Engine & Gearbox Auto v Manual

Discussion in '8th Generation (2008-2015) [Acura TSX]' started by pubcrawler, Wednesday 30th Jan, 2013.

  1. pubcrawler Junior Member ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    Hi

    I am looking to purchase a 8th Grn Accord in the next few weeks. I have owned a FN2 in the past I want to leave the BMW company car and climb back into a trusty Honda.

    I have been reading a lot of posts on here about models and I have spotted a few approved used cars but I have a couple of questions first:

    Is there a big defference in performance between the auto and manual box? Does it have paddleshift and is this only available on certain models. I have owned various autos in the past and was not impressed but the traffic I am forced to wait in each day makes it a more viable option. Searched but doesnt seem to be too many threads mentioning it

    Should the EX (none GT as going for i-VTEC 2.0) have a sunroof and full leather as standard? a lot of cars stating they are an ex with half leather and no sunroof

    I have do like a lot of toys in a car, is paying for an EX over the ES really worth it, I have a Tom Tom that I bring out on the rare occasions its needed

    Thanks in advance

    Wayne
     
  2. AccordCU2 Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    Hi Wayne and welcome to AOC
    I have manual and never driven auto so can't comment on that.
    Mine is an EX model and I do have leather seats and sunroof on mine.
     
    Loading...
  3. SpeedyGee Administrator Staff Team

    England Speedy Birmingham
    14,999
    5,593
    4
    Hi Wayne welcome to AOC. Good to hear that your coming back to Honda :Thumbup:

    I own a 7th Generation 6th speed manual so can't comment specifically but I think modern autos are way better than they use to be. I would expect that the performance difference is now much closer that it ever has been.

    Let's see what current owners have to say but I think you could go with either and be very happy with it.

    Which way are you leaning towards at the moment ? Auto or manual ?

    EDIT: Oopps, just reread that you would prefer the Auto due to traffic
     
    Loading...
  4. Nick Allen Club Member ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    All Autos have paddle shift, yes there is a noticable performance differance in normal driving, the auto is slower. however once the car is moving the paddle shift gear change is instant and does make it fun, there is also a sport mode on the gear box whcih holds the revs further up the range I think. I have owned a few automatics and this is by far the best, it only has five speed but there does feel like there is a sort of overdrive that kicks in once cruising which drops the revs a further couple of 100
     
    Last edited: Wednesday 30th Jan, 2013
    Loading...
  5. pubcrawler Junior Member ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    Thanks for the replies, there seems to be a lot more demand for the diesels does this give me a better stance for a good bargain against AUC's? I spoke to a lady yesterday in Rochadale and she wouldn't drop much more than £500 of the screen price and gave me a shambolic p/x price against my 3 series.

    Back to the topic in hand, I would much prefer a manual over an auto box as I feel you driving the car more, the paddleshift will help but I would more than likely leave it in drive. The last car I had as an Auto was a 2010 Prius (company car - low tax, not my choice) and it was terrible even with the sport button and I enjoyed driving my wifes Yaris more!

    What are the real world MPG figures against the manual and auto, read various post and I know it will be down to our right foot. Also is there much difference between the 2.4 and the 2.0 in terms of economy and power? I have changed roles in my job so I have dropped mileage from circa 25k to 15k per year hence the petrol preference
     
    Last edited: Wednesday 30th Jan, 2013
  6. Nick Allen Club Member ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    I believe the Prius would of had a CVT auto :Aghast: I don't like CVTs there is no feel to them and they are noisey when pushed., the Accord has a proper auto box, you need to go and try one, with 2.0 Auto ES GT Tourer on a motorway drive I will get near 40mpg and around town getting about 30mpg.. as you say it depends a lot on your driving style.
     
    Loading...
  7. richsprint Account Closed. ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

    Hi Wayne and welcome,

    The 2.4 is a lot more powerful, but you pay for that in road tax and fuel of course. The 2.0 petrol auto is ok, fair compromise. Its a revvy engine like all VTECs, so to get it to really pull you need to get the revs up, which uses more fuel of course. Its not massively quick, but adequate, depends what your used to I guess. Mine sometimes seems to labour a bit in 5th gear, and I have to flick it down with the paddle shift.

    I'd concur with Nick, around 28-30mpg around town, 40mpg on the motorway.

    I also agree with the 'driving the car' comment, you do lose some feel and control. If I could afford a weekend sports/fun car then it would be a manual, but for the daily grind, especially with traffic the way it is, auto everytime.
     
  8. TheDarkKnight Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    2,688
    492
    Good to have you join Wayne.

    I can't speak for the auto-box, however it is evident that the auto in petrol or diesel will be worse than manual.

    EX spec has pretty much everything ( Honda Accord Saloon | Book Test Drive | Specification, Finance & Information ) and is the best specced overall.

    Be advised that the 2.0 petrol is SOHC and the 2.2 diesel is DOHC and a lot more torquey as well- but depends what you want/need etc.
     
    Loading...
  9. pubcrawler Junior Member ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    My reasoning behind moving diesel to petrol is the change in mileage and without wanting open a can of worms I have had turbo and DPF problems in the past with several diesel cars. As much as I enjoy the extra torque from the derv the petrol will give me a lot more confidence and won't have me sitting in a car waiting for the turbo to spool down and the worry of the DPF and EGR with each short trip

    One thing that I think is a let down on the petrol version is the lack of HIDs as standard on the EX, can't think why they would miss them out? I have 2 dealers interested in my p/x just making them sweat on price etc but I look to be going for a 2010 2.0 manual silver saloon with less than 40k on the clock. Should keep me happy for the next few yrs at least
     
  10. GarymandingAccord Junior Member ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    I have a 7th generation accord with the 5 spd grade logic auto/sequential. Doesn't have paddle shift though. I think it is an amazing gearbox and I get about 35 MPG.
    I don't see any difference between the sequential mode and auto mode and prefer just to leave it in auto mostly.
    However I've never driven the manual model so can't compare but find the auto to be plenty powerful enough with enough shift for my own needs :Smile:
     
  11. TheDarkKnight Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    2,688
    492
    HIDs are not standard on the EX unless the car is ADAS-equipped. The EX GT (no longer offered new) and Type-S are the only models that have HID/Xenons as standard.

    Best of luck with your transaction, let us know how you get on. :Thumbup:
     
    Loading...
  12. FirstHonda Premium Member Club Supporter

    I have only driven autos for the past twenty or so years from a number of different manufacturers.

    My Accord is a 2012 I-DTEC EX, which has full leather and a sunroof...in fact the spec is so good it's going to make choosing a replacement at some point pretty tricky if Honda don't offer a replacement...

    My comments on the Accord auto vs lots of others owned and driven are:

    1. It is only a 5 speed box, which these days seems a bit "old hat"...BUT it seems well matched to the engine, with sensible ratios. It is an excellent motorway cruiser, smooth and quiet and with plenty of power seemingly in reserve. Did I mention it is VERY quiet...which makes it feels very special and well engineered, a major plus point.
    2. Linked to point 1, I have had cars with more gears, notably the VW DSG 7 speed on a diesel. Whilst the technology sounds impressive (not so when it goes bang on the M1, but that's another story!), in my opinion the extra ratios mean that the car was constantly hunting for the right gear. Much more hesitant pulling away too, pretty tricky sometimes while it was deciding what to do prior to putting the power down.
    3. My car does have paddle shift, but I never use them - the car seems to do fine all on its own. I could just be a very lazy drive of course...?!
    4. It also has a sport setting, but I don't find this such a comfortable fit with the engine...it feels a bit snatchy to me, and the standard smooth approach just works better in my opinion.
    5. Economy - I do 80% of my miles on the motorway, and travel at about 70mph most of the time. I typically get between 45-48mpg which may not sound that impressive, but it IS a lot closer to the government published figures than other cars I have owned, so is actually a lot more satisfying than a car that claims to deliver 60mpg but only actually delivers 45!

    Hope that helps...?
     
    Loading...
  13. SayamaAccord Top Contributor ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

    It's a personal choice only you can make.

    If performance is the priority, get the manual.

    If you want a relaxed, chilled out ownership experience, go for the automatic.

    But I think the way you phrased the question "Is there a big difference in performance..." shows fairly clearly what you really want :Wink:
     
  14. i-DSI Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    Belgium Aalst
    1,046
    300
    1
    Hi DarkKnight, what's the point of this?
    Let me give an extreme, over the top answer, just for the fun of it, no offences to anybody!! Don't let anybody take this personel.
    A DOHC has disadvantages:
    - more expensive
    - more fuel consumption
    - possible higher costs in case the camshaft(s) need replacement
    - the only advantage (more specific BHP/liter) is in 99% of the driving time not even used
    - more noise
    - more weight
    An SOHC is perfect! Only disadvantage: less specific BHP/liter.
    The diesel is indeed more torquey, but extremely limited in RPM (very short usefull powerband, as all modern diesels). You need to shift a lot, accept the noise and all the extra costs. Those costs can only be justified if you drive a very (!) high mileage/year and on top of that most on the highway.
    Be advised the petrol is more powerfull, less noisy, cheaper, more comfortable, more reliable, more fun to drive,....pfff. And, well yeah, they should pay me money to drive in a diesel car:OTT:.
     
    Loading...
  15. TheDarkKnight Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    2,688
    492
    I-DSI

    The relevance was simple - the OP did not state in his opening post whether he wanted petrol or diesel but referred to performance. It was pertinent to point out the SOHC/DOHC difference between the 2.0 / 2.2 engines. Thats all.

    I also take issue with your (wrong) inference that petrol is "more" reliable than diesel. Diesel reliability, at least in I-DTEC form is just as robust. I agree there are cars that are not, but from my own experience, my I-DTEC has been utterly, flawless, bombproof and will return much better MPG than even hybrids can. So no, petrol is not "more" reliable - thats your perspective, just as this is mine and neither are barometers to judge every Accord, petrol or diesel....but I digress....
     
    Loading...
  16. i-DSI Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    Belgium Aalst
    1,046
    300
    1
    But why do you mention this: there is no difference between SOHC and DOHC in this case. The SOHC is even more powerfull and has a slightly higer top speed. The DOHC on this diesel does not make it perform better than the SOHC petrol.
    You're right about he reliability, if you use the diesel as it's supposed to be used.
    Diesel gives indeed better MPG. But in my case (less than 15k km/year), the diesel would even cost me more money.
     
    Loading...
  17. TheDarkKnight Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    2,688
    492
    Perfomance has different variables and will appeal to different people in different ways.

    As I said, the original poster made no distinction between petrol/diesel in his opening post but referred to performance. A DOHC engine in diesel guise may not be as fast as a SOHC petrol, but it won't be that slow either and will offer a better range of torque than the SOHC in a petrol. In the same way, a SOHC petrol is not "better" than a DOHC diesel either nor is it "cheaper". Depends on what the guy is after - performance requirements differ for us all. Hope that clears up any confusion.
     
    Loading...
  18. BanditSid Club Member ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    You haven't mentioned this, but if you are going to chose the automatic box and decide to tow a caravan or similar later on you will not be able to pull anything like the car weight. I don't have the figures to hand but I'm sure the auto is limited to 900kg whereas my tourer manual can pull almost twice that.
     
    Loading...
  19. richsprint Account Closed. ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

  20. SpeedyGee Administrator Staff Team

    England Speedy Birmingham
    14,999
    5,593
    4
    So that's Petrol 1 - Diesel 0

    LOL
     
    Loading...