Well me and my friend got into it today about the '04 Accord V-6 6MT being faster than the '03 CL-S 6MT.... Well darnit he's right! I'm just wondering what makes the Accord faster? It's certainly not the HP/TQ, is it really those 300lbs or so making the difference? (when I say faster I mean faster 0-60 and 1/4mile times stockwise). I would love some input on this.

 

yes, the weight helps because every (1) hundred pounds that you lose, technically you're also losing .1 of a second on the your 1/4 mile so it's no surprise that the CL-S runs 14.9 and the accord runs 14.5.

plus the accord coupe looks better, which adds about 5 hp.

 

Cl-s ftw.

 

maybe next Gen Accord looks better, this Gen... no...

 

I have an Accord 6 speed and love it. Even though we don't have .2 liters, we make pretty decent power. Apparently upgrading to 91 or 93 octane will net 10hp and 10 tq according to a statement made by a Honda engineer. That combined with an intake and an exhaust should put it within reasonable grasp of type-s numbers.

Our upgrades aren't that plentiful, though. CL-S owners can get Comptech headers for 1000, or other headers for less. We have to resort to the E-Shift Procats which are about 1050 or so, but net 17-21 whp. Even so, a supercharger and high boost pulley just puts the CLs out of grasp (unless you spray or retrofit a TL supercharger).

I love both cars, though. I'd love to line up with a CL-S in Austin.

 

it's all a matter of personal opinion but frankly, the 2nd gen CL looks like crap from the back half. it's fat, the lines dont work and that rear pillar is way too small. it looks a little better with the spoiler, but not much.






the lines on the accord flow so much better than the CL.

and dont even get me started on the first gen CL. that thing was a complete waste of metal. i can't believe it actually made it past the drawing board...

 

reasonable grasp? your numbers are already better than the CL-S, as i posted before, unless you're talking about the last gen accord.

 

mods? did you guys switch driver? also, dunno if this make sense, but LSD on CL-S probably held the CL-S back...

 

the accord is a good design, just a bit on the bulky side.

 

I suppose this is true, lol. We run about a 14.5 with the crap Michelins. I've heard of many running low 14s with simple bolt ons and one dude who got a really high 13. There's a supercharged 6 speed running 12s. I always thought the CL-S was a bit more purpose built (LSD, bolstered seats, driver oriented console, etc) than the Accord, but in the end the Accord was cheaper and easier to find, so I went with it.

They don't look so bad with a drop and the HFP kit. For reference, here's mine:

 

^^ so much sleeker than the CL

 

my dropped CL looks like a smushed pancake next to my cuhz' 04 4x4 accord....

i like both cars =]

 

EShift Procats are available for the Accord V6 also. ($1,300 parts/labor according to the shop I corresponded with, re: my AV6.)

 

We've covered this already:

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...=accord+faster

Of course it does, you're making a comparision with a newer generation accord to an older CL. I would hope that honda is moving forward and not backwards...

How's about we compare a 2002 Accord V6 EX to a 2003 CLS 6spd to see which is faster (another unfair comparision since the accord didn't come with a 6mt).

The 2G CL is based on the 6th Gen Accord (98-02), line those 2 up together and tell me which one looks better...

Fucking troll :shakehead

 

You're a retard

 

^

 

I'm surprised that daemonicus still has positive rep points after these comments in this thread ...

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but lest he forget the model years he's comparing ... more importantly, what generation of car he's comparing. Rarely does a car manufacturer regress in design cues. If they do, the head of design gets fired (ie see Subaru and their nasty grills!)

 

i threw him a neg

 

Lol. And so he goes downhill again.

 

i know, how awful of me to compare a '03 CL to an '03 Accord.

thanks for letting me know. now my opinion changes; they both dont impress me.

surely after almost 1000 posts, i can't be "trolling" the forums.

care to elaborate? your 18 year old response didn't really cut it.

why? because i dislike a certain generation of a certain model of acura? oh no...did i hurt people's feelings?

tell me, honestly, that the honda Fit is a step forward in design.

and it was about as appropriate as if i decided to neg you for liking the Jays.

 

I'm not able to give him any more

 

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Some people just state them differently I suppose. I wouldn't necessarily knock the guy for having an opinion (although putting down a car that is owned by many on this forum isn't the smartest business decision).

 

No, it's pretty straight forward

 

 

Mayday...Mayday...This thread is going down!....So as for my I like the 2nd Gen CL and the accord , both are nice cars, and yes, I also lost out to my buddy's 03 Accord ( but then again I have an 01 CL-s)...but it was only by a ball hair.

 

So did I.

 

 

I'll take the cl-s over the egg. kthx

 

this thread reminds me of the guy who was whining about the bimmerforums making fun of his ugly TL.

https://acurazine.com/forums/car-talk-5/f-%25ing-bimmer-drivers-363838/

although this time, it's lots of people crying about someone not loving their cars.

grow up.

 

I respect your right to your own opinion. But I REALLY disagree with it. I think the 1st GEN CL is a VERY good looking car.

 

while you are entitled to your own opinion, if you're going to call the CL "crap" & "a waste of metal" on here, you should know that's going to earn some negs

 

I'll take the CL. I think the CL's lines are much more aggressive, and I think the car look more premium

 

This thread is not going where I wanted it to go.....

^ That's more like it, I don't care about looks, I care about speed! Now what about those changes they made from 6th -> 7th -> 7.5 gen? Can we apply those changes to the CL and see the same HP gains?

Remember 2004 (not 2003 w/ the 5MTs) 6MT V6 Accord vs. 2003 6MT 3.2CL-S

 

^ I sux @ teh manual, I was going based on stock times from allbeedigital.com

 

^

Daemonicus = hero

 

:gheyhug:

 

They are both good cars. You can't judge a car mainly because of how fast it goes in a straight line. I think safety and economy are most important. Fun factor definetly plays a role but hey... some people are young, others have better things to do.

 

 

They are pretty much the same car... except CLS has more stuff than AV6 (2002)

And those 4 Speed auto

 

Damen, i think the hate is geared more towards you just being a tool in general