Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Can't argue with that, but I'm not sure, if I were an enthusiast, that I would want Honda's version. With the 6-speed manual, I suppose it qualifies, but really, I still consider the V6 as an "autobahn" car, essentially. Made for touring where speed limits don't apply. If my driving were mainly such, I would have opted for the V6 myself. As it is, I'm more than happy with the 4.
Still a pretty mean feat for a 4-cyl that is about (there is that word again) half the cost.
My brother has the 530i automatic (last year before bangle) and while it is fun to drive I honestly prefer driving my I4 Accord with a stick - more engaging.
That's the problem with the popular under-$30K family mid-sizers; wanting a fun, v6/manual sedan to drop the kids off at school in limits you to the Mazda 6, or Nissan Altima. Those wanting the Accord's reliability and refinement have to choose between the v6 with an auto, or the I4 with a manual, as most aren't willing to pony up the extra 12K to buy a Type-S TL. That said, I think it's a shame Honda dropped the 6-speed accord sedan.
That's what is so wonderful about today's cars with the 21st century technology = power with good economy!
As to which choice is better, I started looking into a new car several months ago. Finally narrowed it down to the Accord but couldn't decide to get a leftover '07, the new '08 or wait for the '09 diesel.
Obviously, decided on the '07. Even though it's a Honda, I was a bit gun-shy on the '08 being the introductory year & the new VCM technology. And, since the performance & mpg were virtually the same, the '07 seemed the more practical choice.
As for the diesel, I figured it came down to dollars & cents. Yes, those who wait and buy the new diesel will certainly be making fewer trips to fill up than I will, but considering the costlier premium they will pay to purchase the diesel I figured I would have to drive it for at least 6-7 years before it paid for itself (of course, that time-frame will vary depending on how many miles driven per year). But, in the meantime, I'm enjoying the awesome V6 power that certainly will not be the case in the diesel.
For those trying to make the choice, you really need to consider all the variables and then decide which makes the most sense for you personally. In the end, there is no one right answer that fits everyone.
It quite possible gas could be $5 a gallon in 5 to 7 years from now. Maybe more.
5 years ago people wouldn't believe the cost of gas in 2007 would be what it is today.
Some people need a V8 SUV to pull trailers for their business and some people drive V8s because its just a preference. People who have to have a V8 to do some critical task will have to keep buying them regardless of the price of gas and many others will stop buying them unless they could care less how high gas ever goes due to their high level of wealth.
I bet people buying 7 Series BMW V8s will be less likely to downgrade to a V6 at $5 a gallon than people shopping a Camry or Accord are to downgrade from a V6 to an I4, so I can see more people dropping that luxury if gas gets much more expensive.
At those prices, diesels and hybrids will start making more sense too.
The V6 in the 2008 Accord is just a preference for people who want the fun of the extra speed and acceleration over the already quick 4 cylinder, so their is great potential for the V6 demand to drop when fuel costs are a major concern.
The V6 in the 2008 Accord is just a preference for people who want the fun of the extra speed and acceleration over the already quick 4 cylinder, so their is great potential for the V6 demand to drop when fuel costs are a major concern.
Glenn Says: I never said fuel mileage was NOT important, What I am saying is that 1. There's no substitute for cubes when you are looking for performance and 2. The V-6 is not that bad on the gas mileage side either (my 6 only gets about 2 MPG worse than my 06 I4). 2 MPG in the real world is not going to make or break anyone. That 2 MPG can come from easier cruising speeds on the highway, better engine longevity from not having to work as hard to pull the load. I'll guarantee that somone looking for a 4 banger will still buy or consider the 6 at resale time because of its performance and still great gas mileage, BUT that few if any looking for the 6 will accept the 4 because of the performance difference. I own a 4, so this is no slight to the engine. Its just that the 6 is so much more enjoyable when you press on that lil peddle on the right and it just plain goes!!! Its nice being able to dust an Acura TL and ask the driver of that car, "You Paid what????" In my opinion the current 3.0 litre v-6 is simply one of the best Honda engines ever made. I am sure the new 08 engine will take the crown away, but in the meantime, see you at the gas pumps!!
When prices of gas get much higher than they are today, many people will not be completely satisfied even with the 4 cylinder mileage and 2 or 3 mpg loss with the V6 cross it off many lists. With the purchase savings, they can buy that much more gas.
