[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
This 2019 Acura RDX A-Spec is wearing an exclusive new shade of blue
More.......................
2019 Pilot gets upgraded with standard LED headlights and "Telematics"
More.......................
Sources: 2019 HR-V adds Sport trim, loses 6MT option
More.......................
All-new 2019 Acura RDX Makes Road Debut as Official Vehicle of Rally Cycling Alongside NSX Supercar
More.......................
Clarity Electric still available for $199/month lease, but down payment has increased $600
More.......................
Driving impressions: Hondata's FlashPro for the FK8 Civic Type R
More.......................
American Honda Reports April Sales Results
More.......................
Honda reveals Everus EV Concept at Beijing International Auto Show
More.......................
RDX --> Re: 2019 RDX pricing?
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Is a G1 NSX w/4AT worth the huge price break?
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: The Fine Tradition of English Goalkeeping
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: Important Message
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: Indy 500
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Harley's Demise
Join Discussion......
Sales Experiences --> Re: Questions regarding: lease, then buy option
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Monaco
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: F1 - 2018 Monaco Grand Prix - Spoilers
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Tesla - facts behind the mirage
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Acura-when marketing went adrift
Join Discussion......
RDX --> Re: 3rd Generation Acura RDX Reviews
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Honda S660 Modulo X
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Mobileye claims their system detected the pedestrian, even with the crappy Uber video as input
Join Discussion......
Integra --> Re: 95 GSR DYNO
Join Discussion......
PR Photo Gallery - 2019 Acura RDX Advance
Read Article....................
PR Photo Gallery - 2019 Acura RDX A-Spec
Read Article....................
Photo Gallery - Some other cars from 2019 NYIAS
Read Article....................
TOV Video: 2019 Acura RDX Walk-around with LPL Steve Hansen
Read Article....................
TOV Photo Gallery: 2018 North American International Auto Show
Read Article....................
2018 Acura RLX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
  TOV News > All-New 10th Generation Honda Accord Launching This Year with Advanced New Powertrain Lineup > > Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - [1]
Author
    
RAV
Profile for RAV
V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-09-2017 21:25
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
The present 3.5 V6 gets 34 highway mpg. Adding direct injection and the 10 speed auto would easily raise this to 36 mpg. A 2.0t with the same horsepower would most certainly need premium fuel ( 20% more expensive ) and not get any better milege and maybe worse. So with the 2.0T you get a less refined engine, higher fuel costs and higher maintinance costs. The only party benefiting here is Honda. I for one are tired of the BS of all these turbo mileage benefits that do not exist.
BallerMDX
Profile for BallerMDX
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-09-2017 21:32
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It's already been confirmed the 2.0T will not require premium fuel.
RAV
Profile for RAV
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-09-2017 21:48
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.
just527
Profile for just527
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-09-2017 22:15
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
RAV wrote:
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.

We don't know that yet. All we know is that it's not going to make 300+ hp like the Type R. Some of the press have said they were told it actually makes more power than the J35.

bgreen83
Profile for bgreen83
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-09-2017 22:23
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
The survey Honda sent out to a few customers earlier this year suggested 3-4mpg more than the current V6. Don't be surprised if it's more than 36mpg on the highway.
Gfn8r
Profile for Gfn8r
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-09-2017 23:03
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
bgreen83 wrote:
The survey Honda sent out to a few customers earlier this year suggested 3-4mpg more than the current V6. Don't be surprised if it's more than 36mpg on the highway.


Oh yes, that survey!

Too bad that Honda doesn't seem to be thinking about the ultimate one..

..of decades-long customers abandoning ship after jumping the final shark!

This afternoon, I sent an E-Mail to my dealer and two of the salesfolk there with the link to the Honda presser. Received a reply this evening from one of the guys: after he received my message, as he was sitting at his desk trying to process the news, in walks a couple there to take delivery of a new Fit. Before he could pick up the phone to make sure the car was ready he got an angry phone call from a now-FORMER customer who had leased a string of Accord V6s from that dealer, and was informing him that he was taking his business elsewhere, effective immediately, because of Honda's decision, loud enough that his Fit customers could hear! (They have a pretty good Toyota franchise, and sadly, I'm going to be investigating that option, too, though unlike that customer, I'm at least going to test-drive the Accord before I officially proclaim that Honda left me! In fact, I'm going to try to arrange a multi-day test-drive of a Civic EX-T, just to see if I'll even be able to live with the lag and other drivability issues.)

