Check the manual. I think the V6 says 7500 under normal usage and the 4 cylinder says 10,000 under normal usage. They have a particular sentence that specifically say NOT to change your oil until those mileages. They also have SPECIFIC conditions that would require you to use the severe conditions.
Using premium is also discouraged if the car is designed for regular. Even if you get more percieved performance from using premium, it's designed for regular and should run just fine. Additionally, premium is $.20 more per gallon. Is the "extra" performance worth it?
I tend to agree with you on this subject, which by the way, has been beaten to death. It's usually best to follow the manuals that are provided with any car, read them and follow them so if any problems crop up later, they can be resolved. What am I missing here...Why can't people just read and follow directions? Confused and amused in sunny South Florida.
But the wrapper is genuinely ugly. I know someone who works at a Mitsi dealer and they haven't sold enough to count on one of your hands. That car is fugly.
i wholeheartedly agree with you about gasoline. however, at least the new accords have dual range knock sensors that can take "advantage" of higher octane fuel and deliver more power and torque. imo, what is really stupid is when people put high octane in a vehicle that can't take advantage of it. this is just plain stupid!! and a complete waste of money.
then there are people who put so-called premium (high octane) in their car because they think premium means better...as in better quality. again, stupid if you ask me!
It seems to run a little stronger on premium. But it's still not worth it. I burn most of that gas with the cruise on. How much more performance do I need for that?
Knock sensors don't allow a car to use 92 octane when it should have 87.
They allow a car that should have 89 or 92 to use a lower grade. The sensors detect knocking and tell the computer which can retard the spark or adjust whatever to compensate for the faster ignition of the air/gasoline mixture.
not completely true...the type of knock sensors that honda employs in the accord are of the type that allow the engine to produce more power/torque when high octane fuel is used...
I drive very little (about 1500 miles per year) but still find owning a car convenient. So to bond with my 4 month old Accord EX-L, I drove from San Francisco to Palm Springs (500 miles each way--total 10 day trip was over 1200 miles).
After 8.5 hours the seats were still comfortable and the car has a solid, safe feel. The XM radio is excellent, too.
Is a Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, really worth the price? The Accord has a luxury car feel for a fraction of what those cars cost. I think the Accord is a great car!.......Richard
The recommended 3,750 first oil and filter change came from the selling Honda dealer. To date we have had the follwing leased Hondas: 1997 Accord, 2000 Accord, and 2000 Civic, (all 39 month leases). We now own a 2003 Accord, and a 2004 Civic. The vehicles had the first oil and filter change done at 3,750 miles.---- Since we now own the 2003 & 2004 vehicles, and we have a 7 year 100,000 Honda bumper to bumper extended warranty, we plan on keeping them for 100,000 miles then trading them for either a "new vehicle",---- or a one or two year old replacement vehicle, (and put an extended warranty on these vehicles), and start the process again. At 100,000 miles any vehicle starts to become a "money hole". I do not want to put a $2,500.00 transmission in a vehicle that has 100,000 miles on the clock. Most likely, we will hit 100,000 miles at five years of ownership. The vehicles will be paid off and we can use the value of the vehicles as a down payment on another vehicle.----------- Under "hard acceleration" (getting on a highway, coming out of a toll booth or passing another vehicle on a two lane road),----you will be "winding out the gears", so as such, the spark advance will be "peaking" until the knock sensor tells the computer that "knock" has been noticed. The computer will then "back off the advance" to a point where the "knock" stops. Assuming that there are no "built in limits" to the advance of the computer, the only thing that sets the limits of the "advance" under "hard acceleration" is the octane of the fuel. 93 octane will allow the computer to push the advance further, before "knock" is noted in the engine block. ------- In terms of oil and filter changes, the mileage numbers in any vehicle book represent the "maximum numbers" where this service MUST be performed.---The goal of any manufacturer, is to reach the warranty period of 36,000 miles without a major failure. After the 36,000 mile mark,---- you, the owner are on your own. In addition, extended oil and filter changes look good, and they are a selling point. As the owner of the vehicle, you can give the vehicle any type of preventive maintenance that you think is appropriate. It is a personal decision. When I pull the dip stick on our vehicles to check the oil, I like to see clean oil on the stick, so as such, I have the oil and filter service performed at every 3,000 miles at the selling Honda dealer. We have operated five Honda vehicles to date, and each one has been very quiet and smooth in terms of engine performance. The bottom line to this discussion is that you have to make your own decision. If you feel comfortable going by the book that is "ok". I have been around engines, (land & marine), all my life, and I believe in a certain level of preventive maintenance. It doesn't make me right and other people wrong. It just means that we look at the issue differently. ----Have a nice day. ----Greg
Is detect knock in the engine. To say it can only be used to retard timing is like saying that a wheel speed sensor can only be used for ABS when it can also be used for traction control.
