Honda Element

chris777

the bumpers on my 86 hatch have survived

a rear end tag from a drunk at a 4th of July fireworks show

my own backing into a lady who backed into my blind spot. I did 1200 to her accords rear door and rear quarter and i could not find where my bumper was scuffed

and most recently I had a 4wd ford drive over the corner of my bumper while it was in the shop
I can see a smooth scuff on it but after removing the metal frame and repairing it you have to search to find where its been scuffed

cladding's ugly but if it's placed judiciously (by hopefully a non pontiac designer) it's probably better than Saturn's plastic panels (unless of course its the same stuff I don't know)

there are countless other bumps and dings but since you never notice any dings and scratches like on metal I don't remember them all

If it could be had I'd almost buy a vehicle coated entirely of cladding or at least high enough to prevent door dings .

it would also be nice to stop jerk keyers too

diploid

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=5216&sid=181&n=157

Fair overview of the Element. They don't exactly like it, though. 2wd manual version is actually heavier than an AWD CR-V with automatic transmission. I guess Honda is sticking to their expected 5-star safety rating. 16 inchers, standard. Shorter than the CR-V by a hair more than a foot (!), but taller and wider.

ropedart

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=5215

He also felt the Element should lose the cladding and offer MINI-like colors. Clearance sale of dull tones coming soon!
Hey, I was dead on.

artdecho

I'm on the same wavelength as the 2nd reviewer(home depot reference especially), although I can see the points (and somewhat agree with) the first. 3600 lbs for the EX/4WD is a little porky.....hopefully in a couple of years (when I'm ready to buy) they'll bump the power somewhat (along with the CR-V). Despite its many cool features though, if the EX/4WD doesn't offer a fairly significant price advantage over a similarly equipped CR-V, I may still go for the latter (or the Latitude). Nice to see some more details seeping through though.....I imagine other reviewers from the same session will be posting their thoughts over the next few weeks.

ateixeira

varmint's got a point, ignore Toyota's base prices completely because you have to add the rear bumper, A/C, power stuff, ABS, etc.

who is going to pay 16000 for a stripper?

Wrong Topic! LOL

Cladding can be good (Grand Cherokee, Forester, Audi allroad quattro) or bad (Aztec, Baja, Avalanche). Generally, when it's overdone, as in those latter vehicles, it detracts from the vehicle.

But just enough in the right places makes it more dent and scratch resistant.

I liked it better with the more playful Blue/Silver, so now I'd say it leans toward the 2nd group. Still, I'm function over form and would still consider an Element (or a Baja, for that matter).

-juice

varmint

I'm most disturbed by the mileage estimates. 20-23 mpg is nothing to write home about. I think I see why.

They keep saying that Honda is using the same engine as the Accord, not the 2.4 from the CR-V. This makes sense given where the vehicle is going to be made. However, the torque peak for the Accord's 2.4 is higher on the rev band than the CR-V's. I think they are going to need some low end grunt to pull 3,600 lbs.

With less torque and more weight, the Element's engine is going to have to work hard to get off the line. That'll mean more foot in the pedal and lower gas mileage in the city. The boxy shape would account for part of the low highway figure, but I wasn't expecting a 3 mpg difference.

varmint

.... is why won't they publish interior capacity. That thing looks like it could be rated for up to 90 cu.ft. I would've thought that would be selling point, but nobody seems to have that information.

?????

artdecho

Hope those estimates are low, as I would have expected better from Honda as well.....that's one reason they are always high on my shopping list. Hope they also tune whatever engine they put in it for more torque. Varmint.....do you think in a couple of years the CR-V/Element will get a hp/torque bump like the 1st gen did....maybe up to 180/185 or so?
Also curious about the back seat riding experience. Looks like a pretty fat pillar right beside your head, as the rear seats seem aft of the flip out windows.

diploid

I hope they can still put conventional doors on the Element before launch. That should save weight by getting rid of the extra steel strengthening that's required to achieve 5-stars with suicide doors.

If they can do that, the Element should see an increase in mileage. I have no idea why anyone would need such a huge opening in a vehicle like the Element anyway.

ateixeira

But then it would be a CR-V. Why build a vehicle that overlaps completely with something already in the lineup? Just to have freaky styling?

You could probably fit two freezers in that thing.

Is that the official mileage, 20/23?

-juice

diploid

Judging from some of the posts in here regarding the Element's look, I doubt the Element would've overlapped the CR-V, at least not in terms of sales.

