2013 Accord

[SOHC-FTW]

Simplicity is why. I know a few guys that had to find other dealership jobs due to the reliability of toyota's and hondas. Sure many companies produce factory turbo charged car's , but that is just more shit to break.

[Night Wolf]

I like the rear bumper on the coupe, other then that, not much else. too many lines. looks like an abstract art.

on another note, holy shit, owequitit, you wright alot.

[owequitit]

Nearly 260whp is impressive. Either that engine is seriously under-rated, or they've somehow managed to get away with a 6% drivetrain loss! It's only rated at 278 at the crank ("only" ) At a reasonable 15% drivetrain loss, that engine would be cranking out over 300 in reality.
This is, of course, assuming that the dyno isn't terribly optimistic.

The new V6 only requires 87 octane? Wow! I figured that would be a premium fuel engine. I wonder if there are any gains to be had by retuning the ECU and using a higher octane fuel...

It seems most cars these days, even the high end ones, are programmed to pull timing to make lower octane fuels safe, if not ideal. My Cadillac does that.

The engine is unquestionably under-rated, as J series have been for a long, long time. On premium fuel, the old J30A4/A5 put out closer to 260 crank HP, even though it was rated at 240/244 HP.

The TL Type-S was under-rated at 286HP (one of the cars the new Accord's V6 was compared to), and this one is doing about as much power with a lower rating. The increase in top end indicates Honda found better flow somewhere as well.

*The guy who did the testing said he didn't know if it was regular unleaded or premium because it was fueled when he got it, however, if it was like most dealers, it had the minimum required. Also, it typically takes about 2-3 tanks before the tangible benefits of the higher octane fuel are felt, and it seems unlikely that with 200 miles on the car, the ECU would have had enough time to relearn, although it isn't impossible.

As for the dyno, it is a Dynojet 248C where all of their other dyno results usually come from. It is the EXACT same dyno where the 2009 V6 6MT and the TL-S were tested. There may have been some atmospheric difference, but not 20HP worth in the case of the Accord vs Accord scenario. The TL also only had a 4% correction factor (the 2013 was uncorrected), although he mentioned it was hotter on test day, so the TL may have been pulling some timing.

Assuming a 12% drivetrain loss (I usually like 15% for MT's, but Honda has made some friction improvements in the last 5 years) that would put the car at about 300 crank HP.

Also, I haven't seen any definitive tests that show whether or not the new V6 responds favorably to higher octane. The 03-06 V6 gained nearly 20HP from the use of 91 (it was definitely more responsive feeling) as well as 3MPG consistently. The 08-12 V6 AT did not however. I think the MT gained a little bit, but the jury is out on how the new car is programmed.

Generally, turbocharged engines have a shorter lifespan, especially if you take into account the fact that many people tend to neglect proper maintenance.
Honda's products, for the most part, are a genius way of providing high-tech performance in an idiot-proof package. Toyota does much the same with the majority of their products.
Turbo engines also generally require premium fuel, and produce lower fuel economy than N/A engines. In today's eco-conscious world, that's a bad idea for a company that has built its reputation on efficient vehicles!

Plus, Honda's "thing" has often been about producing sporty FWD cars with fairly small naturally aspirated engines (often making impressive power, AND providing reliability and economy.)

To top it off, the new crop of Japanese V6's absolutely KILL the turbo fours in the segment. Not only do they average about a .5-.6 improvement in the 1/4 mile with an extra 3-5MPH trap speed, but they are far smoother and more refined. They are more tractable around town, and in most cases, they return far superior MPG. There are a plethora of real world MPG reports of the new V6 Accord doing ~35MPG highway at 70-80MPH. Not only is that stellar (beats our old J30 equipped 7th gens by 2-3MPG highway) economy, but they are stonking fast as well. Effectively, there is a 10% improvment (real world) over our best J series, with an additional 40 lb-ft of torque and over a second chopped off in acceleration (with an additional 5-7MPH trap speed). They will also likely prove to be much more reliable as they are all based on previous designs with proven history. And yes, they are a lot less stressed than those high-strung turbo fours.

[owequitit]

I like the rear bumper on the coupe, other then that, not much else. too many lines. looks like an abstract art.

on another note, holy shit, owequitit, you wright alot.

I consistently average between 60-80 words per minute. One of the benefits of college papers and office jobs. LOL!

[tutsuo]

Am i the only one here that prefers my CB7 over the new Accords ?! IM OUTRAGED !

[Losiracer2]

I consistently average between 60-80 words per minute. One of the benefits of college papers and office jobs. LOL!

You know those typing tests you had in school during 6th-8th grade? you probably enjoyed those lol, as did I. They came up with the most creative paragraphs to type out haha.

[owequitit]

My parents just put a deposit on an Orchid White Pearl EX-L V6 Navi.

Can't wait to play with it. I will definitely report back.

[drummersteve7]

djcaz_aom and I looked at this extensively when it came out.

Does it appear to any others of you that the 4 cyl exhaust manifold,
resembles a t3/t4 turbo flange already, straight off the head.

So interesting. Meanwhile...

I am trying to decide, do I get one of these, or do I get a truck.
Its a hard toss up, being a homeowner, there is several things I need a truck for. At the same time, celebrating Honda Accords 30th year building in the United States car is looking very appealing.

[ExplodingCake]

djcaz_aom and I looked at this extensively when it came out.

Does it appear to any others of you that the 4 cyl exhaust manifold,
resembles a t3/t4 turbo flange already, straight off the head.

So interesting. Meanwhile...

I am trying to decide, do I get one of these, or do I get a truck.
Its a hard toss up, being a homeowner, there is several things I need a truck for. At the same time, celebrating Honda Accords 30th year building in the United States car is looking very appealing.

yes , the exhaust manifold is not casted into the block. Basically only the cat us getting bolted off. The typical 4-2-1 / 4-1 configuration is not being used. same with the Civic/Si.

[owequitit]

Took delivery of the car today.

This is the first Accord since the CB7 that I could only find minor things to gripe about.

[foamypirate]

Took delivery of the car today.

This is the first Accord since the CB7 that I could only find minor things to gripe about.

Looking forward to the full review!

[owequitit]

Initial Review:

A few notes about this post. I normally take the inaugural drive in our new Accords, but due to the complexity of this thing, I sat and fiddled with systems while my father drove, so that I could explain enough to him for him to get home without assistance (I live about 1.5-2 hours from the Phoenix area, and they live another 3-3.5 hours beyond that).

1) Exterior

The first thing I noticed about this car is that I do really like the styling. I always thought the '09 was exceedingly awkward and frumpy. It looked pretty high end for the class, but I just never warmed to the styling detail. This car is crisp, taut, and fluid. In that respect, it actually reminds me of the CB7. A fairly "plain" but highly detailed and very well thought out design. Much like the CB7, it looks angular, but on closer inspection, there isn't a straight line on the car. I haven't really liked the design of ANY Accord right off the bat since the CB7. They have all taken time to grow on me (the cars were so good, I eventually didn't care about styling). I never did warm to the Rubbermaid styling on the 2002 because it looked to plasticky. The 03-07 also never warmed my heart until the MMC in 2006, but even then I didn't love the front end. I liked the '09 initially, but unlike the others, it never really grew on me, so I never really liked it "more." This car I like in pictures immediately, and loved it once I saw it in person.

The biggest improvement, IMO, is that the entire car flows with itself, and doesn't look like it is designed by separate committees.

The second biggest improvement, IMO, is that the car LOOKS and FEELS a lot smaller than it actually is. While similar in overall size to the 7th gen (while being wider than the 8th gen), it doesn't LOOK that big. In fact, in person, I think it looks smaller than the 7th gen did, and certainly smaller than the 8th gen did. The extra width probably helps with that too, since it lends it a more low slung, hunkered appearance that was common on Accords of the CB7 era.

The LED DRL's are a cool touch on the higher end models, although they are fairly similar to a lot of other schemes at this point (I guess there are only so many ways to string LED's on the front end these days). However, I think they look less tacky that Hyundai/Kia's because they aren't as overstyled. The same with Audi's new ones. They are simply a straight line, but they are behind another layer of lenses, so they don't look as obvious when the lights are off. The LED tails also are exceedingly well done with a thin strip of LED's representing the running lights (the flow sideways and curve up the side), with the rest of the lense being reserved for brake lights.

The lines all flow together, and the door handles don't look like they were installed upside down which helps with the cohesiveness. The proportions remind me a LOT of the CB7 in terms of profile, overhang, axle to dash ratio, etc. Unfortunately, one of the apparent bonuses to the front struts, was that it allowed them to shorten front overhang. I still think they just mostly tried to avoid making a rounded front end that would look shorter from certain angles, but Honda claims it allowed a shorter overhang.

If I could have 1 exterior complaint, it would be that the stock wheels look not aggressive enough. They are well hunkered out to the edges of the car, but 17" profile seems a little too pedestrian. Personally, I think the car is perfect with the 18" wheels that are standard on the Sport model.

2) Interior

I am again reminded of the CB7, as this car has a closer, more cockpit feel to it. Where the previous cars felt hemmed in and distant, this car puts the windows low, and the dash close. To me, it made the car feel a lot more intimate, and more wrapped around versus the previous several generations. Overall, the dash material is leaps and bounds beyond the 8th gen, and is a pretty significant improvement on the 7th gen as well. The top of the dash is squishy (not as squishy as some Acura products, but probably a little more so than the CB7), and the graining/texturing is fantastic. The quality of the switchgear is impressive and the fit and finish was flawless as far as I could tell (certain parts on the 7th and 8th gen didn't fit so well (mostly door handles and the like). It wasn't bad, but this one is better. Also gone are the weird finishes like the silver spray paint looking trim. Also gone are the ridiculous number of IP cutlines, seams, and materials.

The gauge cluster is well detailed and looks very high end for this segment. The LED screen in the middle of the speedo is very clear, and has a lot of good information on it. The only thing I don't like about the new gauge package is the 2D font type that I think is supposed to look 3D. In this respect, the actual 3D setup of the 7th gen was superior.

I actually also like the new center stack, which although with 2 screens looks awkward in pictures, actually works really well in person. I also think it doesn't appear to be as large scale in person. I have seen complaints about there being 2 screens, but when Honda lumps everything together, they get bashed for that too, so who knows. IMO, the audio touch screen works well, and the separate climate control provides easy visual differentiation for ease of use. I can see some validity in the complaints about the touch screen being a distraction from the road, but frankly I feel it is better than the sub-menu setup of most cars (including the previous 2 generations of Accord). With those you had to find the button you wanted, and then press it several times to get what you wanted all while watching the display. Changing climate control modes comes to mind here. Also, with so many people distracted by talking on phones, doing makeup, etc. I just don't see the complete logic in it.

The perforated leather in this car is nice, and will probably breathe better in summer (forecast to be 120-130*F this weekend at home). Not sure about the long term quality of them yet. I can say that the seats are MUCH more comfortable than the 8th gens, which never bothered me too much. They feel a lot more natural to sit in.

Another big change I noticed was the inclusion of black surfaces below knee level. This ensures that the interior will look fresh and clean, rather than the dirty/worn appearance that is the norm with lighter surfaces.

Room is good. It is about as spacious as the 8th gen, but doesn't FEEL like it due to the more intimate nature of the design. But the space is there.

3) Powertrain

Obviously, the engine was still green (departed the dealership with 10 miles on the odo), but I can already tell I like this engine LEAPS better than the old J35 in the 09. While the old VCM system was crippled by a single cam profile for making power, this one has 2 (at the expense of losing the VCM's 4 cylinder mode). However, the power band of this J series reminds me of the old non-VCM J series, which is to say that has a plateau flat torque cure that continues to 6K+. The additional torque, coupled with the 6AT provides a fantastic driving experience. This engine is smooth, smooth, smooth. This engine is also more unobtrusive than the old one. You hear it less, but when you do, it has a much clearer voice. Not sure if that is engine tuning, or the active noise cancellation systems, or both; but it still has that extremely good J series engine note when pressed.

The transmission is absolutely seamless, and seems to be very intuitive. The car ran home from the dealer going from ~700' above sea level to over 5,000 feet above sea level over about 10 miles while staying in 6th gear at ~2,000RPM at 80MPH. That was with 4 people and no break in time on a ~100* summer day. The few times we did need to pass, it out powered the old car by a wide margin. Also, that was in ECO mode, which dulls throttle response and accessory duty cycle to save gas. The car becomes noticably more responsive in "normal" mode. The best part? It was reading 30-35MPG under these conditions. I will have to verify the accuracy of the trip meter, but initially many people say it is accurate. I also know from experience with the J series that will continue to improve for about the first 5,000 miles, as will power output.

For those times when you are feeling frisky, the auto has a "sport" setting, which does exactly what it used to in the CB7. It holds gears longer, shifts more aggressively, and may also up the throttle mapping.

I can say from previous test drives that the new V6 hauls balls with trap speeds in the ~100MPH range and ET's in the low to flat 14's repeatably.

4) Ride/Handling

Can't say much about the handling at this point, other than the chassis feels extremely settled. On curves, dips and textures that would have had the '02 and '09 bobbing like a Buick, this car was as calm as could be. Again, it reminded me of the CB7 in its motion control. It is definitely firm, but is still extremely compliant. The 7th gen was always my favorite in terms of stock chassis setup, but in the MMC cars it was pretty harsh sometimes. It definitely had too much road noise. The 2004 we own was a little softer, but also felt a little less confident. This car does both equally, and road noise is WAY less, especially on broken pavement.

The jury is still out on the DWB vs Struts debate, but given how poorly the '09 was tuned (the back end used to bob around a lot), I don't think it will give up much in terms of outright numbers. It might not be quite as predictable or easy to read in the turns though.

Overall, I couldn't believe how impressed I was with this latest Accord. Needless to say, I am glad I talked them into waiting for the 2013 versus picking up a 2012, as it is so superior in every way, I probably wouldn't consider a used one from that generation. We did get Honda Care on it though, since there are so many expensive electronics to break, and they did not lease this one.

This car very much renews my faith in what Honda is capable of.

[Ravens_CB7]

I would love a sedan with the full mugen package, now that would be awesome!!!!! But to be honest the only thing I would change or wish was different is the tail lights, why? Cuz everybody and it's true actually that the rear looks the same as the Hyundai -____- maybe red clears would've look more appealing to us than the clear reds.....

[owequitit]

Our 2013 EX-L V6 has about 4,000 miles on it now.

City mileage is working its way up to about 26MPG (and still going up), while highway MPG on the last trip was about 34MPG at ~80MPH. Not sure if that is still increasing, since it only went on the one long road trip when it was new.

We are also trying a couple of tanks of 91 octane in it to see if it responds favorably to the better fuel (like the 04 and 06 did).