Quite possibly yes - a 4.7 final drive would noticeably help acceleration and go much of the way to offset the weight increase with the CU2.Quote:
Originally Posted by tony1234
Printable View
Quite possibly yes - a 4.7 final drive would noticeably help acceleration and go much of the way to offset the weight increase with the CU2.Quote:
Originally Posted by tony1234
These are from TSX off the internet.Quote:
Originally Posted by yfin
I'll try and find Euro. I would have thought they would be the same???
Ratios: CL9/CU2Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R Positive
1st: 3.533/3.27
2nd: 1.880/2.04
3rd: 1.354/1.43
4th: 1.027/1.07
5th: 0.825/0.87
6th: 0.659/0.69
Rev: 3.583/3.58
Final: 4.388/4.76
CU2 is significantly shorter than CL9. Manual's top speed in 2nd gear onwards has errors.
For CU2? I think it's right.Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
What Honda manual states and what I got were pretty much the same, except 2nd (85km/h@~7krpm vs 97km/h@???) which I will retest for ya.
Honda manual did not state top speed. It stated maximum recommended speed before entering red zone.
I just retested it, 2nd gear = 95-100km/h@7k rpm.
It can go faster in 2nd.....
top-speed per gear has absolutely no indication of how quick a car is.. infact in my opinion, it's the opposite. a higher top-speed per gear would indicate taller ratios.. this would actually sacrifice acceleration for a higher speed.
The ratios on the new 6-speed are definately CLOSER matched than CL9. wether they've shortend and closed the ratios or simply shortened the final drive, the effect is the same - much snappier !!
I took a Std. Manual home the other night and it was very very impressive.
the mid-range torque is so much stronger than the CL9 and it actually throws you back in the seat when u floor-it in even 3rd and 4th gears !!
there is a definate change in the audible tone at 5,000RPM (or just after) when VTEC engages and while there's less of a 'kick' than the CL9, this is probably due to the gains in mid-range masking the changeover point... like the B16A has a strong VTEC 'kick' but the B18C-R isnt quite as violent at changeover due to the extra torque before the switch point.
But overall this new model is a substantial evolution from the previous model and when you consider the price has dropped $1,000 across the lineup and we have more car with more features - it's definately a good move.
As Aaronng said (i think) that this is the first time in a while he'd felt excited behind the wheel of a new model - i'd have to agree. the FN2 was great but you kind of expect that from that kind of vehicle.. the ACCORD was a huge improvement over the older model also but is also of the standard you'd expect - where this new Euro is even beter than I expected and a significant improvement over the CL9 - which in it's own right is still an exceptionally good car.
Any 0-100kms/hr figures?
Does it beat the CL9 MT6 of 7.8 seconds?
I've read that the auto only does 9.5 - how crap is that? No wonder honda doesn't publish performance figures. LOL
The times are only what's available off the net.Quote:
Originally Posted by EuroBro
Where did you read auto only 9.5?
Figures show that the CU2 manual is quicker.
But That's if you can trust the internet! ;)
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=754035Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R Positive
..it also has 2.2 diesel @ 9.6 seconds.
The CL9 is also 9.5 - see here http://www.autoweb.com.au/cms/A_1967...y/article.html
That's why I was wondering why you only got up to 85km/h on 2nd gear? Should be at faster speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R Positive
That top one is a good read. It has the manual sedan at 7.8 0-100.Quote:
Originally Posted by EuroBro
As I said before, every review had a different time.
That diesel is auto only too.
It was hard to remember 5 gears worth of speeds. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Euro76