|
|
|
|
 |
TonyEX
 |
|
owequitit wrote:
Except that Honda also backed it up by waxing Toyota's ass all over CART and then when they ran to INDY, Honda followed them there and waxed their ass all over INDY too.
The point is the CEO didn't just say "we have a problem.". He said it and then backed it up through action, not through accusations.
|
Yes, but in CART both Toyota and Honda were playing by very strict rules: not only did they have to follow the formula but then it had to win races. In essence it was a close loop with the manufacturers responsible for their work in the "real world" out on the racetrack. The CART customers were professionals and extremely picky.
In CART, manufacturing did not win sales, only performance did.
The EPA is different: manufacturers can easily game the test but are not on the hook when they sell it to consumers. If the products fail to live up, or if the products are tuned all wrong, well the worst that happens is that people just put up with it.
With the EPA, manufacturing usually wins, only in egregious cases will lies and half truths be exposed.
In the real world, marketing twists reality with little responsibility for its actions. "Your results may vary" is a huge disclaimer.
|
TonyEX
|
|
DCR wrote:
We should all buy a Prius and see if we can get gas to $18/gallon US.
|
Obama will sell you a solar and wind power machine that uses algae to product gas.
It only costs $250K and produces five gallons a day (assuming 24 hour full sunshine and constant 50 mph wind).
But, if you donate to his campaign for a 3rd term he'll give you a $25K tax credit.
|
atomiclightbulb
|
|
CarGuyLee wrote:
Funny we didn't hear anything from Honda about testing the Equinox and saying that it and the CR-V were similar... or did they test and they were not similar at the time and the Equinox handily beat the CR-V numbers at the time and so Honda didn't make a fuss? What is it? Either they do this all the time and cars match what they say so they don't say anything, or they don't but still don't say anything. Makes you wonder doesn't it? |
I don't think Honda was as sensitive at that time to bad press as they seem to be now. The Civic-bashing changed that.
In any case, the automotive press trashed the Equinox pretty badly on the fuel economy claims and the transmission programming. I recall that Car & Driver and other magazines basically concluded that the Equinox's transmission was dumb as shit, the Equinox was miserable to drive, and the fuel economy was nowhere near the EPA rating.
sugaki wrote:
Altima gets better gas mileage than Honda? I don't care.
One thing I applaud Honda for is that they don't compromise the driving experience for nifty EPA numbers. I can't stand cars with dull throttle tip-in, tepid throttle mapping and uncomfortably low RPMs for sake of having a higher EPA MPG. |
I don't think the slight EPA rating disadvantage will matter much in the end. Without exception, pretty much every reviewer of the 2013 Accord has said that Honda's CVT is a step above Nissan's CVT. People are going to notice during test drives, and that gives the edge to Honda's product.
|
CarGuyLee
|
|
auto_enthu wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
gofast182 wrote:
superchg2 wrote:
Since Nissan has the prize for the best number, Honda's guys should just keep on working at improving their cars, rather than fretting about a done deal.
|
I get what you're saying and I agree however there seems to be an increasing amount of suspect EPA numbers. I'm recalling the Equinox which I believe was rated at 32 hwy (which GM touted in commercials) yet no automotive publication or consumer for that matter reported anything close to that. There have been other examples more recently, too. This isn't to say that the Altima isn't very good, rather that the EPA's numbers are sometimes suspect from car to car. And not for nothing but when real-world numbers are reported they usually seem to favor "less efficient" Honda products yet, unfortunately, many only bother to use the window sticker when shopping.
|
Funny we didn't hear anything from Honda about testing the Equinox and saying that it and the CR-V were similar... or did they test and they were not similar at the time and the Equinox handily beat the CR-V numbers at the time and so Honda didn't make a fuss? What is it? Either they do this all the time and cars match what they say so they don't say anything, or they don't but still don't say anything. Makes you wonder doesn't it?