It is a simple program of the ECU 'testing' the ignition timing. Since the Honda(and many other) engines are coil on plug, it is easily feasible that the ECU can continually advance timing until it 'sees' a knock, then retard timing back a bit. Between that and your 2-3 O2 sensors, your engine can run at it's best.
forgive me for being rash because i understand that everyone has a different comfort level. however i'll still say that having an extended warranty and then spending extra money to supposedly make an engine last longer when it's covered by warranty just seems like money down the toilet...
Everyone responded and agreed exactly with my point. A knock sensor doesn't do anything to allow an engine to use a higher octance fuel than that for which it was engineered; it lets the computer adapt to a lower octane fuel by retarding the spark.
As a very happy owner of an '86 Accord, which has served me loyally over the course of 150,000 miles (despite mistreatment on my part), I'm looking at the new generation Accord. In doing research, I'm reading with interest those owners of the new Accord that are complaining about various quality-related issues. But, it's hard to complain about Motor Trend's latest review of the Accord: In awarding the Accord "First Place" status in their February evaluation of various family cars, Motor Trend said the following of the Accord: "Sporty, spacious, efficient, luxurious, and beautifully crafted, the Accord borders on family-sedan perfection." Now, I don't doubt that there are those who have problems with their cars, as is the case with any brand, but I gotta tell you that when MT describes the Accord with such glowing words, the Accord goes to the top of my list for new cars.
You are right, I even figured it up for gregory1 a while back. He does excessive maintenance on his cars, which he has stated over and over he will not drive unless they are under warranty. He pays top dollar for his cars, buys a 100K extended warranty, life insurance on the loan, uses premium gas & marvel mystery oil, has the dealer do early oil changes & all his service checks, and he tips the service department 5 bucks every visit. He could easy pay for a new engine and transmission or anything else that might go wrong, if you added up all of his self induced, not required maintenance and insurance cost. But again the only thing that might go wrong in 100K of driving would be the transmission and you can get a lifetime repair from AMMCO for about $2,500. It hard to believe he has a mechanical background. I don't know single mechanic that would impose all this unnecessary maintenance & insurance cost upon themselves. Hey, it's his money & it's a free country, so he can continue to spend excessive amounts of money for a car that someone else will be driving in 5 years. The guy buying his car is getting the best deal, but the car will probably drive like crap when he tries to put the right fuel back in it. Gregory's philosophy is definetly not the norm, but he's happy with it. I just wish he would give up on trying to justify the premium gas and MM oil, when every article out their states they are not necessary and in some cases are actually counter productive. I keep cars 13 to 15 years and I just follow the extreme maintenance schedual, which I accomplish myself as laid out in the owner's manual and I have yet to have any failure over $300 bucks. If I were only keeping a car for the warranty period, I would just have my oil changes done at Wal Mart on the normal maintenance schedual. Then pay an independent shop $75 or less to do the major checks as defined in the owner's manual when they come due. Obviously, if you have a mechanical background, you can do all of the servicing and checks. There is absolutely no possibility of having a warranty issue as long as you have receipts. And the only time that will even come it to play is if you have a total engine failure that appears to be oil related. Then and only then will a dealer possibly want you to show proof that oil changes were accomplished. The bottom line is buy a good car (Honda, Toyota, or Nissan to name a few), at a good price (300 or less over invoice) and just follow the owner's manual for recommend fuel, servicing, & maintenance as defined by your driving. Save your money on an extended warranty and get it serviced at the most economic place that you truss. You will most likely get a good 10 years and easily over 100,000 miles of driving before you will be spending any significant sums of money. Most likely though it will be a lot longer than that. I think that's about all I have to say about that. Happy New Year and happy motoring.
okay, if certain folks wanna be a pickadilly about knock sensors...i'll just state it this way.
the accord, unlike many other cars, has a fuel/electronic system that allows it to use fuel that is 86 or higher octane. regular unleaded is recommended. however, using high octane fuel does net a slight increase in horsepower and torque over using regular octane unleaded...
