Re: Crosstour
 

"JRStern" <JRStern@foobar.invalid> wrote in message
news:01vgi5tbplduvaum4iq96acuk2kql3e6cd@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:24:59 -0600, Dave Garrett <dave@compassnet.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Well, I wouldn't mind seeing Honda develop a V8 either, but I had
>>something more like a Cosworth DFV in mind than a Chevy small-block. :)
>
> exactly, glue together a couple of S2000 engines ... or at least Civic
> SI engines, smart cylinder technology like all the V8s these days,
> 400hp at 8000rpm, ... just what I need to go up the onramp into the
> 15mph congested freeway, but hey, very kewl in theory.
>
> Much as I'm liking my 2010 Accord I4 at low speed low revs, when I
> finally do punch it on the freeway - nothing there. It's even more
> optimized for the low RPM than I thought. Even the 2007 and 2004
> models had something going on when you hit the cam at 4000rpm, the
> 2010 not so much. I'm starting to understand why someone might drive
> the six. I mean, my I4 goes zero to eighty in under ten seconds (I
> estimate), it's not bad at all, in fact it's a downright amazing piece
> of machinery. But I got smoked by a Versa today. Grumble.
>
> J.
>
>
I recall years ago in a car mag seeing an article that featured a 12
cylinder inline Jag XKE. The builder had coupled two 3.8 Jag I6s for about
the longest engine you ever saw. Brings to mind the old Buick straight
eight. Frankly, I avoid V6s and am very happy with my Accord I4. Heck I
wish I still had my Prelude.

Re: Crosstour
 

"tww1491" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote in message
news:wSeWm.178$lH1.169@newsfe12.iad...
> I recall years ago in a car mag seeing an article that featured a 12
> cylinder inline Jag XKE. The builder had coupled two 3.8 Jag I6s for
> about the longest engine you ever saw. Brings to mind the old Buick
> straight eight. Frankly, I avoid V6s and am very happy with my Accord I4.
> Heck I wish I still had my Prelude.

I vaguely recall seeing that, and only later realizing it
was a parody. Had a tv camera in the nose to make up for
the extra-long hood. That was pretty funny, circa 1975.

J.

Re: Crosstour
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:fL-dna2KHNpNd7XWnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> you remind me of a ricer kiddie trying to buy a crx off me one time. "it's
> got no power" he bleated after creeping abound the block at 1500rpm. we
> shifted seats and i layed rubber as we pulled away. you ever seen an
> asian kid turn white?
>
> bottom line dude, when you "punch it", you also need to reach all the way
> over to that "transmission shift" thingy as well - 'cos you need to be up
> near that red line. that's what hondas are built for and where they
> perform best.
>
> btw, you didn't answer the v8 vs. i4 question. the correct answer is the
> i4 - lower losses on the fewer moving parts. now, you go ahead and learn
> to rev that engine of yours - the i4's have 16 valves specifically so you
> can do this.

jim, you're way off on this.

slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin. I've already made
several
posts about this. and it turns out I don't need you to tell me to rev it
in such cars as it works in, I drove Fiats and Alfas for years, and they
had nuthin at all going on below about 4000 rpm,
you had to rev it just to go zero to sixty in ten seconds, had to rev
it to 4000 just to get up to 30mph in traffic, I can go all day in an
Accord,
including freeways over 80mph, and not hit 4k. Amazing, actually.

Seems like the S2000 or Civic SI would respond to reving to the 8k
redlines. But the long-stroke Accord engines and the 6k redline,
not so much. Not hardly at all, in fact.

Honda has the most amazing mass-production 4-cylinder normally aspirated
engines in the world. Just want to see the same technology in a V8, just to
show
the world what it can be like, I'm not asking for a seven liter 10mpg 1960s
Chevy
or Dodge Hemi. Heck, even the current Chevy Corvette engines are better
than that. Somewhat.

J.

Re: Crosstour
 

On Dec 16, 5:44 pm, "zzznot" <zzz...@invalid.net> wrote:
> "tww1491" <twau...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:wSeWm.178$lH1.169@newsfe12.iad...
>
> > I recall years ago in a car mag seeing an article that featured a 12
> > cylinder inline Jag XKE. The builder had coupled two 3.8 Jag I6s for
> > about the longest engine you ever saw. Brings to mind the old Buick
> > straight eight. Frankly, I avoid V6s and am very happy with my Accord I4.
> > Heck I wish I still had my Prelude.
>
> I vaguely recall seeing that, and only later realizing it
> was a parody. Had a tv camera in the nose to make up for
> the extra-long hood. That was pretty funny, circa 1975.
>
> J.

I have owned an XK-140 Jaguar and an E-Type (technically there was no
XKE, but everyone called it that, so it became the de facto name.)
There certainly was a 12 cylinder E-Type, and it was a very long
engine, because of the double overhead camshaft design. As an aside
the first Ferrari V-12 was made up of two V-6s, one behind the other.
I've also owned a Prelude, a generation ahead of its time, and, I
thought, could really give my E-Type a run for the money. But what do
I know. I'm old. Really old. I raced the XK-140 at Laguna Seca, in
1959, when they had pro-am races, and I was the amateur, and had to
retire, after one lap, when I realized that I was probably the only
one paying for my fenders. Passed by two Ferraris, within the first
quarter-mile. Now I have a new Honda Pilot Touring (because we have
two grandsons) so that is what happens to you. Nice to hear something
about Jaguars. They were totally great (when they ran) and I wish I
had them both today.

Re: Crosstour
 

Yes, there was a 12-cylinder E-type,
I think I even test drove it once,
but I'm pretty sure it was a V-12 not
an I-12!

Way overpowered, or so it seemed
at the time.

I think the I-12 was a parody in Car and Driver
ahead of the V-12 announcement.

The XK-140 was one of the most distinctive
cars ever made. Those big paws! Never did drive
one of those.

J.

"billzz" <billzz@wildblue.net> wrote in message
news:4a937b8e-3506-4022-af6e-27cf7d1d5852@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 16, 5:44 pm, "zzznot" <zzz...@invalid.net> wrote:
> "tww1491" <twau...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:wSeWm.178$lH1.169@newsfe12.iad...
>
> > I recall years ago in a car mag seeing an article that featured a 12
> > cylinder inline Jag XKE. The builder had coupled two 3.8 Jag I6s for
> > about the longest engine you ever saw. Brings to mind the old Buick
> > straight eight. Frankly, I avoid V6s and am very happy with my Accord
> > I4.
> > Heck I wish I still had my Prelude.
>
> I vaguely recall seeing that, and only later realizing it
> was a parody. Had a tv camera in the nose to make up for
> the extra-long hood. That was pretty funny, circa 1975.
>
> J.

I have owned an XK-140 Jaguar and an E-Type (technically there was no
XKE, but everyone called it that, so it became the de facto name.)
There certainly was a 12 cylinder E-Type, and it was a very long
engine, because of the double overhead camshaft design. As an aside
the first Ferrari V-12 was made up of two V-6s, one behind the other.
I've also owned a Prelude, a generation ahead of its time, and, I
thought, could really give my E-Type a run for the money. But what do
I know. I'm old. Really old. I raced the XK-140 at Laguna Seca, in
1959, when they had pro-am races, and I was the amateur, and had to
retire, after one lap, when I realized that I was probably the only
one paying for my fenders. Passed by two Ferraris, within the first
quarter-mile. Now I have a new Honda Pilot Touring (because we have
two grandsons) so that is what happens to you. Nice to hear something
about Jaguars. They were totally great (when they ran) and I wish I
had them both today.

Re: Crosstour
 

In article <hgc2tp$r73$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
"zzznot" <zzznot@invalid.net> wrote:

> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.

Auto or manual trans?

Re: Crosstour
 

On 12/16/2009 05:53 PM, zzznot wrote:
> "jim beam"<me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:fL-dna2KHNpNd7XWnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> you remind me of a ricer kiddie trying to buy a crx off me one time. "it's
>> got no power" he bleated after creeping abound the block at 1500rpm. we
>> shifted seats and i layed rubber as we pulled away. you ever seen an
>> asian kid turn white?
>>
>> bottom line dude, when you "punch it", you also need to reach all the way
>> over to that "transmission shift" thingy as well - 'cos you need to be up
>> near that red line. that's what hondas are built for and where they
>> perform best.
>>
>> btw, you didn't answer the v8 vs. i4 question. the correct answer is the
>> i4 - lower losses on the fewer moving parts. now, you go ahead and learn
>> to rev that engine of yours - the i4's have 16 valves specifically so you
>> can do this.
>
> jim, you're way off on this.
>
> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.

last accord i drove was 2006 dx. that had /plenty/. i don't know what
kind of problem your car seems to have, but in my direct personal
experience, even the base accord will lay rubber and pull just great,
especially at high revs. sure, some cars have even more power, but some
people clearly don't know how to drive.


> I've already made
> several
> posts about this.

yeah. repeat until believed, right?


> and it turns out I don't need you to tell me to rev it
> in such cars as it works in, I drove Fiats and Alfas for years, and they
> had nuthin at all going on below about 4000 rpm,
> you had to rev it just to go zero to sixty in ten seconds, had to rev
> it to 4000 just to get up to 30mph in traffic, I can go all day in an
> Accord,
> including freeways over 80mph, and not hit 4k. Amazing, actually.

eh? gear ratios??? what a ridiculous statement!


>
> Seems like the S2000 or Civic SI would respond to reving to the 8k
> redlines.

"seems"??? so no personal experience??? first, you clearly haven't
driven the si or the s2000. second, you need to check your facts on the
red lines.



> But the long-stroke Accord engines and the 6k redline,
> not so much. Not hardly at all, in fact.

again, check your facts - the s2000 is "long stroke". oh, and check the
accord red line.


>
> Honda has the most amazing mass-production 4-cylinder normally aspirated
> engines in the world. Just want to see the same technology in a V8, just to
> show
> the world what it can be like, I'm not asking for a seven liter 10mpg 1960s
> Chevy
> or Dodge Hemi. Heck, even the current Chevy Corvette engines are better
> than that. Somewhat.

no, you need to learn to drive. all this b.s. coming from someone that
clearly doesn't have experience is just so much hot air.

Re: Crosstour
 

On 12/17/2009 04:10 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<hgc2tp$r73$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "zzznot"<zzznot@invalid.net> wrote:
>
>> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.
>
> Auto or manual trans?

"pedal on the right?" more like...

Re: Crosstour
 

"billzz" <billzz@wildblue.net> wrote in message
news:4a937b8e-3506-4022-af6e-27cf7d1d5852@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 16, 5:44 pm, "zzznot" <zzz...@invalid.net> wrote:
> "tww1491" <twau...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:wSeWm.178$lH1.169@newsfe12.iad...
>
> > I recall years ago in a car mag seeing an article that featured a 12
> > cylinder inline Jag XKE. The builder had coupled two 3.8 Jag I6s for
> > about the longest engine you ever saw. Brings to mind the old Buick
> > straight eight. Frankly, I avoid V6s and am very happy with my Accord
> > I4.
> > Heck I wish I still had my Prelude.
>
> I vaguely recall seeing that, and only later realizing it
> was a parody. Had a tv camera in the nose to make up for
> the extra-long hood. That was pretty funny, circa 1975.
>
> J.

I have owned an XK-140 Jaguar and an E-Type (technically there was no
XKE, but everyone called it that, so it became the de facto name.)
There certainly was a 12 cylinder E-Type, and it was a very long
engine, because of the double overhead camshaft design. As an aside
the first Ferrari V-12 was made up of two V-6s, one behind the other.
I've also owned a Prelude, a generation ahead of its time, and, I
thought, could really give my E-Type a run for the money. But what do
I know. I'm old. Really old. I raced the XK-140 at Laguna Seca, in
1959, when they had pro-am races, and I was the amateur, and had to
retire, after one lap, when I realized that I was probably the only
one paying for my fenders. Passed by two Ferraris, within the first
quarter-mile. Now I have a new Honda Pilot Touring (because we have
two grandsons) so that is what happens to you. Nice to hear something
about Jaguars. They were totally great (when they ran) and I wish I
had them both today.

I had a 64 E type back in the mid 60s -- bought it used in 65 or 66. I was
USAF Lt at the time. It was a maroon (red) roadster. Have driven 120s and
140s. Traded the Jag off on a Sunbeam Tiger which I modified and autocrossed
when I was in Japan. Loved the Jag, but it was a real maintenance headache.
I guess at age 68 I'm old but I still work -- have a grandson and drive an
06 Accord I4 coupe...we also have Pilot and a CRV.

Re: Crosstour
 

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:10:25 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <hgc2tp$r73$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "zzznot" <zzznot@invalid.net> wrote:
>
>> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.
>
>Auto or manual trans?

auto

what it delivers is sort of a linear response, same acceleration frm
about 3k to about 6k, which is as high as I've taken it. hard to find
space to rev it higher, since really, even that linear acceleration is
pretty good. it just *feels* boring.

J.

Re: Crosstour
 

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:03:37 -0800, jim beam <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>On 12/16/2009 05:53 PM, zzznot wrote:
>> "jim beam"<me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:fL-dna2KHNpNd7XWnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> you remind me of a ricer kiddie trying to buy a crx off me one time. "it's
>>> got no power" he bleated after creeping abound the block at 1500rpm. we
>>> shifted seats and i layed rubber as we pulled away. you ever seen an
>>> asian kid turn white?
>>>
>>> bottom line dude, when you "punch it", you also need to reach all the way
>>> over to that "transmission shift" thingy as well - 'cos you need to be up
>>> near that red line. that's what hondas are built for and where they
>>> perform best.
>>>
>>> btw, you didn't answer the v8 vs. i4 question. the correct answer is the
>>> i4 - lower losses on the fewer moving parts. now, you go ahead and learn
>>> to rev that engine of yours - the i4's have 16 valves specifically so you
>>> can do this.
>>
>> jim, you're way off on this.
>>
>> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.
>
>last accord i drove was 2006 dx. that had /plenty/. i don't know what
>kind of problem your car seems to have, but in my direct personal
>experience, even the base accord will lay rubber and pull just great,
>especially at high revs. sure, some cars have even more power, but some
>people clearly don't know how to drive.

The 2010 (and I assume the 2009) seem tuned differently.


>> I've already made
>> several
>> posts about this.
>
>yeah. repeat until believed, right?

this is the first I recall you commenting on.


>> and it turns out I don't need you to tell me to rev it
>> in such cars as it works in, I drove Fiats and Alfas for years, and they
>> had nuthin at all going on below about 4000 rpm,
>> you had to rev it just to go zero to sixty in ten seconds, had to rev
>> it to 4000 just to get up to 30mph in traffic, I can go all day in an
>> Accord,
>> including freeways over 80mph, and not hit 4k. Amazing, actually.
>
>eh? gear ratios??? what a ridiculous statement!

What are you babbling about?

I'm commenting on how the Accord is engineered from front to back to
deliver great performance at such lower revs, which is pretty amazing
in a i4 2.4l package. It's an observation, not a criticism.


>> Seems like the S2000 or Civic SI would respond to reving to the 8k
>> redlines.
>
>"seems"??? so no personal experience??? first, you clearly haven't
>driven the si or the s2000. second, you need to check your facts on the
>red lines.

Nope, never drove either, but I can read a spec sheet and compare them
to what I have driven. Redlines from vague memory, is it 10k on the
S2000? Checking ... SI is 8k. Hey, S2000 is out of production?
Didn't even know. Redlines ... seem to have been up to 9000 then
reduced to, y'know, around 8000. So once again, what are you babbling
about?


>> But the long-stroke Accord engines and the 6k redline,
>> not so much. Not hardly at all, in fact.
>
>again, check your facts - the s2000 is "long stroke". oh, and check the
>accord red line.

OK it's 7K on mine. I'll have to make a point of getting the revs up
there at least once, it doesn't seem to really want to go there, what
with the ratios and the 65mph speed limit, have to do it in some lower
gear. Really, not what the car was built for, but anything for you.

*Some* of the S2000 were *slightly* longer in stroke than bore, but
nothing like the Accords. You checked the I4 Accord recently, like
the last ten years? God bless balance shafts.


>> Honda has the most amazing mass-production 4-cylinder normally aspirated
>> engines in the world. Just want to see the same technology in a V8, just to
>> show
>> the world what it can be like, I'm not asking for a seven liter 10mpg 1960s
>> Chevy
>> or Dodge Hemi. Heck, even the current Chevy Corvette engines are better
>> than that. Somewhat.
>
>no, you need to learn to drive. all this b.s. coming from someone that
>clearly doesn't have experience is just so much hot air.

Outside of that my own strokey Accord has an official (but not really
useful) redline of 7k not 6k, all your complaints have been
unjustified.

Hope tomorrow finds you in a better mood.

J.

Re: Crosstour
 

On Dec 17, 3:46 pm, "tww1491" <twau...@cox.net> wrote:
> "billzz" <bil...@wildblue.net> wrote in message
>
> news:4a937b8e-3506-4022-af6e-27cf7d1d5852@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 16, 5:44 pm, "zzznot" <zzz...@invalid.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "tww1491" <twau...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:wSeWm.178$lH1.169@newsfe12.iad...
>
> > > I recall years ago in a car mag seeing an article that featured a 12
> > > cylinder inline Jag XKE. The builder had coupled two 3.8 Jag I6s for
> > > about the longest engine you ever saw. Brings to mind the old Buick
> > > straight eight. Frankly, I avoid V6s and am very happy with my Accord
> > > I4.
> > > Heck I wish I still had my Prelude.
>
> > I vaguely recall seeing that, and only later realizing it
> > was a parody. Had a tv camera in the nose to make up for
> > the extra-long hood. That was pretty funny, circa 1975.
>
> > J.
>
> I have owned an XK-140 Jaguar and an E-Type (technically there was no
> XKE, but everyone called it that, so it became the de facto name.)
> There certainly was a 12 cylinder E-Type, and it was a very long
> engine, because of the double overhead camshaft design. As an aside
> the first Ferrari V-12 was made up of two V-6s, one behind the other.
> I've also owned a Prelude, a generation ahead of its time, and, I
> thought, could really give my E-Type a run for the money. But what do
> I know. I'm old. Really old. I raced the XK-140 at Laguna Seca, in
> 1959, when they had pro-am races, and I was the amateur, and had to
> retire, after one lap, when I realized that I was probably the only
> one paying for my fenders. Passed by two Ferraris, within the first
> quarter-mile. Now I have a new Honda Pilot Touring (because we have
> two grandsons) so that is what happens to you. Nice to hear something
> about Jaguars. They were totally great (when they ran) and I wish I
> had them both today.
>
> I had a 64 E type back in the mid 60s -- bought it used in 65 or 66. I was
> USAF Lt at the time. It was a maroon (red) roadster. Have driven 120s and
> 140s. Traded the Jag off on a Sunbeam Tiger which I modified and autocrossed
> when I was in Japan. Loved the Jag, but it was a real maintenance headache.
> I guess at age 68 I'm old but I still work -- have a grandson and drive an
> 06 Accord I4 coupe...we also have Pilot and a CRV.

