Howdy, Stranger!

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

Honda Accord I4 vs V6



  • Good post man! I totally agree with your points.
  • dolfan1dolfan1 Posts: 217
    I still don't understand this silly name calling.
    I drive the 6 & don't feel proud or superior in any way.
    And it isn't about giving the oil companies more of my money.
    I bought it because I wanted it. Plain and simple.
    If someone wants to drive a Hummer, for goodness sakes, it's their business.

    IT'S ABOUT FREEDOM, FOLKS! The freedom to choose!
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    the silly name-calling either, so let's just stop it, okay?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Indeed, it's your call. If you feel the 4 doesn't meet your needs, and spending the extra 2 grand to get the 6 is in your budget, go for it. By the same token, if the 6 isn't in the budget, or you simply don't feel the need for it, go for the 4. Nobody should be ridiculed for their choice.
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Posts: 1,724
    I don't believe I was name calling.
    My posts were not remotely close to being personal or attacking, lol.
    wanna drive a hummer, go for it. But, that won't keep me from laughing at you though.

  • vietviet Posts: 847
    Test drive an Accord V6 EX-L, Robert and you will change your mind forever. You are right. With VCM, the V6's MPG is exciting.
  • parvizparviz Posts: 484
    I am not sure about the prior year Accords (I could check since a friend of mine owns an 06), however, with the 08 model year, the extra $2k you pay to get the V6 EXL, you also get some other niceties with it (no, I don't mean VCM :) ). The additional features may not be worth anything to some but I know I was interested in some of them when I was comparing trims before I bought my V6.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Yes, you do get a few little niceties (I remember in the EXL V6 vs. EXL 4 in 2006 you got a power passenger seat, but that was about it). They aren't features that make you think "I'm getting the more expensive model because it has features X, Y, and Z, and oh yeah, it has a V6 too. It's the other way around.

    But you are right, the V6 model affords a couple of extras, however they aren't deal-makers or deal-breakers.
  • jam1000jam1000 Posts: 182
    Exciting is certainly one word for the VCM.
  • are you talking about the 190 hp 4 cyl or the 177 hp 4 cyl........i am considering the 190hp but have heard people talk about not getting the power until your rpm's are high.......i did test drive both the 190 hp and the 6 cyl....but never drove the 177hp lx.....I have called around in my area (Raleigh, Durham NC ) to try to find a rental car agency that has the honda accord that I can rent it for at least a day and just drive drive drive.......I don't feel that the test drive was long enough for me to determine the amount of comfort the seats offer... and to really feel what the power was like in the cars.......I had back surgery and need comfortable seats but also want decent power...drom what I could tell on my very brief test drive the 190 hp seemed to have decent acceleration.....I currently drive a 6 cyl car so I was judging it against my 3.4.....
  • gleen6191gleen6191 Posts: 80
    190 hp 4 cyl or 268 hp V6.

    The issues listed about the V6 is making me lean toward the 4 cul.

    What say you?!
  • carzzzcarzzz Posts: 282
    Since you are leaning toward the I4, i say take I4
    how often do you need the extra power? Unless you drive on freeway or race alot, you may need the V6. Otherwise, 190hp is more than adequate. 0-60 needs only 8.2 sec. This K24 produces nearly as much HP as Gen6 V6.

    1. Slower = less speed ticket :D
    2. Slightly better fuel-economy
    3. Cheaper to insure and maintence
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Since you are leaning toward the I4, i say take I4
    how often do you need the extra power? Unless you drive on freeway or race alot, you may need the V6. Otherwise, 190hp is more than adequate. 0-60 needs only 8.2 sec. This K24 produces nearly as much HP as Gen6 V6.

    1. Slower = less speed ticket
    2. Slightly better fuel-economy
    3. Cheaper to insure and maintence

    And most importantly, cheaper to buy upfront!!!
  • carzzzcarzzz Posts: 282
  • carbuyer11carbuyer11 Posts: 114
    Here's what you get by upgrading to the V6 (compared to an EXL 4 banger):

    Fog Lights
    Chrome door handles
    Hood struts vs. a prop
    Dual exhaust
    Home link remote system
    4 way power passenger seat

