By on December 16, 2009


There are guys at my gym that work out hard, three times a day, chiseling their chests and abs to perfection, compensating for the fact that God didn’t give them High School Musical faces. They are masterpieces of strength, structure – everything other than looks. From now on, I will secretly call them Crosstours.

crosstour2Honda’s newest addition to their Accord line is not ugly. Don’t let the pile-on from a Facebook crowd that was never in the market for this type of vehicle in the first place confuse you. In person, especially in white or silver, it’s not a half-bad car. Actually, it’s only about 23% bad car. From the grill to start of the rear glass, I like the sheet metal quite a bit. Most of this car is an aggressive take on the Accord. The designers gave up when they got to the rump. Still, at eye-level the car is fine. No lust, no revulsion.

There is a good deal of silliness, though. What I really dislike about the butt of this beast is the compromised utility. To what end the sloping rear end? I don’t get it. The Crosstour is akin to a decent – if unattainable in the US – Accord wagon with a space handicap. If there’s always going to be some of your spouse’s stuff in the back, why not just give us a proper station wagon? The people who want this car want storage room and can obviously deprecate the importance of style. This design provides 25.7 cu-ft. (seats up) and 51.3 cu-ft (seats down.) A more wagonesque design could give you numbers closer to the Toyota Venza (34.4 / 70.1) and, arguably, betters lines.

All of which is doubly disappointing because this is best Accord you can buy – you know, aside from the tragic ending. Crosstours come with Honda’s 271 hp 3.5-liter V6, putting out 254 lb-ft of torque. The engine itself is lovable. The consistent, energetic response is ready throughout the power band. This is, however, a 4,000 lb automobile. You can’t spend time in this car, with this engine, and not wish it would hit the gym. crosstour1

This six has cylinder-deactivation to bring the gas mileage up to 18/27 mpg city/highway (FWD) and 17/25 mpg (AWD). Which also partially explains the lack of engine choices. In the Accord sedans, the four-cylinder only bests the six by two miles per gallon, so I’ll assume similar results for this configuration. Yes, that means occasionally you’re driving two tons with a three-banger. To Honda’s credit, it’s pretty though to tell.

The Crosstour’s transmission du jour is a five-speed automatic with rev-matching downshifts. On its way up the cogs, the tranny stays well behaved. It tried not to leap up to the next gear before I was ready. On the way down, the rev-matching was quick . . . but almost too quick. Kind of jarring. Like you’re teaching someone else to drive a manual. Of course, by this point I was getting on the thing. Day to day, most Honda owners will be quite content.

The overall feel of the car – in all-wheel drive form – is more comfortable than its sedan siblings. I can’t decide if the added bulk counters the little bumps and holes of the road or Honda actually tuned this more for touring than carving. Probably a little of both. The car’s body roll is present, but way less than you’d expect. The vehicle dynamics are an improvement for the platform. The AWD gives you a slightly better weight distribution and, under load, it evens out the front-wheel drive tug. This is the most fun you can have in an Accord.

crosstour4Not that any of them were built for fun, per se. The four-wheel-disc antilock brakes are up to the challenge. Firm and predictable. The steering floats a little too much for my taste. The breeziness has a point, though, as the turning circle is just over 40 feet. Above illegal speeds you want a heavier feel. When parallel parking, you want all the help you can get.

Our test car stickered at $37,035. That gives you all the gizmos Honda has to offer, including a navigation system I didn’t bother with. It does not give you Honda’s top shelf, super-all-wheel-drive (SH-AWD). All Crosstours get a simple set up that sends power backwards when it feels like, rather than a four-way distribution system. I got to test the car in the wet and the traction is certainly better the FWD variants. There is no suction cup effect, a la Acura.

You do get an Acura interior. The basic Accord moldings dress up nicely. The extra pieces of leather and wood make the space more inviting. The brushed metal looks better than it feels. Living in a cold climate, I continue to appreciate Honda’s over-sized buttons. Gloves-on ergonomics are more than sufficient. crosstour3

The trunk area is smart. The side wells intrude some, but the bin in the floor is brilliant. It has handles. You can take the whole thing out and cart stuff around and wash it when you’re done. The lid flips, if you want to keep at least that part of the carpet clean.

The dealer that loaned me a Crosstour had already delivered its first four. Honda devotees bought them sight unseen, without a single turn of the wheel. That probably says more than I did in the previous 11 paragraphs. There is a car-buying public that can get past looks and handicaps to simply accept a car for what it really is . . . Whatever that is. I’m not sold on this whole fat five-door sub genre. Just because BMW does it doesn’t make it right. The Crosstour is good enough to make me wish for a pretty Accord wagon. Yes, I am that shallow.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

90 Comments on “Review: 2010 Honda Crosstour...”

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    You went to high school with a girl. She was terrific, athletic,  smart, and beautiful. You go to the 20th reunion. She has put on a lot of weight and let herself go.

    • 0 avatar

      But you accept you’re no young buck either and have become desperately sad and lonely with the lack of other suitable brides. And every day onward from the wedding you remind yourself about her terrific personality.

