One of my son's has a 2011 V6 Coupe manual and now I'm thinking about getting my other son an Accord Coupe but can't decide to hold off for a V6 or go with a 4 cylinder. I know some of the basic Pros/Cons like the V6 needing the timing belt done around 100k which of course is the mileage range that is in his budget but I'm more concerned about the lesser power of the 4 cylinder if we go that route for price and to avoid the timing belt. This is a car I'll be sending my son off to college with so it will need to be something that he will be good with for 4 - 5 yrs minimum and maybe even beyond until he can get a career going. Is it worth spending the extra $3k+ for on the V6 with assumption that we will need to drop about $1k within the year or so of purchase to get the belt done. Or, is the 4 cylinder plenty good on power?
V6 vs 4 cylinder thoughts?
2 reading
caverman
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
One of my son's has a 2011 V6 Coupe manual and now I'm thinking about getting my other son an Accord Coupe but can't decide to hold off for a V6 or go with a 4 cylinder. I know some of the basic Pros/Cons like the V6 needing the timing belt done around 100k which of course is the mileage range that is in his budget but I'm more concerned about the lesser power of the 4 cylinder if we go that route for price and to avoid the timing belt. This is a car I'll be sending my son off to college with so it will need to be something that he will be good with for 4 - 5 yrs minimum and maybe even beyond until he can get a career going. Is it worth spending the extra $3k+ for on the V6 with assumption that we will need to drop about $1k within the year or so of purchase to get the belt done. Or, is the 4 cylinder plenty good on power?
I myself am in college. My Accord is an I-4, and I think it's a great fit. It has sufficient power to merge onto highways and pass if needed. It's pretty good on gas too.
Of course, have your son test drive one first, but I don't think you need to spend $3k more for a V6 model.
Of course, have your son test drive one first, but I don't think you need to spend $3k more for a V6 model.
- Reaction score
- 6,884
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
I'm assuming you're looking for a 9th gen, hence why you posted in the 9th gen forum?
The I4 is direct injected for this gen while the V6 is port injected. So there's something to consider. The I4 makes 185hp while the V6 makes 278hp, so nearly 100hp difference there.
IMO the timing belt isn't that big of a deal. Many will argue with me about this but I do prefer it to the timing chain.
Does your son need the extra V6 power? I found that the port injected K24 was more than good enough for a regular daily driver to run errands, commute around town, etc, and that was on an 8th gen. The 9th gen is smaller than the 8th, so it should be more than adequate.
If it makes you feel better, buy an I4 and slap a V6 badge on the back
The I4 is direct injected for this gen while the V6 is port injected. So there's something to consider. The I4 makes 185hp while the V6 makes 278hp, so nearly 100hp difference there.
IMO the timing belt isn't that big of a deal. Many will argue with me about this but I do prefer it to the timing chain.
Does your son need the extra V6 power? I found that the port injected K24 was more than good enough for a regular daily driver to run errands, commute around town, etc, and that was on an 8th gen. The 9th gen is smaller than the 8th, so it should be more than adequate.
If it makes you feel better, buy an I4 and slap a V6 badge on the back
I would like to get a 2013+ but it just depends on how it fits into the budget. The 2011 just fell into our lap when I was looking for a manual car and I got a great price on it espcially now looking back with how much used cars have gone up. However, I definitely like things like the gauge cluster, dash layout, and push button start on the 9th Gen.I'm assuming you're looking for a 9th gen, hence why you posted in the 9th gen forum?
The I4 is direct injected for this gen while the V6 is port injected. So there's something to consider. The I4 makes 185hp while the V6 makes 278hp, so nearly 100hp difference there.
IMO the timing belt isn't that big of a deal. Many will argue with me about this but I do prefer it to the timing chain.
Does your son need the extra V6 power? I found that the port injected K24 was more than good enough for a regular daily driver to run errands, commute around town, etc, and that was on an 8th gen. The 9th gen is smaller than the 8th, so it should be more than adequate.
If it makes you feel better, buy an I4 and slap a V6 badge on the back
Is the K24 the I-4 or V6? I'm assuming by your statement that it is probably the I-4 but then you said that is direct injected vs port injected so not 100% sure.
With the I-4 is there any big thing like a timing belt to look out for on those? I know the I-4 is a timing chain that doesn't have to be changed around 100k but is there anything else like that to keep an eye out for?
