4 cylinder better than V6?
 

Dear Honda experts:

I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"Benjamin Bootstrap" <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:hbsk45p989dpvmmsskro0j4bqv4gglaf0g@4ax.com...
>
> Dear Honda experts:
>
> I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
> stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
> Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?

The V6 engine is fine, it's the transmission (mated to the V6) that has a
questionable history.

That said, I have an '01 Accord EX-V6 with almost 230,000 and an auto and
have had zero problems with the transmission. Unscheduled maintenance over
the life of the vehicle has been under $600 thus far.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

On 6/30/2009 3:59 PM Seth spake these words of knowledge:

> "Benjamin Bootstrap" <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:hbsk45p989dpvmmsskro0j4bqv4gglaf0g@4ax.com...
>>
>> Dear Honda experts:
>>
>> I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
>> stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
>> Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?
>
> The V6 engine is fine, it's the transmission (mated to the V6) that has a
> questionable history.
>
> That said, I have an '01 Accord EX-V6 with almost 230,000 and an auto and
> have had zero problems with the transmission. Unscheduled maintenance over
> the life of the vehicle has been under $600 thus far.
>

Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one with a
manual transmission. Like a rock.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
01 Taffeta White Odyssey EX V6 4AT
03 Noble Green Accord LX Sedan I4 5AT
04 San Marino Red Accord EX-Navi Coupe V6 6MT
--
Approximately 75,000 years ago, the supervolcano Toba erupted. In 24
hours, it ejected enough material to fill the area inside the DC Beltway
over a kilometer deep. Good idea, bad timing.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

In article <4a4ad37f$0$5679$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.co m>,
Dave Kelsen <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> >> I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
> >> stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
> >> Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?
> >
> > The V6 engine is fine, it's the transmission (mated to the V6) that has a
> > questionable history.
> >
> > That said, I have an '01 Accord EX-V6 with almost 230,000 and an auto and
> > have had zero problems with the transmission. Unscheduled maintenance over
> > the life of the vehicle has been under $600 thus far.
> >
>
> Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one with a
> manual transmission. Like a rock.

The issue is, Honda's 4 cylinder engines are WAY powerful enough--and
the gas savings is substantial over the 6 cylinder engine.

The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want bragging
rights. Nothing more.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

Thus spake "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> :

>In article <4a4ad37f$0$5679$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.co m>,
> Dave Kelsen <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> >> I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
>> >> stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
>> >> Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?
>> >
>> > The V6 engine is fine, it's the transmission (mated to the V6) that has a
>> > questionable history.
>> >
>> > That said, I have an '01 Accord EX-V6 with almost 230,000 and an auto and
>> > have had zero problems with the transmission. Unscheduled maintenance over
>> > the life of the vehicle has been under $600 thus far.
>> >
>>
>> Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one with a
>> manual transmission. Like a rock.
>
>The issue is, Honda's 4 cylinder engines are WAY powerful enough--and
>the gas savings is substantial over the 6 cylinder engine.
>
>The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want bragging
>rights. Nothing more.

I'm wondering if this is an issue in other parts of the country.

A couple of years ago, cops (multiple jurisdictions, including state)
busted several "tuners" in the Austin area who were buying Accords
with V6s and popping them in to Civics and then selling the rest of
the car for parts. By "buying" I mean buying from theives. You know
it's a theif if you pay $6000 for a 2005 Accord. And then sell the
engine for $4000 and the parts car for $4000.

--

- dillon I am not invalid

"Jimmy, I'm sorry your girlfriend turned out
to be a cylon."
-Special Agent Tim McGee, "NCIS"

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-280BD4.07070601072009@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <4a4ad37f$0$5679$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.co m>,
> Dave Kelsen <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> >> I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder
>> >> and
>> >> stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not
>> >> get a
>> >> Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?
>> >
>> > The V6 engine is fine, it's the transmission (mated to the V6)
>> > that has a
>> > questionable history.
>> >
>> > That said, I have an '01 Accord EX-V6 with almost 230,000 and an
>> > auto and
>> > have had zero problems with the transmission. Unscheduled
>> > maintenance over
>> > the life of the vehicle has been under $600 thus far.
>> >
>>
>> Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one
>> with a
>> manual transmission. Like a rock.
>
> The issue is, Honda's 4 cylinder engines are WAY powerful
> enough--and
> the gas savings is substantial over the 6 cylinder engine.
>
> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want
> bragging
> rights. Nothing more.

