Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Has Honda's run - run out?
This discussion has been closed.
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The next RL is supposed to weigh about 3750 lb. with AWD (remember, its smaller sibling, TL is just 200 lb lighter). And the outgoing front drive RL is heavier, at about 3850 lb.
That said, it is not always about weight, FWD/AWD/RWD, but how the car is set up and more importantly, performs. Theory and reality can be quite different, that is why cars need to be driven, and not judged on paper.
You know that a RWD based AWD car is heavier than a FWD based AWD car. So to compare the RL to an M3 doesn't make sense.
If you want to make a valid comparison, you have to do this:
1. Compare a RWD based car to its AWD based sibling, such as a BMW 330i vs. BMW 330ix.
2. Compare a FWD based car to its AWD based sibling, such as an Audi FWD version to the equivalent Audi AWD version.
If you do these apples to apples comparos, instead of the invalid apples to oranges comparos you so misleadingly use as "proof", then you'll see that the extra drivetrain adds weight, knocks off mileage usually by at least 1 MPG, and if you look at reliability, the AWD version is almost always less reliable than its FWD vs. RWD version.
Furthermore, as I have driven both the AWD and RWD version of BMW 330i and the FWD and quattro version of older Audis, I know that for my tastes, the AWD version felt really slow and I could feel the extra weight when thrown around.
robertsmx, I'm not denying that the cars you listed are nice cars, but I don't see you comparing the AWD version of those cars to the equivalent RWD/FWD versions.
I see your point, but do you see mine?
A list of rather incredible sporting machines that feature AWD posted uptopic demonstrates the "eyes wide shut" viewpoint expressed by the quoted statement.
Dude, what market stats are you looking at? Last time I checked, the combined sales of the BMW 3-series and the G35 outweighed the sales of all the cars robertsmx mentioned. If you look at BMW 3-series and Infiniti G35 sales, the sales of the RWD cars far outweight the AWD drivetrain.
So how are my eyes wideshut when I say the market has spoken in favor of RWD in the performance market?
Also, don't read with your eyes wide shut. You'll see if you actually read my posts that I am comparing the RWD/FWD vs. AWD version of the SAME car, unlike robertsmx.
I see your point, but do you see mine?
robert, I am not disagreeing with your point that in the end the drive determines.
what i'm saying is if all those fine AWD cars you mentioned offered a 50-50 balanced RWD version, it'd be lighter and would be more sporty.
I'm not saying an AWD car can't be sporty, because clearly it can. I'm just saying that the RWD version of that car is going to be sportier.
IMO, if you're going for the pure performance market, you have to go RWD. Is the pure performance market a big market? Not as huge as the mainstream market, but still pretty big, and more importantly, the performance market is willing to pay HUGE premiums for a car that really delivers.
Look at how the G35 is selling even though everyone, even its fans, admit it has a crappy interior b/c Ghosn decided to keep the same interior used in the right hand driveside Japanese version of the car to save on costs.
Look at the prices charged by BMW for a fully optioned 330.
How can Honda ignore this market given their racing history and their engineering ability?
The VTM-4 system in the MDX and Pilot is said to weigh about 212 lbs total. SH-AWD is a variant on that design, with a few additional features. Those extra goodies (Honda calls them the "acceleration device" and the electro-magnetic clutch actuators) will add weight. That's true enough. But the propshaft and other parts are made from carbon fiber to reduce weight. Chances are, we're not talking about a heavy system.
BTW, there is a FWD/RWD/AWD thread in here already. Maybe non-Honda discussion of these attributes should head thattaway. Plenty of completely untested speculation, keyboad theory and useless statistics over there for one and all!
if you can't acknowledge that FWD based AWD systems will still have some weight balance, torque steer and additional weight, then you can't acnkowledge facts.
get into a real RWD performance car, drive it to 8/10ths and then come back and tell me there isnt'a difference.
i'm not knocking FWD, it has its advantages, and most of my cars have been FWD b/c of those advantages, but in the performance market, RWD rules, and anybody (like you) who says differently needs to drive some performance cars to see what i'm talking about.
The thing is our margins were strong and our commercial aircraft side made money with less sales. Problem is we now need to change the way we build the craft and increase the seat mile rate to stay competitive and remain attractive to airlines even if the compition is cheaper. We are countering with a state of the art jet liner built around light weight composites. The funny thing is the plane will be sold at the same price as the last jet liner we launched over ten years ago.
I thought we were discussing what Honda should do with their business strategy, emphasis on "business." Not debate the merits of RWD vs. AWD.
I raised the point that BMW and the G35 dominate the near luxury performance market because their "business" strategy of offering near 50-50 balanced RWD offerings has clearly worked, as indicated by sales.
Clearly, Honda has taken a bite out of those sales with a FWD TL, but the point being made is that they could take a bigger bite out of it with a quality RWD offering.
So your hackneyed "sales mean nothing" argument is inappropriate here, because in a business context, I assure you sales mean a hell of a lot.
1. Compare a RWD based car to its AWD based sibling, such as a BMW 330i vs. BMW 330ix.
2. Compare a FWD based car to its AWD based sibling, such as an Audi FWD version to the equivalent Audi AWD version."
Thats a completely invalid comparison. Those cars use completely different AWD systems, which will have different effects on handling than their 2WD counterparts. A FWD Jag X-type, Audi, and RL will all respond differently given each company's respective approach to AWD.
RWD is not the end all be all of performance, and all others can go to hell. Drive a RWD 911 GT3, and then a 911 Turbo. The GT3 can get tail happy REALLY fast, and if you're not extremely cautious, you can throw it into a spin like the old F40. The Turbo on the otherhand, with the front wheels actively gripping the surface, hunkers down and hangs on till the end. Does it ever rain down there in So Cal? I wouldnt suggest racing any Audi S4s on those days.
I'm not sure which cars you're comparing, the BMW to the AWD BMW, Audi to AWD Audi, or each to the Jag-X.
As for Porsches, I haven't driven 'em to the limit (don't own one and I'm not about to drive someone else's car to the limit) so I can't comment on the respective merits of their RWD vs AWD offerings. It's why I limited my comparos to BMW and Audi offerings, where I've driven both the AWD and RWD/FWD offering.
I'm not saying that an AWD car can't be a fine performance car, because clearly they are out there.
I'm just questioning Honda's business decision to stay out of the RWD performance market, which is a big and profitable one and certainly larger than the AWD performance market.
Come on, there have got to be so many Honda fans or people who would like to be Honda fans who'd pay $35k to $40k for a RWD, near 50-50 weight balanced TL with a Honda quality straight 6. If Honda developed that car, they could sell it for decades.
"Does it ever rain down there in So Cal? I wouldnt suggest racing any Audi S4s on those days."
Hey location matters. When I lived in the Northeast, it was FWD or AWD all the way. In SoCal, I'd prefer a RWD.
On a related note, big utes are still selling well - they could probably sell quite a few if they made an enlarged MDX. It could still be unibody and FWD if that kept the costs low enough to make it feasible. These are mostly people-on-pavement haulers anyway. Or conversely they could give the Acura line a premium CR-V. THERE is something Lexus and Infiniti haven't tried yet. Wonder how X3 sales will be...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The thing is, the sell plenty of FWD TLs, which are so much cheaper for them to build. Modifying that car with SH-AWD "could" put it in within 9/10ths of the performance we see from the RWD competition. And it would still be much cheaper to produce.
I know there are buyers who still wouldn't consider the TL, even with AWD, but that's not the bulk of the market. I mean, there are buyers who won't buy anything without a German nameplate. Does that mean Honda should change their name to something that sounds more Germanic (like "Datsun")? No. Ya can't please everybody!
Nippononly - I doubt we'll see an Acura version of the SUT. We've been hearing rumors about an Acura crossover based on the CR-V for quite a while (the RDX). Personally, I don't like the idea. They'd have to add quite a bit weight to make the CR-V quiet and refined enough for the Acura nameplate.
