S600=Dream
 |
|
I'm in the minority here, for sure.
I'd like to see them extrapolate on the RLX theme with E-SH-AWD in a smaller package.
Conceptually, boy it sure is appealing. The engine would be a screaming small engine, say the 1.6 forthcoming DOHC Earth Dreamer, tuned to an inch of it's life like the ole' B16. I could live with a 8000 rpm redline. That's not too much to ask. The ability to cruise around town on battery power and save gas, the advantage of that torque from the rear wheels for balance and rotation, being able a real enthusiast engine for the high end...sounds good to me! Sell it with a 6 speed manual.
They could literally just use the CR-Z and do it, and frankly, they should. Realistically it's a car we could see, and one that I'd be very, very interested in. Rear drive be damned! I'd rather have grip and balance!
I think it's a shot in the dark with a pop gun to see another rear drive car like the S2000, and frankly, I'd rather see big H be innovative and gobsmack that stupid Subayota with something interesting and futuristic, rather than just copying them.
Rear drive is old hat, and Honda shouldn't be chasing it.
|
Chocs
|
|
S600=Dream wrote:
I'd like to see them extrapolate on the RLX theme with E-SH-AWD in a smaller package. |
If not the CR-Z, maybe the rumoured next Beat would make a good baby NSX - same setup as the NSX, smaller package.
|
Dren
|
|
RolledaNsx wrote:
A) $ 25,000 Toyota/Subaru I4 Competitor
B) $ 40,000 S2000 Replacement
C) $ 60,000 + Toyota/BMW Supra/m class Competitor
And don't ask... they will not make all of them, American Honda
wants "A" for sure and would like an Acura "C"
|
I just ordered a BRZ. I would much rather have the K20 and 6 speed from my Civic Si in it than the Subaru engine. I know given the chance Honda could make something superior. Honda will not give up its sacred FWD. If anything comes from Honda, I expect it will be an S2000 successor.
|
Chris David
|
|
RolledaNsx wrote:
A) $ 25,000 Toyota/Subaru I4 Competitor
B) $ 40,000 S2000 Replacement
C) $ 60,000 + Toyota/BMW Supra/m class Competitor
And don't ask... they will not make all of them, American Honda
wants "A" for sure and would like an Acura "C"
|
I'd combine A and B. A $40,000 high revving RWD coupe with 2+2 seating. A cheaper, reliable version of the classic Italian GT car (and have Pininfarina style it)
In the C category, I think it would be more practical and personally appealing is they made a kickass luxury AWD performance car along the lines of Audi's S class cars.
|
Grace141
|
|
330R wrote:
I'm sorry, Grace, ...
|
Let's agree on whatever Honda should decide to do if they decide to do anything here it needs to be a combo of Honda + ground-breaking + smart + cool looking. The US customer apparently didn't want a cheaper Prius, a luxury GT-ish empty nester CUV, or an off-roader-ish lifted sporty hatchback sedan thing with a truck-like grille. I really doubt a RWD sports GT that is also green with a super low CO2 count combined with quirky styling would sell all that well.
|
S600=Dream
|
|
I don't understand peoples' fascination with coupes unless they're AT LEAST Accord sized.
The BRZ feels awfully cramped inside to me. The S2000 would have been miserable as a coupe. The Miata *is* miserable with the top up, and I'm only 5'11! I can't imagine anyone taller than me enjoying something coupe-y and S2000 sized.
Anyhow, is there any real reason for Honda to go rear drive? I mean, yeah, the S2000 was a terrific car, obviously, and it would have been basically awful if it was front drive, but why shouldn't we embrace AWD? I love the idea of Honda bringing it to Subaru and Audi rather than chasing the rest of the RWD luxury crowd, especially if they figure out how to make the hybrid AWD system work well. In the real world, boy, it would be rad to have a line of cars like the TL and RL that got crazy good gas mileage and had the benefit of less mechanical baggage.
Here's the thing, profit margins don't lie, and Subaru and Toyota make zilch on that thing they're making. If they had just brought back the damn Celica with AWD they'd have been much better off financially. That the BRZ exists is cool, and I'm glad it's around, but I don't think Honda would do something as silly as make a car like that.
There's a reason VW is taking over the world, it's because they have a solid plan and solid products that use similar platforms. If anything, Honda should be doping *that* idea and making it their own, and if indeed "old" Honda is indeed back (fingers crossed that they are!), the products that come from that plan could be very exciting and innovative.
|
ClementZ
|
|
S600=Dream wrote:
I don't understand peoples' fascination with coupes unless they're AT LEAST Accord sized.
The BRZ feels awfully cramped inside to me. The S2000 would have been miserable as a coupe. The Miata *is* miserable with the top up, and I'm only 5'11! I can't imagine anyone taller than me enjoying something coupe-y and S2000 sized.
Anyhow, is there any real reason for Honda to go rear drive? I mean, yeah, the S2000 was a terrific car, obviously, and it would have been basically awful if it was front drive, but why shouldn't we embrace AWD? I love the idea of Honda bringing it to Subaru and Audi rather than chasing the rest of the RWD luxury crowd, especially if they figure out how to make the hybrid AWD system work well. In the real world, boy, it would be rad to have a line of cars like the TL and RL that got crazy good gas mileage and had the benefit of less mechanical baggage.
Here's the thing, profit margins don't lie, and Subaru and Toyota make zilch on that thing they're making. If they had just brought back the damn Celica with AWD they'd have been much better off financially. That the BRZ exists is cool, and I'm glad it's around, but I don't think Honda would do something as silly as make a car like that.
There's a reason VW is taking over the world, it's because they have a solid plan and solid products that use similar platforms. If anything, Honda should be doping *that* idea and making it their own, and if indeed "old" Honda is indeed back (fingers crossed that they are!), the products that come from that plan could be very exciting and innovative.
|
I'm 5'8, and I find that the Accord Coupe is quite big. But then again, I don't like big cars. I think the 09 Camry is too big, and the 05 Accord is a bit bigger than I would like.
Trust me, there are plenty of people who prefer small cars and coupes.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Dren wrote:
RolledaNsx wrote:
A) $ 25,000 Toyota/Subaru I4 Competitor
B) $ 40,000 S2000 Replacement
C) $ 60,000 + Toyota/BMW Supra/m class Competitor
And don't ask... they will not make all of them, American Honda
wants "A" for sure and would like an Acura "C"
|
I just ordered a BRZ. I would much rather have the K20 and 6 speed from my Civic Si in it than the Subaru engine. I know given the chance Honda could make something superior. Honda will not give up its sacred FWD. If anything comes from Honda, I expect it will be an S2000 successor.
|
Believe me, you don't!
The Subaru engine allows you to see out of the thing (unlike the stupid CR-Z) plus lowers the CG for fantastic handling and being a boxer, is very, very smooth. The F20c in the S2000 has such a nasty, tingly harmonic, it shakes off oil filters & loosens spark plugs. The balancer-shaft engines are I admit, for better in that respect.
The throttle response is good in 'sport' mode and the economy seems promising. Once the engine's loosened up - Subaru lumps are very 'tight' at first.
I've always loved boxer engines (good ones) and so am a bit biased. It gives the car character, a bit like the NSX's off-beat V6 does.
So don't worry about missing your Honda lump - it's not as concerning as you fear it will be. I know...
As for the vote, realistically I dunno.
I don't like the idea of a long-stroke K series in a sports car, though. So it needs virtually a dedicated engine. A de-stroked V6 might be a better place to start.
This has to be a DEDICATED plank - either an update of the S2000's excellent one, or else it can fuck right off. Another CR-Z abortion need not apply.
A me-too MX-5 or 86? Don't see the USP from here. A lightly updated, upscaled S2000, maybe Rotrexed (if there a four) and aiming closer to the next Supra (yes, it's coming!) and Z4/Boxster, would be more unique. I realise it'll be less hardcore & upcontented to appeal, but that's progress, allagedly.
