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

Honda Accord Future Models

16781012

Comments

  • ichpokhudezhichpokhudezh Member Posts: 12
    I'm on my second Accord (2002 4-cyl manual, sold@89k and current 2004 4-cyl auto now@50k) and my average mpg with both cars was/is above 31mpg (observed over 20k miles, not on tank-by-tank basis).
    My daily commute is about 80 mostly highway miles but my cars do see 6250 rpm a few times a day.
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    I wonder how many of the gas slips you lost over the 20k?
  • ichpokhudezhichpokhudezh Member Posts: 12
    Well, we're on the internets, so I assume you are aware of them computer thingies? Once I had the gallons/mileage/conditions&etc data entered in the spreadsheet, the receipt would go into the trash.
  • gpkgpk Member Posts: 38
    I have been looking for new info on the new I-4 for the Honda Accord? Has anyone found any info yet? Like Hp and torque and mpg? The current I-4 is silky smooth I am excited for the new car..
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    It would have been posted already without anyone having to ask if people had that info.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    History of the last few accord generations show that the accord went up a tenth of a liter in displacement each year.

    I wouldn't be surprised if honda made a 170hp 2.5l I4 or a 200hp 2.5l I5

    I like the idea of the I-5 because its something new and different from most companies. Then the accord could get a 260hp 3.2l v6 from the Acura TL.

    I know they could do an I5 as the Vigor and 2.5TL had I5 engines with 176hp in the 90's. It may not happen but its beneficial to the vehicles that use the engine like the Cr-v, Element, and probably others in other markets.

    Also history says a new TL usually comes out a year after the Accord :P

    Honda should use this tag line i came up with: "Traditionally Untraditional". "Power of dreams" is getting old[er] fast.

    I guess T. U. Is better for acura as thats also true: No V8, Sh-awd, no RWD, very powerful v6s.
    -Cj :)
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    hp 180....tq 175......
  • gpkgpk Member Posts: 38
    I like the idea of the I-5 because its something new and different from most companies

    I like this idea as well but I doubt it. Torque has always been on the low side for Honda with the I-4. Yes they are silky smooth but I have always felt that they needed more torque at the bottom of the curve. Especially with this engine because its dual role in the CRV.
    The other reason why I am interested is because the new Accord will have the ACE structure as well. I know that adds some weight along with the usual model refresh the new Honda's are getting portly soo. While 180/175 may sound like a lot of power that engine is going to have to lug around extra weight.
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    Just wait for the CRV diesel avail 9/08 it has 250 FT. lbs. of torque @ 2000 rpms.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    yeah but all diesels provide good torque. The base engine they are selling until the diesel comes has to carry around a lot of weight and cars!

    in 1995, The 2.5TL made 176hp/170lb ft vs the v6 accord had 170hp. The 5cyl got better city MPG than the v6 accord.

    but that was over 13 years ago. With this new technology, I think honda can make a 2.5l 5 cyl with 200hp and 200lb ft. Its good for the HP wars and should still get great MPG.

    The new I-5 could make each car that gets the k24 ahead in its classes. The Acura TSX needs it most since it only make 167lb ft.

    -Cj
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    Most people are already satisfied with the 4 cylinder power and torque. Those who are not can buy the V6.
    They really need to keep improving the fuel economy and not worry about adding more than a trivially small amount of extra power on the base engine.
    The new 2008 fuel economy ratings will make it look as if it uses more gas even if doesn't, so the only way to even maintain the current MPG ratings is to improve it.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    5cyl mpg sometimes mirror that of a 4cyl but with 6cyl hp when made correctly. The old 5cyls that honda made in the 1990s got great MPG and had a a good amount power also.

    A 5cyl would be good as honda doesn't plan to offer a v6 in the element or Cr-v which both could use the power boost.

    -Cj :)
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    The CRV is getting the diesel.
  • gpkgpk Member Posts: 38
    With current gas prices I really think that there should be more emphasis on MPG. Its a concern to most individuals.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    The 4 cylinder doesn't need more power. 5 cylinder isn't asked for or wanted even if it could get "almost as good mpg" as a 4 cylinder. They need to focus on maximizing MPG while keeping similar power. They can worry about having class-leading power on the optional V6 if they want to have bragging rights about horsepower.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    i think a 5cyl is a great median since honda won't give the cr-v a v6 let alone the element. It would be better for us overall!

    -Cj
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    I have a novel idea. The 4 is plenty fast how about making it a tad smaller and more fuel efficient and keeping the same hp? Less is more. ;)

    Those who think more is more can get the V6 - which could also stand to get smaller while keeping the same hp.

    Why waste technology on bigger and more powerful (and usually heavier and number), keep the power and increase the mileage.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Most people buy the 4cyl, and will not even consider the V6. These people still want to have performance that's competitive in this segment. The Accord already has the smallest V6 in this class, and while the car keeps getting bigger, I doubt the engine will get smaller (not going to happen). Honda is known for not following the leader, but you have to give in to consumer demand at some point.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    I know they won't make it smaller - just wishfull thinking on my part.

    BTW what is wrong with the smallest engine - isn't the performance of the car what matters. There are plenty of really big engines without much power.

    Of course my morning commute is not a drag race - maybe it is for most people. I guess I am just old and out of touch. ;)
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I think what Honda should do (and should have done from the start) is make the 4cyl the hybrid, instead of the V6. People who buy the V6 are not necessarily looking for economy, IMO.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    I absolutely agree with that. The hybrid is not even the most efficient Accord the 5M 4cyl has that honor (remember most hybrids have a harder time hitting EPA numbers than non-hybrids).
  • gpkgpk Member Posts: 38
    I triple that I would really like to see a match with the TCH. 32/40. I need something with good gas mileage and in two years when my current lease is up I can just move over to a hybrid. :shades:
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    A diesel accord should be less than a TCH because of the cheaper technology. Say, 44MPG. And there is no reduction in trunk space! An accord diesel should be $22k. I believe in diesel!

