Japan vs. America Automotive Review - The 1984 Honda Accord vs. Oldsmobile Omega
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Learn more about the 1984 Honda Accord vs. the 1984 Oldsmobile Omega: the good, bad and ugly! 1984 was also the first year the Accord was built in the US.
The nice thing about my omega back in the 80s/90s was that when it broke down (which was often) here in the Michigan winters it was usually on fire which kept me warm while waiting for help. Thank you GM.
😄 LOL!
That's Funny
The 82-85 Accord was a game changer for the Japanese car industry in America with sedans. At least for the first 4 model years before the Taurus debuted, the 82 Accord made American cars in its class, look very dated.
do not fall for any scammer in the comments section saying that you have won a prize.
The 84 Accord actually came to being in 82.
SteelCity1981 - I agree with most of your observations, but I also wondered about this: do you miss the hatchbacks of the Accord, or for comparison- the Citation or Phoenix X-car hatchbacks?
it really started with the 82 model accord
Forget the 84(which really began in 82), it was the 1976(78 sedan) that was a game changer. And although most Americans still chose domestic brands, we all know which one was by far more reliable and efficient as well as mechanically superior in the end!
I for one appreciate the sound of the Iron Duke. That unique agricultural note always tells me when the mail is here. If your postal carrier drove a Grumman LLV when you were growing up (or like mine, still does) you know that sound.
The early X car probably was the biggest reason for the sales boom of the Honda and Toyotas.
Ashame. GM should have launched the J and A bodies in 1980 alongside X bodies instead of MY1982 to compete with the Japanese family sedans
@@jayda1k_ I'm surprised that GM is still in business despite all the garbage 🗑 GM still makes to this day.
@@CJColvin I’m a GM man. In fact, the underpinnings comprising my Alpha Platform ATS is about as best as a General Motors platform gets 💯
@jayda1k_ Nice, my mom has a 2010 Camaro RS with the 3.6L LFX V6 in it with 304 HP and 278 Ibs of Torque and its a real blast to drive.
The 1976-1980 Dodge Aspen/ Plymouth Volare twins along with the 1980-1985 FWD X cars were both reasons for the sales boom of Honda's and Toyota's.
Adam thanks for such a well rounded comparison. One of the Japanese cars’ secrets is they made their cars sound happy at all speeds. The Hondas hummed a pleasant tune. Other sensory delights were employed in their cars as well (like feel of switchgear, shifter, etc.) Completely intentional, strategic, clever, and effective. You could say the accord had a positive attitude, whereas the omega had at times a piss poor attitude, like when it’s 10 degrees F and it’s started, wow does it sound put out and inconvenienced
The Accord was light years ahead of the X cars in build quality, reliability and driveability. The demand for mid-80's Accords was very high in my city, with long waiting lists at every Honda dealer and dealer premiums of $2500 over MSRP (and no choice of exterior color). My family owned two mid-80's Accords and they were both fun to drive, extremely reliable and had excellent resale value. Almost bulletproof cars, especially compared to the domestics of the day. My '87 Accord ran as well the day I sold it (with 160,000 miles) as it did when it was new.
My mom's 1990 Honda was a piece of crap. That is, it was as much a piece of crap as all the other cars my parents owned.
@@admiralkrankandhismightyba158 I had a 79. It was nice to drive, but transmission sucked. Engine overheating
@@djkenny1202 Rust too
@@thekidfromiowa eArly Hondas had some issues. Nice to drive and nice interior.
@@djkenny1202 Also supply couldn't keep up with demand until the factory in Ohio came along. I've heard anecdotes about waiting lists. I guess they couldn't import them fast enough.
Adam, Good review. When I was trying to buy my first brand new car in 1985-86, nobody in their 20s or 30s was cross-shopping Oldsmobiles, at least in Southern California. In addition, in those days the 1986 Honda Accords had $2K - $3K Dealer mark-ups because they were so popular. I ended up with a 1986 Nissan Maxima SE, which had a V6 and manual shifter, and was, I think, more car for the money.
Good point. I doubt GM sold many X-cars to people who had actually driven an Accord or Camry, unless they simply couldn’t afford them. In which case they weren’t looking at the Omega.
Ditto here- It's why I didn't buy one.. that "over list" nonsense. Bought a Nissan truck. Nobody I knew would ever consider those GM X body cars. Those were for the Midwest.
I think a 1986 Maxima is a fine choice. Surprising that it was cheaper than an Accord as the Maxima was Nissan's quasi-luxury car at the time with the Stanza being the more direct competitor.
You got one of the most iconic Maximas extant: 5MT SE. Such a fantastic car, with perfect styling, V6 just sings with the manual. Awesome
I really enjoy your reviews, and the malaise era cars were the ones I grew up with (I turned 16 in 1976). Compared to the 1960's, it seemed like the popularization and acceptance of radial tires meant that, though it seemed engines may have taken a step backwards in performance, it was handling and suspension improvements that really started to come online (as was witnessed by the increased availability of handling options like 8-inch rims, big sway bars, and faster steering ratios starting in the early 1970's).
I know this video is about the later-era GM front wheel drive platforms and Japan's cars of the 1980's, but I thought I might add an observation I learned from being a mechanic at the time. This was the first time that technicians were dealing with cars made with lighter materials (even the domestic compacts of the 1960's were using conventional production and casting techniques), as well as having to add metric toolsets to their tool collection.
