Printable View
hey guys, just wondering for you euro owners, how is it like as a family car?
i currently have an integra DC5 and my parents are loooking at buying a new family car. I suggested the euro to keep in line with the honda tradition..
just want to know what u guys tihnk/
thanks in advance
I don't use mine for a family car (yet) but it was one of the main reasons I bought it. I've definately had 4 of my mates in the car, and there was no complaints. So if they want a bit of style and not a boring commodore yeah, id totally suggest it as a 4 door, sports car ;)
If you want a family car, I think Euro is very nice. If you want a sports Sedan, go for Liberty GT or MP6.
The Euro is good as a family car for 2 adults and 2 kids/young teens. There is not much legroom at the rear. If you fit 5 people, the person in the middle rear will be a bit uncomfortable as the backrest juts out a bit in the middle. The Liberty should be even worse, since the rear seats are bucket type and the middle is extremely uncomfortable.
Euro suppose to be a family car anywayz. I reckon that will be mine if i had a family :)
Depends on who the rear passengers are going to be. If they are small kids or young teens, then it will be fine, however if your parents plan to carry other adults frequently or the kids are grown up, the Euro will be abit of a squeeze, especially on long trips. A better choice would therefore be the Accord V6. Lots of room in the back and it's still a Honda to keep in the tradition. And it's got heaps more powerrrrrr!
Good family car especially for the price. It shits on anything else for the price.
Subi GT and MPS (if it is even out yet) are atleast 10K more and you get more power but much crappier interior build quality as well as other subaru quality issues. I don't know about the MPS but its a mazda and that is scary enough.
With petrol at 1.30 a litre and set to go up, a 4 cylinder is a smart choice.
I disagree with the people that say the rear of the euro is not comfitable in the rear. I have had several adults in the back and they all said they think the car has plenty of leg room.
I tried sitting behind myself (you know), and there is just 1cm of space between my knee and the rear of the seat. The rear seats themselves are good. Just the lack of space....
Obviously rear leg room is proportional to how far back the front seats are.
I think rear accord rear legroom is fine.
I think most back seats get a little 'intimate' ;) with 3 adults unless we are talking a LWB car.
Can you elaborate on the crappy Subaru quality please? Why are you scared of a Mazda?Quote:
Originally Posted by euro1978
No problem
I owned an MY02 Sti.
The roof lining, carpets, dash, etc were all terrible compared with other jap cars. The liberties run a better spec interior but it is still no where near the accord in terms of it's finish. I had other quality issues with my subaru and whinged plenty at the time. That was my experience and if you are happy with your subaru then good for you.
Mazda has had quality issues for a long long time and it has survived in Australia by the skin of its teeth as a consequence. Before the 3 and 6 were released, with the exception of the MX5 which has always had a strong following, mazda has failed to find success with any of its models except for its low end range. The 626 and 929 were both taken out back and put out of their misery and just because mazda has clawed its way back with a novel suicide door rotory rx 8 and a mazda 6, I for one wouldnt hop on the bandwagon just yet and I wouldnt pay the best part of 60k for one(MPS)
Remember the Impreza is based on a 20k econo car. Oh yeah sure it's 60k but it's intention isn't exactly luxo.. however I found the MY01 onwards WRXs to be a huge leap ahead in quality and pretty decent and up to the standard.. maybe you just copped a Friday car ;)
Haven't had such issues or know of any from other owners of the Liberty. Other than the odd rattle or squeek which I've read Euro owners here have experience so I'd say they are on par
I've not had quality problems with a Subaru - MY03 WRX seemed to be fairly well made. Not everyone's experience from the WRX forums but I was lucky. The interior design itself was a little dated but otherwise I was happy with quality having always had at least 1 Honda in the garage for 30 years as a good benchmark. Narrower than a Euro.
My wife's Mazda 3 is just too small for a family car. Interior hard plastics mark easily. Looks more upmarket over a Jazz which is why we got it.
The ivory coloured Accord Euro seems a a wrong choice for young kids. I currently have the ivory leather interior and it's high quality materials but shows marks and stains. My workmate's cloth interior Euro is also ivory and doesn't look good for kids either.
I regularly carry tall teenages in the back of the Euro and I'm aware it doesn't have a lot of room. Mazda6 is a bit roomier if you want an equivalent priced car.
We had all sorts of Accords as our family car from the baby capsule to the teenager. Up until then it's more than enough although I sometimes miss the rear hatch of other cars.
Just a few thoughts.
Want a Euro? Get a dark interior for a family and tinted windows to keep it cooler. The Mazda6 isn't a bad car either. I'd not want a 2.5 liberty, but the 3.0r or b is just too expensive.
How tall are you aaronng? I sat in the back once and my knees hit the rear of the front seat but i was more annoyed by the lack of head room. I think the Euro is ok as a family car but it's not really designed to accomodate very tall people. When i think of a cramped car i automatically think of a Mazda 3 for some reason. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
WRX is a fun car to drive but the plastics are very cheap compared to the Euro. I took the 3.0R for a test drive a while ago and it's excellent - but it's way too expensive imo. In terms of power, the Euro has more than enough unless you demand something very fast.
I'm 185cm tall. The thing about the Euro is, if you get into a Toyota Corolla hatch, there is the same amount of legroom! The space inside is narrower than the Euro, and there is nada bootspace, but I was surprised when shopping for my car that the Corolla had the same rear legroom length when I adjusted the driver's seat to my liking. And the Accord had heaps of legroom, plus width. But I wanted the handling of the Euro. Hehe. Too bad for those sitting behind me.Quote:
Originally Posted by sodaz
I agree, the rear headroom is limited because of nice slope of the rear windscreen. But my head/hair doesn't hit the roof, so it is fine for me.
Sorry dude but I'd have to disagree with you on Subaru build quality, my folks have a 'o4 Liberty GT Premium (has leather interior, lesser models may differ in quality) owned since Christmas day '03. The reviews these cars have been given regarding the interior have been excellent, and importantly a big improvement over the MY02 Impreza in all areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by euro1978
I don't think I'm biased as we have 2 Hondas in the family too, but personally prefer Liberty interior over Euro but it's a close call. Good luck jOnbubz! :)
I am going to contradict myself here and I hope I get flamed for it BUT I bought the euro just before subaru brought out the new lib and more importantly the RB model.
If the RB would have been available I would have bought it over the euro. I am ready for it so :wave: flame me bitches :wave: .
(I still think the euro is much better value though)
O mY gOd!!
I say go for the euro, honda build quality luxury, there is leg room definetly if you adjust your front seats properly. The boot is big and nice, if you think euro isnt big enough try accord V6 just needs a suspension upgrade to start handling like a euro, its big and roomy. Subaru looks to conservative for my taste, the commodores and falcon i donot recomend at all. Mazda 6, stay away from it!
Falcons are ok. Not too bad I think. Just that the interior styling is not like the jap style that I'm used to. What's bad about the Mazda6 (other than the engine)? I think it is a good car.Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Genesis
The Euro boot is narrow inside, because the multilink rear eats into the side space. But there is no way to get near to the Euro's handling by upgrading the suspension of the V6. It's just heaviers both overall and at the front. And it's auto only. I agree that the Accord, both I4 and V6 are good as family cars. If I had 3 kids, I would get the Accord instead, but for now, it is me, me and me! Oh and plus my gf. :D
I don't think Subie has any quality issues, my friend has a Liberty GT and just the sound system and AWD is enough to justify to pay the extras if you can afford it. However, I think the non-turbo liberty, Euro and M6 are all good family cars. The point I was making before was if you want a 'performance' Sedan, you will need to pay a little more to get the Lib GT, just go for a test drive and you know what I mean by performance. Or pay alot more for a BMW 330/M3 or Audi S4/RS4/RS6.
1. M3 and RS4 are both not available in sedan in Australia at this juncture.
Just remember not everyone wants turbo. Its an extra $1000 bucks a year on insurance alone plus all the other associated costs.
I am the first to say that the RB is a great car. The fact is its the best part of $15,000 more than a euro luxury. I would have bought it if it had been available at the time but it wasnt and there was nothing that could compare to the euro in my opinion.
4wd and a sound system is not worth the extra money in a lot of people's opinion and I dont think affordability is the deciding factor for many.
Hate to disappoint but no flame from me, haha! I definitely agree the Euro is excellent value for money. Actually Dad test drove one before buying the GT but just wanted a more serious performance sedan ( please don't take that the wrong way), RB quite nice too.:)
I say get a falcon XR6T...that way you get a nice roomy family sized car with real performance.
Thats what Im intending to do (leased car)...:D
XR6T is nice.. get the blue one, so everyone will slow down next to you thinking you are a cop:)
The only bad thing about the XR6T's are the heavy duty clutch and clunky gearbox...really making me consider an auto version instead!! guess this is quite normal for powerful cars, think i've just been used to the smooth gearboxes and light clutches of honda cars..:P
Yeah it's weird isn't it. I also noticed that the Euro had similar rear legroom to the Corolla when i was in my friend's car. I think since the Euro is designed in Japan it's also designed to accomodate slightly shorter people. I test drove the accord v6 when i was shopping for a car too and it does indeed have a lot more legroom and slightly more power. The Camry has a crazy amount of leg room but too bad it's not good for anything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
Considering how much better the Euro handles and looks, i knew instantly which car was the right choice. I'm 180cm myself but i have a longer spine proportionally so that might explain why i'm hitting my head in the rear. At the end of the day it doesn't really matter cause i know very well that i'll never be sitting in the back. ; )
There is one other bad thing about an XR6.
Its a taxi with a turbocharger and it is about as refined as most taxi drivers.
Resale on anything ford is discusting as well.
If you still wanna buy one I was told the new 6 speed is much nicer than the stick through cement 5 speed box.
Is this box available in the turbo or only the GT?
The XR6T is a good car imo but i don't really like the interior. Everything looks too much like a Taxi with squarey edges. But the straight line performance of these cars are excellent. They have very good legroom too.Quote:
Originally Posted by blkeuro
Agree with you on all counts. But its still not enough to stop me from buying it :DQuote:
Originally Posted by euro1978
In terms of resale, doesn't affect me since its a company leased car..
Also it was a mates MKII with the new 6 speed box that I test drove..
Haha, I think my legs are proportionally longer than my spine (not that I look like Urkel), but I hit the seat and not the roof. Oh well... Good thing I'm the driver :DQuote:
Originally Posted by sodaz
I am a fairly tall guy (5' 6.5") and only my youngest son (4 yo) can seat behind me. Euro is ok for family on short trips but would not recommend it for long trips. Better bet may be to go for a Accord V6.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-onedc2
the GT is a very fast in a straight line but in the handling department it aint too sharp. Aarong the mazda 6 is all about show, the cabin carpet is aweful, the abs brakes are aweful. The auto is aweful. The manual needs an extra gear o wait so does the auto .. :P
"Slightly"? More like ALOT more power. It's chalk and cheese. I have driven both and the V6 Accord is substantially quicker than a 2.4 Euro. And alot torquier too.Quote:
Originally Posted by sodaz
Are you talking 6mt or auto - around corners or in a straight line?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpine
"Substantially" quicker is a big call - the V6 Accord is no Ferrari.
Throw in some real world driving (eg inc corners) and even the slower auto Euro will not be disgraced by the V6 Accord.
I think it's a good family car. But I don't envy the person who has to sit behind me while I'm driving. Whilst there is enough leg room for kids, adults might find it slightly on the small side.
42k for a Euro L compared to 55k for a GT is a big difference. Wouldn't be happy about shelling out for petrol too especially with prices so inflated. And if they are quoting correct figures, then I would be happy with 9.1L per 100 the Euro is getting. :)
That's close to my average fuel consumption so far in the Eastern Suburbs. 9.2L/100km for the 6speed manual over 9 months.Quote:
Originally Posted by nexace
When i test drove it, i never got the impression that the Accord V6 will blast the Euro away in terms of performance. It is faster but not by much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpine
GT is overpriced.Quote:
Originally Posted by nexace
For that price, they should have more powerful engine and more differentiation from cheaper Liberty models.
My average fuel consumption has been around 8.5L/100km although it jumped to 9.5 in my last tank of fuel because I was redlining it everywhere.
EH?Quote:
Originally Posted by coladuna
more powerful engine 190kw vs 121kw for the STD. I think it IS more powerful. I agree on the exterior looks abit 2.5i'ish though. It even gets the same 17inch wheels same front bar etc etc.. only the scoop lets you know there's a EJ20T lurking under :eek: as opposed to the RB which runs 18s a different front bar and subtle chromings..
However on the inside it's a different story to the 2.5i. the GT gets full leather + electrics, different middle console not to mention the brilliant McIntosh system..
I don't think GT is overpriced.
I just think Euro is better value and priced more aggresively.
I do agree that the GT should have different wheels and maybe a subtle bodykit (VERY SUBTLE like a front lip or deeper skirts) just to differentiate it from the lower models.
GT is definitely not overpriced, it simply should not be compared to Euro for anything but interior appointments and comfort. It's made to compete with BMW 3 series and alike and so represents superb value for money, sit in an E46 (328 or 330) 3 series and you'll notice how similar they are, not a bad interior to imitate either if you ask me.
Styling is designed to remain understated and classy.
As for sub-standard handling, I think you really need to drive one, or simply learn how to adjust driving styles for different vehicles, FF, FR & AWD all have their quirks, just drive around them. If you educate yourself with the wealth of info available you would know how capable, comfortable and stable the GT is, and trust me I've spent many hours as a passenger and some time as driver and always emerge impressed.
The funny thing is that in the US, the TSX is compared to the 325i, as both of them are about the same price. BMWs here down under are much more expensive when compared to the US.
Interesting how it is in other markets eh. Just wondering "aaronng" what you think of the power of the Euro, do you find it adequate or lacking? I'd imagine it would have a very smooth power delivery though like most Hondas.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
my 2c.....power in my euro seems to be more than adequate.....it seems if you dont rev past 4000 it feels like any other large 4cyl but if you give it a good rev even to just 5000-5500 you really feel the power.......in my opinion the best is a cold night like tonight as i just returned from a golf driving range and i gave it some on the way home and with the cool air it was fantastic..heaps of grunt.....
Haha, this is an interesting question. I drive the 6mt and it can be smooth and linear, yet once you floor the throttle, you still get the feeling that the engine pulls harder as the revs increase without the feeling of the engine running out of puff! Most other cars that are tuned to be linear just either have too much resistance to high revs, or have cams that just are not optimised for the upper range. I remember in another thread a while ago I posted sort of a description about the Euro. I'll fish it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-onedc2
Ahhh... so many posts to go through, but here it is:
I like the Euro's engine because it's flexible. If I'm in 2nd, I can accelerate nicely. If I want to give it a big of a fang, just have to make sure I'm above 3500rpm and it'll be heaps enough to lose your license in today's roads. And on the freeway, 3rd gear 5000-7000rpm is lovely! All this and it still returns a fuel economy of around 9L/100km if you drive without the intention of losing your licence. Bloody good for an engine with a 99mm stroke and no racing internals! What other car gives you something like this at such a good price point and still keeps the luxuries and comforts?Quote:
Aww... Victoria's nice.. snow's only a short drive away. I have to drive 5 hours to reach Snowy Mountains in NSW.
I noticed something about the Euro's engine.
Idle - 2100 rpm: Just an adequate amount of torque. Good for sedated driving (no overtaking for you) and low fuel consumption. Can get 9L/100km in 100% city driving, 6 - 7L/100km in highway.
2100 - 3500 rpm: A bit more spirited. On par with cars of other makes such as Camrys, V6 Commo and the odd pulsar being fanged.
3500 - 5000 rpm: The engine wakes up, throttle response is quick and only a very very very slight want of more torque if going up steep hills. Enough to scare wannabes away from Euros.
5000 - 7000 rpm: Beauuuuutiful... Scares V6 Camrys and V6 Commos. Shouldn't use this too much as the engine is after all a huge 2.4L inline-4. But when you do, the smile comes on your face.
I live in the 2100 - 3500 rpm zone. But once in a while I go to the 3500 - 5000 rpm for a smile in the twisties. I still can't make full use of 5000 - 7000 rpm in the twisties, but that is more suitable for the track.
Edit: I noticed that the experiences of 5AT drivers are somewhat different, with the car being sluggish. I think the torque convertor just saps away the power. This car NEEDS the 6MT.
Some good descriptions there and kind of what I thought it would be, it's great to have power that doesn't taper off towards redline, which gives top points in my book, much like most early 90's onwards Honda engines. Thanks.:)
For me personnally, I think 42K for a Euro is excellent value. But if I wanted a car with a more power, I would have gone for the GT. In which case, the car would have to be MT as well. Not sure what the figures are like for the Euro, but GT figures for 0-100 are something like 5.7 for MT and 6.8 for AT. Big difference...
I'm stuck with AT regardless (wife factor) so I don't think it's worthwhile getting a GT. And besides, we both want to stick with Honda! :D
you said it.....considering the euro starts at $33500 how can you go wrong...smooth and refined with heaps of power and safety features and luxury not to mention honda resale values......Quote:
Originally Posted by nexace
imo...i looked at the liberty 2.5i and its a great car no doubt very refined but it dont have the same features or the power that the euro does. having said that i dont think the mazda 6 can compete with either one of them....
thanks for all the responses guys! really appreciate it!.. starting to really like the euro now.. i was also thinking the liberty as well.. we'll see how it goes..
also .. i want to keep the honda tradition in the car! was also looking at the CRV.. but yes euro + integra! cant go wrong there :D:D
We have '05 Euro and '02 CRV. Luv'em!
Quote:
Originally Posted by j0nbubz
Sorry to go off topic but since the lib GT/RB has been mentioned in near on every post.
Can someone tell me if the manual version which I am pretty sure is DBW suffers from the same problems as the euro.
What problem would this be? I might know.. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by euro1978
Yes GT figures are MT 5.7 and AT 6.7 (Wagon add 0.1 to each), the difference is due to 1) extra drivetrain losses naturally occurring from AT, and 2) the AT loses 10kw and I think 20nm of torque to MT, something to do with ability of AT transmission to handle the power reliably within warranty period I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by nexace
Can't go wrong with the Euro though.:)