Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Has Honda's run - run out?

17576788081153

Comments

  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Actually they build Accords in Japan, Taiwan, Mexico."

     

    Actually, I know that. Acually, you aren't refuting anything I said. Actually. The Taiwan Accord doesn't come here.

     

    "Looks like we have about 26,000 non-NA built Accords. The Mexican factory has built only 25,000 Accords in year 2002. Less in the next year. Obviously they would NOT be a major contributor to those numbers."

     

    And obviously, the Mexican factory isn't operating at capacity. Capacity according to your links is 30,000 at the Mexican factory. You'd think they could bump production up, IF THEY NEEDED TO for the US market. So OBVIOUSLY, there's something going on BEYOND capacity issues. The Mexican factory CLEARLY has capacity to spare.

     

    "The 3.8 V6 in the GTP has been around for over 30 years."

     

    About the only thing that hasn't changed is the bore and stroke. Geez.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Because our ORIGINAL discussion was about fuel economy. In day to day driving, I was saying I'm probably getting better fuel economy in my Supercharged V6 than my wife's TL, because I don't need to revv the engine nearly as much, even though I drive quite spiritedly, which was counter to your claim that these engines only get good fuel economy if you drive like a grandma.

     

    My original response was regarding engine outputs and had nothing to do with fuel economy (and it was referring to kernick’s post). But, if you want to talk about fuel economy, we could do that as well.

     

    HP does not come for free. To get more, you have to burn more. Now, “probably” isn’t the best way to make strong claims on anything, and comparing different driving styles and circumstances isn’t the best way to get the job done anyway. Since we’re (likely) unaware of BSFC measurements under various load conditions (the appropriate way to compare fuel economy if you want to throw in engine output into the mix), we could use more logical approach.

     

    A supercharged engine means something, and that is, more air (than naturally possible) is being fed into the cylinders. And more air will require more gasoline to burn and the result is more power (than NA version of the engine). This means, 2000 rpm under WOT for a supercharged 3.8-liter engine is likely to burn more fuel than a normally aspirated 3.2-liter engine under the same conditions (2000 rpm under WOT). If it didn’t, you wouldn’t get more power!

     

    The 3.8 SC is actually comparable to a 4.5-4.6 liter normally aspirated engine, so if you run the engine at 2500 rpm all day long, and the NA 3.2 at 3500 rpm, you’re likely to get very similar fuel economy.

     

    No, you are wrong. Gearing is a torque multiplier. It multiplies the torque you have, but it isn't free. The gears don't just pull power out of the air. The heavier the car, the more work the engine has to do. Gearing helps to a point. It makes it so you use the available power more effectively. However, there comes a point, when you simply don't have enough power even after multiplication.

     

    You cannot have more power than what your engine provides. So, you’ve to realize the limits. However, I’m not sure what was so wrong about this statement of mine:

     

    “Gearing makes the horses useful, and engine torque meaningful. This is true in an empty vehicle or loaded to the brim.”

     

    You seem to agree with me. That said, yes, gearing does not multiply power, but torque. However, you need to realize that power has two ingredients:

    - Work

    - Rate of doing the work

     

    Torque is not work. However, torque is a part of the equation that gives us force (or thrust) when coupled to gearing. Less torque but shorter gearing could translate to greater force.

    Gearing also determines the rate at which the force is being used. That’s why TL, in first gear couldn’t exceed 45 mph (with automatic transmission) at redline.

     

    Understanding of all this boils down to understanding of power and torque. We can discuss this at length if you want, or disagree with my arguments.

     

    Just like when you peddle your mountain bike up a steep hill, and you put it in first gear. You can peddle really hard and go maybe 5 mph. Now if I was he-man (more torque), I could peddle up that same hill with more authority. THAT was my point.

     

    Not necessarily. He-man would have to be more powerful than me (not necessarily deliver more torque). We may be heading in the direction of discussing power versus torque after all!
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Honda may not be producing enough diesel engines to send to the USA. Giving European market more diesel options may be higher on the priority list at this time. Eventually, it can happen. And whenever that does, IMO, Element would be a great candidate to use the 2.2 i-CTDi, while CR-V could use 3.0/V6 from Accord. And yes, I think Honda should develop a 3.5/V6 i-CTDi and they could offer it in European Legend as well as Ridgeline here. It would be a perfect engine for the pickup here (nearly 400 lb.-ft at 2000 rpm would be possible, with 220-225 HP at peak).
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    You can blow other cars away and the engine doesn't even break a sweat. Hondas are not like that.

