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

Honda Accord I4 vs V6

11112131416

Comments

  • keitha3keitha3 Member Posts: 124
    I went from last generation's 4 cyl. to the '09 V6 and have not regretted the choice whatsoever. I never thought my new Accord would be the favorite car I've ever owned, but it is. While not a roadburner, it does accelerate so smoothly that passing other cars at freeway speeds is a snap. It is a joy to drive and fun to push on twisty mountain roads, while, at the same time, offering room and comfort for the family.
  • pwgoodmanpwgoodman Member Posts: 6
    The 2008 V6 is rated at 268 mph. The 2009 is rated at 271. The specs appear to be the same. What is different?

    btw, I love this car. the mileage is not great (suburban driving, avg about21; have gotten 27 on the highway), but it's comfortable, smooth, fast and it looks so good.

    pg
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Simply been re-rated is all. The 2008s are no less powerful than the 2009s.
  • pwgoodmanpwgoodman Member Posts: 6
    Thanks. Feel much better. ;-)

    pg

    ps: re-rating means a change in the way of measurement? Paperwork?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Not quite sure in this case. I'm sure they haven't changed the methods of determining how a car will be rated HP wise (they did that a couple of years ago; the results were lower numbers for most vehicles - an example, the Honda Odyssey was rated 255hp for 2005, but after the re-rating, it had 244hp, despite no engine changes).
  • scubaduscubadu Member Posts: 17
    I like this thread! My 2007 Accord SE V6 lease is up, so I drove a few cars:

    First was the Accord LX I4 automatic sedan. While not slow, it certainly was not inspiring.

    Next was the Accord EX V6 automatic sedan. Lots of torque and you can feel the vehicle's heft. I like the leather seats, too. Then I saw the price and said no thank you. Too bad Honda doesn't make an LX or SE V6. And I understand why. When I got my 07 SE V6, the dealer and Honda almost gave me the car.

    Third drive was a 2009 Civic SI 4 door sedan with manual transmission. I loved the way the car drove and the engine reved into VTEC land. The dealer wanted over $21,000 for it, and I wasn't a big fan of the tacky rear spoiler. Nor do I want to use premium unleaded. The deal breaker was a black interior. It makes a small car look smaller and shows every bit of dirt.

    I also drove a "strippy" camry with the 158 hp engine and manual transmission. Toyota may get better performance with auto, but the manual Camry was boring.

    Yesterday I drove and bought a 2009 Accord LX I4 manual sedan. Compared to the automatic, the manual is much more fun to drive. It is a totally different experience compared to the auto. Now comparing to driving a 2007 I4 manual, that model seemed slighly quicker. The 2009 engine feels smoother. If you want a car that is fun to drive and relatively inexpensive, give the I4 manual transmission a try.

    This will be my 4th Accord:

    1988 Accord LX 99 hp auto
    1998 Accord LX V6 200hp auto
    2007 Accord SE V6 auto
    2009 Accord LX I4 manual
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Too bad Honda doesn't make an LX or SE V6. And I understand why. When I got my 07 SE V6, the dealer and Honda almost gave me the car.

    There is an EX-V6 that costs $2,100 less than the loaded EX-L V6 (comparable to the 2007 LX-V6). It doesn't have things like leather, heated seats, premium sound, auto-climate control.
  • scubaduscubadu Member Posts: 17
    "There is an EX-V6 that costs $2,100 less than the loaded EX-L V6 (comparable to the 2007 LX-V6)."

    I drove that model, and what a nice one! Unfortunately even the non-loaded EX-V6 is about $6,000 more than the LX with manual transmission.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Indeed it is a nice one. Just making sure you knew what-was-what. Most dealers I've come to find out have only leather models, and with the recent re-labeling of particular models, it can get a little bit confusing. ;)
  • arkdarklesonarkdarkleson Member Posts: 7
    177 vs 190hp:

    EX's have a extra valve on the exhaust that opens at high pressure. This is the only difference; the engine, intake, ECU, everything from that muffler valve forward is the same. What happens is that backpressure change equates to a higher redline, 7100 in the EX, over 6800 in the LX, and the increased airflow north of 6800 rpm allows for the engine to go an extra 300 revs and get something out of it: the 23 hp. Having said that, and as you probably already guessed: both engines are only pulling 170hp at 6500 rpm, and all powerband equivalents back to idle.

    There is no difference driving wise unless you really stomp on it, and I mean really stomp on it. And honestly, you probably don't even feel it, let alone do it enough to. 23hp isn't enough to throw you back in your seat. I Think the only reason Honda throws that valve on is to make it look like your getting something more out of the EX. If your spending more money, you want more power, right?

