Topic: New Honda models are slow sellers... duh?

[Ice]

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/06/cr-z-crosstour-insight-sales-hurting-odyssey-lone-bright-spo/

Alright I read that and I felt the need to comment and maybe start a bit of a discussion here. When I started looking at cars back in 2006 the Honda's were one of the first I gravitated towards. A bit sportier than Toyota, great reputation for solid cars, and most of all...their cars made sense to me. Fast forward to now and the discussion about slow selling CR-Z, Crosstour, and Insight. None of them interest me very much... whoever at Honda is calling the shots right now is missing the boat big time.

Everyone was excited when the initial Crosstour mule shots came out. It was a modified Accord Wagon that they used for the mule. Then when it was spied closer to the release everyone was aghast... and then it came out. It looks like a disaster. It's actually a very decent vehicle but the pricing, packaging and design are horrendous. The Venza seems to be a success (I see them all over) but the Crosstour is seen few and far between.

The Insight seemed like Honda was making a legitimate push for the hybrid again... but then we all heard it was Honda's old IMA system and from then on I knew it couldn't hold a candle to the Prius. That's a difficult fight to have on the best days... but Honda desperately needs a new hybrid system if they want to play in that space.

The CR-Z is by far the coolest of the bunch but it's held back by a mediocre engine and power train. How it's less powerful and less fuel efficient than larger cars... I'll never know. It makes no practical sense, I've heard it's pretty decent handling wise... but it's just not got anything going for it aside from some pretty unique styling.

Odyssey is apparently selling well so far... sure the styling may be a bit weird for some but it's still a traditional minivan design ultimately and Honda makes one of the best.

So if you were Honda execs... what would you do to the lineup? Keepers? Redesigns? Throw aways?

[rrocket]

--They've dropped the MSRP on the Insight for 2011/12.  So that may help. ($18,200 USD)

--The CR-Z is supposed to be coming with a naturally aspirated engine OR turbo engine.  The sportiest of the bunch will be 160-180HP.

--The Crosstour?  Not sure what to do with this one.

So it looks like they are addressing these issues for the time being.  Will it help?  I don't know.


But the three models you've listed are hardly the bread and butter models.  That belongs to the VERY popular Civic and Accords.  Need a minivan?  The Odyssey is likely the best on the market.  The CR-V and Pilot SUVs are widely are quite good too.

[Mitlov]

So if you were Honda execs... what would you do to the lineup? Keepers? Redesigns? Throw aways?

Can I get a hallelujah?

[Cam]

As a former long-term Honda supporter, I have to say that it's the Honda execs that are the throw aways.  Whomever is making the decisions on design and content needs to fall on their collective swords.  The contrast with Hyundai/Kia shows just how fast empires can fall.

[Erik]

But the other side is that the meat of the line, the Accord, Civic and Fit, are competitive to say the least and are likely the class leaders and just damn good cars. Any one of them would be a pleasure to have in my garage!

[5 Wheel Drive]

I've always liked Honda's, so I've always had one.  Until we needed something with a little bit of space.  I wasn't ready to give up my clutch pedal, the current CR-V was auto only, no more 5 speed.  I really liked the CR-V, but I'm perfectly happy with the Forester.

I think both the Civic and CR-V have redesign's coming in the next year or 2.  I think?

Definitely put the engine from the Civic Si into the CR-Z.  Bring on a CR-Z Si!

Lose the Crosstour.  I think I've seen 1 on the road since it's been out.  The rest of the Accord line up is good.  As much as I would like to see a proper Accord wagon, I know it won't happen.  It needs a little fun-to-drive factor injected into it from previous generations.

As ugly as the Pilot is, it seems to be selling ok.  I see lots of them around.

The new Odyssey is, IMO, the best van out there.

[Shnak]

But the other side is that the meat of the line, the Accord, Civic and Fit, are competitive to say the least and are likely the class leaders and just damn good cars. Any one of them would be a pleasure to have in my garage!