    • 0 avatar

      Being that you’re no young buck at this reunion you hit the bar hard and find she’s looking better and better, why she hasn’t aged at all! and as you pound another you find your “Keg o Abs” turning into the sixpack you always thought you had! Beautiful!

    • 0 avatar

      But we wear our age better. ‘nutcase

    • 0 avatar

      Our 4 year lease just ran out on Accord LX. We are now leasing a Crosstour because it accomodates a 135 lb great dane and passenger in the back which the Accord doesn’t. It doesn’t keep up with my Porsche but has plenty more balls than the Accord,corners well and, when you get used to it, parralel parking isn’t much different than any car (Assuming you can parallel park!). Aztec? get real this thing is a Honda! not a Pontiac! Talk to a former Aztek owner.  I work with one and that is why I don’t understand the comparison.

  • avatar

    Back to the future: a practical Japanese four door hatchback.  More storage than the trunk of a sedan without the bulk of a wagon.  There is probably a big market for this (again), particularly with practical and smart Honda buyers.  This car will make a lot of sense for a lot of people, just like the Accord hatchback did in the 1980″s.

  • avatar

    It sounds pretty useful, but being a butt man, I’d have to pass on it.

  • avatar

    And how much did Honda pay you to say it’s only 23% bad?  I guess not enough !  It’s the Honda Astek !

  • avatar

    “In person, especially in white or silver, it’s not a half-bad car.”
    I saw one the other day wandering around downtown.   I had heard of the massive Facebook beatdown hate fest the Crosstour obtained.  Really, somehow in person it is ok.  It is very chiseled.  Might sell very well.  My roommate thinks the same thing – somehow when you see it in person it is ok.

  • avatar

    I am wondering, since they didn’t take the wagon approach, why not just make a lift back/5 door configuration that is found on some cars, Opel Insignia and the old Mazda 6.  My wife loves the 5 door on the Mazda 6 that we own.  I would think it would have been a better choice.
    Was this a loaded model?  37k seems kind of pricey for a taller Accord with a little more cargo room.

    • 0 avatar
      Richard Chen

      The high hip point is what distinguishes this from the other hatchbacks you mention, and a big selling point in the States.  The Mazda6 5 door and wagon got canned due to lack of sales, whereas the Mazda CX-7 is still around despite its lack of practicality.

    • 0 avatar

      Richard Chen:

      The last gen Mazda 6 hatch / wagon didn’t just get canned for the hell of it. It was in DIRECT competition against the Escape for Mazda (Tribute) as well as the CX-7 / CX-9. Which also shows, if you check out the current gen Mazda 6 for Europe, they have the wagon there. But refuse to bring it to the U.S, BECAUSE of said competition.

      Put 1 wagon of 1 size against 3 different SUVs / CUVs and the loser is quickly apparent.

  • avatar

    Oh good- I thought I was the only one who didn’t mind the look.
    The problem is they’re calling this thing a “crosstour”, whatever that is.  What we really have here is the Accord hatchback, and for what it is, it’s great.  I’d much rather have this than the sedan (of course, a wagon would be better still).  If I were buying an Accord right now, this is the one I’d get.  Cargo volumes with seats up and down closely match the A4 wagon.  Unfortunately, price is probably knocking on the door of A4 territory, too.
    So, how expensive is it?  Is reward visibility as bad as it looks?

  • avatar

    Having had the chance to check out Crosstour (and ZDX) at the LA Auto Show I’d have to agree that these aren’t that bad looking in person. Having said that I still don’t find much redeeming here.
    Cargo space is too compromised for the sake of “design”, and the fact that you have to literally curl up into a ball to gain access to the rear seat where you cannot sit upright is inexcusable. The rear seat headroom is about on par with that of our long departed RX-8. The ZDX is worse and the Insight is god awful.
    At least with most crossovers (or whatever you’d like to call them) you have the cargo area to place taller/bulkier items, which in a way made up for the compromise in fuel economy and sloppier driving dynamics. The Crosstour…..

  • avatar

    The Crosstour is pricier than the regular Accord, especially with AWD. Even in FWD form and adjusted for $1,200 in additional features, it’s about $2,500 more:

    On fun-to-drive, wouldn’t a V6 MTX Accord coupe have this beat?

    The Crosstour eliminates a common problem with the Accord sedan–broken welds in the package shelf that cause rattles. So I’d expect reliability to be very good, based on results for the Accord in TrueDelta’s Car Reliability Survey.

    The 56,000 car was enrolled yesterday. The more people participate in the survey, the better then information we can provide.

  • avatar

    I’m waiting for people to complain how this is so much bigger than the Accord of the 1990s, while ignoring how the current Fit has as much useful space as the Accord of the 1990s and costs about as much as the Accord of the 1990s, and how the Accord isn’t competing in the same market as it used to anyways, so it’s a moot point.
    The Accord is actually pretty svelte for a fullsize car, and Honda still makes the Fit and Civic.  You can get an “Accord” badge and stick it on a Civic or Fit if this whole concept bugs you.

