Tell me about Accord CVT

[FZ1]

Originally Posted By: I_4
Well, I steered my son away from the Accord with a CVT. To a 2017 Toyota Camry SE 6 speed auto with port injection. And 3k cash back. The main drawback, as I saw it and he did also, was a test drive in both. And the CVT was a fail in his eyes. The 6 speed auto felt like a "normal" transmission. We both felt the Toyota was a proven product. No direct injection, no CVT, so he felt better spending his money with Toyota. And no, I am not on Toyota's payroll, I don't own one. Another son owns a 2014 Accord Sport with a CVT. The one thing he complains about is the CVT. Just feels sluggish, he claims. I don't like driving it at all, but then again look at my sig, I like manual trans. After driving both the Honda Accord and Camry, I would not hesitate to buy a 2017 Camry 6 speed automatic above a 2017 Accord with a CVT. And that's leaving direct injection out of the mix.
This^^^^^. Cvt's aren't repairable like the 6 speeds and the Honda 2.4 DI is rough,noisey,and dilutes the oil. Get the 17 Camry with 6 speed auto,smooth port injection,and the 3500 cash back.

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: dlayman
I would have concerns. Honda hasn't been doing well lately with first year models. They've always struggled a bit in that area, but not like now. And why in the world does a mid-size sedan need a 10 speed transmission? Lots of added complexity and shifting for very little if any benefit. I hate the direction Honda is going lately with most of its vehicles.


Honda was never all that great. Rose colored glasses and being told how great they are tends to make people gloss over things. They rarely have done a great automatic. Even their engines have had their fair share of issues.

I'd shop elsewhere.


The majority of their products are well above average in reliability. They had a poor run of autos in the late 1990's - early 2000's, but overall their transmissions are pretty rock solid.


Buick always beats them.

wat?

That's a really apples to oranges comparison. Honda doesn't market to Buick customers, and vice versa.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
That's a really apples to oranges comparison. Honda doesn't market to Buick customers, and vice versa.


Wait, WAT?

Honda and Buick are in direct competition. Honda occupies the "high-end" of their general market segments (generally more expensive than their US/German/Japanese non-luxury makes). Buick occupies the quasi-luxury level and nips off of both Honda and Acura. You do not think that the HR-V is nor a direct result of the success of the Buick Encore?

 

[L_Sludger]

The Buick Encore is a piece of trash. I won't make any effort to construct an argument around that downmarket imported pile of junk that severely tarnishes Buick as a brand.
Buick is a car for baby boomers. Hondas are for everyone else. The Encore is a car for those who want a cute car with a fancy nametag, with a high riding seat that's easy to get into and out of, and light steering to make driving to bingo tournaments a breeze. Things like parts origin, country of assembly, American jobs, or anything else of any value do not matter to the Encore buyer.

 

[4WD]

.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
That's a really apples to oranges comparison. Honda doesn't market to Buick customers, and vice versa.


Wait, WAT?

Honda and Buick are in direct competition. Honda occupies the "high-end" of their general market segments (generally more expensive than their US/German/Japanese non-luxury makes). Buick occupies the quasi-luxury level and nips off of both Honda and Acura. You do not think that the HR-V is nor a direct result of the success of the Buick Encore?

Absolutely not. The HR-V is 100% a direct result of the Subaru XV Crosstrek. At this point, and for some time now, Acura and Buick are much closer competitors than Honda is with Buick. Start lining up models and price ranges and this will quickly become apparent. There have been rumors for a couple years now of a HR-V-based Acura 'CDX' which would compete with the more premium compact CUVs.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
The Buick Encore is a piece of trash. I won't make any effort to construct an argument around that downmarket imported pile of junk that severely tarnishes Buick as a brand.
Buick is a car for baby boomers. Hondas are for everyone else. The Encore is a car for those who want a cute car with a fancy nametag, with a high riding seat that's easy to get into and out of, and light steering to make driving to bingo tournaments a breeze. Things like parts origin, country of assembly, American jobs, or anything else of any value do not matter to the Encore buyer.


Yes, because we really want to get into a battle between a US badge made in Korea vs a Japanese badge made in Mexico

My mother in law loves her 2015 Encore and they only "buy American" (yeah, the Korean-made is lost on them). The encore has made GM fists of cash, and helped elevate Buick to being well ahead of Honda in brand reliability (Buick #3 in CR, Honda #10), especially if you consider this is a "small entry level GM car". It outperforms Honda's mexican made crossover as well.

Have you met the new Honda buyer. Hate to say it but they are boomers too. Most car brands have a hard time keeping the average age of a new buyer below 50. I would say that "cute car with a fancy nametag, with a high riding seat that's easy to get into and out of, and light steering to make driving to bingo tournaments a breeze" would fit the Honda buyer to a T.

Quote:
Compared with the segment average, Civic buyers skew more female, slightly older, and a little more affluent. According to the 2015 U.S. APEAL Study, 48% of Civic owners are women, compared with 44% for the Compact Car segment. The median age of a Civic owner is 50, compared with 51 for the segment, and the median household income of Civic owners is $75,556, compared with $72,219.
- JD power


Have you seen the Have you seen the Buick "millennial" commercials. Buick would have a word with you that they are a boomer car brand. Elsewere in the world, Buick is the new, young money buyer while Honda is the pensioners hearse.

 

[FutureDoc]

Except that the "Crosstrek" is not new. It has existed since the mid-late 90s. It was called the Impreza Outback Sport. Heck, you can make an argument that the Forester was this as well. So, Subaru has been doing a lifted Impreza this for a while and if the HR-V is a response to that, they are 20 years late. Also, the Crosstrek is (arguably) a segment up from both the HR-V and Encore. The Impreza is a compact (akin to the Corolla/Cruze/Civic) and the Fit/Spark are subcompacts.

However, taking a sub-compact vehicle, lifting it and changing the dimensions to a quasi-micro-SUV like vehicle is all Buick (or Opel). Give GM its due for creating this type of vehicle.


Also: I don't think Honda/Acura want to be Buick's rival. They are really after Audi/Merc/Lexus/Caddy. Acura's problem is that they spend the last decade with horrific styling (beak) and underwhelming performance in an arms-race segment. Honda has had to cut Acura's pricing just to remain relevant.

Keep this in mind, you can buy Buick's cheapest (buy dying) Verano for $21K (before dealer breaks). The Civic is tough to find under 20K and the Verano is a lot better equipped than the Civic.

 

[pandus13]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
The Buick Encore is a piece of trash. I won't make any effort to construct an argument around that downmarket imported pile of junk that severely tarnishes Buick as a brand.
Buick is a car for baby boomers. Hondas are for everyone else. The Encore is a car for those who want a cute car with a fancy nametag, with a high riding seat that's easy to get into and out of, and light steering to make driving to bingo tournaments a breeze. Things like parts origin, country of assembly, American jobs, or anything else of any value do not matter to the Encore buyer.


Yes, because we really want to get into a battle between a US badge made in Korea vs a Japanese badge made in Mexico

My mother in law loves her 2015 Encore and they only "buy American" (yeah, the Korean-made is lost on them). The encore has made GM fists of cash, and helped elevate Buick to being well ahead of Honda in brand reliability (Buick #3 in CR, Honda #10), especially if you consider this is a "small entry level GM car". It outperforms Honda's mexican made crossover as well.

Have you met the new Honda buyer. Hate to say it but they are boomers too. Most car brands have a hard time keeping the average age of a new buyer below 50. I would say that "cute car with a fancy nametag, with a high riding seat that's easy to get into and out of, and light steering to make driving to bingo tournaments a breeze" would fit the Honda buyer to a T.

Quote:
Compared with the segment average, Civic buyers skew more female, slightly older, and a little more affluent. According to the 2015 U.S. APEAL Study, 48% of Civic owners are women, compared with 44% for the Compact Car segment. The median age of a Civic owner is 50, compared with 51 for the segment, and the median household income of Civic owners is $75,556, compared with $72,219.
- JD power


Have you seen the Have you seen the Buick "millennial" commercials. Buick would have a word with you that they are a boomer car brand. Elsewere in the world, Buick is the new, young money buyer while Honda is the pensioners hearse.


[off-topic]
Wohoo, FutureDoc, 2 good "pearls" in the same post....

Friends bought the Verano: traded-in an Acura with forever local dealer un-diagnosed transmission problems...
They know is Chinese built. The other contender was Mazda CX-9.
Verano win on price and amenities.
Also: they are in their 50's, small kid, and one income was just obliterated by a multi-national company firing a whole division....
[/off-topic]

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc


Have you seen the Have you seen the Buick "millennial" commercials. Buick would have a word with you that they are a boomer car brand. Elsewere in the world, Buick is the new, young money buyer while Honda is the pensioners hearse.

It was awful enough to see them flaunt the now-disgraced serial philanderer Thaigger Woods in their early 2000s ads. Now I see them pushing that homely slag from the "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" show.

Buick's advertising geniuses who came up with this golden material need to be brained.

Anyway I'm not in this so much as to defend Honda (I won't buy one. Their golden age ended around 2005, they have sucked since then) - in as much as I'm here to disparage Buick for the direction they've taken since their zenith, when they made these stately cars for real American men. MEN.

The GNX is the car that won the Cold War.

Now Buick is catering to the generation of hipster scum that enjoy television shows like "The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt", and boomer cat ladies, and they are burning their seed corn of American brand identity by importing cars from the hostile epicanthic East.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
[/quote]
It was awful enough to see them flaunt the now-disgraced serial philanderer Thaigger Woods in their early 2000s ads. Now I see them pushing that homely slag from the "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" show.

Buick's advertising geniuses who came up with this golden material need to be brained.

Anyway I'm not in this so much as to defend Honda (I won't buy one. Their golden age ended around 2005, they have sucked since then) - in as much as I'm here to disparage Buick for the direction they've taken since their zenith, when they made these stately cars for real American men. MEN.

The GNX is the car that won the Cold War.

Now Buick is catering to the generation of hipster scum that enjoy television shows like "The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt", and boomer cat ladies, and they are burning their seed corn of American brand identity by importing cars from the hostile epicanthic East.


Unfortunately I bet this era of the automobile will never return

There will never be exciting cars anymore that bring about that feeling of awe when you see one. I remember when the Grand National came out (I was 14,15) my heart would literally stop and I would be in a state of hypnosis. Now most cars make me want to either laugh,cry,or throw up.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Except that the "Crosstrek" is not new. It has existed since the mid-late 90s. It was called the Impreza Outback Sport. Heck, you can make an argument that the Forester was this as well. So, Subaru has been doing a lifted Impreza this for a while and if the HR-V is a response to that, they are 20 years late. Also, the Crosstrek is (arguably) a segment up from both the HR-V and Encore. The Impreza is a compact (akin to the Corolla/Cruze/Civic) and the Fit/Spark are subcompacts.

However, taking a sub-compact vehicle, lifting it and changing the dimensions to a quasi-micro-SUV like vehicle is all Buick (or Opel). Give GM its due for creating this type of vehicle.


Also: I don't think Honda/Acura want to be Buick's rival. They are really after Audi/Merc/Lexus/Caddy. Acura's problem is that they spend the last decade with horrific styling (beak) and underwhelming performance in an arms-race segment. Honda has had to cut Acura's pricing just to remain relevant.

Keep this in mind, you can buy Buick's cheapest (buy dying) Verano for $21K (before dealer breaks). The Civic is tough to find under 20K and the Verano is a lot better equipped than the Civic.

This simply isn't correct. It shows a disconnect from the new car market and how the brands directly indicate they are positioning themselves.

If you can find us a model called XV Crosstrek that was on sale here in the US before 2013 I've got $20 for you. Because of the shape/looks, new(er) platform, and marketing, the XV model has done better for Subaru than any Impreza before it has in the US. It is that success which prompted Honda to get the HR-V into play here. And the two absolutely compete. Compare them on the mfr. websites, look at Motortrend, look at Car and Driver, or look at Edmunds to see what people cross-shop. They're the "same" car: a lifted version of an existing cheap car with AWD (and that are slow as molasses).

Honda does not in any way try to compete directly with Audi, Merc, or Cadillac. Honda competes primarily with Toyota, Chevy, Ford, VW, etc. Acura attempts to compete with Audi, Buick, Volvo, and Infiniti. Acura may not want to be Buick's rival but, as a whole, Buick has upped their game so it is unquestionably the state of play right now as Buick attempts to target Acura customers. In terms of sedans, it's hard to critically compare Acura with BMW, Merc, and Cadillac due to the model lineups and FWD-based v. RWD-based architectures.

 

[aquariuscsm]

I like this one:

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: gofast182
If you can find us a model called XV Crosstrek that was on sale here in the US before 2013 I've got $20 for you. Because of the shape/looks, new(er) platform, and marketing, the XV model has done better for Subaru than any Impreza before it has in the US. It is that success which prompted Honda to get the HR-V into play here. And the two absolutely compete. Compare them on the mfr. websites, look at Motortrend, look at Car and Driver, or look at Edmunds to see what people cross-shop. They're the "same" car: a lifted version of an existing cheap car with AWD (and that are slow as molasses).

Honda does not in any way try to compete directly with Audi, Merc, or Cadillac. Honda competes primarily with Toyota, Chevy, Ford, VW, etc. Acura attempts to compete with Audi, Buick, Volvo, and Infiniti. Acura may not want to be Buick's rival but, as a whole, Buick has upped their game so it is unquestionably the state of play right now as Buick attempts to target Acura customers. In terms of sedans, it's hard to critically compare Acura with BMW, Merc, and Cadillac due to the model lineups and FWD-based v. RWD-based architectures.


The name "Crosstrek XV" was just a re-branding/naming of an existing product riding under the new Impreza platform. Just because it has a "new name" does not make it a new concept or product. Both the "Crosstek" and the Impreza Outback/Sport (before they broke-off the Outback name to a stand along model). Before 2010, the label "Outback" for Subaru reflected a raised suspension and additional body cladding (in most cases). At least if you are going to claim that the "Crosstrek" is something new an original, please at least do your internet research first.

Oh, and in case 1996 calls:

Oh and if you want to keep pushing it back... 1990 and older with the Loyale and its raised ride height

As for folks cross-shopping. Yeah, they the HR-V and the Crosstrek occupy a similar price-point, but not exact. People cross-shop between pricepoints but the Crosstrek is a compact car based crossover, the HRV is a subcompact. The HRV is about $20K for the base model and the Crosstrek is $22K. So there is the $2.2K difference. The same ways as the Impreza and Fit can compete is your squint. Heck, you can argue that the CRV and the Crosstrek compete as there is a 2.2K difference there. Still, if you are going to make this argument, how can you claim that Honda and Buick are NOT competing directly.

Look around at where Honda sits in their "non-luxury" group. Consistently, Honda tends to be the highest priced of the group (not always the most but always in top end). Buick on the other hand is perhaps the cheapest if the Luxury brands" (really near-luxury). Buick also discounts some of their products so much that they can undercut the Chevy brand. My mother-in-law was able to get an Encore for less than a Trax. I know right? Go figure. Both brands overlap. Once you get into Honda's higher trips and comparing equipment of a FWD-biased sedans, Buick and Honda are sitting in the same group/pricepoint. They overlap and are in direct competition. Both try and be "nicer" than the base brands, but not "uncompromising luxury" either.

I don't even think Acura is targeting Acura customers. Actually, Acura is starting to target Subaru with their SH-AWD push. They have made that concept a formal marketing strategy.

FYI, Audi and Merc all have FWD vehicles. BMW as well if you consider MINI in that mix. I think Caddy is the only one (that you mentioned) without a FWD sedan vehicle once they killed off the ELR. Kinda odd to say that. There really is one manufacturer without a FWD "luxury" option (of the major makes)... and you wouldn't expect. Hyundai's Genesis Brand... that is it.

 

[gofast182]

I spend a LOT of time following automotive market and I am confident my understanding is stronger as you're mostly focusing on smaller areas of overlap. Of course those areas exist but defining overall market positions based on that fundamentally flawed (Ford and Chevy don't agree that the Fusion and Malibu shall both start at $22,610 with the same equipment).

We've already established that Subaru making a raised Impreza or raised ___ is nothing new. The point is it was not until [specifically] the XV Crosstrek came along that Honda (and others) were spurred to compete in that market space with whatever product could most closely fit the bill. This is because the XV Crosstrek has been a great success for Subaru, more than any previous raised Impreza variant, and it took everyone else by surprise.

Acura would be happy to siphon off some Subaru buyers based on SH-AWD (which has been around for 12 years) but that is NOT their focus. Subaru (and Acura for that matter) have very high brand loyalty rates so that's not where they're throwing their money; they want Audi customers (who are generally more fickle) first and foremost.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: gofast182
I spend a LOT of time following automotive market and I am confident my understanding is stronger as you're mostly focusing on smaller areas of overlap. Of course those areas exist but defining overall market positions based on that fundamentally flawed (Ford and Chevy don't agree that the Fusion and Malibu shall both start at $22,610 with the same equipment).

We've already established that Subaru making a raised Impreza or raised ___ is nothing new. The point is it was not until [specifically] the XV Crosstrek came along that Honda (and others) were spurred to compete in that market space with whatever product could most closely fit the bill. This is because the XV Crosstrek has been a great success for Subaru, more than any previous raised Impreza variant, and it took everyone else by surprise.

Acura would be happy to siphon off some Subaru buyers based on SH-AWD (which has been around for 12 years) but that is NOT their focus. Subaru (and Acura for that matter) have very high brand loyalty rates so that's not where they're throwing their money; they want Audi customers (who are generally more fickle) first and foremost.


I used to work as a sub-contractor for one of the Big3 (which is also how the Big3 communicate between themselves)

My PhD focused on vehicle segments based on fuel economy (did you know the Old Caddy DTS and Accord were in the came class?). So I "lived" vehicle classification and marketing... it was my "life's work" so to speak.

So, before you want to "measure", do some recon. You might be surprised how things can cut, both from a regulatory and a consumer-side.

It was the Buick Encore in 2012 (with a 2013 model year) that made the manufacturers perk-up to the subcompact based CUV. Both the Crosstrek and the Encore hit the US market at about the same time. However, it was everyone looking at GM and figuring out why someone would spend $25K on what is about a raised Chevy Spark with leather. Everyone in the industry was amazed that Buick could move 75K plus of these vehicles in a year... considering it was Buick! The Subie on the other hand was making the Impreza variant and the market eventually moved into a somewhat forgotten vehicle. No one was really caught by surprise. A slightly lifted Subie will sell (and has since the 90s). You can point to the Gen 4 as revitalizing all of the Impreza vehicles compared to the Gen 3 (which was unremarkable save for the WRX).

Actually, Acrua's consumer base has basically fallen off the cliff while Subaru has been expanding. The "Beak" did some damage that made Acura a bit of a good deal (if you can ignore the beak). Acura better be careful before it becomes Lincoln-Japan. Also, Audi is loosing ground to Merc (current luxury king). The only folks buying Acuras are the Acura-brand dependent.

Yes, Acura will be focusing on SH-AWD as a "standard" for their vehicles. Here is common press: http://jalopnik.com/acura-may-go-all-awd-because-its-working-for-subaru-1646275245

 

[gofast182]

I did not know about the old DTS and Accord but any day job that resulted in putting "odd couples" like that together explains some things!

I can't argue that the Encore isn't some part of the equation but I guarantee Honda was looking more at what Subaru was doing with the Crosstrek. Within a few years they went from selling ~45k/yr. of the entire model line to selling ~50k/yr. of one trim variant (which incidentally makes up a plurality of the sales). So yes, Subaru is expanding.

They do some good stuff but don't take all of what you read from the children over at Jalopnik as gospel. People within Acura (Erik Berkman and others) were arguing that point for many years prior and it had nothing to do with Subaru at that time and everything to do with Audi as Acura attempted to make a move to be a "Tier 1" luxury manufacturer (they failed). SH-AWD is/was their best driveline engineering achievement and it has gone woefully unexploited.

 

[FutureDoc]

Not coupes, sedans. The DTS and the Accord were both full-sized sedans (according to NHTSA). The Hyundai Sonata could be a mid-sized or compact sedan depending on the trim. You get into some rabbit holes with vehicle classification. When my research hit, I used footprints (based on CAFE changes) and engine cylinders/displacement so I could pair common market vehicles together such as a Camry, Sonata, and Accord as they could be different classes base on other definitions (see above).

Yeah, but Buick did that same 50-75K sales per year with the Encore. Buick! None saw that coming and most (myself included) thought Buick has lost its mind and that their customer base would reject that small of a lifted hatchback. Who would spend $30K+ on a subcompact Buick lifted hatchback. Some folks do and while they can be discounted, it is a cash cow for the brand. Buick (Opel) did that with a "Spark" under its skin. If you want to point to the vehicle that started the subcompact crossover, it is the Buick. Subaru is compact crossover.

Another often overlooked example would be the Nissan Juke which pre-dates both.


I just grabbed a mass-market example for you. However, it was fairly well know that Acura was thinking of trying to tackle a lot of Subaru's high-end sales. Almost becmome a high-end Subaru. However, that concept was slightly dismissed too as being a bit odd. However, look at the other languishing luxury brands like Lincoln which was pushing AWD.

 

[gofast182]

Who said anything about coupes?

We'll have to agree to disagree on the finer points. I spend enough time following Honda press releases and interviews to know that the XV is what impressed them most and that's not to say Buick never crossed their mind at all, it can't not have in a segment analysis, but I never saw it mentioned by Honda. You seem to think Subaru occupies a slightly more flattering position than it does vis-a-vis Acura (and that's not to take anything away from the good work Subaru has been doing in the past few years). At the same time I have no illusions about where Acura's failings have been.