Honda struggles to move the once-hugely-popular Accord
03-14-18, 01:36 PM
#76
Pole Position
Can we also assume VWs are on the same level of reliability as Toyotas and Hondas?
03-14-18, 07:06 PM
#77
Lexus Test Driver
Ding ding ding, we have a winner. They did both, here in Ontario, largest market in Canada, they had the 2018 XSE V6 for CA$ 299.00/month on a 39 month lease with 1.9% lease rate and $3500down including freight, PDI and fees. All through December and January. The 2017 were at the same monthly and lease rate with no down, freight/PDI/fees rolled into the totals. They sure as hell weren't going to end the year and begin a new one on downtrend with a brand new model out.
03-14-18, 07:39 PM
#79
Lead Lap
The relatively high price, and the lack of attractive financing and lease options are main reasons affecting sales, I believe. Other possible reasons have to do with the ability to attract showroom traffic to the Accord from other vehicles in the showroom.
Is there showroom traffic? Is it up or down since the recent replacement of the popular CR-V and Civic? If there is showroom traffic -- I have not read any complaints about a lack of showroom traffic -- is that traffic looking at the Accord and sitting in it?
If there is no traffic around the Accord, perhaps it is hidden by the CR-V and Civic; maybe the CR-V and Civic are more than good enough cars for Honda shoppers and there is no need for the Accord. (I do not believe that people shopping for the Pilot or Odyssey would be looking at the Accord.)
If, however, there is traffic around the Accord and shoppers are sitting in it, do they like it? Is it that much better than the other vehicles in the showroom (the CR-V and Civic, which are its most likely showroom competitors)? Or is it too expensive for what it offers and what else is in the showroom?
I do not believe that the other reasons mentioned play a big factor in low sales.
Unattractive looks - This may be keeping traffic away from the Accord in the showroom but I do not believe that it is a major factor. For every person who finds the Accord unattractive there will be another who likes the styling or is indifferent. Despite all the contributors to CL who say that Toyotas are unattractive, Toyotas consistently sell well, for example.
Only turbocharged engines available (no naturally-aspirated engine available) - If there is traffic and bums in Accord seats, I doubt that this is a big factor. I believe -- from observing my relatives relationships with their cars -- that "normal" drivers know very little or care about turbocharged engines. If the EPA / Transport Canada, backed up by the salesperson, gives the car a "good" fuel efficiency rating, that is good enough for these buyers. Any knowledge about the turbocharged engines -- their servicing requirements and their real-world fuel efficiency -- would come from word-of-mouth from friends and relatives, not auto media, which has been supportive of turbocharged engines.
But maybe the small displacement of the available engines -- only 1.5-litre and 2.0-litre engines -- are keeping people away. Its Japanese competitors -- Camry, Altima, Mazda6 -- all come with a larger, naturally-aspirated, 2.5-litre engine. Accord shoppers may be afraid that the small displacement engines (remembering that the "normal" car shopper does not really understand turbocharged engines) are not large enough.
Lack of V6 - Like turbocharged engines, I doubt that this is a big factor. V6 engines in mid-size sedans these days are there to attract enthusiasts and I doubt there are many enthusiasts shopping for Accords and Camrys.
Is there showroom traffic? Is it up or down since the recent replacement of the popular CR-V and Civic? If there is showroom traffic -- I have not read any complaints about a lack of showroom traffic -- is that traffic looking at the Accord and sitting in it?
If there is no traffic around the Accord, perhaps it is hidden by the CR-V and Civic; maybe the CR-V and Civic are more than good enough cars for Honda shoppers and there is no need for the Accord. (I do not believe that people shopping for the Pilot or Odyssey would be looking at the Accord.)
If, however, there is traffic around the Accord and shoppers are sitting in it, do they like it? Is it that much better than the other vehicles in the showroom (the CR-V and Civic, which are its most likely showroom competitors)? Or is it too expensive for what it offers and what else is in the showroom?
I do not believe that the other reasons mentioned play a big factor in low sales.
Unattractive looks - This may be keeping traffic away from the Accord in the showroom but I do not believe that it is a major factor. For every person who finds the Accord unattractive there will be another who likes the styling or is indifferent. Despite all the contributors to CL who say that Toyotas are unattractive, Toyotas consistently sell well, for example.
Only turbocharged engines available (no naturally-aspirated engine available) - If there is traffic and bums in Accord seats, I doubt that this is a big factor. I believe -- from observing my relatives relationships with their cars -- that "normal" drivers know very little or care about turbocharged engines. If the EPA / Transport Canada, backed up by the salesperson, gives the car a "good" fuel efficiency rating, that is good enough for these buyers. Any knowledge about the turbocharged engines -- their servicing requirements and their real-world fuel efficiency -- would come from word-of-mouth from friends and relatives, not auto media, which has been supportive of turbocharged engines.
But maybe the small displacement of the available engines -- only 1.5-litre and 2.0-litre engines -- are keeping people away. Its Japanese competitors -- Camry, Altima, Mazda6 -- all come with a larger, naturally-aspirated, 2.5-litre engine. Accord shoppers may be afraid that the small displacement engines (remembering that the "normal" car shopper does not really understand turbocharged engines) are not large enough.
Lack of V6 - Like turbocharged engines, I doubt that this is a big factor. V6 engines in mid-size sedans these days are there to attract enthusiasts and I doubt there are many enthusiasts shopping for Accords and Camrys.
ugly design, maybe but truth be told accords imo have not been winning design awards for ages, mostly reliability and low cost to own. I encourage those with the engine concerns to sit down in a dealership and observe the most common concerns the target demographic has about vehicles, and I assure you a FI turbo motor longevity in specific accounts is not one..."carplay availability, safety tech, best deal" are more in line.
In most accounts I think its a CUV market, but also a market that flourishes on the bottom line. Not too many people I know are willing to pay sticker on an accord or get shafted on lease deals. The idea here is regardless of what features this thing has (and mind you this thing runs rings around whats available in some luxury class vehicles) the end game here is pricing, either offer great deals to long term owners who finance or pay cash (usually finance things) or offer these things at great lease deals which will make this move units like no other especially
03-14-18, 10:24 PM
#80
I haven't read through all the responses, but IMO the new Civic is stealing a lot of Accord sales, especially on the bottom end. You get almost as much car space wise, with the same engine in some trims, for a few thousand dollars less than the Accord. Both are built to the same exacting standard, the interiors are equally nice in that under $25,000 price range.
As for dealers complaining about the Accord having bad lease rates, maybe the rates on Civics are a lot better, thus more sales. IMO you don't give up that much moving from an Accord to the Civic, the gap between those cars in terms of refinement and interior/trunk space has shrunk dramatically IMO.
As for dealers complaining about the Accord having bad lease rates, maybe the rates on Civics are a lot better, thus more sales. IMO you don't give up that much moving from an Accord to the Civic, the gap between those cars in terms of refinement and interior/trunk space has shrunk dramatically IMO.
03-14-18, 10:32 PM
#81
Turbo will require more strict and expensive maintenance in the long run. Most people that buys this class of cars wants absolute reliability and dependability with low maintenance costs in the short and long term. The people that can afford to move up to the V6 wants the same level of low maintenance and reliability.
I doubt that many Accord buyers know what "turbo" means and most of those that do know don't care so long as the performance is there.
03-14-18, 10:57 PM
#82
This may have been true back in the early days of turbos just added to engines not designed for them, but the modern turbo is not an issue. Turbo engines are now mainstream and normal aspirated engines are becoming the minority. Ford is heavily committed to the Ecoboost concept and luxury car makers are using the turbo 4 very widely. Mercedes uses a turbo 4 in virtually all the C class cars and most of the E class.
I doubt that many Accord buyers know what "turbo" means and most of those that do know don't care so long as the performance is there.
I doubt that many Accord buyers know what "turbo" means and most of those that do know don't care so long as the performance is there.
BMW and their first gen twin turbo V8's(with the turbochargers in the V of the engine) turned out to be unmitigated disasters. **** poor engineering, cheap *** materials under the hood(lots of low bid crap plastic parts to break like vacume lines, radiators, water pumps, electrical connectors), extended oil change intervals(where turbo motors need more frequent oil changes), all of this led to a "special service campaign"(aka recall), where BMW replaced 2 pages worth of parts on these engines with redesigned pieces.
03-15-18, 01:04 AM
#83
I haven't read through all the responses, but IMO the new Civic is stealing a lot of Accord sales, especially on the bottom end. You get almost as much car space wise, with the same engine in some trims, for a few thousand dollars less than the Accord. Both are built to the same exacting standard, the interiors are equally nice in that under $25,000 price range.
As for dealers complaining about the Accord having bad lease rates, maybe the rates on Civics are a lot better, thus more sales. IMO you don't give up that much moving from an Accord to the Civic, the gap between those cars in terms of refinement and interior/trunk space has shrunk dramatically IMO.
As for dealers complaining about the Accord having bad lease rates, maybe the rates on Civics are a lot better, thus more sales. IMO you don't give up that much moving from an Accord to the Civic, the gap between those cars in terms of refinement and interior/trunk space has shrunk dramatically IMO.
03-15-18, 05:42 AM
#84
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
I think dropping the six cylinder is playing a part because there were a core of buyers who really liked it
the last quarter of 2017, compact sales dropped to 486,244, while midsize sales dropped to 453,359.
Meanwhile compact utility vehicles rose to a whopping 806,341, while midsize utility vehicles rose to 542,547.
The large car segment was only 100,989, while large utility vehicles was a good 342,525.
Meanwhile compact utility vehicles rose to a whopping 806,341, while midsize utility vehicles rose to 542,547.
The large car segment was only 100,989, while large utility vehicles was a good 342,525.
so roughly 1M vs 1.7M cars vs utes... 70% difference! and another .75M pickups!
03-15-18, 06:35 AM
#86
Lexus Fanatic
I thought it was generally understood that hybrids have no break-even, and were more to make a statement? EVs, are likely worse, my only two experiences were the i3 and the Tesla 75. The sticker prices seemed imho to outweigh any savings.
03-15-18, 06:41 AM
#87
Lexus Fanatic
I think some of the newer turbo engines will go the distance and last 200k, 300k miles, while some will be complete junk even before 100k miles. The main thing I think driving long term reliablity(aka 150k, 200k, 250k miles) in new turbo engines is the engineering from the factory and the cost of all the ancillary components spec'd by the factory. Also I think on time oil changes will be a HUGE deal with turbo engines, let the oil go for an extra 5k miles, it will cook the turbo bearings a lot sooner, maybe even gum up stuff like oil supply lines to the turbo.
BMW and their first gen twin turbo V8's(with the turbochargers in the V of the engine) turned out to be unmitigated disasters. **** poor engineering, cheap *** materials under the hood(lots of low bid crap plastic parts to break like vacume lines, radiators, water pumps, electrical connectors), extended oil change intervals(where turbo motors need more frequent oil changes), all of this led to a "special service campaign"(aka recall), where BMW replaced 2 pages worth of parts on these engines with redesigned pieces.
BMW and their first gen twin turbo V8's(with the turbochargers in the V of the engine) turned out to be unmitigated disasters. **** poor engineering, cheap *** materials under the hood(lots of low bid crap plastic parts to break like vacume lines, radiators, water pumps, electrical connectors), extended oil change intervals(where turbo motors need more frequent oil changes), all of this led to a "special service campaign"(aka recall), where BMW replaced 2 pages worth of parts on these engines with redesigned pieces.
This is what you said, apparently none of the below applied to my car. For pete's sake, this vehicle has a true dual exhaust, if anything, engineers won over bean counters back then. I would have to vehemently disagree with you, and that comes from actually owning the vehicle for over 11 years.
**** poor engineering, cheap *** materials under the hood(lots of low bid crap plastic parts to break like vacume lines, radiators, water pumps, electrical connectors), extended oil change intervals(where turbo motors need more frequent oil changes), all of this led to a "special service campaign"(aka recall), where BMW replaced 2 pages worth of parts on these engines with redesigned pieces.
03-15-18, 08:45 AM
#88
Lexus Champion
Myy purchase of a Highlander Hybrid had zero to do with making a statement. Break even point is slightly less than 3 years on it. Not sure what the premium is for the Accord Hybrid but I'm sure a break even point can be achieved.
03-15-18, 09:52 AM
#89
Lexus Fanatic
Judging by sales that is not true at all, buyers are not interested in them especially when it comes to luxury cars.
03-15-18, 11:27 AM
#90
Anyway I was glad to get rid of a torquey 4cyl turbo with killer oversteer for a NA V6 for now.