Honda acknowledging problems
02-24-2016, 07:42 AM
#1
Honda acknowledging problems
http://jalopnik.com/honda-wants-to-t...ldi-1760889419
Amazing to read a CEO saying, what many of us have said for years, with certain people telling us we're wrong. Great to read the acknowledgement and hopefully he is successful.
.we began producing watered down, uninspiring, what you might call designed-by-committee, cars.
02-24-2016, 08:30 AM
#2
The CEO didn't say that; their "insiders" said it.
Designing a car is a fine balance between engineering and sales. Cutting out or minimizing sales is, in my opinion, stupid. Sales knows what sells, not engineers. Engineers know what is reasonable, not sales.
The key for any company is vision. With a strong vision, Sales and Engineering are forced to align (more or less) and produce a car that the company has decided will represent their product ethos. Otherwise, they're pulled around by the nose by every whim and fad and sales success (however temporary it might be). Sales should be feeding the queue with trends and information while Engineering should be staying on top of technology and cost reduction while improving performance.
Honda's key selling points have been reliability, quality, fuel economy and "fun to drive" vehicles. Not always the sportiest but usually in the top 2. Usually top 2 (with Toyota) for quality, reliability and economy. Blending that with new technology is key to their success. Fun to drive doesn't matter to most people nowadays but it'll certainly earn them some praise from the car rags.
Designing a car is a fine balance between engineering and sales. Cutting out or minimizing sales is, in my opinion, stupid. Sales knows what sells, not engineers. Engineers know what is reasonable, not sales.
The key for any company is vision. With a strong vision, Sales and Engineering are forced to align (more or less) and produce a car that the company has decided will represent their product ethos. Otherwise, they're pulled around by the nose by every whim and fad and sales success (however temporary it might be). Sales should be feeding the queue with trends and information while Engineering should be staying on top of technology and cost reduction while improving performance.
Honda's key selling points have been reliability, quality, fuel economy and "fun to drive" vehicles. Not always the sportiest but usually in the top 2. Usually top 2 (with Toyota) for quality, reliability and economy. Blending that with new technology is key to their success. Fun to drive doesn't matter to most people nowadays but it'll certainly earn them some praise from the car rags.
02-24-2016, 08:52 AM
#3
Fun to drive needs to be higher on the list for the lower end of their spectrum like the Civic. They are first time new car buyer cars and they really need to hit mark to make that buyer a "Honda buyer for life". Every marque has road map strategy for keeping a consumer loyal to the brand. They may start with a C class, but a few years and promotions later are looking for an SL or S class (hopefully for Mercedes).
The imprint of how much fun the Civic was to drive lays the foundation for a lifetime of loyal Honda buyers. Think of Mazda's ad campaign where guy buys are 2nd hand Miata in high school and later on buys a new Miata when he is more established in life.
If the entry offering is not that good, why would anyone want to stick the same marque?
The imprint of how much fun the Civic was to drive lays the foundation for a lifetime of loyal Honda buyers. Think of Mazda's ad campaign where guy buys are 2nd hand Miata in high school and later on buys a new Miata when he is more established in life.
If the entry offering is not that good, why would anyone want to stick the same marque?
02-24-2016, 09:11 AM
#4
15 or 20 years ago, I'd agree with you. Today? Not really. With new, young buyers, the shift has been more towards technology and gadgetry rather than fun to drive. The majority of buyers today don't give a rip about fun to drive vehicles. If they did, Mazda would be selling way more cars than anyone - instead, they've had a decade of poor sales and only recently (2014) saw an uptick in sales. They were effectively bankrupt in North America for quite a while.
Honda's 9th generation Civic was built to a price point due to the GFC and it STILL sold in massive numbers. Why? Reliable, efficient, gets the job done, etc, etc. It wasn't much better than the 8th generation. Toyota's Corolla used a 4-spd (!) automatic transmission until just a few years ago and has been #1 or #2 in its segment forever. Why? Because it gets the job done.
The Accord and Camry have gotten much more significant upgrades each year, in general, as they're competing at a higher price point with higher expectations. However, the Mazda6 drives better than them both and it still has horrible sales figures (it's also quite efficient and reliable).
Car buyers today want technology, especially as it relates to infotainment and reducing skill requirements (auto parking, backup cameras, etc). They want reliability. They want low cost. Once you get into Odyssey, Pilot, high-level Accord, etc, etc, then you have other factors that play in as well (due to the higher price points) but ultimately, if you look at sales trends, they don't favour fun to drive vehicles (at all).
It's the enthusiasts that want fun to drive vehicles...but they're in the minority and the minority is getting smaller every year.
THAT SAID, the new Civic is built on a platform that will be shared with higher-level cars and it is significantly better than it's ever been. It's highly efficient, quick, fun to drive, solid, well built and luxurious. We'll ignore the engine recall for now....
Honda is upping their game and that includes cars that are more solid and drive better, so that's good. Platform sharing is allowing them to build "entry level" vehicles to a higher standard via the efficiencies of said sharing.
They've even taking to mentioning "fun to drive" in their PR and interviews and such. The new Civic suggests that they're adding that back into their designs, whether as a goal or as a result of other decisions is unknown. We'll see how it translates elsewhere...
Honda's 9th generation Civic was built to a price point due to the GFC and it STILL sold in massive numbers. Why? Reliable, efficient, gets the job done, etc, etc. It wasn't much better than the 8th generation. Toyota's Corolla used a 4-spd (!) automatic transmission until just a few years ago and has been #1 or #2 in its segment forever. Why? Because it gets the job done.
The Accord and Camry have gotten much more significant upgrades each year, in general, as they're competing at a higher price point with higher expectations. However, the Mazda6 drives better than them both and it still has horrible sales figures (it's also quite efficient and reliable).
Car buyers today want technology, especially as it relates to infotainment and reducing skill requirements (auto parking, backup cameras, etc). They want reliability. They want low cost. Once you get into Odyssey, Pilot, high-level Accord, etc, etc, then you have other factors that play in as well (due to the higher price points) but ultimately, if you look at sales trends, they don't favour fun to drive vehicles (at all).
It's the enthusiasts that want fun to drive vehicles...but they're in the minority and the minority is getting smaller every year.
THAT SAID, the new Civic is built on a platform that will be shared with higher-level cars and it is significantly better than it's ever been. It's highly efficient, quick, fun to drive, solid, well built and luxurious. We'll ignore the engine recall for now....
Honda is upping their game and that includes cars that are more solid and drive better, so that's good. Platform sharing is allowing them to build "entry level" vehicles to a higher standard via the efficiencies of said sharing.They've even taking to mentioning "fun to drive" in their PR and interviews and such. The new Civic suggests that they're adding that back into their designs, whether as a goal or as a result of other decisions is unknown. We'll see how it translates elsewhere...
02-24-2016, 09:13 AM
#5
Honda hasn't pioneered any new technology in their vehicles in ages, except maybe the HondaVac.
Hell, it took them forever to implement direct injection, and now turbocharging. Although it could be argued turbocharging was a step in the wrong direction since it changes one of the fundamental attributes of Honda engines. Time will tell – I have never driven a turbocharged Honda engine (or the old RDX).
Hell, it took them forever to implement direct injection, and now turbocharging. Although it could be argued turbocharging was a step in the wrong direction since it changes one of the fundamental attributes of Honda engines. Time will tell – I have never driven a turbocharged Honda engine (or the old RDX).
02-24-2016, 09:24 AM
#6
Honda hasn't pioneered any new technology in their vehicles in ages, except maybe the HondaVac.
Hell, it took them forever to implement direct injection, and now turbocharging. Although it could be argued turbocharging was a step in the wrong direction since it changes one of the fundamental attributes of Honda engines. Time will tell – I have never driven a turbocharged Honda engine (or the old RDX).
Hell, it took them forever to implement direct injection, and now turbocharging. Although it could be argued turbocharging was a step in the wrong direction since it changes one of the fundamental attributes of Honda engines. Time will tell – I have never driven a turbocharged Honda engine (or the old RDX).
Direct injection comes with its own set of issues (google is your friend) which is why Honda likely stayed away for so long and stuck with port injection. Turbocharging, well that's just due to emissions and meeting mileage reqs. I wouldn't be shocked to see the IC engine gone in 50 yrs for the average person and big golf carts for everyone.
02-24-2016, 09:59 AM
#7
Honda hasn't pioneered any new technology in their vehicles in ages, except maybe the HondaVac.
Hell, it took them forever to implement direct injection, and now turbocharging. Although it could be argued turbocharging was a step in the wrong direction since it changes one of the fundamental attributes of Honda engines. Time will tell – I have never driven a turbocharged Honda engine (or the old RDX).
Hell, it took them forever to implement direct injection, and now turbocharging. Although it could be argued turbocharging was a step in the wrong direction since it changes one of the fundamental attributes of Honda engines. Time will tell – I have never driven a turbocharged Honda engine (or the old RDX).
Turbocharging also brings some issues, including what is often poor real-world fuel economy when compared to EPA ratings. They appear to have solved that, as have others, but it's taken time. I'd rather they waited and got it right than implemented it poorly up front, like Ford and arguably Hyundai have done.
They've also stayed away from turbocharging their bigger vehicles and it's paid off bigtime with more reliable engines, more power, equal or (many times) better performance and even better fuel economy. Ford, in particular, has suffered with turbocharged engines underperforming in fuel economy (and have been sued accordingly) and acceleration and Hyundai lost a big lawsuit over the same issue.
Honda has focused a lot of their time on implementing manufacturing technology rather than gadgets in their car. This Civic uses a forming and localized heat treatment process in the chassis rails that allows for "seamless" changes in material strength, without changing the cross-section of the material and without adding welds or adhesives to join dissimilar materials. It's a big benefit to the solidity of the structure while also improving the way the car fails in the event of a crash. As a result, the new Civic is significantly stronger while also being LIGHTER than the previous generation(s) (very rare today).
The NSX has a number of new casting technologies that reduce weight and improve strength at the same time.
Honda has also developed a new eSH-AWD system and are focused on new and improved hybrid technology for both performance and economy. They are focused on "green technology" but that doesn't automatically mean hybrid power. They've focused on reductions in weight, stronger materials and manufacturing methods to limit the powertrain "supplements" that are needed to overcome poor basic design parameters (weight, aerodynamics, powertrain efficiency, etc).
As an example, Honda's 8th generation Honda Civic used a 5-spd transmission, normally aspirated engine, light weight and excellent aero to achieve fuel economy that cars with 6-spd transmissions (or CVTs), turbo motors and bloated designs never could achieve. Honda spent time on the engine to reduce friction by 15%, which was tech they could use on ALL engines (N/A or FI) in the future, regardless of configuration.
Honda has generally been about making "less noticeable" changes to achieve improved results. It's often a simpler idea, done through sheer engineering, rather than bolting on technology to compensate for other issues.
Trending Topics
02-24-2016, 10:25 AM
#8
Yes, you both make good points. I suppose I shouldn't say they've stopped innovating, but rather that the nature of their innovations has changed.
I also suppose I should keep in mind that Honda (along with other Japanese makes) made a lot of their most outrageous technological breakthroughs during the bubble in the 80s and early 90s. Highly unlikely we'll ever see anything like it again.
I also suppose I should keep in mind that Honda (along with other Japanese makes) made a lot of their most outrageous technological breakthroughs during the bubble in the 80s and early 90s. Highly unlikely we'll ever see anything like it again.
02-24-2016, 11:03 AM
#9
In my opinion, the next breakthroughs will be hybrid tech (batteries especially), weight reduction, alternate energy powertrains (hydrogen, etc) and autonomous technology...
02-24-2016, 10:30 PM
#10
Didn't honda just have a recall for the civic engines?