$5 or more per gallon gas will kill a lot of desire to use faster acceleration as a form of recreation and "enjoyment."
$3 a gallon is hurting the sales of big SUVs, but isn't enough to hurt sales of V6 sedans that much. Some higher gas price in the future will be enough for more buyers to look at saving every MPG they can. That will be reflected in resale values down the road.
I had a V6 Accord 5 years ago and liked the power, but I will not buy the V6 version of current accord even though it has more power. I drove a 2007 4 cylinder for 2 days and was more than satisfied with the performance, so I don't see any reason to even give up 3 mpg or more just to have even more power. I drive more city than highway mileage and city drivers have been seeing a bigger difference in fuel use between V6 and 4 cylinder than the EPA estimates indicate.
At $5 per gallon, I'd probably get the diesel model if I were going to get an Accord.
$5 or more per gallon gas will kill a lot of desire to use faster acceleration as a form of recreation and "enjoyment."
Bingo. I think in Europe, the Mazda 6 with the 2.3L 4-cyl is one of the "big engines." It also comes with a 1.8L and a 2.0L over there, IIRC. Fuel was over $3 a gallon when I was there back in 2000, I can only imagine they are over $5 and $6 now, depending on the particular country.
Accord LXV6: $22.3K (200 HP)
Accord EX-L: $23.1K (150 HP)
Accord EXV6: $24.3K (200 HP)
I didn’t bother to consider LXV6. If I had to get the V6, I would rather go all-out and get EXV6 (since EX-L was already in consideration, and already more expensive than LXV6). So, it can down to the top two trim, and down to I-4 versus V6. My pick: I-4.
One of the drivers was indeed that I saved $1.2K up front. I had figured, over the stretch I plan to keep my new car (100K miles), I would be saving another $1.5K or so in gas and maintenance costs (V6 maintenance was higher). But the most important point was that the I-4 felt sportier, and had just the amount of power I needed. Ten years and 183K miles later, I still stand by my decision. If I had to buy another Accord today, it will be EX-L/NAV. No wonder that is where sales are. Honda projects EX/EX-L trims to account for half of Accord sales.
Now, V6 is clearly a better performer. But, do I need the extra performance? Is it worth the cost upfront and ownership costs over time? Would it really matter if I had a car that could do 45-65 acceleration in 4.2s as opposed to 5.2s?
My old Accord is probably capable of doing it in 5.5-6.0s, yet, it happens to be quick enough to NEVER be a nuisance when it came to overtaking slower vehicles on two-lane high speed highways. And it has seen action from relatively crowded lower speed highways along the east coast to 75 mph 2-lane highways in the mountains and deserts of Arizona, Utah and Colorado. And that is with people on board. I still remember, a friend of mine asked me from the backseat once if my car had a V8 (she drives a CLK320 but has little clue about cars). I told her not even a V6. It’s a four banger. And that’s the beauty of Honda’s four cylinder engines.
The second car happens to be 2006 TL. In terms of performance, I feel that the TL has more than I need. It gets to speeds that I want so quickly (and without going all the way in the rev range) that the need for more power seems almost moot. The one advantage it does have is smoothness, and in being completely quiet under low throttle driving but with a nice growl upon acceleration. It even gets almost identical mileage on freeway as my four cylinder Accord, both around 32 mpg at about 75 mph. The difference shows up in city driving.
A lot of my friends have noticed that I still drive my Accord faster than the TL. And I happened to have TSX as my first choice over TL. So, V6 played very little role in my selection. What did was better deal on TL than I was able to get on TSX. Dealers were unwilling to budge more than $500 off TSX MSRP, and I got TL for invoice. Still ~$3K more expensive than TL, but I was more satisfied getting a deal than not.
As of now, I get 25-26 mpg in my TL in mixed driving with a not so leadfooted driving. I get 26+ mpg in my Accord with a leadfoot all the time. While not a huge difference (ignoring the ~10% premium on premium grade in TL), when I can drive the Accord at 9/10 or even 10/10 of its engine's potential. At best, I get to use the TL at, may be, 7/10 of its engine's potential for a fraction of the time.
