No more V6 in the Accord. I wonder when the Camry will lose its V6…
I’ve against the trend to go to the four cylinder engines in everything particularly because it is driven by government regulations more than the market. But I will have to say that Malibu loaner that I had with a four in it, had quite a bit of pep. Surprising to me. Not at all like the Jeep 4 cyl that was DOA. Or maybe its the transmissions I don’t know.
My son in law bought a 2016 Accord EX with the 4-cyl, and it has enough power. I’m sure the 2L at something around 300 HP will be a good alternative. I have a 2005 V6 Accord, and it was definitely the most lively of the sedans I test drove at the time. Still, I’m not thrilled at the prospect of a second timing belt in 2 years. At least the 4-cyl engines have chains now.
I’ve had a 4 cylinder Camry since 2003. Not once have I had any reason to complain about its acceleration. It’s quite zippy and more often than not, I am running up on a line of traffic trying to merge onto the expressway in front of me anyway. This idea it can’t keep up with the rest of the traffic is ridiculous. I’m usually sliding over a lane and zipping past that line when the chance to do so presents itself. Could it be faster? Of course! Does it NEED to be? No.
That being said, I’m all for choice. You want a 6 or even 16 cylinder, have at it!
For those not wanting to click on the link, the 3.5L V6 will be replaced by a turbo 2.0L I4, and the 2.4L non-turbo I4 will be replaced by a 1.5L turbo I4.
Turbos!?
Quick Everyone, get your non-turbo cars now before they are gone (and the used ones rise in price)!
2 Likes
I dunno about that. The government regulations say “achieve X fleet average MPG.” They don’t say “Don’t use V6’s anymore.”
I think it’s driven more by marketing and lack of general consumer understanding of cars.
It’s not hard to find an example of a car with a V6 and an “eco” turbo-4 where the MPGs are very similar. But if you ask Joe Blow on the street, he’ll assume the 4 gets better mileage because people think that cylinder count is directly related to fuel economy. He’ll probably also assume it’s faster because, hey, turbos are in fast cars, right?
In reality it’s probably going to turn very similar performance numbers to the V6 version, and those numbers will only come when the turbo is spooled up which means they’ll only be there for leadfoots, so the mileage will suffer to boot.
But car buyers don’t generally get that, and the automakers are playing to that audience.
I’m not inherently opposed to 4-bangers. Most of the cars I’ve ever owned only had 4 cylinders. But I am opposed to this “ecoboost/etc” crap that pretends to give you great performance with better mileage than the normal engines it replaces.
The coupe with the V6 and a manual was a good alternate to a Corvette; both price wise and also as being discrete.
I don’t understand the problem. I had a 2004 KIA Optima 4 cylinder auto with most options you could have and kept it until 2014 and never wished I had a V6. The GMC reg. cab Sonoma was also 4 cylinder auto and I hauled dirt up to the top of bed sides and did just fine. I also used both for courier service for two years.
There are a lot of myths concerning gas.mileage vs performance as to the number of.cylinders. For example, back in 1951, a.comparison between a new Chevrolet with its 6 cylinder engine and PowerGlide auto transmission and a new Cadillac model 61 with its OHV V8 and Hydramatic auto transmission, the Cadillac got better gas mileage and had better performance. On the other hand, in 1952, a Ford with its new OHV 6 got better mileage and would outperform the 1952 Ford.flathead V8 at least up to 50 mph and get better mileage to boot. There are too many other factors besides the number of cylinders that affect mileage and performance.
I agree 100%. Non-turbo is one of my requirements for a new car, as well as good visibility and NOT low profile tires.
2 Likes
Here ya go 
:
4 Likes
Those are my goals also, but I fear that I may not have those choices when I buy my next car in 2-3 years. One by one, it seems that fairly powerful turbo-4 cylinder engines are being introduced, and they do indeed match the power of some six cylinder engines, but I question the durability of those turbo-fours. Additionally, most of them seem to require oil changes more frequently than non-turbo engines.
I really like the power and the smoothness of the H-6 in my Outback, but I think the handwriting is on the wall for this engine to be discontinued. Subaru recently announced the specs of their new 3-row SUV (the replacement for the discontinued Tribeca), and this larger vehicle is equipped with a turbo charged H-4. If that vehicle will have an turbo H-4, I tend to doubt if the somewhat smaller Outback will continue to offer an H-6 option.
Typical car reviewers think everyone wants to drive like maniacs.
My '88 Accord had a 2L fuel injected 4 and could cruise comfortably at 85mph.
Only a few places in the US you can do that without getting a big, fat ticket.
Sorry, but my opinion doesn’t match yours
We have both 4 cylinder and V6 Sonomas in our fleet, and the 4 cylinder versions are a cruel joke
No need to be sorry DB. Your situation is different from mine.
1 Like
Not really. The Corvette is RWD vs. the Accord’s FWD, and the Corvette has a lot more power. The Stingray is 3298# and the Accord weighs 3397# - 99# more than the Corvette. The Corvette will drive rings around the Accord coupe.
I have a forester with the non-turbo H4 and find it’s power more than enough.
In 1952 Ford raced in the low priced stock autooble class of the Mexican Road race with orders to keep their hoods closed when the public was around because they didn’t want the buying public to know they were using the ohv 6 because it was faster than their flathead V8,
Just what we need, a three row Subaru with a turbo 4. They can’t keep head gaskets in the 4s now without a turbo.
From what I see here in Calif, turbo isn’t the feature to be concerned about if you prefer fewer gizmos on your vehicles. If you want to worry, worry about the all electric car. Electric cars seem likely to eventually eliminate petroleum engines entirely for basic personal transport. Gasoline and diesel engines will be mostly for trucks and other commercial vehicles.