    • 0 avatar

      @psarhjiian.. I’ll bite.
      FOUR THOUSAND FRICKING POUNDS!!  It weigh ~500 lbs. more than a 5 Series wagon. And (according to the review) it doesn’t even have a lot of cargo space.
      OK, I’m done, and I agree with your basic premise :). But still.. 2 tons for a Honda?  I suppose it’s lighter than say a BMW whatevertheycallit SAV.
      Unrelated note: how long is Honda gonna stick w/ this 5 speed auto?

  • avatar

    What I really dislike about the butt of this beast is the compromised utility. To what end the sloping rear end? I don’t get it.

    The same reason the Saab 900 and Prius look like this: aerodynamics.  That you get a huge cargo opening and very easy loading is a nice bonus.  The cubic foot difference doesn’t really come into play until you’ve piled stuff so high that you’ve obscured your view of the road behind; if you do this regularly, you’d be better off with the Oddy or Ridgeline.

  • avatar

    Hit every branch on the ugly tree and still can’t compete for driving enjoyment with a 18k (that’s 20k less) new Accord 4 banger MT.

  • avatar

    I saw the first one out on the road last Sunday, in the color as pictured above.  I had to double-take to be sure it was what I was seeing.  It didn’t stick out nearly as horribly as it’s press photos would make it seem, and was rather inoffensive.  That would indicate to me that it will be a sales success if only beyond the relative failure predicted by armchair CEOs on the ‘net.

  • avatar

    This was the car I was really looking for, but I *knew* Honda’s waving bye-bye to the manual trannies.  Pretty lame.
    Sticker price is also a bit ugly . . . at that cost you can have something nicer, albeit with a beak.
    There are SEVERAL cars that are taking a visual commentary beating (even here, ahem) that shouldn’t.
    Thanks Michael.

  • avatar

    There is so much about this car.. that totally irks me.

    Ive owned the 4th gen.
    Ive driven the 5th gen.
    I own the 6th gen.
    Ive driven the 7th gen..

    I wont even touch the 8th gen. My mind cant possibly comprehend how much weight has to be lugged around on a 6cycl.

    Im so positively against the current Accord.. mainly because it is THAT much bigger against 7th gen.. forget about drawfing the 6th gen.

    Worst part..
    Honda is bringing the Accord from Japan / EU to the U.S as the TSX wagon.

    Even worst..
    I know it wont last long and or gain much in sales.. simply because its competing against ITS other CUVS. I know the tooling will probably be paid for. Its a solid vehicle.. made by Honda, but at this point.. jesus.. its a big ass damn vehicle, trying to be (what) that the others aren’t?

    I dont get the point of how it fits.. anywhere?!

    As far as even the Venza goes..
    Ya still have better looking vehicles made on its same frame.
    What is wrong with the Highlander and or RX? What is wrong with the Rav4.. that this has to be built and sold??

    Why cant we just have the Avensis wagon.. and be done with it?!

  • avatar

    Like usual I disagree with most on the styling.  I like the rear (like said above I consider this a throwback to the old Accord hatchbacks), but to me the oversized grill is hideous.  Too pricey and no M/T is the deal killer for me. 

  • avatar

    $37k for this pig, huh?   So you don’t get great fuel economy, or a fancy badge, or utility, for your $37k.  You don’t even get a nice looking vehicle.

    The only potential buyer for an uglified $37k Accord would have to be someone that doesn’t want to flaunt their wealth in an Acura or Lexus.  Well guess what, the Toyota Venza is much nicer.

    • 0 avatar

      Remember, that’s the Canadian price. $37k can barely buy you a TSX. Or a Lexus IS250 with no leather seats.
      FWD I4 Venza starts at $28k. But if you get AWD and V6 and equip it to similar levels, it’s not far off $37k.

  • avatar

    Yeah, they’re doing it again.  Pricing the crap out of a car in this segment, just like the Toyota offering.
    And after people balk at the price and so the model moulders on dealer lots, the press will say, see, Americans just don’t want wagons.

  • avatar

    but to me the oversized grill is hideous
    Everyone is doing this.  Mercedes started it with the six-inch-in-diameter three-pointed star, but it’s an epidemic in marketing circles characterized by four simple words: “Make the logo bigger”.
    Everyone wants their brand to have instant recognition (translation: everyone, at least in Marketing, wants to be Apple or Nike).  So you make the logo bigger, even on your product.  For a car, there’s a limit to how much you can do this before you have to do something obnoxious to the grille to accomodate it.**
    The end result that brand managers are looking for is a “You are about to be Run Over By a HONDA!!” effect.  Your product must lead with it’s logo.  Don’t be surprised to see the logo get bigger, become backlit or illuminated (and not in a subtle, Prius 3 way)
    By comparison, there’s the Hyundai Genesis.  Which, truthfully, I’m liking more and more every day because of how No-Logo it is.
    ** Have you seen what Ford’s done to the Fusion or F-Series?  At least they’ll know what car hit you because the badge will leave a solid imprint in your flesh.

  • avatar
    Mark MacInnis

    Another former Accord EX Wagon owner.  Not buying this.

    Liptick and earrings on a pig, etc., and so forth….

  • avatar

    Looks like somebody went after the clay model of a Porsche with a chisel.  This thing makes me want to go out and buy a used Dodge Magnum, at least I’ll have lots of money left over if the kevetching about Chrysler build quality on this site is true. 

    • 0 avatar

      I own a 2007 Magnum SXT (3.5L V6).  I’ve put on almost 40K on it in the last 12-14 months.  Except for oil changes and a electrical issue (DUE TO AN IMPROPER TRAILER HITCH INSTALLATION by an aftermarket business, not Chrysler), she’s been just about bulletproof.  Gets me about 26 MPG highway @ 65-68mph and about 18-20 MPG mixed driving.

      All cars have problems, I’ve owned about 7 or 8 Chrysler products since the 70’s (along with several Ford, GM, Toyota, etc). I put on about 40K to 60K a year on them, running them to 150K to 250K before replacing.

      Each car has it’s issues and problems. You just purchase it knowing that they will probably occur (Chrysler = A/C, GM = Electrical, Ford = rattles and electrical, Toyota = Rattles and high repair bills) These issues are from my experience of driving them.

    • 0 avatar

      Glad to hear your happy with it.  I only put that disclaimer in there so the Honda/Import fanboys wouldn’t attack me to baddly.  I love the Magnum’s style, just wish it came with third row seats in the old rear facing style even if the roofline is so low they would only be seats for little kids.  I really want one with either a Hemi or the 3.5V6 (I’m ebarrassed for Chrysler that they even put that 2.odd liter monstrosity in the LX platform).  How awesome would the Magnum be if it had survived long enough to recieve one of the Phoenix V6s?  (As long as they live up to their hype.)  BTW I’ve only owned GM and Ford vehicles, other than a 1982 Celebrity, I never found them to be that awful. 

  • avatar

    My god, this thing is hideous.
    And I LOVE the way X6 looks…

  • avatar

    I figured they botched the back-end to make it look more SUV and less wagon.

  • avatar

    I’ve seen it in person (driving and at the Phoenix auto show) and it is more than a little awkward; and if not explicitly ugly, it is definitly not a good-looking car.  I don’t like the front end.  But I don’t like the looks of the Accord, either, so that’s never been the problem for me.  

    My problem is I don’t see the point of this over a simpler wagon setup.  A jacked-up Accord hatch that starts at $30k?  No thanks.  Considering some of the non-US Honda options (JDM Odyssey, Stream, etc…) and the fact that they used to make an Accord wagon, it just makes it all the more disappointing.

  • avatar

    I looked in one at the dealer a few days ago.  This car is HUGE !  I suddenly felt like I was 5 years old standing next to my Dad’s massive 56 Oldsmobile.  

    I’ve been a very big fan of Honda for many years, but they currently have nothing in the line-up that meets my needs (unfortunatly nobody else does either).  Unless they can come out with a light weight, compact to mid-size, practicle, fuel efficient, manual tranny wagon,  for under $20K,  I’m going to have to look elsewhere for my next ride.

    Anyone know a car restoration place that specializes in early 90’s Accord wagons?  I’d rather pay $37 grand to have one restored to showroom condition and drive that.

  • avatar

    There’s a little ditty that comes to my mind when looking at this car:
    U-G-L-Y you aint got no alibi! You ugly!

  • avatar

    Maybe it’s me but doesn’t this “Crosstour” have a G.M. Cadillac/Volt front end look?  Not unlike Honda’s “Ridgeline” that looks to be a  copy of G.M’s  “Avalanche”. Maybe Our domestic auto companies(what’s left of them) could do some copying of their own and take a very close look at Toyota’s and Honda’s  four cylinder engines and hybrid motor/engine/transmission line up.

  • avatar

    I can’t even bring myself to read the review. This is just horrid. Worse than the spy shots led me to believe.
    Kill it with fire.

  • avatar

    I visited this car at the LA show as well.
    In earlier remarks I tried to explain the horror of its rear view…not mentioned in this review.
    Not mentioned?
    Look, it’s that bad.
    The look in the rear view mirror is like looking through an eye piece from the wrong end!
    I wished for the Space Hubble to give me a look at what seemed the far end of the universe narrowly expanding behind me!
    This car should come with a spotter.
    I will say it’s not a bad looking car, but surely they could have gotten the fastback design without the dumb dumb dumb small rear glass with its THICK  view consuming cross bar!

  • avatar

    “Honda’s newest addition to their Accord line is not ugly.”
    It is. Very Ugly. An American fat ass, British aristocracy sized teeth/front grill and the rest of the body as bland as the cheapest cheese in Walmart. It’s proportions are all wrong. I don’t care how it looks on the inside or how it handles. If you buy one you may as well wear a slogan T-shirt stating “I HAVE NO TASTE”, and as for the fools who bought one without looking at it – are they NUTS? Do you spend nearly $40k without actually looking at what you’re paying for?

