Howdy, Stranger!

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

Midsize Sedans 2.0



  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    Why change the oil so soon? A lot of factory fills have oil with high moly content to help with break in. Usually better to keep it in for normal change interval. Not the 50's anymore.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I remember my Honda dealer specifically telling me to go the full length of the oil-change recommendation before changing it the first time. I think I took it to 5,000 miles or something like that.

    My Sonata, well, it wasn't new when I bought it!

    2009 Sonata GLS V6
    103,000 miles
  • suydamsuydam Posts: 3,237
    Honda Accord oil change interval is 7500 miles. There is an oil life indicator too.
    '14 Buick Encore Convenience
    '17 Chevy Volt Premiere
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    When I owned my '06 Accord there was not a specified interval, just the OLM (Oil Life Monitor). When the monitor reached 15%, the reminder came on, and that's when I tended to go ahead and service the car. Have they added oil change intervals to supplant/supercede the OLM? I routinely went 7500-8000 miles before hitting the 15% notification.

    I do miss that in my current car; the Sonata 3.3L doesn't have such a monitor, so I just get it serviced every 5000-6000 miles, and I do a lot of highway (90 of my 105 mile daily commute is interstate, the rest is four-lane). That was part of my reason for going with the V-6; it still had ratings of 19/29; best-in-class for a V6 at the time. I'm averaging about 30mpg.

  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    They still have the same system in the Accord. It gives oil life based on driving conditions. My '07 usually gets changed every 9k miles or so. I go right down to 5% since I use 100% synthetic oil. 161k miles and no problems - ready for another 161k. Have not changed the '13 yet - it reads 80% at 2,100 miles.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    Enjoyed this post! Especially the last line :chuckle:
    But hey, don't worry about it, you could have your local dealer order some OEM factory oil and start over..And look on the bright gotta 50/50 chance then of getting it right!! lol
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,933
    Yes, I really appreciate this Honda feature too...
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    edited April 2013
    It is interesting how this break-in process has evolved over the years. All engines are run-in at the factory to a certain extent. This would help reduce ring pinch at end of stroke at RPM's far greater than the usual putt-around-town type. The wording for break-in leaves a lot to be desired from one owner's manual to another. The general (mfgrs) consensus is to drive gently for the first term be it 500 to 1000 miles or whatever, and to not work the engine in.. they all say to not tow a trailer. Yet many a small trailers with a small load of debris for the landfill could weigh far less than a car full of people, and never have I read yet with any brand to avoid full passenger capacity during break-in..Like I say, so much is left to interpretation. IMO, (which has been derived from a large and varied number of new engined equipment ranging from every type and size from chainsaws, bikes, cars to heavy trucks) generally speaking.. engines (once outta the factory and into the new owner's hands), should be brought up to temp progressively gentle from start up. Idling up to temp is not good. After a couple hundred miles of progressively higher and higher RPM's (once thoroughly warmed up of course), occasional full throttle applications can be beneficial from time to time. This is just an extension of what the engine saw on the run-in dyno before it left the factory. Modern day cylinder bores apparently don't have the same degree (depth) of hash-markings on the cylinder walls as in years past. But recently I read about..I think it was Honda's new Green Earth 4 cyl (or whatever they called it) cylinder wall hash marks and it seems that they (or at least the degree of what is left after break-in) still play quite a roll in engine performance/efficiency/longevity.

    While owner's manual suggestions for break-in are likely best followed to the letter, for reasons we must trust are current, for those in the know, their break-in procedure can certainly be expanded upon if they know why the break-in suggestion is worded the way it is (general public idiot-proofing basically) and interpret further, the message behind the wording. But since the vast majority of us are not in the know, best to follow what the manual says.

    My old habit was to do an early oil change also until a pretty smart engineer (3 actually) I knew at Caterpillar enlightened me and brought me up date. I saw many examples of engines that were run-in prior to sale on...for example large excavators..because it is harder to actually make them work hard in the first few days of use without compromising hydraulic cylinder seal break-in, so they dyno them extensively first. If you look at charts of various engine records that they kept track of, engines that were generally babied in first life, but started and stopped in cold cycles, did not pull as strong or as efficiently as engines that were brought up to temp at a good rate regularly and made to work.

