Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Has Honda's run - run out?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Could it be a coincidence that there is no more SVT Focus?
I don't think they are there yet, though. Tribute doesn't handle any better than Escape. MPV would need more power. Miata needs to lose weight or gain power, or both. The 3 delivers and the 6 is getting the MPS version soon, so that's a start.
Isuzu for GM, I'm not sure. Isuzu's expertise was with trucks and diesels. That's exactly what they got from them - Colorado/Canyon and the Duramax.
Perhaps GM could have used Isuzu on the truck side and Suzuki on the car side. But they're fixated on costs alone.
-juice
GM’s sales between car and light truck have basically swapped positions in a decade:
1993
Cars: 2.91 million (60% of total sales)
Light Trucks: 1.96 million
2003
Cars: 1.75 million
Light Trucks: 2.76 million (61% of total sales)
Nissan came closest so far, we'll see. The next Tundra will get bigger. Honda seems to be aiming low in terms of volume, though.
-juice
For Acura, RSX should receive a makeover, and RDX is due for launch next year as well. So, some growth potential is there as well.
Eventually, Honda will have to take its pickup offering in another direction. Ridgeline may be just the beginning. And if Ridgeline succeeds, it could have other automakers like Ford think about offering similar products (like Falcon Ute in Australia) that are more car-like pickups than body-on-frame design. Pretty much like the trend that Rav4 and CR-V started in 1996-1997. And if that happens, it will play in Honda's favor (again). If it doesn't it won't be a complete loss since Ridgeline is a low volume product based directly off Pilot! No major investment involved.
But I think the Ridgeline is a temporary fix. I don't see Honda getting into ladder frames and direct competition with the likes of the F-150 and Silverado crowd. But I do anticipate that this truck is just an example of what they can do now, while they bolster their capacity to do something a bit more heavy duty in the future. In short, the next generation Ridgeline is probably what they are aiming for.
I have figured it out well. If 200 HP is good enough power level is good for you, Accord V6 will deliver it to you at just 5000 rpm. You would have to rev higher to get the same from Malibu’s 3.5/V6 (5600 rpm) and Ford’s 3.0/V6 (5750 rpm).
Bzzt. Sorry...
According to GM the 3500 V6 gets 220hp@5200 rpm and 220 pound feet of torque @ 4400 rpm.
According to Honda the Accord gets 240hp @ 6250 rpm and 212 pound feet of torque at 5000 rpm.
So horsepower wise, you don't need to rev the Malibu any higher. As far as torque is concerned, (which is what most people feel), the malibu has more of it, and at a lower RPM. So technically you would have to rev the Accord more.
I have first hand experience. My wife has a TL. And like in my previous thread, if you want to pass a car on the highway, you need to rev it past 4500 RPM in order to have any kind of power, which means you need to drop to 2nd gear. My GTP, just dropping out of overdrive is sufficient to pass someone. You said the GTP and Accord both have 240hp, so you dismissed it. But look at the torque numbers. The Accord has 212 pound feet at 5000RPM. According to GM, the GTP has 280 pound feet at only 3600 RPM. This is why I don't need to drop gears to pass on the freeway.
The Vette/GTO are similar. 405 pound feet at only 4400 rpm. You don't need to drop gears to move this thing.
These are midsize grocery-getter kid-hauler cars people! It would be one thing if you were talking about sport sedans at least. But that is not the primary purpose of any of them. And when you are just loafing from stoplight to stoplight on the way to and from work or the grocery store, my guess is the Accord will trump the GTP for fuel economy every time.
Now of course, it is no problem if you are the type to lay into the gas very frequently. But there are cars much better suited to your purpose out there that can haul five people and are also sport sedans. The Malibu, the Accord, and even IMHO the GTP, aren't among them. Well, possibly the GTP, but in that case much of this debate has been of apples and oranges.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
One thing to keep in mind... discussing peak torque figures and comparing the RPM at which they occur can be misleading. It makes it sound like the only RPM level at which usable torque is available is peak RPM. I can't speak for the Malibu or GTP, but I just looked at the torque curve for the Accord V6 AT, and it's quite flat. So while the torque peak is at 5000 RPM, the Accord V6 actually reaches 91% of its peak torque at only 2500 RPM, and 98% of its peak torque at 3500 RPM. It's all the way up to 99% at 4000 RPM.
So it's not as if you have to get into that 5000 RPM range to get any usable torque... almost all of it is available at much lower RPM.
As for downshifting to pass on the highway, when comparing a TL and GTP...
Let's assume that the TL has a 5-speed AT and the GTP a 4-speed (have to guess here because you didn't specify model years). Both 4th and 5th gear in the TL are overdrive gears, with the TL's 4th gear being roughly the same gear ratio as the GTP's only overdrive gear. The TL would have to downshift one gear just to get the same gear ratio as the GTP's overdrive gear. And the TL would have to downshift 2 gears to get the same gear ratio as the GTP would get by downshifting one gear. So while the TL may be shifting more, the difference isn't all because of the available torque... the transmission design also plays a part.
I have a 2003 Accord V6, and IMO, it has lots of passing grunt on the highway when it shifts down to third gear. This is not to say that the GTP doesn't have more... I can't speak to that, never having driven one. With the supercharger, it's probably safe to say that it does have more.
Now, if you care about low end power only, obviously you don’t care for high power. In that case, a diesel is all that you really need. However, regardless of how much torque you’ve got on hand, in city driving, you’re unlikely to go past 3000 rpm so a miniscule difference in low end power isn’t going to make a difference. And thrust is compensated for by gearing. Don’t believe me? Check out the gearing.
According to GM, the GTP has 280 pound feet at only 3600 RPM. This is why I don't need to drop gears to pass on the freeway
But it drops gears to pass on the freeway. It has to, since it is geared tall.
The Vette/GTO are similar. 405 pound feet at only 4400 rpm. You don't need to drop gears to move this thing.
Don’t be fooled by engine torque without considering gearing. A vette is capable of near 10 second acceleration from 50 to 70 mph if you don’t drop the gears. Do you think that is good enough to “move” you?
me: exactly what I was trying to say (for a car the size of an Accord). An S2000 can be a sports car with a small displacement engine because of its size.
To buy an Accord or Civic, or Mazda 6, or Camry V-6, Malibu, or Ford 500 and be concerned whether your car has 220hp or 240hp at 6000 or 7000 rpm is not significantly different these days. None of them are performance or sports cars, relative to the crop of 2005 performance and sports cars on the road. It's like discussing the hitting prowess of baseball pitchers.
Instead of all the focus on having larger engines to make more hp, the focus should be on keeping the power the same, reducing the size slightly, and saving fuel with these types of cars.
Comfort, style, room, options, fuel economy, price, and repair history are all reasonable attributes to discuss when buying a $25K sedan. 200hp is plenty to achieve their task of Pt. A to Pt. B travel. If you want performance/power the conversation would be Mustangs, Vettes, WRX STi's.
Or if you want to talk performance Hondas, there's a plethora of aftermarket parts to do so.
I see you live in South America. Yeah I have heard Suzuki is pretty popular there. Isuzu is also popular there from what I heard. I never considered Mazda mass market. I always considered them a Japanese Chrysler(a company that has good exterior styling idea's but just can't breakthrough Honda and Toyota's shadow sort of like Chrysler can't eclipse GM and Ford.)
I can see the White House right now, from my windows. Hi George!
-juice
First off on Mazda sales figures Mazda sales 1998 and up have been up every year except for 2002. Basically with exception of 1998 the 1999-2003 Protege, 2002-2003 Protege 5 and now the new Mazda 3 have been a key to their sales resurgance in the Us in the past 5-6 years. I believe 1994 was Mazda's best selling year in the US with 380,000 units sold. Mazda's worst selling year in the 90's in the US was 1997 when they sold 215,000 cars. Mazda's best selling year since 1996 was 2001 when they sold 269,000 cars. I think they are on pace to at least 260,000 units this year in the Us at its least up from 258,000 units last year and the year before. Mazda's is definately a brand thats trying to reastablish its glory days of the late 80's/early 90's. Mazda's market share was around 2.5-2.9% range in the late 80's/early 90's. Now its 1.6% currently.
"Subaru is a smaller player than Mazda, and although I don't have a YTD number for it, Subaru sold a total of 13.8K units compardd to Mazda's 17.6K units in November."
As for Subaru they have sold 168,000 cars in the US this year. Last year at this time they sold 171,00 cars in the US so they need a big December month to outgain last years YTD sales totals. I have not seen very many 05 Legacy's on the road. As a matter fact I see more 05 Volvo S40's than I see 05 Legacy's.
And you consider Mazda mass-market?
Legacy was redesigned this year and supply was slow at first, but now that they're in full swing they've had a couple of strong months in the fall.
Outback is still their big seller, though.
-juice
I'm not talking about sales volume, I'm talking about the markets they target with their product.
Here's what I'd call mainstream for each segment:
Small: in-line 4 cylinder, FWD, 4 doors.
Mid-size, I4 or V6 optional, FWD, 4 doors.
SUV: I4 or V6, FWD or AWD, 5 doors.
Minivan: V6, FWD, sliding doors.
In each segment Mazda matches the same "formula" as all the mass market manufacturers.
That is why I do not see them as a niche manufacturer.
Compare to Subaru - boxer engines with AWD and wagon bodystyles. Best seller in small cars is the Outback Sport, mid-size is the Outback, and they don't even have a van. For SUVs the Forester uses a turbo instead of the mass market norm - a V6 - and it doesn't come in FWD.
Totally quirky, they do not choose to compete in one single "conventional" class.
-juice
Accord and Civic became mass market vehicles at different points. The 3rd generation or 4th generation Accord(86-89, 90-93)was when the Accord became popular. Basically the Accord was "niche" until the 86 or 90 models came out(pick your poisin on that one.) The Civic became mass market when the 96 model came out but I think the Chevy Cavilier outsold the Civic in 96. I think from 1997 to 2002 the Civic was the best selling compact car selling car in the US. The Cavilier had a brand new bodystyle for 96 even though the platform was about 15 years old. Interestingly enough I was looking at Road and Track a couple years ago and they had a list comparing the best selling vehicles versus Model Years 1993 to 2003. In 1993 the Civic was 21st best selling car in the US. Meanwhile Accord became flatout mainstream in 1997-1998. I'm not saying 1998 Accord is a bad looking car or anything. I'm just saying its a mainstream car.
I was hoping that the Mazda3 would be a big hit. I like them, and I think they bring a real touch of class to the small car market. They really seemed to raise the bar, showing that a small car could look upscale and not be bargain basement.
The Mazda6 is about half a size class behind the likes of the Accord, Camry, and Altima, straddling the line between intermediate and compact. It's great as a sporty alternative to those other cars, as long as you don't need to put adults in the back seat on a regular basis. So as a sporty car at the lower end of the midsized spectrum, it carves out a niche for itself, but it's not big enough yet to play with the real heavy hitters in the midsized arena.
The 3 is their best seller. Its one of the class leaders. I think the things that kill the current 6 are it doesn't compete in interior room with the Japanese Big 3 mid-size offerings, its too close to Mazda 3S in terms of packaging(the 6i model anyway.) It looks better than the Accord or Camry but looks in the mid-size category are not enough to get away with unless you are VW. The packaging its just not there for the 6 to penetrate the market. The Tribute I like it. The reason it doesn't well is in its 5th year of bodystyle and it shares DNA with the Ford Escape. The Escape itself is a good seller. I think Ford unlike Mazda can sell Escape' because they have huge brand loyalty. Mazda doesn't have huge brand loyalty. Mayself would by a Mazda 6 but I always buy models before they get their death cerificate: the last generation 626 and the Acura CL. I don't know why I buy models that don't sell. I haven't figured that one out yet.
Thank you for stating what I've been thinking all along. And making me look bad. ;-)
-juice
Saleswise, Accord gained steam almost immediately after launch (1976) and crossed 200K mark in 1983 (222,137). This was also the year when Accord’s production begain in Ohio. For Accord, the all time best year was 1990 with 417,179 units sold
"I was hoping that the Mazda 3 would be a big hit. I like them, they bring a real touch of class to the small car market. They really seemed to raise the bar, showing that a small car vould look upscale and not be a bargain basement".
