Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-15-2005, 05:03 AM   #16
chris_knows
๑۩۞
 
chris_knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada Status:Trying to find my ish
Posts: 7,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
Remember, the Mazda 6 is basically the same vehicle.

Yeah, I just figured it would be RWD, and the SVT would just be built on that...Guess I learned something new today
__________________
chris_knows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2005, 05:12 AM   #17
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris_knows
Yeah, I just figured it would be RWD, and the SVT would just be built on that...Guess I learned something new today

The platform isn't easily converted into RWD, but AWD fit it quite well (Mazda 6/Fusion/Zephr/Milano). That's why it would be AWD mor ethan anything.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2005, 05:22 AM   #18
jedimario
Mr. Hot Wheels
 
jedimario's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Clemson University
Posts: 2,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
No, it won't be. If anything it will be AWD (ala Mazdaspeed 6).

Would be neat to see it get the turbocharged 2.3L from the MAzdaspeed 6.
o YEAH....

hey it's monday..
__________________


UNBAN WHAT
BAN BAV
jedimario is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2005, 04:28 PM   #19
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
Actually the Duratec is ranked on the OLD SAE system while the Accord is ranked on the NEW SAE system. Which means if you compare the two hack the Duratecs numbers down by about 4%-5% (or add 4-5% to the Accord's 244hp 211tq).

Which means it makes an ungodly 210hp and 195tq. For a DOHC 3.0L 24v V6 this isnt anything great, nor that good today.

Honda makes 244hp (34hp more) and 211tq (16tq more) with the same displacement V6 but with ONLY SOHC 24v heads, not DOHC 24v heads like Duratec. Let me also state this Honda engine has remained mostly physcially unchanged since it came out in 1997 at nearly the same power figures as the NEW 210hp DOHC Duratec of today (10 less hp ,same tq).

They have the SAME Honda J series V6 in the Accord, in the Acura RL making 300hp and 260tq still with the same SOHC 24v heads and only with .5L more displacement (3.5L).

Schooled.


Actually, the point is the Duratech is very undertuned. The SVT owners ahve already been getting 250-270 hp from N/A 2.5 liter versions, and over 300 from 3 liter versions. Kenne Bell already did a turbo version and with a single turbo and stock heads/crank/rods, and just a drop in compression and custom cams, pulled 450 hp. the block is EXTREMELY durable and well built, and hasn't even been stretched to 3.5 liters yet.

And while the Fusion is built from a stretched and widened Mazda 6 platform, with all new suspension, even the Mazda 6 was derived from the current Mondeo. So in essense, the Fusion is derived from the current Mondeo.

You need to get off this "if it isn't a Honda (or a select few other Japanese cars) it sucks" crap.

Funny thing, even my old 200 hp 2.5 liter SVT Contour was a better driver's car than any factory Accord has ever been, and the Fusion is faster and handles better...
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2005, 10:12 PM   #20
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
A.You need to get off this "if it isn't a Honda (or a select few other Japanese cars) it sucks" crap.

B.Funny thing, even my old 200 hp 2.5 liter SVT Contour was a better driver's car than any factory Accord has ever been,

C.and the Fusion is faster and handles better...

Okay, I already made a long post (15 minutes) but IE freezed when I clicked submit so this might be a shortened version...

A. I'm not even going to argue with you, you always try and use this against me and it has never worked, and it wont. I dont take that mantality, I was JUST pointing one thing out, I could of used another enigne if I had wanted to, but in this segment, THAT engine is the benchmark. Not saying the Duratec is absolute junk, just not up to par with other engines such as the Honda's. I just happen to know more about Hondas more than any other brand so I use that more often, simple as that. And if I think the Accord is the best family sedan, then so be it, you dont have to, you can think the Fusion is, but it is, my OPINION.

B. Obviously you have never driven an HFP Accord 6spd Coupe or an A-Spec TSX. Both of those are some of the best handling FWD's I've ever had the chance to drive, and they aren't light at all being 3200-3300lbs (but BOTH are factory Accords, with factory options, backed by factory warrentys, but ARE dealer installed). Dont forget the Accord SiR/Type-R (Although not sold in the US ever, sold elsewhere, but for the sake of the argument we'll stick to USDM). Both of those cars hold .9g+ on a 300ft skidpad on pretty skinny 215/225 tires, not to mention slalom numbers that are excellent for any FWD. Plus, the driving feedback you get from the tuned suspension and great steering is wonderful. But anyone can say most any performance oriented car has more driver feedback than an Accord. Look Chris, I'll even say it. My 300ZXTT has more driving feedback than USDM factory Accord ever.

C. A Fusion is faster than a more powerful less weight Accord, AND handles better? (Unless you meant faster/handles better than a SVT Contour, which i dont thin kthat either) Don't think so. Every place I've looked the performance numbers for the Accord topped the Fusion in nearly EVERY way (not to mention they all were the slower, worse handling 5AT version of the Accord; the 6MT version handles better and is faster, by a margin, magazines even got 14.5 out of the 6MT coupe Accord, and now Honda offers the 6MT in sedan form too). Since I just happen to have some numbers to the right of me I'll show you how you are so wrong in the performance area with that statement: C & D; December 2005

2006 Accord EX-V6 5AT Sedan vs. 2006 Fusion SEL-V6 6AT Sedan
Acceleration:
0-60(mph) = 6.6 vs. 7.4 (sec)
0-100(mph) = 16.6 vs. 19.7 (sec)
0-110(mph) = 20.6 vs. 25.8 (sec)
5-60(mph) = 7.1 vs. 7.8 (sec)
1/4 Mile = 15.1 vs. 15.7 (sec)
Top gear tests:
30-50 = 3.5 vs. 3.9 (sec)
50-70 = 4.9 vs. 5.8 (sec)
Braking:
70-0(mph) = 187 vs. 194 (ft)
"Handling":
300-ft skidpad = .79g vs. 83g
Lane Change = 60.7 vs. 58.5 (mph)

Looks like the ONLY thing the Fusion did better was the skidpad (go figure it has bigger tires). But the Accord stomped all over it in the lane change, and in other tests kills it in the slalom. Now we know slalom/lanechange and skidpad dont equate to strictly how a car handles. But even i nthis comparison they said the best handling car was the Accord (subjectively obviously). They even listed one of the Accord's highs as "Muscular Handling" and they didn't mention handling as a high for the Fusion. The lows for each car were this: Accord "Suspension muscles tell you about all the bumps, back-seat s[ace was the tightest in the group (4)"; Fusion "HVAC controls located down around your ankles, door pockets so small that stuff falls out, and, Has that hood come unlatched (referring to the poor fit and finish of the Fusion in comparison to the group)?" They even said in the article also, the Accord's 5AT was smoother and could find gears easier than any other in the group. They also said the Fusion's 6AT seemed unrefined in that it had a "jerky snatch into first gear" and "a few drivers reported some hunting between 5th and 6th gears at highway speeds".

So anyways, that's it
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2005, 02:00 AM   #21
importluva
Obsessed with imports
 
importluva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,060
I can't believe you guys are comparing 0-60 times and what not between these cars! The potential buyers can't possible care how well their family sedan does on a skidpad. "Muscular Handling" bwhahaha

That aside, i really do like how the front end looks. Definitely fresh from the old taurus. Any stats on the future SVT model?
__________________
AJ
BB6
FC3S
importluva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2005, 02:23 AM   #22
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by importluva
I can't believe you guys are comparing 0-60 times and what not between these cars! The potential buyers can't possible care how well their family sedan does on a skidpad. "Muscular Handling" bwhahaha

That aside, i really do like how the front end looks. Definitely fresh from the old taurus. Any stats on the future SVT model?

HE said the Fusion performed better, I rebuttled with statistics. Simple as that.

You'd be suprised about some buyers that buy Accords. Afterall they wouldn't offer a 6spd Manual on the coupe and sedan (Along with a tuned suspension and front tower brace with it) if people didnt want a little performance in mind. Not to mention the HFP package offered on the Accord (stiffer suspension, lower stance, bigger wheels/tires...). The definate buying masses want the no frills Automatic version, but Honda does sell 6spd equipped model (About 5% or so). They dont leave the enthusist behind, just like Ford is not going to leave them behind either with the SVT Fusion.

"Muscular handling" was obviously in COMPARISON to the group it was tested against, the Fusion, 2006 Sonata and 2006 Camry. It wasn't saying it has muscular handling like a Lotus Elise... Sorry you failed to see the connection.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2005, 03:01 PM   #23
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
HE said the Fusion performed better, I rebuttled with statistics. Simple as that.

I said the Fusion performs better than the SVT Contour. Your reading comprehension skills suck.
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2005, 07:04 PM   #24
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
I said the Fusion performs better than the SVT Contour. Your reading comprehension skills suck.

I acknowleged that you MIGHT of said that... did you not read my post, you jumbled everything up in the same sentence, so it was kind of hard to comprehend which you really meant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
Funny thing, even my old 200 hp 2.5 liter SVT Contour was a better driver's car than any factory Accord has ever been, and the Fusion is faster and handles better...

Anyone could of taken that as you meant the Fusion is faster and handles better than the Accord. Not to mention by inference skills, you could of really meant the Fusion was a better driver's car than the Accord, since you MEANT it was better than the SVT Contour which you previously said was better than the Accord! Ah-ha! That took a lot of deducting, but it makes sense.

But anyways, this is what I wrote since you seemed to ignore it and tried an insult gut-check that missed...

Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
A Fusion is faster than a more powerful less weight Accord, AND handles better? (Unless you meant faster/handles better than a SVT Contour, which i dont thin kthat either) Don't think so.

Now do you see?
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2005, 07:22 PM   #25
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
I acknowleged that you MIGHT of said that...

i DID say that, and so your rambling post was pretty much showing that you wanted the argument more than you wanted to understand something.


Quote:
you jumbled everything up in the same sentence, so it was kind of hard to comprehend which you really meant.

Sorry, thought it was pretty clear what it was discussing. And to be honest, even re-reading your post it was hard to make out where you were "admitting" I might have said that (buried in a parenthetical comment in the middle of a huge rant)
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2005, 09:35 PM   #26
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
i DID say that, and so your rambling post was pretty much showing that you wanted the argument more than you wanted to understand something.




Sorry, thought it was pretty clear what it was discussing. And to be honest, even re-reading your post it was hard to make out where you were "admitting" I might have said that (buried in a parenthetical comment in the middle of a huge rant)

I never miscomprehended anything, just to make sure what you typed could be misleading, I had that statement checked by my college English professor, and she even said it could go either way, that it needed to be more precise. And reguardless if you think it was "Buried" (just as big as anything else, but in parenthesis, wait is this buried too?), it was there, just in case you DID mean otherwise, but I took out the time to rebuttal anywho, didnt hurt a thing.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 06:12 PM   #27
LeDrew145
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 15
...sad

I mean no offense here, but does a measly argument over a goddamn sentance mean that much that you have to get it checked out by an english professor, its just sad plan old sad.
LeDrew145 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 06:20 PM   #28
hondaman
I drive a Buick.
 
hondaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Somewhere in Alabama
Posts: 1,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeDrew145
I mean no offense here, but does a measly argument over a goddamn sentance mean that much that you have to get it checked out by an english professor, its just sad plan old sad.
Oh, but nitpicking is just too much fun!
__________________
hondaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 06:27 PM   #29
LeDrew145
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 15
Lol

I've come to see that while reading posts, but its nice to see that most of yas can get into pretty heated arguments then not bring it over into another post
LeDrew145 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 07:24 PM   #30
PontiacFan27
CF Extraordinaire
 
PontiacFan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Grove City, PA
Posts: 1,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
Actually the Duratec is ranked on the OLD SAE system while the Accord is ranked on the NEW SAE system. Which means if you compare the two hack the Duratecs numbers down by about 4%-5% (or add 4-5% to the Accord's 244hp 211tq).

Which means it makes an ungodly 210hp and 195tq. For a DOHC 3.0L 24v V6 this isnt anything great, nor that good today.

Honda makes 244hp (34hp more) and 211tq (16tq more) with the same displacement V6 but with ONLY SOHC 24v heads, not DOHC 24v heads like Duratec. Let me also state this Honda engine has remained mostly physcially unchanged since it came out in 1997 at nearly the same power figures as the NEW 210hp DOHC Duratec of today (10 less hp ,same tq).

They have the SAME Honda J series V6 in the Accord, in the Acura RL making 300hp and 260tq still with the same SOHC 24v heads and only with .5L more displacement (3.5L).

Schooled.


You and this SAE system crap. Its funny how every time you mention a Honda it goes up, but any other company it goes down, without showing any proof. Why dont you get your head out of hondas ass once in a while?
__________________
PontiacFan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:33 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.