Yes. The now defunct CL Type-S had a 6-speeder in the 03' (final) year of production. That combo would have been hot if it were offered with the second generation TL as well. Now that a 6-speeder is offered with the current TL, I would hope that a proposed Type-S would as well. :shades:
Where do I buy habitat. If the RL ever got such a set up with SH-AWD and a 350+ hp. 6 speed manuel with (AC) seats I'd cave in and probably buy one. :surprise: OMG it would be next to impossible not to. Especially a Good lease of lets say $599 a month.
I would like to see heated seats make their way to the rear bench as well as ventilation. A buddy of mine has a Saab with a rear heated seat option. It is great for ski trips and car pooling in the colder months...
My only other beef with the TL is the stock wheel design. the five spoke design looks like something off an 86' Z28 Camaro.
But it is a very minor nitpick on an otherwise excellent, if not class leading vehicle. And the styling is like none other which is very appealing.
I would like to see heated seats make their way to the rear bench as well as ventilation. A buddy of mine has a Saab with a rear heated seat option. It is great for ski trips and car pooling in the colder months
Agree. My 02' STS had heated Rear Seats and yes they are nice.
My only other beef with the TL is the stock wheel design. the five spoke design looks like something off an 86' Z28 Camaro.
LOL I thought I was the only one that saw that. My uncle has a 86' I-Roc-Z and yes I saw the similarity.
But it is a very minor nitpick on an otherwise excellent, if not class leading vehicle. And the styling is like none other which is very appealing.
Yes it is class leading, and perhaps the best bang for your buck and is another reason why I baught one. BTW- I asked my Aunt if she wanted to race for titles against her 04' Grand Prix GTP. You already know her answer. The Acura TL is probably the best designed vehicle on the market today. I got all kinds of compliments and the teenie bopper girls around town just gawked at that anthracite paint and tinted windows. :shades: Gosh I do miss that car. I better stop talking about it before I buy another one.
The wife wants a Redondo Red Pearl 6-speeder in the fall. So far, the only other Acura we've owned has been our MDX, which I will inherit. It has been an excellent vehicle for us and even withstood an impact froma guy in a Ford Taurus who hit us on the highway doing probably 80mph at the time. :surprise: Walked away without injury. So we owe the vehicle nothing as it saved our lives.
Nice pic. This Lincoln LS owner is trying to say his 5 speed auto would smoke a 6-speed TL in a road race in the Lincoln forum. Go take care of my light work.
I'd just remind him of which one is still availible for purchase...
Ah, the LS. Such a promising vehicle. It is a crying shame that FMC let that car languish into extinction, especially the hi-po LSC model for 04'... meanwhile the CTS came in and stole its thunder right out from underneath. :mad:
that editor specifically mentioned the Pilot as a less-than-stand-out new model. I know it sells decently for such a vehicle. I think the guy meant it was more run of the mill than new Hondas of the past.
Pilot is just one of the several models in the lineup. Which Honda was a stand out model in 1995? I would be curious to know.
And you may have misunderstood - he was saying Honda was very innovative in the period leading up to 2000, less so since then.
Then I would like to know more about “innovations up to 2000”.
And his "issue" is not with Asimo - he was merely pointing out that in Japan, the home market, Toyota and Nissan are known for their cars available to the public, while Honda is known for a robot. I would agree that is somewhat significant.
Only if he were correct in his assumptions. I disagree. People might see Honda as more than just a car company (which has been true since day 1 at Honda) but that doesn’t bode well with his statements.
I also think it is significant that Honda allowed Toyota to become the media darling for hybrids.
But, has Honda ever been like Toyota, in PR, at any period in time? And what has this got to do with “innovation” or lack of?
As for "not commanding the premium it used to", I think he is generalizing from a few models. However, that has been very true for the Accord since 2004, for the Ridgeline, and even for the Civic for a couple of years before the redo.
I’m not sure what is meant by premium. Is it paying more than MSRP like S2000 commanded in the 2000+ era? Or is it vehicles like MDX, second/third generation Odyssey and Pilot commanding MSRP for a long time?
Besides, doesn’t the huge incentives and rebates from competition also play a role? Name one automaker that has NOT offered a 0% APR financing or advertised a hefty cash back, yet.
If selling a vehicle at close to invoice (as opposed to MSRP) is what one chooses to call “not being able to command premium”, well then I must tell you that I paid close to invoice for my 1998 Accord in Fall 1997. That said, I’m wondering what people are paying for Civic now, compared to what they did a decade ago. Take a guess.
except for the disaster-prone '02-'03 SI
And is that still true? For a company to have lost it mojo, we should find a load of 2006 Si’s collecting dust at the dealership lots right now.
It's a flooded market in North America, at and well over capacity, and it was perhaps inevitable that the period when Honda charged higher prices and sold at sticker would end.
It is not Honda’s fault that vehicles are flooded and incentives rule. I’m still curious to know which cars from Honda were commanding MSRP/higher than MSRP in 1996, ten years ago. Just making a statement didn’t help me get the point, the author should have brought up some real examples.
certain models like the Odyssey and Pilot still sell close to sticker. But they are also not the volume leaders in their segments, and the cars that are (Accord, Civic) are now selling for discounts (well, the Accord is, the Civic was, and will be again after the initial rush of next-gen buyers is done). Honda dealers have had to learn how to bargain.
When was the last time Honda dealers didn’t have to move their products, especially after initial 2-3 years in the market? I’m really curious about it, more so with the claim that 1995-2000 era was so much more better for Honda sales performance wise than it has been since. And those stand outs too!
I do think Honda has lost some of the "mojo" that made the company a hit with younger buyers. On that point, I think the author was fair enough.
The problem I have is that everyone seems to think that mojo is the only strength worth having.
There ain't much mojo is being highly regarded for safety. But Honda is building a reputation there.
There isn't much mojo in building a family friendly SUV, but Honda did it better than most.
Sure, the Honda of old was known for hot little economy cars. And they stood out in that niche. But they're a more mature company now with a line-up that crosses several categories of buyers.
Sure, the Honda of old was known for hot little economy cars. And they stood out in that niche. But they're a more mature company now with a line-up that crosses several categories of buyers.
I agree and they might of made the worlds first real "drivers" SUV (RDX) that's affordable to most of us with alot of darn technology. BMW start with the throat, and eat your way to the heart. :P
Things get even more interesting when you consider where Acura was, beginning in the author assigned mojo era, and where it ends up now, in the era that the author believes Honda lost it.
Acura had an annual sales of 108K units with a brand new line of Acura products in 1996. The break down: Integra: 47K (44% of the sales) CL: 17K TL: 25K RL: 16K SLX: 2.6K
That was when the author claims Honda had the mojo. This is Acura as of 2005, sales of 210K units with the following breakdown: RSX: 21K (10% of total sales) TSX: 35K TL: 78K (37% of total sales) RL: 18K MDX: 58K (28% of total sales)
This is a very interesting break up. Acura no longer relies on its cheapest models to carry the sales. As a matter of fact, 65% of Acura sales appear in mid to $40K price class.
And each of these vehicles is better in its time than those 1996 models were at their time. So much for the loss of mojo and innovativeness.
Also worth mentioning is that Honda was apparently "late" in the SUV game when Pilot arrived. In 2005, Honda sold almost as many Pilots (143K) as it did CR-V (150K). And 174K units of Odyssey were moved out... despite being one of the premium minivans out there that doesn't have significantly cheaper models.
As for total (AHM) sales... 844K in 1996 to 1.44 million in 2005... a 70% increase!
May be the author knows something that I'm not getting. If true, I would like to know.
Mojo doesn't sell cars. If there is anyone who knows that, it's Toyota, practically doubling sales every decade without an ounce of mojo.
We may lament the passing of Honda's mojo for sentimental reasons - everyone loves the guy who will stick his neck out and maybe score big, maybe go down in flames. But Honda doesn't lament it - they are on their way to record profits.
Robert: the huge increase in sales that Acura recorded and you mentioned came on the back of product evolutions that were entirely ordinary - take a couple of midsize sedans and a midsize crossover, sport them up or lux them up a bit, or both, then put them out there. Make your top of the line sedan a technological tour de force and give it optional or standard AWD. Isn't this the BMW playbook pretty much word for word? Also the Lexus and Mercedes playbook, unless I miss my guess pretty badly. Acura followed all of them to record sales. Now it will follow the X3 to market with the RDX.
It's funny, because this is exactly what all the Japan-car-haters always complain so loudly about: that the Japanese merely made a better Buick, or a better Mercedes, or whatever, and did nothing original of their own. I do NOT agree with that assessment by the way, but it has elements of truth.
Mojo is what gets you models that sell by the hundreds every year: S2000, NSX, Insight. All of which originated prior to CY 2000, BTW. We could be waiting a while for more models like that - the mojo is flowing away as we speak.
I am a fan of Hondas, so I'm not here to diss them, but I AM sad that the mojo is disappearing as Honda becomes too mainstream for my tastes.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
the huge increase in sales that Acura recorded and you mentioned came on the back of product evolutions that were entirely ordinary - take a couple of midsize sedans and a midsize crossover, sport them up or lux them up a bit, or both, then put them out there.
But is this any different from the cars in 1995-2000 era? Or earlier? Besides, haven't we discussed at length how Honda should do RWD and V8, like everybody else does? After all, we're not enamored by Honda's unique approach to the luxury market.
Ridgeline is another excellent case for being different and innovative... in a market where just about nobody wants to risk it, and try something different. Honda comes up with something unique. And we say it isn't innovative. If that isn't... what is?
It's hard for me to say why the Ridgeline just doesn't seem that innovative to me - more like a way to avoid development costs on a proper truck platform, coupled with a few interesting bits and pieces like under-bed storage and the like. Explorer Sport Trac and Avalanche were here (on truck platforms) way before the Ridgeline, as were crew cab compact pick-ups and whatnot. Even weird stuff like the Baja. What are the innovative advantages of the Ridgeline? It tows about the same amount (actually a little less), it weighs the same, and gets the same lousy fuel economy as the trucks built on truck platforms.
As for innovative - how about the first luxury car with hybrid drive to increase performance? IIRC Honda had a concept quite a while ago for that, didn't they? But who will be the first one to actually do it? Why, Lexus of course, with the LS460H!
But that's just one weak example I thought of on the spur of the moment. I am sure the more imaginative among us could do much better.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I was hoping to see Acura RL with hybrid before GS450h, but that is another story. Still, people are asking RWD/V8 from Acura, which is basically what everybody else does.
Going back to Ridgeline is far more interesting, because it is mentioned in the article. One of Honda’s philosophies, right from the beginning, has been to grow based on success of its existing products one product gives rise to another and so on.
Ridgeline fits right there. And if Honda were to come up with a completely platform like every other wouldn’t it be just like every other pickup in the market? Honda went ahead and revised its light truck platform with a hybrid chassis (who else has done that?) and offered an urban pickup like no other in the market today. Sure, Avalanche looks like it form the side, and that Explorer Sport Trac is simply a pickup version of Explorer as we all assume Ridgeline to be Pilot’s, but the similarities end there.
Ridgeline is unique vehicle that stands out in the crowd, in structure, drive/ride qualities, and features. Every road test that I have seen about it, doesn’t shy away to bring out those aspects. In fact, the biggest issue people have with it is that it is too different from the norm. How can we miss this obvious argument?
"And if Honda were to come up with a completely platform like every other wouldn’t it be just like every other pickup in the market?"
Yes, what they did was perfectly logical, and it gave them a pick-up without incurring major costs. Kudos to them. But that is not the same thing as being "innovative".
"Ridgeline is unique vehicle that stands out in the crowd, in structure, drive/ride qualities, and features. Every road test that I have seen about it, doesn’t shy away to bring out those aspects. In fact, the biggest issue people have with it is that it is too different from the norm. How can we miss this obvious argument?"
This part is interesting to me. As we all know, all the "truck people" are mad at the Ridgeline, viewing it as a poser, despite having decent load and towing limits. But it is not that different from the norm. Every time Toyota brings out a new Tacoma (and when they brought out the current Tundra) all the press oohs and aahs over how carlike its demeanor is, and I am sure we will hear more of that when the new Tundra arrives this fall. Same thing with the latest F-150 and now the ridiculous Mark LT. Having a truck with a carlike ride does not sell trucks, as we have seen, and to me is not innovative given how much of that is already available in the market.
The structure is new in concept - but is it new in an important way? Will this lead the way to a new breed of pick-ups that have advantages over their old BOF brethren and gain in popularity? I can't see it. But that would be innovative if so.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
We seem to have a difference of opinion on being innovative, and being a risk taker (two aspects the author tries to cover). I see Ridgeline as something laden with innovation, and a risk that Honda took. So, I have to firmly disagree with the author.
Or is it that incurring major development cost is the only way to being innovative? That I could never agree with.
As we all know, all the "truck people" are mad at the Ridgeline, viewing it as a poser, despite having decent load and towing limits. But it is not that different from the norm. Every time Toyota brings out a new Tacoma (and when they brought out the current Tundra) all the press oohs and aahs over how carlike its demeanor is
Not different from the norm? Well, we seem to have a difference of opinion about norm as well. C&D comparison of Ridgeline against other pickups including new Frontier and new Tacoma along with others seems to tackle a few points there.
If I had to ask you to pick one of the following that defines Ridgeline, given the pickup market we have around us, which would be it Ridgeline is: - Evolutionary in approach - Revolutionary in approach
Having a truck with a carlike ride does not sell trucks, as we have seen, and to me is not innovative given how much of that is already available in the market.
Then I must ask, what does? As for “sales”, are we worried about it? Then you are disagreeing with the author on lack of risk taking from Honda! Besides, innovativeness does it guarantee huge sales?
The structure is new in concept - but is it new in an important way? Will this lead the way to a new breed of pick-ups that have advantages over their old BOF brethren and gain in popularity?
Possibly! Again, risk taking and innovation do not always translate to huge sales.
a fwd pickup is a tough sell. rwd is better because when when towing or carrying a load, it is better to have the weight over the drive wheels. it is a simple concept and it works. honda does make good fwd cars (van too).
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Ridgeline has full time AWD... FWD only when it can be. And true, it is better to have weight over the drive wheels, which is why lot of RWD pickups have trouble with empty beds (95% of the time, if not more).
Besides, aren't we talking about risk taking (or lack of), and being different (or lack of)?
which is why lot of RWD pickups have trouble with empty beds
This is why the ridgeline is a poser. Pickups are light trucks, you know, for trucking things. They are (or should be) developed with a load in mind. They are not a tall, poor handling sedan with the trunk-lid missing.
Its also the same reason a Peterbuilt handles better with triples, than bobtailed.
So you do accept that Ridgeline is different, and does not represent the "norm".
But, different doesn't mean bad... usually misunderstood. This supports one of the points I have been trying to make. Honda has demonstrated here that it isn't another sheep in the flock.
Have you drive the Ridgeline... to assume things that you have? And better yet, have you actually done so in bad weather conditions? Try THAT on a RWD truck. Ridgeline has a good AWD system (and stability system, which is standard BTW) that acts proactively. So, it is designed to carry load, and without it.
I couldn't say the same about a lot of pickups, if any other at all. Isn't that a reason they are usually found on the roadside when the snow storm hits (more than any other kind of vehicles, in my observation).
BTW, Ridgeline also boasts one of the highest payload capacities in the 4WD world.
What does that say about the innovation from other truck builders?
All they needed to do is build a cross-over SUV with part of the back missing... and that's enough to win every major and minor award that can be given to a truck.
Just not a truck for off-roading. The Ridgeline is tasked for the purpose of hauling more than two people and toting lots of gear. (Robert is right about that payload. It makes others look like posers.) It was built to tow watercraft, dirt bikes, and fishing boats. And, all the while, serve as a good family vehicle. You won't need to buy your wife diamond ear rings so she'll let you buy it. It's a sportsman's truck.
If only Honda had been around back then to show true innovation. Maybe the domestic brands would have a better grasp on how to make a reliable and durable small car without resorting to importing from foreign countries. While the foreign companies build their reliable and durable small cars in the U.S.
It's the first unibody midsize four door pickup in the U.S.
1. The plan vs. the implementation are light years apart. 2. Former GM huh. Probably showed too much initiative. 3. Nice "concept" but didn't Chrysler also built a 10 cylinder motorcycle and a Jeep with two engines. 4. The Sport Trac and Avalanche are frame based and RWD based. Both of which rob usable space. The RL isn't. The advantages are discussed in that Rampage link.
Honda was around. Remember the 600? IIRC, the first Civics were 1973 models, so 2 years past the Vega.
At least based on the 600, I don't think the big 3 was learning too much about small cars from Honda then! Not exactly suited for the US market..
The Vega, IMO, at the time was just what the US market needed. The problem was GM shooting itself in the foot. If they had managed some level of rust proofing (although to be fair, at that time the Japanese makes rusted just as fast), a bit better build quality (again, not the strong suit in those days), but mostly, A DECENT ENGINE!
You would think after the Corvair they would have gone more mainstream. Just a normal, robust Iron block 4 cyl would have saved a lot of headaches. Remember, at the time (at least before the Civic), the foreign small cars had pretty rudimentary engines (Corolla, Datsuns, etc.). Iron block tractor motors, but at least they were reliable.
If nothing else, Ford got the engine concept right with the Pinto, although (in concept) I think the Vega was a much better product.
What does this have to do with Honda? I dunnow, but it is a nice history lesson as to the bomb that Honda dropped on the big 3 (and Japanese rivals) when the firt Civic CVCCs showed up. Can they do it again?
I'm just saying that awards don't mean a whole lot. It was the all aluminum, OHC "performance" engine that won award up the ying-yang, and then turned around and melted on the way home from the dealership.
Not that I'm saying the Ridgeline is bad for what it is. It is a very competent, competitive SUV. More like an Avalance or an Explorer Sport Trac, than a Tacoma. Sort of what they used to call a half-cab, Sorta.
But then again, you don't nee a real "truck" to haul a pallet of sod or a couple shrubs. For the meager number of RL's Honda plans to sell, it's just what the doctor ordered.
Heck, GM was still trying to build a decent DOHC 4 cylinder when they were building the Fiero. The Quad4 was supposed to be the second coming for GM. The only thing it ended up making was a LOT of vibration. Are any of those still running?
Stickguy, the 600 hardly qualifies as a car. It was a curious oddity though. Kinda like BMW's Isetta. There are a couple of them off in the weeds around this house where I live.
Honda's obviously still 'rolling'. CR loves em. So do millions of Americans. Go ahead and disparage CR but there obviously is something to Honda's panache. The market accepts them, unlike a multitude of other makes.
I recall a CR promotion picture many months ago showing a proud-looking man standing in front of a red S2000. Guess that's their idea of the typical purchase of the typical American: an S2000 two seater... Not in touch.
That's my point exactly. Most people can't afford one, can't use one because it's a two seater, and have need for a normal family car. That's to whom CR should be directing their image choices. But they themselves prefer the sporty type and certain brands. Like the car magazines who have to keep their readers interested they pick the sporty cars about which most people like to read but they aren't going to go out and buy unless they can afford 2 or more cars.
It's like guys looking at Sports Illustrated swim suit issue; need I say more?
IntelliChoice's Best Overall Value Winners!!! 45% Toyota/Lexus 45% Honda/Acura 8% other japanese branded cars 1% chevy 1% German branded cars (Excluding giant 3/4 ton and larger trucks)
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Comments
What do you mean by this anything ???? Are you talking about clutch, brake pedal, gas pedal, set-up ?????
Rocky
BTW- I think the Type-S needs some nice ventilated(AC)seats.
Rocky
Rocky
My only other beef with the TL is the stock wheel design. the five spoke design looks like something off an 86' Z28 Camaro.
But it is a very minor nitpick on an otherwise excellent, if not class leading vehicle. And the styling is like none other which is very appealing.
Sounds about right. If I were a gambling man, I'd put it right around a TSX which I believe is at 6.7 seconds.
Well if a track result of such ever materializes, Honda will have another winner and the Calipers.
Rocky
Agree. My 02' STS had heated Rear Seats and yes they are nice.
My only other beef with the TL is the stock wheel design. the five spoke design looks like something off an 86' Z28 Camaro.
LOL I thought I was the only one that saw that. My uncle has a 86' I-Roc-Z and yes I saw the similarity.
But it is a very minor nitpick on an otherwise excellent, if not class leading vehicle. And the styling is like none other which is very appealing.
Yes it is class leading, and perhaps the best bang for your buck and is another reason why I baught one. BTW- I asked my Aunt if she wanted to race for titles against her 04' Grand Prix GTP. You already know her answer.
The Acura TL is probably the best designed vehicle on the market today. I got all kinds of compliments and the teenie bopper girls around town just gawked at that anthracite paint and tinted windows. :shades:
Gosh I do miss that car. I better stop talking about it before I buy another one.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Ah, the LS. Such a promising vehicle. It is a crying shame that FMC let that car languish into extinction, especially the hi-po LSC model for 04'... meanwhile the CTS came in and stole its thunder right out from underneath. :mad:
Rocky
Pilot is just one of the several models in the lineup. Which Honda was a stand out model in 1995? I would be curious to know.
And you may have misunderstood - he was saying Honda was very innovative in the period leading up to 2000, less so since then.
Then I would like to know more about “innovations up to 2000”.
And his "issue" is not with Asimo - he was merely pointing out that in Japan, the home market, Toyota and Nissan are known for their cars available to the public, while Honda is known for a robot. I would agree that is somewhat significant.
Only if he were correct in his assumptions. I disagree. People might see Honda as more than just a car company (which has been true since day 1 at Honda) but that doesn’t bode well with his statements.
I also think it is significant that Honda allowed Toyota to become the media darling for hybrids.
But, has Honda ever been like Toyota, in PR, at any period in time? And what has this got to do with “innovation” or lack of?
As for "not commanding the premium it used to", I think he is generalizing from a few models. However, that has been very true for the Accord since 2004, for the Ridgeline, and even for the Civic for a couple of years before the redo.
I’m not sure what is meant by premium. Is it paying more than MSRP like S2000 commanded in the 2000+ era? Or is it vehicles like MDX, second/third generation Odyssey and Pilot commanding MSRP for a long time?
Besides, doesn’t the huge incentives and rebates from competition also play a role? Name one automaker that has NOT offered a 0% APR financing or advertised a hefty cash back, yet.
If selling a vehicle at close to invoice (as opposed to MSRP) is what one chooses to call “not being able to command premium”, well then I must tell you that I paid close to invoice for my 1998 Accord in Fall 1997. That said, I’m wondering what people are paying for Civic now, compared to what they did a decade ago. Take a guess.
except for the disaster-prone '02-'03 SI
And is that still true? For a company to have lost it mojo, we should find a load of 2006 Si’s collecting dust at the dealership lots right now.
It's a flooded market in North America, at and well over capacity, and it was perhaps inevitable that the period when Honda charged higher prices and sold at sticker would end.
It is not Honda’s fault that vehicles are flooded and incentives rule. I’m still curious to know which cars from Honda were commanding MSRP/higher than MSRP in 1996, ten years ago. Just making a statement didn’t help me get the point, the author should have brought up some real examples.
certain models like the Odyssey and Pilot still sell close to sticker. But they are also not the volume leaders in their segments, and the cars that are (Accord, Civic) are now selling for discounts (well, the Accord is, the Civic was, and will be again after the initial rush of next-gen buyers is done). Honda dealers have had to learn how to bargain.
When was the last time Honda dealers didn’t have to move their products, especially after initial 2-3 years in the market? I’m really curious about it, more so with the claim that 1995-2000 era was so much more better for Honda sales performance wise than it has been since. And those stand outs too!
The problem I have is that everyone seems to think that mojo is the only strength worth having.
There ain't much mojo is being highly regarded for safety. But Honda is building a reputation there.
There isn't much mojo in building a family friendly SUV, but Honda did it better than most.
Sure, the Honda of old was known for hot little economy cars. And they stood out in that niche. But they're a more mature company now with a line-up that crosses several categories of buyers.
I agree and they might of made the worlds first real "drivers" SUV (RDX) that's affordable to most of us with alot of darn technology. BMW start with the throat, and eat your way to the heart. :P
Rocky
Acura had an annual sales of 108K units with a brand new line of Acura products in 1996. The break down:
Integra: 47K (44% of the sales)
CL: 17K
TL: 25K
RL: 16K
SLX: 2.6K
That was when the author claims Honda had the mojo. This is Acura as of 2005, sales of 210K units with the following breakdown:
RSX: 21K (10% of total sales)
TSX: 35K
TL: 78K (37% of total sales)
RL: 18K
MDX: 58K (28% of total sales)
This is a very interesting break up. Acura no longer relies on its cheapest models to carry the sales. As a matter of fact, 65% of Acura sales appear in mid to $40K price class.
And each of these vehicles is better in its time than those 1996 models were at their time. So much for the loss of mojo and innovativeness.
Also worth mentioning is that Honda was apparently "late" in the SUV game when Pilot arrived. In 2005, Honda sold almost as many Pilots (143K) as it did CR-V (150K). And 174K units of Odyssey were moved out... despite being one of the premium minivans out there that doesn't have significantly cheaper models.
As for total (AHM) sales... 844K in 1996 to 1.44 million in 2005... a 70% increase!
May be the author knows something that I'm not getting. If true, I would like to know.
Mojo doesn't sell cars. If there is anyone who knows that, it's Toyota, practically doubling sales every decade without an ounce of mojo.
We may lament the passing of Honda's mojo for sentimental reasons - everyone loves the guy who will stick his neck out and maybe score big, maybe go down in flames. But Honda doesn't lament it - they are on their way to record profits.
Robert: the huge increase in sales that Acura recorded and you mentioned came on the back of product evolutions that were entirely ordinary - take a couple of midsize sedans and a midsize crossover, sport them up or lux them up a bit, or both, then put them out there. Make your top of the line sedan a technological tour de force and give it optional or standard AWD. Isn't this the BMW playbook pretty much word for word? Also the Lexus and Mercedes playbook, unless I miss my guess pretty badly. Acura followed all of them to record sales. Now it will follow the X3 to market with the RDX.
It's funny, because this is exactly what all the Japan-car-haters always complain so loudly about: that the Japanese merely made a better Buick, or a better Mercedes, or whatever, and did nothing original of their own. I do NOT agree with that assessment by the way, but it has elements of truth.
Mojo is what gets you models that sell by the hundreds every year: S2000, NSX, Insight. All of which originated prior to CY 2000, BTW. We could be waiting a while for more models like that - the mojo is flowing away as we speak.
I am a fan of Hondas, so I'm not here to diss them, but I AM sad that the mojo is disappearing as Honda becomes too mainstream for my tastes.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
But is this any different from the cars in 1995-2000 era? Or earlier? Besides, haven't we discussed at length how Honda should do RWD and V8, like everybody else does? After all, we're not enamored by Honda's unique approach to the luxury market.
Ridgeline is another excellent case for being different and innovative... in a market where just about nobody wants to risk it, and try something different. Honda comes up with something unique. And we say it isn't innovative. If that isn't... what is?
As for innovative - how about the first luxury car with hybrid drive to increase performance? IIRC Honda had a concept quite a while ago for that, didn't they? But who will be the first one to actually do it? Why, Lexus of course, with the LS460H!
But that's just one weak example I thought of on the spur of the moment. I am sure the more imaginative among us could do much better.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Going back to Ridgeline is far more interesting, because it is mentioned in the article. One of Honda’s philosophies, right from the beginning, has been to grow based on success of its existing products one product gives rise to another and so on.
Ridgeline fits right there. And if Honda were to come up with a completely platform like every other wouldn’t it be just like every other pickup in the market? Honda went ahead and revised its light truck platform with a hybrid chassis (who else has done that?) and offered an urban pickup like no other in the market today. Sure, Avalanche looks like it form the side, and that Explorer Sport Trac is simply a pickup version of Explorer as we all assume Ridgeline to be Pilot’s, but the similarities end there.
Ridgeline is unique vehicle that stands out in the crowd, in structure, drive/ride qualities, and features. Every road test that I have seen about it, doesn’t shy away to bring out those aspects. In fact, the biggest issue people have with it is that it is too different from the norm. How can we miss this obvious argument?
And the other, development of new technology when it comes to ICE... HCCI.
Yes, what they did was perfectly logical, and it gave them a pick-up without incurring major costs. Kudos to them. But that is not the same thing as being "innovative".
"Ridgeline is unique vehicle that stands out in the crowd, in structure, drive/ride qualities, and features. Every road test that I have seen about it, doesn’t shy away to bring out those aspects. In fact, the biggest issue people have with it is that it is too different from the norm. How can we miss this obvious argument?"
This part is interesting to me. As we all know, all the "truck people" are mad at the Ridgeline, viewing it as a poser, despite having decent load and towing limits. But it is not that different from the norm. Every time Toyota brings out a new Tacoma (and when they brought out the current Tundra) all the press oohs and aahs over how carlike its demeanor is, and I am sure we will hear more of that when the new Tundra arrives this fall. Same thing with the latest F-150 and now the ridiculous Mark LT. Having a truck with a carlike ride does not sell trucks, as we have seen, and to me is not innovative given how much of that is already available in the market.
The structure is new in concept - but is it new in an important way? Will this lead the way to a new breed of pick-ups that have advantages over their old BOF brethren and gain in popularity? I can't see it. But that would be innovative if so.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Or is it that incurring major development cost is the only way to being innovative? That I could never agree with.
As we all know, all the "truck people" are mad at the Ridgeline, viewing it as a poser, despite having decent load and towing limits. But it is not that different from the norm. Every time Toyota brings out a new Tacoma (and when they brought out the current Tundra) all the press oohs and aahs over how carlike its demeanor is
Not different from the norm? Well, we seem to have a difference of opinion about norm as well. C&D comparison of Ridgeline against other pickups including new Frontier and new Tacoma along with others seems to tackle a few points there.
If I had to ask you to pick one of the following that defines Ridgeline, given the pickup market we have around us, which would be it Ridgeline is:
- Evolutionary in approach
- Revolutionary in approach
Having a truck with a carlike ride does not sell trucks, as we have seen, and to me is not innovative given how much of that is already available in the market.
Then I must ask, what does? As for “sales”, are we worried about it? Then you are disagreeing with the author on lack of risk taking from Honda! Besides, innovativeness does it guarantee huge sales?
The structure is new in concept - but is it new in an important way? Will this lead the way to a new breed of pick-ups that have advantages over their old BOF brethren and gain in popularity?
Possibly! Again, risk taking and innovation do not always translate to huge sales.
honda does make good fwd cars (van too).
Besides, aren't we talking about risk taking (or lack of), and being different (or lack of)?
This is why the ridgeline is a poser. Pickups are light trucks, you know, for trucking things. They are (or should be) developed with a load in mind. They are not a tall, poor handling sedan with the trunk-lid missing.
Its also the same reason a Peterbuilt handles better with triples, than bobtailed.
But, different doesn't mean bad... usually misunderstood. This supports one of the points I have been trying to make. Honda has demonstrated here that it isn't another sheep in the flock.
Have you drive the Ridgeline... to assume things that you have? And better yet, have you actually done so in bad weather conditions? Try THAT on a RWD truck. Ridgeline has a good AWD system (and stability system, which is standard BTW) that acts proactively. So, it is designed to carry load, and without it.
I couldn't say the same about a lot of pickups, if any other at all. Isn't that a reason they are usually found on the roadside when the snow storm hits (more than any other kind of vehicles, in my observation).
BTW, Ridgeline also boasts one of the highest payload capacities in the 4WD world.
All they needed to do is build a cross-over SUV with part of the back missing... and that's enough to win every major and minor award that can be given to a truck.
The Ridgeline may be distictive, but it's still a poser.
2. The LPL for the Ridgeline is a former GM employee who helped develop that plan.
3. It took all of one year for Chrysler to copy the innovations from Ridgeline (see Rampage)
4. The SUV missing the back end was developed first by Ford with the Sport Trac.
All good reasons for calling the Ridgeline a poser.
1. The plan vs. the implementation are light years apart.
2. Former GM huh. Probably showed too much initiative.
3. Nice "concept" but didn't Chrysler also built a 10 cylinder motorcycle and a Jeep with two engines.
4. The Sport Trac and Avalanche are frame based and RWD based. Both of which rob usable space. The RL isn't. The advantages are discussed in that Rampage link.
At least based on the 600, I don't think the big 3 was learning too much about small cars from Honda then! Not exactly suited for the US market..
The Vega, IMO, at the time was just what the US market needed. The problem was GM shooting itself in the foot. If they had managed some level of rust proofing (although to be fair, at that time the Japanese makes rusted just as fast), a bit better build quality (again, not the strong suit in those days), but mostly, A DECENT ENGINE!
You would think after the Corvair they would have gone more mainstream. Just a normal, robust Iron block 4 cyl would have saved a lot of headaches. Remember, at the time (at least before the Civic), the foreign small cars had pretty rudimentary engines (Corolla, Datsuns, etc.). Iron block tractor motors, but at least they were reliable.
If nothing else, Ford got the engine concept right with the Pinto, although (in concept) I think the Vega was a much better product.
What does this have to do with Honda? I dunnow, but it is a nice history lesson as to the bomb that Honda dropped on the big 3 (and Japanese rivals) when the firt Civic CVCCs showed up. Can they do it again?
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Not that I'm saying the Ridgeline is bad for what it is. It is a very competent, competitive SUV. More like an Avalance or an Explorer Sport Trac, than a Tacoma. Sort of what they used to call a half-cab, Sorta.
Heck, GM was still trying to build a decent DOHC 4 cylinder when they were building the Fiero. The Quad4 was supposed to be the second coming for GM. The only thing it ended up making was a LOT of vibration. Are any of those still running?
Stickguy, the 600 hardly qualifies as a car. It was a curious oddity though. Kinda like BMW's Isetta. There are a couple of them off in the weeds around this house where I live.
What are they thinking ????? No turbo and no upgrade in horsepower from the Si ????? :confuse:
I'd like to see honda start making VTEC engines with turbo's to slap in TL's, RL, etc. to become a performance benchmark.
The perfect car would be a current Acura TL Type-S or
Type-R with 320+ hp. with a turbo.
Rocky
What's this 'run over' BS?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/AUTOS/carreviews/03/01/cr_top_picks/index.html
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And even more proud if I have the time away from family to enjoy this fine automobile
Lexus always scores higher than Toyota (usually number one, in fact), and Infiniti scores so far above Nissan it's not funny.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It's like guys looking at Sports Illustrated swim suit issue; need I say more?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Overall Value Winners!!!
45% Toyota/Lexus
45% Honda/Acura
8% other japanese branded cars
1% chevy
1% German branded cars
(Excluding giant 3/4 ton and larger trucks)