"Bob" <bobwhite@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:W1nNj.106014$Ft5.91171@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>I am considering the purchase of either the Honda Accord or the Toyota
>Avalon for my wife's use. Both seem to be very nice cars but good and
not
>good features to each.
>
> On the Honda Accord, I am concerned about the engine which runs on
either
> 3, 4, or six cylinders, depending on driving conditions, speed, etc.
> They claim this is to increase fuel efficiency. I don't know how long
> this engine has been used by Honda, but it sounds to me like it could be
> major expensive problem a few years down the pike. Does anyone know
> anything about this engine and/or have any experience with it?
>
> I recall that in the middle 70's, that Cadillac came out with a 4, 6, 8
> cylinder engine. Apparently it didn't work out because they only kept
it
> the one year. I don't know if it was a problem engine or if it didn't
> achieve the efficiency expected. At any rate, I am leery about the
Honda
> engine.
>
> As an aside questions: How do they do that, and does it really save
> fuel?
>
> On the Toyota Avalon, they have a six speed transmission. Again, I
don't
> know how long they have used this transmission or what the service
record
> has been. I also have concerns about expensive transmission problems.
>
> The other problem with the Toyota is the gear ****ft. It is not just a
> back and forth lever. It has a deeply notched track for the ****fter.
It
> seems to me that this might result in ***bersome ****fting. Anyone have
> any knowledge and/or experience with this six speed transmission?
>
> Thanks in advance for your ideas, suggestions, and experience.
>
> Bob-tx
>
> PS: I am also posting this on both the Honda and the Toyota groups.
>
I took a look at both the 2008 V6 Accord and the Toyota Avalon. I already
have in the stable a 2000 V6 EX Accord. I went with the Avalon (got it in
Dec '07) for a number or reasons. One, I was very leery of the new engine
cylinder design. Obviously, it must require a complex control system as
well as the interaction of the mechanical components. As far as I know,
no
real (field) history behind this design and any problem would likely be an
expensive repair. I didn't want to become one of Honda's fleet leaders.
Two, the predicted gas mileage wasn't all that great considering the
potential problem risk. Three, the inside looked too much like the Accord
that I already have. As a result, didn't feel/look enough like a new car
to
me.
My first surprise with the Avalon was the gas mileage--with only 400 miles
on the car went on a 3000 mile round trip, most of it highway at 70-80+
MPH, I got 28-32 mpg. Running around the city it goes anywhere from 24 to
26 mpg; filled the tank last night, had over 300+ miles since the last
fill
up and was between the 1/2 and 1/4 marks on the gas gage. Surprisingly,
on
my trip, the instrument panel MPG readout compared very close to
calculated
mileage --read about 1 mpg higher than calculated. With respect to the
transmission and ****ft lever--the ****ft lever is spring loaded so that it
just falls into the correct position--Drive/reverse etc..after a while you
don't even have to look, it kind of naturally seeks the desired position
when you move the lever. The lower gears (3,2 & 1) are achieved by just
moving the lever from Drive to the left and then just tapping it to get to
the next lower gear. Haven't had to use it yet. Hasn't been a problem
going
from one gear to the other. The Avalon has a lot of bells and whistles,
lots of room inside, very smooth ride and in my opinion, far more
luxurious
then the Accord. It costs more too but I think that it's worth it.
MLD
|
