Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Again, this is a matter of "preference." This is why Baskin Robbins sells 31 flavors. Nothing wrong at all with the 4, I just prefer the "speed" (much superior over the 4) of the V-6. The Accord 4 door with the V-6 is about as close as you can get to the current gen of the Acura TL 3.2 (or even 3.5) without paying 40 K to get it. The NEW 08 model is even that much closer and probably superior to the current TL and nipping at the heels of the RL (price-wise anyway).
By the way, saw the 09 RL at Chicago and its nice, BUT more of the same-old same old. Can't see how they justify nearly 50K for this car (the SH AWD is not worth the 20 K over the Accord EX and certainly not the 10 K over the current TL).
Glenn
Nothing wrong with that. If I did a lot more highway driving, I'd consider a V6. As it is now though, I'm not doing a lot of 80MPH cruising, so the 4-cyl is plenty. I feel like the V6 would be wasted, as I can't tell much difference around town when, say, pulling out onto a 45 MPH road from a parking lot. Above those speeds the V6 just keeps pulling incredibly hard, while the 4-cyl starts to run out of juice above 70 MPH relative to the V6.
Glenn Says: The 6 cylinder is also available in stick (client of mine just got the Coupe and its nice and quick (0-60 in about 5.5); Thats almost BMW 335i territory
Glenn
For the $$, the Accord coupe V-6 stick is all the SH**.
Glenn
[guess I better get back on topic]
Now, I think the accord sedan, some what needs a spoiler in the rear. It looks a little plain. I am going to get the wing spoiler, because it has the brake light in it as well.
Let's skip the insulting names and keep a focus on whether the I4 or V6 is the choice we'd prefer.
I chose the V6 because I wanted the extra power. How often do I need it? Practically never. When I do travel my cruise is set between 75 and 80, and I'm quite sure the 4 would be able to handle that without any difficulty whatsoever. With all the practical angles (economy, usable power, etc) I would not argue the 4 is a more practical choice, and as grad indicated the reason why so many more of them are sold compared to the six.
So for you prospective buyers, read through the forum, figure out what arguments apply to your situation and buy accordingly. Happy motoring!
The 4 however, has enough power and is the logical choice for most people. I personally think the little 2.4 in the Accord is an amazing motor, I once 'stuffed' around ~900 lbs of weight (5 people + luggage) in the car and amazingly, it could still go without trouble. I've also got up to the speed of around 90mph(with only me in the car) on the highway without much trouble, and I felt it could still go higher, but I was just a little scared lol. :P The V6 does have it's benefits besides the superior highway passing power though. Sometimes when I go uphill with the car fully loaded, especially with A/C on, the 4 feels quite a bit strained. This won't be the case I'm sure, with the 6.
Lastly, a note about the 'grocery getter' comment, a lot of 4cyl Accord buyers(besides me though, but I'm no typical Accord buyer) could probably afford the V6 as well if they really wanted it. They just opted the 4cyl because it's the more sensible option. Lower fuel costs, lower insurance, lower maintainence upkeep etc. The V6 is more fun but that is not really the top priority to most Accord buyers. To me, unless it's frequently used as a family hauler or taken on trips(loaded with passengers+ luggage), the 4 is plenty enough for and the most logical choice for most people with commuting and 'grocery getting' purposes.
The 4cyl engine did great, even through Tennessee mountains, and down into Alabaman, with the A/C on the whole way. It really didn't show any signs the we were in the car with that much weight. It loves to be wound up, and my mom loved to get up and go, and I kid you not she squealed the tires with us all in it, were like Wow, take it easy mom! My mom was like , this car has some power. She isn't however used to the brakes which are quite stiff, and barely have to push them.
I was very impressed with the power, and the gas mileage was amazing, I think really we only spent like $160 if that, on gas total for the whole trip. I think we drove from indiana to like nearly Alabama without stopping. I have been nothing, but impressed with it, and I think time has only made it much better, as crazy as it sounds.
Sometimes, I take er out on the interstate, and let it run, and I am always impressed, even at 80, it is so calm, no shakes, doesn't feel like your going that fast, and the steering it awesome. It is literally like you could keep going faster. It is so smooth and stable. I love driving the interstate. My car does drive alot of highway going 60mph, about 85% of the time. I am sure thats good for the engine!
I will take our trip in my car again this summer, I'll have the 08 accord by then, so we'll see how that stacks up.
Well, there you go... my experience.
Yep, the whole "grocery getter" insult for a 4 vs. a V6 is silly. If I see an Accord going by on the street, I basically think "generic reliable McCar", I don't look for dual exhausts or the V6 emblem and somehow think "oh, well he's a real enthusiast" if I see them. Anyone who's snobbish about sports sedans won't even notice an Accord - they'll only pay attention to the German stuff, or maybe a TL, TSX, G35, or IS.
