Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > What Car? > Sedans


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 17th November 2009, 17:55   #16
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 200
Thanked: 4 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigbarai View Post
If you want to play safe, pick up a NHC CVT.

Would give you great FE, comparitively.
Cost significantly less upfront.
And you wont lose more than 35-40 k resale value in 2 yrs of ownership.
Sacrilege! After owning an OHC, tejas wouldn't dream of buying the NHC! I don't think he cares too much about FE. His daily drive is approx 8-9 kms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by .anshuman View Post
@ACM 2.4MT had better 0-100 figure compared to 3.0 V6 AT.
Correct! Around 1 second slower.
jasher26 is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 18:19   #17
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney / Secunderabad
Posts: 278
Thanked: 10 Times
Default

You can also check out an auto C-class as it might fall in your price range
D.V.R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 18:55   #18
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 541
Thanked: 13 Times
Default

LOL @ Sacrilege
Yes, 77 odd BHP against 100 odd BHP, but the CVT doesnt feel that bad in city driving and is immensely practical as well as economical.

If he wants something to be better than the OHC and not be too much of a bother, Civic AT or Corolla AT. Many reliable options can be found at Honda/Toyota dealers itself.
jigbarai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 21:39   #19
Team-BHP Support
 
Akshay1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,762
Thanked: 6,670 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigbarai View Post
LOL @ Sacrilege
Yes, 77 odd BHP against 100 odd BHP, but the CVT doesnt feel that bad in city driving and is immensely practical as well as economical.

If he wants something to be better than the OHC and not be too much of a bother, Civic AT or Corolla AT. Many reliable options can be found at Honda/Toyota dealers itself.
oh cmon, who are you kidding. its frikking slow. it takes ages to go above 80. but in traffic, bumper to bumper its fine. not comparable to a 220bhp accord v6.


but this thread is of great interest to me since i am in the same position as tejas. looking at an accord. can someone post up the 0-100 times of the 2.4 manual and auto? the facelifted 3.0v6 was about 1.5 seconds faster than the pre facelift v6.

Last edited by Akshay1234 : 17th November 2009 at 21:40.
Akshay1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 22:13   #20
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 541
Thanked: 13 Times
Default

I am not kidding anyone.. my note was specifically for CITY DRIVING only.
When we are talking 8-9 kms driven per day, can't be anything else, right ?
The CVT would be far more convenient and frugal in the city traffic because of its dimensions. Depends on where you want to drive the car and park it, on a daily basis.

Far more easy to find a good piece, light on the wallet to own and easy to sell too.

But yes, the Accord will have far more power, luxury and snob value.
jigbarai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 22:16   #21
Senior - BHPian
 
pranavt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 1,628
Thanked: 272 Times
Default

Tejas, if you end up buying an NHC, please make sure to bang it into a bus/truck, preferably at a speed of around 40 kph. Probably the best and cheapest way to improve the looks of the front. Don't forget to wear your seatbelt while you're at it though.
pranavt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 23:12   #22
Team-BHP Support
 
Akshay1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,762
Thanked: 6,670 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigbarai View Post
I am not kidding anyone.. my note was specifically for CITY DRIVING only.
When we are talking 8-9 kms driven per day, can't be anything else, right ?
The CVT would be far more convenient and frugal in the city traffic because of its dimensions. Depends on where you want to drive the car and park it, on a daily basis.

Far more easy to find a good piece, light on the wallet to own and easy to sell too.

But yes, the Accord will have far more power, luxury and snob value.
we get your point of view and it is absolutely correct. except your forgetting one thing, that the fact that he is looking at the accord v6 means he wants a fun to drive car, which the nhc is not.
Akshay1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2009, 23:46   #23
BHPian
 
prateekm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mumbai & BLR
Posts: 756
Thanked: 311 Times
Default

I am also looking this the same market and I am going for a Skoda mostly

Accord, due to it's FE, just doesn't fit into my budget. I need to travel 70+ kms daily from Thane to Fort and paying fuel costs for Accord will empty my wallet more than a Skoda even if there is a part failure.
prateekm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2009, 10:47   #24
GTO
Team-BHP Support
 
GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bombay
Posts: 47,748
Thanked: 89,395 Times
Default

Getting hooked on to automatics, eh?

Accord V6' go so cheap in the used market for a single reason : 5 - 5.5 kpl in a city like Mumbai. Even in less populated areas, you'd be hard-pressed to cross 6 - 6.5 kpl, but in metros, 5.xx kpl is the norm.

And if you think you've seen a depreciation disaster, just wait until the current V6 enters the used car market. Its priced a whopping 7 - 8 lakhs more than the I-4 (when new). The current gen V6 is going to sink like a brick in water when its time for resale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tejas@perioimpl View Post
Going through all the threads I found out that the 3.0V6 is slower than the 2.4 manual.
Yes and no. The facelift version had its ECM / gearbox tweaked. Thus, '07 (and above) V6s are quicker than the I-4. The pre-facelift is marginally slower than the I-4 manual to a 100, but quicker to the 160.

Related link (Honda Accord 4 cylinder vs V6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigbarai View Post
It is not regular maintenance I was refering to. It was more so 'when something goes wrong'.
Accords are the cheapest to maintain from the D segment. And things go wrong very rarely. Of course, just like most other premium Japanese cars, parts are expensive (yet cheaper than Euros), but exceedingly durable (far better life than Euros). And the failure rate is negligible. These cars are known to have a 2.0 - 4.0 lakh kms reliable life. The regular maintenance costs are peanuts, most of the times cheaper than even of cars a segment or two lower.
GTO is offline   (3) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2009, 11:27   #25
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Tejas@perioimpl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bombay
Posts: 3,969
Thanked: 4,931 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigbarai View Post
If you want to play safe, pick up a NHC CVT.

