To my motoring requirements, a near perfect combination of performance, economy, comfort, equipment and reliability is achieved by the Honda Accord. But the diesel has no auto option and I would never go back to changing gears myself.
Anyone know why no auto is offered ? Is there an auto option on this model for the Japan market ?
|
Try it, have done 60k in mine and it is marvelous.
After the Accord the 530 TD Auto Beamer I drove up from London on Wednesday was a disapointment!
|
|
It must of been a bad beamer as being a repo man i can tell you the bmw far outways the honda?
|
|
|
|
Not sure that answers the question ! Unless you're saying that you did your 60K in an auto. In which case, it raises another one: where did you get it !
|
Honda didn't really want to develop a diesel engine, but were forced to due to the European market (previous engines have been collaborations i think). I believe that honda believed that the diesel would only account for a minority of their sales, and so have limited the engine tranmission combination to just manual. Same for the CR-V.
|
|
Maybe the new Toyota Avensis diesel due out in 155 and 180bhp (I think) will offer an auto option?
|
|
|
Auto boxes for diesels need to be designed to take account of the massive low-end torque produced. Petrol engines, particularly multi-valve engines, produce most of their torque at much higher revs.
The cost of designing/building for low sales volumes may have been a consideration.
|
|
|
No the Honda is a manual of course - it is very good and other than in stop-start traffic the torque almost makes it an auto.
The BMW was an auto and granted it was quieter at 75 than the Honda but I was expecting something which drove way better than the Honda and had intuitive, easy to use controls. The rear seat is too upright to sleep in, the front electric seat isn't entirely electric, the cruise controls are difficult to use and it is easy to get the wrong lever, i-drive is awful.
Would I spend an twice the money to get one - no, but then I set no value on the badge!
|
|
|
|
|
After the Accord the 530 TD Auto Beamer I drove up from London on Wednesday was a disapointment!
I'm not saying the Honda isn't a great car, but the 5 series in general are acknowledged as being more or less the holy grail in driving perfection !
|
|
|
|
Before this thread gets hijacked into a discussion of the relevant merits of the BMW and Honda(why not the Mondeo?) I think the problem is that, in terms of economy, diesels and auto gearboxes are not a good combination. Below is an extract from another post.
"The problem is that the economy with a diesel automatic suffers. HJ wrote in Car-by-Car breakdown "Steptronic auto increases fuel consumption of 330D by around 25%."; and I have seen this point made in other publications.
There was a thread covering this:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=11847
The most plausible explanations for this stated
"I suspect that the reason many diesel automatics do not show good fuel consumption figures is due to the high engine torque at low revs, which maximises torque convertor slip. Coupled with the weight penalty of a diesel, this is a sure-fire formula for bad figures unless the box has a torque convertor lock. ....... Around town, an automatic gearbox is using the torque converter as lock-out doesn't occur until 50 mph, or thereabouts. The gear ratio might be slightly more efficient but the torque converter efficiency is quite poor."
As economy is the main reason for most people buying diesel, perhaps this is why few diesel automatics are produced."
|
I concur. Our Diesel Automatic Trajet does at best 26mpg on average and 32 mpg on a run. MiL E320CDi does about 30mpg on average and 40mpg on a run, but is a more powerful engine in a lower car.
The better engineered cars (Merc.BMW.Audi)seem to do the derv/auto option better than others.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
I really wanted an auto diesel, and I did eventually buy a Merc diesel auto ? for some reason Merc Auto?s don?t seem noticeably less economical than manuals.
I looked at Mondeo TDCi, but the auto murders the fuel economy, and the Volvo S60 D5 auto does a similar thing.
I had an Accord corporate demo for a few days ? of all the manuals I drove, it was the one I probably could have lived with. It?s 5 speed (I think 6 speeds are just a marketing gimmick). Its spread of torque and smoothness are such that, around town, you could leave it in 3rd gear unless you actually stopped.
I did ask about an auto, but was told (by Honda) that they had no plans to offer one. My local dealer told me Honda benchmarked Accord against Audi A4, so the dealer was disappointed by lack of auto (which of course Audi has).
I did have some other issues with the Accord ?package? though (I looked a year ago, so maybe some things have changed, although I don?t think they have). Lack of elec folding mirrors is just ridiculous these days. No trip computer seems an incredible omission. No easy way of integrating mobile phone. Dash looks fab with Sat Nav, horrible without it. There was something else funny about the dash too ? IIRC it was illuminated all the time, but there was no indication of external lights on, so I was never sure if I had the lights on or not (during rain in the day time). I really wanted Xenon lights, yet although they?re standard on 2.4 petrol, they?re not available even as an option on the diesel. The side bumper strips should be fitted as standard.
Honda does seem to struggle with their equip levels (in my opinion, of course). We own a Jazz, but it wasn?t a ?no-brainer? to buy it. I wrote to Honda ? they never replied, but at its last revamp, they did (co-incidentally, I?m sure) address several of the points I made.
|
>>Lack of elec folding mirrors is just ridiculous these days
Hardly.
No trip computer seems an incredible omission
Agree wholeheartedly.
>>There was something else funny about the dash too ? IIRC it was illuminated all the time, but there was no indication of external lights on
Mine does this, and i agree not having the dipped headlight indicator (green icon on most cars) is pretty bad.
>>I really wanted Xenon lights, yet although they?re standard on 2.4 petrol, they?re not available even as an option on the diesel.
Daft too.
Great cars otherwise.
|
I am sure there is a lights-on indicator, and a busser to warn of lights left on, when the key is removed. And the dash can dim when the lights are turned on. Apart from looking out of the window how many warning lights and audio notifications does one need.
sorry I have strayed OT
|
|
|
>>There was something else funny about the dash too ? IIRC it was illuminated all the time, but there was no indication of external lights on Mine does this, and i agree not having the dipped headlight indicator (green icon on most cars) is pretty bad. Great cars otherwise.
I have an Accord i-CTDI Tourer and there is an indication on dash of lights being on, there is also an audible warning of lights left on when you open the door. There is also a high beam warning.
The dash is illuminated all of the time, but this can be altered by a control on the dash.
|
|
|
|
|
I dont think the diesel Audis (Multitronic) are much different in terms of economy than the manuals. These next-generation autos dont tend to have the hang-ups of the traditional autos with torque converters etc..
|
When Honda first announced a few years ago that they were working on a diesel powered Accord I distinctly remember reading about a test model which was hooked up to a five speed automatic transmission.
I also remember the author of the article praising the engine/gearbox combination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
