Honda deserve more credit than Toyota becuase they make more interesting cars (from a driving and styling perspective - compare Corolla to Civic!) and they didn`t try and drink at the large V8 truck market like Toyota who got burned badly by mis-timing their entry.

Everything does seem to be falling into place for Honda. I personally like the styling of the Civic. And the newly designed Accord must be doing extremely well, at least in the Boston area. I see lots of them on the road every day already. In comparison, I rarely see a new Malibu, and haven't seen a single G8 yet! Possibly given bad past experiences, it seems that many people aren't willing to consider the domestic car companies even now that they have some good cars.

They just gotta tone down the crazy weird styling. Go back to boring. A 93 Accord still looks good, I don't think the same will be said of the 08 accord 15 years from now.

Honda is simply benefitting from high gas prices. Honda is much smaller than Toyota and lacks the capacity to be a full line automaker like Toyota, Ford or GM which is why they don't compete in several major market segments. This wasnt a great thing 5 or 10 years ago when SUVs and trucks were hot but it's a positive now that gas is high and gas guzzlers are on the decline.
 
I have yet to see any proof of Honda's great fuel efficiency. The Accord gets 21/31 while the Malibu gets 22/30 (soon to be 22/32) and the 2009 Sonata gets 22/32. The civic's mileage is no better than the Corollas. The Pilot and Ridgeline get mediocre mileage. In fact the Lambdas get better highway mileage than the Pilot in spite of being 400lbs heavier. Every single Acura gets mediocre mileage and in some cases (RDX) the mileage is just below average.
 
Instead of saying Honda makes more efficent vehicles than others we should just say Honda's lineup is devoid of large, powerful, thirsty vehicles that drag down CAFE averages. If you don't make high powered sports cars, V8 luxury sedans or trucks your CAFE number will be industry leading.

What's interesting about the Honda case is that they have been doing pretty well for years. Their success now makes perfect sense, as their product portfolio matches the public Zeitgeist. But how were they successful during the late-90s/early-00s heydey of SUVs? There must always have been a number of people that Ford, GM and Chrysler weren't serving, but those companies' shortcomings were masked by truck/SUV and fleet sales.
 
Now if only Honda could figure out what to do with Acura! I would have seriously considered a TSX when I bought my 07 Civic, if only the price premium a TSX holds over the Accord were justifiable. Or even better, if Acura had a car in the RSX slot that were noticably a premium over the Civic. As things are, the differences between Acura and Honda are becoming like the differences between Mercury and Ford.

Karl, the Honda brand will be here for long selling with higher or lower gas prices. You can say they don't have a V8, Acura sucks, compare mpgs with others etc. We can beat around as much as we can but Honda will be here.

"Honda is simply benefiting from high gas prices. Honda is much smaller than Toyota and lacks the capacity to be a full line automaker like Toyota, Ford or GM which is why they don't compete in several major market segments."
 
Honda has stated that they don’t WANT to become a "full line manufacturer". They have survived this long without making a V8 or full size trucks and SUVs so why would they start…NOW? Bigger isn’t always better!
 
Honda probably has better manufacturing flexibility than the majority of manufacturers especially the domestics and maybe even Toyota. The current market proves that as they have ramped up Civic, TSX and Fit model production significantly. TSX sales are up 53%! Civic and Fit sales are up to.
 
Honda has a top-notch research and development team and they have and will continue to look at what the future market will bring not what’s trendy now. This is what I admire about Honda they do their own thing not what everyone else is doing and now their giving even more consumers what they are asking for.
 
Honda also has stated that they believe hydrogen is the future, not just for automobiles but also for producing electricity/heat for your home for half the running costs of other “alternative energy sources” while fueling your hydrogen power vehicle. Who knew a solar panel on the roof of your house could go that far? Honda is about LONG TERM energy solutions and sustainability not this E85 ethanol or plug in Hybrid nonsense.
 
http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1219/1

Element, Ridgeline, and Pilot are all less than impressive and I have to wonder if they even meet Honda's expectations.
I very much dislike the gauges in the Civic. Do not care for the digital speedometer at all.
Accord center stack climate and audio controls are very busy and a departure from Honda's simple, ergonomic controls of the past.
Civic sedan lacks the utility of the hatch sold in Europe. Accord does not offer the fantastic wagon that is sold in Europe, and the US Accord is a bit overweight and bloated.
My point is, that while Honda is positioned well for future, they do appear to have allowed too much "North American thinking" into their North American product line. My judgement is that the best Hondas in the world are the ones designed for the global market and not the ones designed for the US.