So it's already starting, friends! That 10% is a loyal bunch! Pi$$ them off at your own risk!

JimmyEats
Profile for JimmyEats
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-10-2017 09:06
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
With the Civic they're trying to give customers every option from Civic's history (Coupe, Hatch, Sedans, Sport, Touring, Si, Type R), except the hybrid. But they need to add more color combinations.

Why wouldn't they use the same strategy with the Accord and give a V6 option?

Toyota on the other hand seems to have one goal of being the largest automobile manufacturer in the world. On it's own, that's not a very appealing goal.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-10-2017 23:57
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
just527 wrote:
RAV wrote:
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.

We don't know that yet. All we know is that it's not going to make 300+ hp like the Type R. Some of the press have said they were told it actually makes more power than the J35.



On paper, or officially? On paper the current V6 makes 278HP. In reality, it is closer to 290-300.

08NWBLKTLS
Profile for 08NWBLKTLS
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-11-2017 00:08
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
just527 wrote:
RAV wrote:
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.

We don't know that yet. All we know is that it's not going to make 300+ hp like the Type R. Some of the press have said they were told it actually makes more power than the J35.



On paper, or officially? On paper the current V6 makes 278HP. In reality, it is closer to 290-300.


On paper the 1.5t is underrated according to everyone that has done a dyno run with the 174hp version

just527
Profile for just527
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-11-2017 01:03
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
just527 wrote:
RAV wrote:
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.

We don't know that yet. All we know is that it's not going to make 300+ hp like the Type R. Some of the press have said they were told it actually makes more power than the J35.



On paper, or officially? On paper the current V6 makes 278HP. In reality, it is closer to 290-300.


On paper but I wouldn't be surprised if the 2.0T ends up being underrated as well.

Dren
Profile for Dren
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-11-2017 12:48
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I own a coupe V6 accord. I'd take the turbo over a V6 for the likely improvement in economy.
bluefz22
Profile for bluefz22
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-11-2017 17:39
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Little to no real world difference in fuel economy in turbo vs. NA engines. The Turbos are more complexity and more heat and I don't want one.
Gfn8r
Profile for Gfn8r
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-11-2017 18:29
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
bluefz22 wrote:
Little to no real world difference in fuel economy in turbo vs. NA engines. The Turbos are more complexity and more heat and I don't want one.


And how many 1/4-mile pulls can you do before the engine does an impression of the six Honda engines that went Tango-Uniform in May at Indy, two of which were in the big show when they went sky-high?!

bluefz22
Profile for bluefz22
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-11-2017 18:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Gfn8r wrote:
bluefz22 wrote:
Little to no real world difference in fuel economy in turbo vs. NA engines. The Turbos are more complexity and more heat and I don't want one.


And how many 1/4-mile pulls can you do before the engine does an impression of the six Honda engines that went Tango-Uniform in May at Indy, two of which were in the big show when they went sky-high?!


Lol. Then there's that. Doubt that durability will be as good as the NA engines.

mlody
Profile for mlody
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-12-2017 07:42
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
If the weight savings are true to what had been already stated, even if the turbo lost couple HPs compared to the existing V6, it will most likely still offer a better performance.
bluefz22
Profile for bluefz22
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-12-2017 10:37
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Some Honda owners just prefer the quietness and smoothness of 6 cylinders vs. 4 cylinders. We also are concerned with long term durability issues with Turbo vs. NA engines
Dren
Profile for Dren
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-12-2017 11:33
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
bluefz22 wrote:
Little to no real world difference in fuel economy in turbo vs. NA engines. The Turbos are more complexity and more heat and I don't want one.


The new 1.5t seems to return very good fuel economy. I expect similar results with the 2.0t vs the old V6.

A well designed turbo ICE will perform well and have the reliability to go with it.

Hondarulez
Profile for Hondarulez
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-12-2017 12:19
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
The current Civic Hatch 1.5T 6MT seems to be returning pretty good real world fuel economy:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-honda-civic-hatchback-15t-manual-test-review

C/D observed: 31 mpg combined
C/D observed 75-mph highway driving: 43 mpg

Durability/reliability remains to be seen. Though the 2.0T has been available for 2 years now.

