Printable View
Caradvice.com.au reported yesterday that they interviewed the chief of Honda Japan at the Detroit auto show,who confirmed that there will most definatly be an all new Euro,which is being readied at the moment,and will be launched globally sometime in 2014...
Cant wait to see it...
I'm betting Its got CVT
If it does it will be a colossal stuff up. You wouldn't put it in this type of car. It doesn't seem feasible at all to do this and if you look at the other cars in the Honda range it doesn't seem to fit. Its not a hybrid after all. Though if they do then the car will be a joke.
If you've read this:
http://www.ozhonda.com/forum/showthr...uro-Drivetrain
Wouldn't surprise me if they got rid of the current 5sp auto. It wasn't horrid, but it was no where near great either. Although I wouldn't having very high hopes on anything special.Quote:
2.4 Liter used in the TSX/JDM/EUDM Accord, in short:
- Same K-series block (as far as pics and specs can tell)
- AVTEC (advanced Vtec) replaced i-vtec
- Direct Injection
- Stop Start
coupled with.... wait for it...
- CVT: Continuously Variable Transmission (at least they are getting rid of that useless 5speed auto)
Above measures netted in:
- 5% better economy
- 5% more power
- 10% more torque
but.... the test drive revealed:
the new engine has sharp response on take off, opposed to today’s “comes alive at high rpms” character. Can’t quite remember the top end feel though, no thanks to the CVT
DI + Start Stop + CVT = only 10% better economy?! Any other decent car manufacturer would have gotten that and more power and torque through implementing DI alone. Although, having said that, the Euro's are typically thirsty so 10% maybe a bit more than it seems.
^^^ lol my thread.
Can't wait for the reveal
The problem with direct injection apart from the high cost of the high pressure injectors (10X more than standard injectors) is that on high km engines carbon builds up on the back of the intake valves.
In normal port injection system the fuel washes the carbon off the intake valves, with direct injection nothing is washing the carbon off the intake valves.
The carbon builds up due to blow by from the PCV system so a catch can would be needed and very clean oil that does not flash should be used to reduce the carbon buildup.
Nothing a can of seafoam or Subaru upper engine cleaner can't fix :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBen
or threebond upper engine cleaner from bursons
I think the CVT should be pretty much set since the new CRV will be moving on to CVT when the new engines come in (Honda did make the announcement when the CRV was released, saying they didn't have enough time to put the new engine and transmission in, and will replace them soonish). Not to mention the 2.4lt specs seem fairly similar (not sure if it's a K24 though).
I for one, ain't a big fan of start stop. A bit too annoying for me. If they really wanted to save fuel, it would be better to have the auto's disengage drive when at a halt or braking, leaving it in neutral (benz has a similar system). I mean a lot of taxi drivers shift to N at the light for this simple reason. It's kinda like how the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S has start stop, as if fuel consumption is important on a 2 ton + twin turbo V8 4WD. Lets hope we can turn it off.
"Although, having said that, the Euro's are typically thirsty so 10% maybe a bit more than it seems." That is not my experience at all, & i have had 2 CU2's. It comes down to driving conditions & how the right foot is used. I don't know of too many petrol cars that can get over 1,000km on a tank.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMaster
If you haven't noticed you're the exception.Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
While I agree with the "driving style" bit, the actual design of the motor promotes heavy footing and high rev ranges.
I'm sure in the same conditions, even the V6 Aurion, BMW 328i, Commodore V6 SIDI/ V8 Auto etc would manage similar results... and they are quieter and more comfortable too.Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredoops
^ this!
But you said the Euro is typically thirsty, that is not the case in my view. I have exceeded 1,00km on a tank once & twice exceeded 980km on a tank - you need to have petrol stations located in the right area to achieve 1,000 on a tank. In saying that, for the whole of 2012 I only traveled a little over 1,700km & averaged 8.12L/100, that was without leaving the city limits of Hervey Bay & no trip over 7km in length. So if that is typically thirsty I don't know what economical is.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMaster
If you haven't noticed. All the car's I've listed were much more powerful, and larger (not really in the BMW case), and they are matching a 4 cylinder in terms of economy. What I mean to say is that, if you were to change over to say, a Camry or Passat, in the same conditions, it would eclipse what your Euro has been achieving. Not to mention, the case you're using is, even a V8 Turbo diesel Range Rover Vogue would manage similar consumption, and that thing's a tank in comparison to the Euro.Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
Look, I get that you admire your car. I love mine as well. But the fact is, Honda has been lagging behind these past few years. It's not entirely their fault. After the GFC hit, they were without (as) much government backing. Then the Thailand floods hit, which basically put their production to a halt in most countries. Because of that, they're about 5 years behind. The evidence is clear throughout their range. The "new" Civic, for example, underneath is exactly the same as the 2003 model but with a new skin. The current CU2 is basically running the same engine and drive train as the 2003 CL9. The S2k, of which production finally stopped 2-3 years ago, was already 11 years old, and they still were charging 80k for it, because to them, it was the peak of their technology. Even though the interior was bland and empty of any luxuries, and the engine, while a gem in 1999 (and still is today) had already been surpassed by hot hatchbacks, but Honda refused to acknowledge this due to the lack of funds. Name one model that has had a significant upgrade compared to it's decade old counter part in Honda's range.
Do you drive like a grandma and shift at 2000rpms?Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
You may find that shifting too early actually results in worse fuel consumption. Besides, he drives an Auto.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasemas
It seems that someone else was listening in on the interview of the Honda CEO...
http://www.houseofjapan.com/auto-mot...odel-confirmed
The new CRV's 2.4L engine has 140kW output like the CL9 engine but on 91 RON petrol. I hope that the new Euro comes with a 91 RON engine as I'm sick of paying 174.9 cpl for 95 RON instead of 159.9 cpl for 91 RON.
I was in Melbourne over Xmas and New Year (go on, some have a go at me for writing Xmas) and paid 122.9 cpl for 91 RON. You guys down there massively under-pay for petrol. They should put it up to something more realistic like what we pay. (err.. lol)
Well with DI you shouldn't "NEED" PULP.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPQR
having said that, the reason petrol is cheap in VIC is because of refinement capabilities here, compared to North where everything's imported
Ahh trueQuote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMaster
So if its an auto... slowly press foot down... And get to 60km/h in 35 seconds?
Nah the torque converter would be doing most of the pushing actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasemas
No turbos, no dual-clutch box, just the same old incremental updates cloaked as new tech :(
I have a feeling Japanese makes like Honda, Toyota and Mazda are banking on perceptions of their reliability to sell. What's with the resolute Japanese obsession with high compression, naturally aspirated engines and direct injection when everyone else is moving to forced induction? It's funny because Toyota and Nissan were among the first to go with turbos in the first place. Hybrid tech is interesting but Honda's IMA recovers lost energy rather than acting as a main power source like on the Prius.
Fiat and VW have tiny 1.4 litre turbos with more power than the aging 2.0 lump Honda uses. Fiat 1.8 and VW 2.0 turbos put out lots more power and torque than the ancient K24 while using less fuel and burning cleaner. CVTs feel horrid compared to dual-clutch boxes... I would rather take a lumpy old Selespeed single-clutch robotized manual instead of a CVT.
Honda has to do much more to survive.
After driving cars with DSG, I would pick an auto or manual anytime. The reliability issues are woeful.
+1 with what Aaronng said. DSG is crap. At least my experiences with them haven't left me very impressed.
That and many are finding that the good old auto torque convertor can be much more efficient than the DSG, handle a much higher outputs, are cheaper to produce and much more reliable and smooth. It's why BMW and Merc (who were investing in DSG) are now moving back to torque converters.
I'm not sure about the Turbo thing though. I mean it seems the Japs are really into free revving NA engines, I don't know why they seem against Turbos. Perhaps it is the reliability and cost which is pushing them back. Or perhaps Japanese roads require revs over torque?
So which one used in our current CU2 Euro? Direct injection or high cost high pressure injection?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBen
Neither. CU2 uses port injection into the intake manifold.Quote:
Originally Posted by praja6
That can't be right, I mean look at the TT supras, R31/32/33/34/35 skylines, GTiR Pulsars, S13/14/15 Silvia's, FC/FD RX7s, EVO1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10's and 3 generations of WRX'sQuote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMaster
I'm pretty sure the Japanese can make a turbo, but they seem to refuse
To make it for the passenger market....
Yeah man, plenty of old school turbo power from Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Subaru, Mazda... Then why did they stop using forced induction? If it's for emissions reasons, the Europeans somehow managed to get past that issue. Honda and Toyota would rather make crazy intricate hybrid setups instead of coming up with powerful, economical turbos. Don't forget diesels too :)
There was also the Honda City turbo, RDX as well as a couple of turbo bikes. Seems reasonably likely that the next Civic Type R will be turbo.
How about making a rear wheel drive sports sedan thats affordable and fun to drive for the $30k range.
I think thats what the 86 is forQuote:
Originally Posted by BigBen
Last time I check the GT86 has only 2 doors, and a sedan has 4 doors!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasemas
Touche, but for under $30k... And sporty 86 is the way to goQuote:
Originally Posted by BigBen
I guess you can't really do 'sporty' with a sedan/euro lol
One reason for the anti turbo... possibly, could be that all Jap passenger are FWD. Turbo create a lot more torque than N/A, which would induce torque steer. Then again, there was the Ralliart Colt which was turbo FWD and that was a failure of massive proportions. The reason the Japs went Hybrid Electric over Diesel is because I believe there isn't any diesel fueling stations in Japan (I could be wrong). That and diesel perform best in FWY conditions, but in the city, they are worse than Petrol. The Hybrid is opposite, where the fuel economy is actually better in city driving than on FWY/Urban driving. Japan doesn't have that much FWY, considering how small the place is.
Had anyone else noticed that the Honda Accord (our Euro) and the Honda Inspire (our Thai built American Accord) both disappeared from the Honda Japan website last month from the list of cars that they sell in Japan. New models can't be far off?
The new Accord Euro is... the ILX? :)
I hope not. Honda has a crazy lineup with different cars having the same names for the European, Asian and American markets, or the same car having different names. They should do a BMW or Mercedes where a 328i or a E300 is the same car in Timbuktu or New York.
No, it's not. Honda has already announced that there will be a new Accord (Euro). I just thought it interesting that the Accord in both the North American version and the Japanese/European version are no longer being sold in Japan.Quote:
Originally Posted by redseven
I just hope Honda goes back to what made the CL9 great and work from there.
give me a an Audi A3esque sedan.
hate to sound like a party booper.. but with the uninspiring cars that honda has being producing.. the new euro is going to be an ugly car with a tree hugging engine..good buy euro..hello mazda 6
i still heard nothing.
In terms of new cars honda has recently released. I am still keeping the hope alive, the new accord looks good as long as it won't be the bloody ILX . I am happy?keen on the 1.6 i-DTEC earth dream tech...consider civic hatch diesel has been released, it's definitely doable
Latest information
No new Euro this year. Update CU2 coming in June with no specification change except one new colour. As for the new Accord, price rise of around $3,500.
Lol....... Whaata****up
Mazda 6 will own the segment!
^^^ pretty much.
Here's an article
http://m.nbr.co.nz/article/honda-acc...c-140178#bmb=1
Interesting Kiwi perspective.
We have to patiently wait for the Acura TLX to be launched,and hope we will get the new Euro shortly after...but wont be before next year.
Ominous stuff from Honda Japan website: What was the 'Honda Inspire' and what we know as the new USA 'Honda Accord' (built in Thailand for Oz) is now called the 'Honda Accord Hybrid' in Japan.
http://www.honda.co.jp/auto-lineup/
I wonder what they'll name the replacement for the old Japanese 'Honda Accord' (sold as the 'Honda Accord Euro' in Oz)? They've even stopped selling the CU2 model.
Not looking good for a new Euro... Unless they name it 'Honda Accord Not Hybrid'.
http://www.honda.co.jp/auto-lineup/i...ordhyb_new.jpg
nah man, Imma call it.
Aint gonna have no euro no more.
Edit: and here on queue
http://www.carpoint.com.au/news/2013...uro-call-37294
We sell as much Accord Euro's here since the GFC as EU as a whole.......Quote:
Honda Australia is anxiously waiting to hear whether a third generation Accord Euro sports sedan will be green lighted.
The decision primarily rests on the wishes of the car’s important European market, although the Australian version is built in Japan and has been a success here as part of a two-pronged Accord line-up since 2003.
