Honda V6

[jiraphe]

Any of ya'll have a V6 Accord? Ever driven one? I'm wondering how that V6 picks up. Is the VTEC as nice as in a four banger? I'm thinking about making one of these my next car.

[deevergote]

The V6 isn't a performance engine in any way, especially the older ones. I'm hoping to find a nice 6th gen V6 for my wife soon...

The 5th gen V6s aren't spectacular. The 6th gens are a little more luxurious. The 7th generation, with the introduction of the 6 speed manual, is where they start to get sportier.

They're decent cars though. The earlier models have a variation of the older Legend motor in them.

[Dinner_Time]

I've rode in one before, it was nice. All leather too! It gave 'er pretty good. Can burn some good rubber. Went powersliding in the winter with a friend (it's his parents) he put it in the ditch, it was fun lol. Not sure of year though...it's a newer one, but the newest.

[freq]

I just sold my '99 EX V-6 Coupe to my brother. All black w/ leather. The VTEC was almost not noticeable, especially when compared to my S2000. Watch for tranny issues on the 99 and 00 models.

[NAiL05]

I rode in my buddies 99 V6 Coupe when it was stock still pulled pretty good for a stock car really smooth and lots of torque I liked it.

[owequitit]

VTEC in the V6's is similar to VTEC in the Accord EX.

You don't really feel it. It isn't like DOHC VTEC where you have a distinct changeover.

Basically, one intake valve opens at low RPMs and then when VTEC engages, they both open fully.

My mom used to have a 2002 EX V6 4 door, and it was a very nice car, but not sporty at all.

It rode great, had decent power, and sounded good (although very quiet).

It really shone on the highway though. It was just waking up at 90MPH.

The 2002 was not included in the tranny recall, so they apparently fixed what was broken.

We drove the car for over 60,000 miles and had not a single hiccup of any kind whatsoever.

They traded that for a 2006 EX V6, and it is really a whole different ballgame.

It has tons more power, pulls to 7 grand, sounds beautiful all the way there, and even gets better MPG than my CB7.

The interior materials and design are much better than the 1998-2002, and it feels much more solidly built and intimate. The ambiance is superb. It is a lot of little details too. The doors close with a solid thunk, that is unlike any Honda I have heard before, and the soft padded leather seems to be of nearly the same quality as what you might find in a car costing twice as much. In fact, it rivals a 2002 740i Sport that I once looked at.

Where the ride in the 2002 coddled and floated, the 2006 is more like what I expect from a Honda. It rides wonderfully, but it is taught, much like a German car.

The handling isn't even comparable. The 2002 would roll over or wander around corners that seem like they aren't even there in the 06. The steering is much more accurate, and the car doesn't seem to wander or get blown around as much as the 02 did. I don't know if this is partly because of the difference in tire size, suspension tuning or both, but my guess would be both.

The standard XM in the 06 is great too.

Fit and finish are superb, paint quality is excellent, and wind noise is very low. There is a bit of road noise due to the stiffer suspension and low profile tires though, but nothing like a CB.

The tranny has a more aggressive shift program than the 02 did too. It shifts smoothly when needed, but as soon as your prod it a little bit, it kicks down, and it kicks down now. No waiting no pondering. If it needs to kick down 3 gears, it does, and it does it without hesitation. It also will downshift in turns, anticipating that you are going to get back on the gas. That way it is already on boil by the time you step on it. No waiting.
This is good, because in light running, it heads straight for 5th gear. That is good for fuel economy I guess, but it also leads to a bit of hunting around town at high altitudes on hills.

It doesn't seem to be quite as soft as the tranny in the 98-02 V6 though. I don' know if they were going for a sportier feel, or if that is part of what was contributing to the failures. I imagine with the way the rest of the shift programing is, and the rest of the car is setup, it was done for feel. It isn't harsh, just more firm.

If it wasn't for Honda's smooth wonderful manual trannies, I would probably want an auto.