    There’s my slice of vitriol for the day.

  • avatar

    <blockquote><i>25.7 cu-ft. (seats up) and 51.3 cu-ft (seats down.)</i></blockquote>
    Does this thing get the cherished “light truck” status from the EPA?  That would work wonders for the upcoming changes in fuel economy mandates.

  • avatar

    Meh, it doesn’t look so bad to me. If it came with a manual transmission I would take a look. No manual? No look.

  • avatar

    Unless they can come out with a light weight, compact to mid-size, practicle, fuel efficient, manual tranny wagon,  for under $20K…

    Would you like a diesel engine and RWD/AWD with that?
    Everyone with a keyboard, an internet connection and an account here or on Autoblog seems to want this.  On the other hand, Honda has hundreds of thousands of Civic and Accord owners who don’t really seem to care about manual-stick-wagons and, before the recession, was selling more and more cars to more and more very happy buyers the further they went from the manual-stick-wagon days.  You’d think they’re on to something with that?
    If you want a light, spacious, manual-transmission equipped Honda that handles well and has nearly the space of the Accord wagon or hatch of the 90s, you can buy a Honda Fit today.  Go ahead, it’s right there.
    I should note that whenever I mention that, people tend to say that they want something nicer, more refined, more powerful, not bottom-of-the-lineup as the Fit, even though it hits all of the points and combines the weight and useful interior space of a late-80s/early-90s wagon with a modern crash structure and chassis.
    Enthusiasts are hypocrites.  We all want stick-shift BMW 335d wagons (or pine for some eighties shitbox like the Metro, and oh why can’t they build cars like that today….) for under 20K and whine when we don’t get it.    Yet even enthusiasts aren’t buying those cars when they are made.  Sales of the Mazda6, Passat or Legacy wagons?  Miserable.  Sales of the Accord or Camry?  Several times those numbers.
    Can you really blame Honda, or Toyota, or whomever?

    • 0 avatar

      LOL great post, yes we are hypocrites and I resemble that remark.  However having owned a Legacy Wagon first, a Passat Wagon second and now a Mazda6 Wagon third – what the hell am I supposed to buy when the Mazda wears out?

    • 0 avatar

                  I cannot see a 4cyl Accord wagon, if optioned OK, not selling, but I may be off. Wagon people are a practical lot keeping their cars longer. Reliability and post warranty repair costs are big with them. Hence, VWs, Audis, Bimmers, Benzes and Chinese Volvos are a bit risky. And the “sport wagons”, sold more to Euro pretenders than practical people, are anyway too small. A US sized Accord with a squared off rear a-la V70, could have 75-80 cubic feet behind the front seats without destroying gas mileage (30+ with a smooth Honda 4) compared to the sedan. Only issue I can see with an Accord wagon would be road noise. Even the sedan is a bit noisy, and road noise and drone are harder to suppress in a wagon.

    • 0 avatar


      I do like diesels, but I’m not sure they make sense economically anymore. I’m open to that though.

      AWD, while nice (I did have that on my last car, a 96 Legacy Outback), is really unecessary. This coming from a life long snow belt resident. AWD is to calm the fears of frightened and inept drivers. So I would and did pass on that.

      I looked at the Fit.  I really wanted to like it.  I thought the 1.5 Vtec was even overpowered for the car, but I did like the engine.  However, It’s NOT a wagon!  Too small in the cargo area. 

      The Toyota Matrix is a little closer in terms of cargo space, but still too small in the rear end. I currently own an 06, 5-spd. It was the closest I could find to what I was looking for. Although every time we toss something in the back, that hatch will not close by about 6 inches! If only the car was 10-12 inches longer …

      I did own a 96 Legacy Wagon (2.2 with 5-spd).  Great car.  Too bad the Outback just went massive SUV, and the Legacy wagon is no more.

      Your right though.  I seem to be a very small minority.  So I’m stuck for what my next car will be. 

    • 0 avatar

      When the Mazda wears out, you could buy a Jetta wagon (they’re bigger now). Or an Elantra Touring. Or maybe a lowered Outback?

    • 0 avatar

      I recently bought a Fit and can attest to the cargo handling capability.  My wife took it to pick up a 42″ TV and a stand to place it on.  The kid at Best Buy convinced her she should run home and grab our CX-7.  There wasn’t anyway the TV would fit in the Fit.  When she got home and told me this, I laughed.  I told her I’d eat my hat if the stuff wouldn’t fit.  Off we went to Best Buy.

      Seats down, TV in, shut hatch.  Done.  Then we threw in the TV stand for good measure.  Then some groceries.  Still had plenty of room for more.

      The longer we own this car, the more I love it, and the more I wonder why I need 5 cars.  The Fit does it all…

      Well, our Miata has its niche…but the rest can hit the road, so to speak.

  • avatar

    Ok, so the review and some of the comments say this, this ‘thing’ looks better in person.  After just walking back from our Honda showroom and checking one out in a pretty awesome silver, I’ll have to admit the Crosstour is even worse in person.

