Weck

From an Autoextremist.com article: (edited for length)
<<<<<<
Honda, Honda PR. An operative from Honda PR (who shall remain nameless) took great umbrage (via an email sent to us last Friday) with our portrayal of Honda's 2003 sales figures (their car sales are down) in last week's "On the Table" column, in which we referred to a cover story in Automotive News on the same subject. He even suggested that we take a Journalism 101 class and that we should "check our facts" about Honda's glowing sales numbers and that we should "take a moment and set the record straight" for our readers.

While we were mulling over just how we'd inform our readers of this communication, John O'Dell, a Staff Writer for the Los Angeles Times, wrote a story this past Monday with the headline "Civic Slump Puts a Dent in Honda's Armor." O'Dell opened his story with the following:
"Superman isn't supposed to catch colds, gamblers aren't supposed to beat the house in Las Vegas and Honda's car sales aren't supposed to slump.
But for the last two years, largely because of the softening popularity of its aging Civic compact sedan, Honda Motor Co.'s passenger car sales in the U.S. have dropped, falling 8.8% since hitting an all-time high in 2001. Last year, sales of the company's Honda and Acura brand passenger cars were off a combined 3.2%, after falling 6.8% in 2002." He then went on to point out that overall Honda sales were actually up 8.2% in 2003, thanks to the Pilot and the MDX, which is what the Honda PR operative was squawking about, but the fact remains that Honda car sales are faltering, and they're even giving dealers between $400 and $800 to help move the sluggish-selling Civic through March.

O'Dell went on to quote ace industry analyst Art Spinella, president of CNW Marketing Research in Bandon, Ore., as saying, "It is getting tougher out there and we fully expect Honda to lose some market share in 2004...everyone's gunning for them."

We thought the "Journalism 101" reference was cute, albeit amazingly unoriginal, but the only record that needs to be set straight here is the fact that Honda and their PR operatives are incapable of facing the music with their sales numbers. This is due, in large part, to the fact that Honda (and Toyota for that matter) has been getting a free ride from the automotive media for years - with the closet Honda zealots among them having perpetuated the idea that the two leading Japanese manufacturers are infallible - with Honda in particular wallowing in high praise seemingly with each new issue of every car publication known to humans (except for us, thankfully - ed.).

So it's no wonder that the well-meaning Honda PR operative would quake in his Dockers (and official Honda-branded polo shirt) with the thought that some media outlets, including us, are no longer willing to take the Honda view of the world, hook, line and sinker as has traditionally been the case. The fact of the matter is that Honda used to be a cool car company, jam-packed with distinctive, march-to-a-different-drummer-type products that bristled with ingenuity and creativity. But lately, Honda has demonstrated that it's no different from any other car company, import or domestic - especially after their dismal performance during the Detroit Auto Show media preview days, when they debuted the new Pilot SUT concept, which was shockingly the most tedious concept masquerading as a "breakthrough" product that was introduced at the show. To say that the Pilot SUT was very "un-Honda-like" would be the understatement of this young year. ... (edited for length)

... That being said, Honda does have some bright spots in their lineup (the S2000 being our clear favorite), but they have their share of dogs, too - starting with the decidedly lackluster Civic and the woefully uncompetitive Civic Si. The real problem for Honda and Honda PR is that all of a sudden the automotive media (and surprisingly, the non-automotive media too) doesn't seem to be so eager to genuflect and leave offerings in front of the Honda altar. ... (edit)
... and Honda finds itself dangling dangerously close to the rest of the pack for the first time. There are several car companies challenging Honda's reputation for engineering creativity and ingenuity, and now Honda is faced with having to remind everyone of their raison d'etre. But wait a minute - isn't it officially named the Honda Motor Company? And hasn't Honda had their asses handed to them in F1, with their motor clearly under performing against its rivals (Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, Ford/Jaguar and Renault) for the last five seasons? And haven't they gotten their butts kicked in the Indy Racing League by Toyota and the Cosworth-engineered Chevrolet? Yes and yes. Honda has basically lost its mojo, and they're floundering and flailing around trying to regain their footing. But it's a different automotive world out there now, one not as willing to accept Honda at face value. And when you look deeper at what's going on, Honda seems to be veering awkwardly toward becoming (oh, nooo!) just another car company. We suggested to their PR operative in our response that Honda PR would be better off focusing on transforming Honda's "holier that thou" image into something more relevant in today's hotly competitive market ...- instead of worrying about "setting the record straight" with Autoextremist.com. And frankly, when it comes to PR - they pretty much suck at it, so we won't hold our collective breath waiting for them to get their shit together. In short, Honda has been resting on its laurels for far too long. Instead of creating dominating racing engines and breakthrough products, it's all about Ass-imo robots and "me-too" SUTs. How the mighty have fallen. >>>>>


A very blunt and perhaps honest look at our beloved automaker. In the past, Japanese automakers have been known to be conservative to a fault, but has it begun to backfire?

Lung Fu Mo Shi

I think largely it's a good comparison. There are two main problems at Honda. First, the competition is getting extremely tough now in the markets Honda has traditionally been good at. Second, the "spice" of Honda isn't there or even worse, when tried to deliver is just flat.

I just look back on the examples set by the CRX, and Civic Si lines. With each step, the car has gotten heavier, slower, and less fun. The current Si is what the other Civics SHOULD be, but is nowhere near what an "Si" should be.

The S2000 on the other hand is an excellent car and shows what Honda used to be and could be again.

There is no "small, fun and cheap" car left in Honda's inventory. The Civic is now the size of what a '85 or '90 model year Accord was, and it has less power to boot.

Then again, I see some real promise in the Acura line. The TSX, TL, MDX, and upcoming HSC/NSX looks great. Best value in segment, fun, etc. etc. Hopefully we will see something good with the RL.

The Honda line...well, everything seems so be just blah until you get to the S2000 or Odyssey.

Unless they fix it, I see some real troubles ahead.

kiteboy

Wacko 4-door styling aside, the bread-n-butter Accord remains the class of its field in terms of refinement, interior quality and power. I think USDM product mix is very boring - they seem to have more interesting models in Europe and Japan (like the Integra and Civic Type-R's) which they would do well to bring to NA.

justinjsw

Agreed...some of that mojo is gone. Hondas "fun factor" is no where to be found and their designs are no head turners. The two prime bread and butter cars...the Accords and Civics are just too bland. The Accord is a class-leader in the family Sedan segment but because of its looks...how many sales has it loss? If it looked more like say the TSX...instead of being neck even with the Camry in sales, it will blow it off the radar. The Civic used to be fun and cheap...it's no longer either. Thats why I say the RSX in its current form should have been marketed as a Honda Civic from which it is based. A 200HP Civic EX would be something to write home about.

The Pilot nice well rounded SUV but again so bland. Now the upcoming Honda pickup...again the designers fell asleep at their desk.

Acura went into a freefall in the mid 90s with lackluster offerings...and it's just the past 3 years or so have started their climb back into the ranks of the fun and affordable department. Now they NEED/MUST take it to the next level. (If only to shut Gilboman up) By offering what they have been lacking all this years...RWD platform and an image or flagship car...if only to say Acura has arrived. The new RL hopefully will take it to the next level and finally be able to compete in the 45K+ dept. With all that said there is hope. If it goes the way I hope it will, there are models due up for Acura that will really turn up the heat on the likes of Audi and Infiniti. Lexus is a benchmark, a place Acura was years ago and there are no reasons why it can not reclaim that title.

Honda just needs a small shakeup...like firing the entire design team. Bring back the fun factor and start from there.

tsx-mdxman

Well said, Justin. The new Accord was a mistake. I really think looks count, although I can't explain why Honda sells so many Pilots (boooring!) or why Toyota sells so many Highlanders (eewww!).

Gebbeth

I think it was discussed before, but I think Honda is getting a bit distracted. They have so many product lines and so many projects running around that it would be impossible for any one company to concentrate and turn out real winners on a consistent basis. With Honda, they're making motorcycles, cars, tractors, lawn-mowers, power generators, jet skis and now jet engines/planes. They are all competing not only for development dollars but also design and marketing dollars. But right now Honda has a lot of goodwill built up due to the quality of their cars, so if they're designs are a little bland or there are some misses, so what, people will buy them on quality alone. That may not be the case anymore as the car industry gets more competitive (for example, look at the new Subarus coming up, or the Mitsubishi EVOs, the Nissans/Infinitis).

