Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Honda Element

1141517192093

Comments

  • aquaswimmeraquaswimmer Member Posts: 30
    Could the accord engine be cheaper?

    Or perhaps it's a room issue. Perhaps the accord engine is slightly more compact.The blunt short nose makes for a small engine bay.

    Ditto for the trans. Perhaps the flat floor puts space for mechanical components at a premium.

    Boy Rope, you sure think the Element is going to be slow!

    I hope not. If the El is too slow or too small I guess I'll get a pilot or a used MDX but my work will destroy the interiors of those vehicles...

    I can't wait for a reputable third party to do a test/review with some numbers..

    The gentleman's bet is on...C'mon Element!
    Don't fail us...
  • bowkebowke Member Posts: 169
    ...ive been away for awhile, but you said in post #705 that the element is getting the 4-cyl from the accord and not the CRV....hate to break it to you, but the 2.4L in the '03 accord, and the 2.4L in the '02 CRV are identical in every way, shape and form...even the same HP and torque ratings...160 HP and 162 lb/ft.

    now, up to date...all honda accessories carry a 12 month/12000 mile warranty, or the remainder of the original factory warranty, whichever is greater, as with all honda replacement parts.
  • mariobros100mariobros100 Member Posts: 15
    The accord,CRV and Element have the same engine;a 2.4L(2354cc).

    The only difference is on the intake:
    -Dual Stage on the CRV ( gives the Torque peak at a lower rpm)
    -Single Stage type on the Accord and Element ( Cheaper$$..)

    Power is almost the same:
    CRV: 160HP @ 6000rpm
    Accord ,Element: 160HP @ 5500rpm

    Torque is almost the same but at a higher rpm on Accord & Element:
    CRV: 162 lb-ft @ 3600
    Accord, Element: 161 lb-ft @ 4500.
  • cb70cb70 Member Posts: 226
    the same torque output as the CRV. Is the solution as simple as finding a CRV intake and slapping it onto an Element?
  • ropedartropedart Member Posts: 163
    ...and electronics, et al.... Well if you go that far might as well shoehorn an Accord V6 or complete CRV engine package in. Wait till some tuner magazine puts an Accord V6 into the Element. Hope the 4wd drivetrain can take 240 horses.
  • cb70cb70 Member Posts: 226
    all would need to be changed to pull off such a thing. To me, tuning an engine has always involved 8 cylinders, lol.
  • chris777chris777 Member Posts: 126
    with the element being the porker everyone describes, most tuners would turn their nose up at it or at the very least gut a bare bones dx interior included from what I know about them.

    I read an article where this dude stripped out absolutely everything out of his civic hatch that could be removed just to get it as light as possible.

    plus if this thing has the same drive train notice the mpg ratings on it the crv and the accord

    the accord stomps them both with over 30 mpg. If all the power train components are the same wind drag (and weight )must be a big factor on fuel economy. other than stoking some punks ego why bother.

    I know I am going to test drive them all before I make my decision.

    A while back I took a trip to car max and test drove a 98 crv then got into a civic (i know its a loosing comparison to the newer vehicles) but it really did drill home the sluggishness of the old crv.

    needless to say I'm gonna compare them all while I'd rather have a wagon or van to haul stuff in, but if the accord is ergonomic enough in its refinements and if element doesn't impress with price/functionality/utility I might spring on an accord or crv especially if the torque is screwed up .

    surely honda isn't going to let it fly if it wont move especially with one of the biggest complaints on the old cr-v was the lack of power.

    hopefully they have it worked out somehow (I hope)

    I'd like to think that honda has learned from that mistake and has some other reason for the torque differences than saving a couple of lousy pennies (and looking at prices thats all it is is pennies ) look at the flak that they have caught at taking the double bones off the civic and the subsequent return oF dual wishbone in 2006
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Bowke - Let me know when you figure out the post immediately following yours. Is the block the same? Yes. Is it tuned the same? No.
  • ropedartropedart Member Posts: 163
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Torque is almost the same but at a higher rpm on Accord & Element
    Peak torque, you mean. Because, comparing the torque curve in CRV versus Accord/Element engine, it appears to me that Accord/Element version has a stronger torque output from 2000 to 3000 rpm, and CRV version has stronger torque curve from 3000-4000 rpm. Past that, Accord/Element torque curve is stronger hence same peak power is delivered earlier, 5500 rpm versus 6000 rpm.

