I'm looking at buying a used 2006 Honda Accord Hybrid because that's the first year it has Electronic Stability Control, and they stopped making this model with a hybrid engine in 2007.

My question: was there any reason they stopped making hybrids in this line that I should know about? At the Wikipedia's Accord site it says that Honda's stated reason was that "hybrids work better in smaller cars", or something to that effect. I'm also concerned about the extent to which it will be harder to get good service on a discontinued model. (The reason I'm not looking at a smaller Honda is because I'm 6'4", so I need the extra head and legroom.)

Thanks for any insights anyone can give me; I'm interested in this vehicle because it has such good reliability ratings according to Consumer Reports' Used Car Guide.

I have been driving a 2006 Accord Hybrid since Oct 2006. AFAIK, it never sold well. For one thing it was price quite high and the fuel economy numbers were not astronomical like Prius and Civic hybrid. A lot of people argued they could get that kind of fuel economy from I4 version of Accord any way and save their money. These factors may have contributed to slow sales and Honda finally killed it.

I am very satisfied with this car. I get to drive a car with V6 engine for the fuel economy of I4. I get all the extras that V6 came with (VSA was the most important one for me). I was quite apprehensive about buying a car with automatic transmission having always bought manual transmission only, but I was pleasantly surprised by how well this car shifts. I still wouldn't give up manual transmission :) but auto in HAH is not a bad compromise at all. I consider it to be a very good car.

I'm looking at buying a used 2006 Honda Accord Hybrid because that's the first year it has Electronic Stability Control, and they stopped making this model with a hybrid engine in 2007.

My question: was there any reason they stopped making hybrids in this line that I should know about? At the Wikipedia's Accord site it says that Honda's stated reason was that "hybrids work better in smaller cars", or something to that effect. I'm also concerned about the extent to which it will be harder to get good service on a discontinued model. (The reason I'm not looking at a smaller Honda is because I'm 6'4", so I need the extra head and legroom.)

Thanks for any insights anyone can give me; I'm interested in this vehicle because it has such good reliability ratings according to Consumer Reports' Used Car Guide.

For a regular Gen 7, service is not a problem because they sold so well. Finding Accord Hybrid-specific parts (special low weight hood, etc. if you, say, hit a deer) down the road may be hard because the sales volumes were so low, though. I personally would buy a 2006 Accord Hybrid if it had low miles and the price was right, mainly for technology geek/mad acceleration purposes. My practical side, though, would say no - I am happy with my 2003 Accord V6 that gets relatively good mileage (consistent 27-28, mainly highway - have gotten as high as 31 with summer blend fuel). The question is, why do you want the hybrid?

I think that *mild* hybrids (read Honda IMA) don't work well in larger cars. I think Toyota's HSD full-hybrid Camry is a better hit for the overall market (from what I've read, 4-cyl with real world mileage of 35-40 with good acceleration, and handling not much crappier than a regular Camry).

Don't forget that All 2006+ V6's have VSA, and all 2003+ V6's have traction control.

----I have been driving a 2006 Accord Hybrid since Oct 2006. AFAIK, it never sold well. For one thing it was price quite high and the fuel economy numbers were not astronomical like Prius and Civic hybrid. A lot of people argued they could get that kind of fuel economy from I4 version of Accord any way and save their money. These factors may have contributed to slow sales and Honda finally killed it.

I am very satisfied with this car. I get to drive a car with V6 engine for the fuel economy of I4. I get all the extras that V6 came with (VSA was the most important one for me). I was quite apprehensive about buying a car with automatic transmission having always bought manual transmission only, but I was pleasantly surprised by how well this car shifts. I still wouldn't give up manual transmission but auto in HAH is not a bad compromise at all. I consider it to be a very good car.
------------

Thanks for your response, it makes sense and assures me that the reason they cancelled it was not because the car turned out to have a lot of mechanical problems once it was put into production.

I guess it's partially a question of where you live, since not living in a city where hybrids get their highest mileage might reduce to the difference to that of a non-hybrid V4 as you stated.

For a regular Gen 7, service is not a problem because they sold so well. Finding Accord Hybrid-specific parts (special low weight hood, etc. if you, say, hit a deer) down the road may be hard because the sales volumes were so low, though. I personally would buy a 2006 Accord Hybrid if it had low miles and the price was right, mainly for technology geek/mad acceleration purposes. My practical side, though, would say no - I am happy with my 2003 Accord V6 that gets relatively good mileage (consistent 27-28, mainly highway - have gotten as high as 31 with summer blend fuel). The question is, why do you want the hybrid?

I think that *mild* hybrids (read Honda IMA) don't work well in larger cars. I think Toyota's HSD full-hybrid Camry is a better hit for the overall market (from what I've read, 4-cyl with real world mileage of 35-40 with good acceleration, and handling not much crappier than a regular Camry).

Don't forget that All 2006+ V6's have VSA, and all 2003+ V6's have traction control.

I want it for better (good) mileage, in a car that has enough space for me and has very good reliability ratings. (I'm living in the burbs but may be moving to a denser area shortly.)

I'm confused about VSA vs. traction control, though--I thought they were the same thing--is the former much better than the latter?

Btw what does IMA stand for?

IMA-Integrated Motor Asist. The Honda system uses and engine plus an integrated electric motor to make total horsepower. Only in a few instances will the electric motor entirely power the car. The Toyota system is a little more sophisticated in that the electric motor can be the sole power provider to the car. Each system has its advantages....Honda's is on the highway and Toyota's really shines in the city.

VSA: Vehicle Stability Asist. This system includes traction control. Traction control helps keep the front wheels from spinning (i.e. reduced burnouts in the rain and such), while stability control helps with lateral stability of the car. Traction control will help with fore/aft stability and controllability while stability control will monitor and help fix foreward, backward, and side-to-side controlability.

Are you more confused now or less? :D

IMA-Integrated Motor Asist. The Honda system uses and engine plus an integrated electric motor to make total horsepower. Only in a few instances will the electric motor entirely power the car. The Toyota system is a little more sophisticated in that the electric motor can be the sole power provider to the car. Each system has its advantages....Honda's is on the highway and Toyota's really shines in the city.

VSA: Vehicle Stability Asist. This system includes traction control. Traction control helps keep the front wheels from spinning (i.e. reduced burnouts in the rain and such), while stability control helps with lateral stability of the car. Traction control will help with fore/aft stability and controllability while stability control will monitor and help fix foreward, backward, and side-to-side controlability.

Are you more confused now or less? :D

Less—I thought IMA was an Internet thing like IMO.

Also I didn't know there was a difference between traction and stability control.

But of course it seems like having both is better—unless you were trying to imply that stability control doesn't really help that much in the real world.

Also I didn't realize there were some situations in which a certain hybrid gets better results on highways than in cities—or did you just mean it (the Honda IMA) doesn't do as well in cities as a "full" hybrid?

You got it in the last line. Honda's system relies more on the engine to produce the mechanical power necessary to power the vehicle. Therefore...you will burn more fuel in the city since it isn't operating under electrical power only. Toyota's system in the Prius can do aproximatly 40 MPH without any need for an engine to run. That is where the real benifits happen.


On the otherhand....Honda's engineering seems to shine on the highway where (I'm talking Civic Mileage here since my mom has an 07 Civic II Hybrid) the IMA system assists the engine. You degrade milege on the highway with little throttle imputs. These imputs come from small hills, passing, and overal non-steady driving. The IMA system provides the power needed to overcome those obsticals while keeping you from adding fuel to the engine.

The Accord Hybrid goes one more by having Variable Cylinder Management (VCM) where the engine will drop 3 cyclinders on the highway. Now you have IMA and 3 cylinders driving you down the road. Pretty smart way of having power and mileage out of the same platform.

Which is better...that is up to you and your driving style. I don't like the Prius, but the Camry/Highlander drives great. I love the Civic hybrid over the Prius.

As for stability control...I along with the government agree that stability control is better than just traction control. In saying that...it is only better if you can turn it off (which Honda provides us as consumers).

Hope this helps some.

