Few years ago Honda had a fine range of vehicles.
Now they have Jazz/Civic/Accord/CRV/CRZ.
Other than the Civic's space-age looks, and the CRV's fugliness, the only one that stands out is the 'sporty' CRZ-hybrid - that is about as desirable as a Hyundai Scoupe.
i-SHIFT gearboxes are unutterably pump.
No turbo-petrol engines means falling way behind with performance vs economy vs emissions.
No desirable sports car since the demise of S2000 (mechanically left to rot on the vine since it appeared other than some handling tweaks) and the NSX (not popular here but again virtually unfettled since it appeared).
No people carrier.
No luxury car - again the Legend was a good machine but not designed to perform well in Euro tests and was thus overlooked.
For all their heritage in engineering they appear to have well and truly dropped the ball.
Maybe they've just given up any hope of pre-retirement age sales and gone back to the 60+ brigade?
I've owned 3 Hondas in the past 15 years or so, and been impressed with them all (still got an FRV) but the current range makes me want to paint the world beige.
Matt beige.
|
I sense a frustrated loyalty L. But I think you've got it right. The CRZ look less of a bread van in the metal but only "less", it doesn't entirely escape. Write and offer to do their model planning, working from home, a few hours per week, £100k pa.
Worth a shot :-)
JH
|
|
I think the Accord is a superb car
|
Possibly. I'd even say probably. But that is one car in a range full of holes as L as has pointed out.
JH
|
Our experience of the FN3 Civic was that the bean counters had triumphed, the suspension (in particular) was truly dreadful, the reliability was poor (compared to our experience of Ford or VW) and the whole thing just felt flimsy, I'd hate to see one at 100K miles or even 5 years old (thin paint which chips easily, corroding alloys, rattling trim, dash and trim very prone to scratching etc).
Hopefully other models are better, however we won't be buying another Honda any time soon.
I think they do people carriers and larger cars in other markets ?
|
>> Our experience of the FN3 Civic was that the bean counters had triumphed, the suspension
>> (in particular) was truly dreadful, the reliability was poor (compared to our experience of Ford
>> or VW) and the whole thing just felt flimsy, I'd hate to see one at
>> 100K miles or even 5 years old (thin paint which chips easily, corroding alloys, rattling
>> trim, dash and trim very prone to scratching etc).
>>
That sums up the Civic 2.2D we have in our company. 3.5 years old, 90k on the clock, terrible stone-chipping on the black bonnet, rattles terribly (has done from day 1, gradually getting worse), badly scratched (cheap) plastics inside. But worst of all has been the continual punctures which the can of goo has never failed to heal, leaving the driver stranded on average every 6 months.
The driver is a user-choser and he's looking for a replacement now. There is no Honda in his wish-list.
|
Hybrid Jazz just announced for UK, so they are doing stuff of some sort.
|
The Accord is a fine car (with engines barely changed over the past 10 years other than an uprated iDTEC) but it's barely bigger than a Focus inside - rear legroom is awful, and for a family man it is a crush for baby seats, etc - Mondeo/Vectra it is not.
Back in the day, the Accord was an obviously superior product to the Sierra/Cavalier brigade.
Honda attempted, and failed, to put it in the same bracket as the BMW 3 and Merc C.
In fact even an Octavia is more practical.
|
|
There is a brand new top of the range Accord Estate parked outside my house (not mine) and I would want two Skodas to do a swop.The Civic is a super car gorgious inside and out Its Ford and Opel that are really suffering in mainland Europe not Honda
|
>> Write and offer to do their model planning, working from home, a few hours per week <<
S2000 - put in NSX V6 & much longer gearing (but keep the fantastic gearchange) - get below 225g/km CO2
...remove foldy roof and graft on a structural roof (improve rigidity & cut a little weight)
...make the interior not look like a 1980s catalogue.
Call it a.... S3000/S3200/whateVah.
Cayman-baiter.
When do I get my cheque ?
|
Well L, you've passed the interview but I want a full model line-up by the end of next week. Would it be ok if we emailed you some design sketches and we'll be sending round product samples. Might you be free to visit our California design studio at your convenience? Limo to pick you up and first class all the way, of course.
