Should I get an Accord, or Civic?

Question

I am looking into buying a car so I can drive 50 miles a week. I am currently looking into a 1997 or newer Honda Civic, or a 1998 or newer Honda Accord coupe. Which would last longer with lowest maintenance costs? Which would be a better buy? All cars that I am looking at are currently above 100k miles.

Answer 1

Both the Honda Civic and the Honda Accord are very fine choices for a reliable, durable vehicle. Here is what I found:

(1) The Honda Civic has a 1999-2003 Reliability Percentrank average of .95 and the 4-cylinder Honda Accord has a Reliability Percentrank average of .96 while the V6 Honda Accord has an average of .90. This compares with a Honda overall average of .84, a Toyota overall average of .89, and a General Motors overall average of .31. So, the Honda Civic and the 4-cylinder Honda Accord are virtually identical on this measure of reliability, and the V6 Honda Accord is very close behind.

(2) The Honda Civic sedan is on AutoOnInfo.net's list of the Best Automobiles of 2008 with a Composite Reliability Score of .85, on a scale of -1.00 to +1.00, based on Consumer Reports' Reliability Verdicts for the 10 preceding model years. The 4-cylinder Honda Accord is also on AutoOnInfo.net's list of the Best Automobiles of 2008 with a Composite Reliability Score of .95. The V6 Honda Accord did not make this very selecive list. Here, the 4-cylinder Honda Accord leads.

(3) With regard to engine reliability, the Honda Civic and the 4-cylinder and V6 Honda Accord are all on AutoOnInfo.net's list of Automobiles with Best Engine Reliability, each with a Composite Reliability Score of +1.00 on a scale of -1.00 to +1.00. (The engine Composite Reliability Scores are based on Consumer Reports' Reliability Ratings in the Major Engine category for model years 1999-2002.) A dead heat here.

(4) With regard to transmission reliability, neither the Honda Civic nor the Honda Accord made AutoOnInfo.net's list of the Best, and the 4-cylinder and V6 Honda Accords made the list of the Worst. So, Honda transmissions may be a bit weak, but installing a used transmission (if ever needed) is not a major expense. In any case, the Honda Civic is stronger by this measure.

(5) With regard to durability, there are many more Honda Accords on AutoOnInfo.net's Roster of Vehicles with 300,000 or more miles. So, here the Honda Accord leads.

Answer 2

good question....it depends on your preference...are the bodies in the same shape? do you go for gas mileage, or looks? whichever car has the lowest amount of miles might last a little bit longer

Answer 3

These two cars have their separate histories. If they each had been equally cared for and used equally it would be much tougher to say which was best- that would be comparing two apples from the same tree.Choose the one in the best condition. One of them is in vetter condition than the other. Maintenanace costs are going to be so close, theres not much point in comparing that. If that doesn't help, drive them and see which fits you better personally. A 50 mile/week use isn't much use at all. Heck, see which one shines the brightest or has fewer dents. Rust is a deal breaker.

Answer 4

both honda models are great. Accord of course being a bigger car and has bigger engines. I think its better if u have a family or if your a big guy.

I would choose the civic. Smaller lighter car, better gas mileage, less expensive to maintain and repair, more popular therefore more aftermarket support.

96-00 civics have the same body

94-97 accords have the same body

98-02 accords have the same body.

Answer 5

Honda Civic would have lower maintenance costs. The Accord would last longer (newer). If you can afford an Accord I'd get one of those (they're slightly bigger than a Civic).

Answer 6

Both are good cars. The Accord is larger and more luxurious, where the Civic is smaller, with less frills. Depends what ur looking for. The Civic would probably be better on gas.