No V6 for 2018 Accord. No word on CVT - Page 2 - Drive Accord Honda Forums
 232Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
post #16 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 11:03 AM
6th Gear
 
14v6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Capital District, NY
Posts: 1,876
Thanks: 122
Thanked 150 Times in 132 Posts
So, the upgraded engine will be a 2.0 turbo. Let's see how it turns out. I am doubtful that in real world driving it will match or exceed the current 3.5 in MPG or performance. It may, however beat it in drivability which could be huge. No more VCM to complain about either. I would think that if Mazda puts the 2.5 turbo in the Mazda 6 that car will lure many away from an uplevel Accord.

Remember the days when thieves wanted the Integra engine for their Civics. Hope that doesn't happen again with the 18 Accord.

So does this mean that they will need a new CVT for the 2.0? The RDX will most likely be the same or will it get the 10 speed. I'm not as averse to CVT's as I once was as the software update for my wife's CRV has solved a lot of my complaints. My guess is that the V6 will go away on the Pilot, Odyssey and Ridgeline when the generations after the 2018 model years end production. The Acuras will probably start with a 4 Turbo with some sort of hybrid assist or Honda will eventually raid the Acura parts bin for the 3.0 hybrid. Times are changing for sure but the J series V6 is long in the tooth and doesn't look like there is an evolutionary step left for it.


2009 CRV LX
2014 Accord EXL-V6
2015 CRV Touring
2017 Ridgeline RTS
14v6 is offline  
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 11:06 AM
1st Gear
 
czelaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: New Orleans, Louisiana
Posts: 41
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Sad to see the V6 go away (just got my 2017 V6 manual coupe). The only way this would be executed with progress is if Honda had a larger displacement I-4, maybe like 2.3 Liter, so it wouldn't have has much "stress" on the engine with around 300 horsepower. For me, I expect Honda reliability. Along with the demise of the V6, I'm almost sure the manual will end with the 2017 model. However, if they beefed up and added the 8-speed dual clutch manual that could handle the horsepower and torque, I will say, that would be serious progress on all fronts: MPG, performance, and handling.

This leads to the question of weight. With the turbo engines, are we going to see a reduction in weight and size? I remember reading that the new Accord is going to be based on some derivative of the Civic architecture.

UNLTD1487 likes this.
czelaya is offline  
post #18 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 12:56 PM
(Ken)
 
Mr. Slowly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NJ
Posts: 41
Thanks: 2
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Garage
Let's not put the J35 in the ground just yet. If Honda ran on rumors we would've had a new s2000 6 years ago.
Flyboy likes this.
Mr. Slowly is offline  
 
post #19 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 01:17 PM
Out of Control
 
Baldeagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 3,206
Thanks: 279
Thanked 515 Times in 398 Posts
If Honda mates a 250+hp 2.0T with a 6MT in their sedan, I will be a happy camper. If they drop the 6MT in the Accord, it is goodbye Honda. Sadly, as Honda continues to build cars for the non-enthusiast masses I fear the latter will become reality. Fortunately my 6-6 still has low miles on it. Let's hope for the best.

2012 Accord Coupe EX-L w/Nav, V6-6MT
2007 Accord Sedan EX-L w/Nav, V6-6MT (sold)
Baldeagle is offline  
post #20 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 04:27 PM
Out of Control
 
Flyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 5,203
Thanks: 13
Thanked 461 Times in 370 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by optivity View Post
"No V6 for 2018 Accord. No word on CVT"

IMO the only thing worse than losing Honda's V6 engine would be to also drop their AT and pair a top-trim Accord (e.g. Touring) with a 4 cyl. turbo & a CVT.

