|
|
|
|
 |
z-zero
 |
|
That would be an awesome daily driving car if it had the Si's powertrain, complete with the slip diff. Maybe I'm day dreaming, but might the Sport version come with more than 180hp? Something more sportier than an EX/LX but not as expensive as the V6.
So far, the new model "appears" to be taking shape nicely.
|
CivicB18
|
|
I'm sure the new batch of 2.5L ED 4cyls will be around 200hp with a strong and flat torque curve. However, I don't ever see an Accord with an LSD unless it's the V6/6MT combo. I've always said that Honda should make that combo equal to the former 07-08 TL-S 6MT!
~Patrick
|
TheGandalf
|
|
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
ClementZ
|
|
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
EternalShadowAW
|
|
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I thought they always stated "More than" 182 hp
|
spyder5786
|
|
Just put a manual in there and let me get leather please. Honda, are you listening?
z-zero wrote:
That would be an awesome daily driving car if it had the Si's powertrain, complete with the slip diff. Maybe I'm day dreaming, but might the Sport version come with more than 180hp? Something more sportier than an EX/LX but not as expensive as the V6.
So far, the new model "appears" to be taking shape nicely.
|
|
mobis21
|
|
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Perspective. Remember to subtract about 15% from Hyundai claims for HP and MPG.
|
MarkR
|
|
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
z-zero
|
|
MarkR wrote:
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
Agreed!
|
TheGandalf
|
|
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Although I was also expecting more (and who knows maybe we can still be surprised...) in the hp department, you have to keep in mind that the new Sedan is supposed to be somewhat lighter than the outgoing one. That + max torque available at less RPMs might still produce some very competive numbers.
200hp would sound sexier for sure but for me it is all about how the car feels. So I'll defer my judgment until said day that I can test drive one.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
MarkR wrote:
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
I believe the TSX with 6MT (ie. similar to your euro accord type s) can do 0-60 around the 7's range (have seen one test where it did it in 6.7s). Wouldn't that be competitive with cars that do it in 7.1s? Then there's the V6 model...it's just that it's not available in Europe.
|
MarkR
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
MarkR wrote:
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
I believe the TSX with 6MT (ie. similar to your euro accord type s) can do 0-60 around the 7's range (have seen one test where it did it in 6.7s). Wouldn't that be competitive with cars that do it in 7.1s? Then there's the V6 model...it's just that it's not available in Europe.
|
The old euro-Accord (TSX) could, and that was fine, 7.7 or something 0-100, but something happened with the current model, I guess they threw in more weight and forgot to upgrade the Hp output ;) ?
Yes, I am totally fine with 7.7 0-100km/h, but with todays weights they won't make that with 200hp and 2.4 NA torque, unfortunaly.
There are two ways to go:
1) reduce weight drastically ( is it possible with todays safety requirements and not going for expensive metals in the chassi)?
2) Make sure there's magic in the 2.4 NA engine or a nice little electric engine to boost torque between 1200-3500rpm
|
Hondarulez
|
|
MarkR wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
MarkR wrote:
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
I believe the TSX with 6MT (ie. similar to your euro accord type s) can do 0-60 around the 7's range (have seen one test where it did it in 6.7s). Wouldn't that be competitive with cars that do it in 7.1s? Then there's the V6 model...it's just that it's not available in Europe.
|
The old euro-Accord (TSX) could, and that was fine, 7.7 or something 0-100, but something happened with the current model, I guess they threw in more weight and forgot to upgrade the Hp output ;) ?
Yes, I am totally fine with 7.7 0-100km/h, but with todays weights they won't make that with 200hp and 2.4 NA torque, unfortunaly.
There are two ways to go:
1) reduce weight drastically ( is it possible with todays safety requirements and not going for expensive metals in the chassi)?
