Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Ford Recalls
Ford Aspire '94
Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique '98
Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique '95
Ford F150 light pickup trucks '97
Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique '95-'96
Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique '98
Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique '99-'00
Ford Contour, Mercury Mystique and Cougar '99-'00
Ford Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis '92-'93
Ford Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis '94
Ford Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis '95
Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis '95
Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car '95-'96
Ford Escort '93
Ford Escort '95
Ford Escort '91 and Mercury Tracer '91-'92
Ford Escort '92 and Mercury Tracer '91
Ford Escort and Mercury Tracer '92
Ford Escort and Mercury Tracer '94-'95
Ford Escort and Mercury Tracer '95
Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator '99
Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator '97-'00
Ford Focus '01
Ford Focus '00
Ford Focus '00
Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury cars, vans, and sport-utility vehicles '00-01
Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury cars, vans, and sport-utility vehicles '95
Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury (various models) '96-'97
Ford, Mercury, and Lincoln vehicles '01
Ford Mustang with V8 engine '93
Ford Mustang '95
Ford Mustang and Taurus, and Mercury Sable '95
Ford Mustang GT '98
Ford Mustang GT '94
Ford Probe '93
Ford SVT Focus '02
Ford Taurus '96
Ford Taurus and Excursion, and Mercury Sable '00
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable '93
Ford Taurus, Lincoln Continental, and Mercury Sable '96
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable '88 and Lincoln Continental '86-'88
Ford Taurus, Mercury Sable, and Lincoln Continental '86-'95
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable '91 and Ford Explorer '89-'90
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable '95
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable '96
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable sedans and Ford Windstar minivan '96
Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable with antilock brakes '93
Ford Thunderbird and Mercury Cougar '92-'93
Ford Thunderbird and Mercury Cougar with semiautomatic climate-control system '96
Ford Windstar '95-96
Ford Windstar '99-01
Mercury Capri '91-'92
Mercury Capri with automatic transmission '93
Mercury Cougar '99-'00
Mercury Mystique and Ford Contour '99-'00
Mercury Villager and Nissan Quest '93
Honda recalls
Honda Accord station wagon '90-'93
Honda Accord '95
Honda Accord and Prelude '83-'87
Honda Civic '96-'98
Honda Civic '94 and Acura Integra '92-'94
Honda Civic '96
Honda Civic del Sol '94
Acura (various models) '96-'99
Acura CL and Honda Accord '98
Acura TL '02
Lincoln Continental '95-'96
Lincoln Continental '99
Lincoln Continental and Town Car '94
Lincoln Navigator and Ford Expedition '97-'00
Lincoln Town Car '90-'91
Lincoln Town Car '91-'92
SORRY!
Spoiling reputation? See above + the Car & Drivers recent conclusion for the Civic(whoops again:finished fifth and behind of POS Focus) in the comparison test: "something new from Honda - a Loser."
The Civic is traditionally selling like hot cakes in America.
It takes some time for people to figure things out.
CR-V? I was saying nothing about the CR-V.
And I'm pointing out the car that finally bested the Japanese as a response to your previous post where you make it sound that the Japanese best in the industry quality is a given fact.
O, the Focus SVT throttle cable recall.
The fact is the most of them were fixed while on the factory or dealership floor and before getting out to the customer.
I would rather live with 10 recalls like that than with a recall free and oil burning/rattling Civic.
Thank you for reading my posts.
It'll take more than one off year to ruin Honda's rep. Nice try though, keep believing...tap your ruby slippers together and repeat after Billy Ford Jr. there's no ride like FORD ,there's no ride like FORD ,there's no ride like FORD ,there's no ride like FORD...
Go cry somewhere else! (Preferably a Focus board)
NOTE: We are not brand haters or brand loyal to any manufacture. We have owned everything from VW, NISSAN, FORD, CHEVROLET, MITSUBISHI, ACURA, TOYOTA. All have lasted well but we have noticed that our Toyotas have always been the best as the miles roll up. Never owned a HONDA yet.
Exterior: Totally subjective. We both slightly preferred the CR-V. Neither is what I would call ugly or have weird shapes or lines.
Interior: Again, totally subjective. We both slightly preferred the CR-V. Everything is "nicer" to look at and the Honda's levers, switches, dials etc.... DO feel of higher quality to us. Seat comfort is very close with the Escape feeling slightly softer and the CR-V feeling more laterally supportive. Space is very close so that's a wash. After several drives in both we began to favor the CR-V's front seats and called it a tie for the rears. The Heating and A/C in the CR-V is very powerful and fairly quiet. Both work well though. There is slightly more road noise in the Escape at 60+MPH. There are so many more details but this is just a generalization and we both agreed that the Honda just felt more refined and would remain that way for quite a while.
