Unfortunately Toyota has got some transmission issues it needs to work completely out before I would consider them again without some trepidation. The problems with the auto tranny surge/lag are very real and a major no buy in my opinion. My 07 Highlander has had a few little tranny burps with only 800 miles on it. I have fingers crossed that it will stay mild and occasional, but I tell ya I feel real bad for the Camry folks with the almost unlivable sounding issue along that line. I also, have the oil sludge debacle in the back of my mind with the Highlander, will really have to keep on top of oil changes with it unlike my Accord who will be more forgiving Im sure. ( I aim for 4-5000 miles intervals ) I had a Camry once and it was a very nice car (a little boring and I have always like Accord looks over it even now cept for the droopy rear end Accords) and its a very comfortable set up too. The Highlander is silky smooth and very nicely done, but Im nervous I tell ya....Toyota is losing trust.
But these are still very isolated incidents, and far from a widespread issue.
Toyota is aware that they maybe just a top-level company, and not clearly superior, at this present time, and are performing countermeasures to satisfy their own quality standards.
This should start with the 2008 Highlander. The increased demand for their products, and the demand on their top personnel, is causing growing pains.
Neither of the engines in the '07 Highlander were part of the oil sludge issue that has tarnished Toyota's reputation. Aside from that, any engine can potentially have sludge issues, mitigated by proper maintenance.
Honda isn't without blemish either; transmission issues as well, and VCM on the current gen Ody has been far from flawless... I'd figure all of that would be well worked out before the Accord debuts with the technology, though, as it sells in much higher volume and the margin for error could have significantly more pronounced negative results.
That was for a UK spec Accord. It converts to 52.3 using US gallons. The new US Accord is bigger and heavier and may have a larger version of the engine, so I could see it ending up in the 45 MPG range (or even less) when it finally gets here especially under the new 2008+ mileage calculations.
Now some are talking about calendar year 2010 as a 2011 model instead of 2009 mentioned earlier.
Hyundai and Toyota both have Autostick or Tiptronic automatic transmissions. Where is the new Honda Accord on this important issue? Does the 4 cylinder get all-speed traction control?
I have in my Acura (TL) but have used it only a few times for the sake of using it. It is better to just leave the transmission in "drive". If self-shifting is higher priority over auto, nothing beats stick.
I disagree. Autostick or Tiptronic automatic transmissions are not particularly desireable to the overwhelming majority of drivers and are therefore non-issues. Most folks with those features will find themselves rarely bothering to use them. Anyone on this forum with one? How often have you ever used it?
Whether 2008 Accords get all-speed traction control is purely open to speculation. Wait three weeks and all will be answered.
I've played with autostick on a few cars and it was fun for a few hours, then mostly pointless. I'm not against it, but it isn't important. I'd like to see stability control available without needing to buy a V6 model or even the top of the line 4 cylinder EXL.
As I mentioned before, Hyundai, Toyota, Acura, and even Nissan have autostick. You may not like it but many other people do like the occasional convenience , especially on a hilly terrrain.
I didn't say I didn't like it, but as long as you can still manually downshift out of 5th gear by pulling the lever down, the level of importance is very low. The Ford Fusion V6 6-speed automatic only gives you the choice of D and L. That's inadequate.
Paddle shifters, or autostick are not something I'm willing to pay extra for. As long as I can shift it down to a lower gear with the normal shifter, I don't need the boy-racer stuff. If it doesn't cost extra, no problem.
Is it a sure thing that the 2008 won't have this feature?
There is no sure thing about 2008 Accord specifications until Honda permits specifications to be released. That won't happen until the publication embargo is lifted the third week of August. Otherwise, anything that you read or hear about them is pure conjecture.
Engine braking while going down long grades is about the only time I use the sport shift mode in my TSX. I wish that I'd bought a MT instead of an AT, but manually shifting an AT just doesn't carry the same thrill.
Not really. If you have sportshift (as Honda calls it), then you go sequentially twice to get down from 5th to 3rd gear. If you're in normal auto mode, to get to 3rd, you only move the lever down one slot.