And that's the important thing... the bread and butter vehicles are all doing very well for Honda... the Fit, Civic, Accord, CR-V, Pilot and Odyssey are all very competitive in their respective segments and all selling well. As long as those core vehicles do well, Honda can afford a little experimentation with vehicles like those listed here... CR-Z, CrossTour, Insight, Ridgeline, Element, etc. Any of these are bonuses if they work out, if not, oh well, Honda tried something different and will use some of that R&D into future 'core' vehicles.

[Guy]

As a former long-term Honda supporter, I have to say that it's the Honda execs that are the throw aways.  Whomever is making the decisions on design and content needs to fall on their collective swords.  The contrast with Hyundai/Kia shows just how fast empires can fall.

 

[Gardiner Westbound]

Honda/Acura has lost its mojo. It’s been coasting on its positive 1990s reputation for powertrain innovation and quality. Recent models are technologically uncompetitive, eat automatic transmissions, air conditioner compressors and audio equipment like hot dogs at a baseball game and are odd looking. Other defects include bad brake master cylinders, rotors, wheel bearings, oxygen sensors, power window servos and interior squeaks and rattles. Stingy warranty administration is killing its image for quality and integrity.

[Weels]

I just find that personally, there's nothing that excites me in the Honda lineup.

That sums it up for me too.  There has always been something in the Honda/Acura lineup that caught my interest, but nothing now.  The best of the lot I think is the TSX, but its essentially just a TL now, very little like the 1st gen model, which I had and really liked.

Strangely enough, I was at Crappy tire over this past weekend and I parked between a Crosstour and a ZDX (should have taken a picture).  I say strangely because it felt like one of those 'where the planets align' sort of moments where the one person that owns a Crosstour and the other person that has a ZDX in a 100 mile radius were in the same lot at the same time... anyway, I could not believe how huge the ZDX was - it made the Crosstour look like a Civic, not to mention my TL parked between them look like a Hot Wheel.

I couldn't imagine parking that ZDX - its as wide as it is long, and with what looked like massive blind spots.

[evil_twin]

I see the odd Crosstour here in town - just a complete monstrosity. The Honda Aztek.


I saw my first CR-Z....looked great. They put a peppy turbo engine in there and it'll be a winner.

Agree with this.  I think the CR-Z is a great design - just have no interest in the current powertrain.

Other than that, 'meh' as far as the Honda lineup.  Like the Si sedan I suppose, but I'd take a GTI for myself.

Hoping the 2012 CR-V is a nice design and maybe more powerful as it could be an option for wife's next ride.

[footlong58]

Honda/Acura has lost its mojo. It’s been coasting on its positive 1990s reputation for powertrain innovation and quality. Recent models are technologically uncompetitive, eat automatic transmissions, air conditioner compressors and audio equipment like hot dogs at a baseball game and are odd looking. Other defects include bad brake master cylinders, rotors, wheel bearings, oxygen sensors, power window servos and interior squeaks and rattles. Stingy warranty administration is killing its image for quality and integrity.

I think Acura's near future choices could put the brand under...  They have NOTHING going for them, nothing.  Not a single car is a standout.

[Shnak]

Honda/Acura has lost its mojo. It’s been coasting on its positive 1990s reputation for powertrain innovation and quality. Recent models are technologically uncompetitive, eat automatic transmissions, air conditioner compressors and audio equipment like hot dogs at a baseball game and are odd looking. Other defects include bad brake master cylinders, rotors, wheel bearings, oxygen sensors, power window servos and interior squeaks and rattles. Stingy warranty administration is killing its image for quality and integrity.

I think Acura's near future choices could put the brand under...  They have NOTHING going for them, nothing.  Not a single car is a standout.

And yet, they still outsell Infiniti, Audi, Lincoln and Volvo. Not bad for a lineup with "NOTHING going for them, nothing". Say what you want, but the MDX is one of the best mid-size SUVs around, it looks great and it sells great. Both the TL and TSX, while having controversial styling, sell reasonably well also.