     

    Depends on what you’re comparing. We’re trying to compare apples to oranges here, aren’t we? GTP uses a larger displacement engine to start with (3.8-liter versus 3.2-liter in TL), and to top it off, it is supercharged (8 psi, I believe).

     

    How does the Acura 3.2/V6 with 5-psi Comptech Supercharger sound? 369 HP/310 lb.-ft would do it, right? Honda simply chooses to not use forced induction. The Honda V6’s deliver more than enough horses (and torque) anyway.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    "Honda may not be producing enough diesel engines to send to the USA."

     

    The big issue here is the fact that until we completely switch to low-sulfur diesel fuel, the demand for diesel engines will be relatively low due to California and four Northeastern states now allowing diesel engines to be sold for passenger car applications. Once we get low-sulfur diesel fuel, we can finally apply the latest diesel engine technologies to reduce emissions to at least ULEV level, which will make them 50-state legal.

     

    When that happens, don't be surprised that Honda may build the 2.2-liter I-4 and 3.5-liter V-6 i-CTDi turbodiesel engines at their Marysville, OH engine assembly line. The sheer low-end torque of a potential V-6 i-CTDi turbodiesel will make the engine perfect for the Odyssey minivan, the Pilot and MDX SUV's, and the Ridgeline truck. :-)
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Depends on what you’re comparing."

     

    We're comparing the GTP to the TL and have been the whole time. Where have you been, lol? The GTP doesn't work as hard as the TL. It just doesn't need to rev like the TL. The TL and GTP both have much different engines, but the end results (the numbers) aren't that much different. What's different is how they go about making those numbers.

     

    "GTP uses a larger displacement engine to start with (3.8-liter versus 3.2-liter in TL), and to top it off, it is supercharged (8 psi, I believe)."

     

    Yeah, that's obvious. That probably has something to do with the GTP having a more relaxed power delivery. Ya think? It's bigger and it's blown, yet it gets similar MPG....because it's more relaxed. I know you understand. The S/C 3.8L is not a bad engine. I've driven a few cars with that engine and it has butt loads of low end and it's kinda fun. I'm not a huge GM fan, but I like that engine, because it throws into your seat immediately. It's a great engine for a large car.

        

     

    "How does the Acura 3.2/V6 with 5-psi Comptech Supercharger sound?"

     

    It doesn't sound like something that the factory makes. Lol. It doesn't sound cheap either.

     

    Listen, I'm not saying that I'd personally rather have a GTP over a TL. I'd take the TL for many reasons, manual transmission availability being the main reason.
  • sensaisensai Member Posts: 129
    How does the Acura 3.2/V6 with 5-psi Comptech Supercharger sound? 369 HP/310 lb.-ft would do it, right? Honda simply chooses to not use forced induction. The Honda V6’s deliver more than enough horses (and torque) anyway.

     

    And those who have started strapping turbo's to the NA 3.8 engine are making 400hp right off the bat.

     

    There is nothing wrong with either engine design. But the SC 3.8 is still more powerful and cheaper than the Honda engine. If GM ever got an updated 5 or 6 speed transmission out, it would likely take back the fuel economy and performance crowns it used to have.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "But the SC 3.8 is still more powerful and cheaper than the Honda engine."

     

    You can say that again. It's also much cheaper to get more power out of. That engine takes excellent numbers and makes them even better with cheap mods like a chip, pulley, and an exhaust. The TL motor can't compete as far as tunability is concerned.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Civic Versus Jazz/Fit:

    Civic may have reached a point when its sales are likely to stay around 300K-325K units per year regardless of what Honda does with it (without resorting to massive incentives and double digit percentage towards fleet sales). In addition, Civic is expected to get more features (including standard ABS and side airbags) and that could make Civic a $14.5K-plus car.

     

    This creates room for a economy car based off a cheaper platform to serve multiple purpose. One, add to the car sales. Two, cover $12-15K price class to appeal to first time buyers. Three, tap onto hatchback market to go with high fuel economy (something that old Civic HB/CRX did).