And EMALE, I agree 100%, perhaps "knock sensors" is a misnomer in the case of Honda's engines. However, there probably is a limit(I have no idea what it is) as to how much timing advance the ECU can provide and without dyno testing or consulting some Honda engineers, we will probably never know.
I believe the Honda Accord 3.0L V6 engine was developed to run with premium. But since a lot of family car buyers would refuse to buy a car which requires premium, Honda equipped the car with sophisticated knock sensors that would retard the timing, to allow the car to run on regular fuel. The downside to filling with regular, being a slight degradation in power/torque at 240HP/212Torque. With premium, the timing would be free to advance to the "true" rating of the engine at 250HP/225Torque or so.
However, the 4-cylinder Accord engine would not have any benefit by filling with premium, since the compression ratio is fairly mild at 9.7:1 and is truly designed to be run with regular fuel.
Less than a month ago in another forum I looked up the trade-in values for a 2003 Accord EX-L 4 cylinder automatic and a 2003 Camry XLE 4 cylinder comparably equipped (leather, roof, wheels) and found that the Accord holds a $2000 advantage while having a $2000 lower MSRP.
Assuming 12,000 miles and good condition here is what kbb.com says:
I still find it implausible that an engine designed to run on premium will run well on regular. The engine probably was designed for 89 and benefits from that grade. If it's a true 93 octane engine running regular --, I don't want it. I'll take one engineered for regular or engineered for plus or engineered for premium.
An engine running retarded so much from its performance at 93 octane levels would be poor running at 87 octane, two levels below its design.
Thanks for the dialogue on this. I think we disagree to disagree. You give more credibility to the words in the description from Honda and others of the engine than I give to the engineering and technology in the engine, or in most engines.
We would both agree that 4 cyl. doesn't need or benefit from premium. Plus might be nice..., but I'd save my money most of the time.
Tried a test with plus vs regular on a trip. Improved gas mileage 0.5 mpg. 1.6% increase in mileage; 6.6 % increase in price.
If you think I "overservice" the cars, you should see the boat!---- Life is all about having fun for the short period of time that you are on earth. I can't help myself, I have a "love affair" with my vehicles. I don't drink, smoke or gamble, so I have to spend my money on something! Have a "GREAT" New Year! Try a tank of premium fuel, you might like the experience. If you do like premium fuel, don't tell anyone. -----Greg
i actually tried running high octane in my v6 but couldn't "tell" any meaningful difference in power or mpg. i usually end up putting in what's cheapest; and around here it's the 10 percent ethanol 89 octane. but my point all along was that at least according to honda engineers, if you put high octane in the v6, you aren't throwing your money down the toilet like you are with most other cars/engines rated for 87.
gregory,
no booze or smokes or gambling...geesh...now that wouldn't be a good year ...
Basically, by filling regular fuel in the Accord, you are not harming the engine, since the electronics are specifically designed to prevent any detrimental effects. Harm would occur in the engine if it "knocks" repeatedly/constantly. But if the electronics can prevent knock from happening by retarding timing and thus obtain the Honda advertised horsepower/torque rating, while preventing any damage whatsoever from occuring, then what is your issue ? That the engine "only" develops 240 HP ? From my perspective, the fact that the engine can develop more power with premium is just a plus for folks who want to experience that additional kick. For folks who want to save money, stick to the "recommended" regular fuel ! JMHO.
I know you love your vehicles, that's why I can't understand why you don't do all your own work on them. I never let anyone else touch my vehicles unless I just can't do the work or it's warranty stuff, which is rare. I know it's done right if I do the work. Instead of trading your cars or boats in, let us know when your ready to get a new vehicle. You will get top dollar from us, because we all know you take incredible care of your vehicles. I sincerely mean that Greg. Take Care.
