There are lots of cars that are better than the Civic. I really like the new Protoge and if it had come out a month earlier, I might have one now. But when it comes to an inexpensive car that is inexpensive to operate, the Civic still beats it.
It just seems to me that people are expecting too much. I remember my buddy who had a first generation Civic. The car was unbelievably small and chintzy. Another friend of mine had a 5th generation Civic. (One of the best econo-cars ever built IMO) But it was still a very small car. This new Civic is big. They've made the car noticably bigger and given it an advanced engine that's peppy and gets awesome milage. But they've had to cut corners to keep the price down. I can live with that, it's what I expected.
OK, if the turn signal was the only issue with Q.C. I would not be unhappy about it. I mentioned the poor "feel" and calibration of the 01 Civic turn signal because it seems to be indicative of the overall quality of the car. By calibration, I mean the ability to activate the turn signal momentarily and not fully "click" it into place like you would if you were turning out of a side street. The "feel" is something you have to decide for yourself, but the Protege's turn signal feels of a much higher quality. Again, this would be insignificant, if it wasn't for other items of questionable quality like the cheap seat height control.
The Civic cost's less than the Mazda to purchase. (About $2000 less by my estimation.) It get's better fuel mileage.
My impression has always been that Honda's reliability is a little better than Mazda's. Overall, I think they are pretty close though.
I guess I was making some assumptions here that reliability would continue, but so are you. Both the Protege and the Civic are brand new. My cost of ownership comparison assumes that reliability for both will be about the same, but the Civic get's significantly better fuel milage.
There's been quite a bit of anectotal evidence here that there are lots of problems with the new Civic. Just keep in mind that the Civic is a very popular car, and when people are having problems, they are more likely to post a message about it than if everything is going fine. I'll balance those out here by saying I have 11,000 miles on my LX coupe so far and have not had any problems.
The Civic gets way better mileage than the Protoge. I have a 01 Protoge ES 2.0L. The reasons why I bought it were: 0% financing for 48 months, 6 months defered payment, $400 college grad rebate, GREAT handling, 16 inch rims with excellent tires, made in Japan, relatively torquey 2.0L engine, and they are somewhat unique compared to a Civic. I think the Civic is an excellent economy car, but I think the Protoge sacrifices some ecomomy for a little bit more sportiness and a higher fun to drive index. For those that want pure economy though, the Civic is the way to go.
But the best MPG that I have gotten in my Protoge is about 33 mpg. I know that the Civic EX sedan does better than that. But you are right, it doesn't really add up to much.
In real world numbers -pklas is almost right. The actual savings (based on 18,000 miles per year) comes out to approximately $72 per year. I don't know about you, but I could live with that.
If buying a Civic, I would make sure it was made in Japan before I would buy one manufactured in the USA or Canada. Look hard on the lot and you might find one. Look for the letter J on the vehicle identification number. I really don't know much about the Mazda Protege outside of that it was ranked #1 in its class in Consumer Reports in 2000. This year they rank the Civic as #1 without any reinforcing data on a new model. Sometimes, I don't understand Consumer Reports when they rate an auto.
I guess my point wasn't really to compare the Civic to anything. If you think the Protoge is better, that's fine, maybe it is.
My point is simply that some of your percieved loss of quality in the Civic has probably been offset by other improvements that you are not taking into account. The Civic in it's current form is still a good value. Maybe it doesn't fit some people's needs as well as the older models, but for most people, some of the changes such as the size are a real improvement. If it goes 5mph slower on a slollem course, that's fine as long as I can fit my mountain bike in the trunk.
Data: KBB.com City MPG specs - Civic 32/Protégé 25. Conservative standard of 12,000 miles per year, and $1.50/gal. That's $157.50/yr difference. You guys decide on other buying criteria.
The main reason for the Protege's lower resale is the rebates that are offered. What you save up front, you lose at the end. So no big deal. $157/yr still isn't going to break the bank if you're prepared to spend $17K on a car. After 5 years, that's still only $800 - about the price of the free sunroof Mazda is now offering on the Protege. In fact you could argue that the 3/50K warranty on the Protege may cover an item more expensive than this amount, that would not be covered on the Civic's 3/36K.