Driving: After three drives in each they DO begin to reveal different personalities. Since this discussion is based on the engines and their performance here are my (non-technical) thoughts. Of my three test drives twice I drove the CR-V first and Escape second and the third drive the Escape first and CR-V second. Looking at the HP/Torque numbers you really expect the Escape to easily separate itself from the CR-V in stop light and highway passing acceleration. Well, IMHO, it does not. Driving the Escape within 10 minutes of the CR-V on the SAME roads the Escape did not dissapoint but certainly did not feel or display any performance advantage over the CR-V we had just driven. We were very surprised considering the numbers and that salespersons insistence that there would be a BIG difference. We did not notice ANY. We even insisted on driving a second one. No difference. The next night we drove an Escape (different dealer) first. Again, it did not dissapoint. Then, going over to drive a CR-V, I thought, now I should notice a difference....right. Wrong. The CR-V did not seem to have any advantage over the Escape we just drove but it certainly did not feel any slower from a stop or at speed. The CR-V is indeed smoother at higher RPM's though.
Transmissions were both smooth although I'd give the CR-V a slight advantage for "knowing" the right times to shift (up and down).
Both vehicles don't handle great but I have to say the Escape does not feel as tall when cornering at any speed. Not much of a difference though.
What did we finally end up with? 02 CR-V EX Auto. Why? We felt that Honda more closely fit our personal preferences. It is very well built, feels better us as drivers, no noticable performance gain with the ESCAPE's 3.0, and the Honda dealerships were far and above more knowledgable and professional than that of the Ford dealers. Can you say "Product Confidence." It shows in the sales people!!!
Anyways, sorry for the lack of technical terms, phrases and number crunching but the point of this was to state the seat of your pants behind the wheel perspective to these two very good little SUV's.
Happy Driving........Reed
Nice pick up on the dealer confidence. I totally agree with that. It's so easy to sell something you believe in!
I really like the walk through feature of the CR-V. With a kid on the way it'll be nice to have access to the back with out driving a minivan.
This is our first Honda and after 700 miles we both love it more each day. We have two kids age 10 and 14. They love the rear seat comfort (i.e. slide and recline independently.) As for the rear seat access we tend to use it to break up the back seat brawls!!!!! In December we are taking a three week trip from Austin to the Grand Canyon then on to various relatives in So Cal. Can't wait to put the V through it paces.
Reed
Thanks.
tidester, host
I’m not sure where you’re going with the Acura badging. They use the Type S designation for hi-po models, but that’s about it.
GM, Honda, and Toyota sold purely electric vehicles. GM is now looking at “mild hybrid” systems. They are also introducing engines with cylinder shutdown features. Dodge has a hybrid Contractor’s Special version of the Ram as well as a diesel Liberty. In addition to the hybrids, Honda has the first fuel cell on sale in the US and DCX is bringing over a fuel-cell A-class. Saturn even calls their small engine the “Ecotec”. Here’s a link with some of the promised offerings.
http://www.autonews.com/news.cms?newsId=3981
So, if the American public isn’t concerned with fuel economy and emissions, why is everyone building green cars? All manufacturers have made some attempts to create more fuel efficient and cleaner cars, Ford included. However, Ford is the only one that has stopped. I do believe that Ford will resume research into green cars. As you said, when they return to profitability. However, that doesn’t look like that’ll happen any time in the next few years, AND the road to profitability may soon require green cars.
CAFÉ standards are based on sales as well as individual vehicle rankings. The Insight, for example, does little to help Honda with their CAFÉ ranking. They do not sell enough of them. The Escape, on the other hand, probably raises Ford’s average because they sell so many. So adding a hybrid or diesel will not help Ford’s numbers if that vehicle doesn’t sell. If it were that easy, manufacturers wouldn’t be fighting the changes, now would they?
Getting back to the CR-V. In it's original form, the 96-01 CR-V was only moderately clean, got reasonable gas mileage, and performance was only respectable if revved the way Scape2 would have us believe.
Introduce the 2.4L engine with i-VTEC and we get more power, better emissions, and better fuel economy in a bigger vehicle. Compare the 2.3L Accord with the 2.4L and you see the same thing. Ditto with the '00 Civic vs the '01 model.
VTEC works.
Also, it is my understanding that peak torque of the CRV is 160 ft/lbs. 90% of 160ft/lbs = 144 ft/lbs. (any mistke in math there?)
The RPM range where the CRV puts out higher than 144 ft/lbs of torque is between 2600 and 5700.
Show me the curve that says otherwise.
If you want to choose 85% as broad, then the Escape has 85% of its torque at around 2000 to just over 6000 rpms. Again, same basic shape as the CRV, although admittedly the CRV is a bit more broad..
85% of 198 ft/lbs = 168. So still the entire time the Escape is in this range, it is producing more torque than the CRV peaks at.
Many descrepencies in the exact dyno numbers can be attributed to several factors including that no 2 dynos are the same, air temp and other factors can also play a role, so it's difficult to nit pick a few ft/lbs here or a few hp there.
However what will be consistant even from dyno to dyno, is the general torque and hp curve of an engine. In this we see that both the CRV and Escape have similar shaped, broad curves.
I did some checking at the NHTSA site for recalls for Honda/Acura. I only checked the last 5 years. Here's the list I compiled from just those years.
Acura TL 98-02 *
Acura RL 98-02 *
Acura CL 98
Acura SLX 98 *
Acura MDX 02 *
Honda Accord 98-02 *
Honda Civic 98-02 *
Honda S2000 00 *
Honda Odyssey 00 *
Honda Odyssey 02 *
Honda Insight 01 *
Honda Passport 01 *
Honda CRV 98-99 *
Honda CRV 02 *
Honda Prelude 99-99 *
Honda CL 99 *
Honda EV Plus 98-99 *
*indicates vehicles that weren't on your list
So either your not reporting what your reading from CR, or CR is not informing you..
If that's a fact, then why do those calculations have the CR-V producing 168 ft-lbs of torque? You yourself put a question mark next to those numbers.
I can understand when manufacturers are optimistic about hp figures. But why would Honda under-rate the CR-V's peak torque numbers when lack of torque was such a big deal with the first model?
"Also, it is my understanding that peak torque of the CRV is 160 ft/lbs. 90% of 160ft/lbs = 144 ft/lbs. (any mistke in math there?)"
Actually, the CR-V produces 162 ft-lbs at peak, so, yes, you are mistaken. I didn't think it was worth pointing out the first time. 90% would be 145.8 ft-lbs.
"The RPM range where the CRV puts out higher than 144 ft/lbs of torque is between 2600 and 5700. Show me the curve that says otherwise."
I just did. About 20 posts ago. It's a curve that I created, but it's based on the one provided by Honda. I copied it into that graph as it is easier to read. If you want the original, go to Hondanews.com and search through the images section of the CR-V pages.
"85% of 198 ft/lbs = 168. So still the entire time the Escape is in this range, it is producing more torque than the CRV peaks at."
Again, you're assuming that we are comparing the Escape's V6 and the CR-V's I4. (You need to show me a real curve before we can do that.) That wasn't my point at all. As I wrote the first time, the specific output for the CR-V's engine is not the sole benefit of VTEC. I listed several similar sized engines that put out similar power figures as examples. The i-VTEC engines series wasn't nominated for several engineering awards because they crank out Ferrari-like power. It's the output combined with clean emissions and good fuel economy that makes the technology noteworthy.
http://beta.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=55870
http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/021203-1.htm
http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/021202-2.htm
Here's a couple of examples:
3.2TL, 3.5RL, etc.. It may be reversed on the trunk, but I do know that they display the engine displacement. To be fair, most luxury brands do something similar but without the decimal point. The older Civic Si's (don't know about the newer one's because they are too hard to look at) had a big VTEC sticker on each door.
Enough about physical badges. They really aren't that important.
"CAFÉ standards are based on sales as well as individual vehicle rankings."
You're right. I was referring to the Escape and Focus when stating how a manufacturer can raise its CAFE (Thanks for that. I couldn't remember it.) ranking by adding a hybrid or diesel model. The HEV Escape is coming, and there is a strong rumor that a diesel Focus is being considered for the near future. They have one in Europe and it is a pretty big hit from what I hear.
As for the Dodge hybrid pickup and the GM cylinder shut off, I've seen the specs on the pickup and it seems that it will only be good for cruising and hauling small items. What's the point? You have to start somewhere I guess. Remember the last time GM tried the cylinder shutoff? It was in a Cadillac and didn't last very long. DM uses it in the S Class and I think a few others' do too, but I have not heard anything about their long-term reliability. Maybe the second time will be a charm for GM.
