2013 Honda Accord - Your take

[LTC8K6]

Are you kidding? The V6 pulls a 14 second quarter mile. The 4-banger does it in only 15.3 seconds.....

That's incredible for a family car.....and well worth it....

That's a V6 coupe vs a 4 cylinder sedan.

I'll take the 1 second 0-60 difference for the more fun driving and 6 mpg better fuel economy both city and highway.

The 4 cylinder 6M coupe is probably a little quicker than the sedan. Maybe even under 15 seconds?

1 second is just about unnoticeable on the street in traffic. The 4 cylinder is almost certainly better for cut and thrust driving. The V6 is probably typically nose heavy.

 

[power_hour]

That's a V6 coupe vs a 4 cylinder sedan.

I'll take the 1 second 0-60 difference for the more fun driving and 6 mpg better fuel economy both city and highway.

The 4 cylinder 6M coupe is probably a little quicker than the sedan. Maybe even under 15 seconds?

1 second is just about unnoticeable on the street in traffic. The 4 cylinder is almost certainly better for cut and thrust driving. The V6 is probably typically nose heavy.

My bullshit detector just went off. Do you have any facts to back up your ridiculous claims? cut and thrust driving? what is that exactly? jousting with your car?

Look I get it four bangers are great and all but c'mon any driver would rather have a V6. Effortless driving is why people pay the extra dough not stoplight racing. These are cruisers not racers.

 

[LTC8K6]

My bullshit detector just went off. Do you have any facts to back up your ridiculous claims? cut and thrust driving? what is that exactly? jousting with your car?

Look I get it four bangers are great and all but c'mon any driver would rather have a V6. Effortless driving is why people pay the extra dough not stoplight racing. These are cruisers not racers.

It's ridiculous not to be bothered by a 1 second difference?

They are apparently now better racers than ever...they handle very well now.

Yes, cut and thrust driving. Fairly common description.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-porsche-911-carrera-4-4s-first-drive-review

http://www.racer.com/cut-and-thrust-driving-the-ferrari-430-based-new-lancia-stratos/article/192914/

I have no idea what you are talking about otherwise. Several reviewers seemed to prefer the I4, and the I4 apparently handled better, even though the V6 was quicker in a drag race.

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 four-cylinder Accord.

Also, a couple posters here were happy to read about the I4 6M combo.

 

[RagingBITCH]

It's ridiculous not to be bothered by a 1 second difference?

They are apparently now better racers than ever...they handle very well now.

Yes, cut and thrust driving. Fairly common description.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-porsche-911-carrera-4-4s-first-drive-review

http://www.racer.com/cut-and-thrust-driving-the-ferrari-430-based-new-lancia-stratos/article/192914/

I have no idea what you are talking about otherwise. Several reviewers seemed to prefer the I4, and the I4 apparently handled better, even though the V6 was quicker in a drag race.



Also, a couple posters here were happy to read about the I4 6M combo.

I'm going to sound like I'm just being a devils advocate for no reason, (not trying to be a dick) but are you new to Accords? The I4 6M combo has been available again since the 5th gen. Nothing about the manual in an Accord is new, no matter if it's a K or J series engine. The manual option has been the preferred choice for some time now amongst anyone wanting to push the Accord beyond being a dependable point A-B car. (IE, the auto tuner boys) I guess I fail to see how it's "big news" or makes people happy - it's always been a choice.

And to play nice, I agree with your statements in your other post. The I4 stick does net you better times. (The 7th gen manual I4 was faster than the 6th gen V6, stick or auto) The 4 is plenty for most people, but having driven around my fiancee's new EDGE, it's nice having that extra effortless power over the normal high revs you get when you push the 4. I'd still stick with the 4, not for the bobbing and weaving but simply for getting a little bit extra gas mileage out of it.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'm going to sound like I'm just being a devils advocate for no reason, (not trying to be a dick) but are you new to Accords? The I4 6M combo has been available again since the 5th gen. Nothing about the manual in an Accord is new, no matter if it's a K or J series engine. The manual option has been the preferred choice for some time now amongst anyone wanting to push the Accord beyond being a dependable point A-B car. (IE, the auto tuner boys) I guess I fail to see how it's "big news" or makes people happy - it's always been a choice.

And to play nice, I agree with your statements in your other post. The I4 stick does net you better times. (The 7th gen manual I4 was faster than the 6th gen V6, stick or auto) The 4 is plenty for most people, but having driven around my fiancee's new EDGE, it's nice having that extra effortless power over the normal high revs you get when you push the 4. I'd still stick with the 4, not for the bobbing and weaving but simply for getting a little bit extra gas mileage out of it.

I never said anything was new about it. Not sure where you got that from.

