After nearly 2 years and a meager 13K miles (I have 4 cars to split my miles) the thrill is gone with the 4 cyl.
I recently drove the V6 and I'm sick. Comparatively, the 4 cyl just doesn't cut it. Other than cost, I see no significant advantage to getting the 4 cyl. While the Accord looks rather "upscale midsize family car", the 4 cyl makes it feel rather "economy".
1. The V6 gets almost the same MPG as the 4cyl on the freeway and gives up only a few in the city-real world based on info here, not EPA.
2. 4 cyl is not as smooth, and has that 4cyl sound, buzz, and vibration that is getting long in the tooth. Other interior rattles don't help.
3. CVT used to be as smooth as the center seed of a cucumber and now is having judder at low speed more often to the point I'm going to the dealer in the not too distant.
4. Rarely do I go to WOT but when I do, it makes a lot of revs, a lot of noise, and not a lot of thrust. It makes 185 HP at 6400 RPM. Anybody here get their CVT up to 6400 RPM to touch that peak HP?
5. Not selling or anything like that-still a good car that is adequate and in a couple of years when Jr. starts driving, a great car to learn to drive on and take to college as I had planned. He sure doesn't need a V6 but I sure could use one now.
A 4 banger, is a 4 banger, is a 4 banger.... Will never have that "pull" of a V6. With that said, Im happy with my EX Manual though. Im 35 y.o married with 2 kids, but maybe Im getting too old? :dunno:
i know in the states when you trade in a 13 accord for a 14 i think you lose 2-4k$ but here in canada... i wonder how much you lose if you wanna trade in a 13 for 14 i mean the accord touring is already 39000$ CDN with no option while you guys pay like 28000$ i suppose?
Agree with a lot of your sentiments. I traded my 4-cyl/CVT for a V6/6AT and could not be happier. The V6 just has much more sophisticated feel, with an abundance of power and refinement. The V6 powertrain is just in a different league and doesn't give up much when it comes to fuel economy, particularly if you are cruising on the freeway a good amount.
Did you test drive the V6 back when you bought your 4-cyl EX-L or just now for the first time?
No, but I have experience with the V6, just not in the Accord. The shortcomings if the CVT combined with the 4 are becoming more noticeable over time. In fairness, if I had the V6, I might say the same thing about VCM drone but in 80K miles of VCM on my 05 Ody, I never had a drone problem.
Tough it out, son....tough it out. Think of the family.
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son! -Rudyard Kipling, If
Yep, it's for Jr now. I just hope that CVT lasts 8 years through college (he is not obtuse, 4 years HS, 4 years college) MDX goes by Dec to be replaced with a '15 Ody or Sienna. Leaf goes by spring to be replaced by an AWD something.
Also, those who buy V-6s may not give a crap as much as those who buy a 4 about fuel economy.
I drive mostly city, it's 2 mpg difference. It is noticeable in the trip mileage when filling up, but I feel it's worth the difference in power and refinement.
I'd agree, worth the power and people here are getting 37-40 on the freeway with the 6, same as my 4. In the area I live in which is country/rural, I could granny drive the 6 and do as well with VCM as the 4 with CVT. It needs stop/start.
It's funny, you guys are such a huge minority. A lot of the Acura TLX reviews published today are PRAISING the 4 cylinder engine model as it is 1. lighter 2. less nose heavy 3. more sporty 4. less torque steer 5. more fun to drive. On the Acura forums, people are cancelling their V6 orders and reordering the 4 cylinder. Ahem, these engines are similar to the Accord.
The sweet-sounding four-cylinder is the most chuckable TLX, while the front-drive V-6 model feels a bit more nose-heavy and prone to torque steer.
Thankfully, before I started to question Acura’s whole thinking, I switched into the 2.4-liter P-AWS car. It may be down on power in comparison to the V6, but it feels more decisive and straightforward; the gearbox is cleaner in choosing between its eight ratios, and while Sport+ mode still feels frenetic at times, it’s less jarring than in the more powerful car.
It's funny, you guys are such a huge minority. A lot of the Acura TLX reviews published today are PRAISING the 4 cylinder engine model as it is 1. lighter 2. less nose heavy 3. more sporty 4. less torque steer 5. more fun to drive. On the Acura forums, people are cancelling their V6 orders and reordering the 4 cylinder. Ahem, these engines are similar to the Accord.