     

    Accord Sales:

    Honda has seen worse. Even with lower sales, Honda may move 375K or more Accords this year, still greater than the number of Accords they can produce in the USA (said to be about 340K units). Besides, demand for TL forced Honda to move production of (some) Accord to East Liberty.

     

    Honda has seen worse drop in Accord sales a decade ago. After averaging 403K units/year from 1990-1992, sales plummeted to just 330K units in 1993. Went up a little the next year to 367K units, and went down in 1995 to 341K units. Remember, these sales were for Accord that had a drastic revision on the outside compared to the old.

     

    It was the rubber-maid style (as some reviewers and many people quoted) 1998-2002 version that brought home much better sales (averaging about 400K units). With the current Accord, Honda tried to break the mold, and was dismissed. Perhaps a safe approach would be the better way to go about next Accord (noticing how people are going gaga about Altima and even Camry styling).

     

    Something interesting, however, is that as much as we see Civic being bashed for lack of features and power, its sales are up. OTOH, Accord is loaded with features and is among the more powerful vehicles around with a fantastic interior, yet it ends up losing some sales.

     

    What happened with the current Accord sedan and CR-V? It looked like Honda was scared to do a total revision of exterior styling with the current CR-V.

     

    CR-V received the typical MMC changes, with addition of SE model. IMO, it is one of the better looking mini-utes out there.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    We're comparing the GTP to the TL and have been the whole time. Where have you been, lol?

     

    Are you sure about that? This was your comment:

     

    “You can blow other cars away and the engine doesn't even break a sweat. Hondas are not like that.”

     

    Not just TL, or was it?

     

    The GTP doesn't work as hard as the TL. It just doesn't need to rev like the TL.

     

    A multi-dimensional perspective is needed since revving isn’t the only thing an engine has to do. A supercharged engine, like in GTP has to deal with greater cylinder pressure and turn the supercharger itself. It also depends on what you want out of engine (an argument addressed earlier). TL-S delivered 240 HP at 5400 rpm, and GTP got it done at 5600 rpm.

     

    It doesn't sound like something that the factory makes. Lol. It doesn't sound cheap either.

     

    Oh yes, supercharger does add to the cost! Do you think it comes for free in GTP? The first part of your statement does not make sense, since it is trimmed to convenience unless you missed the following statement completely:

     

    “Honda simply chooses to not use forced induction”

     

    The TL motor can't compete as far as tunability is concerned.

     

    Really? Here is an excerpt from a SEMA display with supercharged Acura 3.2/V6:

     

    “The core of Comptech’s supercharger system is Eaton’s 62-cubic-inch Roots-type twin-rotor blower. This is the same type of blower used by GM on its supercharged 3800 V-6 and by other tuners…, the Eaton spins at slightly more than twice engine speed and, considering the 3.2-liter SOHC VTEC V-6’s robust 10.5:1 compression ratio, pumps in only about 4.5 pounds of boost.”

     

    And the result was 369 HP. How much does the GTP engine get with its 8 psi boost now? And what would it take to get 369 HP out of it?
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 50,439
    Maybe the GP vs. TL can be continued in a comparison thread?

     

    I have driven a TL AT and 6 speed, and both IMO have more than enough power, especially for a FWD platform. The AT moved out right now when you nailed it, so if it needed a few revs, it got there quick!

     

    I agree that the Fit is a good idea, to keep from spreading the Civic line too thin.

     

    The Accord is a sweet car. If I needed to get a new 4 door right now, I'd probably take a deal on an EX-L 4 cyl 5 speed. IMO, the styling (at least the rear end) is probably what is (if anything is) holding down sales a bit. Either that, or just too many choices, and the Accord price has nudged up a bit.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    And those who have started strapping turbo's to the NA 3.8 engine are making 400hp right off the bat.

     

    What is the big deal there, if there can be 424 HP at the wheels in a daily, street driven Civic.

      

    But the SC 3.8 is still more powerful and cheaper than the Honda engine.

     

    How do you compare costs?

     

    If GM ever got an updated 5 or 6 speed transmission out, it would likely take back the fuel economy and performance crowns it used to have.

     

    And if Honda were to supercharge its engines, we wouldn’t have this discussion.
  • avs007avs007 Member Posts: 100
    Geez, you like taking me so litterely huh? No need to explain basic physics to me, I understand them well. We don't need to discuss this further, you appear to be mangling my words around, and then restate what I already stated. I said you wouldn't have enough power even after multiplication. You said, gearing multiplies torque. You said gearing determines the rate at which that torque is applied. Ding ding ding ding! Power IS work over time/distance. (Even you stated that) Therefore, we said THE SAME EXACT THING!

     

    We also don't need to discuss how a supercharged 3.8 engine is equivalent to a 4.x litre engine. We walked down that path many moons ago. That's when we brought up the LS1 and VQ35, which screwed up that assumption. There is no simple forumula anyone can come up with, to try and make this comparison work. There are a lot more variables. For example, the 3800 may make more power equivalent to a larger engine, but the VQ35 and J32 both have more moving mass. Those extra camshafts, cam lobes, valves, valve-springs, etc, do not take 0 energy to operate.

     

    Also, there is no point in comparing stock to non-stock. FWIW, Motor Trend had an HKS Supercharged Accord a few years ago. It blew the tranny, and the perfomance numbers were not that great, but that's because they said the torque converter is undersized in the Accord.

     

    You also seem to imply that He-Man is NOT more powerful than you... Did you really want me to spell everything out, such as endurance, etc? That's why I used the term "He-Man", as that sort of implies how/why he's more "powerful"...

     

    Now I know that a J32 has a lot of pontential, as I seen it with my own eyes, but the tranny is still the weak point, which is why I'm not going to bother with putting a blower on my TL. I've already had to get the tranny worked on, and it's still naturally aspirated. Besides, the GTP's engine has more aftermarket potential, because it already has beefed up components. People are already running low 12's with mostly stock components.

     

    FWIW, the 1962 3.8 V6 and the current V6 actually DON'T share bore and stroke. I know in 1995 they reduced stroke and increased bore, to increase torque output. Nissan did a similar thing with the VQ30.

     

    Now back to our regularly scheduled discussions....
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    You said, gearing multiplies torque. You said gearing determines the rate at which that torque is applied. Ding ding ding ding! Power IS work over time/distance. (Even you stated that) Therefore, we said THE SAME EXACT THING!

     

    I hope so. But, I’ve my doubts.

     

    We also don't need to discuss how a supercharged 3.8 engine is equivalent to a 4.x litre engine.

     

    We don’t need to discuss GTP in this thread, period. But when you throw in those kind of comparisons that you did, it makes sense to cover all grounds.

     

    You also seem to imply that He-Man is NOT more powerful than you...

     

    I didn&#146;t imply anything, you probably did, but failed to mention &#147;power&#148; in your argument. So, I assumed (note: assume <> imply) he had more force going down, but I had more power being delivered. See, why I still have doubts about us being on the same page on power versus torque discussion?

      

    the tranny is still the weak point, which is why I'm not going to bother with putting a blower on my TL.

     

    Transmission is another entity. The manual gearbox would be the right way to go with it since Honda hasn&#146;t really designed the automatic to handle too much power (but for good reasons, their manual transmissions seem to be designed for it).

     

    Even in case of GTP, I have read that GM deliberately limited power for the same reason, weak transmission.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Member Posts: 1,280
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Ford has just announced that it will be introducing a model below the Focus for 2007. It appears the Fit will have more competition than just Scion and the Koreans (including Aveo). Now watch Nissan jump into the game too!

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    Wow, that new Civic looks awesome. Thanks carlismo! And the 2.4l is an excellent motor in the Accord, I can only imagine what it can do for the Civic.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Oh yes, supercharger does add to the cost! Do you think it comes for free in GTP?"

     

    Actually, it does. Buy a GTP, get a free supercharger. ;)

     

    "The core of Comptech&#146;s supercharger system is Eaton&#146;s 62-cubic-inch Roots-type twin-rotor blower. This is the same type of blower used by GM on its supercharged 3800 V-6 and by other tuners…, the Eaton spins at slightly more than twice engine speed and, considering the 3.2-liter SOHC VTEC V-6&#146;s robust 10.5:1 compression ratio, pumps in only about 4.5 pounds of boost.&#148;

      

    And the result was 369 HP. How much does the GTP engine get with its 8 psi boost now? And what would it take to get 369 HP out of it?"

