Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Beholders have beheld the new Honda Crosstour and found it not beautiful. Ugly, in fact. Ten years ago, this condem-nation wouldn’t have been a problem for the vehicle’s manufacturer. At worst, a few aesthetically-offended members of the automotive press would have nibbled the hand that feeds, gently alluding to the vehicle’s “challenging” exterior. Otherwise, the illusion that the Honda Crosstour isn’t a Gorgon-on-wheels would have been maintained—at least until “disappointing” sales proved the point. Those days are gone. These days, Honda’s decision to green light an ugly automobile has unleashed a major PR debacle. Welcome to the Internet, fellas. I did warn you.
True story. Once upon a time, I wrote that the Subaru B9 Tribeca was ugly. More specifically, I called the Subie SUV’s front end a “flying vagina.” Excrement and rotary air moving device collided. Subaru had me fired from my job as car reviewer for the San Francisco Chronicle. The anti-TTAC backlash was fast and furious. BMW, Chrysler, Subaru, Toyota, GM—every single mainstream carmaker in the United States took TTAC off their press car list. Including Honda.
HoMoCo tried to dress up their contribution to the ban as a sudden realization that TTAC was too small for press car consideration. I didn’t argue the point. Why bother? We were small. But I told the PR flack in question that he was missing the point. The game was changing. Thanks to the Internet, the Japanese carmaker couldn’t hide from the truth about their cars. You know, eventually.
I figured GM’s bankruptcy would be the beginning of the end for decades of journalistic bribery and collusion. When the largest and most monolithic of the American automakers went down, the industry would realize they had to face the truth about their products, or face extinction. While I didn’t expect the chastened car companies to embrace their protagonist, I thought the post-GM C11 automakers would at least begin to see the value of a website that left no holds barred.
At that point, perhaps, carmakers might reach out to us and engage our writers and commentators in something roughly akin to a conversation. An open, honest and frank exchange of views about their vehicles’ shortcomings, leading to better products and customer relations. I predicted that the first car company to fully embrace Internet openness would have an enormous competitive advantage.
Here’s what I didn’t understand: TTAC was part of the problem. Yes, we host a not inconsiderable 1.1 million unique visitors per month. But we’re still an elitist outfit. Not to coin a phrase, we report, you decide. Old school. Or, more accurately, outdated.
The Crosstour controversy proves that the power of the truth has leapfrogged gatekeepers—both old and new—and landed on the keyboards of individual enthusiasts. To wit: a TTAC writer didn’t force Honda’s hand in the matter of its ugly ass CUV. Everyone did. Honda’s Facebook page was the medium. “The Crosstour is ugly” was the message.
And now that the message is out there, Honda can’t deal. Their efforts to do so, via their “Message to Fans,” misunderstands the fundamentally no-bullshit nature of Internet “debate.” By doing so, Honda only makes things worse.
Hi, Facebook fans. We’re listening, and we want to address a few things you’ve been talking about over the past few days. The photos: Arguably, the two studio photos we posted didn’t give you enough detail, nor were they the best to showcase the vehicle. There are more photos on the way. Maybe it’s like a bad yearbook photo or something, and we think the new photos will clear things up. It’s not the European wagon: We’ve seen a lot of comments about the desire for a wagon, but this is neither a wagon nor designed for wagon buyers. We think the Euro wagon is a cool vehicle, too, and we appreciate the feedback… but a version of that wasn’t our intention here. That’s another segment worthy of our consideration, but the Accord Crosstour, built on the larger, Accord platform, is meant to give you the best of two worlds – the versatility of an SUV with the sportiness of a car. Many of you don’t like the styling: It may not be for everyone. Our research suggests that the styling does test well among people shopping for a crossover.
Arguably? “A bad yearbook photo?” “Clear things up?” Honda’s rip-post is defensive, evasive, obfuscatory, condescending. Moreover, it shows that the automaker is so far out of the cultural loop they don’t realize that the phrase the “best of two worlds” evokes the deeply uncool Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus paradigm. And “We’re listening” brings to mind blowhard fictional shrink Frasier Crane. Taken as a whole, it’s hard to imagine Honda drafting a worse reply to their “fans” that doesn’t include the words FOAD.