Saturn calls their engines Ecotec and Ford used to put little green leaf badges on Taurus' and Rangers. Names and badges don't always show the whole picture. Although, I don't know much about the Ecotec line, so I won't go on.
"All manufacturers have made some attempts to create more fuel efficient and cleaner cars, Ford included. However, Ford is the only one that has stopped."
Yes, but Ford's program was supposedly a lot more involved than the other two's. They announced it a while back and a big deal was made of it. Now it is seemingly on hold, and we're making a big deal about it again. Either the other two didn't make as large of an effort, or they were smart in keeping their intentions to theirselves.
The Honda fuel cell vehicle was on The Weather Channel (of all places) this morning. According to them, it was just introduced yesterday and will not be for sale to the public. I think they said that a handful of government agencies will be using the few that will be produced. Again, I guess you have to start somewhere.
A month or two ago Ford and GM announced that the two of them are going to work together in developing a new transmission (6 speed automatic I think it was). In short, they want to do this in order to increase both performance and fuel mileage in FWD vehicles. FWD SUV's, like the Escape, included.
Here's a couple of links for this story:
http://popularmechanics.com/automotive/auto_technology/2002/10/gm_ford_transmission/
http://www.auto.com/industry/speed11_20021011.htm
If you think CR is "Honda's Bible", what is "Ford's Bible"? Surely they have someone in the world (other than employees) saying they build the best products money can buy. BTW CR has recently switched their rating of civics from the highest relaibility to the second highest.
If you still insist CR is trying to pull off a massive cover-up of Honda's errors while maintaining a Ford/Big 3 smear campaign, visit jdpower.com. Their studies of inital quality don't lie.
Government workers are still the minority - even in Canada! Don't you think it will go over well with the voters? :-)
tidester, host
2003 Chevy Tahoe
2003 Chevy Express
2003 Chevy Silverado
Here are some other GM ULEV offerings:
Pontiac Vibe
GMC Safari
Chevy Suburban
Chevy Avalanche
Cadillac Escalade
GM leads the world in research and development of "green vehicles."
Of course, you could always lease a battery powered Highlander for only $10,000 per month. Think of the savings at the gas pump!
Chevy Suburban
Chevy Avalanche
Cadillac Escalade
GREEN VEHICLES!!!!!! Air pollution is a part of being a "green vehicle". Fuel economy is another. When you burn 2 - 3 times as much fuel as other vehicles the benefits of ULEV are a bit diminished.
I'm not saying GM should stop producing cleaner running engines (the EPA won't let them). I am saying your classifying them as "green" is a joke.
http://www.greenercars.com/12mean.html
The best vehicles -
http://www.greenercars.com/12green.html
Funny, how three of the 5 GM ULEV vehicles you listed are the worst for the planet. GM does have two cars in the nice category though...who makes the engine for the Prizm? TOYOTA!!!
Another smear campaign against the big 3??? Ya never know!
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/TailpipeTally/
Hondaman - Lightyears? No. Toyota, Honda, and MB are just willing to take losses by selling these vehicles. It's a PR move and experiment more than anything else. Several other companies could have done the same thing. They just don't have the cash reserves (or guts) to do it.
Baggs - According to your earlier post, no one (or very few) people seriously consider emissions when shopping for a vehicle. If that is true, why the green leaves and Ecotec name? Whether the cylinder shut-down works or not is moot. Why is GM working on it? Why are Toyota and Honda leasing waste-of-money fuel cell cars? Because emissions ARE important to them (and their customers).
"Ford's program was supposedly a lot more involved than the other two's."
Not according to Fedlawman. I've never seen any evidence to support your claim. Ford made big promises a few years back, but there was no mention of how they were going to achieve those goals. If they did have a serious program already underway (like the Escape HEV), I doubt it would have been postponed so readily.
While Ford does have a few remaining green programs in effect, none are as significant as what the leaders are doing. The hybrid system in the Escape HEV has been purchased from Toyota. It isn't even a Ford design. The tag-team effort with GM isn't completely their own. These are Dutch boys standing at the dam with their fingers blocking the holes.
Fedlawman - How exactly was this measured?
"GM leads the world in research and development of "green vehicles.""
