(first posted 6/17/2016) The new 1976 Honda Accord was the one single car that had the greatest influence on subsequent cars. FWD, fuel and space efficient, excellent handling and fine ride, and perhaps most importantly, attention to detail and fine craftsmanship that changed the rules of the game forever.
R&T was duly impressed, although at the time it would be difficult to imagine the impact the Accord would make. But they clearly saw its potential.
I’ll sprinkle some shots of some local suvivors in with the R&T review.
There was essentially unanimous accord among all of the magazines that reviewed the all-new Accord: This was the best automotive buy for the money ($3995) bar none, unless of course your taste lay in an altogether different realm. The Accord initially came only as a hatchback coupe, and in only three colors, silver, gold and blue. The green was added later, or it replaced the gold, IIRC.
For that price, the Accord had standard equipment unlike any American small/economy car. Back then, everything from a radio to the most minor convenience items were inevitably optional, and those options quickly jacked up the low price of a stripper car. Which means that the base price of a 1977 Mustang II hatchback ($3901) was not really comparable. The Accord came standard with an AM/FM radio, a monitoring system for maintenance and all exterior lights, side window defrosters, flip out rear windows, and all sort of little minor convenience items like a coin tray, etc. And it was nicely trimmed, inside and out.
R&T made lots of comparisons with the VW Scirocco, because of their similarity in design (accidental), and their general configuration. But they were actually designed for quite different purposes: the Scirocco had a very low and compact body, and its suspension was tuned for maximum sportiness. Good luck trying to sit in the back seat of one. The Accord was targeted to the heart of the American market, meaning its ride was almost surprisingly supple and soft, even if it was at the expense of some handling sharpness. But that turned out not to be a liability, given how most Americans use their cars. In fact, it was a key part of what would propels the Accord to the very top of the sales charts within a bit over a decade, a truly remarkable feat. The Accord was an exceptionally all-round well-balanced and well-built small car, a feat that would elude the Big Three for decades.
As it’s clear from the review, the Accord didn’t really excel in any specific performance category; it was the classic case of the sum of the parts being greater than the whole. Everything exuded a sense of precision and attention to detail, which was in contrast to the sloppy way too many American cars were being built at the time. One could rightfully say that this was the very first small car that didn’t punish the owner for buying one. Which meant that the Accord transcended the typical buyer demographics for small cars; an Accord was essentially a classless car, comparable to the image the VW Golf similarly acquired in Germany and other parts of Europe. No one would look down at you for buying one, no matter where it showed up.
Adding a four door sedan was of course a key ingredient to the Accord’s success, as that was becoming the new heart of the market after the coupe’s (think Olds Cutlass Supreme) long run at the top during the 70s.
It should be noted that while the Accord’s rise was truly meteoric, with waiting lists and dealer mark-ups, the Mustang II really only had one big year, in 1974, thanks to the energy crisis.
Performance stats were mostly typical for its time and class; today a 0-60 time of 15.4 seconds would be laughable. But then it had all of 68 hp! But the little 1597 cc SOHC four had the usual Honda veleverty-smoothness in its running characteristics, one that alone put it ahead of anything in its class. And ahead of any small car engine GM would build for the next 30 years. Measured fuel economy was excellent for the times, 32 mpg.
Gen 1 Accord have become pretty rare even here in Curbsidelandia, so finding these two on the same walk within two blocks was a bit unexpected. This one is showing some surface rust, from the paint finally just wearing out. But other than that, it’s survived pretty well. Yes, they were rather allergic to salt, like so many other cars of the times.
The upholstery fabric on these Hondas was clearly not as durable as the rest of the car, as it tends to just disintegrate with time, use and/or the sun. One might think a cheap set of seat covers would be more pleasant than sitting on (or looking at) the bare foam.
The back seat has survived better,
except for the backs of the head rests, which are inevitably totally gone due to the UV radiation’s effect.
