Comments on: Test Drive: 2008 Honda Accord Coupe

By: Justin

Justin — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:29:08 +0000

Look up the 0-60 times for the 5AT and the 6Mt…

As Honda stated, the VCM creates a a more shallow torque curve (aka peak torque takes longer to reach), thus allowing for better fuel economy and the reliability of atheir VCM system…

The intake on the 6MT should be pretty nice for a stock V6…(see the new comercials they have…), plus there are no VCM components…so there is a nice steep torque curve on the 6Mt…

from what i’ve heard…the 6Mt can run about a .2 or .4 seconds slower than a stock Mustang GT….look up the numbers…

Can’t wait to see the new NSX btw

By: starzzguitar

starzzguitar — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 18:23:11 +0000

Okay, now after a few months the drivers seat is starting to soften up. They need to use that cushy soft leather instead of the plastic like hard leather in the future. I have not noticed any delay when stepping on the gas. I would also like to add that this car is bigger and wider than it looks, watch the front “fenders” when parking. This is not your grandpa’s Honda, baby, no way. Beamers beware. Get the loaded one.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:14:13 +0000

Carl, you’re right. As I mentioned above, there is a bit of a throttle response delay. It’s not significant during normal driving though.

By: carl

carl — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:09:18 +0000

Starzzguitar, are you serious? Is it really THAT fast? I might expect it to out-run a bottom end BMW, but last time I checked there were a few other cars under 30k that did 60 in 6. Anyways, the only not-so-good thing I’ve heard/read about the new v6 accord coupe is that it has a bit of a delay before it takes off. I’d imagine it’s got something to do with the VCM. Regardless of weather it’s the VCM or transmission itself, you’d probably get the 6 speed manual if you were serious about pushing it. You’d get lower mileage, but you’d probably get the 4 cylinder if you were worried about gas.
Thanks for all the info. I think I’m gunna get one when I get back.

By: starzzguitar

starzzguitar — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 05:51:50 +0000

Okay, I was kidding about how I should have gotten the new Sebring instead of the Honda Coupe. Really. But you know what? The driver’s seat is still killing me and I always can’t wait to get out of the car. In this car, you do have to hang on to keep it straight when you step on it, as in most front wheel drive cars. Also, I can blow away any car, Mercedes, BMW, what have you very easily whenever I want. But that SEAT! Help!

By: Justin

Justin — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:44:43 +0000

from the beginning i was obssessed with the flagship EX-L V6: it’s got a nice balace of specs for a FWD coupe…or for a sedan for that matter (i.e Chevy impala SS is a VERY unbalanced car, but seems to have good specs). But when i considered all the drivetrains out there, Front wheel drive is for two purposes: ease in manufaturing and mpg benifits. FWD wasn’t intended for the sport setting, even though with current technology its pretty easy to attain it (i.e Civic Si or acura TL-s). As referred to when analysing nissan’s VQ engine paired with their various layouts, FWD and RWD can have the same engine (same displacement and valvetrain) but with one being longitudinal and the other lateral, and different transmisions and differentials for the most part. the 350Z and the Nissan Altima are those examples…

…so after this analysis, i realized that any FWD car (or FWD based AWD/4WD system for that matter) i purchase should be modest, but not over the edge in their hp and ft-lbs of torque. I LOVE sports cars, but of all the success in that market, RWD and rear wheel based AWD are the only genuine drivetrains that can really yield the massive power from 250+ engines without seeing adverse effects of tourque steer and under/oversteer and various dynamic flaws. of course steering (electric versus conventional hydralic), tires, balance of weight, yaw, size, frame torsion, tranny/shifter and other crap greatly contribute to sportiness and performance, it’s HOW you lay down your rubber, not HOW MUCH POWER can lay down your rubber that contributes to your performance factor.

…but don’t think i hate FWD. I used to drive a 1996 Honda Accord DX. It’s dieing, but don’t think i won’t stop loving it…SOHC V-TEC is what powers all the 130+ horses and 130+ foot pounds of torque there…this is why i am a fan of the DOHC iV-TEC on all the 2.4 liter I4 in the accord’s lower models. Those engines are WELLLLL refined and won’t torque steer unless you push them. V6 power is meant for RWD i think and if Honda could make a G37, 335i, IS350 fighter it would have to be RWD (think the looks of the new accord coupe but with the drivetrain and balance of the S2000 and the engine in the acura MDX)…not the TSX or the TL that seem to fit this caste.

FWD can be exciting…but not exillarating. Honda is probably the only dealer that almost exlusively does FWD and AWD based on FWD automobiles in the auto market today…and this is why they are so incredibly reliable…they are veterans in this section. They make a decent FWD car, and some of there model’s even have some steroidal performance….nice!
But if you’re lookiong for that perfect mix of luxury, reliability, performance, safety and very little adverse effects, look at the inline 4 EX-L honda Accord Coupe….it out guns its rivals in the I4 sect and has nice standard features. My only honest complaint is the curve weight and size it is plagued with…but luxury and performance ever so often like to oppose each other, so what can you say. it’s got incredible value

By: Demonblade

Demonblade — Thu, 22 May 2008 02:08:35 +0000

Nice review Chris. From what I got out of it, the gist is that it looks good, drives good, gets good mileage, and is an all around good car to have. That’s great, but that’s what is said of basically every Honda, Toyota, Nissan, whatever. My point is, Honda, though a good car manufacturer, still only makes average cars, with average looks, and average everything. This is also true of every Japanese car manufacturer, and that’s partly why I have this ever present aversion to any Japanese car. They are no different from each other, and that has affected the American car companies as well. However, I do see hope in the form of the Nissan GT-R, Cadillac CTS, Chevy Camaro, and a precious score of others that dare to be different, and thus beyond the competition.

Oh, and starzzguitar? Not to be crude, but the Accord is a hell of lot better than the Sebring ’cause while the Accord isn’t all that special, the Sebring downright sucks.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:59:29 +0000

Hi starzzguitar, thanks for the comment. I didn’t have a problem with the drivers seat, but I only drove it for a few days. I understand what you mean by the controls being fussy though, it’s hard to manipulate stuff while driving.

By: starzzguitar

starzzguitar — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:53:13 +0000

I have one. Don’t like the drivers seat. My back is killing me! The lumbar support wants me to sit ramrod straight! Not much adjustment to fix this problem. I should have gotten the Sebring. The controls are too fussy. Difficult to use while driving. Anybody want to swap-a-lease? Looks great, though…

By: Carnival of Wheels: Edition #57 - Finally! — The Garage

Carnival of Wheels: Edition #57 - Finally! — The Garage — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:26:27 +0000

[...] Over at Automoblog, Chris was lucky enough to spend some time behind the wheel of the new Honda Accord Coupe. [...]

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:37:25 +0000

Hi ninjatales. No, ours was the automatic, but I’d be interested in driving the manual for a comparison. Personally, I like the larger wheels as long as they don’t look awkward on the car, and I thought these 18″ looked pretty good on it.

By: ninjatales

ninjatales — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:30:45 +0000

Did you get a chance to review the 2-door coupe with a manual stick shifter? BTW, I prefer the 17″ as long as the wheel arches don’t look too wide for them.