In short:
Reliability - unknown factor without more data
Fuel economy - seems like it will be good in the real world based on another Honda's modern 1.5T
Power - probably about the same as J35, but the new Accord is supposed to be 200lb lighter
Sound & NVH - this would be my concern, as V6 just sounds different and more premium than I4.
Engine potential - I think the 2.0T will no doubt has more potential for aftermarket power increase while costing less money



owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-12-2017 19:45
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Dren wrote:
I own a coupe V6 accord. I'd take the turbo over a V6 for the likely improvement in economy.


We own 2 V6 Accords, one auto sedan and one manual coupe.

I am going to wager that the 2.0 REAL WORLD fuel savings aren't that extreme versus the V6. Our auto V6 handily outperforms the MT due to gearing, but we see very high 20's in the city and high 30's on the highway at averages of 80+MPH, over varying terrain and without EVER using ECO mode. I just don't see the turbo four killing that by much.

I am also about 100% certain that the turbo is going to hit a cliff in hot temperatures and high altitude environments, where you would have seen some power loss from a V6 or NA 4 banger, but nowhere what you will see from a highly boosted engine trying to keep itself together on 87 octane in 100+* temps.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-12-2017 22:49
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
08NWBLKTLS wrote:
owequitit wrote:
just527 wrote:
RAV wrote:
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.

We don't know that yet. All we know is that it's not going to make 300+ hp like the Type R. Some of the press have said they were told it actually makes more power than the J35.



On paper, or officially? On paper the current V6 makes 278HP. In reality, it is closer to 290-300.


On paper the 1.5t is underrated according to everyone that has done a dyno run with the 174hp version



Yes, but early results indicate that the Si version may not.

My point is that if you were dealing with a "278HP" V6, then you would be expecting 230-240HP at the wheels, whereas the real car is doing quite a bit better than that.

The real big question though is what happens when you start heat soaking the crap out of the turbo 4 and putting regular in it? Does it turn into a Focus ST?

VTEC_Inside
Profile for VTEC_Inside
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-13-2017 02:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
bluefz22 wrote:
Some Honda owners just prefer the quietness and smoothness of 6 cylinders vs. 4 cylinders. We also are concerned with long term durability issues with Turbo vs. NA engines


^This^

My Grandpa had a 2008 V6 and was trading up to a 2010 (long story, nothing wrong with car)... We tried the 4cyl and there was no question that it was enough power, even the noise wasn't too bad for the most part. I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but it didn't seem to want to do a 5-4 downshift if you wanted to accelerate at speed. I tried a few times and it would always go 5-3, which meant the revs came up over 3000rpm and it was clear I was driving the 4cyl... It's just not the same silky smooth quiet J series that will shove you into your seat without breaking a sweat.

I have to imagine that a new V6 is in the works for Acura. A 3.0L DOHC with a couple small snails on it would be pretty nice.

Maximania
Profile for Maximania
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-13-2017 04:01
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
08NWBLKTLS wrote:
owequitit wrote:
just527 wrote:
RAV wrote:
Yes, but the horsepower numbers will be down compared to the v6 because of the use of regular fuel. If the 2.0t used premium it could put out 280 to 3oo hp.

We don't know that yet. All we know is that it's not going to make 300+ hp like the Type R. Some of the press have said they were told it actually makes more power than the J35.



On paper, or officially? On paper the current V6 makes 278HP. In reality, it is closer to 290-300.


On paper the 1.5t is underrated according to everyone that has done a dyno run with the 174hp version



Yes, but early results indicate that the Si version may not.

My point is that if you were dealing with a "278HP" V6, then you would be expecting 230-240HP at the wheels, whereas the real car is doing quite a bit better than that.

The real big question though is what happens when you start heat soaking the crap out of the turbo 4 and putting regular in it? Does it turn into a Focus ST?



What results? Based on what? Here are actual results. Stock EX-T 1.5 Civic vs Stock Civic Si 1.5 (93 octane). Numbers don't matter as much as the difference between the two. At any rate, if the base Civic is underrated, then the Civic Si makes more power than it anyway.


Dren
Profile for Dren
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-13-2017 07:15
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
Dren wrote:
I own a coupe V6 accord. I'd take the turbo over a V6 for the likely improvement in economy.


We own 2 V6 Accords, one auto sedan and one manual coupe.