    You can already tell from pictures that its mash-up of seperate styling cues and marketing elements have come together to make something blandly awful.    But what pictures dont convey is how huge this contrived flopizoid actually is.  The Crosstour is longer than a Pilot, has less rear headroom than a Fit and weighs more than a CR-V.  I never thought something would make the Porsche Panamera look good by comparison.  I cant believe the same company makes the Fit and S2000.

    The word ‘Crosstour’ should be Webster’s 2010 entry as an antonym of ‘synergy’.

    • 0 avatar

      Do they still make the S2000?

      On the Panamera front, every single one built so far (11,000) has been accounted for.

      I think it’s ugly (everyone does just about), but when the first taurus came out everyone said the same thing and no car, in the last 25 years, has had more influence on design, you never know.

    • 0 avatar

      I think the original Taurus was pretty ugly.  It was influential not by how it looked but by how well it sold.  Regardless, due to Fords model evolution plus other manufacturers copying and altering the design, the Taurus’ basic shape improved over years and looked good eventually.  I can’t see these huge, squashed front-drive SUVs ever evolving into something attractive.  If the Crosstour / Venza / next-monstrosity start selling well and people end up liking the styling, then they are indiscriminate and pliable consumers who deserve to drive something like this.
      Regarding the Crosstours already accounted for sight unseen, its interesting when brand loyalty supersedes or can influence personal style and taste.  BMW, Ferrari, and now Honda churn out ugly vehicles that customers somehow convince themselves look good.

  • avatar

    I’ve not yet seen one in person –and I hope I never do– but in the photos this thing is horrific. It looks like an old Chevy Citation on steroids, or an Official Rawlings NFL football… after being spiked. It has no good angle, the grille looks like it belongs on a whale.
    4000 pounds? I think Soichiro is rolling in his grave.

  • avatar

    The oldsters who love Accords are going to love this thing. The big question for them will be, “can my wheelchair find room in that bustle?”, and “is there enough space for my oxygen tank by the driver’s door?”

    Oh and finally, “this reminds me of my father’s old 1952 Nash!”

  • avatar

    Does this thing get the cherished “light truck” status from the EPA?
    So long as you can have a flat load floor, just about anything can get “light truck” status.  This is why you see the load floor of crossovers and some hatchbacks raised to meet the edge of the rear seats where they fold.  Even though this steals cargo room.

  • avatar

    I’d still rather have a Passat 4Motion or even a Jetta Sportwagen, despite what you say, this car IS hideous.  The overly-common Honda 5 speed automatic is never in the right gear though, it stays in gear going up hills rather than downshift when floored.  FWD is only good with 200BHP maximum, after that its just bonkers.  Even Honda’s AWD system should be rear wheel biased instead of front wheel biased, why would they purposely plague all their cars with FWD? Its so utterly awful.  I like Hondas, they’re good cars, but having FWD in all of them makes it a deal breaker for me.

  • avatar

    I personally would not drop this much cash on something that made me deal with a Honda dealership (even though I love my Si sedan, it was also $17K cheaper).
    Although I can see how this would sell really well in limited numbers to a risk-averse Honda fan.  Kind of like how my father, a die-hard F-150 driver for several decades, marched right out and bought a Five Hundred for his wife when they came out – he wanted a big car for her within the brand that he trusted, and little else matters.  Now people can stay in the Honda family and get a biggish family truckster hauler touring wagon thingy.  And as with many automotive purchases, shopping based strictly on practical concerns (e.g. relative cost, visibility, viable alternatives) doesn’t always rule – otherwise I’m not sure how a 2 door variant of anything would ever get sold.

  • avatar

    It’s the Honda Panamera at half price and half as fast.  But just as ridiculous.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    I would slap the backend of a Venza on this thing, throw in the 4 banger, and call it a day.

    And to me, this design is appreciably easier on the eyes than was the Z4 prior to it’s restyle.  Or even the Ridgeline.

  • avatar

    I’ll agree that this thing isn’t nearly so ugly in real life as it is in pictures.  I drove past our local dealer and stopped to look at it.  About the only real issue is that it needs to drop about and inch or more the close the wheel-well gap, and that the grille could be toned down.
    I can see what Honda is trying to do with the front-end: they thought they had a good thing with the truck-nose on the Ridgeline and they’re trying to apply it elsewhere for that “brand image” look.  It’s not working, or at least it’s not working on cars that aren’t the Ridgeline and Odyssey.  But Hondas are often weird in the details (the seventh-generation Accord and last-gen Prelude still stick in my mind) and it doesn’t seem to hurt sales much.

  • avatar

    Wait a second – the Subaru Outback 3.6R gets comparable gas mileage from a simlarly-sized (though differently configured) six which doesn’t resort to cylinder deactivation, makes similar power and is rated to tow more, weighs 350 lbs less, has a turning circle four feet smaller, has comparable interior room and much more cargo room, and stickers, similarly equipped, for $5000 less than the Honda.
    Why the hell would anyone buy a Crosstour?

