bruce van

Dunnojack, nice photochop skillz bro.

I don't mind the kink so much. What I do mind is the how the rail cuts into the rear quarter of the vehicle. This is just another example of how Honda designers have really dropped the ball. When are they going to wake up and fire these people responsible for dragging down the entire company?

IS350jet

You're just not getting it, are you? I'm finding it difficult to understand how you define technology. What, there's no such thing as mechanical technology? I suppose if Honda were building 2 and 3 speed transmissions like manufacturers did in the 60's and 70's, that would be okay with you. By your thinking, HDTV isn't a technological advancement at all. Hell, all it is, is 1's and 0's, which we've had for for 75 years.

You don't think that when car manufactures started offering 4 speed automatics that that was a technological advancement? What if the only manual transmission Toyota made was a 4 speed? Would you not question their engineering and technology advancements, especially when ALL other manufacturers offer 5 and 6 speeds, and have so, for years? It's the same thing with automatics. Where would any manufacturer be today if all they built were 3 speed autos?

Lenscap2

Not true. The SE is mast antenna only. And the XLE has the mast antenna, too, unless you get a pricey option package.

LexJaq

You walked right into my trap.

Toyota Yaris: 4 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/yaris/specs.html

Toyota Corolla: 4 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/corolla/specs.html

Toyota Matrix: 4 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/matrix/specs.html

Toyota Tacoma: 4 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/tacoma/specs.html

Toyota Tundra: 5 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/tundra/specs.html

Toyota Rav4: 4 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/rav4/specs.html

Toyota FJ Cruiser: 4 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/specs.html

Toyota Highlander: 5 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/highlander/specs.html

Toyota 4Runner: 5 speed automatic
http://www.toyota.com/4runner/specs.html

I can't believe how far behind the curve Toyota is.

Sometimes, debating on the internet is fun.


Are you saying that if Honda was to stuff another gear into the Oddy's transmission, but made no other improvements, that the transmission's technology content is current?

UDel

For all the complaining and jabs Honda is taking for using a 5 speed auto in the new Odyssey compared to Toyota using that "high tech" modern 6 speed has anyone compared the fuel economy numbers?

I'll be the first to say I don't buy into EPA numbers much since real world driving can lead to different results and many makes and models real world either tend to out or under perform EPA numbers but look at the ratings.

Honda with its "ancient" 5 speed and "ancient" SOHC J series v6 in the new Odyssey gets 18/27 mpg compared to Toyota with its "high tech" modern 6 speed and newer DOHC engine gets 18/24mpg in the fwd v6. Both have similar weights yet the Odyssey gets a good deal better fuel economy with its 5 speed hwy then the Sienna gets with a 6 speed. Shouldn't the issue be how underwhelming the Sienna performs with its newer supposed superior engine and transmission compared to the Odyssey. The Sienna does make more hp where the Odyssey makes a little more torque but they most likely will accelerate very close to each other. Even comparing the new 6 speed 4 cylinder Sienna the new 5 speed 6 cyl Odyssey still gets better highway fuel economy.

By stepping up to that "high tech" modern 6 speed auto in the Odyssey you get a whopping 1mpg improvement in fuel economy which maybe nice but I don't see 1mpg setting the world on fire. It may be a good deal quicker but that is yet to be seen. At 19/28mpg for the Oddy 6 speed auto it is significantly more fuel efficient then the Sienna 18/24mpg and that is not even throwing the AWD Sienna poor 16/22mpg rating in there.

Styling aside the Odyssey gets better fuel economy, has higher resale, and has a nicer interior then the low rent Sienna's that many have complained about. I am not a mini van buyer but I doubt some odd styling bits are going to turn many buyers off from the Odyssey when they start comparing based upon specs and merits.

Compare Camry 6 speed autos ratings to Accord 5 speed ratings.

Accord 5 speed v6 20/30 Camry 6 speed v6 20/29
4 cyl 23/34 4 cyl 22/33

Same thing, higher hp Accord 5 speed auto are more fuel efficient then lower hp Camry 6 speeds according to EPA. You don't need a bunch of gears over 5 speeds to get good fuel economy and the fuel economy in the Sienna and Camry is not very impressive with the 6 speed auto compared to the 5 speed auto in the Odyssey and Accord. Give Honda some credit for getting better fuel economy out of less gears then Toyota gets with more gears in very similar vehicles. It seems there is no real advantage in these cases for needing more gears.

LexFather

1. We don't join Clublexus as 1sIcklex to try to confuse people.

2. We don't "spring traps" on Clublexus. I also don't spend my time on Toyota's website like you do. This is a place for intelligent discussion not for "tricks", "traps" and childishness.

You have ignored multiple members refuting your dull argument to now involve Toyota. This thread is about the Honda Odyessy. Shall we bring up every single vehicle made and what transmission they have?

The other point you missed in trying to set your "trap" is Toyota has 6 speeds and has for years. Shall we mention all the technology Toyota has? Leading hybrids? A TRD S/C 500hp Tundra? I don't think so, that is not the point. This is not a Toyota vs Honda discussion.

The point is simple, one should not have to pay $40,000 for a 6 speed auto. It should be standard like everyone else.

Uhh, no one said it didn't make good MPG. However it could make even BETTER MPG if they really tried. You are picking and argument and being a Honda apologist for the sake of it.

Most here know and acknowledge the Odyessy is a fantastic van and is possibly best in class. Why is that point missed and past over to bring up a Honda vs Toyota argument?