In fact, I have seen many people forget to upshift/downshift in sportshift mode, only to realize later. They would be better off leaving those in "D".
Quite possibly because none of us are Honda insiders, and don't have the information you're seeking!
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
On p2 of the link you posted, some guy made a comment about him/herself working at the Marysville ohio plant and the coupe and sedan being shown to employees. Well, he also stated that the car has a recessed nav (confirmed from pics) and a 260hp v6 engine. If this is true, it could confirm one of several things.
The 3.5l v6 is not used and either the 3.2 or 3l is A-vtec isn't ready(unless this is a 3l v6) or the person is trying to belie us
Still, nothing on the diesel except that it is a newer version of the 2.2l CTDI with 140hp and 2XX lbs ft of torque. Its the same engine in the Euro Accord(TSX) but with a better catalytic converter and no UREA like the benzes.
That new Vw Jetta Bluemotion/TDI sounds promising. It will have a 2l 140hp and 236lbs ft. A big improvement from the 1.9l TDI with 100hp and 177lbs ft. I cant wait to drive both of them back to back! My next car decision has just been made that much harder!! :P :shades:
I agree. My last 2 TL's have had autostick and have never used it. I'd rather they put stability control and all the other goodies on the EX or EXL 4 cylinder. I now have 07 crv. The 4 cylinder is plenty of power.
Hyundai and Toyota both have Autostick or Tiptronic automatic transmissions. Where is the new Honda Accord on this important issue? Does the 4 cylinder get all-speed traction control?
Acura has had it all along .
Autostick is as useful as a flashlight is to the blind, or the iPOD to the deaf.
I have driven other people's cars with auto stick (Landrover, Kia...).
First of all, auto stick does not eliminate the torque converter. This is where most of the parasitic losses in the automatic come from.
Second, autostick does not hold gear when you want it to, such as near the redline, to take the full advantage of the power.
Thirdly, they downshift to 1 for you when you stop.
If you are interested it in it for hill driving, Honda already has Grade Logic built into all of their automatics, which downshift and hold gear on incline and decline drives.
I had the dubious pleasure of driving my son's stick shift Infinity G20 on the Washington Beltway during a 23 mile rush hour commute- can't say that the manual made it fun at all. Don't get me wrong, no fun with an automatic either, but all of the shifting and clutching...why bother?
First of all, auto stick does not eliminate the torque converter. This is where most of the parasitic losses in the automatic come from.
Second, autostick does not hold gear when you want it to, such as near the redline, to take the full advantage of the power.
Thirdly, they downshift to 1 for you when you stop.
Not all are created equal. Most seem to be as you describe, but there are some that are designed more for the enthusiast. I can tell you, for instance, when I testdrove a Mazda6 with this feature, I bounced it off the rev limiter more than once. And in the Lincoln LS I owned for a while, it would only downshift to 1st if you were in 3rd or higher when you came to a complete stop. If you downshifted to 2nd prior to stopping, it would stay in 2nd.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Trust me, I've driven that car with an Auto (2001 model, my best friend's girlfriend's car). It is utterly GUTLESS below 4,000 RPM. At least a manual allows you to put the engine in the powerband more readily. That automatic (in that particular model of car) is geared way too tall for the meager powerplant.
Drive the auto and manual versions of the same car and you'll find the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Since the competition has a auto/manual shift available and because Honda already has that type of transmission on Acuras, I think it will be available on at least the 6 cylinder models of the 2008 Accord. By the way the rumor now floating around is the 2008 V-6 Accord has 273 HP.
Yes, I too have heard the 273 hp number. That sounds about right.
Personally, the 4-cyl would be more than enough for me. I feel like my 166 hp Accord is peppy (especially after driving a loaded down Odyssey 1500 miles last weekend). With the new Accord 4-cylinder having even more power, I can't see myself ever ponying-up for the V6!
