I've always thought it would be great if Honda offered a turbo Diesel engine for the Element. It would have plenty of torque, better mpg, be cheaper to run, good durability, and haul more weight. What engine option would you like to see offered in future Es?

[quote:ba3bcb5fee=" "]I've always thought it would be great if Honda offered a turbo Diesel engine for the Element. It would have plenty of torque, better mpg, be cheaper to run, good durability, and haul more weight. What engine option would you like to see offered in future Es?[/quote:ba3bcb5fee]

I'd go with the turbo diesel. It appears to be the shorter-term efficient and/or high-output power plant and low sulpher diesel will be here shortly, making it perhaps lower emissions as well.

-brendan

I like the turbo diesel idea as well.

Couple of things stand in its way, though. I've mentioned before that Honda hates diesels. It's in their culture. Yes, they have one in the Euro market now, but they were dragged into that kicking and screaming (i.e., they were losing sales - more than 50% of new car sales in Europe are now diesel).

The other is the upcoming pollution regs. Even with low-sulphur blends, particulate and NOx emissions in current designs still exceed the new limits.

[quote:6e5d878438=" "]I like the turbo diesel idea as well.

Couple of things stand in its way, though. I've mentioned before that Honda hates diesels. It's in their culture. Yes, they have one in the Euro market now, but they were dragged into that kicking and screaming (i.e., they were losing sales - more than 50% of new car sales in Europe are now diesel).

The other is the upcoming pollution regs. Even with low-sulphur blends, particulate and NOx emissions in current designs still exceed the new limits.[/quote:6e5d878438]

Why does Honda hate diesels so much? The people in Europe obviously understand the benefits of diesel engines. How can you argue against them? They are not the same stinky loud engines they were in the past. Is it the pollution? Maybe because they last longer than gas engines people wouldn't be purchasing new vehicles as often as they did with the gasoline engines. Would Honda be losing money in the long run?

>Why does Honda hate diesels so much?

Because Soichiro Honda himself said that was the way it was going to be.

Honda does have a Diesel. In fact, it is considered probably the best 4cyl diesel sold. You can buy and Accord and CR-V in Europe with a Diesel.

One big problem. The Diesel fuel in the US has toooooo much sulfur in the fuel, and the trucking industry has a huge lobbying contingent in DC.

Did I not say, "Yes, they have one in the Euro market now, but they were dragged into that kicking and screaming..."?

:?

I thought I would get more responses than this. Isn't anyone interested in seeing new engine options for the E?

How about a twin turbo eight? Something with about 450 ponies.

[quote:43fa2c83e8=" "]How about a twin turbo eight? Something with about 450 ponies.[/quote:43fa2c83e8]


That's true. Forget all this V6 and Diesel crap. Go for the big time! Can you imagine the E with all that horsepower? :twisted:

How about a inlline 5? I know there was an Acura (Vigor??) that had a straight 5 cyl. engine. I wonder... would that be a good compromise between efficiency and power? Would it be a better choice for vehicles like the Element or a CR-V than a V6? GM put a 5 cyl. in the Colorado and Canyon to accomplish this, why couldn't honda develop something like this, around 2.6 to 2.8 liters?

just a thought

justin

i notice that a lot of people in the poll are interested in a hybrid, but no one is talking about it.

personally, i find the 5sp MT to be peppy enough, except in the most exceptional circumstances (up a hill with a full load at 85), but really wish i was getting better than 22-24 (16 with bikes on top and people in!).

a hybrid that retained the 160hp, yet managed to get above 30, would be enough for me to trade up!

I want more pep in my E....especailly on these NJ Highways.....need to get up to speed very fast.....so give me the V6 Baby!

That's why I said the turbo diesel. It would have nice torque, carry a heavier load and be able to tow something of decent size, and have much better mileage. The new turbo diesels can accomplish all of this. They are not the slow smelly machines they used to be.

I think that the E is just fine the way it is. I have owned many Accords with the 4 Vtec and the V6 and I would take the 4 Vtec anytime better gas consumption and the power differance is not that substantial along with higher insurance costs on the V6.

The MDX I have for work is down right bad on gas.

But again I bought this as a run around car and Diesal god they are messy...

-SS

[quote:ad2da08861=" "]I think that the E is just fine the way it is. I have owned many Accords with the 4 Vtec and the V6 and I would take the 4 Vtec anytime better gas consumption and the power differance is not that substantial along with higher insurance costs on the V6.

The MDX I have for work is down right bad on gas.

But again I bought this as a run around car and Diesal god they are messy...