     

    A comptech superchargers costs a couple thousand dollars. A pulley, chip, and exhaust doesn't.

     

    "We don't need to discuss this further, you appear to be mangling my words around, and then restate what I already stated."

     

    Robert is VERY good at that. Lol.

     

    "FWIW, the 1962 3.8 V6 and the current V6 actually DON'T share bore and stroke."

     

    Obviously, I did not know that. Thanks for the correction.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "And the 2.4l is an excellent motor in the Accord, I can only imagine what it can do for the Civic."

     

    Huh? Where'd you see that?
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    Ah, I had to look very closely to that article that calisimo posted.

     

    If that's true about the 2.4L, quite a few folks in here are going to have head over to the "Eating Crow on Edmunds" message board. I don't need to name names, you know who you are. LMAO. ;)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Rumor has it that the Civic Type-R will get a 2.4-liter with 250 HP. Current CTR gets 2.0 with 197 HP (in Europe) or 215 HP (in Japan).

     

    Now, interesting could be the impact on steering/handling with as much power on a (relatively speaking) light weight car. But, does this picture also depict potential of Europe getting 5-door CTR this time around?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Actually, it does. Buy a GTP, get a free supercharger. ;)

     

    And rebates on top of it. ;-)

     

    But I guess, you got the point, so I will leave this at that.

     

    A comptech superchargers costs a couple thousand dollars. A pulley, chip, and exhaust doesn't.

     

    Included in the cost of GTP to start with. Sure, factory installed SC would cost less, but that would be true in any case. Point is, SC isn't cheap.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Agree about the looks! If the EVO or WRX STi had that look I'd own 1 now.

    Hopefully Honda doesn't price that near $30K w/o adding AWD.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 50,439
    I like that Civic. Take the goofy cladding and the oversized wheels, and it looks like a neat package.

     

    Of course, the US will probably only get a 4 door and 2 door coupe, and If I get another small car, it will be a hatch or wagon for the utility factor.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    That looks like the new CTR. It is rumored to have 18 inch rims, and the rear glass mounted spoiler is likely to stay as well (in CTR).
  • avs007avs007 Member Posts: 100
    Depends on perspective. Superchargers actually are viewed as cheap. That's why Ford opted to drop the 32 valve DOHC V8, in place of the Supercharged SOHC V8. Made more power, and was cheaper.

     

    I think the previous posters comment on tunability, was talking about from a cost point of view.

     

    I can throw a Supercharger or Twin Turbo into my G35, but if I want to be able to get low 12's with it, I'd need to swap out a bunch of internals. The GTP's motor already has beefed up internals from the factory.

     

    And FWIW, 369HP is nothing to brag about. There are many Grand Prix's that have exceeded 400hp a long time ago.

     

    And the comment about GM needing some extra cogs not being available, and Honda choosing not to supercharge, actually is a valid comment. GM is introducing a 6 speed automatic. But even GM is deciding not to use forced induction anymore. The upcoming Grand Prix GXP loses the supercharged 3800 V6, and gains a 5.3 litre all-aluminum V8, which GM claims actually weighs less than the outgoing V6.

     

    And yes, I did throw the GTP comparison in there, because I was throwing a monkey wrench into said arguments. However, when I said we didn't need to talk about blown 3800 being equivalent to 4.x litre engine, I said that because we would not only be beating a dead horse, we would be talking in circles, as that's how this whole gearing discussion started, when we refuted the comparison to 4.x litre engines, by mentioning the VQ35 and LS1/2 engines...
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "I think the previous posters comment on tunability, was talking about from a cost point of view."

     

    I was. It is easier, and cheaper to get big numbers from an S/C 3.8L than it is from the TL's 3.2L. Hands down.

     

    My Grandma could install an exhaust and pulley on an S/C 3.8L and pay for it with her social security check.

     

    That just ain't happenin' with a comptech supercharger on a TL.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    I think the next gen Mitsu EVO has a similar nose design which is supposedly going to become the corporate nose across the Mitsu lineup. It too looks real sharp, and has functionality of 4 doors.

     

    I'll be absolutely stoked if this is the next Civic Type-R, and I'll be even happier if we (the states) get one this time around. It'll be interesting to see what Acura does with the RSX if that happens.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Member Posts: 1,280
    Do keep in mind that they're only talking about the 2.4L in the type R, and that the arrival of the type R to the US would be a big change in Honda strategy.