Or more pick up pulling out onto CA freeways with 3 people in the car
and the AC on where everyone is going 75 mph. My 6 gets 29.7 MPG on
the highway regularly, even driving at 75 mph most of the time.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

Dave Kelsen wrote:

> Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one with a
> manual transmission. Like a rock.

It doesn't look like Honda offers a stick with the V6. :(

(As mentioned, the I4 makes 180~190HP, more oomph than you'll ever need.)

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

On 7/1/2009 11:38 PM Greg Campbell spake these words of knowledge:

> Dave Kelsen wrote:
>
>> Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one with a
>> manual transmission. Like a rock.
>
> It doesn't look like Honda offers a stick with the V6. :(
>
> (As mentioned, the I4 makes 180~190HP, more oomph than you'll ever need.)

I drive one daily.

I don't believe Honda has a stick with the V6 in the sedan. They did
for 2 model years of the 7th gen Accord.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
01 Taffeta White Odyssey EX V6 4AT
03 Noble Green Accord LX Sedan I4 5AT
04 San Marino Red Accord EX-Navi Coupe V6 6MT
--
That young receptionist at the sperm bank was really nice. When I left,
she thanked me for coming.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:07:06 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <4a4ad37f$0$5679$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.co m>,
> Dave Kelsen <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> >> I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
>> >> stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
>> >> Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?
>> >
>> > The V6 engine is fine, it's the transmission (mated to the V6) that has a
>> > questionable history.
>> >
>> > That said, I have an '01 Accord EX-V6 with almost 230,000 and an auto and
>> > have had zero problems with the transmission. Unscheduled maintenance over
>> > the life of the vehicle has been under $600 thus far.
>> >
>>
>> Honda makes a very fine V6. To avoid potential problems, get one with a
>> manual transmission. Like a rock.
>
>The issue is, Honda's 4 cylinder engines are WAY powerful enough--and
>the gas savings is substantial over the 6 cylinder engine.
>
>The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want bragging
>rights. Nothing more.

Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and then
the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of acceleration,
going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging it
along.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:

> >The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want bragging
> >rights. Nothing more.
>
> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and then
> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of acceleration,
> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging it
> along.

You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas have
plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines AREN'T used to
revving the Honda to where the power is.

And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger NOT
perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's overkill.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-820DF0.07115303072009@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> >The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want
>> >bragging
>> >rights. Nothing more.
>>
>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and
>> then
>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of
>> acceleration,
>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging it
>> along.
>
> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas have
> plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines AREN'T used
> to
> revving the Honda to where the power is.
>
> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger NOT
> perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's overkill.

I've had many 4 cyl Hondas, but my last one (04 EX), the 6 made the
difference for me. It's not overkill, it's a choice, and the mileage
is not that off from the 4 cyl.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want bragging
>>> rights. Nothing more.
>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and then
>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of acceleration,
>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging it
>> along.
>
> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas have
> plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines AREN'T used to
> revving the Honda to where the power is.
>
> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger NOT
> perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's overkill.

i agree with elmo on this. because my friends know me as "one of those
guys that knows about cars", i've test-driven countless cars with them
countless times, and lack of willingness to rev the engine is pretty
much universal. even among many so-called "ricer" kids. "but it's
making a loud noise", etc.

bottom line: honda 4's have /plenty/ of power, but limited low end
grunt. the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy, but the 4 is
where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:ouCdnTFPnpCHndPXnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
>> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want
>>>> bragging rights. Nothing more.
>>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and
>>> then
>>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of
>>> acceleration,
>>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging it
>>> along.
>>
>> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas have
>> plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines AREN'T used
>> to revving the Honda to where the power is.
>>
>> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger
>> NOT perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's
>> overkill.
>
> i agree with elmo on this. because my friends know me as "one of
> those guys that knows about cars", i've test-driven countless cars
> with them countless times, and lack of willingness to rev the engine
> is pretty much universal. even among many so-called "ricer" kids.
> "but it's making a loud noise", etc.
>
> bottom line: honda 4's have /plenty/ of power, but limited low end
> grunt. the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy, but the 4
> is where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.

