2003 Accord 6-speed -vs- CL-S
01-11-2003, 11:29 PM
#1
Cruisin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 Accord 6-speed -vs- CL-S
Just curious to hear people's feedback on a 2003 Accord 6-Speed -vs- both a 6-speed CL-S and an auto CL-S. My friend is getting a 2003 Accord 6-Speed and I want to know beforehand what that car is capabable of doing before running against a CL-S. Also, he is an excellent driver -- knows how to speedshift very well. He also showed me a dyno where the 03 Accord gets 10 more HP (250 HP) by putting in 93 octane. YIKES!!!
01-12-2003, 04:39 AM
#5
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: kamloops, british columbia ,Canada
Age: 62
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Dantethelnferno
The 2003 Accord 6-speed basically sounds like a poor man's CL-S
The 2003 Accord 6-speed basically sounds like a poor man's CL-S
price is cheaper than the Cl, but the Cl looks better and has more of a luxury feel inside.
i have test drove one and would pass on buying one i felt the same as you '''a poor man's CL-S'''
for those that drive honda and would never go up to the acura line-up this might be a great car for them and honda. a would even say it was a poor replacement for the prelude.
01-12-2003, 02:58 PM
#6
Cruisin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by goldcltype-s
there has been a lot of talk that acura might drop the cl and push the tl and tsx models we might find in 2004 it will be the Cl's replacement?
price is cheaper than the Cl, but the Cl looks better and has more of a luxury feel inside.
i have test drove one and would pass on buying one i felt the same as you '''a poor man's CL-S'''
for those that drive honda and would never go up to the acura line-up this might be a great car for them and honda. a would even say it was a poor replacement for the prelude.
there has been a lot of talk that acura might drop the cl and push the tl and tsx models we might find in 2004 it will be the Cl's replacement?
price is cheaper than the Cl, but the Cl looks better and has more of a luxury feel inside.
i have test drove one and would pass on buying one i felt the same as you '''a poor man's CL-S'''
for those that drive honda and would never go up to the acura line-up this might be a great car for them and honda. a would even say it was a poor replacement for the prelude.
Still looking for feedback for the 2003 Accord 6-Speed -VS- the CL-S....
01-12-2003, 03:48 PM
#7
cmng 2 a lawschool near u
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Kansas City
Age: 39
Posts: 1,823
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Dantethelnferno
I wouldn't necessarily agree that it is a poor replacement for the Prelude -- actually is was never a replacement to the Prelude. The Accord has been around for years. If anything, the S2000 would be the closest thing to a replacement for the prelude, but the new accords OWN any year prelude.
Still looking for feedback for the 2003 Accord 6-Speed -VS- the CL-S....
I wouldn't necessarily agree that it is a poor replacement for the Prelude -- actually is was never a replacement to the Prelude. The Accord has been around for years. If anything, the S2000 would be the closest thing to a replacement for the prelude, but the new accords OWN any year prelude.
Still looking for feedback for the 2003 Accord 6-Speed -VS- the CL-S....
Trending Topics
01-12-2003, 04:01 PM
#8
Cruisin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by KC CL 1785
I don't know if I would say that the new 6spd accord would own ANY prelude, any STOCK prelude yes. But my bros prelude runs high 13's with no really major mods.
I don't know if I would say that the new 6spd accord would own ANY prelude, any STOCK prelude yes. But my bros prelude runs high 13's with no really major mods.
01-15-2003, 03:38 AM
#10
go like hell
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Anna,OH(home of the honda/acura motors)
Age: 42
Posts: 5,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I haven't drove a new Accord yet (but I rode in a V-6 Automatic) the 6 speed V-6 hit the marketing in about 2 months(estimateing). But Car and Driver( i think it was that magazine) ran the V-6 6-Speed in a 1/4 and it ran about the same time as a CL-S automatic. so I think it would be a good race.
as far as a Prelude even if you had a H22A motor with intake,exhast,headers i don't think you could run with a stock new 6-speed V-6 Accord
as far as a Prelude even if you had a H22A motor with intake,exhast,headers i don't think you could run with a stock new 6-speed V-6 Accord
01-24-2003, 03:14 AM
#11
Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bay Area , CA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Dantethelnferno
If anything, the S2000 would be the closest thing to a replacement for the prelude, but the new accords OWN any stock prelude.
If anything, the S2000 would be the closest thing to a replacement for the prelude, but the new accords OWN any stock prelude.
01-26-2003, 10:33 AM
#13
Cruisin'
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SC
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to hear everyone's thoughts on this topic as well. Anybody know the 6 sp CL-S's 0-60 time? I have a 6 sp '03 Accord on order (black, no nav), due in Feb?, March? Who knows. Just test drove an automatic CL-S and really liked it: The dealer did not have a manual for me to drive, but is getting a customer to let me drive his this week. Articles on the Accord agree it is quick straight line (0-60 6.2 Motor Trend?), but seem to dismiss its handling. CL-S, on the other hand, was one point behind the 330Ci in Car & Driver comparo, and they eat, sleep and breathe BMW.
Seems like the CL-S manual is flat out the way go? Especially because the Accord is at MSRP and the CL-S manual is at invoice.
Just slightly questioning "which is better", as many people make a stink over the Accord being 7th gen and the CL-s being based on the older platform.
For what it is worth, I drove a manual G 35 coupe right after the CL-S. FUN to drive, loved the transmission, But .. . . . CL-S felt much quicker
! G 35 had more road noise (bad), more aggressive engine sounds (cool). Also drove a 2001 330ci, and found, to my surprise, that my preference was the CL-S (all the magazines had apparently convinced me that the 330 ruled).
For reference, back before having a wife and kids, I had a '95 M3 and then a '98 M3. Torque, acceleration, handling was awesome, so I started out being bimmer-biased. Gotta tell ya, I LIKE the CL-S!
Seems like the CL-S manual is flat out the way go? Especially because the Accord is at MSRP and the CL-S manual is at invoice.
Just slightly questioning "which is better", as many people make a stink over the Accord being 7th gen and the CL-s being based on the older platform.
For what it is worth, I drove a manual G 35 coupe right after the CL-S. FUN to drive, loved the transmission, But .. . . . CL-S felt much quicker
! G 35 had more road noise (bad), more aggressive engine sounds (cool). Also drove a 2001 330ci, and found, to my surprise, that my preference was the CL-S (all the magazines had apparently convinced me that the 330 ruled).For reference, back before having a wife and kids, I had a '95 M3 and then a '98 M3. Torque, acceleration, handling was awesome, so I started out being bimmer-biased. Gotta tell ya, I LIKE the CL-S!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rp_guy
Member Cars for Sale
9
07-16-2017 07:33 AM
adreano17
3G TL Tires, Wheels & Suspension
2
09-29-2015 08:48 AM
