I understand the promise of continuously variable transmissions, but I don't think I could live with the monotone drone of the motor trans combination. Imagine a CVT S2K !? RPMs continuously hovering around 8-9K for max performance. Unappealing.
Much of the fun of driving is the rise and fall of engine revs & matching vehicle/motor/trans with road conditions. In general, CVT and performance are mutually exclusive for me; CVT = economy.
Saw an "Auto World" scan for the 03 Accord which discusses 5spd auto. This should be the same/similar 2.4L-5spd combo to make it into the Element with hopefully more hp/torque. TOV forums are predicting 175hp for the 2.4L Accord motor. Somethings got to give, but with Honda, it doesn't have to be performance. The 5spd auto alone should make up for 200lb weight gain (for accel times).
I was thinking about the minivan vs 7 person car. We all know there is a stigma to minivans now. So a 7 person car is an alternative to a minivan. Now factor in the Boomers. The children of Boomers need a car to take their aging parents who are suffering the ailments of old age. The healthy boomers need a car to take the grandchildren around. Everyone wants to dump the minivan. Now call the 7 passenger car a "sport wagon" and everyones happy.
diploid: I like to give credit for information, but do not always have time to do scholarly research. The source I get the info from gets the credit. The real credit goes to Auto World, which I did reference.
I wonder if you would have made a criticism if I did not reference anyone? Perhaps my attempt at courtesy is offensive?!
Nope. Just thought it would be nice if beach got the credit, since he took the time to scan the pics from Auto World and shared it in the Accord forum. He subscribes to that magazine. New issue won't be in stores until a few more days.
CVT technology is still in its infancy. I think we'll see it develop quite a bit as fuel regs tighten up.
Lots of them have artificial "steps" so they feel more familiar. And it's really only a drone if the engine sounds that way.
I had a CVT in my Honda scooter, and it took a while to get used to but generally worked well. The 2 cycle engine also took a while to get used to, like no engine braking (since there is no compression cycle).
My guess is 2 cycles will disappear because of noise and emissions, but CVTs won't.
CVT today is like where FWD was. It took a while for CV joint, torque steer, suspension, transaxle problems to be sorted out. The first ones were by FIAT and Mini-Cooper with problems. Now its the way to go. Light and easy to assemble. Its not easy seeing that Saturn can't release its CVT transmission. Audi have come up with a great CVT solution that I hope others can use. A Honda 5 speed auto must be a real bag of parts. Get used to the sound. It is the future sound of saving gasoline and the environment. Soon the sound of a shifting engine is like the old sound of a steam engine huffing and puffing.
The Justy failed because US consumers don't like such tiny cars, though. There's a thread here on Edmunds and the owners seem to like 'em.
In concept, a CVT could keep an engine at its peak torque at all time, and vary the gearing to keep it there. That would be beneficial off road, towing, accelerating, auto crossing, you name it.
I like the fact that the Honda Element has a hoseable interior. Let's just face it. Babies spit up. Toddler's spill drinks & put Cherios down the crack of seats. Or even better, cotton candy down the crack of the seat. Why don't other car mfg. take note of the hoseable interior concept.
barnes- I thought the exact same thing. This car may be aimed at the Y-gen, but I can bet young couples who really can't afford a minivan will also look at this.
The Element doesn't appear to have a center seating position in the second row. (Or was that just the concept car?) It's a four seater. That center position is the preferred spot for child seats. If it's a four seater, it wouldn't have tethor anchors and belts for a child. :-(
Rear upper tether anchors are required by law. LATCH/ISOFIX anchors are being phased in, but it would not make sense for Honda to release a new model without them.
So I bet it has them. All it takes is two anchor point on the floor, which could double as a tie-down when the seats are folded up.
The 4 seater layout is a bigger issue, but minivans with captain's chairs are that way, too. Maybe they'll have 3 anchors on the floor, then, since you can't put an infant seat in the middle.
I saw the appeal in a hose-out interior almost immediately. Our toddler gets in food fights regularly, and I always lose. ;-)
What I mean is that the center position may not have belts and tether anchors. The outboard seating positions would.
