Now in the case of my Accord the fact that I was in somewhat of a hurry influenced what I could choose from. but I would have had to wait for the next model year at least to get a red Accord with a sunroof and a stick. The choices were black, white, silver, blue, green and gold. That's it.
I understand some of the choices Honda makes but the idea that you can't order in a basic color strikes me as extreme. It's not like they have to send the paint order to Japan. The car was built in Ohio. I'd have brought them the paint myself if I had to.
This, however, is nothing new. Those first Accord sedans in 1980 were only available in a couple of colors. The coupes were in a couple of other colors.
Comparing to GM, since the subject was brought up, this is one of the ways Honda keeps its costs lower (see? It's not all the UAW!). Fewer changes on the line equals less cost.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I'm trying to remember the name of the horrible orchid colored Civics that they made from 1993-1995. I understand it was the number one choice in Hawaii. Go figure.
But they topped that in 2001 with Inca Gold! Talk about a HORRIBLE NO SALE color.
I think a coworkers of mine's mother ordered an 08 Accord from your dealership. She wanted a V6, so it is due in next month. It must be part of a future allotment.
A kid who works in my office bought kind of an odd car from you guys as well, a 98-02 (I don't know the year) EX 4cyl leather 5 speed sedan.
I understand some of the choices Honda makes but the idea that you can't order in a basic color strikes me as extreme.
Probably a deal killer for me even if they do get a diesel Pilot. I have inquiries at MB dealers in several parts of the USA. We want a 2007 ML320 CDI in Desert Silver Metallic, with Macadamia leather interior. It can be new or used. I cannot imagine buying a color I did not want in any vehicle. I did not know people were that desperate for certain cars to accept what the dealer has. I have flown 3000 miles to get the vehicle I want at the price I want.
I'm trying to remember the name of the horrible orchid colored Civics that they made from 1993-1995. I understand it was the number one choice in Hawaii. Go figure.
I believe it was Amethyst, but I could be wrong. It wasn't a bad color, my friend owned one in that color on a DX hatch. Metallic paint, IIRC.
Oh, I'd never buy a car in a color I didn't like no matter how good a deal was offered.
I obviously do buy ones where the color is acceptable but not my first choice. You do have to be able to make the distinction between the two and know where your point of tolerance is.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
For my wife and I, color is pretty far down the list of what is important. If ten colors are offered, we would probably be happy with at least three of four of them.
I'm with the others here, too. I mean, I won't accept purple, but I will accept others if need be.
My Accord is an example. Silver was pretty far down on my list. But out of the 2 dealers that even had a 6-speed sedan, they ONLY had silver. It did have a black interior, though, which was my first choice, and since that's where I spend all my time ... not to mention it IS just a lease. If I was buying, I woulnd't have accepted silver. (they didn't even produce my first choice, which was black on black ... for some reason, that was a coupe-only combination ... go figure.)
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I hear you. To me color has to be pretty awful to reject it out of hand. I have preferences, but as in the case where we got like our 6th choice it still wasn't that big a deal. It did take years before I could see that the dark green with the ivory interior (being Honda ivory is the only option with a green car)is a nice combination. I was to busy knowing ivory show dirt like mad.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I got stuck with Indigo Blue on my 1998 Suburban. I hit a deer with my truck and the choices were red, blue or black. I hate red and black so I took the blue. It is my last dark colored vehicle EVER. Way too much heat absorption. My first choice is usually white. I like pearl white a lot. It is too hot in CA for anything but a very light color.
Funny thing that. Certain colors that will do very well in some areas are complete dogs in other areas. The case of the black car in Florida is always the classic. Who wants a dark car in that heat?
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
That's my issue with the dark green car. Clean as a whistle it's a nice looking car - not as nice as black but nice. Put just a little dust on it and it's a mess.
I ended up in a silver van because of that. It never looked bad but it never looked stunning either.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Motor company? Sure. Car company? Well, they are in the hunt. It is always interesting to me that for years I've been told that Honda is too small to survive as an independent, yet when I think of good, successful, profitable companies I think of folks like Honda, BMW and Porsche, all of whom are smaller independent companies that make just fabulous cars.