I suppose one could argue that comparing an Accord to a Mustang II is like comparing sushi to Sloppy Joe’s. I doubt there’s many folks who have positive feelings for both of them, or did at the time. They represent two completely different approaches and solutions to the sporty coupe market, although the Accord wasn’t really overtly sporty. But then neither was a basic Mustang II four cylinder, despite the name. Between the two, the Accord was undoubtedly more fun to drive, with its slick-shifting five speed and eager but smooth engine that revved joyously to 6000 rpm.
The Accord re-wrote the book as much as any car did, and the results are everywhere. It became the model for every sedan in its class going forward, and the benchmark that almost always moved a step forward just as the competition was closing in, on the previous generation. Not that it was perfect by any means, but it certainly did define the modern sedan. And I suspect most of us will be in accord with that final thought.
Paul writes “Everything exuded a sense of precision and attention to detail… “.
A future COAL of mine discusses my 1982 Accord hatchback, and Paul’s words are exactly right. Honda Accords (and Civics) were beautifully put together and perfect for the fussy, but non-performance oriented, car enthusiast.
They were pretty too.
I don’t think the analogy works. In the early ’80s I knew people who owned both cars, and the status purpose was different. The M2, like the earlier Mustangs, was an attempt to raise your status. A status prosthesis. Owning a Falcon or Torino or Pinto with visible coolness attached.
The Accord was bought by people who had already arrived and knew the Insider Code. At that time Honda had already replaced Volvo as the Mark Of Quiet Coolness for the knowledge-workers.
They were good cars if not overly exciting, especially next to a Scirocco. So funny how little power all of these cars had, even my first GTi was 90hp…
The Accord is one of the first cars I ever drove a stick on, terrorizing the East Side streets of Cleveland, Ohio in the 80’s right. I am sure that Evan Wright’s mother was not exactly thrilled with this LOL.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Wright
The execution of the first Accord really was quite good. The inclusion of the five speed and the fact that Honda was ahead on their small engines, no doubt due to their motorcycle experience, made for a good suburban driving experience. The car was from early in Japan’s rise, so costs were low and the early Accord was not stuck with a Dasher like price.
These early ones were really aimed at a tiny slice of the market. Those who wanted a small four cylinder manual for their commute. Automatic?- better not 2 sp to a small engine. AC- better not dealer installed so expensive and iffy quality. Sound system- better not see A/C. Power steering, well the car is light and even with front drive putting all the weight up front you can make it work without. just pull through when parking, giving up a little of the small car ease of course.
I wonder if there was any thought of keeping the Accord what it was through the generations. It is amazing to me how much of the early mystique carries over to the Impala clone that currently has the name. The current real Accord goes by the name Fit and just moved to Mexico and added a CUV version the way cars do now.
I don’t remember any complaints about dealer A/C in our family’s ’75 Civics, and we lived in So. Cal. And as with domestic cars, it was easy to go aftermarket with audio, as I did on my ’88 Accord, if you didn’t like what the dealer offered.
The A/C in my ’76 civic was DOA when I got it in ’81. The fan refused to shut off and insisted on blowing hot air no matter how much I moved the temp control or replaced vacuum hoses. My final solution was to loop the engine coolant hose from the outlet leading to the heater connection on the firewall back into the pipe on the engine block and treat the fan as some sort of forced air ventilation system. In the fall I’d reconnect the hoses and use the open window as a temperature regulator.
Between that, the driver’s side door window having to be propped up with a coat hanger (the crank was DOA as well and the window would fall into the door), the rear hatch struts totally not working, the bottom of the front fenders rusting, and needing CV joints on both sides – all this with 60,000 miles on the odo mind you – I found Hondas to be less than expected.
Yes, the engine was great, the transmission was precise and the driving experience was fun, but the bum quality left a taste in my mouth to this day. My other direct comparison for imported cars was the chuffle of VW Bugs and busses that my folks had, so I might have been biased on body quality. I have yet to shop a Honda dealer since. A recent ride in a friend’s 2016 Civic did impress me, so I may shop there when I tire of my Versa and am no longer underwater.
His point was that it was dealer installed, therefore the quality was inconsistent, not universally bad. Glad you had a dealer that knew what they were doing.
I have a 2016 Accord in Obsidian Blue…John C. is right. I never thought about it until he said it. With the restyled front end and tail lamps it does kinda look like the new Impala. Doesn’t really bother me since I happen to really like the styling of the new Impala.
