By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
can you even dare imagine how fun a 200 hp CRX type-R would be? Of course, we won't get it, we never get the best stuff Japan has in the world.
I read the article, which also said they will be redesigning the Civic hatch to look less like a microvan next time around. They are going for a more sporty look for the whole Civic line next time.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
nippon, Honda will have to bring it over to battle WRX and evo. So I hope they'll come to their senses.
I don’t think BMW was mentioned before Civic in this thread. You have emphasized on going cheap with displacing wishbones for struts (and ignoring the other aspects of it).
Using the same tone, if wishbones are desirable in a Civic, why not in a BMW?
The bottom line is, car handling is determined mostly by its tuning. Just having double wishbones in a Civic does not make it a sports sedan/coupe, or does it?
Honda is now riding on the fumes of pure past reputation and status.. Lets see what the next 10 years brings. My prediction.. Honda will be bought by either BMW or another big maker with deep pockets...
Another thing. Toyota sells the Camry for less than an Accord... with discounts and low APR at that.. The market is tough...
What brought Honda to the forefront is the long term solidity of the products they sell. You generally can't go wrong with a used Toyonda product and that's what will keep Honda in the black. If they become short sighted and start designing cars with short term longevity in mind, then they wil be in trouble. But for the time being it still looks like the 94-98 Accords are holding true to Hondas reliable values.
BMW might have deep pockets, but they ain't Honda deep. They bought Rover and Rolls but heck, nearly every automaker has bought a British make.
Last I checked though, Toyota had record profits. Honda's big problem is not that others are catching up in reliability. Toyonda (like that phrase BTW) still has an actual and market perceptions reliability edge.
I think there are a variety of factors causing Honda's hiccup (can't really say they're major problems as Honda is still doing well), increased competition, in the form of increased reliability, across the board, being a major reason.
The competitive challenges to Honda (and Toyota) also don't seem to pose any long-term threat. The Chevy Malibu was supposed to be the latest challenger, but, having looked at one closely, I can't see that it will make a huge dent in Honda or Toyota sales. Early sales figures are rather lackluster. Let's hope Ford has better luck with the car-that-was-going-to-be-named-Futura.
~alpha
I haven't ignored the "other aspects" at all. I just believe that the #1 reason for the switch was cost.
"Using the same tone, if wishbones are desirable in a Civic, why not in a BMW?"
Using the same tone, if wishbones are desirable in an Accord and previous generation Civics, why not in the new Civic? Oh yeah, that's right, it's a cost issue. Lets forget about BMW, because the Civic is not a BMW. When Honda gets the new Civic's front suspension and steering to perform like BMWs or even a Protege or Mazda3 (and it's more than just #s from a flat skidpad, alot has to do with the feel), then we'll stop talking about wishbones. Instead of comparing the new Civic to BMW, you should be comparing the old Civic to the new Civic, and the old Civic has a better ride/handling balance and doesn't skip all over the place going around bumpy corners. Does that make sense to you? Have you driven both versions?
"Just having double wishbones in a Civic does not make it a sports sedan/coupe, or does it?"
Who said that? Anyway, the old Civic Si is a heckuva lot more sporty than the new hatchback IMO.
Read similar statements ten years ago. Reputation is built on history, and Honda has done that. 90-days of ownership experience is not “history” to prove that (and knowing that Honda is still the best among non-premium brands even in that category).
Honda has had a conservative approach. Just look at the offerings in its largest market (USA), offers only two mainstream car models. Even Kia has more. Honda’s growth has always been based on success of its products.
Honda started building motorcycles, and a reputation with it, followed it up with basic sports cars (the S-series sports cars in the 1960s). Built a reputation with those sports cars, the company followed it up with “interesting engineering” in the early 70s (the Honda CVCC that was later called Civic). Success of the CVCC helped them bring Accord and Prelude. Until 1982, Honda had only three models in the lineup when CRX (basically a Civic) was added.
This was followed by launch of Acura brand in 1985 with just two models, Integra and Legend. NSX joined in 1990 (as 1991 model in the USA). Vigor (later called TL) was added in 1992, and so on. The growth has been steady, with addition of new models over time. In the late 1990s, Honda decided to focus on light truck market and in five years, has managed to increase sales of the light trucks by 10 times.
Besides engineering prowess, it is Honda’s basic business philosophy that impresses me about the company. Today, I feel bad for Isuzu. Honda was apparently eager to invest into the company for trucks, but GM upped the ante by getting 49% control. And now, Isuzu is almost lost, and probably will just end up being a vendor to GM.
