Honda Cars : Autos.ca Test Drive: 2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Review and photos by Greg Wilson

Photo Gallery:
2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring

Last month, we drove the 2013 Honda Accord sedan Touring with the 2.4-litre four-cylinder engine and new-for-2013 continuously variable transmission, remarking that it set a new standard for “understated redesign” but that it offered “an essential goodness and balance of efficiency and performance, space and content, and the old Honda driving magic.”  In a separate comparison test, the same Accord sedan emerged as the clear winner against four other new mid-size four-cylinder sedans.

Now that we’ve got our hands on a V6-powered Accord sedan, we can confirm that it shares most of the four-banger’s positive qualities – the key difference, of course, is its smoother, quieter and more powerful 278-hp V6 engine mated to a standard six-speed automatic transmission (replacing last year’s five-speed auto) and its proportionately higher fuel consumption – although it’s not as much as you might expect.  According to the EPA, the 2013 Accord V6 sedan consumes 11.2/6.9 L/100 km city/highway, an impressive 12.5 percent improvement over last year’s V6 – and that’s without a stop/start engine idle feature that many automakers are now using as a convenient tool to lower fuel consumption figures.

Our V6 test car’s fuel consumption display was showing an average of 9.0 L/100 km, very close to the EPA’s combined estimate, but considerably higher than NR Canada’s rather optimistic ratings of 9.7/5.7.   Just for the record, the EPA rates the Accord four-cylinder with a CVT at 8.7/6.5. Both the four-cylinder and V6 Accords use regular grade gasoline.

Accord buyers looking for maximum fuel economy won’t have long to wait for the 2014 Accord Plug-in Hybrid that arrives early this year, followed in the summer by a regular hybrid sedan.

Unlike the four-cylinder Accord, the V6 sedan is not available with a manual transmission; realistically, not many V6 sedan buyers would order it anyway.  A six-speed manual is available in the sporty V6 Coupe because that car appeals to buyers who put a higher priority on performance.
  
2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring. 
Our test sedan was a top-of-the-line V6 Touring sedan model loaded with all the latest gadgets and luxury features. As is the trend nowadays, buyers don’t have to order the big engine to get all the toys –four-cylinder Accords are also available in the top Touring trim.  That makes us wonder why the $35,290 Accord V6 Touring commands a hefty $3,700 premium over the Accord I4 CVT Touring model when the only difference is the powertrain.  I guess that’s the price you pay for an extra 107 horsepower.

As we reported earlier, the new Accord is slightly smaller on the outside than the previous model but offers more rear legroom and slightly more headroom and shoulder room despite a significant 79 L (2.8 cu. ft.) reduction in passenger cabin volume.   We’re not really sure how this is possible – perhaps Houdini was consulted – but the cabin does seem roomier and there is a generous amount of rear legroom and adequate headroom and hiproom.  Still, the Accord’s published interior passenger volume of 2,922 L (103.2 cu. ft.) is less than many of its major mid-size competitors.

Good news for golfers: the 2013 Accord sedan’s trunk has increased in size by 31 L (1.1 cu. ft.) to 447 L (15.8 cu. ft.) and the fully lined trunk with a flatter floor will accommodate four golf bags.   The news is not so good for skiers and hockey players: all Accord sedans come with a single folding seatback with a rather narrow, restricted opening with rounded corners.  Most other family sedans have split folding seatbacks which can accommodate long cargo items, like skis and hockey sticks, plus one or two rear passengers (read ‘kids’) at the same time – which seems important in a ‘family’ sedan.  So why doesn’t Honda offer split folding rear seatbacks?  This could be a deal breaker for some sedan buyers.

Before I get to the Accord’s new interior design, let’s talk about the V6 powertrain.  It’s the same silky-smooth 3.5L SOHC 24-valve i-VTEC V6 engine with an improved version of its “variable cylinder management” that automatically switches to three cylinders under light load to save fuel.  Horsepower and torque figures are up slightly and Honda has tweaked the engine to offer more torque and responsiveness.  Indeed, the V6 Accord is very quick off the line, rockets onto the freeway when prodded, and passes other cars with ease.  According to Consumer Reports, the 2013 Accord V6 sedan does 0 to 60 mph in just 6.3 seconds – that compares to the four-cylinder Accord with a CVT at 7.7 seconds.  The V6 engine is smooth and quiet at idle and relaxed at highway speeds, turning over just 1,800 rpm in sixth gear.  But while the new 2.4L four-cylinder engine features direct fuel injection, the V6 continues with multi-point fuel injection – somewhat surprising given that Honda is usually at the forefront of engine technology.

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring. Click image to enlarge

Accord buyers who choose the V6 engine are probably not too concerned with good fuel economy, but even V6 Accords are equipped with Honda’s new driver-selectable Econ driving mode that helps save gas.  By pushing the green leaf-icon button just to the left of the steering wheel, throttle response is muted and the automatic climate control operation is limited, thereby enhancing fuel economy.  For the driver, this has the effect of making the car feel slower when accelerating, but unlike some other cars with a similar feature, we didn’t find a huge difference in performance.  Accord drivers can tell if they’re achieving maximum fuel efficiency by observing the colour of the illuminated arcs around the speedometer – if it’s green, you’re driving efficiently; if it’s white, you can start feeling guilty about contributing to climate change.

The Accord’s new six-speed automatic transmission, which replaces the previous five-speed, is a real smoothy.  And with its wider range of gear ratios, it offers improved throttle responsiveness and better fuel economy.   If you want more performance, just drop the transmission lever from ‘D’ to ‘S’.  This elevates engine revs in any given gear in order to provide more immediate throttle response – increasing the fun but sucking back more fuel.  The new six-speed automatic also offers Honda’s ‘grade logic control’, which prevents gear hunting when climbing grades and provides engine braking when descending hills by gearing down automatically.  Unlike in the Accord V6 Coupe, this six-speed automatic doesn’t come with paddle shifters, probably because Honda believes sedan buyers just aren’t that interested in ‘paddling’.

The Accord’s handling has definitely improved.  With its shorter overall length, slightly shorter wheelbase and slightly wider track, and a reduction in curb weight thanks in part to a new, lighter MacPherson strut front suspension (replacing double wishbones) and a lighter aluminum and steel front subframe, the 2013 Accord feels more nimble and balanced.  It new electric variable assist power rack and pinion steering replaces the previous hydraulic steering and is among the best electric steering systems out there.  It’s nicely weighted – steering effort when parallel parking is easy but not effortless, and at highway speeds it feels responsive and tracks well in a straight line.   My only concern is the Accord’s rather wide turning diameter of 11.6 m (38.1 feet).

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring.

Contributing to driving safety is the Accord’s new LaneWatch Blind Spot monitor, a feature we think will soon be copied by other automakers.  When the right turn signal is activated, a camera in the right outside mirror sends an image of the area beside and behind the car to the centre screen where the driver can observe other cars travelling in the car’s blind spot.  It’s even better than shoulder checking because cars you can’t see hidden behind the C-pillar are visible in the screen.  We think it would be nice to see a camera image for the driver’s side blind spot, too, but we noted there is a new “Expanded View Driver’s Mirror” that increases the driver’s field of vision by 4.2 degrees.

In addition, all Accords now feature a rear-view camera.  In addition to the normal view, EX-L and Touring models have a wide view that captures objects to the side, and a top-down view that helps judge the exact distance to the object behind the car.  This is really useful when you want to park as close as possible to a wall or barrier without hitting it.  My only reservation with vehicle cameras is that rain, ice, snow and grime can sometimes obscure the camera lens which can make the view murky.

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring. Click image to enlarge

Another new feature in the 2013 Accord is Forward Collision Warning, which uses radar to detect a potential frontal collision and warn the driver with warning sounds.  As well, a new Lane Departure Warning System warns the driver if the car is moving out of its lane without using the turn signals.  Soon we’ll be able to drive blindfolded!

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring. Click image to enlarge

The Accord sedan’s braking performance is very good – Consumer Reports’ braking tests show a braking distance of 42.4 m (139 feet) from 96 km/h (60 mph) in the dry.  P235/45R18-inch all-season tires, four-wheel disc brakes with ABS, EBD, and brake assist, and vehicle stability control are all standard.
For night-time visibility, top-of-the-line Touring models feature new LED (light emitting diode) projector beam headlights, which provide better illumination than the standard halogen projector beam headlights on all other Accord trims.  In addition, LED daytime running lights and LED taillights are now standard on all Accords.

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring. Click image to enlarge

Inside, the Accord’s new instrument panel makes use of better quality plastics and brighter trim to improve quality appearance.  The instrument panel does away with the previous confusing assortment of poorly arranged buttons in the centre stack and substitutes a touchscreen for the audio controls, and just below it, a simpler horizontal arrangement of buttons for the dual-zone climate control.  These are in addition to the large eight-inch screen at the top of the instrument panel.  As before, it’s not a touchscreen, its menu-driven system controlled by a large dial now positioned at the bottom of the centre stack.  The larger screen displays many functions: navigation, audio, telephone and trip information as well as the rear-view camera image and the LaneWatch feature.

An assortment of new information and entertainment features have been added for 2013:  in addition to hands-free Bluetooth phone and audio operation, the new Accord features a new SMS text messaging feature that allows incoming text messages to be read aloud and the driver to respond with short factory pre-set replies while driving.  As well, e-mail messages can be received and sent.  Perhaps the most advanced feature is Honda’s new HondaLink web audio service.  It requires owners to download apps into their iPhone or Android smartphones and use them to access web-based music, information and entertainment services.

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring. Click image to enlarge

The first app available in Canada is the AHA web-based infotainment service where users can download any of its 30,000 channels of available news, music, and entertainment – and then play them through the Accord’s HondaLink audio system.  Once downloaded, the driver can control stations using the audio touchscreen, and drivers can even call out songs by their name to find them.  U.S. Accord owners can also use the Pandora internet radio service, but that’s not available in Canada.  The trend seems obvious: a car’s audio/video system is becoming an extension of the owner’s smartphone.  The tricky part will be to take advantage of the smartphone’s features without distracting the driver from his/her primary task.

We found engine and road noise are well suppressed in the V6 Accord, but that’s partly because our ears are being tricked.  2013 Accords feature Active Noise Control and Active Sound Control, which use two microphones, a processing unit and four speakers to analyze undesirable noises entering the cabin and counter them with out-of-phase audio signals.  More desirable noises, however, such as the sporty engine note, are actually enhanced.  So don’t believe everything you hear, or don’t hear, in the Accord.

2013 Honda Accord Sedan V6 Touring.

We found the Accord’s leather seats very comfortable and appreciated the driver’s power lumbar and height adjusters – unfortunately, the front passenger seat doesn’t have them.  Seat heaters are standard in both the front and rear outboard seats, and a new side airbag design allows the front seatbacks to be heated (previously only the seat cushion was heated).   Interior storage consists of an open bin at the bottom of the centre stack next to a 12-volt charger and USB/auxiliary port for iPods and smartphones, a small bin under the centre armrest with a 12-volt outlet, small door pockets and a glovebox – but we think the designers should have added more storage space.  We liked the two front cupholders with flexible cup grippers and the folding rear armrest with two cupholders.

The 2013 Accord V6 sedan’s closest competitor is probably the Toyota Camry XLE V6, which offers improved driving dynamics over previous Camrys.  The VW Passat V6 is also similar to the Accord in many ways. The Nissan Altima V6 is less exciting to drive, as is the Chevrolet Malibu 2.0T and the Dodge Avenger V6.  The Ford Fusion is more exciting to drive but its turbocharged four-cylinder engine is not as refined.  The same thing might be said about the Hyundai Sonata 2.0T, the Kia Optima SX, and the Buick Regal Turbo.

All in all, the 2013 Honda Accord V6 is an attractive and luxurious family sedan that offers a nice balance of power, comfort, handling, comfort and technology that won’t alienate mainstream buyers by being too boring or too trendy.  Downsizing it slightly was a bold move, but we think it was the right one for the times.

2013 Honda Accord V6 sedans start at $32,790 for the EX-L trim, and $35,290 for the Touring trim.  They’re built in Marysville, Ohio.
Pricing: 2013 Honda Accord sedan V6 Touring
Base price: $35,290
Options: none
Freight: $1,640
A/C tax: $100
Price as tested: $36,030

Source;
http://www.autos.ca/car-test-drives/test-drive-2013-honda-accord-sedan-v6-touring/?all=1 

Honda Cars : 2013 Honda Civic first drive from Consumer Reports | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Honda Cars : The Wall Street Journal; Review: 2013 Honda Accord V6 Touring | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

by Dan Neil

LET’S BEGIN WITH your state of mind: You want to buy a sedan, mid- to full-size, good gas mileage, nice cabin. You want it to look good, but you’re averse to showy displays. Safety is important, so, seat belts.

A sedan! What a splendidly calculated choice. Let me be the first to congratulate you on your sense of equilibrium. Four doors, four seasons, four winds blowing. Makes you think.

You have lots of company. Four of the 10 best-selling vehicles in the U.S. are front-drive, four-door, five-seat, C- or D-segment sedans, about a half-million annually, representing nearly 20% of the total light-vehicle market. These are the sturdy milkmaids of the middle class.

But perhaps you’re wondering why a sedan seems so inevitable, given that there are so many other kinds of vehicles, from a Mini Cooper Countryman to a Ford F-350 Club Cab (long bed, fifth wheel), and every coupe, cabrio and compact that flies or crawls? Family sedans do sort of have a penitential air to them. You don’t own them so much as do time in them.

It’s because you’re rational. You’ve taken a very complex set of vehicle attributes, plotted them as coordinates in three-axis space—the axes being money, performance, commodity—and concluded the classic, three-box family sedan represents, altogether, the best compromise on all fronts. Sedans have great-looking number clouds.

People shopping for family sedans are therefore predisposed to extreme reasonableness. It is here that the Honda Accord has the segment by the throat.

Has there ever been a more radically reasonable automobile than the Honda Accord? Even its name means consensus. Big, but not too big; attractive, but too familiar to be provocative; well-appointed, but incapable of igniting sustained envy. The car’s trademarked engine note—sweet, high, isolated—is flirtatious, never carnal. Across a host of comparative metrics, from trunk space to fuel economy, from horsepower to stopping power, year after year, the Accord strives not for superlatives in any one category but a portfolio of general excellence in all.

Example: The segment bogey at the moment is the great Hyundai Sonata with a 2.0-liter, 274-horsepower turbo four-cylinder. The new Accord EX-L and Sonata Turbo are almost identical in price (around $28,500), size, interior room and cabin amenities. The Accord’s new direct-injection 2.4-liter four gives up 89 hp (185 hp) but is lighter, quieter and returns a whopping 4 miles per gallon better in combined fuel economy with a new continuously variable transmission.

Since fuel economy matters all of the time and marginal advantages in acceleration matter almost none of the time, reasonable people agree that’s a constructive compromise. And while big horsepower is nice, so is a refined, pleasant powertrain sound. The Sonata’s shimmering turbo thrash is fun but not exactly family-friendly.

Plus, the Sonata…dear, don’t you think that’s too flashy to go out in? Flashy is for other people.

It’s no secret that Honda has had a miserable couple of years. Like the rest of Japan, the company was deeply affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake. Production was also disrupted by flooding in Thailand last year. The yen has been strong and European demand weak.

And in the midst of all that, the U.S.-market products have slumped, drifting into mediocrity, which is the stupid stepbrother of reasonableness. Honda lost market share. The press was unkind to the redesigned Civic—it’s possible I might have used the word “treason”—and the company is now embarked upon what its chief executive last month called nothing less than “global reform.” Please have him swing by the U.N. when he’s done.

The early results can be felt in the Accord redesign, which returns the nameplate to its usual holistic excellence. Actually, this car feels less like a ninth-gen redesign than a proper sorting out of Gen 8. Even though the car is 3.5 inches shorter overall, and even though the front suspension has gone from double A-arm to McPherson strut, it looks as though the team of stylists barely changed pens. The Accord is still a deliberate, substantial hunk of sedan, with a spacious greenhouse, thick flanks and large doors. A bit bovine, really. It’s an optical wonder the way so large a car can seem to disappear before your eyes.

In the upper trim levels you can get LED headlamps that tuck under the headlamp assembly like beaded eyelashes. That jazzes up the look quite a bit. There’s more brightwork and definition around the car’s grille—but not unreasonably so.

As I count them, the new Accord had three priorities, all achieved: to regain competitiveness in fuel economy and powertrain sophistication; to re-establish the brand’s advantage in refinement and noise abatement; and to correct—even overcorrect, if possible—the impression left by recent Hondas that management cheaped out on materials.

As for the first, the Accord will be available with three powertrains: the 2.4-liter (185 hp, 181 pound-feet) with either CVT, auto or manual transmission; the carry-over 3.5-liter V6, now with 278 hp (21/34 mpg) buttoned to the six-speed automatic only (the Accord Coupe V6 will be available with a six-speed manual); and a 196-hp, plug-capable hybrid powertrain arriving next year with a marquee economy number of more than 100 mpg-e (gasoline-gallon equivalent).

I know the 2.4-liter is the newsy powertrain—the Accord’s first direct-injection engine—but I have to tell you, after recently driving big, clattery DI engines like the one in the Cadillac ATS[?], I was glad to drive the Accord with the V6, which is still port fuel-injected and still a spools to the 7,000-rpm redline with an easy athleticism and aerospace smoothness. With the six-speed automatic pulled down into Sport mode, the V6 cracks off a 5.6-second 0-60 mph time and pours midrange torque over the first four gears. If the Sport mode feels a bit too antsy, the transmission regular Drive mode is almost too calm (balance, see?). If you engage the Accord’s ECON mode—the bezel of the speedometer glows an encouraging green when you do—the Accord’s powertrain gets downright aggressive in the fuel saving. I was seeing almost 25 mph on a couple-hundred-mile interstate drive.

By stick and rudder, the Accord feels direct, agile and capable, with quick reflexes summoned through the electric power steering system and an appealing tendency to stay planted in corners. The light, lofting ride compliance on the highway gives way to a surprisingly muscular cornering on country lanes.

But the biggest improvement of the car brings together the second and third priorities. This is a resoundingly more solid and satisfying car than before, an impression of substance that extends from the door handles to the seat frames. Wind noise at 70 mph is just about nil, for instance. The cabin materials of our full-dresser V6—with fine-grain leather seats, door gussets and steering wheel, as well as lovely gloss-black resins and alloy trim—step way up from last year’s car.

Look, people who shop for family sedans are Vulcans, driven by logic, denying the temptations of emotion. They constitute a self-selected audience of the deeply reasonable and intensely practical. The new Accord will resonate with them. I predict it will live long and prosper.

2013 Honda Accord V6 Touring
Price as tested: $34,220
Powertrain: Naturally aspirated 3.5-liter, multipoint fuel-injected, 24-valve, DOHC V6 engine with variable valve timing; six-speed automatic transmission; front-wheel drive
Horsepower/torque: 278 hp at 6,200 rpm; 252 pound-feet at 4,900 rpm
Length/weight: 191.4 inches/3,559 pounds
Wheelbase: 109.3 inches
0-60 mph: <6 p="p" seconds="seconds">EPA fuel economy: 21/34/25 mpg, city/highway/combined
Cargo capacity: 15.5 cubic feet

Source;
http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/2012/10/06/review-2013-honda-accord-v6-touring/?mod=google_news_blog

Honda Cars : 2013 Honda Accord first drive from Consumer Reports | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Honda Cars : 2013 Honda Accord Review - The new Accord is good, and it knows it | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Honda Cars : Cars.com Midsize SUV Shootout; 2012 Honda CRV wins.... | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

By Cars.com Staff  Cars.com

A quick reminder on the judges:

• David Thomas, managing editor, Cars.com
• Bill Jackson, senior editor, Cars.com
• Jennifer Geiger, editor, Cars.com
• Fred Meier, automotive editor, USA Today
• Brian Robinson, producer, "MotorWeek"
• Nicholas and Erin Ravelingeen, parents of two who are eager to replace their 2001 Chevrolet Tracker

Here's how the score broke down: 75% of the total was based on the experts' scores; 15% from the family's scores; and 10% was based on fuel economy. To help you make your own comparisons of these SUVs, we’ve pulled together a list of what you get for $25,000.
It was evident when the smoke cleared that all six of these compact SUVs were strong contenders, each in its own way. With a firm $25,000 price point, consumers could get many useful features, but no one SUV had all of them. The top three finishers were extremely close in scores, which is a testament to how hard it was to pick a winner in this class. If you're in the market for a compact SUV, focus on your top concerns, and certainly one of these will work for you.

No. 6 2013 Ford Escape, 693.5 Points

(See the scorecard, the Monroney sticker or research the 2013 Ford Escape)

What they liked: Even though the Escape came with fewer features than its competitors (our broker got us a no-frills base version, but we couldn't have gotten a different engine without topping our $25,000 maximum price), as a driving machine, it won over more than a few of our reviewers.
"The Escape's 2.5-liter feels spirited from a stop and has plenty of midrange punch," Geiger said. Jackson agreed: "The Escape excels in the vehicle dynamics category — the combination of ride, handling and acceleration — by managing to feel both composed and relaxed." Now, the new Escape ditches the pickup-truck look and feel of the previous generation, and that "unique" look (as Robinson said) appealed to our family testers, too.
"I like this shape much more than the old one." Erin said. "The old one wasn't even a contender because of the shape." One area of concern for several judges was the look of the second-row seats, but Meier discovered that "the thin-looking rear seat has a reclining back, and it is surprisingly comfy and roomy for two." In addition, Thomas noted that the "the cargo area is quite large with a low load floor."

What they didn't: Here's where the no-frills come to roost. The "2.5-liter engine [is] not nearly as nice as the available EcoBoost engines," Robinson said, but he added: "To get the Escape that I would actually want to own, I'd be pushing 30 grand, and at that point, I'm looking at bigger vehicles."
For Geiger, "the cabin is a disappointment: large, uneven panel gaps are obvious; hard plastic surfaces abound; and chintzy fabric makes the seats feel and look budget-grade." As usual, our Shootouts are about families and she noted a big fail in the second row: "There are no rear cupholders (except for the door-panel cubbies) and there's only one seatback pocket." Meier agreed. "There's just not enough useful storage for this segment." Clever underfoot storage in rear seats can't make up for the tiny console bin, lack of cubbies."
For Thomas, his biggest complaint was one we're really feeling in a steamy Midwestern summer. "Someone will have to walk me through how the air-conditioning vents work. They don't shoot air in the direction you think when adjusting them, and there are two above the HVAC controls that shoot air only toward your lap. I had a hard time getting comfortable on the longest driving portions of my test." Meier felt his own pain in a sensitive location: "The front seats are not rump-worthy for a long drive."

The verdict: "The base model is a black-plastic austerity plan," Meier said. "You have to pay more to get the real redesign, including new state-of-the-art engines."
Key Features

• EPA-estimated 22/31 mpg city/highway; we observed 27.4 mpg combined (the second lowest mpg tested).
• 68.1 cubic feet of maximum cargo space; 34.3 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats (the second highest amount of combined cargo space in comparison)
• Auxiliary input for audio system
• Reclining second row
• Only vehicle tested with wheel covers
• Only vehicle tested without Bluetooth hands-free phone connectivity
• Floor storage compartment in second row
• No safety data available from NHTSA or IIHS yet

2013 Ford Escape Payment Facts
MSRP with destination fee: $23,295
Monthly payment: $479.16*
Cheapest car in Shootout
Find a 2013 Ford Escape near you

No. 5 2012 Hyundai Tucson, 721.5 Points

(See the scorecard, the Monroney sticker or research the 2012 Hyundai Tucson)

What they liked: Clearly, all of the judges enjoyed how much they got for 25 grand. "Great value," Geiger said. "At this price point, we were able to get some pretty nice features: heated leather seats, a power driver's seat, hill descent control and satellite radio." "The price starts under 20 grand, and by the time you get to 25, you've got a ton of features for not a lot of price," Robinson added. "Amazingly well-dressed for the price," Meier noted. "It delivers on Hyundai's reputation for value for your bucks."
Using those features was a little easier for Thomas in the Tucson: "Give me the Tucson's straightforward tech over the Mazda's touch-screen any day. Scrolling through iPod playlists, synching your phone and making calls was intuitive and natural."
Of course, part of the equation is the driving. "The Tucson springs away from stoplights and has decent passing power," Jackson said. "Handling was top-notch in the Tucson," Thomas said. "It was one of the few crossovers that I could take at full speed through tight turns. For the family, with its 11-year-old SUV, the SUVs in this Shootout were revelations, and the Tucson was no exception.
"This one and the Mazda never would have made it" onto their shopping list. "This really feels beautiful," Nick said. "I'm really surprised by this car," Erin added. The heated leather seats were something "we didn't think we could get at this price," Erin said.

What they didn't: Where the family saw beauty in the Tucson's design, Robinson saw "ugly exterior styling." Many of the experts' complaints revolved around a slew of issues.
"Some of the controls feel cheep and light," Jackson said. "Road noise and tire roar in the Tucson are hard to ignore, making it one of the loudest SUVs in the class," Geiger said. "There's no hiding the fact the cargo area is small," Thomas said, a view that Robinson shared. Thomas continued: "It's too small for my family dog — let alone what we pack for a road trip — and it has a really high load-in height." For Meier, the "lack of visibility at the rear corners makes you see the value of backup and blind spot warning systems."

The verdict: "The Tucson remains an excellent option in the class," Thomas notes, "but the class has gotten much tougher very quickly."
Key Features

• EPA-estimated 22/32 mpg city/highway; we observed 27.6 mpg.
• Heated leather seats (only vehicle tested with feature)
• Most-expensive vehicle of the Shootout
• 55.8 cubic feet of maximum cargo space; 25.7 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats (the smallest cargo area behind the second row amongst the competitors)
• Roof rack
• Five-year/60,000-mile new vehicle warranty, 10-year/100,000-mile powertrain warranty (tied with Kia for the longest warranty)
• Power driver's seat
• Satellite radio
• IIHS Top Safety Pick for 2012

2012 Hyundai Tucson Payment Facts
MSRP with destination fee: $25,820
Monthly payment: $531.10*
Difference from cheapest car: $51.94 a month
Find a 2012 Hyundai Tucson near you

No. 4 2012 Chevrolet Equinox, 740 Points

(See the scorecard, the Monroney sticker or research the 2012 Chevrolet Equinox)

What they liked: "Being the biggest one in the group, obviously there's lots of cargo space, but even more importantly, there's lots of small-item storage up front as well," Robinson noted. "The interior has an 'almost-premium' feel."
Jackson, a triathlete, picked up on that the Equinox "was the only SUV where I felt I could take a road trip in the second row thanks to the sliding rear seats.There's a huge second row and a large cargo area, too; most SUVs in this class make you choose one or the other." Meier called that sliding second row a "why can't do they do it all?" feature.
For Geiger, the Latch anchors were a winning point for the Equinox. "They rank among the best I've ever used. They're completely exposed and have lots of clearance around them — hooking up a child-safety seat is a breeze."

What they didn't: The driving experience lagged its competitors. "This powertrain needs to go to finishing school," Geiger said. "It's slow, loud and the transmission's shifts are clunky and oddly timed." Robinson concurred: "The engine, while adequate in power, has a very rough feel to it." The family had a hard time with the concept of an Eco button. "When would you use that?" they asked. The idea that the transmission adjusted electronically for better fuel economy didn't impress them.
It wasn't all about the engine, though. "On the highway the Chevy was definitely the loudest of the six with lots of road noise," Thomas said. "The seats did not provide enough support, especially for my thighs," Jackson found. And the stereo sent Meier off on a mini-rant. "The Equinox had an unexpectedly good audio with subwoofer at this price — and then there's no USB port for your iPod! Chevy should fire the bean counter whose cost-cutting will turn off those younger buyers you could have wooed with the good sound," he said. "Worse, putting a white plate in the black console reminds you where the USB would have been if you'd just paid more."

The verdict: "The Equinox is bigger than the rest of these SUVs, so it's very roomy inside, and it has one of the best rides of the group," Robinson said. "It's a great overall package that could just use a little more refinement in the powertrain."
Key Features

• EPA-estimated 22/32 mpg city/highway; we observed 27.1 mpg combined (the lowest mpg tested)
• 63.7 cubic feet of maximum cargo space; 31.5 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats
• IIHS Top Safety Pick for 2012
• Power height adjustment for driver's seat
• Sliding, reclining second-row seat

2012 Chevy Equinox Payment Facts
MSRP with destination fee: $24,355
Monthly payment: $500.97*
Difference from cheapest car: $21.81 a month
Find a 2012 Chevrolet Equinox near you

No. 3 2012 Kia Sportage, 774 Points

(See the scorecard, the Monroney sticker or research the 2012 Kia Sportage)

What they liked: "Getting a full navigation system with an upgraded stereo at a price in the middle of our range was a huge win for Kia," Thomas said. "Plus, the stereo sounded better than the rest, too."
Erin also liked the nav system: "It feels really high-end." That wasn't the only advantage. "The Sportage definitely has an attitude," Geiger said. "Its exterior styling breaks the compact-SUV mold; it's the edgiest-looking one of the bunch.  It also gets some brownie points in the storage department. A deep center console, coupled with under-floor storage with separate bins in the cargo area, mean there are plenty of places to stash stuff."
"The Sportage has the crisp handling of the mechanically similar Hyundai Tucson," Meier said, "but its good ride and quiet interior are amazingly better than its stablemate." Jackson also liked its "immediate engine response," and the family raved about its spaciousness. "It's really roomy," Nick said after feeling cramped in the Tucson.

What they didn't: While some experts liked the aggressive styling, "that stylish high belt line may make shorter folks claustrophobic," Meier said, "and they sure won't be resting an elbow on the window sill." He also pointed out that the rakish roof leads to "very limited rear sightlines, and that means you'll need that backup camera and you'll wish for a blind spot alert system."
For Robinson, "the interior quality doesn't seem on par with most recent Kias." "Like the Tucson, the cargo area is too small with a very high load floor," Thomas said. 
And that nav system that everyone raved about? "You've got a great nav system and you install it at an angle leaning backward toward the windshield? That leads to a lot of glare, and when it's sunny out, it is very hard to read the screen," Thomas said.

The verdict: "The sticker price and features wowed me, the family and likely other shoppers. If cargo space isn't a concern, the Sportage will be hard to ignore, Thomas said.
Key Features

• EPA-estimated 22/32 mpg city/highway; we observed 28.5 mpg combined
• Navigation system (only one equipped as-tested)
• 54.6 cubic feet of maximum cargo space; 26.1 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats (least amount of maximum cargo space in Shootout)
• Heated side mirrors
• Cooling glove box (Only vehicle tested with feature)
• Backup camera
• 5-year/60,000-mile new vehicle warranty, 10-year/100,000-mile powertrain warranty (tied with Hyundai for longest warranty)
• Satellite radio
• IIHS Top Safety Pick for 2012

2012 Kia Sportage Payment Facts
MSRP with destination fee: $24,575
Monthly payment: $505.49*
Difference from cheapest car: $26.33 a month
Find a 2012 Kia Sportage near you

No. 2 2013 Mazda CX-5, 784 Points

(See the scorecard, the Monroney sticker or research the 2013 Mazda CX-5)

What they liked: The CX-5 is the first Mazda to shed the “big grin” design language the automaker has been using for the last five years.
“More than one person has described the CX-5 as ‘cute,’ ” Jackson said, even though this is the first Mazda to shed the “big grin” design language the automaker had been using for the last five years. “The interior has the richest look of any in our test,” he continued. “I kept thinking that we had to be in a model that didn’t meet our price level; it looked so nice.” But meet our price limit it did, a feat that Geiger also praised. “Low base prices and high fuel economy mean this car should appeal to penny-pinchers, and lots of features for the price (blind spot warning, backup camera and powerdriver seat) mean they’re getting a good value,” she said.

“I really like it,” Erin said about the interior. “It’s really streamlined but in a good way,” she said. Meier praised the “airy, spacious feel inside with classy trim and seat cloth and the straightforward gauges and controls,” he said. “You expect classy interiors from Mazda and CX-5 doesn't disappoint.”

Beyond that, Geiger favored the second row. “The backseat folds in a 40/20/40 split, which is useful for hauling different combinations of people and cargo. The seats also fold flat with ease, thanks to three cargo-area handles.” One of the reasons the CX-5 scored so high was its outstanding fuel economy. It was more than 2 mpg ahead of its closest competitor.

What they didn't: Part of that great fuel economy was because of, shall we say, reserved acceleration. Looking at the judges' scores, this category likely kept it from the top spot. "The CX-5's 2.0-liter engine has adequate pep from a stop, but it's on the loud side and takes awhile to gather steam," Geiger noted. "That famed Zoom-Zoom wasn't there in the handling department," Thomas said. "While it topped the CR-V and Equinox in that regard, the Escape, Tucson and Sportage all out-cornered it." Worse, Meier said: "The engine's thin power undercuts confidence in demanding situations."
The CX-5's new stereo setup also raised ire. "The info screen looks outdated, and there's a navigation button even though there's no [factory installed] nav," Robinson said.
Compared to the others in the Shootout, the CX-5's Latch anchors weren't super accessible. There wasn't a lot of clearance around the anchors, so the car seat's Latch connector has to be jammed in for it to hook on.
One big point of contention: the clock. The family and a couple of judges could not understand why the clock was placed where it was, and while they all liked the look and layout of the dashboard, they thought the air-conditioning controls and the clock felt as if they were out of a different time period than the rest of the car. "It looks basic, basic, basic," Erin said. She also thought the center armrest was "unusably too low; actually, it's too far back and too low." Husband Nick was not as wowed as the expert judges. "I hate it. I don't know why!"

The verdict: "Mazda really needs the CX-5 to be a winner, and it's poised to be," Geiger said. "The CX-5 should appeal to a wide audience with eye-catching styling, a quality interior, plenty of convenience features and excellent-for-the-class fuel economy."
Key Features

• EPA-estimated 26/32 mpg city/highway; we observed 32.8 mpg combined (highest mpg tested)
• 65.4 cubic feet of maximum cargo space; 34.1 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats
• Power driver's seat 
• 5.8-inch color LCD display with backup camera
• HD Radio and satellite radio
• Blind spot warning system (only vehicle tested with feature)
• IIHS Top Safety Pick for 2012

2013 Mazda CX-5 Payment Facts
MSRP with destination fee: $24,690
Monthly payment: $507.86*
Difference from cheapest car: $28.70 a month
Find a 2013 Mazda CX-5 near you
And the winner is...

No. 1 2012 Honda CR-V, 809 Points

(See the scorecard, the Monroney sticker or research the 2012 Honda CR-V)

What they liked: Perhaps the greatest compliment to be paid to our winner is that everything that came in our tester was standard for the trim level, and the combination of those features really pleased our judges.
"Even just equipped with the standard tech features, the CR-V shined," Thomas said. "The Bluetooth and USB integration works well with a vibrant color display that's easy to read, and the stereo was one of my favorites." "The CR-V is loaded with convenience features that come standard," Geiger said. "Three of my favorites are the always-helpful backup camera, the cavernous center console box and the easy fold-flat seats with cargo-area release handles. Bonus: This was the only vehicle with a sunroof at this price point." Robinson loved the "great ergonomics and the CR-V's best interior layout."
Perhaps betraying that they haven't been in the market since 2001, Erin and Nick were "totally amazed" by the conversation mirror (most commonly found in minivans) that lets parents check up on kids in the second row. "Mason, look! Mom can see you!" But that wasn't the only thing they liked about the Honda.
They had barely begun their test drive when Erin exclaimed, "It drives like a dream." She also liked the CR-V's size: "This just feels like a car, and the Chevy feels big," she said, with "big" referring to a larger SUV.

What they didn't: The CR-V is one of the totally redesigned SUVs in this contest, but not everyone thought the Honda had improved on its looks. "The rear styling is pretty bad," Jackson said. "It's got the biggest butt of any of the SUVs here. Actually, the front styling ain't so hot, either."
But it's not all about looks. "Handling is where the CR-V showed some chinks in the armor," Thomas said. "When taking corners, driver and passengers leaned more in the Honda than the other contenders." Geiger also had some issues with the driving. "Eco mode is a double-edged sword: I appreciate the potential fuel savings, but the system alters the throttle response and delays shifts points so the CR-V seems lazy," she said.
While many praised the features included in the price tag, Robinson said the CR-V "still trails many others in technological and convenience features such as blind spot monitoring systems, push-button start, etc." Finally, Thomas was bugged by one little annoyance: "Considering how many great cubbies there are around the cabin, I would really like a better place to put my smartphone."

The verdict: "The Honda CR-V is one of the most well-rounded vehicles in this segment. It's a comfortable cruiser with a solid powertrain, a compliant ride and plenty of features," Geiger said. "The brand's history of strong reliability helps tip the scale."
Key Features

• EPA-estimated 23/31 mpg city/highway; we observed 30.3 mpg combined (the second best mpg tested)
• 70.9 cubic feet of maximum cargo space; 37.2 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats (largest cargo area in competition)
• Second-most expensive vehicle of the comparison test
• Sunroof (only vehicle tested with feature)
• Backup camera
• Pandora Internet radio (only vehicle tested with feature)
• IIHS Top Safety Pick for 2012

2012 Honda CR-V Payment Facts
MSRP with destination fee: $25,425
Monthly payment: $522.98*
Difference from cheapest car: $43.82 a month
Find a 2012 Honda CR-V near you

*Monthly payment assumes good credit, no money down, 60-month loan, 5% interest and 9% sales tax.
Source;
http://www.cars.com/go/crp/buyingGuides/Story.jsp?referer=&year=New&section=SUV&story=25ksuvShootoutresult&subject=stories

Honda Cars : Consumer Reports Video Review of the 2012 Honda CRV | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Honda Cars : Driven: 2012 Honda Ridgeline Sport | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

After years of ignoring the exploding market for pickup trucks, Honda finally in 2006 brought out its first pickup, the Ridgeline. Rather than develop a V-8 engine and a body-on-frame chassis from scratch, Honda adapted the unibody underpinnings of its Pilot SUV to create an unconventional pickup, but one that nonetheless would meet the needs of a large number of pickup buyers.

Four-wheel drive is standard. The lone cab configuration has four real doors. Passenger space both up front and in back in generous. The cargo bed is only five feet long but it's more than four feet wide, so building materials can lie flat. The towing capacity of 5000 pounds can't approach the max capacities of full-size pickups (which are constantly one-upping each other) but is sufficient for most recreational towing.

Honda also added a few clever touches. The most significant is a standard, lockable, under-floor trunk below the cargo bed, providing a secure, outside-the-cab place to stow luggage. And there's a two-way tailgate that drops down like a conventional tailgate or can swing open like a door, providing closer reach-in access to whatever's in the bed and making it easier to hose out debris.

The reaction among pickup buyers has been a collective yawn. Sales, which were never great to begin with, lately have been in a freefall. Volume dropped by half from 2008 to 2010 and then fell another 40 percent last year. In fact, a few months ago, Honda felt compelled to post on its media web site an open letter from the company's head to truck product planning, denying rumors that the Ridgeline would be dropped and insisting that a pickup truck will remain part of the company's portfolio.

For 2012, Honda gave the Ridgeline a bit of attention, coaxing another 1 mpg out of the powertrain and adding the Sport trim level.

At $30,805, the latter is a $745 step up over the base model. It adds a bit of much-needed flash outside, mostly with black-finish 18-inch wheels. There's also a black grille with a unique texture, fog lights, and black surrounds for the head- and taillights. Inside, the Sport gets a leather-wrapped steering wheel with audio controls, an aux input jack, heavy-duty rubber floor mats, and rear privacy glass.

The fuel economy boost brings the Ridgeline up to 15/21 mpg (city/highway), but that's no more economical than a Ford F-150 4x4 with the Ecoboost V-6.

Clearly, none of the 2012 changes is likely to reverse the Ridgeline's fortunes. That's too bad, because the Ridgeline is in many ways far more pleasant to drive and easier to live with than a full-size four-door pickup. Being two feet shorter, and with a four-foot smaller turning circle, it's far less hassle to park and maneuver. The Ridgeline also doesn't require the huge climb up that regular 4x4 pickups do.

Having the cab and the cargo bed integrated as a single unit makes for a more rigid body structure and thus the Honda is free of the shudder over bumps that plagues typical pickups. With an independent rear suspension, there's no axle hop. The 3.5-liter V-6 is no powerhouse, at 250 hp, but it has enough muscle to get the Ridgeline moving, and four-wheel drive eliminates any torque steer. The transmission is only a five-speed, but the ratios are well spaced and the gearbox doesn't do a lot of hunting.

The Sport interior is pretty basic, with lots of hard plastic, and cheap-feeling cloth upholstery (why not vinyl?). There really are no factory options, so buyers looking for more niceties, like leather or navigation, have to move up a more deluxe trim level. In typical Honda fashion, the switchgear is very clear; cabin stowage is plentiful. The flip up rear-seat cushion makes it easier to carry bulky items inside the cabin. The worst aspect of the Ridgeline interior is the somewhat awkward driving position, with an intrusive and strangely positioned dead pedal.

Apparently, though, none of that matters much. Pickup buyers like their trucks big, and unless Honda can make the Ridgeline a more compelling alternative -- perhaps by giving it a clear advantage in fuel economy -- it appears likely to remain an outlier.

Source;

http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/driven/1201_2012_honda_ridgeline_sport/index.html

Honda Cars : First Drive: 2012 Honda Civic European-Spec | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

It's Different, but Is It Better?November 07, 2011 / By Paul Horrell
The new Ford Focus and Honda Civic went on sale at roughly the same time, aiming at roughly the same buyers -- but the two were designed with entirely different global philosophies. Thanks to One Ford, the Focus is largely interchangeable in Europe, Asia, and the U.S. Honda, meanwhile, has continued the split-design policy started with the previous-gen Civic. As such, the European model has very little in common with the one sold in the States and elsewhere.

For starters, the European Civic is a hatchback, not a sedan. It has entirely different exterior sheetmetal, rear suspension, and interior. It even has different front frame rails to make space for Europe's bulky 2.2-liter diesel engine.

Because it hasn't gotten into bed with any other car company, Honda is now in the second tier, size-wise. This separation of platforms must therefore count as a scarily expensive decision. Is it worth it?

Certainly the Euro-Civic has a unique selling proposition. As with the Jazz/Fit, the fuel tank is under the front seats. The rear suspension uses a simple, compact torsion beam layout rather than double wishbones, giving the Civic remarkable versatility. There's nothing but fresh air under the rear seats, so you can flip the cushions up against the backrest like in a movie theater, giving a wide floor-to-roof cave that can easily fit a bicycle upright. Even with rear passengers, the trunk is super-deep.

But let's face it, if cargo space is that important, there are plenty of other options, like one of the micro-minivans that are all over the roads in Europe. If the rest of the Civic doesn't have enough engaging characteristics, flip-up rear cushions aren't going to save it.

Cosmetically, this brand-new Euro Civic is an update of the car it replaces. It develops the same styling form, a sort of one-box that tends to the pyramid-shaped, but it's slightly lower than last time, and has a wave-like crease along the sides plus a black goatee at the front.

On the powertrain side, Honda hasn't done enough. Although the automaker used to be regarded as one of the world's most progressive engine-makers, these days it looks out of step with the European market. European buyers are busily downsizing, and gasoline engines in this category tend to be torque-rich direct-injection turbos such as the Ford Ecoboost or Mini 1.6s, or even a 1.2 and 1.4 from Volkswagen. Honda is sticking with port-injected 1.4 and 1.8 VTECs. The 1.4 makes a scant 94 lb-ft. Meh.

At the same time, Honda's diesel is the opposite: It's too big and powerful. Europe's compact car diesels are usually around 1.6 or 1.8 liters in size. Honda's is 2.2-liters, making it an expensive engine for the market. Still, Honda has at least found ways to eke out the fuel consumption -- the reason diesels proliferate. For this size of car, it now balances performance and economy in an attractive fashion. Economy is a bit better than average, and performance is much better than average.

It's not just engine improvements that make these economy gains. Honda obsessed on aerodynamics, both in the body shape and the details. There's an active shutter arrangement for the radiator grille, so that at speed when cooling air isn't needed in quantity, the grille shuts off for smoother airflow over the car. The tail has several small spoilers and fillets to clean air detachment and cut turbulence. More gain came from an idle-stop system. And weight hasn't risen, despite better equipment.

Yes, this is a good engine to use, with a wide spread of torque and decent refinement. Use the sweet six-speed stick sensibly and the rated acceleration (0-62 mph in 8.5 seconds) translates through the major-league torque into muscular passing and corner-exit acceleration.

The previous Civic was set up with a jittery ride and sharp steering. Fun, but tiring on a long trip. It didn't suit the buyers - families, commuters, and business travelers who spend a lot of time on highways. So Honda used the model change to uprate the NVH isolation. It went back to the source with, among other measures, new fluid-filled bushings for the rear suspension. Even more significant, the springs have been softened off. The Euro Civic now has a decently pliant and quiet ride, a contrast to the criticisms leveled at the U.S. version.

Of course, this means extra body lean, but in general the motions when cornering feel well-controlled. The real downer is a new EPS system, which is soggy and lacks road feel through curves. The simplicity of the rear suspension probably doesn't help. Still, the steering does have good straight-line stability and easy placement in urban driving. And it saves fuel versus the old hydraulic system. See where Honda's priorities are?

Honda did consider moving the European and American Civics closer together with this generation, but as the project went along they drifted apart again. There's a lot to like about the Euro car, and its character seems very different from the U.S. one. But both of them seem, in different ways, to have needed a bit more money spent on them. Maybe a single world-car program would have been the way to do it.

Source;
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1111_2012_honda_civic_european_spec_first_drive/printer_friendly.html

Honda Cars : 2012 Honda Civic Si Coupe - Road Test | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Now Playing: Upsized and downrevved for the enthusiast of tomorrow.
BY JOHN PHILLIPS, PHOTOGRAPHY BY ROY RITCHIE May 2011

For the past six years, we’ve felt a little like Estragon and Vladimir in Waiting for Godot. So many hours have been lost debating whether the previous-gen Honda Civic Si produced enough power to hold its head above water in the pocket-rocket pond. Eventually, this existential controversy morphed into a kind of recreation, with Si devotees screeching fiery epithets from the bleachers. Well, finally, Generation Nine is upon us. “We’re saved!” shouted Beckett’s protagonists whenever they suspected Godot might momentarily appear.

Here’s a sad fact: Godot never showed. And whether the Si is “saved” likewise remains unclear.

Let us review recent history.

Our first encounter with the previous Si came late in calendar year 2005, when we pitted it against a Volkswagen GTI. The Honda lost. In 2009, we inserted an Si into a seven-car comparo, where it finished fifth, gasping and sweating. We weren’t surprised. The Si’s engine—2.0 liters, 197 horsepower, 139 pound-feet of torque—relegated it to least-powerful status in the whole segment. It certainly didn’t possess the grits to fend off, say, a 263-hp Mazdaspeed 3 Grand Touring or a 265-hp Subaru Impreza WRX. What’s more, accessing the Si’s horses has always required the spinning of the crank and cams to a fine fare-thee-well. The VTEC didn’t swap cam profiles until 6000 rpm, and it was thereafter vital to rely on every single rev right up to the colossal eight-grand cutoff.

Of course, Si purists—and trust us, they are legion—smugly insisted that the little howler-monkey engine comprised much of the car’s charm. Yet in the same breath, they’d also confess the coppery taste of  humiliation whenever a WRX achieved 60 mph 2.0 seconds in front of them, fast becoming a gnat on the horizon.

Now comes Honda’s solution for the ninth-gen Si, a solution both simple and a little surprising, given the rumors of a turbo. Out goes the 2.0-liter engine, in comes the naturally aspirated 2.4-liter unit that sees simultaneous duty in the Acura TSX. The result is an unnoticeable 4-hp gain, but torque is up 22 percent—peaking at 4400 rpm instead of 6100 rpm—and that’s a difference you can feel. While they were at it, the engineers paired the engine to the TSX’s delightful six-speed transaxle. But is that enough?

Well, sort of. At the track, the Si nailed 60 mph in 6.3 seconds versus the previous 6.7, and it proved a half-second quicker in our 5-to-60-mph rolling start. Turn off  the traction control, and you can now shred rubber for 15 feet, followed by a Rottweiler bark as you bang into second. An improvement, for sure, but it’s still shy of the accelerative thrust of five turbocharged competitors, including the Speed 3, the WRX, and even the GTI, which has a similarly meager 200 horses but can nonetheless summon 60 mph in 6.1 seconds.

On the other hand, the larger engine ushers in welcome perks. The mechanical thrash of the previous powerplant, for instance, is now largely MIA, and gear noise is likewise reduced, with all three of our sound-level tests confirming the fact. (Still, road-borne noise and tread roar remain issues that Honda must address.) Equally important, the number of shifts required for ’round-town cruising seems subjectively halved. In traffic, the Si is perfectly content relying on first, third, and fifth. And by eschewing a turbo, the Si’s mileage—now up to an observed 26 mpg—is best described as a charming achievement.

Yes, yes, 900 top-end revs have been lost. But the car now pulls with at least vague enthusiasm just after step-off. In fact, our only serious beef with the new engine is its considerable overrun when the throttle is suddenly dropped. Among other things, that makes for very little initial engine braking, and the revs sometimes take a couple of seconds to return to idle. Most drivers won’t complain, but it’s a behavior that lends the drivetrain a titch of laziness that has historically been anathema to Honda-think.

As with the previous-gen Si, this is among the most-neutral-handling front-drivers on the planet. Around our 15-mile public-road loop in southern Ohio, we could provoke only the most minor of nibbling understeer—and that was at speeds approaching Fear Factor Nine—with the rear tires faithfully following whatever paths had been established by the fronts. No rotation, no drifts, no drama. Body motions were exquisitely controlled, with the ride revealing the stiff springs and dampers only over high-frequency imperfections, primarily expansion joints and broken pavement.

At around-town speeds, the Si’s steering tends to feel artificial, as if it were the outcome of some sort of electrical/mechanical calculus that never precisely balanced. At least it’s light. As speed rises, fortunately, it firms up nicely and also becomes livelier. There’s no bump steer, no nervousness, and interstate tracking is peerless. The brakes are fade-free, and the pedal is firm and informative.

Moreover, the light, fluid shifter—as good as any that Honda has ever produced—allows the driver to summon alternate rev ranges with the flick of two fingers, abetted by a new lightweight clutch with simply seamless takeup. Faced with slow hairpins, the limited-slip differential carefully apportions power so that the inside front wheel never scrabbles. The thinly cushioned seats hold you firmly in place, and the dead pedal is perfectly sited. With lateral grip rising from 0.87 g to 0.90 g, the Si just dances and sings in the hills. This 2864-pound coupe is perfectly balanced, agile, poised, ever willing, a car that is easy to drive. Real fast comes real quickly.

The only obvious failure here is the unimproved interior. There are crass plastic trim bits on the steering wheel and around the HVAC controls. The Civic’s trademark minivan-sized windshield leans over a mini­van-sized dash, a vast plain of cut-lines, textures, and colors. The bunk-bed layout for the IP is okay, but the garish LCD gauges are right out of a RadioShack in Akron. The mouse-fur headliner suffers from the mange, and there’s a lumpy, wrinkled collar of felt that surrounds the steering column, shouting to one and all, “Yessir, that’s right, I actually am the cheapest bit of flotsam in the universe!” Note to Honda: Check out the Ford Focus’s interior.

The new Si—manual six-speed only—comes in both sedan and coupe forms. The coupe starts at $22,955, the sedan opens at $23,155, and both top out at $24,655. The only options are navigation, XM radio, and (exclusive to the coupe) summer tires—17-inch Michelin Pilot Exalto PE2s, as fitted on our test car. (Fun driving tip: Demand that your spouse call you “Pilot Exalto.”) If you’ve got a calculator handy, you’ll perhaps already know that a starter Si coupe is more than $1500 cheaper than either a GTI or a Speed 3.

This latest Si is more sophisticated than its forebear, although it has been somewhat cruelly left to play David to the turbocharged Goliaths. As of now, it offers a better ride, produces less noise, and is faster in both a straight line and through the most diabolical off-camber, double-apex turns that Ohio’s deranged civil engineers could conjure. It is surely less raw than its predecessor, a trait that many Si purists—including our own revered Tony Quiroga and Dan Pund—lament. Until they commit to a three-day, 800-mile road trip, two-thirds of which skates over frost-heaved interstates. No longer is the Si a one-trick pony. At speed it’s a serial killer, yet during commutes and city errands it’s a near-soothing mental-health counselor with practicality and a price that make it easy to justify.

And with that, as always, please feel free to express your unalloyed hatred.

Source;
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/11q2/2012_honda_civic_si_coupe-road_test

Honda Cars : Honda Tuning: 1985 Honda CRX SI | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

Ah, Honda's glory days.... what a fun car....
1985 Honda CRX SI - CRX Memoirs
Although the first-generation CRX had been formally introduced during the 1984 model year, when Honda unveiled the Si model just 12 months later, enthusiasts realized that the brand’s little, performance-minded hatchback was better in almost every way.
From the June, 2011 issue of Honda Tuning
By Aaron Bonk


Thank the mid-’80’s mini-truck clubs for Honda performance as you know itcarefully tailored mullets, Ray-Ban Aviators, pegged jeans, and all. When you’re done, thank the ’85 CRX Si too. By 1985, mini-trucks were arguably a prevailing force among boy enthusiasts who denied more predictable domestic cars. As expected, testosterone-charged arcade meet-ups lost their luster as mini-truck clubs soon sought a more balanced male-to-female ratio. The fairer sex added an interesting and unexpected element to the equation thougharriving at events in smaller, easier to maneuver Ford Escorts, Volkswagen Rabbits, Nissan Sentras, Toyota MR2s, even Honda CRXs. Discriminating, newly enlightened mini-truckers traded their trucks for hatchbacksso many so that by 1989 Mini-Truckin’ magazine, for example, had a compact performance following so large it spawned the first-ever publication catering to sport compact enthusiasts: Sport Compact Car magazine. Sport Compact Car’s editors would later create Honda Tuning.
Honda’s CRX wasn’t the first sport compact enthusiasts cared about. Volkswagen’s early-’80’s Rabbit GTI overwhelmed much of the competition within a market that, frankly, had little rivalry. Although the first-generation CRX had been formally introduced during the 1984 model year, when Honda unveiled the Si model just 12 months later, enthusiasts realized that the brand’s little, performance-minded hatchback was better in almost every way.

American Honda had a difficult time convincing Honda of Japan to make the CRX available to U.S. consumers. The two-seater was designed for the world market, not Americans. Its essence was aimed toward young, economically conscious, city-dwelling Japanese who grappled with big-city traffic and nonsensical parking. Americans, who Honda’s analysts were convinced bought cars for legroom and impressive cubic-inch counts, were not who the company initially considered as viable consumers. Of course, American Honda was given the go-ahead and, from its first sales brochure and its first commercial, did something nobody expectedit solicited Honda’s all-new sport compact for exactly what it wasa sports car. This should come as no surprise; the Si acronym stands for Sport Injected after all. The media immediately pitted the angular-shaped, two-seater CRX against the GTI and MR2. The CRX delivered. Later, Honda’s CRX made Car and Driver magazine’s Ten Best list in 1985, among other accolades, like earning Motor Trend magazine’s Import Car of the Millennium title in 1990. Road & Track magazine went on to say that the Si had the sprit of an exotic.

Astute enthusiasts appreciated the high-revving Si’s modern fuel injection, taut suspension, precise steering, and ample braking, yet were left jaundiced by the fact that America never received the higher-output 1.6-liter, DOHC version the rest of the world had. To ensure exclusivity to the much-anticipated Acura brand that would launch later that year, and to the chagrin of CRX enthusiasts, twin-cam D-series engines were reserved solely for the upper echelon nameplate’s entry-level compact, the Integra. None of this mattered, though. Every CRX American Honda received sold.

For the rest of the article, follow the link;
http://www.hondatuningmagazine.com/features/htup_1106_1985_honda_crz_si_crx_memoirs/index.html

Honda Cars : Auto123: 2011 Honda Pilot Touring Review | 2013 New Honda Car Reviews 0

By Michel Deslauriers
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Honda can, without a doubt, be considered an environmentally friendly car company. Their small cars, the Fit and the Civic, are versatile, fuel-efficient and produce low levels of CO2 emissions. Their hybrid models, the Insight and CR-Z, are extremely efficient. So how can they justify an 8-passenger SUV in their product line-up?

Well, it has to maximize fuel economy. It has to maximize interior space. And it has to avoid being perceived by the public as a dirty, socially-irresponsable truck. The Pilot manages to meet at least two of these three conditions.

Under the hood of the Pilot resides a 24-valve, 3.5-litre V6 that’s found in various Honda and Acura products. In this case, it gets cylinder deactivation systems across the model range and develops 250 horsepower as well as 253 pound-feet of torque. The sole transmission choice is a 5-speed automatic; Honda does have a 6-speed in the tool shed, which equips the Odyssey Touring and several Acura models, so why don’t they quit fooling around and put it in the Pilot?

Whatever. Zero to 100 takes 8.8 seconds, which isn’t bad by truck standards, but some of its rivals are quicker. As for fuel economy, our average of 13.2 L/100 km is decent but didn’t trigger any high-fives in the office. The Advanced VCM system, or Variable Cylinder Management, helps a little but isn’t a miracle worker.

The V6 is smooth while providing enough muscle for a tow rating of 4,500 pounds (or 2,045 kg). That’s better than the Mazda CX-9, but not as good as pretty much every other mid-size, 7- or 8-passenger SUV.

The VTM-4 all-wheel drive system works the front wheels under normal conditions, and sends up to 70 percent of engine torque back to the rear during acceleration or when wheel slippage is detected. The system can be locked in four-wheel mode with the help of a dash-mounted button, but it only works under about 30 km/h.

The Pilot is a trooper on the highway, but the driving experience is tarnished by a steering rack that doesn’t send up enough road feel. Change lanes on a snowy day, and you’ll barely feel that strip of slush as you merge back into the slow lane; it should be more communicative.

The cockpit’s overall appearance is industrial-strength robust, although the dash piece seams at the top of the centre stack spoil it a little. It takes a few days to get used to the climate control switchgear, while the sound system includes a USB port in the Touring trim only; however, you can flip through music folders by holding down the song-skip buttons on the wheel, which is practical. Oh yeah, the rear-seat DVD with wireless headphones works beautifully for the kiddies.

We’re a little less enthusiastic about the navigation system. While relatively easy to use, spelling out a city or a street name by turning the system’s control knob isn’t a quick operation. The navigation display’s crude graphics makes me feel like I’ve fired up my Super Nintendo console.

Space-wise, the Pilot’s interior is muy grande. All three rows can accommodate adults, a pretty rare accomplishment in this vehicle category. Imagine a bus built by Honda, and it would look a lot like the Pilot. The Touring trim also benefits from heated front and outboard second-row seats. Visibility all around is great, and the truck’s narrow turning radius makes it easy to park.

Cargo space with the second and third rows of seats folded amounts to 2,464 litres; that’s bigger than in the Ford Explorer and Nissan Pathfinder, but smaller than in the Mazda CX-9 and way smaller than in the Chevrolet Traverse/GMC Acadia twins. The tailgate window can also be opened separately.

In general, though, the Pilot feels solid. Not just solid, but Tonka truck durable. The Pilot’s squared-off look doesn’t offend anyone, and the truck’s front fascia also makes it socially acceptable because it looks sympathetic, not truckish.

The entry price for a LX 2WD model is $34,820 before tax, freight and delivery charges. The Touring version we’re driving this week escalates the price ladder like the yodeling mountain climber in The Price is Right, reaching $48,420. Ouch.

But wait. Similarly-equipped rivals are also a wallet-drain. A Chevrolet Traverse 2LT AWD costs $54,720. A Mazda CX-9 GT AWD costs $49,790. A Nissan Pathfinder LE costs $52,548. A Toyota 4Runner Limited costs $49,665. A Dodge Durango Crew Plus costs $48,995. Actually, only the $46,999 Ford Explorer Limited and the $44,900 Toyota Highlander Limited are cheaper, although the latter doesn’t offer a rear-seat DVD.

With every passing year, the competition gets better and better, and the Pilot needs to stay in the game. In typical Honda product mid-cycle fashion, a facelift should arrive in 2012; we’ll see what other changes will be made.

Still, the Pilot is a competent, practical SUV that’s easy to live with. It maximizes interior space, it arguably consumes a reasonable amount of fuel, and its lack of aggressiveness prevents it from being conceived as an environmentally-unfriendly vehicle. Can the Pilot justify its presence in Honda’s line-up? We think so.

Source;
http://www.auto123.com/en/honda/pilot/2011/review?carid=1112301205&printable=1&artid=130547