Leaving Honda behind
Originally Posted by MDXLuvr,Jun 14 2007, 10:53 AM
The fact that Honda has done very little to update the S2000 shows to me what is really important to them.
Yup. They'd probably agree.
I have gone from being mad at Honda for not following through with the new sports car (whatever they call it or however they configure it) to being a happy Lexus owner and thankful that they will be build me a reliable super car that my wife will be OK with.
Here is yet another indicator of how Honda is being seen.
My 19 year old son said he would rather have a Prius than the 2004 TL (we already own) to take to college next year.
Here is yet another indicator of how Honda is being seen.
My 19 year old son said he would rather have a Prius than the 2004 TL (we already own) to take to college next year.
Another defected Honda owner here. And it is safe to say my next sports/sporty car won't be a Honda either. They practically showed me the door by the lack of progress in sports/sporty cars. Sad... 
The fact Honda is rolling in banks from Civic and Accord sales is irrelevant to my opinion of their sporty image. Now if they are willing share some of their banks with me perhaps I think better of them.

The fact Honda is rolling in banks from Civic and Accord sales is irrelevant to my opinion of their sporty image. Now if they are willing share some of their banks with me perhaps I think better of them.
Sigh, everyone bitching about Honda is bitching about something pretty much every carmaker entrenched in the US domestic market (read: cars $35k and below) is "guilty" of, i.e. not having enough "sporty" stuff.
It's not going to happen guys. I think you're all missing the big historical picture. It doesn't matter if it's Ford, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc., they all race sometimes and put out "sporty" vehicles every now and then. None of them has ever "sported out" their entire lineup, or offered more than maybe 3 such cars at once. At it's best Toyota had the Supra, Celica and MR2 out simultaneously, but that was over 10 years ago. Honda at best had the Del Sol SI, Prelude and Integra. Nissan had the 240SX, 300ZX and 200SX/SE-R. GM had the Vette, Camaro, and other divisions contributed other cars like the Fiero, Regatta, or something else.
I honestly don't know what reality you guys think once existed that doesn't now. Why not take stock in the fact that the average car now is far more capable and powerful than the average car even 10 years ago?
It's not going to happen guys. I think you're all missing the big historical picture. It doesn't matter if it's Ford, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc., they all race sometimes and put out "sporty" vehicles every now and then. None of them has ever "sported out" their entire lineup, or offered more than maybe 3 such cars at once. At it's best Toyota had the Supra, Celica and MR2 out simultaneously, but that was over 10 years ago. Honda at best had the Del Sol SI, Prelude and Integra. Nissan had the 240SX, 300ZX and 200SX/SE-R. GM had the Vette, Camaro, and other divisions contributed other cars like the Fiero, Regatta, or something else.
I honestly don't know what reality you guys think once existed that doesn't now. Why not take stock in the fact that the average car now is far more capable and powerful than the average car even 10 years ago?
Originally Posted by Slamnasty,Jun 14 2007, 11:56 AM
Sigh, everyone bitching about Honda is bitching about something pretty much every carmaker entrenched in the US domestic market (read: cars $35k and below) is "guilty" of, i.e. not having enough "sporty" stuff.
It's not going to happen guys. I think you're all missing the big historical picture. It doesn't matter if it's Ford, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc., they all race sometimes and put out "sporty" vehicles every now and then. None of them has ever "sported out" their entire lineup, or offered more than maybe 3 such cars at once. At it's best Toyota had the Supra, Celica and MR2 out simultaneously, but that was over 10 years ago. Honda at best had the Del Sol SI, Prelude and Integra. Nissan had the 240SX, 300ZX and 200SX/SE-R. GM had the Vette, Camaro, and other divisions contributed other cars like the Fiero, Regatta, or something else.
I honestly don't know what reality you guys think once existed that doesn't now. Why not take stock in the fact that the average car now is far more capable and powerful than the average car even 10 years ago?
It's not going to happen guys. I think you're all missing the big historical picture. It doesn't matter if it's Ford, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc., they all race sometimes and put out "sporty" vehicles every now and then. None of them has ever "sported out" their entire lineup, or offered more than maybe 3 such cars at once. At it's best Toyota had the Supra, Celica and MR2 out simultaneously, but that was over 10 years ago. Honda at best had the Del Sol SI, Prelude and Integra. Nissan had the 240SX, 300ZX and 200SX/SE-R. GM had the Vette, Camaro, and other divisions contributed other cars like the Fiero, Regatta, or something else.
I honestly don't know what reality you guys think once existed that doesn't now. Why not take stock in the fact that the average car now is far more capable and powerful than the average car even 10 years ago?
My position in all this is that Honda was never quite the sporty car manufacturer as it was, so Honda not developing a new S2000 for instance doesn't phase me at all. Why? I have never regarded Honda as a sporty brand and I'm glad that I own such a gem, kind of like finding money while you're hiking.
Like he said, no manufacturer aside from Porsche, Ferrari, etc can be regarded as a sporty manufacturer. However, these days, Mazda has been injecting some sportiness to virtually their entire line and have been quite successful at beating Honda in this regard but I digress.
Also, Honda is starting to be left behind, they've never been ahead. Other makes have made as capable cars as Honda with their own followings and, again, had sports cars in different price points: where was Honda's Z, Supra, 3si, rx7, or vette competitor?
In the end, sports cars arent very profitable, and when they are, they;re criticised (i.e. vette and Z) so why bother? Porsche had to take on an SUV to make itself profitable. Honda isn't being left behind, they're being smart by putting their money into where it counts because after all, you're not going to please everybody.
In the end, I don't care who does what, so long as their is a car that fits my tastes and needs available and it would also be nice to have options, but I really don't care who makes it.
Here is another thing....in an age of rising gas prices and governmental hysteria over global warming (real or not), who's business model for mass produced car making is the best?
One merely just has to look at which car companies have gained market share in the US to find them.
One merely just has to look at which car companies have gained market share in the US to find them.
Originally Posted by GPMike,Jun 14 2007, 12:41 PM
Here is another thing....in an age of rising gas prices and governmental hysteria over global warming (real or not), who's business model for mass produced car making is the best?
One merely just has to look at which car companies have gained market share in the US to find them.
One merely just has to look at which car companies have gained market share in the US to find them.
Originally Posted by Slamnasty,Jun 14 2007, 01:56 PM
Sigh, everyone bitching about Honda is bitching about something pretty much every carmaker entrenched in the US domestic market (read: cars $35k and below) is "guilty" of, i.e. not having enough "sporty" stuff.
It's not going to happen guys. I think you're all missing the big historical picture. It doesn't matter if it's Ford, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc., they all race sometimes and put out "sporty" vehicles every now and then. None of them has ever "sported out" their entire lineup, or offered more than maybe 3 such cars at once. At it's best Toyota had the Supra, Celica and MR2 out simultaneously, but that was over 10 years ago. Honda at best had the Del Sol SI, Prelude and Integra. Nissan had the 240SX, 300ZX and 200SX/SE-R. GM had the Vette, Camaro, and other divisions contributed other cars like the Fiero, Regatta, or something else.
I honestly don't know what reality you guys think once existed that doesn't now. Why not take stock in the fact that the average car now is far more capable and powerful than the average car even 10 years ago?
It's not going to happen guys. I think you're all missing the big historical picture. It doesn't matter if it's Ford, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc., they all race sometimes and put out "sporty" vehicles every now and then. None of them has ever "sported out" their entire lineup, or offered more than maybe 3 such cars at once. At it's best Toyota had the Supra, Celica and MR2 out simultaneously, but that was over 10 years ago. Honda at best had the Del Sol SI, Prelude and Integra. Nissan had the 240SX, 300ZX and 200SX/SE-R. GM had the Vette, Camaro, and other divisions contributed other cars like the Fiero, Regatta, or something else.
I honestly don't know what reality you guys think once existed that doesn't now. Why not take stock in the fact that the average car now is far more capable and powerful than the average car even 10 years ago?