    Anyway, I should have maybe put this post somewhere else, but decided to leave it here as there is a lot of passion on this forum it seems...owner's who seem a little more proud of their new mid-sized baby, than those on..say a Toyota Corolla forum, where there doesn't seem to be nearly as much passion involved and probably don't care as much how their new car gets broken it.
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,933
    Good stuff. Thanks+++
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    You're welcome, Ben..glad you found some that useful.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    With late availability will be offered with an Ecoboost 1.5 liter 3 cylinder of 175 hp, designed to put Fusion back on top of the MPG wars. The 1.6 will be continued, but only with a manual transmission.
  • tundradweller1tundradweller1 Posts: 74
    edited April 2013
    Few manufacturers use anything but a lighter weight oil and that is from small engines to commercial vehicles. Yes metallurgy has changed and even more so is the manufacturing processes allowing tighter, more precise tolerances. (my field) Hence there is less friction from parts wearing at point of contact until "broken in". That being said there is still a great amount of particulate metal that is suspended in the oil after only the first few hundred miles of a vehicle engines life. I have rebuilt Motorcycle engines and run in new ones straining the oil with only a couple hundred miles on it through a coffee filter. The swarf I found in the oil is amazing, not mention what was caught in the oil filter.
    Break in procedures used to be strict and involved low RPM limits which most people interpreted to lugging the engine around for extended periods leading to un seated piston rings, lower compression (power output), potential damage to crankshaft bearings and possible oil blow by later in life. There are allot of opinions on how to break in a engine from engineering theory to engine builders that have made tear down comparisons. Most will agree that varying the RPM is a must, heat cycling then a couple full throttle bursts (not red line in every gear) will have a impact on engine longevity and power output. That being said I do not change my oil at 3000 mile intervals in spite of what Jiffy Lube suggests. ;)
  • The term is "cross hatching", this refers to marks left on the cylinder walls after the honing process. The piston rings wear these down somewhat in the break-in process. Not correcting just saying....
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    I don't mind anyone..even you ;) ..correcting me when I use the wrong term. I take no offense. I was having a brain freeze when I was trying to remember the term..and in the back of my mind I didn't really think it was right but mainly wanted to get my message across so I knew hash marks was at least gonna do that. I almost said hatch marks but that didn't seem right either at the time..

    You say this is your field...and that break-in oil is primarily simply a lighter viscosity. I assume to keep debris more suspended and assist in flushing out during a change?

    Years ago, (not sure how many..perhaps you probably can confirm) break-in oil used to have an abrasive. I am curious if modern day break-in oil differs in that regard, besides the lighter viscosity?

    If a cars normal oil requirement states 0W20, what would the break-in oil be, you think?
  • Not an oil guy, manufacturing processes, machining. The lighter weight oils are used more for small engines. Vehicles not so much. What's laughable is Mazda recommends 0-20 wt. oil in the U.S.A and 5-20 or 5-30 wt. in other countries. No doubt to comply with CAFE compliance to improve gas mileage. Though I can't imagine much improvement in MPG.
    I don't think there a single subject that has more fallacies than motor oil.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    Oops...the 2014 Fusion 1.5 is a FOUR cylinder. Should have known the press reports were wrong about it being a 3 is Volvo that will have a 3 cylinder of about 1.5 liter displacement.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,534
    Dude....I was just replying to you on that press release. :D Yeah.... apparently there is a big tax break for buyers in China if the engine is 1.5 liters or less.

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • I assume this means that the new 1.5 turbo will replace the 2.5 non-turbo as the new base engine, but where is the new 2.5 turbo they're supposed to be working on for it as well? I don't see .1 making a huge difference to anyone, but a turbo 2.5 would sure make it scoot! The new Fusion doesn't really need any better mpg ratings, but it could sure use more hp!
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    Maybe the Fusion does not need better mpg ratings, but it sure needs better actual mpg. As I pointed out in another thread, the most fuel efficient Fusion gets mpg almost as good as a V-6 Accord or Camry on Consumer Reports tests.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,534
    The 2.0 turbo is the Fusions go-fast option. As a matter of fact, the 2.0 turbo has become the industry standard. Almost every brand offers one. The Malibu introduced it's turbo a few months back, which is essentially the same engine in the Caddy ATS. BMW offers it standard in the 328 and the 528. Jaguars base XK, and it has become ubiquitous in the Volkswagen Audi group. The flagship A8L has two 2.0T's lashed together at the crank and is now called the 4.0T. Nuff said! TGIF!

