|
|
|
|
 |
Jovian8
 |
|
http://blog.caranddriver.com/why-honda-is-in-even-more-trouble-than-you-think-deep-thoughts/
But even though it will raise the ire of Honda executives and brand loyalists alike, the company’s problems aren’t simply the aftereffects of the world’s climate gone mad or a substandard take on a bestselling vehicle.
It’s worse than that.
There is good reason to consider Honda to be in a similar place as General Motors was in, say, January of 1981.
Stage 1: Hubris Born of Success
Stage 2: Undisciplined Pursuit of More
Stage 3: Denial of Risk and Peril
Stage 4: Grasping for Salvation
Stage 5: Capitulation to Irrelevance or Death
Wow... they are really piling on! ;-(
|
Hondarulez
|
|
There's already discussion on this here:
http://www.vtec.net/forums/one-message?message_id=1068397
|
GoFaster
|
|
When something doesn’t make sense, it is best to try to look for what you are not understanding. In the case of Honda/Acura going for sedate/value I think I finally understand it. The entire lineup is basically FWD, so with no possibility of 50/50 weight distribution that makes BMW so special, they are not going to try to compete in that market. My old Prelude and Integra were LIGHT, so they didn’t have an understeer problem. My heavy ’03 Accord V6 is a disgrace when you dare to push it.
BMW has a series of videos of what makes BMW so special, and they do go to great pains to slam the competition. On the 50/50 weight distribution it was either the TL or RDX, can’t remember which, where they said the Acura is like putting a football front line on the nose of the car.
So when faced with a starting point of developing cars that puts you in a position you can’t overcome the competition in performance, don’t go after that market. Instead make a comfortable vehicle and price it well. It worked well for Oldsmobile…I mean Buick…well at least don’t tack on plastic bits to make it look like something it isn’t like Pontiac use to do…errr, don’t look at the upcoming trucky Crosstour.
I have never driven a Fit, but from my readings it appears a manual Fit remains a fun car to drive, and probably because it hasn’t gone over the weight tipping point of needing to be RWD for balance. The current Civic is the size of which year of Accord?
A recent C&D that had 6 cars under $40K they rated on just handling. The tally went as expected. AWD, RWD, and then FWD bringing up the rear. Nobody overcame the expected handling advantages of the competition. Mitsubishi Evo MR, Miata, Mustang GT, 370z, Mini Cooper, GTI.
So Honda/Acura knows this and says there is nothing we can do to match those with a RWD bias, because our engines hang over the front wheels, so lets build comfort and not performance. I can understand that. If the executives want to spend money to build balanced chassis, then the engineers will build more engaging vehicles to drive. Until then if you great value for your money and a the most reliable cars available with the lowest cost of ownership, this is your home.
|
cforez
|
|
|
The Mini is FWD...
|
Hondarulez
|
|
GoFaster wrote:
When something doesn’t make sense, it is best to try to look for what you are not understanding. In the case of Honda/Acura going for sedate/value I think I finally understand it. The entire lineup is basically FWD, so with no possibility of 50/50 weight distribution that makes BMW so special, they are not going to try to compete in that market. My old Prelude and Integra were LIGHT, so they didn’t have an understeer problem. My heavy ’03 Accord V6 is a disgrace when you dare to push it.
BMW has a series of videos of what makes BMW so special, and they do go to great pains to slam the competition. On the 50/50 weight distribution it was either the TL or RDX, can’t remember which, where they said the Acura is like putting a football front line on the nose of the car.
So when faced with a starting point of developing cars that puts you in a position you can’t overcome the competition in performance, don’t go after that market. Instead make a comfortable vehicle and price it well. It worked well for Oldsmobile…I mean Buick…well at least don’t tack on plastic bits to make it look like something it isn’t like Pontiac use to do…errr, don’t look at the upcoming trucky Crosstour.
I have never driven a Fit, but from my readings it appears a manual Fit remains a fun car to drive, and probably because it hasn’t gone over the weight tipping point of needing to be RWD for balance. The current Civic is the size of which year of Accord?
A recent C&D that had 6 cars under $40K they rated on just handling. The tally went as expected. AWD, RWD, and then FWD bringing up the rear. Nobody overcame the expected handling advantages of the competition. Mitsubishi Evo MR, Miata, Mustang GT, 370z, Mini Cooper, GTI.
So Honda/Acura knows this and says there is nothing we can do to match those with a RWD bias, because our engines hang over the front wheels, so lets build comfort and not performance. I can understand that. If the executives want to spend money to build balanced chassis, then the engineers will build more engaging vehicles to drive. Until then if you great value for your money and a the most reliable cars available with the lowest cost of ownership, this is your home.
|
Keiichi Tsuchiya once tested the G35S 6MT, IS350, and 3G TL-S 6MT on Willowsprings. The TL-S had the fastest lap time (by 2 seconds) despite using inferior tires along with the worst power to weight ratio.
This is not to say FWD > RWD. Instead, this is just to show Honda knows a thing or two when it comes to making performance FWD cars.
|
RocketRon
|
|
For cars under 300 HP, FWD is not necessarily a disadvantage...In this race, you'll notice that the FWD Civic Type R (equipped with an heliociodal LSD) came out of the corners in a more agressive manner:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cMZtCp9qu8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Track Results:
1.NSX, RWD, 3.2L, V6
2.Civic Type R, FWD, 2.0L, I4
3.350Z, RWD, 3.5L, V6
4.S2000, RWD, 2.4L, I4
5.Integra Type R, FWD, 1.8L, I4
|
cforez
|
|
|
Reading comprehension fail on my part, lol.
|
A77
|
|
There's a lot of truth in there but I'd take issue with some of it.
I like this bit
"In the case of the first-generation RDX, this abstract was “Jason,” a young, upwardly mobile, urban-residing male that needed a turbocharged engine, “Super Handling All-Wheel Drive,” and room to transport all his lifestyle accouterments. Yeah, okay. As it turned out, there weren’t many “Jasons” buying the RDX. Planning got that part wrong—really wrong. The idea that product knowledge, sensitivity, and a comprehension of the new-vehicle market can be abstracted into the form of bullet-pointed nonexistent customers is, frankly, insane. The methodology is doubly destructive as it rewards the ability to devise synthetic buyers while purging real car or truck knowledge and insight from the planning function. The damage from this kind of product generation continues up through the organization by allowing management, with no more awareness of the market than a grapefruit, to make billion-dollar product decisions with minimal deleterious career consequences."
This Jason thing is all pervasive - witness the (admitedly neat) new ILX commercials. Witness the ZDX's target - empty nesters wanting to tour vineyards, Or the Element - 20 somethings with no job, no insurance premiums and a surf board. I have no idea who the CRZ is aimed at. I have sold 3 - to an 80 something spinster, a 50 something dinky pining for his old CRX, and a wealthy 50 something habitual small Honda buyer.
But I'd take issue with all the models being no better than their predecessors - The new CRV is clearly a better vehicle, and its huge sales success proves it. It has a nicer interior, is quieter, more comfortable, and is one of the best cars in its segment. It even looks better to most eyes. The Fit is easily the best in its segment but for the time being Honda isn't very interested in selling it - no marketing, no promotions.
The Civic is not more poorly assembled than its predecessor - which had a few interior components that consistently did not fit right. It's just poorer materials and a poorer design. And in the States the price may have gone up but in canada it came down (DXG = best seller) $1100 and added Traction Control and Stability Assistance, Bluetooth, Bluetooth Streaming, USB, Alarm System, Remote Trunk opener, 60/40 split rear seat, rear armrest
rear cup holders, trip computer, heated mirrors, body coloured mirrors and door handles, RDS Radio, stereo controls on steering wheel, map reading lights, auto off headlights, iMID (wallpaper, customisable settings, album art), litres/100kmh or mpg gauge...and there's $1500 off for cash on top of that AND the best long term finance rates ever.
Trouble is, Honda wants to maintain profit per unit and in order to do that, and to add the kind of equipment the growing threat from Kia and Hyundai offer, interior quality had to suffer. Which has kicked them in the foot as they have had to incentivise it so much to keep sales up. But fair dos - sales right now, if not in my town :-(, are impressive.