    • 0 avatar

      I agree with your points in terms of value for the money, but see the Crosstour selling due to two other factors: Availability and familiarity.

      There are many more Honda dealers than Subaru dealers in the United States, particularly once you venture inland. For many, not having a dealership within 100 miles of your home is a deal-breaker.

      As for familiarity, parts for Hondas and people familiar with working on them are a dime a dozen, simply because they sell in such vast numbers. There are also some gearheads out there who are unfamiliar with opposed engines, and sadly that’s a deal-breaker for them, as well.

      Since I have a Honda and a Subaru dealer within a few miles from my home, I’d be likely to consider the Outback if I were shopping for a wagon, but not everyone is that lucky.

  • avatar

    butt ugly. literally.

  • avatar

    Chevy should be very happy about this – it will increase Equinox sales.

  • avatar

    There’s no excuse for marketing a car this unattractive.  Seriously, how hard is it to design something that isn’t offensively unattrractive?

  • avatar

    The problem with the car isn’t in concept – it’s in execution. Vehicles like this offer massive interior room and flexibility, without SUV inefficiency, so in concept they’re great. Personally, I would put my family in the Venza in a heartbeat if my wife would look at one – I think it’s a terrific design, for what it is.

    And if you don’t think this kind of car can be good looking, check this one out:

    It’s all in the execution.

    But I think this is a sales dog at $37,000.

  • avatar

    Quote:  Whatever that is. I’m not sold on this whole fat five-door sub genre. Just because BMW does it doesn’t make it right.

    Couldn’t have put it better myself. The days car manufacturers and public alike stop drooling over everything BMW and Toyota does will be a day to celebrate and bury this abortion in the junkyard where it belongs or in other words Honda pulls an Aztek out of it’s ass for 2010.

  • avatar

    Michael – Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and you’d better get down to Sterling Optical to get your peepers checked!…This puppy is ugly…The Facebook piling on was justified…That being said, I agree that why not just make a AWD Accord wagon?  The Venza – love or hate the looks – has more utility, better lines and a Lexus-like interior.  I see a lot of them on the road.  I really think Honda would have had a hit with a tall midsized wagon.  Especially with those of us that hate the current gen Pilot (went from a 2004 Pilot to a 2008 Highlander because the new Pilot was just too hideous to look at).  Honda would have fared better going the Venza direction IMO.

  • avatar

    I have a huge problem with Honda’s FWD biased all wheel drive systems and I’ve been driving one for the last 3 days in light snow. They torque steer like pigs and punt power to the rear only after a significant delay, drastically affecting weight transfer, usually mid corner. If it dosen’t do it mid-corner, that’s because it was too late to the party and you’ve already straightened out to the point where it isn’t noticable, and I’m not talking yahoo driving (strictly) here. I enjoy driving AWD cars in general, yet I find Honda’s to be significantly less predictable than even FWD with modern power outputs. In no way is their AWD worth any sort of price premium or fuel economy compromise. I think they just did the bare minimum amount of work required to put that AWD badge on the back, purely for marketing purposes.

    As to the design, I absolutely love the entire side window treatment (gasp…shiny chrome), and even well…nothing else. Other than that detail this car makes the case for late term abortion.
    Still, I could see this car being a success for Honda. Accord faithful will only see a car with more power, cargo room and traction than their trusty steeds, and the community is clearly willing to buy even based on those hideous photos. And if you never provoke a downshift on a snowy day, you might not even notice the  crap power delivery.

    • 0 avatar

      In case you didnt know..
      Honda is PREDOMINANTLY FWD. You can / SHOULD add snow tires to any drive layout for better traction.. but as for as Honda’s you JUST have to DEAL with torque steer.

      I’ve driven through deep snow in my Accords..  without ever having any preconceived notions that Hondas are AWD in any shape and or form.

      The AWD system for Honda is probably a coupling and some electronics. While I truely have nothing wrong / no problem with Honda’s engineering or Honda’s history of lightweight and drive able vehicles… I dont buy their cars for AWD prowess.

      I HATE / ABSOLUTELY DESPISE.. with the hatred of 10,000 SUNS any inclination of having / driving a AWD vehicle of any shape and or form. No matter Honda’s advertising.. they arent using a HALDEX AWD system.. like the domestics and various other companies do.

      As for as the Crosstour…
      Its blasphemous in 10 ways.

      Ive been seeing DOZENS of Honda spyshots of this vehicle.. with a MAGNUM-like hatch to it. The car looked excellent. The car was pictured lifted.. but with a sizeable hatch.

      This.. is BEASTLY!

  • avatar

    “In case you didnt know.. Honda is PREDOMINANTLY FWD. You can / SHOULD add snow tires to any drive layout for better traction.. but as for as Honda’s you JUST have to DEAL with torque steer.”

    On the other hand, this particular Honda is very much AWD, as is the Ridgline, Element, CRV and Pilot. Also, I’m already rocking metal studs, there’s not much more I can do besides chain the tires (and that is not happening).