"Honda has stated that they don’t WANT to become a "full line manufacturer". They have survived this long without making a V8 or full size trucks and SUVs so why would they start…NOW? Bigger isn’t always better! "
 
Well Honda is profitable and obviously thats all they are concerned about. I respect them more than Toyota since they arent trying to be all things to all people. Toyota is on a mission to become the Japanese GM and its showing on the sales charts.
 
Honda has two incredibly successful models, a few models that are OK (TL, MDX) and sales flops like the RL and Ridgeline. Make no mistake about it, the Civic and Accord are responsible for the majority of Honda sales. Since the Accord typically outsells the civic I'm not sure how anyone can come to the conclusion that Honda has been successful because of its small cars. The Fit's sales are only a fraction of Accord sales. Honda's other big sales success is the Odyssey which is hardly a small car.

"My point is, that while Honda is positioned well for future, they do appear to have allowed too much "North American thinking" into their North American product line. My judgement is that the best Hondas in the world are the ones designed for the global market and not the ones designed for the US"
 
I think you may be right about this. But -- they are still the only Big 6 automaker that's up in sales this year. Impressive, even with their product mis-steps. I guess you could say that, of all maufacturers making mistakes right now, Honda's mistakes are the least impactful on sales in the current market situation.

"Element, Ridgeline, and Pilot are all less than impressive and I have to wonder if they even meet Honda's expectations."
 
Although Honda targeted the Element to a younger demographic the older folks bought it. It still met Hondas sales figures. The Scion brand is in the same boat as far as demographic sales.
 
Ridgeline hasnt been a sales success but its a pretty well thought out vehicle. Give it a bit more time, maybe a MMC and it should do better given the pull away from full size trucks. Current sales of this truck are better than what people think.
 
http://66.160.188.111/Straightline/96
 
The first Pilot was a competent vehicle. The new Pilot just takes that formula and makes it better. Styling aside, the new Pilot is better than the old one as it should be. Of course there are many good alternatives like the Lambdas, Highlander and the CX9.
 
"My point is, that while Honda is positioned well for future, they do appear to have allowed too much "North American thinking" into their North American product line. My judgement is that the best Hondas in the world are the ones designed for the global market and not the ones designed for the US."
 
Great post Mopar! I also believe American Honda has become a bit too Americanized. The current Accord (while a great car) is a prime example as its a larger car. Not as large as some poeple on this board make it out to be (its not a Grand Marquis) but it has grown. Honda stated that it needed to be larger to prevent existing Accord customers from purchasing larger cars like the Avalon. The market can forcefully change ones mentality drastically as the birth of the Pilot, Ridgeline and the new upsized Accord prove that.
 
I remember a time when American Honda stated "the Accord will never have a V6 engine as an option". Sure enough American Honda wacked off the front end of the 95 Honda Accord and reconfigured it to accept a slightly updated 2.7 Acura Legend derived V6. The EX 4 cylinder/5 speed was actually the quicker car.
 
To be honest I think the Acura TSX would make a perfect Honda Accord for this market, just give it a V6 option and the Euro Honda Accord grill maybe even offer the wagon.
 
http://66.160.188.111/karl/8
 
"Well Honda is profitable and obviously thats all they are concerned about."
 
Honda isnt or has never been a profit driven company nor do they set out to outsell any certain competitor.
 
http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1219/extra?play
 

I think Honda has always been stellar at making economy cars. (I have owned 2 CRX Si's, Civic, Accord, Prelude). However, Toyota's plan has been so much more far-reaching.
 
Toyota created Lexus- now a benchmark icon in luxury cars.
Their trucks have been #1 (Tacoma is pretty 'legendary').
Their SUV's are the gold standard worldwide.
Their Synergy Drive Hybrids are the icon of green cars
They successfully launched into Honda's market with Scion
 
In other words, Toyota's plan for the last 20 years has basically destroyed Honda (by comparison) to become #1 nearly worldwide.
 
