Traction control on 4 cylinder Honda Accords?

Hi,

I've been looking at 2004 Honda Accord EX models, and have test driven
the automatic transmission version of both the I-4 and V-6 models.
For my needs, the performance of the I-4 motor is more than
sufficient. The I-4 motor also gets better gas mileage.

My one concern with buying an Accord EX with the I-4 motor is the lack
of traction control. I live in New England and the roads can get
pretty bad at times. I do plan to buy a set of winter tires, but I
feel that having I having traction control is very desirable for
winter driving. Currently I have a very primitive version of traction
control in my '93 Saturn SC2, and it has come in very handy over the
years.

Does anyone know if Honda has any plan to offer traction control on
Accords with the I-4 motor? Perhaps in the 2005 model year? If so,
then I would hold off on buying the car until that time. Otherwise,
it looks like I'd be forced to buy an Accord EX with the V-6 motor to
get the traction control.

Thanks in advance for any input.

Ken

 

Personally, I think a bad traction control system is a waste of $$$.
Perhaps the one on the Saturn SC2 was better then others.

Pars

 

On 6 Apr 2004 12:01:34 -0700, (Ken) wrote:

||Hi,
||
||I've been looking at 2004 Honda Accord EX models, and have test driven
||the automatic transmission version of both the I-4 and V-6 models.
||For my needs, the performance of the I-4 motor is more than
||sufficient. The I-4 motor also gets better gas mileage.
||
||My one concern with buying an Accord EX with the I-4 motor is the lack
||of traction control. I live in New England and the roads can get
||pretty bad at times. I do plan to buy a set of winter tires, but I
||feel that having I having traction control is very desirable for
||winter driving. Currently I have a very primitive version of traction
||control in my '93 Saturn SC2, and it has come in very handy over the
||years.
||
||Does anyone know if Honda has any plan to offer traction control on
||Accords with the I-4 motor? Perhaps in the 2005 model year? If so,
||then I would hold off on buying the car until that time. Otherwise,
||it looks like I'd be forced to buy an Accord EX with the V-6 motor to
||get the traction control.

Our Beetle has traction control. Last snow it kept my wife from getting up our
long gravel drive. I had to turn it off to get the car parked.
Rex in Fort Worth

 

I have a 2003 EX V6 with traction control. I live in New York and we do
get snow. The traction control has kicked in from time to time this
past winter but whether we would have gotten stuck without it is hard to
say. Personally, I would rather have it than not (you can always switch
it off if you don't like it). I have driven both and the I-4 performs
fine, but the V6 is better, and its mileage has been good--32 mpg on
250-300 mile trips.

 

I have the V-6 and one of the reasons I bought it is that I like traction
control.

The Acura TSX has a hotted up version of the I-4 and is available with
traction control. You might test drive one to see how you like it. More
$$$ though!

John

 

Complete waste of money on a FWD car.

 

||On 6 Apr 2004 12:01:34 -0700, (Ken) wrote:
||
||>My one concern with buying an Accord EX with the I-4 motor is the lack
||>of traction control.
||
||Complete waste of money on a FWD car.

I think the 4-cylinder and automatic trans pretty much makes traction control
redundant
Rex in Fort Worth

 

Maybe in Texas, maybe not in Ontario.

 

Still a waste, no matter where you are. It just don't matter if you
spin a wheel from time to time.

 

Oh.

So why does it matter on RWD?

 

Because, on RWD cars, the rear wheels are the ones that slip if you
apply too much power for the available traction. This can lead to a
condition called "oversteer". In other words, the tail-end of the car
swings out, and the car may even spin all the way around. This is a
completely different dynamic than what happens when you spin the
driven wheels with a FWD car.

Honestly. You implied that you live in Ontario. I assume you've
driven a FWD car in slippery conditions, and occasionally spun a
wheel? Was it scary/dangerous? Did you feel the need to buy an
expensive traction-control system to prevent it from happening again?

 

Really, why?

Do you actually understand what traction control is and how it works?

John

 

That is *not* oversteer - it's a skid. Oversteer is a controllable
condition where the slip angle of the rear tires is greater than the front
- the tires are still working within their normal grip parameters and have
not yet lost traction.

Have you not heard of uhh, understeer? Hint: it's slip angles again.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

To be more precise, the loss of control I described is known as "snap
oversteer".

http://eaglewoman.racesimcentral.com/gpl/grehelp/glossary.htm

Of course. And it doesn't lend itself to the loss of vehicle control
that snap oversteer can. It's eminently manageable.

 

It's a euphemism for tail-wagging.

Slip angles is *not* "sliding". Either those guys don't really know or
can't be bothered to explain properly.

Unless the speed really is excessive, i.e. the driver completely misjudged
the corner, it's true that backing off on a properly engineered chassis
with FF usually saves you from a catastrophe on a bend where it usually
doesn't on a FR and may even make things worse. OTOH the benefit of
traction control is *not* limited to cornering, e.g. when the front wheels
unload slightly on low speed acceleration with a FF.

In very slippery conditions -- wet snow, ice etc. -- the worst part of the
battle is getting and keeping sufficient momentum without putting too much
torque to the wheel and causing loss of traction. IOW once you lose
traction it's hard to reacquire it - a FF car can benefit from traction
control by that dynamically reduced torque.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

Definately it helps, but not as much as having the right tires for the job
at hand. I found traction control _useless_ with certain types of tires.

I don't know how many drivers are aware of this, but many of the Honda
automatics stay locked in 2nd gear if you select 2nd. They don't downshift
to 1st. So you can reduce the torque and manage wheel spin much easier.
Together with a real winter tire, this works much better than traction
control and supposed "all season" tires. And if you're driving stick, then
you can start in 2nd gear as well to reduce torque.

Of course traction control _with_ good tires is the the best choice if you
can get it. Just don't expect miracles from traction control on tires that
don't suit the conditions.

 

I used to use "real Winter tires" when I had a VW Beetle - other than that,
for the maybe 3 times a year I'd really need them, they're a waste of my
$$, time and storage space. I do not want tire gorillas hacking at my
wheels, studs & hubs twice a year... and I do not have storage space for 12
wheels/tires. There *are* good all-season tires on the market, even high
performance ones, which with a bit of planning on when to venture out in
Winter can work satisfactorily for places which are not quasi permanently
snowed in.

Unfortunately the OE tires fitted by manufacturers are not in that
category. If there was not this obsession with tire wear on the part of
the consumer, that might be able to be changed more easily. Many of the OE
tires are simply dangerous - prime example: Michelin XGTV4s fitted to
Integras... probably the worst tire in the wet I've ever encountered and
yet it is/was labelled M+S.

Adding traction control to a good all-season tire for the occasional Winter
weather use is a viable alternative IMO.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

ABS, not traction control, helps to safely deal with excessive speed.

Sorry, but I just don't see the benefit there. It's just all too
easy to regulate the wheel spin with the gas peddle, and wheel spin
isn't punished by a sudden loss of control, as it can be in a
rear-driver. Traction control can actually be a hinderance in
situations where some wheel spin will indeed accelerate the vehicle
more quickly.

I'll turn it off in my BMW in situations where I need a quick burst
off acceleration, such as crossing a busy highway, and don't want to
worry about my acceleration being squashed at a dangerous moment, just
because I spun a little bit on a patch of sand. Honestly, if the car
wasn't rear-drive, I wouldn't even want traction control - even if it
was free.

 

That's what was on my Prelude Si, and they were terrible in Winter
conditions. The Prelude was my first car with ABS, and for years I
thought that ABS was a terrible joke (and indeed, the implementation
of ABS on that car wasn't the greatest), but when I started using
Nokian's in the Winter, it was "wow, this really works!"

 

I agree. I like the Nokian WR in that category, it's an all-season that
really works well for snow / ice. That's what I plan to on putting on
soon. I'll still put on Nokian Hakka Qs for winter, but I'll use the WRs
for summer. Where I am, close to the mountains, we still get caught in the
odd snow storm in May for example. The WRs will be far better in these
situations than the Pilot Sports I'm using for "summer" now.

I found the same thing with the Michelin MXV4s. I don't know how I made it
through a winter with them. I replaced them with Pilot Sports, which are
considered more of a "performance" tire and have less wear, but they were
actually better in snow than the MXV4 "Engergy" tires.

Yep. It's too bad that you don't see a lot of these on from factory. I'm
guessing for some makes, they're focusing more on tires that are cheap and
have long wear, like you said above. They might also be give priority to
fuel efficiency too. Not many factory supplied tires do well on snow/ice.