With a minivan, the child seat may be placed in the center of the vehicle. This is possible with the short bench and most capt. chairs may be slid to the middle position.
I'm sure that you can secure a child seat in the outboard positions. But those seats are generally less desirable than the center seat.
I dunno, if you can't afford a mini-van or something like that does it matter if the kid sits in the outbound seat? I mean really how did we evolve this far w/o things like tethers and airbags!
All I'm saying is that the advantage of being able to secure a child seat in its most effective position will probably mean more to a parent than the ability to hose the interior.
this is the official specs on the accord per vtec.net :
"All 4-cylinder models get the 2.4L i-VTEC motor (K24) which debuted in the 2002 CR-V. It is rated at 160hp @ 5500 rpm and 161 lb-ft @ 4500. A 5-speed manual transmission is standard in all 4-cylinder models, with an all-new 5-speed automatic available. "
This is pure speculation on my part but here it is:
since the same 4 cylinder will be in the cr-v, the element, and the accord
it makes one wonder, just how difficult would it be to pop the accords 240 hp v6 in a crv? (or something else)
especially since the element will be getting a 5 speed automatic
Auto.com has an article quoting a supplier as saying that the Stream will be coming as an '04, but called the Latitude, as Ropedart said. This is exciting to those of us who appreciate the design and concept.
Looks like Edmunds will need to de-archive the Stream discussion over on the Vans board.
Chriss77 - They say that the Accord V6 is a massaged version of the old block. That would mean that it spins in the opposite direction and may require a different transmission than the 2.4L engines. Just a guess on my part.
Odman - Good find. Thanks for the confirmation. Both the Stream and TSX are highly anticipated.
Honda is into paradigm shifts, and more hp for Honda Element wouldn't necessarilly mean more cubes. We know how secretive they are and won't know the rest of the story until the Accords roll-out.
Honda has offered base and upgraded fours in past, and if the 160 hp ivtec CR-V 160hp is the "base motor", could there be an upgraded ivtec 4cyl in the future?
I don't see the need for a 6cyl in a CR-V or Element, and Honda already has a 240hp 4 in the S2K; granted with marginal torque but that's a 2L. Something along the lines of a 200hp (can you say Escape 6cyl), good torque (200lbf, or so) would do nicely.
Traditionally, Honda has not offered much of an increase in power from the base to upgrade 4cyl, so it'll probably be around 180hp, 180lbf. But with the 5spd auto would keep up with the Fords'.
I agree. I think that 180hp is reasonable from the 2.4L, but it won't come anytime soon. If it happens, it might find its way under the hood of the SE edition CR-V.
they added another cylinder to the CRV/Element engine, they would end up with a 200 HP, 5-cylinder, 3.0 engine. Honda used to offer a 5-cylinder engine on the old Acura Vigor, so they have plenty of experience with 5-cylinder engines.
Even thought the Element/CRV engine is an east-west layout, I think there's room for adding an extra cylinder. Bob
rsholland, the Acura RSX has the same engine as the CRV only it is tweaked a little bit to give it 180 hp, and the Acura type-S has the 200 hp version! I speculate they may put that in the CRV in a couple years! Maybe????
rsholland - I think a 5-cylinder will be a warm welcome for the CR-V. Unless Honda decides to put it in the Open Air concept and turn it into an...Acura.
ok honda if you are tweaking the stream for the north am market here is one suggestion:
the rear roof pillar open it up more like an old fashoned wagon
the big overly thick pillars on many vehicles hinder rear visibility greatly, for example the pontiac vibe/ toyota matrix the matrix has much better visibility than vibe (though an even thinner pillar would be better)
compare the cr-v to the pilot and you will see how thick the crvs pillars are compared to pilot
if you are sill looking at vw take some cues from the passat wagon or other more traditional station wagons NOT the major blind spots on the golf or the ford focus (croak us)
and if you have any intention on selling yours truly a latitude it better be fore sale NO LATER than April or May )unless my car dies 1st)or else I'll buy something cheap and used the streams been out a while so it should be here quick its not a prototype like element so u should have most of the kinks out of the design
too bad peugeot doesn't sell cars in north America I've seen some interesting ones
I still would like to see a slightly modified step wagon (exterior)with about 180 or 200 hp myself
and the open air peugot looks sweet take notes honda
<< I think a 5-cylinder will be a warm welcome for the CR-V. Unless Honda decides to put it in the Open Air concept and turn it into an...Acura. >>
Even though I haven't heard any rumors about an "Acura CRV," it would make a whole lot of sense! Afterall, the MDX and Pilot are related, so why not a sporty, up-level Acura interpretation of the CRV? IMO, I think it's a no-brainer.
paisan- But it's true, ya know. Rich kids play soccer, too!
I think Honda can easily rebadge a CR-V into an Acura. They're probably just waiting to see how the Freelander sells, as well as the success of the upcoming BMW X3.
Acura is trying to regain its focus as a performance-oriented marque. The CR-V doesn't fit that image. They can slap leather into it, put more chrome around the edges, and even boost engine output, but under the skin it's still a fairly basic car.
And how many people think that the Integra should have been a Honda, not an Acura. With the RSX, they had to make it a more refined (and dare I say, "adult") car. Even then, most feel it isn't a true luxury-level car. It competes with Celicas, Eclipses, and WRXs. It should be going after BMWs, MBs, and Audis.
The CR-V is too noisy. It doesn't handle well enough. Even with the 2.4, it doesn't have the straight line performance. It would need new styling. It would also need considerably more equipment (which would add more weight hindering almost all of the above). Fix those problems and you're talking about a CR-V that costs $28-30K.
It's like the suped up Mustangs that Ford lets the media drive. $70K for a Mustang when you could buy a Vette or Viper for the same dollar.
But 28-30k is nothing these days. The new Accord and Camry will surpass $30k loaded up, and neither is from a luxury brand.
Looking at the next step up MDX, they run $35-40 grand with the most common equipment. So there is no overlap.
Why not get a Pilot? Well, it's big, and serves a different customer than a sporty Acura Element/CR-V would.
Would a 5 cyl fit, though? And would consumers value it? It's still not a 6. Plus, the Vigor has a north-south configuration, and it never sold well anyway.
Just playing devil's advocate. I think Honda would need a 6 to compete in the Freelander's price range, even if it's a 2.5l six.
I paid $26,700 for a 2001 TL. You can get a TL-S for about $32K. A gilded CR-V does not have that kind of draw.
The Accord platform has the upward potential to support the TL. It isn't a big stretch. The Civic platform is maxxed out with the upgrades to the CR-V and RSX. Stretching it further, would be... well... a stretch.
But the TL isn't the only model based on the Accord platform. The Odyssey was also based off the Accord platform (I believe it's the only minivan to have double wishbones), which in turn spawned the MDX and the Pilot. So why the double standard for the Accord and Civic platforms?
The Ody is to the Accord as the CR-V is to the Civic. (Though even that's a stretch.)
The TL is to the Accord as the RSX is to the Civic.
The Pilot and MDX are both purpose-built vehicles (as far as their platforms go). Note that they do not ride on 2X wishbones, they have different drive trains, and they have integrated rail frames. This is an Accord platform twice Frankenstein'd. IOW, it shows no resemblance to the original. The Pilot is not the Accord's brother, it's more of a 2nd cousin.
Even the Ody shows little resemblance to the Accord. Only the front end rides on bone-style suspension, the back rides over struts. The engine and transmission are also Pilot/MDX/RL based.
Make those kinds of changes to the CR-V, and we're not talking about a CR-V any more.
I honestly don't know what platform the 1st gen Odyssey was made from. But I do know the 2nd gen is made from the Accord, as Honda realized that the previous Odyssey, from whatever platform they built it on (previous Accord?), was simply not large enough for NA's taste.