Speculate all you want about automakers cheating, there is no good way to tell people 'your real world #'s will be better with this car' because unless you start taking week or month long test drives to see how it does.... you will never know because everyone drives different. Now if you take the EPA #'s of your current car and compare it to what you really get, you might have a scale to grade by when choosing your next car.
In this case 1 point for Nissan because the Accord couldn't match, that's all there is to it. Personally if I were buying today and had to choose between the Altima and the Accord I would most likley choose Accord, it is much more appealing to me, even if it is down 2MPG HWY.
|
Equinox has never been a major threat to CRVs sales.
But Altima is a clear threat to Accord.
Moreover, Honda has never promised class-leading MPG on other models before their release. It did that now for Accord. Since it made that stupid statement about achieving class-leading MPG, its now trying to do some damage control, and ending-up looking more stupid. That's typically GM kind of behaviour. Never expected this from Honda.
Honda should just keep quite and work towards improving the numbers in MMC.
|
Yeah because thoes 18-20K equinox that sell each month don't take any from CRV.
I do agree that it was kind of stupid to say that before it came out... but they have known what the Altima gets for a long time.
|
CarGuyLee
|
|
atomiclightbulb wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
Funny we didn't hear anything from Honda about testing the Equinox and saying that it and the CR-V were similar... or did they test and they were not similar at the time and the Equinox handily beat the CR-V numbers at the time and so Honda didn't make a fuss? What is it? Either they do this all the time and cars match what they say so they don't say anything, or they don't but still don't say anything. Makes you wonder doesn't it? |
I don't think Honda was as sensitive at that time to bad press as they seem to be now. The Civic-bashing changed that.
In any case, the automotive press trashed the Equinox pretty badly on the fuel economy claims and the transmission programming. I recall that Car & Driver and other magazines basically concluded that the Equinox's transmission was dumb as shit, the Equinox was miserable to drive, and the fuel economy was nowhere near the EPA rating.
sugaki wrote:
Altima gets better gas mileage than Honda? I don't care.
One thing I applaud Honda for is that they don't compromise the driving experience for nifty EPA numbers. I can't stand cars with dull throttle tip-in, tepid throttle mapping and uncomfortably low RPMs for sake of having a higher EPA MPG. |
I don't think the slight EPA rating disadvantage will matter much in the end. Without exception, pretty much every reviewer of the 2013 Accord has said that Honda's CVT is a step above Nissan's CVT. People are going to notice during test drives, and that gives the edge to Honda's product.
|
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Atomic Frog
|
|
Yeah, I think I agree with that knowing how many of those Japanese engineers work (I've dealt a lot with them).
They've tested the Altima & Accord side by side under the same conditions and they get equivalent numbers. I don't think that's their complaint. Their complaint is how can the official numbers be so much higher? And it isn't a question, I think it's a statement. You can't outright go to the EPA and say "I think our competitor is fudging the results!"
Somebody more in tune with the process can chime in, but my understanding is that the EPA doesn't normally test the cars, the manufacturers test them under EPA stipulated conditions and report them, honour system.
One thing that I've been very pleased with most of my past Honda/Acura's (the turbo RDX is one exception) is that they've always met or beat their stated mileage numbers. Not so with other cars I've driven.
|
atomiclightbulb
|
|
CarGuyLee wrote:
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Where the Accord is concerned, I don't think Honda has much to worry about. Insideline just published their comparison test of the 2013 Accord vs the 2012 Camry, and the results weren't even close: Accord dominated the comparison in virtually every category: powertrain performance, efficiency, interior, handling, electronics, etc.
As for the Civic, only ONE publication complained about ride quality: Consumer Reports. It's bullshit. I've driven the 9G Civic EX and the ride quality is absolutely fine. Go back and read reviews from Insideline, Motor Trend, Cars.com, and Car and Driver. Nobody complains about ride quality. Nobody except Consumer Reports. This is a case where a lie that is repeated over and over again takes on a life of its own.
|
longhorn
|
|
The manufacturers do the majority of the mpg tests and EPA does something like 10% of the vehicles. Honda must at one time thought they could clearly beat the competition. We have known since Detroit in January that the Ford Fusion was going to get 37mpg in one of its trims and since the New York Show in April that the Altima was going to get 38 mpg.
In an Autonews article it stated that the Accord was going to be lighter than it is now, however due to a new crash test Honda had to add more reinforcement to the engine area, adding more weight. So maybe before that last second change was made, in Honda tests the Accord did beat the Altima.
|
CarGuyLee
|
|
atomiclightbulb wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Where the Accord is concerned, I don't think Honda has much to worry about. Insideline just published their comparison test of the 2013 Accord vs the 2012 Camry, and the results weren't even close: Accord dominated the comparison in virtually every category: powertrain performance, efficiency, interior, handling, electronics, etc.
As for the Civic, only ONE publication complained about ride quality: Consumer Reports. It's bullshit. I've driven the 9G Civic EX and the ride quality is absolutely fine. Go back and read reviews from Insideline, Motor Trend, Cars.com, and Car and Driver. Nobody complains about ride quality. Nobody except Consumer Reports. This is a case where a lie that is repeated over and over again takes on a life of its own.
|
And it's the one mag that people gave a lot of credit to... until that. It's the ol pick and choose what's best for me game. Everyone values their opinion until it's negitive about something they like...then it's a terrible mag.
My beef lies with people who think that their company is the only company, and when someone else does better, they are cheating.
|
P54
|
|
CarGuyLee wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Where the Accord is concerned, I don't think Honda has much to worry about. Insideline just published their comparison test of the 2013 Accord vs the 2012 Camry, and the results weren't even close: Accord dominated the comparison in virtually every category: powertrain performance, efficiency, interior, handling, electronics, etc.
As for the Civic, only ONE publication complained about ride quality: Consumer Reports. It's bullshit. I've driven the 9G Civic EX and the ride quality is absolutely fine. Go back and read reviews from Insideline, Motor Trend, Cars.com, and Car and Driver. Nobody complains about ride quality. Nobody except Consumer Reports. This is a case where a lie that is repeated over and over again takes on a life of its own.
|
And it's the one mag that people gave a lot of credit to... until that. It's the ol pick and choose what's best for me game. Everyone values their opinion until it's negitive about something they like...then it's a terrible mag.
My beef lies with people who think that their company is the only company, and when someone else does better, they are cheating.
|
A magazine looses its credibility when it comes to the surface that the guy at CR that was in charge of automotive testing actually came from Nissan. Any coincidence that Altima was rated among the best in the class and Accord slipping? Any coincidence the Civic is not recommended, however sells in big numbers? Any coincidence the auto tester at CR now has quit his job and is back with Nissan. This gives a bad taste in your mouth. When this comes out that is when the magazine looses its credibility. Up until that point you wondered why do they not recommend the Civic while most other test magazines don't come to that conclusion, even one mag questions the test results from CR.
|
CarGuyLee
|
|
P54 wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Where the Accord is concerned, I don't think Honda has much to worry about. Insideline just published their comparison test of the 2013 Accord vs the 2012 Camry, and the results weren't even close: Accord dominated the comparison in virtually every category: powertrain performance, efficiency, interior, handling, electronics, etc.
As for the Civic, only ONE publication complained about ride quality: Consumer Reports. It's bullshit. I've driven the 9G Civic EX and the ride quality is absolutely fine. Go back and read reviews from Insideline, Motor Trend, Cars.com, and Car and Driver. Nobody complains about ride quality. Nobody except Consumer Reports. This is a case where a lie that is repeated over and over again takes on a life of its own.
|
And it's the one mag that people gave a lot of credit to... until that. It's the ol pick and choose what's best for me game. Everyone values their opinion until it's negitive about something they like...then it's a terrible mag.