That said, I'm buying a leftover '07 V6 6MT EX-L tomorrow. It'll be replacing a BMW 5 Series as my daily driver. It won't approach the fun of taking the 5MT 5 through the mountains where I live, but it'll be comfortable, reliable, and spacious, in each case more so than the BMW, and at the leftover price I'm paying, it'll cost about 40% of a new 6 cyl. 5 series (30% of a 550i). With the V6 and 6MT (and eventually aftermarket suspension bits), it'll also be enough fun that I won't miss the 5 too much, and I'll either sell that car or relegate it to weekend fun status. I don't kid myself that it's in the same class, however - it's an Accord, and I'm buying it for it's Accord-esque virtues, which are excellent. After years of German cars, my friends are baffled at this move - one said that I'm "getting in touch with my inner bland". That's okay, for what I want it for it's absolutely perfect, and I'm looking forward to driving it every day for years. If I wanted a sports sedan, I'd buy one; that's not what the Accord is, and that's fine with me.
I'm not poking fun - promise -- its just a difference in where you drive. I live in the great state of Wyoming where the "men are men and the sheep are nervous . . . . " Wait --wrong joke! There are lots of very long, very smooth, very deserted roads in Wyoming. I always put very good tires on my Accords and, lets just say, it is "literally like you could keep going faster . . . ." :shades: Lots faster . . .
If I would have decided on the 4 cylinder Accord, I'm sure I would be completely satisfied with it, but the V6 has spoiled me over the past 5 years, so I would have a tuff time going back to a 4 cyl. now.
mike
I wanted a car with bulletproof reliability, a proven track record (no, not race track), an affordable price tag, reasonably economical, etc etc, that also had plenty of uummph if I wanted it for whatever reason (usually, theres no reason at all = just feel like getting on the gas once in awhile). After spending months and countless hours studying various makes and models, I decided the best car to fit the bill was the Accord V6. End of story.
But I must say I'm shocked you found a leftover 07 6MT still on the lot. Yea, I think you'll be pretty satisfied. Wish I could have done that, but there is NOOOO way the wife will drive a stick. So have fun.
I'm not arguing against ya elroy, just presenting the other side of the coin. We both know each of us picked the right engine for us.
Right grad. I'm glad we have a choice now. Back in 91, I had no choice. The 4th gen Accord came in I4, and that's it. It was a light car, so 140hp did ok, but there were times I wanted more.
If, to me, my 130hp '96 Accord is adequate, and my 166hp Accord is fast, the V6 is overly excessive in power; I barely use what I've got in the 4-cyl!
And, you're right, I didn't suggest there was anything wrong with those who prefer more powerful vehicles. My parents are shopping for a V6 midsize/full-size car right now because they want lots of power on the highway (their other car for running around is a 2007 Civic EX, so this new car will be a comfy highway runner for trips.
It's a personal preference. Period. I don't consider myself smarter than the other guy who chose the 4, nor do I think I'm being wasteful compared to 4 driver.
I wasn't trying to be over-critical grad. As I said I think you probably have the most thoughtful posts in these Accord forums. It's just when I read that phrase it hit a nerve. I realize you were talking about yourself, but if it's a wretched excess for you, I think there is the implication it's a wretched excess, period. That's just the way it hit me, and I think a lot of others who opted for the 6.
But in the end, no biggie. Looking forward to your future posts throughout the Accord forums.
Sorry it came off like that, because that's not how it was meant in any way. The V6 is a great motor in a great car. It's just more motor than I care to pay for, because the 4-cyl is much more than adequate for me as it is.
I don't do lots of high-speed driving in high-traffic areas, so the V6 is pretty unnecessary.
For some of us, once we experience the power AND mileage of the 4, we wouldn't think about getting a 6. And that doesn't even factor in the initial cost.
For the practically minded person, considering what it costs to fill up every trip to the gas station, that probably doesn't make a lot of sense. Nor do I expect it to. I'm just glad we still have a choice to make.
LOL, driving the way she did probably isn't a good idea on a family trip.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Nice to know that your family could fit comfortably in the Accord in such a long trip. Like I posted in my previous post, my family could 'fit' in the car, but I don't think they'd all be comfortable in a long trip like yours did. Also, although the 4cyl is a great engine itself, I'd imagine there would be times when the car would struggle, if it's fully loaded with people and luggage. In my case, the V6 would be the more ideal choice for the long trip. Better yet, I think we'll probably feel more comfortable in a Odyssey or Sienna in a situation like this, but that is a whole different topic. :P
If I wanted a sports sedan, I'd buy one; that's not what the Accord is, and that's fine with me.
It's not a sports sedan, not by your definition. But it's a sporty family sedan. 0-60 in 5.9 secs for your 6MT is surely 'sporty' enough for me.
LOL, I guess if I lived in Wyoming, I'd be considered one of those nervous sheep.
Seriously, even if the road conditions allow and you have enough 'guts' to do higher speeds, don't you have to watch out for those state troopers in your state?
I'd get a big fat ticket if I got caught doing over 90mph where I live, even on the highway/interstate.
[Interestingly, my 08 Accord feels slower than did my 98 Accord. I'm not sure whether I just haven't fully broken in the engine/transmission yet - but I have 6000+ miles. In any event, my new car just seems to have to push a lot harder to maintain fast speeds. Whereas my 98 seemed not to really start panting until the 95-100mph mark, the new one seems to start breathing hard about 85mph. Wonder if it could be aerodynamics. My 98 was a very curvey design . . . .]
Same here! I try to "free" up my car a bit once in a while too! Except I don't go insane while doing so. Mine (and others') safety, as well as the possibility of a 'big' ticket from the cops keep my speed in check.
my 08 Accord feels slower than did my 98 Accord
Maybe it's because your 98 weighed something like 400 lbs less than your 08 while there isn't a lot of difference in torque between the two?
Why am I about to buy a honda Accord 2008?
Gas mileage folks.
Is the VCM and new 6 cylinder problematic, or one to rethink till 2009 incase there is a major flaw? Anyone have thoughts on this?
Really if you don't drive alot, than a 4 will be awesome, and I am no way close to thinking that I am lacking power when I need it, I have no problem passing or getting on the highway. I love it. Try to drive a broken in 4cyl if you can, a demo.
Think about this, are you going to be able to really use this V6 engine? Don't be like my co-worker and drive an 06 Dodge Charger R/T with a V8, and literally live only a mile or so away from work, just down the street a few lights. She is never going to ever use that engine on the way to work. Doing more harm to the engine than anything, let alone killing her fuel economy. It also has VCM on it. Of course not a speed to use it, in a residential zone. So think about that as well.
We all have to remember, that a Honda 4 cylinder engine is not your typical 4 cylinder engine. It is one amazing engine. This is a Honda engine, with V-Tec, and it simply pulls and it is very smooth. Think of it like a V6 wanna be. lol really it tries and puts up a good fight. 4 cylinders are not what they used to be.
Just drive them both, we all have our own definition of fun and practical. Its the only way. Do what feels right to you. It is your car.
If I were to consider the 08, I'd be waiting a bit & closely monitoring the 08 forums. I noticed the VCM forum has over a thousand posts. You should find your answers there.
Yepper, you got that right. Think Poseur. I-4 is a grocery getter and wanna be and the 6 is a great performer and the real thing. Dual exhaust and all. I own BOTH and for the $$, the v-6 is the better deal. Gas mileage is only about 1 less per MPG than the -4, so spring for the 6. Insurance is about the same too.
Glenn
Personally, I think some people (not all) think that their grocery getter having 260 horses make them sports sedans... it doesn't. It makes them fast-in-a-straight-line grocery getters with umpteen cupholders and plenty of trunk space for the stroller, or soccer equipment. The Accord V6 has safe, predictable handling, better-than-average road feel, but definitely isn't the sportiest in the class (Mazda 6 anyone?), much less a comparable rival to true sports sedans. It's a practical, 3500lb, FWD, automatic, family-minded and designed vehicle.
By the way, I know this, and I'm a young person who CHOSE an Accord over an SUV or sporty car. The option I chose (4-cyl) is by far the best seller. Maybe its the V6 being the poseur since only a fraction of buyers believe the V6 to be worth the extra money to them? Haha
By the way, glenn, if you read this, how is the 4-cyl Accord being the poseur? It's the bread and butter; the car that's always been around. It's always been the most efficient option, with competitive horsepower and fuel economy with other comparable cars (1996 Accord - 130-145hp, 1996 Camry 125hp; 1999 Accord - 150hp, 1999 Camry 133hp - Honda always tied or led for economy during these example years). I can pull more numbers if anyone would like.
I personally feel a car that can accelerate as fast as a 320hp Tahoe (faster, actually) up an onramp to 60 MPH has plenty of power, since these beasts hog the roads these days in Birmingham. Hondas have always prided themselves on their smooth, high and free-revving 4-cylinder engines. The Accord still has them; and that, my friend, is the real thing as far as I'm concerned.