GreenMonster

WoW... A crossover is the flagship vehicle... That's a far cry from when the NSX was the flagship... It's a shame how far Acura has fallen... RL is a sales disaster, which only strengthens the argument that still has a ways to go before it's even close to being a teir1 automaker.

Colin

Of course there is a long way to go. Did they EVER say Tier 1 was a 2010 goal?

VTEC Racer

LOL. People were complaining about the lack of tier one products less than 6 months after Acura officially announced their goals.

Mokos23

Acura started to fall at the end of 2005 when the NSX was discontinued.

Costco

I simply don't understand the point of announcing Tier 1 aspirations 5-10 years before the Tier 1 models actually arrive. Really, what good can it do? Just leave people hanging on long enough to hold out for the new Acura models later on, I guess. It sure as hell didn't improve their current sales, especially in the higher end segments where Tier 1 brands BMW, MB, and Lexus are usually a lock for tops in the sales charts with models like the 3/C/IS/ES, 5/E/GS, etc. It sure as hell didn't help the RL any, though I'm not quite sure if the styling had anything to do with it.....

So far the Tier 1 aspirations haven't garnered excitement... on the contrary, they have brought about disappointment. A simple case of bad timing IMO... I'm sure Acura will come out with new products in the foreseeable future, but at this moment people are left scratching their heads wondering why Acura talked the talk with their big, bold Tier 1 goals, but in the end they didn't manage to walk the walk. I guess they're still trying to hang on to the Acura faithful, which judging from the reactions to the current and upcoming Acura lineup, isn't very faithful at all. Also who knows if their Tier 1 goals will really hold up, there's always sightings and press releases that an NSX successor will show up but various factors resulted in one model being postponed indefinitely. Who's to say that the times won't affect Acura's goal of an entire Tier 1-worthy lineup?

From a few articles I've read its been ~1.5 years since they announced their Tier 1 goals. I'm just dumbfounded over why they even announced it in the first place, as people are still tugging on the coattails about it.

JD23

I agree with you here. Until the release of a tier 1 vehicle is imminent, the announcement does nothing good for Acura.

SpicyMikey

Agree. The ZDX (style and purpose aside) seems to have upscaled features in the cabin from their past offerings. Also, they are FINALLY coming out with an AT with more than 5 gears, but lets see how much smoother and faster it shifts before getting too excited. Which leads to my biggest skepticism. To me, the features and F&F are better than MB, BMW, Lexus, and the likes. That isn't the problem of getting an improved image in my eyes. For me the thing that keeps them inferior to those just listed is the powertrain. I love my MDX and RL, but I couldn't argue with a straight face that it doesn't feel like you're driving a Honda with inferior Torque and clunky AT transmission shifts. And that's the exact area where they seem to be waffling in these latest decisions to kill the V8 and RWD projects. I think it's going to be hard to raise the image if they don't change that formula. Granted the prices will need to rise and they will probably lose many of their current buyers. But, if their goal is Tier 1 they must do this sooner rather than later. Otherwise, just stop the charades and build off the "value luxury" position you've already carved out and conquered.

dom

Agree.

Far too many annoucements with little to show lately.

Colin

Whatever happened to the old Honda where they never said anything about their plans? Back then the forums were full of people bitching and moaning that Honda was so secretive.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

^^ I still remember those days....lol....people will never stop complaining because they still love and care about Honda and want them to do well...

Fishy

^^ Yep, we know who they are, and they won't stop bitching until Acura delivers a car that cures PMS.

Costco

I'm an automobile enthusiast, I like all cars, as long as well.... I like them. I try not to get too attached to brands because it makes me overlook things that will later on REALLY bug me as time goes on, styling being one of the top things.

In reality as of this moment there aren't any Hondas/Acura that I really like, and even fewer that I'd be really interested in buying. Civic Si, maybe... but even then there are easily dozens of cars I'd take before it. Acura's current lineup does nothing for me, though I do like the TSX and MDX (pre-beak). Honda killed the S2000 and some people are expecting them to come out with a successor.... just like Honda/Acura did with the NSX, right?

I'm tired of them treating their customers and enthusiasts like dingleberries, expecting us to hang on and hang on until hopefully we catch on to the next that comes out. If anyone here honestly, in their heart of hearts, REALLY likes the ZDX.... well, I feel sorry for your poor taste. I have always felt that taste is a thing left to the eye of the beholder, but the ZDX is a joke.

And another thing... there's an extreme to everything. Not announcing a single damn thing at all is on one end of the spectrum while making projections 5-10 years down the road is on the other end. Its like a base Honda Fit automatic, compared to an NSX-R.... lets keep it somewhere in the middle, like an AV6 EX or something. I like Infiniti's car lineup, but teasers like their brush stroke commercials are weak as hell, and on the other hand, announcing the return of the Camaro 4-5 years before it actually comes out and saturating the media by showing barely-disguised Camaros on the street all over the world is also too much.

I'm not exactly a Hyundai fan either, but I especially like how Hyundai handled the Genesis sedan/coupe. Most non-car enthusiast people I know knew nothing about it until they saw this great (IMO) commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N14X...om=PL&index=36

dom

The only thing their line-up is curing these days is insomnia.

If you guys are content with the current Acura line-up, great. But don't try and pretend all is fine and people have nothing to bitch about. And yes, beleive it or not, some of us who have owned nothing but Honda's since we got our driver's license do truly want to see them do well.

Fishy

I'm not personally content with Acura's current line-up since I do share some "enthusiast" tendencies, but I'm not so self-engrossed to link my lack of contentment with Honda's success.

I don't see any evidence that Honda isn't doing well. Even the 4G TL is selling 3,000+ a month, which is pretty good in this economy.

Costco

As long as a manufacturer makes cars that I like (which covers a wide range of criteria), for a price I think is reasonable, and they aren't out murdering people, racketeering or pimping or kidnapping Nepalese babies to use as slave labor in their factories, and they manage to keep the lights on and keep moving forward... its fine by me. I don't give a rat's ass if they sell 50 cars a year or 500,000 - again, if it follows my criteria...

My point is, I should care that x manufacturer is selling well because...? There are no guarantees that if they sell well that they will bring out more features, or vice versa. I have no idea why people are so obsessed over sales numbers. As long as the lights are on, they aren't hemorrhaging money or hell, my tax money *cough*GM*cough*

Yeah, that's right. I'm a huge GM fan and I'm pissed about my tax money going to their lost cause thanks to deeply-rooted mistakes made years and decades earlier. AND I was a strong supporter of them going bankrupt and letting the cards play out the way they should without the government sticking their hand in the cookie jar, even if that meant the lights went out in Detroit indefinitely.

Colin

I seriously don’t think that the current lineup is without fault. However, I don’t think things are any different than the last time the topic was raised. Regarding your comment about only driving Honda since you got your license. IMO, this would mean that you’ve only ever driven a 4 or 6 cylinder and have only been in a FWD (or more recently AWD) Unless you’ve had an NSX or S2000, you’ve never had a RWD car.

Now, like so many posters here, you want something other than what Honda makes. Wouldn’t this mean that your wants and needs have changed? Probably. And there is nothing wrong with that. However, blaming Honda for not changing with you is like marrying a short legged brunette and than later complaining to her that she’s not a leggy blond. She finally says, “if you like leggy women so much, why did you marry me?” You reply, “ I thought you’d grow” Of course the difference is that we can just trade in our cars, while (most of us) don’t trade in our wives.

So is there nothing to bitch about? Of course not, but I’d like to confine my griping to things that are “doable” within Honda’s framework of how they build cars. I’d like to see the F22C in the TSX. 238 hp at 8000 RPM would be sweet. I’d like to see a little more content in the Tech Package (maybe merge CMBS into all of them?). I’d like to see an Acura version of either the Insight or the upcoming CR-Z. And when the economy improves, I’d like to see the super car come out. That car was soooo close to production, you’d be shocked.

neuronbob

and .

Just because I own a GM vehicle as my DD right now doesn't mean I've abandoned Honda/Acura. I'm still waiting for the next RL , hope it's got a turbo or two on top of the J37, and exterior design to die for. We'll see how the ZDX sells, in the meantime.

dom

So what you're essentially saying is....

Honda shouldn't be the one changing and offering more to KEEP their customers...... The customer should STFU and take what Honda gives them. If they don't like it they can go elsewhere. Not the best stragedy IMO but an interesting perspective. I wonder how things would be if every company thought this way. Would we ever see progress? Then again, I wonder why Honda would develop and push SH-AWD if they were simply content with the status quo. Something tells me they made it to keep their existing customers who were looking to move up. (see neuronbob) So your theory doesn't really hold water.

Again, I'm separating Honda from Acura here.

dom

Neither am I. Just remember where you are. An Acura forum where people will bitch and complain (rightfully so sometimes) about every nut and bolt. If you can't do it here where can you do it.

Colin

NO, If I meant to say it, I would have said it. What I mean is that Honda is "going" to manufacture cars in a certain way with a certain architecture. They have perfected flexible chassis to the point that they can make a wide range of cars out of some common components. Most of the time they are very successful with this and sometimes the cars overlap too much (Accord cpe and CL?). I think that Honda realized that they cannot offer a product in every niche for every buyer. It just seems that many forums cannot accept this.

Regarding SH-AWD. I had an interesting conversation with someone at Acura back in 2006. Most specifically about the future of AWD. I asked "if Acura was 'betting the farm' on AWD, shouldn't we know about the long term reliability?" He laughed and said that reliability wasn't an issue, but also that "the farm is already bet" I guess this underscores that if you want to introduce an AWD TL in 2009, you better be working on it 3 years in advance. But I digress...

SH-AWD allows Acura to capture buyers 'moving up" from FWD, BUT in a way that allows manufacture on existing assembly lines and flexible chassis'. I'm sure everyone here can see the attraction to the manufacturer. How well this is received but the marketplace has yet to be determined (hard to gauge success in this economy).

So, should Honda and Acura just say 'see ya' to buyers moving beyond the brands' offerings? As much as it pains me to say it, (and I'm sure HMC), I think the answer is 'yes' but with one qualifier. This philosophy requires that the Honda brand continue to capture 'aspirational' buyers. This insures a constant supply of customers that a manufacturer can 'step up' through the brand. This way as you lose buyers (all consumer products from cameras to TVs do) you can replace them with new ones. But it also means that you will 'cut off' customers on the extreme ranges of the price/performance scale.

So, I think my "theory" makes sense if you don't try to distill it into one flippant statement like "The customer should STFU and take what Honda gives them"

dom

You just confirmed what I was suggesting. I understand what you're saying... and although flippant, it is what it is. If you want something more than an RL, your local Lexus, MB, BMW, Cadillac and Audi dealer will be more than happy to assist you. If you'd like something even remotely sporting, they can give you a hand with that as well.

Or you can have a seat in our waiting room, Teir 1 should be here any minute now. Feel free to have a seat in our new ZDX Sports Coupe.

Colin

So if that's the way it is, why keep crying over it?

dom

Right, dicussing Acura's at AcuraZine is obsurd. Sorry about that.



Why is this place still open?

Colin

I knew you'd say that. Seriously, all the venom is disappointing. It's not good for the soul. I strive to be objective in how I view the strengths and weaknesses of the brand. It just seems like so many people are trying to 'pick a fight' and not really discuss. Hey, just my

dom

For Acura

:gheyhug: Better?

I'm spewing Venom? Have you ever seen a post from Moog? Next to him I'm Acura's biggest fan.

Keeps things in perspective. Its a car forum where everyone has an opinion. All it is is an opinion, nothing more.

But in all seriousness, Its difficult to remain positive because I fail to see much positive at Acura these days. Their interiors are still nice.

And getting back to your earlier point. I find it difficult to believe that Honda would be OK with losing customers that were once theirs to other brands. In this tough times now more than ever do I hear how its easier to keep the customers you have than it is to earn new ones. And how once they're gone, they're not coming back.

LessisBestmakingendsmeet

Lets see here....
Porsche, yes PORSCHE has evolved (we know Audi, BMW, Lexus, Mercedes Benz have but using this sports car brand really shows WHY you want to expand). Now Acura isn't close to being a competitor but this was a sports car brand ONLY. They expanded to the Boxster, Cayman, Cayenne, Panamera. Why? To KEEP people in Porsche that wanted something different and didn't want to leave the brand. No brand, NO COMPANY wants to see customers LEAVE. They want brand loyalty and for people to stay. Its much easier and CHEAPER to get them to stay than to leave and go elsewhere. Now you can tow your 911 with a Cayenne instead of having to buy a Tahoe and now you can have executive lunch in your Panamera instead of having to buy and drive that S-class.

Now Acura has done this somewhat and its most successful venture was with the MDX. The SLX stunk they didn't have a mid size SUV and they brought the MDX so you DON'T have to leave the brand. However, you can't move past the MDX. No V-8, nothing bigger and seemingly Acura stopped there.

Colin

I wasn't specifically saying all the venom was from you, but on the boards in general.

I don't speak for corporate, but I'm sure they would prefer that people stay with the brand. As LessisBest said, "No brand, NO COMPANY wants to see customers LEAVE. They want brand loyalty and for people to stay."

I would hypothesize that they looked at the potential upside of building an all new chassis or engine program, weighed it against the huge cost, and decided that they cannot make a business case.

Since none of us have the numbers to know for sure, we can only judge based on the actions we see. Since we "know" they want customer retention, and we "know" they were working on new programs to ensure this but canceled or delayed them. Well my dear Watson, we can logically conclude that they are choosing a path that they don't want to do but feel is necessary.

Again, I don't pretend to know everything, I simply want to offer an alternate point of view that nobody seems willing to offer or consider.

dom

I know I'm certainly not, nor do I think anyone else is saying you're wrong about that view. What I'm questioning is the wisdom of Honda taking that approach. And its a valid argument that should be discussed. We can't simply all agree on the reason's and then fail to discuss their merits.

If that's their approach, its a poor shortsighted one IMO. What I do know as fact is that they have lost a least 1 customer that drove nothing but Honda's for 17 years. Insignificant yes, but -1 all the same.

Colin

LOL Obviously, I have a different definition of 'discussion' because the worst of what I read are the internet equivalent of a 'drive by' shooting. Someone comes by, lobs in a deliberately inflammatory post, and then leaves with little additional comment.

I will comment on one thing that occurred to me. It goes back to what you said earlier "The customer should STFU and take what Honda gives them. If they don't like it they can go elsewhere." A long time ago, back in the mid-80's that's how it used to be. It was like:

"What? You want a CRX with an automatic? Sorry, they don't make it that way"

"What? You want a color besides Red, White, and Blue? Ok, we'll add Silver and Black, but they'll all have a gray interior"

And later ....around the time when I started....

"What? You want a GS-R with an automatic? Sorry, they don't make it that way"

"What? You want a GS-R sedan with Black on Black? How about this Dark Currant Pearl which is so purple it's almost Black? Oh, and it has a gray interior."

This 'quirk' was actually embraced by the fans of the brand. These "True Believers" actually self qualified themselves because they understood what were shortcomings to some, but bought anyway. In other words, they STFU and took what Honda gave them. Interesting no?

Not to be too argumentative, but isn't this exactly the opposite? I think they are taking a long term approach to insure the continued existence of the company.

But let's break down a RWD chassis project. It will obviously serve as the basis of the sedan lineup for Acura. Pre-automeltdown, the TL was at 70K/year, TSX at 40k/year and RL at ... well never mind. Let us assume that this chassis will also spawn a coupe at around 20K/year. This gives us 130,000 chassis sold in a year. I can only assume that they came to the conclusion that without a global presence, there was no way to get enough volume to justify an all new chassis. Infiniti and Lexus have launched globally and struggle in Europe (and Japan???). Honda execs probably look at this and wonder if launching such an initiative in the current economy can pay off?

Now it might be argued that they should have done this a long time ago, and maybe you'd be right. But just as we are discussing their plans for 5-7 years down the road, someone had to be talking about 2009 back in 2001. Think about where you were in 2001 and what your outlook was? Also remember that we're only 1.5 product generations removed from the Integra days where customers just "took what Honda gave them"

TMQ

Problem with Acura is that it's not a global brand. Honda cars in other markets are reasonably upscale, making Acura products almost redundant. So Honda has to drive the Honda products downscale a bit, to leave room for Acura.

Only when they decide to launch Acura world wide will we get really competitive products to go against the Germans. Right now the design department only looks at the NA market and come out with pretty lousy stuff that will never succeed in other markets.

AWD is useful but many in the sun belt don't need it. Audi faces the same issue.

Colin

Or if/when they decide to go global, they have to push Acura higher to allow the Honda product room to "breath"

dom

Again, its a forum, don't expect too much.

No, not really considering not much has changed. Last I checked many Acura's were available in limited color combo's. (6MT TL) And do we really need to discuss the V6 TSX again? Looks like the same boneheaded decisions to me.

You can break things down all you want and come up with a few more reason's why they shouldn't be doing RWD etc....Fact is other companies are. As the consumer that's all I care about. I would think these companies are facing the same economic realities. I'm sure they have their own long term approach, yet it somehow doesn't involve taking any and all excitement out of your luxury division. Will they possible bleed more money than Honda in the short term? Maybe, but I'll bet they'll be stronger for it in the long run.

Your point about why Honda is doing what they are is well taken. I think we've discussed this a few times in the past. Save a few bucks by not offering a MT in the V6 TSX... You see that as wise while I see it idiotic. Just because the approach looks good in accounting, that doesn't necessarily mean its the right business decision. Again, my opinion.

Colin

What can I say, people don't buy manual transmissions. Everyone talks a lot, but nobody steps up and buys them.

A few weeks ago, our GM asked the sales force who had customers waiting for an MT TL? And the answer was .... nobody. I recently sent out a newsletter to 5000 people and not ONE person called me to say "hey, let me know when that comes in"

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with the ZDX anymore...

dom

Unless its a GS-R, Civic Si or S2000...I don't think an MT is a great idea on every model. The vehicle has to be right and I think the V6 TSX is the right vehcle for the MT. TL, not so much.

BTW, you sure the lack of response from those 5000 doesn't have more to do with the TL than it does the MT?

SpicyMikey

It's like the V8 drum beat. Many says Acura needs it and points to that as the reason they are not viewed highly enough. Many say they want a V8 and the torque it provides. But at the end of the day when it's time to buy one, few do it because they can't justify the cost. That's the cold economic reality It all makes for good forum banter to entertain us but it's importance in sales is exagerated IMO.

dom

I think sales numbers back that up but the aura of having that V8 in your lineup can still be argued. :ibMrDeeno:

The lack of a V8 isn't what frustrates me at all. Its the lack of any other technologoical advancement. Was SH-AWD nice, yes. But pretty much every other competitor now has a similar or superior system. Where are the engine advancements? Everyone loves to point out how competitive the J is and point to how its more than enough. The same people who were bragging when Honda led the HP race with the 260HP TL.

SpicyMikey

Possibly true. But when you are going to spend $30-$40k on your daily driver. It's hard to justify a MT. TSX is geared for a younger group. They might think it will be a good idea and buy one. For the rest of us. Not such a good idea unless it's a weekend car. I had a two car situation when I was married-without-children years ago. Had a Mits 300GT VR4 Spyder and a S10 Pickup. Best of both worlds. Not true now

dom

Exactly my point.

SpicyMikey

Again I agree. Acura makes a great car inside the cabin. Luxury and technology to make yuor drive enjoyable can't be beat even for 20% more money. For me, the shortcoming is in the powertrain. Engines are underpowered and do not impress in the MPG category given the HP. Also, the AT is way behind. Drove a Z4 with the 7 speed double clutch recently. Dear lord what a nice smooth delivery of power all the way through. I was impressed. Heard great things about Porsche's new PDK AT as well. I'd love to try one. I know it would add significant cost to the cars for Acura to do that, but I wish Acura would step in that area. I'd pay for it and THEN they could argue with a straight face that they are more than just up-trimmed Honda's.

Colin

I think a V6 TSX would be interesting, but realistically, in the best of times, Acura only sells 40K TSXs a year. These days probably less.

There are already:
TSX I4 AT
TSX Tech I4 AT
TSX I4 6MT
TSX Tech I4 6MT
TSX V-6
TSX V-6 Tech

Adding two more trim levels (assumes base and tech) is just too much (IMO). The 6 cylinders are only a small percentage of all TSXs and a 6MT would be 10% (at best) of this. I bet it'd be 500 to 750 cars total per year. As much as I'd love to see it, I simply think it's unlikely.

LOL who knows? It could be the currency exchange rate in Latvia but I wasn't trying to assign a reason. I was only offering an honest (if anecdotal) account of the perceived demand for a manual.