Maybe smaller IS better...
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I would say that Honda can rightly lay claim to building the best "motor" (engines). I think it is a real stretch on their cars as a whole. They may be good appliance cars and reliable. There is a lot more to the driving experience than just getting to work and home again. I am assuming the title of the thread is referring to their engines only. No way are they the best auto company in the world. Half a dozen are ahead of them. In countries that are not restrictive like the USA, Honda is not in the top 10. Neither is Toyota.
The first post says we're talking about the best "auto" company in the world.
If it helps, think Ford Motor v General Motors v Honda Motors.
Everyone knows that Nissan makes the best car engine. The VQ has been in Ward's Top Ten for 13 years now. You can look it up. :shades: (Honda doesn't even have one in the top ten this year).
Seriously, you should send your resume to Honda. Maybe they would hire you to straighten things out.
You bet! Got contacts? I will start with a focus on valuing “A” customer, and passing the concept down to the dealerships and sales people.
You simply have to realize that not all people think like you do. What seems to be of utmost importance to YOU isn't at all important to MOST people. Honda does try to strike a balance and I think they do a pretty good job of that.
The problem with your assumptions is that I’m perfectly fine. To repeat myself (again), I want moon roof and leather in my car. I don’t care for MT any more (there is a reason I had a Prelude/MT for only six months or so). But I’m not someone who thinks that as long as my needs are being met, Honda is perfect. Why do I care?
I see a lot of potential in Honda, and want them to succeed. It is a company that deserves it. It is a shame to see it getting lambasted for things it can and is doing. And apparently, sales people are a part of the problem. To be honest with you, sales people don’t like me visiting their dealerships regardless of the brand. There is one guy I used to go by default at a Honda dealership. He no longer works there.
I'm sure they do worry about Honda cannabalizing sales from their Acura division so they have to make wise (to them, not to you) choices.
It is not wise of Honda to put itself in that situation to begin with.
You can't seem to understand this, but certain configurations of models simply do not sell well. I never said Honda couldn't care less about losing one customer but WHY would ANY car manufacturer build a model that would have very few takers. Don't you think they research the market?
Did they skip market research for Acura RL? Did they do it for 2003-2007 Accord, a generation that required TWO cosmetic changes to keep up when one MMC is the norm? I could go on, hopefully you got my point. I have a feeling that Infiniti EX is going to be more successful and better received than Acura RDX. And it won’t have anything to do with better product (I see it that way between Infiniti M and Acura RL, but the market doesn’t). Honda’s engineering rules but marketing sucks. That’s the reality.
Maybe if you had ever worked in marketing you might understand better and that is NOT a slam. I don't expect everybody to understand.
With Honda’s engineering capabilities, I could take a struggling model (CSX, sold only in Canada), and make it a huge success not only in Canada, but also in the USA. And yes, it will hurt TSX unless that car is changed substantially and that only exemplifies the problem in Hondadom.
Please don't bring up Acura when we are talking about Honda. I know next to nothing about them and have no response for you.
I guess you think Honda should produce every oddball configuration of car possible on the off chance SOMEONE just might buy it. For the LAST time, they are like any manufacturing company that tries to strike a balance and please the masses.
I can imagine salespeople not being happy when you visit. I can visualize a VERY creative test drive and bunches of questions even a veteran would have never heard before.
Honda is a VERY successful company. They build great cars but unfortunatly they will never be able to please everyone.
Yes, the Nissan VQ is a great engine, but Honda has both an I-4 and a V6 in the list over the past few years. The same can't be said for the 2.4L Nissan I-4. Nissan makes a nice V6, but a questionable I-4.
Re. the reference to Acura in the above post . . . the Acura brand has only been used in the USA, Canada, and Hong Kong since 1986, Mexico since 2004, China since 2006, and in Japan perhaps in 2010. Everywhere else in the world, it's marketed as a Honda, and in fact is a Honda.
Ward's criteria for defining a ten best engine is one of the greatest mysteries to me. And often they don't rate an engine.
I remember Honda S2000's F20C making the list. Surprisingly, couple of years later, RSX's engine replaced it. F20C is far more advanced engine than K20A that we saw in RSX. What was the logic? Only they can answer.
Honda's 3.0-liter V6 made the list in 2003 for boasting 80 HP/liter. A year or two later, Accord Hybrid's 3.0/V6 replaced it. Strangely enough, what criteria made Accord Hybrid's 3.0/V6 (a J-series engine) better than Accord's non-hybrid 3.0/V6 (a J-series engine) better than TL's 3.2/V6 (a J-series engine)? In 2005, I believe, Acura RL's 3.5/V6 (a J-series engine) replaced Accord Hybrid's.
I would love to know and analyze the criteria Ward's uses to put the engines in its list. It can't be refinement, NVH characteristics, fuel efficiency etc. They seem to rank engines based on cars as a package. But then, if they say VQ engine is a ten best, does that make is "any VQ"? Because with Honda's V6, they didn't say "J-series", they specified model (and even trim).
Until then, I would continue to consider it an extremely poor source to make a point about "best engines".
Acura is affecting Honda, and vice versa. And both are part of "American Honda Motor" company. If Accord is taking a back seat in some areas, do you not think it is due to its Acura siblings?
What you might consider an oddball configuration might be sensible for many. While it might make sense for a low volume car to not have many combinations, we're talking about one of the best selling cars in America.
And I am not talking purely configurations, instead getting the right things out of the gate. I’m not sure if you have kept up with my ramblings on Acura RDX. But, do you think it makes sense for it to have manually operated passenger side seats, or basic rear view mirror? Some say, and I tend to believe, that Honda keeps a few things out deliberately to add a thing or two virtually every year if not at MMC. And that is just WRONG way of doing business. These have become more mainstream features, and they have no place in an Acura.
I have done enough analysis myself to conclude that 5AT and 5MT are NOT the best choices with the 190 HP engine (EX/EX-L). Why provide people an impression of having more power when they can’t feel it? This is not to say that the engine isn’t making 190 HP, but people will question where the horses are. They already have. And that does not bode well for Honda. I bet quite a few customers are being lost (either by way of test drives or some never make it after reading magazines). This is the same problem that was noted in 2005 RL, and 2007 MDX. I can’t figure out why Honda is perfectly fine with this aspect of their drive train sitting under cons, yet they will go out and advertise HP.
Configuration is indeed another thing, When Honda added moon roof and alloy wheels to LXV6 in the previous generation, I started to wonder why they would do so. A lot of people shop based on perception, and often starts with base price. Why else do you see Lexus “offer” base ES350/RX350 with cloth seats?
In another board, a guy brought up that base Accord Coupe is over a grand more expensive than base Altima Coupe. That’s representative of a typical buyer. I helped him do the math, telling that Accord Coupe has quite a few things standard that are either packaged, or standalone options or not even available in base Altima Coupe. Get those packages, and the Nissan has a higher price tag.
Have we not seen that before? Think Acura RL again. I thought the RL was a great value, and is a great car. The market doesn’t. What went wrong? People thought it was too expensive. Honda went with one-size fits all mentality.
Could Honda sell more Accord V6 if they had LXV6 without EXV6 appointments and a lower price? You bet. But I feel, Honda thinks that those buyers might realize not needing extra power and will settle for LX-P, EX or EX-L. What if they don’t? Would it be too much to ask if Honda went with: DX (currently LX) LX (combine LX-P and EX) EX (the current EX-L) LXV6 (LX with V6) EXV6 (EX with V6)
I actually managed to cut down a trim! Honda could have made VCM standard only in EXV6 trim, and offered 6MT with LXV6 (non-VCM) even if it came in only silver and red. There are buyers, may be wrong, that will be wary of technologies like VCM. But do they have a choice other than moving over to a competitor?
It boggles my mind that a company like Honda cannot build to suit the customer. It is like going back 70 years in the automotive business. I know in 1985 you could order what you wanted from the Honda factory when they were being built in Japan. Are the US factories not capable of giving the customer what he wants? Sounds like that may have a lot to do with Honda losing market share to Toyota. Personally I think it is good. Now that GM & Ford are building good small cars it will give them the edge. This mass mentality may be good in Japan. I think it will fail as other automakers show they are as good or better than Honda. Add to that the Honda dealers arrogance and you have a formula for losing market share.
Why would that boggle your mind? Car companies get such few requests for special order cars. I think I can count on two fingers the times people have wanted something special..GM and Ford aren't going to do this either. Toyota sure doesn't do this.
Does this come off as "arrogance" to you. I hope not.
Toyota is more the anti-Honda on options, though. All sorts of crazy packages that you have to buy as a piece whether they make sense or not. Makes it very difficult to price a Honda and a Toyota head to head.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
No, the arrogance was my local dealer Tipton Honda. They would not let people test drive their Accord Hybrid. Their attitude was it is a Honda that should be good enough. My reaction. It is just another car. Nothing special. I tell you what I can order a new Mercedes any way I want it. Save enough money to fly over to Germany have a vacation. And have it delivered to my home. That is the kind of service I expect from any car company. You can rationalize having a couple different options with a take or leave it sales pitch. You would not sell a car to me. If I want leather and no NAV or sunroof, I will have it or go elsewhere. Too many car companies to accept that kind of crap from any of them.
Honda had offered the gray cloth interior with the Taffeta White Exterior and the separately controlled temperature for the driver and front passenger in the Odyssey LX.
I don't want the power sliding doors that are a major part of the price difference between the Odyssey LX and EX. The Honda instrument cluster, dash, and seats are much better designed than the Sienna's.
All Scions come one way from the factory no options at all. All the extras on Scions are dealer installed accessories and that is how Scion dealers make money with the "One Price Model."
The car it self might be on price with minimal profit but I can assure you they make a healthy profit on the accessories.
You are correct about going through a US dealer. You are also right about it meeting US standards. I was seriously considering an E320 CDI built in Germany. It was a slam dunk $7000 savings over the same vehicle bought in the USA. I was using an Alaska dealer with the car being picked up in San Diego. I changed my plans to the ML320 CDI and they are built in Mississippi. So I do not have the German delivery option. I can still get the car the way I want it. Unlike Honda where you get what Honda wants to sell you. Honda has proven you can condition the masses for poor choices.
I don't think you can call it that when a company simply decides not to build a car to everyone's liking.
So, buy a Mercedes instead if they will custom build a car for you! You will no doubt pay dearly but you will get exactly what you want so there you go!
You can't compare a maker of luxury only, at least in the US not true in the rest of the world, vehicles to a maker of mass market cars.
The average selling price for a new Mercedes in the US is probably close to 50,000 dollars. Nearly everything on a Mercedes is optional the only two companies that offer a more bewildering array of options are BMW and Porsche.
Just for example I had a customer cross shopping a LR3 vs a GL450. The GL450 starts about where a loaded LR3 tops out in the mid-upper 50k range. In order to get a GL with all the equipment a 55k LR3 comes with standard you have to pay close to 70k.
Its just business if it costs too much money to offer a few oddball combinations then a company won't do it. The tiny bit of business they lose to the people that want oddballs is more then made up for by not losing money making those oddballs.
All I am saying is the leading auto makers are regressing. You may think that 3 choices for an Accord are plenty. It may be fine for what you carry on your lot. There should be an option for those that may not want to be part of the cookie cutter world you service.
That's correct, but to the people who want these oddball cars, they don't consider them "oddballs" and they can't understand why they aren't more popular or why more people don't want them that way. They can't seem to understand that certain configurations colors, stickshifts, etc simply don't sell!
Then they think a company is arrogant when they won't build these cars!
Somebody here is wrong. According to Edmund's new car listings I can get EVERY model Accord Sedan from Value to EX-L V6 w/Navigation with a manual transmission. You say they don't offer them. Maybe someone should tell Edmund's.
Hondas are like the Scions in that way. You can option them up at the dealer. I wouldn't do that but you can.
It's pretty silly to me that a manual transmission is considered some oddball thing. I like Hondas a lot. I've had 5 of them. But if they won't sell me a six cylinder with a manual when the time comes for next car someone else will.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
who is the best motor company in the world??and why?
define best.
Best selling is not equal to best Quality / Best Technology. It is more likely Best Value.
In my humble opinion Honda makes the "best" engines in the world from 50cc single cylinder to their V6. as for the whole car itself, I found that a 1999 Accord interior was far superior to a 1999 Audi A4.
True enough. Probably Mazda and Nissan at the moment. I'd have to look around and see what else is there. As the current Accord only has 137K on it I don't anticipate worrying about it in the near future. Maybe by then I'll have changed on the manual. On the other hand, if I indeed have my mom's stick gene then it would be hopeless.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Comments
I understand some of the choices Honda makes but the idea that you can't order in a basic color strikes me as extreme. It's not like they have to send the paint order to Japan. The car was built in Ohio. I'd have brought them the paint myself if I had to.
This, however, is nothing new. Those first Accord sedans in 1980 were only available in a couple of colors. The coupes were in a couple of other colors.
Comparing to GM, since the subject was brought up, this is one of the ways Honda keeps its costs lower (see? It's not all the UAW!). Fewer changes on the line equals less cost.
But they topped that in 2001 with Inca Gold! Talk about a HORRIBLE NO SALE color.
I think they have learned some lessons.
A kid who works in my office bought kind of an odd car from you guys as well, a 98-02 (I don't know the year) EX 4cyl leather 5 speed sedan.
Probably a deal killer for me even if they do get a diesel Pilot. I have inquiries at MB dealers in several parts of the USA. We want a 2007 ML320 CDI in Desert Silver Metallic, with Macadamia leather interior. It can be new or used. I cannot imagine buying a color I did not want in any vehicle. I did not know people were that desperate for certain cars to accept what the dealer has. I have flown 3000 miles to get the vehicle I want at the price I want.
I believe it was Amethyst, but I could be wrong. It wasn't a bad color, my friend owned one in that color on a DX hatch. Metallic paint, IIRC.
I obviously do buy ones where the color is acceptable but not my first choice. You do have to be able to make the distinction between the two and know where your point of tolerance is.
For others, COLOR is the ONLY thing that matters.
I don't understand, but that's O.K.too...
That sorta bronzish yellow color? There's a coupe around here with that; I think it looks kinda nice in a boy racer sort of way.
My Accord is an example. Silver was pretty far down on my list. But out of the 2 dealers that even had a 6-speed sedan, they ONLY had silver. It did have a black interior, though, which was my first choice, and since that's where I spend all my time ... not to mention it IS just a lease. If I was buying, I woulnd't have accepted silver. (they didn't even produce my first choice, which was black on black ... for some reason, that was a coupe-only combination ... go figure.)
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
the answer is yes they are.
and yeah, inca gold was pretty awful. even worse on the si hatch!
I ended up in a silver van because of that. It never looked bad but it never looked stunning either.
Maybe smaller IS better...
If it helps, think Ford Motor v General Motors v Honda Motors.
Everyone knows that Nissan makes the best car engine. The VQ has been in Ward's Top Ten for 13 years now. You can look it up. :shades: (Honda doesn't even have one in the top ten this year).
OK let's give Honda the nod for the greenest car company. Not because fezo got a green Accord. :shades:
NASCAR only turns left too. :P
I try to avoid unprotected left turns as much as possible.
Returning full circle, the first post defined best in terms of sales. Lots of reasons not to go that way too.
You bet! Got contacts? I will start with a focus on valuing “A” customer, and passing the concept down to the dealerships and sales people.
You simply have to realize that not all people think like you do. What seems to be of utmost importance to YOU isn't at all important to MOST people. Honda does try to strike a balance and I think they do a pretty good job of that.
The problem with your assumptions is that I’m perfectly fine. To repeat myself (again), I want moon roof and leather in my car. I don’t care for MT any more (there is a reason I had a Prelude/MT for only six months or so). But I’m not someone who thinks that as long as my needs are being met, Honda is perfect. Why do I care?
I see a lot of potential in Honda, and want them to succeed. It is a company that deserves it. It is a shame to see it getting lambasted for things it can and is doing. And apparently, sales people are a part of the problem. To be honest with you, sales people don’t like me visiting their dealerships regardless of the brand. There is one guy I used to go by default at a Honda dealership. He no longer works there.
I'm sure they do worry about Honda cannabalizing sales from their Acura division so they have to make wise (to them, not to you) choices.
It is not wise of Honda to put itself in that situation to begin with.
You can't seem to understand this, but certain configurations of models simply do not sell well. I never said Honda couldn't care less about losing one customer but WHY would ANY car manufacturer build a model that would have very few takers. Don't you think they research the market?
Did they skip market research for Acura RL? Did they do it for 2003-2007 Accord, a generation that required TWO cosmetic changes to keep up when one MMC is the norm? I could go on, hopefully you got my point. I have a feeling that Infiniti EX is going to be more successful and better received than Acura RDX. And it won’t have anything to do with better product (I see it that way between Infiniti M and Acura RL, but the market doesn’t). Honda’s engineering rules but marketing sucks. That’s the reality.
Maybe if you had ever worked in marketing you might understand better and that is NOT a slam. I don't expect everybody to understand.
With Honda’s engineering capabilities, I could take a struggling model (CSX, sold only in Canada), and make it a huge success not only in Canada, but also in the USA. And yes, it will hurt TSX unless that car is changed substantially and that only exemplifies the problem in Hondadom.
A lot of potential getting wasted gets me.
I guess you think Honda should produce every oddball configuration of car possible on the off chance SOMEONE just might buy it. For the LAST time, they are like any manufacturing company that tries to strike a balance and please the masses.
I can imagine salespeople not being happy when you visit. I can visualize a VERY creative test drive and bunches of questions even a veteran would have never heard before.
Honda is a VERY successful company. They build great cars but unfortunatly they will never be able to please everyone.
No, not for 2007, but:
2005 - 2 engines
2004 - 1 engine
2003 - 2 engines
2002 - 1 engine
2001 - 1 engine
2000 - 1 engine
Yes, the Nissan VQ is a great engine, but Honda has both an I-4 and a V6 in the list over the past few years. The same can't be said for the 2.4L Nissan I-4. Nissan makes a nice V6, but a questionable I-4.
Re. the reference to Acura in the above post . . . the Acura brand has only been used in the USA, Canada, and Hong Kong since 1986, Mexico since 2004, China since 2006, and in Japan perhaps in 2010. Everywhere else in the world, it's marketed as a Honda, and in fact is a Honda.
I remember Honda S2000's F20C making the list. Surprisingly, couple of years later, RSX's engine replaced it. F20C is far more advanced engine than K20A that we saw in RSX. What was the logic? Only they can answer.
Honda's 3.0-liter V6 made the list in 2003 for boasting 80 HP/liter. A year or two later, Accord Hybrid's 3.0/V6 replaced it. Strangely enough, what criteria made Accord Hybrid's 3.0/V6 (a J-series engine) better than Accord's non-hybrid 3.0/V6 (a J-series engine) better than TL's 3.2/V6 (a J-series engine)?
In 2005, I believe, Acura RL's 3.5/V6 (a J-series engine) replaced Accord Hybrid's.
I would love to know and analyze the criteria Ward's uses to put the engines in its list. It can't be refinement, NVH characteristics, fuel efficiency etc. They seem to rank engines based on cars as a package. But then, if they say VQ engine is a ten best, does that make is "any VQ"? Because with Honda's V6, they didn't say "J-series", they specified model (and even trim).
Until then, I would continue to consider it an extremely poor source to make a point about "best engines".
What you might consider an oddball configuration might be sensible for many. While it might make sense for a low volume car to not have many combinations, we're talking about one of the best selling cars in America.
And I am not talking purely configurations, instead getting the right things out of the gate. I’m not sure if you have kept up with my ramblings on Acura RDX. But, do you think it makes sense for it to have manually operated passenger side seats, or basic rear view mirror? Some say, and I tend to believe, that Honda keeps a few things out deliberately to add a thing or two virtually every year if not at MMC. And that is just WRONG way of doing business. These have become more mainstream features, and they have no place in an Acura.
I have done enough analysis myself to conclude that 5AT and 5MT are NOT the best choices with the 190 HP engine (EX/EX-L). Why provide people an impression of having more power when they can’t feel it? This is not to say that the engine isn’t making 190 HP, but people will question where the horses are. They already have. And that does not bode well for Honda. I bet quite a few customers are being lost (either by way of test drives or some never make it after reading magazines). This is the same problem that was noted in 2005 RL, and 2007 MDX. I can’t figure out why Honda is perfectly fine with this aspect of their drive train sitting under cons, yet they will go out and advertise HP.
Configuration is indeed another thing, When Honda added moon roof and alloy wheels to LXV6 in the previous generation, I started to wonder why they would do so. A lot of people shop based on perception, and often starts with base price. Why else do you see Lexus “offer” base ES350/RX350 with cloth seats?
In another board, a guy brought up that base Accord Coupe is over a grand more expensive than base Altima Coupe. That’s representative of a typical buyer. I helped him do the math, telling that Accord Coupe has quite a few things standard that are either packaged, or standalone options or not even available in base Altima Coupe. Get those packages, and the Nissan has a higher price tag.
Have we not seen that before? Think Acura RL again. I thought the RL was a great value, and is a great car. The market doesn’t. What went wrong? People thought it was too expensive. Honda went with one-size fits all mentality.
Could Honda sell more Accord V6 if they had LXV6 without EXV6 appointments and a lower price? You bet. But I feel, Honda thinks that those buyers might realize not needing extra power and will settle for LX-P, EX or EX-L. What if they don’t? Would it be too much to ask if Honda went with:
DX (currently LX)
LX (combine LX-P and EX)
EX (the current EX-L)
LXV6 (LX with V6)
EXV6 (EX with V6)
I actually managed to cut down a trim! Honda could have made VCM standard only in EXV6 trim, and offered 6MT with LXV6 (non-VCM) even if it came in only silver and red. There are buyers, may be wrong, that will be wary of technologies like VCM. But do they have a choice other than moving over to a competitor?
So how did Honda do in August?
Does this come off as "arrogance" to you. I hope not.
They don't?? Am I misunderstanding the special configurator kiosks at the Scion dealer?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
And it's cost them more than one sale to this writer.
Toyota is more the anti-Honda on options, though. All sorts of crazy packages that you have to buy as a piece whether they make sense or not. Makes it very difficult to price a Honda and a Toyota head to head.
I don't want the power sliding doors that are a major part of the price difference between the Odyssey LX and EX. The Honda instrument cluster, dash, and seats are much better designed than the Sienna's.
The car it self might be on price with minimal profit but I can assure you they make a healthy profit on the accessories.
I don't think you can call it that when a company simply decides not to build a car to everyone's liking.
So, buy a Mercedes instead if they will custom build a car for you! You will no doubt pay dearly but you will get exactly what you want so there you go!
The average selling price for a new Mercedes in the US is probably close to 50,000 dollars. Nearly everything on a Mercedes is optional the only two companies that offer a more bewildering array of options are BMW and Porsche.
Just for example I had a customer cross shopping a LR3 vs a GL450. The GL450 starts about where a loaded LR3 tops out in the mid-upper 50k range. In order to get a GL with all the equipment a 55k LR3 comes with standard you have to pay close to 70k.
Its just business if it costs too much money to offer a few oddball combinations then a company won't do it. The tiny bit of business they lose to the people that want oddballs is more then made up for by not losing money making those oddballs.
Then they think a company is arrogant when they won't build these cars!
Still, no matter how many choices, there would always be someone that want's more.
It's pretty silly to me that a manual transmission is considered some oddball thing. I like Hondas a lot. I've had 5 of them. But if they won't sell me a six cylinder with a manual when the time comes for next car someone else will.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
define best.
Best selling is not equal to best Quality / Best Technology. It is more likely Best Value.
In my humble opinion Honda makes the "best" engines in the world from 50cc single cylinder to their V6.
as for the whole car itself, I found that a 1999 Accord interior was far superior to a 1999 Audi A4.
'nuf said.
"Someone else will"
No doubt, but your choices will be very limited.