Has Honda's run - run out?

nippononly

sales figures NEVER say it all. The Mazda3 will speak clearly for itself if you give it a try. And the Honda Civic, even now that the current model is four years old, speaks pretty well for itself too. Not tops in its class IMO, but a very good car. The shifter alone might be worth the price of the car, and that is one aspect of the Mazda3 that is NOT better.

robertsmx

Civic and RL may have been the only cars where Honda hasn’t continued to raise the bar when it comes to features. Since 1998, Honda has been very aggressive with Accord, not only in terms of adding power but also features while improving fuel economy and emissions. I wonder if the same is in reserve for Civic with the upcoming redesign. With 2001 redesign, I didn’t think much had changed compared to the 1996-2000 Civic. I’m sure the next will be much bigger.

But no matter how big the changes are, sales are unlikely to exceed the usual 300K-325K mark under a single model name in this class. And competition is going to keep attacking. It has been done in the past, and will be done in the future. The challenge is, keeping up with the tradition.

andre1969

is "too tasteful for the masses"? ;-)

Hey, that's what they said about the '57 Plymouth, which was outsold by Chevy and Ford by roughly 2:1. However, how is the Mazda3 selling, in general? Is it meeting forecasts? Has it improved over the Protege? For instance, way back in 1957, while Ford and Chevy beat Plymouth, Plymouth still sold a record number of cars, reclaimed 3rd place, and stole plenty of sales from Ford and Chevy. It didn't totally decimate Ford or Chevy, but it was still a success.

Just because the Civic is outselling the 3 by a wide margin, doesn't automatically mean the 3 is a loser. Mazda probably doesn't have nearly the dealership network or production capacity of Honda, so on sheer volume they could never compete. However, if they originally forecast, say, 75000 units and it pulls down 125000, I'd classify that as a success. But I have no idea at all how it's selling. Anybody got any sales stats?

robertsmx

Automakers try to woo customers in any way they can. With the track record of cars like Civic and Corolla, it is hard for others to play the same game, so they have to be different. There is no other way out, but the bottom line is sales. Success can be measured in terms of sales figures, or even inventory turn around time (Honda and Toyota are hard to beat in that regard).

nippononly

last I heard was in general terms: that the 3 was meeting Mazda forecasts, something the Mazda6 did not do initially. The 50-day supply of 3's that Mazda had on 8/1 is slightly below the average, so it is selling slightly better than the average vehicle on the market.

And yes, the smaller Mazda dealer network would have an effect on sales. As would the fact that Honda is a household name while Mazda is a relative unknown - when I had my RX-7, people would refer to it as the "Isuzu", and a couple assumed it was a 300ZX. Some of the same people also used to call my Subaru the "Isuzu"! Two brands with little mainstream recognition, except for Miatas and Outback wagons, and for Subie more recently, the WRX.

That is a problem Honda rarely has, especially not with the Civic.

robert: my point was merely that price plays too much of a role in sales for sales figures alone to indicate the best vehicles out there, either in build, reliabilty, or for enthusiast enjoyment. Some people buy cars just on the basis that they save money, while others just get the A-to-B transportation that gives them the least hassle in the buying process, or which has the best warranty. None of those consumer aspects of the car say all that much about the car itself.

npaladin2000

"shown by Mazda owners is rather funny. When your product is being outsold by nearly 7 to 1 by the competition and you still claim your product is superior is sort of ridiculous. The sales figure pretty much says it all"

Cavaliers outsell Lotus Elise. Does that make Cavalier a better car? I think not.

Mazda is selling every Mazda3 they're building. They're making money. And when compared on a feature-by-feature basis, the 3 equals or beats the Civic.

newcar31

"Success can be measured in terms of sales figures, or even inventory turn around time (Honda and Toyota are hard to beat in that regard)."

I guess the current Civic Si is a failure in that regard compared to the previous generation.

I'll be Chevy sells more Z24 Cavaliers than Honda sells Si Civics. The sales numbers speak for themselves, the Cavalier must be better.

nippononly

about that Z24 Cavalier, but the Civic SI has been the biggest sales challenge for Honda since the Prelude's sales were drying up several years ago. The Prelude got killed then, and the Civic SI got sent back to England early now (no more a-comin', and my local dealer has four on the lot gathering dust right now that were all shipped to him four to six months ago).