The TLX doesnt use the CVT though. IMO, if youre going to get a 4-cylinder and care at all about the car having even decent performance, the manual trans is a must.
to me both the cost difference (Ex-L 4 vs Ex-L V6) and MPG diff was so minor it's almost laughable.. Even my non-car Wife said if i buy the I-4 I'm nuts. We drove my V6 from Northern NJ to SC end of June and got 34 mpg avg at 70-75 mph and hitting 80 many times. Great engine for both power & fuel efficient
5 miles per gallon over the lifetime of a car is nothing to sniff at. But then it is human nature for optimists to trivialize the cons and exaggerate the pros of their decision.
if i were to get a v6 in los angeles i think the mpg would kill me from being on the freeways in stop and go traffic twice a day 5 times a week.. but im pretty ahppy with my 4 cyl avg about 31 mpg.
Wow! I am surprised, yet I am not in my own experience with V6 cars. Going from pro CVT and Vtech I4, to this is kind of scarey... How is the mod going to kill all our past posts about all the pros. Not that we get many searching for early experiences, just it sounds so two faced from following you.
Though I remember my early posts about the Honda V6 being more like a V8... I got shot down, but it was for the lack of understanding that I was talking about the smooth torque range unlike most I4 engines turbo or not. Less pedal less gas, heavier sedans can get by with an I4 but really need the V6 if your passengers are older than 16.
Even with the older 5spd auto being a wee lacking between the gears, the torque does provide passing slower cars without a gear change within the power band.
Though many don't complain about drone of VCM with the newer VCM engines. Just depends on how you drive and what has been modded, if anything. Some times I can hear the drone but most of the time I don't. So I assume lower RPM cruising speeds are prone to drone with VCM.
I wish I got the V6 too, but not for the Engine. For the Leather, Heated Seats, and slightly more powerful stereo. I know that I could have have it in an EX-L but I am not doing CVT.
5. Not selling or anything like that-still a good car that is adequate and in a couple of years when Jr. starts driving, a great car to learn to drive on and take to college as I had planned. He sure doesn't need a V6 but I sure could use one now.
Tough it out, son....tough it out. Think of the family.
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son! -Rudyard Kipling, If
same here. Ended up getting a 4 cyl with navi coupe because they had a good deal on 4 cyl. I thought id be saving money but by the time I signed I was prob paying close to the cost of a V6.
Now that I look back on it I've taken a lot of lessons from buying my first car. Luckily its a lease so in a couple of years Ill have a better idea of what I really want in a car.
What about the extra expenses of the v6 at the 100k-105k interval...if you have it that long of course. Can't forget to add that onto the list of expenses
I'm right there with you though. If we didn't need to get the wife a new car AND have the arrival of our 1st kiddo all in the same few months...it would have been the EX-L v6 for me in a heartbeat. Still wish I would have just given her the '04 TL since it was paid off, but she charmed me dangit! Ugh. You live and learn
What about the extra expenses of the v6 at the 100k-105k interval...if you have it that long of course. Can't forget to add that onto the list of expenses
I've never driven anything as slow as this Accord and I still don't wish I got the 6cyl.
I bought something for gas mileage, no desire to modify and that I could drive 500mi on a tank.
Now my TBSS has been down for the past few weeks so I couldn't get my speed fix, but I'm still not wishing I got a v6 because comparatively the v6 is still pretty slow IMO.
Let's see, Motortrend says that 2007 Trailblazer SS (apparently the year that you own, per your signature) does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, and ¼ mile in 14.1 seconds at 97.5 mph. 9th Gen Accord V6 6AT does 0-60 in 5.6, and ¼ mile in 14.1 seconds at 101 mph. You apparently drive your TBSS for "speed fix" (when it is not in a shop for "several weeks") but Accord V6 is "still pretty slow"? Do you have some serious mods on your TBSS?
It's beyond me why people get off on fast SUVs anyway. Why not a fast mini-van, too?
Not to worry, as Flyboy will be here shortly to console you with his experience with the I4 CVT, which by his account is better than the ZF 8-speed auto and the Porsche PDK dual-clutch transmission all rolled into one. Well, that may be bit of a stretch, but he does love his CVT.
Guys, I am getting really concerned. We have not heard from MartyV6 or Nossan in this V6 vs. I4 thread. And it's already been a few hours since the thread was created! That's impossible. In fact, I haven't seen their posts anywhere recently.
Does anyone know what's up? Did they get kidnapped by the aliens? I just wish they are not being treated as experimental guinea pigs, with alien probes in their orifices and such. That reminds me, I am starving.
