Would anyone know what engine is it in the 2.2L CL. Is it H22???

Thanks.

 

i think it might be an f22, although that might be the accord...

 

I think its a Hemi

Hey Rafal!
What up?

I am looking for the same thing!
Let me know if you find it.
I will promise you it is not an F22

AccordVTEC
AKA Joe

 

the 2.2 is the same engine found in a 5th gen accord
the 2.3 is the same engine found in a 6th gen accord

i think thats the f, not sure

 

f-series single overhead Cam engine - CL is just a purtied up Accord.

 

Yeah. . . what he said. Same chassis & everything.

 

Thank you for your comment.

Well based on what you said, would it be worth to buy one. I am looking to get a more streetable car for eveyday use and I am considering the CL. I am not sure which entgine package to go with the 2.2 or the 3.0. Any issues with durability and performance of both engines?

Thank you for your help.

 

Well for one the 2.2 (or 2.3L) is a 4 cyl & the 3.0 is a 6.

So the initial power is obviously different, but as far as reliability,I don't think there are any issues for either one.

<u>BTW</u>-The 4 cyl is rated at 150 hp & the 6 is rated at 200 from Honda.

 

I've seen a few 6cyl with more than 300hp.

 

Those must have been stock for sure. . . factory freaks of nature.

If you are going for a 4 cylinder try to find a '98. They added a couple of things to the interior.

 

Based on the previous coments that the CL is build on the exact same platform as the Accord is it worth buying the CL? What are the advantages / disadvantages of going with the CL besides the price and appearance?

Thanks.

 

well you cant get a manual in the v6 (3.0) only in the 4cyl (2.2 and 2.3) so that made my choice for me.....

just something to think about

 

H22 ....... i wish.

its the F22B1 in the 97CL

 

It seems that you have a CL. Is that correct??? How do you like the car overall, any comments on things that you don't like? How is the gas milage?

Thanks.

 

I had a '98 2.3L CL for about 2 years before it got hit (don't get me started). I regret not getting another one. Granted my '00 Prelude is a good car, but it doesn't compare to the comfort and amenities that my CL had.

It is the best car I have ever had and I plan on getting another one as soon as possible. Unfortunately my Prelude is worth less than what I owe so I would carry over too much debt if I got one now.

Even the 4 cylinder had plenty of power for daily driving. Although it is based on the Accord the interior had a better layout and more amenities than does the Accord. . . not to mention the outer appearance.

No, I'm not biased or anything.

 

You can get a manual V6 if you get the new 3.2 CL-S 6 speed. This is video of ours with I/H/E and a ZEX kit.

This is it racing a Roush Stage 3. Yes the Roush has a supercharger!

http://www.undergroundracing.com/vid...%2003%20CL.wmv

The automatic 3.0 can be made fast also. This is our 3.0 racing a Z28!

http://www.undergroundracing.com/video/CL_vs_94Z28.asf

 

Thank you for the videos, but I am planning to buy this car not to race it, but as daily transportation. I have my civic to race.

To the previous post. Thanks for your comments in regards to the comparison between the lude, accord and the CL. The CL is really starting to grow on me.

How does the 2.2L and the 2.3L engines compare is there a large difference? What about model differences are all the CLs came with the same trim?

 

As far as I know there is essentially no difference between the 2.2 & 2.3 models. Honda just did a few tweaks becuase the '97 was the first year of the model. Along with the engine tweaks they upgraded the interior a little starting with '98.

I know this because my aunt had a '97 & I had a '98. The center console has a nicer trim to it and a couple of other minor differences. The only thing that I really notice exterior-wise is the wheel package and front grill are different on the '97 also.

I think the '97 still had the same seats, wood trim, door panels, and "Homelink" system as the '98. Basically the same car, but just a couple of "touch-ups" after the first model year.

Good luck. . . I obviously feel that they are great cars.

 

Thanks again for your comments. Did you have the auto or the manual version??? Which model would you be considering if you were to buy it again, would it be 3.0???

Any pics of nice lowered with some rims and tint??? Would be great to see what people do to these.

Thanks.

 

I had an auto. . . the manuals were special order. I'd probaby get the 3.0 now, but I've heard they are heavy on gas consumption compared to the 2.3.

Plus the 3.0's have seat warmers and an upgraded stereo.

There are pics of my car in this thread

 

well yea. but we were talking about 1g CLs....

 

Screamer,

I have a 99 2.3 5spd, i chose it over the 3.0 because i wanted a manual. in the 98 and higher the 2.3 and 3.0 have the same features, but the 3.0 has heated seats and heated mirrors and the bose sound system. 3 things i could care less about. the 2.2 became the 2.3 because in 98 the 6th gen accord came out and changed the engine to 2.3 and it carried over in the CL line (production costs.) I would get a 98 or higher, preferably 99. they have nicer wheels and more standard features then the 97 2.2, 2.2 can have cloth seats and less luxury pending which model you find. 2.3s are all the same across the board. the gas milage is alright, factory rates it at like 21/25 or 23/25 something like that i think, might be off a bit. either way for a daily driver 4cyl is enough of a car to get you into trouble.

They are definately glorified accords, but no other car has the same body design and they come stock with a front strut tower brace. Drive one if you like it get it, if not, keep looking. just a car.


[Modified by sarlacc23, 11:57 PM 2/6/2003]

 

Thanks for the great responses guys. This really makes it easier to decide which direction to take. Just like it was said, I will have to test drive one before I can decide which way I will go. Nevertheless you have been of great help. Right now my biggest issue is weather to go with an auto or manual, I think I will be going with the 2.3 since I am looking for good gas milage. Is there a huge difference between the 2.3 auto and manual in performance. I am looking for more of an eveyday car and I just have enough of driving my civic whith the 4puc ACT Extreme clutch in the traffic .

Storm Shadow - very nice ride, too bad it ended in a crash. What did you lower your car with??? Also how easy is it to remove the rear number and ACURA decal?
The CL looks very sleek.

 

well if youre going to get an auto then i would get a 3.0, there isnt that much of a loss in gas mileage, its still really good. only reason to get a 2.3 is because you want a manual.

 

Thanks for the compliments. Removing the emblems is no problem at all, just have a little goo remover/ paint thinner for the adhesive. Just don't remove the Acura "A" emblems unless you are replacing them with colored ones because they have mounting holes under them.

Good luck again.