We may be twins. My E-type was 62, drove what you drove, and even
thought about the Sunbeam, in Germany. I'm 71, and with grandsons,
have to have the Pilot. And right you say about Jaguar maintenance
headaches. Stuck fuel pump? (Hit it with a rubber hammer.) Blown
fuzes? Well, they did not call Lucas (the electrical system) the
"Prince of Darkness" for nothing. Starter motor whining? Get a big
screwdriver and insert into the opening in the transmission and move
the gears until the starter motor catches a gear. I could go on
forever. drive a Jaguar across the Mohave and it will overheat, but
you can put the heater on and use that small radiator to disperse
heat. With all windows open and your feet blistering, but it works.
The mod is to replace the radiator with a small block Chevy radiator,
which hangs below, but it works. Air conditioning? Forget it. Ah,
the good old days. They never worked quite right, but when they
worked, they were heaven on wheels. I wish I had them back. Of
course I would be broke trying to maintain them.

Re: Crosstour
 

On 12/17/2009 04:56 PM, JRStern wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:03:37 -0800, jim beam<me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> On 12/16/2009 05:53 PM, zzznot wrote:
>>> "jim beam"<me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:fL-dna2KHNpNd7XWnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>>> you remind me of a ricer kiddie trying to buy a crx off me one time. "it's
>>>> got no power" he bleated after creeping abound the block at 1500rpm. we
>>>> shifted seats and i layed rubber as we pulled away. you ever seen an
>>>> asian kid turn white?
>>>>
>>>> bottom line dude, when you "punch it", you also need to reach all the way
>>>> over to that "transmission shift" thingy as well - 'cos you need to be up
>>>> near that red line. that's what hondas are built for and where they
>>>> perform best.
>>>>
>>>> btw, you didn't answer the v8 vs. i4 question. the correct answer is the
>>>> i4 - lower losses on the fewer moving parts. now, you go ahead and learn
>>>> to rev that engine of yours - the i4's have 16 valves specifically so you
>>>> can do this.
>>>
>>> jim, you're way off on this.
>>>
>>> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.
>>
>> last accord i drove was 2006 dx. that had /plenty/. i don't know what
>> kind of problem your car seems to have, but in my direct personal
>> experience, even the base accord will lay rubber and pull just great,
>> especially at high revs. sure, some cars have even more power, but some
>> people clearly don't know how to drive.
>
> The 2010 (and I assume the 2009) seem tuned differently.
>
>
>>> I've already made
>>> several
>>> posts about this.
>>
>> yeah. repeat until believed, right?
>
> this is the first I recall you commenting on.
>
>
>>> and it turns out I don't need you to tell me to rev it
>>> in such cars as it works in, I drove Fiats and Alfas for years, and they
>>> had nuthin at all going on below about 4000 rpm,
>>> you had to rev it just to go zero to sixty in ten seconds, had to rev
>>> it to 4000 just to get up to 30mph in traffic, I can go all day in an
>>> Accord,
>>> including freeways over 80mph, and not hit 4k. Amazing, actually.
>>
>> eh? gear ratios??? what a ridiculous statement!
>
> What are you babbling about?
>
> I'm commenting on how the Accord is engineered from front to back to
> deliver great performance at such lower revs, which is pretty amazing
> in a i4 2.4l package. It's an observation, not a criticism.
>
>
>>> Seems like the S2000 or Civic SI would respond to reving to the 8k
>>> redlines.
>>
>> "seems"??? so no personal experience??? first, you clearly haven't
>> driven the si or the s2000. second, you need to check your facts on the
>> red lines.
>
> Nope, never drove either, but I can read a spec sheet and compare them
> to what I have driven. Redlines from vague memory, is it 10k on the
> S2000? Checking ... SI is 8k. Hey, S2000 is out of production?
> Didn't even know. Redlines ... seem to have been up to 9000 then
> reduced to, y'know, around 8000. So once again, what are you babbling
> about?
>
>
>>> But the long-stroke Accord engines and the 6k redline,
>>> not so much. Not hardly at all, in fact.
>>
>> again, check your facts - the s2000 is "long stroke". oh, and check the
>> accord red line.
>
> OK it's 7K on mine. I'll have to make a point of getting the revs up
> there at least once, it doesn't seem to really want to go there, what
> with the ratios and the 65mph speed limit, have to do it in some lower
> gear. Really, not what the car was built for, but anything for you.
>
> *Some* of the S2000 were *slightly* longer in stroke than bore, but
> nothing like the Accords. You checked the I4 Accord recently, like
> the last ten years? God bless balance shafts.
>
>
>>> Honda has the most amazing mass-production 4-cylinder normally aspirated
>>> engines in the world. Just want to see the same technology in a V8, just to
>>> show
>>> the world what it can be like, I'm not asking for a seven liter 10mpg 1960s
>>> Chevy
>>> or Dodge Hemi. Heck, even the current Chevy Corvette engines are better
>>> than that. Somewhat.
>>
>> no, you need to learn to drive. all this b.s. coming from someone that
>> clearly doesn't have experience is just so much hot air.
>
> Outside of that my own strokey Accord has an official (but not really
> useful) redline of 7k not 6k, all your complaints have been
> unjustified.

