View Poll Results: What do you like Better?
Accord Concept Rims and Bodykit
54
73.97%
2004 Acura TL A-Spec Bodykit and Rims
19
26.03%
Voters: 73. You may not vote on this poll
Honda: Accord News
10-10-2012, 04:16 PM
#3361
It's quite odd that in SoCal I have not seen any on the road yet either.
10-11-2012, 05:34 AM
#3363
Senior Moderator
Honestly, I see less of those than I've seen of the new Accord. 
10-11-2012, 06:32 AM
#3364
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
My brother told me that he test drove the Touring sedan last weekend. I was pissed that he didnt ask me to go with him 
Overall - He loved it. He currently has an 08 V6 coupe 6MT. He loved the navi, the power, and he really liked the LED headlights. He also liked the way the Sport model looked, he just wish it had the V6 and a 6MT.
Overall - He loved it. He currently has an 08 V6 coupe 6MT. He loved the navi, the power, and he really liked the LED headlights. He also liked the way the Sport model looked, he just wish it had the V6 and a 6MT.
10-11-2012, 07:28 AM
#3365
Test drove the touring v6. I loved it. The only thing that kept me from signing on the line was my hopes for a new speed 6 in the next two years which will come with a manual trans.
If Mazda officially smashes the idea of a new speed 6 then I will be getting the accord. It really was a nice vehicle.
If Mazda officially smashes the idea of a new speed 6 then I will be getting the accord. It really was a nice vehicle.
10-11-2012, 07:53 AM
#3366
My brother told me that he test drove the Touring sedan last weekend. I was pissed that he didnt ask me to go with him
Overall - He loved it. He currently has an 08 V6 coupe 6MT. He loved the navi, the power, and he really liked the LED headlights. He also liked the way the Sport model looked, he just wish it had the V6 and a 6MT.
Overall - He loved it. He currently has an 08 V6 coupe 6MT. He loved the navi, the power, and he really liked the LED headlights. He also liked the way the Sport model looked, he just wish it had the V6 and a 6MT.
Thats a good review coming from another 8th gen 6-6 owner
Last edited by EL19; 10-11-2012 at 07:55 AM.
10-11-2012, 11:47 AM
#3367
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,518
Received 844 Likes
on
526 Posts
Test drove the touring v6. I loved it. The only thing that kept me from signing on the line was my hopes for a new speed 6 in the next two years which will come with a manual trans.
If Mazda officially smashes the idea of a new speed 6 then I will be getting the accord. It really was a nice vehicle.
If Mazda officially smashes the idea of a new speed 6 then I will be getting the accord. It really was a nice vehicle.
10-11-2012, 05:09 PM
#3368
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
Yea, but he was really hoping for the 6MT in the sedan. He thinks the coupe is horrendous.
10-12-2012, 06:27 AM
#3369
My first Avatar....
First when I started my hobby of metal detecting, I do not know that there is a device called metal detector that can help me to have easier access to the gold metal and helps me sava time, then one of my friends told me about this device, I am so curious and want to find a good equippment to help me so I search the internet and find the one that I am satisfied and by now everything goes on well and I have find some gold coins by using such kind of gold metal detector.
10-12-2012, 03:13 PM
#3371
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,518
Received 844 Likes
on
526 Posts
Here's an interesting post from TOV:
http://www.vtec.net/forums/one-messa...&page_number=1
http://www.vtec.net/forums/one-messa...&page_number=1
I got my copy of automotive engineering international, an SAE publication. In it, they talked about the 9th gen Accord at length. There were a couple of interesting points I wanted to share.
Regarding the use of struts, they interviewed Chief Engineer Shoji Matsui:
-When did you recognize you’d have to change the front suspension to a Macpherson struts from the previous double-wishbone layout used since 1986?
We wanted to have the wishbone suspension from the previous Accords, but we were having problems with improving the noise inherent in that structure. In each generation of the double-wishbone suspension we tried to improve the noise characteristics. We finally realize we had done all we could with the upper wheelhouse structure. We did reduce weight by changing the structure, but that wasn’t the main purpose. But with the new EPS combined with the strut suspension, we were able to achieve that same level of dynamic performance and quiet damping. We’ve been doing research on using a new kind of suspension since in the 1990’s. It’s taken 20 years, but finally we have that new suspension. And unfortunately, there is no cost saving involved with it because we really wanted to get the EPS right.
-Did you know that the previous ACE structure would have to be modified significantly in order for the new Accord to do well in the IIHS new small-overlap frontal impact test?
No. Halfway through development we started to see the changes in the small-overlap requirement. We looked at our body structure and realized that with some small modifications we could handle that, so we challenged ourselves to meet that new regulation.