    This only shows that peak torque rpm is an insignificant number to draw conclusions upon.
  • scnamescname Member Posts: 296
    I just read in Car and Driver, the Japan/Euro version Accord (smaller than ours) will be brought to the US in 2004 as an Acura. Current engine is the 2.4 L putting out 190 hp 163 lb ft torque. Hp could be pumped to 200 by the time it gets here.
  • ropedartropedart Member Posts: 163
  • civicwcivicw Member Posts: 135
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/columnists/chi-0209010434sep01.column

    The review makes it sound like Element has a rough,noisy, and slow ride. "Crude" is another word used in the review, and the suicide doors are more problematic, than functional, IMHO. I'm not convinced that for $16-21K it's such a great value for college students. Most college students don't have that kind of money to blow on a new "lifestyle" vehicle.

    I see 2002 2wd auto RAVs go for 18K after rebates in California, 2wd CRVs for about 19K, or Tundra pickups for 16-20K. All of these could be a more refined alternative, depending on one's real needs. Of course, the Element will be different, cool looking, with a little more functionality for some people, and then price or crudeness doesn't matter.
  • AnakinAnakin Member Posts: 410
    That was one of the lamest "reviews" I have ever seen.

    So he didn't like the engine noise, and he complained about hard seats. He seems to me like an old newspaper auto "journalist" who measures things by the Buick standard.

    I'll wait until I can read a real review and drive it myself. :P
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    I'm sure this guy only reviews Buicks, and has no real experience with other makes to judge the Element against. Editors are alway looking for guys with no background to be critics.

    Face it, the Element's a cheap trucklet for the "gotta have it" crowd. Certain sacrifices were made (it was designed to be cheap, slow, and loud) to keep the cost down. If Honda had tried to build a plusher, more-powerful Element for $25K, exactly who would buy it, looking like it does?

    Think of the Element as a Honda version of the Jeep Wrangler and don't take it personally if someone says it's less-refined than a Civic.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    If you go to http://www.wieck.com/public/index.html, and do a search for the Element, you will find 30 pages (8 images/page) of pixs, and cut-away illustrations of the Element. This is the first photo I've seen of the entry-level Element DX.


    Bob


    http://www.wieck.com/public/*2PV_042033

  • AnakinAnakin Member Posts: 410
    Newspaper auto journalists are the laughing stock of the auto review world. They don't need to know much about cars... just how to write. Consider some of his advanced technical terms like "sideways balance."

    I have no problem with someone disliking the Element, but Jim Mateja is not one of the respected opinions of the auto world. *roll eyes*
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I think the review has a positive note to it as well, if Element was indeed 'rough and crude' compared to Cadillac STS, Mercedes E-Class, but better than a Corolla, Crown Victoria? Not bad for a truck.

    BTW, he appeared expecting for a bouncing ball experience instead of a stiffer ride.
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Anyone in the "auto review world" who takes themselves seriously enough to rank on a newspaper auto columnist has their own unique set of issues.

    He may not have the "respect" of his peers, but his review strikes me as honest and informed, "sideways balance" not withstanding.

    Then again, somebody could come along and claim the Element is the end-all, be-all of autodom, and I still wouldn't be impressed by it. It's a Suzuki built by Honda that lacks any off-road ability.
  • AnakinAnakin Member Posts: 410
    Ok, so you don't like it.

    Anything else?
  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    Looks like someone's quickly approaching the dark side.

    Anyways, the new posts are all interesting (except the one with the Aztek having a V-6, I'm glad no one responded to that), but I agree with the latest review. It's not like Wardlaw's review of the new Accord at all (i.e. unnecessarily harsh).
  • AnakinAnakin Member Posts: 410
    LOL

    Then again, somebody could come along and claim the Element is the end-all, be-all of autodom, and I still wouldn't be impressed by it. It's a Suzuki built by Honda that lacks any off-road ability.

    Remember kids, hate leads to suffering.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Anyone else see the V6 Accord in C&D hit 60 in 7 seconds flat? It was much quicker than the TL Type S in the same issue, ironically.

    Now imagine that engine in the Element. Or maybe in the Acura CR-V.

    -juice
  • daveghhdaveghh Member Posts: 495
    ACURA CRV!!! I want it! I wouldn't mind the luxury vehicle without the size of the large well designed MDX. The Acura CRV would fit a nice niche!!!!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The Pilot/MDX are big and feel big. The CR-V feels like a compact, roomy as it is. I'm talking about driving feel.

    I think there is some room for a product in between, though an Accord wagon would be just right.

    -juice
  • daveghhdaveghh Member Posts: 495
    Accord wagon would probably fit that niche just fine! Rumor is, later next year the Accord wagon will be back!
  • rerenov8rrerenov8r Member Posts: 380
    Much more positive than Mateja in the Trib...


    http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadtests/firstdrive/73408/article.html

  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    The Edmunds article is very positive. DiPietro admits that it's slow, but only at top speeds, and the engine never felt taxed.

    Did Edmunds and thecarconnection.com test drive 2 different vehicles?!
  • chris777chris777 Member Posts: 126
    "Not surprisingly, Honda expects no less than 80 percent of Elements sold to be the EX versions."