So recent events have played into Honda's strength and reputation. However, nothing to do with anything Honda did. The real question is: can Honda hold this gift horse?
Toyota has the Prius (and the best hybrid technology to make more hybrids) and hybrids in every price/size segment of car.
Once BigT winds up on the economy car market, can Honda withstand the hit?

Toyota has an excellent, widespread product range. Diversity is always good.
As for the SUV/trucks- I have always been disappointed in Honda's solution. They are not real trucks. They are toys for sedan drivers that need more room.
 
I have a SUV but actually use it as such and need the capability a ladder frame, solid axles, low range gears offer. My feeling is if you need a SUV, get a SUV. Toyota makes SUV's.
 
If you need space, get a minivan. These "street suv's" like the Pilot are absolutely nothing in concept. Because they cannot perform actual SUV duties, I don't see it any different than a smaller, less convienent, expensive minivan w/ poser suv intentions.
1 hour on the trails will prove my point. 5 years of use will prove the durability and quality of Toyota trucks & suv's over those designed by Honda.
 
So I strongly disagree with the concept of Honda's "suv" and "truck" design. They are catered to the poser crowd, imo. Ultimately weakening the market of true capability.
 
The least I can say about Toyota is that they keep the faith and make the best products in each market without pandering their SUV's.

"Their Synergy Drive Hybrids are the icon of green cars."
 
The Toyota SD systems are MUCH MORE expensive and MUCH MORE complex than Hondas much cheaper, simpler IMA system. Honda has stated that they wont ever put their IMA in a large vehicle such as SUVs. Takeo Fukui thinks that smaller vehicles benefit much more from the hybrid technology which is.........true.
 
"In other words, Toyota's plan for the last 20 years has basically destroyed Honda (by comparison) to become #1 nearly worldwide."
 
I guess if thats your initial goal (to become #1) I would say Toyota outscores Honda. Honda has not and wont set out to become number 1. If it happens ...it happens but thats not their initial goal. That kind of thinking (among other things) is what got GM and Ford where they are now. D*ck waving no longer works in this industry.
 
"So recent events have played into Honda's strength and reputation. However, nothing to do with anything Honda did. The real question is: can Honda hold this gift horse? "
 
It seems you may think fuel prices and environmental concerns will be put on the back burner or cease permenatly? Honda bascially stuck with their initial plan and instead of being super aggressive and chasing the market, Honda waited until the market came to them. Smart(?), you decide.
 
Toyota built a multi billion dollar truck plant in Texas and now large truck/SUV sales are getting lower by the day. To make that even worse Toyota went over budget $400 million to build the facility...$400 MILLION! Smart(?), you decide.
 
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061201/FREE/61127008/1024/LATESTNEWS
 
"Once BigT winds up on the economy car market, can Honda withstand the hit?"
 
Hybrids while a great alternative (currently) arent really a good long term solution as they still call for fuel and/or electricity (plug in hybrids). Ever heard of the FCX Clarity? Hydrogen is the most abundant resource and is (the best?) long term sustainable alternative and not just for automobiles. I would say Honda nearly tops in hydrogen technology.
 
http://revver.com/video/487230/tov-video-honda-fcx-clarity-at-the-la-auto-show-part-2/
 
http://revver.com/video/576639/lapping-twin-ring-moteg-in-a-honda-fcx-concept/
 
It seems as if Honda is still a few steps ahead of everyone else. I think Im going to log on to Schwab and purchase some Honda stock. =)

"I have a SUV but actually use it as such and need the capability a ladder frame, solid axles, low range gears offer. My feeling is if you need a SUV, get a SUV. Toyota makes SUV's."
 
Last time I checked Toyota made a few "non traditional" or "poser" SUVs. Highlander and RX350 come to mind. What do you think about those?
 
"1 hour on the trails will prove my point. 5 years of use will prove the durability and quality of Toyota trucks & suv's over those designed by Honda."
 
If one would think a bit more logical, the average Pilot /Highlander or CUV/crossover customer doesnt need or require that type of capability. Why offer it in this segment or in this market when its not being asked for? Honda never said that they designed the Pilot or Ridgeline to attack the Rubicon Trail. Your post has some MAJOR flaws and it seems you may be a bit out of touch with reality.

Kudos to Honda. They may not be the "BIGGEST" or the "BEST" but I'm sure the other 5 companies listed would love to trade places with Honda right now......

Part of Toyota's diversity is that they have at least a couple viable competitors in every segment of the market. Hybrid or not.
 
I don't like any crossover or fake suv's, doesn't matter if it's Toyota or Honda. if you want to talk about chasing the market, catering to that market is it.
 
If you don't need a real SUV than you don't need a real SUV. What is the Pilot for? (rhetorical question)
People want "SUV's" because they look cool. Missing the fact of WHY they look cool in the first place.
When it looks like something but doesn't have a reason for it- that is the definition of poser.
 
As for the rest of your comments, they are assumptions of what I said and you can address them since I didn't.
 
As for Honda, as I said, an excellent company w/ excellent products. *economical, well built, practical cars never go out of style.
 I just don't think they are as adaptable as Toyota.

Last time I checked Toyota made a few "non traditional" or "poser" SUVs. Highlander and RX350 come to mind. What do you think about those? "
 
Well, at least Toyota has real and fake SUVs. Where is Honda's real SUV?

"Since the Accord typically outsells the civic I'm not sure how anyone can come to the conclusion that Honda has been successful because of its small cars. The Fit's sales are only a fraction of Accord sales. Honda's other big sales success is the Odyssey which is hardly a small car."
  
Just because the Accord typically sells best doesn't mean the Civic and Fit are not adding to the bottom line. Consider that both are rumored to be production-limited. And you're also forgetting the CR-V, which sells as many copies as the entire line-up of some well-known car companies. Is it truly a small car? When you compare it with the Explorer that once reigned supreme, it sure is.

Honda Civic is the #1 seller
http://66.160.188.111/straightline/118

"Honda Civic is the #1 seller
http://66.160.188.111/straightline/118"
 
That brings us back to the idea behind perception... The Mazda3 really should be the number 1 car, (Im not going to go into details about it, you can read the reviews on the car)... Ive test driven both and the 3 feels way more expensive than the civic, drives better and just feels like the 00-05 vw jetta over all...a couple mpgs down on the civic but so what, its advantages more than make for it... i guess you can stick an "H" on a Daweo "aveo" and it will be percieved as the greatest car of all time...

... except the Civic is actually a good car. It gets good mpgs, is rated highly and all-around you can't do much better for the price. It's ugly and I wouldn't buy it but that is just my personal bias. It's still a great choice, obviously alot of people think so.
 
You are right, perception is a big factor. But, Honda earned that perception.

@ 1487,
  
Since the Accord typically outsells the civic I'm not sure how anyone can come to the conclusion that Honda has been successful because of its small cars. The Fit's sales are only a fraction of Accord sales. Honda's other big sales success is the Odyssey which is hardly a small car."
  
The Fit's sales are limited by supply. Nothing more. The Odyssey is a minivan, a concept that still caters to a large portion of recreational families who aren't afraid of the stigma SUV owners don't want to be "stuck" with. Only recently has the Accord become a full-sized sedan. The Accord coupe, however, is still not full-sized, so in reality, Honda's success is still smaller vehicles than roughly most anything in its segment. That I believe is what is meant by "small cars". I believe even the Odyssey is the smallest vehicle in its class (Mazda5 not withstanding).
  
  
@ cruiserhead1,
  
"In other words, Toyota's plan for the last 20 years has basically destroyed Honda (by comparison) to become #1 nearly worldwide."
  
Toyota's plan is vastly different from Honda's. To say Toyota "destroyed" Honda isn't accurate at all. Toyota is a much larger company than Honda. MUCH larger. Honda, along with Mazda, Hyundai and Kia are the smallest "large" automakers in the world (or at least here in the states). Of all of them though, Honda is one of few independents. Acura was born of Honda, and although Honda has shared a few components with companies like GM, Hyundai and Kia, seperate companies to begin with, share whole platforms and engines as do Mazda/Ford. I don't think Honda's done this since the Isuzu Rodeo/Passport. lol Someone feel free to correct me on that though :).
 