Greetings Accord owners! I just got my new '04 EX-L 4Dr Auto (my first new car and first Accord) a couple of days ago and noticed the audio unit LCD display has a different layout than shown in Honda brochures and photos posted here on edmunds.com. For example, the volume indicator is a horizontal bar on the left of my display, while in the photos it's shown as a circle in the middle. Also, in photos the display has a blueish background while on my unit it seems to be gray. Now I recall the other two EX's I test drove both have the same layout as the photos. Did anyone out there get a different layout than the brochures/photos? My car was assembled in Japan. Could this be the reason? I hope the unit was not replaced at some point out of the factory.
I bought one of the first 2004 Accords in late August and mine was also made in Japan. The LCD screen for the audio, etc. is gray and not blue as shown in the brochure. Maybe the 2003s were different from the 2004s. Also, cars with the navigation system might be different, too. In any case, I wouldn't be too concerned about it....Richard
"since the electronics are specifically designed to prevent any detrimental effects. Harm would occur in the engine if it "knocks" repeatedly/constantly. But if the electronics can prevent knock from happening by retarding timing and thus obtain the Honda advertised horsepower/torque rating, while preventing any damage whatsoever from occuring, then what is your issue ?"
"You will have to run with premium for at least a couple of tankfuls (or reset your ECU), before you will experience any additional power or mpg."
No need to get personal as if I have an issue...
You're saying the electronics are so well designed they allow an engine built for 93 to run on 87. Then in the next post it's the engine is as adaptable and you have to reset the computer or use several tankfuls.
My original fact was that people said the "knock sensors" allowed the engine to build up to be able to use 93 from normally running on 87 octane. That's not what knock sensors do; they retard the spark when knock from problems or octane occurs. That's the reverse. Got it?
Read through the sequence of posts again. Maybe that will help. EOD.
I had a 2003 Coupe and it had the circle as the volume indicator. My 2004 sedan has the horizontal bar. Probably a tweak to allow room for the XM display.
Have to be able to run regular. At least modern ones. I know my 94 LS400 requires premium BUT the owners manual says it CAN run regular if that all you have available. I tried it and noticed a difference but it did run. Didn't knock or anything. I'd do it again if I was taking a long trip under cruise where I didn't need max-power.
Your comments remind of a coast to coast drive I took about fifteen years ago. While driving through the mountains I made a near emergency fuel stop. I was shocked to discover that small establishment sold only one grade of gas, regular 86 octane.
Quite typical in higher elevations. The less dense air equals less total cylinder pressure(if your comp ratio is 10:1, then total cyl pressure is 10 times that of ambiant air pressure), thus reducing the need for higher octane rating. Unless, of course, you have a turbo or supercharger, then you still need the higher octane.
we are talking HONDA (you know, they make lawn mowers and generators too), not FERRARI. you can put whatever gas you want in the car - it will be okay.
it always makes me chuckle to hear YOU MUST USE PREMIUM or the engine will lose power, MPG's, or get "sludge", or die early, etc.
if that were true, can you imagine how much auto makers would be paying out in warranty service?? they make the engines to run on anything - they can't afford the repair bills/bad press that would be coming along if they left it up to consumers to make such important decisions....
If people can't figure out what/how often to change the oil in cars, you know they aren't gonna get the correct gas every time. What if you lend your car to someone? What if the gas station cheated and put regular in the premium. You don't want your car stalling driving out of the station.
i think you guys are losing site of what was originally being talked about. the point was that most cars designed to run on 87 octane get no additional benefit out of running high octane. HOWEVER, the v6 accord can run on anything from 86 through 90+ octane...and will produce more horsepower with higher octane. so putting so called "premium" in a v6 accord isn't a complete waste of money...!
But again, what kind of driving are you doing when approx. 220 hp aren't enough? And how often to justify the extra cost. If not complete waste...It's very close. If you're not doing time trials or planning on a autobahn run...you get my point?
Your point is well taken. If I could shave one or two tenths of a second getting to 60 mph by "flooring it" once a week, it surely wouldn't be worth wasting money buying 91 octane fuel all year for a vehicle designed to operate on 87 octane, such as my 2004 EX V6 Coupe. Clearly, "more horsepower" is overkill for anyone using this engine, that performs superbly when fueled as Honda specifies for us mere mortals.