If that happens sound a death knell for the Accord.
Obviously you are entitled to your opinion, but Honda knows what they are doing. The I4 turbo will probably produce the same performance as the V6 with better fuel economy especially when mated to a CVT transmission. Both CVTs in my Accord and in my wife's 2015 CR-V operate flawlessly although differently than a conventional geared automatic. My guess is that the manual transmission is also on the chopping block due to the lack of interest. Not only do most buyers not know the number of cylinders in the engine they don't know what kind of automatic transmission is in the car.

The manual transmission will survive in cars like the Civic and Fit that appeal to the lowest price buyer. The Accord's competitors, Camry, Fusion and the Korean twins don't offer a manual transmission for a reason, a very small take rate.

The Accord will go on into the future without a V6 nor a manual or geared automatic transmission. Today's buyers are more interested in the technology than in the performance as long as the car can merge and keep up with traffic.

If you want a Honda with a V6 and a dual clutch automatic transmission, then reach in your pocket and pony up for an Acura. It's only about an additional $10,000. BTW Acura doesn't offer a manual transmission for the same reason it will be dropped from the Accord.

2013 Accord Coupe EX-L San Marino Red
2015 CR-V EX Urban Titanium Metallic
2007 Fit Sport Silver 65,000 miles and going strong.
Previous Honda: 2000 Accord Coupe, 1994 Accord Wagon Red, 1988 Prelude White 5 speed manual, 1981 Accord 4 Door Ivory 5 speed manual
Previous Cars before Honda: 73 Mazda RX2 manual, 63 VW Bug manual, 63 Alfa Romeo 2600 Spyder manual, 70 Toyota Crown manual, 59 Vauxhall Victor manual (worst car ever produced, a pre Yugo, Yugo)
Flyboy is offline  
post #21 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 05:30 PM
3rd Gear
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Southern California
Posts: 150
Thanks: 1
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by KW2004Accord View Post
Last chance to get a new Accord V6 - time to make a decision.
I was concerned that the V6 won't make it in the 10th gen Accord. Well, a bad torque converted on the TL-S made the choice easy for me.

2017 Honda Accord EX-L V6 (current)

Past cars
2002 Acura TL-S 206K
1996 Nissan Maxima SE 5-Spd 110K
1980 Volvo 242 GT 425K
Inspire02 is online now  
post #22 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 08:42 PM
HondaNewb
 
pparks1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Westland Michigan
Posts: 160
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Slowly View Post
If I'm not mistaken, where manufacturers are adding turbos to their cars, they're reducing the engine displacement and maintaining the cylinder count. If Honda wanted to make a 2.8L v6 with a turbo, I'd be all for that. I'm not against progress. I just can't envision a reality where a turbo-four is any kind of replacement for a normally-aspirated-six, especially in the eyes of the average non-enthusiast consumer.
I went from a 2.8L v6 in my 2002 Passat with a 5 speed, to a 2.0L turbo charged diesel in 2013 Passat with a DSG transmission.. the turbo 4 was more than enough, and with so much torque, it felt faster. Not to mention, it returned mileage in the upper 40's on the freeway.
My 2016 accord is an I4 with a CVT. I'm totally satisfied with performance, but I do wish the mileage was better. Its about 70% of what I got in my diesel for the same size car. Going 800 miles per fillup was awesome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by optivity View Post
"No V6 for 2018 Accord. No word on CVT"

IMO the only thing worse than losing Honda's V6 engine would be to also drop their AT and pair a top-trim Accord (e.g. Touring) with a 4 cyl. turbo & a CVT.