If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I have
no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are properly
engineered to their limits.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

L Alpert wrote:
> "jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:ouCdnTFPnpCHndPXnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
>>> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want
>>>>> bragging rights. Nothing more.
>>>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and
>>>> then
>>>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of
>>>> acceleration,
>>>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging it
>>>> along.
>>> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas have
>>> plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines AREN'T used
>>> to revving the Honda to where the power is.
>>>
>>> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger
>>> NOT perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's
>>> overkill.
>> i agree with elmo on this. because my friends know me as "one of
>> those guys that knows about cars", i've test-driven countless cars
>> with them countless times, and lack of willingness to rev the engine
>> is pretty much universal. even among many so-called "ricer" kids.
>> "but it's making a loud noise", etc.
>>
>> bottom line: honda 4's have /plenty/ of power, but limited low end
>> grunt. the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy, but the 4
>> is where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.
>
> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I have
> no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are properly
> engineered to their limits.
>
>

how do you know what is "properly engineered"?

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:r-GdnQTdRoNw2tPXnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>L Alpert wrote:
>> "jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:ouCdnTFPnpCHndPXnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
>>>> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want
>>>>>> bragging rights. Nothing more.
>>>>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and
>>>>> then
>>>>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of
>>>>> acceleration,
>>>>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging
>>>>> it
>>>>> along.
>>>> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas
>>>> have plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines
>>>> AREN'T used to revving the Honda to where the power is.
>>>>
>>>> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger
>>>> NOT perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's
>>>> overkill.
>>> i agree with elmo on this. because my friends know me as "one of
>>> those guys that knows about cars", i've test-driven countless cars
>>> with them countless times, and lack of willingness to rev the
>>> engine is pretty much universal. even among many so-called
>>> "ricer" kids. "but it's making a loud noise", etc.
>>>
>>> bottom line: honda 4's have /plenty/ of power, but limited low end
>>> grunt. the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy, but the
>>> 4 is where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.
>>
>> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are properly
>> engineered to their limits.
>
> how do you know what is "properly engineered"?

Reputation, as far as Honda goes. With the equipment I work with, it
has to do with reviewing the equipment design specifications and
auditing their quality systems.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

L Alpert wrote:
> "jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:r-GdnQTdRoNw2tPXnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> L Alpert wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:ouCdnTFPnpCHndPXnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
>>>>> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just want
>>>>>>> bragging rights. Nothing more.
>>>>>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord and
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of
>>>>>> acceleration,
>>>>>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> along.
>>>>> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas
>>>>> have plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines
>>>>> AREN'T used to revving the Honda to where the power is.
>>>>>
>>>>> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four banger
>>>>> NOT perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then there's
>>>>> overkill.
>>>> i agree with elmo on this. because my friends know me as "one of
>>>> those guys that knows about cars", i've test-driven countless cars
>>>> with them countless times, and lack of willingness to rev the
>>>> engine is pretty much universal. even among many so-called
>>>> "ricer" kids. "but it's making a loud noise", etc.
>>>>
>>>> bottom line: honda 4's have /plenty/ of power, but limited low end
>>>> grunt. the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy, but the
>>>> 4 is where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.
>>> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>>> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are properly
>>> engineered to their limits.
>> how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>
> Reputation, as far as Honda goes. With the equipment I work with, it
> has to do with reviewing the equipment design specifications and
> auditing their quality systems.
>

ok, my point is that with automotive stuff, unless someone is privy to
info that the car companies don't publish, or are prepared to do do
their own dissection and testing, they don't really know, they're just
projecting what they hope to be true - it's not a statement of fact.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:CNKdnU-jxpRP9tPXnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>L Alpert wrote:
>> "jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:r-GdnQTdRoNw2tPXnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> L Alpert wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:ouCdnTFPnpCHndPXnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>>>> In article <r53r45991qq167mu4h1nuqom4uvmatrdij@4ax.com>,
>>>>>> Benjamin Bootstrap <benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The 6 is for people who don't understand, and/or who just
>>>>>>>> want bragging rights. Nothing more.
>>>>>>> Hmmm... really? I test drove a 4-cylinder 2008 Honda Accord
>>>>>>> and then
>>>>>>> the EX-V6, and I can sense a big difference in terms of
>>>>>>> acceleration,
>>>>>>> going up the hills, and the 4-cylinder feels like I'm dragging
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> along.
>>>>>> You probably just didn't want to rev the four banger. Hondas
>>>>>> have plenty of power, but people who are used to big engines
>>>>>> AREN'T used to revving the Honda to where the power is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And sure there's a difference in power--but does the four
>>>>>> banger NOT perform perfectly well? There's enough, and then
>>>>>> there's overkill.
>>>>> i agree with elmo on this. because my friends know me as "one
>>>>> of those guys that knows about cars", i've test-driven countless
>>>>> cars with them countless times, and lack of willingness to rev
>>>>> the engine is pretty much universal. even among many so-called
>>>>> "ricer" kids. "but it's making a loud noise", etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> bottom line: honda 4's have /plenty/ of power, but limited low
>>>>> end grunt. the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy,
>>>>> but the 4 is where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.
>>>> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>>>> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are
>>>> properly engineered to their limits.
>>> how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>>
>> Reputation, as far as Honda goes. With the equipment I work with,
>> it has to do with reviewing the equipment design specifications and
>> auditing their quality systems.
>
> ok, my point is that with automotive stuff, unless someone is privy
> to info that the car companies don't publish, or are prepared to do
> do their own dissection and testing, they don't really know, they're
> just projecting what they hope to be true - it's not a statement of
> fact.