One of the things that had to be drilled into old-school mechanics was the importance of properly torqueing wheel lug nuts, which was almost unheard of for a line technician working flat-rate on the older cars that were still on the road. The extremely lightweight hubs and rotors of the newer vehicles did not react very well to 1/2" drive impact guns slamming on the lug nuts, no matter how careful a mechanic might think he was being. If the specs and procedures weren't followed to the letter, it was very easy to warp the drums and rotors, which resulted in brake pedal pulsations. While a full size passenger car might be comfortable with 150 ft-lbs on the lugs, the imports were only designed for about 80, with very little tolerance on either side of that figure
Part of the problem also may have been public perception of what constituted an acceptable level of "Noise, Vibration, and Harshness". Cars were becoming better handling and thus driven more aggressively with higher speed limits, and all of this was happening on unibody platforms that were less tolerant of errant vibrations compared to rubber-isolated full-frame cars of the previous era. Also adding in the fact that front wheel drive cars and their half-shafts were turning a much slower wheel speed compared to rear wheel drive cars with long and heavy steel driveshafts that were typically turning three times faster, and the public became much less tolerant of NVH in their daily drivers. It might even be argued that the American automotive industry saw more changes between 1975 and 1985 than any decade before or since.
Anyhow, it was a thought that came to mind as I watched this excellent video!
I was a poor college student driving a 1980 Pontiac Phoenix in 1991. A friend of mine gave me a ride in his 1982 Accord one day. I was flabbergasted. It was so smooth. The interior was exquisite. Everything was so well put together. Jewel-like. So well thought out. That's when I started to understand why so many people were choosing Japanese cars. BTW, the best manual transmission I've ever operated was the Getrag in my 2005 Mini Cooper S. The best!
@American Flyer
I had the same experience as you. A buddy of mine owned a Chevy Citation...we rode in a Honda Accord and it was like on a whole other level of quality and refinement from the Citation
The interiors were not "exquisite" lol. Nicer than a number of American cars , sure. Not exquisite. The accords werent that great. Very good. Not some amazing flawless vehicle
@@admiralkrankandhismightyba158 I dont recall the X car interiors being that great either...do you?
I had bought a used Chevy Citation in college....horrible car and I am not even talking about the interior
The Accord was another level all together than a GM X car and for about the same price when they were new
@@turnne yeah I don't disagree. Though the accord was priced uh.... Accordingly. The interiors weren't really nice or comfortable as much as spare. No separate liner cloth to fall down on you. Nicer than a citation fine. But not as nice as the interior of the vehicle in it's same price range!!!
The accord, though always a fine car, was not, and never has been the amazing car many people make them out to be. Better than '84 model 4 cyl built by an Americano manufacturer? Sure. Better than every American vehicle you could purchase in 1984? No way in hell.
@@admiralkrankandhismightyba158 The Accord was priced at the same level as the GM X cars...so lets make sure we are comparing cars in the same price range
In regards to being nice...you have to look to Mercedes Benz S class W126 model as being, in my opinion, the nicest mass produced automobile that was commonly seen on the road at the time. Seriously..nothing made by the Americans even had real wood trim in the interiors at the time
When I was 17 I went down to the honda dealer asked to look at the accord . Told the salesman I'll be back . Grabbed my dad took him back with me . The salesman wrote up the paper work and my dad had his first Honda . Our family has had 16 Hondas since . Not one issue !
For me it is all about the build quality and how long they are on the road. It is still pretty common to see 80s Honda Accord and Toyota Camry on the road. I can honestly say I haven't seen a Omega out in thw wild in at least 15 years. ACCORD is a much better car.
I barely see any Cobalts or Cruzes as it is, much less anything from the 1990s or even 1980s. Can't remember the last time I saw a Celebrity or Corsica.
Another thing to note, related to the wonderful smooth 5-speed, is the smoothness of other interior bits of Hondas of this era. Switches, door handles, knobs, etc., all had a nice feel to them and just felt precise and well engineered. I don't know it's true, but at the time the rumor was that some of the switchgear had teflon coating. One downside though- the interior fabrics of the domestics were better. I had an 83 Civic bought used with shredded seats around 1988, which I had reupholstered. Our family had a 82, and it shredded and pilled early also. My Civic 1300FE had 100k when I bought it, and I regretfully let it go at 205k. The only issue was that it tended to eat mufflers and exhaust parts, and after 11 years on the road it was starting to show some rust in the mid-Atlantic region. The engine used a little oil and the valve seals were worn, but it still ran smoothly and easily returned MPG in the low 40's in my average driving, and could exceed 50 on highway trips.
Thanks for the comparison between these cars - something that new car buyers most definitely did when they were new.
Your points about the superior drivetrain and fit and finish sold a lot of Hondas to the detriment of the domestic manufacturers. Many people never looked back and stayed with Honda & other Japanese manufacturers from then on to this day. One point about pricing back then; while shopping for an X car, the sticker was always just the starting point. Factoring in rebates, special deals etc. one could always drive away with a new car well off the sticker price. For the Honda Accord the list was the list. They usually had limited inventory and a waiting list in addition to the Monroney list. Their cars' perceived value compared to an X car allowed the average Honda dealer to make full mark up or even better in some cases.
