Honda Crosstour Forums banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Merely curious here. I've the 2011 EX-L AWD, which has the six cyclinder engine.

So what are the performance specs? I've read the 4 banger get better MPG but the six has much better torque and HP. So, what happens when one tromps on the accellerator? How do the two compare side-by-side on the test track?

Obviously, those who value MPG above performance really don't care. :p

Thanks, Vince.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
I would think the 4 Cyclinder has enough power to get you in and out of most daily driving issues. I have a Six cyclinder and think the power is very good torque is good but seem to takes it good old time to kick in. Got to get thoses RPMs up. In another words the torque band seem a bit off at low end. What we really need is a turbo 4 cyclinder then you get best of both worlds and adjust the cam for better low end torque

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I would think the 4 Cyclinder has enough power to get you in and out of most daily driving issues. I have a Six cyclinder and think the power is very good torque is good but seem to takes it good old time to kick in. Got to get thoses RPMs up. In another words the torque band seem a bit off at low end. What we really need is a turbo 4 cyclinder then you get best of both worlds and adjust the cam for better low end torque

And if Honda were to sell a turbo, there goes the advantage of using regular gas. I've had two turbo-4 cylinder cars previous and both required premium. Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
I agree with Chefmark about the lower end perfomance of the 6 cylinder, but hit 4500rpm and its another story. I have to keep reminding myself that this is a 4000lb car. For the size and weight it does have respectable power and acceleration.

I have not test driven the 4 cylinder and cannot comment on it but I would not want any less power or acceleration. Performance vs mileage, its your preference that will ulitmately help you make that decision. Either way it still a great vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
And if Honda were to sell a turbo, there goes the advantage of using regular gas. I've had two turbo-4 cylinder cars previous and both required premium. Thanks!
Great point on the premium gas. With more car makers going to turbo charged engines for fuel saving it's going to interesting to see how the general public perceives the difference between regular gas and premium gas. Even better I like to hear how the dealers are going to spin the difference in prices
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Honda's V6 is far superior over the 4 cylinder I have had both. The CT is a heavy car and even though you will get better mpg's with the 4 cylinder to me there is no comparison. Both use regular gas and not that I am racing but the 4 cylinder can't get out of its own way!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
The 4 cylinder is 185-hp, 2.4 liter 16 valve VTC (Variable Timing Control):(

While the 6 cylinder is 278-hp, 3.5 liter 24 valve VCM (Variable Cylinder Management):D

Keep the few more miles you may get with the 4, I want to get to my destination before its dark!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I drove them both and ultimately went with the 4 cylinder. The 6 is noticeably quicker, but not enough to transform the driving experience, and the 4 is more than adequate. Like the 6, you need to rev it high to get any power out of it, but that is rarely necessary. The 4 effortlessly and quietly cruises at 80+ on the highway at around 2400 rpms, and it will get 30 mpg at that speed. The 2013+ V6 may have narrowed or eliminated the mpg gap with the 6-speed transmission. Altogether, I don't think there is a clear winner--the 6 trades off a bit of efficiency for a bit of power, and the 4 does the opposite. I went with the 4 because of the deal I got on the specific car; I could have just as easily ended up with a 6. One thing to consider, though, is that the 4 has a timing chain that does not need to be replaced; the 6 has a timing belt that needs to be replaced every x,000 miles (I think 60,000?), and that runs around $500. So keep that mind when comparing operating costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
QUOTE=esinger;72201]I drove them both and ultimately went with the 4 cylinder. The 6 is noticeably quicker, but not enough to transform the driving experience, and the 4 is more than adequate. Like the 6, you need to rev it high to get any power out of it, but that is rarely necessary. The 4 effortlessly and quietly cruises at 80+ on the highway at around 2400 rpms, and it will get 30 mpg at that speed. The 2013+ V6 may have narrowed or eliminated the mpg gap with the 6-speed transmission. Altogether, I don't think there is a clear winner--the 6 trades off a bit of efficiency for a bit of power, and the 4 does the opposite. I went with the 4 because of the deal I got on the specific car; I could have just as easily ended up with a 6. One thing to consider, though, is that the 4 has a timing chain that does not need to be replaced; the 6 has a timing belt that needs to be replaced every x,000 miles (I think 60,000?), and that runs around $500. So keep that mind when comparing operating costs.[/QUOTE]


Timing belt replacement is recommended at 105k miles or 84 months.

I had the 4 cylinder in a previous Accord and it was more than sufficient - so I would imagine it wouldn't be half bad in the Crosstour. Although, I'm sure the drive-by-wire throttle system helps mask the different between the two engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
I test drove a 4cylinder before I bought the 6. I felt like the 4 was adequate, especially if most of your driving is around town. For freeway driving with hills etc., you're better off with the 6. The 6 is so smooth...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
For me I had a 2012 Honda Accord with a 6 cylinder, I needed and wanted the power. I loved that car but it was leased and time to turn it in. My wife got a 2014 Camaro 2LT RS (beautiful car) but terrible in the snow. We work in the same place so when its snows I drive that's why I bought my 2015 CT-EXL 6 cylinder 4WD (AWD) for the winter months and the power.

Before I bought my CT I was looking at the new 2015 Jeep Renagade.
Its a pretty neat 4WD with a 4 cylinder built on a Fiat chasis. But again I disliked the 4 cylinder engine, I have to step in the gas and go!

The 2015 CT has a 6 speed tranny and cruising on the highway only uses 3 of the cylinders. Its pretty close on gas to the 4 cylinder and the extra power makes me just smile.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
6 vs 4

The local dealer made a great deal on the navigation equipped 4 they had on their lot.

The 4 has a 5 speed transmission (2014) - the 6 has a 6 speed tranny.

When accelerating lightly, the engine will almost get to 3 grand before hitting 2nd gear. Apparently due to the gap of ratios between the 5 & 6 speed and the torque of the two engines.

The CT, being heavier than the sedans, is a bit limited by the lack of the V-6, but seems to get me adequately into the flow of traffic. I've yet to take it into the mountains and experience the difference in engines. My first trip on the highway, I was pleased with the 32.7 MPG, but that was only a single tank of gas on 70 & 75 mph roads with headwinds one way and not the other.

The six also has the cylinder cut-out for improved mileage when torque is not needed, plus electric power steering whereas the 4 is hydraulic. They tried to maximize the mileage out of the V-6 and I would prefer it, but I think I'll keep mine for a number of years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
I love the HP of my V6 but to be honest.... it also has some dead spots and really has to think a moment when I give it the beans...

I had two 2.4's one in a 2003 Accord coupe and another in a 2004 Accord coupe. The 03 was an auto and the 04 was a 5speed manual. I will go on record that the 2.4 is one of the best engines Honda has ever made. It is very durable, smooth, and produces great power for it's size. A truly great engine.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top