t quite stretch for it. I still think it’s handsome and that this generation was peak Accord.
There were no V-6 five-speeds. V-6 was automatic only for this generation.
Oh, you’re right. OK, make mine a four-cylinder – I still want the sweet Honda stickshift.
You and me both!
We had both a ’91 Accord EX and a ’99 EX. In retrospect, I’d peg the ’91 as peak Honda. They were both 4 cyl- the ’91 a 5 spd, the ’99 an Automatic. They were both good cars, but I liked the styling of the ’91 better, and it seemed to enjoy aggressive driving, while the ’99 merely tolerated it. My biggest gripe with the ’99 was the road noise generated by the “Green” Michelins that came with the car. On anything but a smooth asphalt, the noise those tires generated was astounding. The first time I’ve ever thrown rocks at a Michelin product- normally they’re my “go to” when it comes to tires.
Accords have gotten far too big. I wish they would go back to this more sensible size from 20 yrs ago.
Easy, just look at a current Civic, 😉
The ’98 Accord coupe seemed to take the place of the Prelude.
And yeah, nowadays, Honda’s #1 seller is the CR-V, which owners call “their car”, not truck.
With S/CUV’s selling like hotcakes, now domestics are breathing a sigh of relief not having to try to compete with “Cam-cords” anymore.
This reminded me just how much I miss reading Patrick Bedard every month.
we all know it but it must be said: the Accord has outsold the Camry retail virtually every year.
every year
Another great piece and well-shared article. Looking at the test data, I had to ask myself: did anyone really cross-shop an Accord coupe with a V-6 Mustang? I imagine there might have been a few, but not that many.
I cross-shopped the Accord Coupe with a Trans Am. Accord won by a mile.
Ex-girlfriend cross-shopped a Mustang with the Accord Coupe. I think an Alero was in the running too.
I suppose this makes sense. Anyone in the market for a sporty coupe might have considered all options. I still find these comparisons interesting, as back in ’98, there were a lot more two-door options out there.
I remember helping one of my friends buy one post-college about 15 years ago. (I was pushing for an Infiniti J30, but it didn’t work out…)
Anyway, her Accord was a V6 model in dark green with tan leather interior. It was a great car for a girl in Montana. She was the daughter of the local district attorney: even though Montana had recently instituted speed limits, they didn’t really apply to her.
It was under her duly vested authority that I hit my personal speed record. This was before the Accord showed up, so we had borrowed her dad’s Chrysler Concorde. What I remember most of all is that even after (gently) hitting the brakes and scrubbing tons of speed… we were still barreling along at 70 mph.
Styling is the biggest complaint here? Whatever. These still look crisp and downright clean even today. The reviewer is even quoted as saying “We like the look here”. Yet the three counterpoints contradict that statement. Okay. That said, I bought a ’98 LX sedan, and it was a great car. Fuel efficiency was an eye opener compared to my concurrent Celica, it was very roomy (37.9 inches of rear leg room!), it handled very well for a mid-size sedan, and performance was pretty good. The two-tone taupe/tan interior was classy, and my favorite feature about the car is so simple but so nice. The fan speed was a rheostat, not set speeds. Loved that car, despite the Emerald Green Pearl exterior.
My parents bought a white 2000 Accord EX V6 new off of the showroom floor. We intended to buy a Camry that day, but were severely let down by the test drive. We loved the Maxima SE that we test drove, but the price wasn’t right. Thank goodness that the Honda worked out because we’ve been Honda faithful ever since. My sister and I both learned to drive in that car and it stayed with the family for 10 years and 187k miles. We called it “the tank” because it was the toughest vehicle we’d ever owned. My mom replaced a 1995 4Runner with it and we were amazed at how much more room we had in the back seat. They were very, very good cars.
I’m the weird one. When Honda and Toyota moved away from their angular styling cues after about 91 or 92 I totally lost interest. My wife’s 90 Honda Civic 4dr is what a Honda or Toyota is supposed to look like. At least to me. Keep your aero crap.
I’ve always rather liked the styling of the coupe, but then I’m a sucker for a full-width taillight panel. Looks best in colors other than red as that helps the lights stand out, and despite my usual disdain for non-functional rear spoilers, it also looks better with one fitted. Great looking car from rear 3/4 and really not a bad line on it, though the nose styling shared with the sedan isn’t very exciting.
