Honda Car Forum

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <S6CdnX3Ol7PF1RHbnZ2dnUVZ_rS3nZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> I'm pretty sure they decided to aim the Accord coupe V6/manual
>>> transmission at that market.
>>>
>>> After all, the 'lude was built on the Accord chassis.
>>>
>> in which case, why not just sell a prelude?
>
> Ah, but you forget: the beancounters were in charge during that time.
>
> It is cheaper to make the Accord than a model with different sheet metal
> and interior.

but the accord coupe is extensively re-worked. can't see any cost
saving between that and a prelude.

>
> They may yet bring back the 'lude, now that the engineers seem to be
> back on the throne, but no doubt it's way down on their to-do list.

remains to be seen. they haven't cured the civic wishbone thing yet.
and they're not addressing the fact that they don't have anything to
touch the evo/wrx yet either. [that's a /serious/ failing.] all it
takes is a new prelude with 4wd and a blown s2000 motor to get that ball
rolling. even if it were limited edition. redirecting resources to
giant suv's??? wtf were they thinking?

btw, that wrx is one heckofa car. got passed by modded one a few weeks
back - no idea what he had under the hood, but the noise was such that i
looked in the mirror to see what was going on. wrx emerging from an
on-ramp maybe 300 meters back. two shifts [and about as many seconds]
later, he passed my sorry 85mph ass like i was standing still.
seriously, that's one of the fastest vehicles i've ever seen. on or off
the track. if honda had a vehicle, with motor, able to handle that kind
of re-work, and wishbones, they could recapture the hearts and minds of
the 2-ner/wrx crowd they blew apart back in 2001. and they should.

In article <YKKdnRVcOMX0mBDbnZ2dnUVZ_vHinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > It is cheaper to make the Accord than a model with different sheet metal
> > and interior.
>
> but the accord coupe is extensively re-worked. can't see any cost
> saving between that and a prelude.

Sure--because they were doing the Accord coupe anyway.

When they chose to equip it with the V6 w/manual tranny, that was their
nod to the 'lude crowd--which, by and large, had grown up and probably
were very happy to have such a car.

They gave a nod to that market without having to spend a bunch of money.
Doing a full-on 'lude would have entailed MUCH more money, and plainly
Honda didn't see any good return on such an effort.



> > They may yet bring back the 'lude, now that the engineers seem to be
> > back on the throne, but no doubt it's way down on their to-do list.
>
> remains to be seen. they haven't cured the civic wishbone thing yet.

In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured". It's
just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all Honda cares
about.


> and they're not addressing the fact that they don't have anything to
> touch the evo/wrx yet either. [that's a /serious/ failing.]

nah. Honda doesn't have the money Toyota has, not by far, so they're
happy to stay out of those markets. Given Honda's history, that doesn't
surprise me one bit.



> redirecting resources to
> giant suv's??? wtf were they thinking?

Well, the Pilot/MDX has sold well--no surprise, since that's the kind of
car many people were buying.

"What were they thinking"? I can tell you: "let's build an SUV that
competes well in the SUV market, which is huge." No surprise there.

The Ridgeline has its niche, too. It's a very, very strong vehicle.
Not my cup of tea, but well done for those who like it.




> btw, that wrx is one heckofa car. got passed by modded one a few weeks
> back - no idea what he had under the hood, but the noise was such that i
> looked in the mirror to see what was going on. wrx emerging from an
> on-ramp maybe 300 meters back. two shifts [and about as many seconds]
> later, he passed my sorry 85mph ass like i was standing still.
> seriously, that's one of the fastest vehicles i've ever seen. on or off
> the track. if honda had a vehicle, with motor, able to handle that kind
> of re-work, and wishbones, they could recapture the hearts and minds of
> the 2-ner/wrx crowd they blew apart back in 2001.

Ah, they could--but they clearly see their destiny lying elsewhere.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <YKKdnRVcOMX0mBDbnZ2dnUVZ_vHinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> It is cheaper to make the Accord than a model with different sheet metal
>>> and interior.
>> but the accord coupe is extensively re-worked. can't see any cost
>> saving between that and a prelude.
>
> Sure--because they were doing the Accord coupe anyway.

but that's the illogical bit! just do it properly and call it a prelude!

>
> When they chose to equip it with the V6 w/manual tranny, that was their
> nod to the 'lude crowd--which, by and large, had grown up and probably
> were very happy to have such a car.

v6 is not "true honda" and hardly sells anywhere else in the world -
it's pandering to the american market.

>
> They gave a nod to that market without having to spend a bunch of money.
> Doing a full-on 'lude would have entailed MUCH more money,

really, not very much.

> and plainly
> Honda didn't see any good return on such an effort.

vs how many accord coupe's sold? not many.

>
>
>
>>> They may yet bring back the 'lude, now that the engineers seem to be
>>> back on the throne, but no doubt it's way down on their to-do list.
>> remains to be seen. they haven't cured the civic wishbone thing yet.
>
> In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured". It's
> just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all Honda cares
> about.

disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map. they threw that out
the window when they went macpherson on the civic. may as well buy a
camry. or a subaru if you want a car with guts.

>
>
>> and they're not addressing the fact that they don't have anything to
>> touch the evo/wrx yet either. [that's a /serious/ failing.]
>
> nah. Honda doesn't have the money Toyota has, not by far, so they're
> happy to stay out of those markets. Given Honda's history, that doesn't
> surprise me one bit.

but the point is, the civic was one of the most popular cars in the
world in terms of gross sales. and incredibly popular on the track.
and with a relatively low power motor! don't see many modern civics on
the track because they don't handle. you see wrx's because what they
lack in handling, they make up in power.


>
>
>
>> redirecting resources to
>> giant suv's??? wtf were they thinking?
>
> Well, the Pilot/MDX has sold well--no surprise, since that's the kind of
> car many people were buying.
>
> "What were they thinking"? I can tell you: "let's build an SUV that
> competes well in the SUV market, which is huge." No surprise there.
>
> The Ridgeline has its niche, too. It's a very, very strong vehicle.
> Not my cup of tea, but well done for those who like it.

but globally, that's a zero market - it just diverts resources. and
domestically, unit sales aren't high either. cost of development vs. sales?


>
>
>
>
>> btw, that wrx is one heckofa car. got passed by modded one a few weeks
>> back - no idea what he had under the hood, but the noise was such that i
>> looked in the mirror to see what was going on. wrx emerging from an
>> on-ramp maybe 300 meters back. two shifts [and about as many seconds]
>> later, he passed my sorry 85mph ass like i was standing still.
>> seriously, that's one of the fastest vehicles i've ever seen. on or off
>> the track. if honda had a vehicle, with motor, able to handle that kind
>> of re-work, and wishbones, they could recapture the hearts and minds of
>> the 2-ner/wrx crowd they blew apart back in 2001.
>
> Ah, they could--but they clearly see their destiny lying elsewhere.

yes, handing their customer base over to toyota, subaru, mitsubishi and
nissan. they should stick to the one thing that used to differentiate
them from the pack, and do it was well as possible - sports car handling
on a cheap compact/family car. it's not like it costs that much more to
produce, and when balanced against brand loyalty and repeat sales, is a
no-brainer.

On 4 Jul 2007 21:22:48 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

>I wish they would bring back the Prelude.
>Update it with LED turnsignals and taillights.
>Right now,Honda/Acura does not make anything I would buy.
>I'd buy an old 00-01 Prelude before I'd buy any new Honda/Acura.

Well, I agree with the others here, that today's Accord coupes deliver
whatever it is you think you'd get out of a Prelude.

EXCEPT the distinction.

I agree with you that, in terms of sizzle, Honda/Acura is
determinately non-sizzling. The Si's are so-so, the S2000 is an
engineering marvel but addresses only a tiny market, no successor to
the NSX, no V8's for the top of the line. They seem to be
underselling the Fix for reasons that escape me, but the thing is 500
pounds too heavy in any case.

My Accord is perhaps the world's best automotive bargain and an
engineering marvel itself (as are also the Camry), but ... not as
exciting as one would like.

Just look at that new Audi R8 coupe ... bring back a Prelude in that
class, why doncha?

J.

In article <j9idnQBEgfMliBDbnZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured". It's
> > just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all Honda cares
> > about.
>
> disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map.

That may have been so years back, but you can't dispute: Civics are
selling well, AND that's all Honda cares about.

Honda is a marketing company. If handling doesn't sell, then they won't
care.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <j9idnQBEgfMliBDbnZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured". It's
>>> just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all Honda cares
>>> about.
>> disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map.
>
> That may have been so years back, but you can't dispute: Civics are
> selling well, AND that's all Honda cares about.

but they're not selling as well as they used to - honda have lost
significant market share to toyota. and the rsx or whatever the
successor to the integra is, [same civic platform] isn't selling at all!

>
> Honda is a marketing company.

if that's what they think, that's the problem!

> If handling doesn't sell, then they won't
> care.

but handling /does/ sell!

if they think they're just going to sell cheap generic crap, they're in
trouble because toyota can do that better. and frankly, hyundai [etc]
is breathing hard up their tail pipe as well. they'll also have their
margins cut to the bone and have no brand loyalty. if they make
something that people like because it's better, price is less elastic
/and/ they retain repeat customers. like subaru.

honda used to play the game /way/ better. there's no reason they can't
do it again.

JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in
news0bq839lrt0qdaqvmmr4tdofmrj5pe17gr@4ax.com:

> On 4 Jul 2007 21:22:48 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>>I wish they would bring back the Prelude.
>>Update it with LED turnsignals and taillights.
>>Right now,Honda/Acura does not make anything I would buy.
>>I'd buy an old 00-01 Prelude before I'd buy any new Honda/Acura.
>
> Well, I agree with the others here, that today's Accord coupes deliver
> whatever it is you think you'd get out of a Prelude.

Put a 1998-2001 last generation Prelude next to an Accord coupe,and the
Accord will be bigger and taller.(and heavier) IMO,significantly different.
The older 1990 Prelude was much closer to the Accord.
Then there was that wierd Prelude inbetween them.....

Even the defunct RSX was sportier than any Accord.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
news:9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net:

> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <j9idnQBEgfMliBDbnZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured".
>>>> It's just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all
>>>> Honda cares about.
>>> disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map.
>>
>> That may have been so years back, but you can't dispute: Civics are
>> selling well, AND that's all Honda cares about.
>
> but they're not selling as well as they used to - honda have lost
> significant market share to toyota. and the rsx or whatever the
> successor to the integra is, [same civic platform] isn't selling at
> all!

the RSX is defunct;they stopped making them,ISTR.
>
>>
>> Honda is a marketing company.
>
> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>
>> If handling doesn't sell, then they won't
>> care.
>
> but handling /does/ sell!

Look at how well the Integra sold. 3dr and 4 dr versions!
Then Honda redesigned it to the RSX,which was uglier,and it didn't sell.
the old 1996-2000 Civic hatchback sold very well,and newer versions were
uglier and didn't sell as well.
Tuners would rather buy an older Honda and rework it than buy a new Civic.

>
> if they think they're just going to sell cheap generic crap, they're
> in trouble because toyota can do that better. and frankly, hyundai
> [etc] is breathing hard up their tail pipe as well. they'll also have
> their margins cut to the bone and have no brand loyalty. if they make
> something that people like because it's better, price is less elastic
> /and/ they retain repeat customers. like subaru.
>
> honda used to play the game /way/ better. there's no reason they
> can't do it again.
>

Sochiro Honda is no longer around,that's the problem.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On 5 Jul 2007 22:12:23 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

>> Well, I agree with the others here, that today's Accord coupes deliver
>> whatever it is you think you'd get out of a Prelude.
>
>Put a 1998-2001 last generation Prelude next to an Accord coupe,and the
>Accord will be bigger and taller.(and heavier) IMO,significantly different.
>The older 1990 Prelude was much closer to the Accord.
>Then there was that wierd Prelude inbetween them.....
>
>Even the defunct RSX was sportier than any Accord.

I like the taller small cars, if I want an MGB roadster there's
already the S2000. I look at the current Porches as a little retro in
staying so low. The new motors are so much better, a little extra
wind resistance, even a *little* extra weight, are OK.

How 'bout this, a new Prelude would make a great new Honda vehicle to
experiment with low weight technologies, like the Lotusii.

http://lotuscars.com/Elise.aspx

Civic Si engine, Accord-derived composite chassis, << 2200 pounds,
maybe 4wd option, << $40k list.

For Acura, I *still* say put in a 4-liter V8, make it an RL-class
sedan << 2800 pounds (V8 drivetrain is still gonna be heavy), but at
that power/weight ratio it would also fly. Probably $60k range. Put
a few solar cells on the trunk for good luck!

Needless to say, both would get outstanding mileage, for the class.

.... though I see that Lotus is only listed at 24/29. With Honda
tuning (and some loss of zoom) I'd think a two-seater like that could
go 29/36 or better - current Si sedan lists at 23/32 @ 3000 pounds.
Hmm, oddly enough, the specs are almost the same for the coupe.
Error?

J.

In article <Xns9964B960789EBjyanikkuanet@64.209.0.85>,
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

> Put a 1998-2001 last generation Prelude next to an Accord coupe,and the
> Accord will be bigger and taller.(and heavier)

If Honda continued to make the Prelude today, put today's 'lude against
a 98-01 'lude, and today's car would be bigger and heavier.

Fact.

So?



> Even the defunct RSX was sportier than any Accord.

Ever driven a current model V6 Accord coupe w/manual trans?