Honda moves Civic refresh forward to 2013

[SLCraig]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself
While I value high mechanical and other quality, I could care less about the "expanded features list" that seems to drive today's automobile market. Cars are becoming like the fashion industry.

KISS for me, but I feel like I am in the minority.


I'm with you man.
Self parking Focus? I wouldn't pay 5 bucks more for that useless feature. People drive cars, cars don't drive cars.
Also [censored] like enormous touch screens or other stupid junk no one needs. I like dials and analog gauges etc. Frustrating indeed.

 

[Nick R]

I personally just find it amusing that while Ford, GM, and Hyundai are all stepping up their game in the small car market, Honda and toyota seem to be moving in the opposite direction. As much as I do admire the Japanese and their culture (Shut up, I do) I can't help but wonder, what went wrong?

 

[edhackett]

Quote:
The proper word would have been "more affordable" rather than "lower quality". The same way as VW lowered the price of their Jetta and Passat.


The problem is that Honda did not lower the price. The base price for the 2011 and 2012 Civic was $15,605.

Ed

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I think this is good of Honda. Not that the 2012 Civic was a dud to begin with, but that they're responding so quickly to the negative reception of the car. They clearly made a business decision that was wrong and they're apparently working quickly to fix it. It normally takes much, much longer for this type of error in judgement to get mitigated.

I agree.

 

[ffracer]

Originally Posted By: edhackett
Quote:
The proper word would have been "more affordable" rather than "lower quality". The same way as VW lowered the price of their Jetta and Passat.


The problem is that Honda did not lower the price. The base price for the 2011 and 2012 Civic was $15,605.

Ed


I've owned 3 Hondas, loved them, and family has a had quite a few, and they've lost it. The interiors are cheap. the handling, once a Honda hallmark, has gone to the mushy American rolling sofa in some models, manual transmissions, also a Honda strength, are only in the performance models or a super cheap ones, the cars are getting heavy (like most), and the styling is bizzare.

The S2000 was a great, great car. The Civic Si sedan, also fun, but cheap inside. The Integra, TSX, older Accords, all great cars.

Memo to car makers: stop giving me so many "apps" and electronic [censored] in the dash board and so many safety nannies, and just give me a simple good handling, fuel efficient car with a manual transmission and high quality interior that's reliable and fun to drive. Like 80s Hondas.

 

[91344George]

Originally Posted By: ffracer


Memo to car makers: stop giving me so many "apps" and electronic [censored] in the dash board and so many safety nannies, and just give me a simple good handling, fuel efficient car with a manual transmission and high quality interior that's reliable and fun to drive. Like 80s Hondas.


Honda needs to go back and search their roots especially they need to go back and look at what the founder Mr. Soichiro Honda
was focused on. Heck speak to his family members/ children.

I would bet Mr. Honda is rolling in his grave just about now.

It is a shame to see a once dynamic successful auto company like Honda fall so fast from the top.

The best Honda products were produced from the early 80s until the mid ninties or so. It was all down hill from there, with bigger, lower quality, poorer handling products.

The Accord died when Honda stopped using the global platform in 99 for the US Accord.

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: ffracer


Memo to car makers: stop giving me so many "apps" and electronic [censored] in the dash board and so many safety nannies, and just give me a simple good handling, fuel efficient car with a manual transmission and high quality interior that's reliable and fun to drive. Like 80s Hondas.


The closest you're going to get to that in a 2012 is a Detroit product. Focus and Cruze in MT forms can be had without all the electro-junk, handle pretty well, and still get good fuel economy. Their interiors are also nice places to spend time.

 

[Mr_Accord]

I have to agree with the majority of the comments here. Honda needs to go back to the 80's and early 90's and take a good look at what made them great, because the direction they're headed in is the wrong one. The cars are getting bigger, the designs are getting weird and Toyota boring (Forget the Accord Crosstour, the new 2012 Civic is f-ugly!) and the quality/reliability isn't great when compared to cars past. I'm still driving my 92 Accord Lx AT that I bought at the beginning of College and it has been an absolute tank. It might not be the prettiest thing on the road, but I love the reliability, comfort and handling. I fear the day I will have to send it to retirement because I know I will never get the same experience from a newer Honda

. They just aren't made like they used to be, and its sad because they made some great stuff. Hopefully they will get the message like others (Ford, GM, Hyundai...) and come back to the top.

 

[Jeepster_nut]

Don't forget that Honda is an ENGINE company that happens to make cars, powersports, jets, etc. I buy Hondas for their engines, the styling and features are secondary. Obviously, I am the exception to the rule when it comes to consumers. Most consumers buy a car for the looks, cup holder count, and iPod jacks.

I won't throw Honda under the bus for designing a few ugly cars. Compared to the Koreans and domestics they haven't built nearly as many flops.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Jeepster_nut
Don't forget that Honda is an ENGINE company that happens to make cars, powersports, jets, etc. I buy Hondas for their engines...


Both of my vehicles have Honda engines and two out of my three mowers have Honda engines. They do make a good reciprocating engine.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: TurboLuver
Quote:
Ito reportedly explained that the 2012 Civic was under development during the American financial crisis, which led Honda executives to believe Americans would accept lower-quality cars


WOW, I can't believe they actually said that. I guess it goes without saying that Honda will not be winning the Deming Prize anytime soon.

Well, we don't really know what Ito actually said, do we? There's no direct quote, let alone a verifiable one. We only have Motor Trend's interpretation of whatever Ito said. We ought to take it with a grain of salt.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Jeepster_nut
Don't forget that Honda is an ENGINE company that happens to make cars, powersports, jets, etc. I buy Hondas for their engines, the styling and features are secondary. Obviously, I am the exception to the rule when it comes to consumers. Most consumers buy a car for the looks, cup holder count, and iPod jacks.

I won't throw Honda under the bus for designing a few ugly cars. Compared to the Koreans and domestics they haven't built nearly as many flops.



What does that mean, anyway? "Honda is an engine company that happens to make cars?"

I think I read that in some sappy piece of automotive drivel on the Yahoo homepage a few months ago as reason why their cars were "reliable".

How does Honda Motor Company differ from Bavarian Motor Works or General Motors or Ford Motor Company, for example?

They make good engines, they make not so good engines, like everyone else out there. They happen to make engines for a wide variety of applications. Personally I could do without their V6 engines or the rest of their car engines that have no guts below 5500 rpm.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Jeepster_nut
Don't forget that Honda is an ENGINE company that happens to make cars, powersports, jets, etc. I buy Hondas for their engines, the styling and features are secondary. Obviously, I am the exception to the rule when it comes to consumers. Most consumers buy a car for the looks, cup holder count, and iPod jacks.

Yeah, well, there's more to a car than just an engine, whether Honda likes it or not.

 

[Jeepster_nut]

Originally Posted By: cchase
Originally Posted By: Jeepster_nut
Don't forget that Honda is an ENGINE company that happens to make cars, powersports, jets, etc. I buy Hondas for their engines, the styling and features are secondary. Obviously, I am the exception to the rule when it comes to consumers. Most consumers buy a car for the looks, cup holder count, and iPod jacks.

I won't throw Honda under the bus for designing a few ugly cars. Compared to the Koreans and domestics they haven't built nearly as many flops.



What does that mean, anyway? "Honda is an engine company that happens to make cars?"

I think I read that in some sappy piece of automotive drivel on the Yahoo homepage a few months ago as reason why their cars were "reliable".

How does Honda Motor Company differ from Bavarian Motor Works or General Motors or Ford Motor Company, for example?

They make good engines, they make not so good engines, like everyone else out there. They happen to make engines for a wide variety of applications. Personally I could do without their V6 engines or the rest of their car engines that have no guts below 5500 rpm.


It means that their engines are world class and used everywhere. Engines are their forte always have been and hopefully always will be.

How do they differ from Ford or GM? Well, they make a Jet for example. Visit their website then visit Fords and GM's website. Honda dabbles in everything which may be good or may be bad.

The truth of the matter is that Honda in no way,shape, or form has had as many epic fails as Ford or GM. So a styling issue on one model year isn't going to change many consumers opinions of them outside of BITOG.

 

[cchase]

What does making a jet have to do with anything? Does that mean Saab should be the cream of the crop? Subaru engines are used in light aircraft everywhere, do they get special treatment? BMW made airplanes before they were stopped from doing so.

I've not found anything on a Honda engine that makes them stand out from any other manufacturers engine. Unless there's a "world class" module somewhere I didn't notice. I don't see too many epic fails with GM or Ford engines. In fact they're used in a lot applications I suspect most on here aren't aware of, some of which your life probably depends on.

Should I buy a Honda for the engine even if the body falls apart and the transmission grenades?

 

[Jeepster_nut]

It means that Honda can and does excel in most any field they enter. SAAB's auto failure speaks for itself.

Haven't found anything that sticks out on a Honda engine?? Well the chinese sure have. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Yea, those Hondas are know for their horrible build quality and poor reliability and years of past poor manufacturing issues and sticking it to their customers. That has kept them in business all these years.

I'm by no means a dyed in the wool Honda guy, but I call it like I see it. I will give Ford and GM and SAAB and Subaru credit when they spread themselves across as many markets as Honda does, and succeeds.

 

[TurboLuver]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Well, we don't really know what Ito actually said, do we? There's no direct quote, let alone a verifiable one. We only have Motor Trend's interpretation of whatever Ito said. We ought to take it with a grain of salt.



Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Accept a lower quality car? Give me a break. Didnt they realize what made people want to buy honda?

My thoughts exactly.


Have you changed your tune from your previous post? You seemed to be buying it then?

 

[Win]

If they're such a great engine company, they can come get that noisy, hard to start, gas hog that's on my pressure washer.

And mosquito fogging was the only thing world class about the Honda car engine I had. I also call it like I see it.

Mistubishi and Kawasaki and probably a lot of other Japanese firms build or built jets and turboprops. That's a meaningless comparison. And Saab aircraft and Saab automobiles were divorced long ago.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: TurboLuver
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Well, we don't really know what Ito actually said, do we? There's no direct quote, let alone a verifiable one. We only have Motor Trend's interpretation of whatever Ito said. We ought to take it with a grain of salt.



Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Accept a lower quality car? Give me a break. Didnt they realize what made people want to buy honda?

My thoughts exactly.


Have you changed your tune from your previous post? You seemed to be buying it then?


Actually yes, more or less. I have knee-jerk reactions sometimes, just like everyone. Good catch.

However, whether or not Mr. Ito actually copped to it, the 2012 Civic does seem lower-quality to me, at least in terms of its execution if nothing else. It made me think "what does Honda take its customers for?" That's why I was so quick to make that first response. It's a typical cognitive bias: we are less likely to question things that jive with what we already believe.

The second response was to an allegation about what Mr. Ito actually said. I'm sure you'll agree that that's a different matter, and it made me look at things more critically.

 

[Vikas]

When somebody says "Honda is an Engine company", we need to interpret as "Honda is NOT an automatic transmission company"