You got it in the last line. Honda's system relies more on the engine to produce the mechanical power necessary to power the vehicle. Therefore...you will burn more fuel in the city since it isn't operating under electrical power only. Toyota's system in the Prius can do aproximatly 40 MPH without any need for an engine to run. That is where the real benifits happen.


On the otherhand....Honda's engineering seems to shine on the highway where (I'm talking Civic Mileage here since my mom has an 07 Civic II Hybrid) the IMA system assists the engine. You degrade milege on the highway with little throttle imputs. These imputs come from small hills, passing, and overal non-steady driving. The IMA system provides the power needed to overcome those obsticals while keeping you from adding fuel to the engine.

The Accord Hybrid goes one more by having Variable Cylinder Management (VCM) where the engine will drop 3 cyclinders on the highway. Now you have IMA and 3 cylinders driving you down the road. Pretty smart way of having power and mileage out of the same platform.

Which is better...that is up to you and your driving style. I don't like the Prius, but the Camry/Highlander drives great. I love the Civic hybrid over the Prius.

As for stability control...I along with the government agree that stability control is better than just traction control. In saying that...it is only better if you can turn it off (which Honda provides us as consumers).

Hope this helps some.

Yes it definitely does. I haven't really looked at the Prius and/or Civic because they both look like small(er) cars, which defeats my purpose of finding something that's big enough for me (same with the Camry, which from the Toyota website looks smallish).

One more question: why would you want to turn off stability control if it's a valuable feature?

They Hybrid, just like the V-6 six speed Accord, was stopped due to lack of sales......simple as that.

Don't discount the Prius due to looks from the exterior. My attorney is 6'6" and is very comfortable in his Prius. I was amazed at the interior room.

They Hybrid, just like the V-6 six speed Accord, was stopped due to lack of sales......simple as that.

Don't discount the Prius due to looks from the exterior. My attorney is 6'6" and is very comfortable in his Prius. I was amazed at the interior room.

According to Toyota's website the head and legroom are both about 1/2" less than the Accord—I would have thought it would have been much more.

i just traded my 08 I-4 for a 2007 honda accord hybrid for 21500 with 9000 miles. I average 27 in the city and 38.8 on the highway. I love that I have power and torque when I need it and I get MPG of a I-4. I'm very happy with my purchase. hope this helps

mike

i just traded my 08 I-4 for a 2007 honda accord hybrid for 21500 with 9000 miles. I average 27 in the city and 38.8 on the highway. I love that I have power and torque when I need it and I get MPG of a I-4. I'm very happy with my purchase. hope this helps

mike

Sounds like a pretty good trade to me :) Your numbers are fairly close to mine. I get about 26 in city (lower in winter of course) and 37-40 on the highway. What were you seeing on your 2008 I4 Accord?

2008 i4 accord manual here...gets 32 mpg hwy when you keep to the speed limit (around 65-70), i suppose you can get a little more out of it going 55-60

Some random thoughts

Consumer reports is good for one thing - their MPG #'s (these are from memory so may not be exactly correct)

G7 V6 AT 23 MPG
G7 I4 AT 24 MPG
G7 V6Hyb AT 25 MPG

I wouldn't be surprised if one day the V6 Hybrid becomes a collectors item. If you remember the 80's when engine sizes went down to get better MPG #'s - all of the muscle cars from the late 60's became collectors items. If Gas prices continue - the engine sizes will go down again, MPG will go up, Acceleration times will be slower.

In 10 years, will the V6 Hybrid Accord be what the 60's Muscle cars were in the 80's?

2008 i4 accord manual here...gets 32 mpg hwy when you keep to the speed limit (around 65-70), i suppose you can get a little more out of it going 55-60

I get 37-40 mpg on the highway from my hybrid doing 75-80 mph :) I get 31-32 from my non-hybrid '06 V6 Accord 6MT (again doing 75-80 mph). I recently was on a 3000 mile road trip in my non-hybrid V6 Accord and got overall 31 mpg which included lots of highway driving but also city miles, stop and go traffic at times, and slower drives with stops through national parks.