More to the point, Honda fails to understand that the Internet wins. The web has revealed that their would-be emperor is buck naked and unattractive; rendering their previous product design and research worthless. And there’s nothing Honda can do to change this perception amongst the automotive opinion shapers. Because it’s not perception. It’s reality.
Honda can’t fix ugly. Unless, of course, they do. Honda could spend tens of millions of dollars to rectify this now-obvious mistake. Lest we forget, despite Subaru’s vicious anti-TTAC smear campaign, the car company quickly modified the Tribeca’s flying vagina front end into a Chrysler Pacifica-esque snout. Will Honda follow suit and change the Crosstour?
In some ways, it doesn’t matter. The autoblogosphere has forced Honda to face the truth about their car. For those of us who love cars—not forgetting that hatred is love turned upside down—the fact that Honda may be shamed into returning to product excellence is a truly wondrous thing.
It turns out that Gil Scott-Heron was right: the revolution will not be televised. It’s on Facebook.
92 Comments on “Editorial: Honda Crosstour: You Can’t Fix Ugly. Or Can You?...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Just want to give props to spyspeed for making mention of “It’s Alive” and the ZDX in the same sentence. I am always impressed with level of eruditeness (?) expressed by the readers of TTAC even though some of arcane knowledge shows a little too much familarity with the dark side. I had always thought I and three others were the only ones to have seen that film and its two sequels and the one remake in 2008.
What’s wrong with Honda? They were once the altar on which the vast middle class prayed. They built a jet plane – just because they could. But now they can’t build a car outside their comfort zone to save themselves. Just look at what they did to Acura. What’s next: a revival of Sterling?
At least they still make a good snow blower.
I’m very happy that Honda has released such a polarizing design in the form of this Crosstour. Love it or hate it, this automobile is now seared in the memory of millions of car enthusiasts, not to mention the memory of those summoned to the enthusiasts’ computers in a moment of “share the awe” (alternatively, “share the morbid fascination”).
The worst thing that Honda could do now is bow to the collective “wisdom” of the masses. There’s a very good reason why design-by-committee is derided in a vast number of professional fields; if you have to ask, your brain can’t afford the answer.
All of this is simply my opinion, of course. I find the Element beautiful, purely a consequence of its supreme functionality as a transportation device. Does this make me an aberration? I like to think so.
Jeff in NH:
The worst thing that Honda could do now is bow to the collective “wisdom” of the masses.
You mean give the people what they want?
I thought the stereotypical import buyer didn’t care much about looks, just ticking off the boxes on the spec sheet. At least that’s what happened the last few times I went car-shopping.
The Crosstour will likely sell okay, controversy and vortex-inducing grill included. Heck, thanks to CfC Toyota sold almost 8500 Venzas last month.
You know what? They’re still going to sell plenty of them. Why? They’re Honda- they’ve been selling ugly vehicles for quite some time and nobody seems to have cared. Is this really any uglier than the Ridgeline? The Element? The Accord sedan?
The only thing Honda screwed up was its marketing- it should’ve been dictating to its customers “you’ll like this, damnit” just like BMW has been doing ever since it shunned timeless design for ugly du jour. BMWs aren’t even good cars anymore, but their sales are through the roof. Why? Because they tell their customers they’re going to like the car, so they do. How else do you explain the X6?
That’s GM’s problem as well. Hell, GM is the pioneer of this wretched category. These vehicles all should bow down to the Pontiac Aztek from which they were ripped off. But GM lacked the clout to cram it down the throats of their customers. GM is forced to sell pleasant-looking vehicles and beg you for the sale.
I tend to agree with “Jeff in NH”. The current Hollywood studio process of showing various endings to movie test audiences and going with the popular choice has resulted in bland pap relying on special effects to entertain. Real stories only come from the independent producers. The same will become true of cars. If the big guys make only “what the people ask for” they will become the lowest common denominator in the motor industry. Honda may have made a mistake this time but ….. maybe next time.