I can see the point about the limits of a platform, but look at the TT Quattro roadster and the plain jane Golf. VW has done a great job proving a platform can be versatile.
On another topic, I read an Accord review, and the same 2.4l makes 161 lb-ft at 4500 rpm, with the same HP. The CR-V makes 1 more lb-ft 900 rpm sooner, so why not put that more accessible torque band in the best seller? Odd.
The CR-V is the best-selling import SUV already. I don't think it's in Honda's interest to dilute the model with an Acura offering. MDX / Pilot makes sense, since they sell in fewer numbers. But the CR-V is already in the truck top 10. That would not make any sense. A venhicle the size of the freelander, which volumewise is smaller than the CR-V, is too pricey at $30K plus. For that money I would so rather buy a Pilot and still be able to pocket some cash.
I can understand why people would want a more content-filled version of the CR-V, but that can be handled with an SE version; badged as a Honda. It doesn't need to be an Acura. Quite frankly, it would dilute the Acura nameplate.
Getting back to the Element... I'm wondering about the 5 speed auto. It appears that this will be the same auto used in the Accord. Perhaps the gearing ratios will be slightly different, but I'm guessing it could still use the same basic gear box. However, I don't see how this could be mated to the 3.0L V6. Based on what I've read about the Accord, it sounds like the 3.0 is an improved version of the old engine. I've been under the assumption that the old V6 spun in the old direction. So does Honda have a second 5 speed auto for the V6? Could it be the same as the Pilot/Ody/MDX?
Along those lines, the 2.4 version of the 5 speed auto is being used in American built cars for the NA market. So they may not produce/ship them to Sayama and Swindon for use with the CR-V. Just a thought.
It's the same way with Subaru, the H6 is made in the USA and so far has only been put in US made Subarus (the Outback).
The turbo 2.0l boxers are made in Japan and so far have only been put in Japanese made models (Impreza/Forester and Japan-only Legacys).
Forester is getting an upgrade engine so if logic follows we'll get the 2.0l turbo instead of the H6, unless of course they move production to the USA.
Early reports stated the 2.0l turbo Forester will land here (next Spring) with ~217 hp and more low-end torque than found in the WRX. Maybe Subaru is going to use a smaller turbo that peaks earlier in the rev range like the VW 1.8T.
I doubt if I'll have any trouble talking my wife into trading our 2.5RS for one of those babies!
I wonder if/when Honda will respond, given when the CR-V came out the most power in the class was about 180hp (Cherokee), and 120hp was more common.
Today plenty of them offer 200hp or more (Liberty, XTerra, Escape, Tribute, and soon Forester).
A friend saw a Nissan XTrail in NM, so Nissan is probably hot weather testing that, too. And Mitsu will have the Outlander soon, though it won't be very powerful.
Comments
Much of the fun of driving is the rise and fall of engine revs & matching vehicle/motor/trans with road conditions. In general, CVT and performance are mutually exclusive for me; CVT = economy.
Saw an "Auto World" scan for the 03 Accord which discusses 5spd auto. This should be the same/similar 2.4L-5spd combo to make it into the Element with hopefully more hp/torque. TOV forums are predicting 175hp for the 2.4L Accord motor. Somethings got to give, but with Honda, it doesn't have to be performance. The 5spd auto alone should make up for 200lb weight gain (for accel times).
http://community.webshots.com/photo/44150265/44151119DfdaXr
I like to give credit for information, but do not always have time to do scholarly research. The source I get the info from gets the credit. The real credit goes to Auto World, which I did reference.
I wonder if you would have made a criticism if I did not reference anyone? Perhaps my attempt at courtesy is offensive?!
Lots of them have artificial "steps" so they feel more familiar. And it's really only a drone if the engine sounds that way.
I had a CVT in my Honda scooter, and it took a while to get used to but generally worked well. The 2 cycle engine also took a while to get used to, like no engine braking (since there is no compression cycle).
My guess is 2 cycles will disappear because of noise and emissions, but CVTs won't.