Other than the partially corrected error in my V6 post, which you still seem to be using, I haven't claimed any 6M's are new.

I posted the link to the I4 6M sedan review because of how much they liked the new Accord and how quick it was.

To wit, you are inventing errors I never made, or continuing to harp on one error that I already corrected, albeit incompletely.

 

[Ryan]

That's a V6 coupe vs a 4 cylinder sedan.

I'll take the 1 second 0-60 difference for the more fun driving and 6 mpg better fuel economy both city and highway.

The 4 cylinder 6M coupe is probably a little quicker than the sedan. Maybe even under 15 seconds?

1 second is just about unnoticeable on the street in traffic. The 4 cylinder is almost certainly better for cut and thrust driving. The V6 is probably typically nose heavy.

Don't look now - the sedan can pull nearly the same....1/4 mile in 14.1 seconds: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-honda-accord-sedan-v-6-test-review

With that said...there is less than a 50lb difference between the Accord Sport sedan and the EX Coupe....which amounts to nothing considering the drivetrains are the same.

 

[LTC8K6]

Don't look now - the sedan can pull nearly the same....1/4 mile in 14.1 seconds: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-honda-accord-sedan-v-6-test-review

With that said...there is less than a 50lb difference between the Accord Sport sedan and the EX Coupe....which amounts to nothing considering the drivetrains are the same.

I have been linking to the CD reviews all along...so I've seen that.

Had we been talking about a V6 with a slushbox, I would have linked it.

 

[Ryan]

I have been linking to the CD reviews all along...so I've seen that.

Had we been talking about a V6 with a slushbox, I would have linked it.

You're really splitting hairs here - being argumentative for no reason. I see this fairly often with your posts....

Let's deconstruct this argument from the beginning:

The V6 6M coupe doesn't seem to offer enough performance boost over the I4 to justify buying it.

To that, I responded that the V6 Coupe was indeed MUCH quicker - more than a second faster than the 4cyl in the 1/4 mile. That is a HUGE measurable difference.

Then you said:

That's a V6 coupe vs a 4 cylinder sedan.

Which I demolished with an article that shows the sedan is capable of performing just as quickly (regardless of which transmission is selected, the V6 is just as potent regardless of which transmission or body style it is in).

On top of that, the 4cyl Coupe 6mt is nearly the same weight as the 4cyl 6mt Sport Sedan - with the drivetrains being the exact same, your statement that we cannot compare 1/4 mile times due to body style differences is completed BS.

What the fuck are you even arguing about?

 

[LTC8K6]

You're really splitting hairs here - being argumentative for no reason. I see this fairly often with your posts....

Let's deconstruct this argument from the beginning:



To that, I responded that the V6 Coupe was indeed MUCH quicker - more than a second faster than the 4cyl in the 1/4 mile. That is a HUGE measurable difference.

Then you said:


Which I demolished with an article that shows the sedan is capable of performing just as quickly (regardless of which transmission is selected, the V6 is just as potent regardless of which transmission or body style it is in).

On top of that, the 4cyl Coupe 6mt is nearly the same weight as the 4cyl 6mt Sport Sedan - with the drivetrains being the exact same, your statement that we cannot compare 1/4 mile times due to body style differences is completed BS.

What the fuck are you even arguing about?

I had already linked to both. I already knew the numbers. Did you not read the thread?

Not sure why you bothered to repeat them to me. Not sure why you care what cars I like or why I like them.

I reiterate, the V6 6M is not worth buying over the I4 6M Sport. That's an opinion.

You are welcome to one of your own.

 

[Ryan]

I had already linked to both. I already knew the numbers. Did you not read the thread?

Not sure why you bothered to repeat them to me. Not sure why you care what cars I like or why I like them.

I reiterate, the V6 6M is not worth buying over the I4 6M Sport. That's an opinion.

You are welcome to one of your own.

Ah, I have found your problem - you never presented your argument as an opinion. In the future, it would behoove you to say "I don't think" before such a statement so it doesn't appear as if you are trying to state a fact/universal truth.

 

[LTC8K6]

The V6 6M coupe doesn't seem to offer enough performance boost over the I4 to justify buying it. The I4 6M is probably a better drive.

I think it's abundantly clear that this is an opinion, and not a definite one. Certainly not enough controversy to rant about.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Are you guys really arguing about 1/4 mile times/weight etc on a family sedan?

Really?

I think new accord looks horrible. Honda is slowly turning into Toyota.

They must've hired one of Nissans/BMW designers or something cause their styling has been downhill # of years. They even managed to ruin the oddysey......

Just me though.

I LOVED Civics/Accords/CRx etc of the 80s and 90s......still my favorite.

