09 lancer RA or 09 Accord Coupe V6?
Jun 11, 2009, 08:38 PM
#17
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to car and driver.. just the raw numbers:
Accord V6 (271hp):
C/D Test Results:
Zero to 60 mph: 7.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 20.8 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 8.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 16.1 sec @ 88 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 130 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 185 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
Ralliart (237hp):
Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 36.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.3 sec @ 97 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 184 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.80 g (Smaller dia + probably even better if they replaced the 215 yoko's with some 225+'s)
Then you have to consider that on top of that, the RA is awd, twin clutch, louder, less comfortable, and just looks plain badass. But's also a stiffer ride and runs on premium only.
OTOH, the accord is more civilized, subtle, quieter, and better on gas, and can run on regular.
Accord V6 (271hp):
C/D Test Results:
Zero to 60 mph: 7.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 20.8 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 8.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 16.1 sec @ 88 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 130 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 185 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
Ralliart (237hp):
Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 15.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 36.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.3 sec @ 97 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 184 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.80 g (Smaller dia + probably even better if they replaced the 215 yoko's with some 225+'s)
Then you have to consider that on top of that, the RA is awd, twin clutch, louder, less comfortable, and just looks plain badass. But's also a stiffer ride and runs on premium only.
OTOH, the accord is more civilized, subtle, quieter, and better on gas, and can run on regular.
Jun 11, 2009, 09:01 PM
#18
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Boston
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i know it seems biased but i actually test drove accord 08 v6 coupe manual and it seemed soooooooo slow... also test drove genesis coupe v6 before i made my choice which was much more of a contender, but i ultimately went with awd
Jun 11, 2009, 09:54 PM
#19
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Fort Hood Texas
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Link for the Accord numbers? The older Accords were faster than that so that can't be right. As far as I know the 0-60 on it is under 6 seconds(around 5.8).
Available on the EX trim levels is a 3.5-liter V6 that produces 271 hp and 254 lb-ft of torque (251 lb-ft on manual-shift V6 coupes). Sedans with the V6 can only be had with a five-speed automatic, but a six-speed manual is a no-cost option on V6 coupes.Acceleration is class-competitive with either of the four-cylinder engines, but the last V6 sedan we tested recorded a middling 7.5-second sprint from zero to 60 mph, well behind competitors like the Mazda 6 s and Nissan Altima 3.5 SE. In terms of fuel economy, four-cylinder Accords are about average, while V6-powered models receive slightly above-average ratings.
OP, have your friend test drive each of the cars he is interested in, it really is the only way to be sure.
Jun 11, 2009, 10:05 PM
#20
According to the R&T in my hands right now, the Civic SI was able to pull off a 6.8 0-60 so I would suspect that the Accord should be faster. In fact, according to the same magazine, the Accord EX-L (a V6) managed a 5.9 0-60 and a 14.5 1/4 mile run. The Ralliart managed a 14.1.
Jun 11, 2009, 10:38 PM
#23
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still don't see the relation between the two totally different cars. The accord, even in coupe form could hardly be considered a performance vehicle. Second, it's hard to imagine that any R/A owner on an R/A forum would recommend the accord. But what do I know?
Jun 12, 2009, 06:26 AM
#26
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The V6 accord coupe 6 sp 0-60 is in the low to mid 5's and pulls mid to high 14's for the quarter.
They are a very nice car, however I was disappointed with the manual that Honda is famous for as it seemed notchy and not up to Honda's usual standards. The torque steer is terrible, and takes away from the driving experience.
They are a very nice car, however I was disappointed with the manual that Honda is famous for as it seemed notchy and not up to Honda's usual standards. The torque steer is terrible, and takes away from the driving experience.
Jun 12, 2009, 08:03 AM
#27
Newbie
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wtf! all this accord data is a cluster F***! What is the thing; a sub 6 second car or a 7 second car? now im dying to know how these things actually run...bc my girl might want one. RA ALL DAY! four door practicality + all weather drivability + borderline EVO driving experience make this a no-brainer IMO. unless of course you dont mind a big hunk of ugly in the driveway then I guess the wrx is kindof a no brainer...
Jun 12, 2009, 08:38 AM
#28
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats weird... edmunds also said in this video that the accord coupe did 0-60 in 6.3 secs. (it said it in 1:18 of the vid).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTIEH0vDqkw
and that the ralliart had a time of 6.6 secs from 0-60 in this vid (1:18)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67cB_B80AjE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTIEH0vDqkw
and that the ralliart had a time of 6.6 secs from 0-60 in this vid (1:18)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67cB_B80AjE
Jun 12, 2009, 08:41 AM
#29
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My friend tends to think that the Accord Coupe is a sports vehicle... with a bith more luxury than the RA... One of his major concerns with it is the FWD platform.