2018 Accord (10th generation)

**niky** · June 12th, 2017 12:12 AM

Stick the 1.5T in there and there's a chance the Accord will be able to break 20 km/l on the highway.

The Americans are getting impatient for the 2.0T. Once that's in the Accord, there's a chance of Honda finally selling a 2.0T Civic Si instead of sticking it with an uprated 1.5T.

**babkalakal** · June 14th, 2017 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by niky

Stick the 1.5T in there and there's a chance the Accord will be able to break 20 km/l on the highway.

The Americans are getting impatient for the 2.0T. Once that's in the Accord, there's a chance of Honda finally selling a 2.0T Civic Si instead of sticking it with an uprated 1.5T.

Hi Nicky!

I read somewhere that the 2.0 turbo costs a lot more than the 1.5 turbo. I'm totally unaware if these two engines are dissimilar enough to warrant this discrepancy. They said a 30 plus grand 2.0 turbo civic si would be too much for buyers but the type r as a halo model for the civic and the accord can carry this higher price point.

**Egan101** · June 14th, 2017 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by babkalakal

Hi Nicky!

I read somewhere that the 2.0 turbo costs a lot more than the 1.5 turbo. I'm totally unaware if these two engines are dissimilar enough to warrant this discrepancy. They said a 30 plus grand 2.0 turbo civic si would be too much for buyers but the type r as a halo model for the civic and the accord can carry this higher price point.

An 80-100hp difference in power output between the 1.5T and 2.0T models will surely be something to consider with regards to the price difference. Also, the 2.0T model will be sporting a 10-speed AT tranny as compared to the CVT tranny for the 1.5T.

Like with the current gen Accord in terms of local pricing, the difference is around 500k between the base-model 2.4L 4-banger and the higher trim 3.5L V6.

**niky** · June 14th, 2017 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by babkalakal

Hi Nicky!

I read somewhere that the 2.0 turbo costs a lot more than the 1.5 turbo. I'm totally unaware if these two engines are dissimilar enough to warrant this discrepancy. They said a 30 plus grand 2.0 turbo civic si would be too much for buyers but the type r as a halo model for the civic and the accord can carry this higher price point.

Basically, what Egan said.

The 2.0T is specifically being shoehorned in as a replacement for the V6, and the extra torque mandates the use of that 10-speed auto instead of the CVT (the CVT probably can't take the torque).

It's just that with the introduction of the 2.0T in the USA, the chances of a 2.0T Civic increase, whether or not they can get one down to current Si prices.

As it is, the only way to offer a Civic Si is with the 1.5T, which is definitely cheaper, but not quite as tuner-friendly as the 2.0. Reportedly, stock boost for the Civic 1.5T Si is around 20psi... which is insane for an everyday factory gasoline car.

**Egan101** · June 14th, 2017 06:12 PM

The upcoming Accord 2.0T engine might have similar power and torque output as the stock WRX (270hp/350Nm) or the EUDM Passat 2.0T (280hp/350Nm). Honda's CVT may not be rated for more torque than the CVT used by Subaru on the WRX and Forester XT (good for up to 400Nm). However, the new Accord 2.0T will be the first FWD car to offer a 10-speed AT.

**babkalakal** · June 15th, 2017 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by Egan101

The upcoming Accord 2.0T engine might have similar power and torque output as the stock WRX (270hp/350Nm) or the EUDM Passat 2.0T (280hp/350Nm). Honda's CVT may not be rated for more torque than the CVT used by Subaru on the WRX and Forester XT (good for up to 400Nm). However, the new Accord 2.0T will be the first FWD car to offer a 10-speed AT.

With this much power it would be interesting to see if there are significant fuel economy benefits to be had in real world driving conditions. (Accord 3.5 V6 vs accord 2.0t). In the first place the shift to turbo engines is primarily because of fuel consumption and emissions regulations.

20psi and plastic intake runners. And to note that honda does not use a variable geometry turbo. I wonder how they manage the potential lag in a setup like this.

**Egan101** · June 16th, 2017 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by babkalakal

With this much power it would be interesting to see if there are significant fuel economy benefits to be had in real world driving conditions. (Accord 3.5 V6 vs accord 2.0t). In the first place the shift to turbo engines is primarily because of fuel consumption and emissions regulations.

20psi and plastic intake runners. And to note that honda does not use a variable geometry turbo. I wonder how they manage the potential lag in a setup like this.

I guess the fuel economy benefits between the two powerplants would be significant. Mazda has been saying the same when they opted for a 2.5L turbo in place of the old V6 for the new CX9. Ford has also moved away from the usual V6 engines and moved to turbo engines with their bigger vehicles.

Another example is the fuel consumption of CUVs with 2.0L-2.5L NA engines against 2.0L turbo engines. Most would say it is about the same but you get more power/torque with a turbo engine.

**StockEngine** · June 16th, 2017 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Egan101

I guess the fuel economy benefits between the two powerplants would be significant. Mazda has been saying the same when they opted for a 2.5L turbo in place of the old V6 for the new CX9. Ford has also moved away from the usual V6 engines and moved to turbo engines with their bigger vehicles.

ford and mazda didnt make significant fc gains with their turbo petrols.

honda made leaps and bounds with their civic 1.5T in both fc and low end torque

if thats the basis... their 2.0T will be the real v6 killer. 0-60 in 5flat. saying under 6 is a given imo.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tsikot Forums mobile app

**TireWhisperer23** · January 3rd, 2024 12:02 AM

The Tenth Gen Accord and its contemporary Civic look so much alike to me, I need to see them side by side to know which is which any more! The only (significant) difference is size.