Long-Term Road Tests

It is a fact that the VCM equipped V6 suffers a loss of 30 ft lbs of torque in the mid range rpms versus the regular V6 6MT coupe. Tell me THAT is not noticeable - I had a couple of moments driving this weekend when I called to the engine room for power while cruising at about 50 and when I pressed the accelerator to the floor there was nothing there - no downshift - no power. I took my foot completely OFF the accelerator and slammed it to the floor - ONLY then did it downshift and I get some passing power. The initial reluctance to downshift and respond to a call for power was downright dangerous. GET RID OF THE VCM AND ADD A 6AT FOR BETTER MILEAGE HONDA.

I'm pretty bummed that a 6AT was not offered on the new Accord. I also dislike VCM, don't quite trust it, etc... so I would have liked it to see it as a stand-alone option (or better yet deleted altogether.)

Those are @ the crank ratings. As far as I knew VTECH kicked past the mid range.. not in it. Torque creats thermal somesfdsf and it makes the engine less efficent to have gobs of torque in the mid-range.

"it makes the car more efficient to have less midrange torque."
 
Actually no. The reason the Accord V6 5AT DOESNT have the midrange torque is because the VCM eliminates the performance mechanicals of the VTEC system. The dyno plot I implemented in anohter post clearly shows the torque hole in the midrange. Its just awful.
 
In any case more torque wouldnt necessarily mean its less efficient. I know an RDX owner who has the Hondata reflash and it just transformed the vehicle completely. Power was gained everywhere in the range (up to 35hp/40lbft in some areas of the curve) yet he reports a 3-4 MPG increase overall.
 
http://hondata.com/reflash_rdx.html
 
"Does the extra gear in the Camry really make that much of a difference?"
 
Gearing plays a significant role in fuel economy. A 6AT has more ratios so you can stack them close in the first few gears (for better off the line acceleration) and then spread them out in the rest (better fuel economy). A 6AT would do wonders for the Honda V6 and they could eliminate the VCM system (torque sucker) all together.

250hp means nothing, it could have 250hp @ 6200rpm and have 155 1500rpm-6100rpm 6200rpm. and then Torque is a whole other factor you left out.. which the Accord with VCM is seriously lacking in, it makes the car more efficient to have less midrange torque.

I'd say anything north of 250 hp in a midsize fwd sedan should never ever be considered "underpowered" in the slightest.

Thanks Zach. How did I miss that? Well I'm sorry to see the Altima go.

I've never sat in a '08 Accord with leather seats, but our LX's cloth seats are nice and comfortable in my opinion.

johnmarco- Here's a link to the long-term Altima's wrap-up. Hope it helps!
 
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/LongTerm/articleId=119740

Whats the point of the VCM anyway? Could the fuel economy be that much worse without it? The Camry makes the exact same amount of horsepower and torque as the Accord but is faster and only gets 1 mpg worse and doesn't use VCM. Does the extra gear in the Camry really make that much of a difference? Looks like Toyota is stomping all over Honda in the powertrain department these days...

"And the OLD 5AT could be the blame for lack of power, they probably haven't even changed the gearing on it after all of these years."
  
Its not that old actually as the Honda 5AT debuted in 2000 in the TL and 2003 for the Accord. I wouldnt call that old. All Honda 5ATs were significantly updated in 05 or 06 (depending on vehicle) to a stronger 4 shaft design. Of course gearing is different for each vehicle application.
  
As Ive said before Honda implements a slow stall speed and TC lockup which makes for rather lazy getaways in just about all their AT applications. Another decision Honda made that I dont understand.
  
I know Honda stated for the 2008 Accord V6 5AT that the electronics dial back some of the power in 1st gear and of course to add to the damage...the VCM sucks out the midrange torque considerably to the amount of 30 lbft which was proven by the dyno.
  
At about 4000 RPM the 6MT V6 (non VCM) and the 5AT V6 (VCM) have about a 50 lb ft difference in torque output to the wheels which is SIGNIFICANT! I know the automatic will suck some torque over the manual but the VCM (which eliminates the high performance mechanicals of the VTEC system)just ruins the torque curve.
  
"And the V6 doesn't really get going till about 4500 RPM, unlike others in its class with considerably more low-end punch (the Aura's 3.6-liter V6, for example). "
  
People always look at peak power and peak torque when under the curve is what matters most. The Honda J series V6 (non VCM) provides 80-90% of its peak by 2000 RPM which is on par with just about every other V6 in its class.
  
Honda should have delivered a nice 6AT with the non VCM V6. They claim they dont have the resources for a 6AT yet they can build jets and humanoid robots.......I call BS.

Johnmarco -- All the Nissan products have left; Altima, G35 and Versa.

Different people have different feelings.
 
And the OLD 5AT could be the blame for lack of power, they probably haven't even changed the gearing on it after all of these years.

Off topic (sorry Glenn.) What the devil happened to the Altima? I never saw a farewell post but it hasn't been blogged about in months. That was my favorite car in the stable.

Glenn, if you don't intend to post exactly what the other editors post, you have no business posting at all. We simply cannot tolerate differing opinions on the very same car.

"The ride was smooth enough but I kept wanting a little something from the engine for passing, etc. that it was never able to deliver. It isn't gravely underpowered but it would be nice to have a little more back-up the times I needed it. It is a V6."
 
You can blame the torque sucking VCM system for that! I know Honda can do better as the V6 (no VCM) in the Accord coupe V6 6MT is a BEAST!
 
By comparison the best time at the drag strip for my stock 2003 Acura CL-S 6MT was a 14.3 @ 97 which is pretty quick for a stock V6 car. The Accord coupe will run 14.5-14.4 but the trap speed is 101-102 range. Traction is the biggest issue as it doesnt have an LSD like my CL-S 6MT.
 
Honda, give the Accord V6 (and other Honda/Acura V6 cars) the 6AT they deserve and drop the VCM all together.

pazbien,
 
Having spent a fair amount of time in the same car, I heartily agree with Glenn on the points you mentioned. The bottom cushion of the Accord's driver seat is extraordinarily firm (though I do find it supportive on longer drives) -- it's the first thing I noticed when I got in. And the V6 doesn't really get going till about 4500 RPM, unlike others in its class with considerably more low-end punch (the Aura's 3.6-liter V6, for example).
 
-Sadlier

I find it hard to believe that the seats are so uncomfortable since EDMUNDS EDITOR James R. posted not to long ago HOW COMFORTABLE AND GREAT the entry "Less Lumbar." I don't understand your statement since many people have praised the accords seat.
 
Likewise what are you expecting powerwise? 600HP and 2.3 0-60 seconds.
I guess it must be that you are use to muscle cars or something because the sedan is only miliseconds if not equal to its competition in 0-60 and it is faster through the quarter mile than every midsize except the camry. Your own tests proved it. I even bet you as the Broadband producer probably filmed it.
 
Again EDMUNDS editor Warren Clarke in the thread "Fast Love" praised the Accord's V6 for being fast and torquey.