I have to say the current generation of Civics are a success to Honda. The styling was fresh, although conservative to some extent, when it was introduced in 2006. In 2006, an EPA rated 30 mpg city/40 mpg highway (later 26/36 due to revisions in mpg calculation) was considered excellent. Customers flowed into the showroom to snatch up the Civics. Dealers couldn't keep them on the lots. How did I know? I was selling Hondas back then (2006 to 2008).

However, once the novelties wear off, you see what the Civic truly is: an econobox. Did the Civic provide comfortable commutes? Yes. Did it live up to its MPG estimate? For us, yes (avg. 28 city & 35 highway). Was it interesting to drive? No. The current Civic has become too "grown-up" and lost its "tossability." Take it hard into a corner you felt like you are driving a car a size bigger. The harder you push it, the bigger it felt. The little 4-cylinder felt rough after 10,000 miles and lacked the smoothness of our previous Hondas.

What had gone wrong? Cutting corners in engineering? Cost-cutting to the degree that length R&D was reduced? Honda made the Civic a Corolla. To the 95% of customers our there, that is totally acceptable. It's economical and reliable. To the enthusiasts on this board, to people like myself, the current Civic is downright boring.

[QUOTE]This has nothing to do with sports cars- this has everything to do with capturing

 

The new Sienna SE is supposedly a better drive then the current Odyssey. Although there's a new Odyssey on the way. But given what Honda has been doing: bigger, softer, and same power; I have doubts about the new Odyssey retaining its "King of Minivan" title.

 

Wait until you see the styling new Elantra! Plus Hyundai has that Veloster coming that actually looks interesting. Think CRZ competitor with an actual backseat.

 

I guess you haven't been following the prototype and concept. It looks great, has more room, is slated to get 28 mpg highway (EPA), and Honda has yet to make an Odyssey that doesn't drive well. It'll also get the 6AT transmission.

Not sure why you'd think they'll fail on this one.

 

Honda's were fine when the rest of the auto industry was either crap (all US makers) or lux (bmw, audi, volvo, etc). Now that the mid-range to economy segment has matured, style and performance actually matter at all price points. Honda is agressively oblivious to this change in the market.

 

Even if that were true, still without the racist comments, such as "Jap crap", "rice burners", etc.

You're on a Honda/Japanese auto site, mostly, so it's natural to expect to see some favoritism. If you wanna see USDM favoritism, I'd suggest heading to Chevy and Ford forums, where there is no shortage of favoritism, accompanied by racism. If you wanna see German car favoritism, I'd suggest heading to VW or BMW forums, where there's no shortage of favoritism for their vehicles. If you want a perfect neutrality, head to bed and dream about it.

If you don't like seeing partiality for Japanese autos on a site like this, then get the hell out or shut up, because I'll never stop showing partiality in my posts. A Jap liking Jap crap...Oooohhhh! The world is ending! Either sue my ass or STFU. Or better yet, put me on your ignore list like you had for 1 or 2 days; or stop corresponding to my posts.

 

Sorry, you made a post. I commented on it. If you can't take the heat...

 

 

I would love to see a Fit hybrid come out because it will be done right. However, most likely Honda won't release it in NA, especially if they aren't announcing it. I mean, they are always concerned about overlapping products. It competes too closely to the Insight and CR-Z even though they are at different price points.

The only thing the CR-Z has over a possible Fit hybrid is styling and a 6-speed manual gearbox. What else does would the CR-Z do better in? MPG? Doesn't sound like it. Driving dynamics? They sound similar to me. Weight? May be similar <2650. Utility? Nope.