If that happens sound a death knell for the Accord.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

2016 Honda Accord EX-L, in White Orchid Pearl (1st ever Honda)
Click to see lifetime mileage of my I4 CVT. http://badges.fuelly.com/images/sig-us/453612.png
pparks1 is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to pparks1 For This Useful Post:
trl888 (11-14-2016)
post #23 of 689 Old 11-13-2016, 09:16 PM
3rd Gear
 
RPG97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: California, USA
Posts: 112
Thanks: 4
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
For me it depends. I have an I4 6MT and I'm very satisfied with it. If they can execute a turbo 4 properly then fine. It's just, when I think about forced induction I also think about reliability. More air/pressure inside the engine, more heat, more moving parts...more things to go wrong (REMOVED BY MOD FOR SWEARING)

2013 Accord Coupe EX
K24 6MT
Crystal Black Pearl
41K miles and counting
Hoping to hit 300,000 one day!

1990 Accord Sedan DX
F22A1 4AT
Frost White
263K miles and counting
RPG97 is online now  
post #24 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 12:47 AM
3rd Gear
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 128
Thanks: 94
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
You posted this on 11/12/16 and you said it's from "Autoweek 11/14/16"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
UNLTD1487 is online now  
post #25 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 12:52 AM
又一位第八代雅阁双门车主
 
UnknownJinX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Posts: 941
Thanks: 13
Thanked 50 Times in 48 Posts
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Slowly View Post
If I'm not mistaken, where manufacturers are adding turbos to their cars, they're reducing the engine displacement and maintaining the cylinder count. If Honda wanted to make a 2.8L v6 with a turbo, I'd be all for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by czelaya View Post
Sad to see the V6 go away (just got my 2017 V6 manual coupe). The only way this would be executed with progress is if Honda had a larger displacement I-4, maybe like 2.3 Liter, so it wouldn't have has much "stress" on the engine with around 300 horsepower. For me, I expect Honda reliability.
Mustang Ecoboost I4's has a displacement of 2.3L. I don't think Honda will make Accord go Mustang Ecoboost I4 level fast, just Mustang V6 level fast. Unless Honda decides to have an Accord performance line like Civics with their Si, I don't think Accords will have more than 290hp. Only time will tell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Slowly View Post
I'm not against progress. I just can't envision a reality where a turbo-four is any kind of replacement for a normally-aspirated-six, especially in the eyes of the average non-enthusiast consumer.
Someone understands!

Sure, turbos are more eco, and are good ways make smaller engines more powerful. But cheating always comes with a cost. Turbos need to be warmed up more before you can drive them hard and needs to be cooled down more. Oil replacements need to be more common. Also more parts you have to worry about(Compared to an N/A engine with the same number of cylinders anyways). And of course, turbo lag. Unless you have a supercar where they have electric motors to eliminate that, it's gonna be there. One of my family friends has a Mercedes turbo diesel. The thing sounds so badass with the diesel noise, but my family friend said it also has an apparent turbo lag before it actually goes fast. Can be a little annoying.

If I have to pick between turbo I4 and N/A V6 with the same level of power/torque output, N/A V6 will be my choice.

I don't dislike turbos, really. It makes engines much more efficient. But I do see them as a way of "cheating". Like you said, no way it can replace an N/A V6.
Baldeagle likes this.

My first car!

2008 Honda Accord Coupé EX-L V6 w/Navi 5AT PMM

Mods and such things:

AFE Pro Dry S drop-in filter
VCMuzzler II
HFP body kit
RGR-16D HFP Alloy Wheels
i-VTEC & 3.5 stickers(+10 HP each)(JKLOL)
High and Low beams - Philips CrystalVision Ultra
Front turn signals - HV 6000K white/amber switchback
Rear lights - Philips Vision LEDs
Interior LEDs
Crosstour shift knob
OEM footwell lights
and more!

1999 Toyota Corolla CE 5MT(bone stock, learning stick on this one)
UnknownJinX is online now  
post #26 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 03:03 AM
6th Gear
 
14v6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Capital District, NY
Posts: 1,876
Thanks: 122
Thanked 150 Times in 132 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLTD1487 View Post
You posted this on 11/12/16 and you said it's from "Autoweek 11/14/16"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He's probably referring to the 11/14/16 issue that he received before that date.

