Mid-Year Upgrade - 2012 Civic

Page 1 of 5  
My Honda dealer tells me that Honda is upgrading the 2012 Civic's interior as a mid-year upgrade in 2012 -- presumably in response to the negative comments in the various reviews. If true, I have to wonder about all of
those unfortunate folks who bought before the upgrade.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wouldn't surprise me; the 2012 has engendered lots of criticism. Plus Hyundai is carving slices out of Honda's turkey, so they have to do /something/.
Me, I'd like to see some of Mr. Honda's spirit back in the cars. Honda needs to get off the green-and-safety bandwagon and start making cars people get excited about, like they used to.

It works both ways. Anybody who bought an Accord before '99 got a reliable automatic tranny. The ones after that...
I got lucky with my Integra. The '90s had igniter problems, and the '92s had distributor-bearing problems. I have a '91, and escaped both of those issues.
--
Tegger

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

I don't know if wow = innnovative but in my opinion they need to at least show more innovations.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/24/2011 04:16 AM, Doug wrote:

"innovation" for the sake of it is marketing/mba retardation, not what consumers want in their cars. what people want is incremental improvement. exploding transmissions, macpherson suspension and gutless underperformance are neither incremental nor improvement.
to put it another way, the vw gti has been the same basic configuration for over three decades. incremental improvement to the motor, transmission and rear suspension have made a decent-ish car pretty good, for the money. porsche 911 is another example of enduring design with incremental improvements making it great.
compare that with the polar opposite starting points and directions of the civic/gti. the ef civic/crx was simply awesome, and a great starting point for further improvement. [wishbone suspension, room for performance bolt-in motors, and built-in capacity for 4wd for example.] but that platform was steadily neutered. now, the civic platform is nothing but a capon - fat sterile, and it can hardly even walk, let alone fly.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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

Jim, I'm not sure I agree with this above but I admit this comes from my gut nothing else. Now me personally, I don't need wow or innovation. I just want a car that works well. I don't care how boring it is. Now I'm not against incremental improvement of course as long as it works well.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/25/2011 12:38 PM, Doug wrote:

we're both on the same page.
as i said, if you have a car like the civic, and it has wishbones, moving to macpherson is not an "improvement" by any measure other than the financial savings for the manufacturer. [they certainly didn't pass on any savings to the consumer.]
if you have a car like the vw gti, and you give it multi-link rear suspension, that /is/ improvement by any measure /except/ the financial. and even then, having looked at it, the incremental cost is probably less than $200 in the kinds of quantities vw move. and if any manufacturer finds themselves in the situation where a mere $200 is a significant financial issue on their production costs, then they should shut shop and go home because they're fundamentally in the wrong business.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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

Then buy a Toyota. Toyota is not exciting, but they are better-made than Hondas.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/27/2011 03:14 PM, Tegger wrote:

that wasn't always the case. my toyota pickup is a p.o.s. compared to my civic. or my accord.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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


"Wow" means making buyers think they're getting something special. For years, "special" meant advanced technology. Honda pushed hard with engineering and racing. Honda was also known for their motorcycles, which added another convincing dimension to the engineering aspect. That made the cars seem special to buyers, who liked to think that they were getting something really advanced, refined, youthful, and sporty.
Plus, since Honda did not have Toyota's stodgy image, they could use their marketing-pitch to successfully contrast themselves against Toyota.
Nowadays? If you ever hang around malls with your wife, go check out "The Body Shop", and "Bath and Bodyworks". From the outside, I mean. You don't actually need to go in the store.
Which one has more women in it?
What's wrong with Honda is what's wrong with "The Body Shop". What's right with Hyundai is what's right with "Bath and Body Works".
--
Tegger

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

Kia is halfway there with their designs.
And now Honda stumbles.
This could be enough for Hyundai/Kia to invest some very serious effort in down to earth engineering, to mimic what Honda did back in the 70s and 80s. Combined with their serious attack on the design front, that would be the end of Honda's reputation for a long, long time.
Can you imagine the current Kia designs with bulletproof 4 cylinder/manual trans drivelines and proper suspensions?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/24/2011 05:30 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

especially if they offered one in evo/subie-killer format. [they've been rallying them in europe i believe.]
it's also worth noting that kia have a small pickup they sell in other markets. if they sold that here, that would be a real challenge to the sensibilities of the great american rural "joe/jolene sixpack"'s who have been ignoring kia thus far.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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

Then Honda would be even closer to being the next RIM, another company that appears to have lost its way.
--
Tegger

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

Ooooo, good analogy.
That should scare the piss out of them, if they had the brains to acknowledge it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/24/2011 06:46 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

rim: started by techies, taken over by mba's. honda: started by techies, taken over by mba's.
can you spot the performance/trajectory correlation?
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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

Wouldn't surprise me; the 2012 has engendered lots of criticism. Plus Hyundai is carving slices out of Honda's turkey, so they have to do /something/.
Me, I'd like to see some of Mr. Honda's spirit back in the cars. Honda needs to get off the green-and-safety bandwagon and start making cars people get excited about, like they used to.

It works both ways. Anybody who bought an Accord before '99 got a reliable automatic tranny. The ones after that...
I got lucky with my Integra. The '90s had igniter problems, and the '92s had distributor-bearing problems. I have a '91, and escaped both of those issues.
I had a 90 Integra RS (base version) years ago. Great car -- lousy dealer.
--
Tegger

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

Just an a-men here.
Still driving new Accords every three years, but since I traded an '87 for the Acura CL back in 99, none of the new models has the responsiveness of the old one. The *engineering* is terrific, but obviously the design target is as Elmo says, neo-GM.
Honda needs to peel 500 pounds gross weight off the Accord, and 1000 pounds off the Civic. And my Accords, at least, have never been very pedal-responsive, they all have to spool up slowly so as to not emit another gram of NOx or something, or so as not to stress the automatic transmissions which maybe Honda is still not entirely on top of.
Wasn't the gross weight of 1980s Civics about 1,000 pounds less than today's?
J.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/25/2011 10:45 AM, JRStern wrote:

nah, inferior performance is programmed into the engine management system on purpose. honda's mba's don't want the accord to "perform" and thus impinge on acura sales.

that's a whole different issue. i'm pretty sure honda moved to a cheaper gear manufacturing route. regardless, the result is that the cogs spall, the swarf plugs filters and coolers, and the lube system fails. and i guarantee you it was a tested and known result before manufacture. mba "strategy".

roughly, yes.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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

IMO,excessive weight is one of the biggest problems with today's cars. they just keep on getting bigger and heavier.
If a car maker(and the public) wants a bigger car,bring out a new model. don't ruin the proven winners by "improving"/upsizing them.
WRT cars,fat is not where it's at.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/26/2011 09:49 AM, Jim Yanik wrote:

indeed. but that's the political genius of "safety" mandated weight increases. if you can tag weight as "increasing safety", then nobody can be seen arguing against it without risking career suicide.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum

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

My guess is that it's not so much the safety as the repairability.
Even if you want to pay for composite materials, and they fail to the point of passenger injury at 200% of the point that steel fails, the problem is that small dings that you can fix or ignore in steel might cause a hidden failure in the composite causing it to become much less safe. Aluminum is like that too - even with greater strength and safety, the repairability is majorly less than steel, and small damages hard to judge.
OTOH these tiny cars like Smart cars or Fiat 500 or new Scion IQ, OMG how "safe" can those things be, whatever they're made of? No crush room ahead of passengers, has to damage the suspension if you have a 5mph collision in the parking lot.
J.
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.