    I have my doubts that they would let a Civic match the TSX.

     

    It's interesting to see that Honda's reversing its trend towards making its headlights bigger. Does this mean the Accord will follow suit?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    avs007:

    Depends on perspective. Superchargers actually are viewed as cheap. That's why Ford opted to drop the 32 valve DOHC V8, in place of the Supercharged SOHC V8. Made more power, and was cheaper.

     

    I couldn&#146;t speak for Ford, but apparently you can. Comparing engine costs based on layouts is not as simple as you are trying to make it. Commonality along the lineup will often dictate the cost. Ford may be trying to differentiate its premium offerings from base cars by taking the route that you say was to get more power and cost effective. What does Ford GT use?

     

    The GTP's motor already has beefed up internals from the factory.

     

    Remember to get a new transmission. Isn&#146;t that a reason often quoted regarding deliberately reduced power output from the SC/3.8? You can&#146;t have it both ways.

      

    And FWIW, 369HP is nothing to brag about. There are many Grand Prix's that have exceeded 400hp a long time ago.

     

    It wasn&#146;t about bragging, it was about effectiveness and acceptance to forced induction. A 4.5 psi system could add 109 HP to the top end in the 3.2/V6. For bragging, I could have used several of Civic examples that can boast way more than 400 HP from measely 1.8-liter displacement.

     

    The upcoming Grand Prix GXP loses the supercharged 3800 V6, and gains a 5.3 litre all-aluminum V8, which GM claims actually weighs less than the outgoing V6.

     

    Probably costs less too! No more cost of adding and tuning an engine with a supercharger.

     

    newcar31:

    You get what you pay for, at least in this case. With this, I&#146;m putting this discussion on TL versus GTP to rest.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I too would be very surprised to see them bring the CTR to the U.S. But if it truly will have the 2.4, it gives me more hope that we will see a 200 hp SI for the next gen.

     

    As for the RSX, consider that non-premium compacts have rapidly caught up to it in terms of content and handling. I think it could get away with a 200 hp base model, even if other markets get a Civic with more power. Because the thing is, they could work on the handling a lot and improve content to the point where Integra is not the "forgotten stepsister" of the Acura line. With a commensurate increase in price, of course. Even since its intro, people have called for the RSX to have little niceties that were entirely absent, such as heated seats and NAV, and which are common or even standard throughout the rest of the line.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    If Civic gets 2.4 in Europe, RSX may get 2.4-liter engine here. And that could mean 200-210 HP for the base model, and 240 HP for the Type-S (slightly detuned version of the rumored 250 HP power plant in the next CTR). TSX could get 240 HP too!

     

    I doubt we will get CTR, but next Civic Si/Si-R may close the gap. It is expected to get 200-210 HP itself.

     

    It's interesting to see that Honda's reversing its trend towards making its headlights bigger. Does this mean the Accord will follow suit?

     

    Slim line headlamps were Accord signature since 1990, and in fact, I still see it in the current Accord from this angle. However, the size of the lens grew to include eye-brow/lid style turn indicators matching in overall shape Honda adopted with 1996 Civic.

     

    However, with MMC refresh, Civic now has more 1998-02 Accord/1997-2000 CL like head lamp lens. I wouldn&#146;t be surprised next Accord would too.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "For bragging, I could have used several of Civic examples that can boast way more than 400 HP from measely 1.8-liter displacement."

     

    Lol. Don't forget a measly beefed up block (hondas have floating cylinder sleeves and they do not like 400 hp), new crank, new connecting rods, and new pistons, among other things. Basically, it's not even the same 1.8L that you started out with.

     

    "You get what you pay for, at least in this case."

     

    As far as power is concerned, no, you DON'T always get what you pay for.

     

    There is such a thing as cheap power, and expensive power.

     

    Adding lots of power to the 3.8L S/C is cheap. Adding lots of power to the TL's 3.2L is expensive. Period. It's not debatable.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I think this debate is pointless, because I doubt many TL shoppers are seriously looking at a GTP. Resale alone would turn most Acura intenders away.