 

[LTC8K6]

Are you guys really arguing about 1/4 mile times/weight etc on a family sedan?

Really?

I think new accord looks horrible. Honda is slowly turning into Toyota.

They must've hired one of Nissans/BMW designers or something cause their styling has been downhill # of years. They even managed to ruin the oddysey......

Just me though.

I LOVED Civics/Accords/CRx etc of the 80s and 90s......still my favorite.

I'm not.

I just said that 6.6 to 60 for the 4 banger 6M sport sedan was nice...and it is. In fact, it's amazing to me what we have available today.

 

[heymrdj]

Are you guys really arguing about 1/4 mile times/weight etc on a family sedan?

Really?

I think new accord looks horrible. Honda is slowly turning into Toyota.

They must've hired one of Nissans/BMW designers or something cause their styling has been downhill # of years. They even managed to ruin the oddysey......

Just me though.

I LOVED Civics/Accords/CRx etc of the 80s and 90s......still my favorite.

I think all of us have a small place in our heart for the boxier more simplistic vehicles of the 80's and 90's. But the fact is the companies don't have a choice, plain and simple. Euro styling is what's selling, and on top of that the curved cars yield the increased EPA mileage that companies are being gutted to maintain. So I can't really consider the styling a con.

 

[vi edit]

I'm not. I just said that 6.6 to 60 for the 4 banger 6M sport sedan was nice...and it is. In fact, it's amazing to me what we have available today.

I'm am actually in quite a bit of amazement at the refinement, economy, and performance that we are seeing in 4 cylinder engines(and the transmissions for them). They really are worlds of improvement over the buzzy, anemic engines that we "settled" for 15 years ago. They are legitimate choices for all but the most power happy people out there in a midsize and smaller sedan.

 

[gus6464]

Look at the Honda CR-Z. Not the fastest car out there by a long shot but still pretty damn fun to drive. If Honda found a way to give it 40-50 more HP while still retaining pretty decent MPG it would sell like hotcakes.

 

[Vdubchaos]

I think all of us have a small place in our heart for the boxier more simplistic vehicles of the 80's and 90's. But the fact is the companies don't have a choice, plain and simple. Euro styling is what's selling, and on top of that the curved cars yield the increased EPA mileage that companies are being gutted to maintain. So I can't really consider the styling a con.

Euro styling? I have no idea what you are talking about.

Car design is in it's "ugly/over the top" phase.

If you look at the history of car design it goes from Boxy to Curvy to over the top/ugly.

Boxy is up next.

In general, styling is really a personal preference. Personally I don't like current designs at all. It's the melted plastic design. It's not classy/clean or beautiful to me. Of course this doesn't apply to all new cars (there is some very nice designs out there).

 

[dbk]

Would you guys say it's bad decision to buy a used 2012 EX-L coupe V6 17k mi. for around $23k over a brand new 2013 Sport sedan? The 8th gen seems really outdated compared to the 9th gen but I want the V6, leather. I've driven plenty of 8th gens but haven't driven the 9th gen yet. Any former 8th gen owners upgrade to the 9th gen Accord??

 

[SearchMaster]

The 9G is universally lauded as "better" - quieter, better handling, better tech, etc. But if the V6 and leather are high on your list then you're looking at $23K versus $30K (new), so you have to decide how much the other things are worth to you.

 

[evident]

the 8th gen is probably decent but there's no way i'd pass up on the 9th gen. that car is simply stunning

 

[bigi]

The new Accord is by far the best looking sedan in its price range. Honda claims that the new hybrid will do 50MPG as well.

 

[SniperWulf]

The 9G sedans favor the Genesis to me. Still not my cup of tea.

 

[BlitzPuppet]

I love blind hate towards CVTs.

I personally don't mind it much, I compare it to prop pitch in planes; it just makes sense in terms of an evolution of car/mechanical design. Just because it's different doesn't mean it sucks, how many people STILL piss all over geared ATs just because they aren't manual? Sometimes it just seems like telling monkeys there are better ways to go about things than just throwing their shit at each other.

My girlfriend got her 13 Accord after coming from an '11 Civic. She LOVES her Accord, nice display, awesome backup camera, awesome gas mileage, quiet ride (way quieter than her civic) and she enjoys driving it.

 

[Kaido]

2013 Honda Accord - Your take

I went in to get a 2013 Accord and left with a Civic. The redesigned 2013 Civic is awesome. I felt a lot more comfortable in it at 6'1" than I did in the Accord, which surprisingly felt smaller & more cramped. We're a couple months into it and have really been enjoying it. The base model has all the goodies, the only thing we added were heated seats on the cloth seats, since we didn't want leather.

Can't go wrong with a Honda!