I'm going to stop by tomorrow after work and see what kind of a deal I can get on an 04 LX.
I'm wondering if any of you LX owners have had the 16" alloy wheels installed that are part of the LX convenience package. If so, was that a good experience? Did your dealer have them in stock? What do you think of their appearance? Did you have them installed as you bought the car? According to the catalog, that's the only way to have them covered by the new car warranty.
A related question is if anyone knows if there is a difference in the engine rpms at highway speed with the 15" standard LX wheels compared with the 16" EX wheels. I've driven an EX 4cyl. and noticed about 2300 rpms at 70. If the standard LX 15" wheels push the rpms up, have the 16" alloys via the convenience package brought them back down?
For those of you who would suggest I go ahead and get the EX, that's a good suggestion. It is a good value, with the alloys, CD changer, moonroof, etc. However, I'm not particularly interested in a moonroof, but I do like alloys (and lower rpms on the highway), so I'm considering the LX with alloys added. I also think I'm going to like the extra headroom without the moonroof, since I'm somewhat tall. My head does clear in the EX, but not by much.
Thanks very much for any advice or experiences you have had with these wheels.
If you live in a place where it snows it might be a better deal to buy the car with 15s then swap them out for aftermarket tires and wheels. You can then use the 15s wheels for snows. You could also get some better looking alloys and some better tires.
I think the engine speed is roughly the same between the two wheel sizes. The 16-inch wheels (assuming they use the same tire size as the EX 16-inch wheels) are a lower profile tire. The tire diameter is about the same between the two, so engine speed difference is negligible.
I believe all dealer-installed options/accessories are covered for 12mos/12k miles or until the end of the factory 36mo/26k mile warranty, whichever is later. You could get them installed 6 months from now and they would still be covered until the end of the factory warranty.
I have driven both an LX (loaner from dealer service dept.) and EX (which I own). The major additions in the EX are the moonroof, 6-disk CD changer, steering wheel radio controls, adjustable lumbar support, and alloy wheels. I drive a lot and really like the steering wheel audio controls and CD changer on the EX, especially on long trips. The adjustable lumbar support in the EX is okay, but the LX seats were a little more comfortable for me. Personally, I think the alloy wheels on the EX are nicer than any of the accessory wheels. The deciding factor for me was the sunroof. Either way you will end up with a nice car.
Swapping an LX's 15" rims with the EX's 16 inchers would slightly improve economy (but w/ speedometer showing lower speed) and ride. The alloys' (presumably) lighter weight should also enhance handling and extend suspension system life.
The LX's tire size 205x65x15 has about a 2% smaller circumference than the EX's 205x60x16 (ref: tirerack.com).
I am really disappointed to hear all this pointless debate.
The 4-cyl and 6-cyl Accords were designed SPECIFICALLY to use 87 octane gasoline.
The 4-cyl recieves no benefit from using 89 or higher.
The 6-cyl has dual-stage knock sensors and CAN take a small advantage of premium gasoline. Honda engineers have revealed in interviews that the HP and torque ratings were achieved for both engines by using 87 octane, but that the V6 is designed in such a way that using higher-octane gas may yield more hp and a little more performance.
I'll also take a turn at beating the dead horse: when you mention what honda recommends for oil change intervals, save the newbies some confusion and specify which engine you are speaking of. The 6-cyl and the 4-cyl differ greatly on this.
If you want references on what I said about octane, don't bother me for the references. Find it yourself like I did. You can find it in the forum. It was MONTHS ago, so you'll likely have to use the search button, or even hit Google and look around.
Thanks to all for your responses on my questions about LX and alloy wheels.
rcc8179: I did think about the differing tire profiles (205/60 vs. 205/65) after posting my questions. That's a good thought, and I'm sure you're right about the overall diameter of wheel and tire being about the same in both cases. At any rate, I'll see the rpms on the LX tonight when I drive it. Also, thanks for the tip on lumbar support. I tend to like it retracted as far as possible, so I'll see if the LX seat suits.
Comments
Using premium is also discouraged if the car is designed for regular. Even if you get more percieved performance from using premium, it's designed for regular and should run just fine. Additionally, premium is $.20 more per gallon. Is the "extra" performance worth it?
What am I missing here...Why can't people just read and follow directions?
Confused and amused in sunny South Florida.
The Sandman :-)
i wholeheartedly agree with you about gasoline. however, at least the new accords have dual range knock sensors that can take "advantage" of higher octane fuel and deliver more power and torque. imo, what is really stupid is when people put high octane in a vehicle that can't take advantage of it. this is just plain stupid!! and a complete waste of money.
then there are people who put so-called premium (high octane) in their car because they think premium means better...as in better quality. again, stupid if you ask me!
They allow a car that should have 89 or 92 to use a lower grade. The sensors detect knocking and tell the computer which can retard the spark or adjust whatever to compensate for the faster ignition of the air/gasoline mixture.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
After 8.5 hours the seats were still comfortable and the car has a solid, safe feel. The XM radio is excellent, too.
Is a Mercedes, Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, really worth the price? The Accord has a luxury car feel for a fraction of what those cars cost. I think the Accord is a great car!.......Richard
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It is a simple program of the ECU 'testing' the ignition timing. Since the Honda(and many other) engines are coil on plug, it is easily feasible that the ECU can continually advance timing until it 'sees' a knock, then retard timing back a bit. Between that and your 2-3 O2 sensors, your engine can run at it's best.
i think your request has already been answered...
gregoryc1,
forgive me for being rash because i understand that everyone has a different comfort level. however i'll still say that having an extended warranty and then spending extra money to supposedly make an engine last longer when it's covered by warranty just seems like money down the toilet...
A knock sensor doesn't do anything to allow an engine to use a higher octance fuel than that for which it was engineered; it lets the computer adapt to a lower octane fuel by retarding the spark.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
the accord, unlike many other cars, has a fuel/electronic system that allows it to use fuel that is 86 or higher octane. regular unleaded is recommended. however, using high octane fuel does net a slight increase in horsepower and torque over using regular octane unleaded...
And EMALE, I agree 100%, perhaps "knock sensors" is a misnomer in the case of Honda's engines. However, there probably is a limit(I have no idea what it is) as to how much timing advance the ECU can provide and without dyno testing or consulting some Honda engineers, we will probably never know.
i wish i could find the article about the new accord and dual stage knock sensors vs single stage knock sensors...but i've been unable to find...
However, the 4-cylinder Accord engine would not have any benefit by filling with premium, since the compression ratio is fairly mild at 9.7:1 and is truly designed to be run with regular fuel.
Later...AH
Assuming 12,000 miles and good condition here is what kbb.com says:
03 EX-L auto: MSRP: $24,790 trade-in: $18,255
03 XLE 4 cyl: MSRP: $26,200 trade-in: $16,025
I chalk it up to maybe the rebates that Toyota has been offering with the Camry along with it's higher percentage of fleet sales (10-12% vs. 2%).
An engine running retarded so much from its performance at 93 octane levels would be poor running at 87 octane, two levels below its design.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
We would both agree that 4 cyl. doesn't need or benefit from premium. Plus might be nice..., but I'd save my money most of the time.
Tried a test with plus vs regular on a trip.
Improved gas mileage 0.5 mpg. 1.6% increase in mileage; 6.6 % increase in price.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
i actually tried running high octane in my v6 but couldn't "tell" any meaningful difference in power or mpg. i usually end up putting in what's cheapest; and around here it's the 10 percent ethanol 89 octane. but my point all along was that at least according to honda engineers, if you put high octane in the v6, you aren't throwing your money down the toilet like you are with most other cars/engines rated for 87.
gregory,
no booze or smokes or gambling...geesh...now that wouldn't be a good year ...
Later...AH
You will have to run with premium for at least a couple of tankfuls (or reset your ECU), before you will experience any additional power or mpg.
Later...AH
"You will have to run with premium for at least a couple of tankfuls (or reset your ECU), before you will experience any additional power or mpg."
No need to get personal as if I have an issue...
You're saying the electronics are so well designed they allow an engine built for 93 to run on 87. Then in the next post it's the engine is as adaptable and you have to reset the computer or use several tankfuls.
My original fact was that people said the "knock sensors" allowed the engine to build up to be able to use 93 from normally running on 87 octane. That's not what knock sensors do; they retard the spark when knock from problems or octane occurs. That's the reverse. Got it?