     

    -juice
  • avs007avs007 Member Posts: 100
    I couldn&#146;t speak for Ford, but apparently you can. Comparing engine costs based on layouts is not as simple as you are trying to make it. Commonality along the lineup will often dictate the cost. Ford may be trying to differentiate its premium offerings from base cars by taking the route that you say was to get more power and cost effective.

     

    I'm not speaking for ford. I'm just re-stating what Ford has said about the SVT Cobra. At least that's what I remember all the interviews to have said.

     

    Remember to get a new transmission. Isn&#146;t that a reason often quoted regarding deliberately reduced power output from the SC/3.8? You can&#146;t have it both ways.

     

    What are you talking about? We are talking stock to stock here, so yes, we are talking about the de-tuned 3800. But that aside, the 3800 is not grenading trannies like the TL is. The weak-spot in the 4T65-E is known. It's the spider gear in the differential. A LSD will fix that problem, and one is available from Quaiffe. The TL's tranny problem is more of a design defect, but we're not arguing about transmissions here.

     

    And yes, the new 5.3 litre V8 probably does cost less, but not becuaes it doesn't have a blower. GM has stated a long time ago, that it is streamlining it's entire engine lineup to reduce cost.

     

    So GM got rid of a bunch of engines, and now has basically:

     

    Two V8 Familes: NorthStar & LS

    Two V6 Familes: Global (2.8/3.6 VVT), 3500/3900

    Ecotech Family: 2.0, 2.2

     

    The 3800 was sort of sitting all by itself.

     

    And not that I care, but the Comptech Supercharger alone will not give you 369hp. That Comptech CL-S, also has Comptech headers, downpipe, exhaust, intake, light-weight flywheel, clutch, high-pressure fuel pump, fuel-pressure regulator, and ECU. That's a lot of money to make 369 ponies.

     

    And pointing to a 4.5psi boost pressure is misleading too. The J32 has a 10.5:1 compression ratio. Most factory blown engines have a reduced compression ratio, such as 8.5:1.

     

    But getting back on topic... I for one would love to see a Civic Type-R here. We can't let the SRT-4/Cobalt-SS/etc have the market all to themselves :p

     

    I would also like to see a TSX with a J30 240hp V6 (to keep it from stepping on the J32/TL toes) I think Infiniti and Lexus were on to something by not offering 4 cylinder models in this market.
  • avs007avs007 Member Posts: 100
    I think this debate is pointless, because I doubt many TL shoppers are seriously looking at a GTP. Resale alone would turn most Acura intenders away.

     

    You never know what may be cross-shopped.

     

    When I bought the G35, I cross shopped the TL with the Pontiac Grand Prix GTP CompG, Pontiac GTO, Infiniti G35 Coupe, and Cadillac CTS 3.6.

     

    Resale alone will not always close the deal. I know many people that swear they will never buy Acura again, becuase of the whole tranny fiasco. I know others that didn't buy the TL, because the seats weren't as supportive as Infiniti's seats. I also know people that loved the Acura Navigation, but had to have GM's Heads-Up-Display linked navigation, etc....

     

    Different strokes for different folks...
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    A TSX with a V6 would be very attractive. I do believe however, that even with the 2.4l the TSX has beaten it's projected sales target by a large margin. I think this is a big reason for the decline in Accord sales.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Last time I checked, Acura isn&#146;t struggling, and is growing well in fact. So, if there are fewer repeat buyers now, it would only mean that Acura is getting buyers from somewhere else!

     

    Going back to CTR, I doubt it will happen here. There isn&#146;t a market for it. All that Honda needs is a well designed/marketed Civic Si/Si-R to keep the ball rolling.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    2002+ CR-V and 2004+ TSX may have both hurt Accord sales in recent years, another reason suggesting overall growth makes more sense than growth of individual models.

     

    As far as TSX is concerned, going hybrid may not be a bad idea. Especially if the power train happens to be the production version of the same showcased with Acura RDX prototype at 2002 NAIAS (250 HP/AWD). There is enough room for TSX to grow before it hits the base price on TL ($34K).

     

    Another interesting addition would be TL w/SH-AWD, something that is now dubbed a strong possibility.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Member Posts: 1,280
    I don't get this 3.8L supercharged vs 3.2L n-a engine argument (I'd try harder if you guys found dyno charts over the full rev range though =] ).

