Well, Acura Strategic Planning Expert, I hope you're wrong. I say even if they added AWD and $2K to the price, the TL will still be the value leader, because compared to everyone else's AWD model, the price spread will still be the same, if not more. But by not offering AWD, they risk losing potential customers to other brands.
BTW, you know what they say about an expert --- someone who knows more and more about less and less, until he knows everything about absolutely nothing. :P
Bodble2 : Commissioner - Global Automotive Strategic Planning and Marketing Authority
Yeah, I know the BMW is getting a boost. And you can bet the C35 (when it arrives) will have gobs of power. But look at how many copies BMW was able to sell with the current engines. It virtually matches sales of the X5. And even though the X3 is getting a new engine, I cannot imagine the RDX will offer less than 220 hp. So long as the base price is below $33K, that's really all it needs to be competitive.
I happen to like Acura's way of packaging one well equipped car and then making Nav the only option. Streamlining and economies of scale mean they can offer it all for far less than if you had to order a la carte.
Toyota is the exact opposite, you almost buy a chassis and then the wheels and engine are options. So they cover the widest range but you'd still have to custom order to get only what you wanted.
I believe Acura needs high levels of content to compete. I suspect that both the X3 and CX35 will offer a slightly sportier driving experience. The BMW will have more fluid handling, and the Infiniti will have the advantage of raw power. That's just based on the general tendencies of the brands. To compete, Acura will have to load up the RDX and sell it at a very competitive price. That packaging will likely be the one area where it cleanly bests the others. It'll be the thing that gets a buyer's attention when they sit in the car. The strategy has worked very well for them in the low and mid-range of the market.
I hope Acura does continue the trend of offering only 2-3 trim lines: base, navigation and touring. I Like the fact that the vehicles come loaded and are priced competitively. However, if the RDX is on the CRV platform, it will likely have equipment similar to the TSX and an engine that might be underpowered for a bigger heavier vehicle.
Whatever happens Acura fans will still win with the planned redesign of the MDX in 2007. Although the MDX will be expensive it will probably have 300 HP the RL all-wheel drive system and other fine attributes.
I'd like to have a nice powerful yet smaller RDX in 2006 but am willing to wait and pay more for the top of the line if necessary. Pricing will be very interesting with all of the competition heating up hopefully this results in a great deal for consumers.
The current MDX has equipment that is more or less the equivalent of the 1999-2003 3.2TL. The dash is styled in a similar manner, the seats are similar, as are the materials. I've got a 2001 TL, so I've have some familiarity with it.
Giving the next generation MDX everything that the RL has (plus it's a bigger vehicle) would drive the price north of $50K. I don't think Acura would do that. I expect that the next generation MDX will continue to mirror the TL. The 2004 TL is a significant step up from the older model, so it would make sense for the new MDX.
Based on what I've been reading, the RDX is to be slotted below the TL in terms of performance, but it's implied that it will slot above the TSX. So I'm expecting the RDX to have more power than the TSX, but about the same level of creature comfort. That would allow it to slot between the two sedans.
Yeah, that MDX would likely cost too much. A Touring with Nav and DVD already runs low/mid $40s. The RL is around $50k but comes loaded.
MDX would give up a lot of volume if it moved up to that price class.
Acura would only do that if the RDX moved up to fill the gap left by the MDX, but I don't think an RDX priced in the high 30s/low 40s is to be expected.
So I think the MDX will move up only incrementally, and perhaps even without a price increase. RDX will have the sub $36k market to itself.
What is the latest news (or rumors) regarding the actual release date for the RDX? I am looking to get into a new mini SUV now and am wondering if it is worth the wait. Is there a consensus as to what the lowest expected starting price will be?
This may sound silly but we are about to purchase a Hyundai Tuscon LX 4WD (2.7L V6) for about 23K rather than wait. It actually comes with a lot of nice features but clearly isn't in the same territory as the upcoming RDX - on the other hand it will be 7-10K cheaper.
If you need a vehicle now, I don't think you should wait for the RD-X. Release date is likely a year away. And you really don't want to snap up the first one off the boat. So if you wait 6 - 9 months for teething issues to be ironed out, you'd be almost 2 years from getting behind the wheel.
About the Tucson, as much as Hyundai has improved the quality of their vehicles, I would get the CR-V rather than the Tucson any day. The '05 CR-V has all the safety gear that the Tucson has. Even though the Tucson has the V6, I don't think its performance is any better than the 4 in the CR-V. The CR-V engine is probably more refined. Also, with the CR-V, it would be easier to trade-up "within the family" to an RD-X in 2 or 3 years' time if the RD-X turns out to be a winner.
Another viable alternative is the '06 Forester, which will have 173 hp from its 4 cylinder engine. The Forester will likely be the sportiest of the non-lux compact SUVs.
A co-worker was up at the Honda plant in Ohio, making a pickup.. they made him wait for 20 minutes, because, "There is a prototype vehicle being unloaded, and the shipping dock is on lock-down."
The CR-V engine is probably more refined. Also, with the CR-V, it would be easier to trade-up "within the family" to an RD-X in 2 or 3 years' time if the RD-X turns out to be a winner.
The car is for my wife and she likes the look of the Hyundai Tuscon better than the CR-V. I also like the auto-stick feature - makes driving it a lot more fun. The fold-flat seats are nice too.
As far as the CR-V engine being more refined, I disagree. I have an '03 Accord with the same engine and it can be rough at idle, especially with the A/C on. The Hyundai V6 was very smooth.
We don't worry about trading up "within the family" as we usually sell our cars in the private market - you get a heck of a lot more that way. We also keep them a lot longer than 2-3 years at which point the resale value difference between the brands is much less significant. The 10 year/100K warrantee is also nice if you keep a car for a long time. If something is going to go wrong with a Honda it us unlikely to do so in the first 3yr/36K miles.
All that being said, it would be nice if I at least had the option of purchasing a more upscale mini-ute NOW. Thanks for your comments.
After reading your last post I would have to disagree with your logic... When everyone talks about Hyundai they talk about the warranty...Now I assume you have actually read the warranty and know what it actually covers...correct? I cannot see how you can compare the Tuscon with the CR-V...especially since the Tuscon is in it's first year of production...CR-V is a proven vehicle that is the most reliable on the market today...hands down. The last time I checked around I did not see to many Hyundai's (any models) with 200,000 plus miles... I will give you this though...Hyundai's are allot better than they have ever been but are still a long ways away from Honda! I have a couple of neighbors that have the Hyundai Sante Fe and boy let me tell you...nothing but problems...and the warranty....doesn't cover any of it...period. So don't let that warranty give you that false sense of security...The Tucson is a cute car if that's what your trying to get out of a car...but for me, I want something that is going to turnover everytime I go to turn the key...and that the only visits to the repair shop are for routine scheduled maintenance. And lastly...one that will retain its value down the road even if it is 10 years from now...check out all of the web sites/magazines and see how much each will be worth in 5 years....I don't know about you...but my pockets are not bottomless...and it doesn't matter if you trade or sell private party...the Honda will be thousands...(yes I said thousands more than a Hyundai) in retained value. You know what they say...to each his own...it's just that instead of being broke down on the side of the road I will be passing by in my Honda with a big fat smile on my face... Tell Hyundai I said hello... Just my thoughts... lol )
That's assuming the past predicts the future, i.e. no changes in the car world. Not very realistic.
Hyundai was near the top in JDP studies and the Sonata was CR's most reliable vehicle overall for 2004. The Santa Fe had some bugs early on but since then it's been reliable as well.
Don't dismiss the Koreans, they've figured out quality and now they're figuring out how to make their products lighter. Public perception lags years behind reality but once the public catches on they will thrive like the Japanese nameplates did in the 80s. Just watch.
The Koreans are coming...fast! But they are not there yet. My prediction is that in 5 years they will give the Japanese something to worry about. Right now they are mainly stealing sales away from the poor downtrodden American big 3, especially the General.
I will agree with you up to a certain point... The JDP studies you are referring to is for the first 90 days of ownership... I don't know about you...but to me, if you buy a new car you would think that if at least for the first 90 days of ownership you should not have a whole lot of problems. But let's look 3 plus years out...check out consumer reports, Inteli choice, etc... I have yet to see a Korean car make the list...again, they are improving, I just don't think it is at the same pace as you think...when they first brought their cars here they were like yugos (showing my age)...they were just nasty! I have read many things about these cars and none of them have been good...especially years after ownership...these cars a dime a dozen at auctions...because nobody wants them after they reach the age of 3 years old. It's almost like clock work...they really start falling apart after 3 years... Check out the 5 years of ownership costs stats and you will see what I am talking about! Hell, just getting past the first stat (depreciation) is very hurtful... In closing...when was the last time you seen a Honda broke down on the side of the road...be honest..not to many... I'll watch....but my wallet will be just that much fatter than yours with the money I saved on repairs, resale value, trade in value...the list goes on!
A new car purchase involves both financial and emotional considerations. Neither my wife (who the car is for) nor I like the way the CRV looks. The Tuscon is a much more attractive vehicle in our opinion. Additionally, I find the driver's seat of the CRV much less comfortable. I can't stand that stupid little arm rest in the CRV. We also like the interior quality and appearance of the Hyundai - feels like a nicer car from the inside. I also like the autostick feature of the Hyundai and the fold flat cargo floor - not available on the current CRV.
I purchase a vehicle to enjoy owning and driving it. I fully realize the CRV would cost less to own and operate over the life of the vehicle (from gas to resale). I have owned many Hondas in the past and most of been great, some have been lemons. We are going to give Hyundai a chance. We are not talking "bottomless pockets" amounts of money here. Both are pretty inexpensive cars to purchase, own and operate.
What type of problems has your friend had with the Santa Fe that are not covered under warrantee?
So yes, to each his own. I am glad you enjoy your Honda.
"Although juice may have a very fat wallet to begin with!"
I doubt it if he is going to buy a Hyundai !!!! Remember what they say..."you get what you pay for"....
When was the last time you seen an advertised cash rebate on a Honda/Acura? Never...period! They don't have to...the cars sell themselves... They may have factory to dealer incentives...but they are sure not advertised...and the only way to find them is by reading through outstanding websites like this one.
When the RDX comes out...which one do you thing will be better...the Tucson or the RDX...mmmmm tough decision on that one...
I don't know about you...but when I shell out good money for something...I want my money's worth now and in the future...regardless of how much that is. If I know ahead of time I will get allot more money back by buying a Honda product i.e. Honda/ Acura...then it seems like a no brainer! People buy houses to live in and hopefully make some big $$$ in the future off it... Although you don't make money off buying and selling cars as a private owner...but you can control how much you loose and that is by buying great products up front that are proven and passed the test of time...some companies have that rep (Honda/Acura) and some don't (Hyundai)... If I owned a Korean car...I would be a AAA member for life (tow package is good)!
I understand what you are saying about the Tucson...you say it is more attractive... or maybe cute is the better word...and yes emotions do get involved with buying a car...but something else needs to be involved also and that is what in the long run is going to be a better buy...all factors involved... Financial consideration you would thing would be the one factor that would shift your decision one way or the other...If you know that your going to buy a car that in three years time is going to spend more time up on the rack than on the road then where is your logic in saying the Tuscson is a better financial choice. If you read the many boards listed on this website then you would know of how many posts where people have written "bought the Hyundai...biggest mistake of my life!" In fact if you go over to the Accord postings there is one that was posted not to long ago from a lady who did just what you are going to do "Give Hyundai a chance" and she states it was the worse mistake of her life.
Autostick feature...c'mon you driving a mini-ute! Not a sports car...I would also like to know 3 years from now how often you actually used this feature?
I have 2 neigbors who own the Hyundai Sante Fe...they told me it was the warranty that peaked their interest in these vehicles...and they have been nothing but a big problem....42,000 miles later and the problems have mounted....serious electrical issues....seats that no longer work...slides are cracked and must be replaced (again...not covered under warranty) it is driven by a 5'3" Asian women, so it is not like there is a weight issue with the driver...she's maybe 110lbs after a 10 course meal!....over heating issues....thermostat issues....the problems just go on! Take a real close look at that warranty....the only thing it covers for 10 years is most INTERNAL LUBRICATED PARTS....everything else your out to lunch... So unless you burn a piston...throw a rod...burn a valve....everything else you pay for.....and to top it all of....blown head gasket...not considered an internal part...not covered! And how am I so involved with my neigbors car problems....it is because I have to pull out my Acura TSX to either jump start them or pick them up from the shop! In my opinion...if you are only going to keep the car for 3 years then maybe it might not be such a bad buy...but I hope you put allot of money down on it...because if you are like my neighbors and you try to sell and can't because they are so upside downs on these vehicles...$2K-$3K down isn't goint to cut it either....then I wish you a happy purchase....I'm all about enjoying the car we buy...but to me seeing it up on the lift at the shop all the time would steal from that enjoyment...don't you think?
I don't put a lot of faith in the IQ study either, but it's an indication that things are improving. When you put it together with longer-term data like CR's, then it means something.
Resale can be misleading, because they usually calculate that as a % of MSRP. But you don't pay MSRP. Too bad they don't tell us resale as a % of what you actually paid, eh?
Example, my cousin paid full MSRP for her Odyssey. She's happy, no regrets. It was $25k or so for an LX a couple of years ago.
A Sedona LX might MSRP for around $20k, but people are paying $15.8k if you follow the Sedona threads. Basically you get a much bigger discount up front, so you're not necessarily hurting as bad as you might think when you resell it.
In this example, if my cousin sells her Ody after 2 years and gets 18k, that sounds great, but the Sedona buyer would only have to get 9k to come out ahead, and they just might. Plus you have to factor the opportunity cost of that $10 grand.
So buy the Odyssey if you prefer it, that's the real reason to pick it.
BTW, I hear Honda ads for 0.9% financing all the time around here, they all do it.
My wallet is not fat - it's empty. We bought a condo at the beach last year. )
I'm a car nut and all, but I'm still practical when it comes down to it.
Great input... I however, respectfully disagree with your logic when it comes to pricing... First of all...I do not know anyone who would pay full MSRP for any vehicle...I don't care which vehicle we are talking about...this is strictly on the buyer...if you do your homework...spend a little time on this webpage...you can get any vehicle for invoice....so your logic there doesn't hold up....and even if it did why do you think the Sedona sells for so much under the MSRP? It's because those units don't move...it's all about supply and demand...as I am sure you know. What does financing have to to with cash rebates? Most people can get the same and better rates with their own bank...assuming you have decent credit...and if you don't Honda Corp. will not give you that rate to begin with. In other words...Honda does not offer cash back on it's vehicles because they don't have a problem selling them...i.e. 400,000 accords alone last year...now you can make the arguement that all you see on the roads are accords...but I wonder why that is? Could it be that Honda/Acuras have a proven track record...since day one! The Korean car companies do not...and one of them has been in the U.S. market for some time now...again, they are improving....just not in the same league as the Honda brand. Hope you enjoy your condo on the beach...just remember a couple of things...get out and actually enjoy the beach instead of just living on it...and I hope you have a garage for that vehicle of yours...metal and salt air don't mix...I don't care what kind of car it is! Cheers! )
It's the same as a rebate. Honda is ponying up for that. It may disguise the incentive a bit, but it's still an incentive.
Back then the Odys were selling for MSRP, in fact they had to order theirs and wait for several months. It was par for the course, I did check here on Edmunds back then.
The proven track record you talk about is exactly what Hyundai will have to establish, and I mentioned this earlier - public perception lags years behind reality. The Koreans are arriving. The public will really notice this 3-5 years from now.
Condo is on the bay side but her steel is galvanized and I wash it after a trip. We spent the last 2 weekends on the sand playing with the kids. Life is good. :-)
Any sense whether RDX or the CR-V will be the larger vehicle? If the past is any indication (ie MDX versus Pilot) the Honda will be the larger of the two. Any other thoughts?
I'd say the odds are pretty good. TOV's explanation for the old turbo four rumors makes sense, and has been corroborated by other sources. So that is highly doubtful.
A hybrid-only option is also unlikely. For the most part, Honda takes existing cars and makes them into a hybrid. I don't see them designing cars to be sold as a hybrid only. Not yet.
So a V6 seems like the most likely option, and the boys at TOV (who are pretty reliable) seem quite confident in the V6.
You might have to move to Europe, because as much as I'd like to see that as well, it's about as likely as winning the lottery without buying a ticket. ;-)
Sheesh... I can't keep up. TOV is now reporting that Honda has resolved the reliability and NVH issues they had with the turbo four powerplant. That possibility is back in play.
Dewey - The Diesel Accord is pretty nose heavy. While it would excel in fuel economy, the diesel will not handle like the car with a gas engine, it will not accelerate like the petrol, and it is not as clean as the gas burner, either.
A diesel Accord wagon should be able to out-handle an RDX. The accord has size and weight as an advantage!
I wouldn't be so sure. The RDX will have SH-AWD. While it certainly will be heavier, it will likely have better weight distribution. And, unlike the Accord, the RDX will be tuned for sport, not family use.
As for acceleration, the current CR-V with the 160 hp 2.4L I4 will easily match the 9.3 seconds your link is citing for the Diesel Accord. With a 5MT, the CR-V gets to 60mph in about 8.5 second. I think it's safe to say the RDX will improve on those numbers.
The rumors are stating that it's a 2.2L engine designed specifically for turbo application. For all we know, it could be a whole new engine family (though I think that's unlikely).
wouldn't be so sure. The RDX will have SH-AWD. While it certainly will be heavier, it will likely have better weight distribution
An RDX will cater to a very different buyer than a Honda diesel wagon.
Only time will tell which one is a better handler. Weight/size vs. better weight distribution?
A bigger torquey turbodiesel engine than the 2.2 has the potential to out pace 8.5 figure with ease. As I said I would rather trade-off performance vs. fuel efficieny. If I wanted performance/handling I have a whole slew of options among RWD cars instead!
Now what if the RDX has a v6 or a turbo gasoline 2.2l engine? The RDX will have impressive 0-60mph figures, indeed. But at what cost in terms of mpg?
My point is a Honda diesel wagon will provide a more "car-like feel" without a sacrifice in space/cargo and significant fuel savings at a reasonable price( versus the hefty hybrid price premiums) . At what price are these diesel advantages? A one second reduction in the 0-60 mph figure compared to an RDX! Not a bad price dont you think?
Almost the opposite feel, generally. Turbos have a little lag until they spool up, then in the boost they perform like a big engine.
Diesels have good torque off the line at low revs, then they tend to get wheezy and run out of steam at high rpm.
Newer powertrains, both kinds, lessen those weaknesses considerably.
FWIW, CR's 0-60 for the CR-V in this month's issue was a slow-ish 10.4 seconds. But they always get the slowest times. The diesel Liberty was slower IIRC.
Comments
BTW, you know what they say about an expert --- someone who knows more and more about less and less, until he knows everything about absolutely nothing. :P
Bodble2 : Commissioner - Global Automotive Strategic Planning and Marketing Authority
I find it incredible how some supposed sports cars/sedans weight in at 3700+ lbs. It's just crazy.
I find my Miata, at 2300 lbs, slightly overweight. Gimme an Elise and soon as used ones are affordable.
To me, weight matters more than HP, because it not only affects acceleration, but also braking and handling and fuel economy.
X3 does get a 3.0l base engine this fall. There's that moving target thing again...
-juice
You know how BMW is. Base price is $30k but you can't find one on the lot for less than $37k or so.
-juice
At least BMW provides you a choice---unlike Honda/Acura that loads most their cars with frilly featues that I myself find frivolous!
BUT I do realize that if the RDX was as minimally equiped as the X3, it would TURN OFF most Acura buyers who love their standardized gizmos.
Despite the fact that the RDX will compete with the X3, the type of buyers for each of these vehicles will be quite different.
Try saying that 5 times fast...
True Honda/Acura is a take it all or leave it, but the overall value undercuts the competition by a few grand on the comparable models. :shades:
I happen to like Acura's way of packaging one well equipped car and then making Nav the only option. Streamlining and economies of scale mean they can offer it all for far less than if you had to order a la carte.
Toyota is the exact opposite, you almost buy a chassis and then the wheels and engine are options. So they cover the widest range but you'd still have to custom order to get only what you wanted.
-juice
RDX = TL
RDX = TSX :confuse:
I hope Acura does continue the trend of offering only 2-3 trim lines: base, navigation and touring. I Like the fact that the vehicles come loaded and are priced competitively. However, if the RDX is on the CRV platform, it will likely have equipment similar to the TSX and an engine that might be underpowered for a bigger heavier vehicle.
Whatever happens Acura fans will still win with the planned redesign of the MDX in 2007. Although the MDX will be expensive it will probably have 300 HP the RL all-wheel drive system and other fine attributes.
I'd like to have a nice powerful yet smaller RDX in 2006 but am willing to wait and pay more for the top of the line if necessary. Pricing will be very interesting with all of the competition heating up hopefully this results in a great deal for consumers.
RDX = TSX
The current MDX has equipment that is more or less the equivalent of the 1999-2003 3.2TL. The dash is styled in a similar manner, the seats are similar, as are the materials. I've got a 2001 TL, so I've have some familiarity with it.
Giving the next generation MDX everything that the RL has (plus it's a bigger vehicle) would drive the price north of $50K. I don't think Acura would do that. I expect that the next generation MDX will continue to mirror the TL. The 2004 TL is a significant step up from the older model, so it would make sense for the new MDX.
Based on what I've been reading, the RDX is to be slotted below the TL in terms of performance, but it's implied that it will slot above the TSX. So I'm expecting the RDX to have more power than the TSX, but about the same level of creature comfort. That would allow it to slot between the two sedans.
MDX would give up a lot of volume if it moved up to that price class.
Acura would only do that if the RDX moved up to fill the gap left by the MDX, but I don't think an RDX priced in the high 30s/low 40s is to be expected.
So I think the MDX will move up only incrementally, and perhaps even without a price increase. RDX will have the sub $36k market to itself.
-juice
This may sound silly but we are about to purchase a Hyundai Tuscon LX 4WD (2.7L V6) for about 23K rather than wait. It actually comes with a lot of nice features but clearly isn't in the same territory as the upcoming RDX - on the other hand it will be 7-10K cheaper.
About the Tucson, as much as Hyundai has improved the quality of their vehicles, I would get the CR-V rather than the Tucson any day. The '05 CR-V has all the safety gear that the Tucson has. Even though the Tucson has the V6, I don't think its performance is any better than the 4 in the CR-V. The CR-V engine is probably more refined. Also, with the CR-V, it would be easier to trade-up "within the family" to an RD-X in 2 or 3 years' time if the RD-X turns out to be a winner.
Another viable alternative is the '06 Forester, which will have 173 hp from its 4 cylinder engine. The Forester will likely be the sportiest of the non-lux compact SUVs.
Wouldn't you like to know what that was?
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
The car is for my wife and she likes the look of the Hyundai Tuscon better than the CR-V. I also like the auto-stick feature - makes driving it a lot more fun. The fold-flat seats are nice too.
As far as the CR-V engine being more refined, I disagree. I have an '03 Accord with the same engine and it can be rough at idle, especially with the A/C on. The Hyundai V6 was very smooth.
We don't worry about trading up "within the family" as we usually sell our cars in the private market - you get a heck of a lot more that way. We also keep them a lot longer than 2-3 years at which point the resale value difference between the brands is much less significant. The 10 year/100K warrantee is also nice if you keep a car for a long time. If something is going to go wrong with a Honda it us unlikely to do so in the first 3yr/36K miles.
All that being said, it would be nice if I at least had the option of purchasing a more upscale mini-ute NOW. Thanks for your comments.
Read up and I think ball park guesses range from $28k to mid $30s for starters, depending upon how it's equipped.
kyfdx: bet someone got a spy shot, let's keep our eyes peeled.
-juice
Congrats on the TSX.
-juice
After reading your last post I would have to disagree with your logic...
When everyone talks about Hyundai they talk about the warranty...Now I assume you have actually read the warranty and know what it actually covers...correct?
I cannot see how you can compare the Tuscon with the CR-V...especially since the Tuscon is in it's first year of production...CR-V is a proven vehicle that is the most reliable on the market today...hands down. The last time I checked around I did not see to many Hyundai's (any models) with 200,000 plus miles...
I will give you this though...Hyundai's are allot better than they have ever been but are still a long ways away from Honda! I have a couple of neighbors that have the Hyundai Sante Fe and boy let me tell you...nothing but problems...and the warranty....doesn't cover any of it...period. So don't let that warranty give you that false sense of security...The Tucson is a cute car if that's what your trying to get out of a car...but for me, I want something that is going to turnover everytime I go to turn the key...and that the only visits to the repair shop are for routine scheduled maintenance. And lastly...one that will retain its value down the road even if it is 10 years from now...check out all of the web sites/magazines and see how much each will be worth in 5 years....I don't know about you...but my pockets are not bottomless...and it doesn't matter if you trade or sell private party...the Honda will be thousands...(yes I said thousands more than a Hyundai) in retained value.
You know what they say...to each his own...it's just that instead of being broke down on the side of the road I will be passing by in my Honda with a big fat smile on my face...
Tell Hyundai I said hello...
Just my thoughts... lol
Hyundai was near the top in JDP studies and the Sonata was CR's most reliable vehicle overall for 2004. The Santa Fe had some bugs early on but since then it's been reliable as well.
Don't dismiss the Koreans, they've figured out quality and now they're figuring out how to make their products lighter. Public perception lags years behind reality but once the public catches on they will thrive like the Japanese nameplates did in the 80s. Just watch.
-juice
I will agree with you up to a certain point...
The JDP studies you are referring to is for the first 90 days of ownership...
I don't know about you...but to me, if you buy a new car you would think that if at least for the first 90 days of ownership you should not have a whole lot of problems.
But let's look 3 plus years out...check out consumer reports, Inteli choice, etc...
I have yet to see a Korean car make the list...again, they are improving, I just don't think it is at the same pace as you think...when they first brought their cars here they were like yugos (showing my age)...they were just nasty!
I have read many things about these cars and none of them have been good...especially years after ownership...these cars a dime a dozen at auctions...because nobody wants them after they reach the age of 3 years old.
It's almost like clock work...they really start falling apart after 3 years...
Check out the 5 years of ownership costs stats and you will see what I am talking about! Hell, just getting past the first stat (depreciation) is very hurtful...
In closing...when was the last time you seen a Honda broke down on the side of the road...be honest..not to many...
I'll watch....but my wallet will be just that much fatter than yours with the money I saved on repairs, resale value, trade in value...the list goes on!
Although juice may have a very fat wallet to begin with!
I purchase a vehicle to enjoy owning and driving it. I fully realize the CRV would cost less to own and operate over the life of the vehicle (from gas to resale). I have owned many Hondas in the past and most of been great, some have been lemons. We are going to give Hyundai a chance. We are not talking "bottomless pockets" amounts of money here. Both are pretty inexpensive cars to purchase, own and operate.
What type of problems has your friend had with the Santa Fe that are not covered under warrantee?
So yes, to each his own. I am glad you enjoy your Honda.
I doubt it if he is going to buy a Hyundai !!!!
Remember what they say..."you get what you pay for"....
When was the last time you seen an advertised cash rebate on a Honda/Acura?
Never...period! They don't have to...the cars sell themselves...
They may have factory to dealer incentives...but they are sure not advertised...and the only way to find them is by reading through outstanding websites like this one.
When the RDX comes out...which one do you thing will be better...the Tucson or the RDX...mmmmm tough decision on that one...
I don't know about you...but when I shell out good money for something...I want my money's worth now and in the future...regardless of how much that is.
If I know ahead of time I will get allot more money back by buying a Honda product i.e. Honda/ Acura...then it seems like a no brainer!
People buy houses to live in and hopefully make some big $$$ in the future off it...
Although you don't make money off buying and selling cars as a private owner...but you can control how much you loose and that is by buying great products up front that are proven and passed the test of time...some companies have that rep (Honda/Acura) and some don't (Hyundai)...
If I owned a Korean car...I would be a AAA member for life (tow package is good)!
I understand what you are saying about the Tucson...you say it is more attractive...
or maybe cute is the better word...and yes emotions do get involved with buying a car...but something else needs to be involved also and that is what in the long run is going to be a better buy...all factors involved...
Financial consideration you would thing would be the one factor that would shift your decision one way or the other...If you know that your going to buy a car that in three years time is going to spend more time up on the rack than on the road then where is your logic in saying the Tuscson is a better financial choice.
If you read the many boards listed on this website then you would know of how many posts where people have written "bought the Hyundai...biggest mistake of my life!" In fact if you go over to the Accord postings there is one that was posted not to long ago from a lady who did just what you are going to do "Give Hyundai a chance" and she states it was the worse mistake of her life.
Autostick feature...c'mon you driving a mini-ute! Not a sports car...I would also like to know 3 years from now how often you actually used this feature?
I have 2 neigbors who own the Hyundai Sante Fe...they told me it was the warranty that peaked their interest in these vehicles...and they have been nothing but a big problem....42,000 miles later and the problems have mounted....serious electrical issues....seats that no longer work...slides are cracked and must be replaced (again...not covered under warranty) it is driven by a 5'3" Asian women, so it is not like there is a weight issue with the driver...she's maybe 110lbs after a 10 course meal!....over heating issues....thermostat issues....the problems just go on! Take a real close look at that warranty....the only thing it covers for 10 years is most INTERNAL LUBRICATED PARTS....everything else your out to lunch...
So unless you burn a piston...throw a rod...burn a valve....everything else you pay for.....and to top it all of....blown head gasket...not considered an internal part...not covered! And how am I so involved with my neigbors car problems....it is because I have to pull out my Acura TSX to either jump start them or pick them up from the shop!
In my opinion...if you are only going to keep the car for 3 years then maybe it might not be such a bad buy...but I hope you put allot of money down on it...because if you are like my neighbors and you try to sell and can't because they are so upside downs on these vehicles...$2K-$3K down isn't goint to cut it either....then I wish you a happy purchase....I'm all about enjoying the car we buy...but to me seeing it up on the lift at the shop all the time would steal from that enjoyment...don't you think?
Resale can be misleading, because they usually calculate that as a % of MSRP. But you don't pay MSRP. Too bad they don't tell us resale as a % of what you actually paid, eh?
Example, my cousin paid full MSRP for her Odyssey. She's happy, no regrets. It was $25k or so for an LX a couple of years ago.
A Sedona LX might MSRP for around $20k, but people are paying $15.8k if you follow the Sedona threads. Basically you get a much bigger discount up front, so you're not necessarily hurting as bad as you might think when you resell it.
In this example, if my cousin sells her Ody after 2 years and gets 18k, that sounds great, but the Sedona buyer would only have to get 9k to come out ahead, and they just might. Plus you have to factor the opportunity cost of that $10 grand.
So buy the Odyssey if you prefer it, that's the real reason to pick it.
BTW, I hear Honda ads for 0.9% financing all the time around here, they all do it.
My wallet is not fat - it's empty. We bought a condo at the beach last year.
I'm a car nut and all, but I'm still practical when it comes down to it.
-juice
Great input...
I however, respectfully disagree with your logic when it comes to pricing...
First of all...I do not know anyone who would pay full MSRP for any vehicle...I don't care which vehicle we are talking about...this is strictly on the buyer...if you do your homework...spend a little time on this webpage...you can get any vehicle for invoice....so your logic there doesn't hold up....and even if it did why do you think the Sedona sells for so much under the MSRP? It's because those units don't move...it's all about supply and demand...as I am sure you know.
