Honda Car Forum

Hi Dori,

Dori Schmetterling wrote:
> Ever seen a Cappucino?
> A two-seater that fits into a pocket, sold in the UK.
> DAS

Sale in Germany will begin this October -
with right-hand-drive, no LHD available!


Juergen

Honda Big car, the Honda Legend in the UK is the same as the Acura
Legend-3.2L, and the Newer Acura RL-3.5L in the USA.
Honda came up with a "New" division to market their "Upscale" cars in North
America...Smarts buggers..! Make more money whichever way they can.

> > Hondas"? Does Honda make any big cars in the U.K.? In the U.S. we get
> > both JP and UK builds of the CR-V - I haven't compared personally but I
> > haven't heard anything in the Honda NG to indicate a preference for the
UK
> > one.
> >
>

> The big Honda here is the Legend, dunno what it's sold as in the US. "Big"
> is a relative term you understand - here a 1600cc engine is pretty
average,
> which makes the Legend's 3L V6 pretty "big", over there you would probably
> laugh if your lawnmower salesman offered you less than 2L (with a turbo).

"Alexander S. Wood" <alec_wood@dont.spam.me.ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<7TlJa.777$gT6.142581@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...

> No, what I'm saying is that the cars built for export by the
> Jap auto industry are of superior build quality to those
> supplied to their domestic market,

Japan produces some sorry models just for domestic consumption,
but when it comes to models that are virtually identical for all
world markets, can you explain how the Japanese separate the
superior ones from the inferior? Because if you can, then
you know something that not even the best auto maker does.

"V.B. Mercon" <transmission@ ford@fail> wrote in message news:<hQCdnQJnqu1cYmujXTWJhg@comcast.com>...

> It is the Emission requirements that is nearly impossible to
> meet without costly repairs that drive people to buy new cars
> in Japan, hence flooding the low mileage used cars business.

The emissions requirements are no problem because they're
approximately the same as U.S. standards, and every car, regardless of
where it's to be sold, is designed to meet them for at least 50,000
miles because of U.S. requirements. It just wouldn't be economical to
make engines and fuel/emissions systems of different durability for
different nations.

The real reason Japanese cars are usually sold after three years is
because
Japanese government requires each car to receive a very thorough
inspection every three years that costs thousands of dollars.
Initially, this was done to increase sales of new cars to help the
Japanese auto industry lower its costs through higher volume so that
it could compete better against U.S. car makers. But now it's done
just to sell more cars and repairs.

R. Makul K1XV <k1xv@arrl.net> wrote in message news:<b9mdfvgubfghp3ndt45uo6p2hd10hfnnmg@4ax.com>. ..

>>it's false that the worst samples of any car model are kept in the
>>domestic market and the best exported because it's impractical to
>>sort them by quality (you don't rely upon inspections to check
>>quality).

>True, if the cars coming out of Japan as used exported models are
>statistically identical in quality to the cars not exported. But the
>used cars coming out of Japan, as I understand it, are cars that
would
>otherwise be subjected to rigorous inspections to be kept on the
road.
>Wouldn't it make sense then, that the used car industry would in some
>way cull out the cars for export that are more problematic, and keep,
>for the Japan domestic market, those less problematic?
>
>Also, wouldn't it make sense that a private Japanese car owner is
less
>likely to sell or trade in a car that is a good one, and more likely
>to sell, or trade in, a car that is worse, thereby making the overall
>pool of used cars inferior to the average car produced?

I seriously doubt it works that way because used Japanese cars enjoy a
price permium overseas and in some markets even compete against
domestically produced brand new cars of poor quality. Also those
expensive inspections are required every few years for used cars as
well, which has got to depress their values in Japan, and the Japanese
people I've known don't like used merchandise - their trash cans are
known for containing a lot of almost-new merchandise in perfect
working order.

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 09:25:25 -0400, "V.B. Mercon" <transmission@ ford@fail>
wrote:

>It is the Emission requirements that is nearly impossible to meet without
>costly repairs that drive people to buy new cars in Japan, hence flooding
>the low mileage used cars business. Those cars are still in pristine
>conditions. I have seen they with my own eyes, and I dare say, some are
>better than some "New" American cars. It is that quality that started the
>export and have kept it going. Prior to that they used to dismantle and
>recycle those cars.

Are the JP emissions limits really that strict/low? Isn't it more a
mandatory policy of component replacement whether the system still tests OK
or not? In fact I got the impression that instead of testing they just
force expensive component replacement anyway. After all, our US cars run
for years and still pass emissions tests just by following recommended
maintenance.