    So, If your hung up on purchasing an cloth EX over an LX-P, do it if you want the larger wheels, cd changer, dual zone climate control, ambient console lighting, and that sunroof that I never see anyone use. (apologies to those few that actually do use it) If your doing it for the horsepower, buy the V6.
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    I think if I were to get an Accord or the new 2010 TSX, it will be a V6. I am ready for some power!! While still being efficient.
  • dpmeersmandpmeersman Member Posts: 275
    Considering the target market that the TSX is going for, the non VCM V6 should make quite the pocket rocket. It'll be interesting to see what the real world pricing will be.
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    Yes!! I really want my Honda back! I have a 08 G6 4cyl now. I want to dump it!

    I live in a small town, and was out walking today. I saw a RED Accord Coupe V6 driving around. I happened to walk by the car again in the housing edition. She was pulling out of her drive way. It was gorgeous!! I want it so bad!! I told her to be proud she has such a fine car. I would love to have that car!! However, I told her to watch out for our horrible harassing cop we have.

    It is too bad Honda cannot offer a sporty 6spd DSG transmission with paddleshifters. Heck the Honda fit has the paddleshifters, even GM . I know a manual is best, but the automatic could offer "almost" the same fun. for me atleast.

    What a beauty! I love that car. .... Snap out of it.....lol anyway..
  • dpmeersmandpmeersman Member Posts: 275
    A DSG type transmission would be what I would choose. VW designed that as a manual transmission with automatic capabilities. Shifting exclusively with the paddle shifters would not be a strain on that transmission as this was the intent from the ground up. Most vehicles today offering paddle shifters have taken traditional automatic transmissions and provided the driver with the option of shifting using the paddles. As this was not their original mission, consistent use may cause problems with these transmissions. I'm only speculating here and can offer no hard facts. But I have test driven a recent VW GTI with the DSG and was very impressed with the vehicle overall and in particular the DSG/4 cyl turbo combo. The new model hitting show rooms this fall looks to be an improvement over an already very capable vehicle.
  • ezshift5ezshift5 Member Posts: 858
    ......I am ready for some power!! While still being efficient.

    .........the numbers inherent to my 6M underscore your words above.....................

    To 60 <6.0 seconds; 1/4-mile circa 14.5 on an abusive (to the clutch) launch.......

    In the flat AZ desert - 2200 rpm/cruise/no ac/87 octane/6th gear overdrive - i have broken the 40 MPG barrier............

    best, ez.........
  • gyushergyusher Member Posts: 67
    I still like my 08 4 cyl EX-L coupe especially now after my first oil change. The car feels like she has 20 more HP at least. . . Why I know not unless that 'break-in' oil was just too heavy and the 5-20 M1 I use is much thinner. Anyway she's much perker now.

    I just about traded her for a V6 Rav 4. . . The V6 Rav 4 will smoke the V6 Accord. Biggest sleeper going. . . . Toyota says the V6 Rav 4 is their fastest accelerating vehicle. Faster than a Mustang GT. . .

    Anyway I decided to keep my Honda. . . I know the V6 is sexier, faster and better equipped but my little 4 banger grows on you. . .
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Faster than a Mustang GT

    I know this particular forum isn't where this challenge belongs, but I have to say that seems like a stretch. The numbers I've seen for the Mustang are 0-60 in the low fives. I would expect the V6 RAV4 to be around six seconds flat, since it weighs about the same as a V6 Camry (2wd RAV=3560 lbs, Camry V6 SE=3483 lbs per Toyota website).
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    Why would you trade an 08 car in? The fewer cars you own in your life the more $ you will have.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    RAV4 = 6.9 sec
    Mustang V8 = 5.2 sec
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    Yes, but keep the Accord! It definitely grows on you, and Honda makes an awesome 4cyl. GM cannot keep throwing Honda in their commercials and remotely compare the differences in their 4cyl engines. NO WAY!! Their cars could get better mileage, but the Accord is rated usually for better mileage than what it is posted, and will most definitely be more consistent over time. My 08 G6 4cyl engine is a piece of crap! Either something is wrong with my transmission/engine or that is honestly the way it is supposed to be. I am having the service center look at it.

