Diesel vs Petrol 8th Gen

Hi all, have recently sold my BMW and am looking for either a late 7th or an early 8th Gen Accord.
I had a CTDI Accord which was great other than a battery drain that couldn't be traced - no DPF to worry about but I do like the look of the 8th Gen.
Although my mileage isn't very high I like the driving characteristics of the diesel engine.
However with the i- DTEC having a DPF I am concerned that short local trips and the occasional longer one would give issues.
Not to bothered about fuel economy, so, my alternative choice is the 2.0 VTEC ( Not paying £300 + tax for a 2.4 ).
I have read in some reviews that the 2.0 VTEC car is underpowered with that engine, sometimes struggling on motorway inclines in 6th gear.
I have also read the forums on DPF issues but wonder if they are really as bad for everyone. I live a bit far from F6HAD to get that issue sorted so maybe a petrol would solve that problem if performance is OK. Not looking to burn the road up but nice to go when you need to.


I wonder if any members have experience of these cars regarding DPF on short trips and VTEC performance that they could share with me.

Thanks in advance
Geoff

For a comparison of torque at the wheels see here --> http://typeaccord.co.uk/forum/topic/23311-diesel-bashing-thread-only-kidding-pros-and-cons-discussion/?p=241802

While that post is "7th-gen 2.4 petrol" vs "7th-gen 2.2 diesel", and while the curves are based on WOT, it does demonstrate that the drivability of the 2.4 petrol is very good. It pulls well at light throttle openings at low revs in high gears, basically because the torque curve is relatively flat. Although the 2.0 is only 70% of the 2.4 at WOT, I wouldn't expect much noticeable difference of the 2.0 other than at WOT in low gears. I would also suspect that the reason for the better mpg of the 2.0 vs the 2.4 is because any WOT and/or higher rpm simply gives better BSFC than the 2.4.

Regarding the DPF on the 8th gen diesel, it's only really a sticking plaster. Its main intention is to limit the emissions of particulates to less than 0.005 g/km during the test for the car to achieve the legislative standard at the time the car was introduced. But all it does is "store" the particulates in the DPF until the engine ECU senses that some accumulation has taken place in the DPF and then initiates a burn process when the car seems to be cruising on motorway or dual-carriageway. Thus is the DPF is removed, it won't make any difference to polar bears, and it won't affect the NOx issue (because a DPF on its own doesn't stop NOx).

Cheers Brian. Looks like the 2.0 shouldn't bee too bad.
Geoff

I've never driven one tbh, but I think the "under-powered" thing probably comes from instances at traffic-lights, but even the 2.4 won't beat a lot of small cars away from traffic lights.

I'm not up for drag racing off traffic lights. Lol. As long as it will tootle around town and cruise comfortably at about the speed limit on duals and motorways, that will suit me. Got my eye on a es gt. 108k. Hopefully be alright.

In that case I'm sure you'll find it ok

There is quite a difference between the K24A3 (7th gen) and K24Z3 (8th gen), and probably same goes for K20A6 (7th gen) and K20Z2 (8th gen)

Overall bang for buck, you can't go wrong with an idtec 8th gen. And once the DPF is solved it's a very reliable and economical luxury car.

Thanks for the comment Fahad, but I'm in south wales and that's a bit far to come to you. Don't know if there are any reliable solvers of DPF issues in our area !!!!
Cheers, Geoff

Test drive both petrol and diesel variants and then decide.. an idtec auto is a lovely car

Selling my 2.4 if interested