My prediction.. Honda will be bought by either BMW or another big maker with deep pockets...
That’s funny, because BMW itself has an uncertain future. And Honda is too big (and has among the best solvency rating) for most automakers that are larger.
Another thing. Toyota sells the Camry for less than an Accord... with discounts and low APR at that.. The market is tough...
Market is definitely tough, but I can bet no automaker wants to sell their products for less. If Honda can keep doing its job for an extended period, without having to play the deep discount game, it benefits the company’s cause. Doesn’t it? If there is a need, I’m sure they will have to, and will.
As far as Civic is concerned, I’m sure spending a few minutes behind the wheels of a Type-R (or even SI/SI-R with better tires) will change a lot of “perception”. Honda doesn’t (and shouldn’t) try to match the characteristics of cars like Protégé/3 (and they don’t use double wishbones, front or rear) in its mainstream offerings, because it would tilt the balance towards harsher ride across the board that is considered a weakness for the Mazda offerings. It would, however, be better to offer at least one trim that is “sport tuned” from the factory.
Part of the reason the older Civic Si (1999-2000) is considered more sporty because the new version is relatively docile. Honda focused too much on making it "easier to drive" and better equipped. The old had a 1.6 liter screamer pumping 160 HP, and people complained... little torque, peaky engine.
Honda delivered, torquier, 160 HP Civic Si, but limited the screaming factor, and with additional weight and too short gearing (one of the reasons the new Si doesn't record better 0-60 run is that it now requires two shifts to get to 60 mph).
With the last generation people complained about bland interior and lack of ABS.
With the new generation, Honda added EBD/ABS as standard equipment, and pumped up the interior (one of the best there is, in this class).
People, always discover ways to complain. Don't they?
Hmmm...space and price are non-issues in the midsize family sedan class.....uh yeah, sure. I guess space and price were non-issues for the previous generation Civics too, right? Space and price are just as important with the Accord as they are with the Civic. The Accord costs a little more than most of it's competitors and so does the Civic. Shrink the Accord down, and you could have a Civic....with a double wishbone front end.
Really? When did you get to drive a wishbone Type-R and a mac strut Type-R back to back?
Really, when did you get to drive a wishbone Type-R and a mac strut Type-R back to back?
I wish I could, but I can base my opinion on reviews. Have you?
No, let us not leave it at that. Honda engineers know which setup is better, but the beancounters don't agree.
I never implied that I did. But I HAVE driven the wishbone Civic and strut Civic back to back.
Nice post morphing BTW.
And speaking of bean counters, I wonder why engineers ended up having a say with retaining double wishbone rear, instead of moving to something "cheaper" and more space efficient.
I just love the reviews that doesn’t whine about niggling things mostly from paper, but on the essence of driving experience (one of the weaknesses of Edmunds’ Road Tests). Here is a summary from AutoCar on the current Civic Type-R
“Which leaves one question: does the Type-R’s chassis now match the talent of its phenomenal drivetrain? Not a chance. For that, it would need to handle like a 911 Turbo. But at least the two elements are on speaking terms, and it makes all the difference”
Obviously, they just love the engine. Civic SI/SI-R deserves that engine, and hopefully, Honda will address that next time around.
I haven't driven it, but hypothetically speaking, I'm glad they geared it like that. Toyota geared the Celica GT-S specifically so shift into third above 60mph and it's almost ruined the car. You can't keep it in the powerpand when you shift from 1st to 2nd.
But then, the Si has a more linear engine, so it should've been fine with gears that aren't closely spaced. So uh, never mind.
While 0-60 is not the end all, a lot of people tend to judge performance aspect of a car from it, and with two shifts needed to get to 60 mph, it hurts the Si in that regard.
It feels like a much sturdier car too. The interior of the older coupe was a little nicer looking though. But the seats in the hatch are superb.
(and wait a minute... third EP??)
Straight line speed is about the same - the old engine was fun, but the k20a3 is much better, if not faster. Both cars handle pretty well, but the big advantage to the new civic is the chassis. Much stiffer than previous civics, the handling feels better, the car feels more solid. Spend some time behind the wheel of both cars, and then make your decision. This car doesn't sell you with the 8000rpm redline of the 99-00, but the package is far superior overall.
I must say that even though it is a lot of fun taking the RSX up to 60 in second, if I were given my druthers I would have the gears just a little closer together than they are. With these little engines it helps to have close gears to keep the power on, which is what Toyota was trying to do with the gearbox in the Celica GTS and what is kinda nice about the SI. In the RSX the shift from second to third at redline gives the engine momentary pause if you are full on the gas.
I go away for two days and come back to find the same wishbone-vs-strut debate going on! Really folks, if Honda has to actually try a little to sell its cars for the first time in ages, that is just a reflection of how tight the market is nowadays. I hope that when they bring out the next Civic and Accord, they will keep in mind that their design philosophy up until now has been to make the cars just slightly on the sporty side of perfectly balanced (where Toyota cars are at least three steps on the "comfort" side), with a healthy dash of smart engineering and efficiency. And I hope they will think about bringing some of the more interesting European models to the U.S., at least in limited numbers. And if they can do all that and (mostly) hold the line on price, the cars will go back to selling themselves, I think.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
GM had projected about 150-175,000 in sales for the new Malibu; at the current rate, it will fall well short of that goal. The Wall Street Journal noted that GM has a 153-day supply of the 2004 Malibu, which is over twice what is considered desirable. The lackluster sales figures aren't because dealers don't have enough cars in stock. So, even taking into account that the new Malibu is selling to retail as opposed to fleet customers, its sales aren't that hot.
So, at this point, whatever challenges Honda is facing, the new Malibu isn't one of them.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Also, GM should have put the 240 HP 3.9L pushrod in the Malibu.
Without a doubt, Toyota is one of the best engine builders out there. But I think Honda's the top one.
Depending on how you choose to define “usual track”. If niche models in economy class can be considered a usual track, then the company is definitely off. If diversification and growth is “usual track”, the company is on it. If more power has been a usual track, new offerings have suggested that Honda isn’t shy of doing it (even the already powerful Odyssey will get a power boost with the redesign this year, possibly up to 250 HP). This, while maintaining the little things that everybody associates Honda with excellent emissions and fuel economy.
Since the late 90s, Honda has focused on splitting its car to light truck sales to match the average that prevails in America, to near 50-50. And it is almost there, now selling almost 10 times as many light trucks as the company did nearly ten years ago.
By next year, Honda would have consolidated production of its light truck lineup (Honda: Element, CRV, Pilot, pick up truck and Odyssey; Acura: MDX, and potential launch of RDX). Model year 2006 will be a redesign year for cars based on the global sub compact (Jazz) and global compact (Civic & RSX/Integra) platforms. I feel that Honda will bring the new Jazz to USA/Canada, to sit under redesigned Civic line up. And this time, I think there will be more emphasis on sport at both ends (Jazz and Civic). Accord is just fine, and addition of Accord Hybrid this Fall can make things interesting.
Competition for the Fit in NA will be intense. I hope it is equipped to clearly stand out on either the safety or performance fronts. (How about first subcompact with standard side airbags, or some such?)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Fit (aka Jazz in Europe) would make for a good entry level car in the Honda lineup. I hope it is offered as a hatchback.
Give it 240 hp, SH-AWD, a pricetag around $33-35K, and decent cargo space... I'm sold.
I have a feeling that it might get a detuned version of the 3.2/V6 from Acura TL (for 240 HP or so).
SH-AWD can be a possibility but chances are, it will follow its big brother's (MDX) lead and use VTM-4. Not a bad choice for an SUV either way.
The engine in her 2000 Chevy Cavalier has been making a ticking noise that, over the past two weeks, has been growing louder. She has gone to two garages to get an opinion on what needs to be done. So far, she has heard that she needs a rebuilt engine ($1,200) or work on the valves ($1,100 quoted by the Harrisburg Chevy dealer). This is a car that has 101,000 miles on the odometer.
The head gasket was replaced at 55,000 miles, and the air conditioning died last summer. She is contemplating whether to dump the car entirely. She is considering a Honda Civic, because, in her words, "I've had it with American cars. The Civic gets a good reliability rating, and seems very safe for its size."
This is from someone who used to make it a point to "buy American" to support domestic industry (she is from western Pennsylvania, and thus witnessed the effects of the collapse of heavy industry in the 1980s and early 1990s).
Obviously, Hondas aren't perfect, and it's possible that she could get a lemon if she buys a Civic. The bottom line, however, is that Honda has the reputation to convince her to "make the switch." And that reputation didn't come out of nowhere. As long as Honda can maintain that reputation, its "run" won't run out for a good while.