US Sales for first 9 months of 2010:
Mercedes-Benz 165,427
Lexus 162,438
BMW 157,464
Buick 114,000
Cadillac 105,013
Acura 96,388
Infiniti 74,797
Audi 73,590
Lincoln 63,286
Volvo 32,525

[Mitlov]

Honda's not in dire straits YET.  The three flops mentioned in the original article are all niche vehicles, not their meat-and-potatoes vehicles (Fit, Civic, Accord, CR-V, Pilot, Odyssey).  HOWEVER, I am concerned looking at recent Honda offerings that Honda is starting to lose its focus.  A company's lineup can't be all things to all people.  You have to know what your strengths are and what your weaknesses are. 

If I was running Honda, I would run every new design through the following litmus test.  Cars that passed would have, I think, a distinct "Honda-esque" identity that helped build the brand into what it is today.

Not everyone is going to like the results of this litmus test.  That's fine.  Honda doesn't have to be the best-selling car maker on the planet so long as it makes a profit on each car it sells.  Better to have a coherent vision and know your base than to dilute your product by being too many different things to too many different people.  I think the best examples of recent cars that fit this litmus test are the current Fit, the current Civic, the recently-deceased S2000, the first-gen TSX, and last but certainly not least, the NSX (the perfect halo car for Honda's traditional virtues).  Not right for everyone, but nevertheless, excellent and successful cars.

Under my litmus test, the car MUST have the following strengths

Relatively light for its class
Relatively agile for its class
Relatively fuel-efficient for its class
Relatively high-revving for its class
Simple, modern, aerodynamic exterior design
Function-over-form interior design
Over time, good mechanical and electronics reliability

Under my litmus test, the car MAY have the following weaknesses and still pass the test

Relatively high road noise for its class
Relatively low torque for its class
No traditional good looks (inside or out) if traditional good looks don't make as much sense from an engineering/pragmatic standpoint
Over time, squeaks and rattles develop

[Shnak]

Do we know for a fact that Honda made money on selling NSX and S2000's?

[Mike]

Do we know for a fact that Honda made money on selling NSX and S2000's?

I can't say yes for a fact, but I would assume so.  The S2000 didn't have any exotic techology on it that wouldn't be covered by its price.  It seemed to be a hit initial for Honda for what it was.  The NSX had such a long, worldwide market run I would hope it eventually broke even.

[Shnak]

Do we know for a fact that Honda made money on selling NSX and S2000's?

I can't say yes for a fact, but I would assume so.  The S2000 didn't have any exotic techology on it that wouldn't be covered by its price.  It seemed to be a hit initial for Honda for what it was.  The NSX had such a long, worldwide market run I would hope it eventually broke even.

Sure, but the S2000 never sold in great numbers, did it? And why did Honda decide to stop making the S2000 if it was making money for them?

[Mitlov]

Sure, but the S2000 never sold in great numbers, did it? And why did Honda decide to stop making the S2000 if it was making money for them?

Because they don't ALWAYS make the right decisions, as the original post makes clear (three recent models flopping).

If you want, ignore the passing mention of the S2000 and NSX in my last post.  Do you disagree with the main point of the post--that Honda needs to get back to having a coherent vision for all of its lineup, and my summary of what that coherent vision should be?

[Shnak]

Relatively high-revving for its class

Why the heck would Honda want that as part of their coherent vision? Do you think that everyone who buys any Honda other than a Si wants to hear an engine screaming to 6000rpm to get decent power?

[Mitlov]

Relatively high-revving for its class

Why the heck would Honda want that as part of their coherent vision? Do you think that everyone who buys any Honda other than a Si wants to hear an engine screaming to 6000rpm to get decent power?

It hasn't hurt the Civic's reputation.  The Civic's always been high-revving but low-torque relative to its competition.  Same with the four-cylinder TSX.  And the Integra.  And even, traditionally, the four-cylinder Accord (which was more comfortable revving than your average family sedan).  That's part of Honda's unique character, and I think preserving that unique character is important long-term.