    I truly miss the Honda 4cyl I had on the 06 Accord. Be glad you have a nice Honda!
    keep it! I would trade out for my Honda back in a heart beat. I am brain storming of ways to get out of my G6 now. I want out now!
  • dpmeersmandpmeersman Member Posts: 275
    In considering your next purchase/lease the type of terrain you usually drive in should be factored in when deciding on the 4 or 6 cyl. If you decide to go with the Accord it's larger size & weight require more torque to climb steep inclines. So your going to find yourself getting more aggressive with the throttle. If you visit the real world mpg in this forum a lot of 4 cyl owners under these conditions are reporting less than expected mpg's. The 6 cyl will return equal or slightly better fuel economy in hilly terrain. If your driving is mostly level terrain the excellent Honda 4 cyl will be more than adequate.
  • gyushergyusher Member Posts: 67
    I just now have 8K on my 08 4cyl Coupe. My average mpg is right at 23. . . I would think it could be better but I'm not complaining. on the big road she will get 30 at 70+ but my route to work and back although about 80/20 hwy/city the traffic level makes it more like 100 city. . .
  • acar1acar1 Member Posts: 4
    My commute is also about 80/20 highway city; about 30 miles each way. Plenty of traffic here in the DC metro area. My 350 HP, 6 speed Corvette delivers 25-26 mpg on average. True, I short shift to save fuel but even at 1500 RPM (about 70 mpg in 6 gear) my 'Vette still can move better than your I4 Accord. Honda's I4 engine is not well matched to the new, corpulent Accord. Platform sharing with the TL makes the Accord a V6 car.
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    acar1, no offense intended, but have you driven a four-cylinder Accord? It's a pretty well-balanced car, and at least with the manual transmission it does not feel underpowered.

    I'll agree that your Corvette is a lot more exciting--for the money it should be!--but not all of us are able to put our automotive dollar into something that will only hold two people.
  • gyushergyusher Member Posts: 67
    Apples to apples. . . i'd still rather have my under powered gas hog than an economical Corvette at about 3 times the money.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    You're comparing a Vette to an Accord? :confuse: Can you take the family out for dinner and a movie with the Vette? These are two entirely different cars, for different purposes. Let's be realistic with the comparisons, ok.
  • gyushergyusher Member Posts: 67
    I was rear ended by a woman driving a late model Acura MDX. . . Long story short my 08 coupe had to have 4500 bucks worth of work done and while in the shop I drove rental cars for 3 1/2 weeks. I got to compare mileage against my Honda.

    1st car was a Chevrolet Impala SS loaded with a very similiar engine to the Corvette. Mileage over the same roads I drove my Accord on for a tank of gas. Mileage for the V8 Impala was 21. . . I thought pretty darn good.

    The next 2 weeks I drove an HHR (cheaper than the SS Impala). The HHR had the big 4 cyl (not the turbo model) and my mileage was also 21. . .

    Actually my Accord does better at 23-24 than both those cars. I expected the little HHR to be much better but wasn't so. . .
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    Penny rich and pound foolish to "short shift" your Vette. You are lugging it:That's hard on your drive train.
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    I bet you were so glad to have your Honda back... I know I would after driving those cars... yikes!
  • gyushergyusher Member Posts: 67
    I bet you were so glad to have your Honda back

    The big V8 Impals SS wasn't bad. . . Gobs of power but still cheesy. . . Then the HHR. . .ugghh!!

    My Honda felt like a Formula 1 race car after that thing. What I did realise was that I just thought I was getting bored with my 4cyl Accord. Once I got her back it was like a new car all over again.

    Funny thing. . . It's now about 3 weeks later and that good feeling is still strong as ever. . .
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    I am in need of a bigger family vehicle. Naturally, it is between Accord with V6 and V4 (with a Maxima entering the picture if I decide to go with a V6 option). Now this is what I have gathered so far:

    Accord V4 - 2003 - 2007 - the good:

    1. V4 - better fuel economy
    2. Cheaper to maintain
    3. Better on gas
    4. Same look (well the dual pipes and the V6 insignia don't count ... that much)
    5. Better designed engine - Honda's V4 are legendary and while the V6 is not garbage the V4 is considered to be Honda's best effort in engine technology.

    Accord V4 - 2003 - 2007 - the bad:

    1. Buying used I think it is more prudent to buy a car with a bigger engine which under regular driving would be under less stress. Example: If a car X was driven for 100,000 miles and was fitted with a V4 engine, car Y (V6) with the same millage would have a less stressed engine (assuming the same driving conditions and dynamics). Simply put I think that V4 would be more stressed than V6 and hence the bigger engine would be more desirable.
    2. Extra power. My family consists of 3 adults and 2 kids + groceries = good amount of weight. While I do not think V4 would under perform with such a heavy load, V6 would handle it with more ease.
    3. The Boy in me - my commute does take me on a parkway (10 miles) where there are numerous curves and while I am not breaking any speed limits I do enjoy accelerating from 0 to 65 when it is safe and ok with local laws. Seems like V6 here would give me more fun doing 0-65-15-65-15-65 thing. I don't do it often but when I do I enjoy it.
    4. The price difference between used V4 and V6 especially the older models (03, 04) are not that far apart. Since V6 cost on average 5K more, one is getting a better deal on a used V6.
    5. Here I am not sure but I would imagine that because of a beefier engine, the tranny is also made to handle the power of the engine. On average, most people who buy V6 do not drive it any harder than those driving V4s, the beefed up tranny should also be less "tired".
    6. The stability control device - only on V6.