They (Honda) have been successful building automobiles for many years,
and I have owned more than a few of them. Are their designs perfect?
No, probably not, considering I have 2 vehicles affected by the
transmission recall, but they made good on their design issue both by
fixing it, and then by extending the warranty. I doubt if any auto
maker has a perfect design, but I'm sure most of us are not here in
this group because we believe Honda designs and builds inferior
products, and at some point that in itself becomes the statement of
fact.
The difference with the equipment I use professionally is that I will
either design it myself, or thoroughly review the vendors design
specification and BOM before I purchase it.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:12:42 -0400, Benjamin Bootstrap
<benjamin.bootstrap@verizon.net> wrote:

>
>Dear Honda experts:
>
>I read in here that someone says Honda makes the best 4-cylinder and
>stick with that (and manual.) So if I wanted a V6 I should not get a
>Honda because Honda is not an expert building V6s?

The six engine is fine, and let's asssume the tranny is fine, too,
it's just that it seems overkill.

Once in a blue moon I wish my four was a six - when I try to pull into
the fast lane, going up a hill, with a couple of passengers, and some
moron is closing from behind a lot faster than I thought he was going.
Then even the four properly reved into the vtech cam is just not
enough.

Though if they could peel 500 pounds off the frames of these things,
the four would be even more ideal.

J.

ps - also when the tranny gets sticky and doesn't downshift like it
should, you wonder if a bigger engine wouldn't be in order.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

In article <ouCdnTFPnpCHndPXnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> the 6 has that grunt and it keeps the freds happy, but the 4 is
> where the fun is if you know how to drive properly.

and the VTEC growl isn't a warning signal of anything other than "fun's
a comin'".

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

In article <G4s3m.2242$Wj7.1892@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com>,
"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:

> >> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
> >> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are properly
> >> engineered to their limits.
> >
> > how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>
> Reputation, as far as Honda goes.

Yeah. Like the transmissions they put on their 6 cylinder engines, all
the way from the 1998 model year through the 2004 model year.

Those were a beancounter's dream, and a reputation-killer. Honda spent
SIX YEARS with TWO ITERATIONS of that transmission, BOTH of them junk,
foisting that crap onto the world, riding on their previously
hard-earned reputation.

SIX YEARS. I can only imagine that some executive that had experience
on the Ford Pinto team was busy telling them, "don't worry that each
dealership is replacing four to six of these things a week--we've done
the math, and it's cheaper for us that way, so let's keep making the
junk and pushing it out the door".

In my mind, Honda is STILL earning its reputation back. Not that I
won't buy one, but my eyes are WIDE open.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

In article <JIu3m.6803$iz2.421@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>,
"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:

> but I'm sure most of us are not here in
> this group because we believe Honda designs and builds inferior
> products,

I am 100% positive that Honda deliberately built not one but TWO
versions of an inferior transmission, and deliberately pushed it out to
its customers who had other expectations based on Honda's reputation.

Honda has shown that it is not against trashing its reputation to make
money--or at the very least, Honda has shown that senior management is
not on the stick with regard to protecting its reputation.

In short: as far as I'm concerned, while I don't put Honda into the
GM/Ford category, they're not looking out for me one itsy bitsy bit.
They've shown that they are capable of not caring what I think of them
six months after I've bought the car.