Mick
P.S. Life is all about trade offs and compromises. People place emphasis on different things, to a differing degree. (Otherwise, "big boned" chicks and bald men would be single forever.) You can argue until your face is blue about which trim is intrinsically better, but good luck achieving any type of consensus here. For me, V6 is well worth the price difference (net of higher resale value of V6 later) and the additional fuel, to get about 90 more hp, additional equipment and smooth engine/transmission.
P.S. Life is all about trade offs and compromises. People place emphasis on different things, to a differing degree. (Otherwise, "big boned" chicks and bald men would be single forever.) You can argue until your face is blue about which trim is intrinsically better, but good luck achieving any type of consensus here. For me, V6 is well worth the price difference (net of higher resale value of V6 later) and the additional fuel, to get about 90 more hp, additional equipment and smooth engine/transmission.
This reminds me of my co-worker, whose eyes got big when I told her how much I paid for the Accord. 'I'd never be able to sleep if I spent THAT on a car!!' oh well you have a child and are a single mother, and live in your parents house at age 50. So apparently, you IMO didn't make the perfect decisions somewhere along the line. However, she's happy with her life. Which makes it MY opinion. Opinions are like buttholes, everybody has one!
If the OP can afford to take the hit financially then that is his call. It's individual on which car makes more since to him. If you think the V6 is not good enough then downsize to a Fit. It only matters in the end if the OP is happy and for my 2 cents the Honda V6 is a lot more real word tested and proven then the I4 with a CVT transmission.
3. CVT used to be as smooth as the center seed of a cucumber and now is having judder at low speed more often to the point I'm going to the dealer in the not too distant.
Funny timing - I have slightly over 10K in 13 months and just in recent days I noticed how the judder in low speed is much more noticeable that it used to be. Really annoying and unpleasant. I am not confident it's the I4, I believe it is the stupid CVT which I've always said would be my 2nd choice had they offered a standard old-fashioned automatic transmission.
I "fear" going to the dealer with this because I know what the answer would be - that this is normal behavior for this car. It would be a total waste of time, talking the wall, wasting hours of phone calls and emails if I elect to call HQ (which will also be a waste of time). Bottom line - there's definitely an issue with these trannys and we're screwed, unless we bite the bullet and spend thousands on trad-ins of some sort. Sad. I still enjoy driving my 2005 EX after 10 years. Never dreamed I would be having 2nd thoughts about an Accord on her 1st birthday (this is my third one).
I hope it works out for the OP, but this should be a lesson to all. If you really want something that is a little more than you want to spend save your lunch money and get what you really want. Buy once, cry once.
Not so much a matter of really wanting a V6 and settling on a 4. I never drove the V6 to know I might want it. The I4 was so good that I didn't look at the 6. After 2 years (really over the last 6 months) the I4 has lost it's shine. It may well be the CVT.
I was just thinking similar thoughts earlier today... I've owned both V6 and 4 cylinder Accords - with the 2013 being my first CVT Accord. I previously owned a CRZ with a CVT - and that unit was buttery smooth and never had an issue.
The Accord CVT is a problem - and only gets worse with age, not better. I wish I test drove the car longer and harder before deciding to buy. It drives like crap under hard acceleration and only feels smooth when I baby it at this point. I don't expect it to remain smooth and am fully confident it will have greater hesitation, judders, etc in the future.
I wish I got the V6 just to have a regular automatic transmission - if for no other reason.
I can't wait to see how well or not so well Acura's new 8 speed dual clutch automatic pans out. For the sake of Acura owners - I hope its better than the Accords CVT.
CVT worse with age? Hmmm. I won't have enough miles to come close to 60K by the time 5 years is up. I hope this thing does not fail. Would hate to put a new transmission in while Jr is in college 5-6 years.
Yep-V6 gives you the auto transmission: reason enough for the 6. Hopefully the TSB fill fix the driveability issues. I bought the CVT with the understanding that Honda has been building CVTs since 1996 and has plenty of experience. I think I'm still right.
Honda's 4 cylinders are usually pretty smooth, so it's surprising to hear about the buzz and vibrations in the first post. I thought my '07 I4 5A was a pretty good combination, but I never test drove a V6 model to compare (I'd never need all that power).
The idea of buying the I4 never even entered my mind. I would've just stuck with my old Corolla otherwise. The V6 simply elevates the Accord into a different class of vehicle altogether.