Lowest consumption I got cruising on the highway.Quote:
Originally Posted by buddah51au
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...a/DSC00007.jpg
Car and Driver magazine in the USA today revealed some spy pics of the 2015 Acura TLX,and although it does not show much,it could clearly be the next Euro,as size looks the same,and shape of rear lights look like the theme is being carried over.
Grille is traditional Acura/Honda shaped.
Looks like its going to be upmarket.
The TLX is a replacement for the Acura TL in the USA and probably the TSX as well. The TL was only ever made in the USA for the USA and its TLX replacement is not likely to be the new international Honda Accord (Euro), especially if it's only available with V6 engines.
You can achieve good fuel economy on the Euro, but only if you're doing 80km/h in minimal traffic. Do 100km/h and you'll struggle to get under 6.5l/100km. Do 110km/h and good luck getting under 7. Gearing is too short for proper FWY stints.
@SPQR
The Acura TLX is going to be available with 4 cylinder engines to replace the TSX,and 6 cylinder engines to replace the TL.
65/9.392 = 6.92L/100km. Not bad. I managed 6.5L/100km during my drive from Melbourne SE (Dandenong) to Adelaide. Sad thing is I reckon I V8 Commodore Auto would easily match that, and would have been a lot more comfortable too.Quote:
Originally Posted by MR_LATE
i agree
Still got a few litres left in there. It isn't over til the engine cuts out! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by MR_LATE
I drove my CL9 for about 75kms after the needle went 1 notch width below the empty line. I'm tempted to try to run it til it dies to find out how large the fuel tank really is. I have my 2L jerry can ready.
looking at the speedo needle position, I think I should be probably close at 100km/hQuote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMaster
What does everyone think of the new model possibly with CVT transmission? I'm not too fond of the idea... once my poor CL9 goes arthritic I'm not sure what I'd get next. I quite like the new Mazda6... its front grill looks a bit gopping though. I'd probably want to replace that pretty quickly.. but 19" wheels standard!!
Of course, if the new euro turns out to either not be CVT or excellent with it... then no problem. If it doesnt, what are your picks for future wheels?
hyundai
I traded my Euro CL9 last Friday to order a new CRV Luxury with the new ADAS technology pack for my wife and I'll inherit her 2007 CRV Luxury (Model Year 2008) but I've been driving a hire car since. It's a Hyundai Elantra and it's actually pretty good after you get used to the feel of the steering. It's averaged 7.1 l/100km and performance is good although the engine doesn't sound and rev as well as the CL9's. The ride is better than the CL9 and no rattles (5,300 km on odometer). It's the mid range Elite model and comes with auto headlights, rain sensing wipers, push button start and Smartkey, dual zone climate control, leather steering wheel, slightly more wheel bearing and road noise and etc.
I've also test driven the Hyundai i40 CRD Active (base model) and was very impressed (with the Diesel grunt amongst other things), albeit apart from the strange feel of the steering common to Hyundai cars; which if my experience with the Elantra is any guide, you get used to it and don't notice with time.
The new (Model Year) 2015 Euro had better be really good and with affordable Diesel option Mr Honda OZ.
Im still waiting for Kia to release the Optima turbo...
But I might be a bit optimistic. lol
icwhatudidthere
Optimastic
Nah, no way a V8 commo will do under 6.5, even on fwy driving. I've owned a few in my day upto and Inc a 6spd vy ss currently. Comparing economy between these two cars is ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMaster
An Aussie 8 would be very lucky to get less than 8-9L/100 on the highway.
According to Redbook extra urban for the VF SS auto is 8.7L / 100km
Then again the VF drinks regular instead of PULP, which makes a big difference on the pocket
EDIT: anyone tried the auto parking feature on the VF yet?
For easy reference, over same roads, same driver, driven much the same way in Sydney traffic(the SS a tad harder sometimes.:D) my '12 manual euro avgs around 8.1-8.3 consistently , the manual SS averages between 16-17l/100km.
If I nail them around the euro gets high 9s /the commo 20+. As I said can't compare, the Vf sv6 and v6 Calais look tasty I must admit as a daily now that they have brought the interior up to the accord euro type standard fit and finish. That said a V6 commo won't Avg 8.7 economy or whatever they quote I promise you, let alone the SS/v8 models.