This SI is a really good car, and deserved to sell better than it did. And the Mazda3 is a really good car too, that deserves a bigger better dealer network and more brand-name recognition.

robertsmx

Let us break it down…
1. Some people buy cars just on the basis that they save money
2. While others just get the A-to-B transportation that gives them the least hassle in the buying process
3. Or, which has the best warranty.

Where does Civic fit in? More often than not, I see people claiming Civic is overpriced and people don’t get to see the financing/cash back deals either. So, can it be one? Is Honda the best choice for number 2 to most buyers? Or, does Honda provide the best warranty?

Civic sells for what it is, a proven, reliable, economical car that offers a balance between good ride quality and handling. You will see spike in sales of Civic just as soon as price of gasoline creeps up. That’s the kind of reputation the car has and there is no point changing that. And this addresses the last point in your post…

None of those consumer aspects of the car say all that much about the car itself.
I think it does in this case. People buy a Civic because it is a Civic. It was never meant to be a lifestyle vehicle, to be exclusive and different. A lifestyle vehicle makes a splash like Jetta did in the late 90s. But style can last only for so long.

Speaking of sales, Mazda3 is on pace to beat the sales of Protégé from a year ago. At this point last year (thru July), Mazda had sold 43K units of Protégé and has sold 48K units of 3. I don’t expect Mazda3 to be the sales (volume) success that Civic and Corolla are, for couple of reasons. Mazda isn’t a big player, and for Ford, Focus might be the more important car in the class.

But, inventory turnaround numbers bring in a good perspective. At least it helps quiet the crowd that was claiming something quite different from what the reality is. It is amazing to see a quicker inventory turnaround on a higher volume car but somehow this aspect gets lost in our zest for flashy attitude

robertsmx

I guess the current Civic Si is a failure in that regard compared to the previous generation.
I’m not sure. How many Civic Si’s did Honda sell in 1999-2000 compared to 2002-2003? But, if Civic Si is all you can talk about, you’re talking about 15K units/year (or 5% of Civic sales) and ignoring the rest.

IMO, the current Civic Si is better than the old in a lot of ways. It has a better engine, better interior, better shifter, and better features. Heck, the 1999-2000 Civic Si didn’t even have ABS! The new Si has ABS with EBD. Couple of poor choices may have hurt the perception… tires and the decision to use the most docile iteration of the K20A possible coupled to extremely short gearing. Throw in 200 HP K20A and better tires, and Si/Si-R could have easily had the success it is having in CTR form in Europe.

I'll be Chevy sells more Z24 Cavaliers than Honda sells Si Civics. The sales numbers speak for themselves, the Cavalier must be better.
If more people are buying Cavalier Z24 for same price with manual transmission over Civic Si, I would acknowledge that it is more successful than Civic Si.

Civic Si, like most cars in the USA, would do better in terms of sales with available automatic. But, it isn’t something that the car is supposed to be about.

newcar31

"I’m not sure. How many Civic Si’s did Honda sell in 1999-2000 compared to 2002-2003? But, if Civic Si is all you can talk about, you’re talking about 15K units/year (or 5% of Civic sales) and ignoring the rest."

Why ignore the Civic Si? We're talking about areas where Honda's not doing so hot, and the Si is a good example.

I've already asked for sales figures for the previous generation and nobody said anything. I don't know.

What I do know is that when my friend bought one of the previous generation Si's in 2000, they weren't dealing at all on them. He had trouble finding one, let alone trying to pay less than MSRP. Around here, that generation Si was very popular.

ateixeira

One funny thing about those Civic sales figures is that sales tend to drop with the first year of each redesign, then build up in the next few years.

Strange. Must be a conservative bunch of buyers, averse to change.

-juice

robertsmx

Why ignore the Civic Si? We're talking about areas where Honda's not doing so hot, and the Si is a good example.

I kinda doubt Si has been ignored. Rather, it has been the focal point of much of the discussion. And this discussion isn’t just about failures, but where Honda stands as an automaker. So, you’ve got to cover the positives and the negatives to draw a conclusion, logically. At least, that’s how I would do it.

I've already asked for sales figures for the previous generation and nobody said anything. I don't know.

The way you had put it…
“I guess the current Civic Si is a failure in that regard compared to the previous generation”

I thought you had some information you could share with us. I have heard that the 1999-2000 Civic Si was popular, but I still don’t know how popular. And then, is sales an indicator of quality of a car. ;-)

robertsmx

Part of the equation could be slow down in the manufacturing process as the production switches from outgoing model to the new. But, thats just a guess. However, with the 2001 redesign, the sales went up to the second best ever level.

ateixeira

Did they add production from another manufacturing plant? That would explain it.

Maybe the first incentives, too.

-juice

newcar31

"I thought you had some information you could share with us."

I did share my information with you.

You couldn't get a deal on the previous generation Civic Si.

Now, with the new one, it seems like you can pick your color and negotiate.

Based on that, I'd say the old generation was more popular.

"And then, is sales an indicator of quality of a car. ;-)"

I'm not the one emphasizing sales figures. I brought up the Si to prove that sales figures alone don't tell you if the car is good or not. I wouldn't say the Si is a bad car at all, it just doesn't sell like a typical Honda or the previous generation Si.

driftracer

wasn't sitting on lots collecting dust. It was an MSRP car that people clamored to get. The newer one IS collecting dust, to a degree. I like both of them - different cars, different designs, different public reactions. The previous generation sold every one there was, so to say Honda "only" sold xx,xxx 1999-2000 Sis makes no sense - they aren't like the collection of Aleros down at my local Buick/Olds dealer (Lansdale, PA), gathering dust, brakes all rusted, etc.

Someone made the comment about the earlier Si not having ABS. I'm sure some people have to have all the protection they can get, in their "chicken little", "the sky is falling" hand-wringing way of life, but this car was built for enthusiasts - people who race autocross and hillclimb events DON'T want ABS, traction control, and all those things that protect you from your own inability to drive...

The car was built for people who COULD drive, and took courses and practiced to improve their skills.

robertsmx

That’s supposed to be sales, not production. I believe NA Civic is sourced from Canada (my car is) or from East Liberty, OH. 2002-2004 Civic SI is the only import (from UK).

robertsmx

But if Honda was targeting 5000 units/year of Civic SI (1999 and 2000) and targeting 15000 units/year for 2002 thru 2004, that could make a difference. That said, I think 1999-2000 Civic SI was better received in the market because it inherited Honda genes in the power train department and more importantly, stuck with the more conservative coupe styling. HB styling have yet to make a mark in the USA.

newcar31

"But if Honda was targeting 5000 units/year of Civic SI (1999 and 2000) and targeting 15000 units/year for 2002 thru 2004, that could make a difference."

If they only sold 5000 units a year of the previous generation, how come I see way more of the older Si's than the new ones? The new Si has had an extra year of being on sale than the older one. The new one was sold 2002, 2003, and 2004, the old one was sold in 1999 and 2000.

newcar31

"stuck with the more conservative coupe styling. HB styling have yet to make a mark in the USA."

I don't even think that it's only because it's a hatchback.

Yes, it's a hatchback, but it's goofy looking on top of being a hatchback.

robertsmx

Someone made the comment about the earlier Si not having ABS. I'm sure some people have to have all the protection they can get, in their "chicken little", "the sky is falling" hand-wringing way of life, but this car was built for enthusiasts - people who race autocross and hillclimb events DON'T want ABS, traction control, and all those things that protect you from your own inability to drive...

True. I guess that was the point. If I were to dig down deeper, I could probably find my post here at Town Hall along the same lines that you suggested. I remember quoting Dodge Viper as an example back then, but people chose to bash the SI anyway.

But who is to say that perception or needs or wants work the way we think? Let us recap a little using road test from our very own Edmunds (I knew I had to find just one road test to illustrate it).

