2008 Honda Accord EX-L V6: Fuel Economy Update

Interesting. The just posted Mazda6 vs. Accord vs. Altima comparison test had the big Honda at 16mpg worst, 23mpg best, 18mpg average. I guess the long-termer has been doing more road trip duty than the comparo?

I was wondering about that too 7driver but its obvious that Edmunds used a different Accord V6 for the comparison as the LT Accord is silver. In comparison tests its obvious that the cars wont get the best MPG as the tests can be quite aggressive. Im still impressed with the Mazda as that big 3.7 V6 seems to be quite nice.

Im wondering how new the Accord in the comparo was as Honda engines are seriosly tight when new?

VCM = joke. That about sums it up. What a scam.

Thanks heavens for the Accord Coupe.

I always see roadtests having lower averages. I blame the leadfoot tendencies of having a car for a few days/weeks vs months

roadtests may lower averages but 18mpg combined is not good at all. especially when the 6 acheived its EPA average under the same conditions.

WHen MT tested the Accord coupe in a comparo it averaged less than 17mpg without VCM. In spite of the lofty EPA numbers the Accord's real world mileage seems quite average. The camry V6 rountinely comes out on top with regards to real world mileage in comparo tests.

honda accord is now just another mid-size sedan (on the cusp of being full size).

The only benfit it has, is the honda halo.

The mileage is just another reason I'd never buy this car.

One more reason to go for the 4 cylinder Coupe with the manual transmission. 14.5 MPG is pathetic even if it was all city stop and go driving. My gas guzzling BMW V8 4 liter gets about the same in city driving and 26 MPG on the highway. I agree with others that the VCM simply makes no sense when you compare it to your recent test against the Mazda6 and Altima.

VCM is an unnecessariy complicated attempt to improve fuel economy on an overweight, oversized car that no longer fits the definition of what had been an Accord. A simple regearing of the AT and the final drive would have enabled the normal V6 to provide the mileage figures quoted and the performance of the V6 6MT coupe. VCM is a joke - or a gimmick that has been foisted off on thousands of what may be formerly Honda loyalists.

the thing is Honda knows most people dont buy the Accord for 0-60 times or engine response so they could care less about the VCM complaints. The Accord sells based on reputation for fuel efficiency and reliability. Fortunately for Honda most people arent going to bother comparing the Accord to it's most worthy competitors. The I-4 model has average efficiency and the V6 appears to be closer to the rear of the class in real world efficiency. Out of the 5 comparisons I have seen the Accord in so far it has never finished first or second in mileage. I believe the camry and sonata beat the I-4 model in MT's recent test.

14.5 mpg is downright lousy, but these real world numbers seem about right for a 268-hp 3600-lb hunk of steel.

"the thing is Honda knows most people dont buy the Accord for 0-60 times or engine response so they could care less about the VCM complaints."

1487, Im not so sure about that as numerous Accord V6/5AT owners over at TOV (Temple Of VTEC) arent pleased or impressed with the VCM system. We are actually having a HUGE debate (thread) on that subject now as this band-aid approach simply isnt the type of engineering us Honda enthusiasts have come to expect from Honda. Many of us have picked the Accord and Honda for that matter apart for offering a system that really has little to no real world benefit. Keep in mind that all members of TOV arent Honda enthusiasts as many just own or have owned a Honda products. Some have never owned Honda products (there are a few GM fans on the site) but just like the site as a whole.

The funny thing is that Edmunds LT Accord V6/5AT average fuel economy of 21.1 was WORSE than Motorweeks average of 22.1 with the 6MT coupe. Keep in mind the 6MTs V6 doesnt have the VCM and its 6MT ratios are much closer than the 5AT, so you would expect worse overall economy from the coupe. Testing procedures may be different but given Hondas relentless touting of the VCM system I expected more. Highway milage was more with the 5AT sedan as expected given the coupes close ratio gearbox.

Another funny thing is the 2009 Acura TL SH-awd with the 305hp 3.7L V6 has highway ratings of 25MPG and city ratings of 17 (same as the 6MT coupe)and its a 4000lb car with the new SOHC VVT on both intake and exhaust valves yet it basically matches (on paper) the 600lb lighter, less powerful FWD Accord coupes EPA estimates. Taking that into consideration the V6/5AT combo should be delivering better fuel economy than both the TL SH-awd and the Accord V6/6MT.

Personally I wouldnt buy the Accord V6/5AT combo as Id get a Accord EX-L 4cyl sedan 5MT, TSX/Tech 6MT or a Passat 2.0t manual over it in a heartbeat.

This is a prime example of the simple yet top notch, world class engineering I expect from Honda. Even back in the 60's Honda had some pretty interesting products.

http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=204774

For what it's worth, my 4-cylinder Accord is only getting 20 MPG in the city, which is so far the only disappointment about this car. I'm wishing they had made the Accord 9/10ths its current size.

I do believe that Honda enthusiasts are disappointed but I doubt that casual car buyers care. Honestly, Honda's rep for engineering is something most often heard when reading auto magazines or talking to Honda fans. Most people are primarily concerned about reliability and resale and thus the new Accord is as good as any accord. It's not the car, its the brand that's important and thus Honda has run out of incentive to lead in innovation. The simple fact is they don't need to. A few years ago cars with 4 speed automatics were ridiculed by the press but now that Honda is stuck with "only" 5 speeds no one in the press makes a big deal about it. Instead they talk about how smoothly Honda's 5 speeds operate or how performance really isn't compromised so 5 gears suffice. It's good to be Honda.

"A few years ago cars with 4 speed automatics were ridiculed by the press but now that Honda is stuck with "only" 5 speeds no one in the press makes a big deal about it. Instead they talk about how smoothly Honda's 5 speeds operate or how performance really isn't compromised so 5 gears suffice. It's good to be Honda."

1487, I guess Im on both sides of the fence here. The Honda 5AT is a little behind the times when it comes to the number of forward gears but it does have better than average transmission logic programming and response, something that hasnt been said for the Malibu 6AT or Camry 6AT. In the end its still all about execution.

I do however think the Accord V6 could benefit from a 6AT as its been pretty much proven throughout the industry to increase performance and efficiency while the VCM system reduces engine performance and response for a CLAIM of better fuel efficiency. A 6AT with Hondas Grade Logic programming and the non VCM V6 would be a great combination as I think it would get better fuel economy without the penalty in power/torque production, engine response and accleration.