I just think it's a greater price to pay in order to have the Element differ from the CR-V by having suicide doors because the increase in weight (in order to achieve maximum government test ratings) turns the Element into one fat kid.
Four conventional opening doors would've made more sense as I am doubtful that anyone would actually find those suicide doors convenient for ingress/egress.

daveghh

Why does everyone think the suicide doors add weight???

The CRV also has a steel pillar between the two doors.

diploid

Honda expects 5-star ratings from the government crash tests. In order to do so, they reinforced the frame with additional steel.

I'm no engineer like scape, but I'm assuming that's gotta be why a manual 2wd Element would weigh more than an automatic awd CR-V.

ateixeira

But diploid, the suicide doors and different functionality (hose out interior, for instance) are part of the appeal to someone looking for something quirky, off center.

You've been looking at CR-Vs, right? Then Element isn't supposed to appeal to you. It's supposed to appeal to your young cousin with that belly button ring you hate. He wants something that you don't like, that's the whole point of a niche vehicle.

You're asking for a far more mainstream vehicle when you take those key things away.

Yeah, so it's heavy, nobody's perfect. You're not going to find these things at the local SCCA autocross. Baja and Avalance are also heavier than average.

Try cleaning out melted crayons left in the hot sun from carpet, or just regular food spills. Those would be much easier in an Element.

Better yet - wax your surf board, doors open wide, board mounted on the folded front seat. Or fix your bike using the raised platform, again open wide.

I think vinyl seats might actually be a plus, seriously.

-juice

diploid

As I've already said, the added weight is the price you have to pay for the suicide doors.

You can still hose out the interior with 4 conventional doors. I still don't see anything functional about suicide doors in a vehicle the size of a CR-V. This thing isn't like the next Mazda RX, which is too small to have conventional doors, so it must make do with suicide doors for easier ingress/egress to the back seat.

The Element is already quirky looking sans suicide doors.

And just because I looked at a CR-V doesn't mean that I'm not supposed to be attracted to the Element. Even Honda's press release acknowledges that the Element will appeal to a wider audience, even though their target is for gen Y. And I doubt that they would like a car that's underpowered in relation to its weight.

ateixeira

Maybe someone who has owned suicide doors can come up with ideas about why they can be more functional in some situations? I tried a couple (the surf board and the bike), but I have not ever owned suicide doors.

Quirky looking conventional vehicles fail in the market, just look at the Gremlin & Pacer in the 70s, Merkurs and Alfas in the 80s, X90 and VehiX in the 90s, Aztecs today.

The "look" is not enough, it by itself actually ensures the vehicle will fail.

Truly quirky niche vehicles can thrive, though. Avalanche is a hot seller and GM makes massive profits from each one.

I'm not sure if the Sport Trac has met sales targets, but it didn't cost Ford much to design it given they recycled much of it, so I bet they don't regret doing that quirky vehicle.

The ones with form and function tend to succeed.

Is Gen Y really into horsepower? I doubt it. Noone wants a slouch, but I bet it's lower on their list of priorities than some other stuff. They aren't buying Mustang V8s.

-juice

ateixeira

Being a Subaru fan I should mention the Outback, which single-handedly saves Subaru from the brink of extinction.

They gave it the quirky two-tone butch wagon look, but backed it up with standard AWD and a little extra clearance, plus a beefy roof rack to haul all the stuff active lifestyle folks are supposed to use. Top it off with smart marketing and partnerships with ski, snow board, and mounting biking groups and voila, success.

The Suzuki Esteem had a copy-cat two-tone model that looked just like it - with no AWD and wimpy payload and roof rack ratings. Guess which one is being cancelled?

-juice

varmint

"Four conventional opening doors would've made more sense as I am doubtful that anyone would actually find those suicide doors convenient for ingress/egress." - Diploid

You just pegged yourself as too old for this vehicle. LOL

Convenience is just above 8 track player on the list of priorities for the target market. Did Bo and Luke Duke weld shut the doors on the General Lee because they were concerned with convenience? Doubt it. Cool, unique, and hip are much higher on the list.

I've got a feeling that if Honda left out the suicide doors, they would be accused of "selling out" and "being too conservative". Honda has a dozen convenient vehicles in their line-up. They could have simply brought over the Mobilo (rear sliders for convenience!). The Element is intentionally different.

mariobros100

Hmmm Just my 0.02 cents...

To the people who wondered what the Honda Element really is : .... its basically Honda's "First pick-up Truck"....