The fun to drive factor though is undeniably being lost and there's a big big danger that with the adoption of EPS and CVTs, and the further disappearance of decent manual transmission options, the new Accord will lose its most coveted Car and Driver's ten best award.
Honda's greatest talents are at making smooth, high revving, unburstable engines, sublime manual shifter actions, and light communicative steering. This equals fun to drive. All to be sacrificed at the dubious altar of eco greeniness? Without the halo effect and actual sales of genuinely sporty, stylish (but still practical) and interesting cars all they are doing is attracting an ever aging buyer demographic. Which does indeed sound like Buick and Oldsmobile.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
I think the consensus for the Fit is that, Honda is not producing enough of it. Honda also is not making much money of it as the Fit is produced elsewhere.
As for the new Accord, why do you think it will lose its most coveted Car and Driver's ten best award? Because it will use CVT and most likely EPS? From what I've read so far, the new CVT is a great tranny, and it doesn't feel like the traditional CVT where it sounds boring and has this rubber band effect. EPS, it all depends on how well it is tuned. We can't tell how good or bad it will be until the car comes out. The Accord has been winning C/D 10 Best almost every year because it's the jack of all trades, with a decent level of driving fun. The next Accord will most likely get a set of new engines, new transmissions, and lose some weight. Those alone will get you better performance, better fuel efficiency, and possibly better handling. There's also a plug-in hybrid model for the first time. The styling, judging from the photos so far, seems to be better than before. As a result, I'm not not as pessimistic as you are.
|
owequitit
|
|
A77 wrote:
Trouble is, Honda wants to maintain profit per unit and in order to do that, and to add the kind of equipment the growing threat from Kia and Hyundai offer, interior quality had to suffer. Which has kicked them in the foot as they have had to incentivise it so much to keep sales up. But fair dos - sales right now, if not in my town :-(, are impressive.
The fun to drive factor though is undeniably being lost and there's a big big danger that with the adoption of EPS and CVTs, and the further disappearance of decent manual transmission options, the new Accord will lose its most coveted Car and Driver's ten best award.
Honda's greatest talents are at making smooth, high revving, unburstable engines, sublime manual shifter actions, and light communicative steering. This equals fun to drive. All to be sacrificed at the dubious altar of eco greeniness? Without the halo effect and actual sales of genuinely sporty, stylish (but still practical) and interesting cars all they are doing is attracting an ever aging buyer demographic. Which does indeed sound like Buick and Oldsmobile.
|
And here is truely the crux of the debate and IMO, a large part of the reason the GM assertions are true.
First, they want to keep the per unit profit, up, but if they cheapen it and then have to put a ton of cash on the hood, the per unit profit does NOT remain the same. They can cook the books and pretend it does, but ultimately, that is just creative accounting. However, it is very clear example of short-sighted management and poor business strategy, a la GM. People on here have been saying that for years, and any business person with a modicum of common sense knows that, but they did it anyway. That is a revelation of disconnected and short sighted management (a la GM), much as some of their recent colossal product failures have been.
So far, the fact that they are responding to criticisms of the Civic shows some good signs (even if they are still stuck on the green thing), and the Accord seems VERY encouraging for me.
|
DrWhiner
|
|
Ford is experimenting with a rather novel technique: Designing a car around a fictional but psychologically-fleshed-out avatar named Antonella (photo above).
|
Power Of Dreams
|
|
There are a few points I'll take issue with. The Accord was fairly competitive with its V6 competition for a good while. A 1989 Maxima had 160 horsepower, a 1989 Taurus has 145 while a 1989 Accord EX had 135. I would argue that the creation of the Accord V6 had much to do with the introduction of the 1992 Toyota Camry V6 and its 185 horsepower.
Buying BAR wasn't a bad idea, but team management suffered from a lack of focus and discipline.
|
TonyEX
|
|
An avatar named Antonella?
Oh, Oh... did they take into account Antonella's family.. you know. Mama, Papa, her (protective and physically large) five brothers, Gran Mama, Gran Pappa, uncles, aunts, cousins?
Because I think Antonella is italian and you know how that works.. when you marry the daughter you have to carry the whole family with you.
Sounds like designing for Antonella requires this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ford-Club-Wagon.jpg
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