My beef lies with people who think that their company is the only company, and when someone else does better, they are cheating.
|
A magazine looses its credibility when it comes to the surface that the guy at CR that was in charge of automotive testing actually came from Nissan. Any coincidence that Altima was rated among the best in the class and Accord slipping? Any coincidence the Civic is not recommended, however sells in big numbers? Any coincidence the auto tester at CR now has quit his job and is back with Nissan. This gives a bad taste in your mouth. When this comes out that is when the magazine looses its credibility. Up until that point you wondered why do they not recommend the Civic while most other test magazines don't come to that conclusion, even one mag questions the test results from CR.
|
Again, everyone loved the mag until then....sounds like a bunch of GMinside people whining about CR
|
NealX
|
|
P54 wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Where the Accord is concerned, I don't think Honda has much to worry about. Insideline just published their comparison test of the 2013 Accord vs the 2012 Camry, and the results weren't even close: Accord dominated the comparison in virtually every category: powertrain performance, efficiency, interior, handling, electronics, etc.
As for the Civic, only ONE publication complained about ride quality: Consumer Reports. It's bullshit. I've driven the 9G Civic EX and the ride quality is absolutely fine. Go back and read reviews from Insideline, Motor Trend, Cars.com, and Car and Driver. Nobody complains about ride quality. Nobody except Consumer Reports. This is a case where a lie that is repeated over and over again takes on a life of its own.
|
And it's the one mag that people gave a lot of credit to... until that. It's the ol pick and choose what's best for me game. Everyone values their opinion until it's negitive about something they like...then it's a terrible mag.
My beef lies with people who think that their company is the only company, and when someone else does better, they are cheating.
|
A magazine looses its credibility when it comes to the surface that the guy at CR that was in charge of automotive testing actually came from Nissan. Any coincidence that Altima was rated among the best in the class and Accord slipping? Any coincidence the Civic is not recommended, however sells in big numbers? Any coincidence the auto tester at CR now has quit his job and is back with Nissan. This gives a bad taste in your mouth. When this comes out that is when the magazine looses its credibility. Up until that point you wondered why do they not recommend the Civic while most other test magazines don't come to that conclusion, even one mag questions the test results from CR.
|
One would certainly think that. But dig a little deeper and you may find that he was hired AFTER those two reviews. Amazing...
|
owequitit
|
|
Neal wrote:
P54 wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
atomiclightbulb wrote:
CarGuyLee wrote:
Yeah that's why the Equinox sells so terribly.....all the bad things you mentioned... kind of like the Civic for all it's "
choppy ride and cheap interior" according to the automotive press....works both ways for name calling.
In any case Honda evidently wasn't worried until now.
|
Where the Accord is concerned, I don't think Honda has much to worry about. Insideline just published their comparison test of the 2013 Accord vs the 2012 Camry, and the results weren't even close: Accord dominated the comparison in virtually every category: powertrain performance, efficiency, interior, handling, electronics, etc.
As for the Civic, only ONE publication complained about ride quality: Consumer Reports. It's bullshit. I've driven the 9G Civic EX and the ride quality is absolutely fine. Go back and read reviews from Insideline, Motor Trend, Cars.com, and Car and Driver. Nobody complains about ride quality. Nobody except Consumer Reports. This is a case where a lie that is repeated over and over again takes on a life of its own.
|
And it's the one mag that people gave a lot of credit to... until that. It's the ol pick and choose what's best for me game. Everyone values their opinion until it's negitive about something they like...then it's a terrible mag.
My beef lies with people who think that their company is the only company, and when someone else does better, they are cheating.
|
A magazine looses its credibility when it comes to the surface that the guy at CR that was in charge of automotive testing actually came from Nissan. Any coincidence that Altima was rated among the best in the class and Accord slipping? Any coincidence the Civic is not recommended, however sells in big numbers? Any coincidence the auto tester at CR now has quit his job and is back with Nissan. This gives a bad taste in your mouth. When this comes out that is when the magazine looses its credibility. Up until that point you wondered why do they not recommend the Civic while most other test magazines don't come to that conclusion, even one mag questions the test results from CR.
|
One would certainly think that. But dig a little deeper and you may find that he was hired AFTER those two reviews. Amazing...
|
OH Snap!
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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}
