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
FWIW, 27500 would have been a fair price if it were new. With 6500 miles, wow.
Check this out.
An Accord 4-cyl SE (2007) weighs 3177. Mine is an EX (4-cyl) of the same generation (2006), which is pretty much the same as the SE, but adds a sunroof (more weight).
Check out Car and Driver Familiar Four-Doors test from 2007 for curb weight of the Accord SE for 2007.
Another way to look at my car loaded as I said before on my Oklahoma road trip:
A Honda Fit with a 170lb driver has a power to weight ratio of 23.85lbs/hp (2600/109). My Accord loaded to 3900 lbs would have a power to weight ratio of 23.49 lbs/hp (3900/166). The Fit runs 0-60 in well under 12-13 seconds.
I have seen 0-60 in 8.2 for the 190 HP sedan with 5 speed.
That recent Car and Driver test had the 2008 Accord EX (with weight of sunroof) automatic at 8.2 sec 0-60. The same magazine had 8.1 sec for the Accord SE (w/o sunroof) automatic the previous year. Sounds like the cars are pretty identical acceleration-wise when running through the powerband.
You mention the comfort zone... people didn't seem to have a problem with the 170hp V6, 4-speed Accord back when it was the top option. It accelerates similarly to today's 4-cylinder Accord. Back then, the 4-cylinder still outsold the V6 big-time.
I have a 130hp Accord as well (a 1996 model with nearly 180k miles on it now), and my 166hp 5-speed auto Accord feels like a rocket compared to the 130hp model, yet the 130hp model has never gotten me in trouble or had a problem hitting the speed limit in the on-ramp acceleration trials, even with multiple passengers (i've run that car many times on its 850lb weight limit - 5-people in the car). Did I try passing an 18-wheeler in 300 feet at 70 MPH? Nope. It's all about what you WANT in a car, but having the 4-cylinder is certainly not unsafe, as you seem to make it out to be. If the I4 isn't fast enough for you, I understand it whole-heartedly. It's certainly the more pleasurable option for high-speed driving/passing. For me, it's just unneeded, and frankly, unwanted.
Still not something I would be comfortable with - I want more reserve power.
Please let's keep this to the VCM in the new Accord. There are other discussions for other comments and if anyone needs any help in finding them, just drop me an email.
It is interested to see many V6's for sale. VCM, who knows...
I saw a gray V6 with tinted windows, and the Honda chrome rims, and dang it looked AWESOME!! Priced with NAV $30,400, and this was with 3,000 or so miles.
But, is it worth the extra 2-3k for the chrome rim/tires... no.
First - I am a 57 year old car nut who has driven a million or more miles easily, and if I run over a dime I can tell you it's heads or tails. I am "tuned in" to my rides to the point that they become extensions of me - and I keep cars forever - I've had two of my babies for well over 20 years each - a 72 240Z (it eventually died an untimely death at the hands of a friend) and an 85 4wd Toyota Pickup, which I still own and people still try to buy from me in parking lots. Given that - I do not feel a dang thing in the VCM transition. The light goes on and off, but I feel zip as far as hesitation, jerking, bumping, vibration, whatever. Of course, it could start tomorrow, but I'm telling you it's not a universal issue.
On other fronts, the car gets a lot of attention, handles very nicely (I used to autocross that Z car, so I do know how to move through the twisty stuff) rides well, is quiet, and can get up and run if asked. The stereo is average at best, so if sound is important, upgrade or plan on it later. The seats are very good, the lumbar support the best I've ever felt, visibilty excellent, and the rear passenger space very accommodating.
Lastly, gas mileage. On my first tank I managed 21.17 mpg. I quickly found that that tank - the "dealer fill-up" - was probably short about 2 gallons, as my next tank - still using it - is doing much better. I'm guessing I'll crack 24-25 mpg with a mix of freeway (75-80mph) and stop/go local stuff. My half-tank mileage is well above the first tank number.
So - I rolled the dice in spite of my concerns raised by this forum - and I've lucked out so far. I truly believe I'd know it if I had the problem so it must be an issue that is not universal. I hope for the sake of those afflicted that a fix will be found for their woes. Trust me, as much as I love Hondas, my Odyssey tranny issues taught me that they are not without their faults. In defense of my ability to sense a problem when there is one, all three of the trannys I had replaced ran flawlessly under most road conditions. It was only on steeper upgrades that the problems made themselves known, and my wife never even noticed it, yet once I got the service managers to drive it under the right conditions, they replaced it each time. I'm just adding this to "document" my sensitivity to slight mechanical "flutters" that many don't even feel. With the VCM V6, in my case, it's a winner so far. I hope this helps others in their decision.
Why would you think that upshifting should not be more than 2-3 seconds. Upshifting depends on the shift points dictated by the ECU program as well as the rpm of the engine. If you are just tapering your gas pedal, the shift points will be longer. Jackrabbits will result in shorter shifts.
Also, Honda transmission are not the same as other manufacturers as Honda uses sliding gears in parallel instead of planetary gears. More like a manual transmission and maybe this is the reason why the shift points are distinct.
I've asked Honda about the possibility of reprogramming but they say they won't do it. What Honda considers acceptable and what I consider acceptable (and others as well, looking at some of the other posters on this topic) apparently diverge, and I'm in the process of doing my 3 attempted services before going to the next level, whether that involves a lemon law suit or simply dumping the car to be rid of the headache.
Not that I need to justify myself or what I am experiencing with my car to you, but I believe that upshifting should not be > 2-3 seconds based on my experience with approximately 10 other vehicles from a variety of manufacturers during my 35 years of driving, including a 1986 Accord, none of which took this amount of time to upshift and all of which, including the Accord, were considerably smoother in their shifting.
From your post, it seems like you are an experienced driver with 35 years of driving different cars. Therefore, you should know that automatics from different manufacturers have different shift points. 2-3 seconds of upshifts might be normal for one manufacturer but not for another manufacturer. It all depends on the algorithm and the logic points that are programmed in the tranny ECU. In fact, all auto trannies these days have "fuzzy logic" programmed in them that learns how you drive the car and adjust the tranny shift points accordingly. Maybe you should drive the Accord like you stole it once in awhile.
I do know that different cars from different mfs. have different shift points, but this one seems to be an outlier.
Corvettes get better mileage on the highway than a Honda - it is the FINAL drive gearing that makes the difference. They go 80 at 2000 RPM or less! Why can't a Honda V6 cruise at 75 MPH at 2000 RPM? Someone on the Sedan and Coupe forum said Honda didn't like to "lug" its engines. 2000 RPM is lugging??? Hardly - I would consider anything under 1000 rpm lugging. Try driving an S2000 on the highway at 75 MPH - 4000 RPM in 6th gear!!!!!!!!! Insufferable.
Yeah - I think Honda needs to reevaluate its efforts to improve fuel economy - the Accord hybrid was a failure, the Insight too. And, in my opinion, the have now mucked up their fine V6 with VCM, when there are other less intrusive options.
I still stay Accord VCM was a Honda Marketing decision, not an engineering decision.
Why can't a Honda V6 cruise at 75 mph at 2000 rpm ?
Torque vs Power curve.
Are we cruising at 75 with all 6 cylinders or 4 cylinders ? Probably we get reduced torque with 2 cylinders shut down by VCM and need the slightly faster RPM. However, the proof is in the pudding...my mileage is great at highway cruising speeds with VCM.
When I can get my mileage results with this powerful V6, VCM ain't no gimmick !
What kind of mileae are you getting on the highway with the VCM? My friend with the 2007 V6 gets 21 arouund town and 29 on the highway - 75-80 cruising.
You must show much higher mpg versus competitors v6 or much higher performance. The Accord V6 with VCM has neither over its major competitors.
Here are the overall mpg ratings. For some reason the fueleconomy.gov website is down, so I am using the overall mpg as reported by CR in the 2008 auto issue.
These are the V6 models:
Altima - 23
Accord - 21
Camry - 23 .
The only error I see in CRs report is that they think the Nissan requires premium fuel when it does not,(Nissan does however recomend it) so its possible the Nissan V6 may have used different octane gas. Maybe with 87 it only gets 22 or 21 overall who knows. Regardless, they all are relatively the same.
The Camry is likely a mushier ride but still plenty of power. Typically the Nissan is the fastest to 60 of the bunch. There is definitely no benefit performance wise for the VCM. So the only place it can shine is MPG and it doesn't.
Still looks like a Marketing gimmick to me.
Thank you,
Golfr.
I don't think VCM is a gimmick because I've been getting gas mileage with which I'm more than satisfied.
To date I have driven 3940 miles with my 2008 Accord V6. I have used a total 157.5 gallons of gas. This computes to 25 miles per gallon overall.
I've had one tankful which was over 29 mpg and one as low as 21.5 mpg.
I like the power I get when I need it and I enjoy its handling on back roads as well as in traffic. My Accord doesn't need a gimmick.
Altima has CVT, Camry has a 6 speed tranny and Honda has a 5 speed transmission with VCM. Which is the gimmick ? The CVT, the 6 speed or VCM.
Incidentally, I've never understood how CR gets its mileage results. However the 2008 EPA numbers shows Altima, Camry and Accord all equal at 22 mpg average.
The EPA numbers also show all three equal at 19 city. On the highway they're different. EPA shows Accord 29,Toyota 28 and Altima 26.
Hmm, think it could be VCM cruising with 3 or 4 cylinders that does it ?
I've had my V6 for about 6 weeks (about 4000 miles) and have not yet noticed any vibration, surging or "loud engine operation" . Of all these symptoms, vibration seems the least subjective.
How can you tell if the engine is in 3 cylinder operation ? You have complained about problems between 60-75 mph. Is the engine in 3 or 4 cylinder mode at that time? How can you tell which mode it's in?
It's interesting that you mention that you observe this behavior when you operate the throttle and not when in Cruise Control mode. It's also interesting to note that you observed vibration in six different vehicles tested at different dealers.
If operating in "3 cylinder mode" causes the vibration you'd think that putting it in Cruise Control would keep it in 3 cylinder mode and cause it to vibrate continuously.
If you observed vibration in all six vehicles you tested it is surprising to me that my car does not exhibit vibration in cruise control or manual control at any speed .
Have you tried putting your car in cruise control and modulating the speed with the
Accel and Decel buttons on the steering wheel ? You may be onto something with your thoughts about the accelerator pedal and its drive-by-wire controls. It would be interesting to see if using the steering wheel buttons causes the same vibrations as the foot pedal.
We are all simply drivers who sense it - do you not think that we have not all tried various means of reducing the problem or consider other means? Cars have been back to the dealer, seen by area reps, etc etc and looked at I am sure by Honda master technicians. And we laymen are supposed to come up with the solution? I hardly think so.
Hank - it is great that you have averaged 25.4, and that you have gotten 29 MPG on the highway, and you love your car. And no one is denying you any of that pleasure, or saying that your car does do the things they have experienced but you are too insensitive to realize it. But it is rubbing salt in the wounds off other owners when you do that - because they are NOT having that kind of wonderful experience with their cars. "If you observed vibration in all six vehicles you tested it is surprising to me that my car does not exhibit vibration in cruise control or manual control at any speed " You don't get it - YOU are among the lucky 70%! Why question other people and their experiences just because your car is great and you are happy? Again, it is like you are questioning us and our veracity, while no one diisputes yours!
.
Their cars are apparently among the 30% that Honda acknowledges hvae noticeable VCM operation issues that are, as yet, unresolved. Bellieve us Hank - the issues are real and consider yourself among the lucky..
The point that I made was that Honda VCM is no more effective than the major competitors solutions.
The similar mpg and performance numbers prove that.