I know the newer 4 cylinders are nothing like the old ones but my mom had a 2004 Accord 4 cylinder and you had to be mindful when you pulled out in traffic so you wouldn't get run over. The car lasted forever and got decent gas mileage but it could barely get out of it's own way. That's my concern with the I-4 vs V6.
Joined
·
1,980 Posts
- Reaction score
- 1,638
If it's just meant for basic transportation, get the 4 cylinder. Cheaper to purchase, cheaper to maintain, and much more efficient.
The V6 is nice- but not really necessary for basic driving.
I might be wrong, but the V6 in your other son's 2011 Accord Coupe is the same basic V6 that's in the 2013-2017 Accord Coupe. The power output is about the same- 271hp for the 2011 and 278hp for the 2013-2017. The 2013-17 4 cylinder is rated for 185hp, which is a lot less but still is perfectly fine in 99% of driving situations. Maybe if you live in the mountains or frequently need to haul heavy items the V6 could be justified as "needed", but generally the V6 is just nicer to have because it's got more power. Keep in mind that just twenty years ago Accords and Camrys came standard with 140ish HP... they were slow but got the job done.
The V6 is nice- but not really necessary for basic driving.
I might be wrong, but the V6 in your other son's 2011 Accord Coupe is the same basic V6 that's in the 2013-2017 Accord Coupe. The power output is about the same- 271hp for the 2011 and 278hp for the 2013-2017. The 2013-17 4 cylinder is rated for 185hp, which is a lot less but still is perfectly fine in 99% of driving situations. Maybe if you live in the mountains or frequently need to haul heavy items the V6 could be justified as "needed", but generally the V6 is just nicer to have because it's got more power. Keep in mind that just twenty years ago Accords and Camrys came standard with 140ish HP... they were slow but got the job done.
- Reaction score
- 6,884
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
K24 = K series (4 cylinder engine family) 2.4L
J35 = J series (6 cylinder engine family) 3.5L
The K24W1 is direct injected while the J35Y1 and J35Y2 are port injected
The K series in general has a known history of tending to burn oil. Not sure if that's as common on the 9th gens but it was an issue on a lot of 8th gens. The VTC actuator issue didn't really disappear on the I4s yet in this gen.
You're right, the timing chain doesn't need to be replaced at 105k like the timing belt does, but despite the common belief that they're lifetime and don't need to be changed, I'm not really a huge fan of that idea. The modern timing chain is subject to wear, and when it does wear (although it will take longer than 105k, it will still happen down the road), it ends up being more difficult to replace and it's generally harder to find out that it's wearing until it's worn quite a bit. A timing belt is going to be replaced every 105k no matter what, so even if it is wearing, as long as it limps its way to 105k, it won't matter. Just my two cents on that.
As for the pep during acceleration, that's something for which you'll really have to do a test drive of each and find out for yourself.
Thanks for everyone's thoughts. We are just now getting ready to start looking for a car so I won't rule out the I-4 but I will say the V6 with a manual is definitely fun and pretty damn quick for a 18 yr old. For gas mileage and maintenance it's probably better for the I-4 and this son doesn't really want a manual trans so it will be much easier to find something. I'm sure I'll be asking more questions as I research more.
Joined
·
3,682 Posts
- Reaction score
- 1,273
If Longevity and budget are priorities go with the 4 banger but I'm not a fan of the CVT, my 15 CRV needed a replacement at 62K. Timing belt job done correctly can be very expensive with the plugs, tensioner and valve adjustment I've seen 2.5k posted on other forums.
- Reaction score
- 3,072
Ask your son if he would be OK with a 4 cylinder vs. his brother having a V6.
- Reaction score
- 303
- Location
- Simi Valley, CA, USA
I've owned my 9th gen Accord Sport (4 cyl + CVT) for 10 months now. I've put 18k miles on it. Here are my takeaways:
-CVT is better than I expected, but sensitive to fluids that aren't OEM Honda HCF-2 (go eat $hit Amsoil). I turn about 2.2k RPM at 80mph, and average 30mpg commuting with steep grades. When I take backroads around the hills, I can get 33+mpg. On a 2k mile roadtrip 2 months ago I average 32mpg, my best tank was over 36mpg! Overall, I like the CVT. You see a lot of people on here bashing them, but remember Honda built average ~350k Accords per year for the 9th generation, and I only see a few of the stinkweeds/failures online & on FB groups. On that note, the 6AT that Honda paired with the Accord V6 isn't the greatest to begin with..... much like their other conventional automatics in earlier years.