Saw a picture of the new 2002 Civic SI today in one of the auto magazines. Car looks great except that it will be built in Great Britain for export to the USA and Canada. Heaven help us if it is manufactured in Great Britain!
Great Britain probably has produced the least reliable vehicles of any country in the world. Quality control is virtually non existent in Great Britain when it comes to cars being sold to the general populous. (This does not include the Rolls Royce which isn't for the general population).
The Labor (or in Britain--Labour) Party has caused companies such as British Leyland and Austin-Healey to fold. Names such as the MGB, Austin-Healey 3000, Jaguar, and Cooper were some of the least reliable cars ever built.
I hope Honda has trained their British auto workers a lot better than when they produced the vaunted Sterling!
Might not be that remote a prospect. Lucas-Varity (which descends from the infamous Lucas of British-car notoriety) is now TRW - and TRW supplies parts to most automotive companies.
However, the rise of Jaguar as a respected producer of high-quality automobiles removes the old myth about the output of British workers. Most of the cars produced at the nadir of the British auto industry were products of the nationalized British Leyland, or, probably worse, Chrysler (after it took over and destroyed what was left of Rootes Motors).
Just as Ford has injected quality into Jaguar, I suspect that Hondas built in Britain will be totally different in quality from past British models.
I don't really mind that they are built in Britain. What I am disapointed about is the looks of the car. I think it looks too much like a Focus. The new Integra (RSX) doesn't look great either IMO. I am also disapointed in the power outputs of both cars. They both have the new 2.0L, why doesn't the RSX have 220 hp, and the Civic about say...190hp? Who knows? Instead they took that excellent motor and strangled it in the new Civic. It makes 240 hp in the S2000 and only 160 hp in the Civic? Come on now Honda, it has less than 100 hp per liter now, that's not like you.
"Heaven help us" is what the British say when they see a car made in Detroit. If you are going to talk about British Leyland, then why not go all the way back to the Model T and talk about its reliability. It's interesting that Ford's other brands like Mazda, Jaguar and Volvo make better cars than the parent company. How can Ford teach these companies how to build high quality cars, when it can't do so itself - very well. Anyway, the Honda plant in the UK has been making Civics for years and has been regarded as at least as good as any other Honda plant. I bet the British equivalent of this discussion would have the same reaction to the US built Civic coupe that is sold in the UK.
The build quality is not so much to do with the "output of the British worker" vs. the Mexican worker vs. the American worker etc., but instead the output of the Honda worker independant of nationality
For whatever reason, Jaguar did improve after Ford bought them. They were not very good cars before. Maybe Ford doesn't practice what they preached to Jaguar.
It was the 1986-92 Sterling 825 and 827 sedans/hatchbacks 5-door sedans. The Sterling was a Honda/Rover joint venture and it was the second channel Honda luxury marque launched in 1986 along with Acura. I am not sure what was the market position of the Sterling in relation to the Acura Legend of the time; however, the Sterling was a piece of junk and it was plagued with many, many problems with were not present in its Japan only assembled counterpart, the Legend.
The Sterling was supposed to be an affordable 'Jaguar' with hand stitched leather seats, real wood accents, etc....classic British luxury with Japanese reliability. I still remember the Sterling sales brochure..."Only Master craftsmen designed the Sterling 825 sedan"..
what a piece of crap tha car turned out to be!
It was pulled off the US market in the early 1990's.
I believe the Honda/Rover partnership still exists today but the Sterling name, albeit long forgotten, was yet another Honda attempt to agressively capture the newly created market for high end Japanese luxury sedans.
The Sterling was based on the Acura Legend platform. Basically, anything on the car that Rover touched quickly fell apart. Mostly it was electrical problems. Cruise control, power seats, windows, or locks.
Those Sterlings were certainly nice cars when they worked. The first car I've ever seen with heated adjustable power seats in back. A freind of mine bought several because the resale was so good after they quit selling them. You could buy a loaded low milage car that sold for $40K new for $5000 after a couple years. Eventually he got tired of fixing it all the time and gave up though.
Rover has serious problems. Even after BMW bought them, they couldn't turn Rover around. BMW ended up taking a huge bath when they sold Rover. They were so weak after that that GM almost managed to take BMW over.
What has Rover in the 80s got to do with Honda today? Sterling was a bad car, yes. But I'd still take one over what Ford was making in the 80s such as the Tempo.
As I've said before, I'm sure the British would have plenty to say about what Detroit put out during that decade. They still complain about build quality in the few US made cars that are sold over there such as the Neon.
Nothing said so far has convinced me that the 02 Si will have nothing less than the usual high standard of constuction.
Let's separate the wheat from the shaff. Building a car in England is no better or worse than Canada or the United States. What it comes down to is whether the components used are of good quality. That is the real issue. If I had my pick i would want my Civic to be built in Japan because the component suppliers in Japan employ higher quality control and use better materials.
I think the highly unionized British labor (In Britain-Labour) force has a lot to do with their quality control. British Leyland in its hay day had seven different unions building one car model, the MGB. Different unions for various manufacturing processes. A good example of this was the paint union. It had to be one of the worse unions at British Leyland as they always seemed to be on strike whether they worked or not.
(Also posted on the Civic problems board) Does Honda just shovel components into a big box and ship it to the dealers? Does anybody work in quality control there? I am torn between shouting out to the world that the 2001 Civic is a piece of junk, or quietly trying to resell it to some other unsuspecting bonehead, just like Honda did to me.
This just came in the mail yesterday:
June 2001 Safety recall: Civic fuel pump connector Dear civic owner: this notice is sent to you in accordance with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
What is the reason for this notice? Honda Motor Co. Ltd. Has determiend that a defect rrlating to motor wehicle safety exists with the fuel pump in certain 2001 Civic sedans. The fuel pump may fail due to corrosion of an electrical terminal. If the pump stops working, the engine will stall without waring, and a crash could occur.
What should you do? Call any authorized Honda automobile dealer and make an appointment to have your vehicle inspected. If necessary, the dealer will install a new fuel filter kit that includes new terminals for the fuel pump connector. This repair will be done free of charge. Please plan to leave your car for at least half a day to allow the dealer flexibility in scheduling.
That all cars should be perfect..no car should EVER have to have an update done to correct something that *could* cause the car to stall which *could* result in a crash.
Once again, I believe this is more evidence of Honda's increasing reliance of "cheap" suppliers and an alarmingly increased lack of quality control. Only in North America!!!
when quality companies succumb to the pressures of cost cutting U.S. style. Let's face it, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan are increasingly building their cars in redneck towns throughout the U.S. and Canada in places like Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama,Ohio, and the list goes on.
I hate to make generalizations, but I have been to some of these economically depressed regions and alcoholism is typically higher in these places than the national average. Do I want hung-over hillbillies doing the quality control reviews on my vehicle? Well, I'm not exactly thrilled with the U.S. built product I purchased. Makes me wonder if my car was built on the infamous Monday or Friday. Let's not forget many of the component suppliers come from the very same redneck belt.
I always thought "red necks" drive pickup trucks and listen to Johnny Paycheck on their eight-track tape players. Honda doesn't build a pickup so I am wondering if the guys work their shifts real fast so they can go to the local bar?