I am not going to get into a Honda vs Toyota debate as I don't own either and won't be buying either and I find the Honda lineup so ugly that Shrek laughs at them.

Enjoy the thread.

LexJaq

Thank you for adding the icing on the cake, UDel. My next post, when I had time, was going to compare the two minivans' MPG numbers to see how the uber high tech Toyota drivetrain stacked up against Honda's 1970's technology. Evidently, the Toyota doesn't fare well.

I think that we've adequately made our point using published facts, and done so without resorting to baseless comments and spouting off at the mouth.

Don't get me wrong. If newly updated part designs and fancy marketing material are your thing, that's cool, and I don't have any problem with that. I'm a little different, though, and choose to support designs that deliver proven results, regardless of when or how they were conceived.

1Sick (re: your final post from a few sec's ago), common dude. Have some dignity. You threw out some comments, shot yourself in the foot, and someone called you on it. Just smile and move on.

And I'm not going to submit posts in this thread any more. I think that we've made our point, and proven it using facts and links to credible sources. I wouldn't mind seeing the transmission posts split off into another thread, so that this one can remain centered around the new Oddy.

knihc2008

iTrader: (1)

According to insideline:
Honda officials say they could have integrated the tracks with the windows, but it would have forced them to relocate the door motors, depleting shoulder room.

Not really sure what the big deal is anyway, to be honest.

Also, great posts by Udel and LexJaq

LexFather

Icing on the cake? Yeah if its chocolate covered calamari goathead cake. You are so intent on joining here to argue you missed everything positive said to go on some tangent against Toyota. Let me repeat.

The Odyssey gets great MPG. The Odyssey is considered best in class. What is insane and what I don't agree with is someone has to spend $40,000 for a 6 speed tranny when its standard everywhere else. NO ONE said it doesn't get good MPG.

I ignored your first quote of my post and you never refuted mine or anyone's claim on technology. You went onto a Toyota rant. I am not going to defend Toyota. I don't care about the Sienna.

To me Honda had a huge opportunity to really extend any lead if they really brought some new technology here. Instead they seem to be just satisfied with good enough.

shyguy16

looks like a bloated crosstour, with fugly rims.

TRDFantasy

With no kink it looks more clean and cohesive and less polarizing. It is also less alienating to current Odyssey owners. If you also get rid of the awkward window angle in the D-pillar, it would look even better IMHO.

That's just taking things out of context. People don't drive exclusively on the highway, now do they? If you want improved fuel economy in the city AND the highway in the SAME vehicle, then yes more gears DOES help you get more fuel economy.

Talking about a 2-gear transmission with a great final drive ratio is just silly. Using this logic, who needs electronic variable valve technology, electronic fuel injectors, or anything modern really? Let's all go back to purely mechanical cars with 2-gear transmissions, I'm sure such vehicles would still be able to get great fuel economy in city and highway, and have great emissions and great reliability as well .

It's called progress. Less internal parts mean greater reliability. More moving parts mean a bigger chance for something to go wrong. Any knowledgeable engineer will tell you this. Less weight has obvious benefits, and also reducing the number of parts while adding more gears is called progress. It's the advancement of technology.

Do you also believe that single overhead cam engines are good enough too, and are technologically advanced engines in this day and age?

Are today's vehicles more technologically advanced than cars from 10 or 20 years ago? I mean cars from 10 and 20 years ago had microchips and electronics inside them as well, so what's the difference right ?

Have you actually sat in this new Odyssey? On that note, have you sat in the current (dated) 3rd generation Odyssey. It has a lot of hard plastic everywhere as well.

Personally if I had to buy a minivan, I would get the new Sienna. It has a lot of little details that Honda and Chrysler did not think of in their vans. I also hate Honda's suspension tuning, so I really don't care if it has independent rear suspension. I bet a Sienna SE will out-handle the new Odyssey anyways.

You are correct about one thing, it comes down to personal preference.

Your "trap"? Are you for real? That is a very baiting statement you've made there. I'm curious, did you join ClubLexus just to bait others into arguments?

Just like many of us don't understand how someone could think the new Odyssey looks any better than the Sienna. The Sienna looks massive, and slab-sided while the Odyssey does not? Really?

Have you looked at the rear overhang of the new Odyssey? It is absolutely massive.

Here is a comparison:







The specs also support this as well:

Odyssey:

Length: 202.9 inches
Wheelbase: 118.1 inches

Sienna:

Length: 200.2 inches
Wheelbase: 119.3 inches

The Odyssey is over 2 inches longer than the Sienna, yet it has a wheelbase more than 1 inch shorter than the Sienna.

In the pictures above, the front and rear overhangs for the Sienna look roughly equal (the rear overhang is only a bit larger than the front). You call it boring; I call it clean, cohesive and elegant. The Odyssey on the other hand has a considerably longer rear overhang compared to the front overhang.

IS-SV

And I thought the bangle-butt on the old 7 series was ugly....

mmarshall

The one on the 6-series was (subjectively) even worse. But back to the Odyssey, I wouldn't call the rear doors and beltline ugly so much as just plain awkward. To me, there's a difference.

Ugly, to me, for example, was the Pontiac Aztek....it went beyond awkward. Nothing on the new Odyssey even comes close to that.

IS-SV

All good examples of ugly butts and awkward in my opinion. But styling is subjective and taste too.

LexusMan77

Curious to see how customers respond to the dramatic style of this new Odyssey. Look at the Nissan Quest when it tried to be "fun" and "different" it failed miserably. However, this Odyssey has strong points in the interior and ride/handling. Honda is probably going to sell a ton of it despite the new look.