-juice
Get used to the sound. It is the future sound of saving gasoline and the environment. Soon the sound of a shifting engine is like the old sound of a steam engine huffing and puffing.
I don't think CVTs will take over. Give me a nice diesel engine instead. Even now, most manufacturers are going back to RWD.
-mike
In concept, a CVT could keep an engine at its peak torque at all time, and vary the gearing to keep it there. That would be beneficial off road, towing, accelerating, auto crossing, you name it.
These haven't really been exploited yet.
-juice
-juice
So I bet it has them. All it takes is two anchor point on the floor, which could double as a tie-down when the seats are folded up.
The 4 seater layout is a bigger issue, but minivans with captain's chairs are that way, too. Maybe they'll have 3 anchors on the floor, then, since you can't put an infant seat in the middle.
I saw the appeal in a hose-out interior almost immediately. Our toddler gets in food fights regularly, and I always lose. ;-)
-juice
With a minivan, the child seat may be placed in the center of the vehicle. This is possible with the short bench and most capt. chairs may be slid to the middle position.
I'm sure that you can secure a child seat in the outboard positions. But those seats are generally less desirable than the center seat.
-mike
All I'm saying is that the advantage of being able to secure a child seat in its most effective position will probably mean more to a parent than the ability to hose the interior.
"All 4-cylinder models get the 2.4L i-VTEC motor (K24) which debuted in the 2002 CR-V. It is rated at 160hp @ 5500 rpm and 161 lb-ft @ 4500. A 5-speed manual transmission is standard in all 4-cylinder models, with an all-new 5-speed automatic available. "
This is pure speculation on my part but here it is:
since the same 4 cylinder will be in the cr-v, the element, and the accord
it makes one wonder, just how difficult would it be to pop the accords 240 hp v6 in a crv? (or something else)
especially since the element will be getting a 5 speed automatic
Looks like Edmunds will need to de-archive the Stream discussion over on the Vans board.
http://www.auto.com/industry/iwirf27_20020727.htm
Odman - Good find. Thanks for the confirmation. Both the Stream and TSX are highly anticipated.
Honda is into paradigm shifts, and more hp for Honda Element wouldn't necessarilly mean more cubes. We know how secretive they are and won't know the rest of the story until the Accords roll-out.
Honda has offered base and upgraded fours in past, and if the 160 hp ivtec CR-V 160hp is the "base motor", could there be an upgraded ivtec 4cyl in the future?
I don't see the need for a 6cyl in a CR-V or Element, and Honda already has a 240hp 4 in the S2K; granted with marginal torque but that's a 2L. Something along the lines of a 200hp (can you say Escape 6cyl), good torque (200lbf, or so) would do nicely.
Traditionally, Honda has not offered much of an increase in power from the base to upgrade 4cyl, so it'll probably be around 180hp, 180lbf. But with the 5spd auto would keep up with the Fords'.
chris777: great news on the Stream!
Even thought the Element/CRV engine is an east-west layout, I think there's room for adding an extra cylinder.
Bob
http://www.peugeot.com.hk/307SW.htm
Bob
-mike
the rear roof pillar open it up more like an old fashoned wagon
the big overly thick pillars on many vehicles hinder rear visibility greatly,
for example the pontiac vibe/ toyota matrix the matrix has much better visibility than vibe (though an even thinner pillar would be better)
compare the cr-v to the pilot and you will see how thick the crvs pillars are compared to pilot
if you are sill looking at vw take some cues from the passat wagon or other more traditional station wagons NOT the major blind spots on the golf or the ford focus (croak us)
and if you have any intention on selling yours truly a latitude it better be fore sale NO LATER than April or May )unless my car dies 1st)or else I'll buy something cheap and used
the streams been out a while so it should be here quick its not a prototype like element so u should have most of the kinks out of the design
too bad peugeot doesn't sell cars in north America I've seen some interesting ones
I still would like to see a slightly modified step wagon (exterior)with about 180 or 200 hp myself
and the open air peugot looks sweet take notes honda
Even though I haven't heard any rumors about an "Acura CRV," it would make a whole lot of sense! Afterall, the MDX and Pilot are related, so why not a sporty, up-level Acura interpretation of the CRV? IMO, I think it's a no-brainer.