Early Accords were wonderful cars but didn’t live long where roads were salted in the winter. Sure, American cars rusted away, but Accords rusted away much more quickly, just like most Japanese cars of that era. I still see an occasional Mustang II, but I haven’t seen a 1970s Honda Accord in many, many years. (P.S. I own a 2009 Accord, so I’m not biased against them).
The “tin worn” eat these long ago in the UK. It was marketed as a premium model and cut above the more popular Capri that drove out of Ford show rooms up untill 1986.
$4K .Only a $1k above the base Rabbit….
The Accord kind of picked up where the VW beetle had left off. Both were cars bought by people who could often afford better. But Accord did what VW was never able to do: take the car up a notch or two in comfort, performance and equipment levels. A better and more capable classless car.
Of course, it didn’t hurt that the car came out at a time when exchange rates were killing European competition.
To your point, Muir Publications also did a “How to Keep Your Honda Alive” idiot manual…
You beat me to the punch! I was pulling together a piece on this car as well, contrasting it with another subpar American: the Chevette (they were about the same price in 1976!) No question this was an excellent and transformative car. Here is Car and Driver’s review–just like Road & Track, it was very positive on virtually all aspects of the Honda.
Car and Driver Accord article page 2:
Car and Driver Accord article page 3:
Car and Driver Accord article page 4:
Car and Driver Accord article page 5:
One difference between R/T and C/D was their vastly different acceleration times. Production tolerances must have been great even at 70s Honda.
With just 68 HP, I’d imagine driver and equipment weight as well as atmospheric conditions could make a big difference.
John – there was always a huge difference in acceleration times for any cars tested both by R&T and C&D in the 70’s. C&D did whatever necessary to produce the fastest possible times. R&T stressed a more ‘real world’ approach – they never abused the clutch, etc, etc- their times were what an ordinary driver could expect. Since large differences in performance figures were a common issue, both magazines made a point of explaining the difference in their methodologies, making this common knowledge back in the day. You’ll often see a difference in vehicle weights between the magazines as well.
C/D pretty much nailed it… ‘Someday you’ll see swarms of Japanese cars in just about any driveway’… ‘If Honda doesn’t build a GT model themselves, an aftermarket for high-performance Honda parts will surely develop’… yeah, I’d say so, even though Honda eventually did sell sporty variants of their cars.
C/D must have flogged this like a rented mule if they got 29 highway and 30 city. 98 mph isn’t bad for only 68 horsepower.
I like this article even better than the R&T article — thanks for posting it.
The ’76 Accord was a great car, no doubt.
Had it been priced $4,500, (a big jump in 1976), it would still be a good car.
However, few of these were sold for $3995 plus shipping and tax. Most dealers charged more–and got it.
The car was often compared the Scirocco–which had a little less room and a much bigger MSRP–$4995 for a ’76 (that was MY dream car in the late 70s, though I had yet to drive a car…)
By 1979 or 1980, thanks to inflation, as well as Honda’s adding a little more glitz to create the Accord LX (for quite a bit more money), the “new” 4-door Gen 1 MSRP was around $6395. Dealers added more. So an Accord LX 4-dr could cost more than a Malibu or Cutlass sedan by then)
So, as with the original BMW 1600/2002, if you got yours early and kept it, you got a great car AND a great deal (and the smug satisfaction of knowing that those who got the same car a few years later paid a lot more).
Interestingly in my case 10 years later (in 1986) I owned a ’78 Scirocco for which I was looking for a replacement car, and considered the ’86 Accord Hatchback.
I really liked the Accord (and miss the mid-sized hatchback offerings which I think Honda stopped making in 1989), but didn’t like the way they had model tiers (which has become the norm now). I wanted Fuel Injection, but didn’t like something about the high line model that came with it (can’t remember now).
I ended up with an ’86 GTI, which still let me order a-la-carte, it had fuel injection standard, plus 4 wheel disks (which were pretty new back then), mine had air conditioning (which is part of the reason I was looking for a new car, having moved to Texas and living 4 years without air conditioned car was starting to wear on me by that point) and sunroof, it lacked power steering (which with the then wide 60 series tires made parking it a bit of a chore).
