Living in the United States gives one a mighty myopic view of cars the world’s automakers produce. Such is the case with Honda’s Accord. Other places in the world got versions of this car that we didn’t here, and since 1992 in Europe and 1998 in Japan, the US Accord isn’t remotely the same car as what the rest of the world gets. One version of the Accord we did get for a while was the wagon, but it should not surprise you to learn that other wagons bearing the Accord name both pre- and post-date the ones we saw around here.
Bar none, the coolest of them is the AeroDeck, which was available in Japan and Europe and probably other places, but not Stateside. A variant of the third-generation Accord, it appears to be the hatchback body from the B pillar forward, adding a flat roof and Kammback-style tail. Its wicked cool liftgate extends partway into the roof. The average American might hedge on calling this a wagon given that it has but two side doors, but that’s because most Americans either have forgotten or, more likely, weren’t alive to remember how US automakers offered two-door wagons for a couple decades, wrapping up in the 1960s. Read about it here.
The Japanese kept getting Accord wagons after they went out of production here in 1997. This one is from the late 1990s.
The JDM importers site from which I, um, appropriated this photo claims that this Accord wagon is from 2006. Maybe one of our readers in a country that got this car can fact-check me here.
Of course, Accord wagons are currently available in the United States. They just carry an Acura badge–and the Acura sticker-price premium. But as Paul Niedermeyer learned (read about it here), the wagon’s general unpopularity here in the land of the free and the home of the brave means you can strike a mighty nice bargain on one.
But in Europe and Japan, this wagon is available today with a grille that features a giant H. I can’t spot a single other external difference.
Back in the United States, we settled for just the fourth- and fifth-generation Accords in big-booty form. I don’t know what your experience was with these (and please, do tell in the comments), but to a person, every Accord wagon I personally encountered was driven by someone with alternative automotive tastes. An unconventional driver. A driver who wanted to drop out.
Chris Green photo
An old friend of mine drove an Accord wagon of the previous generation for a while. It was even this color, but it wasn’t this particular car as I lifted this photo from the Cohort. This friend was working just enough fund his life’s purpose, which was to follow musician Mike Keneally around on tour. His automotive history was a litany of oddment, beginning with the blue Plymouth Sapporo he drove when I met him. (Side note: I borrowed it a lot and it was a very pleasant car to drive. And its ding-dong door chime amused me.) Later he owned a forward-control Toyota van. That car jazzed him the most, in part because he could fit his entire drum kit into it, but mostly because his was the only one on the road in the small city where we lived then. When the van crapped out, he showed up in one of these Accord wagons. He actually apologized to me the first time I saw him in it, because it wasn’t weird enough for him. But if he had to drive an Accord, this was the one to have, as they were few and far between.
Maybe his Accord wagon bothered him because the cockpit was such a conventional place to be. His previous-gen wagon had the previous-gen dashboard, of course, not this one from the subject ’96. But both dashboards were models of conventionality in their time, even though they were very well executed and downright pleasant places to be.
The days of Accord wagons being any kind of counterculture statement are long over. If you drive a US Accord wagon today, it’s because you need cheap wheels – body style matters far less than whether the car always starts. I feel sure that’s the position this Accord wagon fills for this driver.
when i was looking for my first new car in the spring of 1998 i wanted a wagon for it versatility and i wanted a manual (but didn’t particularly care for brown or diesel). i was an automotive nerd in the making. none of the domestic three offered a wagon with a manual. honda had just stopped offering a manual in their accord wagon for 1998 and i could not find a 1997 on a lot anywhere. volvo offered the v70 and i could find a manual but o boy was it pricey. 0.0% interest for 36 months was tempting but w a meager down payment the monthlys would have been more than our mortgage. that’s a tough one to justify. we settled on a vw passat as our best alternative. we still have it, and at 244k it is a one-owner that has been very reliable. the first child gets his license in a few months and he actually wants to drive the car he came home from the hospital in and is the first car he remembers. would an automatic honda accord have been a cheaper car from a maintenance point? probably but i would have had to drive an automatic all these years. i am still on the original clutch and i am not certain the auto would have served me as long.
As the owner of a 1997 Passat TDI, let me heartily congratulate you on keeping it going for that long! What engine does yours have – surely it’s not the VR6?
In ’98 one could still buy an Escort/Tracer wagon with a stick, and they were decent little beaters.
A great ode to a wonderful car! This and the Camry wagons always carried that “I’m outside the box cool” vibe to me….back when the Explorer and Grand Cherokee ruled the land. I’m a big fan of the 1st generation Odyssey as well….
The AeroDeck looks just about perfect…..
Nice find; I always felt these wore white rather well.
These were mighty nice cars and remain so today. Honda quality was at its peak at this time and, aside from very expensive brake jobs (front rotors are hub-over-rotor design) and the T-belt/water pump, you might well go 200,000 miles in one of these without needing to do much. The ’91-’93 versions had a very nice premium look, with formal styling, rich plastics, big rear headrests and roof-mounted rear speakers. The ’94-’97 versions were slightly decontented, but if anything, any minor bugs were worked out by this time. They’re also a bit more solid, designed to pass more stringent side-impact regs and being wider, able to accommodate the engine and transmission without any bend or notch in the frame rails. I’m surprised to see this ’96 as rusty as it is, too, because for ’96 and ’97, rust protection was at its best. Perhaps this car spent time in Gary.
Wagons got larger front rotors and a lower final drive ratio, to move and stop with the expected larger loads. Unfortunately, I’d argue that Honda needn’t have bothered. I owned one of these and couldn’t fit a twin mattress between the rear wheel wells. This would’ve worked best as a sport wagon, but Honda didn’t equip it that way, sending only the single cam F-block to the states and deleting the 5-speed from EX wagons after 1994. Pity, as all the fundamentals of good handling are there and even the stock drivetrain is enthusiastic. Very annoying that the 6th gen wagon you posted, which finally got a more compact, rational rear suspension design was yanked from the US market, and just before the Odyssey blew up.
A twin-cam H-block from the Prelude would’ve been a good fit. Its torque peak occurred later on paper, but I’m sure that’s more a function of a stronger top end and not necessarily a weaker midrange. And if I recall correctly, the Japanese market versions were equipped that way, out of the Ohio factory, no less. Wagons, with their lower gearing, weren’t going to get thirty miles per gallon, and with their small cargo area, weren’t going to be doing serious hauling duty. It’s best to think of this as an Accord Avant, and for the mechanically inclined enthusiast, a twin-cam VTEC swap and fatter rear sway bar is far from impossible.
I remember the Camry (and of course, Taurus) wagons were far more popular since they had much larger load space and third-row seats for the same money. Too, it was the golden age of the minivan which could haul an entire neighborhood.
Besides the Acura brakes, the 94-97 Accord wagon had a superior rear suspension and handled better than the non-wagons.
I had the 96 w/ a five speed. Very rare. Something like 10% of Accords were wagons and only 5% of that subset were manuals. The manual was sporty, the car was really too underpowered for the auto – one of the reasons it was not a big seller.
Would have gotten the TSX wagon like Paul, but wanted a manual as well.
Yes, every time I see one of these (they’re quite popular here) I’m reminded that it’s the direct predecessor of our TSX wagon. Know two folks who have/had them, and both had exceeded 300k last time I heard.
Speaking of, we love our TSX wagon. It’s not terribly roomy in the back seat and cargo area, but then we’re kid-less now, and it’s more of a sporty four-door shooting brake. But the handling is superb, and everything else has met or exceeded our expectations, including fuel economy, which is between 26-31 mpg.
It makes a perfect complement to the Xbox, which is ideal for my short around-town errands. Stephanie loves driving the TSX during the week, and on weekend outings, I get to drive it. Works out well.
Isn’t it true that the fourth- and fifth-generation Accord wagons were built and offered in North America only?
I was last in the UK in 1986 and still have a copy of Car from that trip, featuring a comparison test that included an Accord Aerodeck. Lovely car. (Headlamps were exposed, unlike the U.S. front end.) At the time one of my siblings had just purchased an ’87 5-speed hatchback, and that car was a great high-speed cruiser and had quite good carrying capacity even without a wagon shape.
Built in North America only, I believe, but much more of a hit in Japan.
Well, I don’t know if I would call the CB9 wagon (1991–93) a big hit in Japan. It did better than Honda expected (their initial projection was like 6,000 a year), particularly considering that the wagon was a lot more expensive than the sedans and was in the pricier three-number tax class. I think the CD version (1994–97) did better, but the CB Accord was kind of a flop at home in general.
More popular, at any rate.
Both fourth and fifth gen were built in NA but also available elsewhere. Most notably, Europe got a completely different fifth Accord sedan, jointly developed with the Rover 600. However, the Coupe and Aerodeck (as it was still called) were variants of the American version.
Neither of those sold well and disappeared for the next generation, the wagon returned on the seventh gen shown above. It may well be a 2006, the rear didn’t really change much over the model run.
I gather that the US-made Accord wagons got a “Built by Honda America” (or some such) badge on the C pillar before being exported.
They did and American built Accords were considered very cool in Japan.
The coupes were exported in the same way.
I always thought Honda’s original (though far from Deadly) sin was bringing out the Accord sedan in ’79 rather than making it simple (for themselves) and just doing a 5-door hatch.
Imagine how much less boring the world would be if there had never, ever, been a Honda Accord with a trunk.
Unfortunately, something like 99% of Honda’s customers are quite happy with (if not out and out preferring) boring.
Honda sold every sedan they could make – usually at sticker, or even more – so bringing out the sedan was the right move.
Perhaps a five-door hatchback would have sold well, given the demand for Hondas in general, and concern over fuel prices at that time, but, in the long run, Honda made the right choice. Like it or not, most Americans prefer sedans over hatchbacks. Honda isn’t the only car maker that has discovered this.
Again, Honda did make a family-size five-door (albeit not an Accord per se), they just limited to markets where they figured it would have the most appeal.
The Quint? Was this not more of a Civic with a big engine, a five-door 1st gen Prelude of sorts? I think it shared the Ballade’s dashboard, if I recall correctly. But it was even more dull; the Accord sedan wasn’t especially boring in those years, although of course, the first-gen Integra five-door was much more exciting.
Edit: I just read your comment below.
Yes, the Quint used the second-generation Civic five-door floorpan, but was somewhat bigger, closely approximating contemporary Accord hatch. A first-generation Accord three-door (in JDM trim) was 161.6 or 162.4 inches long on a 93.7-inch wheelbase; the Quint was 161.8 inches on a slightly shorter (92.9-inch) wheelbase. The Quint’s front track dimensions were also about 1.6 inches narrower than the Accord (the track widths were the same as those of the Ballade, which arrived about six months after the Quint).
However, looking at the styling and the fact that the Quint shared the Accord’s 1.6-liter engine (and the Accord’s softer suspension tuning), it’s easy to see why people initially assumed the Quint was a five-door Accord. It wasn’t until the second-generation Accord arrived that it was noticeably bigger than the Quint. (The 1982 Accord three-door is about 4 inches longer than the Quint.)
There was a short-lived 5 door hatchback of the 97-02 Euro Accord. A bit like the first Mazda6, it was quite hard to tell it from a saloon at a glance.
On a side note – from 92-96 we (in Europe) got the US estate and coupe , from 97-02 just the US coupe.
Honda has infinitely more competition that it had in the year 2000. At that time, the only decent small cars on the market were the Civic and Corolla. The Civic was always $2000 more than the Corolla; the price difference was even more pronounced with American stuff.
Now every single car maker produced a good small car; Honda can’t get the premium it got even five years ago. They are competing on price now and in today’s economic climate, that’s not a bad idea. Their product cycles are so long-the current car dates from 2006-a of content goes into the cars.
Here in Soviet Canuckistan, a Civic LX will go on the road loaded with CVT for C$21k, or $260 a month all in. That’s a real deal for a car of this equipment and reputation and a lot cheaper than it was in 2000.
Mazda Protege? Nissan Sentra?
