I'm a die hard S2000 supporter....but when it comes to other Honda (Acura) vehicles, I have a difficult time defending their product and engineering decisions...Honda seems to concentrate and put more emphasis on what a vehicle IS rather than what it DOES--120 hp per liter is more important than total hp; forced induction is considered an engineering failure; .9gs on 205/225s is more interesting to them from a theoretical standpoint than 1.01 gs on 245/285 tires, etc.

The WRX is already a clear sign of what is possible when purist theory and styling take a back seat to physics and demand for performance.

Other gripes:

Honda refuses to bring the Type R Civic Hatchback because it will hurt the (flagging) sales of the RSX. (WTF? - do they want more total sales revenues or a higher # of sales per vehicle?) How about thinking of bringing the wicked hatchback over to cripple the sales of the SVT Focus?

Honda changes the bodystyle of vehicles that sell like mad (Integra, Civic - notably the 92-95), but they're conservative when restyling cars that don't sell (NSX). Why buy an '01 when only 1% of the fookin' world (and no skirts) can tell the difference between last years' $90K model and a $32K '92?

Corporate theme styling....if customers don't like the look of one car, they won't like the look of any of their other vehicles; if customers do like the theme styling, they'll still only buy one (ok, maybe two). . . again, WTF?

TL, RL, CL. . . . 10 year olds understand the difference between a 3, 5 and 7 series (M or not), but there's nothing intuitive about Honda's arbitrary alpha-designations, which makes their shorthanded use kind of pointless, no?

No TRD, SVT or MazdaSpeed equivalent? WTF again. . . . Honda is f*ing themselves by not having an HRC division that capitalizes on the 8 figure enthusiast market and are exponentially losing touch with the devoted Honda/Acura fans who now are looking elsewhere for pukka vehicles that respond well to aftermarket performance upgrades.

As for the S2000 Type R rumors....well one has to look no farther than Honda corporate to realize that the execs there are more concerned with cupholder placement in Passports and interior hues than they are with dominating the sportscar market which drives sales for ALL of their vehicles (A CRV is cool if the "Powered by Honda" image has merit). Hell, it doesn't take a marketing genius to figure out that Honda can produce an under 40K S2K that (with the help of Comptech, Spoon and/or Mugen) would thrash all but the mightiest of exotic cars.

And let us not forget we are talking about the same Honda that replaced the CRX with the Del Sol - a decision which deserves an ALMIGHTY WTF? Did Honda let a Pontiac exec call that shot?

Oh yeah....don't even get me started on the embarassing braking distances of every Honda/Acura out ther besides the NSX/S2k exhibit. e.g. - Taurus SEs, Thunderbirds, Oldsmobiles, Chrisler 300Ms and even most trucks can outbrake Civic SIs ('00). The Accord V-6? If I remember correctly, a Navigator or an Escalade can brake in less time/distance. Again, WTF?

So if Honda is listening (they should be, but probably are too busy debating the ergonomics of the upcoming seatheater switches in the next TL): Hire me (or any guy with a swingin' dick who posts on this site) as the ultimate C (or even V) level decision maker who has the authority to make product decisions that match market demand.

Honda Corp. is going in the wrong direction and in 2 years will be where Nissan was 5 years ago.

*Now I'll get off my podium and say that I'm mightily looking forward to my commute to work tomorrow in my S - installed the DiGrappa X brace this eve. and haven't had a chance to explore the differences between stock and X!

 

Oh wait--one more thing.... other manufacturers are just (if not way, way more clueless). . . . so i suppose Honda should be strong against the competition well into the 21st century despite their misguided sports-car decisions....

 

Damn! That was funny.

Thanks for sharing your concerns. We'll get back to ya...

 

I think you have some legitimate points... but I wondered where this statement comes from? Have you ever driven a WRX? I have, and that includes quite a few race-track miles... I sure didnt think it really showed any purist thinking or was any kind of performance benchmark.

cheers,
jason keeney

 

I have driven a stock WRX and will confess that I was unimpressed. . . . but I've raced against a couple of 'em on the street and I have to say I was mightily impressed with hard they charged.

Ok, the Subaru definitely isn't a purists car....but you can probably imagine that there was at least one guy on the WRX Design team who cried out for stiffer springs, no rear seats, a lower driver's seat position and more boost--and none of those things would have marked up the MSRP (stiffer springs don't cost a penny more than soft ones).

For 21K you have to admit that a 0-60 time in 5.5 sec & AWD is a definite performance benchmark, though.

 

While Honda may not be meeting all your needs, they are doing quite well, thank you.

Honda has not succumb to the dreaded "merger partner mania." Time and time again they have shown defiance and a willingness to go their own way. Honda is totally committed to pursuing the future as an independent company even though they have to buck a seemingly inexorable trend toward gigantism in all sorts of mature industries. Its relatively small car output means the company lacks the scale and buying power enjoyed by titans GM, Ford, Toyota and DaimlerChrysler.

They build great cars. They build great bikes. They build great engines. And just when everyone else is worrying about "defining their brands" and becoming more "consumer savvy," Honda has the Insight - (the hybrid gasoline/electric motor-powered, super economy car that can deliver 80 mpg).

HMC rode roughshod over its Japanese rivals in 2001, cranking up global production by almost 7% as others cut back. Honda boosted output by 2.65 million vehicles, outstripping Nissan to become Japan's second-largest automaker on a calendar-year basis. Honda had a magnificent year.

Demise? I don't think so.

 

Although some think Honda is bland. Why did they have the best selling vehicle last year with the 01 Accord?

Their products are superior to most with 2 of their cars being MT top 10 in the world (s2000 & Accord) and their Trucks are doing even better with the top spots in 3 of the 5 catagories (best minisuv CR-V, best van Odyssey, and best luxuary SUV MDX).

The only complaint I have is that Honda really needs to close the Acura division (most the dealerships suck with their elitist attitude). When it comes down to it all you have is a Honda with fancy seats.

The most important factors in my car buying decision is reliability and resale. A big thank you to Honda for not selling to rental fleets. Probably the biggest factor at keeping the resale levels as we know them today.

I have been extremely happy with all my Honda vehicles and will continue to support Honda for years to come.

 

I agree with Nobody. If it weren't for the S2000, I wouldn't have even set foot in the Honda dealership. Their North American products get less and less interesting with each passing generation.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Hondafan
[B]The only complaint I have is that Honda really needs to close the Acura division (most the dealerships suck with their elitist attitude).

 

I think what is being said is that Honda (and especially AHM) is not in exactly tune with the enthusiast segment of the market but instead is driven by internal culture and the concern of margin and sales of the mass market cars (Accord and Civic).

Although I have purchased a number of Honda's for the wife and kids this was the first one for me and probably will be the last. I have been disappointed with some characteristics of the car, the response from the company, and have real concerns that durability is questionable and my extended warranty has no value.

The demise is not in the company but in the perception.