What I'm reading now is that they may have switched directions and decided to base the MDX's little brother on the TSX platform. Maybe they were listening to me. I like that plan a whole lot more.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled topic...
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
As it is, we have 2.9 on Civics right now and 1.9-3.9 on Accords depending on term.
Other makes have trapped themselves with this and through constant rebates. The customers demand this even though they are actually paying for these subsidized rates.
To me, it cheapens the product and is short term corporate thinking. A band-aid solution.
I was also under the impression that you had to have good credit to get low-apr financing (although Chrysler gave me 0.9% way back in 1999!), so a great number of buyers would never qualify to begin with.
It's good to see that things haven't changed much in 5-6 years - the rates are about the same. When the best you could get with a 750 beacon was 7.5%, 2.9/3.9 meant something - it still does today, but that beacon score gets you 3.9-5% at your local bank.
I'm glad Honda hasn't gone to giving up rebates and such - makes the car retain a special meaning when you don't have to give it away to get rid of it.
That statement is absolutely false. Many, many consumers either don't worry about long-term reliability or don't care about it (considering the average new car is owned for about 42 months). They make their decision based on the car that is in front of them, do I hear INITIAL quality?
While aficionados like ourselves might worry more about reliability, many average consumers do not.
After trading two new cars in less than 18 months each, I think I have finally found a car now that I can keep for six or seven years. I am always concerned about likely long-term reliability whenever I buy a new car. The thing is, if you buy cars far enough apart, there is no guarantee that the company you bought from last time is still making them as well now.
Late 80s Hondas were awesome - they regularly ran with little attention for well over 200K miles. Now I have purchased another one. Will the 2004s turn out to be built as well and last as long? Some on Edmunds say no, Honda isn't doing that kind of engineering any more. I guess I will find out - at least I hope so.
Either way I got a car I love, so it is worth it. If this one gives up early (before 200K) though, I might give the domestics one new-millennium try. Gotta check out what they are up to about once a decade or so. (Hint: GM, build a coupe off the Kappa platform!)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
To the point of unrepairable or just nickel and dimes you to the point of getting rid of it?
Just wondering. I've had six Honda's and all of them have been damn near perfect. I'd have kept them longer than 100K, but I get the new car itch about every 3-4 years. I would say that Honda is doing just fine and your latest should be good for well past 200K.
Now I will admit, I was a little skeptical myself a few years back when the whole (overblown IMO) tranny thing started to arise on V6 Honda's, but I personally know 11 people right now who have V6 Honda's and Acura's and not one of them has had any issues. Probably 5 of them have long since broken the 100K mark and are well on there way to 200k. Out of that, 1 person has had his tranny replaced on an 04 Ody, but that was only because he and his dealer were able to replicate a buzz in reverse. The dealer took care of him, replaced it right away (something like 1 day labor) and he was back on his way. No charge, zero hassle. Pretty honorable for the dealer to step up and take care of him. Oh and a side note, his Ody was a replacment for his 1 yo Trailblazer that snapped a lower A-arm in the front and an blew a head gasket on Route 2, 5 minutes from work. Nice...
Heck, I was skeptical when we bought my wife's 230 Kompressor coupe, didn't think we'd make it 100k without a major issue, but we are at 80+ thousand miles right now and that thing has been excellent. I'm very impressed given the numerous (also overblown) issues regarding current Mercedes quality. I've just learned to take these forums with a grain of salt.
You cannot simply throw “sales” numbers to justify benefits of having AWD or RWD or FWD. There are too many factors that affect the overall picture.
Let us look at this in another way. BMW 525 handily outsells the V8 powered BMW 545. Does that mean 545 is pointless? It is porkier as well (by 400 lb.). Cost can play a major role in attracting buyers.
what i'm saying is if all those fine AWD cars you mentioned offered a 50-50 balanced RWD version, it'd be lighter and would be more sporty . IMO, if you're going for the pure performance market, you have to go RWD.