Same here. When I got my 1998 Accord EX-L, those 150 horses were plenty (now they would be rated even lower). The V6 with 200 HP was most powerful of any Japanese family sedan at the time (Camry had 192 HP, Maxima had 190 HP while Altima was fine with 150 HP until Honda announced 150 HP Accord in which case, Nissan chose to market additional 5 HP).
Now, the rumor is, at least one trim of '08 Accord will have 200 HP (and that is with new rating system, so that would make it more powerful than the 1998-2002 V6 albeit with a less torque).
I have a 5 cylinder Volvo (no turbo) with 168 HP and it works fine for my type of driving (and I have the speeding tickets to prove it, haha!). But looking forward in evaluating 6 vs 4, bear in mind that over the next 5 years, gasoline could cost $5/gallon (nobody knows for sure, but a war/terrorist action in the Persian Gulf region could do it). And the impact of that could hit you 2 ways- filling up the tank and the higher depreciation on cars that get lousy mileage (if you don't believe me, ask the big SUV owners what $3 gasoline has done to the value of their gas hogs)
but all of the shifting and clutching...why bother?
All the working and looking forward to a weekend, why bother, millions of people live happily on welfare or in FEMA trailers, without bother.
All the inhaling and exhaling, why bother, millions of people are fine just doing nothing....
I can go on and on and on with the "why bother" scenarios....
As to driving stick in stop and go, learn from the best, the truck drivers, they keep it in one gear and just coast. If you keep enough space infront of you, you never have to clutch, and never have to shift. I have done it for years and my legs have not fallen off.
Driving auto in stop and go is truly horrable. You can't modulate speed with just the throttle. If you lift off the throttle, the tranny shifts up, thus increasing your velocity, causing you to step on the brakes to slow it down. Seems like more work to me, working both the gas and brake pedals, rather than just working the gas pedal to maintain speed.
If you have driven recent, 2002 and up Hondas, they do very well at crawling at 5 mph in 1st gear.
Here is the key though. If I drive my TL insanely, it gets me 25-26 mpg in mixed driving (last three tanks: 27.1 mpg, 26.1 mpg, 24.9 mpg). I average about 26 mpg in my Accord (but it is a 1998/EX). So, the difference between the two in terms of mileage isn’t huge. Now, TL runs on premium, but that shouldn’t be a problem with Accord V6 which has traditionally been recommended with regular. So, if Accord V6 gets 25 mpg, and Accord I-4 gets 27 mpg, for an average driver who puts 12K miles/year, the additional cost would be about $10/month at $4/gallon. And these drivers would actually be someone who didn’t mind spending an additional $1500 more to get V6 over I-4 anyway.
Now, SUVs are a whole different thing. There is a reason people are dumping. I won’t be pleased either, if I just spent $92.51 to fill up the tank at $3/gallon like someone did ahead of me at a pump a few weeks ago. No wonder the car like SUVs are catching up, and in fact, leading the SUV sales (CR-V is on top, followed by Escape and Rav4). In fact, seven of top ten best selling SUVs are uni-body SUVs now (more, if we dump fleet sales). But, I’m now digressing from the subject.
"but all of the shifting and clutching...why bother?"
All the working and looking forward to a weekend, why bother, millions of people live happily on welfare or in FEMA trailers, without bother.
All the inhaling and exhaling, why bother, millions of people are fine just doing nothing....
I can go on and on and on with the "why bother" scenarios....
I agree. Let's keep up the analogies though. Why bother with stick shifts when there was never much wrong with horses and buggies.
While I thoroughly enjoy shifting, it's a pain in the butt in heavy traffic and the resale value of a stick shift Accord sedan is below the pits. Trust me, I've been there.
Maybe where you are, resale is the pits, but not here. I had someone come 200 miles within 24 hours of advertising my 2003 Accord LX Sedan with manual transmission to pay the book value that I was asking. When I have searched for manual small cars in my area, there are very few and are snatched up quickly.
I can see why a dealer may not want them as the market is smaller and thus as a trade in you might suffer. For a private party sale, I have never had any problem with price or timeliness.
All the working and looking forward to a weekend, why bother, millions of people live happily on welfare or in FEMA trailers, without bother.
I can't live on that kind of $$$.
All the inhaling and exhaling, why bother, millions of people are fine just doing nothing....
If they are not inhaling and exhaling, they aren't doing fine.
If you keep enough space infront of you, you never have to clutch, and never have to shift.
If you like shifting so much, why do you avoid doing it?
Before batteries were invented, people used to have to crank the engine over by hand to start it. Automatic transmissions were invented as an improvement. If you don't mind shifting, maybe you wouldn't mind cranking.
Automatics were invented to give lazy and weaker people an optional way to shift the transmission. It's kind of like saying white Model T's were invented to be an improvement over all those unfortunate people driving black ones. Different, but hardly an improvement.
Though automatics are much better than in the past, it is an added inefficiency and complexity that is completely unneccessary in operating a vehicle. Think of it as a seat heater or moonroof. A luxury, but hardly an improvement for the experience of driving.
On any vehicle of the Accord's size or smaller, an automatic is a driving impediment not an improvement.
On any vehicle of the Accord's size or smaller, an automatic is a driving impediment not an improvement.
You should always have both hands on the wheel while driving (10 & 2), which is impossible when you have to shift a manual. So that would make a manual more of a driving impedement, as you put it.
On any vehicle of the Accord's size or smaller, an automatic is a driving impediment not an improvement.
You should always have both hands on the wheel while driving (10 & 2), which is impossible when you have to shift a manual. So that would make a manual more of a driving impedement, as you put it. What would make an automatic an impedement?
Driving auto in stop and go is truly horrable. You can't modulate speed with just the throttle. If you lift off the throttle, the tranny shifts up, thus increasing your velocity, causing you to step on the brakes to slow it down.
You obviously have never heard of downshifting in an automatic. I used to put my 02 Accord in 2 in the stop and crawl BS. Worked marvelously. My car now has a SportShift where I can toggle between 2 and 3 and a little 1 now and then. Rarely have to brake.
My 5 spd. truck is a royal PITA in the bumper to bumper. Just aweful. Slow torture.
I don't get the desire for a manual in anything other than a sports car like a Vette, a 335, or an S2000. A manual in a sedan? Ew.
Hard to do that...a seat heater doesn't make life-and-death decisions for me when I need to be going fast ASAP. An automatic (a good one, like in my Accord), does. It will select the most appropriate gear for your situation.
A seat heater burns my bum, but an automatic keeps some driver's from being "toast."
Comments
The problems with the auto tranny surge/lag are very real and a major no buy in my opinion.
My 07 Highlander has had a few little tranny burps with only 800 miles on it. I have fingers crossed that it will stay mild and occasional, but I tell ya I feel real bad for the Camry folks with the almost unlivable sounding issue along that line.
I also, have the oil sludge debacle in the back of my mind with the Highlander, will really have to keep on top of oil changes with it unlike my Accord who will be more forgiving Im sure. ( I aim for 4-5000 miles intervals )
I had a Camry once and it was a very nice car (a little boring and I have always like Accord looks over it even now cept for the droopy rear end Accords) and its a very comfortable set up too. The Highlander is silky smooth and very nicely done, but Im nervous I tell ya....Toyota is losing trust.
Toyota is aware that they maybe just a top-level company, and not clearly superior, at this present time, and are performing countermeasures to satisfy their own quality standards.
This should start with the 2008 Highlander. The increased demand for their products, and the demand on their top personnel, is causing growing pains.
I think you'll be alright.
DrFill
Honda isn't without blemish either; transmission issues as well, and VCM on the current gen Ody has been far from flawless... I'd figure all of that would be well worked out before the Accord debuts with the technology, though, as it sells in much higher volume and the margin for error could have significantly more pronounced negative results.
That was for a UK spec Accord. It converts to 52.3 using US gallons.
The new US Accord is bigger and heavier and may have a larger version of the engine, so I could see it ending up in the 45 MPG range (or even less) when it finally gets here especially under the new 2008+ mileage calculations.