2009 CRV LX
2014 Accord EXL-V6
2015 CRV Touring
2017 Ridgeline RTS
14v6 is offline  
post #27 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 03:12 AM
Out of Control
 
Baldeagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 3,206
Thanks: 279
Thanked 515 Times in 398 Posts
On the subject of durability and reliability, Audi/VW has used their 2.0T for over a decade. Aside from the DI carbon problems, the engine themselves have held together extremely well. When I owned my GTI, many of the people on that forum went nuts increasing power, (ECU changes to increase boost, larger K04 turbos, larger intakes, larger exhaust, larger intercooler, etc.).

Even the most aggressive members made similar comments about driving style. 95% of the time they drove easily under low to no boost, but the other 5% of the time they beat the heck out of the car: a stupid race (common discussions on that forum), entering a highway, passing a slow car on a two lane road. The point was that the extreme turbo-heat was short lived. It was a surge of 5 to maybe 15 seconds. Most of the time the turbo remained relatively cool. In the non-enthusiast world of Honda I’m sure that will be case too, even more so if this will be a lower pressure turbo. I would not make any assumptions that reliability will decrease.

2012 Accord Coupe EX-L w/Nav, V6-6MT
2007 Accord Sedan EX-L w/Nav, V6-6MT (sold)
Baldeagle is offline  
post #28 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 04:03 AM
Out of Control
 
Flyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 5,203
Thanks: 13
Thanked 461 Times in 370 Posts
I think that most drivers would be surprised by how little horsepower is required to keep your car cruising at 70 MPH. I don't know the exact figures but it's probably around 20 to 30 HP. The turbocharger's waste gate would allow all or nearly all of the exhaust gases to bypass the turbocharger. When the driver steps on the accelerator to say pass a slower car, the waste gate directs the exhaust gas flow across the turbine side of the unit to spin the compressor side which increases the intake manifold pressure and increase the engine power output. The turbocharged aircraft piston engines I have used in the past operated exactly the same way. Aircraft engines are producing as much as 75% of their rated power continuously in cruise flight. It takes a lot of energy to overcome gravity. Therefore, those turbocharged engines required a cool down period after landing before shutting the engine off to prevent oil cokeing on the compressor turbine wheel.

Reliability is not that big of an issue in street type automotive applications because the turbocharger is being used much less and it's failure doesn't constitute a catastrophy. However the smaller displacement engines require the boost during acceleration to make up for their small displacement.
pparks1 likes this.

2013 Accord Coupe EX-L San Marino Red
2015 CR-V EX Urban Titanium Metallic
2007 Fit Sport Silver 65,000 miles and going strong.
Previous Honda: 2000 Accord Coupe, 1994 Accord Wagon Red, 1988 Prelude White 5 speed manual, 1981 Accord 4 Door Ivory 5 speed manual
Previous Cars before Honda: 73 Mazda RX2 manual, 63 VW Bug manual, 63 Alfa Romeo 2600 Spyder manual, 70 Toyota Crown manual, 59 Vauxhall Victor manual (worst car ever produced, a pre Yugo, Yugo)
Flyboy is offline  
post #29 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 09:22 AM
HondaNewb
 
pparks1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Westland Michigan
Posts: 160
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
My TDI only made 140HP. 236lb/ft of torque. That torque allowed it to cruise through the mountains with ease. Hate the fact that VW basically ruined the TDI, it was one of the most robust engines.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

2016 Honda Accord EX-L, in White Orchid Pearl (1st ever Honda)
Click to see lifetime mileage of my I4 CVT. http://badges.fuelly.com/images/sig-us/453612.png
pparks1 is offline  
post #30 of 689 Old 11-14-2016, 01:35 PM
Where's my CRX?
 
macrod01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
If I had to choose, I'd rather have the manual transmission survive than the V6. It's a shame given how smooth the Honda V6 has been for years.

macrod01 is offline  
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Drive Accord Honda Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
The answer to the random question may be found under the Off Topic section of the forums and in the "Drive Accord Forums" category.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Linear Mode
Rate This Thread:



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome