v8 > v6 is a perception Honda has failed to recognize

as for just stuffing in a big engine - that has never been Honda's motive - they thoroughly engineer before taking on such a major change in engine/drivetrain/platform

 

the original accord v6?

they mde the nose longer just to cram it in there.

 

are there more?...one example doesn't create a modus operandi

 

what makes you think they didn't thouroughly engineer the first accord V6? of course they had to make the nose/engine bay larger to fit the engine in - what else were they supposed to do? what jaje is saying still makes sense: they have no V8 or larger in a production car, and never have. so they aren't just going to rush one out and stuff it into the RL. whereas the engine in the accord V6 had essentially been in use for nearly a decade by the time it was introduced (1995).

 

The major assumption you're making here is that the difference in width between the blocks is similar to difference in width between the transmission housings. I really don't have any idea if this is true or not. But, even if it is, space is not your only constraint. I would bet the driveshaft to the rear couldn't go in the same place if you put in a V8, because the transmission will shift to the side. Which then might affect where the exhaust travels, or where the fuel tank is laid out or the structure of the rear axle. You change one thing and suddenly a gazillion things need to change as well. And each of these things will need its own solution to the constraints of the current frame. And you end up with a car that really wasn't meant to work that way. Or is really heavy, or is expensive to make. Add on that Honda doesn't have a V8 in its lineup anyway, so that needs to be developed. I think Acura made the right move here, salvaging what they can with the current generation, and hopefully moving towards a V8 for the next design cycle.

 

that engine also came directly from the acura legend 2.7liter v6 which was an accord chassis so updating it was very easy as they had the engine, drivetrain and the same chassis - they only had to adjust it to fit b/c of the front bumper and hood clearance

 

let's not forget Mugen put in a V8 the first year RL came out. so we know could be done and had been done. the question is if Honda is interested and financially does it make sense.

i am no engineer, but it seems like the least expensive fix would be taking out some of the less useful luxury items, reduce weight of the car and maybe put in a turbo to boost performance while keeping the price similar to current model.

 

I looked at the new RL and came to this conclusion: Cramped interior due to all-wheel drive, overly complex and much too expensive relative to other vehicles on the market. I also looked at the new '07 Lexus 350 at the auto show and walked away. No headroom in the back and too expensive for a dressed up Camry. Ended up buying a high-end 2006 Honda Accord complete with NAV and a 100K/7year/0-deductable warranty for $28K plus tax. No other car I looked at at any price offered this much value per dollar, which is my criterion for buying a car.

The only downside to the Accord is that it has a rough ride with the 17" tires. I had hoped to correct this by switching the original tires to the new Goodyear Comfort Tread series, which provided phenomenal ride improvement for my old '98 I30, but they don't make them in 17" at this time.

Bottom line is that the old RL was more in line with what I want in a sedan, namely reliability, comfort, adequate performance, economical operation, luxurious interior, and all at a reasonable price. The new RL doesn't fit that profile, whereas the '06 Accord does. When I am in the mood for pure performance, I drive my C6 Corvette.

 

For this month's issue of Car and Driver, they had an RL for their long term test (40k miles). The car had some issues - moonroof wouldn't close, mulitple squeaks and rattles, the nav system kept rebooting itself, and the power windows and mirrors shorted out twice. They liked the car over all, but it spent more time at the dealers service department than I would guess most Hondas and Acuras (not to mention some part it needed took over 2 weeks to get from Japan).

I'm guessing since it's Honda's most advanced and complex vehicle, the kinks had to be worked out (it was an '05, so first full model year of production).

 

Bingo. A twin-turbo V-6, or even a twin-scroll turbo V-6 could easily generate more power AND torque, with a borad distribution of torque, than the competition's V-8s.

However, two questions remain.

Can it be done at the same cost as the current model? I don't see how. I think it would have to be an option, just as Infinity's M can be had with the base 3.5L V-6, or the optional V-8.

Will luxury car buyers opt for a more powerful turbo V-6 over a V-8? I don't know. I'm certainly not part of the demographic that typically shops for an RL or an M35/45 (not old enough or rich enough). My guess is no.

But, who knows? I could be wrong.