Otherwise, I loved my Scirocco, it is still my favorite of all the cars I’ve owned, though I didn’t really think it was much like an Accord hatch, more like the Prelude (though I know it was a coupe, not a hatchback) or the Celica…the Accord hatch was more like a Rabbit to me (and as a non-scrambler who doesn’t like to get in low cars anymore, I currently own a 2000 Golf (never got to own a Honda, at least not yet)
What I didn’t like about F.I. was the price penalty, either $2K or $3K more for the ’88 LXi. No regrets, for my carbureted Accord DX worked fine, with only slight throttle hesitation when cold. I still miss that car, very nice balance of virtues.
Accord LXi (fuel injected)– I thought perhaps you wanted manual steering, and LXi had ps.
After reading about your GTi, maybe not.
I wanted. VW GTI with manual steering and AC. BL You got my car!
My first new car—and the car I wanted–was a GTI. There were 2 86s left, both PS. The price had risen TWICE that model year, but black looked better than silver, so I got the black one in October 86, though it had a higher base price
Favorite car I have ever owned
Responding to an old post, just the same.
I guess I was a bit ambivalent about power steering, but I really wanted fuel injection. My ’78 Scirocco had only fuel injection, I only needed air conditioning once I moved to central Texas. The ’86 GTi had air conditioning, but no power steering, which normally would be OK for such a light car, but it also had the (then wide) 60 series tires, and once I broke my collar bone and ribs and tried driving it (with manual transmission) it was a bit more than I wanted to deal with. In fact, that’s more than a small consideration for my next car which I think will have to be automatic (and of course it is much easier to find automatics nowdays) mostly because nobody else in my family can drive it, and bowing to frailties that come with age, it kind of has to fit this lowest common denominator.
My current car is an ’00 Golf, it has power steering (a bit heavier than the ’00 GTi) but it also has narrower 65 series instead of 60 series tires. I’ve had the power steering rack replaced, and the new one felt overboosted to me at first (now seems normal)…but I guess it might harken back to my Scirocco and GTi which didn’t have it at all, and I got used to the effort (not so much the Scirocco, which had narrow tires (normal for the time, I think they were 78’s).
I guess I didn’t remember that the ’86 Honda LXi also came with power steering, back then I probably would have preferred manual but it wouldn’t have been the strong preference against that I had for power windows and locks back then, so I might have still considered it if it wasn’t bundled…but of course that was Honda’s way. I think the LXi didn’t come with the 60 series tires nor 4 wheel disc brakes either, so the GTi was definitely the sportier of the two, including the suspension, which is where I leaned back then, but I’ve since changed in my old age (pretty natural) and now would have leaned more towards the Honda, even though I’m still not a fan of power windows nor locks (2 of my doors in my ’00 don’t operate via power locks, just haven’t fixed them…and of course they deleted the passenger side lock cylinder so it is less convenient than manual locks.
I’m a big hatchback fan, so for me this choice went away with the 1989 demise of the Accord Hatch. Still wish I could buy a mid-sized hatch, but few others seem to want them. And I’m still not a fan of bundled options, though I fully recognize they help make anything beyond a stripper more affordable to make.
“A shrunken-head version of the big American coupes” Hee hee 🙂
A few of my fellow university students had older Accords in the late 80’s. It’s been mentioned before but they were ferocious rusters. One girl had a round-headlight Accord that her father had fixed up and painted. After a minor off-road excursion one of the front wheels was weirdly cambered, so she asked me to look at it. The lower control arm mount was armost torn off, the box section had rusted through on 3 sides. She didn’t believe me that NO you CANNOT drive it like this, I wound up calling her father.
The Accords were ferocious rusters, not my fellow students…
In the Summer of 1987 I dated someone who drove that exact green Accord sedan. The car was an ’81 model, IIRC, and it was rusty. I mean like no rustproofing and 6 years of Northern NJ Winters RUSTY! But it was smooth, reliable, comfortable, and despite being underpowered to a certain degree it rode and drove like a luxury car. I hated the car, as I thought it was just plain ugly, but there was no denying that it was very well screwed together. Reading the review above, it becomes very clear: THIS car became the benchmark that all but the most sport-aspiring cars since have been modeled after. Having known one intimately, I can’t say that this shouldn’t be so.