>"fbloogyudsr" <fbloogyudsr@nwlink.com> wrote in message
>news:vfciiqhhsg02a2@corp.supernews.com...
>> "Phil Sharkey" <phsharkey@netscape.net> wrote
>> > Maybe the low milage Japanese cars that get to the U.K. do so because
>> > the Japanese are no fools and would just assume get the Monday morning
>> > lemons out of the country where they will no longer be their problem?
>> > Just a thought.
>>
>> I do know that the inspection requirements for continued licensing of cars
>> in Japan is extremely onerous. It tends to make consumers there buy new
>> cars often rather than spend a lot on maintenance... Also, there are not
>> many
>> places to drive in Japan (nor would I want to drive there, especially in
>the
>> cities.)
>>
>> Floyd
>>
>>
>
>

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 02:26:19 +0200, "Juergen ." <jaguare@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

>fbloogyudsr wrote:
>> specific to our market and is bigger than the "world" accord.
>> I believe that the Acura RSX is also sold in UK/Europe as a Honda.
>
>Yes, it is sold as Honda NSX
>http://www.honda.de/car/15113_337.htm

No the NSX is sold as the Acura NSX in the US. The RSX is the US name for
the new Integra. I dunno why the US Acura division felt they had to drop
the names and go with letter/number codes for their cars - compete with
BMW, M-B etc.?... kinda lame really. I guess some marketing genius will
pat himself on the back if sales go up and get sacked if they don't.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Hello,

I have seen the report where it is estimated about $2.000,— on the
average PER vehicle if they are engineered and built for US DOT. I shall
locate the report and post the further detail.

I wonder if we have legitmate case for World Trade Organisation about
the "repressive" US automotive market. Anyone care to register the
complaint with World Trade Organisation about "unfair trade barrier"?

It is also very easy for workers to overlook miniscule detail and fit
wrong parts or configure the models incorrectly. A guy from Volvo told
me about some of US-bound Volvos having ECE headlamps and taillamps
which must be changed before shipped to the sales centres. Audi has
those stickers, "USA", on its vehicles before they are processed and
prepared by the sales centres. Chrysler had to colour-coded its minivans
along the assembly line to designate them for left- or right-hand drive
edition.

I suspected that Chrysler built the separate assembly line initially
either to ensure the quality was up to European level until Chrysler
figured out better ways to enhance and retain quality control.

Oliver



R. Anton Rave wrote:
> Ennui Society <om@none.net> wrote in message news:<3EF730E0.7080803@none.net>...
>
>>Japanese aren't the ones with that approach. The Americans do the
>
> same
>
>>thing, too. I've seen the North American vehicles manufacturered by
>
> GM,
>
>>Chrysler, and Ford for export are much better in quality and finish
>
> than
>
>>the same ones in the US/Canada markets.
>>
>>Chrysler once had a separate assembly line for export version of its
>>minivan in the late 1980s and early 1990s as to ensure the quality
>
> was
>
>>higher and better. (I think it was probably to ensure the workers
>
> don't
>
>>mix up, fitting the DOT on ECE version and vice versa).
>
>
> That had to be a silly way to produce cars and probably added at least
> $100 to the cost of each vehicle. Keeping track of different versions
> of vehicles on a particular assembly line may not be trivial, but car
> makers have been doing it since the 1980s, even with entirely
> different models designed around different chassis.

>Chrysler once had a separate assembly line for export version of its
>minivan in the late 1980s and early 1990s as to ensure the quality
>was higher and better. (I think it was probably to ensure the workers
>don't mix up, fitting the DOT on ECE version and vice versa).

>>That had to be a silly way to produce cars and probably added at
least
>>$100 to the cost of each vehicle. Keeping track of different
versions
>>of vehicles on a particular assembly line may not be trivial, but
car
>>makers have been doing it since the 1980s, even with entirely
>>different models designed around different chassis.

>I have seen the report where it is estimated about $2.000,— on the
>average PER vehicle if they are engineered and built for US DOT. I
shall
>locate the report and post the further detail.

That may be the cost premium for US versions of the vehicles, but I'm
referring to the extra cost of building the versions on separate
production lines rather than on the same line.

>I wonder if we have legitmate case for World Trade Organisation about
>the "repressive" US automotive market. Anyone care to register the
>complaint with World Trade Organisation about "unfair trade barrier"?

I don't know about WTO, but NAFTA has issued decisions like that when
US or even California environmental laws prevented the sale of
Canadian or Mexican products here, one case being when California
wanted to ban the MTBE additive from all gasoline sold there, and the
only company making it was Canadian. NAFTA decisions are issued under
a provision called Chapter 11, by secret tribunals.