    Plenty of other automakers don’t have this problem, Honda is simply falling behind when it comes to drivetrain technology. I’d apply that criticism to their automatic transmissions (having not driven the one tested here though) and engines as well (no turbo? no DI? I do love the Si but…).  The TL or RL SHAWD might be a counteragrument, but Honda shouldn’t get credit for a car (or technology) that they aren’t selling under the brand.

    AWD is fun when it’s consistent, but totally wasted below 250hp unless you’re on very loose road surfaces. It’s for having fun, not safety, despite the marketing pitch.

  • avatar

    There’s been no shortage of digital egg-throwing and epithet uttering when it comes to Honda’s 2010 Crosstour – this, despite the fact that essentially nobody has seen it in the meta. No point giving any critique except to be consequent in the planning/design stage and start over.  The late model TL, TSX, and MDX were excellent examples of design balance and proportion.

  • avatar

    Absolutely, totally fugly. No thanks. I’ll take a Ford Edge over this abomination, any day.

  • avatar

    I just thank God everyday I never have to make the choice to actually buy a car like this!

  • avatar

    I don’t understand the direction Honda and Toyota (and BMW) are taking with these cars.  But then again, they’ll probably sell.  What’s that old saying?  “No one ever went broke underestimating the bad taste of the American public?”

  • avatar

    Not a bad looking car.
    Seems to be very practical.  Unfortunately Honda has totally missed the mark on price.
    As a $20K practical economobile  it could become a hit.
    But with the price as it is it won’t find many buyers.

    • 0 avatar

      It’s about as ugly as you can imagine! How many other manufacturers give you a 271 hp V6, the flash interior and over 4000 pounds of road-hugging weight for 20K?


      Why would you think Honda could do so? Looks aside, there’s no way this much content can be had for $20K or even close.

      This porker will live and die by its looks. My guess is die.

    • 0 avatar

      Im sorry..
      This is against everything Honda Motor Company was started upon.
      It isnt simple and its not efficient, for once.. A car Honda makes cant use a 4cycl.

      This Crosstour wasnt designed to be marketed as a 20g “practical economobile.” Just like their other attempt to make an Accord sell for 30… their hybrid.

      It wasnt designed to be a “hit”. It was designed to go after the “also-ran, aka Venza platform mate of the Highlander, Sienna, RX.

      As for as finding buyers…
      Every vehicle finda buyers.. its just how many. 

  • avatar

    I was in a Honda dealership yesterday and watched someone complete a sale on one of these right as I got there. I congratulated the salesman but I’m pretty sure he thought that was annoying.

    On a side note, the civic Si 4-door we test drove was stellar, if fantastically tacky.

  • avatar

    The Croostour is extremely hideous. Sales will be at the bottom of the segment. another Ridgeline. Only worse.

  • avatar

    One ugly mutha for sure

  • avatar

    Did Honda actually base the Crosstour on Accord customer feedback, or just decided an Accord Hatchback was a good idea?
    The ’82 Accord Hatchback I owned was a practical, nicely finished vehicle with a 3-barrel carb that boiled over at the drop of a hat – Honda told me that was perfectly normal and did nothing to help.
    Meanwhile, I learned that when driving in snow, full time AWD combined with winter rated tires (some All seasons are winter rated)  gets up the hill while others spin in place.

  • avatar

    I really have nothing new to add to this discussion, aside from the following:

    I really need a new car. I want AWD and decent fuel economy, and enough space to haul myself, my wife, 2 kids and some stuff around without purchasing an SUV, or that bloated carcass of the 2010 Outback. I should be the dead-on demographic for the Crosstour.

    I went to drive it today, and it was really nice. Drove kinda fun, even. Nice buttons and stuff. Salesman was nice, kind of “Honda-cool”. But GAWD, I can’t get over the rear on this thing! I can still taste the sour in my mouth… Many are saying it’s not that bad in person; I thought it was WORSE in person. And I saw it in white, supposedly it’s “best” color.

    I’m growing up, and my opinion of cars is evolving. They are tools, not toys anymore. But frick, this Crosstour is one ugly tool.

    Shame, too; if I could get past the aesthetics, it could be for me…

  • avatar

    I saw one of these on the road today and it was hideous, almost as ugly as the Pontiac Aztec. I was once a loyal Honda buyer, but Honda’s styling since 2003 has driven me to the competition and chances are I won’t be coming back. Honda should fire their entire design staff.

  • avatar

    Every day onward from the wedding you remind yourself about her terrific personality. There are also some gearheads out there who are unfamiliar with opposed engines, and sadly that’s a deal-breaker for them, as well.
    online car insurance quotes

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • sgeffe: G-Bodies in general!
  • TimK: Perhaps the current administration loves unions more than progress. Progress doesn’t funnel money to the right...
  • sgeffe: There’s a TSB to address that issue.
  • conundrum: The Secirities and Exchange Commissionshould investigate the damn pop-up videos on TTAC. NO I DO NOT WANT...
  • sgeffe: There was another Toyota something-or-other ad on here earlier this year that did the same thing! Can’t even...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber