Has Honda's run - run out?

alpha01

"Honda is offering 1.9-2.9% financing on Accords, and 2.9% on Civics, with no cash incentives. Now, this is not as good as those from Hyundai/Kia ($2000-2500, 0%) or Nissan (Upto $1500, 0% to 2.9%) or Mazda ($1500, 0.9%). Probably because Honda is still managing to move its inventory without being too aggressive."

First things first. There is no customer cash incentive on Hondas, but there is a significant amount of dealer cash that is allowing dealers to be VERY aggressive with pricing. Nissans incentives actually range up to $2500 cash back depending on model, but since you reference the Accord, I'll reference the Altima, which has NO customer rebate right now, and whose brief two month use of a rebate was to clear out the 2004s.

"At the end of April, the year-to-date sales of Civic are up 5.6% compared to a year ago, and at the current pace, Honda would be able to move 300-310K units of Civic."

As I just stated, Honda is using factory to dealer incentives more heavily on the Civic than any other of its cars, or in any of the past years. To elaborate, my aunt wanted a Civic recently, we negotiated a Civic LX auto 4 door for 14,200. She also got 2.9% financing on the deal. MSRP = $16,650. This was in late Feb, NJ.

I would imagine that as it has boosted sales for other makes, the more sizable than normal incentives on the Civic are selling it, as opposed to its competitive advantages, which are far fewer than in the past.

~alpha

nippononly

So what are you saying? That Honda now has to use some of the same tactics to sell cars that all the other companies have been using for ages? It still doesn't put customer cash on the cars as many of the others do. This I think still makes it stand apart in the field.

But I would also say that in the ultra-competitive market this has become now, it was inevitable that even the best of the best were bound to have to compete a little in some way on the financial side. Even if it is just advantageous financing. Heck, 1.9-2.9% isn't like 0/0/0 or anything either. I can get 4% any day of the week on an auto loan from my credit union. So they are not exactly giving away the farm there...

And of course, as for Civic, it IS pertinent that it is now a four-year-old model that has had nothing but the most mild of updates since late '00.

bottgers

Wouldn't it be nice if all auto makers stopped shuffling the numbers and just dropped the price to be competitive?

wale_bate1

After 20 years in retail I can tell you customers don't generally respond well to that once they taste incentive blood.

At Macy's (back in my "youth") we ran Revere cookware on ad at 50%-off on a regular basis. Sales were constant, and you could easily predict customer response and buy accordingly. When we tried "value-pricing" the stuff at that half-price everyday, the volume dropped by 17%! Hello rotational sale price, HELLO!

The subsidized lease is, to my mind, the safest way to play the incentive game without giving in entirely to the systemic decline it produces, but that's mostly because the majority of consumers still find leasing a little confusing, perhaps with a fuzzy, slightly spooky aura!

But both Honda and Toyota have resorted to incentives recently. More a sign of the market in general than real weakness of product, IMO.

robertsmx

alpha01

2004 Altima had a $1500 cash incentive and 0.9% financing available as of y’day (source: Autosite Market Report – Incentives).

Do you think I would pay MSRP on an Altima to get those cash incentives and financing? NO. I would still target invoice price and get those incentives on top of it, otherwise they would not be “incentives” to me any more. If I were getting an Accord LX today, I would target a price tag of $18000-18500 (I mentioned earlier), not the MSRP. I have always done that, and managed.

So, paying what you did for Civic LX isn’t unusual. Back in 2000, I paid $15K for a new Civic EX (auto), and got a 3.9% financing that was going on. So, I’m not sure what you mean by aggressive dealer incentives “now” compared to then. And everybody seems to be doing it, and then some.

In fact, I see 0% financing and/or cash incentive as a major attraction to a typical buyer these days than incentives to dealers that are almost transparent to the customers.

Bottgers

Wouldn't it be nice if all auto makers stopped shuffling the numbers and just dropped the price to be competitive?

I was thinking of this the other day, especially noticing that some 2005 models have arrived way too early into the year, and their launch was already coupled to cash rebates and/or 0% financing. It sounds weird to me. Perhaps, incentives and 0% sets a tone for marketing more than lower price tag these days.

carguy58

Comment on post 126(sugatank)

I think there is some truth to Honda deconting Honda's styling to set their styling apart from the Acura brand. Before the 03 Accord came out the TL was ridicluded being for a move-up Accord in terms of exterior styling.

