Has Honda's run - run out?

ateixeira

Yeah, perhaps they drank using one of these:





FHI has been known to indulge on occasion.

(inside joke there, sorry)

-juice

nwng

you better have EMTs standing by if you drink sake with that.

maybe honda has figure out a way to build ima a whole lot cheaper? btw, if you slap the 1.2 i-dsi on the fit, how big a ima unit you need to make it perform competitively with the 1.5 unit? Is the smaller the ima unit the cheaper?

varmint

Honda's CEO is determined to reduce the hybrid "penalty". Essentially, they are aiming for no more than $1,800 more than a similar gas-powered vehicle. If the engineers can't meet that target, they don't build the vehicle.

In other hybrid news, Marcb provided a link to CanadianDriver.com which states that Honda will not build a hybrid version of the Fit in the very last line.

mariner7

One mag (I forgot which one) says NSX is dead. Instead Honda is considering a V10 AWD RW-biased coupe, which would be in SL and 6 series class.

I'd say this is much smarter of Honda, and safer. They can sell more of this coupe than a sports car. 1st NSX is already proven sales loser. And probably they're already thinking of building S/7/LS challenger off same platform/engine, because they got to leverage multiple models off one expensive luxury platform.

It's still very risky though. Honda hasn't made RL, several steps down the luxury ladder, a success yet, and they had several cracks at it.

rsholland

The NSX was, and always will be, a "halo" car for Honda/Acura. It was there to flex their creative and engineering muscles, and to show the world what Honda is capable of if given a clean sheet of paper to play with. It's main purpose was to draw people into the showroom to buy lesser Acuras—that's how they made money on it.

The new model may indeed appeal to a larger audience, but I don't think it will have same halo impact of the original NSX. It sounds like the NSX replacement is more bottom-line oriented, and less how-far-can-we-take-it-oriented. I'm sure it will be very impressive, but I don't expect many to have their jaw drop—which happened with the original NSX.

Bob

schmidtj

I think that if Honda doesn't start doing things right like it used too they will be in some sort of trouble (not like the American makers) but some trouble. The '06 Accord is just ugly. What's with the rear end? I don't like the new Civic's either. Imagine having to commute with a dash like that in front of your face. The Rigeline is a decent truck, but again, does it have to look like it does? The Odyssey again is a good minivan, but the sytling leaves much to be desired. The new Kia Sedona is gaining ground very fast. I like the Element, but a lot of people think it's ugly. The CRV is down-right boring compared to the new RAV 4 and Kia/Hyundai cute-utes. The Pilot is dated and no match for newer designs. The one Honda I can say I would buy is the new Fit. Honda needs to get back on the wagon. Hyundai, Kia, and evewn Suzuki are clsong in faster than Honda thought they would. Nissan and Mazda have already caught up. Just selling great cars is not enought anymore. Hyundai is selling great cars a lot cheaper than Honda is. Kia and Suzuki too. Honda may be looking at a few difficult years ahead....

nippononly

Not to disagree too much here, but the Sedona gaining on the Odyssey? Ody has almost three times the sales so far this year:

http://www.aicautosite.com/editoria/asmr/svvan.asp

And CRV is keeping pace with the BRAND NEW RAV despite being a very old model:

http://www.aicautosite.com/editoria/asmr/svsuv.asp

The one that dominates that segment, of course, is the Escape, also doing very well for itself despite its age.

And hey, as a matter of fact, Pilot is keeping pace with Highlander too, although both are due to be replaced very soon now.

Accord is the only one that continues to be an issue. In fact despite, the dumping of the Buick taillights for '06, it continues to lag, although its volume would be considered fantastic for a midsize sedan at any of the domestic or Korean automakers.

I think this is the first time I have ever seen YTD sales of the Accord outpaced by those of the Civic:

http://www.aicautosite.com/editoria/asmr/svsedan.asp

ateixeira

Sienna will be the last Toyota to get the 3.5l V6, a mistake IMO. That's just what that model needed to help it battle the Odyssey. The engine has more power and better efficiency compared to the older 3.3l.

I was surprised, it just got a face-lift but did not get the engine.

If I were to buy a van, an AWD model with that V6 might be the ticket for me.

-juice

dino001

Did you mean Sienna?

ateixeira

Yep, edited, thanks for the correction.

-juice

nippononly

thought this was the Honda thread?

;-)

ateixeira

That's what an Ody competitor needs to match up with it, plus it's coming next spring I hear.

And when are we ever on topic?

-juice

rockylee

Juice,

Thanx for wanting to be a buddy on the carspace. Is the new MDX going to be priced in the mid to upper $50's like I read on the net ? I personally think this will harm Honda, because they've always been very successful at selling "Premium-Value" I suppose somebody bumped there head ? It's dissapointing the way automobiles have been shooting up in prices over the last few years.

Rocky

ateixeira

True, prices are creeping.

Look at what Toyota did with the RAV4, but it worked, so we can't blame them. It's bigger, but prices are WAY up over last year and sales are up 110% or so even with those higher prices.

Acura is going with a new strategy - two CUVs instead of one. So they will sandwich the old MDX, the RDX being slightly below the current model, and the new MDX moving up to distance itself slightly from the little brother and avoid too much overlap.

I bet they think that 1+1 > one old model.

-juice

nippononly

very good point! :-)

I don't imagine plugging the 3.5L into the Sienna will improve its mileage at all. In the RAV (much lighter vehicle) it only pulls 20/26 in the AWD. Will the Sienna's numbers improve from the current 18/24 for AWD? I think not. But it will be faster of course, Just what every minivan buyer is looking for, drag strip times. :-/

IMHO, the Sienna is already plenty capable with the 3.3. I would like to see a variable cylinder management version of that 3.5, like Honda has (only in the top trims though - too bad for people trying to save a few pennies). But I suppose Toyota will go hybrid before it will do that.

ateixeira

I respectfully disagree.

The new Camry V6 gets 22/31 with 268hp. I'm sure the new tranny helps, but I'm talking about the whole powertrain.

The Camry Solara still uses the old V6, and manages just 21/29 with just 225hp.

Even if we ignore the power bump, a gain of 1-2mpg is worthwhile. I think they can manage 19/26 with AWD if they put in that 6 speed trans as well, with a tall 6th gear.

I hope they don't go part-time on the AWD system like they did for the RAV4, though.

-juice

varmint

"I think that if Honda doesn't start doing things right like it used too they will be in some sort of trouble (not like the American makers) but some trouble."

I agree with some of your critique from a personal perspective, but Honda's 1st quarter profits have doubled. Yes, doubled.

If this is trouble, I'd hate to see how many zillions they make when things are going well! :surprise:

ateixeira

There is an article in today's Automotive News about this, basically they say Honda is "in their element", i.e. small cars are back in vogue and that's what they've always done well.

I doubt gas prices will drop significantly so they're in a good position for the forseeable future. Don't they have the highest CAFE of any automaker?

-juice

varmint

Yeah, here in the US they have a high CAFE rating.

You could argue that their rating is artificially high because they don't have a full line of vehicles (no big truck, not big cars, etc.). And you'd be right.

However, their 2005 CAFE rating was a few percentage points higher than it was back in 2000. And between 2000-2005 is when they added the MDX, Pilot, Element, and Ridgeline.

ateixeira

Hmm, cylinder deactivation? Or more hybrid sales?

-juice

varmint

Nothing fancy. CAFE is sales weighted.

The Accord, Civic, and even CR-V became more fuel efficient when they were redesigned. The boost was incremental, but we're talking well over 700,000 sales for those 3 vehicles. That goes a long way toward eliminating the drag of something like the Ridgeline (40K sales).

nippononly

they have committed to reducing the carbon dioxide emissions of their entire fleet by another 5% by 2010, to complement the 5% they have already reduced it from 2000. At least, that's what Automotive News had to say today in a little article that talked about how they are killing the Insight in September, to be replaced by a whole new, more mainstream, less expensive than Civic, hybrid in 2009.

Insight has had 320 sales so far this year. Imagine that! :-/

juice: it's true, I had forgotten that RAV V-6 only gets a 5-speed auto, but Sienna will weigh a half ton more! I would be surprised if they could extract 19/26 in AWD form with the more powerful engine. OTOH, why keep making the older engine, with its not-so-good emissions rating? Sienna is the only model using it after Highlander gets updated in the fall. So I imagine they will switch over to the 3.5 for Sienna pretty soon. And poor Honda won't be winning the minivan power wars any more.

varmint

Stupid me. Nippon's post is correct. I was thinking of the announcement about CO2 emissions, but wrote about CAFE. He is correct. CO2 was reduced despite moving to larger vehicles. It was not an increase in Honda's overall CAFE rating.

varmint

"And poor Honda won't be winning the minivan power wars any more."