Not so bad from this particular angle. Just from the other 359.
And does anyone really think that this design wasn’t evaluated in clinics? This is what happened despite any research.
As for next time, how many more “next times” do they get? Not too many design winners from Honda or Acura in the past five years.
Here’s a question – is the target market for this vehicle likely to be clued in to negative press on Twitter and auto-friendly websites?
OK, side rant here. Why does every crossover have to be bigger, heavier, fatter, bulkier, more caricaturish, and just plain balloon like?
Whenever I see one, I think that the driver must be old, obese or both. It’s like looking at an SUV with a guilt complex.
Cars like this Honda just make me realize that the classic ‘brick’ design of old Volvo wagons will continue to endure. Those with ovoids aplenty will simply come to pass.
If Honda wants to appeal to families, they need to build bricks. Everything else in the CUV market already has 17 different swoops.
NOTE TO HONDA: The real successor to the family wagon, was the Ford Explorer. Start with the box and make it functional as hell. Leave the plastique and squid inspired curvatures to whoever ends up buying Pontiac’s old tooling.
If they would tighten that ass up, I would buy one. Wait a minute, are we talking about a vehicle or a woman?
Robert Farago:
You mean give the people what they want?
I mean compromise a design to suit everyone’s tastes. Nearly half the comments I’ve read on the Crosstour claim its front end is fine, just the back needs a redesign; a similar number claim the opposite. Lastly, a small percentage revert to childish claims that we’re harming the future of human society with the release of this car. This is all fine by me, naturally – I’m an ardent supporter of freedom of expression. These reactions also make me laugh, which is the greatest value I can derive from the whole episode.
What concerns me is that progress will never be made by those that are forced to retract risky endeavors consequent to critical reaction. The best art, the best science, the best technological advancement is made by those that risk eliciting passions, good or bad, in those observing the process or product. Otherwise you end up with a Toyota. Perhaps Honda has a longer-term goal in mind with this particular design, one with a broader impact on the automobile industry; the company does have a reputation for long-term thinking. I don’t want to sound like an apologist here – just that I don’t believe this to be a simple case of ugly.
I’m glad Honda took this risk, and I hope that its response to the deafening roar is equally venturesome.
Beauty is only skin deep.
Ugly goes down to the bone.
Millions of consumers, including TTAC’s 1.1 million unique monthly visitors, know the automakers own the traditional auto journalists, publications and Internet sites. They no longer look to them for the facts they need to avoid wasting time and money on cars that fall short of expectations. If their traditional mouthpieces and shills cannot deliver buyers the carmakers must reevaluate their strategy, or perish.
I’m thinking it’s time to pack up and head for the hills, it’s all gone crazy now…
Honda and Toyota both come out with cars that aren’t bland but instead downright ugly. Subaru comes out with multiple models that are mainstream and appealing.
Steven Lang:
Cars like this Honda just make me realize that the classic ‘brick’ design of old Volvo wagons will continue to endure. Those with ovoids aplenty will simply come to pass.
As someone who believes that that Volvo 960 was the most beautiful car ever made, I hope that you’re right. Some of the current Audi wagons come close to my aesthetic ideal, but there’s still nothing more attractive than the 960’s long, squared-off lines and big greenhouse.
The worst thing that Honda could do now is bow to the collective “wisdom” of the masses.
You mean give the people what they want?
They aren’t even in the same galaxy of what people want.
Sure, it may be ugly, but it still is better looking than the current queen of the ugly stick. I speak of course of the BMW X6. No one does ugly better than the Germans. So here, from Honda, you get 1/2 the ugly for less than half the price! I predict they sell all of them.