Comment on post 148(robertsmx:)

"Ford is owned by Mazda for a reason".

Does that make Mazda bad company because they are 1/3rd owned by Ford? I don't think so. Mazda ran into a little trouble financially in the early 90's and Ford later did some dumb things with Mazda in the mid 90's.

Other Honda topics:

As far as the Civic is concerned in 1996 the Civic was the best looking car in its class. Now its bested by the Hyundai Elantra and Mazda 3 hatch in terms of styling.

Lastly, the Accord/Camry debate: The Accord Sedan used to be 2-3 steps sportier than the Camry was in terms of exterior styling: well thats no more. As a matter of fact the Camry is a little better looking than the Accord Sedan now. The Accord Coupe still looks respectable and better looking than the Camry Solara.

April Honda sales: Accord sales down, Civic sales up. TL and TSX sales up. The TL and TSX sold 6,711 and 2,367 units respectively. Honda sales were down last month while Acura sales were up. Acura is doing well this year: sales up 21.6% from last year overall.

hondaguy

Anybody who buys a car on looks alone is a fool and most certainly not a 'driver' who expects that his vehicle respond as if it were an appendage of his neuro-muscular system.. I will say that the new Altima and the Camry are very 'eye appealing' vehicles but simply do not come close to the Accord in driveability. I owned a VW beetle back in the 60's, not because I liked it, but because it was cheap.I thought it was an ugly, stunted design back then and still do. Lo and behold, fast forward to 2000 and people are actually shelling out 20K+ for this resurrected retro number. Actually it handles pretty good, having gotten behind the wheel of one, but who in their right mind would go for one of these babies when you could pick up an Accord, Camry or Altima for the same or less?
  
  And then there's the Chrysler PT....whatever in the world would inspire anyone to purchase one of these retro 1930's boxes on wheels? Simple....there's NO accounting for taste. Some folks think that being behind the wheel of one of these vehicles is evidence of their 'coolness'. Like ear studs and tattoos. If you're somebody who actually enjoys the driving experience and its challenges, the Accord cannot be beat in its price range.

seminole_kev

"If you're somebody who actually enjoys the driving experience and its challenges, the Accord cannot be beat in its price range."

I'd think I'd go for a Mazda 6 if that's the criteria. Unless you're ruling it out because it is cheaper? Or depending how equipped the Accord is and its price, I'd probably also go with an Acura TSX first, or even a Lexus IS300 as they are discounted and get pretty close to a loaded Accord in price.

carguy58

Honda styling always attracted me now its Acura styles that attract me so I guess we know where Honda puts their designers these days in the packing order.

robertsmx

Does that make Mazda bad company because they are 1/3rd owned by Ford? I don't think so.

Neither do I, but I only brought up an argument on “must have a reason” to not stay independent. Companies need to be smart with their investment and direction. Could it be that?

As far as the Civic is concerned in 1996 the Civic was the best looking car in its class. Now its bested by the Hyundai Elantra and Mazda 3 hatch in terms of styling.

I’ve never seen people go gaga and buy Civics for looks, not in 1992, not in 1996 and not in 2001. I doubt that will happen in 2005 either. They buy it for the car that it is.

Lastly, the Accord/Camry debate: The Accord Sedan used to be 2-3 steps sportier than the Camry was in terms of exterior styling: well thats no more. As a matter of fact the Camry is a little better looking than the Accord Sedan now.

In your opinion, bland is better. I disagree with it though. Accord sedan’s styling is aggressive and has more details to it that flow together. Camry’s rear end looks like an after thought, and the side profile is typical Toyota slab-sided (Avalon, LS430 and Camry/ES330 share this trait more than others).

Forget driving experience and the interior, I would get Accord over Camry if I had to judge a car based on looks alone (but I don’t). But then, I seem to have a different way to analyze and appreciate a style than you do, so let us leave it at that.

wale_bate1

For someone looking for a "driver's" car, I'd say you get a major bingo there!

Mazda 6.

Anyone looking at actual utility, versatility and style in a fun drive wouldn't rule out the PT either.