“Downs: : Power doesn't come on until 4000 rpm. Don't like the childish, red gauge markings. Where are the antilock brakes?
Base MSRP of Test Vehicle: $17,860

The Civic Si also gets bigger wheels, tires and brakes than regular Civics, giving the Si excellent grip and stopping power in most circumstances. We say most, however, because Honda chose not to equip the Civic Si with antilock brakes, an obvious misstep for an otherwise serious entrant into the entry-level sports car market.”

How does Honda respond? Chooses bigger engine to have more low-end power, revises interior completely (the greatest strength of the SI), added ABS/EBD.

OTOH, the tire size/selection was mediocre the MSRP went up by $1.2K (but so did features) and the Honda opted to go HB style (HB is the heaviest body style in Civic lineup, it used to be the lightest in the past). I’m not sure if importing from Europe plays a role in bumping up the price tag. But regardless, the improvements were masked by many other factors.

I see more aftermarket potential in the current Civic SI than I did in the old. But apparently, that’s not how a typical buyer is seeing it (at this point). Perhaps that will change in a few years.

robertsmx

Well, goofy or not, a car to an enthusiast is more than the looks of it. I admire the Nissan Skyline GT-R not for its looks, but for its qualities. What about you?

And then, there is form versus function aspect. More often than not, styling can affect one or the other aspect. The HB was designed for the European market where pedestrian safety is one of the measures. And with this styling, Civic became the first car to obtain 3 out of 4 stars in that regard, and high praise from the European agency. As for the rest of the styling, I see a lot of resemblance carried over from the old days (see a picture of 1992 Civic SI and 2002 Civic SI side by side, except for the front, the rest of the car is very similar).

driftracer

The Si (hatch) is HOT in every import tuner magazine there is - in fact, just like back in 2000 with the previous version, several magazines have done a "Civic Challenge", starting with the Si model and letting tuners go nuts, then "run what you brung" at a drag race/autocross event.

Some very nasty cars were brought, doing impressive stuff - one car had 374 hp at the wheels...running low 12s, and right at 1.0 g on the pad. Lots of aftermarket goodies for this one, and lots of following from enthusiasts - I just think it's going to be a used car rush instead of buying them new - the way they're being let go for cheap will certainly affect their used car pricing, much to the benefit of yound guys and girls looking for a hot hatch to play with.

robertsmx

I think so too. Didn’t the same happen with the CRX? Or were they a grand success out of the gate? I was too young to even think about driving back then, and too lazy now to investigate.

I have heard that the K20A is very responsive engine when it comes to modifications.

driftracer

count on 260-270 hp with a turbo kit...and it goes up from there - for a $15k budget (including the car) on a 1 year old Si, I could build a very nasty ride...

varmint

Mazda has about 850 retailers in the US. Honda has over 900. (Figures from a year or two back.) In the grand scheme of things, it's not a big difference.

ateixeira

Honda kills them in sales per dealer, they are not even on the same planet in that regard.

Also, 30 day supply is very tight, that's a seller's market. The industry standard is 60 days, so the Civic is in short supply.

-juice

varmint

There are dozens of factors that come into play when comparing sales figures. Having a larger number of dealer outlets is obviously one of them. But then there are also incentives, advertising budgets, and simply having a larger product line. Buyers will often wander in interested in looking at one vehicle, but leave the dealer with the keys to another. The more options you have on the sales floor, the more likely you are to attract these buyers. Then there are icon cars that sell based on their history. The Civic is one, the Mustang another, and the Explorer a third. Lastly there are production constraints.

Anyway, accounting for all of these variables is usually an impossible mess. It would appear that Honda's dealership advantage is moot, the use of incentives is matched, production capacity is not being stretched, and both companies have a similar number of offerings.

That leaves two possibilities.

1. The Civic is selling so well because it's an icon within its class, or...

2. The Civic is selling so well because it's a good car and people like it.

I don't think being an icon is enough to account for a 7 to 1 sales advantage. So the product has got to be part of the reason for the Civic's sales success.

newcar31

"I don't think being an icon is enough to account for a 7 to 1 sales advantage."

Tell that to GM. The Mustang outsold the Camaro and Firebird combined and the GM twins were arguably the better pony cars.

newcar31

I'm just curious.