Interesting when they say the Accord accommodated people up to 6’1″ tall. It’s been awhile since I’ve been in a Mustang II, but at 6’3″ I don’t remember being cramped in it and I drove fox-body Mustangs for years without issue. The lack of space for tall folks is a problem I still have with Hondas to this day. Despite being one of the overall largest vehicles in its class the cramped cockpit of the current Odyssey took it off my shopping list.
It’s a bummer being on the edge of the Bell Curve. Short folks like my wife can’t reach the clutch without being dangerously close to an airbag-equipped steering wheel, hence I had to get my Civic with auto so she could drive it too.
A coworker of mine, perhaps 6’6″, drove a gen-1 Fiesta.
I’m 6’0″ and I felt like he towered over me.
I’m 6’2″ and long in the trunk. I’ve yet to sit in a Japanese car whose front head restraint didn’t hit me in the base of the neck, even when fully extended. I tried a lot of them at car shows in the 70s – 90s. Maybe they’ve improved since.
“The Accord was an exceptionally all-round…well-built small car…”
Besides the bad rust problem of the first Accords mentioned by several commenters, weren’t there other issues, as well? Seems like brake longevity has always been a Honda shortcoming. I know Consumer Reports had given it a Not Recommended as a used car.
Yeah, they had warp prone brake rotors, and a host of other issues mostly related to the engine. I can’t think of a more conceptually advanced car in the market at that time, yet so bitterly disappointing to live with. Half baked.
That surprises me, given how bad its contemporaries were. It makes me wonder what cars were recommended.
“It makes me wonder what cars were recommended.”
I think this was about the time Toyota began their run as the top recommended spot for all their models, which I don’t think they’ve relinquished since.
It’s worth noting that, in the sixties and before, the term Made-in-Japan was synonymous with crap, similar to how Made-in-China is viewed today. The Honda Civic went a long way to changing that perception, but the first year Honda Accord was sort of the last bastion of the ‘bad old days’ of Japanese products in that regard. Fortunately for Honda, It didn’t take them very long to correct nearly all of the Accord’s deficiencies, although I think, to this day, Honda’s brake systems are far from the best in the industry.
Interesting R/T compared the Accord to the Scirocco, I think it matches the 2 door Rabbit more closely. The back seat and rear headroom was really tight in the Scirocco compared to the Rabbit. And the price was lower for the Rabbit as well. I didn’t realize a ’77 car would still come with a manual choke, I thought due to emissions they would be long gone by this time. Maybe this was a 49 state car.
My sister had the 4 door version of this car, she put a lot of miles on it and it served her well. True CC form to find the same color and model in both 2 door and 4 door form on the same walk! VW did from the start have 3 speeds in it’s automatic and by ’77 standard fuel injection, but still only had a 4 speed stick while Honda had a 5 speed by this time.
Interesting how much performance difference there is in the C/D review GN posted. 8 MPH top speed and 2.2 seconds quicker to 60 is quite a difference.
But then again C/D was famous for testing ringers!
I was surprised about that manual choke, too. New for ’77 was an indicator light that was activated whenever the choke knob was extended. I know my ex-wife used to drive around with the choke on periodically. Thankfully, she and the car are long gone.
Pre-CC effect: Spotted a 1st-gen Accord hatch in downtown Richmond over the weekend. Repainted red and sporting newer alloys, but looked to be in great condition overall. Every time I see one (which is rare) I’m reminded of how nice a shape these are.
An engineering professor at my college had a green sedan just like the one in the photos. He was still driving it up until probably 2004 or 05, when he retired. Who knows–he might still have it!
Rust was an enemy of these, which is why the California market loved them and they made a ‘beachead’ . Improved rust prevention and US production then made Accords the “modern Impala/Delta 88”.