Many reasons for buying the Accord over another competitor, but the above wouldn't be two...

seminole_kev

for some reason we tend to think alike. Feel sorry for ya!

boaz47

Looks alone may not inspire you, could I assume you date ugly women with great personalities? But as good as a Aztec might be at what it does still doesn't make one buy them. However call it a Buick and change the lines a bit and you are a hit. The echo was another very ugly car and all they did to increase sales of those was add the Scion name and a different body, period.

People have come to expect Hondas to be dependable and the Civic is no different. However this is one of the first times I can remember the Auto mags have complained about how Honda de-contented the Civic. I agree with most people here that the downturn of the Honda reputation is just a blip but still the competition is stiff.

Why would someone buy a PT, Element, Scion, Aerio, or any number of other cars? Looks and versatility. The Miata is a Lotus knock off. A very good one and one that has inspired more people than most other small sports cars. It is just the way people are, something has to first look good and then they get interested. People that don't car about looks more than likely spent most of their high school years alone and people took their lunch money. (there is always room for humor,)

robertsmx

Ugliness may not cause infatuation, but in the end, personality matters. Aztec was probably an out of proportion vehicle for most of us, but its personality had nothing over its siblings. It didn’t stand out and had nothing going for it, and certain things going against it.

That said, ugly is not a word that I would associate with something that is also dubbed bland. Many would try to exaggerate styling one way or another just to make a point, nothing more.

Wale_bate1, I think you’re right about driver’s car. Those people should look at cars like Mazda6 (or TSX and 325i if they can afford) if that is exclusive requirement. But, Mazda6, TSX or BMW 325 are not driver’s cars based on styling.

Accord wins the race for most buyers because it takes the middle ground. Just enough of the right ingredients. It is a driver’s car without being harsh. As one of the road tests once put it, “Mazda6 feels fast going around a corner, the Accord goes faster”.

barneym

Quick note on price creep on almost all foreign cars including Honda's, the dollar has been dropping over the past few years against the Euro and the Yen. Even though many of the "imports" are made here in the U.S., the corporations look at bottom line in their currency and adjust the prices/cost to match their expected profit margins.

As far as looks go, the Honda's are just plain boring looking. Maybe if I had a chance to evaluate a Honda all by itself, I wouldn't be so critical of it, but once you go out in the real world you realize that half the country has the same damn car you do. I personally don't want to see my car everywhere I go. I want to have some sort of emotional reaction to a car that goes beyond having the satsifaction of having made a "good investment". I think the PT Cruiser is a phenomenal car. Out of this world looks and a truly functional design that makes it's unusal porportions useful. The Aztek flopped because it didn't really use any of the space that the body created. It was just an ugly tall station wagon with an anemic engine. I rented one once while in Nebraska and it wheezed on the mild slopes they call hills out there. My current perfect car right now is the new 300C by Chrysler. I never thought Detroit would pump out a new RWD V8 (I said new, so Ford Crown Vic's dont' count ;-) and here they have done it and it looks and handles awesome. What gets me is that the cars looks inspires emotion within people. You never see someone crowding around a new Honda in a parking lot oohing and aahing.

Don't get me wrong. I love Honda's for what they are, which is a safe choice. My current car is a 2003 CR-V and I love it. My friends know me as a "car guy" and whenever they ask what they should buy I tell them "If you don't want to stress out about the decision making process and don't mind boring, buy a Honda / Acura".

The risk Honda is facing is that they started out as the funky alternative and now they have progressed to where they are the first choice of the bread and butter sedan market. This puts them in the crosshairs of every other manufacturer. Hyundai/Kia is now the cheap alternative and the better value with their warranty structure.

Honda does and has made some exciting cars (S2000, Element, the old Civid Del Sol and the CRX) but as of late, their mainstream stuff is still simply boring.

robertsmx

Price is up, but so is feature content. You've still got to compare car to car, feature to feature, when passing a judgement on the same. One shouldn't compare what a Honda cost in 1990 to what it does today, without considering everything.

bottgers

Hondaguy

People who don't care about looks or driving experience don't buy cars at all, they buy SUV's.

barneym

I think it's been shown in here many times that even though Hondas are higher priced and have shorter warranties, they're still a better value than the Hyundais and Kias because of their higher resale value.

andre1969

with the Civic, versus Hyundais and Kias, is that the Civic gets notably better fuel economy. So does the Toyota Corolla. At least, 2 years ago, when my uncle bought his '03 Corolla, the EPA estimates for the Civic and 'Rolla were much higher than offerings from Hyundai/Kia, as well as the Cavalier, Neon, and Focus.

In fact, I think my uncle ruled out the Hyundai/Kia models almost immediately, because of their EPA ratings. Main reason he settled on a Corolla, compared to a Civic, is that he liked the driving position better, and it was easier to find a basic model, which is all he wanted.

robertsmx

That’s true. I used fuel expense in one of my comparisons above (between Sonata and Accord). The Sonata GLS is rated 19/27 mpg, and the Accord I-4 is at 24/34 mpg. Considering just city driving and EPA estimate as valid, in five years/60000 miles, Accord owner would save $1100.

In addition, in five years, Accord’s ALG residual is rated at 35% compared to 26% for the Sonata (only 22% if you got the Sonata with four banger). These add up, and while Accord costs a grand or two more to get, it ends up being cheaper in five years. This is disregarding the rest of the facts. Little things add up.

One of the reasons for sales surge of Civic in April has probably to do with higher cost of fuel. When people think rising gasoline cost, they think Civic. So, sometimes, being sensible helps more than being aggressive, while trying to balance power and fuel economy.

nippononly

hit it right on the head I think. I would only add that the gyrations of the yen and the dollar have less to do with price creep in Japanese models than they used to, because many are made here. The models that are domestically built are less impacted, while they strengthening yen is bound to drive up the prices of the ones they have to ship over.

And while Hyun/Kia is stealing more domestic sales, I would bet, they are definitely chewing a little at Honda's bottom line...

Every time fuel prices jump up a bit, Honda runs ads on TV that highlight Civic's premium EPA ratings (within its segment).

alpha01

There are no 2004 Altimas left in inventory in the dealers in my area, so I apologize if I misspoke when I said that rebates were offered only for 2 months on the 2004 Altimas. I should have said that rebates on 2004s were initiated only two months prior to the 2005's introduction. It is only natural that they are trying to move the remaining 2004s, with full inventories of the improved 2005s on lots. If you want want, please report back to us with the current incentive offer from Nissan on 2005 Altimas. Hint: There are none.

~alpha

PS- For those currently looking at an Accord LX 4 Door 5A, in my area, Carsdirect.com is showing $17,800 a bit better than you posit. Great price on a great car. Curiosity- does anyone on these threads know someone with an Accord DX? I really wish they offered a Value Package on this model, for the 5M or 5A, that offered just A/C, rear stabilizer, and power door locks. Would be a tremendous value.

nippononly

there will be a VP package for Accord in another year or so. Honda always puts out these VP's with a year or two to go before model revision, to warm up sales with the "value meal".

lil302000

nipp, a little chew here a little chew there, if Honda sits on their butts and refuse to address the the threat they can have problems. As time goes on the Korean cars will get better and better they have already started. When it comes to young families or budget minded people with limited incomes you must remember they would like to have nice things to. They want cruise, A/C, power windows, cd players, sunroofs and so on. That base lot teaser for $18,500 don't have it, much less even being able to take delivery of one. Honda used to be able to appeal to the cash strapped family but in todays climate of out sourcing and a shift to a service economy they have become a bit of an expense. When it comes to Accord it rest in the mid-sized family car segment. Honda is going to have to get out of the business of short warranties, non incentives, and charging extra for features to appeal to what used to be their target market. Will Honda take a great fall I don't think so, but I feel the small incentives you are starting to see will continue on. As for performance and fun to drive you would have to add the Neon SRT4 for about the same price as that teaser Accord. Honda will never lose the loyalist they have worked hard to build that base and they will be there, now they have to get the family person that is working two jobs to make ends meet or the single person in college, or single parent, you know the same person that used to be able to afford their cars. After all these people like the creature comforts as well, and that is what the Korean makers are marketing.

wale_bate1

Well, and all will have to reckon with improving domestic quality as well.

Competition: it ain't gettin' any easier out there...

boaz47

extrapolating here lets try this. Dealers are having to find new ways to do business. Saturn offers a pick your car and see what it will cost. Much like a refrigerator. GM Ford and Chrysler will match anyone's price and bring you coffee while you wait till they find you the exact color you are looking for at another dealer in the next town. I see discounts and cash back, although smaller, from Toyota and Nissan. The Koreans are willing to offer a warrentee three times as long as just about anyone. (well maybe not three times.) Honda, at least in our area is simply you get what we have and in the color we have. Almost like the old VW dealers. I doubt if the cars have slid much but everyone else is doing all they can to attract customers. If they lose the entry level market they could back themselves into a corner that will be hard to get out of. Not impossable however.

hondaguy

boaz... Women are people, cars are possessions. Very important differentiation.People buy beetles and the PT for their 'looks AND versatility'? C'mon, get real...they buy it for the look. It's a car for people who buy on looks only....just another fashion statement.

seminole_kev

have you ever checked out a PT Cruiser? Those things are very versatile. I love hatches, and own a 5-door Focus, but I wish it had the load-flat floor of that PT cruiser when you take the seats out. Very handy!

driftracer

with (now) 265 hp (after Mopar Stage 1 upgrade) and the versatility better than most minivans, with the minivan stigma, it's a cool ride.

Especially cool when you consider that I gave less than $20k for it after discounts and rebates (yes, the GT model).

grbeck

The PT Cruiser may get attention for its looks, but the vehicle offers lots more than a pretty face. It's a very versatile vehicle.

I'm anxious to see the new 2006 Civic. I read in a British magazine (I think it was Car) that the CEO of Honda demanded to know why the current Civic wasn't selling as well as expected (he was, however, referring to worldwide sales figures).

seminole_kev

perhaps the CEO of Honda just needs to get his behind down to a dealer and drive the Civic and its competition back-to-back. Then also negotiate a price on all the cars. Between all that he'll probably figure it out. ;-)

andre1969

where Hyundai and Kia might actually steal some sales from Honda is poor, credit challenged buyers. I hate to paint a broad stripe, but around these parts, most of the Hyundai and Kia dealers have a real sleazy stigma to them. I think it was Grbeck who told me that the Neon is actually the most commonly repossesed car, but I'd imagine that cars like the Hyundai Accent and Elantra, and Kia Spectra (I know I'm forgetting one of their small ones, too), aren't far behind!

When it comes to Neons, I wonder if there's something that's in the human brain that gets triggered when you're in serious financial strife, that suddenly makes the Neon more attractive? Back in '96, when I was deep in debt and working 2 jobs, my Dart broke down while on a pizza delivery run. I was sooo pissed at the thing that when I walked back to the store, I actually called my grandmother and asked if she'd co-sign on a car loan for a Neon! I'm glad I didn't, as the car's points had just gone so long that they pretty much burnt-up and fused together. I guess they'll do that when you let them go for 40,000+ miles! ;-) But sadly, I've known a few people who've owned Neons, and all of them had credit problems!

wale_bate1

mbukukanyau

Seem to be having some trouble. The New Accord is especially a bad design. The element to better.

Transmission woes another problem.

nvbanker

Neither the Civic or Accord are selling as well as expected or historically they have. And there has to be a reason. No doubt, competition is a factor, and Hyundai/Kia matters. Honda seemed to have a natural right to a percentage of the market for years now, just on reputation. With so many other good small cars available, and some for less, they are bound to lose some market share.

driftracer

Hyundai, Kia, Chevrolet (Cavalier) models and others are great for credit-challenged people.

They're cheap, cost wise, to begin with, most have strong rebates which help out on the cash down payment thing, and getting someone into a car with a $225 payment is a world easier than trying to buy a $25000 Accord/Camry or Maxima with no rebates.

When I worked at the Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep store in TX, we always kept a large stock of new and used Neons (the used ones are the BEST!!!) for credit criminals.

On a used one year old Neon, in 1999/2000, for instance, retail book was around $10-11k, wholesale was $9k - we got them all day long at the auction for $5-6k, in great shape with good miles. Selling one for wholesale book, where any lender will go if the person has a job, a phone, and can fog a mirror, usually got us a $2500 payable deal.

Hyundais and Kias were even better, from that perspective, until many lenders started reeling in their loan calls on those cars.

anonymousposts

alpha: There has to be some type of incentive on the Altima. They are being advertised dirt cheap here in Atlanta. It's not s teaser ad either, the dealers have several at the advertised price which is thousands off of MSRP.

"They want cruise, A/C, power windows, cd players, sunroofs and so on. That base lot teaser for $18,500 don't have it, much less even being able to take delivery of one."

