Why Honda doesn't continue the HX line?

Seems like every few years Honda will produce Civic HX, and then drop it almost as immediately as they roll them out.

Why? I love the CVT transmission and the fuel efficient VTEC they have. What gives? Are they not selling?

Reply to
Dan
Loading thread data ...

i dont think the dealers are making any effort to sell them. for one I know they don't come with A/C which is a big problem (at least here in the south). I looked for one a few months ago and the best price I could find was equal to one of the lx versions or one of the special editions.... which made it not worth messing with.

I'm guessing there is not much profit to be made on those so the dealers are not to motiviated to sell them.

----------- Elbert snipped-for-privacy@me.com

Reply to
Elbert

good question! dealers are all about selling the expensive stuff. stuff that's cheaper and reliable isn't favorite. i ask the same question about hatchbacks.

Reply to
jim beam

Again, Jim knows it all. BTW Jim, did anyone tell you they stopped building the HX model and hatchbacks? Howard

Reply to
Howard H

jim beam wrote in news:V_- dncvl8IPatBPZnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@speakeasy.net:

No.

Why would they sell the cheap stuff? Margins aren't as good. If you were a dealer, you'd be doing the same thing. Make hay while the sun shines. Tomorrow it might rain. Some of these dealers are run by people who remember 1991.

Hatchback sales dropped like a rock in the early '90s. They were decidedly uncool then.

Recently they've enjoyed a resurgence, and manufacturers are producing them again. Station wagons are coming back too.

Reply to
TeGGeR®

uncool maybe, but about 10x more pratical (and often smaller)

i like wagons (or estates as I know them better)

Reply to
flobert

maybe, but i don't understand why. as someone that's owned a cvt vehicle, i can say from experience that it's a very good and efficient system. it's "odd" not to have the notchy old shift going on, but it's highly effective nevertheless. reliable too. and the fuel economy of the hx's is quite superb.

but it's not just initial sales. the "downstream" income is considerable.

huh, i've heard dealers say that many times - but the fact remains that here in california, you can't buy a hatchback civic for love nor money. [and just try buying a crx sometime!!!!] there's loads around, but people never sell. retention doesn't seem to be a feature of an unpopular vehicle to me. i think dealers simply repeat the garbage spewing from the marketing morons that had honda produce red rear turn signals...

wagons make sense. /way/ more sense than suv's.

Reply to
jim beam

My guess is they want to ripped people off by selling the "Hybrids." I laugh at my friends who bought a Toyota Prius Hybrid and is getting about 50 mpg. I told them my old Honda Civic HX used to give me 40-45 mpg and that's without paying the ridiculous $7,000+ surplus just to get a "hybrid."

Maybe HX is too efficient. Think about it, if a person only cares about gas mileage, and he can get a HX for around $15,000; then why would he want to shell out $22,000 to get a Honda Hybrid? Just so he can get 5 more mpg?

Reply to
Dan

my thoughts exactly.

Reply to
jim beam

jim beam wrote in news:FcKdnTeXwuo-CRLZnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@speakeasy.net:

They certainly do.

But US government policy heavily favors SUVs. It didn't mean to, though. Favoritism was an unintended consequence of attempting to

*punish car owners*. Repeal the favoritism and SUVs may go by the wayside.

Then again, maybe they won't. People like the room, status, and perceived safety of a big vehicle. People *worldwide* tend strongly to buy big cars when not prohibited by government social engineering policy from doing so.

American government policy starting in the '70s was, specifically and explicitly, designed to make people buy cars that were much smaller than what they traditionally had bought. Since loopholes were left for vehicles defined as "commercial", automakers saw an opportunity and began marketing those to car buyers. The first automaker to exploit the loopholes was American Motors, with its 1980 Eagle 4WD.

Look at the wheelbases, curb weights and engine displacements of modern SUVs. It's absolutely amazing how close they conform to car buyers' traditional preferences. In short, nothing has changed over the decades, just the shape...and the governmental fist-in-your-face.

I believe minivans would stay regardless of policy, as too many people like their undeniable utility (much more utile than a sport "utility" vehicle).

Reply to
TeGGeR®

Dan wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

People don't buy hybrids for their mileage per se. They buy them in order to make a social statement.

Reply to
TeGGeR®

Make social statement with your votes, not your wallets.

It's more effective that way and last I check it's free to vote.

If we stop putting oil-friendly politicians in office we wouldn't have an issue now would we?

Reply to
Dan

You betcha. Nothing like having all that space, OR all the storage room, ANd still being able to reach the roof easy enough to put stuff there.

i only got my first van 18 months ago (previously, i've added a pair of seats to a small commercial van like a rascal, hiJet or supercarry) but I won't give them up any time soon. .

Reply to
flobert

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.