-How did you achieve the new Accord’s airy greenhouse and slim A-pillars, given the NHTSA rollover standards that require the roof to support four times the vehicle curb weight without significant deformation?
When I was working in Ohio I learned of the technology called hot stamping. We don’t actually have this in Japan. We decided to use the hot-stamping technology, from one of our suppliers, on the new Accord’s upper body structure. This helped us meet the new requirements.
-The strut suspension saves about 34 lbs. off the front of the car, but has nothing to do with crash regulations or cost (or at least, that wasn’t the focus; and as the interviewee stated, they actually didn’t save anything). As stated, the main impact was noise, and the struts use an internal rebound spring and hydraulic bushings to reduce NVH in this area.
-The front structure utilized a hybrid aluminum-steel bonded subframe, that was done using stir friction welding. This is the world’s first use of stir welding to join two dissimilar metals (previously, Mazda was one of the first to utilize friction stir welding in a production car).
-The car’s electrical architecture is actually really cutting edge, utilizing two CAN systems for multiplexing- this reduces the number of wires and weight, while allowing more features.
Regarding the use of struts, they interviewed Chief Engineer Shoji Matsui:
-When did you recognize you’d have to change the front suspension to a Macpherson struts from the previous double-wishbone layout used since 1986?
We wanted to have the wishbone suspension from the previous Accords, but we were having problems with improving the noise inherent in that structure. In each generation of the double-wishbone suspension we tried to improve the noise characteristics. We finally realize we had done all we could with the upper wheelhouse structure. We did reduce weight by changing the structure, but that wasn’t the main purpose. But with the new EPS combined with the strut suspension, we were able to achieve that same level of dynamic performance and quiet damping. We’ve been doing research on using a new kind of suspension since in the 1990’s. It’s taken 20 years, but finally we have that new suspension. And unfortunately, there is no cost saving involved with it because we really wanted to get the EPS right.
-Did you know that the previous ACE structure would have to be modified significantly in order for the new Accord to do well in the IIHS new small-overlap frontal impact test?
No. Halfway through development we started to see the changes in the small-overlap requirement. We looked at our body structure and realized that with some small modifications we could handle that, so we challenged ourselves to meet that new regulation.
-How did you achieve the new Accord’s airy greenhouse and slim A-pillars, given the NHTSA rollover standards that require the roof to support four times the vehicle curb weight without significant deformation?
When I was working in Ohio I learned of the technology called hot stamping. We don’t actually have this in Japan. We decided to use the hot-stamping technology, from one of our suppliers, on the new Accord’s upper body structure. This helped us meet the new requirements.
-The strut suspension saves about 34 lbs. off the front of the car, but has nothing to do with crash regulations or cost (or at least, that wasn’t the focus; and as the interviewee stated, they actually didn’t save anything). As stated, the main impact was noise, and the struts use an internal rebound spring and hydraulic bushings to reduce NVH in this area.
-The front structure utilized a hybrid aluminum-steel bonded subframe, that was done using stir friction welding. This is the world’s first use of stir welding to join two dissimilar metals (previously, Mazda was one of the first to utilize friction stir welding in a production car).
-The car’s electrical architecture is actually really cutting edge, utilizing two CAN systems for multiplexing- this reduces the number of wires and weight, while allowing more features.
The following users liked this post:
civicdrivr (10-12-2012)
10-18-2012, 02:07 AM
#3372
278bhp Accord reached 0-120mph in 21.2 seconds on all season setup. just imagine RLX with all its aerodynamic refinement, AWD, electric torque. RLX will should do under 4 second. with its electic torque, AWD, more advance transmission.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-6-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 21.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.3 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 125 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 21/34 mpg
C/D observed: 23 mpg
BMW 335 with 6manual and performance setup took 19.3 second.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...ril-2012-1.pdf
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-6-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 21.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.3 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 125 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 21/34 mpg
C/D observed: 23 mpg
BMW 335 with 6manual and performance setup took 19.3 second.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...ril-2012-1.pdf
10-18-2012, 09:51 AM
#3373
Moderator
10-18-2012, 10:35 AM
#3374
Safety Car
C&d
Despite recent adoption of 2.0-liter turbo-4rs as the top-spec engine for the Hyundai Sonata, Ford Fusion, and Chevrolet Malibu—the idea being to combine maximum hustle and ostensibly improved economy—Honda’s venerable 3.5-liter V-6 remains as the upgrade engine in the new 2013 Accord. While the mid-size sedan’s official fuel-economy ratings do get a bump over last year’s figures, the modest updates to the V-6 combined with the tidier package of the new Accord also result in 1 of the quickest front-wheel-drive 4-doors we’ve ever tested.
