Wednesday, November 06, 2013

A Quickie of a Test Drive: The 2013 Honda Accord 2.0 VTI-L

.

The ninth generation Honda Accord was recently launched here in Malaysia and I managed a short drive in the 2013 Accord 2.0 Vti-L variant. This car sits in the category where it is usually bought by senior managers of companies or by the companies themselves. It is aimed squarely against other large sized Japanese and Korean sedans in the RM150,000 or thereabouts price range and this range of cars is what most Malaysians aspire to have in their driveway, front porch, garage or apartment car park.


Most would want more, but local taxes and excise duties mean that this is usually the threshold amount that most would want to spend on a car. As such, the Honda Accord along with its competitors like the Toyota Camry and the Nissan Teana, all large Japanese sedans fight for a place in the hearts of Malaysian car buyers who want to show that they've made it in life (to a certain extent).

The Design

The Honda Accord 2.0VTI-L is a typical large sized Honda. The ninth generation Honda Accord is a slimmer car than the previous model. It's like the Accord went through a diet and came up looking svelter. It loses the ungainly overhangs of the previous car and there is a more cohesive look to the Accord compared to the previous model.

But whatever you do, do not buy this car with the optional Modulo bodykit. This adds all that unnecessary bulk (and more) to the car and makes it ungainly. And if you compare this car with the current Toyota Camry in terms of looks, this wins by a million miles. If you compared this car with the Nissan Teana it wins too (but the Teana is huge, some people like huge. Small people usually). If you compared it to the Mazda 6 it isn't as fashion forward as the 6, but it positively will not look outdated within the next three of four days when it becomes outdated.

Aside from that I also have to state that this is the first Accord in a zillion years that eschews the double wishbone setup for a simpler McPherson style strut setup. Does it make a difference? I'll tell you about it later.


The interior

All Accords come with standard an 8-inch 480 x 320 pixel WQVGAresolution LCD display screen, single angle reverse camera, Honda's audio system which includes Bluetooth, USB connector, dual zone automatic climate control and alloy wheels. The VTI-L has navigation system but does not have the left hand blind spot camera, LED daytime running lamps, headlamps, and tail lamps; and an adaptive cruise control system.

Honda must have bench marked certain continental makes as the quality of the switchgear is good. Materials used are soft to the touch where it counts and it the double screened dashboard looks like it came from a car of a higher grade. I like the overall feel inside. Every switch, button or knob I touch seems to have some work gone into how it feels whilst operating them.

The driving position is typically Honda which means it is easy to get comfortable whilst driving one. There are enough adjustments to suit almost everyone.

Rear passenger space is good and similar to the outgoing model It was also stated in the design brief that this new Accord is slightly smaller than the previous one as people who bought Accords like things a little smaller (which must be the opposite from every other car brand these days). But from where I'm sitting, there hasn't been much space lost over the previous model. I should know as a business partner uses the eight generation Accord and I have a frequent passenger in it.

Drivetrain

You get a 2.0liter 16 valve SOHC engine in it that makes about 154Bhp and about 190Nm torque. It runs through a 5 speed torque convertor gearbox. This specification is pretty basic and it isn't a Honda 'Earth Dream' engine like the 2.4liter variant. Malaysian Accords however run the 5 speed automatic from the previous model unlike in Japan and the United States which run a CVT box.

I would prefer a newer 6 speed box for more ratios, but I suppose this is still better than buying a Toyota Camry 2.0 which still runs a, gasp, 4 speed automatic or a CVT for that matter.

Driving the darn thing.

It's a Honda, therefore it is actually decent to drive. It isn't overly exciting to drive but it surely isn't dull. What strikes you when you first get in and start the car up (with a starter button) is that the car is quiet. You slot it into gear and as you bimble off into traffic you'd notice that it is pretty quiet. Specs say that this car has active noise control which cancels out unwanted noise via speakers pushing out similar frequencies. As such, at low speeds the Accord 2.0VTI-L is almost as quiet as a Camry 2.0 (which, whilst sad to say, is the refinement benchmark in this category). Tyre roar is minimal compared to the previous model and a mighty big improvement. The gear changes are smooth too with nary a jolt unless you're pushing it.

But refinement takes a back seat when you gun the throttle pedal. The engine above 4,500rpm is coarse and does not have a mechanically refined sound to it. It sounds like something industrial and it isn't like Honda VTEC engines of days gone by. This is because it is a single camshaft design that is tuned for economy (there is a stupid ECO button for owners to play with if they want to – Honda says you'll save more petrol if you prod it...oooooooooh) and isn't tuned to wail like a banshee. This also means that by 5,500rpm or so the car feels just noisy, but isn't really going anywhere. It would do the 100km/h sprint in around 11 seconds but it will be darn noisy whilst doing so. This still is a whole second faster than the quieter at high rpm Toyota Camry. So I'd just drive this car a tad gentler most of the time by being smooth on the throttle inputs if I want refinement in this Accord.

And when it comes to ride and handling I think the Accord rides firmly but not uncomfortably. Body movements are well controlled and if you flung the Accord into a corner it would obey you better than other contemporaries like the Teana and the Camry. The Mazda 6 would outgrip it but it rides like a plank compared to all of the other cars mentioned including the Accord. So did I feel the Accord needs its old double wishbones? Not really. The car steers well with good weighting in the wheel but like most modern helms a little lacking in outright feel. The car takes sharp bends predictably even on the short drive I had around the Penchala Link area. If any of you want an example, a sweeping right hander would be taken a good 10km/h faster than either the big Nissan or the big Toyota before understeer sets in.

This car has a good balance between being sporty when you want it and a nice enough ride for almost every occasion. It is quite easy to test whether the ride is good as the surrounding area has got tons of construction and potholes as well as spilled concrete everywhere. Things does not get jarring for the inhabitants of the Accord over rough roads.

Conclusion

Even though the drive was pretty short, a whole lot of stuff shone through (I'm getting good at this) . It is simple, honest and filled with goodies for the price Honda is asking. To get a similarly equipped Camry or Mazda 6 you'd pay a good RM10,000 more. This Accord also adds good looks that are neither too fashion forward nor shaped like a tank (and you know which uncle car looks like a tank -hint, hint...its the Toyota). I believe that pure refinement but coupled with looks like a tank would not be a good buy. Looks as well as handling over refinement like the Mazda 6 would also not do it after a tired day's work. The Nissan Teana is actually about to get a model change next year and it has ungainly overhangs front and rear over a short looking wheelbase. I wouldn't go for that too.

And so, aside from the unrefined engine noise at high rpm (which isn't a deal breaker in my opinion), I have to say that if I were looking for a company car in this price range, this is it.

2013 Honda Accord 2.0 VTI-L Specifications
Base Price: RM149,800
Body: 4-door SEDAN
Mechanical Orientation: Front Wheel Drive
Engine: 4 cylinder 2.0-litre SOHC VTEC normally aspirated
Power: 154 BHP
Torque: 190 NM
Transmission: 5speed automatic
Weight: approx 1530 kg
Wheels: 225/50r17

0-62 mph: approx 11 seconds
Top Speed: about 200 km/h
Fuel Consumption: 6.5l/100km

For: Low speed refinement, interior quality, exterior looks, decent handling
Against: Industrial and therefore uninteresting sounding engine noise too loud at high revs. Needs more sound proofing up front. Avoid the Modulo bodykit.




10 comments:

MarktheMan said...

this honda looks awesome! I love honda. have had several of them. great post


Click Here

Rossi said...

Dear author, honestly, quite a good review. I am considering new car, which happens to be 2.0 litre Camry / Accord/ Teana class. Comfort is my top priority.

What do you think of this Accord 2.0's high speed refinement in comparison to Camry or Teana?
- wind and road noise at higher speed (say 100 - 150km/h), I see that you mentioned about low speed refinement, but nothing about high speed refinement.

- road noise over coarse road surface, road noise
- Ride comfort around town, and Ride comfort on the highway.

Some people did mention Honda's ANC gives them uncomfortable sensations, you experienced any of that?

Rigval Reza said...

Hello,
Nope, no problems with the active noise control for me.
If you're looking at the 2.0 category with the three cars mentioned and with comfort taking precedence over the rest this is what I think:
Around town:
Camry for the silence and soft ride, teana is also as quiet but slightly stiffer ride. Accord is harder than that but as quiet if you don't gun it all the time.
Highway bombing:
Below 110kmh all about equal. On the highway the sportier ride of the accord makes it the driver's choice with the teana after that and the camry last. Comfort wise it is the teana with its cvt gearbox unless you put pedal to the floor and things may change. Camry 2.0 isn't a good choice even though it is comfortable as it has a four speed automatic instead of the six speed of the 2.5. This will lead to high revs at cruising and worse fuel economy.
Actually the camry 2.0 is compromised by its looks and its gearbox. I would rather live with the accord which looks better and has a 5 speeder.

The teana whilst quiet, refined could actually be te best choice but I personally do not like the feell of a cvt gearbox unless it has tons of torque which a 2.0n.a does not have. This car could be the best choice for you if comfort in the city and on the highways is what youre looking for.

Rigval Reza said...

Oh, personally, I'd take the Accord among these three. It would give me that planted feel on highways compared to the other two as well as driving pleasure. The camry feels floaty over 150kmh and i prefer to drive a car that does not require me to concentrate harder than what i usually have to at higher than usual speeds. The teana is fine, a family member has the previous generation one and its okay for a big boat of a car

Unknown said...

Hallo there Rigval,
Thanks for your time and effort to provide quite some useful insights, these type of info is exactly what I am looking for. If you don't mind, I do have further questions....

1) At highway speeds of say 110km/h to 140km/h (that's the speed I normally go), among the three (Teana 2.0, Accord 2.0, Camry 2.0, lets throw Optima 2.0 into the mix for the sake of more comparisons),...whats your opinion in terms of
- NVH, road noise and wind noise, which is the most refined?
I am assuming engine noise should be less of a factor at higher speed as it is masked by louder road noise. (though Camry's shorter 4 speed gearing may be a disadvantage).

- Accord feels most planted at highway speed of say 150km/h,...I am assuming more comfortable as well,...or is it on the firm side too?

2) Is Accord's firmer suspension going to be abit too harsh in poor town road conditions? This is a tough one to answer I know, because ride quality is a very subjective thing, some folks love super soft floaty feeling, some folks love firm and controlled feeling.

3.) Engine performance of the 2.0 (Optima, Camry, Teana, Accord) -
which has the best acceleration 0 to 100km/h, and which has best in-gear accelerations for overtaking. All about the same?
- Though comfort is top priority, I would sometimes still go all-out.

I see that Honda CRV 2.0 which has almost same weight as Accord, same engine, same tire width of 225/17 (probably same gearing?) has quite a poor figure of quoted 12.7 second to 100km/h. Is Accord about the same, or it is slightly better due to front wheel drive transmission?
Am I correct to assume that CRV permanently drives to the rear wheel when 4WD is not selected,...thus compromising its on the wheel power efficiency vs FWD Accord?

Do you feel a noticeable difference between Accord 2.0 vs CRV 2.0 acceleration or you can hardly feel any difference at speeds below 100km/h?


4) Seat comfort and overall comfort for rear passengers - which car provides best comfort for rear passengers? Though Accord has largest space, I believe all of them should serve more than enough rear passenger room.
But seat comfort at rear? Ride comfort for rear passengers? NVH for rear passengers?

Unknown said...

Hallo again Rigval..its me again, sorry for the rude sounding nick. I just got mixed it up with my gmail account, where this rude nick can appear as the username.
46lanciau = rossi in the previous post.

In terms of choice of car for this segment, probably we are on quite a very similar thinking. Cannot stand the looks of the Camry, and thinking that Accord is the best all round choice.

Only thing is, I would need to test and see if the ride quality is too firm for me (I am old man type who prefers soft, but not floaty please). Guess you can't have the best of everything.

Another potential drawback of the Accord as pointed by you is loud sounding engine at high revs (and also pointed by Paultan). So, I have to test if I can tolerate it. Even though I am having comfort as top priority, due to the "under-powered" nature of the 2.0 for such heavy car, I am afraid I may occasionally need high revs to get it going around town, or in the highway when overtaking cars. Even though the Accord 2.0 has got 5 speed, I felt its not enough for this heavy and underpowered engine,...the spread of the gears are too wide, 1st gear probably 60km/h, 2nd gear probably 110km/h, 3rd gear probably 170 plus km/h, 4th gear up to 200km/h or more top speed, with 5th gear for cruising.
With such a wide spread of gears and peaky engine, and heavy body, man,...I believe that for my type of driving, the car is going to be occasionally forced to drop gears and occasionally with revs about 4000 rpm. If the Accord has 6 speed, then it would definitely help a lot,...I really think a lot. with closer spread of ratios to help acceleration, and reduce the tendency for high revs.



I am also looking forward to next year's new Teana 2.0, though disappointed when I learnt it has the same engine as current.

Rigval Reza said...

Hello,

Boy, you're getting too deep in trying to make a choice. Try taking a deep breath and see with what you heart wants instead of just specs and figures. (and resale value).
I think the Accord is the best because the exterior looks, interior looks, quality of switchgear (close to a continental) and that slightly firm ride (very audi-like in some ways) makes it a nicer car to drive than the camry or the teana. It is also the best for highway driving but not the best for our sometimes pot holed urban roads. But is isn't bad as the car feels pretty solid. The teana and camry are more plush on these urban surfaces. Front and rear.

Both suffer from looking ungainly but offer plush barge-like ride.

But you cannot expect all out power from a 1500kg 150-160hp car. 100bhp/ton means that you get average performance and in real life everything is quite close unless it has a real handicap (like 4 speeds - BUT this is only at speeds above 120kmh IMO which also limits the top speed of the camry to around 180-185kmh).

Do not bother with the Optima as it still has some small niggles comapred to the japs. It looks good but lacks headroom due to the sunroof and handling isn't really that sorted.

Gosh. Your queries are really long. And BTW, the CRV does not accelerate as fast as the accord as AWD suffers from more drivetrain loss than FWD. this is why it is slower than a similar engined accord.

Unknown said...

How about Honda Accord vs Hyundai Sonata?

Rigval Reza said...

I'd still take the Accord. The Sonata is slightly overstyled in a fussy kinda way. The Accord drives and handles better. The roofline of the Sonata slopes in such a way that taller guys will have to duck a little. It may be quieter but aside from that I don't see anything that would make me choose it over the Accord.

And if I were to buy a full sized Hyundai, I'd take the i40 over this. But I'd take the Accord over both.

Regards

Anonymous said...

Hi, how do you find accord comparing to mazda 6? Is accord still better choice?