i'm not complaining about the car, i'm complaining about "shoot from the
hip" b.s. being presented as fact. "definitive" statements like "it's
got nothing" are just plain wrong. as opposed to "i think it's got
nothing relative to..." of course. and ignoring of course the
ridiculousness of this statement when looking at motors that develop
peak power within only a few hundred rpm of red line.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-...fications.aspx

>
> Hope tomorrow finds you in a better mood.

i hope tomorrow finds people prepared to do some freakin' homework
and/or learn not to present underinformed inexperienced speculative b.s.
as fact. homework behind the wheel should be where they learn to look
at the gauges /and/ operate that funny looking lever with "PRND" etc
written on it.

Re: Crosstour
 

On Dec 17, 7:43 pm, JRStern <JRSt...@foobar.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:10:25 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
>
> <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> >In article <hgc2tp$r7...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > "zzznot" <zzz...@invalid.net> wrote:
>
> >> slide into a current Accord I4 and rev it. Nuthin.
>
> >Auto or manual trans?
>
> auto
>
> what it delivers is sort of a linear response, same acceleration frm
> about 3k to about 6k, which is as high as I've taken it. hard to find
> space to rev it higher, since really, even that linear acceleration is
> pretty good. it just *feels* boring.
>
> J.

So going back to the topic at hand; the Crosstour. With AWD this thing
is over 4000 lb. You can beat the crap out of VTEC all you want; 4000
lb. is too much mass for Honda's I4 to move about smartly. Besides,
putting in a V6 allows Honda to jack up the price.

Re: Crosstour
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 05:30:05 -0800, jim beam <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>i'm not complaining about the car, i'm complaining about "shoot from the
>hip" b.s. being presented as fact. "definitive" statements like "it's
>got nothing" are just plain wrong. as opposed to "i think it's got
>nothing relative to..." of course. and ignoring of course the
>ridiculousness of this statement when looking at motors that develop
>peak power within only a few hundred rpm of red line.
>http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-...fications.aspx

You want to add something to the conversation, show me some power and
torque curves for the Accord versus the Civic SI, and you will see
what I mean.

(Road and Track used to publish those in reviews, I never see them
anymore ... but it's true I haven't looked very hard)

And try the decaf.

J.