Hammer Down
As in the previous-gen Accord, the single-overhead-cam V-6 displaces 3471 cc and features port fuel injection, cylinder deactivation, and i-VTEC variable valve timing. Notable changes for 2013 include lighter components, revised heads, reduced friction internals, and updated electronic controls. Horsepower rises modestly from 271 to 278, and although torque drops 2 lb-ft to 252, the grunt is spread over a wider powerband, improving drivability.
Honda’s Variable Cylinder Management (VCM) system is standard on V-6 sedans and now also works over a wider range of engine loads to improve efficiency; when it’s active, it silences 3 cylinders. (The previous version could deactivate 2 or 3 cylinders.) EPA city/highway ratings increase from 20/30 mpg to 21/34; we only averaged 23 due to a heavier-than-usual helping of lead feet. In less-frenetic driving, the car may improve on the 27-mpg average of our most recent Accord V-6 test subject.
Honda’s 6-speed automatic transmission finally migrates from the Odyssey and various Acuras to V-6 Accords for 2013, replacing the old 5-speed, and now includes a Sport mode that holds gears longer and delivers responsive downshifts. (The V-6/6-speed-manual combo remains exclusive to the coupe.) With less weight to haul around—3552 pounds versus 3607 for the last V-6 sedan we tested—our Touring example sprinted to 60 mph in 5.6 seconds and tripped the quarter-mile lights in 14.1 at 101 mph. Those figures put it solidly ahead of all of its competitors and into sports-sedan territory; the Accord ties our long-term, 6-speed-manual BMW 328i to 60 and trumps that car in the quarter by 0.2 second and 1 mph.
Comfort And Control
Despite wearing Michelin Pilot HX MXM4 all-season rubber on 17-inch wheels, the Accord V-6 was entertaining around our 10Best handling loop near C/D HQ. The steering is light and responsive, and the engine is willing to put up a fight with the traction control exiting a tight bend. Heavy throttle stabs in low gears initiate torque steer, but more weight up front helps keep the steering-wheel tug well below that exhibited by hot hatches such as the Mini Cooper S and Ford Focus ST. But the extra pounds over the front axle extract a price, however small, as this V-6 car feels slightly less agile and balanced than the lighter, 4-cylinder Accord. It nevertheless still feels highly composed, and with the 6-pot, has sufficient power to make on-ramp blasts a hoot. Compared to last year’s V-6 model, maximum skidpad grip increases from 0.79 g to 0.82, while a 178-foot stop from 70 mph is 12 feet shorter than before.
As with all new-gen Accords, the V-6 sedan delivers smooth shifts, an excellent balance of ride and body control, and good isolation from the road. The VCM system kicks in frequently when cruising, but active engine mounts and a noise-cancellation system make it nearly impossible to detect that 3 cylinders are snoozing.
The new Accord looks familiar, yes, but the styling is cleaner and less fussy than before. Inside, the materials are much nicer and the designers appear to have paid more attention to detail and usability. Bi-level displays in the center stack break up the audio and navigation data and take some getting used to, but there are approximately a billion less buttons than before. The front seats are more comfortable, thankfully eschewing the permanent lumbar support that made so many of us hate the previous car’s thrones. Rear-seat space is again vast; 6-footers have plenty of room. Outward visibility is great, and the LaneWatch blind-spot camera in the right exterior mirror is a clever and useful feature; it displays a live readout on the main screen when a button on the turn-signal stalk is depressed. It can also be set to come on automatically whenever the right blinker is activated.
Although the Accord 4-cylinder sedan and coupe made our 10Best list last year, the V-6 models weren’t included; we felt fresher competition, such as the 6-cylinder Volkswagen Passat, delivered a superior premium family-car experience. With this ninth-generation Accord, though, the V-6 serves up the kind of refinement and driving enjoyment we expect to see from the class benchmarks.
Quick But Not Wise
Although pricing begins at $22,470 for a base LX 4-cylinder model with the 6-speed manual, V-6 Accord sedans start with the leather-clad EX-L at $30,860 and go up to the $34,220 Touring model tested here. A new-for-2013 trim, the Touring adds LED headlights and adaptive cruise control to the $32,860 Accord EX-L with navigation, and its standard kit includes the LaneWatch camera, 17-inch wheels, a cocoon of airbags, lane-departure and forward-collision warnings, stability control, heated front seats, a rearview camera, and a power moonroof.