Bob
-mike
I think Honda can easily rebadge a CR-V into an Acura. They're probably just waiting to see how the Freelander sells, as well as the success of the upcoming BMW X3.
The CR-V is too noisy. It doesn't handle well enough. Even with the 2.4, it doesn't have the straight line performance. It would need new styling. It would also need considerably more equipment (which would add more weight hindering almost all of the above). Fix those problems and you're talking about a CR-V that costs $28-30K.
It's like the suped up Mustangs that Ford lets the media drive. $70K for a Mustang when you could buy a Vette or Viper for the same dollar.
Looking at the next step up MDX, they run $35-40 grand with the most common equipment. So there is no overlap.
Why not get a Pilot? Well, it's big, and serves a different customer than a sporty Acura Element/CR-V would.
Would a 5 cyl fit, though? And would consumers value it? It's still not a 6. Plus, the Vigor has a north-south configuration, and it never sold well anyway.
Just playing devil's advocate. I think Honda would need a 6 to compete in the Freelander's price range, even if it's a 2.5l six.
-juice
The Accord platform has the upward potential to support the TL. It isn't a big stretch. The Civic platform is maxxed out with the upgrades to the CR-V and RSX. Stretching it further, would be... well... a stretch.
The TL is to the Accord as the RSX is to the Civic.
The Pilot and MDX are both purpose-built vehicles (as far as their platforms go). Note that they do not ride on 2X wishbones, they have different drive trains, and they have integrated rail frames. This is an Accord platform twice Frankenstein'd. IOW, it shows no resemblance to the original. The Pilot is not the Accord's brother, it's more of a 2nd cousin.
Even the Ody shows little resemblance to the Accord. Only the front end rides on bone-style suspension, the back rides over struts. The engine and transmission are also Pilot/MDX/RL based.
Make those kinds of changes to the CR-V, and we're not talking about a CR-V any more.
Thought the 2nd gen was not based on the accord, also does the current accord have rear indy? thought they changed to something different.
-mike
On another topic, I read an Accord review, and the same 2.4l makes 161 lb-ft at 4500 rpm, with the same HP. The CR-V makes 1 more lb-ft 900 rpm sooner, so why not put that more accessible torque band in the best seller? Odd.
-juice
Getting back to the Element... I'm wondering about the 5 speed auto. It appears that this will be the same auto used in the Accord. Perhaps the gearing ratios will be slightly different, but I'm guessing it could still use the same basic gear box. However, I don't see how this could be mated to the 3.0L V6. Based on what I've read about the Accord, it sounds like the 3.0 is an improved version of the old engine. I've been under the assumption that the old V6 spun in the old direction. So does Honda have a second 5 speed auto for the V6? Could it be the same as the Pilot/Ody/MDX?
Along those lines, the 2.4 version of the 5 speed auto is being used in American built cars for the NA market. So they may not produce/ship them to Sayama and Swindon for use with the CR-V. Just a thought.
It's the same way with Subaru, the H6 is made in the USA and so far has only been put in US made Subarus (the Outback).
The turbo 2.0l boxers are made in Japan and so far have only been put in Japanese made models (Impreza/Forester and Japan-only Legacys).
Forester is getting an upgrade engine so if logic follows we'll get the 2.0l turbo instead of the H6, unless of course they move production to the USA.
-juice
I doubt if I'll have any trouble talking my wife into trading our 2.5RS for one of those babies!
I wonder if/when Honda will respond, given when the CR-V came out the most power in the class was about 180hp (Cherokee), and 120hp was more common.
Today plenty of them offer 200hp or more (Liberty, XTerra, Escape, Tribute, and soon Forester).
A friend saw a Nissan XTrail in NM, so Nissan is probably hot weather testing that, too. And Mitsu will have the Outlander soon, though it won't be very powerful.
-juice