fuel_sipping

You can get an Accord Sport in an color, unless you want the MT. Then, you can only get it in Grey or Black. This may also be relevant to the crash test question: http://www.hondainamerica.com/news/honda-leads-industry-first-development-visualization-technology-advance-study-crash-test How was the build quality, fit/finish and such?

Vertical? I'm confused by what you means, as the orientation looks to be standard (parallel to crankshaft). As for intercooling, why wouldn't you use air to air? And the single turbo is likely bolted directly to the cylinder head, which has an integrated "manifold". Should be interesting to see how they perform.

They are beginning the transition to 6-speeds for the heavy vehicles, as evident in the higher end models (Acuras and top Odyssey), but it seems for the rest of the range they are working to develop and build up their CVTs. Maybe not the most sound choice, speculatively, but that seems to be getting the blunt end of their R&D attention right now. All these things are just a matter of free speculation to me... Here is a more comprehensive article on Autoblog, which highlights their planned efficiency dominance. http://www.autoblog....gment-within-t/

All their past and current hybrids have had the auto-stop (which actually started in 2000 with gen1 Insights). Now, I know the hybrids aren't quite high volume, they are all available in the US. Honda has also been using VCM (variable cylinder management) more and more, starting in around '05-'06. Those things aside, i'm just as baffled as you when it comes to the neglect of DI stateside. I really shouldn't attempt to answer based upon my complete uncertainty, but the only thing that I could think of is perhaps prolonged R&D, while thinking they could leave well enough alone...? I don't know off-hand, but I'm sure they have been implementing it in something over the years, and fine tuning.

Honda started using DI in Japan around '02-'03, had Auto-stop in 2001, and they have been practicing cylinder size-reduction since the beginning... lol

It doesn't look so bad in person... While the front seems much more composed, the back end will take a little bit of getting used to. Instead of thinking how much it looks like an Aztec, I try to think that it would look a lot better with a spare tire on the back like the previous generations. Overall, I don't think it is really that bad, and I do believe it will sell well, at least for the foreseeable future. The interior is not too bad. There are many hard plastics, but they feel pretty good to the touch. The door panels are designed much like the Odysseys', so they don't really cater to the "rugged" look. They are appeasing enough, though, with multiple storage nooks. The one I've seen was an EX-L with Nav. The front area is dominated by a fixed center console, but with a few pockets, cup holders, and a good sized slide-door compartment. The gauges are prettier, with a large analog speedo in the middle, analog tach, water and fuel gauges surrounding it. The speedometer needle floats around the inside of the gauge, and on the outside of a digital display. It also has a color Multi-info display on the dash, ala Civic. There is also a pattern inlay across the dash that mimics a marble-y look. Interior space is about the same, but probably a bit more than the PG. One cool feature was the folding rear seats. MUCH improved design over the outgoing models. I won't spoiler that though Final note. This was top of the line, I'm assuming, and it had a 2.4L. Grain of salt info, just saying.

worse yet, when I see this come to mind...

I'm wondering though, if Honda has made half the changes to the Civic HF as Chevy did to the Cruze ECO. Not knowing what they did (if they did similar to what Chevy did) Honda hopes to achieve with the Civic HF a targeted 41 MPG from the 1.8L Non-turbocharged engine that it uses. If it had yet a more efficient motor, maybe it would oust the Cruze ECO in MPG. Oh wait, that's what the hybrid is. That said, I think there is potential room for improvement on both ends.

I just saw this commercial about 2 minutes ago. I was quite shocked and pleasantly surprised by the tone and presence of the ad. Sweet looking Jeep, in and out too!

You forgot to mention the two cup holder down low between the seats, rear of the hand brake. :AH-HA_wink: And a center armrest is an optional accessory, but imho, it's not worth the price. Also, it takes away the use of those two aforementioned cup holders. lol Great review. I drive these things all the time at work (Honda lot tech) and can truly say I agree with you. Mostly I agree that they are fun to drive and the interior is rather poor (material and mixed emotions design wise). What bugs me most is that those same types of materials were carried over to the Insight. Luckily, the Insight interior is a little more "pleasant" to be in. I'm sure most people would agree, anyhow...

I know this is an oldy, but there seem to be more pics now. Bumping it up rather then making a new thread. Courtesy of: http://www.netcarshow.com/nissan/2009-370z/ The more I look over it the more I like it. It looks smaller for some reason too.

Ok, I don't know why I've been shying away from typing anything here, but I've driven the new Fit. In fact we got one in a day or two after I posted my last comment. It was sort of a surprise since we weren't expecting one for some time. It was a silver on black Sport model with auto tranny. The car itself seems a little bigger all around. Idk if it because of the large glass triangles in front of the doors, which excentuate how the greenhouse appears to have grown. Idk. Regardless, the car is still rather small. The front looks pretty sporty and imho way better then the last gen due mostly in part to the better looking head lights. From different angles, the front also looks like what I could image a Euro Ford looking like. It's sharp and aggressive looking i suppose. Of course the side of the car looks better too, as the lines are more sculpted and aggressive. The back is a little subjective, but by no means terrible looking. Idk it just looks odd at some views. The interior is nice. First thing you notice when you sit down is that the seats are more comfy. Next you might notice the leather wrapped wheel. Feeling the position of it, you might get a feeling that something isn't right. No problem, since it now telescopes to fit most any driving position. Next you might play with the controls... All the A/C knobs are lined up almost vertical to each other, close to the driver. The radio is just off to the right, Not so close but not too far. The controls themselves are nice. The gauges are nice too. Not only do are they electroluminous on the inside, but the indicator lights (like the hashes for speedometer intervals) light up as a brilliant blue color. Inside, the plastics used also seem to be a nice choice. They feel soft and blend well. I haven't had much time behind the wheel yet but I can say it drives well. As good as you would expect I suppose. It's hard to tell since the car wasn't broken in yet (lol obviously it had like 3 miles) I couldn't tell you how much difference the additional power makes. It did seem to have plenty of power to lug itself around good at low engine speeds though. BAH, i'm tired and can't think of much else to say. We currently have one sitting on our lot (as of earlier) that I've been meaning to test out, since it's a 5 spd. Overall, It seems like a good amount of car for the money.

I really can't wait for the '09s to come in at work. I just want to see how similarly different they are from the '08s. I doubt i'll be able to tell much of a difference though, seeing how I haven't driven a Fit in just about a month. Of course, that's how long it's been since we sold our last '08. Fits really are hot cars, and for a number of reasons.

lol, You need not describe the pros and cons of owning a MKIII to me. I've seen it all. Infact I currently have only 300 miles on a fresh rebuild in my 90T. This car is so unlike Toyota's of today...

I just wish there were more around that haven't been driven/rusted to death.

I'm gonna bite the bullet and just say it, I love my old Toyotas... Late/mid 80's:

We got a coupe in the other day, Ex 4 banger, white/tan. The exterior is suprisingly different. I mean I know it doesn't share any sheetmetal with the sedan, but the car has a whole different vibe, as it should. First off, the hood gap doesn't look as bad in person as it does in the pics. lol This was on a white car too so I figured it'd be obvious, but it's not too bad. The back end of the car is akward IMHO. Maybe it'll look better with a lip spoiler (haven't even seen pics of that) but really the whole rear is kind of... idk. I was waiting to see the car in person before I judged it, because of the back, and i'll have to say I was let down. The front though, the front is quite nice. The most obvious difference is the headlights have no bulge (yah!) And it seems lower and more streamlined. The car flows well I guess and is a likely improvement in most people's eyes from the '07s. Personally, I generally like it. Past that, I have no other comments.

First off, sorry for any mistakes or typos, it is late here. I have driven three '08 Accords now, and washed two hah. Two of them were 4cyl, (LX and EX-L) and the other was an EX-L navi 4cyl. It may be apparent now, I work at my local Honda dealership, but im in no way a Honda fanboy, at all. My first impression upon seeing the new Accord was wow, it does look bigger, inside and out. But by bigger, I mean both plump and spacious. Once I got my hands on the EX-L (needed cleanup for the showroom), I began to look through it and and see how different it really was. On the inside, the panels all seem very similar to the previous gen. Material qualities seem decent in some areas and excellent in others (the wood grain i might add looks very nice). One place I felt the plastic was too dull and cheap (imo) is the center console (shifter/cup holder area). It is a matte black material, as present in all the previous gen LXs in place of higher grade surfaces. I was surprised it carried out to the EX-L in the same place. That is just nitpicking though, as most of the other plasitcs and such fit well and look/feel soft. As for the changes in dimensions, there are a few places I can see that the length got "wasted". For instance, the engine compartment is much more pushed forward, and on the 4cyl models you can see a great deal of space behind the engine. iirc, the '07s had a more push back engine (closer to the windshield cowling). As for interior space, it seems as though things were moved around to make more space. The dash is sloped toward the front of the car more on either side (which makes the radio in the middle appear to protrude toward the back), and the door panels are much more narrower. All the Accord features are there and then some, just juggled around and presented differently. That is one reason why I feel many people will see that while it may look "like a Bimmer", it is unmistakably, just the next evolution of an Accord. The navi is no longer touch screen, for those who care lol. The same goes for the outside, but in a different manor. It does look like a Bimmer sometimes, but park a silver one and just stand back. Walk around it if you'd like, but stand back. What you will see in front of you is unmistakable an Accord. It does look nice though, at least it's different. The headlights. Siegen mentioned them... They give the car some plumpness. That's all I'll say about those. I will say the front is much more boxy, but it appears and very well may be more aerodynamic. I attribute it to the new grill stand in a rather upright position. Following the lines over and around the front, the nose looks almost like a bullet when at a certain angle.... It is so hard to explain, mainly because I'm not sure what to think of it now. Overall I like the design, mainly because it is fresh and rather new. You'd have to see it in person to know. As for the back end, well... I like it more then I though I would. To some it might come of as bland and droopy, but it is surprisingly fresh and sculpted well (not as well as the CTS though imo). The ride was substantial. Never really got on it or shot through any turns, but it feels very smooth and firm. If you have ever driven a previous gen Accord, it's much the same I suppose. Soft, yet firm and rigid. Power is about the same, but transfer felt much smoother. I'm not quite sure what else to say other then I can't wait for the V6s to arrive. All in all, I found the new Accord to be a honest surprise, but also a faint familiarity. The tooling is all Honda's here and now stuff, and the design holds some soon to be cues. It is a great car and an apparent improvement from the last generation IMO. lol What's up with all the hype about this car? It's just the new and improved Accord. Take it as you will. :AH-HA_wink:

I think he is refering to the MA46/7s. Its widely debated here as to which generation is the first of the Supras, but most agree the '78 model A series chassis powered by M series motor was the first. In Japan, the A70s are often claimed to be since the Supra name wasn't used on the MA6-s over there. Instead they were called Celica XX. I too would love to have an MA46 and do a 2jzgte swap. 320 stock horses in a car that light would rock. Like griffon said though, it wouldn't return as an AE86. That specific name goes to the e86 corollas powered by A series engines. In the case of the new one, it would be an NZE13- or something like that due to the NZ engine series and the fact that the corollas are now into 130s i believe. Anyway, I don't expect to see this PS'd Scion on the streets anytime soon. Im an old school Toyota guy, Ill admit that on a GM board because I respect anything. New Toyotas just do nothing for me... That said, I own an '90 MA71 Supra and a 93 Geo prizm, which is essentially an AE101 Corolla. Speaking of AE111s, they had a sweet little 4-banger. 20v vvti with ITBs. Its a shame it never made it over here.

I get paid to take that stuff out of new cars. At many dealers though, mine included, they sometimes put those back in when the car's detailed. Or maybe someone just left them in there. Clean Alero. Do your best to keep it that way.

There's a video here too: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Gener...e.photopanel..1

I love the new ISs, even if all of you think the mirrors are huge. After driving one a 350 for a week I was hard pressed to give it up. That one in the pic up there looks sexy. I wish the 250 could have a tad more power, even though Ive never driven one. It seems as though Toyota has done some good to make these heavy cars move though.

I agree. I work as a lot tech at my local Honda dealership, so I spend a lot of time in these cars. I try not to be biased and Im not going to rag on anyone. Though, in all honesty ive only sat in/driven one post Lutz GM. It was an 07 Impala that someone traded in. I wasnt to fond of the interior design but fit and all seemed very good. Anyway, most of the honda interiors are different and some even odd, but they seem to work well with the vehicles. I would say that is a +1 for design. Materials are good and much less plasticy then several of the newer used Hondas ive driven. Though I have notice that even between models lx>ex>ex-l some interior pieces change. In an lx civic the other day I noticed a really cheap plastic in place of a much nicer material. It actually made the car feel cheaper as a whole. Idk, IMHO the civic interior (esp the coupe) is nice and I really dont have many complaints. I think tomorrow Im going to run over to the local GM dealers and look at some cars though for research purposes... To clear that up, the 14.2 would be the mileage on "Trip A" When you push the odometer button thing (bottom right of gauges) it will switch between 'A' 'B' and the total mileage. Because the mileage grows, the 'A' is offset. I think the 'B' appears above it. As for the fat bars, I completely agree. After looking into it too, The upper display changes completly to show oil life, more fuel economy crap, or total milage. Thats probably why they're oddly spaced. You'd be foolish to even consider it.. No matter what brand a car is, you should know you're only buying a car.

Did anyone see this chop by AM at TOV? I'll still have to wait and see it in person.

Even better would be the 2GR-FSE 306hp V6 from the IS350. It performs well in a heavy sedan, so why not in a sports coupe? And another option could include the supposed 2UR-GSE V8 soon to be released in the Is-F... Scary prospects from Toyota. Still id have my doubts about it all. I'd kind of like to know where this rumor came from. And 91z4me, the FT-HS is only a concept. What he is suggesting is somewhat different as the FT-HS was only introduced as a hybrid. The Supra should not have to be made affordable, just made right. There is a market for the namesake, but I do not know how far it could be stretched. The car would just have to be really good at everthing, hence the Latin rooted name. http://mkiv.com/specifications/product_Inf...gy/sep20_07.jpg This chart is kind of shows how the last generation was to be marketed over other Toyota sports cars. (why paseo is down there idk ) A not-so-high-endish Supra would be a RWD Celica, just like in the '80s. Of course a revived RWD Celica would be cool too... As a frontie, the tC might even do ok with a remodeling. Just my $.02