I first saw one in late ’76. The owner of the local pizza parlor here in Tigard (Pizza Merchant) bought one. My older sister worked there as a server, and we became family friends. So he let me go over this car with a fine tooth comb; I was 10 at the time. I was smitten. Never since have I been around a rig that just oozed quality, helped no doubt by the flawless silver paint. This machine felt like it was carved out of billet. And limiting the color choice was one clever way of allowing things like AM/FM radio and rear window wiper to be standard. Honda limited color choice on their bikes for years by this time. Truly a ground breaking car, and probably had GM pooping their pants, as the X-Cars (EX-Car??) were already on the chopping block, oops meant drawing board. Disclaimer: I was already a Honda motorcycle fan by then; maybe I’m a wee bit jaded. And then the CBX came out… 6 cylinders of pure motorcycle porn… And I could redecorate my driveway with either, to this day
Back in the early days of the Japanese assault on the American auto industry, they were very good at including a long standard equipment list on all models. Sadly, as they got more and more successful and assimilated to American business practices, the cars became more and more decontented. In fact, for a long time, one of the few cars left where manual windows were still standard might actually have been the base Corolla (I believe the latest base model of the Spark now has manual roll-ups, too).
Nevertheless, one of the key features that was included on every Japanese car from the very beginning, no matter how far down the model list, was an electric rear window defogger. For, literally, decades, the domestics made it a rather sleazy practice to charge extra for this option, even on higher-tier models, and it was something that just about every consumer desired on their car. But you got it as standard on all Japanese cars, as well as the aforementioned AM/FM radio and other niceties that cost extra on domestic cars of the time.
This is another US phenomenon which is totally lost on anyone growing up, or living in the EU in the 70s-80s. When I got to the UK in the late 80s, those were usually seen driven by an old age pensioner, generally starting to rust in all the customary spots. The interesting Civic years were still in the future, and back then, they were thought of as being infinitely dull. But they did make a good budget car for the impecunious… Until rust became terminal or (rarer) something mechanical went boom (spares were never cheap and donor cars could not be found at every scrap yard, being relatively rare).
No surprise really that the Accord did not take root in Europe since there were already good small car choices in the market from a variety of makers, including the European arms of GM and Ford. Unfortunately, most of these European small cars did not make it stateside, or didn’t have proper distribution even if available, so small car choices were limited to mostly inferior domestic products or the higher quality offerings from Japanese brands.
I think two things explain it:
1) Domestic inflation (under Johnson & Nixon), which made the US$ weak compared to the Pound & Mark, killed mainstream Anglo/German “captive imports” like Opel & Ford which were otherwise decent cars & had dealers;
2) As you say, other European makers failed on quality & support, except for VW which was well-entrenched by then.
Success for the Civic DID come later, with the Europeanized models of the 90s. Typically, when Honda went back with its technology in the 2000s and produced less driver-oriented cars, sales went down. Mazda, who long ago understood Europeans do not want a slightly breathed-on US or Japan-spec cars, and whose cars are thought of as nearer to the European ideal, has benefited. The Koreans seem to have realized this recently, too. Not so Honda.
But Honda has an 8 year warranty:)
Much the same for an Australian. Honda were, and have remained, a small Japanese company on our market, with products bought by those in the know who were willing to pony up about a third more than comparable (but yestertech) Japanese brands were asking. Mazda and Mitsubishi were bigger than Honda.
What strikes me most about this car is the interior. Aside from a few details it would look perfectly contemporary in a late 80’s car. Very few 70’s cars can claim that.
It is hard to understate the impact of this one car on the American automotive scene. I remember when the renter of one side of our duplex bought one of these – he ordered it in the summer of 1976 and didn’t get the car until 6+ months later – that’s how popular these cars were even when first offered (it replaced a VW Beetle so it was a step up in every way).
I changed the water pump for him sometime in the mid-1980s (I remember calling around to all of the parts houses for a replacement pump, and to my surprise, the Honda dealer had the OEM pump for half the price that the aftermarket parts houses wanted for one). Having not worked on foreign cars up to that point, I was dreading the knuckle-slicing task of scraping the gaskets off. Boy was I surprised to open up the box for the new pump and see the molded O-ring seal. That water pump job was the easiest one I had ever done and really opened my eyes to Japanese quality and to a superior design.