They are now in a position of earning that back--and it's FAR harder to
earn a reputation than to lose one.

I sincerely hope someone at Honda lost big during those years they let
the beancounters run the show, and ignored the engineers wholesale.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-302587.16214505072009@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <G4s3m.2242$Wj7.1892@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>> >> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are
>> >> properly
>> >> engineered to their limits.
>> >
>> > how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>>
>> Reputation, as far as Honda goes.
>
> Yeah. Like the transmissions they put on their 6 cylinder engines,
> all
> the way from the 1998 model year through the 2004 model year.

Of which I have 2 vehicles that have both been repaired and had the
warranty extended as well.

>
> Those were a beancounter's dream, and a reputation-killer. Honda
> spent
> SIX YEARS with TWO ITERATIONS of that transmission, BOTH of them
> junk,
> foisting that crap onto the world, riding on their previously
> hard-earned reputation.

Bean counters run businesses. It's unfortunate, but they (businesses)
don't run on conscience. Just think Pinto.....

>
> SIX YEARS. I can only imagine that some executive that had
> experience
> on the Ford Pinto team was busy telling them, "don't worry that each
> dealership is replacing four to six of these things a week--we've
> done
> the math, and it's cheaper for us that way, so let's keep making the
> junk and pushing it out the door".
>
> In my mind, Honda is STILL earning its reputation back. Not that I
> won't buy one, but my eyes are WIDE open.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

In article <YS84m.3730$Jb1.590@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>,
"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:

> Bean counters run businesses. It's unfortunate, but they (businesses)
> don't run on conscience. Just think Pinto.....

Prior to the mid-90s, Honda understood the balance of beancounting and
engineering.

It's when they let the beancounters tell the engineers to " off,
build what we tell you for the money we tell you" that things went to
hell. In many very OBVIOUS and bad ways.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

L Alpert wrote:
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-302587.16214505072009@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <G4s3m.2242$Wj7.1892@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com>,
>> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>>>>> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are
>>>>> properly
>>>>> engineered to their limits.
>>>> how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>>> Reputation, as far as Honda goes.
>> Yeah. Like the transmissions they put on their 6 cylinder engines,
>> all
>> the way from the 1998 model year through the 2004 model year.
>
> Of which I have 2 vehicles that have both been repaired and had the
> warranty extended as well.
>
>> Those were a beancounter's dream, and a reputation-killer. Honda
>> spent
>> SIX YEARS with TWO ITERATIONS of that transmission, BOTH of them
>> junk,
>> foisting that crap onto the world, riding on their previously
>> hard-earned reputation.
>
> Bean counters run businesses. It's unfortunate, but they (businesses)
> don't run on conscience. Just think Pinto.....

how those same pinto assholes got away with the same kind of financial
sociopathy that killed thousands of americans with the exploder fiasco
is beyond me. those vehicles should never have rolled just because of a
flat tire. and they shouldn't have had the cabins crush when they did.
but frod knew they would and calculated that potential payouts were
trivial compared to profits. thus, just like they did with the pinto,
they decided to continue rather than redesign. americans died for frod
profits. execs should be in jail for that. period.


>
>> SIX YEARS. I can only imagine that some executive that had
>> experience
>> on the Ford Pinto team was busy telling them, "don't worry that each
>> dealership is replacing four to six of these things a week--we've
>> done
>> the math, and it's cheaper for us that way, so let's keep making the
>> junk and pushing it out the door".
>>
>> In my mind, Honda is STILL earning its reputation back. Not that I
>> won't buy one, but my eyes are WIDE open.
>
>

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:F4OdnS4g9_r-2MzXnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>L Alpert wrote:
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-302587.16214505072009@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> In article <G4s3m.2242$Wj7.1892@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com>,
>>> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>>>>>> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are
>>>>>> properly
>>>>>> engineered to their limits.
>>>>> how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>>>> Reputation, as far as Honda goes.
>>> Yeah. Like the transmissions they put on their 6 cylinder
>>> engines, all
>>> the way from the 1998 model year through the 2004 model year.
>>
>> Of which I have 2 vehicles that have both been repaired and had the
>> warranty extended as well.
>>
>>> Those were a beancounter's dream, and a reputation-killer. Honda
>>> spent
>>> SIX YEARS with TWO ITERATIONS of that transmission, BOTH of them
>>> junk,
>>> foisting that crap onto the world, riding on their previously
>>> hard-earned reputation.
>>
>> Bean counters run businesses. It's unfortunate, but they
>> (businesses) don't run on conscience. Just think Pinto.....
>
> how those same pinto assholes got away with the same kind of
> financial sociopathy that killed thousands of americans with the
> exploder fiasco is beyond me. those vehicles should never have
> rolled just because of a flat tire. and they shouldn't have had the
> cabins crush when they did. but frod knew they would and calculated
> that potential payouts were trivial compared to profits. thus, just
> like they did with the pinto, they decided to continue rather than
> redesign. americans died for frod profits. execs should be in jail
> for that. period.
>

We are in perfect agreement on this.