Now some are talking about calendar year 2010 as a 2011 model instead of 2009 mentioned earlier.
sbpceap, "Honda Odyssey: Care & Maintenance" #429, 30 Jul 2007 8:41 pm
If any of you can share your experience with lock cylinder problems in your ODY, can you post please? thanks.
I post things in the wrong forums sometimes, just curious about your post.
Acura has had it all along .
Stability Control, OTOH, should be standard across the board.
Whether 2008 Accords get all-speed traction control is purely open to speculation. Wait three weeks and all will be answered.
..ez..
I'm not against it, but it isn't important.
I'd like to see stability control available without needing to buy a V6 model or even the top of the line 4 cylinder EXL.
My, the people here can be quite snooty!
The Ford Fusion V6 6-speed automatic only gives you the choice of D and L. That's inadequate.
Who says Hyundai and Toyota and Nissan are charging extra for it??? Their prices are usually lower than Honda's.
Is it a sure thing that the 2008 won't have this feature?
It can be quite handy on a steep hill.
There is no sure thing about 2008 Accord specifications until Honda permits specifications to be released. That won't happen until the publication embargo is lifted the third week of August. Otherwise, anything that you read or hear about them is pure conjecture.
You've asked and been answered twice.
Not really. If you have sportshift (as Honda calls it), then you go sequentially twice to get down from 5th to 3rd gear. If you're in normal auto mode, to get to 3rd, you only move the lever down one slot.
In fact, I have seen many people forget to upshift/downshift in sportshift mode, only to realize later. They would be better off leaving those in "D".
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
The 3.5l v6 is not used and either the 3.2 or 3l is
A-vtec isn't ready(unless this is a 3l v6)
or the person is trying to belie us
Still, nothing on the diesel except that it is a newer version of the 2.2l CTDI with 140hp and 2XX lbs ft of torque. Its the same engine in the Euro Accord(TSX) but with a better catalytic converter and no UREA like the benzes.
That new Vw Jetta Bluemotion/TDI sounds promising. It will have a 2l 140hp and 236lbs ft. A big improvement from the 1.9l TDI with 100hp and 177lbs ft. I cant wait to drive both of them back to back! My next car decision has just been made that much harder!!
-Cj
Acura has had it all along .
Autostick is as useful as a flashlight is to the blind, or the iPOD to the deaf.
I have driven other people's cars with auto stick (Landrover, Kia...).
First of all, auto stick does not eliminate the torque converter. This is where most of the parasitic losses in the automatic come from.
Second, autostick does not hold gear when you want it to, such as near the redline, to take the full advantage of the power.
Thirdly, they downshift to 1 for you when you stop.
If you are interested it in it for hill driving, Honda already has Grade Logic built into all of their automatics, which downshift and hold gear on incline and decline drives.
Friends don't let friends drive auto.
Second, autostick does not hold gear when you want it to, such as near the redline, to take the full advantage of the power.
Thirdly, they downshift to 1 for you when you stop.
Not all are created equal. Most seem to be as you describe, but there are some that are designed more for the enthusiast. I can tell you, for instance, when I testdrove a Mazda6 with this feature, I bounced it off the rev limiter more than once. And in the Lincoln LS I owned for a while, it would only downshift to 1st if you were in 3rd or higher when you came to a complete stop. If you downshifted to 2nd prior to stopping, it would stay in 2nd.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Drive the auto and manual versions of the same car and you'll find the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Personally, the 4-cyl would be more than enough for me. I feel like my 166 hp Accord is peppy (especially after driving a loaded down Odyssey 1500 miles last weekend). With the new Accord 4-cylinder having even more power, I can't see myself ever ponying-up for the V6!
Same here. When I got my 1998 Accord EX-L, those 150 horses were plenty (now they would be rated even lower). The V6 with 200 HP was most powerful of any Japanese family sedan at the time (Camry had 192 HP, Maxima had 190 HP while Altima was fine with 150 HP until Honda announced 150 HP Accord in which case, Nissan chose to market additional 5 HP).
Now, the rumor is, at least one trim of '08 Accord will have 200 HP (and that is with new rating system, so that would make it more powerful than the 1998-2002 V6 albeit with a less torque).
All the working and looking forward to a weekend, why bother, millions of people live happily on welfare or in FEMA trailers, without bother.
All the inhaling and exhaling, why bother, millions of people are fine just doing nothing....
I can go on and on and on with the "why bother" scenarios....
As to driving stick in stop and go, learn from the best, the truck drivers, they keep it in one gear and just coast. If you keep enough space infront of you, you never have to clutch, and never have to shift. I have done it for years and my legs have not fallen off.
Driving auto in stop and go is truly horrable. You can't modulate speed with just the throttle. If you lift off the throttle, the tranny shifts up, thus increasing your velocity, causing you to step on the brakes to slow it down. Seems like more work to me, working both the gas and brake pedals, rather than just working the gas pedal to maintain speed.
If you have driven recent, 2002 and up Hondas, they do very well at crawling at 5 mph in 1st gear.
Now, SUVs are a whole different thing. There is a reason people are dumping. I won’t be pleased either, if I just spent $92.51 to fill up the tank at $3/gallon like someone did ahead of me at a pump a few weeks ago. No wonder the car like SUVs are catching up, and in fact, leading the SUV sales (CR-V is on top, followed by Escape and Rav4). In fact, seven of top ten best selling SUVs are uni-body SUVs now (more, if we dump fleet sales). But, I’m now digressing from the subject.
"but all of the shifting and clutching...why bother?"
All the working and looking forward to a weekend, why bother, millions of people live happily on welfare or in FEMA trailers, without bother.
All the inhaling and exhaling, why bother, millions of people are fine just doing nothing....
I can go on and on and on with the "why bother" scenarios....
I agree. Let's keep up the analogies though. Why bother with stick shifts when there was never much wrong with horses and buggies.
While I thoroughly enjoy shifting, it's a pain in the butt in heavy traffic and the resale value of a stick shift Accord sedan is below the pits. Trust me, I've been there.
I can see why a dealer may not want them as the market is smaller and thus as a trade in you might suffer. For a private party sale, I have never had any problem with price or timeliness.
I can't live on that kind of $$$.
All the inhaling and exhaling, why bother, millions of people are fine just doing nothing....
If they are not inhaling and exhaling, they aren't doing fine.
If you keep enough space infront of you, you never have to clutch, and never have to shift.
If you like shifting so much, why do you avoid doing it?
Before batteries were invented, people used to have to crank the engine over by hand to start it. Automatic transmissions were invented as an improvement. If you don't mind shifting, maybe you wouldn't mind cranking.
Though automatics are much better than in the past, it is an added inefficiency and complexity that is completely unneccessary in operating a vehicle. Think of it as a seat heater or moonroof. A luxury, but hardly an improvement for the experience of driving.
On any vehicle of the Accord's size or smaller, an automatic is a driving impediment not an improvement.
You should always have both hands on the wheel while driving (10 & 2), which is impossible when you have to shift a manual. So that would make a manual more of a driving impedement, as you put it.
You should always have both hands on the wheel while driving (10 & 2), which is impossible when you have to shift a manual. So that would make a manual more of a driving impedement, as you put it. What would make an automatic an impedement?
You obviously have never heard of downshifting in an automatic. I used to put my 02 Accord in 2 in the stop and crawl BS. Worked marvelously. My car now has a SportShift where I can toggle between 2 and 3 and a little 1 now and then. Rarely have to brake.
My 5 spd. truck is a royal PITA in the bumper to bumper. Just aweful. Slow torture.
I don't get the desire for a manual in anything other than a sports car like a Vette, a 335, or an S2000. A manual in a sedan? Ew.
Hard to do that...a seat heater doesn't make life-and-death decisions for me when I need to be going fast ASAP. An automatic (a good one, like in my Accord), does. It will select the most appropriate gear for your situation.
A seat heater burns my bum, but an automatic keeps some driver's from being "toast."