     

    They're different applications. Lots of manufacturers supercharge V6's to emulate V8's, and expect other cars' V8's to be the direct competitors. You can say something about Honda not offering a V8, but for the time being Honda and people looking for V8 behavior are just not meant to be together. (In any case, while I do see Honda eventually making a V8 I don't think it'd go in the TL.)

     

    It doesn't say much about engineering prowess, either. The 3.8L has almost 20% more displacement - that alone should give it more torque.

     

    The underlying question is back to what Honda likes vs. what hypothetical customers like. Is it worth keeping a company's character at the cost of some possible growth? Would Honda suffer in the long run if it sold out? How important is an enthusiast base to a company?
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Would Honda suffer in the long run if it sold out?"

     

    Sold out? How would Honda "sell out"? Some would say that Honda "sold out" by offering a V6 in the historically 4 cyl only Accord. Obviously, Honda didn't think of people who wanted a midsize V6 family sedan as "hypothetical customers". If selling out means competing with competitors, then Honda can't afford not to sell out.

     

    "How important is an enthusiast base to a company?"

     

    Important enough for a 270 hp TL. Important enough for a 240 hp Accord. Important enough for "Type-R" versions of vehicles. Important enough for the existance of the NSX. Honda has been selling out for quite a while now.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "Is it worth keeping a company's character at the cost of some possible growth?"

     

    I like the technical complexity of Honda's engine design, which guarantees smooth high-revving engines using no forced induction. To me, an S/C is a quick and dirty fix to a power deficiency, which has its time and place of course. Toyota has used them occasionally over the years to boost power in models that became underpowered in their segments more quickly than Toyota intended, like the 90s Previas and early 90s MR2s.

     

    But "engine companies" like BMW, Honda, and Porsche rarely if ever use forced induction, and I think that is the way they should stay. Even if it does mean that Honda loses itself a few potential customers by doing so.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "like BMW, Honda, and Porsche rarely if ever use forced induction"

     

    BMW and Honda, yes. Porsche, no. Porsche has a history of using forced induction.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    in street models or racing cars?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    Both.
  • seminole_kevseminole_kev Member Posts: 1,696
    Don't forget BMW's Turbo'd 2002. Gas crisis kind of did it in, but it was a production model.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Member Posts: 1,280
    "If selling out means competing with competitors, then Honda can't afford not to sell out."

     

    Honda's growing despite not having a V8, and its V6's continue to like revs. But yeah, obviously at some point they're hurting themselves too much and I expect a V8 sooner or later. But it won't be a 6L pushrod.

     

    But say Honda went totally mainstream, gave all of its engines class-leading torque and a 5000rpm redline, and standard automatic transmissions across the line. Would those of us who complain have any bearing on Honda's finances? What's the reason not to go down that path?
  • avs007avs007 Member Posts: 100
    If anything, I think Acura needs a V8. If anything, only to compete with Lexus and Infiniti, (and the germans), with regards to prestige for the luxury market. A V8 is almost ante for the table.

     

    And you can have a high torque engine, with a high redline. Saying that a high torque engine has a 5000RPM redline is a bit much image Just look at the BMW V10, and the upcoming Z06 LS4 engine. (I think that's the designation anyways). Both have redlines north of 7000rpm... (And the latter is a pushrod image)
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Member Posts: 3,387
    The 2002 Turbo never was to be sold in the U.S. So technically Bimmer has never sold a gas turbo in the U.S. Just like Honda.

    http://www.bmwworld.com/models/newclass/2002tii.htm

    That's almost as old as the antiquated 3.8.

     

    Porche uses Turbos in the 911 and Cayenne.

     

    Ferrari nor Lambo uses them. Nor did Mclaren in the F1.

     

    Benz has gone Turbo crazy though.

     

    Honda used them in the non-U.S. City Turbo. But never shipped any Turbos here.

     

    http://www.gnttype.org/general/v6hist.html

    Been around for a loooooong time.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Member Posts: 1,280
    Sorry, I meant high torque and low power. Above 5250rpm, you generally get more horsepower than ft-lbs of torque. But I think you know what I meant. The kind of drivers that make up the bulk of sales never go above 4000rpm, and an engine set up to sacrifice the high end completely for their benefit might be a good sales strategy.

     

    I'm just hoping there's some reason for Honda to remain as it is.
This discussion has been closed.