I think it is not pretty in the way we’d like to expect. It may be tuned to become endearing with time. Designed to be owned than purchased, approached than ogled. Maybe Honda’s design ethic doesn’t include anyone who actually cares to comment on a Facetube. People who marry tend not to shout about intimacy, this car may appeal to them. It may appeal to the middle class with as stable a home as finances. The kind of people who want to buy a Honda probably just don’t care what a bunch of opinionated narcissists leave as their digital graffiti. They’d just square a fair deal for it and become increasingly contented as their affection for their trusty Honda grew with their families. Again, I wouldn’t know. I think its a cubist hippo in drag.
Read the FB note…”Our research suggests that the styling does test well among people shopping for a crossover.”
The Crosstour is a design by committee (or focus group, to be more accurate). That’s the problem. A bunch of people who wouldn’t know a Ford Fiesta from a chimichanga loved it.
Yes ugly is a form of freedom of expression, which is fine if you are an artist but not so good if your aim is to sell a lot of these objects d’art. What kills you as a car company is when you spend millions to build a vehicle that can only be described as fugly. Customers today vote with their feet. If they don’t like your product they have lots of other sources of the same type of product to choose from so you need to get it right the first time. What amazes me is that car companies pay out millions in market research money and don’t get much for their money. If I was Honda I would fire the market researchers who said this is what people wanted. Oh, I forgot this is the auto industry, the guys who screwed up probably got a bonus and a promotion.
You should still consider that the beholders are fickle and change their beholdingness when it suits them.
Does anyone remember all of the horrible “the sky is falling on my Subaru” rantings when the latest Impreza sedan and hatch launched? I believe the term suppository was used quite often to describe the car, and many die-hard customers asserted they would never consider the car because it was too ugly.
But guess what – most of that fervor has died down. Heck, read those magazines (oh wait, you guys hate print magazines and think they’re poo… nevermind). Most long term testers of the car reiterate the notion that they think the car’s styling isn’t as bad now versus when they acquired the vehicle to their test fleet. And most consumers/owners I know recognize it’s not as ugly now as they first feared.
I think this Crosstour incident has two components. One is Honda removing the comments from their Facebook page. Obviously a corporation would rather suppress negative feedback from their public media postings, but there seems to be some that believe this is cowardly. I’m sure if your sister knocked up you wouldn’t want somone to post a “slut” sign on your lawn even if it could be true to some beholders.
The second issue is whether or not Honda should invest money in an emergency facelift… which I’m sure they are not going to do until about the 2013 model year.
I’m sorry this is not as ugly as all Toyotas are currently (what’s with the nobs ?), and they have no problems selling.
The idea above of a “revival of Sterling” brought to mind the five-door hatch version of the Acura Legend-based (Rover) Sterling sedan sold 20 years ago in the US. This was not a bad-looking car by any means, and was presumably aimed at the same market as this new Honda 5-door; it’s a shame that Sterling so quickly became an orphan marque (and deservedly so, from what I remember reading about their build quality).
The Crosstour is obviously Honda’s half-hearted (half-witted?) attempt to counter the Toyota Venza. The outcome should be little different than the new Insight versus the new Prius. If Honda continues down the road of delivering bunt singles, Toyota’s most direct Asian competition will soon be the duo of Hyundai and Kia.
I wouldn’t care so much about this thing’s aesthetic shortcomings if the shape had some utilitarian benefit. But it doesn’t. Rear-quarter visibility must be horrendous, and the sloped roofline destroys the thing’s capacity as a luggage hauler. Honda earned its reputation in the US market as a manufacturer of vehicles that were effective and efficient. Trim, blandly attractive designs reinforced the impression of purposefulness. The excess bulk of the current Accord has done some damage to that hard-earned reputation, but the Crosstour threatens to wreck it completely.
A good historical analogy might be the Rambler Marlin, which was American Motors’ attempt to break away from a reputation as a maker of boring cars for little old ladies. Instead of making the company look hip, the Marlin made it look foolish and wasteful. Does Honda really want to head down that road?
Honda’s response sounds a lot like a letter sent from an elected official to a voter who questioned their stand on an issue.
The Crosstour looks are not for me but the main problem with the design is use of space and outward visibility.
I also am a fan of the Volvo 240/740/940 series (the bricks). Not because they are beautiful cars but because they are so functional. Reliable, lots of room and very good visibility. I would take that over an additional 5mpg any day.
Photos of the Sterling 827 5-door hatch I mentioned earlier can be found online, and they show a car with uncompromised outward visibility; it really is possible in this configuration. Down with high beltlines!
I agree with jimble, above, that “Honda earned its reputation in the US market as a manufacturer of vehicles that were effective and efficient. Trim, blandly attractive designs reinforced the impression of purposefulness.” In the 1980s my siblings bought several new Hondas, two-door hatchbacks of increasing size: a 1983 Civic 1300 (4-speed, 12-inch wheels) and ‘84 and ‘87 Accord LX’s – very purposeful cars all, and in addition the 5-speed ‘87 was really fast when required.
As for the Rambler Marlin: the 1967 Ambassador-based model (with stacked headlamps) was much more dignified and pretty than the garish 1965-66’s, but by then it was too late.
If the Crosstour had looked like everything else on the road (i.e. if Honda had taken the Hyundai/Kia/Toyota route) then people would have complained about how boring/bland the vehicle is.
Until recently, I didn’t appreciate what (I think) Honda is trying to do. Honda has taken a risk over the last several years, and decided to build vehicles that *don’t* conform to what the auto industry has decided defines “beauty” for this period in automotive design. Does it really make sense to fault them for that?
I’m not saying that we should completely reverse our stand and declare Honda the saviours of automotive design — I think many of their interiors are becoming unnecessarily cluttered and distracting, and I still think most of their recent designs (eg. Accord, Civic coupe, Element) look awkward — but that maybe we should remind ourselves that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side.
I don’t like the styling of the Crosstour, but I certainly respect Honda for building it (and the ZDX) and trying to stand out from the crowd…ok, along with the X6 and Venza, but you get the point. Honda could have gone for mass appeal and designed a Toyotahyundaikia Camrygenesisorento and had it sell very well. To be honest, though, now I’m glad that they didn’t; their investors probably don’t share that sentiment.
The worst thing that Honda could do now is bow to the collective “wisdom” of the masses.
Bullshit. Honda has already bowed to the “wisdom” of the masses.
Our research suggests that the styling does test well among people shopping for a crossover.
This is where the friggin’ car fails. Honda tried to make a crossover because “that’s what people want”. This has nothing to do with avant-garde styling and everything to do with plain ol’ corporate cynicism. The car looks ugly because it’s trying to be something it isn’t. If it were an SUV and tried to look like a station wagon we’d have an AMC Eagle and it would be just as ugly.
Americans continue to ask for a station wagon. Automakers continue to give them “crossovers” because “that’s what Americans want”.
You can try to make a cocker spaniel look like a pitbull but why on Earth would you?
Hate to say it but much has to do with the brand. If only such disgust was raised about the BMW Bangle Butt. THAT is hideous AND ruined the look of some really nice looking bimmers. And the Cadillac BLS sport wagon? It received some acclaim for its good looks (TTAC excluded). People, it looks like a Saab SportCombi which came out years ago. And the SportCombi was pretty much ignored.
That said, this thing is ugly. But the people in the market for it are the same people who bought the Aztek. They are not enthusiasts, and want to look “different” while picking up the kids. In trying to stand out they will look ugly, and won’t even know it until years later when it’s widely agreed in the pages of car and driver that their car is ugly (just in time for new redesign to come out). Then they will fork out for the latest different looking car, and Honda’s sales will not be affected.
It’s not that ugly now, is it? I don’t really care much for that, but what I do care about is Honda’s attitude, which is …. wrong… I guess that Honda is on the downward spiral now… They used to make decent vehicles…
So Honda bombed with the POS Insight and now this? Wow, really swingin and whiffin.
Not what you’d expect from Honda. A mistake every now and then, well, maybe ok. But two in a row? 3 if you count the ZDX?
This is not the Honda from the 90s that I loved. Its a damn shame.
“holydonut :
Does anyone remember all of the horrible “the sky is falling on my Subaru” rantings when the latest Impreza sedan and hatch launched? I believe the term suppository was used quite often to describe the car, and many die-hard customers asserted they would never consider the car because it was too ugly.
But guess what – most of that fervor has died down. Heck, read those magazines (oh wait, you guys hate print magazines and think they’re poo… nevermind). Most long term testers of the car reiterate the notion that they think the car’s styling isn’t as bad now versus when they acquired the vehicle to their test fleet. And most consumers/owners I know recognize it’s not as ugly now as they first feared.”
All that proves is that long term exposure to a strong stimulus desensitizes one to its effects.
Besides, how many owners are going to say to their neighbour: “Yeah, the car I paid $20 grand+ for is butt ugly (and gets lousy gas mileage.) I have absolutely no aesthetic taste or common sense.”
As for the magazine testers they’re professional turd polishers.
The Impreza is still as ugly as ever.
That rear reminds me of the Hyundai Elantra.
Seems to me there are 3 issues here.
Is it ugly? I find it moderately unattractive. I still say it looks like a guppy with an eating disorder, or like an X6 shoved into a pencil sharpener. But styling is subjective, so all this discussion is very entertaining but of course ultimately unanswerable.
Is it bad design? Here I think it’s safe to say a clear-cut yes (echoing jimble). Honda made its reputation on clever engineering and thoughtful design. The bloated fastback look here means significantly compromised visibility and cargo space, and so far the company has mentioned nary an interesting engineering detail. This from the company that brought us the Civic CVCC (right up to the cleverly packaged Fit). Honda’s idea of Americanized design seems to be elevating styling above function, which would be misguided even if the styling were top-notch.
Is the opinion of the Facebook masses important? Well heck yeah, since the early buzz has a huge impact on whether or not people think they are buying a cool car. Honda utterly messed up in this regard, failing to understand that naysayers are more vocal than fans, that any polarizing design is going to bring on the hate, and that the resulting publicity is just going to look terrible.
In the company’s defense, we all know that posters love to get hot under the collar, and then the emotions just feed on each other. It’s not just about cars–almost any political blog ends up with commentators calling each other Hitler. If 99 percent of the public hates the Crosstour and 1 percent loves it enough to buy it, that would make the car a solid hit.
The problem for Honda is that this logic might have worked in the old, one-way media world–but now that 1 percent (or whatever) knows that the other 99 percent thinks this CUVish thing is hideous. That’s a tough stigma to overcome.
I strongly sympathize with the people here writing in defense of polarizing design. Honda’s mistake, though, was not being too adventurous. It was trying to have things both ways–to follow the masses with a CUV while making halfhearted attempts at differentiation, to submit the car to the very harsh consumer clinic that is Facebook while making halfhearted defenses of artistic purity.
Honda have spent the last 15 years trying to be BMW, but with FWD.
Now this abomination proves they weren’t watching for their own breaking point and followed the leader into a sand-trap.
Remember the movie Snakes on a Plane? While the Crosstour looks pretty damn ugly to me, too, one thing should be remembered about Internet buzz – it’s been wrong before.
Honda seems to be doing about as well as can be expected on dealing with and confronting the Facebook assault on what is admittedly a ‘polarizing’ design. I mean, what are they supposed to do? Say, “Yeah, you guys are all correct, the car looks like hell, don’t buy it”?
@ rudiger
I mean, what are they supposed to do? Say, “Yeah, you guys are all correct, the car looks like hell, don’t buy it”?
Maybe. Are Honda committed to it? Is it all tooled up and ready for production? If not, then they ought to take another look at their market research.
Toyota’s “bland” designs work because they do not offend the eyes. They’re right down the middle, very deliberately. You read stories about this car, the hideous X6, the “smiley faced” Mazdas, the guppy mouthed Audi’s etc, because they tend to polarise. The worst people say about Toyota is “bland” – that’s an achievement.
Excellent editorial. I bet Honda’s wishing Facebook had a “comments disabled” option like Youtube. I’ve been checking back every time I get on Facebook and the hits just keep rolling in. Who would have thought there were so many creative ways to say a car is ugly?
Very well reasoned editorial. I believe it is spot on.
I remember that the first truly ugly car produced was the 1982 or so Chevy Monte Carlo, which even C/D saw as a blight on the landscape.
Despite Horbury’s enforced return to Sweden to style Volvos, his observations on styling are to the point. No more nightmares for him, attempting to conceive such zombie-walking whale toothed front grille absurdities as the Lincoln whatever its name is version of the Flex.
The Japanese just don’t get it when it comes to styling. I’ve read that all the whiz-bang curlicues on Japanese cars are for drivers stuck in endless Tokyo traffic jams. Yes, they get to appreciate little styling flourishes on various vehicles, because the place is so crowded, they never get to see the car as a whole. Is that why the Venza has a ridiculous winglet just below the rear wagon window?
Meanwhile, this new Honda’s front looks like the rictus-like grin of a walking skeleton in a sci-fi movie.
The Koreans make much better looking cars. Saw a Kia Soul and a Nissan Qube together recently. One is smart and saucy, the other is the blob from the swamp.
Meanwhile, Honda’s actions on Facebook are as I predicted. They are just going to sulk, and foist this vehicle onto the landscape. They’re going to show US who’s right if it kills them.
I’ll throw in my lot with the folks who want a real station wagon (hint, it has a near-vertical hatch). I’ve had Volvo 850s, 740s, and 240s and I agree that they define the genre.
But what I’m really pining for is some good ol’ function over form (practicality) along with some understated elegance. And, yes, this is a lofty and difficult design goal.
One of the print mags used to do a “biggest box” test in which they assembled “boxes” out of PVC pipe and joints. They duly reported the biggest box that they could get in the car and close all the openings. It’s an excellent test; please bring it back.
I think the Ford Flex is a good honest effort in this genre. I’d seriously consider one if it were 10% smaller and had no third row.
When did Chris Bangle start working for Honda???
“# Robert Farago :
September 6th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Jeff in NH:
The worst thing that Honda could do now is bow to the collective “wisdom” of the masses.
You mean give the people what they want?”
Hi Bob, thanks and congrats for your excellent site and for allowing us to comment (Unlike our buddy Autoextremist..LOL)
Cars designed by committee suck. If the committee has 310 million members instead of one, will they suck any less?
A great car designer should be able to give the people not what they want NOW, but what they will want 4 years from now anyway, since it takes about that long to go from concept to production, and then remember it has to be produced basically uncnahged for 4-6 years to make a dime.
The key question that will need to be watched is: will consensous on the ‘net translate to the real world. As the influences have grown it’s become a valid question whether mass opinion reflects reality.
Honda has become more American focussed as it has aged, I think to its detriment. Wrong models, larger sizes and styling that is meant to appeal to the US market will only work so long.
It’s not the European wagon: We’ve seen a lot of comments about the desire for a wagon, but this is neither a wagon nor designed for wagon buyers.
Sounds like “Yes we know you want the European wagon, but nothing you say or do will make us sell them here. This is not designed for wagon buyers. In fact, nothing we sell in this country is designed for wagon buyers. Get over it.”
And that’s supposed to be good communication in the Web 2.0 age?
Contrary to most I don’t think it’s such an ugly car. Much better looking than the X6. If Honda can sell the Element they can certainly sell this. Even though it’s not the class of vehicle I would buy I think it’s a distinctive entry. Honda IMO proved a long time ago it wasn’t the styling that sold their vehicles.
@mtymsi :
Honda IMO proved a long time ago it wasn’t the styling that sold their vehicles.
Counterpoint: Civic hatchback. Looks much less bland than the last generation and sells much better.
Do I jump on the bandwagon or not? All I have to say is Honda basically releases nothing but ugly cars with a pretty one here and there probably by accident. I think the truth is that crossovers are never pretty, ever, but this one will likely make up for it in usefulness and years of reliability, as most Hondas do.
Mugen Type R Crosstour FTW!