2012 Civic "Panned"

Page 2 of 3  
wrote:


But what of the alternatives? Last year, all we heard about was how Toyota quality had suddenly tanked... turned out to be all a big misunderstanding, but at the expense of their reputation.
This year it looks like Honda will be the scapegoat. Reviewers seem to like Hyundai lately, but it seems to be under the optimistic assumption that they have suddenly done miraculous things with regard to quality and safety in the last 2-3 years. The real test comes after these new Hyundais have been on the road for a decade or couple of hundred thousand miles without problems, and I will believe it when I see it. More than once these magazines have said Ford/GM turned their quality problems around, yet after the year model has been out for a couple of years it's back to the same old story as same magazines begin to report problems.
Plus, almost every time I see a late model car broken down on the side of the road, it is a Ford / GM... the occasional odd German make. I don't recall ever seeing a late model Honda/ Toyota/ Nissan /Acura /Lexus /Infiniti sitting on the side of the road waiting for assistance.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've been looking into Subarus as mechanics seem to like it. Unfortunately they seem to lag in the fuel mileage and look department.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Harvey ( snipped-for-privacy@none.com) writes:

That's because Honda/Toyota/Nissan/Acura/Lexus/Infiniti use very pessimistic fuel gauges!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's not that Honda had transmission problems; it's how Honda handled them.
Used to be, Honda took care of its customers. "Oh, we're sorry--here you go, all fixed. Shouldn't have ever happened in the first place." Then the economy tanked, and Honda pulled ALL the way back on its customer care--the goodwill program that covered their screwups, from little to big.
It's not that you fall, it's how you recover from it. Honda went from stellar, top of the game, all the way down to the bottom in one fell swoop--using the same bad management decision making process that had them design and build the bad transmissions for many years in the first place.
When you buy a Honda van but get the Chrysler experience, that says it all.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

Hey Elmo... You might enjoy this nostalgic trip:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/12/curbside-classic-when-hondas-mojo-was-working-1980-1983-honda-civic /
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I found this comment interesting:

I've been doing some tests with my 07 Prius. At 55mph on long trips, I can get 55-60mpg. But bump on up to 73mph, which is where I like to live, and it drops to 45-47mpg.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

And that comment is pure BS. My 1500 automatic gets near 40mpg on the highway.

Which kind of shows that we really haven't come that far...
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Compared to what? A Corolla? I've set in both, and the Prius is more comfortable and has nicer appointments.
The cheapest Corolla with an automatic at the local dealer has an MSRP of 17,814. The cheaspest Prius has an MSRP of 24,634. The cheaspest Camry with an automatic has an MSRP of 22,359.
I get the following from FUELEONONMY.GOV for each (assuming the best mileage automatic transmission version):
Corolla 26/29/34 (city/combined/highway) Prius 51/50/48 Camry 22/26/32
I'll use the combined number and assume you drive 12,000 miles per year and gasoline costs $3.60 per gallon.
Gasoline cost per year:
Corolla - 1489.66 (625.66 more per year than the Prius) Prius - 864.00 Camry - 1661.54 (797.54 more per year than the Prius)
Years to save enough on gasoline to cover difference in initial cost (I am not including the time value of money)
Corolla vs Prius - 10.9 years Camry vs Prius - 2.9 years.
If you drive more miles, or gasoline costs more than $3.60, then the Prius is at an even bigger advantage. Including the time value of money works against the Prius, but after 5 years, the Prius is probably going to be a lot more valuable than either the Corolla or the Camry, so I imagine if you include depreciation in the equation, the Prius will look really good. Plus, I think the Prius is much more comfortable than a Corolla.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Agreed on the more comfortable. It's larger enough to be very noticeable in the front seat, and the leg room in the rear is not to be believed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

...and interest???
JT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My bank account is paing about 1/2% these days, so if I paid cash for the car, it hardly matters. Interest is a factor if you have to finance the car, and so is depreciation, and maintenance costs. Just pretend you paid cash for the car and plan to sell it after 5 years.... The yearly finance charge on the different in cost between the Prius and the Corolla is about $420. So if you are financing the car, you probably push out the break even point by another 5 years or so. I couldn't stand the last Corolla I drove for a week, much less 5 years, so at least for me, the Corolla is not a valid comparison to the Prius. The fiance charge on the difference between the Prius and Camry is only around $120 per year, so it hardly matters. And I'll bet if you lease there is almost no difference becasue the Prius will have a high residual.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I only know one person(s?) who actually bought a Prisus (SO's parents). They were shopping for a Camry and bought the Prisu when they could get it for LESS than the Camry!
Ed

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's not showing to be the case overall with Prius owners and with intense testing of Prius cars in fleet use, though.
Of course, my experience is that somewhere in this mileage frame a car with a traditional automatic transmission will incur a hellacious repair bill on said transmission...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Care to show the details of that assessment?
Remember the key words here: "similarly sized vehicle". Them are some rocky shoals, so tread carefully.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Link to these other reviews? Every other review I've seen conflicts with this one. I posted a couple earlier in this thread.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm kind of puzzled about the whole thing. Honda simply extended what was to be the 2008-2011 generation for one more year on account of the new federal regulations. The 2012 is just the 2011 with some updates.
The 2012 was originally going to be a larger vehicle than the 08-11, but with the new regulations, Honda has had to backtrack and redo the new generation, issuing the 08-11 for one more year so they'd have something to sell in the meantime.
Therefore, the 08-11 generation turns out to be Honda's first 5-year Civic.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, not at all. Honda went to a five year cycle some years back. Let me think...92-95 was a four year cycle, then I think they went to five years after that with the 96-2000 generation. 2001 was all-new.
It was big news when it happened.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yep. Right you are. I missed that.
In any case, it said in the paper many months ago that Honda was extending the current generation by one more year in order to rethink the new generation on account of the new federal regs, so the 2012 is not as "new" as everybody thinks.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ah, marketing.
It's amazing people still pay attention to the marketers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tegger" wrote in message

I'm kind of puzzled about the whole thing. Honda simply extended what was to be the 2008-2011 generation for one more year on account of the new federal regulations. The 2012 is just the 2011 with some updates.
The 2012 was originally going to be a larger vehicle than the 08-11, but with the new regulations, Honda has had to backtrack and redo the new generation, issuing the 08-11 for one more year so they'd have something to sell in the meantime.
Therefore, the 08-11 generation turns out to be Honda's first 5-year Civic.
Frankly, I was surprised by the showing given the success of the previous generation. I should imagine different Civic models would test quite differently. most especially the SI which has had positive reviews. I do think that Hyundai and Kia are improved to the point where they are competitive with Honda.
--
Tegger


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.