If the Honda fans in here had to get a brand new small car (Civic, Corolla, Mazda3, Focus, etc.) tommorow, what would it be?

varmint

The Stang and Camaro essentially formed a two car class. The Civic competes with the Corrola (another icon of sorts) and a dozen other high volume vehicles. Different market. You see the same situation hppening with the Explorer, now that the mid-size SUV segment is getting crowded.

I think I've already answered your other question.

varmint Aug 30, 2004 1:39pm

anonymousposts

"If they only sold 5000 units a year of the previous generation, how come I see way more of the older Si's than the new ones? "

I think they sold more than 5000 99-00 Si's. I have looked for the exact numbers but they don't seem to be published, at least not where I can easily find them. However, it's worth noting that someone can easily "fake" a 99-00 Si while it's impossible to fake the 02-04.

"If the Honda fans in here had to get a brand new small car (Civic, Corolla, Mazda3, Focus, etc.) tommorow, what would it be?"

First off the list is the Focus. Nothing against it (I actually think the interior in the 05 is pretty nice) but I just can't quite switch to the Ford camp yet.

Next off would be the Corolla. I like the overal design (especially the S model) but the seating position is uncomfortable for me and the equivalent of torture for my husband. I'm also not crazy of the texture of the plastics. And there's the whole semi-independent suspension hump that I can't get over.

That leaves the 3 and the Civic. I like the idea of the 3 but the driving position leaves something to be desired. I don't like the seat fabric and I am not sure it will age as well as the Civic has. Overall, it's a nice car and I can see why people would buy one but it's just not for me.

So by process of elimination I guess I would end up with a Civic. It has it's faults but it is the most comfortable for gee, has great crash tests, great gas mileage, and I like the wheels on the new EX models.

pzev

"...but I just can't quite switch to the Ford camp yet."

"I don't like the seat fabric and I am not sure it will age as well as the Civic has."

This is exactly what I said earlier. People aren't buying the Civic because it's the better product, they buy it because of the badge on the hood. As I said, slap a Ford badge on it and sales would drop like a rock. Put a Honda badge on the Focus and people would be all over it. Even Honda fans can't come out and say the Civic is the best small car because it's not. Give the Focus the Civic platform and the Civic the Focus platform and Honda fans would be frothing at the mouth and saying how great Honda is.

And look at the Accord. It's tops in absolutely nothing.

Fuel mileage: Malibu wins

Handling: Mazda6 wins

Power: Nissan Altima wins

Brakes: below a whole bunch of cars

Warranty: the lowest warranty

Standard Equipment: Not even close, steel wheels on a V6 coupe? Ridiculous.

Price: of course not

Reliability: Toyota and Buick wins

Crash scores: No better than the Camry

Like I originally said, Honda isn't anything special and with all the quality problems there's not much reason to pay more, get an ugly (IMO), worst warranty car that is not tops in anything. If you want a reliable car get a Toyota or Buick and be done with it.

gagrice

We do agree on this one. I don't like ABS or any electronic control of my vehicle, including the steering. One of the most fun to drive best handling cars I ever drove was an early 1980s Honda CRX. It was a blast to drive. It wasn't a Porsche 911 but my partner had just bought an Alfa GT-V6 and I out ran him all over the hills of Lake Havasu with that CRX. The newer Honda Civic's are not as much fun as that older CRX.

pzev

"Mazda has about 850 retailers in the US. Honda has over 900."

http://waw.wardsauto.com/ar/auto_us_promised_land/

"No major expansion is planned beyond the present 1,006 Honda dealers and 262 Acura dealers in the U.S."

http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/13/pf/autos/new_dealerships/

"By 2007, it hopes that half its approximately 700 dealerships will incorporate the new designs."

anonymousposts

I believe I said I would buy the Civic. It offers more of what I would want in a small car. That said I probably wouldn't buy any car that size now because we have a 5 month old son and all of the necessary supplies that come with him.