The well-appointed Accord V-6 Touring is quick, relatively luxurious, and delivers the well-sorted feel we expect from a Honda approaching Acura price levels. The throaty V-6 sounds great compared to the competition’s hissing turbo-4s, but practical types may better appreciate the comparably equipped EX-L 4-cylinder that is better balanced, less thirsty, and costs less. And we really like the 4-cylinder Sport model and its available 6-speed manual. But we—and those sensible folks—would be left in the V-6’s wake.
Specifications>
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED: $34,220 (base price: $30,860)
ENGINE TYPE: SOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 212 cu in, 3471 cc
Power: 278 hp @ 6200 rpm
Torque: 252 lb-ft @ 4900 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manual shifting mode
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 109.13 in
Length: 191.4 in
Width: 72.8 in Height: 57.7 in
Curb weight: 3552 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 21.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.3 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 125 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 21/34 mpg
C/D observed: 23 mpg
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED: $34,220 (base price: $30,860)
ENGINE TYPE: SOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 212 cu in, 3471 cc
Power: 278 hp @ 6200 rpm
Torque: 252 lb-ft @ 4900 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manual shifting mode
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 109.13 in
Length: 191.4 in
Width: 72.8 in Height: 57.7 in
Curb weight: 3552 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 21.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.3 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 125 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 21/34 mpg
C/D observed: 23 mpg
10-18-2012, 10:38 AM
#3375
Audi S6 did 0-60mph in 3.7 second with 420bhp engine. that car is 4300lbs heavy.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...s6-test-review
so why RLX that will atleast be 370+ bhp will not be closer to that?. even Accord with summer performance tires and lighter rims will go below under 5 second. see the comparision performance between Honda SI & ILX. only tire setup with LSD difference and Honda Si is faster by half second than ILX.
i know ur jumping last time when i claimed that RLX performance will be closer to BMW M5.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...s6-test-review
so why RLX that will atleast be 370+ bhp will not be closer to that?. even Accord with summer performance tires and lighter rims will go below under 5 second. see the comparision performance between Honda SI & ILX. only tire setup with LSD difference and Honda Si is faster by half second than ILX.
i know ur jumping last time when i claimed that RLX performance will be closer to BMW M5.
10-18-2012, 10:53 AM
#3376
Moderator
Audi S6 did 0-60mph in 3.7 second with 420bhp engine. that car is 4300lbs heavy.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...s6-test-review
so why RLX that will atleast be 370+ bhp will not be closer to that?. even Accord with summer performance tires and lighter rims will go below under 5 second. see the comparision performance between Honda SI & ILX. only tire setup with LSD difference and Honda Si is faster by half second than ILX.
i know ur jumping last time when i claimed that RLX performance will be closer to BMW M5.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...s6-test-review
so why RLX that will atleast be 370+ bhp will not be closer to that?. even Accord with summer performance tires and lighter rims will go below under 5 second. see the comparision performance between Honda SI & ILX. only tire setup with LSD difference and Honda Si is faster by half second than ILX.
i know ur jumping last time when i claimed that RLX performance will be closer to BMW M5.
The following users liked this post:
TSX69 (10-18-2012)
10-18-2012, 05:14 PM
#3378
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,518
Received 844 Likes
on
526 Posts
14.1s@101mph is definitely entry-level sports sedan territory. Actually, it can smoke a few entry-level sports sedans as long as curves are not involved!
The new gearbox is definitely more efficient and the new VCM is definitely a big improvement. I wonder if the 6MT version will be any faster.
This might also mean the J series might stay here for several more years....the thing is, Honda hasn't even introduced Earth Dream tech to the J yet....
The new gearbox is definitely more efficient and the new VCM is definitely a big improvement. I wonder if the 6MT version will be any faster.
This might also mean the J series might stay here for several more years....the thing is, Honda hasn't even introduced Earth Dream tech to the J yet....
10-18-2012, 10:12 PM
#3379
Even assuming, for a moment, that the RLX is mechanically capable of a sub-4 0-60, I'd think it HIGHLY unlikely Acura tunes it for such performance. That rate of acceleration is very unnerving to the average driver and Acura has never shown an inclination to make a "performance" version of its large flagship sedan. The target market for this car isn't interested in head-snapping acceleration, which is exactly what you get in a sub-4 car. Stop comparing this car to the S6 and M5; it's not going to happen.
Acura is perfectly capable of creating the most aerodynamic sedan in world with fastest engine power delivery and best grip even on all season tire setup. That car will still have full ground clearance not joke like BMW coupes that sit lower to the ground.