Well, a) Honda wanted to make the Accord more competitive against Nissan and Toyota, which offered a whole range of body styles and b) starting in mid-1980 (about two and a half years after the sedan), Honda introduced the Quint, which was initially available only as a five-door. The Quint (ancestor of the Integra) was more closely related to the second-generation Civic, but it looked so much like the Accord and was so similar in most dimensions that a lot of British critics assumed it WAS a five-door Accord.
The Quint wasn’t sold in the States, I think mainly because it was introduced right before the introduction of the Voluntary Restraint Agreement limiting Japanese imports — selling it here would have basically meant taking sales out of the Accord and Civic lines, which would have been risky. The five-door was sold in a lot of export markets, generally as the Honda Quintet. It was later sold in some areas as a Rover, too.
When I was a kid I used to get excited whenever I’d see an Accord wagon, because they were so rare even when new. The only people I ever knew personally that owned one were mutual family friends from New Hampshire. They were very outdoorsy, and the wagon body style was good for kayaks and such.
One only has to wonder if the Accord wagon could’ve survived had Honda taken a Subaru Outback/Volvo XC approach. And I’m not including the frankencar Crosstour as an approach to that. And that silver JDM Accord wagon is a 2006. It’s based on the Accord (U.S.-spec TSX) of that period.
BTW, interesting juxtaposition between the ’96 Accord wagon and more recent E350 wagon in that last photo.
This is one of my favorite generations of Accord, this and the one that immediately followed. After that I got kind of “eeehhh..” on them, but I’ve yet to see one of this generation I disliked.
A while ago there used to be a EX wagon running around town of this vintage, and it was pretty good looking with the alloy wheels and everything. If it had a manual trans, I’d venture to guess that’s about as perfect of a car as you can get. I wouldn’t mind one that’s a slight bit of a beater inside, as it would be better for hauling stuff around.
Too bad that wagons, aside from Subaru, have gone the way of the dodo. While I appreciate Subaru for what they do, I’d much rather have a modern version of something like this for a family hauler. Rock solid cars that last forever, my sister has a somewhat newer accord that’s gone well beyond 200,000 miles with literally no maintenance – Dad has to take it from her once or twice a year to get it’s oil changed.
That Aero Deck looks just like the kind of car that auto bloggers rant, rave, wimper and claim they just have to have. And of course, if it ever did come to the US, those self-same bloggers wouldn’t buy one . . . . . . until it was at least four years old and somebody else had gotten hammered with the depreciation.
Another wagon fan, here. This Accord wagon (and the prior 90-93 version) is a car that was always on my “cheap second car” shopping list, but one never crossed my path at the right time. The 1st Gen Odyssey was roomier, though.
These never were that common. A friend of my mother owned one of these and I toyed with trying to buy it from her, but we never connected.
I grew up in a small town in New England and it seemed like everybody had at least one station wagon in the family. So, partly for nostalgia reasons and partly because now they make me feel counter-culture-cool, I have owned nothing but wagons since 1995.
In 1995 I bought a brand new Accord LX wagon with a manual (5 speed?). I also considered a Subaru Legacy wagon (not a jacked-up Outback but a real wagon) but my dad talked me out of it because he believed that all-wheel drive cars were “too complicated.”
The Accord was the perfect size and the most reliable car I ever owned and perfectly boring to drive. In 1999 I bought an Audi A4 Avant (wagon) with a 1.8T engine – not as reliable but probably my favorite car of all-time.
I now drive a Jetta Sportwagen (TDI, manual) and it’s fantastic but I find myself lusting after, and saving for, a Volvo wagon. I want to order it and pick it up in Sweden. Something to look forward to before I ease into retirement.
I now drive a Jetta Sportwagen (TDI, manual) and it’s fantastic but I find myself lusting after, and saving for, a Volvo wagon. I want to order it and pick it up in Sweden. Something to look forward to before I ease into retirement.
I work at a new Volvo dealer… save your money seriously
The 94-97 wagon also had a full size spare tire. The wagon looked much better w/ the aero roof rack which cost about $900 when new.