I agree the civic is a cheap car, I don't expect to get a host of amenities with it. However, having owned a 95 dx hatch (a good little versatile driver, tight clutch, responsive steering/suspension for the money), and then a 98 dx coupe (somewhat more sluggish and soft, clutch and steering over-assisted), I can say that the vehicle was much more responsive in past models. Recently drove the 01 lx as a loaner, I would not buy one ever. I'm easily pleased, but the current incarnation is the honda escort. Did not seem that much more roomy either. BMW, etc. may use struts, but on an economy car they are not the same. I agree with some of the above, honda literature praised the racing inspired ind. wishbone as superior to other makes. It was. I am a loyal honda consumer, I keep two and have been trading for a new one every 5 years or so. If they continue in the "green" direction as opposed to giving me a little performance for the buck, I'll consider the performance enabled competition. I think alot of other buyers will too, as evidenced by the popularity of the WRX, Prot. 5, Jetta/Golf, and the coming "Mini". Sorry so long.
I would consider some other cars. The Protege is receiving excellent reviews. In fact, some of the reviews have even recommended the Protege over the Honda Civic. A less inspired model is the Corolla.
I also wouldn't rule out the 4 cyl Altima that is coming out in September (that is if you are willing to live with some of the problems associated with a car in its first model year). The design on this car is quite fresh.
I think that VW has the worst bumper to bumper warranty in the industry, 2 years/ 24 months. The 10 year on the powertrain warranty sounds good on paper but most of the problems haunting VW are electrical in nature.
Starting in 2002, VW will have a 4yr/50k b to b warranty. That should put to rest the argument over their insufficient current warranty.
There is no evidence that a VW made in Mexico is any different in quality than those made elsewhere. The VW management doesn't lower the quality control threshold for their Mexican plant because they think that they cannot reach that level. The standards are the same.
Deciding between a Civic and a Golf is like comparing apples to oranges. The Golf is a more upscale, luxurious car and the Civic is more pedestrian. I wouldn't necessarily get a Civic because of the perceived better reliability. The new Civic has had a its share of problems in its first year. Driving the Golf right after a new Civic, makes the Civic feel like a cheap car.
I bought a new 2001 Civic for my daughter who will be going off to college in Arizona (we live in Massachusetts). With less than 2000 miles driven, the SRS warning light came on and stayed on. The dealer had to order an SRS Control Unit (which took about 3 weeks to come in) and replace it. The replacement was completed on Tuesday 7/24 and the light was back on Saturday 7/28.
Has anyone else experienced a problem with this? This really concerns me because the dealer obviously doesn't know the root cause, and I picked the Civic because of its safety rating.
I think the first year in any new model has to get the "bugs" worked out of it. Honda definitely "cheapened up" the new 2002 Civic as cost saving measures. A good example is going from the famous "wishbone suspension" to a McPhearson Strut suspension. Honda prided itself on its unique suspension and then turned around and replaced it with a suspension that costs a lot less to build in the final product.
Another example is the cost cutting measure on the Civic's exhaust system. Take a close look, it looks as if it came out of Midas.
Show me a company that doesn't cost cut their products. So why should Honda be any different. They are a business out to make money. If the public doesn't like the products they put out they would show it by not buying them, but that doesn't seem to be the case, does it? I think we all need to keep in mind that even the worst Honda is better than the majority of other automakers products.
I personally feel after ready both of your posts in other forums that you are polar opposites.
Isellhondas claims that the handling is a lot better on the 2002 Civic by going from a "wishbone" to a McPhearson strut suspension. I have to diagree with you regarding the handling as I have driven both the 2002 and 2000 model Civics. There is no comparison in handling as the wishbone is far superior to the new Civic with the McPhearson Strut. Just ask anyone that races or road rallies their Civics.
The exhaust system on the new Civic does look cheap compared to the 2000 Civics. It also rusts faster which tends to prove that Honda is using less costly materials. This is the point I feel that Anselmo is trying to make. It does look like a muffler shop system.
5 Stars is great for crash tests isellhondas! Overall though, the new Civic looks nice but Honda did cut some corners.
I understand that you sell Hondas but what technical experience do you possess to consider yourself an expert on maintenance and repair?
Have you by any chance been a mechanic in your life and been certified to work on Honda Civics? What technical training have you had to consider yourself an expert?
What experience have you had in the understanding of parts produced by various suppliers? When you can answer any of these questions with facts detailing your technical experience, I will listen as well as many others that read your comments.
