If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
Regular Shell gasoline is my fuel of choice for my Honda too. It gives
better mpg than Chevrons, which is not bad either. Using different gears in an automatic transmission does nothin for performance. But the habit of doing so reduces stresses on the drivetrain and prolongs its life significantly. For me i use 2 when driving in a parking lot, or within an apartment complex or a subdivision. That saves the trans from unnecessary upshift/downshift. I use D3 when driving in downtown streets or in an area with many 4- way stops. And D4 in normal city and highway driving. My 89 Accord doesn't have 1 and i have no idea how it''ll work. Important: You can always shift back and forth between D3 and D4 while the tires is rolling. But shifting to and from P, R, N, 2, 1 (no letter D in those!!!) demands a complete stop (with the engine at idle) or you'll risk wrecking a good transmission. Also keep your right hand off the shifting lever when the car is moving, accidental shifting is bad!!! Finally, if you just want convenience and nothing else, Honda's D4 will handle everything just fine. Cheers!! On Jan 6, 2:05 pm, "Polfus" <nostringscouldsecureyou@thestation> wrote: > > Shell gasoline is fine, Alfred...don't worry, and use the regular unleaded. > > You will not see a difference in performance with the new 2008 Accord that > we both have. > > Shell *does* have detergents and additives, so rest assured you engine is > being cleaned with it. > > If you want to increase *performance* of your Accord, I recommend getting > used to the different drive modes. > > I drive using 1,2, and *D3* especially, which will make your car seem like > it has a new engine in it. > > "Auto", or "D" on the gears, is extremely smooth and made for family > driving. > > However, when I do the different gears manually, my car is like *woah* and > comes alive. Plus, it never gets anywhere close to redline, so there's a lot > of room to play around in. > > Try it...you'll like it. > > Peace, > Polfus |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam
> wrote: >Tony Harding wrote: >> jim beam wrote: >>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>> In article > , >>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>> >>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>> >>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>> >>>> What kind of "give"? >>>> >>> >>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper metal, >>> cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across the board. >> >> In what way has Honda lowered standards? > >macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that a negative or a positive? > >> >>> ford's plastic brake pistons are among of my favorites. >> >> Amusing, yes, but of little interest in a Honda NG. > > >except that when people say a modern honda has been cheapened so much >that there's no more "give", i say that's not correct - there's a ton >more "give" to be had in pursuit of lower costs. plastic brake pistons >are just one example. How about just saying that there is not much room for Honda to lower the production costs of their cars without significantly impacting their reliability or the impression of their cars? That seems to be the driving issue as consumers want to get in a car and not feel that it's cheaply made, and that it's reliable. I would say that the Japanese car companies seem to understand that better than the US car companies as I still see US cars that look cheaply made. Then there's the reliability issue. While the US car companies have come a long way in the last decade I'm not sure they are the equal of the Japanese yet. That's not to say they can't do it, but I always get the feel that the accountants have more control in the US companies than the engineers and designers. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
shawn wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam > > wrote: > >> Tony Harding wrote: >>> jim beam wrote: >>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>> In article > , >>>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>>> >>>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>>> What kind of "give"? >>>>> >>>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper metal, >>>> cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across the board. >>> In what way has Honda lowered standards? >> macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Is that a negative or a positive? negative. >>>> ford's plastic brake pistons are among of my favorites. >>> Amusing, yes, but of little interest in a Honda NG. >> >> except that when people say a modern honda has been cheapened so much >> that there's no more "give", i say that's not correct - there's a ton >> more "give" to be had in pursuit of lower costs. plastic brake pistons >> are just one example. > > How about just saying that there is not much room for Honda to lower > the production costs of their cars without significantly impacting > their reliability or the impression of their cars? That seems to be > the driving issue as consumers want to get in a car and not feel that > it's cheaply made, and that it's reliable. > > I would say that the Japanese car companies seem to understand that > better than the US car companies as I still see US cars that look > cheaply made. Then there's the reliability issue. While the US car > companies have come a long way in the last decade I'm not sure they > are the equal of the Japanese yet. That's not to say they can't do it, > but I always get the feel that the accountants have more control in > the US companies than the engineers and designers. > |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
>