Technically, they never were. The Caravan has always outsold the Ody.

In terms of market opinion, I think Honda has the edge with the Odyssey's reputation. It was so dominant for so long, it will be tough to unseat. Though, I concede that Toyota has the marketing dollars and dealership muscle to change opinion rather effectively.

robertsmx

Honda could always throw in a 300 HP 3.5/V6. :P

varmint

We got the 240 hp V6 in 2002 because DCX was making noise about a more potent V6 in the Caravan. The Dodge stayed the same, but we still got the extra ponies. So, Honda can be pulled into an hp war... even in the minivan segment.

That said, I'm thinking it's about time for Honda to drop the SOHC J35. While the engine can produce 300 hp without doing anything too radical, other V6s of similar size and output are popping up everywhere. Ford's 3.5L looks promising, Toyota's 3.5L is nice, and Nissan has gotten a whole lotta mileage out of the VQ series.

If Honda is going to continue to use the J35 in top of the line vehicles like the RL and MDX, they had better move to a DOHC design or work some other mojo on it.

robertsmx

What is wrong with J35?

rsholland

I agree. A 3.5 DOHC is the way to go. If they, I hope it also gets a timing chain to replace the timing belt.

I'd also like to see a 4.0 version for the Ridgeline. Maybe even offer the 4.0 as an option on the Pilot and Ody—now that would be great!

Bob

rsholland

It's starting to look a bit dated next to some of the newer engines being offered by Toyota and Nissan. There's no DOHC or timing chain, so it's starting to lose the "braggin' rights" battle, be that good or bad...

Bob

varmint

"What is wrong with J35?"

There's nothing "wrong" with the J series, per se. It's a perfectly functional and flexible engine. If the resources were available, I would continue to produce the current version of it for Honda vehicles. It's probably got another 10-15 years of life in it.

But when we're talking about higher market vehicles like the MDX and RL, I think they either need to replace the J series or enhance it significantly. As suggested earlier by myself and Bob, moving to a DOHC design would be one option. Refining it with the new/rumored continuously variable version of iVTEC would be another possibility.

I'm sure there are a dozen significant tweaks they could make. But simply retuning it without something major done to change it's character will leave it a sitting duck. Engines are important to this company. The competition is getting a whole lot better in the mid-size V6 segment. Acura products should have stand-out engine designs, not merely something which matches the competition.

varmint

According to this one site. Honda will bring the diesel V6 here for the Ody and MDX.

FWIW, I was about to place bets this would NOT happen here in the US. I figured this engine would go into the Ridgeline before anything else in the US market.

In other news, Honda has Tribecafied the CR-V. Semi-credible renderings have appeared showing some nasty grille-work.

robertsmx

Again, outside of marketing perception (the SOHC versus DOHC thing), how is J35 dated? Why would you pick a Nissan 3.5/V6 over Honda 3.5/V6?

I agree Honda could do more with a brand new 3.5/V6 DOHC, but realistically, I don't see how Toyota or Nissan 3.5 are better.

robertsmx

In other news, Honda has Tribecafied the CR-V. Semi-credible renderings have appeared showing some nasty grille-work

I'm afraid, that might be true. I would really hate to see Honda mess the grill on CR-V. If they do, I really hope they learn a lesson or two, on how not to mess up a successful design... like they did with Accord, and Acura in the mid-late 90s. But I guess, they never learnt a lesson from it.

robertsmx

I agree that Honda would benefit from an all new 3.5/V6. I just don't agree with the idea that J35 can't compete with the present offerings. Look at J30 in Accord... it is smooth and powerful.

This discussion reminds me of BMW's offerings from a few years ago. While the entry level 323 got a DOHC I-6, the 750iL was running around with an SOHC V12, and a 2-valve/cylinder engine at that.

Part of marketing perception around SOHC has been related to assumptions around a "typical SOHC" (which can have 2, 3 or 4 valve per cylinder, most had 2 or 3), and the applications (think base engine in Taurus, or those from Nissan). OTOH, Honda still stuck with SOHC layout in the latest Civic. There must be a good reason for it.

varmint

I don't know that the Toyota or Nissan or Ford designs are better. But they're very close.

In the past, people would argue that Honda and BMW make the best engines. Now, the others have caught up. The discussion should rightfully include several other manufacturers.

So, one last time, I don't think Honda should be "just as good". They should be better than that.

ateixeira

I'm sure they can offer some evolution of the J35, refine and enhance it further.

Did Honda hire Zapatinas away from Subaru?

Actually, the sketch isn't bad, better than the earlier renderings, which were hideous.

The D-pillar on this new sketch doesn't look bad at all, no saggy look like the old ones had.

The only issue I have with the grille is if the lower intake doesn't line up with the bottom of the headlights. If it does, and they fix that minor detail, I'd give the design a thumbs up.

You seem to be very conservative in terms of design preference. It's far from perfect, but it does make the current design seem suddenly dated to me.

-juice

ateixeira

On another note, since we never agree on anything, even in cases where I *like* a Honda design and you don't, were you the varmint that chewed up the spark plug wires under the hood of both our Legacy and our Forester?

I got a picture of the little varmint, and the damage he did.

-juice

PS The last pic is the actual chip munk I see under my Subaru every morning

ateixeira

Here's a slightly retouched photo where I caught Alvin the chipmunk in the act....

rsholland

Well, I can't ignore the DOHC v. SOHC thing. But besides that I prefer a timing chain to a timing belt. I also prefer a 4.0 to a 3.5.

Again, as Varmint said, "engines are very important to this company." Honda has been described as an engine company that happens to make cars. There's some truth in that. They are known to be at the very leading edge of technology. To be "good enough" is not the Honda way. Much of it has to do with image, how they are perceived.

Bob

rsholland

The new CRV, if that image is correct, makes the Tribeca look like a beauty queen. I'm posting it for tomorrow's Straightline blog.

Frankly, I'm not wild about the styling of several new Hondas or Acuras. I love the Fit and Civic, especially the sedan & the Euro-Civic, but the RDX, Ridgeline, Pilot facelift and new MDX leave me cold in terms of looks.

Bob

toast

I've been a huge Honda/Acura fan since 1985. Excellent value in the past. Recent visit to dealer resulted in brake rotors being machined again. The 2000 TL has only 46,000 miles but the brake rotors have needed machining twice within the last 2 years/12,000 miles.

I am a very undemanding driver averaging 35MPH and an occasional 80 MPH on the freeway. I only drive about 6,000 miles each year. The service advisor indicated he needs to have the rotors machined every 6 months. I find this hard to believe.

It was a good run for 21 years but if rotors are going out every 6 months I'll be going elsewhere.

rsholland

Every Honda I've owned, and I've owned a bunch, have needed rotors; some several times.

Bob

ateixeira

Can't you only machine the rotors once? I mean, they get too thin beyond that. I think once every several years is more like it, though.

Vehicles keep getting heavier so brakes have to absorb more and more energy.

-juice

perna

In other news, Honda has Tribecafied the CR-V. Semi-credible renderings have appeared showing some nasty grille-work.

The current CR-V already looks like a dung beetle; the lower fascia has those hisbiscus looking things that meet up with the hood. How could they do any worse? :P

ateixeira

I don't like that particular feature either, but in Honda's defense the vehicle has sold well plus Volvo's XC70 station wagon has the same thing. It looks better with dark colors IMO.

-juice

ateixeira

anythngbutgm

I think it is true with most makes. In the interest of lightwieghting, rotors just don't hold up the way they used to. Go through a heavy puddle while applying the brakes and as soon as they begin to dry, wham! warped rotors. As far as my hondas have been, I had that issue with a 98' LX Accord (had to turn the rotors almost every springtime) but not my 97' LX or my 2002 EX (Discs all around). My old CRV never had any issues, but my MDX is on its second set of fronts (done at 60k).

FWIW, One of Hondas weakest links IMO has been the brakes. They always manage low scores in stopping distances while brake fade seems to be kept in check at least.

ateixeira

Next time you need them turned, ask if the dealer has an on-car lathe. Those manage to get them more "true", because the rotors are torqued down to the axles.

-juice

perna

I don't like that particular feature either, but in Honda's defense the vehicle has sold well plus Volvo's XC70 station wagon has the same thing. It looks better with dark colors IMO.

You're right on the mark - black CR-Vs are pretty sharp.

I have a violent reaction when I see one of those new snooty Subarus, though. That is the most vile front end I've ever seen on a car, Aztek included.

robertsmx

What makes Honda engines stand out? Has it always been about most power? More camshafts and valves? What is it? Would you consider Civic's new 1.8-liter inferior to Corolla's 1.8-liter because it is an SOHC design?

Honda apparently prefers SOHC layout for some reason. And it isn't something recent.