Originally Posted by dom

Its going to sell. Wife's lease is up next June. Definitely be test driving one.

Originally Posted by dom

I'm sure we'll see the ED 2.0L with the CVT when its ready to replace the current 2.0 and 5AT. Or will Acura decide the CVT isn't worthy of a lux brand? any other lux brand offer a CVT?

Originally Posted by ttribe

I'm thinking you are unique in making the jump from TSX to NSX. The more natural progression would be TSX--->TL, etc.

Originally Posted by dom

F458 has an AT too. And you don't have to wait 3 years for it to maybe show up.

Then again the waiting list is probably 3 years so scratch that.

Originally Posted by Colin

Personally, I think there are going to be two intended targets although you only market directly to one of them. I think the "problem" with older forums like this one is that most of the members no longer remember what it was like to have to scrape together a $250 monthly payment. Most of the long time members here are well past that "experience" so it might be helpful to think back to what it was like when you were 18 or 19 years old and, yeah, you wanted a BMW 325i but an Integra was all you could afford.

When it comes to marketing, I say "never believe it". Marketing is about fostering an image and you market the car to each person's own self image. For example, you don't sell Honda Elements to aging baby boomers by telling them how many Costco sized packages of Depends you can fit in the back. You sell it to them by showing them the active lifestyle that they perceive they lead (remember, baby boomers don't think of themselves as "old").

With this in mind, I think that there is a second market for this car (as with the TSX) for older customers who have had all the fun cars they want, and now want something smaller, that's easier to park, that's good on gas. But, they don't want to drive something as "pedestrian" as a Corolla or a Civic. So I think this car will end up excluding buyers who are on an "upward earning trajectory" and appeal to people on either side of that demographic.

Originally Posted by dom

Its going to sell. Wife's lease is up next June. Definitely be test driving one.

Originally Posted by spdandpwr

The more I think about it, the more inclined I am to skip the ilx and upgrade to the rdx, when the time comes. I seriously don't think the ilx will weigh less than 3100 lbs, which means that it won't be much of an upgrade (in performance). I may as well stick with a practical suv, though I wonder what sort of awd system they will put in it.

Originally Posted by dom

I don't think there's any question he RDX is getting it AWD system from the CR-V. Which is why they were pretty mum on the subject saying nothing more than its lighter than before.

May not be a bad thing as the AWD from the CR-V is all new.

Originally Posted by Costco

...but you would pay $45k for a Passat?



The MDX shared the same platform as the Accord, looks like some suckers paid $50k for an Accord

Originally Posted by charliemike

Not the same thing, and you know it.

Plus that's a B5. Since the B6 the Passat and A4 have not shared platforms AFAIK.

Originally Posted by Costco

Chances are it will still be a bargain for the features you get compared to the Euro brands.

Originally Posted by Colin

ILX vs. Integra Sedan size comparison.

Interestingly, they're relatively the same length with the ILX being only 1" longer at 179" vs. 178". However, it's significantly wider, 74.4" vs. only 67.3" for the Integra and a bit taller at 56.1" vs. 53.9". If these dimensions translate to interior space, we'll probably see a little more legroom courtesy the 2" longer wheelbase and headroom and hip/shoulder room should be much improved as well.

Compared to the current TSX, this is a full 6 inches shorter while being 2 inches wider. Compared to the first gen TSX, it's 3.5 inches shorter and a shocking 6 inches wider. This should be interesting!

Originally Posted by Costco

Well, then how are the Civic and the ILX the same thing? We're talking about a car that nobody has driven, let alone reviewed yet. The only physical similarities so far are that they share the same platform, but the rest of the underpinnings may be completely different.

Chances are it will still be a bargain for the features you get compared to the Euro brands.

Originally Posted by civicdrivr

Thats pretty wide - the NSX concept is only 0.2" wider.

Originally Posted by charliemike

The reason why I don't think it's the same thing is that everything that Honda decided to do for the Civic from the moment they put pen to paper was to sell cars in the $16-22k range.

So unless Acura is telling me that all they did was take the bare chassis and build an entirely new car from the ground up, I'm going to go ahead and stand by my point that I wouldn't pay $30k for a car based upon a Civic.

If they did basically build an entirely new car then I'll come in here and admit I was wrong.

Originally Posted by Colin

Yeah, I wonder if it's a typo?

Originally Posted by Colin

IMO, the big question mark is whether North America is ready to embrace high content 'small' cars in volume?

Originally Posted by biker

How's the 1 series or A3 selling?

Originally Posted by Colin

From what I can see, not very well although I can't say if they're meeting the manufacturers expectations. They are certainly not at the volume that the ILX is supposed to sell at.

2011 sales:
1series = 8,832
A3 = 6,561

To be fair, I believe the actual prices for these are much higher than those expected for the ILX so that probably skews the numbers a bit. But these are arguably the best of the 'premium small' segment in NA.

Originally Posted by ttribe

I'm not sure how you can say that the 1-Series has "not [sold] very well." The things are all over the place and the introduction of the car is credited with BMW's vault past Lexus for top luxury brand in the US in terms of sales.

Originally Posted by Colin

I wonder of the chassis was designed for the ILX first and then decontented for the Civic where they could most easily do it? Most likely the interior which has also garnered the most criticism. This is how it's been for the last two TLs, they were designed with the TL in mind and then modded with steel hoods/engine cradles/bumper frames for Accord use (the TL uses aluminum). This might also be why the Civic retained the IRS and didn't move to a torsion beam like some of the competition?

IMO, the big question mark is whether North America is ready to embrace high content 'small' cars in volume? For example, you balk at a $30K Civic based car (they say it'll be well under $30K btw), but what about a $28K Ford Focus Titanium or VW Jetta w/Nav (for example)? Anyway, if the ILX were viewed as a 'higher trim Civic' that many have complained is lacking in the 2012 Civic, I don't see the harm in adding choice to the lineup.

Originally Posted by Colin

As I said, I don't know if it's over or under performing per BMWs plans but it seems pretty obvious to any objective person that in 2011:

IS = 29,669 (despite production disruptions)
TSX = 30,935 (ditto)
Regal = 40,144
1series = 8,832
A3 = 6,561

So yeah, it's not selling that well in the overall scheme of sale volume. As I've said twice, I'm not trying to say that BMW isn't satisfied with the numbers, I don't know enough about what their goals were for the car.

Originally Posted by Legend2TL

^ I would not use variant introduction as any indication of "success". Honda has introduced a FWD version of the RDX and a Sport version of the Ridgeline. It helped slightly to lower the price of the RDX which brought the price point to a better market position. Neither of which appear to the objective person (I had to use that really) to be sales successes.

On the other side Honda introduced FWD variants of it's highly successful 1G Pilot at a time when it was selling pretty well.

There is a 128i and a 135i at work, I know the 135i owner and she loves her 1.

Originally Posted by ttribe

I'll ignore the "any objective person" comment for the moment insomuch as we're both proceeding from a lack of information; namely, definitive information on BMW's plans for the 1. That being said, the 3 has always been the volume car for them, so it seems a little wrong-headed to simply assume that the 1 was introduced to become a volume seller (and to make comparisons accordingly). Rather, it seems rather apparent that the 1 was intended to capture a percentage of the US market in which BMW had no presence whatsoever. That they continue to introduce new variations of this model to the US market 4 years on seems to be a decent indicator of "success" in terms of BMW's plans for this car.

Originally Posted by Colin

This is all fluff and I've happily acknowledged (twice) that we don't know BMWs plans, I wasn't even thinking of the 1 before biker brought it up.

If you read the original context of my reply to charliemike, he said, "I wouldn't pay $30k for a car based upon a Civic" and I asked if NA is ready to "embrace high content 'small' cars in volume?" I cited high trim levels of the Focus and Jetta since this car could end up competing with those models instead of having the Civic do it at $30K.

But once the topic came up, I think that regardless of what BMW plans for the car, or what it does for the brand, or whether it's supposed to be a volume seller; 8000 per year isn't a lot. Especially compared to the other entry level near lux cars. You seem to want to argue 'intent' vs. empirical numbers, all while I've readily acknowledged we don't know intent. So why even waste the time?

Originally Posted by Colin

This is all fluff and I've happily acknowledged (twice) that we don't know BMWs plans, I wasn't even thinking of the 1 before biker brought it up.

If you read the original context of my reply to charliemike, he said, "I wouldn't pay $30k for a car based upon a Civic" and I asked if NA is ready to "embrace high content 'small' cars in volume?" I cited high trim levels of the Focus and Jetta since this car could end up competing with those models instead of having the Civic do it at $30K.

But once the topic came up, I think that regardless of what BMW plans for the car, or what it does for the brand, or whether it's supposed to be a volume seller; 8000 per year isn't a lot. Especially compared to the other entry level near lux cars. You seem to want to argue 'intent' vs. empirical numbers, all while I've readily acknowledged we don't know intent. So why even waste the time?

Originally Posted by charliemike

The Jetta is a whole other story, IMO. They gutted that car in order to make sure it didn't get over $25-26k ...

I've drive a Focus SEL for a few days as a rental and it's a good car. If they could fix that transmission/drive by wire thing I think the SEL is priced pretty decently. But the Titanium loaded out is $28k and I think it's too much. I think a Focus ST should be about $30k to compete with the Golf.

Now, if I'm comparing a $30k ILX and a $30k 4-dr GTI, that's a tough call.

Originally Posted by Johns

Were we talking about the US being ready to buy small cars at luxury prices? The BMW 3 series is close to the same size as the ILX. The 1 series is small by US standards (not mini small but you get the idea).

Originally Posted by Costco

Originally Posted by ttribe

[sigh] Never mind. You seemed to be reaching a faulty conclusion based on an unknown assumption. That's all I was going for.

Originally Posted by phile

i was watching the walkaround vid of John Ikeda on TOV, and he was mentioning how Acura went to pretty great lengths to not use the same raked A pillar that the Civic has and gave it a longer hood for a more conservative sedan look. and i'm so fucking glad they did.

notice though that the taillights on the ILX are pretty much the Civic's except they stretched it horizontally.

Originally Posted by Legend2TL

Actually you don't know whether the conclusion is faulty on unknown data (BMW's sales goal of the 1) so it appears your objective conclusion is also faulty

Auto debate team class 101

Originally Posted by Costco

not sure if I've mentioned it before but I actually like the ILX in terms of looks. The only thing up in the air is the engine choices... it's nice that they're offering choices, but having the 2.0 standard and 2.4 only in manual