So, if 7/10 of 258 HP is what I need, I might be fine using 190 HP Accord and pushing to to 9/10 or 10/10. Even Honda has recognized this, a reason the choice of 3.5-liter engine isn't to promote performance, but to promote fuel economy with V6 power. That is why the new 3.5/V6 is really more like a 3.2/V6 in low-mid range, and transforms to 3.5/V6 only in high speed acceleration situations that involves passing over 60 mph.
The difference might disappear further, if Honda were to use a fine 6AT on 190 HP/I-4. That engines deserves it.
And here is a bonus, a non-VTEC SOHC from first generation RL...
And before you think the second looks better than first, be advised that the peak in the second is 231 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm. In the first, about 230 lb-ft is being delivered around 1800 rpm, while peak is 253 lb-ft from (not "at") 3500 rpm to 5000 rpm.
Why did you ask?
This is a minor consideration, but for sake of the discussion, it's worth mentioning for folks who keep their cars for a long time.
Where I live (Whidbey Island, WA) my 2006 4 cyl Honda Accord EX-L provides ample performance. Maximum speed limit here is 55mph and that's only in a few places. Buy the car you need, not the one somebody else wants.
The business about $ is also not exactly accurate. Yes, 4 cyl owners will spend less, no question. But I just purchased an 07 V6 for 2K below invoice. Next year, when the diesel debuts, what do you think will happen if gas is $4 a gallon? Think you'll get a diesel for 2K below invoice? Try MSRP, or close to it. When Toyota introduced its new Camry Hybrid, they were selling for MSRP or at best a couple hundred below it. Meanwhile, non-hybrid models were selling 1500 below invoice.
I did the math. It would take years for the hybrid to pay for itself. The same will probably hold true for the upcoming Accord diesel.
Also, mpg will likely continue to improve across the board. Tomorrows V6's will probably get what today's 4 bangers get.
I will have to dig up the 3.5 (VCM) dyno from articles posted couple of months ago, which shows it is more like TL's 3.2 under 3500 rpm, and more aggressively tuned above that.
Please help with any valid knowledge!!
With VSA being standard in all models, it comes down to tires. I would still think that I-4 might have a little advantage in snow/icy but one could make a point that V6 being heavier might offer more traction on the same footprint (EX/EXL/EXV6/EXLV6 wear the same size tires, while LX/LX-P wear narrower tires... good for traction on snow but they also weigh a lot less).
I would say you can't go wrong with any of them. For me, EX-L makes the most sense because I want those features, and don't feel the need for V6 power. My opinion might change after a test drive, however. Then there is your decision around whether V6 premium is worth it, or not.
My personal opinon? If you feel comfortable with the power of the I4 (I have the 2.4L in my Accord) go with that and save some $. They have equal safety features to the V6.
(By the way, click the link for Vehicle Stability Assist to learn what I'm talking about).
" My personal opinon? If you feel comfortable with the power of the I4 (I have the 2.4L in my Accord) go with that and save some $. They have equal safety features to the V6. "
Glenn says: " I own BOTH, a 2006 4 and a 2007 V-6; If you're coming from an 8, the lack of torque in the 4 will be readily appraent on your daily commute, particularly in stop and go. Go with the V-6, its far superior in performance and real close in gas mileage (probably the same on the highway with VCM) and it'll be there when you need it (such as on ramp acceleration run) or getting around that slug in front of you. Get the V-6, you will not be unhappy." I find that on the Highway the V-6 is about the same or a tiny bit less than the 4 in MPG. In Fun Per miles, the V-6 gets much better mileage.
Glenn
I believe the test results chart looked like this:
0-30: Soon
0-60: Eventually
0-90: Maybe
The best idea is drive them yourself and form your own opinion. Obviously glenn has his/hers (V6) and I have mine (I4). Opinions are like noses though, everybody has one. Go form one for yourself and decide if the V6 is worth the extra cash to you.
As an aside, went to Honda dealership today and saw the new Mugen Civic. ONlY comes in Blue (no Black wah wah wah) and stickers at 31 K without Navi (which is a must for my job). Nice car, sorta cool and I love the ground effects and the adjustable rear wing. Problem is, it looks like a ticket magnet supreme and every Evo and WRX on the street will be hunting you down for a race. They told me they only made 1000 of them (internet says 2000 total for 08), What give, anyonew know about the car and its performance???? I dont think that 0-60 wil be much better than my 07 Accord sedan with V-6.
