New Honda Accord has something for everyone

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
14,505
Location
Top of Virginia
For those lamenting the disappearance of V-6 engines from midsize sedans, the next-generation Accord will continue with both 4- and 6-cylinder engine options. It looks like the 4 will be paired with a CVT, and the 6 with a new 6-speed automatic transmission. Honda claims that the new V-6 model will beat the old V-6's 20/30 EPA mpg numbers.

For those interested in hybrids and plug-ins, the new Accord will apparently offer a plug-in hybrid variant, offering 10-15 miles of electric-only operation (and up to 62 mph). 120V provides a 4 hour re-charge while 240V lowers that time to 90 minutes.

And for everyone interested in driving dynamics, the good news is the new model will be smaller and lighter than the old model.

More at Motor Trend WOT
 
Honda's second shot at a Accord hybrid.The first attempt failed miserably.
The Civic hybrid hasn't sold well either.
 
no MT with the 4 cyl? That setup was the best thing the accord had going for it.
 
Would not want a V6 with gas going only one place but up. What could be worst?

A DI'd 4 cyl mated with a CVT (and then a first year combo).

One word for me (and I am looking to get into something sooner than later)

PASS.

Plus I hate the rear bumper on it. Is it coming or going?
37.gif



They will sell a ton of them. Always do. I'd rather look at a Camry or Hyundai/Kia offering right now. Not much else looking like something I'd put money on.

I may end up picking up something used with less than 100k and dealing with that. Like a 2008 Acura TSX. (before Honda screwed it up in 2009)
21.gif


Take care, Bill
 
Sounds like several steps in the right direction! Here's hoping they learned from their mistakes on the 2012 Civic and don't screw up the execution. This is a promising car IMO.

Regarding the reduced size and weight: that's good, but the shorter wheelbase makes me a bit worried about how the car will ride and feel, especially on the highway.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
no MT with the 4 cyl? That setup was the best thing the accord had going for it.

Are you sure they won't offer a MT at all?


Side note, speaking of transmissions: if it's going to be automatic, I'm glad it's CVT.
 
I have been watching this closely as I've been wanting to buy another Honda for a daily driver for a long time now. I was hugely disappointed in their announcement. The Coupe is just a 2012 Accord with a body kit, and a pretty bad one at that.

The engines are a huge disappointment to me as well. Currently a 4cyl Accord Coupe gets the 190HP K24, whereas this new car gets a 181HP DI 4cylinder? You'd at least think they could get it up to 200HP considering they easily do that now with the similar K24 in the current generation Acura TSX and Civic Si.

Finally, the complete non-mention of a manual transmission in the 4cylinder Coupe was pretty crushing. 2012 is looking like it might be the last year for the Acura TSX, so I was really hoping we'd see an Accord Coupe with a 200HP 4cylinder and a 6spd manual to kind of fill in the gap that the TSX will leave. At this point, might as well get a TSX SE and hang on.

I'm continually amazed at how Honda can't seem to find their way in producing a car that people actually want to drive. No NSX, no S2000, they flubbed the CR-Z, the new Civic Si pales in comparison to the 2011 model, it's just more swing and miss from Honda.
 
Has Honda fixed all the issues with their A/Ts?
I swore off buying Honda until they make an A/T that lasts as long as their engines...

Regarding the constantly rising cost of gasoline...it seems we have just accepted it (change we can believe in)...
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
Has Honda fixed all the issues with their A/Ts?


If you look at reported rates of failure since the 2005-2006 time frame, their transmission reliability is easily competitive with their peers, if not exceeding in some cases.
 
Originally Posted By: 90crvtec
...
The engines are a huge disappointment to me as well. Currently a 4cyl Accord Coupe gets the 190HP K24, whereas this new car gets a 181HP DI 4cylinder? You'd at least think they could get it up to 200HP considering they easily do that now with the similar K24 in the current generation Acura TSX and Civic Si.

Finally, the complete non-mention of a manual transmission in the 4cylinder Coupe was pretty crushing. ...
...


I think most engine have TOO HIGH a HP rating for their general use and midrange torque and fuel mileage are being hurt in this HP war. I dont see many real driver running their engine over 5000 rpm - ever. With Hondas odd logic - my '12 FIT struggles to attain 34mpg average where my 08 Yaris easily got 39mpg average the first 2 years with better power feel in daily driving. Why honda dumped the i-vtec of the L15A1 and went to a mild/wild 16v all time vtec on the '12 L15A7 is a mystery to me. As is the Killer shortgearing on the MT. 1st gear is all but unusable. This would all be great if they didnt ruin the handling for ride on the '12 but they did that too. A suzuki SX4 feels much much better in daily "sporty" driving than the new fit - as did my 05 Aerio SX which the fit copied anyway. I hope it hold its resale because its gone in the spring if I cant get the suspension sorted..

Suzuki Aerio 2.3L DOHC from 7 years ago:
38464393.jpg
 
I tell you something: I'm a fan of the styling. Seriously, I like it a LOT. I think it's one of the best looking cars I've seen in recent memory. However, the lack of regular automatic or even a manual is a deal killer for me.

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Would not want a V6 with gas going only one place but up. What could be worst?

A DI'd 4 cyl mated with a CVT (and then a first year combo).

One word for me (and I am looking to get into something sooner than later)

PASS.

Plus I hate the rear bumper on it. Is it coming or going?
37.gif



They will sell a ton of them. Always do. I'd rather look at a Camry or Hyundai/Kia offering right now. Not much else looking like something I'd put money on.

I may end up picking up something used with less than 100k and dealing with that. Like a 2008 Acura TSX. (before Honda screwed it up in 2009)
21.gif


Take care, Bill


You could always just get a Cruze, which has the most traiditional powertrain in the segment these days, no DI, regular automatic, or 6 speed manual.
whistle.gif

Or, wait for the Dart. You could just get it with the Naturally aspirated engine. Looks cool, too.
 
I've got a '10 TSX and it is great, but I am pending an upsize for the family. It will be on the sales block as soon as I find something suitable.
 
Originally Posted By: Coprolite
I've got a '10 TSX and it is great, but I am pending an upsize for the family. It will be on the sales block as soon as I find something suitable.


What have you looked at/are considering?
 
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite

I think most engine have TOO HIGH a HP rating for their general use and midrange torque and fuel mileage are being hurt in this HP war. I dont see many real driver running their engine over 5000 rpm - ever. With Hondas odd logic - my '12 FIT struggles to attain 34mpg average where my 08 Yaris easily got 39mpg average the first 2 years with better power feel in daily driving. Why honda dumped the i-vtec of the L15A1 and went to a mild/wild 16v all time vtec on the '12 L15A7 is a mystery to me. As is the Killer shortgearing on the MT. 1st gear is all but unusable. This would all be great if they didnt ruin the handling for ride on the '12 but they did that too. A suzuki SX4 feels much much better in daily "sporty" driving than the new fit - as did my 05 Aerio SX which the fit copied anyway. I hope it hold its resale because its gone in the spring if I cant get the suspension sorted..

Well, this seems kind of apples to oranges here. The Honda Fit powerplant is nothing like the K series available in the current mid-range cars in the Honda lineup (Accord, Civic Si, Acura TSX). We're talking about the 1.5L engine in the Fit, versus a 2.4L engine in the other cars mentioned. We can't really make any comparisons of value there.

As for midrange torque, your 2nd generation Fit actually has more torque with the new VTEC system through the midrange than the 1st generation Fit with the L15A1. Basically, the car has more HP, more torque, and keeps the same or better fuel economy compared to the 1st gen Fit.

Maybe what you're looking for is a diesel engine? Low cruising RPMs and lots of torque? If you think the Honda Fit is a "mild to wild" VTEC setup, try the S2000 on for size. Then tell me what you think.
wink.gif
When I think Honda Fit...I think wheezy and gutless but, good utility and cheap transport. It's a slightly better designed version of an otherwise average appliance.

Given the choice between all the comparable road refrigerators, the Fit is easily the best available in terms of power, handling, efficiency, and versatility. It would be my choice for a car in that category but, a Honda Accord it is not.
 
I think ARCO wasn't meaning "mild/wild" in the absolute sense, but the move from the VTEC-E style valvetrain to a more conventional VTEC system with a small cam (mild) for most engine operation with a bigger cam (wild) for engine operation above some higher RPM threshold, like 5,000 rpm (or whatever the switchover point is).
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I think ARCO wasn't meaning "mild/wild" in the absolute sense, but the move from the VTEC-E style valvetrain to a more conventional VTEC system with a small cam (mild) for most engine operation with a bigger cam (wild) for engine operation above some higher RPM threshold, like 5,000 rpm (or whatever the switchover point is).

Yes, I considered that too. However, the 2nd gen car still keeps the same efficiency as the old car but makes more torque and HP everywhere in the powerband. So I think it still met Honda's goals of increased performance while either improving or retaining the existing efficiency benefits of the car. Basically, it's still a better engine than the L15A1.

They did have to shorten the gear rations for the MT 2nd generation Fit:
"To multiply this additional thrust, and to further offset the '09 Fit's weight gain, the effective gear ratios of the 5-speed manual transmission are shorter by anywhere from 3 to nearly 8 percent."

Link to Review

When we consider that the 2nd gen Fit gets the same or better mileage as the older car, and does so with shorter gearing, I think it's a pretty good compromise in addition to getting more HP and Torque for the same money. But I digress, I want my 6spd MT 200HP Accord Coupe.
smile.gif
 
I wanted and accord MT also but only could find a fit. I didnt know they lengthened the wheelbase and slaughtered the handling. The Kia Rio 5 was the best handler in this segment let down by a really gutless engine (pre DI). Honda has done a LOT of messing and experimenting with its engines lately. I DONT like the new L shaped rocker and the lack of an external tubular header (or any exhaust manifold whatsoever!) on the new L15A7) or the silly undersquare engine with insane chevy smallblock stroke of 3.5". Its an I'll conceived engine that is overshadowed by competitors in the 1.5> 1.6 category. Just thinking out lououd whats going on at honda r&d. Honda scrapped the Idisi 8 valver - never made sense to spec a dual plug ignition on a TINY combustion chamber - what were they thinking anywho?!. The new civic ivtec 1.8L has a "reverse" vtec that engages an eco mode cam at steady state cruise rather than a hot cam. IMO, The fun cars in this segment under 17K are the Chevy Sonic, Suzuki SX4, Golf 3 door, Scion Xc. And its shaking out that VVT not vtec seems to be the way to go for good torque from 2k-5k. Contracting Yamaha to run the headflow modeling helps too.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top