Motor Trend previews/Test drives 2013 Accord

[Hokiefyd]

Motor Trend 2013 Accord preview

There are some things I like and some things I don't.

Likes:
- Smaller exterior footprint and larger interior footprint
- Reduced weight
- 21 city/34 highway from the V-6 model, with more power to boot
- 27 city rating for the I-4 CVT model, excellent for a mid-size sedan
- Lots of MT availability (including V-6/MT in the Coupe)
- Plug-in hybrid model coming in 2014
- I *love* the exterior styling; seems to take a lot of cues from the Genesis sedan, which I already think is a very handsome car

Dislikes:
- No more wishbone front suspension; gone to MacPherson struts
- I don't care for the safety nannies/lane watch cameras
- I also don't care for all the Facebook/Twitter/junk integration with the radio
- Interior looks nice enough, but I don't care for Honda's recent gauge panel design, with a large center speedometer and half-of-a-tachometer pushed to the left

I expected Honda to create an "Earth Dreams" version of the K24 engine, but it looks like they've gone with a 2.4L displacement based on the R-series engine. As much as I like the K-series engine, it's been aruond since the early 2000s, so it's relatively long in the tooth. The R-series in the Civic is a very smooth engine, so I expect no different from a larger R-series in an Accord.

Honda says the MacPherson strut front suspension offers lighter weight and improved handling, but I'm not sure I can take that at face value. I guess I'd have to be convinced with some performance numbers before I could believe it. That was one of the best attributes of the old Accord in my opinion; it was a genuine alternative to the sea of "strutted" sedans out there.

Looks like it'll continue to be a top-seller. I like how Honda hasn't abandoned the V-6 option like some others have. I'd love to see a comparison one day between the V-6 sedans (Accord, Camry, Altima) and a turbo Kia or Hyundai (and a Malibu or Fusion if they will offer performance turbo powertrains).

 

[rszappa1]

I will be looking at one in a few months. Either getting a 2012 coupe or a 13.... not sure yet..

 

[fusion0389]

I really like the new look! IMO Honda has some funny looking cars in their lineup, but the new accord FINALLY looks very elegant and professional. It kinda reminds me of the VW passat or Toyota Camry. Im curious to see if the new design has any major bugs associated with it, overall I think this was a good move for Honda.

 

[bepperb]

I'm not sure what to make of the new I4 engine. It's designation is K24W, but it's flipped backwards from the way the other K24 engines run (exhaust in front of car). The K20 did have direct injection in the Stream. But I guess overall, and no I obviously haven't driven it, I'm a bit disappointed in the numbers the engine is producing (not class leading in power, torque, or fuel economy) and it seems to me they took a k24 block, a DI head and called it a day because if they didn't then it's even more disappointing. I hope Honda wasn't [earth] dreaming about an engine that really just matches what Hyundai and GM have had for a couple model years already.

And don't get me started on the J series V6. At least it gets a 6 speed automatic. And obviously I'm sad the wishbones are gone. But I assume most buyers don't care and would rather have the extra money that cost spent on a backup camera and an airbag in the cupholder.

Despite the powertrains I really doubt they make or break the car. I'm sure it's nice. A lot of cars in this segment are nice. I had hoped for an engineering breakthrough from a company that has had quite a few, but over the last decade not so much.

 

[DuckRyder]

It is a good looking car, I predict it remains a best seller.

I guess the gold one in the group photo with the goofy bumper and ugly wheels is the Hybrid. Why Honda insist on this is beyond me. Does it actually have blue lights in the grill? Take a Camry hybrid, barely looks different from the standard one. That is the way it should be in my opinion.

Your like/dislike list mirrors mine, something looks off with the coupe, I think the rear overhang is too long.

"Earth Dreams"? - Really?

 

[BrianWC]

I actually like the hybrid looks better than the rest. It's the only one that goes beyond slightly restyled Accord. I'd probably never buy one, though...

It'll be interesting to see if Honda's revisions to the v-6 and transmission speed up the Accord any. THe Camry and Altima v-6s both scoot to 60 in a few ticks south of 6 seconds these days...

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: bepperb
I'm not sure what to make of the new I4 engine. It's designation is K24W, but it's flipped backwards from the way the other K24 engines run (exhaust in front of car). The K20 did have direct injection in the Stream. But I guess overall, and no I obviously haven't driven it, I'm a bit disappointed in the numbers the engine is producing (not class leading in power, torque, or fuel economy) and it seems to me they took a k24 block, a DI head and called it a day because if they didn't then it's even more disappointing. I hope Honda wasn't [earth] dreaming about an engine that really just matches what Hyundai and GM have had for a couple model years already.


My bad; you are right: it is indeed a K-series engine mounted backwards. I'd love to see some more photos of them with the cover removed to see what the nekkid engine looks like.

I intially shared your disappointment in the 4-cylinder; shoot, the current non-DI K24 makes as much power as the DI version does.

That said, fuel economy is up (from 23/34 to 27/36); that compares favorably with cars like the 2.5 Fusion and 2.4 Sonata, and even the new 2.5 Altima (27/38). Peak torque is also improved, and occuring at a lower RPM than before (3,900). So while the peak power number isn't really improved, a host of other things appear to be.

The more I see it, the more I like what they've done. They're not pushing the technology to the bleeding edge; they're producing a solid powertrain with solid performance that will likely deliver for hundreds of thousands of miles (the reliability of the new CVT still being in question, though).

"Earth Dreams". Everyone's got a catch phrase for their vehicle technology now, don't they? "SkyActiv" (you're missing the 'e' Mazda!), Nissan's "Pure Drive", etc. I think Cadillac was actually the first to coin a catch phrase for a group of technologies: "Northstar". Northstar is best known for the V-8 engine, but it was a host of other technologies as well, including speed-sensitive steering, variable damping, integrated traction control, etc.

 

[Hokiefyd]

More information from Car & Driver.

Car & Driver article

 

[bepperb]

Sound to me like this would have made a great CRV engine with more low end. I guess the Accord will never really be a sport sedan again (despite having a manual transmission) so it will probably be a good engine for most of the buyers. It's just not what I wanted so sour grapes for me.

"We can't talk about the driving experience yet due to embargo, but I will point out something in the specs that should tell you a little about how the new K24W will feel.

On the old 190 hp K24 you made 162 lbs-ft at 4400 rpm. At 7000 rpm where peak power was made, you dropped to 142 lbs-ft. IOW, a 20 lbs-ft, or about a 12% drop over 2600 rpm.

By contrast, the new 189 hp K24W DI engine in the Accord Sport produces 182 lbs-ft at 3900 rpm. The 189 hp at 6400 rpm calculates out to 155 lbs-ft of torque. This is a drop of 27 lbs-ft or 15% over a 2500 rpm range. And given that the peak power is 500 rpm before the 6900 rpm redline, we know that torque will drop even further by 7000 rpm.

As such, you can probably make some pretty good inferences about how the new engine will _feel_ vs. the old engine (absent gearing changes and such). Much more bottom end biased with a more rapidly falling torque curve up top. "

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

- Lots of MT availability (including V-6/MT in the Coupe)

Still no manual available on the V6 Sedan though.

 

[Mud]

I would also be curious to see the performance/feel of the 4 cyl in this car. When we test-drove the 2008's I was disappointed in (subjective) feel of the car with the 4. It felt like a slug, we went with the V-6, still happy with the car at 60k miles.

 

[GearheadTool]

Call me old-fashioned but Honda Accords stopped being attractive after MY 2007 Coupes.

 

[SLCraig]

I LOVE the new look of this Accord... Way better than these goofy swoopy looking things that keep coming out. Finally a new car that looks like a car, not a sculpture. Honda has maybe found it's way again after seeing this car. I'd love a V6/6MT sedan, could be on my list of cars to own down the road, since I can no longer get a Maxima/Altima in V6/6MT.

 

[2002 Maxima SE]

When I hear folks talk about the design change, I just don't see it. The headlights are thinner, the grille is different and the lower fog lights have changed, however the side profile and sculpting in the doors looks the same to me. Is it a bad thing? No, I like this design but it is not that different than the outgoing model. Even the wheels are very similar to the outgoing model.

 

[cptbarkey]

definitely an improvement, and gives me hope that the refreshed civic will get similar treatment.

 

[rshaw125]

They'll sell very well. A couple of details I would like to see added to these reviews is confirmation of where they are manufactured (assembled). Also the US content % of the cars.
I have spoken with several people who use this information to 'buy American'. A Honda made in the US is a better choice for the patriot than a Ford made in Mexico.

My neighbor just bought a new Camry. Made in Kentucky (right ?) highest US content of any vehicle sold according to USA Today.
Toyota traded on NY stock exchange and pays a dividend. 2012 that is as 'American made' as you can get. A real eye opener.

 

[dishdude]

It's better, but still a little odd looking. I loved the 2003-2007 gen, the last gen was just extremely odd (dare I say ugly) looking.

 

[SLCraig]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
It's better, but still a little odd looking. I loved the 2003-2007 gen, the last gen was just extremely odd (dare I say ugly) looking.


06-07 are my favorite Accord of recent years. My true favorites are still the older ones, they always will be, since I am a child of the 80's/90's. (Most of my favorite stuff is from that era)

I think the 06/07 refresh though, if you get an EX-V6, is a really good looking car, I love the tail lights.

 

[MaximusD]

Originally Posted By: rshaw125
They'll sell very well. A couple of details I would like to see added to these reviews is confirmation of where they are manufactured (assembled).

Assembled in Marysville Ohio. CVT made in Russels Point Ohio. Engine in Anna Ohio.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Honda says the MacPherson strut front suspension offers lighter weight and improved handling, but I'm not sure I can take that at face value.

Mac struts do offer lighter weight. They take up less space, too.

As for "improved handling," I share your doubts. Nissan played this game when they went from IRS in the '94 Maxima to a beam suspension in '95, saying that the beam worked so much better than the old IRS. At best, all it means is that they did a better job with the new setup. It doesn't exclude the possibility that that IRS (or wishbones) could have been even better.

BMW has used Mac struts for decades, including in cars that consistently won praise for out-handling all of their peers. The current Mustang with its live rear axle out-handles many cars with IRS. Those comparisons don't mean Mac struts and live rear axles are better than wishbones and IRS; it just means BMW and Ford did a better job with what they had.