miketala

Did i read this right that the accord V6 is getting an update to improve mpg?

http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=906887

MurkyRiversTL

If that is the change made for the 2011 accord (3 years after the release of the 8th gen) then you could safely assume that some of that will carry over to the TL in 2012 (3 years after the release of the 4th gen) especially the cylinder deactivation. I was expecting that to come in the 2009 especially with the new required minimum fuel ratings that will take place in (I believe) 2013-15.

Audi has made the change with their 2011 A5 making an 8 speed automatic to increase fuel efficiency ( as was told to me by the sales manager who actually forwarded me the email of all the changes of the 2011 A5 to include no chrome trim on the sportline packages for a more sporty less luxury look)

Also, considering the accord received a mid model grill change, it would be a safe bet that the TL will also receive the same. Although I have a strange feeling that it will not be a simple bolt on change, I'm assuming the hood and bumper will change much like the 2nd gen TL received during its mid model change.

These are assumptions and can be argued against especially with the sublte mid model change made with the 3rd gen TL. Either way, we will see next year, and yes I can see the 6 speed auto tranny making it in 2012 not 2011 like most are hoping.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

Not to start a "2011" or "2012" TL thread for the 50th time, but I think the 2012 will probably bring what Murkey said would be a more significantly front end like the 2G. The center stack will probably be mildly changed out. Other than that and maybe some mild trim changes, that probably will wrap up the interior. The contents of the rear lights may be re-arranged. The current engines will probably remain unchanged, but many are thinking a new hybrid model would show its face. Round it out with the 6-speed automatic and you're probably set. Oh, and the Advance package or some of its features will possibly trickle down.

MurkyRiversTL

Yes let's not make another 6 page 2011 tl thread that doesn't talk about the 2011 TL lol.

jasonwdp10

I would not buy an acura with VCM, so if honda does that, they lose a buyer instantly (and i'm sure many others who dislike VCM)

one of the reasons i bought the TL over the Accord V6 was the brute force of the non-VCM V6 vs the VCM V6. The VCM sucks up the power. Search TOV for the dyno comparison between the TSX V6 and the Accord V6.

charco

+1

everyone includes honda knows the VCM save gas in the expense of reduced torque....... seriously....... the easiest way to save gas on hwy is just to throw in an 8-speed tranny.. (ya....and i know someone going to flame about this....but theory is theory.....and why would everyone claim that if that doesn't work...)

MurkyRiversTL

For reference to my earlier comment

jasonwdp10

sad to see the 3.2 A5 go, it's a pretty nice engine (tons of low end torque compared to the TL). I wonder how the 2.0 drives

compewterbleu

Sounds like the usual progression of engineering design improvement to a vehicle.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

It seems to me that Hondas don't much benefit from cylinder deactivation while other brands' engines so.

I find that odd.

MurkyRiversTL

It drives really nice actually. i test drove one while looking for a new vehicle. it was very peppy and the salesman pushed me to drive it hard and had me go on a very windy road to test the awd and paddle shifters. he said if I was good I could go through the whole course without touching the brake and using the paddles for engine braking. I did and it was a blast, although I feel very sorry for the person that buys that particular a5 lool.

Oswald Vater

These seem to be accurate assumptions. I'm sure the mpg change in the 2011 Accord is due to the 6-speed. The TL is a year behind so 2012 is a safe bet for the tranny. My salesman told me yesterday that the grill will be revised as well but wouldn't give me any details.

SatinSilverAV6

iTrader: (2)

Im sad to say that the 2011 Accords do not come with a 6AT. Honda revised the gear ratios of the 5AT for the bump in gas mileage. Expect the 6AT for the 9th gen 2013 Accord. Truly a bummer. Honda should have used the 6AT for the Accord in 2011 and dropped VCM IMO.

MurkyRiversTL

I can actually see the TL not getting the VCM if it does indeed hinder performance (ie. Reduce torque) the TL needs to keep the sporty appeal and also perform with or above the competitor vehicles in its class.

Acura may be using the 6 speed to increase gas mileage as opposed to using VCM to achieve the same goal. The accord isn't performance oriented and VCM would suit nicely and would probably be more cost efficient.

jasonwdp10

from TOV

"For those who are interested in seeing how the horsepower of the TSX compares against the Accord V6 6MT and 5AT, here's the plot. As you can see, the TSX V6 falls almost exactly in between the two Accords up until the final 1500 rpms of the rev range, where the power of the VCM-equipped Accord V6 sedan fades off."

article
http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=855587
pic
http://www.vtec.net/articles/article-image?image=855587/tsx_vs_accord_v6.gif


red = accord coupe 6mt (non-vcm manual)
blue = tsx v6 (non-vcm, auto)
green = accord sedan v6 (with vcm auto)

if the link or pic doesn't work, plz copy the link into your browser thx

Oswald Vater

That is indeed a surprise and I think an error on Honda's part as all the competition is moving in this direction. In regards to the VCM, we have it on our 09 Odyssey and love it but I've not driven an Accord to compare it with. I think that to have BOTH VCM and a 6-speed would give the Accord a class mpg advantage when comparing 6 cylinder engines.

SatinSilverAV6

iTrader: (2)

True that both VCM and a 6AT would equal class leading gas mileage. For me VCM isn't worth the sacrifice in performance it gives up to the non-VCM J35 in the TSX V6. The TSX V6 puts out 280 crank HP. The Accord V6 VCM puts out 271hp. Since there is only a 9HP difference in crank HP and it should reflect that on a dyno and the difference is much more drastic with HP and TQ than what it should be all across the plot. Looking at the TSX V6 gas mileage vs the Accord V6 gas mileage the numbers are so close that VCM doesn't give a big advantage like it should for such a huge sacrifice in performance. Drop in a 6AT and lose VCM and performance is up by a huge margine and gas mileage would be right where it is now with the accord V6 VCM if not slightly better due to the 6AT.

YetiTL

I'm with you! Trash the VCM and add 6AT!

I like my car fast and efficient please!

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

Part of that small power difference in the J35Z3 and Z6 though is probably due to the premium fuel requirement in the TSX, which helps both economy and power.

Not saying VCM does a good job, just adding.

YetiTL

Indeed, I agree with you but that would account for a small thing like 2 hp and 2 lbs to torque? Maybe a smidgen more?

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

Depends on tuning of course, but I would suspect the improvement would be greater than that.

Honda K24, the latest K24Z3. The regular sipping version in the EX/LX-S Accord models makes 190 hp/161 tq, but when on premium in the TSX it makes another 11 hp/10 tq.

The two J35s we have been comparing have a difference of 9 hp/3 tq.

Both have slightly higher compression with the premium fuel, so the premium fuel and thus the slightly higher compression allowed appears to account for much (if not all) of what the Acura version improves upon.

Some other examples I can think of are the Lincoln MKS, which adds 4 hp if you run the engine on premium. The Hyundai Tau V-8 adds 7 hp/8 tq when you run it on premium.

And so on and so forth. I suppose we could debate it endlessly so I'll just say in MY opinion the VCM's "damage" to sheer output is quite minimal if not non-existent at this level.

That said, I'm certainly no advocate for the VCM system which DOES reduce the torque and so on as others mentioned. In addition, what about the sheer complication of such a system? More stuff means more problems, even for a Honda product. And what of longevity? Is this a proven technology in the long term? I don't think so.

MurkyRiversTL

I'm pretty sure, but not positive, that cylinder deactivation is as simple as programming the ecu for a certain throttle position or load to shut off the spark and injectors for the particular cylinders being shutdown. Then when the tps or load is at a certain point the ecu switches those injectors and spark plugs to reactivate.

If I'm correct then the chance of failure isn't too high and the cost of implementing that program in the ecu, which is already in effect in the odyssey, would be practical and cost efficient.

If I'm not mistaken the power gain from the tsx engine over the accord engine besides higher compression, which requires higher octane fuel to prevent detonation, is also due to a different intake manifold as well as throttle body. And I honestly do not think that with just the addition of a higher octane fuel will net any increase in power, unless you have a switchable program which would lean out the fuel mixture to make better use of the higher octane rating. However, using a lower grade octane in a high compression engine will definitely diminish power as well as potentially cause damage to the engine via detonation.

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

That's why many of the engines I noted are tuned for both fuel types and may or may not even be all that different. The ES350 supposedly had a "premium" fuel tuned version of the Camry V-6 but testers from multiple outlets have repeatedly put regular in it without a hiccup.

That may not be the exact case here, but the differences between the engines are certainly not that great and have more to do with minor tinkering than serious upgrades.

MurkyRiversTL

You do realize that the "premium fuel tuned" engine are more than just tuned for premium fuel but also receive a higher compression piston which requires the use of the premium fuel.

MurkyRiversTL

I am mistaken. Apparantly the 2GR-FE engine (the one you were referring to) does not have different compression pistons and uses the knock senor to advance timing and adjust afr's via the ecu. When ping or knock occurs the ecu then knows where the limit of the fuel octane rating. When using 91 octane on the ecu can advance timing further and adjust the afr's accordingly to generate more power. Which, according to my research, is done over a lengthy time period.

Either way I was wrong and learned something new.

However, I'm not sure Honda utilizes a knock senor for tuning adjustments as Toyota does. I'm not even sure we have a knock sensor on these engines lol. Supposedly Honda tunes for a safe number based off of the recommended fuel octane.

Scotten

FWIW it's worth, I recently drove a new V6 Accord and watching the "ECO" light turn on and off as I drove was annoying. And naturally, it was green lettering...

Oswald Vater

Agreed. For me the tradeoff wouldn't be worth it either but most people don't drive Accords for performance reasons. The VCM on our ODY was a great selling point because it gives a 2-3 mpg increase over non-VCM units. We have achieved as high as 27mpg to this point with ours and we probably could do even better given more careful driving. But of course, nobody buys a minivan for performance reasons either!

MurkyRiversTL

except for these guys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0apfECwB-M

ParaSurfer1979

It's not that it sucks up power per se but the i-vtec V6 isn't true 3 lobe vtec like the 6spd Accords 3.5L or Acura's V6's. There is more power in the true vtec engines.