-K24W 'Earth Dreams' engine makes plenty adequate power. It makes excellent low end torque & the CVT seems to do an alright job putting you in the power band when needed.
-Handling is spot-on for a front-drive sedan in my opinion. I put Michelin Pilot Sport all season 4's and the Acura TL 19mm rear bar and its night and day difference in handling.
-The fit and finish of the 9th gens isn't the best compared to older Accords (in my opinion). The panel gaps are below what I would expect from a Honda, but leagues better than the '13 Hyundai Sonata my dad owned. These cars were designed during the economic recession period, so not much else to explain there.
I test drove a '17 V6 EX-L sedan before I bought my car. I wasn't impressed with the power & responsiveness, after owning two G35's prior, the V6 was not what I expected & the car felt very nose heavy. It didn't feel like 100hp advantage. On top of that, I had a feeling that gas prices would rise (thanks democrats) and wanted more efficiency. If I were to do it again, I'd have spent more money up front & get a TLX with the K24W + 8-speed DCT. I drove one a month ago and loved it.
-CVT is better than I expected, but sensitive to fluids that aren't OEM Honda HCF-2 (go eat $hit Amsoil). I turn about 2.2k RPM at 80mph, and average 30mpg commuting with steep grades. When I take backroads around the hills, I can get 33+mpg. On a 2k mile roadtrip 2 months ago I average 32mpg, my best tank was over 36mpg! Overall, I like the CVT. You see a lot of people on here bashing them, but remember Honda built average ~350k Accords per year for the 9th generation, and I only see a few of the stinkweeds/failures online & on FB groups. On that note, the 6AT that Honda paired with the Accord V6 isn't the greatest to begin with..... much like their other conventional automatics in earlier years.
-K24W 'Earth Dreams' engine makes plenty adequate power. It makes excellent low end torque & the CVT seems to do an alright job putting you in the power band when needed.
-Handling is spot-on for a front-drive sedan in my opinion. I put Michelin Pilot Sport all season 4's and the Acura TL 19mm rear bar and its night and day difference in handling.
-The fit and finish of the 9th gens isn't the best compared to older Accords (in my opinion). The panel gaps are below what I would expect from a Honda, but leagues better than the '13 Hyundai Sonata my dad owned. These cars were designed during the economic recession period, so not much else to explain there.
I test drove a '17 V6 EX-L sedan before I bought my car. I wasn't impressed with the power & responsiveness, after owning two G35's prior, the V6 was not what I expected & the car felt very nose heavy. It didn't feel like 100hp advantage. On top of that, I had a feeling that gas prices would rise (thanks democrats) and wanted more efficiency. If I were to do it again, I'd have spent more money up front & get a TLX with the K24W + 8-speed DCT. I drove one a month ago and loved it.
The 4 cyl is a great transportation appliance, nothing more. Even with good tires, the engine and suspension are lacking. It does get great mileage, easy to maintain and probably much cheaper to insure than the 6.
I had a g37, had an accord 4 cyl ex-l fall into my lap. One of the cars had to go, keeping the accord was more practical. Few months ago got rid of it for a 4 cyl stinger (the 300hp model). No regrets, though I do miss the G. It was a 4dr with a 6mt.
I had a g37, had an accord 4 cyl ex-l fall into my lap. One of the cars had to go, keeping the accord was more practical. Few months ago got rid of it for a 4 cyl stinger (the 300hp model). No regrets, though I do miss the G. It was a 4dr with a 6mt.
2017 Honda Accord, Coupe, Touring (V6, 6AT), 2017 Honda Accord Sedan, EXL V6 w/ Navi, Sensing
Joined
·
383 Posts
- Reaction score
- 176
- Location
- Oregon
Myself, after putting up with sub 100 Hp engines for the first 15 years of my driving experience, I no longer elect to own 4 cylinder cars, although they’ve come a long ways since the ‘70’s and 80’s cars/pickups I learned on. I’ve had a handful of V6 accords, 7th through 9th Gen, none of those with manual tranny, but I’d like one. So I’m definitely in the V6 camp on this one. Since the budget is in the 9th Gen 100k mile range, I suggest only looking at ones that have had the timing belt done, so 110-120k miles with documentation.