Anyway, Honda has absolutely no interest in world domination, unlike Toyota. Honda's interest lies in creating vehicles sized proportionately enough to consumers needs, and advancing "mobility" in water, in the air and on land, particularly when it comes to automobiles and home-efficiency, a place Toyota, to my knowledge has plans to visit. And as for your claim that Toyota has better technology, Honda gets there before Toyota more often than not (hybrid technology, fuel cell technology, Acura intro vs. Lexus intro...etc). Toyota has been and will more than likely always be, a follower, behind Honda and most every other automaker. Don't take my word for it; look at their history. It can't even be said they "perfect the technology". For example, most consumers have NEVER gotten the Prius' advertised mileage.
  
  
@ cruiserhead1 again:
  
"5 years of use will prove the durability and quality of Toyota trucks & suv's over those designed by Honda.
   
So I strongly disagree with the concept of Honda's "suv" and "truck" design. They are catered to the poser crowd, imo. Ultimately weakening the market of true capability."
  
Your argument here is flawed on both accounts. First, how does a vehicle built for off-road use but used on-road equate to a "more durable and higher quality" vehicle than one built for on-road use, actually used on-road? So by your logic, the Hummer H2, a vehicle obviously built for off-road purposes should have far less problems and be of a far higher quality than a Pilot? That makes no sense. And you can't argue you were talking about a comparison between off-road vehicles used off-road and on-road vehicles used off-road because if a consumer were actually in the market for an OFF-ROAD vehicle, they wouldn't purchase anything BUT an off-road vehicle. Besides, a quick trip to the Tundra forums reveals a frame obviously weaker than anything the Big Three put out. You were saying?
  
And Honda hasn't hardly "weakened the market of true capability". You have the domestic companies and their brands that pushed and profited the most from SUV buyers and SUV buyers themselves to blame for that. Case in point: that darned Hummer H2 again. I don't think I need to say anymore than that....

>>>the Hummer H2, a vehicle obviously built for off-road purposes should have far less problems and be of a far higher quality than a Pilot?
  
Except that the H2 is not built for off road use. It is still just a Suburban with a body kit. If you try to take one on the Rubicon trail there is a good chance you will have to be towed out by little girly Jeep Liberties.
  
The Pilot exists because it is what the market demanded. In the future the big Acuras will have V8s because that is what the market demands. Honda is not perfect at predicting the market shifts, but by staying true to their core products and philosophy they are better equipped to meet the demands of future market shifts, unlike say, Toyota, Ford, Chrysler, and GM. BMW and Porsche are about the only other car makers that stay true to this philosophy. (And don't give me that crap about the Cayenne not being a true Porsche. It was what the market demanded. If they had not built an SUV and given the market what was demanded, they might very well be in the same shoes today as Jaguar, which didn't give the market what was demanded.)

I love the Honda story. A company with its roots in one man, a racer and an engineer, who set the tone for the way the company still works... and it's also nice to see that relatively young car companies like Honda and BMW could become major players a few decades back. Everyone else seems to date back ages.
 
Their recent products all seem to have been base hits, and a bit disappointing to Honda fandom. But it works. Hondas don't tend to look old two generations later, both aesthetically and in terms of what shape they're in. May they have a long life!

"Last time I checked Toyota made a few "non traditional" or "poser" SUVs. Highlander and RX350 come to mind. What do you think about those? "
 
That statement wasnt to bash Toyota I was just making it clear that Toyota ALSO makes what Cruiserhead called "poser" SUV's. Im sure Toyota sells many more Rav4s and Highlanders then 4Runners, Sequioas and Land Cruisers.
 
"Well, at least Toyota has real and fake SUVs. Where is Honda's real SUV?"
 
Youve gotta be kidding right? Did you read what you just typed? Did you not go to the link I posted in a previous post about the 400+ MILLION dollars OVER budget for the Tundra plant? Im glad Toyota has $400 million to just throw away.
 
As I just said, Honda didnt see it necessary to invest in "real" full size SUVs and full size trucks and them resisting to dip in that segment has evidently paid off. Why go into that segment when sales arent that great? If you were in the car business would you be developing or increasing production of full size SUVs and trucks? Honda would have to develop new larger V6's, V8s and a true 4x4 system, develop the truck and SUVs then turn around and build a facility to produce them. Would you do that right now?
 
Thats like me asking why doesnt Toyota offer a S2000 competitor? Its not that I think Toyota cant make one as the MR-S was a fun car (my father has one), they just dont have a competitor. Do I bash Toyota for not making one? No. Why bash Honda for not making a "real" SUV when they have survived and been sucessful without them?
 
Louiswei and Cruiserhead should go buy Hummer from GM. You think you guys could sell one in the current market?

I have to agree with Hondacura - Toyota may have the more robust model line, but Honda's strategy is safer. I will say, however, that their safe strategy has been their downfall with Acura.

I can't believe how you take one statement and add your own interpretation and assumptions to bolster an argument.
 
Talking about SUV 'genetics' and then all the sudden I said "full size trucks and suv's?" ahhh, no.
Last I checked, the Pilot is not even a competitor to the Tundra (a full size pu) or the Sequoia (a full size suv)
 
The ignorance of calling a H2 "designed for offroad" just shows how misinformed the general public is to the actual markets.
The H2 is a big waste of time. It couldn't disappear fast enough in my book.
The Honda FIT is fantastic and i'm really excited to see the 09.
So how does that fit into your world view?
 
Honda makes great cars, so does Toyota. One can debate their business plans and image all they want. But, I nor many others, see them in black and white. Critique and opinion doesn't mean you hate it. Is there anyone that can have a good discussion anymore??

Glad to see that (at least for now) reason trumps . Congrats to Honda for staying the course and offering quality/economical products that make sense that are sprinked with a touch of "extra" engineering.

As Mopar stated, I do think Honda's global products are superb while the American-centric models (new Accord, SUVs) are less inspired.
 
While I commend Honda for staying the course in many ways, I do think Honda should develop a more robust lineup. I think Honda needs a V8 for Acura, a RWD architecture, a proper flagship platform, and a small offroad pickup (Wrangler fighter).

I think the big difference between Toyota and Honda can be easily summarized.
 
When Toyota created the 2JZ (arguably the best Toyota engine ever made), they boasted how much engineering went into it by stating how many hundreds of millions of dollars went into its development and refinement.
 
When Honda developed the F20C (again, arguably the best Honda engine ever made), they let the results speak for themselves.

" Consider that both are rumored to be production-limited. And you're also forgetting the CR-V, which sells as many copies as the entire line-up of some well-known car companies. Is it truly a small car? When you compare it with the Explorer that once reigned supreme, it sure is."
 
Everytime an import car isnt racking up record sales I hear its production limited. Toyota will tell you the Camry is production limited even though dealers in my areas advertise having 30 on their lot. The CR-V has been a success but its not a small car. I believe the CR_V gets about 20/28 which is about normal for the class, its not groundbeaking. The CR_V has taken the explorer's title (no surprise) but its not registering explorer-like sales. The explorer outsold the Camry and Accord at least one year, maybe even more. It rang up over 400k sales in the 90s or early 2000s.

"The Fit's sales are limited by supply. Nothing more. The Odyssey is a minivan, a concept that still caters to a large portion of recreational families who aren't afraid of the stigma SUV owners don't want to be "stuck" with. Only recently has the Accord become a full-sized sedan. The Accord coupe, however, is still not full-sized, so in reality, Honda's success is still smaller vehicles than roughly most anything in its segment. That I believe is what is meant by "small cars". I believe even the Odyssey is the smallest vehicle in its class (Mazda5 not withstanding). "
 
I'm not debating why the Fit's sales are limited, I am just telling you that they are limited. The Accord isnt a small car by any means and hasnt been compact since 3 generations ago. The Accord is Honda's best seller and its a full size/midsize sedan, not a compact car. Honda has one compact car that sells very well and that is the civic. The Odyssey is one of the largest minivans in existence and weighs over 4000lbs, its not a small vehicle nor is it a fuel miser. The numbers speak for themselves. Just because a vehicle is a Honda doesnt mean its efficient or small.
 
As for your claim that the Accord is one of the smallest vehicles in the segment I would note that it's one of the largest and heaviest cars in the class. The Altima, Camry and Malibu are smaller than the Accord and only the Malibu is heavier. This is one reason why the 2009 Malibu/Aura and Sonata have better I-4 gas mileage than the Accord.

"Except that the H2 is not built for off road use. It is still just a Suburban with a body kit. If you try to take one on the Rubicon trail there is a good chance you will have to be towed out by little girly Jeep Liberties. "
 
That is a lie if I've ever read one on here. The H2 is based of the last gen full size SUV platform but it's not a suburban with different sheetmetal.
 
"The Pilot exists because it is what the market demanded. "
 
The Pilot exists because Honda needed a competitive midsize SUV instead of an also ran rebadged Izuzu model. Honda may not make V8s, but they do make some large vehicles. They are in the business of competing in the US market and you cant do that without larger vehicles. The Pilot, Ridgeline, RDX, MDX, RL and Odyssey arent fuel sippers but neither are the vehicles they compete agaisnt. Honda is "green" by default because they have no presence in most of the segments where gas guzzlers rule. The only Hondas with truly notable mileage are the civic, civic hybrid, Accord V6 sedan and Fit. The rest is nothing to brag about. The new Pilot has VCM and still gets 16/22 with AWD.

Estraka, in what cars/models are the 2JZ and F20C engines? I have no idea.....
 
Karl, I think it's a bit of both. On one hand, Honda is somewhat "lucky" that its product range is exactly what the market is after right now. At the same time, I admire them for what they do. given their small size. Overall, I think Toyota's strategy of having competitive products in every segment is the best strategy, especially considering Toyota's size.
 
I'm not a huge fan of Honda. (Coming to think of it, there is no Honda I really want or like very much.......the Accord comes close but I'll wait for the new Mazda 6 first.....)
But at the same time, I really like what they do. They make highly reliable cars, take risks engineering-wise (especially when it comes to engines.....although they've stayed away from turbos), and have what I call "honest pricing".
 
I especially love Honda's pricing and trims. If you get an Accord EX-L, you know it will come with every possible feature one could want in a non-luxury car. No "starting from" crap. Honda, keep that up!

Those are the Supra's and S2000's engines, respectively.
 
1487, the Civic just became Honda's top seller over the Accord. I'm tempted to say that the midsizers have "jumped the shark" and outgrown their market... the Civic's as big as some of the older Accords, and those were perfectly sized for average people.
 
Honda's size confuses me. I know they're smaller than the other big ones, and have less manufacturing capacity... but I keep hearing about them hitting their production limits. If you hear that year after year, you have to wonder why they don't just build another factory for small cars. Are they so conservative that they underestimated Fit production after deciding to sell it in the US?

"Estreka, in what cars/models are the 2JZ and F20C engines? I have no idea..... "
 
2JZ-GE = 3.0L inline 6 -Toyota Supra / Lexus SC300 / Lexus GS300 / IS300
 
2JZ-GTE 3.0L inline 6 twin turbo - Toyota Supra Turbo
 
F20C = 2.0L I4 - Honda S2000 (00-03)
 
F22C = 2.2L I4 - Honda S2000 (04-present)
 
Personally I think the B Series was more significant than the F as the B was in a wider range of products (Civic/Integra/CRV) and it debuted Hondas well known VTEC system. The F is just much more extreme in terms of block strength, durability, design and specific output. I do however agree with Estrekas statement.
 
I have to add to Hondas list the C32B from the NSX as for its "low" power rating it was a fast car. It also debuted some production car firsts such as titanium connecting rods, Fiber Reinforced Metal engine block and unique casting techniques.

"Honda's size confuses me. I know they're smaller than the other big ones, and have less manufacturing capacity... but I keep hearing about them hitting their production limits. If you hear that year after year, you have to wonder why they don't just build another factory for small cars. Are they so conservative that they underestimated Fit production after deciding to sell it in the US?"
  
Good question. As you said Honda is EXTREMELY conservative but they did add production capacity to one of the plants in Ohio and Alabama a few years back. Yes, Honda did under estimate Fit production but at the time gas wasnt as expensive as it is now. You also have to consider that small hatchbacks have never been really popular in the US so they had to be careful estimating sales figures.
  
Honda has plans to build the Fit at its new Indiana facility ( I think) as well as Civics. Having one plant for just 1 large volume seller is stupid (GM/Toyota). I believe (dont quote me on this) Honda has the ability to produce any Honda or Acura (sans RL) currently made in the US at any of their US plants. Im not sure if any TSX cars are built here. Hybrids are built in Japan using the old dedicated NSX-Insight plant.
  
You also have to look at it from all areas. Honda has always been very flexible when it came to what the market was asking for and the current market just proves that Honda can shift model production with ease at just about any plant. I think they try to use the most of their resources without having to spend the money on a new plant unless its absolutely necessary.
  
Honda doesnt want to spend billions of dollars on a new dedicated model plant like Toyota, go over budget by $430,000,000 and then that market segment take a huge dump. Honda is extrememly cautious and that alone has helped their success. Now if we could just do something with the Acura brand.....

Thanks, guys, for the engine info.
 
From what I've read in publications, the S2000's engine has to be revved very high to get any performance and it doesn't sound that great either. I don't know if I'd call that a great engine......Although I like my engines to make some noise, I can't imagine having to rev past 4000 rpm all the time to get decent performance!
 
I prefer the BMW 335i's engine, which seems to have massive torque even in 6th gear!

"1487, the Civic just became Honda's top seller over the Accord. I'm tempted to say that the midsizers have "jumped the shark" and outgrown their market... the Civic's as big as some of the older Accords, and those were perfectly sized for average people. "
 
One month doesnt spell a trend. The Accord outsold the civic in 2007 as far as I know and has done so for a long time. Lets see what happens by the end of the year. Most people who need the space of a midsize sedan arent going to be jumping into compacts.

1487, you have a valid point about the Accord and Civic but I'm willing to bet that the Civic will outsell the Accord for months and years to come. Firstly, there's the high fuel price, which isn't going to reduce significantly anytime soon, if ever. Then there's the fact that the Accord is too big....although it drives very well. Some people have complained that it can't fit in their garages. Lastly, the Civic is not that small anymore: remember that the "soccer mom" in the econocar comparison test said it would meet her family needs, even with a baby seat in the car!

"Lastly, the Civic is not that small anymore: remember that the "soccer mom" in the econocar comparison test said it would meet her family needs, even with a baby seat in the car!"
 
Its too small for me. I have a carseat and stroller and I cant use a trunk any smaller than the one on my car (15 cu ft). If you are single or lack kids a compact may work for you but for people used to the trunk space and rear seat space of a midsize or larger vehicle a compact wouldnt be comfortable. I would buy a midsize hybrid before I got a compact. Besides, you are only talking a 10-15% mileage difference between a 4 cylinder midsize and compact car.

You have to consider that Honda sales are only up 5% so far this year. A couple factory expansions can easily cover that growth. A new factory would require far larger market gains than 5%. Besides, the Ohio and Alabama plants were preplanned for additional growth. They've intelligently decided to use the resources they already have.
 
Also consider that the North American market is shrinking. There's more people, but there's a lot less money.
 
HA4 - I do agree with you about the B-series having more of an impact, but from a technological standpoint, the F20C is a marvel of engineering never before seen in a Honda automobile. I guess I'd call it a "flagship" engine, just as the 2JZ has been for Toyota.

"Civic is not that small anymore"
Agreed; the Civic is nearly as large as the 1996 Accord, or a 1998 Contour. I think most (including me) tend to buy bigger cars than needed. Probably a status thing.
I had always thought of Honda cars as small light & nimble, not particularly powerful. After test driving the new Accord; well I have to change my thinking.

"From what I've read in publications, the S2000's engine has to be revved very high to get any performance and it doesn't sound that great either. I don't know if I'd call that a great engine......Although I like my engines to make some noise, I can't imagine having to rev past 4000 rpm all the time to get decent performance! "
 
We own a 2002 S2000. Its only a 2.0L so dont expect to be mashed into your seat, it is however pretty quick. It has to be revved high to get MAXIMUM performance and I wouldnt call 4000RPM high since it has a 9000RPM redline. People dont understand that these types of engines are so eager to rev so they arent your garden variety everyday engines.
 
This engine is super smooth and super refined at any engine speed and makes great noises especially after the "TeK" makes its presence know. Fun car and a fantastic drivetrain to go with it. I would suggest a test drive as I bought ours about a week after I drove a friends.