Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2008 Honda Accord Coupe and Sedan



  • kiawahkiawah Posts: 3,666
    And the odds are pretty good that we won't be around either..........or if we are, we certainly won't care (will be lucky to be breathing, let alone driving).
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    I think they could be baught by Toyota, or somebody else by then....... ;)

  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    best post i've ever read!!

    yes honda will still be around.
  • gpkgpk Posts: 38
    Gas mileage at 30/36 for I-4
    tech pkg like the Altima
    I-4 hybrid
    200# weight increase
    6 spd AT/MT
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "200# weight increase "

    Increase? INCREASE???
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Posts: 992
    An accord diesel should get 32/42

    The accord already offers the NAV and there should be bluetooth next year! 200lbs is reasonable. But i think that a diesel accord is more likely. The 5sp auto should be ok for a diesel engine as it loves to keep revs low and thats a diesels favorite place! Still, a 6sp auto would be nice!!

    I hope honda doesn't get desperate for bigger autos and just throws in a CVT... Unless its the Altimas, i'd be depressed... :cry:

  • autoboy16autoboy16 Posts: 992
    I agree 99.99%

    I dont agree with the 230hp thing as HP isn't a very important number because most companies record it at an unusable range.

    TORQUE is that all important number! Thats why so many people are beginning to switch to diesels. The m5 has 500hp but the E320CDI has 400lb ft of torque and gets 35mpg. Which sounds more appealing to the AVERAGE (non-rockylee j/k) consumer? Not to mention Diesels lower price than regular in some areas.

    The Accord is most likely to get the TL's engine. Hondas rarely get new engines before Acuras. The TL has had the same engine since 1995 in the 3.2 TL. Sure this old v6 is ok for the TL but it would be perfect for an accord. The specs of the current accord v6 and acura TL are very similar and shows the 3.2l v6's advantages.

    The 3.2l v6 in the TL has to carry more weight and has more power but it has the exact same results as the 3l v6 in the accord. I'm sure honda could make a few changes and bump this up to 265hp and 240lb ft of torque with the same or similar MPG.

    As with the Cr-v honda doesn't have to have a v6 more powerful than the competition to win. As long as it stays competitive and refined it will do great. 258hp and 233lb ft of torque will be great for the accord.

  • gpkgpk Posts: 38
    200# is an estimate of how much ACE will add to the weight on the frame.
    I would also like to see a diesel option as well. Ideally I would like to see a diesel hybrid.
    I can see the 3.2 or the 3.5 being in the Accord v-6. There are arguments for both engines. I would assume that they will pick the engine that does the least damage to the scale.
    A 6spd auto and mt allows Honda to lead the pack for F/E with the new 2008 epa guidelines.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    a six speed auto

    a more powerful 4 cyl (similar to the tsx, but with better fuel economy and no req for premium.)

    and a v-6 that will result in passing camry's easily. :P

    A diesel will be great...

    but the one thing i would love? A wagon version. Bring it back!!

    Honda, it is possible to have a more utilitarian vehicle then all the sedans being offered. We want a hatch that isn't the fit, and a large capacity car that isn't the element. (although i love both those cars!)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Honda, it is possible to have a more utilitarian vehicle then all the sedans being offered. We want a hatch that isn't the fit, and a large capacity car that isn't the element.

    Your answer is the Mazda6 5-door (hatch) and wagon.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,426
    Mazda 6 :confuse:

    Smaller than my Accord and uses as much gas as my Sienna. :surprise:

    Now if they would put a 4-cyl in the Mazda 6 that would make it palatable, but still smaller and less efficient than an Accord wagon would be.

    I like wagons (prefer them to sedans), but the Mazda 6 misses the point.
  • bamacarbamacar Posts: 749
    Also I think 2007 is the last year for the 6 Wagon. It seems that wagons are still not selling well enough to justify the cost of a different bodystyle (excluding Subaru and the European makes).
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,426
    That is because wagons are not marketed. Subaru markets their wagons and sells 10 for every 1 sedan.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The closest thing to an Accord wagon is the C-RV. Same 4cyl engine, and built on a car platform. The chances of the Accord wagon making another appearance are very very slim. The C-RV sells like hotcakes.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    Blame your fellow Americans. I believe that in the rest of the world the 6 does not even have a V6 available in any version of it.

    You may not like it but at least tiny Mazda, with a measly 3% of the US market, sells a conventional wagon and hatchback in the US. Even if it is smaller and less efficient than the non-existant Accord wagon.
  • dolfan1dolfan1 Posts: 216
    Put the V6 in the CRV and they'd probably sell a whole bunch more. I'd love to have a CRV over the Accord, but I won't settle for less than the V6.

    Yes, yes, I know the 4 provides enough power for almost all situations, and gets better mileage. Its neither right or wrong, it's just a personal preference = some folks like more power.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,426
    The problem with the CRV is that it can't touch the Accord for efficiency.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Toyota's Rav4 has gone up in size, has a V6 and a third row seat. Since the CR-V sells more than the Rav4, Honda wasn't going to change what works. People obviously like it the way it is, light and nimble. The mileage may not be as good as the Accord (the CR-V is heavier) but I'm sure the extra weight of an Accord wagon would mean lower mileage too.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,426
    A wagon typically weighs less than 100 lbs more than a sedan. The difference is negligable.

    The big reason for the CRV using more gas is aerodynamics and shorter gearing.
Sign In or Register to comment.