I think the hard part will be finding a 9th Gen V6 with a manual tranny. I think that configuration is limited to the EX and EXL (maybe just EXL) coupes and they sell very quickly, especially in the current used car market, which has escalated more than the S&P 500 has in the same timeframe.
Good luck on your quest. Both of my daughters learned on V6’s and did just fine.
I think the hard part will be finding a 9th Gen V6 with a manual tranny. I think that configuration is limited to the EX and EXL (maybe just EXL) coupes and they sell very quickly, especially in the current used car market, which has escalated more than the S&P 500 has in the same timeframe.
Good luck on your quest. Both of my daughters learned on V6’s and did just fine.
Joined
·
78 Posts
- Reaction score
- 64
Do you trust him with nearly 300hp vs nearly 200hp?
Keep in mind since he doesn't want a manual (which Honda does excellent at), the 4 cylinder will come with a CVT transmission while the 6 cylinder will come with a real 6 speed automatic transmission. While automatic transmission Hondas don't generally get the best rap, CVTs get an even worse one. Also, the v6 will come with VCM (shuts down 3 of the cylinders on low effort driving). I would personally delete that feature (via tuning software) as I've never been a fan. Just things to consider. If I were you though, I'd probably go with with v6 for the transmission and just the fact that I have more experience with Honda v6s (nothing against the 4 cylinders by any means). J series engines go forever with proper maintenance.
Yes, the manual (for the US at least) only came I'm the EX-L trim. And yes, they are very hard to secure.
- Reaction score
- 6,884
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
I agree. The J series is a tried-and-true V6 with minimal issues outside of VCM unlike the relatively new direct injected K series that we really don't know all that much about in comparison. The newer Honda ATs aren't that bad either, just that early to mid 2000s period that was a real nightmare for them.
Joined
·
78 Posts
- Reaction score
- 64
Agree fully. With the j series design being perfected since its release in (1996 I believe it was in the Acura CL) it really doesn't get any better after over 2 decades of r&d. They may not be the most powerful or most sophisticated v6s out there, but its where I choose to spend my money.
Also, for the 4 cylinder, I wish honda did what toyota does with their DI systems where it's still a mix of port AND direct injection, instead of 100% DI all the time. That way you get the best of both worlds. Port spray onto the intake valves at low speeds to keep them clean & DI when you need the power. Don't get me wrong, it's still a honda, I'm sure there's nothing inherently wrong with the DI k24s, but we might not see that 600k+ reliability out of them that we see with the older k series engines. Only time will tell.
- Reaction score
- 6,884
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
I'm just hoping we don't see the big oil dilution issues like some of Honda's other DI engines.
Joined
·
78 Posts
- Reaction score
- 64
Yes! I totally forgot about that. The GDI oil dilution is so bad with the turbo engines.. thats all bad. Not only is your engine getting starved (as an Ill effect of being overfilled) but the gas probably destroys the lubricating properties of the oil itself. I'd be changing my oil every 3k if I was a new GDI turbo honda owner
Again, thanks for all the replies. Keep them coming if you have any more thoughts. I'm still back and forth with getting the I4 or not with all of these comments but this information is exactly what I'm looking for....the pros/cons between them. There are actually a couple 9th Gen Accord Coupe V6 around me in the upper end of our budget (~$18k) within 30 min of me but we are just not ready to pull the trigger right now. I need to wait at least 4 months so that I don't have a car sitting in our driveway for 6+ months that isn't being driven. Those asking if I trust my teenager with a V6 over I4....absolutely. My oldest got his V6 manual at 18 yrs old and so far no tickets or wrecks and he is about to turn 21. My middle son is even way more cautious at driving so I'm not too worried about him either. Now, my youngest son....that is a different story, I expect he might make up the difference of the other two.
Re Driving a manual. Sure it's more work, but IMO everyone should know how to drive one. What happens if he ever travels to europe. It's a useful skill that [usually] makes one a better driver because they pay more attention given more focus is required to drive. Can't text and shift gears at the same time [easily].
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
