[CU2] Hondas claimed 0-100 time and top speed

[yfin]

Interestingly this isn't on the honda Australia web site:

http://www.honda.co.uk/accord/#specs

Maximum speed (mph)141 (manual and auto)

Acceleration 0-62 mph (secs) 7.8 (MANUAL)

Acceleration 0-62 mph (secs) 9.5 (AUTO)

141mph is 227kph

These times are for what appears to be specs similar to our lux model (leather seats, etc).

[yfin]

Fuel economy figures are also more useful in the UK (separate urban and extra urban)

MANUAL
Urban (l/100km) 11.9
Urban (mpg) 23.7
Extra urban (l/100km) 7.0
Extra urban (mpg) 40.4
Combined (l/100km) 8.5
Combined (mpg) 32.1
CO2 (g/km) 209

AUTO
Urban (l/100km) 12.0
Urban (mpg) 23.5
Extra urban (l/100km) 6.6
Extra urban (mpg) 42.8
Combined (l/100km) 8.6
Combined (mpg) 32.8
CO2 (g/km) 204

[johnprocter]

mmm so its a bit slower than the cl9

[Type R Positive]

227km/h is very believable.
As is 7.8 0-62mph for man.

Fuel ecomomy is great.... if you drive like a grandma.

[yfin]

mmm so its a bit slower than the cl9

The auto seems to be a bit slower - but for the CL9 Honda UK quoted 7.9 seconds manual.

We really need to see the independent magazine tests - hard to say whether quoted times are accurate.

[VTECJimStar]

227km/h is very believable.
As is 7.8 0-62mph for man.

Fuel ecomomy is great.... if you drive like a grandma.


Not buying mine in order to get fantastic fuel economy. Want a great fun car to drive and great build quality for the price..

[Type R Positive]

Not buying mine in order to get fantastic fuel economy. Want a great fun car to drive and great build quality for the price.. The missus wouldn't let me buy second hand (so many great cars around $40k), and she hates hatchbacks. So no civic type R.

Next car is what ever the hell I want!!!
(I seem to keep saying that, D'OH!)

[Type R Positive]

Gear ratios: CU2 (CL9)
1st: 3.27 (3.27)
2nd: 2.04 (1.88)
3rd: 1.43 (1.36)
4th: 1.07 (1.03)
5th: 0.87 (0.83)
6th: 0.69 (0.66)
Rev: 3.58 (3.58)
Final: 4.76 (4.76)

[Suntzu]

That urban fuel economy figure is disturbing. i get 10L/100km flogging the jesus out of my CL9.

But 11.9 by a tester in town is shocking. Lets see some real world figures.

[aaronng]

Gear ratios: CU2 (CL9)
1st: 3.27 (3.27)
2nd: 2.04 (1.88)
3rd: 1.43 (1.36)
4th: 1.07 (1.03)
5th: 0.87 (0.83)
6th: 0.69 (0.66)
Rev: 3.58 (3.58)
Final: 4.76 (4.76)

The CU2's slightly shorter gear ratios will be cancelled out by the larger rolling diameter of the tyres.

[aaronng]

That urban fuel economy figure is disturbing. i get 10L/100km flogging the jesus out of my CL9.

But 11.9 by a tester in town is shocking. Lets see some real world figures.

Do you do any highway (anything above 80km/h) kms?
When you flog it, you should get above 15L/100km, otherwise you are not really flogging it. When I flog it, I get 28L/100km. :)
Pure start stop at under 60km/h, I get 10.5L/100km and pure freeway, I get 7L/100km. Combined now for work, I get 9.4L/100km.

[Crapdaz]

Do you do any highway (anything above 80km/h) kms?
When you flog it, you should get above 15L/100km, otherwise you are not really flogging it. When I flog it, I get 28L/100km. :)
Pure start stop at under 60km/h, I get 10.5L/100km and pure freeway, I get 7L/100km. Combined now for work, I get 9.4L/100km.

holy crap 28L/100km, i am guessing that 28L/100km was during the week when you tracked your car.

[Type R Positive]

The CU2's slightly shorter gear ratios will be cancelled out by the larger rolling diameter of the tyres.
But wouldn't the weight of the wheels play more of a role (no pun intended) than the extra diameter?

I just find that it's got heaps of grip, VSA doesn't kick in all the time, and just moves. I think the CL9 would go better with the bigger tyres too!

[Type R Positive]

Do you do any highway (anything above 80km/h) kms?
When you flog it, you should get above 15L/100km, otherwise you are not really flogging it. When I flog it, I get 28L/100km. :)
Pure start stop at under 60km/h, I get 10.5L/100km and pure freeway, I get 7L/100km. Combined now for work, I get 9.4L/100km.
That's more like it!!!

I haven't really driven mine enough to tell, but from initial results, it is just as economical as the CL9.

[EUR003act]

227km/hr max speed?!

does that mean they're limited?

CL9 should do atleast 240...

[Type R Positive]

CL9 should do atleast 240...
Should do..... or Can do? :p

[EuroBro]

When I sold my 06 Lux Manual - i had never reset the 2nd trip computer and average FC was 8.8 for the entire 48000 clicks. Not bad for 80% urban (all around sydney except north shore) - I only ran 98 octane and I am no slouch on the throttle either!

The worst ever economy was 10.5 for a tank - but that was going as hard as I could without breaking speed limits by more than 10% and lots of red-lining in 1st and sometimes 2nd. I swear it felt I was doing 0-100 kms/hr in low 7's.

My current Accord V6-L does mid 6's and is averaging 11.5 L/100 after 6000 k's on the clock and the last couple of tanks have been high 10's and 11.0 L/100. I have definately noticed better FC with 98 octane (esp. Shell V-Power)

[EUR003act]

Should do..... or Can do? :p

lol well... im not sure about the AUDM CL9 ;)

but the european CL9 definately does:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_04faaODGLA

[SPQR]

lol well... im not sure about the AUDM CL9 ;)

but the european CL9 definately does:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_04faaODGLA

Ah! I remember now. The most I could get before the current no-fun nanny-mollycoddling interfere-as-much-as-possible-in-peoples'-lives NT Labor government introduced speed limits on NT highways was 239km/h indicated on the speedo. I don't know what the actual speed was but it is more likely to be around 229km/h given that the Euro's speedo appears to read 104.2% fast (96km/h actual at indicated 100km/h). I've been faster in a car. Very fast if I can include one trip in a Boeing 747 when we hit 1068km/h.

If speed is so intrinsically dangerous as the authorities would have us believe then why are there no speed cameras for planes?