My Dad had a bunch of malaise work cars back in the day, I remember one day he got rid of a much maligned Dodge Diplomat in favor of a Toyota Camry. He was thrilled.
Those old American four bangers were loud and they seemed they wanted to vibrate apart at high rpms. I grew up around escorts and gm iron dukes. I also had a quad four in a Sunfire which was horrible.
I owned an 88 Nissan Sentra on which the five-speed manual was also very smooth. My parents had an 88 Accord at the same time and my dad was surprised at how smooth the shifting was in the substantially cheaper Sentra. That Accord, in a deep red colour similar to the one at 10:02, was a great car.
Safety-wise, though, probably not so much.
I STILL have my father's 88 Sentra, 360k on original drive train. Still comes to life and purrs. Trans a little growly now. But really a nice driver for Nissan's cheapest car of the time. Incredible durability. My 98 civic has always shifted nice, but has input shaft bearing is getting loud at only 260k. Disappointing. In contrast, my 87 Nissan truck trans, at 423k, somehow still shifts like new.
I absolutely agree with you Adam, Honda manuals were and to this day are absolutely world class. The engines are soooooo smooth. 1980's era Honda was just outstanding. As far as the cons are concerned, I never experienced any of that. My cars were fuel injected and totally reliable. Just keep up with basic maintenance and timing belt.
When I was commuting over 100 miles a day in the SF Bay area back in the mid 90's, I bought a cheap '89 4 door Accord for my commuter, with over 160k on the clock. Loved the pop up up and down headlights in that model. Anyway, my wife had her doubts about the reliability of that car and she named it for me: Drop Dead Fred. Well, Drop Dead Fred hung in there for another 40k on my watch with zero failures, other than an intermittent HVAC flap engaging all on its own. When we moved out of state I sold it to my neighbor for what I bought it for, with a warning about the HVAC anomaly. By comparison, my wife's '87 Chevy Corsica was an absolute maintenance nightmare, not even making it to 100k.
Well , my anecdotes say otherwise.
I Imagine that some of the pre-injected Honda's were Twin-Carb which in many ways was a very British way of doing things to get close to equal length intake runners where a lot of BMC engines had the twin SU arrangement. I always think that Japanese looked to a British Car and then started from scratch.
Excellent review. I own a 1980 buick x car and an 84 Honda accord. Have also owned an 89 and still own a 92 accord. The honda was well engineered, and assembled with care, however the quality of the steel itself, fabrics, carpet, etc was not very good on the Hondas. They looked great when new, but were not as durable long term. I've done head gaskets in most of my hondas as you mention. They do have a wonderful driving experience though. Honda plastics such as the door cladding on the gen 1 crxs are EXTREMELY brittle. My biggest challenge keeping my old hondas going, other than the ridiculously complicated vacuum system is keeping or finding plastic pieces.
My x car on the other hand actually drives quite nicely, rides good, and has excellent seats. However, while it was relatively reliable the 2.5 L4 is so crude and so agricultural with lots of noise, vibration, and harshness, that it ruins what could be a nice driving experience.
My x car still has all its factory bits and pieces, and things like the plastics, upholstery, carpet, and the like is light years better than all but my 92 Accord.
Lastly, the x cars were very roomy inside despite their trim outside dimensions. If smoothness and refinement was your thing, get the honda. If luxury, comfort, quietness and ride quality was what you wanted, get the Buick or Olds x car.
"So agricultural...", original and precise expression.
Looked at a new '82 Accord, walked away when we saw $1,800 "dealer market adjustment." Went across the street and bought a new Buick Skylark Limited V6. 120,000 miles later, and the only repair was a new fuel pump. Sold it to a co-worker who drove it a few more years without any problems.
🇺🇸🚘
When I went into any Japanese car dealer in the '80's, you were going to pay lots and lots over sticker.
I was still in college in 1984 when I replaced my Renault R5. I didn't even consider Honda because of the ridiculous premium they charged for a/c and parts as Adam mentions here. I ended up buying a base Dodge Aries 2-door with stick shift, AM radio and A/C. I drove it for 100K miles with virtually no problems. Certainly not as well assembled as something like an Accord, but it was very reliable, very economical (for the time) and pleasant transportation.
I got a 84 aries wagon sitting in my driveway right now, I have no idea why I bought it when I saw it I couldn't think of the last time I saw one.
I was a pretty young kid when the K cars were new but I remember how modern they looked for a small car.
Fast forward to the present, I am a huge gearhead for anything with an engine and The 84 wagon I just picked up the other day, I forgot how comfortable K cars were, it was a really nice car for the era Lee Iacocca did a good job over seeing that platform.
I have personally owned an 84 Honda Accord and I was not impressed with it other than as this video points out for the era it was a really smooth running 4 cylinder, it couldn't get out of its own way but it ran great. I have probably had 300ish cars in my adult life from pretty much every manufacturer you can buy in the United States and in my opinion Honda didn't really come into their own until the mid to late 90s, at that point I would consider them one of the best cars on the road but in the mid 1980s if supposing I was to buy a new economy car from that period, it would probably be a k car or a Fairmont with a 4 banger, in that period I think the Japanese made pretty good drivetrains but the rest of the car was lackluster at best although I guess that could be said about a lot of '80s cars.