-SS[/quote:ad2da08861]

You have a point. The E is nice with the 4 Vtec. I would like to try out that new Diesel that Honda now sells in Europe, though. It sounds like a great engine from everything I have read about it. It just seems like that would be a good mate for the E.

do something to make the E a little more fuel efficient, plus it would add power. If the demographic they didn't intend to buy it are buying it, they certainly would attract more by going green. plus the E is so versatile and outdoorsy it just seems to fit to have an evironmentally friendly E.

[quote:76c70bc2c5="dbpaddler"]do something to make the E a little more fuel efficient, plus it would add power. If the demographic they didn't intend to buy it are buying it, they certainly would attract more by going green. plus the E is so versatile and outdoorsy it just seems to fit to have an evironmentally friendly E.[/quote:76c70bc2c5]

I simply LOVE what Mercedez has done with their V-8! It automatically "downgrades" itself to a 4 cylinder whenever possible to conserve fuel. But then all 8 cylinders are available when called upon! I believe that THIS method of thinking will be the wave of the future! Let's hope that Honda catches on! :)

LEGO

I simply LOVE what Mercedez has done with their V-8! It automatically "downgrades" itself to a 4 cylinder whenever possible to conserve fuel. But then all 8 cylinders are available when called upon! I believe that THIS method of thinking will be the wave of the future! Let's hope that Honda catches on! :)



Didn't GM try this very idea out 20 or so years ago and fail miserably?

Hmm.. I don't recall GM trying this. I do remember that during the oil shortage years in the 70's and 80's there were kits that one could install to turn their V8's into a 4 cylinder. I do believe that THESE failed miserably.

I'm not certain, but I think that Mercedes has been doing this for a while. It's called "Cylinder Cutout" and is available on the S 500. Here is an article on the subject;

http://www.sae.org/automag/newenginereview/mercedes.htm

Chrysler's new Magnum (what's their next model going to be, Jeroboam?) has got one of those engines that shuts down half the cylinders while you're barreling down the interstate.

Personally, I'm not interested. 98% of my travel is urban. For me, the best option is hybrid. And since I'm a selfish git, that's what I'm urging Honda to do next. An E with a hybrid engine would be an unbeatable combination.

-- Bill

My vote is for a Hybrid that dramatically improves the fuel economy which is my biggest complaint with the E. 8)

Agreed. A Hybrid engine would probably be a better direction for the "E" since it already has plenty enough power to move itself, and since the Civic frame cannot tow much anyhow.

The cylinder cutout feature would be a nice way for Honda to add a fuel efficient V8 to the new SUT!!

http://www.cars.com/go/features/autoshows/story.jsp?autoshow=Detroit&autoshowyear=2004&story=coverage_01_05_08&aff=national

> With Cylinder Deactivation, Honda Adds New Dimension of Conservation to Hybrid

DETROIT — Honda Motor Co., already a leader in gasoline/electric hybrid and hydrogen-fuel-cell innovation, announced today that it will use another conservation-minded technology, called cylinder deactivation, in a hybrid Accord sometime this year.
At a North American International Auto Show press conference, Honda President and CEO Takeo Fukui said the Accord gas/electric hybrid equipped with a V-6 engine would deliver a higher level of performance than the 240-horsepower Accord V-6 midsize sedan while delivering fuel economy equivalent to that of a four-cylinder Honda Civic (about 28/37 mpg city/highway) compact sedan.

The car will be the first V-6 application of Honda’s Integrated Motor Assist hybrid technology and the first hybrid vehicle in the world to employ cylinder-deactivation technology. Honda’s system, which it calls Variable Cylinder Management, allows for the deactivation of half of the engine’s cylinders under light torque loads such as highway cruising. All six cylinders would be in use during most acceleration conditions.

General Motors has been developing cylinder-deactivation technology for years and announced in November that it will offer it as early as August in some of its 2005 GMC Envoy/Chevrolet TrailBlazer sport utility vehicle models equipped with V-8s. Displacement on Demand will arrive in the Malibu sedan in 2005. GM eventually will make its cylinder-deactivation technology standard equipment in the updated 3.9-liter V-6 and the 5.3-liter V-8.

Honda officials would not elaborate on a launch date for their cylinder-deactivation-equipped Accord, saying only that it would come before the end of 2004. In a press release, Honda also announced that its Variable Cylinder Management will be applied to a new model to be announced in the fall.

Fukui also announced that in 2005 the automaker will introduce a next-generation fuel-cell stack that has the ability to start in subfreezing temperatures.

Fukui said Honda’s new FC Stack is much more compact than those already on the market. It can operate at temperatures as low as 20 degrees below zero, breaking a significant technical barrier to mass-market application of fuel-cell technology.

