Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Honda Accord Future Models



  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    and you know what? its not biggie. ANYONE complaining of gettin 2mpg off is silly.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    true, but under the new guidelines, they are probably going to be closer to real world driving than ever before.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    It is HEAVILY reliant on driving style, so we really can't do an apples-to-apples comparison of driver A's car vs driver B's. That's why the EPA testing is helpful, it gives a level playing field.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    you shouldn't be, because most sources that talk about reliability of the mkV jettas/rabbits have shown it to be a major imporvment. (unless of course you are citing what has been written about mkiV and earlier.)

    the 1.9 tdi 2005 jetta under the 2008 estimates are as follows:

    30/38 for the auto
    and 32/41

    there are many who routinely surpass these numbers with ease; and while the 2.0's numbers seem optimistic, i figure they would at least get around this.

    if the new accord does come with the 2.2 diesel, there should be no reason for it not get similar numbers and AT LEAST 28mpg in the city. 35 mpg on the highway should be attainable too.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    def. true. I'm on the same page as you grad. Thats why those getting upset over 2mpg discrepencies are just silly to me. What do you average in your accord again? I know you get over old epa right?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Here's the rundown for me, in both cars

    1996 Accord LX 4-cylinder, 4-sp Auto, 173,000 miles
    EPA 23/31

    Average in commute (5 miles of 40 MPH with 9 traffic lights, 10 miles of interstate at 70-75 MPH) of about 27-28MPG. Filled up today and was over 28 MPG. I average just UNDER 28 MPG in that car, but since gas has been so high, I've reduced my interstate cruising speed.

    2006 Accord EX 4-cylinder, 5-sp Auto, 20,700 miles
    EPA 24/34

    Average in commute (same as commute listed previously) is between 29 and 30 MPG, with MUCH higher numbers when I go strictly highway. If I limit myself to staying under 75 MPH, I get 37-41 MPG depending on conditions, load, and A/C. The longest trip I took was over 1,500 miles to Oklahoma City (From Birmingham, AL). For the trip, we got 35.43 MPG. Three people, constant A/C usage, and fluctuating speeds from 75-80 MPH, with some traffic in Memphis. I'm convinced ANYONE who doesn't drive like a fool will get at least EPA highway figures. The tall fifth gear is really helpful in the automatic particularly.

    On the highway in my 1996, at 75 MPH, I have averaged 30 MPG (3,000 RPM). At that same speed, my '06 is running at 2,500 RPM, a substantial amount lower.

    I don't take trips in the old car anymore. There's really no point when the newer one is more comfy, roomy, powerful, and MUCH MUCH better on fuel.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    awesome numbers. Its nice to see someone who can give real world driving experience and get decent numbers. (and not plauge the civic forum with ridiculous numbers!)

    ok we better stop before we get kicked to a mpg forum! ;)
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    28/35 mpg for the diesel would be pretty low even for the new numbers. I would expect the diesel Accord to get 50 mpg driven at reasonable speeds on the highway.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    It can't get 50mpg 'cause it's not a 2.2 and it's an auto. :) Actually, most people won't get 50. Maybe you and Grad.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    What. I want a 2.2 with the stick. Diesel won't do me much good if it does not get much better mpg than the gasser. :cry:

    Seriously bad news if this is true.

    If I wanted an automatic diesel I could have bought a Passat - and in the much more practical wagon body.

    Dream car - Accord diesel stick wagon. Space of an SUV, efficiency of a hybrid, and drives like an Accord.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    I think Honda heard about you coasting feats and decided to offer you only an automatic.
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    OK So I'm an older guy with an extremely bad back. In the past 7 years or so, I have owned 2 V6 Accords. I loved both of them, but alas I had to let them go and replaced them with the Lexus RX350. Yes, more expensive, but my back cannot in any way shape or form take the 'hard' ride in the Accord. If only they would change it a little. Maybe like the Camry which I've driven at times. Any of you good people out there see any answer to 'my'problem.
    Yes the Lexus is a luxurious SUV, but as far as driving is concerned, and getting your monies worth, their is nothing like an Accord. So what do I do?

    You can wait for a BMW diesel that's affordable or hope Lexus makes one or you can buy a custom drivers seat for your Accord. Maybe a Recaro and you can always put softer springs in the car which will give it a more pliable ride but in the end you have to buy a car that really is comfortable to drive. It doesn't make much sense to buy a car you hate to drive to save on fuel. I know as I also have back problems and chronic sciatica. But I'm only driving about 6,000 miles a year right now. I do not like gassers but when I get back to the US about June-August 2008, I will need a car within a week of getting there. So if the Accord diesel isn't available then whatever is a diesel will be high on my list. My Toyota Hi-Lux diesel 4 door pickup truck easily gets 45 mpg on the highway.
  • wardcowardco Posts: 27
    I've got a bad back also and the Acura TL is murder. The Accprd V6 is light years better on my back.
  • blackexv6blackexv6 Posts: 503
    Many of us wonder why Honda refuses to address 2 major consumer complaints: road noise & road shock.

    This doesn't mean a softer, floatier ride...just better isolation of the forces to the subframe i.e. rubber mounts.

    Honda dramatically improved the road shock in the '05+ Odyssey by adding the rubber isolation subframe mounts. However, the road noise is still excessive.

    I am hoping the '08 Accord has more sound insulation & less road shock transfer noise into the cabin.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    This doesn't mean a softer, floatier ride...just better isolation of the forces to the subframe i.e. rubber mounts.

    Road shock? The Accord isn't even the firmest midsize sedan out there. If you want something even less sporty, maybe look at Sonata, or Camry. PLEASE Honda, don't take away my road feel and firm suspension. I enjoy the driving experience!

    I am only 19, so I don't remember cars before the 1990s really, but my '06 is so much quieter than my 1996 Accord, that there is no way I'd need it any quieter, if it was, then I would just be too isolated from the driving experience.

    Seriously (and not sarcastically), it sounds like a Camry is a perfect fit for you. Quiet, smooth, not very involving, but fast.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    Posted this once boys, don't waste my time! The GACTs smoothed and quieted the ride on my 02 V6 EXL substantially My V6 had a harsh ride I attribute to stiffer suspension settings than the 4. These cured my discomfort. I do not consider them great handling tires but they are very smooth and quiet. Don't ax me again! :)
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    "I think Honda heard about you coasting feats and decided to offer you only an automatic. " :sick:

    If true they will lose 3 sales just from my family. Others will make a diesel though. Altima for one, and VW will have a slew of them. Less concerned about VW reliability with a diesel.

    Would have really loved the Accord though - especially with the 2.2. Of course this is the land of too much is never enough, so what is considered excellent in Europe would be panned here - mostly by people who have never driven one. :( Silly of me to think 250 ft/lbs of torque was enough. ;)
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    Yes,but you will be embarrassed when the VW body falls off the drive train!
  • bamacarbamacar Posts: 749
    Have you seen for a fact that there will be no manual transmission on the diesel? I would be another buyer who will look elsewhere if that is true. Does Honda not realize a person who wants a diesel car would also tend to be a person more likely to want a manual?
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    I think it's possible they may offer a manual also for the reason you suggest. If they do, we can see if Dudley can coast 55 mpg out of it.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Posts: 2,697
    Though you will see many loud and vocal posters in many forums ranting about how badly they want manual transmissions, the fact is there is little demand.
    It has been proven time and again and automakers reduce production of manual transmissions over time in response.
    I think Honda, BMW and maybe Mazda probably attract more manual transmission buyers than Toyota, Mercedes or Ford, but the numbers are low and resale is difficult except for sports cars/roadsters.

    I wonder if the same is true for diesels? I keep seeing people posting how they want diesels in this car and that car, but I wonder if they will really sell.
    Automakers are dragging their feet with release of diesels. I thought many manufacturers would have new diesel cars ready to be released as soon as the low sulfur diesel became available, but it isn't happening despite many years advance notice that the new, cleaner fuel was coming to the US.
    Even VW that had previous mass market diesels in all 50 states before the emissions standards become too strict, has nothing 50 state compliant available now or in the very near future.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    The automakers have to wait to be sure there is demand prior to designing and building a car for sale in the U.S. Then the design to production pipeline is 4-5 years. Witness the larger and not particulary fuel efficient cars and giant trucks just now hitting the market.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Posts: 2,697
    They have had many years to have diesels ready by now especially those automakers that already produce them and are not starting from scratch with a blank slate designing these engines (most especially VW).
    People still buy cars beyond what they need. They are not blinking at $3 a gallon gas since is still cheap compared to Europe. The extra 4-5 or more mpg or so between an Accord V6 and and 4 cylinder is often dismissed as "only a few extra dollars a month," so I don't think diesels will catch on at these fuel prices.
    When the US has $6 or $7 per gallon gas is when the US will flock to diesels and much smaller cars. Maybe even mass transit.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    Disagree. Do the math on 15,000 miles per year and there is a real savings at $3. When the mideast spins off kilter do the math on $4 and $5. I think these diesels will sell like hotcakes. They were never previously popular because gas was cheap and the engines were not very sophisticated.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618

    man i hate being a honda AND vw guy.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    it probably could, but it wont be something that the epa will claim. i was just thinking about what the actual sticker would say. mabye it would be a bit higher.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    It can't get 50mpg 'cause it's not a 2.2 and it's an auto

    what are you saying? that because its an auto it wont achieve high mileage, or as high as a manual could? Don't most automatics today get better mpg than their manual transmissioned bretheren?

    the fact that its a 2.2 and not a 1.9 or 2.0 like in vw is valid, but i dunno about the auto tranny part of it.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    but i dunno about the auto tranny part of it.

    Even though I believe they are currently rated the same, the Accord's 5th gear in the automatic revs at lower rpms than the manual (to allow for the fear that us stick people who use cruise control might make the engine lug). So for strictly highway mileage, the auto can do the same or better than the stick. City mileage is another story... the stick wins there.
  • bristol2bristol2 Posts: 736
    Given that the small car market is now the fastest growing segment of the auto business it's pretty clear that gas prices are making a big difference to people.

    The gap in price between here and Europe makes no differnce at all on the decisions buyers make. The impact they perceive in their pockets as costs go up makes the difference. It's all relative, gas is relatively 33% more expensive than 2 years ago, that's a huge gap regardless of cost elsewhere.

    Being able to get compact car mileage with family sedan size will be a great selling point.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    Actually, I was talking about everyday driving like most of us do. Dudley gets 35 in his regular driving. It seems from all the posts that, in the real world, the manuals get slightly better mpg. Better ability to coast etc. It could also be that the manual drivers posting on this site might be better drivers and more in tune w/ their drivetrain than the automatic drivers. Just my .02.
This discussion has been closed.