If 50-50 balance were the key to performance, why would companies like Lotus, Ferrari and Porsche lean so heavily on mid/rear engine layouts? They are all rear heavy cars. Lamborghini loves to go AWD, and to some extent, Porsche too! IMO, if having AWD can enhance performance (it can), and safety, why not?
As Varmint appropriately pointed out, the AWD in RL is not for the sake of having AWD. It is also designed to enhance performance, at least in theory, at this point. In addition to enhancing traction, in straight line or around a corner, the system is designed to rotate the car around (by “speeding up” the outer rear wheel while being capable of delivering 100% of the rear torque to it using ATTS). With just RWD, Acura could have achieved half of this (the ATTS half), and not the other half (the compromise between added weight and added benefits).
As far as RWD market is concerned, I wonder if Acura could sell any more units of TL by going RWD than it already does. In last two months since launch, Acura has moved 14K units of TL, and this while taking advantage of one of the best platforms around even though it happens to be FWD. With a dedicated RWD platform for limited volume via 2-3 models (say, TSX, TL and RL), the cost will go up. And for many buyers who prefer FWD, Acura would still have to offer AWD as an option. Is that move justified? A logical move, IMO, would be to offer AWD TL sometime. That also happens to be a route that Audi has successfully taken.
That statement is absolutely false. Many, many consumers either don't worry about long-term reliability or don't care about it (considering the average new car is owned for about 42 months). They make their decision based on the car that is in front of them, do I hear INITIAL quality?
While aficionados like ourselves might worry more about reliability, many average consumers do not.
It actually is better, if you consider non-fleet sales. If sales numbers were important over everything else, a great idea for Honda would be to let go of its self-imposed “no more than 2%” fleet sales limit, and match (at least) Toyota in that regard to about 15%. With the added “fleet sales”, Accord would outsell Camry (since it always has, in sales to individuals). But is “more sales” the bottom line to any business?
And then, 0% financing and/or cash back always ring well to a typical consumer. There are up sides, and there are down sides, to everything. If I Honda were my company, I would prefer to keep its net income up, rather than compromise my net income for more net sales. Which would you prefer?
By offering and attracting customers based mostly on rebates and incentives, companies like GM and Ford have entered a territory where they must continue to do it, and sometimes beat each other with it. Now they are hitting new grounds when with the redesigns, they offer rebates. Incentives no longer apply to outgoing models! And that is not good in the longer term, and often, loses its meaning. Nobody wants to offer huge rebate, it is just the need that dictates it.
I consider SUVs the size of Explorer and MDX... midsize. RDX and CRV would be compacts. RDX/MDX duo could be similar to Aviator/Navigator duo except that the Aviator would be moving to unit body platform and Navigator remains a refined version of Expedition.
[-P
i quite frankly don't shop for cars in the lotus, ferrarri market so i don't really pay attention to them or the engineering they use. i've no idea why they put engines in the back.
it makes sense to me that AWD would be good for a car with a heavy engine in the back to help balance out the weight of the car.
cars with engines in the front, however, are not balanced by AWD, they're balanced by RWD. in any case, this is not the forum to discuss this so if you want to continue this discussion, i suggest we head over to the FWD/RWD/AWD post.
As for your point that the TL sales are strong, thus justifying the decision to stick with the FWD platform, my resonses are:
1. TL is a great car, I like it a lot and it'll probably be my next car b/c although I prefer a RWD, it's interior is so much nicer than a G35 and it's so much of a better value than a BMW that I'll overlook the fact that it's a FWD, plus it handles pretty well for a FWD car.
2. Think long view. Nissan's FM platform has singlehandedly revived Infiniti. The 350z, G35, FX and now the upcoming M35/45 will be based on this platform. That is 4 line of cars based off of one platform, all doing quite well (we'll have to wait and see on the M35/45 but it looks like it'll be a hit).
What if Honda had done the FM platform instead? All those sales that Nissan is generating would have gone to Honda.