Glenn
Glenn
Glenn
The only issue with the V6 is the VCM surging and almost a hesitation or overdrive/shifting sensation you will begin to feel on long highway drives at faster cruising speeds i.e 65-70mph. thats when you will notice a vibration as well ( in your seat, not steering wheel) almost like tires out of balance. This is the 3 cylinder mode in full swing (oximoron). take it for a long ride and try it....before you buy it. if its not objectionable to you then go for it. :sick:
I have been keeping track of all the Consumer Reports auto reliability history for over 20 years, and it appears that Honda Accord I4 engines always last longer than Toyota Camry I4, regardless of what year.
You really can't take that into account. When I bought my '99 VW Beetle TDI, diesel was still priced under 0.99 and was at least .10 cheaper than regular gasoline. My point is that diesel prices fluctuate differently than gasoline so trying to take cost difference into account simply won't work.
Also, I've been there done that with a "beta" VCM system in our '06 Odyssey. They can keep that system because it only saves 1mpg max.
Sounds like you are used to the V6 power, and like it. You are going to be hard to please. I think my V6 gets great mileage, if you consider 21mpg in town, and 29mpg easy on the highway great.
I happen to over hear someone at my dealer, a couple that went out and test drove the 4cyl, and apparently a V6, I am not sure, but they had said, "we are certain the 4cyl is enough for us". The dealer of course, tried to get a V6 in the picture. Many have thought my car was a V6. I love it!
It is all what your used to.
My '08 V6 EX-L gets 25.5 to 30+ MPG. When one drives a Honda V6 he/ she never wants to get back to I4. I just got rid of my last '95 I4 Accord 2 months ago.
My salesman actually encouraged me to stick with the 4 - he challenged me to check the used car market for '04-'05 4 vs 6 cyl used accords... he told me that I would find more 4 cyl models selling for more than the equivalent 6 cyl with equal mileage. I tought that he was off his rocket, but oddly enough, he was right (at least here in the Montreal, Canada area). Anyone else notice this?
I've been very happy with my 06 EX-L I4. I have a manual which I found to be much more responsive than the automatic I4. I have over 40k miles and drive over mountain passes and up western Washington hills quite a bit and very rarely do I want or need more power. Around town and on the freeway, it's a gem. I've only had a few tanks of gas under 30 mpg so I'm more than happy about gas mileage too. :shades:
I do agree that it will probably be hard for you after driving a V6. However, I'm sure you will get used to it soon enough.
Many have gotten it my car, and literally went, wow your car is so quiet.
The 4cyl accord, loves to whine up, its great! But, I am never too hard on it, its my baby! But, you do have to let it loose every now and then!
Although I test drove the 08 accord 4cyl with about 3,000 on it, and I found it not as spunky when trying to pass a car on a back road. It didn't kick into gear like my 06. Normally my 06 just goes, when I want it too, its like the line up is different in the 08. I never pushed the 08 really hard, hopefully I am not taking a hit because of bigger size if I get the 08 4cyl. Perhaps it was not fully broken in.
I need the dealer to stay back when I test drive, so I can really concentrate on the car... that can be tricky. It is not like I want to steal your car, when I already lease a honda.
Glenn
Glenn says:
I believe that was addressed below in my comments referring to who's paying the bill; Having owned BOTH (still), I stand by my comments that the I-4 is a grocery getter. See below:
"I guess all that really matters is that you're happy, since you're the one paying the bill for the car and gas. Insurance-wise, there was no difference."
I must admit that my 4-cyl Accord (2006) doesn't feel like a grocery getter when listening to the engine at 5500 RPM and taking corners in a *ahem* hurried fashion.
If anything, I'd think that the 4-cyl would be the more balanced handler of the two cars since there is less weight over the front-end. The V6 will be a lot faster in a straight-line, but 8 seconds to 60 is more than I've ever found necessary, and if I get the urge to, it's a lot of fun to really wind it out!
So, while the non-enthusiast Accord shopper would likely choose the 4-cyl for reasons of thriftiness, I actually like the 2.4 in that it's so smooth and peppy, a friend who drove it thought it was a V6, as he has a V6 midsizer as well. The 35 MPG we got on that trip certainly wasn't V6 mileage though!
Best regards,
TheGrad
I totally agree with you!!!
So true about the 06 Accord 4cyl engine, couldn't have said it better!! Love it!
Same experiences and feel with mine.
I love Honda!