Gas mileage? Accord is one of the best
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm

Power? Accord is one of the best while still providing excellent gas mileage numbers
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_midinexp.htm

Crash tests? Accord is one of the best
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_midinexp.htm

Standard equipment? For $20,000 (carsdirect.com) you can get an Accord EX which comes with sunroof, cruise, CD changer, alloys, ABS with EBD, 4 wheel disc brakes, side airbags, etc.

Even more important, for 2005 ALL Accords from the $16,000 DX up have standard side airbags, side curtains, and ABS. Most families care more about safety than they do shiny round things.

Reliability? Okay, Toyota and Buick do better in tests. Even so, Honda is ahead of lots of makes. Mazda and Nissan included. So again, the Accord is one of the best.

Brakes? The stopping distance may be longer than others. At least you have class-leading safety features and crash tests to help you out in the even of a crash.

Warranty? This award goes to Hyundai. Does that mean that Hyundai makes the best car in the segment?

You see, the Accord's claim to fame has never been excelling in any one area but when you look at the big picture the Accord is at or near the top in every category.

Edmunds agrees although they do think the brakes could be stronger.

"as an overall package, the seventh-generation Accord is the best one Honda has ever offered"

"Judging by the numbers, it's readily apparent that the Accord had few weaknesses. It earned the top score on editors' 23-point evaluations, and our test car came standard with nine of the 12 features that we consider most important in a family sedan. It didn't fare too badly in instrumented testing, either, as its smooth and potent V6 engine earned it the second-fastest 0-to-60-mph (7.5 seconds) and quarter-mile (15.7 seconds) acceleration times. Its braking performance was much less impressive, however, and we'd like to see Honda fit its sedan with a more powerful set of brakes."

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/101056/page019- .html

So if you want the car with the highest HP rating, buy an Altima. If you want to hug corners all day buy a 6. If you want to run around slamming on your brakes then buy a Sebring. If you want the cheapest car buy a Sonata. If you want the most standard equipment buy a Passat. If you want some of everything then buy the Accord. I know I did and I haven't regretted it for a second.

grbeck

According to another website, which per Edmunds.com policy shall remain nameless, the wishbone front suspension will not return on the 2006 Civic. The suspension will be extensively reworked, however, to improve handling and reduce bump steer.

The engines may also feature direct injection, as Honda wants to improve performance AND economy, which is line with its corporate "green" image.

The Civic is also expected to move upmarket, in resposne to the debut of the smaller, cheaper Honda.

If all of this is true, it sounds as though Honda IS paying attention to the Mazda3.

robertsmx

If those things happen to Civic, it would be the direction that Honda has given Accord since MY1998. Accord has consistently received features and power upgrades (with improvement in fuel economy). Very little was done in MY2001 redesign for Civic. MY2006 may be the time.

birdman579

One of the main reasons that the Civic outsells the 3 by such a wide margin is brand recognition. I've met so many people that have no idea what the Mazda3 is. The zoom zoom advertising helps, but its not a household name like the Civic. I've talked to several friends who were car shopping and they didn't even consider the 3 and bought a Civic. Its not because they think the Civic is better, they've just always bought Hondas and they trust them and didn't think to consider looking at Mazda. The same can be said for GM cars. I can't think of single GM car except maybe the Corvette that I want to purchase. People buy GM cars because they always have. There's not that same type of attitude with Mazda or Nissan or Subaru. Its the diehard car fans that drive all the cars in the segment and buy the best one, typically not a Honda. The same people that buy Hondas, typically buy Silver cars, boring cars for boring people. Enough rambling, the 3 is still the best small car by far.

talon95

"Its the diehard car fans that drive all the cars in the segment and buy the best one, typically not a Honda."

IYHO.

Contrary to your position, it's amazing how Hondas almost always land at or near the top of every comparison test. For example, the Accord was the top rated car in its class according to enthusiast mags like Motor Trend, Car and Driver and Road and Track, web sites like Edmunds, and consumer mags like Consumer Reports.

"The same people that buy Hondas, typically buy Silver cars, boring cars for boring people."

That's as opposed to boring people who have deluded themselves into thinking that their choice of car has made them exciting. Of course, nobody else is fooled.

I for one am grateful for the fact that I have enough self-assurance that I can buy a car that does what I want, rather than feeling compelled to define myself by the car I purchase.

robertsmx

A CarConnection Review of 2005 Odyssey

In a recent minivan comparison test in Car and Driver the old 2004 Odyssey was rated as the best minivan, defeating brand new offerings from four other manufacturers. Certainly when it was first introduced in 1995 the Odyssey did not fare well. But the entirely new model launched in 1999 shot to the top of the class as the best minivan on the market. For it to still be regarded as the best four years later when all its competitors have introduced supposedly new and improved models is almost unheard of.

One could forgive Honda if it too introduced a lightly revised Odyssey with just a handful of changes and called it new. Instead it has totally revamped the 2005 model making a myriad of changes to "maintain its leadership as the benchmark minivan."

synpthesis

an incredibly reliable and pretty fast 91 Accord 5MT soon. Every time I try to convince myself to like the current model I turn back in amazement. Why did Honda have to 'dumb down' the car for the sake of the TSX? Sales are very good for the Accord and they seem to have lured over the 'Buick crowd' but try as I might I cannot fathom the logic in the re-design for the young fun-to-drive guys. If the Civic rumors are to be believed then maybe Honda has started to dance to a different beat.

blueiedgod

I guess I could chime in as well, I think one of Honda's strong points has always been maintaining the name. The Civic and Accord names have been around since the early 70's. So, if someone had a used Civic or Accord and they liked it, they would undoubtly go back and buy a new Civic or Accord. Mazda has had 3 name changes that I lived through, 323, Protege, Mazda3. Yes, an enthusiast will probably see that they are just the names, but to majority of people all these name changes are confusing.

Like people said before me, Honda does not excell at just one, but rather is better at all aspects.

And by the way, the V6 coupe comes standard with Alloys.

Ford Focus is a good car, but the good oen is not sold here, we get the dummified, american rendition of the Focus. Drive Volvo S40/Mazda 3 and see what true Focus is capable of.

Yes, Honda may not make eye candy cars. But, truely, what is better a good looking car that drives like crap or a decent looking car that drives like a charm and provides comfort and years of service?
Hunday Tiburon is a very good looking car, but I would not buy it. Same for the VW Jetta. If Honda paid Pininnfarina to design the Accord, it owuld have been a good looking car, but would you pay $40K for an Accord?
Maserati Quadroporte is a family sedan with looks and perfomance, but I don't see Masrati selling 500,000 of them in a year, or 10 years.

Hondas are not as overpriced as people think. Since there are almost no options, you choose trims. If you compare the top of the line trim in every model (EX, Si, or Type S) with comparably equipped Ford, Mazda, Toyota, Nissan and even Hyundai, you will see that Honda's price is right on the money, or even bellow competition.

npaladin2000

"Yes, Honda may not make eye candy cars. But, truely, what is better a good looking car that drives like crap or a decent looking car that drives like a charm and provides comfort and years of service?"

Honestly, here in the land of shallow superficialness, people will put up with a good looking car that drives like crap because impressing other people is more important to them.

blueiedgod

I guess, you are right. Plastic surgeons make a killing fixing people's looks, which were decent to begin with. Why did I think it would be different with cars?

robertsmx

Which automaker wouldn’t be interested in attracting buyers otherwise dedicated to another badge? They’ve got a product that’s getting positive attention! As long as it doesn’t quickly add to the average age of a buyer, why not? As long as they can make money from selling products, why not?

newcar31

"If Honda paid Pininnfarina to design the Accord, it owuld have been a good looking car, but would you pay $40K for an Accord?"

LOL! You don't need to spend $40K to get a decent looking sedan.

In my opinion, the Camry, Altima, Passat, Mazda6, and Legacy are worthy comepetitors to the Accord and they're all better looking and none of them will cost you $40K.

ateixeira

Funny thing is you find the best Italian designers doing cheap Korean cars nowadays.

Guigiaro penned the Daewoo Leganza, which was a sharp looking sedan (too bad the hardward didn't match the looks).

-juice

anonymousposts

I think the Accord is better looking than the 6, Legacy Altima, and Camry. Now the Passat is nice, I'll give you that.