Acura & Honda's future info - Other Cars Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Acura & Honda's future info
Monday, August 27, 2007 5:07 PM
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T.
Acura opened its design center in California in May, a step toward distancing itself from sibling Honda Division. But critics say that because there is no V-8 in Acura's future, the brand will remain a second-tier luxury marque, what ever.

TSX: The small sedan will be redesigned for the 2009 model year. It may get the same turbocharged four-cylinder engine that is in the RDX crossover.

TL: A redesign is scheduled for the 2009 model year. All-wheel drive will be available. The new 3.5-liter V-6 engine is expected to put out close to 300 hp. A V-6 diesel may be available for the 2010 model year.

RL: Acura's flagship sedan was redesigned for the 2006 model year but has disappointed Acura and its dealers. Consumers refused to pay a premium price for a V-6-powered vehicle. The RL is scheduled to be redesigned for the 2011 model year. There has been no word on whether it will get a V-8. Some sources say it may get the V-10 scheduled for the next-generation NSX.

NSX: No firm date has been given for the next-generation two-passenger sports car's debut. Acura sources say it could be the 2010 or 2011 model year. Acura showed an advanced sports car concept at the Detroit auto show in January, but it had no engine. Acura sources say the company hasn't decided whether the next NSX will be powered by a V-10 or if it will be a mid-engine, rwd car or a front-engine awd vehicle. Sources say the V-10 may generate more than 500 hp.

RDX: Acura's new small crossover went on sale as a 2007 model. No major changes are scheduled, but sources say the company is rethinking the four-cylinder turbocharged engine offered as the only powerplant. Because of the RDX's premium price, a V-6 also may be offered.

MDX: The mid-sized crossover was redesigned for the 2007 model year. No major changes are planned in the coming years. A V-6 diesel will be available for the 2010 or 2011 model year.

Honda on the other hand is determined to be the greenest car company. It plans to bring out a wider range of hybrid, diesel and fuel cell vehicles over the next several years.

Fit: This is the smallest car Honda sells here. U.S. sales began in April 2006. But that model has been sold since 2002 in Japan and other markets. A redesigned version debuts this fall in Japan as a five-door hatchback. Honda sources say U.S. dealers won't get the redesigned car before the 2009 model year at the earliest. What isn't clear is whether Honda will continue to export the current hatchback to the United States until the redesigned model goes on sale here.

FCX: Honda's fuel cell car goes on sale next year as a 2009 model. The four-door is expected to have a 270-mile range. The interior features a biofabric partly made from corn. The car will not look like the concept FCX. Stephen Ellis, Honda's fuel cell marketing manager, says the company will market the redesigned vehicle aggressively.

New hybrid model: Honda will introduce a hybrid for the 2010 model year that is smaller than the Civic. Sources say it will be a sedan version of the redesigned Fit but will have a different name.

Remix: The once-popular Civic CRX sport hatchback may return in spirit to the United States as a sporty hybrid for the 2011 model year. The three-door CRX came to the United States in the early 1980s. It was replaced in 1992 by the del Sol, which was killed in 1997. Honda showed the two-seat sporty Remix concept at the Los Angeles auto show last November. It was designed to fit a small, front-wheel-drive platform.

Civic: Mugen, a company known for making race car engines and racing components, is helping develop the limited-edition 2008 Civic Mugen Si sedan. This is the first time Honda has put the Mugen name on a vehicle sold in the United States. Honda has a close relationship with Mugen in Japan. The Mugen is 0.6 inches lower and 1.1 inches longer than the stock Si sedan. The car features a front spoiler with a sports grille bearing the Mugen Si emblem, along with a rear wing. But the car will be powered by the same 197-hp 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine used in the Si sedan and coupe. Honda plans to sell about 1,000 Mugens here with a sticker price under $30,000. The car will be assembled in Japan. Sales begin this fall. A Civic redesign is scheduled for the 2011 model year.

Accord: The redesigned 2008 Accord sedan has a bigger interior and exterior than the current model. The Accord will offer a 3.5-liter V-6 making more than 260 hp. The base four-cylinder engine makes over 175 hp. V-6 versions have Honda's next-generation variable-cylinder management system. The Accord hybrid was killed at the end of the 2007 model year, paving the way for a diesel.
"Diesel is more effective for Accord and above" models, Dan Bonawitz, American Honda's vice president of corporate planning and logistics.

S2000: The two-seat convertible gets a stiffer suspension for the 2008 model year to give it more of a race car feel. The engine is the same, but the 2008 car is lighter than the current model and will sport large front and rear spoilers. A removable aluminum hard top replaces the convertible soft top.

CR-V: Redesigned for the 2007 model year; it will get the company's new clean four-cylinder diesel for the 2010 model year.

New crossover: This new seven-passenger vehicle will be slotted between the CR-V and the Pilot. Some sources think it will be a version of the Crossroad, which went on sale in Japan in February. U.S. sales are expected in the 2010 or 2011 model year. The vehicle likely will be powered by a 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine. Fwd and all-wheel-drive versions are expected.

Pilot: A redesign is expected for the 2009 model year. Expect more dramatic styling, similar to what Honda did for the CR-V. It will be powered by a bigger V-6 engine. A V-6 diesel will be available for the 2010 model year.

Ridgeline: The mid-sized truck has not sold well but may be in a sweet spot because of new CAFE requirements. A V-6 diesel will be available when it is redesigned for the 2011 model year.

Element: Freshened for the 2007 model year; it is due for a redesign for the 2010 model year.

Odyssey: The minivan will be reskinned for the 2008 model year. Changes include tweaks to the grille and taillights.
The Odyssey will be the first Honda model to offer the company's new V-6 clean diesel engine. The engine will be offered on the redesigned 2010 Odyssey.





>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----


Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Monday, August 27, 2007 10:54 PM
urban
I still miss the prelude... it would be nice to see it in Honda's future plans






[ o ][][][][][][][][ o ] coach built xj ( o   [][][][][][][]/  o ) hid wj
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Monday, August 27, 2007 10:57 PM
Ace140
Remix huh? Interesting....



Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:11 AM
97cavie24ls(™)
yay for second level wanna be luxo cars , lol

and lack of V8 power







Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 4:40 PM
Jookycola
my question is this. Honda makes fine cars, they're high reving motors are fun to run. but why can't they build anything with any torque?
It's like they defiantly refuse to switch up their gear ratios to give their cars some grunt. I know that was the selling point of my Z24. I loved that "right there" power it had. It makes the car fell more sporty and fun i think. Does Honda have a reason why they refuse to up their Tq. numbers?

The current Civic Si with 200hp would be awesome if it had close to 200tq to match. They build cars with amazing motors that produce like 200hp, then give it a tranny with 120tq...that's never made any sense to me.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 6:09 PM
Sip
^ ^ HUH>?

The reason they 'don't produce any torque' is because they have comparatively smaller displacement. Good luck getting 200lb-ft out of a 2.0L block with no forced induction.




www.drluc.ca
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:01 PM
Jookycola
Sip wrote:^ ^ HUH>?

The reason they 'don't produce any torque' is because they have comparatively smaller displacement. Good luck getting 200lb-ft out of a 2.0L block with no forced induction.


Huh?
What does forced induction have to do with gear ratios? The current Civic Si has a 2 liter that produces 197hp, yet they have it very conservatively geared at 132 pound-feet of torque. 132!?
A 2000 Cavalier Z24 has more liters and more torque 2.4 - 150hp - 155lb-tq. Pretty evenly matched, The current Scion Tc is about the same. They could totaly slap a proper tranny with say...170tq on the Si and give it the "right there" grunt a so-called performance model should have. But they don't, It's a pretty simple question. Why not?

Why do they always use a rediculously low gear set with their cars? It just never really made sense to me i guess.

I know the HP numbers are at almost redline, but Honda is considered a leader in engine technology and it's just amazed me that they can never build a motor with mid-range power and then match that with an acceptable transmission.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:59 PM
Sip


That torque figure is from an engine dyno. That is power and tq at the crankshaft. It has nothing to do with the transmission, because that 132 lb-ft tq is measured before the transmission.



