Possible Revamped CR-Z
09-24-2013, 09:41 AM
#101
For years now. But hey, they provide you options. The Civic Si with similar performance numbers to my old 2002 RSX Type S, or a bloated TL.
09-24-2013, 10:24 AM
#102
Originally Posted by JonBoy' timestamp='1379991365' post='22793212
Tommy made me laugh, though. 
What you FEEL is not what is actually true. The TDI does feel quicker (at times), but when you're beating on it, it feels pretty damn flat and slow (just like a Civic). It's the quick jump (from low-end torque) that makes it feel quick, but it's actual passing power isn't that great (just like a Civic). The TDI runs out of steam in a hurry, though.
What you FEEL is not what is actually true. The TDI does feel quicker (at times), but when you're beating on it, it feels pretty damn flat and slow (just like a Civic). It's the quick jump (from low-end torque) that makes it feel quick, but it's actual passing power isn't that great (just like a Civic). The TDI runs out of steam in a hurry, though.
09-24-2013, 11:36 AM
#103
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole problem looks a little clearer from a 50,000 ft view of Honda as a company.
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
09-24-2013, 11:52 AM
#104
Moderator
The problem with that view imo is that Honda's engine tech is lagging the industry and has been for several years now. Mazda won LeMans - so what? What have you done for me lately?
And the whole "Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best" argument is ridiculous. Might as well counter with "I don't need to buy Honda products because I am satisfied by other companies that actually build what I want to buy". Plus, Honda keeps trying to satisfy this "little corner" with things like souped up CR-Zs. See the OP article. If you or anybody wants to wait on Honda, go ahead, but don't hold your breath. In your post you basically state that Honda doesn't care bout your needs and shouldn't, but you'll wait until it does, which is ridiculous if you ask me.
And the whole "Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best" argument is ridiculous. Might as well counter with "I don't need to buy Honda products because I am satisfied by other companies that actually build what I want to buy". Plus, Honda keeps trying to satisfy this "little corner" with things like souped up CR-Zs. See the OP article. If you or anybody wants to wait on Honda, go ahead, but don't hold your breath. In your post you basically state that Honda doesn't care bout your needs and shouldn't, but you'll wait until it does, which is ridiculous if you ask me.
09-24-2013, 12:50 PM
#105
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Fort Myers, FL.
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zerocool602
The whole problem looks a little clearer from a 50,000 ft view of Honda as a company.
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
09-24-2013, 01:05 PM
#106
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with that view imo is that Honda's engine tech is lagging the industry and has been for several years now. Mazda won LeMans - so what? What have you done for me lately?
And the whole "Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best" argument is ridiculous. Might as well counter with "I don't need to buy Honda products because I am satisfied by other companies that actually build what I want to buy". Plus, Honda keeps trying to satisfy this "little corner" with things like souped up CR-Zs. See the OP article. If you or anybody wants to wait on Honda, go ahead, but don't hold your breath.
And the whole "Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best" argument is ridiculous. Might as well counter with "I don't need to buy Honda products because I am satisfied by other companies that actually build what I want to buy". Plus, Honda keeps trying to satisfy this "little corner" with things like souped up CR-Zs. See the OP article. If you or anybody wants to wait on Honda, go ahead, but don't hold your breath.
I'm assuming you mean auto industry since they are involved in many industries. I'm not sure I follow the engine tech comment - metallurgy, direct injection, turbo technology, etc. Engine tech. can mean alot of different things ... not to be picky but I dont know what you are referring to. And yes, Mazda won the LeMans ... but I'm talking about F1 - the pinnacle of engine and automotive performance. The Suzuka wasnt built to track Civics and Preludes.
What you and I want represents a small market of what Honda can and does sell to. They arent interested in catering to the few. Again, the S2000 only sold a little over 100,000 units over its life time ... thats not the biggest market to be going after. Honda automotive is in the business of making compacts, sedans, minivans, SUV's, etc. From a business stand point manufacturing and selling sports cars is not the most profitable course of action - volumes are low and margins are small... unless you're Ferrari or Lamborghini. Honda is not trying to satisfy us with a turbo CRZ because the turbo CRZ is not a sports car. When Honda comes around to making another sports car again (that I can afford) I will purchase from them. If an S2000 owner is trying to substitute the S2000 with a GTI or FRS or Mazda3 or SI or whatever they will come up empty handed - those arent sports cars, they are sport compacts, or econo sports, or whatever they call them nowadays.
However, Honda has lost touch with the "fun" factor when it comes to Civics ... they are a little bland. I'm glad the SI has kind of stuck but they'll need to work on that a little more. Its a bit of an identity dilemma for them right now.
Maybe thats the heart of the argument here ... there is very little on the market that can come close to providing the driving the experience that the S2000 does.
09-24-2013, 01:17 PM
#107
Originally Posted by zerocool602
The whole problem looks a little clearer from a 50,000 ft view of Honda as a company.
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
... wut?
Ok, so they're an engine manufacturer, let me entertain that for a sec. So why don't they make a V8? Oh forgot, there's no demand for that. Btw, what has Hondas been known for... handling? Sounds like they can dial in chassis pretty good. Engine builder, that makes cars, therefore it's ok for them to not make a sportscar? I'm so confused on what point you guys are trying to make, all I got is you trying to apologize for Honda.
I would love to see honda go toe to toe with an anniversary car, but they won't. They're going to take the CRZ approach to their NSX. Funny, I don't see GTR owners going gee I wish this thing was hybrid, thank god Honda is making a hybrid high end sportscar. I wonder if Honda could make a car as ugly (but I like it, relax) as the GTR and make it a hybrid and not perform as well.
And as good as the NSX and S2000 were, they came out when their competition wasn't fierce. When they did, they backed out. Considering boxster sales, you're saying there's no market for an updated s2000? Pfft.
Btw, as good as the accord is, it isn't necessarily the engine that makes teh car great, and most people find the 4 cyl harsh in comparison to the camry for instance.
09-24-2013, 01:59 PM
#108
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hondagirl0615' timestamp='1380055859' post='22794619
Originally Posted by zerocool602
The whole problem looks a little clearer from a 50,000 ft view of Honda as a company.
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
If you strip Honda down to its basics, its really an engine company. Honda produces engines for cars, motorcycles, power equipment, F1, even aircraft engines. This makes Honda's business decision strategy rather unique when compared to other automotive companies such as GM and Toyota. Honda's strength has been producing well engineered and reliable engines. Ask anybody on the street what comes to mind when you think of Honda and the conversation will eventually go to reliability. In short, they are really frickin good at making all kinds of engines for all sorts of applications. Heck - Honda is 5th all time in F1 wins - yes, the manufacturer of the 2012 Civic and CRZ is 5th all time. Names you dont see in the list - Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru, GM, etc. Its actually kind of surprising that Honda should be there. What does business do the guys that make lawn mower engines have producing F1 engines? Toyota and GM do fewer applications - trucks and autos, they are not as diversified as Honda which is what makes comparing Honda to the other auto companies tricky. Gotta compare apples to apples or the argument wont work.
Back to the sports car thing ... Honda doesnt need to satisfy our little corner of the automotive marketplace because they are profitable doing what they do best. Can Honda produce a great sports car? Of course they can, the NSX and S2000 are proof but its not their first and foremost strength. The turbo CRZ is an extension of the sporty, compact car market that they have had great success in. Its an easier target to hit. With their re-entry to F1 and a better global economic outlook, I'm sure we'll see another "anniversary" style car from them in the future. They'll eventually come back around to the fun stuff but it may take them some time to realize what they are missing out on. I'll wait for them in the mean time ....
... wut?
Ok, so they're an engine manufacturer, let me entertain that for a sec. So why don't they make a V8? Oh forgot, there's no demand for that. Btw, what has Hondas been known for... handling? Sounds like they can dial in chassis pretty good. Engine builder, that makes cars, therefore it's ok for them to not make a sportscar? I'm so confused on what point you guys are trying to make, all I got is you trying to apologize for Honda.
I would love to see honda go toe to toe with an anniversary car, but they won't. They're going to take the CRZ approach to their NSX. Funny, I don't see GTR owners going gee I wish this thing was hybrid, thank god Honda is making a hybrid high end sportscar. I wonder if Honda could make a car as ugly (but I like it, relax) as the GTR and make it a hybrid and not perform as well.
And as good as the NSX and S2000 were, they came out when their competition wasn't fierce. When they did, they backed out. Considering boxster sales, you're saying there's no market for an updated s2000? Pfft.
Btw, as good as the accord is, it isn't necessarily the engine that makes teh car great, and most people find the 4 cyl harsh in comparison to the camry for instance.
Honda competes where they have knowledge and expertise ... The Accord can go head to head with the Camry and Altima. The Civic is still an excellent alternative to the Corolla and Focus. The S2000 was built as an anniversary car - not really designed to compete with anyone else (even had there been more competitors on the market). It was purely Honda indulging in what THEY considered to be a great sports car at that price point. And they succeeded. I'm not sure the Ridgeline has worked out like Honda intended ... the Honda Element didnt and they yanked that from the market. Honda has played around with entering new markets but the cost to do so can be prohibitive. A Honda V8 for the general public would be a very big step and they would also have a formidable marketing challenge. How do you convince a market who already has an impression of you to accept something so different? From an engineering stand point they can do it ... they have been very successful making V8 for F1. I'm not sure if its a marketing or economy of scale issue that holds them back. The V8 wouldnt work in Asian or European markets due to taxes and regulation. That leaves North America which is more friendly to that but competition would be pretty stiff. Not sure if the cost/effort will yield the return on investment.
As for Boxster sales, the Boxster/Cayman after 15 years surpassed 300,000 units in 2011-ish. I'm not sure whats impressive about 300,000 units over 15 years to Honda when they are in the business of selling that many Civics in a single year. Again, I'm sounding like a broken record here ... Honda is a large diversified manufacturer, they need to move lots of units to make money. Niche market sports cars arent the real money makers for these bigger players.
09-24-2013, 03:04 PM
#109
Just to get back on point - I think it is ridiculous that Honda continues to half-step into the sports car arena with tarted up fwd econoboxes. If you want a brand-leading sports car, just make one. The new NSX is finally coming after 5 or 6 failed starts, and I hope something similar happens with an S2000-type car. A CR-Z with a turbo is not going to cut it.
5 or 6 failed starts? There were three show prototypes, actually, and only one of them actually made it to powertrain testing. The others were simply concepts, just like a thousand others that never make it to production (with ALL manufacturers).
09-24-2013, 03:08 PM
#110
And I forgot you live in Honda-Fairy-Tale-Land where all the roads are completely flat and void of any elevation whatsoever and that you're loaded weight is just the driver with absolutely nothing else in the car. 
And for reference, yes I was talking about power down low. With the torque available I don't have to rev the living shit out of it.
And for reference, yes I was talking about power down low. With the torque available I don't have to rev the living shit out of it.
Hills and load change nothing. Area under the curve (work) is what matters. You can change the environment all you want but it won't change the relative acceleration of a given vehicle. If you have more torque, you might accelerate more quickly INITIALLY, but up top, you'll start to fall behind and then it all evens out. You just don't grasp the concept so seriously, stop. You're just making a fool of yourself even more.
If you're not willing to rev a car out, how can you fault it for being slow? And you've owned an S2000? Did you ever take it over the 5100rpm or is that your limit when driving a car?