>
>>
>>> SIX YEARS. I can only imagine that some executive that had
>>> experience
>>> on the Ford Pinto team was busy telling them, "don't worry that
>>> each
>>> dealership is replacing four to six of these things a week--we've
>>> done
>>> the math, and it's cheaper for us that way, so let's keep making
>>> the
>>> junk and pushing it out the door".
>>>
>>> In my mind, Honda is STILL earning its reputation back. Not that
>>> I
>>> won't buy one, but my eyes are WIDE open.
>>

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 14:25:18 -0700, "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>news:elmop-302587.16214505072009@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <G4s3m.2242$Wj7.1892@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com>,
>> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>>> >> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are
>>> >> properly
>>> >> engineered to their limits.
>>> >
>>> > how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>>>
>>> Reputation, as far as Honda goes.
>>
>> Yeah. Like the transmissions they put on their 6 cylinder engines,
>> all
>> the way from the 1998 model year through the 2004 model year.
>
>Of which I have 2 vehicles that have both been repaired and had the
>warranty extended as well.
>
>>
>> Those were a beancounter's dream, and a reputation-killer. Honda
>> spent
>> SIX YEARS with TWO ITERATIONS of that transmission, BOTH of them
>> junk,
>> foisting that crap onto the world, riding on their previously
>> hard-earned reputation.
>
>Bean counters run businesses. It's unfortunate, but they (businesses)
>don't run on conscience. Just think Pinto.....
>
>>

Unfortunately as much as Elmo's post seems like conspiracy theory, but
it has some truths to it. It's kind of like Rebates - the companies
are banking that not everybody will remember to return the rebates, or
they make mistakes by sending in the wrong this or writing the wrong
information on rebates so they can deny it.

I've actually read a study on this in a car magazine a few years ago.
Not everybody gets a recall notice because of change of address,
change of ownership, etc. Therefore, the owners of these
Hondas/Acuras will go to their local shop to fix the transmissions
because it's cheaper than the dealership. Beancounter wins.

Re: 4 cylinder better than V6?
 

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:29:22 -0700, jim beam <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>L Alpert wrote:
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-302587.16214505072009@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> In article <G4s3m.2242$Wj7.1892@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com>,
>>> "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> If you know how to drive properly, the 6 can be fun as well...I
>>>>>> have no problems with pushing mechanical devices that are
>>>>>> properly
>>>>>> engineered to their limits.
>>>>> how do you know what is "properly engineered"?
>>>> Reputation, as far as Honda goes.
>>> Yeah. Like the transmissions they put on their 6 cylinder engines,
>>> all
>>> the way from the 1998 model year through the 2004 model year.
>>
>> Of which I have 2 vehicles that have both been repaired and had the
>> warranty extended as well.
>>
>>> Those were a beancounter's dream, and a reputation-killer. Honda
>>> spent
>>> SIX YEARS with TWO ITERATIONS of that transmission, BOTH of them
>>> junk,
>>> foisting that crap onto the world, riding on their previously
>>> hard-earned reputation.
>>
>> Bean counters run businesses. It's unfortunate, but they (businesses)
>> don't run on conscience. Just think Pinto.....
>
>how those same pinto assholes got away with the same kind of financial
>sociopathy that killed thousands of americans with the exploder fiasco
>is beyond me. those vehicles should never have rolled just because of a
>flat tire. and they shouldn't have had the cabins crush when they did.
> but frod knew they would and calculated that potential payouts were
>trivial compared to profits. thus, just like they did with the pinto,
>they decided to continue rather than redesign. americans died for frod
>profits. execs should be in jail for that. period.
>

Prez Obama's in charge, and now he owns the American car companies. US
Government, who answers to nobody, now are in the business of
producing cars.... can you say PINTO II!