[slickshift6]

Please, I don't want to turn this into a debate or argument, I just want opinions. I was bored at lunch at work so I went to a nearby Honda where I bought my 2019 in January. I test drove a 2017 Sport SE (leather, heated seats) with 6 speed manual with only 5K miles. They made a ridiculous (in a good way) offer on my 2019 and great deal on the cert 2017. My balance would drop by nearly $9K and warranty would be even longer given Honda's CPO terms. Downside is an obsolete model, no sensing, no Andro auto, etc. Biggest downside is power balance, or lack of. The 2.0T is way faster than the naturally aspirated 2.4L. What do you guys think? Would you entertain this idea?

 

[Hudouc]

I would not.

As I'm shopping for a bigger car, I realized that trying to trade in the Camry is just lost cause. I would loose too much money on the trade (I actually got a pretty decent deal on the Camry). From a personal experience, I would not trade a new car that's not even a year old.

$9K is a lot, but the lack of power and the lack of all the tech and safety feature is just not worth it.

Plus, your Accord is a 2nd year. Not much can go wrong.

 

[fazio767]

Realistically, you probably should stick with what you have. However, I personally would be tempted with that deal. I think that the 9th generation Accord was an overall better looking car, and by 2017, had all of the "kinks" worked out with the engineering. For that reason, the dealer would be successful in tempting me.

 

[Pool Shark]

Seems tempting, but I'm curious why the 2017 is on the lot with only 5k miles on it as a CPO? Did the previous owner trade it for a larger vehicle (Pilot, Odyssey) or for a 2018/2019 Accord? Plus, you're not going to know how was it driven by the previous owner? With your current ride, you bought it new and so you know the full history.

 

[Monty]

I owned a 2016 Sport 6MT a couple of years ago and I really, really enjoyed that car. I ended up trading it in for a 2017 Ridgeline because I had always wanted a truck and was able to get a good deal on the Ridgeline. I did end up trading in the Ridgeline for my current 2.0T Sport AT.

Would I switch back to the 2016 Sport 6MT? To be honest, I have thought about it myself a couple of times. I love the power of the 2.0t and really enjoy the overall handling of the car. But I miss having that 6 speed manual and my 2016 didn't have the small issues that I have with my 2.0t (head unit restarting, jerkiness in the transmission, etc). In your case you still have the manual, but yes that $9k does look really good. I'd still end up keeping the 2.0t, however.

 

[fzr100098]

If you're going to trade down for an older car to save money why not get the V6? Should hold its value a bit better and more fun to drive. If reliability is #1 the 2.4 is ok

 

[DougNuts]

Would you entertain this idea?

No.

 

[Spied4US]

Yes, based on your post. You said you'd be getting a "great deal" on a 2016 Accord that's essentially new; you were given a "ridiculous[ly good] offer" on your 2019, and the net result is you'd end up financing $9k less.

This isn't even a close call unless you hate money.

 

[RickBlaine]

Seems tempting, but I'm curious why the 2017 is on the lot with only 5k miles on it as a CPO? Did the previous owner trade it for a larger vehicle (Pilot, Odyssey) or for a 2018/2019 Accord? Plus, you're not going to know how was it driven by the previous owner? With your current ride, you bought it new and so you know the full history.

Some trade every few months (see @zroger73 post) because they can and it is no big financial deal. Some because the car has lots of serious issues and people dump it (see various threads from other members), and some (a friend of mine) is a financial mess and gets her new cars repossessed every 8-14 months as her debt gets rolled into an even larger loan amount for the next Chevy Equinox or Ford Escape-type vehicle.

This isn't even a close call unless you hate money.

From the movie, Idiocracy....

The OP does not have a location listed under his username, so naturally I assume he is in Bangladesh (I am on the "B" countries now). As a Bangladeshi, he no doubt has to deal with roads that are not in ideal condition. Can he really use all the power of the 2.0T? All kidding aside, he did have a thread about his car getting damaged and then repaired. With new car owners- especially if it is a first car accident, there can be "love lost"- even though the car is repaired well and drives like new. I have seen this with friends and family- if the car is new and damaged- even if it is back to new, their eyes stray to look at other cars....

 

[fzr100098]

This isn't even a close call unless you hate money.

?

A 2017 is still going to deprecate. All Accords are common as dirt and this isn't some kind of golden deal.

Far less fun to drive and the the user interface is much worse so I would need to be financially strapped to consider it

 

[outersquare]

There are sales tax implications depending on state also. Some states give a sales tax reduction/credit for trade in (Washington state), others tax the full amount of the sale regardless of trade (California). Obviously it is twice as disadvantageous to pay sales tax again, on top of realized depreciation.

 

[slickshift6]

Seems tempting, but I'm curious why the 2017 is on the lot with only 5k miles on it as a CPO? Did the previous owner trade it for a larger vehicle (Pilot, Odyssey) or for a 2018/2019 Accord? Plus, you're not going to know how was it driven by the previous owner? With your current ride, you bought it new and so you know the full history.

Some trade every few months (see @zroger73 post) because they can and it is no big financial deal. Some because the car has lots of serious issues and people dump it (see various threads from other members), and some (a friend of mine) is a financial mess and gets her new cars repossessed every 8-14 months as her debt gets rolled into an even larger loan amount for the next Chevy Equinox or Ford Escape-type vehicle.

This isn't even a close call unless you hate money.

From the movie, Idiocracy....

The OP does not have a location listed under his username, so naturally I assume he is in Bangladesh (I am on the "B" countries now). As a Bangladeshi, he no doubt has to deal with roads that are not in ideal condition. Can he really use all the power of the 2.0T? All kidding aside, he did have a thread about his car getting damaged and then repaired. With new car owners- especially if it is a first car accident, there can be "love lost"- even though the car is repaired well and drives like new. I have seen this with friends and family- if the car is new and damaged- even if it is back to new, their eyes stray to look at other cars....

Not going to lie, there is a smidge of love lost due to the accident. I'm working through it (mostly through spirited driving) but it's undoubtedly there. I've decided and actually begun paying it down 15% more than minimum payment so I can get to the breaking even point in next two years (no negative or positive equity). I figure I'll be at that point by the time mid model cycle refresh rolls in some 20 months from now as 2021 models. I'll probably end up going for a still night blue pearl, also 2.0T 6MT. That's if I don't take the 2017 deal which after I slept on it I'm leaving towards a hard no.

 

[grumpypolecat]

Not a chance. If you're in a financial bind I could see why you might consider it. For me, no way I would downgrade to an inferior model of the same car to save a little money.

 

[fearnight]

No way. I'd only entertain the idea if it were the V6.

 

[BenzAccord]

I’m in no way telling you that this is what you should do, but if it was me, I’d probably put the question here as you did. I also think I’d keep the 2.0. My prior accord was an LX-SE 2007. The 9th gen Sport is also loosely based on the LX trim as my SE was. I don’t think I could go back to the LX level. While I certainly appreciate the extras that my EX-L trim gives me, I could live with the EX level trim (which is what the 2.0 Sport is based off of). If I was presented with similar deal on an even rarer 9th gen EX manual, it would be a much harder decision.

 

[slickshift6]

I’m in no way telling you that this is what you should do, but if it was me, I’d probably put the question here as you did. I also think I’d keep the 2.0. My prior accord was an LX-SE 2007. The 9th gen Sport is also loosely based on the LX trim as my SE was. I don’t think I could go back to the LX level. While I certainly appreciate the extras that my EX-L trim gives me, I could live with the EX level trim (which is what the 2.0 Sport is based off of). If I was presented with similar deal on an even rarer 9th gen EX manual, it would be a much harder decision.

I actually had a chance to pick up a 2016 EX 6MT and walked away because I found it unacceptable for steering wheel to be the same plastic one from LX and seats were just as cheap. It makes zero sense for Sport which is wedged between LX and EX to have better interior. It was quote a list: plastic vs leather steering wheel, cloth vs leatherette seats, metal/leather vs plastic shift knob, metal vs rubber pedals, carbon vs plastic trim (yes carbon is fake but it looks great), etc. If you sit in the Sport and EX; the Sport is such a nicer place to be. Same thing continued into 10th Gen; Sport (even the 1.5T) has a much nicer interior than EX.

 

[BenzAccord]

I actually had a chance to pick up a 2016 EX 6MT and walked away because I found it unacceptable for steering wheel to be the same plastic one from LX and seats were just as cheap. It makes zero sense for Sport which is wedged between LX and EX to have better interior. It was quote a list: plastic vs leather steering wheel, cloth vs leatherette seats, metal/leather vs plastic shift knob, metal vs rubber pedals, carbon vs plastic trim (yes carbon is fake but it looks great), etc. If you sit in the Sport and EX; the Sport is such a nicer place to be. Same thing continued into 10th Gen; Sport (even the 1.5T) has a much nicer interior than EX.

Probably most folks will agree with you. I actually agree on some of those points especially the leather wheel and shift knob. Otherwise, I’m not for the sport interior, I prefer cloth when the interior is a dark color. I use my sunroof a lot too.

 

[slickshift6]

Probably most folks will agree with you. I actually agree on some of those points especially the leather wheel and shift knob. Otherwise, I’m not for the sport interior, I prefer cloth when the interior is a dark color. I use my sunroof a lot too.

EX does have some nice features, better stereo integration, android auto/carplay, sunroof, etc. But I think Sport interior looks a lot better, more upscale. Exterior also; EX has single exhaust, smaller wheels, no spoiler, no side skirts, etc.

I guess it all comes down to preference and personal taste. That's what's so great about different trims, something for everyone.

 

[sandevino]

Interesting question and $9k is not a small amount.

You have to consider what happens 2 - 3 years from now. With the 2019, you’d have a car worth substantially more than the 2017. If you decide to trade, you’ll be in a better situation with the 2019 and potentially be chasing zero with the 2017.

 

[slickshift6]

Interesting question and $9k is not a small amount.

You have to consider what happens 2 - 3 years from now. With the 2019, you’d have a car worth substantially more than the 2017. If you decide to trade, you’ll be in a better situation with the 2019 and potentially be chasing zero with the 2017.

You're absolutely correct. I'm keeping mine until refresh comes out sometime in 2021. I'll decide if its worth upgrading at the time. My 2019 will be a lot better trade than the 2017 one on the lot. I want to see some more color options for 6MTs. Something like ruby red flare that Toyota puts on the Camry. Love it, it's like a chameleon, so many different colours depending on time of day, sky, etc.