    The Ugly:

    Even if I decide to go with Accord V6 - it will have to then compete with the Maxima. But that is another thread I suppose.

    So what do you guys think?

    Did I miss any negative/positive aspects of either V4 or V6? Please remember I am only interested in the 7th. gen. Accords.

    Awaiting your 5 cents!
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    The 4 (it's an I4 not a V4) will be MUCH cheaper to maintain, because it doesn't have a timing belt.
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    Point well taken, the timing belt is an issue, especially when buying a used car with millage close to 100K. From what I have gathered, the whole operation should not cost more than a $1000. Using independent mechanic, the price should not be more than $500. Nevertheless, I valid point.

    As for the V4 instead of I4, it is an old habit, however I am aware that the 4 cilinder Accord is I4 and not a V6.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    It might help you be taken a bit more seriously if you call it a "four cylinder engine" or an "inline four" as opposed to a "vee four" when it comes time to talk to a dealer. I see V4 typed all the time though; no biggie!

    I have a 4-cylinder Accord with the automatic ('06) and have never found it sluggish when loaded, even with 4 adults on board merging onto our 70 MPH interstates (I-59 and I-459 in Birmingham). Yes, the V6 is faster, but the 4-cylinder feels easily as peppy as a V6 sedan from 10 years ago, if not peppier due to great gearing and a flexible powerband.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    I have an 03 V6. If you think you would use, and enjoy the V6 power, I would recommend it. It will cost you a little more, at purchase, at the pump, and for maintenance (timing belt every 100k miles). I think the V6 is well worth the extra costs. Drive both for yourself, then decide. The effortless, and silent way the V6 moves this car, even when you're not gunning it, makes it feel more high-end.
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    You can never have too much money or too much torque. Get the V6.
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    Like I already stated, I fully understand the difference between V4 and I4. Will dealers respect me or take me more seriously?? I could not care less. My negotiation skills are in no way connected to my ability to differentiate between the two types of engines. I am there to buy the car not to impress the dealer.

    I also understand fully the prevailing notion that I4 Accords are peppy and that the 4 cillinder version will merge effortlessly getting on highways. Again, bad reading skills. My drive has a lot to do with curves and stop and go traffic (two things interstates are not famous for). Therefore information on merging onto one is neither important nor the opinion I was seeking. Please, next time when answering a question, it would be pertinent to focus on the questions and relevant responses that ought to fill the answer box. This way one could impress the reader and perhaps "be taken a bit more seriously"? :P
  • stephen987stephen987 Member Posts: 1,994
    Nowhere in your original post did you specify that you do not use interstate highways. Therefore, there was no way we could know that we would anger you by providing information that most people would care about.

    Perhaps you would get better responses if you treated your fellow posters as a resource rather than as your inferiors.

    Did you come here for information and input? Or for a fight?

    Over and out--I'm done feeding this troll. Anyone else wanna take a turn?
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Didn't realize that my run to 70 MPH was so drastically different from your run to 65 MPH.

    And, if a dealer sees a customer as uninformed, he's more likely to be willing to deal.

    As far as talking down your nose at everyone... give me a break. We replied to you kindly trying to help and got a sarcastic snotty response in return.

    Good luck car shopping. I'm through here.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    AT the risk of getting criticized like the last few people offering advice, I would like to say that.

    The V-6 is no more likely to last than the I4. Don't take that into consideration. An I4 can last as long as you want it to. I have a 1990 Integra with 230,000 miles. My brother has a 1995 G20 (2.0 Nissan I4) with over 300,000 miles. Neither has been rebuilt. Good modern engines last longer than the body of the car if taken care of.

    If you want the best of both worlds get an I4 MT. Pretty near V-6 acceleration with even better mpg than the I4 AT. Also lighter and more nimble (70 lbs off of the nose), and less expensive. I mention this since you seem interested in the "fun" aspect, and the MT certainly helps in that regard.
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    Well maybe if some posters would not try to educate me on the subtle difference between V4 and I4 which incidentally I gave an apologetic response admitting my gaffe right before the scolding and being put down by another poster. Perhaps then, my initial response would not have the tone it had. Injecting phrases such as "you will be take more serious ...." do not make a friendly response and generally will not be met with flowers and candy by most intelligent posters.
    Teaching and lecturing are entirely two different animals, especially when the latter is provided in condescending manner.
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    You mention cars from 1990s (specifically 1990 and 1995). Their engines are legendary and I would be the last one to argue that they are anything but workhorses. The problem is when you buy used the history of that particular vehicle is an enigma. Therefore, since it is more difficult to over abuse a V6 than a I4, it would be prudent to go for V6. Most people who drive V6 Accords do not use more than 40% of this engine potential and it is possible to get a fairly fresh engine by being a careful buyer (and having a little bit of luck).
    As for manual trans. option. Two things: wife and NYC make it impossible.

    regards
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    The folks here are trying to help. Remember that message board communication is difficult as we don't have tone of voice and facial expressions to help us interpret what is being typed. I am sorry that you interpreted some genuine attempts to help you as "lectures", but honestly, I didn't see them that way.

    It is a fact that many people around here use the term "V4" for a four cylinder engine, just assuming that since many 6 cylinder engines have the cylinders laid out in a V shape, that 4 cylinders are as well. Since the layout of the engine cylinders is an important feature of the car, I can understand why the thinking is that a buyer will come across better to a salesman if he demonstrates that knowledge.

    On the other hand, there seems to be a fair number of car salesman who may not understand it themselves, unfortunately, so it really may not be that big of a deal.

    In any case, I hope you can take the advice offered in the spirit in which it was intended - to be helpful.

    Good luck to you.
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    "Like I already stated, I fully understand the difference between V4 and I4".

    Do you, really? Then, why not type it correctly, and avoid being corrected? :confuse: I think you should buy a Sebring. :P
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    Knowing whether a car is V4 or I4 will not get anyone a better deal when buying. Negotiation skills are not correlated with car knowledge. I have seen people haggle with great finnese and extraordinary skill, getting a very good deal not because they knew the difference between I4 and V4 but because they came from a sales background or were lawyers. I have also seen people who would put 50 average folks to shame with their car knowledge receiving less than decent deals because they lacked negotiations skills. Simply put car knowledge has very little to do with getting a fair price. I am even willing to state that this kind of mechanical infraction (saying V4 where I4 should be used) would not even be noticed by the sales person.
    As for being taken seriously. The minute $$$ is put on the table a good sales person will know who is a buyer and serious about purchasing a vehicle and who is there to lecture and act all knowledgeable thinking that knowing intricate details of the product will somehow impress the salesman and who in admiration or perhaps as a reward for being so intimately familiar with the product being sold, would be willing to knock off another couple hundred bucks. LOL! :P
  • ezshift5ezshift5 Member Posts: 858
    .....El5 - - - your Sebring thought says a bunch. I offer Road & Track (3/04) to qualify your words. The three-way Accord/Solara/Sebring comparo helped me end up with an AV6 6M.

    keep up the good work.

    best, ez....
  • drhuntrdrhuntr Member Posts: 3
    I just bought a 09 accord V6, I test drove the I4 190Hp. It probably would have been a good vehicle but I am replacing my 2000 accord V6 which I bought new and have enjoyed the V6 from day one. The 09 accord is a larger car than my 2000 and I sure couldn't see dropping HP instead of gaining a little for the extra weight. It is about pesonal preference between a little more money per fillup versus the extra power and quietness of the V6.
  • dpmeersmandpmeersman Member Posts: 275
    I'll assume you purchased a sedan and have the same V6 I have in my 08. I'd be interested in getting your impressions on the difference in sound compared to your 2000. Not that the current 6 is necessarily a bad sounding engine but I feel it has lost some of it's refinement and free revving qualities as it's increased in displacement. After you've given it a proper break in I'd just like to get your comparative impressions say between 4000-6000 rpm. Depending on the terrain and your driving style you may not be giving up to much in fuel economy.
  • saxon2nsxsaxon2nsx Member Posts: 19
    After much research, countless excursions to a variety of dealers, I have found my new vehicle. A 2004 EXV6 1 owner Honda Accord with Leather seats that are soothing to look at and feel heavenly to boot. For all those contemplating whether a V6 is more fun the answer on my side of the fence is a resounding YES! It is worth it for those who enjoy driving and do not want to fork 10K more to experience it in something from BMW. While V4 (uuuppps I mean I4) is OK for commuting, V6 is just plain more fun.... in every category less quenching V6's thirst, but that is a minor gripe when gas hovers around $3 :)
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    V6 is just plain more fun.... in every category

    Unless you have a V6 automatic. Then the I4 manual is waaaay more fun. :shades:

    Congrats on the new ride!!
Sign In or Register to comment.