The Demise of Honda
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Gales Ferry
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?
I wish Honda would bring over the Type R too...I disagree that the Type R would hurt the RSX sales, RSX buyers are different than Type R buyers.
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?
Honda almost always changes their body styles every four years on their bread and butter cars...The Integra was an exception, not sure why. The NSX is a "halo" car, meaning it has a performance image that will hopefully rub off on the other Honda/Acuras. It is not necessarily going to be profitable, and therefore, it is silly for them to spend lots of money changing it regularly...I also really like the looks of the pre-face lift model. That said, damn Honda, give us 400hp and a F1-derived V10!
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?
Someone else mentioned this....they want you to look at the car and know immediately that it is a Honda. Also, most Hondas are not styled controversially enough to sway a buyer away or (unfortunately) toward buying one...but then again, look at what happened to Pontiac when it took a styling risk (Aztek...)
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?
I can tell you the reason they did this...When a young guy would buy a $20k Integra, he'd say, "I drive an Acura"...when an older guy would buy a $45k Legend, he'd say "I drive a Legend." They made the cars alphanumeric so that more people would just say they drove an Acura, and that would boost brand awareness. Knowing why it happened doesn't make me agree with it though...bring back the names Legend and Vigor.
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.
I think that Honda needs to capitolize more on its racing heritage, and make the public more aware of it. I bet far more people think Porsche makes racing cars than Honda, when, in fact, Porsche doesn't race at all anymore, and Honda has successful teams. That said, would you really go to the Honda dealer to buy a CAI? Honda aftermarket equipment would (probably) involve too many compromises because it will be watered down for the general public, like it will be more restricted to keep the noise down, etc. What I am more interested in is Honda's accepting that their cars will be modified, and not penalizing the owners for it. That is more important to me than them developing their own performance pieces.
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.
Agreed...Honda, we want the Type R...stick it in an ad with an F1 car while you are at it. I vote for 275 HP, and drop 400 pounds from the current car...and maybe that trick steering from the JDM S2000??
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?
Another good call....A modern CRX would make a great commuter/garage companion for the S2000. 175 hp, 2400lbs, $14k.
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?
I don't feel like checking the facts on this one, but I will say that it's ridiculous that you can't get ABS on the LX model of Hondas. My mom wanted a 2001 Accord...she didn't want (or want to pay for) leather and sunroof (the EX), but that meant no ABS, either. That's a serious mistake, IMO.
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.
I'll swing my dick, too, if it will get me a job making product decisions at Honda....but I'm swinging my own, thanks, no one else gets to help
Honda Corp. is going in the wrong direction and in 2 years will be where Nissan was 5 years ago.
No way will Honda end up like Nissan...Nissan had an image problem (no one really knew what it meant to be a Nissan), which Honda doesn't have. Honda's name is well known to mean quality, reliability, and sportier than average...If they would only put more emphasis on that sporty part...
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?
I wish Honda would bring over the Type R too...I disagree that the Type R would hurt the RSX sales, RSX buyers are different than Type R buyers.
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?
Honda almost always changes their body styles every four years on their bread and butter cars...The Integra was an exception, not sure why. The NSX is a "halo" car, meaning it has a performance image that will hopefully rub off on the other Honda/Acuras. It is not necessarily going to be profitable, and therefore, it is silly for them to spend lots of money changing it regularly...I also really like the looks of the pre-face lift model. That said, damn Honda, give us 400hp and a F1-derived V10!
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?
Someone else mentioned this....they want you to look at the car and know immediately that it is a Honda. Also, most Hondas are not styled controversially enough to sway a buyer away or (unfortunately) toward buying one...but then again, look at what happened to Pontiac when it took a styling risk (Aztek...)
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?
I can tell you the reason they did this...When a young guy would buy a $20k Integra, he'd say, "I drive an Acura"...when an older guy would buy a $45k Legend, he'd say "I drive a Legend." They made the cars alphanumeric so that more people would just say they drove an Acura, and that would boost brand awareness. Knowing why it happened doesn't make me agree with it though...bring back the names Legend and Vigor.
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.
I think that Honda needs to capitolize more on its racing heritage, and make the public more aware of it. I bet far more people think Porsche makes racing cars than Honda, when, in fact, Porsche doesn't race at all anymore, and Honda has successful teams. That said, would you really go to the Honda dealer to buy a CAI? Honda aftermarket equipment would (probably) involve too many compromises because it will be watered down for the general public, like it will be more restricted to keep the noise down, etc. What I am more interested in is Honda's accepting that their cars will be modified, and not penalizing the owners for it. That is more important to me than them developing their own performance pieces.
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.
Agreed...Honda, we want the Type R...stick it in an ad with an F1 car while you are at it. I vote for 275 HP, and drop 400 pounds from the current car...and maybe that trick steering from the JDM S2000??
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?
Another good call....A modern CRX would make a great commuter/garage companion for the S2000. 175 hp, 2400lbs, $14k.
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?
I don't feel like checking the facts on this one, but I will say that it's ridiculous that you can't get ABS on the LX model of Hondas. My mom wanted a 2001 Accord...she didn't want (or want to pay for) leather and sunroof (the EX), but that meant no ABS, either. That's a serious mistake, IMO.
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.
I'll swing my dick, too, if it will get me a job making product decisions at Honda....but I'm swinging my own, thanks, no one else gets to help
Honda Corp. is going in the wrong direction and in 2 years will be where Nissan was 5 years ago.
No way will Honda end up like Nissan...Nissan had an image problem (no one really knew what it meant to be a Nissan), which Honda doesn't have. Honda's name is well known to mean quality, reliability, and sportier than average...If they would only put more emphasis on that sporty part...
