If you're rich and can take a massive depreciation hit in one year; go for it. But otherwise, wait until you can spread the depreciation over a number of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Euro76
Printable View
If you're rich and can take a massive depreciation hit in one year; go for it. But otherwise, wait until you can spread the depreciation over a number of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Euro76
CL9 DBW is quite refined in autocar generally (no drivetrain shunting like the manual) but there are those moments when you've slowed right down, see a break in traffic, and tell the load pedal "go, go, go now!" like your life depended on it and you get naaaaathing. Then two seconds later, whoa, hang on to your horses; we're coming through!Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
Actually, not too much different to my old WRX manual when off-boost; then, bang (for your buck) on-boost like a freight train. Gee I miss that turbo rush. I don't miss the crap interior.
Have a look at the specs of the new Euro on Honda's web site. It's as big as a Camry almost as wide as a Falcon and heavier than any car in its class. Even heavier than the 4 cylinder Accord. The size of the CL9 was spot on. But the increase in weigh in this day and age is just inexplicable.
Work out the Kg/Kw for yourselves. On paper it needs the extra power and torque just to almost keep up the the 08.
Is Honda after a new market or missing the point?
And yet the CU2 is faster than the CL9... go figure?Quote:
Originally Posted by robburl
Camry's are around 1500kgs too. 1460kgs for base, 1530kg for top. Spec's add to weight. The CU2 is a very well appointed car.
Here we go with the current models:
Mazda 6 (base I presume) 1407kg / 125kw = 11.256
Camry (base) 1460kg / 117kw = 12.478
Euro CU2 (base) 1525kg / 148kw = 10.304
Euro still wins out with power to weight.
On paper does not tell the whole story. Look at the dynos of the 09 TSX. Lots of torque everywhere at low to mid RPM compared to the CL9.Quote:
Originally Posted by robburl
What do you mean by new market or missing the point? The Euro is meant to be a mid-sized family car, not some sports car wannabe! Fortunately, they decided to upside the new Euro, because the old one had insufficient legroom in the rear (for me at least)
Weight increase could be the fact that the new Euro has a stiffer chassis - high tensile steel used: in case of a accident, then the car absorbs the damage better. Curtain airbags is another item added onto the two Euro grades, I can't think of anything else atm that would contribute to the weight increase - but the new Euro had better fuel consumption than the CL9 - both manual and auto : 8.9 litres/100km (despite the increase in weight) and it's faster and more refined than the CL9(I still like the CL9 despite the CU2 Euro fighting for my attention :p)
Nah, same market. It's just more refined, more sportier, more on features.Quote:
Originally Posted by robburl
Take one for a test drive. ;)
What size is the CL9 fuel tank? 55L?
CU2 is 65L now.
Same size... 65 litres . It is compact and placed lower in the chassis now - giving the CU2 a low centre of gravity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R Positive
CU2 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SPQR
Me too, but I couldn't lay money down on a CL9 with the new CU2 sitting there. If I for any reason at all thought the CU2 wasn't an improvement, I would have got a Liberty.Quote:
Originally Posted by IVTECS4
(I wanted a GT-B but the missus said no.... again :()
I think they did that with the engine as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by IVTECS4
Honda has worked hard on this car for sure. Pitty they couldn't keep it around 1400kgs, but thems the times we live in.....