@@AtomicReverend I can't help but disagree with you. Hondas of that era were vastly superior to most anything in the market they went after. They were smooth, solid, well-built and fun to drive. While I never owned a K Car, I did own an 83 Mercury Capri (Fox Body) with the 2.3-liter engine and a 1986 Honda Prelude with the 1.8 liter.
There was no comparison between these cars, I owned the Mercury for 65K miles and while it never left me stranded and was better built than cars of the 70s, it's paint shaker engine, rough ride, wind noise and rattling doors made for a sub-par experience. The car also had a few issues in that short time where I had to have the carb rebuilt, and the engine was starting to consume oil through the valve guides. Luckily, I got rid of it just in time before it became a maintenance headache, it still looked okay, but the paint was starting to show its age.
A few of my friends owned Honda's which enticed me to buy the Prelude, yes, they were more expensive, but they were worth it. The Honda was incredible and still one of my favorite cars to this day. I drove that car for 190,000 miles and aside from gas brakes, tires and tune-ups, I only had to replace the clutch once. As far as it not being able to get out of its own way? That Honda would take on everything in its class and would beat just about anything except a V8 Mustang or Camaro in a drag race. The Capri on the other hand would probably do about a 12 second 0 to 60 and a 22 second quarter mile. The Honda still looked and drove like new when I sold it, for about half of what I paid for it which I probably should not have done.
I doubt that Capri made it to more than 100K before it hit the wrecking yard and the owner maybe got 200 bucks for it.
Hon hon I drove an R5 classic in France when I was elevene! An I also 'ad a baguette 'an som wine, HON HON HON!
Seriously, the Renault 5 was a pretty sweet car.
My dad bought a 1983 Accord for his mom. First year they were built in Marysville, Ohio so he wanted to support the state and have a reliable vehicle. Even after it structurally rusted apart the drivetrain still worked fine.
Awesome brother, I'm surprised that the big 3 American car companies are still in business despite the garbage they make.
@@CJColvin Then you don't really know much about any of the cars made today.
Get un-stuck from 1982.
@67marlins I know American cars from the 50s, 60s, and early 70s are built very well but then after 73 they became garbage.
@@CJColvin You just proved my point.
I guess I'll have to tell my Dad, who drove his 77 Ford 432,000 miles on the original engine.....
@67marlins What engine does you're dad's 77 LTD have?
I see this vintage Accord every once in a while. I haven't seen an Omega since 1984.
I learned how to drive a manual on a 1983 Accord. Loved that car. You’re right about the transmission smoothness. I will say I had a 2013 VW Passat manual, and it had a wonderfully smooth manual (even if paired to the somewhat underpowered 2.5 liter 5 cylinder). Still, that Accord set my standard for manuals, and few others lived up to it.
It was so easy to drive, until I moved to San Francisco. I haven’t driven a manual again, especially now with getting older. The old automatics were terrible power and mpg stealers.
I owned an 83 Civic, with a transmission just as refined, with slick shift action and well-spaced ratios.
@@shiftfocus1 They were awesome cars!
underpowered 2.5L... you mean the one at 174bhp? not sure how that's underpowered...
@@TheChill001 there were no under-powered 2013 Passats. Of course Scotty Kilmer might think otherwise. Scotty's a douche.
Glad to hear you were open-minded enough to own a Honda ages ago.
Growing up on the West Coast, there was no social pressure to "Buy Detroit", so I got a 10yr old, used 1972 2cyl Honda 600 as a revolt against my buddies' 7-liter V8 muscle cars.
Honda must've learned a lot through the 70's, because my 600 with only 43k miles & one prior owner was a thrashy mess & a poor relation to the later Accords.
If GM actually learned anything from their NUMMI collaboration with Toyota, then we'd have reliable compact sedans from Detroit in 2022.
@@SayAhh Ironic how that NUMMI plant is now home to the world's most valuable car maker (and highest profit per unit as well!)
Not a good comment.. learn to discuss
For southern owners the weak AC was an issue in the Accord as well. The domestic manufacturers and Toyota had much better AC.
I really enjoyed your comparison of these cars. I was somebody who moved from GM to Honda in this era. I bought an 85 Honda Accord SE-i This was fuel injected. I think your comparison is pretty spot on. One difference, as you mentioned on the noise. The Honda was tight. You could tell it was well built. As you drove over rough roads or train tracks, it was tight and solid. Whereas the GM products rattled and sounded like something was that was difficult to overlook. However, as these cars aged, the Honda did have some problems. One item you didn't mention was the front CV axle boots. These would crack and would require replacement. This is something you really didn't hear about with the GM products.
You can't expect much more than 100k miles for CV joints on any fwd
@@cruiser6260 I put ATP-AT205 seal rejuvenator in a spray bottle and spray CV boots and rubber bushings etc., to keep them from deteriorating.
Hey! I had an '84 Accord! It went 300,000 miles!
In 2003 I had purchased a 86 Honda Accord with a 5 speed manual transmission. The car handled very well especially hugging the corners. You are right. Many independent mechanics refused to service it.
This is no contest. Accord wins hands down, all categories.
Not really
M2, as much as I don't like Honda I'd pick that betwixt the two
Without a doubt the Accord is the better car.
And where are those Hondas today?
@@RareClassicCars You could still see running Accords of that circa well into the 90's and early 2000's. You can't say that for many X body cars. The A bodies were the ones that were a complete 360 in terms of build quality.
My 84 celebrity 2.5 L blew the head gaskets, but it had just rolled over for the second time as it still had a 5 digit odometer. None of the less it still impressed me it went that long.
It's the owner. Not the car. My mom's poorly maintained '90 Accord didn't do nearly as well.
It was no contest 38 years ago. Once Marysville opened, it was just over. Honda...and made in America.
I remember when working for Chrysler in Detroit in the mid-eighties, we had an '84 Accord sedan as a benchmark vehicle to drive. I believe it was an automatic but it certainly was smooth to drive and everything in the interior seemed precision made.
We loved our 80's era Accord and added 100,000 miles to it. We doubled our fuel mileage when we traded in our 1974 Pontiac. The Accord never got stuck in the snow. We even stuffed a seven foot couch into the hatchback (yes, it stick out of the car)
The Accord made everything else less desirable...What buyer wanted a Citation or a K car?
You might try an old Alpha Romeo 5 speed. They were always considered top to the heap for shifting. I believe they had lots of roller bearings in the shifter itself.
nothing beats japanese cars
I remember the maze of vacuum hoses when these cars were popular and I was removing the cylinder head. I think I remember seeing well over 20 vacuum hoses . The hoses were numbered. But the tags on the pipes were often worn or missing. I found a way to remove the cylinder head while leaving the majority of the vacuum hoses connected.
I have a '98 Honda Accord LX. 270K miles on it and runs great. Easy repair and the daughters love it.
I drove my 1982 Accord over 330,000 miles before I sold it. Major issues over that time were a clutch, a transmission rebuild, CVCC pre-chambers, alternators every 120,000 miles, a radiator, and a brake vacuum booster. Other than that, no other major issues. It was a great car for that time period.
Many Accords were built in the U.S.
This episode and your Omega review have me rethinking my opinions on the X-Cars and the Accord. I didn't own either but drove both fairly extensively. At the time I would never have considered the X-Cars in the same league as the Accord at any level. My Dad had a Skylark and both of us hated driving it. Friends had Accords and the only thing keeping me from getting one was the obscene markups. Today your Omega interior looks more inviting than the Accord. The Omega gets the nod for longevity. The Accord would rust away to dust after 4 Chicago winters as would almost all Japanese cars. The X-cars would run forever on almost nonexistent maintenance. For value the Omega wins taking into account GM discounts vs Honda markups. The X-Cars' cement mixer of an engine, the brakes that would caused end swaps on hard stops, and the abysmal build quality would probably still be deal breakers for me. GM always seems to come close to coming up with world beaters and then somehow screws the pooch because of nickel and dime cost cutting.
I'm seriously struggling with referencing any Omega or it's sister models as a classic. I just remember them being junk vehicles that quickly lost favor with the American consumer. The ultimate question to ask is, which model further enhanced future vehicle purchases of their brand? Hands down the Honda only got better while it's domestic competition became less appealing. I've always rooted for the big three but the 80's were not a time I would have used them as a benchmark for that class of vehicles.
You make a very good point. My Accord ownership led to buying future Honda products. My family’s Citation (Chevrolet sister car of the Omega) experience did not.
That was very good.
The Hondas were so smooth and had a much better suspension and feel to them. The carbureted engines - not so great later on. Rust - here in the rust belt they did rot away pretty quickly, worse than a domestic car. This seemed to be true for all of the Japanese vehicles then, corrosion resistance was about non existent. I had a friend that bought a new Subaru Brat - that thing had football size rust holes in it in a few years.
Speaking of brakes, later on the Accord had trapped brake rotors in the front. You had to press the wheel bearing off to replace the rotors, a bad situation in the rust belt. One of those what were they thinking scenarios.
The Honda noise issue wasn’t that bad back then because the speed limit was 55. And most drove at speeds between 60-65 on the highway. It was bearable at those speeds. But I can only imagine the noise at today’s 70 mph limits where actual speeds are near 80 on interstates. I loved doing timing belts on Accords of that era, I could do it in a little more than one hour.
Just did a timing belt on my 85' pop off the valve cover and loose. The motor mount and it's golden!
My grandfather drove Fords thru the 40s till the 80s His last Ford was a 75 LTD landau. In 1986 bought a Honda Accord DX brand new. He took care of that car though it still gave him trouble. The automatic transmission blew up at around 85,000 miles. At around 130k the cylinder head cracked and he ended up getting rid of it 10 years later. He ended up getting a 1996 Saturn SL1. Last car he bought new.
I worked at Avis Rent-A-Car and got to drive a new Prelude in 1983, and I instantly fell in love with it. No other car felt like that Honda. Later in life, I was able to buy a 1992 Accord, and it's so close to the Prelude that I loved driving it, too. Somewhere I heard that they have double-wishbone suspension, or something like that. Whatever it is, driving Hondas from that era is a sheer delight.
As "everyman" cars go, Hondas of the 1990's are marvels of engineering. Same for Acuras of this era (which of course were sold as Hondas outside North America).
@@DinsdalePiranha67 LOL Marvels of engineering! A decent to very good car. But a marvel? LOL
Have really enjoyed your channel. Your videos cover cars that I have liked over the years. I owned a ‘84 Honda Accord hatchback which replaced an ‘81 4 door sedan. Honda used two different wheelbases depending on the body type. Four door models had a longer wheelbase in both Accords and Civics. After I had had the ‘84 hatchback a couple of years I wished I had bought the four door LX. In addition to more interior space, the four door had more power accessories than the hatch. Honda brakes have been problematic for a long time. I have had many Odysseys all of which developed warped rotors at some point.
An 84 Accord hatchback was my first car, as a family hand me down. Loved that little car. It would zip along at 80 mph all day long, with the engine spinning 3500 rpm. Alas, rust ate it away until it was no longer safe. Curiously, the Canadian Accords used a 1.6L engine, not 1.8.
In 1991 I owned a 1981 280zx that my stepdad had bought new...talk about a car that would rust. My best friend and I were supposed to take my car from NC to NY to go to a wedding. The day we were leaving my Datsun had a flat tire so we drove his ‘84 LX 5 speed. Even with non-working a/c, his car was so pleasant and comfortable to drive that when we got home I immediately traded my car on an ‘87 Accord!
I would argue that recent transmission issues aside, Honda is *still* building outstanding cars. My ‘03 Civic LX 5-speed coupe gave me over 250K miles with nary an engine issue, and original clutch! Only ever had to replace suspension components. Rust eventually forced me to sell it, but it was phenomenal, achieving 38 mpg average its whole life.
I now have an 08’ Accord LX sedan that I was lucky to find from an original owner with only 60K miles. Looking forward to quadrupling that over the next few years! 😁
8:40 IIRC, these 12-valve I4 Honda engines were the "CVCC" type that used a second carburetor barrel for the 3rd valve. See JYD's video here: th-cam.com/video/gRiPRRrN2g0/w-d-xo.html and read *Sam Streeter's* explanation in the comments.
Loved the story of the engineers sticking it to GM by developing CVCC Heads for a 350 and it making more power and slightly better fuel economy.
The early 80s Japanese cars were SO much better than American that it was no contest. The only problem with them was they rusted out, but the American cars did too. By the end of the '80s the Japanese had figured out how to rustproof their cars for salted American roads. And Americans had never experienced an engine that could go more than 80 - 100 thousand miles without crapping out.
The Japanese were definitely close to a decade behind the Americans when it came to rust control and management.
First Honda was a brand new 1995 Accord LX in Malachite Green (dark teal). Very comfortable car.
Japanese cars from the 1980s did not last in areas where they salt the roads in winter -- rust killed most of them by the mid-'90s. And as the saying goes, "a GM car will run poorly longer than most other cars run at all".
Beautiful and accurate review. Adam is a true historian of explaining an era & generation of time....
Great review Adam.
My first car was an 88 Accord. Loved that car. It was my parents car first then handed down to me. Unfortunately, the vacuum system you talk about here was still a thing in the Honda I owned. As well as the carburetor. Incredible smooth car to drive. However, that vacuum system was its demise.
Loved my ‘85 LX hatchback! Great 5-speed manual, fun and economical. Didn’t own it long enough to suffer through the complicated carburetion issues though. Thanks for the memories, Adam
I could have written this comment. I had an 85 Lx hatch with a 5speed and carb problems that cause me to sell it.
@@manthony225 Sorry about the carb problems. Guess I sold mine at the right time. Hope you still enjoyed the car otherwise though
Never had carb problems on mine, but I ran fuel cleaner regularly. That's the key.
Probably like most Americans my Mom and Dads last domestic vehicle was a Cadillac Sedan De Ville 4.1. After buying an Acura Legend my Mom never owned another domestic vehicle after that. My Dad’s last domestic truck was a loaded 1995 GMC Sierra. Even though he owned only Tundras after that I must admit the Sierra was a fantastic truck. He ended up putting over 400,000 miles on it. There’s a reason so many people love the GM 350. It’s just a simple, reliable engine. I inherited Moms old ‘85 Park Avenue 3800 in high school. Even though it had over 200,000 miles it just kept going and going
@Rare Classic Cars & Automotive History
*It shouldn't be forgotten that back in the early-mid 1980s at least on the East Coast, the majority of Honda Accord's sold came with the excellent 5 speed manual transmission, so even though the engine was less powerful and had less torque the manual transmission made it more than competitive to the GM X body cars with the automatic and bigger engines. I remember because I worked at a Honda store from 1983-1990 and drove all the models all the time. Almost all of them were fantastic cars all around for the money, especially the handling, quality, and attention to detail!*
14:00 could not agree more, what a nightmare! But yes, a great running and driving car ... except in cold wet winter weather.
Back in the eighties the Honda Accord was a very popular car. They were everywhere & were often compared to the running of a sewing machine!!! The manual transmission models were fun to drive too!!! 👍👍🌲
My uncle had an ‘83 Accord LX 5spd 3-door. I was 9 when he got it in 1989. That car showed me that I couldn’t drive anything else once I came of age. I have owned 10 Hondas..mostly Accords, one Civic and two Odysseys, all of which are ‘89 up. They’ve all had 150,000-300,000 mi. My wife’s Odyssey has 227,000mi and drives like a brand new vehicle. Keep your fluids changed in the autos and they will last as long as the engines. They’ve all had original drivetrains. Of course, I live in a non-rust climate and on flat terrain.🤷🏻
Dunno, 1980 Honda fit and finish, along w the smoothness, compared to GM X cars, Plymouth Horizon, goofy little Ford LTDs of the era... ...then Toyotas establishing well-deserved loyalty in the US... Japan ate our lunch. We're still paying for it. Today- I can't see paying the outrageous MSRPs of ANY badge on a new car. You can tell they'll all be garbage at 100,000 miles. Electrification will blur the madness even worse.
Many a Holley or Quadrajet carb expert at a local garage was humbled by Japanese vacuum hose diagrams, some still in therapy no doubt. others searching for the rosetta stone equivalent who finally were happy only when their customers traded in for a new fuel injected model.. dont ask me how I know.
i love american cars. trucks . suv,s even the malaise era cars, i find them so interesting, big v8 motors , auto trans , just plant your foot and steer ,i love them it it started with me as a youngster. growing up with u,s t.v cop shows on tv here in the uk in the 70s i still love them when i see any american car here in uk on the road i tend to follow them for a certain number of miles i just have a facsination with them love your channel thank you
Honda , head gasket issues? 76-78 by 80 they were bullet proof. Carbs? Pretty much non issue. Vacuum lines? Not much of an issue. How do I know? Mechanic with Honda 73 through 79 then servie manager then parts and service manager for 11 stores, then CEO for an 11 dealership group. Also had a GM dealership in that group X cars? Crap.
The best gearbox to me is still the one in the 1990 Civic si I drove for a week or so when the dude at the gas station put diesel in my 92 vw 16v GTI !
It was the gas station owner's wife car, mint condition 40k miles example, back then they were pretty common...
Suggestion for a future porch chat: What business, design and engineering functions did GM corporate “own” over the divisions post WWII and how did that change over time? For example, the Vega was designed and engineered by corporate, then handed over to Chevrolet. Another example is the SBC, which I believe there is a power train division that maintains it today (not Chevy). Related to the main question is what is the interrelationships between the divisions, and each division’s roles and responsibilities. Same question for Ford and Chrysler.
In 1986 my mom was ready to buy a new car. I was a car nut teenager so I convinced her she should test drive everything on the market even though she had an idea that she wanted a Honda. We drove the Jetta, Tempo, and an Accord. There just wasn’t any comparison. In fact I felt sorry for the Ford salesman trying to sell those cars when compared to the Accord. The Jetta felt 10 years older than the Accord. The quality of the Accord was simply the best on the market. The engine was like silk. The manual was a breeze. She ended up with the Accord of course. I seem to recall a dealer markup because they could. This was the first year for the Accord with the pop up headlights. It turned out to extremely reliable. She kept it for 16 years and sold it only when a local mechanic told her it needed a head gasket. The buyer threw a thermostat in it and it was driving around town the next day. Anyway, these Accords were simply the best new car on the market. Adam is right though. I wouldn’t buy a carb Accord now. They did make a fuel injected model that I might consider.
But in beauty, the X-cars are way more than those 80s Japanese cars without soul. At least for me. The Xs have that glory rich look of a small Cadillac (though there never was a X Cad.), while those japanese vehicles not only runs like sewing machines, they also looks and feels like them.
But the manual gearbox issue I can confirm, because it's the same to motorcycles. I 've driven almost every great selling make, BMW, M.Guzzi, Harley D., Ducati and of course the big 4 Japaneses. Absolut no one can even nearly reach this smooth high precision shifting quality like Honda offers.
Had an '82 Prelude 5-speed. Awesomely smooth and with a standard moonroof
I would all day long take the Honda Accord fast, quickly and in a hurry over the Ugly GM made Oldsmobile Omega with the "Iron Duke" loud and noisy, under powered engine.
Honda makes great Engines, and the Accord was one of them that proved being the best of the Japanese Automobiles over the American GM ugly junk that keep on breaking down.
Detroit blunders I’m the 1980s and and 1970s built the Japanese manufacturers into world class companies. It’s almost like they wanted to lose market share to Honda and Toyota.
Incidentally, today the Honda Accord is considered a family car.
The original Honda Accord was designed to compete with the Mk1 chassis Volkswagen Scirocco~
What?
This is really not a comparison if you only show the Honda and not the Omega. No thanks to the Honda. I'd take the better riding, quieter, more comfortable Omega any day of the week. I still see an occasional 1984 Omega still tooling around but, I never see any 1984 Accords. Also, in your review of the 1984 Omega Brougham that you did, you said: "Look at these seats! These seats, of any car I own, are the most comfortable. I have never sat in a car with more comfortable seats". Why didn't you mention that when you did this comparison? Adam, something is not adding up here.
This review was very diplomatic. The reality is, the Omega was laughably awful and looked like garbage. GM clearly didn't give a damn about their small car buyers in the 80s. The Accord was a vastly better car. It looked great and felt like money well spent.
My dad traded in his gbody Malibu wagon for a 84 Accord for mom and a 85 civic for himself. Light-years ahead of GM in quality but as a kid I really loved the hum of the 305 in the Malibu and the space. Couldn't understand as a kid why my dad would do such a thing. 😆
Cannot even compare the Hondas and Toyotas to the American cars.
Although I’ve had some very nice lesabre’s and a few killer grand nationals.