> Important: You can always shift back and forth between D3 and D4 while > the tires is rolling. But shifting to and from P, R, N, 2, 1 (no > letter D in those!!!) demands a complete stop (with the engine at > idle) or you'll risk wrecking a good transmission. Also keep your > right hand off the shifting lever when the car is moving, accidental > shifting is bad!!! Finally, if you just want convenience and nothing > else, Honda's D4 will handle everything just fine. > I like to use D4 or D for regular city and hwy driving. I use D3 in slower speeds around town. I usually only use 2 in snowy conditions when the road is not that well plowed. Gear 1 I have usually only used in really deep snow when the car was getting stuck and I had to get out of snow. As far as the manual shifting, well we all know this car could use the sequential sport shifter, maybe next revention. As far as manual shifting though I tend to use D3 and go into D or D4 when the rpms get too high. I have on occasion started off the starting line in 1 and then move to 2 and then D3. You really don't need to be stopped to use 1-2-D3 etc, the only difference is that you have to press the shift button if going from 1-2-D3, but not from D3-D4. Anyone else use the "manual ways?" |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
shawn wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam > > wrote: > >> Tony Harding wrote: >>> jim beam wrote: >>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>> In article > , >>>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>>> >>>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>>> What kind of "give"? >>>>> >>>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper metal, >>>> cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across the board. >>> In what way has Honda lowered standards? >> macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Is that a negative or a positive? >>>> ford's plastic brake pistons are among of my favorites. >>> Amusing, yes, but of little interest in a Honda NG. >> >> except that when people say a modern honda has been cheapened so much >> that there's no more "give", i say that's not correct - there's a ton >> more "give" to be had in pursuit of lower costs. plastic brake pistons >> are just one example. > > How about just saying that there is not much room for Honda to lower > the production costs of their cars without significantly impacting > their reliability or the impression of their cars? That seems to be > the driving issue as consumers want to get in a car and not feel that > it's cheaply made, and that it's reliable. > > I would say that the Japanese car companies seem to understand that > better than the US car companies as I still see US cars that look > cheaply made. Then there's the reliability issue. While the US car > companies have come a long way in the last decade I'm not sure they > are the equal of the Japanese yet. That's not to say they can't do it, > but I always get the feel that the accountants have more control in > the US companies than the engineers and designers. These decisions, like excrement, flow downhill <g>, i.e., Detroit won't change in any meaningful way until the execs decide they want to. This whole business started back in the 70's when inexpensive yet well made Japanese cars started to sell in significant numbers. The issue then was called "fit & finish", which Detroit hasn't really addressed yet IMHO. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
jim beam wrote:
> shawn wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam >> > wrote: >> >>> Tony Harding wrote: >>>> jim beam wrote: >>>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>>> In article > , >>>>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>>>> What kind of "give"? >>>>>> >>>>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper >>>>> metal, cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across the >>>>> board. >>>> In what way has Honda lowered standards? >>> macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >> >> Is that a negative or a positive? > > negative. Just how bad can they be? Porsche has used McPherson struts from the beginning (1963) on their 911 series (including the '69 911 I owned years ago) and continue to use them in 2008 models. http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/12/2...on-technology/ http://www.allautoreviews.com/auto_r...-911-turbo.htm |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
Tony Harding wrote:
> jim beam wrote: >> shawn wrote: >>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Tony Harding wrote: >>>>> jim beam wrote: >>>>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>>>> In article > , >>>>>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>>>>> What kind of "give"? >>>>>>> >>>>>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper >>>>>> metal, cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across >>>>>> the board. >>>>> In what way has Honda lowered standards? >>>> macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>> >>> Is that a negative or a positive? >> >> negative. > > Just how bad can they be? Porsche has used McPherson struts from the > beginning (1963) on their 911 series (including the '69 911 I owned > years ago) and continue to use them in 2008 models. > > http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/12/2...on-technology/ > > > http://www.allautoreviews.com/auto_r...-911-turbo.htm they're great for old farts that drive on freeways. but in terms of engineering fact, they don't keep the maximum contact patch on the road of both the steering wheels at all angles. that means they're not as good in the twisties. it's a geometry thing - turn the wheels to full lock and see how much tire is on the road on the inside tire - not much. the compromise compensation is wider tires, but that's not perfect for normal road use because they suck more gas and aquaplane more in the wet. wishbones allow better geometry but with a significantly higher component count. that means they cost a lot more, hence the move away. don't have the link handy, but somewhere on the web, there's data on the cornering g-force produced by a number of late 80's/early 90's hot hatches, rx7, gti, etc. the honda crx, with 4-wheel wishbones and the skinniest tires, can produce the highest g-force, hence the best cornering ability of the lot. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
jim beam wrote:
> Tony Harding wrote: >> jim beam wrote: >>> shawn wrote: >>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Tony Harding wrote: >>>>>> jim beam wrote: >>>>>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>>>>> In article > , >>>>>>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>>>>>> What kind of "give"? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper >>>>>>> metal, cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across >>>>>>> the board. >>>>>> In what way has Honda lowered standards? >>>>> macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>> >>>> Is that a negative or a positive? >>> >>> negative. >> >> Just how bad can they be? Porsche has used McPherson struts from the >> beginning (1963) on their 911 series (including the '69 911 I owned >> years ago) and continue to use them in 2008 models. >> >> http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/12/2...on-technology/ >> >> >> http://www.allautoreviews.com/auto_r...-911-turbo.htm > > they're great for old farts that drive on freeways. You did notice the link for the 2008 911 Turbo, didn't you? > but in terms of > engineering fact, they don't keep the maximum contact patch on the road > of both the steering wheels at all angles. that means they're not as > good in the twisties. it's a geometry thing - turn the wheels to full > lock and see how much tire is on the road on the inside tire - not much. > the compromise compensation is wider tires, but that's not perfect for > normal road use because they suck more gas and aquaplane more in the > wet. wishbones allow better geometry but with a significantly higher > component count. that means they cost a lot more, hence the move away. > > don't have the link handy, but somewhere on the web, there's data on the > cornering g-force produced by a number of late 80's/early 90's hot > hatches, rx7, gti, etc. the honda crx, with 4-wheel wishbones and the > skinniest tires, can produce the highest g-force, hence the best > cornering ability of the lot. So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
Tony Harding wrote:
> jim beam wrote: >> Tony Harding wrote: >>> jim beam wrote: >>>> shawn wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Tony Harding wrote: >>>>>>> jim beam wrote: >>>>>>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article > , >>>>>>>>> jim beam > wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda. >>>>>>>>> What kind of "give"? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper >>>>>>>> metal, cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across >>>>>>>> the board. >>>>>>> In what way has Honda lowered standards? >>>>>> macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>>> >>>>> Is that a negative or a positive? >>>> >>>> negative. >>> >>> Just how bad can they be? Porsche has used McPherson struts from the >>> beginning (1963) on their 911 series (including the '69 911 I owned >>> years ago) and continue to use them in 2008 models. >>> >>> http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/12/2...on-technology/ >>> >>> >>> http://www.allautoreviews.com/auto_r...-911-turbo.htm >> >> they're great for old farts that drive on freeways. > > You did notice the link for the 2008 911 Turbo, didn't you? > >> but in terms of engineering fact, they don't keep the maximum contact >> patch on the road of both the steering wheels at all angles. that >> means they're not as good in the twisties. it's a geometry thing - >> turn the wheels to full lock and see how much tire is on the road on >> the inside tire - not much. the compromise compensation is wider >> tires, but that's not perfect for normal road use because they suck >> more gas and aquaplane more in the wet. wishbones allow better >> geometry but with a significantly higher component count. that means >> they cost a lot more, hence the move away. >> >> don't have the link handy, but somewhere on the web, there's data on >> the cornering g-force produced by a number of late 80's/early 90's hot >> hatches, rx7, gti, etc. the honda crx, with 4-wheel wishbones and the >> skinniest tires, can produce the highest g-force, hence the best >> cornering ability of the lot. > > So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon. did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the cr-v? or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.] |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Accord 2008 and fuel octane
jim beam wrote:
<snip> >> So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon. > > did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is > wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the cr-v? > or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also > want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.] Do you have a link? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Use of higher octane fuel to pass smog inspection | bd | VW water cooled | 6 | March 3rd 07 01:15 AM |
High-octane fuel largely a waste of time | Dori A Schmetterling | BMW | 23 | May 10th 06 07:05 PM |
High-octane fuel largely a waste of time | Dori A Schmetterling | Chrysler | 16 | May 10th 06 02:22 PM |
High Gas Prices Fuel an Octane Rebellion | MrPepper11 | Driving | 434 | August 18th 05 12:25 AM |
Octane fuel to use for a 92 Passat CL | Tavish Muldoon | VW water cooled | 2 | September 21st 04 04:11 AM |