| vicpai |
I was at Borders a few days back, and in the latest edition of Motor Trend there was a spy pic of the MDX (the ones we've already seen) with a small writeup beneath it. It said that the redesigned MDX engine will feature "cylinder deactivation" ......that's some of the best news ever, and music to my ears!!!....so if this is true, and the new MDX is getting a 3.7-3.8 liter 300bhp V6, we'll be able to "have our cake and eat it too"!!!! :29: ....I'm saying an EPA rating of something like 19city/26hwy
.....if this is the case, it will make the MDX's smaller sibling, the RDX, look REALLY REALLY REALLY BAD in the fuel economy department!!!! (and rightfully so)
Personally, I think this information is credible because, supposedly, Honda has already released detailed info to publications, but there is an embargo on it until Sep 01, 2006 |
|
|
| wmquan |
It's logical that the new MDX will have VCM. The Odyssey has it in higher trim.
Mileage will depend a lot on how much the new MDX weighs, and if Honda can get greater efficiencies if the engine is providing more power.
Less than two weeks to go. |
|
|
| JL_SS |
Honda Pilot with 4WD and NO VCM MPG = 17/22 mpg EPA
Honda Pilot with 2WD and VCM MPG = 18/24 mpg EPA
And so far no one is really posting any real life mileage gains with the 150 weight reduction and VCM of the 2wd. MPG is so sensitive to driving style/terrain that the range of mpgs reported are much wider than that 1-2 mpg EPA increase anyway. I wouldn't expect any noticeable mpg increase with the new MDX if it gets VCM. |
|
|
| teton |
Cylinder Deactivation only benefits people who sit and park in traffic a lot. In fact, they'd be better off deactivating all cylinders e.g. shut off the engine. For people who aren't stuck in the traffic cylinder deactivation doesn't do anything for them. What they need is a lighter vehicle and better aerodynamics.
Stop-and-go is NOT sitting in traffic, this type of driving will not benefit from cylinder deactivation. This requires a lighter vehicle since most of the fuel is consumed in acceleration.
I live in an area where I am lucky to almost never sit in traffic, but I do encounter some stop and go in the city, i.e. red lights. Also I cruise on the freeways a lot so in my case cylinder deactivation will have minimal benefits. Even for folks that live in LA I suspect what they really need is a lighter vehicle. This is why I keep saying they need to make car-based-suvs that are bigger. Folks want the extra space but they don't need the extra weight. I wonder if the new X will gain a few hundred pounds.
-Teton |
|
|
| jford62 |
| Our 2005 Odyssey has it and I wish it didn't. I feel a vibration when it is in the economy mode that the mechanic at the dealer could not feel in a long test drive. He hooked up a diagnostic tablet when we went on the drive, and every time I told him I felt the vibration, it coincided with the VCM kicking in and staying in 3 cylinder mode....basically, no problem found. My 2001 MDX gets better highway mileage than the Odyssey....I would shut it off if there was some way for me to do it. |
|
|
| BLEXV6 |
quote:
Originally posted by teton
Cylinder Deactivation only benefits people who sit and park in traffic a lot. In fact, they'd be better off deactivating all cylinders e.g. shut off the engine. For people who aren't stuck in the traffic cylinder deactivation doesn't do anything for them. What they need is a lighter vehicle and better aerodynamics.
Stop-and-go is NOT sitting in traffic, this type of driving will not benefit from cylinder deactivation. This requires a lighter vehicle since most of the fuel is consumed in acceleration.
I live in an area where I am lucky to almost never sit in traffic, but I do encounter some stop and go in the city, i.e. red lights. Also I cruise on the freeways a lot so in my case cylinder deactivation will have minimal benefits. Even for folks that live in LA I suspect what they really need is a lighter vehicle. This is why I keep saying they need to make car-based-suvs that are bigger. Folks want the extra space but they don't need the extra weight. I wonder if the new X will gain a few hundred pounds.
Well, I don't know if I agree with your assessment. Cylinder deactivation is used at highway speeds to my knowledge, so when you are on the highway and don't neeed all 6 cylinders, it reduces to 3 tosave fuel. I don't think it works at lower speeds.
-Teton
|
|
|
| BLEXV6 |
quote:
Originally posted by teton
Cylinder Deactivation only benefits people who sit and park in traffic a lot. In fact, they'd be better off deactivating all cylinders e.g. shut off the engine. For people who aren't stuck in the traffic cylinder deactivation doesn't do anything for them. What they need is a lighter vehicle and better aerodynamics.
Stop-and-go is NOT sitting in traffic, this type of driving will not benefit from cylinder deactivation. This requires a lighter vehicle since most of the fuel is consumed in acceleration.
