aznstuart
 |
|
http://hondanews.com/channels/corporate-headlines/releases/2013-honda-crosstour-now-offers-class-leading-fuel-efficiency-more-v-6-power-refined-styling-enhanced-visibility-and-new-lower-base-price
...surprised this hasn't been posted anywhere yet.
|
P54
|
|
aznstuart wrote:
http://hondanews.com/channels/corporate-headlines/releases/2013-honda-crosstour-now-offers-class-leading-fuel-efficiency-more-v-6-power-refined-styling-enhanced-visibility-and-new-lower-base-price
...surprised this hasn't been posted anywhere yet.
|
I could have done it this morning, however I didn't think this forum had any interest in Crosstour.
|
xBeastx
|
|
aznstuart wrote:
...surprised this hasn't been posted anywhere yet.
|
Probably because no one cares...
|
NealX
|
|
Wow! Could be the world's longest url.
Welp, I do think the brown color looks nice, though some might joke that it's subliminal for "Crossturd." And overall the photos are better quality - much like the new Accord and revised Civic teasers.
They're tryin'...
|
S600=Dream
|
|
Did it switch over to struts with the new Accord or is this guy still basically the same car with a new nose?
Either way, I've never had anything against the Crosstour. I think it's quite fetching looking, and unique. The new one adds to that and goes a step further in making it look a bit classier.
I admit, I don't like the wood on the dash--not my taste. That said, it is pretty classy looking.
|
sa3eedi
|
|
|
So why does this get the old 4 cylinder powertrain, while the v6 gets the new earthdreams 6at version
|
Restless
|
|
It could sell well in Europe fighting with Audi/VW "allroad" versions.
Just if exterior was better :S
|
Midi_Amp
|
|
|
It's the fat rump that ruins this car, else everything is good. Good engine, okay 4WD, usual Honda packaging... It's just that confusing designed rear area that makes things ugh. The refreshed front end is very good, bold and premium looking, the rear... Well, the bumper is okay, everything above that is crap.
|
CivicB18
|
|
sa3eedi wrote:
So why does this get the old 4 cylinder powertrain, while the v6 gets the new earthdreams 6at version
|
More than likely cost and packaging reasons. The V6/6AT isn't physically different in size vs the former V6/5AT. The new DI 4cyl however I think is positioned differently as the exhaust manifold returns to the front of the car instead the previous K24's exhaust manifold is by the firewall.
~Patrick
|
trexdoc
|
|
The "CrossTour" is one of the worst Honda productions I've ever seen. It's a total cluster. This evaluation is coming from a Honda fan whose first auto purchase was an incredible '85 Accord in 1991.
This "updated" model is a mesh of the awful 8th gen Accord and newer, updated "tech" (Push Button Start, "Lane Watch", blah, blah, etc). Just look at the HVAC and radio controls - each are from different generations! Why is Honda still using toggle switches for the dual climate control - look at the CR-V - a much simpler design.
Also, why the heck is the CT still using the ancient "RT-4WD" system (and not the updated system from the new gen CR-V)?
Lastly, why is any Honda 6 cylinder still using a timing belt?
The CT is like a Frankenstein with the bean counters using all available parts bins from other models; instead, Honda should be focusing on the CT's terrible rear end with efforts to form an overall cohesive design.
Good grief.
|
FondaHonda
|
|
|
Vastly improved. It's cleaner, safer, far more rugged and upscale. Nice color as shown but the remarkable shade of blue of the prototype at the NYC International Auto Show I admired in person was even more of a knockout. Honda's back!
|
Frogger
|
|
Differences: diffuser partially obscuring the gas tank (+1), a deeper rear window (no smoke window? is this just the angle of photo? due to backup cameras, et. al? +1), painted furnishing between lamps and hatch, bumper reflectors, lower load height?
Rear does indeed look like an El Camino, but couldn't get worse from Gen 1
|
Frogger
|
|
Nothing new here... but you can see how the rear has indeed dropped. New wheels a little frumpy IMHO and I prefer the old sleeker fogs.
|
BachelorFrog
|
|
That bulge really piss me off, totally wasting all that space.
|
Frogger
|
|
Mid=new Crosstour, Lower= new Accord...
New Accord steering wheel thrown in old Accord dash. If materials are updated, not necessarily complaining loudly about that. Strange drop extension from the stereo controls tho, exposes the derivative nature.
|
Frogger
|
|
|
Frogger
|
|
Crosstour leather and seating appointments continue to look nicer than the Accords...
|
DCR
|
|
FondaHonda wrote:
Vastly improved. It's cleaner, safer, far more rugged and upscale. Nice color as shown but the remarkable shade of blue of the prototype at the NYC International Auto Show I admired in person was even more of a knockout. Honda's back!
|
This is what makes you believe Honda is back?
|
xBeastx
|
|
|
When will this be up on Honda's website?
|
XDreammachineX
|
|
Frogger wrote:
Crosstour leather and seating appointments continue to look nicer than the Accords...
|
Are you sure? The leather in Accords are now perforated but the leather in Crosstour appears to be the old/non-perforated version. IMO, the perforated version is (slightly) more upscale. Although to be truly upscale, it needs to be a much better leather, which is not the leather in Accord. But hey, I am buying an Accord, not a Porsche, or Audi...
|
superchg2
|
|
FondaHonda wrote:
Vastly improved. It's cleaner, safer, far more rugged and upscale. Nice color as shown but the remarkable shade of blue of the prototype at the NYC International Auto Show I admired in person was even more of a knockout. Honda's back!
|
I'd like to get a hold of whatever you're smoking, Fonda!
Even if you polish it, it's still a Crossturd!
|
superchg2
|
|
FondaHonda wrote:
Vastly improved. It's cleaner, safer, far more rugged and upscale. Nice color as shown but the remarkable shade of blue of the prototype at the NYC International Auto Show I admired in person was even more of a knockout. Honda's back!
|
I'd like to get a hold of whatever you're smoking, Fonda!
Even if you polish it, it's still a Cross turd!
|
Frogger
|
|
XDreammachineX wrote:
The leather in Accords are now perforated but the leather in Crosstour appears to be the old/non-perforated version. IMO, the perforated version is (slightly) more upscale. Although to be truly upscale, it needs to be a much better leather, which is not the leather in Accord. But hey, I am buying an Accord, not a Porsche, or Audi...
|
It looks in photos as though the back of the Accord front seats are hard plastic as they are in our Legacy, which is also perforated, but far from nice. The CT seats are still soft either vinyl or leather back there... CT on top below:
|
danielgr
|
|
BachelorFrog wrote:
That bulge really piss me off, totally wasting all that space.
|
That is the price to pay for a fully independent double wishbone suspension. If Honda were to go with a torsion beam like the car in the right most likely uses, the TOV horde wouldn't stop complaining about cost cuts and what not...
|
jshaw
|
|
danielgr wrote:
BachelorFrog wrote:
That bulge really piss me off, totally wasting all that space.
|
That is the price to pay for a fully independent double wishbone suspension. If Honda were to go with a torsion beam like the car in the right most likely uses, the TOV horde wouldn't stop complaining about cost cuts and what not...
|
That's the subau outback, it actually has a rear double wishbone suspension.
|
owequitit
|
|
danielgr wrote:
BachelorFrog wrote:
That bulge really piss me off, totally wasting all that space.
|
That is the price to pay for a fully independent double wishbone suspension. If Honda were to go with a torsion beam like the car in the right most likely uses, the TOV horde wouldn't stop complaining about cost cuts and what not...
|
http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/outback/vehicle-specs.html
Probably need to get your facts straight Daniel. Especially when you preach from on high about it.
The car on the right is a Subaru Outback, and it is equipped with 4 wheel independent suspension, and double wishbone rear suspension. The likelihood is that they simply packaged it more efficiently than Honda did on the Crosstour, which doesn't feature rear double wishbone suspension, but rather multi-link. Of course the fact that the Subaru doesn't feature sloping backglass only serves to highlight the Crosstour's packaging inefficiency more, since it is quite large for the amount of cargo space it provides.
No, Honda just failed on that one in about every way imaginable.
|
superchg2
|
|
danielgr wrote:
That is the price to pay for a fully independent double wishbone suspension. If Honda were to go with a torsion beam like the car in the right most likely uses, the TOV horde wouldn't stop complaining about cost cuts and what not...
|
Actually danielgr, the TOV horde has come to bring you down from your perch high up on Mount Arrogance!
|
danielgr
|
|
owequitit wrote:
danielgr wrote:
BachelorFrog wrote:
That bulge really piss me off, totally wasting all that space.
|
That is the price to pay for a fully independent double wishbone suspension. If Honda were to go with a torsion beam like the car in the right most likely uses, the TOV horde wouldn't stop complaining about cost cuts and what not...
|
http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/outback/vehicle-specs.htmlProbably need to get your facts straight Daniel. Especially when you preach from on high about it.
The car on the right is a Subaru Outback, and it is equipped with 4 wheel independent suspension, and double wishbone rear suspension. The likelihood is that they simply packaged it more efficiently than Honda did on the Crosstour, which doesn't feature rear double wishbone suspension, but rather multi-link. Of course the fact that the Subaru doesn't feature sloping backglass only serves to highlight the Crosstour's packaging inefficiency more, since it is quite large for the amount of cargo space it provides.
No, Honda just failed on that one in about every way imaginable.
|
Personally, I've never seen a problem with people making wrong statements, as long as :
- They correctly quote their beliefs as such.
- They find no problem in coming back and admitting their wrongs.
I sure try to do both every time, like I did in this case.
Now, sorry if I wrote my post on a 3,7" screen smartphone and the picture wasn't that clear to me.
It's because of it, and because I posted on a rush, that I stated "most likely", 'cause I couldn't be sure.
Indeed, now on my PC I can clearly see the suspension towers on the right car as well (as they are on any car with such a rear suspension).
I can also see that:
- the camera position in the CrossTour exaggerates the prominence of those bulges, since it's a wide angle lens positioned just at the entrance of the trunk.
- that of the Outback has little or no deformation, and sits well behind the rear of the car, hiding the towers.
It is also difficult to judge without seeing the actual height of the cars, as well as the trunk bottom level. Personally I would need to see them both in real life, or see some actual measurements.
Yet as usual owe, you focus on attacking me while disregarding my point. My point is that the elaborated rear suspension that makes the CT a great drive is what costs that extra utility convenience. You can find all kinds of compromises made one way or the other. I believe the CT basically shares the 5-link suspension geometry that debuted in the 1997 Accord, which may not be the most compact around, but offers other advantages.
Again, there are for sure more compact independent designs (Honda has built many through the years), none as space-saving as a torsion beam, the same way one can go front wishbones or struts. Each suspension geometry has advantages and trade-offs, and saying that "this or that automaker has made a poor job with the bulges" is simply disregarding that reality. I'm pretty sure Honda has no better way of making them smaller without changing the rear suspension for something less sophisticated, at which point they would be criticized by some for "cheapening" the sacred mechanical parts in favor of some less essential virtues such as "roominess".
Now, if you have something to say regarding my point, you are more than welcome to argue.
|
DanielAcosta
|
|
BachelorFrog wrote:
That bulge really piss me off, totally wasting all that space.
|
If you look in the trunk of the Accord which the Crosstour is based on, you will see the same rear suspension towers. Thus the Accord has a smaller rear pass through than competing sedans, but it's not as objectionable a difference on sedans as it is on wagons where rear cargo space is a much more important shopping criteria. Honda's own specs show the CRV has a lot more cargo space than the Crosstour.
That Outback on the right has been on our short list for quite awhile because of its superior awd system and off-road performance. Somebody else already mentioned the Crosstour needs the newer awd system the CRV has. The two things holding us back from buying the Subaru are interior creature comforts that are missing compared to Honda/Toyota (auto up/down windows, illuminated window switches, streaming audio and Bluetooth phone address book importing, etc.) and a CVT that pales compared to the CVT in the 13 Accord.
|
gogzy
|
|
|
can that has something to do with wheel size and the ground clearances too? My suspicion is Honda is lower and so the suspension and wheel are more intrude to the body.
|
|
|
| |
![[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}
