I just noticed that our beloved 1992 has a rather distressing rust hole just behind (underneath) the rear bumper, where the upper "corner" of the bumper comes close to the passenger-side wheel-well. In short, that corner of the bumper is now "flopping in the breeze". That "flopping" is the reason I finally noticed that there was a rust problem.

I probably can fix it myself, but we're seriously considering selling it and buying a later generation vehicle as a winter vehicle.

Our daughter has owned a 2003 with 4-cyl and manual trans for about four years. It's a daily-driver and she's never had a single problem with it. I swap her tires each fall and spring, so I get a good look at the underneath of the car and all the suspension parts. There is not a spec of rust on the car and everything is still in good shape and I think she's got close to 150,000 km on the vehicle. The very substantial-looking wheel-well liners in particular seem to have protected the vehicle admirably.

The thing rides and handles much better than our '92 and it's much much quieter, so this is the generation that we're considering buying.

Therefore, in terms of reliability only (not performance or anything else), how does this generation compare to all the other present and previous generations?

Are there any particular problems with this generation that I should know about?

Does the timing chain in this gen really last "the lifetime" of the vehicle, or does at have to be replaced like the timing belt, but at a much higher number of km? Is the timing chain as difficult to replace as the belt?

Thanks for any and all advice, guys.

 

I have an 03, and I love it i've heard the 05-07 is more reliable, but i've had no major issues with it...167,000 miles and runs great! That's my opinion, someone else on here could probably give you a more technical answer. I have some minor electrical things, but it's nothing major.

 

Thanks. I'm hoping "someone else on here", particularly JimBlake, Hondadude or DesertHonda will chime in with their valuable experience and insight.

 

4th gens are just as if not more reliable than 7th gens. 4th gens are cheaper to maintain and to work on due to the simple fact the parts are cheaper. More of the parts are made since the car has been around for a very long time. IMPO keep your 4th gen and fix her. IMPO (again) that's the best looking gen for the accords.

The f22a engines are extremely stout and a dime a dozen. So once again the inexpensive-ness comes into play.

 

OK, I'll do the counterpoint... We had a 2003 4-cyl manual-trans Accord.

I like the SIZE of the 4th-gen, but prefer the 7th-gen for everything else. The engine is much more modern & refined. We got 40mpg on a couple highway trips. Suspension, steering, & brakes are as good or better. I like the front brake rotors being "normal" instead of the hub-over-rotor setup.

I don't like automatic transmissions at all, so if you're gonna do that, look for other people's opinion about which years are better.

Here in northeast Ohio they put tons and tons of salt on the roads because people don't seem to realize that winter tires actually work. I'd go for the newer car simply because it hasn't used up as much of it's "corrosion lifespan". I hate working on rust. I guess that's because I'm not particulary good at bodywork.

We had no problem with the timing chain, but there's a way to check the chain-tensioner. There's a limit where you have to replace the chain. I sold that Helm book after we sold that car, so I don't remember the details.

Oh yeah, did I mention that I HATE working on rust...

 

Thanks to JimBlake, g22cd5 and Nitehawk Girl.

The 7th gen looks like the best candidate. My wife loves her car, though, so in the end I may have to learn how to do rust repair, as well as the finishing work afterward. I guess one is never too old to learn, unfortunately.