    -Cj :)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The new TCH ratings for 2008 are 33City/34Hwy. The Prius? 48City/45Hwy.

    The new ratings for the 2007 Accord 4-cyl (regular) are 21/31. Accord Hybrid? 24/32. (Remember the new standards are coming online in 2008).

    Just an FYI for everyone.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    An accord diesel should be $22k.

    I hope you are right about that, but I wouldn't bet on it. With all the technology Honda had to put into this car (to make it burn clean enough for U.S. emissions), it may be the most expensive Accord yet. I guess if they made a bare bones model (VP) with the diesel, it may go for 22k.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    I do hope they go back to DX, LX, EX and SE! VP sounds weird. As long as the DX gets standard AC, Power windows and the other current VP features, i would be fine.

    I think we would see a diesel engine in the Lx, EX and SE trims. I shouldn't be too expensive because we should see that engine in the accord, Cr-v, element, TSX, and possibly CSX. A turbo for RDX and TSX maybe...

    Still, the cost of that engine will be well spread out!

    -Cj
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    On the street. Check them out on the "2008 Accord Coupe and Sedan" board.
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    Those are estimates - the real numbers from Honda are unknown. There is no "new" rating for MY07 - they are what is printed on the window. Plus, you won't be able to compare 07 and 08 in the Accord since the engines will be different (along with other things).
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    The 08 models will have the new ratings, but the numbers they would have recieved under the old system will also be on the sticker. Direct comparison will be possible.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Honda doesn't supply window-sticker numbers, biker4, no company does. Just the EPA.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Bad BAD photochop. Interesting to look at, but nothing close to reality. Look at the door lines, the windows.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    There are no real photos around. There was another, more realistic-looking, but still fake photoshop posted weeks ago.
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    And where does EPA get its numbers?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings2008.shtml

    Read it for yourself. They've been testing vehicles for decades and coming up with the numbers, biker4. Check out the link for the new methods. Everyone claiming "false advertisement" on the car manufacturers' side is barking up the wrong tree. Ford, Honda, GM, Toyota... it doesn't matter, none of them decide what gets to go on the window sticker. My window sticker actually says that the EPA came up with them. I would think yours would too.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Member Posts: 2,697
    I wonder which carmakers are going to start using weaker A/C units in new cars to try to game their results for the new MPG tests?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Too many people in the south (like me) would complain, just like they have about the A/C in the Mazda 3.
  • danielp1danielp1 Member Posts: 9
    My picture wasn't pretending to be realistic nor a very good job, but I had fun trying to imagine what the sedan might look like.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I know, and I didn't mean for it to sound like I was demeaning you. I'd certainly never do that knowingly, and I apologize if I did.

    I'm ready to see the Accord Sedan, the bread and butter! I'm there with ya danielp!
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "They've been testing vehicles for decades and coming up with the numbers, biker4."

    Actually, not entirely true. The EPA specifies the METHODOLOGY. The actual testing is done by the manufacturers. The EPA spot checks and confirms roughly 10-15% of the models in their own labs.

    http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

    "Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 10-15 percent of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory."
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Ok, thanks for the info.

    I guess biker4 is implying that companies like Honda are breaking the law to improve their numbers by 1 or 2 MPG.
  • txhessrangertxhessranger Member Posts: 5
    Was loking at the 'spy' pics of the 2009 Accord...not much excitment there visually. What's wrong with making the '09 closer to the concept. Front end of the production is same o same o for Accord...BLAH!!! The concept front facia is exciting! And the rearend of the production ...what happened tothe tail lights and the sculpting of the trunk area? No, they go for ZZZZZzzzzzzzzz snore! Again the concept rear is likening to the Infinite G35, got so me Pizzazz! Hoo HUmm body style...again....
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    I'll bet you mean the 08 Accord. ;)
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    No, I was implying that the numbers come from Honda and my main point was that the numbers for the 08s are simply not available. The 08 numbers the EPA posted are estimates. Even Honda itself can't really be sure of the numbers until a real production car comes off the assembly line - probably in July. And then, we'll have to wait till people start driving them to see how close the window numbers compare to the real street numbers.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    The 2008 "Estimate System" or whatever you want to call it is what I've been saying about the Accord having 21/31 (4-cyl, Auto) as opposed to 24/34 on the current system. Realistically, I have mileage higher than the CURRENT numbers. I didn't mean the 2008 MODEL Accord, just the 2008 ESTIMATE SYSTEM.

    Sorry for the confusion.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Member Posts: 992
    Hopefully we will see a diesel accord that gets 27city and 40mpg highway with this new system!

    -Cj
  • hondaruhondaru Member Posts: 11
    I would hope higher. The new Jetta Diesel wagon (January 2008 release?)is rated at 40 city 60 hwy with 140 hp.
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    Guy,just go to Honda UK and you ca see the Imperial mpg just X.83 to get us mpg. Diesels will appear late 2008.
  • bamacarbamacar Member Posts: 749
    Where is the link to official 2008 EPA numbers on the VW? All I have seen on the 60/40 has been pure speculation. I predict more of 45/35 for the VW with the new 2008 EPA numbers. That translates to about 50/42 in pre-2008 terms.
  • blaneblane Member Posts: 2,017
    "Jetta Diesel wagon"??? It's a VW. I'd be very concerned about reliability, based upon lots of sources.
This discussion has been closed.