Ask the Car People.SM


Honda Accord Future Models

577 messages,  Last post on Aug 24, 2007 at 8:41 PM

You are in the Honda Accord Forum.

What is this discussion about? Honda Accord, Coupe, Sedan

Messages Page 57 of 58

#558 of 577 Re: Diesel/Manual Demand [jaxs1] by bristol2

Jun 11, 2007 (12:52 pm)

Replying to: jaxs1 (Jun 10, 2007 9:33 pm)
Given that the small car market is now the fastest growing segment of the auto business it's pretty clear that gas prices are making a big difference to people.
 
The gap in price between here and Europe makes no differnce at all on the decisions buyers make. The impact they perceive in their pockets as costs go up makes the difference. It's all relative, gas is relatively 33% more expensive than 2 years ago, that's a huge gap regardless of cost elsewhere.
 
Being able to get compact car mileage with family sedan size will be a great selling point.

#559 of 577 Re: - [eldaino] by blufz1

Jun 11, 2007 (12:56 pm)

Replying to: eldaino (Jun 11, 2007 11:26 am)
Actually, I was talking about everyday driving like most of us do. Dudley gets 35 in his regular driving. It seems from all the posts that, in the real world, the manuals get slightly better mpg. Better ability to coast etc. It could also be that the manual drivers posting on this site might be better drivers and more in tune w/ their drivetrain than the automatic drivers. Just my .02.

#560 of 577 Coasting [blufz1] by blane

Jun 11, 2007 (3:27 pm)

Replying to: blufz1 (Jun 11, 2007 12:56 pm)
Some drivers may choose to coast. But in my state, as probably in most states, coasting out of gear is against the law. Doing so precludes your ability to instantaneously accelerate to avoid a potential accident.

#561 of 577 - by dudleyr

Jun 11, 2007 (7:00 pm)

Going over the speed limit is also against the law (I am sure nobody here does that ), so is driving barefoot, or in sandals (depending on state), and in PA it is (or was recently) against the law to drive at night unless you fired a flare every 5 miles.
 
BTW a sudden need to accelerate to get out of trouble is required very rarely. On top of that I (and the vast majority of MT drivers) can shift in the gear I want as fast as an automatic can decide what gear it needs and then downshift (lots of cars hesitate badly here - the Camry comes to mind) Maybe automatics should be illegal to drive because of the hesitation.
 
Braking and/or turning is what almost always gets you out of trouble. Coasting can also be done in gear. The whole point is not to give the car gas if you are approaching a red light or stop sign. A car will glide quite well in top gear - it does not have to be in neutral.
 
The MT has the advantage of letting you chose the gear as it will not use engine braking to slow you down unless you want it to. An MT also is not fighting a torque converter at idle, and uses less gas there.
 
Anyway - I hope Honda continues to offer the MT. Freedom of choice is a nice thing to have.

#562 of 577 Re: - [dudleyr] by mcmanus

Jul 12, 2007 (4:15 am)

Replying to: dudleyr (Jun 11, 2007 7:00 pm)
IME manuals are bought by folks who would be doing less stop and go driving, so all else being equal I'd expect users to report getting better mileage. As we research replacement vehicles, wifey will get the manual because her drive is primarily freeway with moderate traffic volumes, but I'll get an automatic because of my routine drives into Detroit with heavy freeway (stop and go) traffic and occasional arthritic bouts.
 
I hope Honda puts more "distance" between Civic and Accord. The initial cost (overlap of various versions exist), fuel economy (real world, end of the month pocketbook), and interior space (with Accord's overstuffed seating) are nearly the same. Perhaps a lighter hatchback version of the Fit would answer this need as I really don't want to see Accord get bigger.
 
My dream car would be a Fit sized car (tall, narrow for elder access and ease of parking) that's built to Accord level of solidity (is that a word?) with a bigger engine (like the Civic's 1.8L) that still gets good fuel economy.
 
On a side note, I really hope Honda improves the looks of the Accord. To me, except for the recent mid-model redesign, they've gotten uglier with each new generation since the early 80s. Even if I never own another at least I don't have to look at them.

#563 of 577 - by dudleyr

Jul 12, 2007 (6:49 am)

I disagree with "distance" for seating. The Accord has 103 cubic ft. to 90 for the Civic. That is a huge difference.

#564 of 577 Re: - [dudleyr] by eldaino

Jul 12, 2007 (9:39 am)

Replying to: dudleyr (Jul 12, 2007 6:49 am)
maybe on paper, but sitting down in both of them back to back is not a life changing experience.
 
the civic now is as big (or at least almost) as the prev. gen accord.

#565 of 577 Re: - [eldaino] by robertsmx

Jul 12, 2007 (11:40 am)

Replying to: eldaino (Jul 12, 2007 9:39 am)
Contrary to popular belief, Civic hasn't really grown much (has become taller, but length and width have been under control). It is still about 3 inch shorter than Accord from 20 years ago. The biggest change that 2006 redesign brought was a long wheelbase (comparable to 1998 Accord) but that is a benefit afforded by cab-forward design, resulting in shorter overhangs.
 
1994-1997 Accords had an interior volume of 94 cu ft (qualifies for compact), which grew to 103 cu ft with MY1998 (qualifies for midsize). Civic is about 91 cu ft right now (probably was about 87-88 cu ft in the 1980s). 2003 Accord stayed at 103 cu ft.

#566 of 577 Re: - [eldaino] by thegraduate

Jul 12, 2007 (2:14 pm)

Replying to: eldaino (Jul 12, 2007 9:39 am)
Um, for me (6'4", 190), sitting in them back to back makes for a very obvious difference. My parents surprised me with a car as a reward for getting a scholarship to UAB (I'd eyed the Civic Coupe in blue since they came out in late '05), they brought home an Accord. Turns out it was a good thing they did. The Civic's lack of headroom leaves me a little claustrophobic, and sitting in the back seat of their 2007 Civic EX Sedan leaves me crouched over with my knees splayed, and this is sitting behind my 5'5" mom.
 
It was kind of funny; when I lived with them, and we went out as a family, we took my car (the '06 Accord) because the "family" car, the Civic, was too small for me to ride in back. I was happy to oblige my car though, it meant I got to drive my baby!

#567 of 577 Re: - [dudleyr] by sploar

Jul 31, 2007 (11:54 am)

Replying to: dudleyr (Jun 11, 2007 7:00 pm)
I know that when MotorWeek did it's testing of the Civics the Si actually got better mileage than the EX in every day driving. I just traded my leased Civic in on a 07 Accord LX Coupe MT and I bet it gets better mileage than my 04 Civic. I never got better than 30mpg in the Civic in every day driving. Seemed to me the engine was always revving pretty high in all situations, although it could have been the way I drove it. BTW, my monthly lease payment on the Accord is $8 more than the 04 Civic was. It's $241 a month, nothing down, $12000 residual. I couldn't pass it up!

Messages Page 57 of 58

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement