Larger 4 Cyl Engine In Accord's Question

Hello,

Will probably be purchasing a 2009 Accord when they appear in a few weeks.

Was wondering about the two different 4-cyl. engines they offered in 2008,
and I presume will again for the 2009's.

The difference in HP seems almos negligible; I think only about 10 HP or so
more for the "bigger" four cyl.

Is this really enough to make some difference ?
Would I really even notice it, probably ?

What do most folks get ? Why ?

Or, is there something else different besides jus HP that actually makey the
larger one "better" ?

Thanks,
Bob

 

www.fueleconomy.gov shows the same size engine for all 2008
4-cylinder Accords. Did you mean to ask something else?

I do see that fuel mileage of the 6-cylinder 2008 Accord is
not very different from that of the 4-cylinder. This is
probably due to the new "Variable Cylinder Management"
system of newer 6-cylinder Hondas.

 

Hi,

I may be wrong, or mis-read, but I am fairly sure in many car mags that
there was in 2008 (and presumably for 2009 also) two different four cyl
offering. I think it said that the difference in HP was (only) about 12 HP.

Bob
--------------------------

 

"Robert11" wrote

You can't just choose the engine. At least in the sedan, it's the EX series
that offers the 190 HP engine. The LX series offers the 177 HP one.

http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx

 

Regardless of whether you opt for the 190hp 2.4 I4 found in the EX or the
177 hp in the LX and LXP sedans, I understand the gas mileage in the new I4
Accords is not as good as the older 166 hp 2.4 ltr I 4s. I should imagine
the weight and size increase contribute to this. On a recent highway trip I
managed to get a little over 35 mpg on a 06 Accord coupe I4 auto.

 

afaik, the power difference is due to the vtec cam, not different engine
capacity.

 

You are correct. These two 2008 Accord engines have the same
displacement. Both use I-VTEC. From my reading, the
difference in HP is due to different tuning (timing of valve
opening and closing and possibly ignition). The result is
that the EX (= 190 hp) has better acceleration at speeds
around 50 mph (and up?).

This phenomenon (same engine displacement for Accord, Civic,
whatever, but different hp) seems to occur on a number of
Hondas yada. Discussion at
http://www.hondanews.com/search/release/3013?q=ATDC&s=honda
for the 1993 Acura Legend (comparing it to the 92 Legend?)
may be helpful.

Just speculating, but I imagine the EX is touted to be more
suitable (comfort and performance-wise) for those whose
driving more often consists of long trips on the highway.

 

Hi,
Why are you hung up on HP rating? If really want to compare them look at
the power band to see where peak HP and torque is occuring. I am waiting
for multi-displacement engine for my nest car. Another way to look at is
under powered or marginally powered engine vs. over(reserve) powered
engine for the intended use. Or power to weight ratio.

 

The base engine is just fine.

I believe the larger one requires premium fuel, at least to deliver
its extra power.

What have you been driving?

If you really need acceleration, or plan to drive four hefty people
uphill in high temperatures at high altitude while towing a trailer,
you might go for the six.

J.

 

with a fully loaded roof rack...

 

None of the Accords require premium fuel. There were some tests using
premium fuel which show about a 3-5hp bump.

 

Looking at Howard's stats it seems the higher output comes from simply
spinning the motor a little faster, perhaps in conjunction with slightly
altered cam profiles, etc. In any event, ~180HP is more than enough for
a 3300lb vehicle. (IMO, my 92 wagon, with 130hp pushing a similarly
sized car, has never wanted for ooomph.) Also note that the EX weighs
about 100lb more than the LX and won't be much/any quicker, despite the
greater power.

-G

 

Huh. I thought they used the HO engine from the TSX.

Site now has 2009 info, both 4's have same 10.5 compression - pretty
high for normal gas, God bless computerized ignition!

J.

 

being able to run normal gas at high compression is much more a function
of getting the combustion chamber design right, and the internal gas
turbulence high. yes, ignition helps, but electronically retarding
ignition on what is otherwise a bad design doesn't improve matters too much.

 

OK by me.

J.