Accord 2.4L sport manual on 18inch rubber. Almost as fast ILX 6MT. but 300lbs heavier,2inch higher and wider tires. This is called king of aerodynamics.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...al-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 17.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 28.1 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 7.0 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 10.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 10.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 126 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 180 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
10-19-2012, 12:43 AM
#3380
אני עומד עם ישראל
It's not linear.
SSFTSX, I'll bet on 5 seconds flat as a best 0-60 time for the upcoming RLX.
SSFTSX, I'll bet on 5 seconds flat as a best 0-60 time for the upcoming RLX.
10-19-2012, 01:08 AM
#3381
5 second will be total failure for car that has potentially 100+bhp, over 150 ft-lb of torque, special 7speed transmission, AWD setup over the top of Accord. I would think Acura will position the car between M5 & 550i.
see Audi A6 3.0T. that one has only 325bhp and still 0-60 in 5.1 second flat.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...on-article.pdf
Acura implementation of AWD setup is much more effective for given bhp.
I bet just changing the tires to Accord will give it 5 second.
see Civic Si sedan example and compare it with ILX. it is full 1 second faster to 0-100mph. that gap increases to almost 3 seconds at 120mph.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.4 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 8.8 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 8.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 97 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 136 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 170 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
see Audi A6 3.0T. that one has only 325bhp and still 0-60 in 5.1 second flat.
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...on-article.pdf
Acura implementation of AWD setup is much more effective for given bhp.
I bet just changing the tires to Accord will give it 5 second.
see Civic Si sedan example and compare it with ILX. it is full 1 second faster to 0-100mph. that gap increases to almost 3 seconds at 120mph.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.4 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 8.8 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 8.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 97 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 136 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 170 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
10-19-2012, 06:38 AM
#3382
Safety Car
C&d
For decades, the Honda Accord seemed to be the automotive embodiment of Nietzsche’s concept of eternal recurrence. Every few years a new version would appear, win awards (including multiple appearances on our own 10Best Cars list), rank near or at the top of the sales charts, and take its familiar place in the fabric of American society. In this way, the Accord generally fulfilled the theory that the universe and its events have already occurred and will recur ad infinitum.
But around the time the 8th-generation model arrived for 2008, the cosmos apparently skipped a beat, and the Honda began to buckle slightly under the burden of success. Although the Civic took the lion’s share of the criticism, we noted a few small cracks in Honda’s mid-sizer in a family-sedan comparison test from earlier this year. The 4-cylinder engine and 5-speed automatic transmission still operated with Honda’s trademark smoothness, but the former sounded coarse under full boot, while the latter was one cog short of the segment-standard 6-pack. At various times we also have noted the outgoing Accord’s undignified exterior styling and its overly busy cockpit erratically littered with buttons. That’s not to say the car wasn’t great—the previous model was a perennial 10Bester, after all—only that it was being reeled in by the competition, notably the winner of that comparo, the Volkswagen Passat.
Restoring the Natural Order of the Automotive Universe
We’re happy to say that the 2013 Accord tested here—a manual-transmission, 4-cylinder Sport model, which differs from other trims mostly through aesthetics—not only benefits from a lightened load metaphorically, but also physically. The car’s steering, braking, and shifting are all light to the touch yet operate with surgical precision. Even the slightest operator inputs produce tangible results. The electrically assisted rack-and-pinion steering is slack-free throughout its full 2.5-turn lock-to-lock travel, yet never twitchy or overeager. The clutch is equally as light, pedal pressure remaining consistent throughout its travel—its operation is intuitive from the very 1st press. And shifting the new 6-speed manual (a CVT is optional) recalls the familiar Honda manual-transmission exactitude that awed so many drivers way back when the brand was still making its bones in this country. Braking is also a paragon of temperate behavior. How deep you go into the pedal is directly correlated to clamping power, and it hides no secrets along its relatively short length of travel.
And as well as the components perform independently, they work even better in unison. Wearing 18-inch wheels shod with 235/45-18 rubber, this Accord managed a respectable 0.87 g on a 300-foot skidpad, but it was while cutting delicate arcs through the wooded environs of our 10Best test loop when the chassis and powertrain really began to communicate with us on a 1st-name basis. As we’ve previously noted, the Accord has swapped its front control arms for struts (Honda says they are lighter and deliver lower levels of NVH); the Accord Sport and all higher trims receive a front strut-tower brace. Our scales pegged the Accord’s weight at 3272 pounds with a front-heavy 59.6/40.4-percent weight distribution. Despite this, turn-in is crisp and neutral, the chassis eagerly following the directions given by the front wheels. Only under hard acceleration over broken pavement did we experience any directional drama, most of it in the form of front wheelspin and hop; the rear end stayed firmly planted on all but loose gravel.
Power in the Accord Sport comes from a 189-hp version of Honda’s new, direct-injected 2.4-liter 4-cylinder. (The LX, EX, and EX-L have just 185 horses; to get 6 cylinders, step up to the EX-L V-6 or Touring, please.) All 181 lb-ft of torque—20 more than the previous-gen EX’s 4-cylinder engine—appear by 3900 rpm, which makes it possible to inject some thrills into the daily commute without winding each gear to the 6800-rpm redline. Of course if you wish to play, the powertrain is ready and willing, as evidenced by our notes from the test track: “Plenty of low-end torque, so you’ll want to launch around 2500 rpm and spin the tires to redline. Very easy to approach the rev limiter and then shift at just the right time.” The 6.6-second scoot to 60 is mighty impressive—it’s 1.3 seconds quicker than the last-gen 4-cylinder/manual model—and the car covered the quarter in 15.3. Those in the mood to save fuel rather than time can select Eco Assist mode via an Econ button to the left of the steering wheel; it alters the operating characteristics of the climate control and remaps throttle response in the name of efficiency.
Internal Introspection
Standard content is the front-line battle in the family-sedan war, and the Sport we tested comes stocked with ammo: A rearview camera, a 10-way power driver’s seat, dual-zone automatic climate control, a leather-wrapped steering wheel, side-curtain airbags, and a suite of infotainment goodies including Bluetooth, Pandora, and USB, connectivity all are included in the $24,180 MSRP. Although navigation is not available on the Sport, it—like all new Accords—does have an eight-inch screen to display images from the backup camera and provide visuals for many of the infotainment functions.
With this redesigned Accord, Honda wisely streamlined the dash, making the controls both more intuitive and fewer in number. The upholstery in our car was among the nicest material choices we’ve recently seen, replacing Honda’s old mouse-fur material with something resembling high-quality broadcloth. The surfaces and overall fit and finish are good enough to give you that subtle feeling of satisfaction each time you climb in the car, and nicely address complaints about the dated and less-than-luxe cabin of the 8th-gen model. Rear-seat legroom is up by more than an inch to 38.5 inches; we didn’t measure it ourselves, but a pair of adults can spend the better part of a Sunday back there without needing to call the chiropractor the following day.
According to Honda, torsional rigidity on the new model is up 42% compared with the previous Accord, due largely to 56 percent of the structure being composed of high-strength steel. While that’s impossible to verify without a barrage of highly specialized equipment, we can say in human terms that the Accord conveys a feeling of solid, well-engineered substance that imparts an impression of bang for the buck. In other words, the Accord doesn’t make you feel like a schmuck for dropping 25 large on a sedan with all the structural integrity of a Flexible Flyer.
In addition to sleeker and less-busy styling, exterior enhancements include body-color folding side mirrors, an integrated rear-window antenna, and underbody aerodynamic covers. Overall, it looks much more coherent and dynamic than the previous model, but casual observers may not notice the difference unless the 2 cars are parked side by side.
It’s good to see that Honda has seemingly begun to work out its kinks, both product-wise and existentially. If you’ve been wandering in despair, searching for a well-rounded sedan that can justify its presence in your driveway, don’t hesitate to consider the 2013 Honda Accord. You might want to act with some haste—although the 9th-generation model is new, Nietzsche says the next one will be here before you know it.
Specifications>
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED: $24,180 (base price: $22,470)
ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement: 144 cu in, 2354 cc
Power: 189 hp @ 6400 rpm
Torque: 182 lb-ft @ 3900 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 109.3 in
Length: 191.4 in
Width: 72.8 in Height: 57.7 in
Curb weight: 3272 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 17.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 28.1 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 7.0 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 10.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 10.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 126 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 180 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 24/34 mpg
C/D observed: 22 mpg
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED: $24,180 (base price: $22,470)
ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement: 144 cu in, 2354 cc
Power: 189 hp @ 6400 rpm
Torque: 182 lb-ft @ 3900 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 109.3 in
Length: 191.4 in
Width: 72.8 in Height: 57.7 in
Curb weight: 3272 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 17.9 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 28.1 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 7.0 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 10.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 10.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 126 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 180 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 24/34 mpg
C/D observed: 22 mpg
10-19-2012, 10:51 AM
#3383
Moderator
The better question - why do you think they will tune the car to that level of performance? Simply because they "can"? That's naive, if you really believe it. Cars are made for target markets. There is no current market for an Acura RLX that does 0-60 in less than 4 seconds. This thing will be tuned to be more like a Lexus LS (not even an F-Sport), not an S6 or M5.
10-19-2012, 10:59 AM
#3384
did u see any inclination of Accord being so fast for given bhp?.
The answer is no.
by putting special 7speed transmission, expensive large electric motors, SH-AWD and DI engine with premium fuel (which Accord lacks).
RLX will provide level of performance that will goes two step beyond Accord. as One step is incoming TLX. which i can forsee easily as sub-5 second car. (Current TL SH-AWD 6MT is 5.2second on R&T & C&D)
Acura/Honda dont share plans.
The answer is no.
by putting special 7speed transmission, expensive large electric motors, SH-AWD and DI engine with premium fuel (which Accord lacks).
RLX will provide level of performance that will goes two step beyond Accord. as One step is incoming TLX. which i can forsee easily as sub-5 second car. (Current TL SH-AWD 6MT is 5.2second on R&T & C&D)
Acura/Honda dont share plans.
http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2012/09...-plans-to.html
While in the United States, the Accord is Honda's bestselling nameplate with 218,665 deliveries this year (from January 1 through August 31), in Europe, things aren't anywhere near as rosy.
Speaking to Just-Auto, a spokesperson for Honda said that Accord sales in the continent have plummeted to the point that the car has become a niche model. As a result, the spokesman said that the Japanese carmaker has "no immediate plans" to launch a new model in Europe.
That doesn't mean it won't, but that Honda is in no hurry to offer a replacement, preferring instead to focus on the European market launch of the new CR-V and the all-important 1.6-liter turbo diesel engine to be offered initially on the Civic and then of the CR-V.
The current generation of the European Accord sedan differs from the previous North American market model as it is directly related to the Acura TSX.
Recently, Honda dropped a teaser image of the new Accord for the Russian market, with the car looking identical to the North American model. According to Just-Auto, this can be explained by the fact that Honda Europe does not include Russia, which has its own separate division reporting directly to Japan.
While in the United States, the Accord is Honda's bestselling nameplate with 218,665 deliveries this year (from January 1 through August 31), in Europe, things aren't anywhere near as rosy.
Speaking to Just-Auto, a spokesperson for Honda said that Accord sales in the continent have plummeted to the point that the car has become a niche model. As a result, the spokesman said that the Japanese carmaker has "no immediate plans" to launch a new model in Europe.
That doesn't mean it won't, but that Honda is in no hurry to offer a replacement, preferring instead to focus on the European market launch of the new CR-V and the all-important 1.6-liter turbo diesel engine to be offered initially on the Civic and then of the CR-V.
The current generation of the European Accord sedan differs from the previous North American market model as it is directly related to the Acura TSX.
Recently, Honda dropped a teaser image of the new Accord for the Russian market, with the car looking identical to the North American model. According to Just-Auto, this can be explained by the fact that Honda Europe does not include Russia, which has its own separate division reporting directly to Japan.
10-19-2012, 11:08 AM
#3385
Moderator
did u see any inclination of Accord being so fast for given bhp?.
The answer is no.
by putting special 7speed transmission, expensive large electric motors, SH-AWD and DI engine with premium fuel (which Accord lacks).
RLX will provide level of performance that will goes two step beyond Accord. as One step is incoming TLX. which i can forsee easily as sub-5 second car. (Current TL SH-AWD 6MT is 5.2second on R&T & C&D)
Acura/Honda dont share plans.
The answer is no.
by putting special 7speed transmission, expensive large electric motors, SH-AWD and DI engine with premium fuel (which Accord lacks).
RLX will provide level of performance that will goes two step beyond Accord. as One step is incoming TLX. which i can forsee easily as sub-5 second car. (Current TL SH-AWD 6MT is 5.2second on R&T & C&D)
Acura/Honda dont share plans.
10-19-2012, 11:20 AM
#3386
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
The following users liked this post:
ttribe (10-19-2012)
10-19-2012, 11:27 AM
#3387
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,518
Received 844 Likes
on
526 Posts
I can see SSFTSX's point here.....we didn't think Honda would make the Accord this fast...yet...they did it....can that be the case for the RLX? We certainly don't know.
Under 4's for 0-60mph is probably a bit too optimistic and is definitely an overkill for a flagship luxury sedan. It will require some sort of launch control....is it necessary on a luxury sedan? That kind of performance should be reserved for the halo car, the NSX.
With that said, I can see the RLX being capable of 0-60mph 4.5s. The current TL SH-AWD 6MT can do it in 5.2s. That's with 3850lb and 300hp. New RLX is said to be around 4000lb with 370hp. That's a 12.83lb/hp (TL) vs 10.81lb/hp (RLX), which is quite an improvement. That's equivalent to the TL having another 56hp. Now, factor in 7spd DSG, instant high peak torque from the electric motors right from 0rpm, and less drivetrain loss as no mechanical Sh-AWD is involved. Theoretically, 4.5s should be achievable.