The FC Stack features a stamped-metal separator structure and new electrolyte membranes, innovations that Honda says improve efficiency, recycleability and operation over a greater range of temperatures. The FC Stack is the first fuel cell developed wholly by Honda.

The automaker will use the FC Stack in its FCX fuel-cell vehicle. The FCX is the only fuel-cell vehicle certified by both the EPA and the California Air Resources Board for regular commercial use.

Honda currently has two hybrid autos on the market: the Insight, a two-door subcompact that launched in the U.S. market in 1999, and the Civic Hybrid, a compact four-door that went on sale in 2002. Toyota launched its Prius four-door subcompact in the United States shortly after Honda’s Insight went on sale; it began selling its second-generation Prius in 2003. That car was named the North American Car of The Year on Sunday at the North American International Auto Show.

Ford and General Motors have each announced plans to launch hybrid vehicles, including the Saturn Vue and Ford Escape SUVs, though launch dates have been set and postponed several times; and Toyota’s luxury Lexus brand has green-lighted an RX 330 hybrid SUV for launch this fall.

-brendan

All the hybrid talk makes me think that my E will remain the hauler while I'll get a fun vehicle in a couple years that is a hybrid. Would love to see a sporty type vehicle with the V6/hybrid combo.

Check out the new 255hp V6 Accord Sedan. Hybrid goes on sale December.

I still say the Diesel would be a great future engine option for the E. Check out this link. http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contendid=4022218

Wow Brendan, thanks for the good information! I had no idea that Honda was already working on this technology (or GM for that matter)! :) Very interesting indeed!

I hear that Mercedes will soon be offering diesels once again in the US (except CA) later this year (?) for about 500 smackers more than gasoline. 30% better fuel economy, AND they say that their diesels won't be smokers either!

That's the only reservation that I have about diesel technology... I can't get that darned stereotypical image of black smoke spewing tailpipes out of my head (usually on a dodge full size truck, BTW)! Other than that, it would be AWESOME to have more power AND 30% better fuel economy! :)

LEGO

I don't really see the Accord as something sporty, but it is nice to see the companies breaking out of the box and make some non econobox models hybrid (the accord, the RX330). It won't be long till it's on a 2+2 type car. Imagine the Mini convertible with a hybrid. You could drive all weekend with the top down and no fillups. Then bring it home and park it in the back of your E :wink:

[quote:f94aa2d45d=" "]Check out the new 255hp V6 Accord Sedan. Hybrid goes on sale December.[/quote:f94aa2d45d]

turbo diesel e as an option would be ultra cool -i'd've bought it without thinking twice, sure 'nough!

turbo diesel like the tdi in volkswagen golfs, jettas and passats have become increasingly more popular over the past ten years or so in europe, it's a pity they're not as common here (though this will change, rather sooner than later)

tdi's are very durable, reliable and get a gasmilage that makes other economically okay engines look indecent...(just wait 'til gas hits $4/gallon)

well, and i also feel, the e and the e community would like the turbo diesel, no?!

Now, more than ever, we need the Honda turbo diesel for the E. It is much more fuel efficient than the gas engine, more durable, has more torque, and would have better towing capacity. To me it still makes more sense than the hybrid because it is less complicated, less expensive, and is proven. The time has come.

I don't know enough about turbo diesels to make a statment about that, but as MikeQBF said, Honda hates diesels and another thing is that Honda doesn't like turbocharging either. One of the reasons Honda created VTEC was to get Turbo level power out of an engine without the turbo. Thus, it seems even less of a possibility we'll see a turbocharged diesel anytime soon.

If that is the case, this new hybrid with the cylinder control sounds promising for the E. I think we have to keep in mind, though, that the fuel economy benefits won't be much at first. Honda is shooting for 4-cylinder economy in a V6, which means we'll have more power but still be paying the same price at the pump. With the extra thousands being spent on the technololy, you're basically paying for V6 power without the loss in fuel economy. As the technolgy improves, I hope we see V6's with better fuel economy and more power than 4 cylinders.

Let me see if I can get this web page to come up again...it's about the diesel. http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4022218&src=News

How about a Diesel/electric hybrid?

http://autoweek.com/article.cms?articleId=100943

If Jeep (DaimlerChrysler) is charging $8,000 extra for their turbo diesel, anyone venture to guess what Honda might want for the same kind of option? And then, add hybrid electric to the equation? Your grandchildren could not possibly live long enough to recoup the "payback". It's one thing to wish for optional powerplants, and I'm certainly among the environmentally conscious here, but until and unless citizens of the U.S. have to pay anything near what the rest of the free world has to pay for gasoline (closer to a reality-based price), this thread might as well be emanating from DisneyWorld.