What does financing have to to with cash rebates? Most people can get the same and better rates with their own bank...assuming you have decent credit...and if you don't Honda Corp. will not give you that rate to begin with. In other words...Honda does not offer cash back on it's vehicles because they don't have a problem selling them...i.e. 400,000 accords alone last year...now you can make the arguement that all you see on the roads are accords...but I wonder why that is? Could it be that Honda/Acuras have a proven track record...since day one! The Korean car companies do not...and one of them has been in the U.S. market for some time now...again, they are improving....just not in the same league as the Honda brand.
Hope you enjoy your condo on the beach...just remember a couple of things...get out and actually enjoy the beach instead of just living on it...and I hope you have a garage for that vehicle of yours...metal and salt air don't mix...I don't care what kind of car it is!
Cheers!
Back then the Odys were selling for MSRP, in fact they had to order theirs and wait for several months. It was par for the course, I did check here on Edmunds back then.
The proven track record you talk about is exactly what Hyundai will have to establish, and I mentioned this earlier - public perception lags years behind reality. The Koreans are arriving. The public will really notice this 3-5 years from now.
Condo is on the bay side but her steel is galvanized and I wash it after a trip. We spent the last 2 weekends on the sand playing with the kids. Life is good. :-)
The auto budget is not so good. LOL
-juice
-juice
ksso
let me try again, what is the chance that this news is true?
ksso
V6 (60% chance)
4 turbo (30% chance)
4 + hybrid (10% chance)
I got the percentages by calculating the alignment of the moon with the planets and then SWAGing it. :-)
-juice
I'd say the odds are pretty good. TOV's explanation for the old turbo four rumors makes sense, and has been corroborated by other sources. So that is highly doubtful.
A hybrid-only option is also unlikely. For the most part, Honda takes existing cars and makes them into a hybrid. I don't see them designing cars to be sold as a hybrid only. Not yet.
So a V6 seems like the most likely option, and the boys at TOV (who are pretty reliable) seem quite confident in the V6.
courtesy of tov
I myself would rather drive a real wagon like the Accord estate wagon available in Europe( In my case it would be the diesel version)
-juice
Dewey - The Diesel Accord is pretty nose heavy. While it would excel in fuel economy, the diesel will not handle like the car with a gas engine, it will not accelerate like the petrol, and it is not as clean as the gas burner, either.
A diesel Accord wagon should be able to out-handle an RDX. The accord has size and weight as an advantage!
Emission regulations combined with lower sulphur in diesel in two years will make diesels quite clean.
Acceleration? Depends on the size of the engine! Personally my preference would be a slower 2.2l fuel efficient diesel(43.3 mpg combined hwy/city)
Here are the impressive Accord diesel specs:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/12/comparing_accor.html
According to Honda we will seeing their diesels here in 07(perfect timing for a new generation of Accords with diesel engines). I cant wait!!
A 2.4T would be nice. RD-X doesn't look to big/heavy.
-juice
I wouldn't be so sure. The RDX will have SH-AWD. While it certainly will be heavier, it will likely have better weight distribution. And, unlike the Accord, the RDX will be tuned for sport, not family use.
As for acceleration, the current CR-V with the 160 hp 2.4L I4 will easily match the 9.3 seconds your link is citing for the Diesel Accord. With a 5MT, the CR-V gets to 60mph in about 8.5 second. I think it's safe to say the RDX will improve on those numbers.
An RDX will cater to a very different buyer than a Honda diesel wagon.
Only time will tell which one is a better handler. Weight/size vs. better weight distribution?
A bigger torquey turbodiesel engine than the 2.2 has the potential to out pace 8.5 figure with ease. As I said I would rather trade-off performance vs. fuel efficieny. If I wanted performance/handling I have a whole slew of options among RWD cars instead!
Now what if the RDX has a v6 or a turbo gasoline 2.2l engine? The RDX will have impressive 0-60mph figures, indeed. But at what cost in terms of mpg?
My point is a Honda diesel wagon will provide a more "car-like feel" without a sacrifice in space/cargo and significant fuel savings at a reasonable price( versus the hefty hybrid price premiums) . At what price are these diesel advantages? A one second reduction in the 0-60 mph figure compared to an RDX! Not a bad price dont you think?
Diesels have good torque off the line at low revs, then they tend to get wheezy and run out of steam at high rpm.
Newer powertrains, both kinds, lessen those weaknesses considerably.
FWIW, CR's 0-60 for the CR-V in this month's issue was a slow-ish 10.4 seconds. But they always get the slowest times. The diesel Liberty was slower IIRC.
-juice