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    The flagship A8L has two 2.0T's lashed together at the crank and is now called the 4.0T.

    Wow, so it will be a straight eight? It sure will be smooth, unless they maintain individual block firing orders?? If so it won't even really sound like an 8 :(

    Sure will be a long engine.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,534
    No, it's a V8. LOL.

    From car and driver, May issue, page 112.

    "Think of the Audi A8's new 4.0- liter V8 as a double-dose of Audi's spectacular 2.0 liter turbo 4. Two 211 hp turbo fours fused into one 420 hp twin-turbo V-8 make for a very quick A8L."

    I understand what you mean, but the engine(s) are side by side, not in a row.

    This is nothing new with Volkswagen AG. The VR6 only had one cylinder head and staggered cylinders, more like an inline-6 w/o the length. (so it would fit in 4 cyl engine bay). Also, the W12, which resides in the Bentley Continental, is two VR6's with a common crank.

    If we really want to get into a VW engine, the quad turbo, WR-16 in the Veyron is just insane. It is 4 VR-4's lashed together with a common crank. Thats a lot of moving metal.

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    Ahhh right...I thought an inline was a little too out there, given space constraints etc.
    But on the positive side, this config basically ensures a great firing order and the sound of a true 8 cyl engine...which is hard to beat, on the planet we know as Earth..

    Altho..that said that V 16 must sound orgasmic...if you happen to appreciate that sorta thing...and I sure do..

    If you happen to be into bikes? is hard to beat a V4 Interceptor with an aftermkt Staintune pipe. At certain revs idling down into town at none blue presence-capturing revs, it sounds a lot like a small block Chevy V8.. The Veyron...of course.. will require a significant extra level of restraint if not to attract db attention by the same blue clad wearing local constabulary.. They have so little humour (humor) when it comes to such visceral commitments to owning and operating such machinery..
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 801
    Hi everyone,

    From the first time I saw a 2011 Optima, I thought they were one of the best looking sedans on the market. I had a 2012 Optima LX rental for a week in Los Angeles last month. It was white with beige interior that seriously needed to be cleaned and it had over 37k miles on the clock. I've been stuck with Corollas, Avengers and Altimas with only 18-20k miles on them. They squeaked, rattled, various control buttons, knobs or levers were broken off or didn't work, the Avenger (my first Avenger and LAST Chrysler rental EVER!) had an electrical shortage that caused all sorts of crazy things. Even the Crapolla felt like it might self-destruct at any moment, and it was a 2010 with 23k miles. I despised every moment I spent in all of them.

    When I saw how many miles the Optima had on it and the stained seats and carpets, a knot formed in the pit of my stomach. It was almost 5pm and I had to fight my way onto the 405 and and I dreaded hitting the first bump because I just knew that every piece of interior trim would squeak and sound as if the car was literally falling apart. I slammed into a pothole before I had a chance to swerve around it and.....after the hard thunk, there was only silence! As I maneuvered in and out of lanes, I realized how tight and solid the Optima still felt, even after 37,000 miles as a rental in Los Angeles!!!

    I am in the market for a new (or new to me) car and my list has just three cars on it, although I am tempted to add the Optima SX-L as a fourth possibility....

    I have narrowed down basically all mid-size cars to the following-

    1) NEW 2013 Mazda6 s Grand Touring (Fireglow Red w/ Tech Pkg)- $32,770 sticker, $24,900 plus TTT

    2) CPO 2010 Acura TSX V6 (Vortex Blue Pearl, 29k miles, 3yr lease turn-in, like new, w/o Tech Pkg) - KBB values it at $27k+ but it has sat on the lot for almost six months and I've got them down to $22,500 + TTT ($24,028 OTD)

    3) NEW 2012 Acura TSX 2.4 Technology- (Vortex Blue Pearl)- $34,005 MSRP, $29,500 + TTT

    4?) NEW 2013 KIA Optima SX Limited - (Titanium Silver) - $35,275 MSRP, $29,975 + TTT

    The SX Limited is truly an impressive car! But my biggest concern would be depreciation, especially in the first year or two.