2) Make sure there's magic in the 2.4 NA engine or a nice little electric engine to boost torque between 1200-3500rpm
|
Actually, what I was saying is, the CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TSX 2.4 6MT is already doing 0-60 in around 7 seconds. The range I have seen is 6.7s - 7.4s, depending on which car magazine you refer to. 0-100km/h is 0-62mph. so I'd imagine a range of 7s to 7.7s is appropriate.
Here is the 6.7s time from C/D:
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2009-acura-tsx.pdf
The TSX 5AT is much slower though, but 8.1 is still not bad.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2011-acura-tsx-sport-wagon-test-review
The previous euro Accord with diesel is slower still, despite its 251lbft of torque as it does 0-60mph in 8.9s:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2007-honda-accord-i-ctdi-diesel-short-take-road-test
The 2nd gen TSX didn't gain much power, but if you have looked into the dyno plots posted by Jeff, you will see the 2nd gen TSX has a much better torque curve than the 1st gen model. This is one of the reasons the newer model is slightly faster, despite the same hp rating and higher weight.
|
MarkR
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
MarkR wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
MarkR wrote:
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
I believe the TSX with 6MT (ie. similar to your euro accord type s) can do 0-60 around the 7's range (have seen one test where it did it in 6.7s). Wouldn't that be competitive with cars that do it in 7.1s? Then there's the V6 model...it's just that it's not available in Europe.
|
The old euro-Accord (TSX) could, and that was fine, 7.7 or something 0-100, but something happened with the current model, I guess they threw in more weight and forgot to upgrade the Hp output ;) ?
Yes, I am totally fine with 7.7 0-100km/h, but with todays weights they won't make that with 200hp and 2.4 NA torque, unfortunaly.
There are two ways to go:
1) reduce weight drastically ( is it possible with todays safety requirements and not going for expensive metals in the chassi)?
2) Make sure there's magic in the 2.4 NA engine or a nice little electric engine to boost torque between 1200-3500rpm
|
Actually, what I was saying is, the CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TSX 2.4 6MT is already doing 0-60 in around 7 seconds. The range I have seen is 6.7s - 7.4s, depending on which car magazine you refer to. 0-100km/h is 0-62mph. so I'd imagine a range of 7s to 7.7s is appropriate.
Here is the 6.7s time from C/D:
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2009-acura-tsx.pdf
The TSX 5AT is much slower though, but 8.1 is still not bad.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2011-acura-tsx-sport-wagon-test-review
The previous euro Accord with diesel is slower still, despite its 251lbft of torque as it does 0-60mph in 8.9s:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2007-honda-accord-i-ctdi-diesel-short-take-road-test
The 2nd gen TSX didn't gain much power, but if you have looked into the dyno plots posted by Jeff, you will see the 2nd gen TSX has a much better torque curve than the 1st gen model. This is one of the reasons the newer model is slightly faster, despite the same hp rating and higher weight.
|
That's just very weird, check Honda UK site for example and you will see the 200hp Accord manual have a time of 8.1sec, and the super quick Honda auto box they claim gives you 9.8 :)
Hmm, I know the 2004 Accord (TSX) was a little quicker, the 2.4 manual was absolutely alright.
For med 7.5 is what is not slow and doesn't need to be quicker, that where most premium germans are at the moment with the basic engine.
I am not saying you are wrong and I am right, not at all, but isn't it funny that Honda doesn't know the performance of their own car. Honda Sweden doesn't post any number for the accord below 8.4 for the 2.4
|
Hondarulez
|
|
MarkR wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
MarkR wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
MarkR wrote:
ClementZ wrote:
TheGandalf wrote:
If I remember right it still will be a 2.4L (not 2.5), and even though it has DI, Honda anounced around 182hp.
Torque should be flatter and a msx torque should come a bit sooner than today's engine.
|
I'm still thinking that that's inadequate (especially compared to Hyundai/Kia's 2.4), but I suppose anymore would be encroaching on the power output of the V6.
Meh. Hopefully no one knocks the Accord 2.4 for having "only" 182.
|
Note that you care, but I live in Europe and when everyone are pumping out family sedans that can produce high torque from 1500-4000 and 0-60 times in ~7 I think we can already now say that for sure the Accord will get raped in the EU press and not sell, because for the same money people can have a car with equal interior but a much more modern engine = that is, they can keep up with soccer moms.
If they can dump the price to way below VW I think there is a market and that is for those unfortunate not with a middle-income.
|
I believe the TSX with 6MT (ie. similar to your euro accord type s) can do 0-60 around the 7's range (have seen one test where it did it in 6.7s). Wouldn't that be competitive with cars that do it in 7.1s? Then there's the V6 model...it's just that it's not available in Europe.
|
The old euro-Accord (TSX) could, and that was fine, 7.7 or something 0-100, but something happened with the current model, I guess they threw in more weight and forgot to upgrade the Hp output ;) ?
Yes, I am totally fine with 7.7 0-100km/h, but with todays weights they won't make that with 200hp and 2.4 NA torque, unfortunaly.
There are two ways to go:
1) reduce weight drastically ( is it possible with todays safety requirements and not going for expensive metals in the chassi)?
2) Make sure there's magic in the 2.4 NA engine or a nice little electric engine to boost torque between 1200-3500rpm
|
Actually, what I was saying is, the CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TSX 2.4 6MT is already doing 0-60 in around 7 seconds. The range I have seen is 6.7s - 7.4s, depending on which car magazine you refer to. 0-100km/h is 0-62mph. so I'd imagine a range of 7s to 7.7s is appropriate.
Here is the 6.7s time from C/D:
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2009-acura-tsx.pdf
The TSX 5AT is much slower though, but 8.1 is still not bad.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2011-acura-tsx-sport-wagon-test-review
The previous euro Accord with diesel is slower still, despite its 251lbft of torque as it does 0-60mph in 8.9s:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2007-honda-accord-i-ctdi-diesel-short-take-road-test
The 2nd gen TSX didn't gain much power, but if you have looked into the dyno plots posted by Jeff, you will see the 2nd gen TSX has a much better torque curve than the 1st gen model. This is one of the reasons the newer model is slightly faster, despite the same hp rating and higher weight.
|
That's just very weird, check Honda UK site for example and you will see the 200hp Accord manual have a time of 8.1sec, and the super quick Honda auto box they claim gives you 9.8 :)
Hmm, I know the 2004 Accord (TSX) was a little quicker, the 2.4 manual was absolutely alright.
For med 7.5 is what is not slow and doesn't need to be quicker, that where most premium germans are at the moment with the basic engine.
I am not saying you are wrong and I am right, not at all, but isn't it funny that Honda doesn't know the performance of their own car. Honda Sweden doesn't post any number for the accord below 8.4 for the 2.4
|
Oh you are referring to Honda's website. Well..Honda lately has the tendency to be underestimating their vehicles. For example, they don't give their hybrids high EPA ratings, but they tend to do better than the ratings in the real world.
Also, looking at the dyno plots from Jeff, it seems that Honda is also underrating their engine outputs for some cars. A good example would be the 2011 Honda Civic Si sold in North America. I believe in Jeff's dyno plot, the Civic Si got around 195whp. Funny thing is, that car is rated at 197hp or so. Assuming a 10% drivetrain loss, the car should be making less than 180whp. With a 15% drivetrain loss, the car would make less than 170whp. However, the car is putting down 195hp at the wheels, that means the engine gotta be making well over 200hp. Bottom line is, manufacturer claimed numbers are only there for reference! Some companies are more conservative than others.
As for car magazine numbers, those are pretty much the absolute best times possible, unless you are really good at driving. That means the cars are probably launched at high rpm, brake-torquing, power-shifting, or a combination of the above techniques. Most of the time people will have a hard time repeating the magazine numbers. That applies to most cars so people still use magazine numbers anyway just for comparison purposes.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
