aaronng

Door rattles ftw. Subs need enclosures. And therefore should stay in the boot.

aaronng

Why skimp on $4-5 with a $28,000 car?

Populuxe

I kind of agree. I'm in the boat that if you buy a car that takes premium fuel, you should be factoring in the cost of that fuel at purchase time. If you had the money to buy the car that takes 91/93 octane, you should have the money to fill it with said fuel.

davidspalding

And I double-checked at home (can't read the online manuals from a Linux system at work), and I was wrong, wrong, wrong. The manual discusses using CD-R and CD-RW discs, and specifying that they must be recorded as audio discs, with the session "closed" to be playable.

I must've confused this with some other literature I've been reading this summer (so many choices, and the TSX won out). Just wanted to correct myself so no one was misled.

STL

There is a V6 option right now...the TL. Seriously I don't understand why people want to see a V6 in the TSX, because all that'll do is make the car handle much like the TL. It reminds me of the ignorant people who kept clamoring for a V6 in the S2000 not realizing it would totally upset the balance of the car. If you prefer the TSX over the TL because of the way it drives, then you have to understand slapping a V6 in it would drastically change that (and I know it's a moot point in the current TSX because a V6 won't fit). I myself don't think we'll see V6 in the next gen TSX -- instead I think base version will be FWD with 225hp naturally aspirated I4 and the Type-S version will be AWD (or have the option for it) along with a 250hp turbo I4.

davidspalding

US$4-$5 every 10 days over a year ... you do the math. Besides, I'm not skimping, I buy at club stores that offer 89 and 93 ... so I'm putting 91 in it. So there. Nyaah.

Oh, and mine was US$24,000. Double-nyaah.

Hey, I did. It's one of the things that Consumer Reports brings up on comparisons and reviews. But a lower octane fuel will work in such an engine, just get not as quite good performance (wider range of conflagration temperatures/pressures, IIRC), but sufficient for commute driving. The price 'diff from 89 to 93 isn't more than $0.50 lately, but adds up so an extra minute putting 91 in there while saving $0.10 or so at the discount store is NBFD.

It's the same as sport-shifting versus using full AT and cruise control. During the week, I'm getting 29 mpg, but on the fun drives, it's a bit less because ... I'm having fun. AND I do that with the higher fuel in its belly.

Mokos23

wow this is a rare moment

Mokos23

the 5th gen Accord 94-97 had a V6 option and it was a little smaller than the TSX. did anyone complain about the handling of that Accord? not really, it was a welcome addition.

dom

But, if they went RWD (cold day in hell) that changes everything....

Newplay1

Yeah its true the 08 accords are nice but they don't have Hondata boooyaaah!!! well not yet

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Except that the Accord always has and always will have a much more pedestrian audience. The TSX was geared towards those who see driving as being more than just a daily chore and therefore handling characteristics become extremely important.

aaronng

That's $5 x 36.5 = $182.50 per year. WOW! What a saving.
Also, why are you mixing 89 and 93? Is it cheaper than just using 91 all the time?

The reason why the TSX can work with 89 octane is because it has a knock detector built into the engine block. So when pinging is detected, the engine retards valve timing. So while your car will run, it will ping before the ECU takes action, thus giving you some nicely dinged pistons down the road. Your car will still run though.

BTW, low RPM, high load can also cause pinging. It is not isolated to high RPM operation.

davidspalding

I think the answer is in my previous posts.

I was initially responding to something along the lines of "Accords are better since they run on 87 (or was it 89) octane, and TSX' require 91 or 93 and won't run on the lower octane fuel", based on a Consumer Reports article I read before I bought this vehicle. You seem to corroborating this. Stick a fork in this snarky side argument, i think it's done.

financeman1

How did this get turned into the octane arguement again. Everyone should use whatever gas they want ( but my baby only drinks shell vpower 93 octane). I agree with the above poster STL. I think the tsx will have a 220 hp 180 ftlb motor w/ a-vtec. Oh I would love that car! The mid model refresh will add Type S with AWD/ turbo setup of RDX. The turbo/ awd setup maybe put in the new TSX from the start, but with Acuras recent conservitism I doubt it. I know you guys like the idea of awd but it may make the tsx a little portly and kill MPG- but performance guys dont care about that. I think the TL will have AWD standard because a motor with over 300 hp will require it to handle well. I guess I changed the conversation from the accords motor to future acuras, but thats in the back of all of our minds anyway.

STL

Well back then, the 4 cylinder in the Accord wasn't making 200+HP (like the one in the TSX) so they more easily overlooked the negatives that the V6 brought with it. Also take into account that V6 was pretty small at only 2.7L -- I'm sure people clamoring for a V6 in the TSX don't want one that small.

jdmturbosol

when a knock sensor sees detonation the ecu retards ignition timing
the only time valve timing is changed is when vtec is activated.

any engine makes more power on lower octane until detonation occurs

BonzoAPD

Maybe he got the car before fuel jumped my $1.50 a gallon. Now that makes a big difference. 30 cents more for 93 isn't a problem but it can be when you factor in the point that gas jumped atleast $1.50 and a one point $1.75 a gallon. I know I thought a time or two of using a lower octain just because when you are talking about such a price jump, that 30-40cents less per gallon when you fill up 1 1/2 times atleast a week does add up. But I never stopped using 93. (FYI in NY you cannot find 91 in most places, it is easier to find diesel yet NY won't allow you to register a brand new diesel, go figure).