It is your opinion to call me wrong but it is your opinion and yours only. Like I stated before, you might be a great salesman but you are lacking in technical expertise regarding Honda automobiles.
...it should be pointed out that the BMW 3 Series uses a MacPherson front setup, as well. I think Honda knew what they were doing; though it is possible to more easily lower a double-wishbone design, whether for racing or for show, the vast majority of Civic buyers (those who view the car as an appliance, or 95+% of Civic buyers) won't notice the slight handling difference but will get use out of the greater space efficiency and better crash test results. It was a smart move on Honda's part, IMHO.
I've driven both 2000 and 2001 Civics on a test track and have ridden along with professional drivers hired by Honda.
The professionals tell us that the 2001's handle as well if not better than the 2000's.
And, to me, anyway, that certainly seemed to be the case.
But...let's suppose that you are correct...let's assume the 2001 doesn't handle quite as well as the 2000's...O.K.?
Most people, the VAST percentage of potential buyers could care less! They like the improved safery and interior room...O.K.?
Paulo...a couple of things...
First, I never said, as you stated that the handling of a 2002 Civic is "much better" than a 2000. For one thing, the 2002's haven't come out yet so I assume you are talking about a 2001?
Exhaust systems...what makes you think they "rust faster"? At this early stage it's pretty unlikely that any car's exhaust system would be rusty....just curious.
Why did Honda spend so much energy flattening out the rear floor, but spend no energy on providing a decent handling car? Bad allocation of their time. The handling is simply mediocre at best, not bad, but not really good. No, you don't have to take corners at high speed to tell that the 01 Civic was meant to be an "interstate cruiser". At least Honda could have improved the handling in the EX coupe for a more sporty experience. But no. The EX rides and handles no better than the DX.
Although sales of the 01 Civic are pretty good, Honda expected much higher sales considering this was a newly designed model. If sales are sluggish this year, what will Honda do to increase sales since it is stuck with this poorly executed model for the next 4 years? Maybe they will start offering standard alloys on the EXs.
I think they handle just fine. It was never designed to be a BMW. To each his own, I guess...
I don't know that the introduction was "poorly executed". Honda is a pretty savvy company and I expect that they will continue to make running changes and improvements that will create excitement for the product.
Comments
It just seems to me that people are expecting too much. I remember my buddy who had a first generation Civic. The car was unbelievably small and chintzy. Another friend of mine had a 5th generation Civic. (One of the best econo-cars ever built IMO) But it was still a very small car. This new Civic is big. They've made the car noticably bigger and given it an advanced engine that's peppy and gets awesome milage. But they've had to cut corners to keep the price down. I can live with that, it's what I expected.
My impression has always been that Honda's reliability is a little better than Mazda's. Overall, I think they are pretty close though.
I guess I was making some assumptions here that reliability would continue, but so are you. Both the Protege and the Civic are brand new. My cost of ownership comparison assumes that reliability for both will be about the same, but the Civic get's significantly better fuel milage.
There's been quite a bit of anectotal evidence here that there are lots of problems with the new Civic. Just keep in mind that the Civic is a very popular car, and when people are having problems, they are more likely to post a message about it than if everything is going fine. I'll balance those out here by saying I have 11,000 miles on my LX coupe so far and have not had any problems.
They do, however depreciate much faster than a Civic.
Something to think about...
My point is simply that some of your percieved loss of quality in the Civic has probably been offset by other improvements that you are not taking into account. The Civic in it's current form is still a good value. Maybe it doesn't fit some people's needs as well as the older models, but for most people, some of the changes such as the size are a real improvement. If it goes 5mph slower on a slollem course, that's fine as long as I can fit my mountain bike in the trunk.
KBB.com City MPG specs - Civic 32/Protégé 25.
Conservative standard of 12,000 miles per year, and $1.50/gal.
That's $157.50/yr difference.
You guys decide on other buying criteria.