I live in an area where I am lucky to almost never sit in traffic, but I do encounter some stop and go in the city, i.e. red lights. Also I cruise on the freeways a lot so in my case cylinder deactivation will have minimal benefits. Even for folks that live in LA I suspect what they really need is a lighter vehicle. This is why I keep saying they need to make car-based-suvs that are bigger. Folks want the extra space but they don't need the extra weight. I wonder if the new X will gain a few hundred pounds.
-Teton
I have to disagree. The cylinder deactivation to my knowledge is only operational at higher speeds, for example, you are cruising on the highway, and does not need all 6 cylinders and reduces to 3. I do not believe it works at all at low speeds or idle. |
|
|
| BigHersh |
quote:
Originally posted by BLEXV6
I have to disagree. The cylinder deactivation to my knowledge is only operational at higher speeds, for example, you are cruising on the highway, and does not need all 6 cylinders and reduces to 3. I do not believe it works at all at low speeds or idle.
x 2 :claphead:
Every vehicle I've read about with cylinder deactivation, does it at highway speed to extend fuel economy, since it takes less power to keep a vehicle in motion, once it's moving. But, when you gas it you get all your cylinders back, until you settle back into a cruise again. It diesn't work (At least it shouldn't be) when you're in low speed, stop & go situations.
Economy when its helpful.
Power when you need it. |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
| This feature seems more marketing hype than actual gain. The other manufacturers systems aren't any better either - the 300's with the cylinder deactivation still only get mid teens... pretty bad especially for a sedan! |
|
|
| BigHersh |
quote:
Originally posted by carguy1234
This feature seems more marketing hype than actual gain. The other manufacturers systems aren't any better either - the 300's with the cylinder deactivation still only get mid teens... pretty bad especially for a sedan!
Only the V-8's have this (Typically), and as stated, it only works on the highway. In town speeds, it shoud be transparent/non functional. I dunno if it's "widespread" among V-6's... The 300's are pretty big, very powerful cars. The weakest "HEMI" still puts out 345 HP. With that kind of power on tap, I'd take MPG in the teens, and the SRT variant has 425 HP...:noshiz:
300 Touring
MPG City 19
MPG Highway 27
300C (HEMI)
MPG City 17
MPH Highway 25
300 C SRT-8: (HEMI)
MPG City 14
MPH Highway 20 |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
quote:
Originally posted by BigHersh
Only the V-8's have this (Typically), and as stated, it only works on the highway. In town speeds, it shoud be transparent/non functional. I dunno if it's "widespread" among V-6's... The 300's are pretty big, very powerful cars. The weakest "HEMI" still puts out 345 HP. With that kind of power on tap, I'd take MPG in the teens, and the SRT variant has 425 HP...:noshiz:
300 Touring
MPG City 19
MPG Highway 27
300C (HEMI)
MPG City 17
MPH Highway 25
300 C SRT-8: (HEMI)
MPG City 14
MPH Highway 20
I agree they have tons of power, but my point was that they get no where near the MPG's quoted, even with the cylinder deactivation - hence the "hype" comment about this feature that doesn't really buy much. |
|
|
| pdempsey |
| Cylinder deactivation is a deal maker for me. If I can get a couple of extra MPG at 3.29 per Gal - 87 Octane, I'll go for it. |
|
|
| wmquan |
Hmmm is it even going to give a couple of extra miles per gallon?
On Honda's site:
Odyssey EX (no VCM): 18/25 EPA, 4,475 pounds
Odyssey EX-L (VCM): 19/26 EPA, 4,541 pounds
JL_SS posted this earlier:
Honda Pilot with 4WD and NO VCM MPG = 17/22 mpg EPA
Honda Pilot with 2WD and VCM MPG = 18/24 mpg EPA
In EX trim, the weights are 4497 / 4341. So the 2WD's enjoy a more significant weight difference which might be why it's 2 more miles a gallon than 1 as with the Odyssey.
And JL_SS also indicated that "real world" experiences don't show a significant difference. |
|
|
| jwaters |
If Honda/Acura really wanted to, they could not only make the MDX the most powerful 6 cylinder powered sport/utility in it's class, but also the most effecient.
Technology I would *like* to see on the new MDX:
-Further refinement of the engine for more horsepower, less friction and exhaust resistance (like the new VQ engine)
-Direct fuel injection (like Audi and Toyota's new engines)
-VCM (for highway drivers it does help, even if it's only slightly)
-6-speed automatic for improved performance and efficiency (Acura, please get rid of the 5-speed already. MB is using 7 and Lexus is now up to 8. Heck, even GM & Ford are now implementing 6-speed autos)
-Improved aerodynamics (it's an SUV, so I know little can be done...but, every little bit helps)
I know I'm probably dreaming, but I would love to see an MDX that could get around 30mpg on the highway and 20mpg in the city. |
|
|
|