As far as acceleration goes, you can imagine what an extra 55HP or so, and an extra gear ratio will do (power rating measuring has changed since '02, so the 200HP of the '02 does NOT compare directly with the 244HP of the 06). Under the old HP system, the 2006 would have been somewhere around 255HP.

The 2006 will absolutely bury the 02. These cars have been known to run in the very low 15's to high 14's stock. The 6 speeds can run low to mid 14's in the hands of the right driver. That is fully loaded and bone stock! Not the fastest car on the road, but certainly fast enough for a V6 family sedan that gets close to 30MPG city with an auto tranny, and weighs 3500lbs.

Highway power is really where the car lives though. Much like the 02, it is just getting started when many other cars are falling on their face. The 02 occasionally left you wanting for passing power, just as a function of gearing. I have not found that to be the case in the 06 though.

Just as a case in point, when we were bringing it back from the dealer, we were coming up a hill between Phoenix and my town. The elevation changes from just about 2,000 ft MSL to just about 5,000ft MSL in the span of a few miles. It isn't the biggest hill I have seen, but it is large enough to know it is there, and a lot of cars start to breathe hard at about 80-85MPH. In the summer the side is littered with cars that couldn't make it.

I was put in a situation where I needed to move around someone, and needed to do it now.

On that same hill in the 02, it would have accelerated from about 70MPH to about 80-85MPH in the same amount of space that the 06 was climbing through 105 on its way to 110. I got around the truck and let off, so I don't know where it would have stopped, but the 02 would not have been close. I didn't really want to romp it, since it had about 60 miles on it, but I didn't have a choice. It has loosened up quite a bit since then (about 4800 miles on it now), and is noticably more responsive and quicker.

The 6 speeds are noticably faster still. Again, not the fastest cars on the road, but definitely quick for what they are.

I really like the styling of the 06. There is a cohesiveness of design that was missing in the 2003-2005 models (mostly due to the rear end). It looks plain in pictures, but it is like most other Hondas. The details and beauty start to emerge when you begin to examine it closer. Much like the CB7. Most people have decided they don't like it because of the 03-05, but the 06 really only looks a little similar. It has new fascias, the rear end is totally different, and the dual chrome tips give it just a bit of attitude. The headlights, hood, roof and doors and front fenders (I think) are the only panels that it still shares with the other years.

All in all, it is a superb car, and I really like it.

After owning it for about a week, I asked my dad how he liked it compared to the '02, and he said: "What 02?"

My mom said the same thing.

It really is a wonderful car, and the mechanicals are spectacular. It has a large list of standard features, tons of safety devices, a great safety rating, and is built with the same precision, durability, and all around driving fun that most people expect from Honda. People who complain about the "downfall of Honda" have not driven their newest of cars. They really are great.

The biggest downsides are the previously mentioned hunting (not really a problem, it just seems like a bit of an oversight or something, a detail oddly out of place), the large C pillars, that aren't super easy to see around while backing the car, and the back seat cushion, which is extrememly comfortable for 2 but seems to sit a bit lower. This feels like it can put your knees at an odd angle. There haven't been any complaints so far though. My 80 year old grandmother thought it was great on a long trip, so I don't know. Maybe it effects the long of leg more.

Other than that, there really isn't much to complain about.

I would like to have a V6 6speed 4 door parked in my driveway next to the CB. Maybe someday.

[OwninUSince1902]

^^lol that must have taken a long time to type

are the v6's the same in the accord as in the odessey? cauz my parents have an 04 odessey and damn the engine is pretty powerful. you can definately tell when you hit vtec in the van because it just comes to life and roars, i wish i had the same engine to replace the f22 in the cb 250 horsepower and it seems a bit on the conservative side. my dad was once driving and we had a guy in a first gen camaro do a double take when my dad passed him in while in vtec, because the engine is pretty loud.

well back on topic i would think that most likely you would be very happy with a v6 accord. i havent driven one but they are very stylish and will last forever as it is a honda. and from what owequitit said they are pretty quick with 6 speed. i know if i was looking to get a new/used car the v6/6speed accord would definately by up at te top of my list.

[Leung]

my boss at work has one, not sure what year either but he loves that thing like he does his wife only if it didn't eat up so much fuel.

[owequitit]

^^lol that must have taken a long time to type

are the v6's the same in the accord as in the odessey? cauz my parents have an 04 odessey and damn the engine is pretty powerful. you can definately tell when you hit vtec in the van because it just comes to life and roars, i wish i had the same engine to replace the f22 in the cb 250 horsepower and it seems a bit on the conservative side. my dad was once driving and we had a guy in a first gen camaro do a double take when my dad passed him in while in vtec, because the engine is pretty loud.

well back on topic i would think that most likely you would be very happy with a v6 accord. i havent driven one but they are very stylish and will last forever as it is a honda. and from what owequitit said they are pretty quick with 6 speed. i know if i was looking to get a new/used car the v6/6speed accord would definately by up at te top of my list.

I type fast.

Also, yes the Odyssey and the Accord do share basic powerplants and drivetrains.

In fact every new Honda V6 is a member of the J series family. Accord is J30, Odyssey, and Pilot are the J35, the TL is the J32 or the J35, the RL is a J35, and the new MDX is a J37.

Pretty much all of the parts are interchangeable, although I believe the J35 has a slightly taller deck height than the J30/J32. I am not positive on that though. They are all swappable.

The most powerful is the J37 at 300HP. Then come the RL and TL Type S's J35 at 290 and 286HP respectively. Next in line is the TL with a 3.2L that puts down 258HP. The Accord, the Odyssey, and the Ridgeline are all rated at the same 244HP, although the J35's in those have more torque and a lower redline (6500 vs 6800).

If you have an 04 Odyssey, you should have a 240HP J35, and yes, they do move very quickly for a minivan. I have seen times in the mid 15s for those.

[ALPINE PIMP 07]

Does any one know how fast a 2000 accord v6 will go stock?

[mondojackal]

Does any one know how fast a 2000 accord v6 will go stock?

not very. they all came stock with a sucky automatic tranny. it really holds that car back. that and having SOHC V-TEC, like owequitiit already mentioned.
*edit*
v6performance.net
there is one accord on that site that broke 12's. he has a 12.7 i think. built automatic transmission, comptech supercharger, j32 swap.

[owequitit]

Does any one know how fast a 2000 accord v6 will go stock?

Bone stock, expect mid 16's or so if it is an EX and mid to low 16's if it is an LX V6.

If you get really lucky, it might run a high 15, or if you clear the interior out.

[jiraphe]

Thanks for the insight guys. I like the newer ones too, but I'm looking for a 1998-2002. How does the 4 cylinder pull? I believe that's an H23, right? I'm assuming that it gets great fuel mileage. So some of these had bad auto trannies? Are the manuals okay? I'm looking for a stick anyway. I've found a 4cyl coupe w/ a 5 speed and fully loaded for around $11000 with ~50000 miles on it. Deal or no deal?

[owequitit]

Thanks for the insight guys. I like the newer ones too, but I'm looking for a 1998-2002. How does the 4 cylinder pull? I believe that's an H23, right? I'm assuming that it gets great fuel mileage. So some of these had bad auto trannies? Are the manuals okay? I'm looking for a stick anyway. I've found a 4cyl coupe w/ a 5 speed and fully loaded for around $11000 with ~50000 miles on it. Deal or no deal?

The fours aren't super fast. The autos are actually quite disappointing, but the manuals probably aren't too bad.

The 2.3 liter in those cars is a punched out version of the F22 that powered all 4 cylinder Accords from 1990-2002. If it is an LX or EX, it will have SOHC VTEC and be rated at 150HP. If it is a DX it will have 135HP and be non-VTEC.

The manual trannies are fine, but yes, there were some auto tranny issues there as well apparently. I don't think they were as widespread though, and I am not totally certain that the ones I have dealt with weren't caused by stupid drivers doing neutral drops.

[jiraphe]

Thanks for your help man. I'm keeping my eyes on that coupe w/ the 5 speed. I love leather, too. I'm hoping the switch from my wagon to a new accord won't be too bad.