I just purchased my E last weekend, the only thing I wish was offered was the V-6. This is the first 4 cyl. Ive ever owned.

So for your type of driving the 4c Element dosen't have enough power? For most people the Element has more than enough power, considering the rate at which we spin the drive wheels and wear them down ;-)

How about adding hydrogen fuel cells as an option to this poll? Especially when honda is already playing with Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology for a while

Schwarzenegger promises 'Hydrogen Highway' by 2010
- approximately one hydrogen fuel fillup station every 20 miles

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/04/20/state1629EDT0115.DTL

http://www.hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/

http://www.hydrogenus.com/advocate/ad71jap.asp
Hydrogen Refueling Stations Open in Japan, 2002
and
http://www.enaa.or.jp/WE-NET/newinfo/station_taka_e.html

Honda is a member of the NHA, National Hydrogen Association.

Here's the Japanese view of a hydrogen economy

http://www.enaa.or.jp/WE-NET/image/illust.jpg

The only thing I don't really enjoy about my E is getting smoked off the line. I'd go for the V-6 gas.

comeon V8 Baby :)

Either a hybrid or a hydrogen fuel cell model should come out in the next few years in my opinion.

No complaints here about power (MT), but if a hybrid provided the same power with improved mpg, I'd pay extra for it. I don't see it happening, as the high-mpg hybrids are purpose-built economisers (light, aerodynamic), not just normal cars with hybrid drivetrains.

One thing about hybrid technology is irresistably seductive, tho: regenerative braking.

I sold my VW Jetta TDI (Diesel) when I bought the E.

I miss the 40+ mpg!!!

I vote turbo diesel or hybrid

Yeah, I traded my TDi Golf in for my E. Miss the gas mileage (45-47mpg) but there are a couple of things I don't. First, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't miss VW as a company to deal with after the sale and quality of build. Hopefully, Honda can easily beat that. Second thing, diesel cars are going to have to become more prevalent. As it was, the only place I could find diesel that I trusted, had two pumps out of twenty with a diesel nozzle on it. I had to fight every redneck contractor with a diesel pickup to get anywhere near the pumps and once I got there, I got some serious flack and sneering. Add onto that, any idiot who had a gasoline machine that picked those two pumps out of the twenty open, you'd be waiting forever. I often didn't stop to get fuel until after midnight when everyone went to bed. But, that being said, when they finally get around to making a diesel E, I'll buy one. :)

for all of those complaining about wanting more speed, why did you buy an SUV with the aerodynamics of a refrigerator when you should have gotten a small light weight sports car? I am not nocking the E buy any means but it was not designed for speed and could never be a speed demond without dropping it 6" and chopping the roofline a foot. No matter how big of an engine you put in there the drag of the E would still limit the speed and gas milage of the car.
I would prefer an engine that gets good gas milage and more towing power. Diesels are a great alternative and could be modified to run bio-diesel(vegitable oils). Maybe someday I will get a Euro spec diesel from a CR-V and do the swap.

Not at all interested in seeing new engine options. At Edmunds.com true cost to own:

Toyota Prius Hybrid: 42 cents per mile
Honda Element: 43 cents per mile

Add in the extra cost of hybrid technology to the base price of an element (I'm guessing it would bump it to around $25,000.00) and the cost per mile will shoot up between 5 and 10 cents per mile. So:

Honda Element: 43 cents per mile
Hybrid Honda Element: ~50 cents per mile

Difference over 100,000 miles: $7,000.00

Keep in mind the Prius has highway MPG figures of more than double the Element yet due to the high cost of hybrid technology it only has a 1 cent per mile advantage over the Element. True cost to own also takes into consideration, insurance, maintenance, fuel usage, initial cost, and depreciation.

Hybrids are a hype as far as saving money goes. Their only real advantage in my opinion is the fact that they are green.

Do any of these car companies who make hybrids think about where the batteries are going to end up when they finally die? Recycle them maybe? I haven't heard about any plans for such a program. Also, if you should happen to make it past the 8 year/80,000 mile warranty on the batteries and need to replace them out of warranty down the road, they cost around $5,000! Yeah, definitely seems like a money saving option there. :roll:

Like funktional said, the only reason to get a hybrid is because they don't pollute as much. But also, like juicebox said, that only matters if there is a good battery recycling system in place. To, right now, they are just a novelty.