Final story: around 1994 a coworker had a 1987 Accord. He constantly raved about how great of a car that it was, and that he had only ever changed the oil and spark plugs in 177K miles. One day he came in late for work and explained that his car had died on the way in (I got my dad’s pickup during lunch and helped him tow it into the work parking lot). I asked him when he had last changed the timing belt, and the blank stare I got in return told me everything I needed to know.
The original 60K timing belt had finally given out after 177K miles and seven years of service!
The original Accord also did pretty well for Honda at home, which wasn’t necessarily the case with later generations. About three-fourths went to export markets, but since they sold a bunch more than expected, that wasn’t bad, particularly considering that it was competing in a very competitive segment where rivals had much strong JDM dealer networks.
The JDM cars weren’t necessarily quite as well-equipped as the exports (base cars had a four-speed and AM radio, for instance, and didn’t have radial tires), but they did have more generous equipment than some, which probably helped. (Low-end Toyota and Nissan models in the home market could be pretty spartan.)
Very well-written article. The first Accord could (almost) pass as a decade newer design. Inside and out, such a well-conceived, and outstanding car. The only significant detail that clearly dates the interior to pre-80s, is the non-use of dashboard pictograms/icons.
My parents lived in the boondocks, with no import dealers close by, when our immediate neighbour bought a new blue ’78 Accord. In spite of the closest Honda dealers either being in Kingston, Ontario (65km), or Ottawa (80km), I never saw it towed. As he appeared to get to work reliably for years. Winters were frigid back then, and you’d hear it stumble on cold mornings, as it drove by our house. But it served that owner, into the mid 80s.
I knew several of this generation whose engine gave out around 50k miles. I forget what went wrong with them.
Do we have Honda to blame for beginning the long, regrettable trend of carmakers offering only a few, very boring paint colors?
It didn’t influence GM too much. GM’s significant confusion about what they were up against continued unabated. The Accord was a class above the Civic- an upscale Civic. GM should have taken the Vega and created a larger, upscale version of it. The Vega’s design was inspired by the ’69 Fiat Coupe, but without the tall greenhouse. A larger, Fiat inspired design- with the taller side glass- would have been just the ticket. Giving this new car only to Chevrolet and Oldsmobile, they could have put a relentless focus on build quality. Made in Janesville only, by German farmers.
The 2022 Civic Hatchback is the spiritual descendant of the first Accord.
Same four-eyed front end, now with rectangular LED headlights
Same airy interior with a relatively low dash, a large and legible pod straight ahead (with maintenance minders and door-ajar warning lights), four horizontal vent registers and side window defroster vents.
Same crisp and smooth shifting manual transmission, now with 6 speeds.
Even the rear wiper has the same configuration.
The price of an Accord with 2-speed Hondamatic, A/C, tonneau cover and clock was $4,579 (not counting dealer installation of the A/C and dealer markups) in June 1976. Adjusted for inflation, that’s $23,564 in May 2022. The MSRP of a 158-hp 2-liter 2022 Civic Hatchback LX with all of the above equipment (plus a lot more) standard? $23,550.
By 1988 a radio (of any sort) was no longer standard on a Civic DX.
Somehow never a Honda car fan, (though they make killer lawn mowers) I heard of nothing but troubles about them in the last 70s. Mostly heads, cracking or warping. But giving credit where due, they made a car for their target market instead of expecting the market to like what they sold, such as the Europeans did. A huge segment of the population wasn’t looking for a sports sedan, they just wanted a comfy smaller sedan. They made a livable sized car, with A/T, that felt like a mini Buick. People liked that. That wasn’t a stellar era for reliability anyway, so it seems like many overlooked it. And after a while they got the reliability factor down, turned it into a semi premium product and have had trouble counting all the money they’ve made since then.
But I still don’t like them.
Along my commute is a colony of car repair workshops and compliance outfits for a couple of weeks one of those four door Accords has been sitting outside a repair workshop, a very very rare sight in this country those cars disolved rapidly but this one was very tidy, its gone no, whatever ailed it cured, and now back with its owner