Read through the sequence of posts again. Maybe that will help. EOD.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
it always makes me chuckle to hear YOU MUST USE PREMIUM or the engine will lose power, MPG's, or get "sludge", or die early, etc.
if that were true, can you imagine how much auto makers would be paying out in warranty service?? they make the engines to run on anything - they can't afford the repair bills/bad press that would be coming along if they left it up to consumers to make such important decisions....
Your point is well taken. If I could shave one or two tenths of a second getting to 60 mph by "flooring it" once a week, it surely wouldn't be worth wasting money buying 91 octane fuel all year for a vehicle designed to operate on 87 octane, such as my 2004 EX V6 Coupe. Clearly, "more horsepower" is overkill for anyone using this engine, that performs superbly when fueled as Honda specifies for us mere mortals.
the accord v6 is rated 240 hp on 87 octane...that's what i burn...the cheap stuff!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
http://sohc.vtec.net/article_files/58735/03accordexv6_dyno.jpg
Dyno of the V6.
I'm wondering if any of you LX owners have had the 16" alloy wheels installed that are part of the LX convenience package. If so, was that a good experience? Did your dealer have them in stock? What do you think of their appearance? Did you have them installed as you bought the car? According to the catalog, that's the only way to have them covered by the new car warranty.
A related question is if anyone knows if there is a difference in the engine rpms at highway speed with the 15" standard LX wheels compared with the 16" EX wheels. I've driven an EX 4cyl. and noticed about 2300 rpms at 70. If the standard LX 15" wheels push the rpms up, have the 16" alloys via the convenience package brought them back down?
For those of you who would suggest I go ahead and get the EX, that's a good suggestion. It is a good value, with the alloys, CD changer, moonroof, etc. However, I'm not particularly interested in a moonroof, but I do like alloys (and lower rpms on the highway), so I'm considering the LX with alloys added. I also think I'm going to like the extra headroom without the moonroof, since I'm somewhat tall. My head does clear in the EX, but not by much.
Thanks very much for any advice or experiences you have had with these wheels.
I believe all dealer-installed options/accessories are covered for 12mos/12k miles or until the end of the factory 36mo/26k mile warranty, whichever is later. You could get them installed 6 months from now and they would still be covered until the end of the factory warranty.
I have driven both an LX (loaner from dealer service dept.) and EX (which I own). The major additions in the EX are the moonroof, 6-disk CD changer, steering wheel radio controls, adjustable lumbar support, and alloy wheels. I drive a lot and really like the steering wheel audio controls and CD changer on the EX, especially on long trips. The adjustable lumbar support in the EX is okay, but the LX seats were a little more comfortable for me. Personally, I think the alloy wheels on the EX are nicer than any of the accessory wheels. The deciding factor for me was the sunroof. Either way you will end up with a nice car.
The LX's tire size 205x65x15 has about a 2% smaller circumference than the EX's 205x60x16 (ref: tirerack.com).
Try ebay for some good deals.
The 4-cyl and 6-cyl Accords were designed SPECIFICALLY to use 87 octane gasoline.
The 4-cyl recieves no benefit from using 89 or higher.
The 6-cyl has dual-stage knock sensors and CAN take a small advantage of premium gasoline. Honda engineers have revealed in interviews that the HP and torque ratings were achieved for both engines by using 87 octane, but that the V6 is designed in such a way that using higher-octane gas may yield more hp and a little more performance.
I'll also take a turn at beating the dead horse: when you mention what honda recommends for oil change intervals, save the newbies some confusion and specify which engine you are speaking of. The 6-cyl and the 4-cyl differ greatly on this.
If you want references on what I said about octane, don't bother me for the references. Find it yourself like I did. You can find it in the forum. It was MONTHS ago, so you'll likely have to use the search button, or even hit Google and look around.
rcc8179: I did think about the differing tire profiles (205/60 vs. 205/65) after posting my questions. That's a good thought, and I'm sure you're right about the overall diameter of wheel and tire being about the same in both cases. At any rate, I'll see the rpms on the LX tonight when I drive it. Also, thanks for the tip on lumbar support. I tend to like it retracted as far as possible, so I'll see if the LX seat suits.