Is this based on how much money has been spent? How many technologies have been produced? How many vehicles have been produced? What's the measuring stick?
Not that it makes a big difference, but those $10,000 leases are priced in loonies (Canadian dollars).
The green leaves appeared for a year or two immediately following their announcement of wanting to be the next "green" auto manufacturer. They didn't offend people who don't care about emissions, and probably attracted some people who do to the vehicle lines. The same goes for the Ecotec name.
I don't think the green leaves had all that much to do with emissions anyway. FFV was also on those badges and I think it was an acronym for Flexible Fuel Vehicle. I think you could use fuels with larger amounts of other chemicals than normal. Chemicals such as alcohol for example. I could be way off though.
"Whether the cylinder shut-down works or not is moot."
How so?
OK, I have an internal combustion engine in my basement at home. It doesn't work though. Am I now considered a leader in "green vehicle" research?
Let me ask you this, if Ford were to put something like the green leaf or Ecotec name on the Escape, would that lean more shoppers away from the CR-V? Nobody looks at the numbers while they are shopping so who's going to know any different?
"I've never seen any evidence to support your claim."
That's why I said supposedly. I don't follow this stuff and really don't know for sure.
http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/suv-02.htm
The Escape is rated for 12.3 to 12.9 lbs of pollution per 15,000 miles. The CR-V is rated for 5.3 to 6.3 lbs per 15,000 miles.
Don't get me wrong, as an LEV, the Escape is doing pretty good. I'd buy an LEV. It's just that the CR-V is doing better.
You tell me... wait a minute... you did.
"The green leaves appeared for a year or two immediately following their announcement of wanting to be the next "green" auto manufacturer. They didn't offend people who don't care about emissions, and probably attracted some people who do to the vehicle lines. The same goes for the Ecotec name."
Go Honda!
(It's an EPA conspiracy.)
As you said in a previous post, they have to for the Japan market.
Do you guys really think that a company as large as Honda really cares about anything other than making money? Their CEO isn't Ghandi or the Pope you know.
varmint,
I did kind of tell you that in a previous sentence I guess. That was just my opinion though, and I wanted to get an honest one from you and the others.
I think the earth plays a big part in Japanese culture. I believe they are expected to do what is best for the health of their people and they willingly do so.
Just my opinion.
Baggs - "Do you guys really think that a company as large as Honda really cares about anything other than making money?"
Of course they care about making money. But corporations are run by people and people have values. Most people describe them as the "corporate culture".
Fuel economy and emissions have long been a part of Honda's corporate culture. The first vehicle they brought to America (the CVCC) was fuel efficient and the first car to meet rising US emissions regs without a catalytic converter. Honda is also a leader in building clean factories as well as waste recycling.
So Honda has been making money AND keeping their values. Ghandi and Bill Gates wrapped up in one package, if you will. At least, as far as these issues are concerned.
As for my honest opinion, I think the makers who are currently taking risks with green cars will be seen as the pioneers. History will favor them and the green reputation will stick. Honda's biggest environmental statement is being first with a hybrid vehicle. Ford's biggest environmental statement is producing the Excursion.
I don't think it's a matter of "IF" green machines will become popular in the market. It's more a question of "WHEN". Toyota, Honda, and others are betting that when will be soon. Ford is betting that it will be later. If this happens in the next five to ten years, Ford and others will be left playing catch up. Not a good start.
Icvci - "I think the earth plays a big part in Japanese culture. I believe they are expected to do what is best for the health of their people and they willingly do so."
If you ever watch their cartoons, half of them are about how mankind has squandered resources and is paying some kind of price. Evil robots take over the world because they determine that mankind is a virus on the planet... Even things like Digimon could be viewed as people taking care of wildlife and "living in harmony".
Based on what I've seen, the places where people have messed up the environment seem to have the greatest concern. LA, Japan, Europe, and parts of Asia do the most toward reducing emissions because they have seen what happens when pollution gets out of control.
Steve, Host
A real world range of up to 130 miles.
Drag coefficient of 0.19, the lowest of any production car on the road.
Composite body panels.
Traction control, cruise control, anti-lock brakes, airbags, power windows, power door locks, power outside mirrors, AM/FM CD/cassette, tire inflation monitor system, etc.
Cost? Between $34,000 and $44,000.
http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/environment/road_to_future/index.html
I am also considering a CRV EX AWD. A similarly equiped Escape would have to be significantly cheaper given lower residuals/resale. Thanks!
