Accords AWD

I heard they will be, but only to those who can pass a grammar and punctuation test...

on 7/13/2014, Bob supposed :

That's pretty much what the Crosstour is.

Absolutely. They are. American Honda Motor Manufacturing sells those in their Acura dealerships.

Is? Was? No, looks like they do still sell them, how about that!

And one model has 4WD and of course you wanted the 6-cyl engine.

J.

JRStern formulated the question :

I just picked up a 2013 V6-AWD Leather\navi with 4500 miles for $15,000 (bought it from a deceased person's creditor) and it is a pretty nice car.

Great deal, I suspect any dealer would have offered $5k-$10k more.

The cars look great on paper as a checklist of design features, but in real life somehow they just haven't caught on.

J.

Because they are butt ugly?

Lynn

The look is definately an acquired taste. You get used to it.

But form over function! What it looks like on the outside is the problem of people in other cars.

Exactly.

When the original Ford Taurus came out I thought it looked all zoomy like a spaceship. Then I thought it was the ugliest thing in town. Then I decided it was one of the finest designs in automotive history.

Then I got a 1999 Acura CL with the bloated cabin and the boat tail. I never did decide if that was ugly or beautiful, but it was highly functional. In retrospect I decided it was loosely based on the Taurus and I gave it high marks.

But of course YMMV.

J.

Agreed, form over function.

Which is REALLY why the Crosstour was a clusterfuck in the sales arena. Not only did it have ugly form, it had nonfunctional function once you went beyond the front seats.

Add to that the fact that Honda thought it demanded a seriously PREMIUM price over an Accord, and that's all she wrote.

The market told the story.

Typical Honda--15 years behind the times.

That was fine, when they built high quality, solid cars. Everyone accepted the package for what it was.

Now they build...cars to compete with Kia. In all areas.

"Seth" wrote

I prefer function first, and in the case of the apparently tiny rear window and the too-small rear side windows, that would have killed it for me if I was in the market for an AWD sedan. I like to be able to see out.

Kia is building some very decent cars, I just hope Honda can keep up.

J.

I'm not saying they aren't.

But Honda used to build excellent cars. Now Honda is busy degrading their product to meeting Kia at the "decent" level.

But, I talked with a guy recently, who bought a new Kia for himself and a Honda for his wife. The discussion was about warranties. He said, and I quote, "I know who has the longer warranty, but we both know who has the better car". His point was, the 10 year warranty doesn't mean shit.

Not to me on a three-year lease.

But I might even have to go Beemer next time, just so they include

Y'know, it's all relative, the "great" Hondas were back in the stone age, when cars were just a whole lot simpler. The new Hondas are really better than those old Hondas in most ways, and until you get into the $60k++ class nobody really does that much better afaik.

J.

Beemers are the motorcycles.

The cars are Bimmers.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote

Since when did it change? (seriously) I'd always heard the cars referred to as "Beemers," but lately I'm hearing it as "Bimmers."

It's never changed. It's always been that way.

It was yuppies in the 80s/90s that incorrectly used the term "Beemer" to refer to their newfound status symbols.

wotever