    I thought the target was the young crowd?
    this info makes it look more like the crv crowd

    this review does seem better than the other and definitely more encouraging other than this news about pricing and trim levels
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Good job Varmint.
  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    chris- EX tops out at 22K. For comparison, I paid 21K for my RAV4 - and that's after haggling. Its original MSRP was in the neighborhood of 23K and then some.

    Likewise, I looked at a CR-V LX and the asking price was close to 22K - ABS isn't even available on the LX CR-V.
  • ropedartropedart Member Posts: 163
    When you can get a new V6 Xterra at about $19K. Only 170HP but 200ftlbs of torque. GenY would sooner get a used Xterra and get more "respect". I mean the Xterra is well understood whereas the El is puzzling to many. Its outdoorsy but not an off roader. Only 6.9 inches of ground clearance and no low range. OK nobody uses it but important to posers. Youth is about posing.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Looks like a good kayaking rig. In my day it would be a bit shy on ground clearance. Now everyone paddles itty bitty short 'yaks, and they drive to playspots along the road instead of down rough roads to a river put-in. Water friendly materials is a big plus.

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Hmm IIRC they are selling for a lot more than $19K. You can barely get a pickup for $19k these days.

    -mike
  • AnakinAnakin Member Posts: 410
    Diploid, I was wondering the same thing. Mateja said he could "feel every tar strip" in the road and Edmunds said the suspension soaked up bumps without complaint.

    Maybe Mateja just didn't "get it."

    Ropedart, The Element isn't meant to be an off-road vehicle. It's targeted at youth who like outdoor activities, so it's really intended to get you to the bottom of the ski resort or the biking trail. It has AWD so you can traverse slippery conditions... this is not a mountain climbing vehicle. You can call it a poseur vehicle if you want, but Honda hasn't tried to make this car out to be a Jeep Wrangler competitor.

    On another note, I can't think of another vehicle that could carry that much STUFF in the same price range. A base Xterra begins where a loaded Element ends, so I suppose they're almost comparable... but again, the Xterra is a truck.

    I know it doesn't appeal to a lot of you here, but for people like me and my wife, it's very appealing. It can carry a whole lot of stuff, or our dogs, yet still get good gas mileage. Frankly, there isn't a truck that can compare on fuel efficiency, so we'll be comparing the Element with other small cute-utes and some of the larger compact wagons like the Jetta Wagon.
  • bent_propbent_prop Member Posts: 1
    The torque chart posted by Varmint indicates the difference in single and dual stage intakes to be insignificant. Any other interpretations?
  • daveghhdaveghh Member Posts: 495
    If I didn't recently get the 2002 CRV, I would strongly consider buying the model X! I think it is awesome!
  • aquaswimmeraquaswimmer Member Posts: 30
    http://www.edmunds.com/news/autoshows/articles/49774/page018.html


    Here is another CR-V variation for the European market. Check it out.


    The Edmunds review is very encouraging. The reviewer wrote that the Element does not lose much performance with the auto as compared to a stick. That surprises me.


    I have shopped Xterra's as well and they have their appeal but aside from being inexpensive and SUV-like I don't think that Xterra and Element are very comparable.


    The Xterra has good cargo space but is slow and gets horrible fuel economy ( a bad combo IMO )and it handles like a garbage truck.


    The Element, while it will have merely adequate power at least it will be among the best handling utility vehicles if the Edmunds review is any indication.

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Nice graph, BTW. I'm not sure which engine I'd pick. You shift at 4000rpm most of the time, and the CR-V has the edge from 3000-4000, where you will use it day-in and day-out.

    I see variations of about 10 ft-lbs, with each engine carrying the advantage at different rpm. That's not huge, but you could feel the difference.

    The Element is better at very low rpm, which will maybe be good to pull that weight during relaxed driving. And the Millenials won't mind revving really high to get that peak torque.

    XTerras are as unrefined as older pickups. The drive is just awful IMO. I would hope the Element would have a far more refined ride.

    For a real world price reference, fitzmall.com's cheapest XTerra 4x4 V6 is $21,012, and that is very skimpy with the options (no ABS, cruise, power, keyless), or roughly like an Element DX at several grand less.

    Plus, I loved the styling on the original XTerra, but Nissan put these ugly glasses on the new one, so it looks kinda "geeky" now. They ruined it.

    -juice
  • AnakinAnakin Member Posts: 410
    They have something more directly compared to the Element.


    http://www.edmunds.com/news/autoshows/articles/49774/page022.html


    "Yanya" is kind of a goofy name, but they've taken it one step further with the convertible treatment.