Presumably, Acura still has the new RWD plank it can dust off for when the economy begins to get over its collapse apparently due in 2014. I'd say leveraging of the S2000 is for easier than doing something like an E92 rival - that's a bit of an uphill stuggle and too ambitious given the image damage they have recently endured.
Why do I get the feeling it'll be an Accord Coupe with a goofy grille & PAWS? At least the latter would be a USP. Renault tried something very similar with a Laguna coupe & that bombed too.
|
DCR
|
|
S600=Dream wrote:
Here's the thing, profit margins don't lie, and Subaru and Toyota make zilch on that thing they're making. If they had just brought back the damn Celica with AWD they'd have been much better off financially. That the BRZ exists is cool, and I'm glad it's around, but I don't think Honda would do something as silly as make a car like that.
|
Silly? How about pure genius?
I doubt the accolades and heaps and heaps of positive press and buzz are working against Toyota on this one. The problem with this thinking, is that the intangibles are not considered. This is the type of thinking that shelves S2000 successors and other exciting vehicles that attract attention to the brand. There is more to business than profit margins.
IF you approach a project with the full intention of producing something people would enjoy, and cash every check your mouth writes along the way, you will silence the harshest critics that you collect along the way as well.
The problem some people have with the 86, is that they didn't think it could be done, nor that Toyota could pull it off...and then add in no one thought it was going to actually be a good car. Thing is, Toyota wasn't chest thumping or spewing marketing bullshit about the car...and if they did, they were actually giving people a preview of what was to come.
Was Honda silly to produce the CR-Z?
Now that we know how the 86 turned out, and how good it is, now we can go back in time and read some things about how they were dead on and 100% correct about this car in the Toyota camp. I watched this car from rumor, to concept, to concept, yet another concept and more rumor, and I really had no intention on buying one. I knew what they were trying to accomplish, but I could be counted as one who had to see it to believe it. Fast forward a couple of years, and the moment I saw the car in person, I knew they nailed it. I didn't even have to open the door to know it, but once I did and turned the key, I knew it would be mine as soon as I could get one.
If Toyota can pry a buyer away from Honda after 21 years of exclusive ownership, I'd say they were anything but silly to build this car. Also, if I were Honda, I would be very worried about the next Supra. The same guy is running the show and he can deliver big, and given the success so far of the 86, there will be nothing but blank canvas and blank checks coming his way.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/the-truth-about-the-ft-86-straight-from-the-mouth-of-the-chief-engineer/
|
Fan Koni
|
|
An A+ a few would be nice.
To explain - a BRZ etc. copy - it would be to late by the time! nobody would care, Honda would see it coming and only do a cheap version, so no special plank etc.
It has to sell in numbers to be relevant to make money yes, but more importantly to have relevance to Honda heritage and recharge the Badge again.
The idea a small NSX.
They must be working on the new civic plank by now and linking it with the new generation of IMA.
So just like the RLX - turn it around!
RWD or e-AWD, 1.6 T & IMA & MT - that could catch and thinking of the European hatches would have more future in the market.
|
S600=Dream
|
|
DCR--I feel you dude. Well said.
I'm not actually bagging on the car, or the concept. Like I said, I'm really glad that Toyota brought the thing to fruition because it'll make everyone stand up straight and think "well, shit, we need some of that". I LOVE that idea.
In hindsight, I wish the CR-Z was more well thought out, and I wish it was the car that Honda had on the table for that niche of the market. I do love the thing for it's looks and even more for the concept that it puts out there, but it's poorly executed in so many ways.
Honda could have strapped on to that same market that the BRZ is now taking advantage of with the CR-Z, and what I'm hoping is that they replace it with something that brings the GT86 twins to their knees, only in a Honda way.
That means no rear drive, no special platforms, no silly marketing bullshit...just a solidly engineered entertaining as f@ck good car based on what's already being used. Be that a Type R or Type S or Si something, I don't give a damn. Just something small and rad.
We all know they can do it, because they did it to death in the 90's.
