Last post on Dec 25, 2011 at 1:37 PM
You are in the Toyota Camry
What is this discussion about?
Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Sedan
Jul 31, 2000 (5:42 pm)
that is a very valid point, that is the only thing about the accord i wish they would change. but since they came out with the v6 in the accord in 1995, it has never been an option.
Jul 31, 2000 (5:53 pm)
I do not agree. Sure the lack of a MT takes away a lot of driver interaction, and thus is a lot less fun to drive. Yet, the overall driving dynamics of the car is still sporty, thus making it still a driver's vehicle compared to other mid-sized sedans IMO.
You cannot say AT Ferrari 456 GT is not a driver's car. It is just not as sporty as a MT one.
Honda's never developed the manual tranny for this 3.0L V6 engine since it debuted back in 94, I believe. THe V6 engine was deployed specifically for the NA market only, cos NAmericans feel that a 4cyc sedan is NOT a serious car, regardless of what kind of output the 4 banger can produce. Market surveys also show that NAmerican drivers DO NOT like shifting for themselves. As a matter of fact, only 5% of Maxima's are sold with 5sp MT even though it is an option. 95% are sold with AT. Thus it was a business decision to not spend the $$ on developing the MT for the engine made specifically for NA.
European Accords and Japanese Accords only have 4 banger engines. The Accord Type R has Prelude's 2.2L DOHC VTEC 4 banger, which produces peak of 210hp, and is available with an accurate and precise MT. It is a seriously fun to drive sports sedan.
#12 of 2813 sales1
Jul 31, 2000 (5:56 pm)
It's probably due to engineering resources at Honda. I can't see it being manufacturing related. That said, the relatively small number of cars Honda would sell with this configuration would probably be at least as, if not more, expensive than the auto. cars. This due to the high fixed cost incurred when designing. Just my .02
Jul 31, 2000 (6:00 pm)
i agree, though the market would not be kind to a v6 manual in the accord, i would still like to see one and of course drive one.
#17-they came out with the v6 in '95.
we sell on average 70% 4cly and 30% v6's.
Jul 31, 2000 (6:04 pm)
I would refrain from bringing in Ferrari to this discussion. By no stretch of the imagination can Honda Accord V6 be compared to those hot italians. Also, the Italian mafia might be looking for you
The only question is then: How can Toyota offer a V6 camry with manual transmission? (I'm not suggesting that the Camry is a trye drivers car either) Bear in mind the Acuras of the 80's and early 90's with V6 and manual transmission.
Like I stated in my previous post, it probably has to do with engineering resources and associated business decisions.
However, I still don't think that the V6 Accord is a sporty car. Can't be with a slushbox.
Jul 31, 2000 (6:08 pm)
its not a sporty car, it is a more sportier sedan than the camry. thats the subject.
#16 of 2813 It's just strange
Jul 31, 2000 (6:12 pm)
Only the different strategists at the respective companies can explain why Toyota can justify a V6 man. when Honda can't. After all, it would make more sense to Honda to offer this powertrain combo than it does to Toyota, given the otherwise "sporty" character of the Accord, don't you think?
#17 of 2813 Not to mention
Jul 31, 2000 (6:34 pm)
That Honda usually can provide a good manual tranny rather than an auto tranny. If the market can sustain the Maxima with manual (a selling point for the SE), why won't Honda do the same with the Accord V6?
#18 of 2813 liufei
Jul 31, 2000 (6:55 pm)
I agree. Honda's manual transmissions are typically really nice.
Jul 31, 2000 (8:23 pm)
"I would refrain from bringing in Ferrari to this
discussion. By no stretch of the imagination can
Honda Accord V6 be compared to those hot italians."
I was not comparing Accords' to Ferrari. I was just pointing out that MT or AT is not the only determining factor in a car's sportiness. It is a big factor, I agree, but it is not the only factor.
Simple illustration - if Buick Century is offered with a 5sp MT, I'd still take AT Accord V6 as the sportier car any day.
"The only question is then: How can Toyota offer a
V6 camry with manual transmission? (I'm not
suggesting that the Camry is a trye drivers car
either) Bear in mind the Acuras of the 80's and
early 90's with V6 and manual transmission."
Keep in mind, the 3.0L Accord VTEC engine and 3.2L TL VTEC engine are not based on the 3.2L V6 engine used in the early - mid 90's Acura Legend V6 engine. That engine was non VTEC, and was relatively problematic, and though it was avail with a 6sp MT gearbox, it was probably the reason for Honda to not deploy the same engine.
The 3.0L V6 used in the Camry is a workhorse used in various other Toyota cars, and it was traditionally available with a MT. Toyota has offered the MT as an option on the Camry V6, but only for the lowest trim model. Equipping the car with any feature pretty much means you'll get a slushbox.
"However, I still don't think that the V6 Accord is a sporty car. Can't be with a slushbox."
If slushbox or MT is the only determining factor you are looking at here then I agree Accord is not a sporty car. Neither is a 456GT then. =)
It all depends on how you define as 'sporty car'. I'd love a V6-MT Accord, but its sporty driving dynamics makes it still sportier than most of its competitors, and thus I'd still consider it a sporty mid-sized sedan. But I agree without the MT, it takes away a lot of driver interaction and a lot of fun to drive.