Based on initial response we're offering £200k pa plus ex's
ps - bring wife if you like.
pps - there's a transporter outside your house with an Infiiti on it. Company car. Any comments for next model greatly appreciated.
JH
|
Infiniti may as well have come from outer space - this stupid 225g/km emissions limit MUST be kept under for any significant sales to be made.
Any maker selling a model that produces 226-240g/km must try harder.
If a Touareg can be made to stay under 225g/km then anyone can do it.
The problem is non UK/Euro bosses making the major calls.
Too many makers are "doing a Jaguar" - if the X-type had first come out with FWD and a diesel then it would perhaps have been a success, but the marketing guys had to have a 6 cylinder petrol. And as RWD was not realistic with the transverse engine they went for 4WD instead.
They're worse than bankers imo ;-)
|
When they were around I always liked the Prelude, all of them. I suppose they just lost too many sales when they 'americanised' the last one and people lost interest. I like the Accords, I never used to until I drove my dads bland looking 98-03 model and suddenly found where all the interest lay. Great double wishbone chassis, snarly engines and a lovely solid, precision engineered feel to it.
I wish Honda would produce an Accord with a hatchback. The 03-08 car isn't practical enough as a saloon and the estate is a weird looking thing and too big in my eyes. The new one looks OK, but apparently it's less reliable than the previous version.
Toyota are the same, their line up is very commendable, but there's nothing to stir the soul, like the MR2, Supra and Celica. We don't get half of the interesting cars here either. They did a Caldina estate, which was a mid sized estate with the turbocharged 2 litre MR2 engine and four wheel drive. I would have been up for that. Only available as an import at the time.
|
And drifting slightly... How hard would it be to put a longer final drive on the turbo-charged Subarus to improve their emissions?
My Forester does 26mpg, rated @ 254g/km and does 23.5mph/1000rpm in 5th. It could easily pull 30-35mph in top (even the standard 2.5XT has 260lbft torque peak with plenty from 2000rpm).
If I was stupid enough to floor the accelerator in 1st, I'd leave 1111s behind me, so I doubt it would struggle with a slightly longer 1st gear.
Amateurs!
|
Back when the prelude and integra were knocking about, the type-r badge really meant something.
Ported & polished head, better quality valves, stiffer valve springs etc. etc. the full works. Only "perfect cast" heads would be selected for type-r's, granny mobile integras got the others. Bottom end got uprated too, better pistons, lighter stronger conrods, more finely balanced crankshaft etc. etc.
Nowadays the only difference between a civic type-r and a type-s is more or less the badge that gets slapped on at the end of the production line.
|
>> Nowadays the only difference between a civic type-r and a type-s is more or less
>> the badge that gets slapped on at the end of the production line.
The other issue IMO is that the concept of a high revving, relatively torque-light engine doesn't work half as well in heavy modern cars as it did in featherweights like the ITR and original Civic/CRX.
Modern turbos don't have anything like the throttle response compromises of their ancestors, which was Honda's main reason for pursuing the VTEC/NA route for their performance models. A turbo also gives you oodles of midrange (and these days, bottom end) punch to shift heavy modern bodyshells.
I personally believe for all its engineering genius, VTEC is an inferior solution for big power compared to a modern turbocharged engine. Yes, they make a lovely noise at 8000+ RPM, but is that enough?
Last edited by: DP on Fri 30 Jul 10 at 23:41
|
I had my first low powered turbo in my Golf GTi in 1999 followed by a Passat with the same engine (Golf nicked). Also briefly had an Audi A4 1.8T Sport which was over-priced considering spec (£25k) but it was a temp car.
But today the trend is for smaller turbo engines which I think is fine providing the car is not too heavy. I read this week a comment that the 1.4 TSi in the new Galaxy might be asking a little too much. Not enough torque.
|
>> I personally believe for all its engineering genius, VTEC is an inferior solution for big
>> power compared to a modern turbocharged engine. Yes, they make a lovely noise at 8000+RPM, but is that enough
In VTEC's defence they are ideal for standard cars that are being kept for a long time because apart from the VTEC system, they are simpler than turbo engines, there is no turbo charger to have to replace when it's done a few miles, and on the whole more reliable because turbo charged cars tend to have a few faults later in life that can sometimes take time to pinpoint due to all the extra pipework/intercooler gubbins.
I agree though that for pure performance in a heavy car a turbocharged engine is superior.
|
Essentially I agree. I've a 5 year old CRV diesel but the current model is far too expensive if you want leather, which you can't have without an overpriced built in sat nav. Mrs M has a 2002 Civic, but won't look at the current model with it's pokey interior and bling - it's just trying too hard to be cool.
If we could buy the same again we would - but not the current offerings.
|
|
My daughter and SiL have only ever owned Hondas, everything from a Civic to a S2000. They currently run a HRV and a FRV. He is looking to replace the HRV (his runabout) and I have heard him mention BMW, Honda must have got it wrong big time.
|
|
Or he wants a change it does happen you know.
|
|
Don't forget they also bring us the insight.............
|
|
If Honda sold something that he found attractive he would not consider any other make.
|
|
The CRV is quite a good package I'd have thought and the new Accord estate looks smart enough. I wouldn't rush to buy either though. Can't really say why, they'd probably both be good cars.
|
|
Honda's uk market share has eased off to 3.15% YTD, compared to a peak of approx 4% in 2007
|
Honda in Europe have, for some years, tended to specialise in niche models.
The Jazz was no ordinary supermini - it was more expensive and spacious than most - and in some ways more of a rival to the Focus than the Fiesta. It also came with only 2 engines, 3 trims, no diesels, no hot version.
The Civic was more mainstream until the current model which seems to be aimed at people who want something that looks unusual, but who don't care much about visibility.
The Accord, as has been mentioned is not available as a hatchback, which seems odd in Europe.
The FRV was in a niche of its own (apart from the Multipla) and a lot of people simply don't find the 3+3 seating arrangement appealing. (It does, however, seem to have sold better than the more conventional Stream.)
And then there are the hybrids . . .
So, it seems to me, only the CRV and the Accord estate, are conventional.
I suspect that a lot of people (like me) think that Hondas are excellent cars - but they can't see a single Honda that is what they are looking for, so they go out and buy a Ford, or a Skoda or a Toyota, or whatever.
By contrast, Honda in the USA sells a lot of cars that fit into conventional categories. It's all a bit mystifying to me.
But I suspect that there is method in their madness, and that those in charge are not idiots. Honda's aim is not to impress the pundits in this forum, or to maximise its market share. It's to make profits. And that it does uncommonly well.
See, for example
tinyurl.com/yb2v4va (June 2009: Tokyo-based Honda raised its forecast for the full year through March 2010 to a 55 billion yen ($585.1 million) profit, an improvement from its earlier forecast at 40 billion yen ($425.5 million). Other Japanese automakers are forecasting deep losses for the full fiscal year.)
& tinyurl.com/3xqx4rm (October 2009: Honda is set to be the only one of Japan's seven automakers to post a profit with a fiscal first half JPY60bn operating surplus, reports said on Thursday.)
|
I think there's something in what you say Tyro - if they do what everyone else does, they'll get the same result.
They can't keep changing niches though, or being too out of line on range depth, unless they want to squander brand loyalty.
I really want to stick with Honda, the two I have were assembled in the UK and have never failed, but they're making it difficult for me. And as Zero says, their share in the UK is falling.
|
Honda Market Share in UK over the past 10 years:
2009 - 3.75%
2008 - 3.93%
2007 - 4.41%
2006 - 4.17%
2005 - 4.03%
2004 - 3.55%
2003 - 3.17%
2002 - 3.04%
2001 - 2.58%
2000 - 3.09%
So, yes, RF is right. But market share is still better than 10 years ago. I'm not quite so sure about the importance of maintaining brand loyalty for Honda. They keep doing well in the reliability and satisfaction tables - so they are an aspirational brand for people who have never owned one.
Last edited by: tyro on Thu 29 Jul 10 at 22:19
|
It generally costs 10 times as much to attract a new customer as to maintain an old one.
One of my colleagues bought a new Honda every 1-2 years for 20 years until she had a new Civic - dissapointed by it's quality and 'foibles' she went and bought a Merc instead. Next car after that? Another Merc.
Honda has lost market share in the UK during a time of unprecedented drops in car sales, especially to businesses - they should have gained share in that time, with a relatively higher private market than, say, Ford or Vauxhall.
|
|
Honda never really operated in the company car sector, they would never discount to the lease companies
|
>> By contrast, Honda in the USA sells a lot of cars that fit into conventional
>> categories. It's all a bit mystifying to me.
>>
>> But I suspect that there is method in their madness, and that those in charge
>> are not idiots. Honda's aim is not to impress the pundits in this forum, or
>> to maximise its market share. It's to make profits. And that it does uncommonly well.
Yes, it makes profits, but it would make more profits if they understood what Europeans wanted. The European Accord is made for Europe, so why not a hatchback? They had one in the previous incarnation (98-03), and they also had a Civic Aerodeck estate which was ideal, not too big for a large part of the population but a very practical load space.
Their move into the executive sector (as regards the Accord) has left them in a void, because people don't perceive them as being in the prestige class like Merc or BMW. Go back to building hatchbacks in the family car sector and keep them reliable and well made. I reckon their sales would go up.
They're not idiots, they're just not in touch with this market, something that Skoda for example are becoming increasingly good at.
|
How are Honda sales doing in Europe?
|
|
Good, but could do better.
|
>> How are Honda sales doing in Europe?
1.4% market share in Germany in 2009. I think Honda aren't that bothered about Europe. They are more interested in the USA, Japan and China.
|
It's interesting that most car makers go through a period in the ascendant when they can do no wrong - usually on the back of one or two particularly successful models.
Back in the 50s Austins (A40/50/55) were far better cars than their rivals - more modern and much more reliable.
In the 60s BMC / BL level-pegged (Mini, 1100) with a rising Ford (Cortina) but fell away with quality problems in the 70s.
Late 70s / early 80s - Vauxhall hit the spot (Cavalier), then it was Peugeot (205, 306) and Renault (Espace, Scenic). Vauxhall have never really replicated the Mark 2 Cavalier's distinction of being better to drive than the competition.
Ford came back big-time in the 90s (Mondeo, Focus) followed by VW /Audi (Golf V, A4) and I think Honda just about got there in the early 2000s with the old-shape Civic and Jazz. Going off a bit now as the new Civic isn't to everyone's taste and the rear visibility is actually dangerously bad - and they won't sell the Jazz 1.5 in the UK and should have seen that the semi-automatic gearbox would be unpopular.
In fairness, as others have said, Honda is stronger in other parts of the world - but with their investment in the Swindon factory you'd think they'd make a bit more effort with the British market.
Skoda is the make of the moment just now, but how long will it last I wonder?
Last edited by: Avant on Thu 29 Jul 10 at 23:52
|
>> Skoda is the make of the moment just now, but how long will it last I wonder?
Another 5-10 mins if Skoda UK have their way.
I've never come across a car vendor who are so frustrating to buy from. I love my octy vrs, i will just never tire of the engine, what a machine, but every time i walk back to it in the car park it annoys me that i couldn't have folding mirrors, and that isn't a limitation of Skoda CZ, if i bought in another market i could have the folding mirrors, it's just Skoda UK decided NO, not on UK spec (but yes on Ozzy spec).
Booo skoda uk
|
>I suspect that a lot of people (like me) think that Hondas are excellent cars - but they can't see a single Honda that is what they are looking for, so they go out and buy a Ford, or a Skoda or a Toyota, or whatever.<
Says it all, really. After 28 years and everything from a Civic Shuttle to a Legend (and I've driven an NSX) I just can't think of any Honda that represents the sort of thing I would want to buy. This problem is now exercising my brain significantly, especially after paying a tentative visit to the Skoda/Audi dealer and being treated like dirt.
My elderly friend turned in his long-serving XJ8 for an Insight and likes it very much and the new hybrid coupe looks ok in the metal but I need easier access these days.
It may mean a return to Alfa, possibly the Giulietta with that interesting sounding petrol turbo, but after all this time to buy a new car that isn't bulletproof would break my heart.
|
>> I think Honda aren't that bothered about Europe
That is true for many other brands. Especially Suzuki.
Their UK market share is just 1%. Their model line up is not attractive (Swift is too small for a family car and Grand Vitara is not worth hassle). I was a Suzuki owner earlier. Went to buy another Suzuki but SX4 appeared no match against my other shortlist Kia Cee'd.
Is Suzuki bothered? No, their bread & butter market is in India, Japan and other far eastern countries.
Most Japanese brands have very strong market in developing world due to their reliability.
|
"Most Japanese brands have very strong market in developing world due to their reliability."
And I suspect that in Asia and the Americas, reliability is a greater priority among buyers than it is in the UK.
|
While global Honda/Suzuki etc might not be too bothered by 'lesser' markets - in the UK there is more profit to be made per vehicle than in most other markets (although weak pound vs. far east currencies have cut this) - Honda UK and Suzuki UK will be very keen to increase market share and profitability.
I'd suggest they need to push their respective head offices for market-specific models.
Just because a car sells well in the US does not mean it will get a look-in in the UK.
Honda in particular need to get turbo-petrols into their line-up.
We know they can do it - Senna was running around with 1300-1400bhp from a Honda 1.5 turbo in his F1 car over a decade ago.
iVTEC is fun, but turbo is easier and more economical... VTEC-Turbo would perhaps get them back on top of the engineering podium?
|
VTEC is imo totally unsuited for UK driving conditions as it requires high revs for max output..
Honda styling is atrocious even by modern car standards..
and their pricing is premium.
I would not say idiots in charge but the only Honda I ever liked was a S800... and the only one I drove had a misfire:-(
It was £1500 but I did not buy it...
I pass a Honda dealership occasionally... I have never felt the wish to enter it... and I am reputedly the age of many of their customers!
|
I used to have a Civic VTi - peak torque at 6000rpm, redline just over 8000rpm.
Perfectly well suited to any type of driving other than motorways - 19.5mph/1000rpm always made me reach for (a non-existent) sixth gear.
Basically it was like driving a regular 1.8, but when overtaking was more like a 2.4.
It also sounded fan-tastic - except the constant 4k rpm at 75-80mph.
Additionally it ran on 195/55x15 tyres - plenty of grip with none of the tramlining of todays 'phat' rims. Honda were one of the last to convert to unnecessarily large wheels.
A decent petrol-turbo 1.4 or 1.6 could do it just as well, just without the 'helium effect' of VTEC.
Last edited by: Webmaster on Wed 4 Aug 10 at 01:11
|
>>and I am reputedly the age of many of their customers!
The Jazz is remarkably popular in my neighbourhood with people in the 65+ age group.
|
As a forty something, I think the latest generation Accord is a very nice car. I agree there is not much rear legroom but for the 4 months I had one I was very pleased with it and very sad to see it go. I replaced it with a DTEC CRV. The CRV is fugly from the front but not too bad in black. I find it a very comfortable and capable car that I like the more and more as I use it. As for them being expensive (I only paid 19K for the Accord Estate DTEC Auto Exec in January 2010 and from memory it listed around £26K). I am on my 4th Honda now and my dealer does look after me very well.
I don’t know what car I would go for today but them new Jaguars look very nice.
|
>> As a forty something, I think the latest generation Accord is a very nice car.
>> I agree there is not much rear legroom but for the 4 months I had
>> one I was very pleased with it and very sad to see it go.
Why did you only have it for 4 months?
|
|
I had to change the car as Honda reduced the towing limits of the Accord so it was no longer allowed to tow my elderly parents caravan. The CRV has a higher towing limit.
|
Lowered the towing limit of a car you already had? I had no idea that could happen. Was there any offer of compensation to people (like you) who could no longer use the car for the purpose they'd bought it for?
While I'm here, why don't I want a Honda? Styling shouldn't be a problem but it is. The Accord and Civic are ordinary-looking cars with gratuitously grotesque details grafted on - the Accord's wings and arches, the Civic's grille, tail and interior. The effect is to make the car seem gimmicky, which ought to be the exact opposite of what Honda is about. They seem to be trying too hard.
|
The Accord and Civic are ordinary-looking cars with gratuitously grotesque details grafted on
>> - the Accord's wings and arches, the Civic's grille, tail and interior.
+1
I've been trying put into words what i dislike about the new Honda's particularly Accord and you've voiced it perfectly for me WDB.
The Civic is the result of trying to woo a younger trendier customer and successfully alienating those loyal older ones who bought the previous models by the boatload and arguably put the company where it is in Britain.
I wonder who's syphoned off the disappointed previously loyal owners.
|
...I wonder who's syphoned off the disappointed previously loyal owners...
At a guess, Kia and Hyundai, partly drawn by more realistic pricing.
|
The new civic was, and continues to be a very good looking car.
You old fogies dont like it when people try and change the look of your zimmer frames do you.
|
>> ...I wonder who's syphoned off the disappointed previously loyal owners...
>>
>> At a guess, Kia and Hyundai, partly drawn by more realistic pricing.
They still buy plenty of Jazzes, as I can vouch for in my area.
|
>>I wonder who's syphoned off the disappointed previously loyal owners.
In our case, we've hung on to the cars we have. The 2002 Civic had the best packaging I've ever seen in a small car. Rear legroom is enormous, you can nearly wear a top hat in it, the floor is completely flat, the boot is still respectable, and in those built before the centre console was introduced you could move around inside between front at rear seats thanks to the dash mounted gear lever. What can we buy that will be as good as that? And as reliable? And be at least assembled in the UK?
By contrast the current Civic has such a low roofline that even my 5'2" wife has to adopt a hunchback in the back of her friend's new version.
The new CRV is perhaps a better prospect to replace our 2005 diesel, but to get leather seats and cruise control, the only extras I really want, I have to add £6,000 to the price and suffer larger wheels that I don't want, and a whole bunch of other fripperies I don't need. The CRV is also blighted by bits of silver-painted plastic stuck on the steering wheel and randomly around other bits of the the interior.
I have considered a Skoda Superb 4x4 estate, but I haven't had much luck with VAG products in the past, and I wouldn't expect the reliability I have had from Hondas. The Korean offerings leave me cold. I drove a Suzuki GV recently, good spec for the price but rough, noisy and thirsty compared with my CRV. Is the current X-Trail any good?
|
You're too kind, GB. }:---)
The overstyling trend isn't unique to Honda, especially in the fetishizing of wheelarches. Ford may have started this with the original Focus, but it's got worse since then. The current Mondeo has overdone arches; so do most Mercedes saloons these days. In contrast, the previous Mondeo and S-class were models of sharp-edged purpose, whose styling worked to disguise their size rather than to accentuate it.
Now over to someone else to steer us back on track.
|
>...I wonder who's syphoned off the disappointed previously loyal owners...
At a guess, Kia and Hyundai, partly drawn by more realistic pricing.<
Not while I live and breathe.
I don't think pricing has ever been an issue for the average Honda owner - we have been pleased to pay more for the extra quality. But what now?
Just out of interest, I wrote a road test of one of the first Kia Prides, back in the early 1990s; I praised it for its perceived quality, in spite of the weird whitewall tyres, etc. I guess they are still good but I wouldn't want to be seen in one in case somebody thought I had mistakenly scrapped a nice motor. ;-)
Oh, and anyone who says Vtec engines are unsuitable for any conditions clearly hasn't driven one, let alone lived with one. Rant over.
|
|
In the Gaurdian today Honda have posted record world profits with all their cars selling exeptionally well,I think that tells a story.
|
|
doesent matter does it, they can ignore your needs.
|
Your right zero, they don't give a stuff about the UK.
automobiles.honda.com/accord-crosstour/
Hatchback and optional four wheel drive!
|
I can't really see what that offers that an Accord Estate or CRV (if you need 4wd) doesn't.
It would need to be priced above the regular Accord putting it well up with the premium brands.
Probably LHD only too.
Either Honda UK thinks they are doing 'it' right at present, or they don't but can't get Honda Global PLC to give them what they want.
|
>> I can't really see what that offers that an Accord Estate or CRV (if you
>> need 4wd) doesn't.
Aerodynamics.
|
|
3.5 V6 engine - same running gear as the old Legend - it can have all the aerodynamics it wants but at 25mpg it's dead in the water here.
|
|
I received a letter from Honda informing of the reduction in towing weight so took the letter to the dealer and said them oh dear what are we going to do now then. They confirmed with Honda the the reduction in towing weight; confirmed I bought the car to tow a caravan of a particular size; suggested they bought the car back and offered me a new CRV to the same spec as the Accord instead. I did pay a little more as I had some extras fitted but I was really happy the dealer really looked after me so well.
|
That story helps to explain why some Honda owners stay loyal: as with Skoda, the general standard of their dealers' customer care is above average.
The promise of the re-introduction of the Jazz CVT shows that someone somewhere is listening. Let's hope the next model Civic sees a return to user-friendliness (as with the 2001 model) rather than stylist-led quirkiness for its own sake (the current one).
|
>> Let's hope the next model Civic sees a return to user-friendliness (as with the 2001
>> model) rather than stylist-led quirkiness for its own sake (the current one).
>>
And decent independent rear suspension so it no longer rides like a cart and shakes itself to bits perhaps ?
|
|
But they are built to drive on smooth roads unlike those found in the UK.
|
My family first bought a Honda in 1980 when you had to know the dealer very well to be able to buy one, as there were so few available. Since then we have owned or driven the whole range until about two years ago, when we finally became a non-Honda owning family as they had nothing in the range to suit us. Shame, we had many excellent years with Honda with almost perfect reliability.
Subaru have done the same. Having had two Foresters and an Outback, they are now too thirsty and expensive to buy to make sense.
The fully automatic Daihatsui Sirion has replaced the Forester and Suzuki Wagon R+ instead of a Honda Jazz with the manumatic and the S-Max was bought instead of the Tribeca to replace the Outback. The tribeca is far too thirsty for anyone caring about their children's future.
Mind you, when you see the size of some cars in the US you wonder why you bother. Some large SUVs produced by manufacturers, who in the UK preach economy and "greeness" (Toyota/Lexus/Honda), are a joke. They must do no more than 15 mpg on the motorway.
|
>> But they are built to drive on smooth roads unlike those found in the UK.
They reverted to a beam axle to stay within budget as the rest of the car was so new.
I will probably end up replacing my car with an Accord despite the boot, because there are so many things that are good about the car. Engine, suspension, supportive seats, driving position, gearbox, reliability. I would buy the 2.0L petrol, thats one thing I'm unsure about, the diesels, especially high milers. I'll just get a roof rack for long items.
I like the Subaru Legacy's but the thirst puts me off, likewise Foresters, and I can't understand why the clutches are so weak on them. For me, the Honda is a good compromise.
I'll probably change my mind when it comes to it!
|
3 x Hondas in a row.
Now a Nissan due to local dealer being less that truthful on the work required on my 6 yo 93,000 mile car that had had no more than £200 spent on repairs (Servicing, tyres etc not counted).
My son & D-i-L bought one of the 1st "new shape" Civics and it was like the good old Vx / Ford days - warranty repairs, recalls, bits falling off..........................
My Xtrail is now 33 mths old and has only needed servicing...............That's what I like.
2 of my sons and their wives are wedded to German cars - VW & BMW with mixed reports. 3rd son has Toyota and Lexus with minimal issues - the departure of the Civic improved their motoring outlook.
|
Honda - Idiots in charge ? - Tooslow
