Menu
What's new
By:
Advanced search...

what is difference?

mikem

mikem

Members
Messages
248
Reaction score
5
Location
Lancashire
Car
accord
as the ***le says what are the differences? Apart from the badges steering wheel and seat pockets, what is the difference?
 
The TypeV is basically a 'parts bin special', but in a very good way. Basically the Type V comes with all the toys Honda had to use at the time i.e. Sat nav, electric everything, leather etc etc.

If it were a choice between the 2 then i'd have to go with the Type V everytime.
 
I think you could get a 2.3 litre lump in type-v as well, which wasn't available on the other models? Seem to remember seeing a 2.3 badge on one I was driving behind and it stuck in my mind cos of the unusual engine size
 
Yep, 2.3 in mine. Not a fast engine despite it's size by any stretch of the imagination. Only puts out 150BHP, but it pulls the Accord and it's weight with ease and cruises very well. And it will return a respectable 30mpg when driven "properly".

The fully loaded Type-V only came available in September 2001, 51 reg. Before then the sat nav was optional. I think that was the only option though!
 
^^^Cheers Colin. Much appreciated.

And iirc the 2.3 Type V was the non-vtec one.
 
I don't know about the earlier pre facelift models, but the facelift 2.3 is a vtec lump, but only SOHC.

I believe the Type-R is the only Accord with a DOHC engine.
 
I can't believe the 2.3 is a VTEC engine if it only puts out 3bhp more than the 2 litre VTEC engine??!
 
According to Parkers (excuse the pun), the 2.3 Type-V blows the insignificant 2l engine away with a huge difference of....




wait for it....





149bhp compared to the 2l's 144
& a stonking 132mph compared to only 130mph from the slow 2l.

Because of the amazing difference in performance it's a whole 0.3 of a second faster to 60!

Drag race anyone? It could just be a photo finish!
 
Josh2109 said:
I think you could get a 2.3 litre lump in type-v as well, which wasn't available on the other models? Seem to remember seeing a 2.3 badge on one I was driving behind and it stuck in my mind cos of the unusual engine size
Click to expand...
so there was a 2ltr and a 2.3?
But the 2.3 was unique to V type?
 
mikem said:
Then I suspect the 2.3 was the same engine that they put in the Rover 623 Gsi
Click to expand...

Wikipedia says as much, and a quick google suggests that too (parts avail kale on Ebay that are listed for both cars).

I must admit I knew that the 400 was the same as the civic, but I thought the 600 was like the 5the gen accord because of the production years.

I'll have to bear the 600 in mind next toying I'm looking for engine parts in the scrapyard.
 
AcesHigh said:
Wikipedia says as much, and a quick google suggests that too (parts avail kale on Ebay that are listed for both cars).

I must admit I knew that the 400 was the same as the civic, but I thought the 600 was like the 5the gen accord because of the production years.

I'll have to bear the 600 in mind next toying I'm looking for engine parts in the scrapyard.
Click to expand...

My apologies for replying months later. I have both a 2.0i SE Exec (2000) and a V-type 2.3i (2001). The 2.3l engine is the same as the 2.0l engine but a different stroke etc. And 5bhp. The Rover GSi has a different head... the one that can have problems with overheating due to it's restricted water space. The Rover 620i engine is the same as the Accord 5th.gen, but bits from the 623 will fit (depending on what it is).

Both are autos. I prefer the 2.0l gearbox to the 2.3l gearbox but it is an acquired taste. Honda changed the gear ratios in the autobox for the 2001 plus models and it now holds the gear for longer before changing up. With the net result it is quicker but more thirsty by about 3mpg (and depending on driver... my wife has a heaver right foot!)

Best Regards... Ian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top