One thing though... sometimes you can get a tax break when you buy a hybrid, and rumor has it that some places allow hybrids in the carpool lane even with one occupant... although I don't know where that might be, I've heard it said before.

Like funktional said, the only reason to get a hybrid is because they don't pollute as much. But also, like juicebox said, that only matters if there is a good battery recycling system in place. To, right now, they are just a novelty.

One thing though... sometimes you can get a tax break when you buy a hybrid, and rumor has it that some places allow hybrids in the carpool lane even with one occupant... although I don't know where that might be, I've heard it said before.

I have heard the same proposals for certain states. They are trying to pass laws to allow hybrid owners use of the carpool lanes. This might have been in NJ.

How about a hybrid diesel.

How about a hybrid diesel.
Probably the smartest thing anybody has said yet.

Diesels are extremely efficient - but in a very narrow RPM range. Automotive diesels are seriously compromised to favor wide RPM range. A diesel hybrid would allow the engine to operate at "optimum" while the hybrid components would give you low-RPM control and performance. A diesel hybrid plus six-speed transmission would be awesome - we're talking 60-80 mpg territory here.

Speaking of hybrids, Toyota more or less "announced" yesterday that they are going to seriously ramp-up their hybrid offerings, possibly with the goal of making hybrid drivetrains available on all models. That especially has a benefit in reducing the "hybrid premium" due to production volume; whether this all-models philosophy will mitigate replacement battery costs remains a "we'll see".

While I still think the return-on-investment with hybrids (even Toyota's) has a long way to go, you can't knock their success. IMO they have the only successful hybrid program. Honda nor Ford have the consistent results of Toyota, nor do their hybrid offerings have the degree of improvement over the same models with standard drivetrains.

And while I'm here, why doesn't anybody discuss or think about "pluggable hybrids"?

These are hybrids with a bigger battery pack that allows you to run short-distant errands without even starting the ICE (internal-combustion engine, for those of you who don't understand EV-speak (EV = electric vehicles)). I recall reading about somebody with an original Prius (or maybe Insight?) had doubled or tripled the battery pack and was getting a couple of miles on electric alone. The Element with its large flat area would be absolutely perfect for a layer of cylindrical-cell batteries.

It galls me no end that Toyota pounds the drum about "you don't have to plug it in!"... no, you still remain beholden to Big Oil. Plugging-in is no big deal with a little planning. I put 250-300 miles a month on my electric car, and it's become a reflex action to get out, reach over to the handy cord hanging-up on the garage wall and plug it in to freshen the charge for the next trip out.

>One thing about hybrid technology is irresistably seductive, tho: regenerative braking.

The reality is that it's not very efficient. The energy control is fairly complex and management systems for real-world power levels get really expensive. It works well in the Toyota because their battery pack is small and "fills up" quickly at relatively low current levels. In a real EV the power return is less than 10% - in other words, going down the hill you just went up still costs you 90%. You're better off putting the same investment into more batteries than in a regenerative-capable controller.

If Honda created a HYBRID model of the Element, I'd be first in line at the dealership. Once the shift begins, maybe we can start talking hydrogen fuel cells?

If the price was within reason I would definitely purchase a hybrid Element.

I think they should go with the V-6 hybrid so you still get hp and more mpg.

>...maybe we can start talking hydrogen fuel cells?

Please understand this from somebody who knows how fuel cells work: the "thumping" of this technology is a bunch of BS intended to shift focus away from more viable solutions. There are considerable limitations where it is nowhere near ready for consumer products... and will not be ready for a long, long, LONG time.

We're not talking about the hydrogen-as-a-fuel infrastructure here - we're talking about key parts within the fuel cell conversion process that have very short useful lives and are hugely expensive due to rare-element components. The best assessment I've heard (thanks, Larry!) is that it amounts to replacing your engine every 6-8000 miles.

Forget hydrogen fuel cells. Until there is a revolutionary shift in the technology, it's mostly smoke and mirrors.

Did anybody see the latest Consumer reports. It featured a 2006 small Acura SUV based on the CRV platform. It will have a V6 and is positioned to compete with the BMW M3 and other emerging small lux suv's. Consumer Reports picked it as one of their interesting new vehicles for 2006.

With gas prices rising as much as they are, it's better to get hyrbids now. At least for me, I do a lot of distance traveling, so it would work out better for me than for others.

I came from a V6 and an RX-7 before that, hence my choice, but I wouldn't mind giving a turbo diesel a shot as well .... I was considering a Jetta TDI before I got my E. The only thing is that the Jetta TDI only had like 90 or 100 hp. I've never driven one, so I don't really know, but how much power is that gonna deliver vs. our current engine vs. a V6?