By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
"“I will leave the "complicated" and "more expensive" part out since neither you nor I have a clue about it”
You should be telling, not asking, me about costs if you care to make it a part of your argument."
Are you serious? You can't figure those questions out? You're telling me that you don't have a clue?
Which engine would you guess to cost more, the Integra Type-R engine, or the 2.4L in the Accord?
What about an NSX 3.2L vs. a 5.7L smallblock Chevy crate motor?
Or a 4.0L Ford Ranger V6 vs. a 4.0L Jaguar V8?
How about a BMW 3.2L I6 vs. a Ford 3.8L V6?
You're telling me that you don't have the answers to these questions? You can't figure out which engines are the expensive ones? I know which engines are the expensive ones in the examples I give, and they're all the smaller of the two (with the exception of the Ford 4.0L V6 vs the Jag 4.0L V8, which are equal displacement) engines compared. You know it too.
"What about Altima? Either you didn't read my story with the timeline earlier, or you chose to ignore it. Which one is it?"
Anytime I roast you in a debate, there ALWAYS seems to be some question that I'm not answering. Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious. I'm done with you. Next?
1990-1993: 387 units/year (Four Year Design)
1994-1997: 365 units/year (Four Year Design)
1998-2002: 404 units/year (Five Year Design)
2003-current: 393 units/year (in its third year)
"Accord sales had been going up with each generation since launch, except with 1994-1997 generation. The larger 1998-2002 generation recorded the best years in Accord’s history. The latest generation of Accord has seen sales slip a little but I can as well attribute that slip to a new competition in Honda’s Acura lineup (namely TSX), and Honda sold 30K of them in 2004, and had sold 19K of them in 2003."
"So effectively, combined sales of TSX and Accord in 2003 was 418K units, and 417K in 2004. I doubt Vigor and 2.5TL were taking up sales from 1994-1997 and 1998 Accord though. (Acura sold only 8K units of Vigor in calendar year 1994, and just 253 units in 1995")
"Just a little more statistical data to play with."
You had numbers a few weeks ago on the 94-97 Accord and I believe the numbers went a little like this if I recall right for the 5th generation Accord model years(94-97.)
93: 330K(that model year was 93 and 94 Accord sales mixed in a little bit however.)
94: 367K
95: 341K
96: 382K
97: 385K(that was 97 and 98 Accord's sales mixed in a little bit, however again.
It looks like with the 96 model year revisions the Accord was going in the right direction sales wise again in my opinion. Another thing of note I believe the Accord for the 1995 model year was the first time Honda put a V6 into the Accord.
Nope. You should tell me how expensive would it be to...
A: Use 160 HP K20A instead of 160 HP K24A (if at all)
B: Extend VTEC to act on exhaust side as well on K24A.
If you can do that, we can discuss the rest.
And I assume you got my point on Altima, so I will leave it at that.
I do think a threshold is crossed somewhere though, where it becomes a better idea to just make it a small 6-cyl instead. Either the block gets so long you might as well just make it a six, or the stroke becomes impractically long. I believe the Tacoma engine uses a long-stroke design.
which causes my thinking to segue into what gee mentioned above - when will the day come when a V-6 is the base engine for Accord? I bet this will be the last Malibu with a 4-cyl (which no-one will buy anyway), and the 500 uses the Duratec 3.0 as a base. The Fusion is going to have a 4-cyl, I guess (it will be smaller too), but the only 4-cyl Passat is the turbo. And the Fusion will also be sold with the engine from the 500, while that model is expected to have a 3.5 available as an optional engine in two years or so.
The domestics have brought the mileage figures way up on their V-6s with a combo of creative transmissions (CVTs and 5 or 6 speeds) and incremental improvements. The Japanese 4-cyls will soon be down on power without an appreciable fuel economy advantage if they are not careful. In the midsize segment, of course. Honda/Toyota are still out in front by a comfortable margin in the compact class.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The Malibu might also be the one exception to the rule in this size class, concerning the breakdown of 4-cyl versus V-6 production. While the majority of Altimas, Accords, Camrys, Mazda6es, and Stratus/Sebrings are still sold with the 4-cyl (I'd imagine the same holds true for the Hyundai Sonata), with the Malibu, it seems the the 3.5 is the more common engine.
Honda still seems to keep a good balance between the 4 and the V-6, though. The V-6 gives you much better performance, but at a loss of fuel economy. Which is about what you'd expect. The 4-cyl still seems adequate for most driving though, from what I've seen.
With the Malibu though, the V-6 isn't that much more expensive than the 4-cyl. I haven't seen any stats for the 4-cyl Malibu, but I'd imagine it's inadequate. And if the Ecotech is as buzzy in the Malibu as it is in my co-worker's 2003 Cavalier, well that puts any refinement gains in this size of car back a good 20 years or more! In contrast though, the 3.5 gives good acceleration, yet returns as good as better fuel economy than the 4-cyl! And it's pretty refined, too.
We care, but we're enthusiasts. A lot of people, probably most, are just Point A to Point B. It really only matters to them because they read press reviews.
But they'll read a favorable review on the EVO VIII and then go buy a base Lancer or Ralliart.
I'm talking about layman buyers, not enthusiasts.
-juice
I have not driven Hyundai’s Sonata/Optima with four banger either, but the 2.7/V6 drive train felt lethargic, and at times less refined than the four banger in my 1998 Accord, or the Camrys that I have rented over time. I have accumulated about 5000 miles in Sonata V6 and just a few in Kia Optima V6.
I was not aware that Honda had prospects for a full hybrid. That would be a very good idea - they could still use the IMA system for power increase like the current Accord.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
A bunch of us are going to Busch Gardens on Sunday though, and she's driving her Sonata, and I'm driving my Intrepid. Maybe I should challenge her to a drag race? Duelling 2.7's!
Honda's 4 bangers make good specific output (HP/liter) but for torque you really need the displacement. Their 2.4l is decent in that regard, though.
Hyundai's real problem is weight. Their cars tend to be heavier than similar competitors.
Weight is perhaps Honda's main advantage. By keeping the cars lights and using alloy blocks, they can build 2.4l Accords and perform like V6 Hyundais most of the time.
-juice
For example, on the Sonata, the 2.7 V-6 only puts out 170 hp, and something like 181 ft-lb of torque. In comparison, I think the Nissan 2.5 puts out 175 hp in the Altima, and around 180-185 ft-lb of torque.
And for fuel economy, I think the Sonata 2.7 is only rated at 20/27, versus 23/29 for the Altima 2.5/auto.
And on the subject of fuel economy, I notice that the Altima 3.5's economy is improved. I remember when it first came out, it was only 19/26 for the automatic, but for 2005 it's up to 20/30 with an automatic.
Looks like they went to a 5-speed auto for 2005. I see it listed as an "S5", though...what's the "S" stand for?
So while the Altima may have initiated this HP war, prompting Honda and Toyota to follow, it looks like Honda was the leader with transmissions, as it had a 5-speed auto on 4 and V-6 models back in '03, whereas the Altima's only getting one now, and only on the V-6.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
In case of Hyundai 2.7, it did not respond well to relatively light load on open roads (especially two-lane highways). Acceleration and refinement was lacking. The manu-matic was useless. It would always force me to use a taller gear than would be required by the situation. And soon I learnt to leave it on its own.
I'm talking the 1.7l and 2.0l models for the most part. Torque is down but coupled with light weight they manage pretty well for the most part.
-juice
Honda could offer hybrid in all three cars (Accord Hybrid is already here, Civic is due for redesign, and Jazz is rumored to be here soon). And while Accord Hybrid may be emphasizing more on performance than fuel economy, a Jazz hybrid, while being cheaper than current HCH, could benefit from lighter weight and evolutionary improvements in IMA, may deliver mileage similar to Insight while performing better and being more practical as well. The next HCH could take the middle ground with some emphasis on performance.
I doubt many will complain about next HCH if it could do 0-60 in 8.0s or less, and deliver 40-45 mpg. But, it would be nice if Honda offers next HCH in 5-door HB form.
Maybe we'll have a K15B with DI rated at 115-120 bhp (SAE) on the US-market Honda Fit? :-)
Not practical at this time, but when I throw my three teenagers out this car will need to be test driven. Who am I kidding my son will retire here. I might have to test it out when the bike is paid off.
"Honda Motor Co. expects U.S. sales of the Accord to fall this year as much as 7 percent to about 370,000. Honda Executive Vice President Koichi Amemiya says that gasoline prices of about $2 a gallon in the United States, delivered "a body blow" to the industry."
Yeah, that is why Chevy has had so much trouble selling Impalas, LOL! Indeed, it was a slow summer until September, but I see no evidence of a "body blow" to the makers of Accord's main competitors...
What I can't figure is how Civic sales are up so much in that model's fourth year, while Accord's are down so much in only its second. Yeah, yeah, you can talk about the looks (especially the rear), but it is a pretty nice package that (I think) tops the Stratus, Sonata, Malibu and Camry (forget the Taurus), even if it is no landslide victory. I think being slightly better and having a more-than-slightly bigger sticker (forget the DX - no A/C in a midsize sedan? C'mon!) combined with that legendary unwillingness of Honda dealers to budge on price, and a laudable lack of financial incentives from Honda Motor, is probably the main culprit.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The Civic could be up because of the refresh and the fact that Honda is giving $500-$1000 dealer cash. A Civic LX sedan is a pretty good value at $13,000.
Only the Nissan Sentra has really seen a jump in sales. And for some reason, Autosite isn't listing the Mazda3.
I think the exodus to smaller vehicles or hybrids is a wonderful trend and is an important trend to reduce our oil dependence.
This proves that markets do work. I dont know why the US Government is throwing money at people by giving away hybrid tax incentives. Currently Hybrids are the hotttest sellers(except Insight). Why use tax money for people to buy what is already a hot seller? In most provinces in Canada there are no hybrid tax incentives and hybrids remain the hottest sellers.
Matrix production stopped for a bit when they changed over from the old '04 to the redesigned '05, and it is counted as a Corolla, so it may have affected the sales numbers a bit.
Camry has had incentives from $750-1000 thrown at it in my area in recent times, and has a promo running right now with a special lease or short-term low-rate financing on the '05. Somaybe Honda just needs to get this message - midsize sedans are a really tough segment, ad they need to run some special national programs on the Accord to get them out there. A special lease is the least costly to the parent company I believe - why not have one of those? I have seen them for several other Honda vehicles right now.
OR...they could come up with an Accord VP the same way they have a Civic VP, to better compete with the new "Camry standard" (below LE trim, $2K lower sticker) that exists for '05. It must have A/C though, unlike the Accord DX.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
That said, I don't think offering incentives is the way out of the hole. There's way too many negatives associated with going down that path (lower resale values, loss of revenue, trading tomorrow's customers for sales today...).
I like the idea of reshuffling the content of the DX, LX, and EX trims. But I think there's also a market boost to be found in the buzz from the Accord hybrid. And the mid-cycle refresh could also boost sales without resorting to larger hand-outs. Even a larger ad campaign might do the trick.
Running a special lease program for a month isn't going to hurt resale values anywhere near as much as putting $5000 cash back on the hood all year long does (as some other car companies do). And none of these leases would go to fleets either.
Having said that, if an Accord VP is the better way to go, then go that way. Better yet, just put A/C on all the Accord DX's (with economies of scale, they should still be able to keep the price around $16,5 anyway - ALL the other Accords have A/C) and watch DX's fly out the door and sales increase 10%.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I am also confident that the new hybrid will breathe some new sales into the Accord, which in my opinion is still on top of its game, even with minimal incentives and that not-so-attractive back end.
Not that the US Ody isn't already hot, but this might be a fuel efficient family hauler option at perhaps a lower price.
-juice
BTW, I'm not suggesting that the Accord hybrid is going to make up for lost sales by providing the missing volume. I just meant that it would have a halo effect on the regular Accord product.
Juice - I've often speculated about what might happen if Honda loaded up the JDM Ody with content and gave it sport-tuned suspension and the 3.0 V6. They could slap an Acura badge on it and sell it here like they have with the TSX.
I think the public will say "wow, that is some halo car, but what a high price!"
I wonder if Toyota will take the same approach next year or the year after with the hybrid Camry. That is, only putting the hybrid powertrain in the most loaded up top-of-the-line trim level. I hope not. When Honda originally announced this, I must confess I was rather hoping it would be like a $2000 option you could order with any trim. I bet they would sell a TON of $22K Accord LX hybrids, probably at full sticker for a while. It would put it in the reach of most family car budgets.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I do disagree with your "comparably powerful" remark. A 4 cyl Accord will keep up with a 6 cyl Escape. The Accord hybrid will likely dust the Escape HEV to 60 mph by 3 or 4 seconds.
The way I see it, the hybrid market tends to be the more affluent. I don't hear about people buying hybrids strictly because the money works out in their favor. Rather they want to make a political statement, or support a company for promoting new technologies. People buying the Prius have been doing so at a premium. Hybrids are not for poor people.
So, I don't see a problem with introducing the Accord hybrid at a higher price point. For all its impressive technology, the Prius is still a smallish, odd duck vehicle in the mid-size class. The Accord represents a vehicle not unlike the 99-03 Acura TL (or loaded Passat) with a much greener image. It falls right into that price range. Given that Honda already offers the HCH in the $20K range, I don't think that's a bad place to be.
I happen to have a friend that has both (the "Escape" is actually the Tribute version, but same power rating and final drive ratio) and I can attest to the fact that this is not true. The Trib V-6 is faster than the 4-cyl Accord.
NOW, I have no firsthand experience of either hybrid. Ford said the HEV would have comparable performance to its V-6 Escape, which is what I based my comment on, but if it is in fact slower then all bets are off. I expect the Accord hybrid to be a little faster than the regular V-6, and again, I have seen no instrumented comparisons yet.
I would say hybrids are not yet in the hands of $12K compact buyers because there is so little profit margin in cars that cheap. Plus the mileage gains are less significant than in bigger vehicles. But there is a big difference between selling a $20K hybrid and a $30K hybrid. Lots of people get left out of the audience at $30K that don't at 20.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Based on what I've read, the Escape HEV has lived up to the claim that it feels quite a bit like the V6 model. However it has lost a little punch. Most journalists have been impressed by the fact that it did not lose more, but there is a consistent mention of some loss.
I may be mistaken on this, but I thought the I4 Accord was good for 8.5 to 9.5 seconds in a sprint. (I did a quick search and the first thing I found was 8.0, but I think that's too fast.) Equipped with the V6, I've been reading low to mid 7's. Most are guessing that the 255 hp Accord hybrid is good for high 6s or low 7s with better than normal punch around town.
Escape HEV = $32,450 with NAV and AWD.
HAH = $32,000 est. with NAV.
The Escape ran 0-60 in 10.8 seconds, while the Accord did it in 6.7. To be fair, the Escape is saddled with some weight from its AWD system. MotorTrend also has an article with the 2WD Escape HEV and a 0-60 time of 9.6 (best time achieved over several runs).
C&D remarks that the Escape's drag race time is a bit fuzzy. It suffers as the drive-by-wire system does not allow for brake-torquing. Also the CVT and electric motor programming does not allow it to reach peak rpm until the vehicle hits high speeds. Still, their 5-60 rolling start was 11.1 seconds.
Apparently, the Accord has no such limitations. While they do not get into specifics, their article describes a situation where they burned rubber from start to 30 mph. The Accord's rolling start was measured at 7.6 seconds.
Were these extended tests where they could measure their own gas mileage, or were they just quick performance tests? I have heard the HEV is rated at 27/37 or something like that - what is HAH rated at?
I LOVE that right after we were talking about it, the magazine tests came out to corroborate what you were saying - HAH is MUCH quicker than HEV! :-)
Both are quite pricey and I wonder if they will sell as easily and in such demand as Prius and, to a lesser extent, HCH have.
(Which is also my idle concern regarding the sales viability of the RX400H, especially if the Highlander hybrid winds up with the same powertrain for thousands less.)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
37 mpg sounds pretty impressive to me! In the long run though, is it worth it? According to Honda's website, which is only a very rough calculator, the Accord Hybrid would save me $921.53 in fuel costs over 5 years. It's only a very basic computation, though. It asks you how much you pay for a gallon of gas (I put in $2.06), how many miles a year you drive (12K) and the highway estimate of your current car (29 in my case)
That being said, IMA based hybrids are likely to be as close to their EPA estimates as non-hybrid cars are to theirs, since ICE still forms the basis for motivation.
And yes, 37 mpg would be fantastic for me as well. My 1998 Accord is rated 30 mpg on highway, and at 70-75 mph, I get about 32 mpg which makes me dislike any car that gets me less than 30 mpg. Even if HAH gets me 35 mpg, that will be still an improvement from a car that has an additional 105 HP handy!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)