As much as the Honda crowd wants to bash the Focus it moved UP the sales chart from 10 to 9. The Civic stayed at 8. You would think noone would buy a Focus with all those terrible recalls...
Trying to make the Japanese look like environmentalists is like making Saddam look like a saint.. The Japanese have very little to now environmental history or background. Every see a forest in Japan? There gone...
If Honda is so high on the environment then why did they come up with the NSX? or the Pilot? Or the RSX? or the MDX? These don't get great MPG. And why is HOnda coming out with a truck?? Why does Japan import most of its oil and raw rescources? Oh-yeah, they used all of thiers up!..
Someone claims the Japanese are the leaders in 4cyl tech?? What?? Ever heard of OPAL? or Renault? or VW???? or Alfa Romeo? or SAAB?
Who in their right mind would buy one without getting a HUGE discount? Seriously, with all the options why take a risk on a proven loser?
When is the last time you were in Japan?
So Japan out-sources for oil because "...they used all of thiers up!"? Really? Is that why we get our oil from the Middle East?
You wouldn't say the Japanese currently lead the world in small engine technology? Who does?
Someone throw this guy a life vest, he's in over his head.
Thanks.
tidester, host
scape- "If Honda is so high on the environment then why did they come up with the NSX? or the Pilot? Or the RSX? or the MDX? These don't get great MPG."
And which other exotic/midsize SUV/coupe get great mileage? Check the numbers (I'm not going to do the homework for you, mr engineer) and you'll see that the MPG ratings of those cars are either slightly above the average or just downright better. And as an engineer, you should know all this talk about being green involves more than just MPG - emissions also play a role (MDX is ULEV rated, FYI). Furthermore, the NSX is over 10 years old. Can I bring up Ford's aging F-series to disprove any talk of them trying to be green? Aging, heck, I can just pluck the 2 year old Excursion from Ford's lineup.
"And why is HOnda coming out with a truck??"
The question is when, not why. As of right now, they don't have one - you can't pin anything on them. You're getting quite desperate to find something wrong with Honda.
"Why does Japan import most of its oil and raw rescources? Oh-yeah, they used all of thiers up!.."
You want to know how many other countries do that too? (hint: one of those countries is America)
"Someone claims the Japanese are the leaders in 4cyl tech?? What?? Ever heard of OPAL? or Renault? or VW???? or Alfa Romeo? or SAAB?"
Excuse you, but no one claimed that the Japanese are the leaders in 4cyl tech. It was your post that claimed they weren't. And no, I've never heard of Opal...only Opel. As for VW and SAAB - why don't you add Subaru and Mitsubishi, along with any other automaker who take the easy route by simply turbocharging their engines.
#2637 of 2706 by diploid Nov 30, 2002 (10:04 pm)
scape - "Hondaman, you are completly brainwashed. You honesly think HOnda has the small engine world cornered?? better yet, they are the only car company that can massage an engine?? The Duratec 3.0 can be massaged to 260HP and about 235ft/lbs of torque.. Even the Zetec Engine Found in the Focus SVT has been massaged to 170HP. This pedastel you place HOnda on makes me laugh."
Yes, and the 2.0L found in the RSX-S can produce 200hp. Type-R's in Japan produce 220hp. And the 3.0L found in the base NSX produces 252hp and 210 lb-ft of torque...and that was close to 10 years ago. If you can't admire that, especially since you're an engineer, I think you're being rather obstinate.
So...who claimed that the Japanese were the leaders in 4-cyl tech? There's a difference between saying a company is good at something and saying that they're the best.
I don't Japan ever had much oil to speak of anyway did they?
Steve, Host
Scape2 - Maybe you should read the earlier posts.
"Trying to make the Japanese look like environmentalists is like making Saddam look like a saint..."
No one said "Japanese". We've talked about Toyota and Honda quite a bit. But others, like Isuzu and Suzuki, have done little for their autotomotive product lines.
Oh, and the RSX is one of the cleanest cars in its class. The MDX and Pilot are ULEV rated, and even the S2000, a purpose-built sports car, is an LEV.
SAAB is in a recall stage these days and even VW has eliminated the turbo in their Golf as it is about 10000$ more than a Civic for about a second faster. When it comes down to fun for the buck, Honda has always given a great car.
As I said before and I will say it again scapey, I have driven more miles in a Ford than you have and I can tell you, they have a long way to go.
I don't feel like looking up the numbers right now, but guess which one sold more in the U.S..