Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Has Honda's run - run out?

16768707273153

Comments

  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    I think I have a great answer for that one. If you remember right Mazda released a brand new Protege for 99 and VW released a brand new Jetta for 99 as well so that can explain declining Civic sales a little bit.
     
    For 1995 into 1996 how can Civic sales decline? Honda brought out a new Civic for 96? Now that one is a hard one to figure out.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    but it could be that Honda didn't have the '96 Civic ready to go at the start of the model year, so maybe it just had a slightly shorter model year?

    Similarly, sometimes a new model will debut early, which causes the previous model year to truncate, resulting in artificially low sales. For example, I don't know what actual sales stats are, but I'd imagine that sales of the 2002 Corolla look horrible. I dunno when, exactly, the '03 was launched, but my uncle bought his in late May of '02, and I think they had been out for a little while at that point.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    To tell you the truth I am not exactly sure when the 96 Civic came out. I do remember getting the issue of Automobile Magazine that year(95-96) and Automobile named its car of the year I think for 95-96.

    The 03 Corolla came out in probably Feburary or March of 02. The 02 Corolla had a short model year too.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    If I recall correctly, the 1996 Civic debuted in October 1995...about the same time most new Hondas arrive at the dealer.

    As for Civic sales remaining strong despite receiving two-thumbs-down from the sport compact crowd - most of them buy used cars, from what I've seen.

    Their disapproval may impact sales of used 2001 and later Civics, but not the new ones.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    when I say I agree with you to a certain extent, I mean that larger sample sizes like CR would count for more than what you call 'chat room grumblings.' That's all. I don't know how you came to the conclusion that it was your information.

    I never implied that Mazda is producing lemons. For a car to have more issues than comparable ones, it doesn't have to be number one on the lemon list. If you had read carefully any of my posts, you would have understood that I was saying that all manufacturers have problems in new cars, but companies like Toyota and Honda have built very strong reputations, and generally tide over these issues, but smaller companies like Mazda have a tougher time with the customer. I hope you read this post entirely before replying.
  • driftracerdriftracer Member Posts: 2,448
    what you agreed with, so I easily didn't understand what you meant.

    In my opinion, the size of the company is irrelevant to their status with consumers - the company either "does the right thing" when taking care of consumer issues with defective vehicles, or it doesn't.
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    I think Honda understands what they did wrong with the current generation. I don't think Honda wants to lose any more buyers to Mazda 3 or Scion TC. Honda has lost younger buyers from those 2 cars of late. I think Honda is forced to make great car with the 06 Civic if they want to keep the younger buyers coming to showrooms. The 96-00 Civic had younger buyers coming in left and right. The 01+ Civic did bring in younger buyers but was not the "youth phenomenon" the 96-00 Civic was.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    "I think Honda is forced to make great car with the 06 Civic if they want to keep the younger buyers coming to showrooms."

    I think the new Honda strategy for the US market is to entice first-time buyers with the second-generation Honda Fit that will probably be available January 2006 as a 2007 model. After all, the current Honda Fit is Japan's #1 selling car, and the Honda Jazz (as the Fit is known in Europe) is selling quite well there.

    Honda will likely take the Civic "upmarket" with the next-generation model to better compete against the Mazda3, Scion tC, and next-generation Nissan Sentra.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    Much as I hope that the new Civic is sportier, I haev a feeling that may not entirely be the case. The recent cosmetic changes in the Acura RSX clearly are conservative, with teh kinks below the headlamps and taillamps being taken away. I much prefered the pre 2005 look, and if this is the policy Honda wants to follow, then I rally don't see anything radical happening to the Civic.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    I'm going to re-post this link because it didn't work last week and people are still talking about it. It's about the current Civic:

    http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=101140
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Here are excerpts deserving a closer look:

    "I wanted something with the same price range as the Civic but with more features," Kang says. "Everyone thinks this car costs $25,000. It's like an Infiniti G35 coupe, but it cost half as much."

    How long until people start to realize that the car he drives isn’t a $25K car? I assume this would be Scion tC which looks no different from Pontiac G6 (rear) or even Hyundai Tiburon. The front is reminiscent of Subaru (with headlamps borrowed from BMW 5-series) pretty much along the same lines we thought Hyundai was going with Ferrari style.

    This is now. What about a few years down the road when there are a few of these cars that are easily recognizable as economy cars? Any volume car is going to lose its uniqueness appeal rather quickly. Civic has been a common person’s car for a long time. It is a compromise between being able to be a benchmark (a reason it can sell in the volume that it does), and being able to cater to buyers who want something different (a lifestyle buyer). The latter are unlikely to stick around with changes. For a stronger customer base, you need less fidgety buyers.

    In the closest admission anyone at Honda will make to the current Civic not hitting the bull's-eye, Elliott says, "The Civic is doing its job. Can we do a better job? No question."

    Couldn’t disagree. There is always some room for improvement. 2001+ Civic is no exception, and neither was 1996+ Civic or the Civics before it. So, what will be different next time around? Nothing, we will still try to discuss the imperfections. Want to bet on it?

    Honda blundered in making the 2001 Civic and 2003 Civic Si redesigns too bland and offending aftermarket tuners with a lesser suspension system, analysts claim. Also, while the Element is wildly exceeding sales expectations, it is priced out of the reach of most young buyers.

    Lesser suspension system compared to what? Nobody is complaining about Macpherson strut/torsen beam axle set up in Corolla, or Sentra, so what is the issue here? As for aftermarket tuning, it is unlikely to show up until a few years down the road when people wanting to soup up their cars have the car within their budget. I did not see people rushing to aftermarket with 1996 Civic in 1997 or 1998. It takes a while!

    Lincoln Merrihew, analyst with Compete Automotive in Boston, says that most Element shoppers already were looking at Hondas and were not the first-time buyers Honda sought.

    That could explain a minor drop in Civic sales since Element does overlap a bit in terms of pricing (Civic spans from about $14K to $18K, $20K if you include hybrid, and Element covers $16-20K price class). For Honda as a company it is all about sales growth.

    Now to address the issue of growing average age, I believe it is a part of growing pain associated with repeat buyers. Last time I purchased my Accord, I was seven years younger than if I go out to replace it with another. In the process, I’m going to add to average age of buyers.

    Here is a simple fix: Somehow manage to not get repeat buyers of your product. It hurts, doesn’t it?

    After all is said and done, if I were to throw out a question, to take a guess: What is the best selling car in America for 18-32 year age group, which would be it? JD Power had the answer, and may still have it. It was Civic.
  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    Article has a Scion VP compating a tc with a Civic, which actually os not at all fair, as the tc is new and was specifically built to lower Toyota buyer's average age. He should have compared it to a Corolla, and he would clearly have an answer. I can understand Mazda, VW etc talking sport, but toyota (Scion) not that much.

    Another thing the article mentioned was Honda's health as a company, and I did a bit of a report on sales, as below. Tell me what you all think.

    Honda/Acura stable:
    Civic: Best selling car in its segment
    Element: Doing pretty well.
    Accord: One of the segment's best sellers
    Pilot: Can't make enough of them
    Odyssey: Same as Pilot, going at MSRP (maybe due to redesign, but the Odyssey always was a best seller)

    Acura:
    RSX: Good sales, not as prolific as other Acuras
    TSX: Best Seller, goes as MSRP, can't make enough of them
    TL: Best selling import in its segment
    MDX: One of the best selling in its segment
    RL: Till recently a dead dog, have to wait and watch for the redesigned car's success.

    Going by all above, does look like Honda is doing really well, at least sales wise.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Intersesting to observe how Mazda fans have gotten pretty passionate about their cars. Didn't used to be that way with the 626 threads, so I guess they're doing something right.

    Perhaps Honda could counter with a V6 sedan with a manual tranny? Give people something to get excited about.

    In my experience you see passion from VW fans and Subaru fans, lately you could add Mazda.

    So I'll propose a new topic: what could Honda do to make its owners feel as passionate about the brand?

    Be creative. I'd love to hear some ideas.

    -juice
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Lesser suspension system compared to what?"

    Come on now robert. Do you even need to ask that question? Lesser compared to the previous Civic.

    "Nobody is complaining about Macpherson strut/torsen beam axle set up in Corolla, or Sentra, so what is the issue here?"

    I don't know about the Corolla, but there have been complaints about the rear suspension in the Sentra.

    "As for aftermarket tuning, it is unlikely to show up until a few years down the road when people wanting to soup up their cars have the car within their budget. I did not see people rushing to aftermarket with 1996 Civic in 1997 or 1998. It takes a while!"

    From the acticle:

    "Aftermarket consumers want go-fast parts for import brands other than Honda - once the industry darling. Those who customize their vehicles typically are trendsetters in their peer group. To see them moving away from Honda could be a sign of a larger future move.

    Greg Neuwirth, president of engine tweaker AEM Inc. in Hawthorne, Calif., says that Honda parts have skidded from 80 percent of his business to about 55 percent in just three years.

    This year, when AEM bought DC Sports of Corona, Calif., all that DC built were parts for Hondas. Already, that has been shaved to about 75 percent.

    The 2001 Civic was a mainstream sedan," Neuwirth says. "With the old Civic, we couldn't keep parts on the shelves. With the new one, the parts sell, and it's nothing to sneeze at. But it's nothing like we used to see."
     

    "Now to address the issue of growing average age, I believe it is a part of growing pain associated with repeat buyers."

    And it would have nothing to do with less younger people buying?

    I'll leave it at this:

    "Elliott has hopes for the next-generation Civic, which he calls "a higher-level car." While retaining its size, he says the 2006 Civic will have more refinement, detail and product content. In short, he says, "What they've been missing the last few years."
  • stragerstrager Member Posts: 308
    I think Honda Product Planners have gotten too complacent about Honda cars with the Buicky Accord and boring evolutionary Civic; it seems like they are targeting an older age group. But they are doing a great job with Acura.

    Probably what AHM needs to do is a handover of the design responsibility back to the Japanese.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    If I'm not mistaken, the Corolla actually goes one worse, and doesn't even have an independent rear suspension! I think they call it "semi-independent", but c'mon, either it is or it isn't!

    But still, nobody ever bought Corollas for their handling and ride, they bought them because they're small, reliable, good little cars. In contrast, Honda used to tout those double wishbone suspensions, and use it as a marketing tool. So naturally, when you take something like that away, and give it a generic suspension that most other cars have, people are going to complain. And in the case of the Civic, they also lost those nice, low beltlines, low cowls, and generous glass area that the older models used to have.

    As for the average buyer age, you really shouldn't focus too much on a number. Most cars probably are going to have an average buyer age in the 40's or 50's, for a fairly "young" car because, let's face it, there are a lot more people in their 40's, 50's, 60's, and up that buy brand-new cars than there are people in their 30's, 20's, and teens.

    Now if the average age of the Civic shot up to like 60 or 70, then you'd have a problem. That would be a sign that you're keeping the repeat buyers, who are aging, but not attracting enough younger buyers. But a gradual creep in average age is inevitable, if you have both brand loyalty AND attracting new, younger customers.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "In contrast, Honda used to tout those double wishbone suspensions, and use it as a marketing tool. So naturally, when you take something like that away, and give it a generic suspension that most other cars have, people are going to complain."

    Exactly. Let me say that again. Exactly.

    Most people probably can't tell, but the aftermarket guys definately can.

    Here's what automobile says about the Civic:

    "The older crowd loves the car for its refinement and durability; younger people enjoy the ease with which the Civic can be modified into a screaming street machine. But with newer, fresher competitors gobbling up more market share each year, the heat is on for Honda. Kids are finding new cars to transform into personal expressions, and quality and reliability can be found elsewhere."

    Sound familar? Yup.

    Here's more:

    "Given the greatness we've come to expect from Honda, we have been disappointed that the seventh-generation Civic is not quite the step forward we'd usually expect from such a veteran."

    That sounds familar also.

    And more:

    "We chastised Honda then for some bad decisions made with this Civic; the rear suspension, its trailing arm discarded in the quest for better space efficiency, doesn't feel as well planted as the great setup on the previous car. The steering is also light to the point of precluding much communication of what the tires are doing. In both the 2000 test and this one, we found the car less confident through tight turns than both the previous Civic and, more importantly today's opponents."

    These articles are beginning to sound like broken records.

    Obviously though, none of these complaints matter to "Jennifer".
  • howachowac Member Posts: 52
    My sentiments, exactly! We just dumped a 2001 Civic a few months ago for the various reasons you quoted above.

    "Given the greatness we've come to expect from Honda, we have been disappointed that the seventh-generation Civic is not quite the step forward we'd usually expect from such a veteran."

    This sentence is probably the most appropriate description of how we felt. Some may wonder why we bothered buying the Civic if we didn't like it. The truth is that we had just gotten out of a VW lemon and were looking for something cheap and reliable. We didn't care for Toyotas and Honda was a natural choice. I think that Honda, on some level, was also banking on their reputation and perceived quality. That's why they got complacent and didn't deliver what they normally do. It's unfortunate, but many other people probably fell "victim" to this corporate strategy.

    Now we are proud owners of a new Mazda3. And my wife's name is NOT "Jennifer!" ;-)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    While the Element is wildly exceeding sales expectations, it is priced out of the reach of most young buyers

    This asks for an interesting question. What price is considered within reach of most young buyers? newcar31, since you vehemently support the article, what do you think about this? FYI, Element is placed in $16K to $20K price class.

    Lincoln Merrihew, analyst with Compete Automotive in Boston, says that most Element shoppers already were looking at Hondas and were not the first-time buyers Honda sought.

    This is another interesting piece. Element or not, Honda managed to add 50K buyers (from 859K to 909K combined for Civic, Element, CR-V and Accord) in 2003 compared to 2002 despite drop in sales for Civic (“the first time since 1996 drop below 300K”), Accord (minor drop of about 2K units) and CR-V (drop of about 3K units). Element was a non-player in 2002 since it was released in December.

    50K additional buyers in a year isn’t anything to sniff at, and certainly not a case that proves Honda run running out.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I may have a post in this thread several months ago dealing with average age of buyers. In 2002 (I believe it was either that, or 2003), average age of a new car buyer from what I remember:
    Honda: 44
    Acura: 43 (this was surprising to me)
    Toyota: 47
    Lexus: 53
    Buick: 62 (the oldest of all)
    All Brands: 45

    Within each brand, average age would depend on model, trim and even number of doors (Civic Coupe buyer was about 10 years younger than Civic Sedan buyer at just 29, a similar trend was mentioned for Accord Sedan versus Coupe).

    Among other cars, Element (43), Corolla (44) and Corolla-Matrix (43). One of the Korean brands (I believe Kia) had an average age of 41. I've also read elsewhere that Matrix was destined to be a part of Scion lineup, until Toyota noticed a Corolla-like average age and refrained from putting it alongside xA and xB. Instead, the sales were now added to Corolla's (beginning in 2003, I believe).
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "What price is considered within reach of most young buyers?"

    I guess it depends on how young and who is buying.

    I think $16K should be alright for a younger buyer, but $20K+ might be pushing it. If Mom and Dad are buying though, $20K might be alright.

    FWIW, you can get a very nicely equipped Scion Tc or Mazda3 for around $16K.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "I think that Honda, on some level, was also banking on their reputation and perceived quality. That's why they got complacent and didn't deliver what they normally do."

    I agree. I think certain people in here fall right in line with banking on Honda's reputation and being arrogantly complacent.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Perhaps Honda could counter with a V6 sedan with a manual tranny? Give people something to get excited about.

    I don’t think that would be an answer to anything. IMO, manual transmission sells only in magazines and to the very few who would ultimately put the money down to buy it in a midsize family sedan that is usually shared between two people. As would be my case, I’ve to abide by the rules of the home and stop dreaming about manual shifts. It doesn’t bode well with my wife.

    Now, as far as Honda’s offerings are concerned, here is a shortlist of Hondas:
    Honda Civic Si: No automatic available, so buy it with stick, or don’t.
    Acura RSX: Base model has automatic, but go for Type-S and you don’t have a choice but to get the 6-speed.
    Honda Accord: V6 Coupe has a manual transmission
    Acura TSX: Sedan with manual transmission

    IMO, that is a lot of offerings with manual transmission in a relatively narrow price range. Throw in the Accord Sedan as well, and that could likely be over-saturation of cars with manual transmission if it already is not.

    As for passion, I believe there is enough for Honda among believers and non-believers. Why else do you think this thread grows so quickly?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Come on now robert. Do you even need to ask that question? Lesser compared to the previous Civic.

    But previous Civic is gone. The new Civic gets more room and more safety, without giving up much in terms of handling and ride. Yes, the initial execution wasn’t good, but the issue was more with the rear suspension (still a 3-link double wishbone) than the front. We have gone over this before.

    I don't know about the Corolla, but there have been complaints about the rear suspension in the Sentra.

    You don’t know about Corolla because nobody cared! Interesting point about Sentra. The front is a non-issue, correct? Does it use double wishbone? Have aftermarket people run out of choices in the compact class offering double wishbones all around? With changes in Civic, you bet! But now what?

    "Aftermarket consumers want go-fast parts for import brands other than Honda - once the industry darling. Those who customize their vehicles typically are trendsetters in their peer group. To see them moving away from Honda could be a sign of a larger future move.

    Why and What would help. Without specifics, I couldn’t discuss this. And that is one reason I don’t give much credence to articles like this. Competition is more fierce, no doubt, but do we care for reasons that may be behind a slow down? For example, I can expect a change in engine formula (the old DOHC VTEC in Civic Si to the new DOHC i-VTEC in the new Civic Si) to introduce new solutions as opposed to old ones.

    What exactly are we talking about? Let us start from there. Bigger wheels? Large mufflers and wings? Or go-fast engine upgrades?

    And it would have nothing to do with less younger people buying?

    Do you have numbers to support your ideas?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    And in the case of the Civic, they also lost those nice, low beltlines, low cowls, and generous glass area that the older models used to have.

    But why is it an issue with Civic when all cars are growing taller? There is a reason why Civic is no longer the low cowl car that used to be, and somehow the crash test results support the idea. Several people have complained about the large frontal glass in Civic Si, so shouldn’t Honda make it smaller? Just look at the car that magazines are going gaga about, the Mazda3. It is one of the stubbiest cars on the road today.

    There has been a spy picture of 2006 Civic HB floating around, and while I see a whole lot of TSX front, a low and large frontal glass in typical Honda fashion, people continue to bash it. The rear, interestingly, appears to have the profile of Focus ZX3, but in this case, being blasted as being ugly.

    It is a tough task to satisfy everybody. Being a niche player isn’t as complex, and one can take big risks.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Interesting point about Sentra. The front is a non-issue, correct? Does it use double wishbone?"

    No, and it never did. ;)

    "Why and What would help. Without specifics, I couldn’t discuss this."

    Lol, you don't read very thoroughly do you?

    Here are some specifics:

    "Greg Neuwirth, president of engine tweaker AEM Inc. in Hawthorne, Calif., says that Honda parts have skidded from 80 percent of his business to about 55 percent in just three years.

    This year, when AEM bought DC Sports of Corona, Calif., all that DC built were parts for Hondas. Already, that has been shaved to about 75 percent.

    The 2001 Civic was a mainstream sedan," Neuwirth says. "With the old Civic, we couldn't keep parts on the shelves. With the new one, the parts sell, and it's nothing to sneeze at. But it's nothing like we used to see."

    Why? Take a guess. What? Aftermarket parts for the Civic. Geez.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "What exactly are we talking about? Let us start from there. Bigger wheels? Large mufflers and wings? Or go-fast engine upgrades?"

    Do you not know what AEM and DC sports sells?

    Hint: It's not wheels and big spoilers.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Do you have numbers to support your ideas?"

    Do YOU have numbers to support THIS idea:

    "Now to address the issue of growing average age, I believe it is a part of growing pain associated with repeat buyers"
  • driftracerdriftracer Member Posts: 2,448
    Honda numbers are further skewed by the fact that they (DC especially) were totally Honda-related, and now they both sell parts for many import and domestic cars. More folks hopping up Mazda 3s and VW GTis have muddied the tuner market - Honda is still #1, just not by as much of a margin.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    There you go! Macpherson strut isn’t a big deal now, is it? Hey, if you’re okay with the choice in other cars, why couldn’t Honda sneak the same in its own cars? What exactly makes it a wrong choice?

    Do you not know what AEM and DC sports sells?

    No, I don’t because I haven’t cared much for after market stuff.

    I should see tons of 1999-2000 Civics with those after market stuff. Guess what, I don’t! Most Civics with aftermarket stuff, that I get to notice, come from early 90s era and understandably so! You don’t mess with a car and its warranty. And Civic holds its resale value pretty well so it takes a while.

    As for the AEM and DC stuff, their pain seems to be along the lines of going thru a period over which a relatively new engine comes around as it did with Civic Si and RSX. Other parts suppliers have caught up to speed, so what is wrong with these two?

    Do YOU have numbers to support THIS idea:

    "Now to address the issue of growing average age, I believe it is a part of growing pain associated with repeat buyers"

     
    Numbers that I knew have been quoted at length in my earlier post(s). However, this isn’t a case where numbers are needed, just common sense. Repeat buyers aren’t getting younger by the day, are they? I quoted myself as an example in that case, didn’t I?

    Now, back to the question I asked: Do you have your numbers?
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Macpherson strut isn’t a big deal now, is it?"

    It used to be a big deal to Honda marketing. Now, it's not a big deal.

    "I should see tons of 1999-2000 Civics with those after market stuff. Guess what, I don’t! Most Civics with aftermarket stuff, that I get to notice, come from early 90s era and understandably so! You don’t mess with a car and its warranty."

    Plenty of people mess with new cars and their warranties. How naive to think otherwise. Many of the things that you mess with aren't visable without opening the hood and even some modifications aren't visable AT ALL. Chips on turbo cars come to mind.

    "However, this isn’t a case where numbers are needed, just common sense."

    And common sense would dictate that as the average age of a car buyer goes up for a particular car, less younger people are buying that car. No?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Element is an unqualified success. Keep in mind it cost them very little to build, using an existing platform and engine, and yet it exceeded their sales goals without cannibalizing sales of the vehicles it is based on.

    You tell your boss: I used almost no budget at all, repackaged stuff off the shelf, made about 25% more sales than was forecast, with no trade-offs. When do I get my promotion? :-)

    -juice
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "I agree. I think certain people in here fall right in line with banking on Honda's reputation and being arrogantly complacent."

    Just out of curiousity... What's Mazda's excuse for selling cars that aren't perfect? Given their past, it certainly can't be complacency following strong products.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Last time I checked the car with the absolute lowest mean age was the $30K Lexus IS300. Not exactly a realistic choice of ride for a teenager. So take the "average age" business with a grain of salt.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    It used to be a big deal to Honda marketing. Now, it's not a big deal.

    Then let us be consistent. If you want to talk on the premise of marketing, you should continue to do so about the switch as well. After all, more room and greater safety are also a part of marketing, aren’t they?

    Quiz: “In contrast, the Honda fared poorly in the fun-to-drive department.”

    Sounds familiar, now doesn’t it? This is from a comparison test of a Civic to another car at Edmunds. Can you guess which model of the Civic this would be for? (Hint: In a comparison test with Escort ZX2).

    Here is more:
    “In tight corners, the Honda's Firestones folded over and the Civic plowed like Farmer Ted at the start of planting season. And, during our emergency maneuver test, the Honda slewed all over the road, tail threatening to swap places with the front end. The Escort ZX2 handled better in both instances, particularly during the latter test. At high speeds, the Honda's light steering provided the driver with little connection to the road, while the heavier-effort ZX2 steering at least didn't frighten the driver while approaching triple-digit speeds. Still, both Whitmore and I felt that the steering and suspension of the Civic communicated more clearly to the driver in all other circumstances, which is more desirable in any urban commuter. What the Civic HX Coupe really needs is more aggressive rubber and some suspension modifications to control roll.”

    Sometimes, it is not the choice of suspension set up, but how it is utilized. RSX is a fantastic car to drive when pushed around. Now, compare it to Civic. Both utilize same basic suspension set up, one tuned differently than the other.

    Plenty of people mess with new cars and their warranties. How naive to think otherwise. Many of the things that you mess with aren't visable without opening the hood and even some modifications aren't visable AT ALL. Chips on turbo cars come to mind.

    It was not about what I think, it was about what I see. If they do, more power to them.

    And common sense would dictate that as the average age of a car buyer goes up for a particular car, less younger people are buying that car. No?

    Not necessarily. I was 25 when I got into my Accord. If I replace my Accord with another now, Honda would need an 18-year old buyer to “make up” for my choice as a 32 year old to get into a new Accord and maintain the same average age.

    You cannot pass judgment about cars and their long term appeal based on short term data. Hold on to your numbers that you have (if you do) for any car(s) of your choice, and see if the average age stays or rolls back. Of course, in case of Mazda, the transition has continued from 323 to Protégé to 3. If it is a Mazda3, hopefully, you will have enough years to arrive at a conclusion.

    BTW, on your answer to what is an "alright" price for a young buyer, how did you come up with $16K? I think Honda Element starts right there, and leaves some room for "souping up" unlike CR-V that now starts at $20K.

    Oh, and if parents buy it for their kid(s), they would be adding up to the average age of the buyer!
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Thanks for bringing it up, I get to learn something new everyday (or so it appears). Not necessarily learn, but look for more information.

    Looks like AEM/DriverFX.com RWD Civic is doing quite a job on the drag racing scene. The interesting thing is that it is RWD and powered by NSX 3.0/V6.

    Or something like this would help, right? After all is said and done, a 24 year old is unlikely to buy a $17K-18K car and soup it up with $10K worth of additions. I have a feeling that the current Civic Si will be an excellent aftermarket car but a few years down the road as more options to tuning the engine (turbo/SC) open up.

    It is designed from the factory to be like that, a low compression relatively high output engine, with a stout chassis. Rest is up to your imagination, but for imagination to translate into reality, the initial cost would have to come down. Why bother spending $12K-15K if one could find a reasonably nice older Civic now?

    If I were interested in tuning a car, 1991-1992 CRX would be my choice. Dirt cheap to start with, and plenty of options to go from there.
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Just out of curiousity... What's Mazda's excuse for selling cars that aren't perfect? Given their past, it certainly can't be complacency following strong products."

    It's not a matter of the Civic being "perfect" or not, it's that the Civic hasn't really changed much since 1992.

    Look at the Protege in 1992. Look at the Mazda3 now.

    "After all, more room and greater safety are also a part of marketing, aren’t they?"

    Of course. Are you saying the wishbone suspension HAD to be ditched to acheive that? Or, was getting rid of the wishbones a de-contenting cost cutting issue? I thought so.

    "Not necessarily."

    Yes necessarily. Geez.

    If the average age of the buyer is going up, that means that more older people are buying and less younger people are buying. It's pretty simple.

    "I have a feeling that the current Civic Si will be an excellent aftermarket car but a few years down the road as more options to tuning the engine (turbo/SC) open up."

    You don't have to wait for those options, they're already there.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    I saw your list on the average age of Honda and Acura buyers.

    It will be VERY interesting to see what will be the average age of buyers of the second-generation Honda Fit that will likely start US sales early in 2006 calendar year as a 2007 model. If the price of gas drops slightly, I expect the average buyer age to be in the low 30's; if the price of gas continues to stay relatively high I expect the average buyer age to be in the low 40's.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 50,439
    From what I can tell, the Scion brand is attracting quite a few older buyers (myself included). I think kids tend to be poor, but older folks are just cheap!

    But yes, the Fit should bring in younger buyers.

    One thing to keep in mind is that automakers like repeat buyers even more than young buyers (well, they actually like anyone with money the most). So, since Honda has long lasting name plates, and takes their models a little more upscale with each iteration, it makes some sense that the buyers ages will rise 9for the repeat buyers).

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    'Look at the Protege in 1992. Look at the Mazda3 now'

    The 1992 Protege didn't have problems with AC, or CEls. Overall, I agree with you, the Mazda3 is a big improvement over the Protege, but the execution by Mazda leaves a lot to be desired, just like the 6, another excellent car spoiled by the actual execution.

    The new Civic will tell us whether it is all that improved or another evolution. Sales wise, even this model is doing great, but I hope Honda is taking steps to take on the new competition
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "The 1992 Protege didn't have problems with AC, or CEls."

    How do you know the 1992 Protege didn't have issues? Did you read Edmunds online in 1992?

    I'm sure the 1992 Protege had some issues. Every car does.

    Can't you just get over the AC and CELs? If there's an issue, I'm positive that there will be fixes. Besides, AC and CEL issues on the Mazda3 aren't an excuse for the Civic not changing at all.

    "but the execution by Mazda leaves a lot to be desired"

    You could say the same thing about Honda. My brother's 2002 Civic EX coupe has issues with the struts (they go "clunk" when going over bumps and the dealer has attempted to fix a few times), a loose driver's seat that the dealer can't or won't fix, a poor paint job with many imperfections, and HVAC vents that rattle. My 1992 Acura Integra had less issues when I sold it with 130,000 miles.

    And do I even need to ask how long it took or will take Honda to "execute" a decent automatic transmission?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    To call that a "Civic" is quite a stretch. Kinda like a NASCAR is a Taurus or Impala. Most we can say is the vinyl stickers on the front slightly resemble the Civic's headlights.

    Actually, no, not even that. The headlight design on the Civic changed this year.

    The '92 Protoge ES was a nice little car. Back then it had the Baby Benz look, resembling the C class of the day, and it had the 1.8l DOHC engine with good torque and power for the class.

    Honda used 1.6l engines back then, so Mazda was offering more torque as they do now.

    Mazda also has passive rear wheel steering and you could get a 5 speed manual with the top engine.

    I think you picked a bad example. LOL

    -juice
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    from all the heated discussion here that the '06 Civic needs to be a MUCH wider line than it is now! :-P

    We could have a DX (A/C now standard please, Honda!) with 14" wheels and gas-saver tires that would not increase in price at all over the current model, to keep all of robert's alleged core Honda buyers for the next gen. We would need an LX and EX with optional NAV and leather and at least 170 hp to compete with the Mazda3 and the next Sentra, to make newcar happy. And for all the magazine editors out there, we need at least two higher trims with serious power, at least one of which must be basically a racing hybrid with 40+ mpg. Full racing suspension must be standard on all but the DX, along with 18" wheels on the higher trims. And of course all of the models must achieve class-leading fuel efficiency and emissions, and the price can't increase more than a couple percent.

    Should be no problem for Honda, right?! :-P

    Sheesh, people! The Civic's sales are UP in its fourth year! Nothing out there outsells it in its segment except Corolla, which combines a wagon (the Matrix) in its sales figures! Things are not all that bad.

    If you are worried about younger buyers abandoning the Honda brand, so is Honda, which is the reason you will see the newer, less expensive Fit here in a little over a year. Civic is a volume label, and as such it will be designed to appeal to a mass audience. Which is how it sells so many copies, even if it is not the outstanding performer in some individual categories.

    To those here who wistfully long for the days when Honda was an all-enthusiast label all the time, it is one of the sad corollaries to becoming a successful volume brand that some of the enthusiast appeal will go away...

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 03accordman03accordman Member Posts: 671
    "How do you know the 1992 Protege didn't have issues? Did you read Edmunds online in 1992?"

    So before Edmunds was there, cars either didn't have problems, or consumers never were able to find out about them before buying that particular car.

    I can get over CELs if they are fixed, but I can't get over a car that is sold in 2004 with a non performing Air Con. The reason I keep bringing this up is because I really like the Mz3, have test driven it many times, and have always been close to buying it, primarily for the AC issue, less so for CELs. I am now waiting for next summer to try one of the new Mz3s to make sure the AC works real well.

    Secondly, as you would see from my earlier posts, I have always said that all manufacturers have issues with their new cars, but some are able to tide over them.

    Coming to Honda automatics, I own a 2003 Accord that had a whine at around 35k miles, reported to dealer who said it was 'wind' noise, then called Honda customer service, who fixed an appt with the same dealer, and called me in the evening saying that the transmission needed to be replaced, which was done at a later date in a day. I was initailly devastated that a new car could have a tranny replaced and wanted to sell the car, but sense prevailed, and the excellent customer service from Honda made me think over my decision.

    Honda extended my warranty to the full Honda care warranty, kept calling me to follow up on the issue, and this with a 4 cyl Accord, which is not even in the tranny recall. I was really impressed by their attention to detail, and so took exception when you said that Honda is an arrogant company. Honda is a company that stands by its product, and I have seen it first hand.

    On the other hand, I have seen on this very forum how Mazda treated the rust issue on the 6, AC issues on the 3, and that does not give me much confidence. This is what pains me, here I have been close to buying a 3 because I love it, but somehow don't have much confidence in the company, and that's keeping me away for now.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I think the young buyer hoopla is over-rated.

    People just aren't as loyal as they used to be. They switch brands like it's no big deal nowadays.

    -juice
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "The '92 Protoge ES was a nice little car. Back then it had the Baby Benz look, resembling the C class of the day, and it had the 1.8l DOHC engine with good torque and power for the class.

    Honda used 1.6l engines back then, so Mazda was offering more torque as they do now.

    Mazda also has passive rear wheel steering and you could get a 5 speed manual with the top engine.

    I think you picked a bad example. LOL"

    It was a perfect example. I used the 1992 Protege to show how Mazda's small car has changed. Contrast that with the 1992 Civic vs. the 2004 Civic.

    "So before Edmunds was there, cars either didn't have problems, or consumers never were able to find out about them before buying that particular car."

    Which is why I asked you how you knew that the the 1992 Protege didn't have issues.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    My point was the Mazda stood out the same way it does today - mostly with more engine displacement.

    You seemed to imply that Mazda has made more progress. To me it seems like they're more or less in the same position relative to each other.

    Honda still does more volume with a more efficient, small displacement engine, while Mazda caters to the niche of enthusiasts.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same!

    -juice
  • newcar31newcar31 Member Posts: 3,711
    "Honda still does more volume with a more efficient, small displacement engine, while Mazda caters to the niche of enthusiasts."

    OK, let's just talk about efficiency and engines. Take a look at the 1992 Civic and the 2004 Civic. The 2004 Civic isn't significantly more powerful or more efficient than the 1992 Civic.

    The 1992 Protege with the 1.8l gets about the same mileage as the 2004 Mazda3 with the 2.3L, yet it is not nearly as powerful.

    See what I'm saying?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    use those crap Ford automatics? Or was that just the bigger cars, such as the 626/MX-6/Probe?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    It's not a matter of the Civic being "perfect" or not, it's that the Civic hasn't really changed much since 1992.

    With a winning formula on hand that provides you with results year after year, as a businessman you could do one of two things:
    Look at needs, and decide to keep it going with subtle changes to keep up with times
    Look at wants, and decide to drastically change the formula completely to change the direction

    Which of the two would be your pick? Honda has chosen the first, hence evolutionary changes, but that didn’t begin in 1992! It goes back to the time when Civic first arrived in the early 70s.

    Now, if Civic were one of the other cars in the market and wasn’t getting the job done and drastic changes weren’t going to hurt, I don’t see a point in continuing with the first approach.

    What next for next Civic? Honda has to continue to evolve Civic on the winning formula, but with enough resources that can be allocated now (Tom Elliot’s comments on Honda’s focus on light trucks since mid/late-90s is appropriate), it should be possible to add more flavor on top of the regular Civic. I believe it will happen.

    Look at the Protege in 1992. Look at the Mazda3 now

    Sure! 1992 Protégé was spanning a price range of $10K-12K with following engine choices:
    1.8-liter: 103 HP (DX)
    1.8-liter: 125 HP (LX)

    While we are at it, 1992 Civic lineup (including CRX) spanned a price range of $9.8K-15K with engine choices:
    1.5-liter: 70 HP to 102 HP
    1.6-liter: 125 HP (Si)

    Fast forward to the present, and Mazda continues to offer larger displacement engine, now 2.0/2.3 liter engines with 148-160 HP (up 30-45%) and Civic goes with 1.7/2.0 liter engines with 115-160 HP (up 30-65%). Base price for both vehicles has jumped up about the same.

    Are you saying the wishbone suspension HAD to be ditched to acheive that? Or, was getting rid of the wishbones a de-contenting cost cutting issue? I thought so.

    Both! You choose to emphasize on it as a cost cutting measure only while refusing to accept anything from the other side. To answer your question, why do you think BMW uses MacPherson struts? Is it superior than it would be from using double wishbones? Or are there other variables involved? If you can think about this with a balanced mind set, you will be able to see what you have not been so far, and by then, you will have the answer.

    If the average age of the buyer is going up, that means that more older people are buying and less younger people are buying. It's pretty simple.

    Simple until you think about it. But you simply won’t get it. I quoted myself as an example, and it still doesn’t click, does it? I will be 32 if I traded my old Accord for the old. In the process, I would have added to the average age. Of course, the number of buyers won’t increase (considerably) after a saturation point that I believe Civic and Accord may have reached in their respective classes.

    Let us say a company sold 100 units in year 1, with 50 buyers age 40 and the other 50 age 30, for an average age of 35. Seven years later, the sales are stagnant but 60 of these buyers return to get the car. These 60 buyers represent an average age of 42 now. Now, to maintain the old average age of 35, this car will have to be able to pull 40 buyers that are no more than 24.5 years old on an average! If you get 40 buyers that are 28 year old, and while they are still younger than what you had earlier, the average age has increased to 36.4 now. Like I mentioned earlier, a bit of common sense would eliminate the need for this simple math.

    You don't have to wait for those options, they're already there

    Oh, I know that! But the car itself isn’t inexpensive yet. BTW, I see more Preludes with aftermarket stuff than Civics from 1996+ era.

    Take a look at the 1992 Civic and the 2004 Civic. The 2004 Civic isn't significantly more powerful or more efficient than the 1992 Civic

    I have let numbers speak for themselves above. Take a look.

    Mazda also has passive rear wheel steering and you could get a 5 speed manual with the top engine.

    So does the Civic. The rear suspension in the Civic is called "Reactive Link" double wishbone suspension designed to allow passive rear wheel steering. It is a 3-link double wishbone setup.

    image

    FYI, pre-98 Accords used 4-link double wishbone later modified to use 5-links ("Watt-link"). It is also designed for passive steering.

    And with the top engine in Civic, you get ONLY manual transmission. No slushy offered.
This discussion has been closed.