Great Britain probably has produced the least reliable vehicles of any country in the world. Quality control is virtually non existent in Great Britain when it comes to cars being sold to the general populous. (This does not include the Rolls Royce which isn't for the general population).
The Labor (or in Britain--Labour) Party has caused companies such as British Leyland and Austin-Healey to fold. Names such as the MGB, Austin-Healey 3000, Jaguar, and Cooper were some of the least reliable cars ever built.
I hope Honda has trained their British auto workers a lot better than when they produced the vaunted Sterling!
Anselmo, that was my reaction also.
I don't understand the business decision but will have to trust they know what they are doing.
As long as they don't come right hand drive.
British-car notoriety) is now TRW - and TRW supplies parts to most automotive companies.
However, the rise of Jaguar as a respected producer of high-quality automobiles removes the old myth about the output of British workers. Most of the cars produced at the nadir of the British auto industry were products of the nationalized British Leyland, or, probably worse, Chrysler (after it took over and destroyed
what was left of Rootes Motors).
Just as Ford has injected quality into Jaguar, I suspect that Hondas built in Britain will be totally different in quality from past British models.
The build quality is not so much to do with the "output of the British worker" vs. the Mexican worker vs. the American worker etc., but instead the output of the Honda worker independant of nationality
The Sterling was supposed to be an affordable 'Jaguar' with hand stitched leather seats, real wood accents, etc....classic British luxury with Japanese reliability. I still remember the Sterling sales brochure..."Only Master craftsmen designed the Sterling 825 sedan"..
what a piece of crap tha car turned out to be!
It was pulled off the US market in the early 1990's.
I believe the Honda/Rover partnership still exists today but the Sterling name, albeit long forgotten, was yet another Honda attempt to agressively capture the newly created market for high end Japanese luxury sedans.
1986-88 Sterling 825
1989-92 Sterling 827
Those Sterlings were certainly nice cars when they worked. The first car I've ever seen with heated adjustable power seats in back. A freind of mine bought several because the resale was so good after they quit selling them. You could buy a loaded low milage car that sold for $40K new for $5000 after a couple years. Eventually he got tired of fixing it all the time and gave up though.
Rover has serious problems. Even after BMW bought them, they couldn't turn Rover around. BMW ended up taking a huge bath when they sold Rover. They were so weak after that that GM almost managed to take BMW over.
As I've said before, I'm sure the British would have plenty to say about what Detroit put out during that decade. They still complain about build quality in the few US made cars that are sold over there such as the Neon.
Nothing said so far has convinced me that the 02 Si will have nothing less than the usual high standard of constuction.
Does Honda just shovel components into a big box and ship it to the dealers? Does anybody work in quality control there? I am torn between shouting out to the world that the 2001 Civic is a piece of junk, or quietly trying to resell it to some other unsuspecting bonehead, just like Honda did to me.
This just came in the mail yesterday:
June 2001
Safety recall: Civic fuel pump connector
Dear civic owner: this notice is sent to you in accordance with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
What is the reason for this notice?
Honda Motor Co. Ltd. Has determiend that a defect rrlating to motor wehicle safety exists with the fuel pump in certain 2001 Civic sedans. The fuel pump may fail due to corrosion of an electrical terminal. If the pump stops working, the engine will stall without waring, and a crash could occur.
What should you do?
Call any authorized Honda automobile dealer and make an appointment to have your vehicle inspected. If necessary, the dealer will install a new fuel filter kit that includes new terminals for the fuel pump connector. This repair will be done free of charge. Please plan to leave your car for at least half a day to allow the dealer flexibility in scheduling.
Bla bla
Honda Consumer affairs Dept
800 999 1009
Only in North America!!!
I hate to make generalizations, but I have been to some of these economically depressed regions and alcoholism is typically higher in these places than the national average. Do I want hung-over hillbillies doing the quality control reviews on my vehicle? Well, I'm not exactly thrilled with the U.S. built product I purchased. Makes me wonder if my car was built on the infamous Monday or Friday. Let's not forget many of the component suppliers come from the very same redneck belt.
I also wouldn't rule out the 4 cyl Altima that is coming out in September (that is if you are willing to live with some of the problems associated with a car in its first model year). The design on this car is quite fresh.
VW Jetta.. Made in Mexico..Dare I say more?
I wouldn't buy any VW car that is made in Mexico.
There is no evidence that a VW made in Mexico is any different in quality than those made elsewhere. The VW management doesn't lower the quality control threshold for their Mexican plant because they think that they cannot reach that level. The standards are the same.
Deciding between a Civic and a Golf is like comparing apples to oranges. The Golf is a more upscale, luxurious car and the Civic is more pedestrian. I wouldn't necessarily get a Civic because of the perceived better reliability. The new Civic has had a its share of problems in its first year. Driving the Golf right after a new Civic, makes the Civic feel like a cheap car.
It just seems that once they get around 75-80,000 miles on them they become plagued with problems.
Mostly electrical and cosmetic things.
It gets to the point that I want to take the jump box with me since I figure the VW probably won't start on our lot.
Not a slam...not meant to be a pro-Honda post but just my honest opinion.
Has anyone else experienced a problem with this? This really concerns me because the dealer obviously doesn't know the root cause, and I picked the Civic because of its safety rating.
Another example is the cost cutting measure on the Civic's exhaust system. Take a close look, it looks as if it came out of Midas.
Civic changed their suspension in order to build a more spacious car with even better crash test results than they had before.
FIVE STARS! How about that?
Instead of jumping to the conclusion this was a cost saving move, you might want to reconsider since the handling wasn't affected.
Exhaust system? What in the world are you talking about? They were able to re-route things to the point they created a flat rear floor!
Sounds like pretty smart engineering to me!
Isellhondas claims that the handling is a lot better on the 2002 Civic by going from a "wishbone" to a McPhearson strut suspension. I have to diagree with you regarding the handling as I have driven both the 2002 and 2000 model Civics. There is no comparison in handling as the wishbone is far superior to the new Civic with the McPhearson Strut. Just ask anyone that races or road rallies their Civics.
The exhaust system on the new Civic does look cheap compared to the 2000 Civics. It also rusts faster which tends to prove that Honda is using less costly materials. This is the point I feel that Anselmo is trying to make. It does look like a muffler shop system.
5 Stars is great for crash tests isellhondas! Overall though, the new Civic looks nice but Honda did cut some corners.
Have you by any chance been a mechanic in your life and been certified to work on Honda Civics?
What technical training have you had to consider yourself an expert?
What experience have you had in the understanding of parts produced by various suppliers? When you can answer any of these questions with facts detailing your technical experience, I will listen as well as many others that read your comments.
It is your opinion to call me wrong but it is your opinion and yours only. Like I stated before, you might be a great salesman but you are lacking in technical expertise regarding Honda automobiles.
The professionals tell us that the 2001's handle as well if not better than the 2000's.
And, to me, anyway, that certainly seemed to be the case.
But...let's suppose that you are correct...let's assume the 2001 doesn't handle quite as well as the 2000's...O.K.?
Most people, the VAST percentage of potential buyers could care less! They like the improved safery and interior room...O.K.?
Paulo...a couple of things...
First, I never said, as you stated that the handling of a 2002 Civic is "much better" than a 2000. For one thing, the 2002's haven't come out yet so I assume you are talking about a 2001?
Exhaust systems...what makes you think they "rust faster"? At this early stage it's pretty unlikely that any car's exhaust system would be rusty....just curious.
Although sales of the 01 Civic are pretty good, Honda expected much higher sales considering this was a newly designed model. If sales are sluggish this year, what will Honda do to increase sales since it is stuck with this poorly executed model for the next 4 years? Maybe they will start offering standard alloys on the EXs.
I don't know that the introduction was "poorly executed". Honda is a pretty savvy company and I expect that they will continue to make running changes and improvements that will create excitement for the product.
I guess we will find out...!