$18,500 is right at the invoice amount for an Accord LX automatic. There is no reason to think someone who knows this information would not be able to get an Accord for $18,500 and in most cases less. As someone mentioned before carsdirect.com has the Accord for $17,800. In case you didn't know the Accord LX does have AC, cruise control, power windows, locks, mirrors, and a CD player. Not to mention it comes standard with ABS, has LED gauges, and keyless entry.

By the way ... I am still waiting to see a car that can be had for $8000 less than the Accord.

newcar31

driftracer--DAMN! That's a pretty good deal for that ride, and talk about sleeper status, a 265 hp PT Cruiser? Sheesh!

and speaking of credit bandits, MSN had an article today about the best and worst cities as far as the citizens' credit scores. Minneapolis (my home town) rated the best as far as credit followed closely by Boston, according to Experian. Way to go neighbors! They called Texas the "no loan star state" because Dallas and Houston are full of dead beats, must be a lot of Neons rollin' around in Texas...lol.

and back to Honda...

Would it be worth it for Honda to offer the 160 hp 2.0L or 2.4L in the Civic coupe and sedan? I think it would, but would Honda sell that many more Civics to justify it? They could keep the 1.7L for the extra fuel economy conscience people. The 2.4L gets excellent mileage in the Accord, it'd probably be better in the Civic, and I'm sure it'd make the Civic more fun to drive.

lil302000

A less expensive car will be at more risk for poor credit shoppers. So what we are saying is that Honda is willing to give market share by selling a more expensive car? I don't think so, just a personal feeling. I think Honda has rode the skirt tails of a great reputation to the point they feel they could command a premium. By the same token the inexpensive Civic of the late seventies would have been more at risk. Allot of this reminds of when I was driving in the eighties. All of the blue bloods saying my Chevy is faster, handles better, and is safer after all the were three times as big. The more things change the more they stay the same.

alpha01

There is no incentive on the 2005 Altima. Incentives are available only for the 2004s. Robertsmx pointed to autosite.com's Market Report Incentive section. Go see for yourself.

~alpha

PS- That is a great site for nearly all mfrs EXCEPT Toyota, whose incentives are regional, which is why you see the range shown.

anonymousposts

Difference between Chevy of the 80's and Honda of today is that Chevy did not offer anything over the competition. The Accord, like it's looks or not, is one of the safest, most refined, and most efficient sedans on the market.

nvbanker

So was Chevy

anonymousposts

According to edmunds the 2005 Altima has $500 customer cash.

lil302000

is Chevy and the press was just as convinced then as Honda is now.

nvbanker

Pretty much

norne

Sales of accord ytd 2003 (jan-apr)--125,849 units
sales of accord ytd 2004-(jan-apr)--114,492 units
down 9.9%

Sales of civic ytd 2003(jan-apr)--98,836 units
sales of civic ytd 2004(jan-apr)--100,626 units
an increase of 0.8%

sales of pilot is up 7% in 2004 from same time 2003

sales of odyssey is down 9.5% in 2004 from 2003. (probably due to new sienna)

sales of element is down 9.6% from 2003
sales of cr-v down 0.5% from 2003

 Most of accord/camary are sold with 4 cyl and they don't cost $25k. A typical 4 cyl camry can be bought for under 19k with big discounts by dealer and $1500 rebate. When I take my cr-v in for service I see full of 4 cyl accords in the low 20's range and one can easily buy one for under 20k.

anonymousposts

Saying that Honda is the Chevy of the 2000's is just as unsubstantiated as your claim that the Accord was $8,000 more expensive than it's competition (a claim which you still have not substantiated to this day).

lil302000

to your Honda dealer and tell them you want the base I4 Accord with Power windows, A/C, keyless entry, side body trim, Alarm, heated mirrors, cd player with cassette, four wheel disk brakes, cruise control, rear window defogger, floor mats. auto trans, 7year/100,000 mile warranty with roadside assistance and let us know if it was $16,000 because the competition is. By the way the base does not come with side air bag.

dodger

I recently purchased my first Honda which is likely to be my last. Poor build quality and uncaring dealership has me fed up.

lil302000

You better buy that $18,500LX considering that the base LX with auto trans on Hondas own web site is $20,350. You can go a little cheaper if you don't want front air bags.

nvbanker

Could you be more specific on the poor build quality? That's not something Honda is known for...