Even if the Americans have improved, she isn't in the mood to find out whether GM, in particular, really is on the road to redemption. And I have the feeling that she isn't alone.
Also, the May 24th issue of BusinessWeek has a GREAT article on pages 62/63 about the actual challenges Honda is facing, if you're interested. ("How Honda is Stalling in the US"). Ive said before that my opinion is that Honda is NOT in trouble overall, but that it may be falling behind the curve here (to its potential future detriment), and this article re-inforces my belief.
~alpha
I focused on the new Malibu because it is the latest salvo fired by the largest division of the nation's largest auto company, and it isn't presenting that much of a threat to Honda (or Toyota).
It's certainly possible that the margins on the new model are better than those of the old one, but with sales this far below expectations, I have to believe that GM is not making nearly as much money as it anticipated.
IMO Honda has screwed up some (transmissions for 3 model years in a row is unforgiveable) but more importantly they've stood still while the rest of the market has caught up.
Hyundai and GM are hitting them in the economy sedan market, they're absent in the RWD performance market and big truck market, they've pretty much gotten about as much of the FWD sedan market share as they're gonna get, and their luxury division has a definite ceiling with only FWD offerings.
Although I'll admit, $1200 for a rebuilt engine doesn't sound too bad nowadays, as long as it's not a crappy rebuild. Heck, that's only about 4 or 5 months of payments on a cheap car nowadays.
But then there's the issue of the dead a/c. With summer coming up, I'm sure that could be an incentive!
FWIW, I had two friends in college with Cavaliers, and both of them made it to around the 110-120K mark. One was an '85 that, in the winter of '94, had electrical problems. My friend didn't feel like sinking any more money into it, so his family donated it, and he got another hand-me down, an '87 or so Tercel. I think that ran about a year or two, until sludge got it (I don't blame Toyota...these people never changed the oil! And it sat around a lot, didn't get used much). Last I heard, he had gotten a nice engineering job, and was bought a '95 or '96 Trans Am, brand new.
My other friend had an '89 Cavalier Z-24 coupe that blew one of the head gaskets in '97. It was also leaking oil by that time, and had other problems, so it was time to donate! I don't know what he's driving now. He was living with his parents at the time, and they were in the process of buying a Honda Civic, and has also just bought a BMW 5-series, so he was probably driving one of those.
Now that I think about it, I had another friend who had an '87 Z-24. It also blew a head gasket. But his dad was a mechanic, and was able to replace it. Were head gaskets a common problem with the 2.8 V-6?
1. Calendar YTD sales figures of the Civic are up, but only after the addition of "rich incentives" following last calendar year's 4.3% sales decline. Additionally, the Civic has lost its footing on the youth-oriented tuner market. Sales of the aging Ody and the still newish Element have both fallen 9%, and the Element hasnt been the hit with the youth crowd that Honda had hoped.
2. Honda has set aside $369 MILLION for the transmission recall, which has weakened cash flow through.
3. Current Accord incentives are only half what Camry incentives are, but Honda's incentives are growing at a greater rate than any other industry entry, and may soon reach their levels.
4. Honda's limited product range inhibits growth, as practically everything in the US product line hinges on an Accord or Civic platform. No V8s, no trucks, no "real" SUVs. Also, Honda has but two all new entries for next year, the Acura RL and the Odyssey, and only one major addition to an existing entry- the Accord Hybrid. (The SUT is still greater than a year away). This is far less than other mfrs. will be offering.
That basically sums up the "problem" that BW cited Honda as facing in the US. Worldwide is a different story, as we all know Honda is still making money.
~alpha
Civic incentives in its fourth year of the current model are still, what, $500 to dealers and 1.9/2.9 financing? Not a good change, to be sure, but still only on par with the rest of the market for finance rates and there is still no customer cash. Plu,s sales are up as a result.
Accord is smack dab in the middle of the most incentived segment in the car industry. And yet its incentives are only half what Camry has, which you can bet are less than half of what GM and Ford are offering. And the GM midsize car is newer than both the Toyota AND the Honda.
The Odyssey is set to be replaced in less than six months, no wonder sales are off a little there after five good years, and Element beat initial sales projections for Honda by more than 20%, so even if they are off 9%, they are still better than Honda expected in its second year.
As for the youth crowd comments, well, here a business major would know better than I what is important. But older buyers have more money than youth, so they must be good for something! :-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So in today's market, 1.9/2.9% financing really isn't an incentive anymore, it's more the norm.