It has the squared profile (like a truck ) ,the suicide rear doors are just like you will find out in a lot compact Pick Up's with extra cab or cab plus.
The only thing extra on the Element is the "roof " over the "truck box"
Honda may as well stretch the wheelbase another 5 -10 inches ,get rid of "that rear roof " and voila !!! A compact pick up truck -may wanna use 4WD standard and maybe a bigger engine.
About the weight ...the CRV is at 3300 lbs and the Element at 3550 or so ..The difference is just like the weight of the an extra person on board ...maybe it would take 0.5 second away -at most- from the acceleration times compared to the CRV...hardly anything major...

And about the niche marketing ...well duh!! that's what it is ..Marketing. How many times marketing has aimed at one thing and landed on another; after all when the CRV debuted in 1997 Honda wasn't sure it would sell more than 20 to 30K of the a year and look at now!!!!

aquaswimmer

As the owner of a business that does swim instruction, beach parties, surf lessons, kayak lessons etc, I am positively salivating at the prospect of a reasonably fuel efficient vehicle that can haul all the equipment I need and be so water resistant interior-wise.

I'm hoping the Element will be as ideal an SUV for my needs as it seems.
However, I'm concerned about the lack of driver/passenger room that was mentioned in the carconnection.com review.

How bad is the front leg-space and overall room in the current CR-V?
Will a big six footer fit?

3600lbs? Not good...
How reliable do you folks think the weight/fuel economy estimates are from the carconnection article?
I wonder how much an AWD EX with manual trans would weigh...

If the Element can get out of its own way to the tune of 0-60 in under 10 secs, I don't think that would be too bad.
Anything slower than that though is getting dangerously slow IMO..

Does anyone know the performance numbers for a stick shift CR-V?

Thanks.

mariobros100

According to Car and driver magazine:

CRV 4WD EX :
0-60 (5 speed manual) : 8.2 seconds
0-60 (4 speed auto) :8.8 seconds

With the weigh increase of 250-300lbs of the Element I predict being 0.5 second or so slower over the CRV times; however Honda could alter the Final drive ratios or some of the transmission gear ratios and this could make it almost even with the times of the CRV...Only a drive test will confirm this for sure.

varmint

The CR-V with a stick is deceptively fast. It's been clocked 0-60 between 8.1 seconds and 8.8 with most falling at 8.5 seconds.

Don't expect that kind of performance out of the Element, though. I think under 10 sounds about right.

varmint

Mariobros - Where did you find those times for the CR-V?

mariobros100

My,my fault...
Car & driver ..NOV 2001 page 90
lists 4WD CRV EX 5 Speed at 0-60 in 8.4 seconds...; the 8.8 second I beleibe was from a 3 suv comparo in C&D..I just hve to check what issue was from.

However Motor Trend September 2002 issue page 92 in a mini SUV comparo between a Ford escape, and CRV and a Saturn Vue list the CRV EX 5 speed 8.1 second for 0-60 ; it even bested the Ford Escape (V6)

varmint

Right. MT ran 0-60 in 8.1 seconds, C&D in 8.4, and at least one other in 8.5 (I forget the source). Edmunds hit 60 in 8.8 seconds, though they mention that it rained while they were at the track.

A while back, Truck Trend got 8.91 seconds with an automatic. I've never seen anything lower. CR reached 60 in 9.6 seconds with the auto. Those are the only automatic times I am aware of.

ateixeira

I agree with Mario, in that they were thinking ahead, and that if the Element sells well they'll have the 2004 Element SUT at dealers in a year. A Crew Cab basically, which would be extremely easy to do given the small doors already in place.

Honda knows what they're doing. They cannot please every single consumer. I think the idea here was to create a niche vehicle to please a separate group of consumers that have not even considered the CR-V. A new niche.

-juice

tdp05

I don't frequent this board, but I was driving in Los Angeles,(405S, near Honda's HQ) and I saw one of these on the freeway on the back of a truck. Thought some of you might like to see it.

 

http://home.socal.rr.com/dancingpeacock/element.jpg

robertsmx

If Edmund's numbers on BMW 3.0 X5 are correct, that vehicle weighs 4800+ lb with 225 HP, or about the same weight to power ratio as the heaviest Element (which is not too far from my 1998 Accord EX sedan either, at about 21-21.5 lb. per HP). At 3600 lb. Element would still be 500 lb. lighter than Liberty.

Dimensions are supposedly very different from CRV. Shorter, but wider and taller, and 16" rims.

diploid

"The Element is intentionally different."-varmit

I know that. My point is that the intentional difference is at the price of performance. I don't expect this thing to be able to do 0-60 in less than 10 seconds. I may not be in the gen Y - but those people that atexeira mentioned, the ones with the nose rings and the tattoos, probably don't have a job, are too stoned to think and probably have revoked drivers' licenses. Contrary to what people think, the Y gen and people like me prefer a car with at least some performance. This car is a slouch, and it's because of the suicide doors. Honda could've given it conventional doors, and the car would still look cool.

