New Chevy Colorado mega-thread

Common misconception about them but not really true. Many Hondas are a square bore/stroke design , true - but if you look it up the 1GR is practailly square also (94mm x 95mm).

Honda engines are not actually low on torque if you look at the specs carefully - they are in fact competitive with if not better than most other naturally aspirated engines in the same size class. The difference is Honda engines are built to rev and typically hold the torque flat to much higher RPMs than others, the natural result of which is that the horsepower peak is much higher in the RPM range (look at a typical honda engine dyno and the horsepower curve is not a curve at all but usually a straight line from zero to the peak at redline). By doing that you get more HP from a smaller package and Honda will take advantage of that by sometimes using a smaller displacement engine in the same size vehicle. They gear to take advantage of that higher RPM power so a typical Honda will run more revs on the highway for example.

In the real world folks who arent used to Hondas think this means they are peaky when actually the opposite is true. Floor it and most Honda engines will keep pulling all the way to redline, whereas an engine with more of a torque reputation might run out of steam before it hits redline and decides to shift.


for example:

Toyota 1GR
4 liter 94 bore x 95 stroke
236hp @ 5200, 266 ftlb @ 4000 (66ftlb/liter)

equivalent Honda is the J35z from the Ridgeline and Pilot:
3.5 liter 89 bore x 93 stroke
250hp @ 5700, 253ftlb @ 4800 (72ftlb / liter)

See whats going on? Yes on paper the Honda has "less torque", has a lower ratio of torque to hp, and makes its peak hp at a higher RPM.... But if you do the math they are actually making more torque per displacement and mainlining that torque higher into the rev range. (in fairness the dual VVTi version of the 1GR would be nearly on par with the Honda power for displacement wise... wish we got that)

In practice, Honda with the J35 feel quite quick (I own one)

 

^The new Accord V6 engines make a TON of power. I was surprised to see what they make at the wheels. VERY surprised. It's a real gem of an engine.

*video proof*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKQSkGwx21U

 

I had a 2010 Loaded Honda Accord and it would haul ass. If I didn't need a truck I would still have it.






​

 

Next truck in 2or3 years will be a hard choice.Only sure thing it will be a 4X4,,,, Tacome, Tundra, Will also look at the F150 5.0 coyote,, Will keep a open mind on the new Honda. But if its FWD its a no go to me. ,Dodge or GM not even on the radar

 

Agreed on all.

 

I'm just going to sell my truck now so it doesn't lose anymore resale value...

Don't want to get covered by an "avalanche"

 

The Accords are really nice cars. I almost bought one. I liked everything and the value, but for some reason, couldn't get comfortable in it. I'm 6'1" and even with the seat moved all the way back, I felt like my feet were crammed into a narrow space. I also looked at the Crosstour, same problem and I wasn't comfortable in the CRV either. Ended up buying a Hyundai Santa Fe Sport 2.0 Turbo. Really nice car with plenty of room and power and the wife is comfortable in it. Only wish it had memory seats.
As for the trucks, Tacoma will survive. Lot's of rumors out there about a makeover, but I think Toyota is doing their usual methodical approach. They probably have a plan, but are waiting to see how much share they loose from the GM twins. If they don't loose much, Toyota may invest in more Tundra upgrades first to compete more with the full size trucks.

 

The diesels are intriguing for sure. But with the added cost up front and the higher price of diesel fuel, I think you have to put a lot of miles on to make it worth while. And the whole DEF urea additive thing makes me feel like it's just something else to go wrong. I agree with you on how much the Colorado looks like the Tacoma, a lot of similarities.

 

But the Colorado will have 365 recalls a year,

 

Stay reliable and durable ..Quality will be chebs and nissans usual weak point.

 

My wife's Honda Crosstour would fly. No complaints about that engine at all! Sucked gas like crazy, but it mainly because my foot was sticking out the front grill

Honda makes great vehicles. The Ridgeline is just ugly though. If they make it more like a truck, then I'd consider it. My only issue with Hondas are interior noises. We've owned 3 Hondas and all 3 developed some sort of noise in the dash or sunroof. Never really bothered me, but wife would go off the deep end over little noises.

 

http://hondaquality.wordpress.com/honda-reliability-myth-busted-data-shows-otherwise/

 

This guy in the comments summed it up nicely.

"Everybody here is missing the point.
#1) Hondas are very popular cars. So the website isnt taking into account that because there are more Hondas on the road, there will be more complaints."

That article is junk.

 

Honda did have a buch of issues with their automatic transmissions in the early-mid '00 accords, Odysses and Pilots. true. And add to it the Honda automatic is an odd design not many shops are experienced working on - its actaully built with traditional manual box gears and follower shafts that they just added clutch packs to, no planetary gears. This is a legacy of some patent issues in the 70s where they couldnt get rights to use the auto trans arrangement everyone else uses.

AFAIK the Honda transmission failure issues where mostly solved when they reformulated their trans fluid to a synthetic. Look at Truedelta these days and they are geting better again. I think they are also getting over their rough years design wise with the recent disappointing civic, etc.

If I was going to buy a sedan it would have been an accord all the way. I sat in one at the auto show its like a limo.

But when I decided to shop trucks I didn't even look at the Ridgeline. its just not a truck.


But I still love our '08 pilot for raodtrips

 

The Ridgeline is a Pilot with third row converted to a pseudo pickup bed.
One thing that is nice (besides reliability) is there is a storage space right in the center of said bed.I don't know if one could craft one using fiberglass or similar composite but it would be neat.

 

If the dealer does not resolve the damn vibration problems in my `13 Double Cab Taco, I will be looking at a GMC Canyon when they come out! Oh, just remembered.............the GMC I traded in for this Taco was at the dealer`s all the time too!

 

Even with the driveline problems with your Tacoma I personally think you would be taking a step backward with the GMC. I would never buy the first year model of any new redesign. That goes for the new Tacoma also should they ever decide to update it.

 

I so badly wish they would redesign the Tacoma; but I must say, there has to be a reason it has gone 10 years without modification (save cosmetic). If they're so good now, still, I can only imagine what they were doing in 2005 compared to the rest of the competition. A 2005 Tacoma is just as capable as a 2015 (Adjusted for wear, of course). Isn't that crazy to think about? Would anyone like to compare a 2005 of the Big 3 to their current models?

 

That chart doesn't speak well for Honda at all. Regardless of how many cars they sell.

I have never owned nor desired to own a Honda. My wife had a Civic when I met her and it was a Huge POS. I sold it for $200 and bought her a 1980 Landcruiser.