Honda Car Forum


 

Go Back   Honda Car Forum - Accord Parts Civic Tuning Acura Racing > Honda Acura > Honda 2

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 30 Jan 2014, 06:35 pm
Bob
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

Hello,

Two questions, please:

a. anyone have any idea what percentage of e.g., the 2013 Accords sold
are 6 cyl. ?

b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl will
last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?

Thanks,
Bob

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2014, 06:27 am
Elmo P. Shagnasty
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

In article <lcenjg$goi$1@dont-email.me>, Bob <rgsros@notme.invalid>
wrote:

> b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl will
> last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?


There is every reason to believe that a Honda 6 cylinder car will cause
you grief in your wallet. They have, shall we say, a history that is
not good.

Honda's sweet spot has always been 4 cylinder, manual transmission cars.
The further you move away from that, the further you move out of the
area in which Honda gained their reputation originally.

Additionally, the 6 weighs more and costs more to maintain than the 4.
What do you do that you need the 6? Frankly, anyone buying a Honda
really needs only the 4. If you're doing something in which you think
you need the 6, then either you're making that choice based on mistaken
assumptions or else you need the 6 without question and you're buying
the wrong vehicle that's wrapped around it.

A 6 cylinder Honda is unnecessary. It serves only to satisfy the market
that thinks "more is better", the market that doesn't understand
evaluating the entire system as such.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2014, 08:49 am
Unquestionably Confused
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

On 1/31/2014 5:27 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <lcenjg$goi$1@dont-email.me>, Bob <rgsros@notme.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl
>> will last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?


[snip]
>
> Additionally, the 6 weighs more and costs more to maintain than the
> 4. What do you do that you need the 6? Frankly, anyone buying a
> Honda really needs only the 4. If you're doing something in which
> you think you need the 6, then either you're making that choice based
> on mistaken assumptions or else you need the 6 without question and
> you're buying the wrong vehicle that's wrapped around it.
>
> A 6 cylinder Honda is unnecessary. It serves only to satisfy the
> market that thinks "more is better", the market that doesn't
> understand evaluating the entire system as such.


Gotta side with Elmo here. I fell into a deal on my first Accord, a
2006 with EX-L with <2k miles on it. I had previously spoken with a
friend who had owned several, currently owned a 2005 with the 4 cyl. He
told me that a 4 was all I'd ever need. It could scoot with the best of
them and gave great mileage. Well, due to the deal, I went with the 6cyl.

I was happy with the car overall but my highway mileage with the 6 was
around 27 - 28 at best (and I'm measuring basically non-stop, get it up
to 70 or better and set the cruise and drive for 2 or 3 hours on the
interstates) vs. 29 mpg for the same type trip in my Corvette.

Snow time? Sheesh, so much torque off the line with that 6cyl it was a
bitch in the snow and ice with the stock tires. Enough power there to
spin the tires on DRY pavement if I wasn't careful or had a lead foot.

Swapped out and put some well rated Continentals and that problem was
somewhat alleviated.

Last year, with just over 100k on the odometer and facing timing belt
and water pump swap out, I bought (another great deal) a slightly used
2013 CR-V EX-L NAV. 4 cyl and AWD and I love it. My friend (and Elmo)
are correct, if you need more than the 4cyl, you shouldn't be in a
Honda. The car can get out of its own way with the best of them and
never once have I encountered (in about 6,000 miles of driving) a
situation where I felt that I needed or even wanted the 6cyl. Gas
mileage is a quite respectable, 25 or so around town and suburban
driving. Highway driving as above? No problem getting 32-33 mpg.

Friend of mine recently rode in the car with me on the interstate and
merging, etc. he commented that he didn't think the CR-V had a 6. He
was surprised to learn that he was correct, he was riding in a 4 cyl.



Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2014, 10:13 am
Earl Grey
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

On 1/31/14, 6:27 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <lcenjg$goi$1@dont-email.me>, Bob <rgsros@notme.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl will
>> last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?

>
> There is every reason to believe that a Honda 6 cylinder car will cause
> you grief in your wallet. They have, shall we say, a history that is
> not good.
>
> Honda's sweet spot has always been 4 cylinder, manual transmission cars.
> The further you move away from that, the further you move out of the
> area in which Honda gained their reputation originally.
>
> Additionally, the 6 weighs more and costs more to maintain than the 4.
> What do you do that you need the 6? Frankly, anyone buying a Honda
> really needs only the 4. If you're doing something in which you think
> you need the 6, then either you're making that choice based on mistaken
> assumptions or else you need the 6 without question and you're buying
> the wrong vehicle that's wrapped around it.
>
> A 6 cylinder Honda is unnecessary. It serves only to satisfy the market
> that thinks "more is better", the market that doesn't understand
> evaluating the entire system as such.
>