  • chris777chris777 Member Posts: 126
    what I meant is that if honda expects 80% to be ex trim it almost gives the appearance that they aren't really interested in making it all that afford able

    much of the pitch was affordability

    and now it appears that the ex will be quite close to an lx crv 2 or 4wd

    with abs and alloys being the "major" differences

    its just puzzling
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    It's all about the Benjamins. They are going to charge what the market will allow. If initial demand is way high, prices will creep up. If it's low, dealers will discount them, and Honda will offer incentives.

    BTW, that review wasn't bad at all, even calling it peppy.

    -juice
  • tpat3tpat3 Member Posts: 119
    Was try to post the link to a review of Element in the 8/31 Boston Globe by Royal Ford but it's not accessible for some reason.

    He basically said Honda is way underestimating the market for this car (his term) and that it will jump demographics beyond the target like the new Beetle did.

    I think he's right. I've got a wife and two young kids and based on what I know so far am ready to buy one. Only concerns I have is whether it is just too slow or too small.

    Anyone know the dimensions of the rear with the seats in place? Tough to tell from pictures, but might be OK.

    Thanks and great info from all the posts.
  • aquaswimmeraquaswimmer Member Posts: 30
    Wow. First the Element is described as peppy. Now snappy! Right on.

    Hey. Who has experience with buying a first run car from Honda or other brands?

    Do you suppose minor glitches might be common in the first batch of Elements?

    I know it's a Honda but still, I have read here at Edmunds that the Acura MDX was a bit glitchy at first.

    Hmm. Too bad the stick/AWD does not come out till 5/03. May have to settle on another configuration.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    If Moonkat's link doesn't work for you, try this one and look for the Element link:


    http://www.newstrove.com/content/suv/


    and please limit your quotes to a paragraph or two so we keep the copyright lawyers happy.



    Steve

    Host

    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    It's supposed to be wider than the CR-V, so I'm assuming it can seat 5, even though Honda only wants to put 2 seatbelts back there.

    They did the same thing with the RSX's backseat - 3 people can actually squeeze back there, but they placed a plastic try in the center to effectively prevent that.
  • chris777chris777 Member Posts: 126
    the only problems about the boston review is it's too friendly. (maby generic is a better word)


    I remember reading reviews of the pilot where the only thing the author could slam on it was the column shifter blocking the stereo controls.


    while at first it seems picky. it at least gives the impression the reviewer had actually sat in the vehicle long enough and put enough thought into it to actually find a point to complain about.


    instead of just scanning it and moving on to the next article they were going to write


    many of the auto reviews these days just give bland descriptions that could have easily been lifted from company press releases or interior photos

    ( we all can see pics of these wheels on the net or at shows, but only a select few are allowed inside, or even better behind the wheels until the official release)


    I like seeing honesty rather than stuff that appears quite similar to product placement.


    if it's sweet call it sweet, if it stinks or is cheap say so

    if you notice something interesting that honda hasn't already said or isn't readily noticeable please by all means spill the beans

    (the low body roll comments are interesting, as are the rear seats lack of comfort)


    this is the direct link to the boston site cut and paste http://www.boston.com/cars/automobilia/

  • ropedartropedart Member Posts: 163
    Some of you might have sensed my frustration with the Element. I own 2 Hondas and I expected something cheap, light, fast and fuel efficient. Its turning out not to be quite that way. Also smaller than I hoped, seats don't turn around and boring colors. I have not seen the hard performance figures yet.

    I find the DX deal a form of bait and switch. Yes Honda wants to sell mostly loaded EXs. Dangle the cheap base model you never buy. The lack of a LX model irritates me. I could deal with an DX. The AC and cruise installation would be manageable. Even I see the sunroof is burned into every Element. Just get a hack saw and open it up. The most disturbing thing is the lack of standards ABS on a thing this heavy. You need all the help you can get to stop it safely.

    I do not want to see Element pricing getting into somebody elses V6 territory. You will get a case of "buyer regret". Everytime you see an Xterra, XL-7, Sante Fe, VUE, Tribute/Escape, whiz by you are thinking U ripped yourself off. Or if Honda upgrades later you won't mind. I think if you pay more than $19K you are a fashion victim.

    It was nice to aim low (age wise) but the success of the El will hinge again with boomers, yuppies, GenXers. Honda will not and should not admit it is a BIG BOX DELIVERY VAN. Road trip you bet. Road trip to big box stores like Costco, Ikea, Walmart, Home Depot, ToysRus. Don't pop the youth storyline.

    It is true the Xterra is rough but that is part of its macho appeal. The rough ride can have a visceral joy to it. Perhaps car reviewers have spent too much time in Buicks. Its suspension is crude but it can take punishment. It can go where the Element can't go. So dude there's bragging rights. On the other hand the CRV suspension could be wrecked by just roadkill.

    You can sleep in the back of an Xterra.
Sign In or Register to comment.