The new Accord is a great car, it really is. BUT, IT COULD CERTAINLY HAVE A BETTER EXTERIOR DESIGN! Honda said they targeted the Passat when they redesigned the Accord. Something got lost in the translation because there is no way the the Accord has anything to do with the Passat. Is it me, or is the Japanese version of the US Accord (I think it's called something else in Japan) better looking! It has a grill and some of the other exterior designs are muted (isn't the rear end different as well?). The Accord needs a grill and the headlamps need to lose that triangular look. Make the beams narrower like the TSX beams. The front hood of the car just doesn't have the right curve to it, it's too blunt and rounded. It needs to be flatter and then angle into the front, into a grill (it's hard to explain in words what I mean). The rearend? Geez, I didn't know Chris Bangle had a twin. Too high, too bulbous, looks like an afterthought.

The RSX has no business being an Acura especially now with the TSX (needs to go to Honda, and make it a competitor to the WRX and EVOs, punch it up with additional HP, maybe the 2.2L Turbo being rumored, AWD?). The Element is a lame attempt at the Scion, or the Scion is a better version of the Element (either way, it's bad for Honda). The new truck is not getting good reviews. The S2000 should have been an Acura (with additional luxury elements inside...this was a real boneheaded decision to give it to Honda). The Civic lost it's way because it could no longer bank on the cheap but reliable car moniker because it's no longer that cheap. But they also couldn't soup it up without eating into RSX sales and/or Accord sales, and or Prelude sales, so they let it become a boring small car like the Corolla. And the Civic Hybrid is getting its lunch handed to it by the Prius. The racing team? From the glory days of F1 and McClaren and the CART cars to not even dominating the IRL ovals? Also, where's the NASCAR team? Hell, even Toyota knows that NASCAR is the way to go in the US? Wasn't Honda the racing innovator?

Finally, the ads. Honda has a great TSX ad they play in Europe (albeit they would have to make some changes), but here...???? a TL flattening out some lava beds, a dorky guy ignoring cash coming out an armored truck, a guy looking at a kite and thinking "WOW, I wanna drive my car!!!, Legos making an Element, I don't think I've seen any Accord or Civic commercials in awhile.

THERE HAS BEEN A FUNDAMENTAL LACK OF LEADERSHIP AND FOCUS, AND IT'S HARD TO RECOVER FROM BAD LEADERSHIP (i.e., Ford and the past CEO). Some ideas. Honda needs to firmly establish Acura as the performance leader vs. Lexus as the luxury leader (kinda of like the BMW/Mercedes relationship). But Infiniti seems to be taking the performance moniker. I-4s and V-6s and FWD alone won't do it. You need a variety of engines and platforms. Honda needs to be FUN again!!!! I had a friend give up his almost new BMW 325i convertible (1988) for a Honda Accord coupe/hatchback because it was more fun to drive. NO ONE DOES THIS ANYMORE! Why?

phile

The sad thing is, the Accord doesn't have to be so ugly. All they need to do is redo the rear end, put a little chrome on the grille and put the Honda logo in the center of the grille instead of looking like it slid down at some point and got stuck there.

Civic needs an overhaul. Add the 5-door hatchback body to the US lineup, and a 2-seater version, like the Del Sol.

zircon

I had an accord. My neighbor - the Honda dealer- brought his 1st new one one by my house for me to test drive. I wouldn't come out of my house to drive a psuedo-Buick.

Think of the recent Honda designs and you can see thy do have a problem.

Truck - hard to believe they copied the Avalanche. Never thought I would see the day a company copied a Chevy design.

Element - brutal looks.

S2200 - moderately better drivetrain no discernible exterior changes.

Accord- I think the reference to Bangle says it all.

Civic. Old and totally uninspiring. Adding 5-10HP every 2 years used to cut it, but no longer. The Corolla and especially Mazda3 are killing it. SiR - bland and expensive - can't give them away.

CR-V - great vehicle but more exterior plastic than an Aztek. Looks like it too. I think the same design team moved from CRV to Element to turck. Fire the lot.

Pilot - how do you say boring? NO external flair.