Although Audi A6 3.0T and Lexus GS450h are "only" capable of 0-60mph in mid 5's, 550i and E550 4matic are capable of 0-60mph in 4.8s and 4.3s, respectively. They are both rated at around 400hp with 4400lb of weight. To make the RLX competitive, it should also be capable of 0-60mph in the 4's. Otherwise, Honda will repeat the same mistake as the 2g RL - came out being one of the best, but the competition quickly pulled ahead within a year or two.
I'm sure different modes can chosen in the RLX anyway - Sport, Normal, Eco, for instance. Most buyers will probably stick with Eco and Normal, they don't have to worry about the car being too fast. If they want the extra power, the Sport can unlock the full potential of the car.
Under 4's for 0-60mph is probably a bit too optimistic and is definitely an overkill for a flagship luxury sedan. It will require some sort of launch control....is it necessary on a luxury sedan? That kind of performance should be reserved for the halo car, the NSX.
With that said, I can see the RLX being capable of 0-60mph 4.5s. The current TL SH-AWD 6MT can do it in 5.2s. That's with 3850lb and 300hp. New RLX is said to be around 4000lb with 370hp. That's a 12.83lb/hp (TL) vs 10.81lb/hp (RLX), which is quite an improvement. That's equivalent to the TL having another 56hp. Now, factor in 7spd DSG, instant high peak torque from the electric motors right from 0rpm, and less drivetrain loss as no mechanical Sh-AWD is involved. Theoretically, 4.5s should be achievable.
Although Audi A6 3.0T and Lexus GS450h are "only" capable of 0-60mph in mid 5's, 550i and E550 4matic are capable of 0-60mph in 4.8s and 4.3s, respectively. They are both rated at around 400hp with 4400lb of weight. To make the RLX competitive, it should also be capable of 0-60mph in the 4's. Otherwise, Honda will repeat the same mistake as the 2g RL - came out being one of the best, but the competition quickly pulled ahead within a year or two.
I'm sure different modes can chosen in the RLX anyway - Sport, Normal, Eco, for instance. Most buyers will probably stick with Eco and Normal, they don't have to worry about the car being too fast. If they want the extra power, the Sport can unlock the full potential of the car.
10-19-2012, 01:49 PM
#3388
Moderator
^^^^He said sub-4. Did you catch that?
10-19-2012, 06:06 PM
#3390
Moderator
10-19-2012, 07:15 PM
#3391
10-19-2012, 08:41 PM
#3392
אני עומד עם ישראל
A FWD luxo-barge hitting 60 in under 5 seconds 
10-19-2012, 08:45 PM
#3393
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
10-19-2012, 08:48 PM
#3394
אני עומד עם ישראל
Well in his universe the new RLX is an M5/S6 killer
10-19-2012, 08:50 PM
#3395
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
The following 3 users liked this post by civicdrivr:
10-19-2012, 08:52 PM
#3396
Motorweek
The following 2 users liked this post by AZuser:
civicdrivr (10-20-2012),
F23A4 (10-19-2012)
10-19-2012, 08:57 PM
#3397
אני עומד עם ישראל
I'm really thinking an S4 will be my next ride or the another RWD vehicle but with a V8.
I've seen S4 times at about 4.3 (fastest) to 4.9 to 60. I just can't imagine Honda doing that for their flagship. The cars he's comparing it against are purpose built performance variants from these respective brands. As Tim said, Honda never has and probably never will.
Pass the motherfucking pipe
I've seen S4 times at about 4.3 (fastest) to 4.9 to 60. I just can't imagine Honda doing that for their flagship. The cars he's comparing it against are purpose built performance variants from these respective brands. As Tim said, Honda never has and probably never will.
Pass the motherfucking pipe
10-19-2012, 11:46 PM
#3398
Moderator
Of course I am assuming, and unless you are in the upper echelons of Acura's design team, so are you. The difference is that, as I have already stated, my assumptions are based on the history Acura has already demonstrated. Yours, judging by the stench wafting from your argument, was extracted from some place located a little more...aft.
Last edited by ttribe; 10-19-2012 at 11:54 PM.
10-19-2012, 11:59 PM
#3399
its been a while since i came out to this part of the forum but god damn is this guy still trolling you all real hard
The following users liked this post:
civicdrivr (10-20-2012)
10-20-2012, 09:46 AM
#3400
My first Avatar....