Great cars overall but the sedan did seem a bit of a styling letdown after the daring (for 1986) pop-up lamp 3rd gen, the refined and elegant 4th gen, and the Prelude-inspired 5th gen. I can’t agree with the statement that they’re starting to disappear though; still quite common around here. Starting to see them in beater status frequently, but common nonetheless. Rust isn’t a big issue here, which is likely a big part of it.
Wow, do I really have a sore spot now! Why? Because guess what I drive? A so-called boring, beige, dull, plain-Jane 1999 Accord EX 4-cylinder sedan. And do you want to know the funny thing? With over 221,000 miles on it, it still rides, handles and performs like new. And let me tell you that my Accord handles better and rides better than most of the new cars I’ve been in as of late. Not even a rattle. And boring it certainly is not! That V-TEC 4-cylinder still revs up as good as day one and still has plenty of power. I often call it the wolf in sheep’s clothing. I can cruise at 85 mph with ease and still get at least 27-28 mpg all the time. And as far as the styling, what car still looks nice and not outdated 19 years after it was initially made? And another thing, I don’t know where you folks live but here in Rhode Island, I see TONS of these cars still to this day. In fact, I was parked at Providence Place Mall at Christmastime and there were three of my same exact car parked within 10 spaces of each other!
The picture below is at Jamestown, RI this past summer. She still looks great and has no rust at all. And the article stating that all of these were built in Ohio is indeed incorrect. Mine was built in Japan! The seats still look new and just recently I replaced the original starter, alternator and radiator. I expect to keep her well over 300,000 miles and who knows, maybe even til 400,000!
So, in conclusion, my Accord isn’t boring. She isn’t ugly. And she certainly isn’t dull. Maybe the Heather Mist color isn’t the most exciting of all colors, but it certainly has aged well. Just like my Accord has.
I never found these to have been boring stylistically. Particularly the coupe, with its NSX-inspired rear end treatment.
Thank you for this article. I never thought of these pathetic looking sedans before. They seemed popular with retirees and many seem to have been passed down to their grandkids. They were like Mao suits from 1950s China, everywhere and invisible at the same time. As a Vanilla guy, I usually like these kinds of vehicles, but they were too bland even for me.
My second car, and my first new car, was my 98 Accord. I loved it, so much that it’s still sitting in my driveway right now in 2021. Still runs and drives like new, shame about the clear coat problem they had. It seems kind of crazy that I’ve been driving the same car for nearly 25 years now but I certainly got my money’s worth out of it and then some. I figure it has a long life ahead of it still, it may even outlast me!
or, as I call it, Exhibit A to dispute anyone who says the most recent Accord restyling made the lines “way too conservative”
I owned a 94 Accord. The one where they finally said “What if the next generation didn’t once again need to be bigger and heavier?”
I had a new ’98 Accord EX V6 and it was a very comfortable car that handled very well with its double wishbone suspension. That car also had real, identifiable leather seats and door panels. Soft, smooth, sumptuous leather. I kept that car 17 years until August, 2015 when a truck T-boned the driver side and bent in the structural “B” pillar. Still, no air bags went off and though damaged, the car was still drivable to the auto shop. The only bad thing about the car was that at 13,000 miles the transmission went out (in 1999), but Honda replaced the old transmission with a new one and I never ever had trouble with the transmission again. Drove the car and loved it until 114,000 miles in August, 2015. The guy at the auto shop said it would take $4,500 to repair it (cutting out the old b pillar and welding in a new one) and I was not interested in that at all. He was so impressed with the condition of the car that he bought if from me for $1,500. I then bought a new 2015 Accord V6 that I still have a like a lot, though not quite as much as the 1998.
When I check the 1998-2002 Accord coupe, I wondered if it might originally planned to be the new Prelude instead?
Wow, great article.
I loved that bit about the Avis car rental advertising shtick: “We’re #2, so we try harder.”
But (now) it seems weird thinking about the mighty Honda as an underdog. Maybe in the hotly contested sales slash production numbers, but always #1 with me.