The 3 has been a huge hit. So much so that they ran out of inventory and then then the natural diasters hit in Japan and from what I understand so they are having a hard time shipping 3's. Thats why sales for the 3 have declined for the last half of the year. Actually the 6 outsold the 3 for the first time(by 2,000 units I think)in months last month because I think in part because of lack of inventory for the 3 people took advantage of special deals on the 6. In NJ I;m sure they are a few leftover 04 3 hatchbacks left. On the 3 sedan they are no special deals.
I think when Mazda enlarges the 6 they can see big sales increaes. Mazda appeals to me because I am single. If I had kids and a family maybe I would go to Honda or Toyota if I needed a family car.
\
Whereas Toyota made the Corolla look like a baby Lexus(styling that is hated on Edmunds) took away the IRS, and left a carryover engine, and sales went through the roof. I don't know...Looks like the real world doesn't read Edmunds.
Not to mention, the Camry, which no one here bothers to mention, hass been the number one selling car out there(with rebates and fleet sales included of course). Honda is doing fine with the Accord and Civic. Mazda has a way to go before anyone is concerned about the 3 if the market keep buying the way they have been. Sporty doesn't seem to be the formula for breaking through.
MazdaSpeed models are great and all, but volume is too low to have a real impact on sales or image.
As Ford starts selling Fusions, the 6 needs clear distinction and I think sportiness is the way to go.
-juice
LOL! If that aint the truth, I don't know what is! :-)
andre: Mazda's sales are a big secret that only a select few are allowed to know. As a result, autosite does not list sales for any Mazda models.
gee's point above has an interesting corollary: Corolla sales soared with the advent of the new '03 model in Feb '02, and they never looked back. It was the first time in a while that Corolla easily trumped Civic in sales. They didn't do it with power, looks, or handling, that is for sure. But it is a solid package with good acceleration, ease of use, high seating position (lots of folks like this one), class-topping fuel efficiency and durability. Part of the problem the Civic designers must be facing right now as they are forced to finalize the '06 Civic makeover is how to successfully compete with that formula, while "sexying up" the car for all the Edmunds types and the glossy ads and numbers comparisons ("my horsepower is more than your horsepower, I am a quarter second quicker to 60", etc).
Tough job, being a car design engineer...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Well... I agree that the Mazda3 is a nice little car. It's probably the one I would buy. But what they've done with it is really nothing new. It's something of Japanese Jetta - a small car with extra features, style, and sport at a slightly higher price.
Civic VP gets it done at $15K. Not a huge difference, until you consider that to get side airbags, you pay $200 in Civic, but $2200 in Mazda3 since it is packaged with 16 inch rims and power options.
This is a reason why I consider Mazda3 to be a niche player. It is trying to appeal to fewer buyers, although its orientation is not much different from Civic or Corolla.
In other words, Mazda seems to be focusing on $18-19K price tag with Mazda3 as opposed to Honda and Toyota at couple of grand under. Remember, at $19K, Civic Si has been called "overpriced" by a lot of people.
"But the 3 hasn't been the all-time winner that you would think it would be. I know it is selling fine, but it's not like it's setting any records over the previous Protege."
"how well is the Mazda3 selling, anyway? I went to www.autosite.com, and for some reason they don't show the 3 at all."
Does someone have the sales numbers for the Mazda3? If so, does someone have worldwide sales numbers for the Mazda3?
5,000 over the Protege which had stopped selling by this time last year and was not having it's best year.
Why are we talking so much about Mazda? There's really no comparison in real word market stats. Time to really move on.
4,071 sold in November
70,662 sold in 2004 through November.
I understand that there were some supply problems in the past. I wonder if they're still having them, because most of the competition is trouncing them in unit sales.
(All approximate)
Mazda3 outsold by:
Civic 5:1
Corolla 4:1
Cavalier 3:1
Focus 2.5:1
PT Cruiser 2:1
Matrix 2:1
Elantra 2:1
Sentra 2:1
Neon 2:1
Jetta 1.5:1
The only cars in its class and/or size range that the 3 is outselling are the Spectra, Forenza, Impreza, New Beetle and Lancer.
That's too bad... it deserves better.
If they bring that car back, they should put in a V8, fat tires and diaper changing table on the trunk lid. Now that would sell, and take Honda to the "next level".
I thought it was selling better than those figures suggest. There seem to be quite a few on the road around here.
