http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...th-2013-accord

 

Looks better than the existing model in my book

 

I'm going to look at the Sport, with the 6 MT, when they come out next week. I don't care for all of the "bells and whistles", just would like to have a good driving, dependable car with respectible performance.

Here is the first Road test:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-7mLNyirBk

 

Another great review!

http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...cle_id=1094166

 

A reviewer that I respect - John McElroy had this to say:

2013 ACCORD DRIVING IMPRESSIONS

Finally we get to give you our driving impressions of the new Honda Accord because the embargo comes off today. Let’s cut to the final verdict. This is a very good car. And yet, the all-new Accord goes up against a field of very good cars, so now it’s merely very competitive, not the benchmark that it was in the past.

Inside there’s a new interior, but the car will feel very familiar because all the interior dimensions are almost exactly the same as before. But the interior does seem slightly roomier thanks to thinner A-pillars that give the greenhouse a more open feel. Honda says this is the quietest cabin it’s ever made, and it uses noise cancellation to make it so, but by my reckoning, it’s not the quietest in the class. I think the Chevy Malibu is quieter.

Purists will sneer at the fact that the Accord now uses electric power steering, but to tell you the truth, if they hadn’t told me that I would have never noticed. Same goes for the McPherson struts that replaced the double-wishbone front suspension. I think it finally dawned on Honda that no one is going to take the Accord to the track. So with the McPherson struts this car rides and handles very well, for a family sedan. The coupe version feels very similar to the sedan. I think it would take a stop watch to discern any performance differences.

The all-new 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine comes with either a choice of a six-speed manual or a CVT. And the CVT drives surprisingly well. Unless you floor the car, you get little of that “rubber banding” feel that’s so typical of many CVTs. Mark my words, all automakers are going to have to take a second look at using CVTs. With Nissan, Toyota and Honda putting them in their mainstream products everyone else ought to sit up and pay attention.

The 3.5-liter V-6 turns the Accord into a rocket ship. It’s very fast, but no CVT for the six. You can get the manual or a six-speed automatic. I still find it strange that Honda is offering a six-speed while the rest of the world is offering transmissions with more gears. The Honda people say “Stay Tuned” so we should be on the look-out for a mid-cycle change.

And then there’s the hybrid version. Check out last week’s show where we covered this system for a technical description, but I really like how this car drives. At speeds up to about 30 miles an hour it feels more responsive than the base four-cylinder version. Specifically, the throttle response is crisper and it definitely feels torque-ier. And no wonder, the hybrid has 11 more horsepower and 45 more pound-feet of torque. And since more than 100 of those pound-feet come from an electric motor it’s there the instant you need it. Honda still hasn’t released pricing or fuel economy on the hybrid and I’m dying to see those numbers.

Like I said earlier, the Accord is a very good car. Honda hopes to sell 300,000 of them a year in the American market, and they should feel pretty good about hitting that target.

 

The two things that I dislike about the car is DI and the CVT. The concensus among Honda followers is that the DI will cause premature engine failure. I see that Honda has a different type of DI than the competitors where the fuel is sprayed on the center of the cylinder which is supposed to reduce carbon build up. and the piston has a specific shape to also reduce this build up. Honda has been working with DI longer than any other manufacturer and hopefully they have solved this problem. On the CVT, I personally won't own one no matter how good they are supposed to be. The 6 cylinder is not DI and remarkably it get's only 1 MPG less than the 4. It seems to make sense to go with the 6 cylinder, more power, same MPG and a conventional IVTEC. The only problem is that with the 6 sedan you can only get an automatic. 6mt's only in the coupe.

 

I only drove a CVT once, in a Nissan, and I know I would never want it. These days, I think a 6 cylinder is the way to go for just about any make or type of vehicle - car or truck. As for the trans, I like automatics for everyday driving and manuals for sporting driving - so as long as I have at least one manual in the fleet, I'm good. Honda, has had a history of transmission failures (don't believe me, do the research) in Acuras, Pilots, and a few others. I'm not suggesting there will be issues with the new one, just saying. For me, Honda styling is just too bland, and this new Accord isn't any different for me. I don't know anything about the DI concerns.

 

Thanks for the info Dave. I know that there were problems with the automatics in the Generation 6 Accords, especially the 6 cylinder. I didn't look into any recent problems with the automatic. I'll have to give it a look.

 

I found the recall: http://news.consumerreports.org/safe...n-problem.html

The problem is only in the 4 cylinder automatics and is caused by rocking the car back in forth from drive to reverse, (like someone might do if stuck in mud or snow) which IMO shouldn't be done anyway.

 

One other issue with the 6 cylinder is torque steer. According to one reviewer, Honda now seems to have it under control. I drove the 2012 Coupe with the 6mt and found it way too pronounced when you put the hammer down. I've also driven the 6mt Acura TL and they have it down. The torque steer is well under control, so manybe Honda has taken some of those lessons and incorporated them into the 2013.