    For me, besides the 40% in additional horsepower, the 2 features that helped sway me to the V6 were the fog lights (I know, they could have been installed by the dealer) and the Home link system (couldn't imagine having to carry a garage door opener in a car that nears $30K.
  • bug4bug4 Posts: 370
    Also - -the 6cyl. comes with a different front air dam that, IMHO, looks much nicer than the 4cyl. air dam. The 6cyl. front air dam both accommodates the fog lights and is more racy looking.
  • imscfimscf Posts: 34
    I've had several Accords, all 4 cylinders, since my first, a 1979 hatchback (no -6 model was offered at the time) and now I'm on a leased EX-4 auto. I've never seen the need for a 6 (city + highway driving), and the present 190 hp on the EX-4 is plenty powerful. Maybe someday I'll sit down and compute how much $ I've saved by not spending the money on 6-cylinders over 28 years of driving Accords. I'm sure it would pay for a new Accord! (a 4 cylinder, of course)
  • dolfan1dolfan1 Posts: 217
    To answer your question at the top of your post, those of us who choose to drive the 6 knew full well it would cost more up front and cost more to drive. No one buys the 6 then thinks, "Man, am I disappointed. I thought it would get as many miles per gallon as the 4 cyl!" We don't consider that decision a waste of money. If we thought it was, we'd have chosen the 4 instead.
    I keep hearing words and phrases like: adequate, enough, sufficient, don't need the V6, and so on.
    I think the problem here is Accords seem to appeal to more practical minded people, some of whom see only the need to have what is necessary. The 4 supplies all their needs and then some, and they're perfectly happy and secure with their purchase.
    But in their wisdom, Honda realized there were some people, not as many, but some who are also practical people, but want a bit more than adequate, enough and sufficient. And are willing to pay for it. For them, Honda builds the 6.

    So if you're out there trying to decide which is best FOR YOU, don't let anybody convince you the 6 is a poor choice when you could buy the 4.
    If MPG is your main concern, you want to get into an Accord as inexpensively as possible, & you don't care if the car has exceptionally strong acceleration or not, buy the 4, as most people do.
    If you want the practicality, reliability and economy of an Accord, but would rather sacrifice some gas mileage for more power, and you can afford the extra $, go for the 6.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Good post.



    2006 Accord EX 4-cyl
    1996 Accord LX 4-cyl
  • bug4bug4 Posts: 370
    I drove my 08 EX-L I4 1200 miles this past weekend. I was headed west and traveling against a very stiff headwind for 350 miles or so. My travels took me on a very long stretch of Interstate 80 . . . lots of hills and relatively high elevation (5000' -9000').

    I made some discoveries about my Honda on the trip: Foremost, I learned that the 4 cyl. engine is inadequate when trying to deal with 20mph headwinds, high elevation, gradual hills and interstate speeds. The car could not climb even gradual inclines without shifting down. Normally thats not a big deal. But, here, the slope was not sufficient to convince grade-logic to keep it in the lower gear. So, instead, the otherwise impressive automatic transmission was doing way to much shifting. I've liked the fact that my Accord transmission is quick to shift so as to keep in its power range. However, here, it was aggravating. The I4 simply didn't have enough reserve power so it was constantly down-shifting to maintain my 80mph cruising speed. I've driven on these roads several times before in my new car without such significant issues -- but never with a consistent and strong head-wind. It was too much for the little I4 :sick:

    I realize that I was demanding a lot from my car (hills, stiff headwind, high elevation, fast speed, etc.). But, I think my observations are notable because my 98 Accord would have done better. My 98 had a manual transmission - which makes a HUGE difference. But, I still believe the 150 ponies in my 98 provided more umph than do the 190 ponies in my 08 (and the power in my 98 came at a more useable rpm range (i.e. more power at lower rpms) ).

    Interestingly -- with all these negative factors, I checked my fuel economy very carefully with 459 miles between fill-ups. I got 29.89 mpg!!!! I am very happy with that!! On the way home, I had a stiff tailwind and the transmission barely shifted at all. I have yet to fill up so I'm unsure of my fuel economy. However, I have 469 miles on this tank and the gauge is still reading about 1/4 full. So, I'll bet my fuel economy on the way home was WAY up there!!

    I might also note that, despite the various complaints on these boards about how firm the 08 Accord seats are, I found them very comfortable. I was sitting for 7 hour stretches and I was pleasantly surprised with the seats. I even, for the first time, used the lumbar support (which I normally don't use since the seat has such a "lump" around the lumbar area even without the lumbar supports). If you notice, airline seats are usually very hard -- but you can sit in them for a very long time without getting too sore. I think the same applies to the Honda seats --- not soft, cushy and luxurious, but I think I prefer them for long rides!

    My final observation concerns wind noise: When I arrived at my destination, I hopped right into an 05 Honda Pilot and drove it 50 miles on the interstate. Unfortunately, I instantly recognized that the Pilot, is MUCH quieter than my 08 Accord. The engine/road/wind noise was much less in the Pilot than in my new Accord :(

    All-in-all, with over 7500 miles on my 08 Accord, I'm happy with it. But, as much as I like the interior, the handling and the looks, I'm reminded -- its a Honda, not a BMW ;)
  • dolfan1dolfan1 Posts: 217
    Everything is relative, isn't it?
    Back in the early 80's I leased a Chevy Spectrum (Isuzu I-Mark). It had 80HP (no,that isn't a misprint) & a AT. Took it on a trip up to the Appalachian mountains (NC & Tenn). You should have seen me on I-40 heading towards Asheville. There were times it wouldn't do over 45mph on the steeper grades. I learned to just get over in the right lane as far as possible and let everybody go by.

    Good news is the little joker got over 35mpg for most of the trip!
    Needless to say things have much improved over the years. It would have laughable for me to try to get the Chevy to cruise @ 60mph in the mountains, let alone 80!
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    I still believe the 150 ponies in my 98 provided more umph than do the 190 ponies in my 08 (and the power in my 98 came at a more useable rpm range (i.e. more power at lower rpms) ).

    Also consider that the 08 Accord is much heavier than the 98, and less aerodynamic (head winds). IMO the size and weight of the 08 Accord makes the V6 a necessity. I felt the V6 was necessary in the 03 Accord, so the 08 would only increase the need. The I4 is adequate, but the V6 is "more" than adequate.
  • gleen6191gleen6191 Posts: 80
    Every day I go back and forth changing my mind about if I go with the 4 or f'ing V6.

    This VCM is driving me crazy! Does it work for anyone!!!!
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Every day I go back and forth changing my mind about if I go with the 4 or f'ing V6.

    This VCM is driving me crazy! Does it work for anyone!!!!

    I would have no problem going with the VCM V6. But I would make sure I thoroughly tested the car for any issues, before I signed papers.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    We have several members who own V6 08s who say they do not experience the problem. You'll find some of them in the general 08 Coupe and Sedan discussion.

    Elroy gives you good advice - test drive, test drive, test drive. :)
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    I don't see how some people can order a car, or buy a car without a test drive first. No two cars are exactly the same, so even if you have test driven one, that doesn't mean the next one will be the same. I've driven two cars, both 92 EX Accords, and one seamed much better than the other. The engine in one car seamed to run smoother than the other. Even the seats felt different. I ended up buying the one that felt better, even though it wasn't my first choice in color. I am more concerned with how the car operates and feels, than what color it is. There was one time (in my youth) when I bought a car because it "looked cool". That will never happen again.
  • nkvnkv Posts: 20
    I consider myself a very practical and frugal person. I always thought newer cars with 4 cylinders will be plenty powerful and economical on gas. But when I was in market for a new car late last year, I test drove both: a 4 cylinder Accord and a V-6, VCM equipped Accord. To me the difference was night and day. I chose the V-6 and have been a happy camper ever since. I have tried and tried to find funny shifting and VCM over activity but alas have seen none to my delight. May be I am not a hypersensitive person who feels the slightest sensation inherent in VCM operation but to me it does what it is supposed to do without causing any uncomfortable feeling. I get 22 mpg in mostly urban commute with stop signs and stop lights and wide variety of speed limits. It is up to you to be the judge of VCM technology. Test drive multiple VCM equipped Accords before you come to your own conclusions. Good luck.
  • hpowdershpowders Posts: 4,301
    I drove two Accord sedans today-the I4 in EX trim with cloth seats and the V6 in its EX L guise.

    I found the I4 much too noisy and seriously underpowered for this vehicle.

    The V6 while smooth and refined proved disappointing in that it came up a bit short in providing the feeling of power that I would have expected.

    As for the seats, I found the leather in the EX L close to excruciating-much too hard-couldn't get comfy. The cloth driver's seat, on the other hand, felt just right-soothing and inviting.

    The brakes could be improved in both-too much distance required to stop! Sure doesn't inspire confidence. :surprise:

    The next time I drop by Honda, I must try the EX V6 sedan. Could be a winner.

    For what it's worth, this is my second test drive in a 2008 V6 EX L sedan. The VCM performed flawlessly both times. I could not feel a thing when the "eco" light came on and off. Both test drives included about 20 minutes of street and highway driving. I hope this augers well for the latest production models of the 2008 V6 Accord sedans.
  • carzzzcarzzz Posts: 282
    Gen 8 I4 does NOT have a strong off-the-line acceleration PERIOD
  • carzzzcarzzz Posts: 282
    I just review the C/D I4 test for both generations' Accord (7.5th, & 8th).
    Here are some facts I notice:

    Gen 7 I4 SE
    0-30 time (2.7sec), 0-60 time (8.1sec), 5-60 time (8.5 sec), 30-50 (4.4sec), 50-70(5.9sec), QM 16.4 @ 85mph, 70-0 194 ft, 39dB idle, 69 dB 70CR, 60.67mph lane change, .79g skidpad

    Gen 8 I4 EX
    0-30 time (3.0sec), 0-60 time (8.2sec), 5-60 time (8.7 sec), 30-50 (4.5sec), 50-70(5.7sec), QM 16.4 @ 86mph, 70-0 169 ft, 43dB idle, 68 dB 70CR, 56.3mph lane change, .81g skidpad (With addition 200lb and wearing wider tires)

    Gen 7 is more enjoyable car to drive around town with better handling, quick low speed acceleration (under 60mph), and lower idling noise.
    Gen 8 is more enjoyable car to drive on freeway with quicker high speed acceleration (60mph+), way shorter stopping distance, and better rear seat comfort with larger interior volume.
Sign In or Register to comment.