Looking at getting a new Accord. The price difference between a hybrid and non-hybrid (1.5T engine) is about $600. Is the hybrid Accord more reliable in the long run since it has an NA, port injected motor instead of the turbo charged motor in the non-hybrid? Or, does the extra systems in the hybrid driveline negate any advantages gained in having an NA motor? Looking to keep the car up to 200,000 miles.
I totally hear you about the turbo vs hybrid. It's tough.
I recommend doing a bit of research on the type of hybrid the Accord is. I am nearly certain is the same hybrid system as the CRV, which would me it is not the usual hybrid system.
In a usual hybrid, the ICE and the electric motor go back and forth, throughout most speed ranges. The ICE actually drives the car.
With the CRV hybrid, the electric motor drives the car until about 45 MPH, and then the ICE may take over. The ICE acts more like a generator than actually drive the car below 45 MPH.
It's compelling technology, but not time tested. Honda is a company that focuses on quality, so I would be open to an Accord Hybrid.
Yes, that's exactly how the Accord's hybrid system also works. It's essentially an EV that's being charged by an ICE generator up to 45 mph. After that, the ICE takes over and is complemented by the electric motor. As you have mentioned, it isn't time or volume tested technology. I believe this iteration of the system first came out with the 2017 Accord and then made its way to the current gen Accord, new Insight and this year with the CR-V. My thought is that although the 1.5T is a turbo motor and it ran into oil dilution issues in the CR-V and Civic, it is a global motor that has been in two of Honda's highest volume models for 5 years and the version in the Accord came out after Honda found out about the issue in the Civic and CR-V. I have been doing quite a bit of research on the 1.5T, and have not come across any owner complaints with it in the Accord. To your point, I believe Honda's engineers don't make mistakes and intentionally put a flawed product in the market. There's only so much testing that can be performed in a lab.
Curious to hear your final decision!
If it is any consolation to you, I have a 2004 Prius going on 295K miles. Bought it brand new. Barely changed the battery this year around 275K miles. And no major problems with the vehicle.
I know it is a Toyota product, at the same time, I believe Toyota and Honda to be on par (plus or minus a few points depending on model) with each other in terms of quality longevity.
I don't have direct experience with the Accord Hybrid, but I conjecture it is similar to the Prius in terms of starter and alternator.
With starter and alternators, those things eventually go out, usually long before the engine or the transmission. Heck maybe even twice, before the engine or transmission go out.
But get this, there is no starter or alternator on the Prius!!! And I suspect the Accord Hybrid. It's incorporated into the electric motors.
So that might be something to consider in terms of long term repair costs.
Over time, the first thing to go out should be transmission, and the Hybrid has a CVT. 10 speed auto, manual, or CVT is your choise. I feel like either way you will have problems in the long term, but the thing is the Hybrid will start needing costly repairs around 150k miles or less, while the gasoline motors, even turbocharged, could go longer. Your call on that one. I PERSONALLY would get a 2.0T with a manual.