I would not compare a car that Mazda makes to a Toyota unless we are talking about a Scion TC vs a Mazda 3. As for the Civic its a good car but its not really an improvement over the 96-00 model. Would I like to see a great 06 Civic? Yes.
"In other words, Mazda seems to be focusing on 18K-19K price tag with Mazda 3 as opposed to Honda and Toyota at couple of grand under. Remember at 19K, Civic SI has been called "overpriced" by alot of people."
Which Civic SI the current one? The current one sold badly because the exterior styling did not appeal to the audience it was going for.
The car sold good for like the first 6 months and then they had the supply problem. Thats why the 3 has dropped off the face of the earth lately. I want to see how the 3 sells for the next year or so .
"Whereas Toyota made the Corolla look like a baby Lexus(styling that is hated on Edmunds) took away the IRS, and left a carryover engine, and sales went through the roof. I don't..looks like the real world doesn't read Edmunds."
As for the Corolla I could not buy one. The last one looked better to me as a matter of fact. I think People do read Edmunds but I think for purposes of only preparing to buy a new car.
"Not to mention, the Camry, which no one here bothers to mention, has been the number one selling car(with rebates and fleet sales included of course). Honda is doing fine with Accord and Civic. Mazda has a way to go before anyone is concerned about the 3 if the market keep buying the way they have been. Sporty doesn't seem to be the formula for breakthrough."
I think Toyota is a fine automaker. Their packaging of their cars is very good but thats where it stops for me. There is no styling. I just can't get past that aspect with them. That has been one of Toyota's main weak points for years: lack of spice in the exterior styling. Threy say they are going to focus more on exterior styling in the future and I hope they do.
The last sentence of your last post grabs me. Why? Because Nissan sells cars on sportiness. The Altima, and G35 sell on sportiness. The Altima is just like the MZ6: sporty in appearence. The exception being Altima has ample interior room where as the 6 doesn't. Thats the difference there. The Altima even sold good with that cheap interior from model years 2002-2004.
The supply problem seems to be regional and again has a lot to do with the option packages. Many areas of the country seem to have plenty of cars. The supply issue is hurting Mazda more in the other markets where the 3 turned out to be MUCH more popular.
Just like I said. People on Edmunds hate the give the Camry and Corolla no respect while the dealer lots are emptyin and the factory keeps on hummin'. I'll take the real world psying customer over the Edmunds "enthusiast" any day.
Corolla is the only car that is showing up with an unusual trend. It seems that there are 2-3 months with a spike in sales (compared to previous year) between months with average sales. This could be due to unloading of Corolla by Toyota to make it the best selling compact car in the USA. I’m guessing that fleet sales contribute to such spikes as is seen from time to time in sales of GM products like Impala or Ford’s Focus and Taurus. To put this in perspective, Corolla sales were up 3-4% 3 months ago, and for last two months, they have been up 23-24%. Let us see how it does in December.
If they bring that car back, they should put in a V8,
me: realistically a turbo 2.4 and AWD would be nice. A topless WRX STi. Sticker it under $30K.
I'm just glad that there are companies that cater to the Edmunds "enthusiast".
It would really suck if the only vehicles available were Camry and Corolla-like.
That's what I think too. Honda never had trouble selling the last Civic Si.
Corolla has a five-door hatch to count with its numbers, Civic has a two-door coupe and a 3-door hatch. Civic actually has more variants counted into its sales numbers. In fact, Civic also has a hybrid model that Corolla doesn't have. I would still say direct comparison of the numbers is fair, because two of Civics four variants sell in niche quantities (hybrid and hatch). Toyota never incentives the Corolla more than about $750 cash back, or 0% financing for three years. Honda offers special lease and value packages instead.
Having said all that, it looks like Civic will be maybe 25,000 units behind Corolla this year, because it is having a super-duper year, and with both well over 300K for the year, the difference is not significantly huge.
Whatever else Honda does with the Civic for '06, I re-e-e-ally hope they bring over the swoopy Civic 5-door from Europe and sell it here to compete with the MULTIPLE entries we now have in the sport hatch field. Matrix/Vibe, Spectra5, Mazda3, Elantra GT, Focus ZX5, and the list goes on.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Wonder if the Si will be in demand used, 3-4 years from now. Don't most Sport Compact folks buy them used and then tune them?
-juice
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)