Sorry…but I only drive Toyota and Lexus now
I owned both an Accord and a Citation. Plus an 86 Camry. There is simply no comparison. The 80s GM offerings were garbage. They were trash the day they rolled off the line. This is when the Big 3 died due to their arrogance and building to a dollar minimum. Not to mention if you were a broke student (me at the time) you could limp a Honda or Toyota along for months without needed repairs. If you sneezed at an X-body car it wouldn't run. I bought one GM product since then and deeply regretted it.
In the X cars ..the design philosophy was wrong ..it was just a big car made smaller with a very ordinary drivetrain.
The Honda design was the opposite , from a small car base they were building larger, with all the freedom of design parameters with quality checks and balance.
This was a time when American Tech was considered ''clunky'' and the Japanese Tech innovative.
You only had to look at the coming Japanese electronics technology in washing machines and compare that to the domestic product.
From my recollection, I didn’t care for the Omega, and didn’t care for how the Buick version drove. Friends had an 84 Accord. I felt the back seat was tight and a lot of road noise. Well built but I thought the dash was not very ergonomic with switches everywhere. Never drove one. The Dodge Aries was more basic but I liked how they drove.
Having grown up during the 70's I can tell you that everyone knew that the Honda was a vastly more reliable, refined and precise car. The X cars were junk. Pure, undiluted garbage.
Honda was killing it during this year/era, in particular, killing US models, which were notoriously lame.
If all you care about is keeping the accord, then swap out the carburetor with a 32/36 weber.
Once Honda went to fuel injection, it’s way more reliable.
Ford Escorts and I believe the Chrysler 2.2 during this era also had timing belts that needed to be changed around 60,000 miles.
You mentioned the fact that most domestic cars did not have timing belts. Hummm. I made lots of money turning wrenches on timing belt replacements on the K-cars. I loved to do that job a new water pump, idler and timing belt on those was so simple I could do that job in an around 2 and half hours if I had a lift. 4 hours on the ground. I think most folks tend to forget the K-cars and that 2,2 liter engine it was a good little car and far better then the X-cars
For sure VERY different driving experience with this comparison.
Just the notion of bucket seats vs a bench was a big hurdle for some American buyers (my dad included).
Our garage featured the pinnacle of early 1980’s American tech, ‘84 century sedan 2.5l and ‘83 reliant wagon 2.2l
Talk about a turtle race!
The mid 80's to late 90's Japanese car manufacturing changed not only the US but the world car manufacturing sector, for good.
Don't forget that Toyota's engines were always not just 16 valve but also DOHC while Honda was always single cam with rockers. Toyota engines sounded more mechanical on the idle and lasted longer. Also Toyota transmissions never went bad while Honda transmissions did here and there. Honda was not better car than a Toyota but maybe 2nd best.
Always been that way. 👌 Honda's may have looked nicer, but they damn sure weren't as reliable.
Yep. Toyota was and is the one to beat. He was dead wrong on this one.
Not sure about that. Had an ‘89 Camry that I bought new and had many issues with the transmission. Sold it and bought an ES350. Strong engine - but as soon as out of warranty the a/c compressor failed. Quoted over $2K to fix. Disgusted, I sold it and bought a 1999 Acura TL and have been an Acura owner ever since. Never a single problem with any Acura/Honda product. You can keep Toyota. I will never go back. That being said, even great cars like Toyota and Honda can have their issues. I just had bad luck with Toyotas.
Not all Toyota engines were 16- valve DOHC. 22R engine comes to mind.
i can't believe i'm hearing someone say the iron duke is peppy had a friend in highschool who had an 87 celebrity 2 door u could reach over and floor his gas pedal and it didn't do anything except make noise.- btw i graduated in 2005 so i saw none of this early 80s stuff when i was in highschool. oldest cars going were like 1985/6 when you'd see a citation you'd be like wtf is that???
I think the other point is that (to me) the Honda is devoid of character. The CRX is interesting but the Accord is more just transport to me.
The 1982 Accord was the first Japanese car manufactured in the United States.
I think the X cars were the UGLYIEST of any GM product
That 84 Camry really still has the ugly 70's squared off Japanese look.
So in other words, Japanese cars were leaps and bounds ahead of anything the big 3 could manufacture
5:25 I read maybe 10 years ago that the Honda Civic was one of the last cars available at the time with a solid manual transmission linkage that used all shafts and levers, as opposed to cables. The VW Golf, in contrast, used cables in an X-Y coordinate setup so you were operating a sloppy joystick that manipulated the real transmission lever under the hood somewhere. I'm sure that was less sloppy than those cable controls they used to use for outside mirrors, but it doesn't sound like a good way to find and shift gears. I would think that a one-cable-per-grear setup, with the cables originating from right beneath the lever would provide the accuracy, if not the feel, of a solid or hydraulic linkage, but I don't know if any manufacturers have tried that. It's becoming a moot point as manual transmissions get rarer and rarer.
Having lived through that era I can vouch for everything you said. Honda had the best manual transmission feel, with a light clutch and a jewel of an engine. But, in 1981 I bought a Chevy Cavalier instead of the Accord because of another Accord con: it had a low seat and high dash which my petite Japanese wife could not see out of, but she was fine in the Cavalier. My dad was a mechanic at a used-car dealer during the 1980's and he echoed your warning about Honda's vacuum hoses.