    As much as I love the 2013 Mazda6 s GT (with the 3.7L V6 and 6-speed auto), depreciation in the first few years is also a huge concern! With a totally new and very attractive 2014 Mazda6 on the market, depreciation will be even worse!

    I'm planning to go back and drive the 2010 TSX V6 again tomorrow. If I enjoy it as much as I did the first time, I will probably be bringing it home with me! If I decide to withdraw $3k from a CD account, which will require an early withdrawal fee and penalty (not much, but a nuisance nonetheless)....but if I get $3k out of the account, I will have enough to pay cash for the TSX!

    The same dealer where I'm planning to buy the CPO 2010 TSX has the one remaining NEW 2012 TSX 2.4 Tech. It is also Vortex Blue Pearl, my favorite of all the colors offered on the TSX! Unlike the CPO 2010 TSX V6, this 2012 has the Tech Pkg which includes Navigation AND the 10-speaker Acura/ELS Premium Audio System (which sounds amazing). If I had never driven the TSX V6, I probably would buy this one and be perfectly content with the 2.4! But I'd rather have the 280hp V6 and CPO Warranties and sacrifice the 10-speaker Acura/ELS Audio, and save $7k also! The Nav System doesn't interest me in the least, so I'm actually glad to not have it taking up a big space in my dash! As much as I would love the 10spkr Audio setup included in the Tech Pkg, I am very happy to report that the standard 7-speaker Audio system in the the 2010 sounds EXCEPTIONAL for a base/standard unit....but on a car that cost $35,500 in 2010, I expected a pretty good standard system and I wasn't disappointned.

    Does anyone think that I shouldn't go with the 2010 TSX V6? If so, why? What do you think is the best choice from my list?
    2015.5 Volvo S60 T6 Drive-E Platinum, 2012 Mazda CX-9 GT
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,933
    edited April 2013
    Looks like you have some great choices.

    My 2 cents: Also test drive a new 2013 Accord Sport or EX. My guess is that you'll find the new Accord to be competitive for performance, quality and even price—if you add in the additional features of the Accord and the sound/power/mpg of the new engines.

    Did the thick rear pillars and blind spots in the Optima bother you at all? If not, that's a fine choice. KIA quality (built in USA) is now equal to the best imho.

    The Acura is a *very* nice car. I considered buying one 3 years ago. You can't go wrong really, but they are kind of pricey.

    The old model of Mazda6 is a good car, and that's a hell of a discount on the old outgoing model.

    But have you seen the all-new 2014 Mazda6? Nicer looking car with better performance, mpg, etc. I think you should test drive that one too.

    Hope you'll keep us up to date on what you decide....
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 801
    Hey benjaminh:

    I actually spent a weekend driving a new 2013 Accord Sport and it would have been close to perfect if not for the CVT! I hate CVTs, but I will admit that the CVT in the Accord is the best one I've ever experienced....worlds ahead of the Altima!

    I also considered an Accord EX-L V6 which has a conventional 6-speed automatic. I was amazed at the power, jaccording to C&D it does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds!!! I had a salesman with me on that test drive and I think I scared the living crap out of him, especially when I stayed on the gas past 60 and it blew past 100mph in another eight seconds (0-100 in 13.9sec).

    The power was amazing and I enjoyed it a little too much! But my biggest issue with all the Accord Sedans (except the Sport) is how BORING they look! I looked at it in every color available, hoping that one might strike a chord and look just right, but it was almost as bad as staring as a Camry!

    I didn't notice any significant blind spots in the Optima and they let me take it out for a few hours on my own. So I drove it for 60 or 70 miles and I really loved the inteior design and quality of materials. I also live in Georgia (born & raised) about 90 minutes away from West Point, where the KIA factory is located. So that would be kind of neat to know my car was build here in my home state. But the 2014 Optima is getting a MMC (mid-model cycle) refresh, so depreciation is a real concern for the 2013 model and the idea of spending $30k on a KIA is still tough to digest. But that Black Nappa leather interior is very impressive!

    I have also seen and driven the 2014 Mazda6! We bought a new 2012 CX-9 Grand Touring about four months ago and I had to take it back for two minor issues in January. I talked them into letting me borrow a 2014 Mazda6 Grand Touring for the day. It was Blue Reflex (smoky blue) with Almond Leather and I liked it very much. It never felt strained or underpowered, but it also didn't have the same kind of thrust as the 2013 model with the 3.7L V6. It also was priced at $32k and they weren't discounting them at all. I am also very leery of buying a first model year of any new design.