Would give you great FE, comparitively.
Cost significantly less upfront.
And you wont lose more than 35-40 k resale value in 2 yrs of ownership.
If i want to play it safe, i would wear a C*****.

Jaideep has summarized my reaction quite aptly below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasher26 View Post
Sacrilege! After owning an OHC, tejas wouldn't dream of buying the NHC! I don't think he cares too much about FE. His daily drive is approx 8-9 kms.


Quote:
Originally Posted by D.V.R View Post
You can also check out an auto C-class as it might fall in your price range
Nah, don't wanna get a second hand one. A friend picked up a sparcely used previous gen diesel from auto terrace for 15lakhs and every month he has some sensor failing on him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigbarai View Post
If he wants something to be better than the OHC and not be too much of a bother, Civic AT or Corolla AT. Many reliable options can be found at Honda/Toyota dealers itself.
Many of my friends are pushing me to the civic AT since i may get a sparcely used one in comparison to the accord. And since i need it for a couple of years, i may consider it.

I'm not a corolla fanboy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by akshay1234 View Post
but this thread is of great interest to me since i am in the same position as tejas. looking at an accord. can someone post up the 0-100 times of the 2.4 manual and auto? the facelifted 3.0v6 was about 1.5 seconds faster than the pre facelift v6.
Let's keep each other posted if we come across a good car and pass it for some reason. I need to buy one anytime after Jan but before March ending.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTO View Post
Getting hooked on to automatics, eh?

Accord V6's go so cheap in the used market for a single reason : 5 - 5.5 kpl in a city like Mumbai. Even in less populated areas, you'd be hard-pressed to cross 6 - 6.5 kpl, but in metros, 5.xx kpl is the norm.
Absolutely getting hooked to automatics!
With 98% city driving, nothing like it.

Ya, the FE is depressing, but that's the compromise. Navin's post about transmission has got me thinking about going towards the civic AT which will be less used and newer compared to the accord in my price range. However, it won't be as much fun.
Tejas@perioimpl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2009, 11:33   #26
Team-BHP Support
 
Akshay1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,762
Thanked: 6,670 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tejas@perioimpl View Post



Let's keep each other posted if we come across a good car and pass it for some reason. I need to buy one anytime after Jan but before March ending.


definitely. same time frame for me except im starting to look mid jan after my exams. never really considered the civic at but now might as well look at that too.

does anyone have 0-100 timings for the 2.4 auto?
Akshay1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2009, 11:41   #27
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Tejas@perioimpl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bombay
Posts: 3,969
Thanked: 4,931 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by akshay1234 View Post
definitely. same time frame for me except im starting to look mid jan after my exams. never really considered the civic at but now might as well look at that too.

does anyone have 0-100 timings for the 2.4 auto?
The link GTO posted has the details:

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian...der-vs-v6.html (Honda Accord 4 cylinder vs V6)

The timings are for the pre-facelift version though.
Tejas@perioimpl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2009, 12:15   #28
Team-BHP Support
 
Akshay1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,762
Thanked: 6,670 Times
Default

so i just learnt there are differences in the gearbox between the pre facelift and facelift version. the facelift version gets a 5 speed autobox and that + the power increase probably helps the quicker 0-100 time. that said i think a remap would improve the power by 30bhp+ make the shifts quicker so the pre facelift could be made as quick as the facelift.
Akshay1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2009, 15:36   #29
ACM
Distinguished - BHPian
 
ACM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 4,154
Thanked: 2,460 Times
Default

Honda Accord 3.0 V6 AT version details, Technical specifications, Features, Price
Honda Accord 2.4 VTi-L MT version details, Technical specifications, Features, Price

Akshay, Jesher do check out the 0-100 speeds and top speed for both 3.0 AT and 2.4 MT - previous gen models. Have driven both cars - for a short while - taking them to high speeds, but somehow (may be it a mental block) i felt the 3.0 to be faster and had trouble keep the foot on the accelerator for for long periods, just a tab would do most of the while.

Yep on the TBHP forum itself the 2.4 has been credited with 0-100 speed in the 8.X sec and the 3.0 in 9.X sec. and the 3.0 is reported to take off only after the 0-100, but in todays world one does tend to go to speeds on 120-140 quite easily in cities like bom / delhi - I do get to these speeds quite often in the Laura DSG AT and getting there faster is useful. (Normally in the Easter, Western expressways, the Palm beach roads and of course for highway driving.)

Could someone point me to a reliable thirdparty or company source that mentions the 2.4 MT to be faster than the 3.0 AT in the 2004-2007 models.
ACM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2009, 19:36   #30
GTO
Team-BHP Support
 
GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bombay
Posts: 47,748
Thanked: 89,395 Times
Default

^^ Me & Shantanu discussed ACI test numbers (thread link given in an earlier post). They are third party and pretty reliable
GTO is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DiCOR - What went wrong? greenhorn Technical Stuff 135 9th January 2012 17:07
The toyota 2010 recalls: what went wrong? What happened to the 'Toyota Way'? greenhorn The International Automotive Scene 6 11th May 2010 22:52
High Idling RPM. What went wrong? saurabhkum Technical Stuff 8 25th October 2007 20:00
What went wrong with Hyundai CRDI moodswings The Indian Car Scene 23 9th February 2007 16:53


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 16:44.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks