Why Bring Back the Insight? Because a Hybrid Civic Just Isn't Done

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Honda raised a few eyebrows by announcing the return of the Insight hybrid for 2019, this time as a larger and plusher four-door sedan. While the model holds the title of America’s first hybrid car, its groundbreaking status didn’t carry over into the model’s second generation, which, despite selling better than the two-seater first-gen model, quietly (and slowly) disappeared from the market after its 2014 discontinuation.

The automaker sold three “new” 2014 Insights last year, and 67 the year before.

Throughout the second Insight’s run, and continuing through 2015, the Civic Hybrid was also available to lower-end electrified car shoppers. Which begs the question: why didn’t Honda just make a hybrid version of its wildly popular 10th-generation Civic?

Oh no, Honda couldn’t do that.

Speaking to Wards Auto at last week’s Detroit auto show, Henio Arcangeli, senior vice president of American Honda’s automotive division, said a new Civic Hybrid just wasn’t in the cards. Instead, it created a new model based on the Civic’s generously sized platform.

“The Civic is lightweight, sporty, fun-to-drive, and if you electrify the Civic I think you kind of take a lot of the character away,” said Arcangeli, “so it was a smarter idea to bring back an older nameplate from before and make it kind of a whole new vehicle.”

There’s no question the Civic lineup is the most diverse in the Honda stable. Three bodystyles. Four engines ranging from tepid to bonkers. It’s possible a variant that doesn’t beat the competition in green specs — and even one that does — could become lost in the noise of all those revving ICEs. Honda’s hoping for 50 mpg-plus combined fuel economy for its latest Insight, a rating that might not best that of the class-leading Toyota Prius.

So, rather than have the Civic Si and Type R hog all the limelight, the automaker figured a standalone model, one outfitted as a premium compact, would serve it best. The Insight’s standard features includes an 8-inch touchscreen and the Honda Sensing suite of driver aids, with upgrades in electronics and interior finishings available on the options list.

Interestingly, Arcangeli’s memory of the second-gen Insight doesn’t seem all that crisp. “The second Insight was I think the least expensive hybrid on the market at the time,” he told Wards. Well, was it? (Note: it was, though reviewers of the day compared it unfavorably to the Prius.)

We’ve seen that hybrids, plug-ins and battery electric vehicles are easier to sell to the affluent, making Honda’s upscaling of the Insight appear a rational choice. There’s little point in chasing the cheapest entry price if the end result is something with a lacklustre reputation. For future “premium” Insight buyers, Honda promises class-leading passenger space — a perk more likely to sway well-heeled green car buyers than 1 mpg or an MSRP slightly lower than a model with far greater name recognition.

Besides, with Hyundai and Kia getting into the compact hybrid game, there’s less chance of capturing the bottom end of the market. Why not put an existing platform to use on a higher margin model?

[Image: Honda]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 30 comments
  • Jalop1991 Jalop1991 on Jan 23, 2018

    So, Honda makes pretty much one 4 door car now. The Incicord.

    • Ernest Ernest on Jan 23, 2018

      haha. That's pretty much what I'm getting out of all this.

  • Insightman Insightman on Jan 24, 2018

    Honda doesn't believe in this age of cheap gas that hybrid customers are comparison-shopping for the ultimate fuel economy. The company is hoping that a fast, green-cred Insight with upscale amenities will appeal to more customers than the gen-1 "science experiment" (which I'm still happily driving) or the gen-2 "near-Prius" (which my wife is still happily driving). This new Insight looks really good--better than the Civic and way better than the competing Prius and Ioniq hybrids in my opinion (but, of course, I'm an Insight fanatic). I'll go even further to claim it is the best-looking Honda, hybrid or not, since the S2000. To power this Insight, Honda has specified the 1.5-liter Atkinson-cycle 4-cylinder engine from the Clarity Plug-In Hybrid (we have one of those, too). If the Insight also gets the Clarity PHEV's 181-hp electric motor, the 212-hp combo will make the Insight the most powerful compact car in Honda's stable, except for the 306-hp Civic Type R. Honda has conservatively guaranteed more than 50 mpg combined for the 3rd-generation Insight. If this spacious 5-passenger sedan can achieve 53 mpg, it will match the 53-mpg rating the EPA now calculates for the original 1,850-lb, ultra-aerodynamic, 2-seat Insight! That will be very impressive, indeed. More analysis at insightman.com/2018_NAIAS/

  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
Next