It is far past time that Honda match its technical and ergonomic excellence with beautiful and innovative exterior designs. People buy vehicles infrequently enough that most want an attractive exterior and a reliable vehicle. The company became far too conservative. They really do need to bring on some of the recent flair shown by Acuras to save the franchise.

ABP-CL9-TSX

The Civic is outdated w/ an old SOHC engine, even with its resent redesign and the Accord is fat and ugly...IMO!!!

What happened with Honda??? Their cars used to be the best and looked great and I am wondering have they become a GM??? Yes, SUV/Light truck sales were the main reasons Honda had a stellar sales year in 2003, but what about their passenger cars? It seems like Honda left out its perennial favorites in the dust and shift eyes to profit from the Pilot, Element, and MDX. I hope they shift focus back to their passenger cars and not think that SUVs and trucks are the only way to make a quick profit and rise their year sales portfolio each year.

I remember when I was 9 years old and the 4th gen (90-93)Accord came out....man I wanted one so bad when I was a kid. The styling was absolutely beautiful...IMO. I still have all the magazines and publications of the '90 Accord. My 92 is my FAVORITE car out of the 3 cars I own.


Same could be said about the 5th gen Civics, 1999-00 Civic Si, Preludes, 94--97 Accords, and 1st gen CRV, they are all nice looking. Since 2000 Honda has gone down hill with styling and focus.

The RL, Civic Si, new CR-V, and the new Accord are ugly!!! At least its not Bangle designing its cars.

I never really liked the 6th gen Accord that much. I used to drive a 2001 Eternal Blue Accord sedan EX before I traded that in for a TSX and I don't miss it at all.

chips

I think the point has been missed. Honda is not about mojo. Honda is about making money by providing value through quality, dependable transportation at a reasonable price. Sorry if that's not what journalist or anyone else wants to hear, but Honda doesn't want or need to limit itself to making sports cars for aftermarket modification. Now, let me summarize the article. A journalist upset about being corrected by Honda executives, points to Civic and other car sales that are down 9% since 2001. The journalist goes on to expresses opinions and quotes other people's opinions. Opinions like, how Honda will likely lose market share in 2004 because everyone is gunning for them. It is a good point that nobody kicks a dead dog just as nobody is gunning for GM or Chrysler. But, I guess the point I was to get is that the journalist found an opinion out there that Honda may lose market share in 2004, which certainly points to a trend of end times for Honda- especially after posted an 8.2% overall (Car's, trucks and SUV's) sales increase in 2003 (besting even Toyota and Nissan). The journalist then goes off on a suspicious rage about Honda's well known respect. Ok, I admit, this part of the article was fun because it sounded just like a jealous, raging Pontiac owner experiencing accelerated market value depreciation. The jounalist's conclusion is that it is the beginning of the end of Honda. Additionally, the journalist finishes by destroying any lingering thoughts of credibility by openly admitting no interested in Honda's position and makes it clear that his opinion can't be corrected with any facts from Honda about stellar 8.2% 2003 sales growth in an otherwise hurting auto market. As a consumer, my more qualified conclusion is that this journalist has no business experience or qualifications, no understanding of varied market segments or Honda's success in filling out it's product lines, and provides no meaningful facts to support any conclusions. Meaningful facts would probably include sales trends of all automakers during the period; industry and Honda sales trends of cars vs SUV's, vans and other trucks; business facts; a study of the Honda business plans and segment sales goals; as well as interviews with Honda executives. My opinion has not changed. Build them right and they will come. I can't help but point out how opinionated, biased and unfactual these journalists can be (Just like the news). Give us some facts and credibility. In the end, the customer will decide - not a journalist. Meanwhile, I'm going to give my 12 year old mint condition Accord to my mother in law, since her 8 year old Chevy truck can't be considered transportation any longer. The TSX sure seems to fit the bill as replacement transportation. Call it mojo if you want. I call it quality, value and a sale.

kiteboy

They are being purchased by people with Accords and Camrys in the market for an mid-size SUV and want something with the big-H or big-T badge because they don't want an American make and can't afford the MDX or RX330.

Honda does seem to be following the market and concentrating on its SUV and truck lineup at the expense of the car lineup, because that's where the money is. Like it or not, enthusiasts like us who frequent these boards (and auto journalists) do not represent the core market in NA.

I agree that Honda needs more sporty and unique cars, but I can also see some of the rationale behind their product decisions.

Mokos23

exactly, the accord sedan needs to lose those ugly headlights shape and rework the rearend and it will look light nice. the accord coupe only need to get rid of those ugly headlights too, but the rearend is cool, mercedes style headlights are great.

phile

I absolutely understand why Honda would want a piece of the SUV market...it is hot. Honda's gotta make money to produce some of the stuff we want them too.

But I just think they come close to achieving something great but, for some reason, stop short it. Like I said, the Accord doesn't have to look the way it does...alls Honda gotta do is make some fixes and it would be a much better seller. And after seeing pictures of the JDM Accord concept with that aluminum trimmed interior...I can't help but wonder why that isn't offered for the US Accord. I know it's a concept, and maybe the parts are expensive, but I would be willing to pay for them as add-ons. That has got to be the most impressive Honda interior I have ever seen from them! And that's what I would like to see from Honda.

BuddySol

I always heard, Honda styling went downhill after the last approved designs from Soichiro's reign (which was around 1997-1998). I figure, give it time before their designers find a new groove. Honda's line in Japan is coming out with better designs: Fit/Jazz, Accord, Oddyssey, Life, Aria/City. I figure it'd take sometime to get their American counterparts upto speed. I mean, at least the Acura lineup is shaping up to something with designs that bring back "classic Honda design." Hopefully, this will trickle back down to Honda.

type-s

its funny....here in Europe everyone is talking about the new Accord (TSX for you guys) in the US the Accord is being talked down...!!

Amazing how perspective changes from country to country !

zircon

different continent, different car. Most people really like the TSX styling, it's the NA Accord that they despise. It looks like a blue whale struggling to get back into the ocean.

dom

This thread................ Best in Weeks. I hav'nt seen a stupid post yet. Except this one

I really have to agree with chips. The journalist is looking at this from a enthusiasts standpoint, which is fine as we all have that same viewpoint but Hondas sales did INCREASE 8.2% which is significant.

IMO, the Honda not Acura lineup needs to do two things to make it competitive.

- Redesign the Civic. Bring back the quality that was lost with the intro of the 01's. Bring in 5 door hatches with 160HP and some style. Get back to the Civic roots.

- Redesign the Accord's rear end. Like Justin said, The Accord is selling well IN SPITE of that rear end. Accord sales trailed Camry sales by some 15,000 or so but we fail to realize that the difference is due to Camry fleet sales which more than quadruple Honda's. A good looking Accord would run away with best selling family sedan honours with ease.

Thats it, two things IMO.

Mokos23

you know all of our opinions about how ugly the accord sedan looks are going to waste unless Honda of America or Honda of Japan gets to hear our opinion. What bumbling imbicel would you write or email all of our dismay with the design ot the recent Accord, Honda America or Honda Japan?

7or8

This is the Accord we have over here...


The Accord you have over there is the same body style as our TSX.

dom

I think Honda is pretty aware of the fact that the Accord styling has'nt really been embraced. But they have to stick with it as immediate changes lower resale and can hurt the image of the current car and infuriate its owners. Not to mention the costs involved in redesigning and retooling to make these changes. I'm guessing we'll see a "freshened Accord" for 05.

Mokos23

man, i didn't want to comment so quick, but please remove that i feel sick right now whenever i see that ugly accord sedan on the road.

planman

Well put, Justin.

Anybody up for 2006 Prelude Si? That would put some spice back in the lineup!

justinjsw

I am actually looking to go back to either work for Honda Motor Corp or start fresh for Toyota Motor NA.

ClutchPerformer

Sorry I'm late. I agree with this statement in general, but the '94-'95 Legend is still the best car (overall, not from an enthusiast standpoint) Honda's ever made.

Am I the only one who likes the way the current US Accord looks?

justinjsw

Mid 90s I meant 95 and beyond...when the lineup for Acura went from Legends/Vigors to RLs/TLs.

In 94 Legend sales was already starting to slump.

ClutchPerformer

Gotcha. I agree.

True, but that didn't make the car any less great. I believe it got a bump in HP in addition to the slightly new look (including the "LEGEND" in big letters across the back that influenced many future Acura designs). Great car.

justinjsw

The first Legend was truly a car beyond its times.

For 94/95 there were so many different variants of the Legend I loss count. Legend L, Legend LS, Legend GS(it had the Type II 3.2L rated at 230hp), Legend Special Edition(two tone paint) legend L coupe, LS coupe, LS coupe 6MT.

dom

Gebbeth

Some of you guys may have seen it before, but I found a picture of the Honda Inspire, which is the NA Accord, restyled and sold in the Japanese market.

While I would not consider this a huge change (or success, design-wise) from the NA Accord, somehow I get the sense that the Honda designers in Japan knew the current NA Accord as designed would not sell in Japan. So they altered it, muted some of its more ugly tendancies.

I really think the grill idea is the right direction, although the Inspire is nothing to write home about too (looks like they slapped an RL grill on it...kinda looks like a desperation move from the Honda Japan guys...as if they saw what a disaster the NA Accord design was said "QUICK, GIVE ME AN RL GRILL!!!!") But what the grill does is give the Inspire a little more dignity and solidity and also changes the overall curvature of the hoodline. It looks more stately than the NA Accord. Again, the headlamps need to lose the triangular look, and make it more horizontal, like the TSX or TL headlamps. The grill needs to shrink slightly (get rid of the diamond shape as well...never a fan of that look really).

The rear is largely the same except the added some accents, chrome pipes(?) and the third light in integrated into the trunk lid which kind of also acts as a spoiler. There's a more squared off look to it which mutes the general ugliness of the NA Accord rear. These are slight changes, but I think really help the overall look of the rear. It really doesn't take a lot to make things better.

So what went wrong in NA?

http://www.honda.co.jp/auto-lineup/inspire/

ABP-CL9-TSX

The Chinese version Accord is the same as the NA Accord, but with more chrome. The grille looks better with the chrome accent around it and the rear has chrome trim around the taillights. The alloy wheels are more like Lexus than a Honda. When I went to China last summer to visit relatives and saw several new Accords on the streets I wondered why we Americans/Canadians got the cheaped on this one?

Mokos23

well if China got the NA accord design, I guess then I wish I could ask Honda Japan who designed this Accord. I guess the Japanese like the NA accord, cause it's the Honda Inspire there. But, anyone who's from Europe, do they sell the NA accord over there as the Honda Inspire too? I hope whoever designed the Accord either got demoted or they will never let him/her design Hondas again.

majormojo

Checking in late, as usual...

I don't think Honda ever had any mojo. They've always made good, reasonable cars that are efficient and reliable, a sound buy and always a safe choice. WRT styling and performance, my perception is that they've always stopped just short of "exciting" (possible exceptions for S2000 and NSX), for the sake of not offending their core "mom & pop" market. None of that should be construed as a criticism. They've made sound business decisions and delivered good value to their customers. They are the modern Chevy, basically. Honda owners tend to be loyal and Honda shareholders tend to be satisfied. I'd call that a win, with or without "mojo".

1SICKLEX

Honda has always had boring, conservative styling throughout history but they sometimes offered what was "fun" products at the time.

With the new competition, Honda is as boring as Volvo now. Even Toyota is in deep shit with younger buyers, that is why they created Scion.

Ugly or not, the Accord sedan is damn near perfect to me. They just need to work on the rear lights and bumper. Otherwise, 240hp avail, perfect interior, Lexus electro-luminicent lights, etc, what a family car. The Civic is shit now, ugly, stupid suspension, the Si is a joke compared to the SRT-4, WRX, 3, etc.


Look, Honda only offers 2 cars. The Accord and Civic. in 2 and 4 door versions. The del sol is gone, prelude is gone too. The Element has been as successful of getting younger buyers as the Toyota Echo (i.e 40yrs and older).

Johnny_RENAMED

Chips.......Well stated. I won't let one journalists attempt at bashing a good car company sway my loyalty to Honda. When you are on top you are in everyones gun sights.A little jealousy goes a long way. If you think you can get a more reliable, quality car for the money...go do it. And nobody does 4 cylinders like Honda.

biker

The only NA Accord sold in Europe is the coupe. For 2004 however even that choice is gone (in 2003 they sold the 98-02 body style coupe). I guess the new style NA Accord coupe is just too ugly to import into Europe.

kiteboy

It has to do with size and not necessarily styling. The JDM has strict size limitations for certain car segments (I think there are tax implications). The NA Accord is too large to sell as the mainstream mid-size car in Japan. Also note that the V6-powered Accord is only available in NA. The Inspire is positioned up-market in the JDM, where cost is less of an issue (the previous Inspire was based on the old 3.2TL).

Other the other hand, if Honda sold the JDM Accord here, they would be hammered for it being too small for NA biggie-sized taste, and lacking the V6 option, which is seen as a prerequisite in this segment.

Gebbeth

Point taken Kiteboy, but I was referring to the exterior styling. I think for the car buying public purchasing something in the Japanese market, the NA Accord as designed, with that visciously ugly sloped front and bulbous rear end (both on the coupe and sedan), would be looked on as....well....ugly! I'm just curious why, if they could recognize that problem and put a halfway decent grill and alter the rear end on the Inpire, why they couldn't do so on the NA Accord? I know you are going to say, "well, it's because the NA Accord in Japan, i.e., the Inspire, is an upscale sedan and upscale sedans require grills!" Well why wouldn't that argument work here? There is no rule that says middle market sedans here in the US have to look ugly, and have no grill. It's not like it's because Honda is saving money by having two different exterior styles on the same car. If anything, making it look more like the Inspire should save money.

It still doesn't make sense.

kiteboy

I agree - the NA 4-door is aboslutely hideous all around. The coupe is not as bad in the rear, if only because the lights remind me of the M-B SL. I think the grill only fixes part of the problem - the triangular headlights, tall roofline and rear end still remains. I hadn't noticed the Inspire's rear was substantially different.

Obviously, somebody at Honda thinks the styling is fine, since the design was approved to be sold (as both the Accord and Inspire). I'm not sure how they would determine that the styling would be suitable for one market, but not another. I also agree they should globalize the grilled version since it does look better.

The 1996-2000 Civic and the 1990-1997 Accord had chrome grills, so I don't think Honda necessarily believes grills = upmarket.

jdibella

You guys are all bashing the Accord and the Civic but yet they continue to sell. Of course sales are going to be down compared to the past because the market is getting alot more competitive. There is so many different cars to choose from now in every type of market. You bash the Accord's styling, yet the TSX isn't the greatest either. Every car has it's plus/negatives. What is nice to you, may be hideous to others. Personally, I'd rather see a car company take some risks with styling and get that "love it/hate it" reaction then just play conservative (i.e. Toyota) and make a boring bland vehicle that is reliable and a great car. The Accord isn't the greatest looking car out there (neither is the TSX, TL, RSX, Civic, Mazda6, etc) for that matter. It's all a matter of opinion.

pending

The fact is the current Accord is a very strong looking exterior design. The taillights have been maligned, but they look very good. The current Accord reminds me of big BMW's compared to big Mercedes. The Mercedes look slim and gracile, almost feminine compared to the BMW 7-Series, which is stout and muscular. Of course, this was intentional on BMW's part, everything except for that hideous Chris Bangle trunk and taillights. I think Honda did something similar with the Accord, even hitting the taillights right, despite what a lot of aesthetically-challenged people say. I think a lot of the people around here who criticize the Accord's taillights got that idea implanted by the magazine articles. These are the same magazine articles that, while criticizing the taillights, lauded the front end. Are you kidding me???!!! LOL.

There's no doubt that they are the same magazine writers who rave about the TL, which is actually an exterior design MESS. The best thing about the TL is the front end from straight-on. Nothing else meshes right. It's a car with all the right elements that just don't fit together to affect the national conscious and Honda in a positive way. It has no soul, no soulful gestalt.

In my opinion, the only other car that is more pointless (from an exterior design basis) than the TL is, of course, the Lexus SC430.

So it looks like Acura is not quite "just a couple of cars away" from regaining its former stardom. The TSX is done right in every way except for the lack of a 6 cylinder (even though I don't mind the 4, the mass population does). The MDX is getting old. The TL is a definite miss. What else we got left? The forecast for Acura isn't as positive anymore as when the TSX first came out.