Would a RWD TL cannibalize sales of the existing TL? Yes, but it would take a lot bigger chunk out of the sales of the G35 and BMW 3 and 5 series for sure.
And once you have that platform, you can continue to modify it, stretch it, use it as the basis for new platforms, etc.
In any case, Honda has elected not to go that route.
as to fleet sales, I highly doubt Camry fleet sales rise to 15% of the total. Overall fleet sales for Toyota are 3%, and they aren't all Camrys. Now if you told me 8% of all Camry sales are fleet, I might begin to consider it. Of course, Camry sales are ahead of Accord by more than 8%. ;-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
What if Honda had done the FM platform instead? All those sales that Nissan is generating would have gone to Honda.
Would a RWD TL cannibalize sales of the existing TL? Yes, but it would take a lot bigger chunk out of the sales of the G35 and BMW 3 and 5 series for sure."
Interesting point. I guess the only thing that I'd point out is that of the 4 Nissan products that you mentioned, Acura's competitors to 2 of them are already considered quite successful. Through March of this year, Acura has sold just under twice as many MDX's as Infiniti has sold FX's, and the new TL is slightly outpacing the G35... so the 4-door TL sedan is doing quite well against the combined sales of the 2 G35 variants (3, if you count the AWD sedan separately).
Even the much maligned current RL is selling more units than the M45/Q45 combined. (Whether these cars are truly competitors is questionable, but they are the premium sedans from both companies.) And I think it's safe to say that the new RL will see a fairly hefty boost in sales over the old one. The upcoming M45 may be Infiniti's first breakthrough car in this class, being their first new offering in the class since the company's rebirth as a contender in the marketplace. I'm not sure when the new M45 is supposed to be available, but I don't believe it will be before MY 2006.
So while a "FM" type platform might be more competitive at getting the mindshare of performance car purists (in other words, RWD only) in sport sedans, Acura is still hardly hurting saleswise in that category. Even if they had RWD, I don't know that the Acura nameplate has the status to be any more competitive with BMW on that front than it already is, for people who care about such things.
I believe that Acura is very satisfied with the market performance of the MDX, so the lower selling FX isn't much of an incentive for them to create such a platform.
The RL? Well, I guess the new version's market performance remains to be seen. Again, when it comes to BMW in particular, the Acura name just doesn't carry the prestige that the BMW name does, so I don't know if a RWD RL class car would make Acura much more competitive in this segment than they already are (or will be, as is the case with the new RL). Up to this point, even Infiniti hasn't been very successful against BMW/Mercedes/Lexus etc. in premium sedans (5/7 series class), even though their offerings in this class have been RWD from the start. (Although, as noted in my next post, Infiniti's and Acura's fortunes in this market space are likely to improve quite a bit over the next few years.)
And even though the upcoming RL's AWD design isn't the preferred approach for people who prefer RWD, at least it addresses the perception that "premium" cars shouldn't be FWD.
So, unless Honda or Acura wanted to get into the Z-car/G35 coupe RWD business, they've already managed to use the global midsize platform to successfully cover 2 of the 4 segments that Nissan covers with the FM platform. They've had more limited success with a 3rd (RL), but at this point they're doing as well as or better than Nissan in this segment, and IMO, the redesigned 2005 version is a vast improvement over the outgoing version, with a platform far better suited for its mission. Would "FM" class RWD/AWD versions of Acura's existing models do better in the marketplace than the existing FWD/AWD models that they currently sell? I guess that's open to speculation. Since they're already considered very successful with the TL and MDX, I'm not entirely convinced.
So in closing, they may get some of those Infiniti sales with such a platform, but would they really significantly outpace their current product lineup? Your point is a good one, but it would carry a little more weight if Acura was struggling saleswise in these categories. And in at least 2 of them, they're not.
However, I do find the thought of how they could extend such a platform beyond their current market segments to be intriguing.
See? A civil post that discusses marketing and is sarcasm-free. Bet you didn't think I had it in me!