I was hoping that the rumored weight problem could be avoided, but I guess not.

diploid

This would've saved weight and the car still would've looked radical. But I don't run Honda, so they'll do what they want despite my ramblings.

daveghh

tdp05,
Thanks for sharing! I think it looks cool!

ropedart

Why not just put the 200 hp Accord V6 engine in? Forget about the CRV customers/line. They don't care. If they want more power they get a Pilot. Just explain to them the Element is heavy and needs more power. Honda has no SUV hp power between 160 and 240. Thats a big gap. Would you pay say 23K$ for a V6 Element??
Or being low volume product encourage/pay Vortek or Jackson Racing to make a Supercharger for Honda Performance.
tdp05->BLACK bumpers there's hope!

aquaswimmer

Interesting! Comparing power to weight with 3.0 BMW X5

For X5 and Element, I calculated curb weight divided by HP and curb weight divided by torque then averaged the two.

This is what I got:

First:

2002 BMW X5 3.0 automatic trans- 4824 lbs 225hp 214 torque

5spd 2WD Element 3352 lbs 160hp/162Torque
5spd AWD Element 3544 lbs 160/162
Auto AWD Element 3595 lbs 160/162

So using these weights and averaging lbs/hp and lbs/foot-pound of torque as noted above I got the following figures:

BMW X5---------------21.99 lbs per hp/torque

5spd 2WD Element-----20.82 lbs per hp/torque
5spd AWD Element-----22.01 lbs per hp/torque
Auto AWD Element-----22.32 lbs per hp/torque

So Robertsmx is right!
The Element should be close to the X5 in acceleration etc..

The stick 2WD should even smoke the BMW!

According to Edmunds the 2002 X5 3.0 auto makes it to 60 in 8.5 secs and hits the quarter in 16.4 @84.3 MPH

I could certainly live with performance like that or close to that from an Element.

Perhaps it won't be so slow after all.

chris777

I've heard the bulk of the weight has been added in reinforcing the structure of the floor

they strengthened the attachment points and made the floor stronger to disperse the damage in a crash particularly the suicide doors to get the 5 star crash rating so they didn't have to kill the whole project (at least in their own eyes)

I agree with diploid standard doors would make this vehicle a much better value

if the original suicide doors off of the model x could have worked it might be sweet because those were pretty big

now its like the rx8 or the Saturn ion with suicide doors just for the sake of them

I think they would be better than say a 2 door element but look at the pics the seats in the rear are way further back on entrance and egress than on the MoDel-X (MD-X I wondered why they changed the name now it makes sense)

something that has been giving me worries on the suicide doors, is a downpour, first you have to open the front then open the back then reverse to shut the opening, sounds like a lot of time to put those waterproof seats to good use (oopse if you happen to buy a dx)

I've also been thinking about space between the doors and other cars the front doors are larger than normal doors like on a coupe so you might not be able to open them so wide, like all the honda pics if in a tight parking space

I personally think sliding doors on both the front and the back like on a mini van would rule no more door dings unless some jerk dings you but thats my opinion (keep the b pillar, what could possibly be loaded through the suicide doors that couldn't go in the tailgate?)

diploid

There's a whole load of new Element pics on wieck. Gray on gray looks the best.

http://www.wieck.com/public/*2PV_042034

DX's got some ugly rims.

ropedart

I am glad the cladding got darker. But the Black one is disappointing, I mean in a Scion bbX way. Those cheap rims. Needs chrome or something. Silver is best. Orange/Red probably the most exciting. The rest-> dump the cans down the (recycling)sink.
Can anyone read the dimensions?

themaxx

I am buying the first one in Austin for my girl friend. She is Disabled and has use of only one arm. The doors make for easy access for her in retrieving her items from the back. For US it was one of the greatest selling points.

chris777

those pics of the " red sunset" look like hazy pollution, a poor photochop job lol

but seriously

I noticed something encouraging though not my first choice on interior color the green one had a green dash, its subtle but its green if you compare it to the Galapagos and the gray interior, maby different colors will get different interiors

the cup holders are deeper and added an extra cup for the rear as well as I'm guessing tape storage?

on the pic with the interior rear view mirror is that an over head light in front of a sunglasses holder, or something else?

also what is the box under the ex shifter its not on the dx and looks replaced by a cubby on the dx

the ex stereo maybe powerful but it just looks so lame.

I wish it had both cd and cassette like on the crv

I usually like painted steel wheels instead of wheel covers but those steel rims do look pretty rough if they offer a 2wd ex package for significant savings over 4wd I might spring for it
it would still have to be fairly close to a 2wd crv unless I really like the element better (a lot better)

I don't like the visibility sketch their looks to be a large blind spot created by the rearmost pillar because they had to fatten it confirming one of my biggest concerns about this vehicle

i also noticed what looks like some sort of button on the dx drivers door a hatch release perhaps?

also judging from the suv like seating sketch with dimensions (I couldn't make out any of it either) it does appear the rear floor is more suv like it has little leg room like say on a exterra or a 4 -runner(when compared to the deeper front seats) so a pick up derived from element might well be something coming in the future

aquaswimmer

I agree Chris, a 2wd EX package would be appealing for not only cost savings but weight savings.

But aren't there some options that only come with the 4wd?

The rear sunroof is the only option that comes to mind that I believe you can only get with the 4wd but perhaps there are others..

I like the red/gray and the silver/gray.

What happened to the Silver/blue?

ateixeira

Those are some nice, big steel wheels. They're kind of styled, I like that. Am I the only one that does?

I'd put snow or off road tires on that, maybe bigger, and then get 17" alloys for the summer, and swap for the seasons.

BTW, the X5 is not fast. I drove it back-to-back with a 530 wagon and much, much prefer the 5 series. Better handling, ride, acceleration, price, and much more cargo space.

The Element won't take 10 seconds to hit 60, I'll bet you a cold one if we ever meet in person.

-juice

cb70

How did you ever get the Department of Motor Vehicles to give you a driver's license? I thought being blind ruled you out. LOL. Just kidding Juice.

whatever_7

http://www.photoshopjunkie.com/ps_comp/ps_comp_3/index.html

lol. It's funny because is ture.

If I buy it (I'm kind of too old for it now) I will put a big Transformer logo on it.

Anakin

I'm very interested in seeing the Element in person. The Seattle auto show is in November, so I should get a chance then.

The rear cargo area looks big enough for my two dogs even with the seats in place. That's a big deal to me, because I can't think of a single small SUV that has enough space for two big dogs without folding the rear seats.

Also, the way the seats fold up and to the sides really appeals to me. Gets them completely out of the way.

I think a lot of you guys are putting way too much importance on the suicide doors. Think about the target market here: Young males with NO KIDS. The suicide doors are going be for occasional use only... and when they do get used, it'll be "cool suicide doors!" They're about style, not practicality.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to it. :^)

ateixeira

I have a rather smart comeback but I CAN'T SEE MY KEYBOARD! LOL

#2 looks like that easy-to-make Crew Cab we mentioned. #16 looks like an Aztec.

Yeah, the suicide doors will probably be used more often for cargo than anything else.

-juice

aquaswimmer

Sounds good ateixeira.

If the Element can do 60 in under 10 secs and if I fit into the thing I'm going to buy one.

Also, I would not be surprised if the Element develops a substantial aftermarket product base.

Who knows this 2.4 engine from other Honda/Acura vehicles?

Does it gain decent power from light mods such as exhaust and maybe a little intake work (filters etc.)?

Even an extra 10 or 15 horses could make a difference if the mods do not adversely affect the torque curve (as of course an SUV needs low end grunt etc.)

ateixeira

Jackson Racing had a S/C kit for the old 2.0l engine from the CR-V, but none was planned for the 2.4l from what I read. It's a little engine that can, have you sampled one with a 5 speed? They are peppy. I was able to chirp the front tires in 2nd gear!

Element is heavier, but I doubt it'll feel slow at all.

-juice

rerenov8r

The output on this engine is excellent. Is already a big hit in the CR-V. Lots of smiles.

The aftermarket parts will probably trickle in, but this is NOT a situation that Honda "left ponies in the paddock" and big gains from small changes are unlikely.

chris777

gotta love the suburban and avalanche derived editions lol

seriously though I think it would be cool to have a vehicle with the spare on the front like on the mystery machine version(sans everything else on it)

it gets it off the rear end like on the cr-v so you canhave either a hatch or tailgate so youcanhave long items like 2x4's or whatever

it gets it out of the wheel well like on the element and opens up either oddesey fold away seats or a jumbo tool box storage area

chris777

I forgot to ask earlier so here goes

I was talking to a dealer about a crv and the salesman told me that the engine in the v didn't have a timing belt it was instead a chain

is their any truth to this

and exactly what is the life span of a chain supposed to be?

robertsmx

Should be able to use any mods introduced for Civic Si/base RSX. They are identical in design. The K24A is slightly bored and stroked (87x99) compared to the K20A (86x86).