BTW a 2.4 L engine is 0.4L larger than a 2.0L engine, that is why there is 155lb ft.




www.drluc.ca
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, August 28, 2007 8:01 PM
Tribals
Jookycola wrote:my question is this. Honda makes fine cars, they're high reving motors are fun to run. but why can't they build anything with any torque?
Well our 05 Honda Odyssey is rated at 244HP and 240lb.-ft........pretty good getup and go for a tank.



Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 8:15 AM
Evol...???
Well duh Jooky. didn't you know if you want better ft./lbs. of torque all you do is slap a turbo or supercharger on your transmission. that's why z24s have such high TQ stats, they have a little supercharger in the getrag transmission. jeez i though everyone knew that.

Thankfully Sip made (a little) more sense in his second post. yes the 197hp is rated at the crank and not the wheels. but that still does bot answer the question, the crank hp still does not determine the TQ specs of the transmission. for example the twin-cam LD9 is rated 150hp at the crank on an engine dyno as well and is still mated to a getrag transmission with 155 ft./lbs/ of torque. A much more well matched powertrain combo. so you don't need forced induction to get better tq, it's all how the car is geared. Now that, that arguement is defused we can now return to the original question. Why does honda build fast cars with no torque?
I firmly believe honda gears their cars for economy and balance first and foremost. they gear their tranny's for real world driving. contrary to what the F&F movies tell us not everyone that owns a honda races them. my own 65 year old mother has an accord. And in knowing that they put the power further up the power band so if you decide to be vin diesel it's there for you. But if you decide to just drive your nice little honda like a normal person day to day, it will return to you that expected 30 or so (give or take) mpg.

And now back on topic. That Remix is funky and almost (dare i say it) kind of Sciony looking. but doing a google image search on it i realized that the front end design was already somewhat incorporated into the new CRV. speaking of CRV i am so excited about their 4 banger diesel. that's awesome. but can't believe thay are going to keep the uber heavy RL v6 powered. no doubt that is a huge disapointment.






2007 Corvette Z51 | Suzuki Swift GTi SCCA racer | 2008 Edge
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 3:39 PM
Sip
Evol...??? wrote:Well duh Jooky. didn't you know if you want better ft./lbs. of torque all you do is slap a turbo or supercharger on your transmission. that's why z24s have such high TQ stats, they have a little supercharger in the getrag transmission. jeez i though everyone knew that.

Thankfully Sip made (a little) more sense in his second post. yes the 197hp is rated at the crank and not the wheels. but that still does bot answer the question, the crank hp still does not determine the TQ specs of the transmission. for example the twin-cam LD9 is rated 150hp at the crank on an engine dyno as well and is still mated to a getrag transmission with 155 ft./lbs/ of torque. A much more well matched powertrain combo. so you don't need forced induction to get better tq, it's all how the car is geared. Now that, that arguement is defused we can now return to the original question. Why does honda build fast cars with no torque?



1st I never said anything about a supercharged transmission. I said good luck getting 200lb-ft tq out of a 2L BLOCK without Forced induction. That was in reference to the below quote about 200lb-ft from this 200hp MOTOR. Then he references 120lb-ft ( . Although I'm not sure why he says 120lb-ft tranny, I guessed he is confusing engine tq with the torque multiplying factor of transmission gear ratios.


Jookycola wrote:my question is this. Honda makes fine cars, they're high reving motors are fun to run. but why can't they build anything with any torque?
It's like they defiantly refuse to switch up their gear ratios to give their cars some grunt. I know that was the selling point of my Z24. I loved that "right there" power it had. It makes the car fell more sporty and fun i think. Does Honda have a reason why they refuse to up their Tq. numbers?

The current Civic Si with 200hp would be awesome if it had close to 200tq to match. They build cars with amazing motors that produce like 200hp, then give it a tranny with 120tq ...that's never made any sense to me.



2nd I make sense in both posts because:
Let's examine the gear ratios, engine torque and then torque multiply factors of these ratios along with final drive ratio

2006 Si
1: 3.267
2: 2.130
3: 1.517
4: 1.147
5: 0.921
6: 0.659
Final: 4.763

Getrag Muncie:
* 1st gear: 3.50:1
* 2nd gear: 2.05:1 (2.19:1 on 2.0 L turbo and some Quad-4 applications)
* 3rd gear: 1.38:1
* 4th gear: 0.94:1
* 5th gear: 0.72:1
* Reverse: 3.41:1
* Final drive ratio: 3.61:1

The tq to the ground that give you the "right there grunt" is a product of the engine tq at a given RPM multiplied by the gear ratio and final drive ratio. For simplicity sake lets assume the tq curve on this engin is flat, meaning constant across the RPM band, and produces 132lb-ft (the figure you spit out).

In 1st gear you get 3.267x4.763x 132= 2054 lb-ft . *That is theoretical tq to the wheels.
2nd: 2.13x4.763x132 = 1339 lb-ft

Now Compare that to if (hypothetically) the Si's K20 was mated to the getrag Muncie with it's final drive:

1st: 3.50x3.61x132bl-ft= 1667
2nd: 2.18x3.61x132 = 1038

As you can see the getrag would produce less torque to the wheels.

Jookycola wrote: The current Civic Si has a 2 liter that produces 197hp, yet they have it very conservatively geared at 132 pound-feet of torque. 132!?
A 2000 Cavalier Z24 has more liters and more torque 2.4 - 150hp - 155lb-tq. Pretty evenly matched, The current Scion Tc is about the same. They could totaly slap a proper tranny with say...170tq on the Si and give it the "right there" grunt a so-called performance model should have. But they don't, It's a pretty simple question. Why not?


So you see, you talk about this 120lb-ft (or 170lb-ft or 200lb-ft tranny) like it is an entity producing torque, when in fact a transmission (gearset) produces NO TORQUE. It is a torque multiplier. Any way you look at it, When you say "slap a 170lb-ft tranny on it" you are confused. Honda could change the gear ratio or final drive ratio to increase the torque in a given gear. But that would be stupid because they would be sacrificing top speed/cruising speed and or acceleration if the gear ratios are not closed (large gap in ratios in order to satisfy top/crusing speed/ MPG)

In conclusion: Honda does a fine job mating gear ratios (in balance), and I am not wrong or confused (at least I hope not) If anyone sees where I am in error in my understanding of transmissions please show me.

I'm not trying to be a prick, just setting the record straight.




www.drluc.ca

Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 3:40 PM
Sip
Pardon the Bold, I forgot to close the tab and there is no edit button.




www.drluc.ca
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:24 PM
Evol...???

Um...........right, anyways.









2007 Corvette Z51 | Suzuki Swift GTi SCCA racer | 2008 Edge
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Friday, August 31, 2007 10:59 PM
toyotaz87
Honda doesn't build engines with low-end torque because... well, that just wouldn't be Honda, now would it? but really, I think Honda does that for a number of reasons which don't appeal to you or me, but apparently do to Honda freaks. And I understand Honda makes great transmissions, in fact, that's what they get the most praise for in automotive journalism: their transmissions have well-spaced gear ratios and smooth shift action, etc. but you can multiply nothing a whole lot of times and still come out with nothing; Honda engines don't have flat torque curves- you have to wait for VTEC to kick in (about the point on the tach. as a guy in a Z24 shifts), and then it has some power, but still a pretty small amount of torque. Jookycola seems rather confused about how engines and transmissions work to gether and how horsepower is measured.
Back to the Original Post:
Quote:

TSX: The small sedan will be redesigned for the 2009 model year. It may get the same turbocharged four-cylinder engine that is in the RDX crossover.

that would be pretty cool...
Quote:

TL: A redesign is scheduled for the 2009 model year. All-wheel drive will be available. The new 3.5-liter V-6 engine is expected to put out close to 300 hp. A V-6 diesel may be available for the 2010 model year.

would that be SH-AWD? that's the only thing missing from the current TL A-spec, IMO. that's a fine-lookin' car
Quote:

FCX: Honda's fuel cell car goes on sale next year as a 2009 model. The four-door is expected to have a 270-mile range. The interior features a biofabric partly made from corn. The car will not look like the concept FCX. Stephen Ellis, Honda's fuel cell marketing manager, says the company will market the redesigned vehicle aggressively.

No matter how good the car is, it's less environmentally friendly ("green") than a gasoline-only car. Hydrogen isn't a source of energy. unless we find a naurally-occuring source of Hydrogen, it will remain nothing more than a means to transport energy. It's less "green" than gasoline because it is produced primarily by electrolosis (running an electric current through water, causing the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms to separate). Electrolosis requires electricity to perform, and where does most of the electricity in the U.S. (and the world) come from? you guessed it- burning fossil fuels. Fuel-cell technology in a car is further "less green" because the production of the batteries and other specialty materials required release additional pollutants during manufactrunig that are not applicable to other automotive production processes, while most of the polutants generated by conventional-automotive manufacturing are still present. This is a very quick little summary of the major feasability issues with fuel-cell technology and I could continue, but I have other subjects to cover. Moving on:
Quote:

Ridgeline: The mid-sized truck has not sold well but may be in a sweet spot because of new CAFE requirements. A V-6 diesel will be available when it is redesigned for the 2011 model year.

There's a reason the Ridgeline hasn't sold well: it isn't a real truck, yet it's too big and bulky to really be considered a car(and has that bed in the back). I mean, check it out: if someone told you they were getting a vehicle with a unibody structure, a transverse V-6, and all-wheel drive, your first thought would probably be more along the lines of a car-based SUV or a "crossover", both of which are really just overgrown station wagons, sometimes with varying degrees of minivan and truck-based SUV influances.
so, basically, the Honda Ridgeline is a huge, fat car with a truck bed (sorta thing) grafted onto the back. Besides, if you're getting a truck, don't you want low-end torque for towing and hauling, especially in a car that weighs well over 4000 lbs. empty? a diesel engine might fix that torque problem, but it's still transverse-mounted in a unibody platform

On another note, I really like the idea of all these diesel vehicles. If you ask me, we really don't have enough diesel cars on the roads in America today.



LD9 F23 FTW!!
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Sunday, September 02, 2007 6:29 PM
Sip
Evol...??? wrote:
Um...........right, anyways.


Cool Smiley, but rolling your eyes make you look like a teenage girl. If there is something wrong with my understanding of transmissions and torque, please enlighten me.




www.drluc.ca
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Sunday, September 02, 2007 6:35 PM
Evol...???
oh noes!
name calling?
so big of you.






2007 Corvette Z51 | Suzuki Swift GTi SCCA racer | 2008 Edge
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Sunday, September 02, 2007 6:43 PM
John H [CavalierKid]
wow at this thread..

1st

MOST honda cars are <2.0 due to cost reasons over seas.

<1.0 liter
1.0-2.0 liter
2.0 + liter.

the 2.0+ falls into a higher cost insurence bracket.. hence while almost all their cars are 2.0 and smallers with the suvs and bigger lux cars being bigger motors..

2nd

serious, how much torque can you honestly expect a N/A 1.6 to make?? its a rev happy motor that lives that 8000 rpm range. and due to their short geared tranny, it acts as a torque mulitplier, and gets them in their high power band just as fast as any other car.


sip is completely right on this.

and anyoen who has ever drove in a civic b16 or integra type r knows it. going down the freeway in 5th gear at 80mph and your in that 4500-5000 rpm range area. i know when i had my 91 hatchback with a b16. it would hit 5000 rpms in 5th right at 80mph


http://www.myspace.com/15102113

12.5@116 2.0 60ft
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Sunday, September 02, 2007 6:57 PM
RedFive
Tribals wrote:
Jookycola wrote:my question is this. Honda makes fine cars, they're high reving motors are fun to run. but why can't they build anything with any torque?
Well our 05 Honda Odyssey is rated at 244HP and 240lb.-ft........pretty good getup and go for a tank.


I have a civic si and it feels kinda torquey. its not like LSx torquey but it was about as fun as my z24 was. isn't there like country restrictions too regarding a max kph? i would guess that would keep hp & tq numbers in a certain range too. and maybe the whole torque thing comes down to e.p.a. ratings too somewhere. honda couldn't advertise themselves as the greenest car maker if they're epa scores were as bad as, say Dodge. honda prolly figures you want more torque get a bigger motor or look toward aftermarket as long as the product they put out meets their standards.

i could be way off but that's what i think. i also have no mechanical knowledge at all so i can't say who's right or wrong, and i refuse to take sides when things on jbo turn into childish pissing contests. that's just as good of info i can offer, with what i think i know.
hehe.
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Sunday, September 02, 2007 7:05 PM
Sip
Evol...??? wrote:oh noes!
name calling?
so big of you.


If you try to make someone look stupid, and it backfires, leave it alone. Don't continue to roll your eyes. Thats all I'm saying.
Truce?




www.drluc.ca
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Sunday, September 02, 2007 7:38 PM
Jookycola
whoa, whoa, whoa.

i ran out of posts when asked that question.
that's first time that's happened since i stopped being premium. It was not meant to start a flame war, i thought it was a good question. It had some good answers. I just thought an s200 has all that hp and kinda weak tq numbers and thought that was odd for a sports car. but even more odd, i had the chance to drive one this weekend and
HELLO!
that is actually a really fast car. A really cramped car too, but loads of fun. I got where you were going with what you were saying Sip, you just lost me in there somewhere with tha n/a boost talk. But i get what you mean now, my question was answered. And evol kinda echoed what i was already thinking before when i originally asked the question.

I actually have a new question. no fighting on this one
lol
It seems like the Civic is going upmarket to replace the slot where accord was. (now that accord has out grown mid-sized catagory) and i'm guessing the Fit will slot into Civics old "entry level" spot. where does a car like the remix sit in the lineup then? Price it to close to civic si coupe and it will wash out that segment...too cheap and people will mock it as a poor mans crx.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, September 04, 2007 9:07 AM
Boardorgohome
[quote=97cavie24ls(™)]yay for second level wanna be luxo cars , lol

and lack of V8 power

cavaliers.... yay for second level wannabe fast cars,lol

funny part is, put up honda's newer v6 accord vs the v8 mustangs and camaros and watch some v8 fags walk home crying



2007 GM Tuner Bash...HELL YEA
PA,MD,NJ,DE,NY and all states north caravan

Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, September 04, 2007 5:47 PM
Jonathan
Sounds like Honda will have some pretty sweet cars. I think it's great that companies are offering diesel engines in mainstream cars.

I cant' wait for the new TSX. I hope it is as awesome as the present one is, but better. I heard a while ago that there might be a 2 door TSX to kinda fill in the open RSX slot, I guess not.
Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Tuesday, September 04, 2007 6:13 PM
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T.
Jookycola wrote:whoa, whoa, whoa.

i ran out of posts when asked that question.
that's first time that's happened since i stopped being premium. It was not meant to start a flame war, i thought it was a good question. It had some good answers. I just thought an s200 has all that hp and kinda weak tq numbers and thought that was odd for a sports car. but even more odd, i had the chance to drive one this weekend and

Jooky 162ft-lb of Torque is nothing to sneeze at for a N/A 2.2L I-4. There is a misperception that because Honda's HP figure is sky high the lowly number next to HP----TQ is weak, but in fact it is either in line our at times higher then what their displacement calls for. Not to mention their cars are relatively lighter too.
Honda does impressive engineering.



>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----

Re: Acura & Honda's future info
Wednesday, September 05, 2007 11:47 PM
toyotaz87
I agree that Honda cars are well-engineered, but that doesn't change the fact that they focus more on top-end peak horsepower numbers (while still maintaining driveability, fuel efficiency, reliability, and all that other stuff that auto manufacturers care so much about) than on mid-range torque and power. That's fine if you like to rev your car to more than 6k and don't mind downshifting every time you want to accelerate from cruising speed, or if you simply don't care that much about performance. I respect Honda's engineering and a few Honda drivers, but it's not my style. "To each his own."

Anyway, it seems like this thread is kinda off-track. Is anyone else even discussing the original post?



LD9 F23 FTW!!
Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search

Copyright © 1999 - 2025 GM Enthusiast Network
GM Enthusiast Network is not affiliated with the General Motors Corporation