I am going to wager that the 2.0 REAL WORLD fuel savings aren't that extreme versus the V6. Our auto V6 handily outperforms the MT due to gearing, but we see very high 20's in the city and high 30's on the highway at averages of 80+MPH, over varying terrain and without EVER using ECO mode. I just don't see the turbo four killing that by much.

I am also about 100% certain that the turbo is going to hit a cliff in hot temperatures and high altitude environments, where you would have seen some power loss from a V6 or NA 4 banger, but nowhere what you will see from a highly boosted engine trying to keep itself together on 87 octane in 100+* temps.



My manual sees at best 32mpg in those conditions. Flat midwestern interstate driving at 80mph. That's the computer readout, so it's likely closer to 30mpg. In town, it's around 20mpg. I don't rip on it at all. The car performs very similar to my 8th gen Si sedan in economy, but doesn't require premium.

The 10spd 2.0t combo sounds like quite the nice pairing. The lower gearing should mask some of the boost lag, while the higher gears will provide good economy. I bet we'll see high 30s with that combo. But if you're claiming that with your automatic, then maybe there is little difference. I am curious how it will pair with the MT. Doesn't the automatic V6 have VCM and a different tune, or am I out on left field with that one?

CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-13-2017 10:09
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
Dren wrote:
I own a coupe V6 accord. I'd take the turbo over a V6 for the likely improvement in economy.


We own 2 V6 Accords, one auto sedan and one manual coupe.

I am going to wager that the 2.0 REAL WORLD fuel savings aren't that extreme versus the V6. Our auto V6 handily outperforms the MT due to gearing, but we see very high 20's in the city and high 30's on the highway at averages of 80+MPH, over varying terrain and without EVER using ECO mode. I just don't see the turbo four killing that by much.

I am also about 100% certain that the turbo is going to hit a cliff in hot temperatures and high altitude environments, where you would have seen some power loss from a V6 or NA 4 banger, but nowhere what you will see from a highly boosted engine trying to keep itself together on 87 octane in 100+* temps.



Yeah but you don't know that. This is all conjecture but certainly the goal for the engine is to meet emissions regulations, and to be more fuel efficient. Honda specifically said that this engine was developed with emphasis on cooling.

Fitdad
Profile for Fitdad
Re: V6 versus 2.0T Fiel Milage [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 06-13-2017 10:11
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
RAV wrote:
The present 3.5 V6 gets 34 highway mpg. Adding direct injection and the 10 speed auto would easily raise this to 36 mpg. A 2.0t with the same horsepower would most certainly need premium fuel ( 20% more expensive ) and not get any better milege and maybe worse. So with the 2.0T you get a less refined engine, higher fuel costs and higher maintinance costs. The only party benefiting here is Honda. I for one are tired of the BS of all these turbo mileage benefits that do not exist.


Well for starters the 2017 Accord V6 6AT is rated at 33 mpg highway.

And 25 mpg combined (21/33/25). The combined number is actually what matters for CAFE as I understand things - it's actually the thing that Honda has to pay attention to.

Oh and the competition. The Accord V6 might deliver great real-world numbers but the competition generally has better efficiency ratings for their "upmarket" engine - 26 or 27 mpg combined.

Is it unreasonable to think that Honda has just about reached the limit of efficiency with the 20 year old J-series? Look at the new DI 10AT J35 Odyssey - it's ratings are almost identical to the 2017 Odyssey with the 6AT and no DI. Maybe there just isn't much more Honda can do with it? Maybe adding those things to the Accord wouldn't make much of a difference either?

A weird comparison here might be the 330i. It's got about 250 hp from a 2.0T and it weighs 3500 lbs. It's rated 23/35/27.

I think the Accord 2.0T will be very similar to those numbers if not slightly better with less weight, more gears, and more focus on efficiency (tires especially but also tranny programming).

I think 28 mpg combined would be a pretty awesome engineering achievement actually given the size and likely straight line performance of the 2.0T - of course no one will give Honda any credit for it - but it seems to be a possibility. I'm expecting at least 27 mpg combined for sure.

31 mpg combined is the current leader in the clubhouse for the "family sedan" category - the H/K Sonata/Optima twins have it with the 1.6T powertrain. We'll see the Camry numbers soon enough.


 
Thread Page - [1]
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2018 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy
29 mobile: 0