Here's to hoping!
|
330R
|
|
Grace141 wrote:
330R wrote:
I'm sorry, Grace, ...
|
Let's agree on whatever Honda should decide to do if they decide to do anything here it needs to be a combo of Honda + ground-breaking + smart + cool looking. The US customer apparently didn't want a cheaper Prius, a luxury GT-ish empty nester CUV, or an off-roader-ish lifted sporty hatchback sedan thing with a truck-like grille. I really doubt a RWD sports GT that is also green with a super low CO2 count combined with quirky styling would sell all that well.
|
After convoluted messes like the CR-Z and ZDX, and especially with the abject lack of simple, straightforward, fun cars in Honda's lineup (since the S2000 departed), why can't we just have one car that isn't ruined by trying to be something new and different for the sake of being new and different? That isn't ruined by being forced into a combination of hybrid sporty car or trucky retiree wagon or TL-MDX 4-door coupe.
I agree with you - I also really doubt a RWD sports GT, super green, with quirky styling is the way to go. That's why, for option A, it's not a sports GT but a more compact sports car/sports coupe (put it that way for the folks for whom a sports car means a drop top), RWD, NOT super green, and with handsome, not overwrought styling (I would hope).
All wheel drive, e-SH-AWD, SH-SH-AWD, whatever nomenclature, will be expensive and Honda/Acura will take their time allowing it to trickle down, if it even ever made its way to the Honda division where Acura exists. I think SH-AWD is great and would like to have it in something smaller, lighter, and more sport oriented than today's implementations, but maybe for something like option C?
Lightweight, tossable, as pure as can be for these times, great balance, something you want to wring out, something personal.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
DCR wrote:
S600=Dream wrote:
Here's the thing, profit margins don't lie, and Subaru and Toyota make zilch on that thing they're making. If they had just brought back the damn Celica with AWD they'd have been much better off financially. That the BRZ exists is cool, and I'm glad it's around, but I don't think Honda would do something as silly as make a car like that.
|
Silly? How about pure genius?
I doubt the accolades and heaps and heaps of positive press and buzz are working against Toyota on this one. The problem with this thinking, is that the intangibles are not considered. This is the type of thinking that shelves S2000 successors and other exciting vehicles that attract attention to the brand. There is more to business than profit margins.
IF you approach a project with the full intention of producing something people would enjoy, and cash every check your mouth writes along the way, you will silence the harshest critics that you collect along the way as well.
The problem some people have with the 86, is that they didn't think it could be done, nor that Toyota could pull it off...and then add in no one thought it was going to actually be a good car. Thing is, Toyota wasn't chest thumping or spewing marketing bullshit about the car...and if they did, they were actually giving people a preview of what was to come.
Was Honda silly to produce the CR-Z?
Now that we know how the 86 turned out, and how good it is, now we can go back in time and read some things about how they were dead on and 100% correct about this car in the Toyota camp. I watched this car from rumor, to concept, to concept, yet another concept and more rumor, and I really had no intention on buying one. I knew what they were trying to accomplish, but I could be counted as one who had to see it to believe it. Fast forward a couple of years, and the moment I saw the car in person, I knew they nailed it. I didn't even have to open the door to know it, but once I did and turned the key, I knew it would be mine as soon as I could get one.
If Toyota can pry a buyer away from Honda after 21 years of exclusive ownership, I'd say they were anything but silly to build this car. Also, if I were Honda, I would be very worried about the next Supra. The same guy is running the show and he can deliver big, and given the success so far of the 86, there will be nothing but blank canvas and blank checks coming his way.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/the-truth-about-the-ft-86-straight-from-the-mouth-of-the-chief-engineer/
|
Where is the evidence Toyobaru make no money on it? Recall costs have yet to even be factored-in and sales levels haven't settled down yet. Toyota seem pleased enough to leverage the idea and Mazda still stamps out MX-5s.
You can easily lose more money on a compromised abortion like the ZDX if it massively undershoots projected sales than a good car which matches or exceeds them.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - 1 [2] |
|  |
![[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}