A different experience indeed with the V6, it feels substantial. Not Hyundai Genesis/5 Series RWD substantial but a different class from the 4 cyl for sure. Don't laugh, if you've not driven a 6 cyl Genesis sedan, I challenge anyone to drive one and not be thoroughly impressed.
I hope it works out for the OP, but this should be a lesson to all. If you really want something that is a little more than you want to spend save your lunch money and get what you really want. Buy once, cry once.
Important lesson for all. Just to be clear in my situation, I wanted the I4 and have become underwhelmed with it's buzziness and powertrain behavior in the last 6 months. It was never about not spending the money on the V6 and my assessment of the 4 cyl accord was initially correct. It has proven to be incorrect recently. If you can't afford $30K for a 6, you probably can't (or shouldn't) afford $28K for a 4-that's another lesson.
I hope it works out for the OP, but this should be a lesson to all. If you really want something that is a little more than you want to spend save your lunch money and get what you really want. Buy once, cry once.
I was just thinking similar thoughts earlier today... I've owned both V6 and 4 cylinder Accords - with the 2013 being my first CVT Accord. I previously owned a CRZ with a CVT - and that unit was buttery smooth and never had an issue.
The Accord CVT is a problem - and only gets worse with age, not better. I wish I test drove the car longer and harder before deciding to buy. It drives like crap under hard acceleration and only feels smooth when I baby it at this point. I don't expect it to remain smooth and am fully confident it will have greater hesitation, judders, etc in the future.
I wish I got the V6 just to have a regular automatic transmission - if for no other reason.
I can't wait to see how well or not so well Acura's new 8 speed dual clutch automatic pans out. For the sake of Acura owners - I hope its better than the Accords CVT.
I was just thinking similar thoughts earlier today... I've owned both V6 and 4 cylinder Accords - with the 2013 being my first CVT Accord. I previously owned a CRZ with a CVT - and that unit was buttery smooth and never had an issue.
The Accord CVT is a problem - and only gets worse with age, not better. I wish I test drove the car longer and harder before deciding to buy. It drives like crap under hard acceleration and only feels smooth when I baby it at this point. I don't expect it to remain smooth and am fully confident it will have greater hesitation, judders, etc in the future.
I wish I got the V6 just to have a regular automatic transmission - if for no other reason.
I can't wait to see how well or not so well Acura's new 8 speed dual clutch automatic pans out. For the sake of Acura owners - I hope its better than the Accords CVT.
I kinda wish this, too, although I'm not having any problems with my CVT (except first thing when I drive it in the morning where it definitely is juddery...but once it's fully warmed up it's very smooth). I still miss the "torque-iness" of my old 2003 Accord with it's 5 speed auto transmission. There was just something about the feeling of winding up each of the gears in that car which is sorely missing in the CVT driving experience.
I get it about how Honda used software to configure the CVT and make it feel as though it's really "shifting" but to me it just has two gears...forwards and backwards.
Although a lot of V6 owners are claiming to get good city mileage, I've also read several comments from people who say the city mileage is pretty bad. So, since I drive 70% city/suburbs, I decided to go with the CVT.
I don't hate the CVT. But it's definitely a different driving experience than a standard AT or MT. It's a lot more sedate, uninvolved, and detached...which is probably fine for 90% of the motoring public out there. But for enthusiasts like us... :dunno:
However, the question is what car would someone like me or the OP get to replace the I4 CVT? I don't want to go back to a MT because I live in the DC Metro area which has the 2nd worst traffic in the entire country. And I don't want to get a V6 from any car maker because I'm driving 70% city/suburbs. Sounds to me like the only option I might have would be another car maker (Mazda6, Mini Cooper, VW GTI/GLI/Passat, insert car maker here).
I put $6K down on my Accord last September when I bought it and I could probably get about $22K for it now but I still owe $19K on it. So, I do have a little equity I could put down on a new car but I'm still going to lose thousands if I do it.
Really amazing that Honda has gone with the CVT but Toyota has not...don't understand that at all. I'd give anything for an I-4 6-speed AT in the Accord!
The V6 is nice... I bought an auto because I didn't feel experienced enough with a MT to purchase a new car in that configuration. It was also the same price and didn't come in Orchard Perl White. Do I regret that decision? Occasionally, but I do have paddle shifters. How else would I eat a crunchwrap supreme and drive at the same time????
If you feel you need the extra power I would wait for the 10G at this point.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Drive Accord Honda Forums
2M posts
125.9K members
Since 2003
Drive Accord forum, a community where Honda Accord owners can discuss reviews, service, parts, and share mods.