Mokos23

btw i put 89 in the TSX for the first time and i can tell the difference in acceleration and i got approx 2 mpg less when i put in 89 vs 93 on the highway.

davidspalding

Just curious. How'd you measure, using the MID readout (avg mpg over the tank of gas), or average based on ODO reading from fill-up to fill-up, divided by fuel added?

gftgrill

I wonder how this new engine will feel with the 5speed manual.

I'm sure it won't feel as sporty as the 6-speed in the tsx. maybe it won't have as many shifting problems because the gears are spaced correctly. does the 2nd stage vtec still kick in at 6k rpms? or did they lower it so it can be used?

on another note, the accord is getting more power, but dropping from 34mpg to 31mpg. Is there a new rating or is this a direct cause of the more powerful engine?

Klutch Dollaz

this is the best prediction on engine type going to be used in 2009

some type of scaled down version of rdx motor I doubt they will built
an all new engine/trans combo for rdx

Plus a turbo four in the rdx that would be sweet also SH-AWD so we get honda reliability with 4wd excellent

aaronng

If you retard ignition timing when pinging is detected, you are delaying the timing of the spark. Detonation occurs BEFORE the spark is meant to ignite, before TDC. So what does delaying ignition timing do for detonation?

SoCaliTrojan

When the spark explodes the mixture, heat and pressure is generated. Knocking happens when pressure and temperature exceed a certain level, which causes spontaneous combustion. By retarding the ignition timing so that the piston is already going down when the spark is generated, the piston is already working to reduce the pressure when the spark occurs. Since the pressure will no longer exceed the threshhold necessary for spontaneous combustion, knocking won't occur.

Thus, there will be knocking (due to detonation), the ecu will retard the timing, and then the knocking will stop because the mixture won't pre-detonate anymore.

Did I get the answer right? Can I have a cookie? =)

And I always thought the valve timing was determined by the lobes on the camshaft? I know when VTEC engages, it engages a different camshaft that has a different profile of lobes. Is the k-series engine somehow different from the other engines in that the ecu can adjust valve timing regardless of what the camshaft lobes are saying?

aaronng

LOL, my bad. I meant pre-ignition. Anyway, I'm wrong.

miken5678

actually the intake cam shaft is capable of advance from 25-40+ degress of timing..

actually an engine will make more power on a higher octane relative to lower octane because of the detonation factor with consideration to compression ratios. If you want to make more power you have to either increase displacement by way of engine size(strokexbore) or fi or compression or all of the above..

miken5678

vtec lift and duration is fixed as well as timing..

ivtec is the same regarding lift and duration having a high and low profile lobe set.. but only the intake cam is capable of advancing timing.. very helpfull when you are taking into accout the scavenging affect of the exhaust valves

SoCaliTrojan

ahh yes, ivtec. I'm still used to the old vtec (my TSX is the 3rd vtec-equipped car we've got, but the other two are like 5 and 12 years old). I had forgotten what the newer vtec's can do

davidspalding

All this is going so far over my head that the thread ought'a have a stewardess on board.

So I guess the bottom line is you can put a lower octane fuel in the TSX engine, it won't ping or knock, but you also won't enjoy optimum performance (and perhaps long-term reliability) out of it...?

Worth revisiting that the OP talked about power and such, but didn't mention EPA mileage. I declined to get an Accord V6 EX partly because the mileage was pretty dismal. I get much better mileage with my TSX than what Consumer Reports published for their Accord road tests. So if mileage is hampered when a lower octane fuel is used in the TSX, you're probably not getting any savings. That is, save $5 at the pump by using 87 octane fuel, but get 24 mpg versus 27 mpg, hence visit the pump roughly 53 miles sooner, and have to buy $6.20 more in gas. This is entirely guesswork, we don't know the actual mileage decrease with the lower octane. If anyone wants to post some practical test results....

BluRay

I can't disagree with any of the logic above, BUT...
The dealer filled my new '08 TSX with 87 Octane before I took delivery.
Guess what ? It runs just fine thank-you. I got 32.6 on that first tank and no better or worse when I put 93 Octane in for the second tank.

For comparisson, I consider myself a "semi-reformed" lead foot with a 75 mile roundtrip commute of abuot 80% Hwy / 20% City.

In the end - I think the result is comlpetely parallel to the many posts about costs for 91-93 Octane - Using lower octance rated gas doesn't change the car's MPG or performance at any noticeable level, is demonstrated to be just as true as the argument that the additional few cents per gallon more for 91 OCtane doesn't increase the gas bill significantly.....

At the end of the day, To each their own.

miken5678

what we are able to hear ping wise and what the knock sensor picks up on are vastly different. you may get 32.6 but at the expense of to much timing and probably not enough in some cases to totally eliminate knock..

personally im awaiting the new advanced vtec... supposedly it comes out in 09-10 should be interesting to see the benefits.

JDMPLUS

so does that mean next gen of V4 accord is going to beat the current tsx in 0-60 and quarter mile.

STL

I don't think so. With the Accord being larger and heavier, it still has more pounds per HP as well as more weight per lb.-ft. of torque -- so it should be slower.

gftgrill

I already asked this question, but there are several things to take into consideration.

when will stg 2 vtec kick in 6k rpms like our cars do? what will the gearing be?

5spd manual vs 6spd manual should make it slower due to the longer gear ratios. but should help improve overall fuel economy.