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
From: Durham
Well since there are some Honda fans up here (and I am one of them) maybe someone can answer this for me... is the CRX coming back? I searched for MUGEN Civic Si a couple days ago and I came across a thread on like some Civic Si board and someone said it was... but I don't believe things until I see more proof... so anyone heard anything?
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 1
From: You wish
Good point cbj, I missed the '00 - the reason though is ABS. Even a stock Viper which doesn't have ABS (or didn't until recently) took longer to stop from 60 than a Honda Accord. ABS is big in panic stops and the last gen Si didn't have it.
SC
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cbj
[B]
In his defense Nobody was talking about the '00 Si, which although it was the pretty much cream-of-the-crop in the sport compact market in 99-00 it definitely lagged in the braking department.
SC
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cbj
[B]
In his defense Nobody was talking about the '00 Si, which although it was the pretty much cream-of-the-crop in the sport compact market in 99-00 it definitely lagged in the braking department.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 42,315
Likes: 45
From: Central Massachusetts
Fun thread, guys. I enjoy seeing how folks feel about their Honda experience and what their perspectives are on Honda cars. I don't agree with many of the opinions here, but the discussion is great!
Gotta' tell you, S2k03, this is inaccurate... I was thinking similar thoughts before I bought my car. You may think you won't spend a lot of time at / near redline, but the F20C engine's song and the car's rock-solid chassis are much more seductive than you give them credit for. I'm truly becoming a VTEC junkie (as are many owners) Also, I'm in constant search for new, wide sweepers to test my mettle. The car is soooo much fun when you start pushing the limits (and I haven't even put 'er sideways into full drift yet 
)!
Just a final comment... I love this car as much as any posession I've ever owned. It's worth every dime of the 16 grand per seat. And, from my perspective as an armchair enthusiast, I really think Honda is doing the right thing concentrating on smaller engines and hybrid technologies and anything that gets them more LEV/ULEV vehicles and higher MPG, rather than bigger blocks or forced induction. Just my $0.02.
Originally posted by S2k03
When speaking about bigger tires and more g's and turbos you are only speaking about a small percentage of S2k owners. Most people rarely visit the red line or take a corkscrew at maximum possible speed. ...
When speaking about bigger tires and more g's and turbos you are only speaking about a small percentage of S2k owners. Most people rarely visit the red line or take a corkscrew at maximum possible speed. ...
Also, I'm in constant search for new, wide sweepers to test my mettle. The car is soooo much fun when you start pushing the limits (and I haven't even put 'er sideways into full drift yet )!Just a final comment... I love this car as much as any posession I've ever owned. It's worth every dime of the 16 grand per seat. And, from my perspective as an armchair enthusiast, I really think Honda is doing the right thing concentrating on smaller engines and hybrid technologies and anything that gets them more LEV/ULEV vehicles and higher MPG, rather than bigger blocks or forced induction. Just my $0.02.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco
Great thread, guys.
I've been a Honda car racing fan since the days of Ayrton Senna. If you add their success in motorcycle racing and then throw in the cleverness and dollar value of their street cars and motorcycles, few companies can match their resume (BMW maybe).
Sure they are human. For example, with all due respect, there hasn't been an interesting Acura for the last 10 years. I don't know know the sales figures and I assume they are well built since they are Hondas; I'm speaking strictly as an enthusiast. I would personally like to see Acura go away quietly over the next 5 years. The Honda name is so much more powerful for me than Acura. If they keep the Acura line, maybe they can learn from Nissan's Infiniti brand and start developing rear wheel drive models to compete with the Germans.
Honda can also be stubborn, like staying with 4 cylinder engines in World Superbike long after Ducati proved the superiority of the twins. They seem reluctant to change once they have made their design investment. Might this belief in the original design also explain their reluctance to market "go faster" parts to the general public? The S2000, for example, has no faults so serious that I would consider changing the car. It has tremendous coherence and unity right out of the box. Same goes for the CBR900RR I ride once in a while.
Thanks again for an entertaining thread.
I've been a Honda car racing fan since the days of Ayrton Senna. If you add their success in motorcycle racing and then throw in the cleverness and dollar value of their street cars and motorcycles, few companies can match their resume (BMW maybe).
Sure they are human. For example, with all due respect, there hasn't been an interesting Acura for the last 10 years. I don't know know the sales figures and I assume they are well built since they are Hondas; I'm speaking strictly as an enthusiast. I would personally like to see Acura go away quietly over the next 5 years. The Honda name is so much more powerful for me than Acura. If they keep the Acura line, maybe they can learn from Nissan's Infiniti brand and start developing rear wheel drive models to compete with the Germans.
Honda can also be stubborn, like staying with 4 cylinder engines in World Superbike long after Ducati proved the superiority of the twins. They seem reluctant to change once they have made their design investment. Might this belief in the original design also explain their reluctance to market "go faster" parts to the general public? The S2000, for example, has no faults so serious that I would consider changing the car. It has tremendous coherence and unity right out of the box. Same goes for the CBR900RR I ride once in a while.
Thanks again for an entertaining thread.
Former Moderator
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 25,439
Likes: 2
From: St. Louis, MO
[QUOTE]Originally posted by djohnston
[B]
The decision to launch the Acura division of Honda in late 1986 was based on the assumption that the American market would not perceive Honda as a luxury or "upscale" vehicle.
[B]
The decision to launch the Acura division of Honda in late 1986 was based on the assumption that the American market would not perceive Honda as a luxury or "upscale" vehicle.