Ye that Areodeck is a Shooting Brake. I have met a few people who bought a 97 Accord Estate because both Buick and Toyota stopped making their Estates in 1996. A Camry and Accord Estate are about the same price as the sedan so I would buy the Estate. Smart move on Paul’s part because that Acura is so much nicer looking than the Venza or Accord Cross tour.
We never had a 6th gen Accord Wagon here in Norway as far as I can recall, but we did get the 7th gen (2003-2006, 1st Gen TSX) as a Wagon, even with a diesel and a manual (and in brown) for those who like that kinda stuff. The 7th gen wagon also sat on an extended platform, so legroom in the rear isn’t too bad, unlike the last generation (which Paul bought) which is more of a ‘2+2-sportwagon’ My brother used to have an ’88 Aerodeck, which shared very few external with the european Accord at the time (the sedan didn’t have the pop-up lights over here, and we never got that generation as a hatchback)
Kustom v8
http://daddytypes.com/2009/03/27/trophy_trailer_not_included_sema_honda_accord_wicked_wagon.php
Never been a big Honda guy but I’ve always been a fan of these Accord wagons… well, pretty much all wagons 😀 .
I preferred the looks of the mid ’90’s Camry wagon. They were also much more useable as a true station wagon.
I’ve always thought these were extremely good-looking wagons, in stark contrast to the extraordinarily weird-looking Camry wagon of the time. Having owned a ’91 Accord and spent a great deal of time as a passenger in a ’93 (non-wagons) I agree that the cabin was a very pleasant place to be, very solid ergonomics, great outward visibility and quite comfortable. Didn’t personally know anyone with the wagon version but I would have happily had one. Now they sit in that uncomfortable “getting too old to be a reliable DD, not yet a classic” territory…though if I were to run across one for the right price it could make a good third vehicle, I suppose.
The aerodeck was very cool-looking, but it’s a shame they didn’t have the pop-up headlights, a big part of why the 3rd gen Accord was so interesting. Off the top of my head I can’t think of any other 4-door sedan that had ’em.
The 94-97 Accord wagon had less space than the Camry, but looked and handled much better than the ugly duckling Camry..
The Camry had that unfortunate “D” pillar, while the Accord’s “D” was virtually invisible.
This recently introduced Honda Civic Tourer has actually more cargo space than its bigger brother Accord Tourer. Comes with a manual and a diesel. Probably also in brown. For whatever reason it’s important to mention wagon-manual-diesel-brown in the same breath.
sigh. Every design detail is fussy.
Maybe it grows on you when all doors are closed.
NZ got em from everywhere US built Accords, Euro Accords and of course used JDM my mates sister had a US built vesion good car untill something wore out then everything began failing in normal Honda style so it was traded, but its first 300,000 kms were fine.
My 5th great teacher (not especially quirky) and his wife had twin ’93s. I had not seen one before and remarked on it. He raved about how useful they were. I presume he kept them for many years afterwards.
I liked the looks of the succeeding ’94-’97 version better without the giant blobby taillights. In fact, I once considered one as a winter car, until I realized that many of the ones I was seeing in my part of the world had tinted windows and sound systems. Already driving an old Cadillac with some of its less desirable stereotypes, I saw no reason to doubly associate myself with that element.
Here’s my daughter and our ’95 LX wagon “off-roading” toward a Western Pennsylvania blueberry patch in 2006. Bought it used shortly after getting married and got it to 196,000 miles before a head gasket leak. Loved the versatility of a wagon and this was a cheap car to own until it wasn’t. A little sluggish at highway passing speeds, but zippy around town. Paul, I’m envious of your Acura wagon.
These Honda wagons are still popular here in Japan – perhaps its because I’ve been at expat for about 10 years now but I think wagons are very stylish, in addition to their utility. One of the best looking of the current models is the wagon version of the new Mazda 6 – just great looking. And while the US gets a jacked up, cladded Audi A4 wagon called the “All Road”, in Japan and Europe you can get one hunkered down and in an “Irmscher” edition.
The Toyota Avensis is, by far, the best selling midsize Japanese wagon here right now, it does look rather clean, not too fussy….(A word I just learned)
The Mazda 6 above really looks good though !