I find the 4 cyls a bit laggy and underpowered. My 6 cyl EX-L zooms and
accelerates rapidly when needed on the interstate-- and usually delivers
30-31 mpg on road trips
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2014, 12:18 pm
Flatlander
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:35:08 -0500, Bob <rgsros@notme.invalid> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>Two questions, please:
>
>a. anyone have any idea what percentage of e.g., the 2013 Accords sold
>are 6 cyl. ?
>
>b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl will
>last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?
>
>Thanks,
>Bob


From my experience with a 2012 EX-L, you only need the 6 if you're
after a little performance and the options you can't get with the 4.
It comes at a steep price. The 4 is a better balanced car
handling-wise. Mileage is surprisingly about a wash. Driving about
80 mph on a lot of long road trips, the 4 is turning in 32 mpg. Better
than the wife's '09 Civic does. I think the 6 might do just as well.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2014, 02:17 pm
Howard Lester
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

When I bought my 2004 EX 4-cylinder, I asked my salesman if there was any
good reason to buy a 6-cylinder. He said "no." When I test drove it, I
goosed it to pass a truck while getting onto an interstate ramp, and was
really surprised at how much acceleration it had.

I'm similarly pleased with my 2013 version.

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01 Feb 2014, 08:19 am
Stewart
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?


"Bob" <rgsros@notme.invalid> wrote in message
news:lcenjg$goi$1@dont-email.me...
> Hello,
>
> Two questions, please:
>
> a. anyone have any idea what percentage of e.g., the 2013 Accords
> sold are 6 cyl. ?
>
> b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl
> will last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?
>
> Thanks,
> Bob
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com


I've had my '04 6 cyl Accord for about 10 years....still requires no
additional oil between changes and gets the same gas milage it did 9
years ago.
Nothing but the regular maintenance on the car from the manual and the
usual tires/brakes stuff.


>



Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01 Feb 2014, 08:23 am
Stewart
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?


"Howard Lester" <howardxtlester@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:lcgssf$31u$1@dont-email.me...
> When I bought my 2004 EX 4-cylinder, I asked my salesman if there
> was any good reason to buy a 6-cylinder. He said "no." When I test
> drove it, I goosed it to pass a truck while getting onto an
> interstate ramp, and was really surprised at how much acceleration
> it had.
>
> I'm similarly pleased with my 2013 version.


At the time I got my '04 6 cyl, I was making regular trips from the SF
Bay area to Tahoe/Reno/Carson City with 4 people in the car plus bags.
It took the mountains like a champ.....


Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01 Feb 2014, 02:38 pm
JRStern
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

On Sat, 1 Feb 2014 08:23:00 -0500, "Stewart" <gortamus@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Howard Lester" <howardxtlester@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:lcgssf$31u$1@dont-email.me...
>> When I bought my 2004 EX 4-cylinder, I asked my salesman if there
>> was any good reason to buy a 6-cylinder. He said "no." When I test
>> drove it, I goosed it to pass a truck while getting onto an
>> interstate ramp, and was really surprised at how much acceleration
>> it had.
>>
>> I'm similarly pleased with my 2013 version.

>
>At the time I got my '04 6 cyl, I was making regular trips from the SF
>Bay area to Tahoe/Reno/Carson City with 4 people in the car plus bags.
>It took the mountains like a champ.....


Driving a full load up hill at altitude just about covers it all!

Unless you could get a turbocharged/supercharged option.

J.


>


Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01 Feb 2014, 02:41 pm
JRStern
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Accord Questions Re 4 vs 6 ?

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:35:08 -0500, Bob <rgsros@notme.invalid> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>Two questions, please:
>
>a. anyone have any idea what percentage of e.g., the 2013 Accords sold
>are 6 cyl. ?


I'm going go guess it's a small number, under 20%.

>b. is there any good reason to believe that a Accord with a 6 cyl will
>last longer, and/or be more reliable than a car with the 4 ?


No.

Take care of the four, and it will take care of you. No way the six
can do any better! Unless maybe you're lead foot Charlie and the six
might be put to somewhat less of an overload.

J.

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Questions about new Accord rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com Honda 2 83 29 Oct 2008 03:12 pm
Questions about new Accord rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com Honda 3 78 29 Oct 2008 03:12 pm
05-Accord - Questions skipper Honda 3 2 29 May 2005 11:58 am
2 questions about 2 Accord's AJ Honda 3 2 19 Jun 2004 12:46 am
03 Accord questions realguy@fakeaddress.com Honda 2 2 04 Mar 2004 09:30 pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 pm.


Attribution:
Honda News | Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers




Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.
HondaCarForum.com is not affiliated with Honda Motor Company in any way. Honda Motor Company does not sponsor, support, or endorse HondaCarForum.com in any way. Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.