    I still love the 2013 Mazda6 s GT, but since we got the CX-9 back in November, I've noticed that they share a lot of interior parts. They have the same steering wheel, same Bose stereo head unit, climate controls, even the display on top of the dash that shows the HVAC settings is almost identical to the one in the 2013 Mazda6!

    I'm still feeling good about going for the 2010 TSX V6. I love everything about the car, from the bold color to the sweet Honda V6 under the hood! Every review I've read mentions that the TSX still uses an 'outdated' 5-speed automatic when everyone else has at least a 6-speed now. But it can hang with the best of them and hit 60 in as little as 5.9 seconds! And it also gets better fuel economy than most competitors....amazing since it has that antiquated 5-speed automatic! =)
    2015.5 Volvo S60 T6 Drive-E Platinum, 2012 Mazda CX-9 GT
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,574
    I owned a 2010 TSX tech w/ 4cyl & 5 speed auto. I loved the smoothness of the engine & how perfectly mated it was to the transmission. Shifts were crisp & in Sport or Manual mode, it will hold a gear to the redline unless you tell it to upshift. I loved the well crafted interior, the taut ride, the thick, bolstered seats. The 2.4 L 201 hp 4cyl is no rocket by any stretch of the imagination, but does get up to speed and hauls nicely on the highway. Just ask the CT State Trooper who nailed me at 81 in a 55 last March.

    I had a Blue TSX V6 (non tech) as a loaner car. I immediately felt the extra (close to) 80 horsepower difference. The 3.5 L V6 is both fast and smooth. Accelerating onto the highway at points where my (4 cyl) would be at 80, I found the V6 to be close (or at) the century mark.

    Too often I felt the V6's 250 lb weight difference over the front axle to be a hinderance. Anything less than gentle throttle application would spin the front tires. I also felt the traction control constantly fighting my steering inputs around tight turns.

    I did prefer the feel of the V6's hydraulic power steering to my 4cyl's lifeless electric power steering (the main reason I traded the car in after only 2 1/2 years & 49,000 miles).

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2015 Infiniti Q40 AWD, 2017 Honda Pilot Touring AWD

  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 12,027
    Although mostly still speculation, I think I'm going to be happy with mileage for my Fusion.
    First tank was 25mpg(26 displayed) second was 26(27 displayed) third is showing 28.
    The farthest I've driven is about 20 miles one way.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 2,933
    edited April 2013
    You took an Accord on a test drive to 100?! And still didn't buy it. Yikes. Tough customer.

    Styling is obviously very subjective, but for me the styling of the Accord works because it's so classic (and rather similar to the TSX I think). It's much better than the Camry imho. Pretty profound difference there. But if you don't like it you don't like it—fair enough.

    The quality of the Accord is more than skin deep. Have you seen that it got the highest ratings on the new IIHS crash test? Probably that won't move you either. Having driven a lot of brands in my life—VW (3), Mazda (2), Datsun/Nissan (1), Toyota (1), Oldsmobile (1), Chevy (1), and Honda (3), I've found that for me nothing is as good as a Honda in both the short run and the long run. But obviously everyone gets to have their own favorites. Variety is the spice of life, which is all to the good, and at this point there are a lot of good options.

    The TSX, as you may be aware, is a great car but might be in danger of being phased out. Some Honda/Acura fans at have made the case that it's only slightly smaller than the TL,and only slightly larger than the ILX. The all-new TL is due out in about 6 months, and like the new Accord it's supposed to get a bit smaller. Maybe there will be room in the long run in the Acura lineup for the TSX, but I'm just not sure about that. And to state the obvious, you usually take a hit at resale time with a discontinued model. With any Acura that should be minimized, bc I think they have even higher resale values as a percentage of the original prices than most luxe cars.

    Since you love the KIA, and it's made right in your own home state, why not go for it. I don't think it's going to have much of a change next year, which is probably the last for the model. There may even be an all-new Optima in late 2014 as a 2015 model. At least an all new Sonata is expected then, and the Optima is in part based on the Sonata.
Sign In or Register to comment.