It’s almost always nice to see a wagon version of a conventional sedan. It shakes up the landscape a bit. But, personally, I’ve been ready to call the death of the wagon over for 15 years. The wagon body, whether a Ford Escape or a Ford Expedition EL has been the dominate style by good margin for decades. Being in the Midwest, where the corn grows tall and vehicles are big probably skews my vision a bit.
The fact that Venza and Highlander get CUV or whatever status, doesn’t make them any less a bigger bodied Camry wagon.
Conventional sedans are mostly bought for commuting, where gas mileage really counts, but lost most of their utility for functions beyond commuting once their size fell below a GM B body or Ford’s Panther. As such, most conventional sedans offer only marginally more utility as wagons, and get expensive for what amounts to a tall trunked car.
The was phenomenally evident to me the past weekend. My family took our F-150 Supercrew, Dodge Durango and Ford Freestyle to help my dad move odds and ends moving to a new house. His Chrysler Sebring sedan held very little by comparison, and putting a wagon rear on it wouldn’t have made much difference. But, it is a perfectly sensible choice for 95% of his needs. A Sebring wagon would meet my needs maybe 15% of the time.
Accords have been built in Marysville, Ohio since 1982… most sedans, coupes and hatchbacks, but…
The wagon has ALWAYS been built in America, an ALL American car that was exported to Japan… funny having a Japanese model, made in the US and then, exported to Honda’s homeland.
Bravo, to you Honda for employing GENERATIONS of American auto workers… we can’t say that about the US auto industry, …..
Those TRAITORS, tell you to buy American, yet have foreigners build their cars in Mexico and Canada.
Pure rubbish.
The 4th and 5th gen wagons were sold in Australia in small numbers, and imported from the US. We don’t get the Accord Euro aka TSX wagons though, which didn’t disappoint me when I saw the styling of the first gen wagon version.
We do have the Mazda6 wagons, ironically the current model wagon is on a shorter wheelbase than the sedan. I understand this is to make it a bit shorter for tighter parking situations in Europe, whereas the sedan is geared towards the US market with more rear seat legroom.
I owned a 5-speed 1993 Accord EX wagon for almost 10 years. I purchased it from the original owner with just under 100k miles and sold it with 230,000. It was the best car I have ever owned. Rock solid, reliable, sporty, great on gas, comfortable and rare. I regret every day selling that car. If it weren’t for the damned rust issue in New England I would have kept it. Unfortunately the subframe was getting pretty bad and my mechanic suggested extensive costly repairs or selling it. I like my replacement CR-V, but I LOVED that Accord wagon!
We had a 1995 LX with a 5 speed manual. Kept it for 15 years and 166,000 miles. Tonight two kids to drive with it. Never in an accident. Sold it for $1700. Mechanically pretty good but did have electrical problems. No rust problems. Would have bought another one if Honda still made a wagon.
I have a 1996 white accord wagon that I bought used. I have put over 150000 miles on it and it has 265000 miles on it. It has been doing hauling, hard use, and I love it. My wife has a 2013 Toyota Prius that does not ride as well as my accord wagon.. I wish Honda would offer an Accord wagon with the quality of these past wagons.
Still driving a 1996 ex wagon…..bought it from a friend about 5 years ago to use as a commuter…..it payed for itself in the 1st year($1100) vs commuting in my 2000 suburban (about $1500/yr in gas alone). Bought it with 160k, now sitting at 190k, mostly trouble free- had to deal with a couple small oil leaks and a window regulator. …..I do wish it was 5spd manual though
Hey do you still have this for sale?
Contrary to the site author’s claims —“the body style doesn’t matter “ —- ACTUALLY THE BODY STYLE IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!! I want a 1996 Honda Accord FOR the body style, which is superior to any current or previous sedans, SUVs, or other station wagons. I bought mine in late 1996, but in 1998 I got a job in Italy, so I had to sell my car. Big regret! Now they are extremely rare. But if I could find one, I’d be willing to upgrade the mechanical issues and even minor body work and paint. I just want that fabulous body style, with its tremendous windows and interior. Please email if you know of one for sale. THANKS!
rossangela@yahoo.com