Find Reviews by Make:
Honda has long played second fiddle to Toyota in the hybrid powertrain department, especially from a public relations standpoint, but also in terms of technology, sales volume, and fuel economy. At least they've redoubled their efforts: Automotive News [sub] reports a push to increase sales tenfold to 500k per year with four different models: the current Civic Hybrid, an upcoming dedicated sub-$20k model, a sporty hybrid previewed last fall as the CR-Z, and now an upcoming Fit hybrid in a few years' time. Although that's only half the annual sales that Toyota is projecting early in the next decade, all will be affordable and fuel efficient, unlike the short-lived V6 Accord Hybrid.
22 Comments on “Honda Shooting for 500k Hybrids Yearly...”
Read all comments
Hmmm…it seems a little redundant to offer both an “upcoming dedicated sub-$20K model” and a Fit hybrid.
The Accord V6 Hybrid was a performance oriented version – which was not what the market wanted. Minimal mpg gains and extra cost is the same problem as the Yukahoe Hybrids which are not selling. Of course the parallel system in the Accord only costs $3k versus $10k for GM’s version. The new Honda IMA system supposedly cuts $1000 off and brings down the increase to $2k. Still more expensive than a diesel option to get the highest HWY milelage and trump the gas city mileage.
Hmmm…it seems a little redundant to offer both an “upcoming dedicated sub-$20K model” and a Fit hybrid.
If history has taught us anything, it’s that hybrids have to look unique to be taken seriously. Still, would it hurt to offer us a Civic wagon hybrid? I’d much prefer that to a Prius or a Fit. They would sell, Honda. I swear.
The Fit Hybrid is not confirmed for markets other than Japan.
The dedicated model should get better fuel economy as it will have an Aerodynamic design. The Fit seems to the have Brick like Aerodynamics. The tiny fit actually gets worse highway mileage than the Civic. I would prefer the dedicated model, not because “it looks like a hyrbrid” as some will claim, but because better aerodynamics equals better fuel econ. Heck, give me those aerodymamics without the electric motor.
Technology wise. Honda is still behind. They just dump a electric motor between the engine and transmission, where Toyota replaces the transmission with an elegant and durable planetary gear/electric motors combo.
Though I like the Honda approach, because they can offer manual transmissions if they want to.
I think Honda is missing the boat on hybrids. They need to have a hybrid system that will allow the car to run on full electric. This will make it easier to use a plug-in system when the batteries are available. And I think the environmental laws will force all electric in some areas eventually.
People here continue to insist that the Prius is just a niche vehicle, so who can blame Honda for being dumb on the Accord Hybrid?
As for the “it’s only a success because of how it looks”, give me a break. Don’t you guys ever update your FUD? It’s a midsized car that gets 50 mpg in normal use. That’s why it won.
Will they offer the CR-Z in the United States?
Seems to me, at least when pricing out Civics, the Hybrid costs a lot more and would take a long time to recoup the savings in fuel costs over just a gas powered Civic. For example, the Hybrid Civic costs about $3,000 more then an EX Civic, where in my own situation where I drive 45 miles a day, a Hybrid would only save me $230 a year at current gas prices. Although with a Hybrid, I could drive around thinking I care more about the Earth then non-Hybrid owners. (rolleyes)
As for the “it’s only a success because of how it looks”, give me a break. Don’t you guys ever update your FUD?
The comment you’re quoting must have been deleted already. It seems like somebody’s always pulling poor Strawman’s comments.
Seems to me, at least when pricing out Civics, the Hybrid costs a lot more and would take a long time to recoup the savings in fuel costs over just a gas powered Civic.
The same is true for the non-hybrid version of the Prius. The difference is you can’t buy a non-hybrid Prius, so such thoughts don’t trouble the Prius buyer.
"If history has taught us anything, it’s that hybrids have to look unique to be taken seriously." The non-hybrid version of the Prius is closer to the Camry than the Corolla – you can shop against whichever one you'd have been able to live with; for us it was the Camry.
That CR-Z better be fun as hell to drive, to make up for that hideous front end.
And it better have a real manual.
And that IMA better not interfere with driving dynamics.
BTW, the the CR-Z link is dead.
The non-hybrid version of the Prius is closer to the Camry than the Corolla – you can shop against whichever one you’d have been able to live with; for us it was the Camry.
I’m really not trying to harp on one person in these threads, but what non-hybrid version of the Prius are you talking about? If you are referring to the Camry, I believe the more equivalent comparison would be between the hybrid Camry and the just plain Camry. The previous poster’s point was there is no non-hybrid Prius to compare it against like there is with the Honda Civic. Maybe if Toyota made an aerodynamic sedan/hatch with a 1.8L to 2.3L sized engine we could do a direct comparison to the Prius. But, they don’t, and that has lead to much discussion on this board (and others) as to just how wonderful a Prius really is.
The non-hybrid version of the Prius is closer to the Camry than the Corolla – you can shop against whichever one you’d have been able to live with; for us it was the Camry.
Sure, but the fact remains that the Prius slots somewhere in between those other models. That’s a plus for the Prius relative to the Civic Hybrid. The obvious comparison for the Camry is the Camry Hybrid. I would guess that Toyota has the same problem marketing that car as Honda does with the Civic Hybrid.
Lumbergh, I was pointing out that IF there was a non-hybrid Prius, it wouldn’t be Corolla-sized; so the right thing to do is to slide to the Camry or the Corolla depending on which one you’d be shopping if the Prius weren’t there.
Strippo, I don’t see Toyota having any trouble at all marketing and selling the Camry Hybrid. It was doing quite well when we bought our Prius.
The Camry is in a different segment and is more likely to be purchased by buyers who could easily afford much more expensive vehicles if they chose. Checking the hybrid option is not a big deal for those buyers. But a Corolla Hybrid, with the price differential being a very significant percentage of the base car’s selling price, would be a tougher sell for Toyota.
The Fit Hybrid will have the Civic Hybrid’s marketing disadvantage relative to base models and then some. It will be very interesting to see how that car sells.
Re to Bytor,
A different viewpoint on the engineering of the Honda system.
To my mind, Honda’s IMA system looks far more elegant and efficient than Toyota’s. There is only one motor that does it all, not two or three. This decreases complexity & expense, increases lightness. I know, its a big deal to some that it really can’t run purely electric. Another problem in marketing oriented America, is that the power train experience is far more conventional than the Prius. Big deal I say. My nephew is getting mid fifty mpgs with his current Civic Hybrid, equal or better than any Quotes from Prius owners I have heard.
Personally I vote for the Honda system.
I think Honda is on the right track. The simplest architecture which gets the job done is almost always the way to go. For this generation of vehicles the ability to run a few yards down the road on electric power is more novelty than anything else. There is also a bit of a pedestrian safety hazard created by a silent running car. When I’m walking through a grocery store parking lot I use my eyes and ears to tell if a car is about to back up and run me over. A Prius gets under way silently, which makes it more likely that a combination of inattentive driver and distracted pedestrian will end in disaster. I wonder if anyone is trying to collect statistics on how often the Prius is involved in car-pedestrian collisions compared to other similar sized vehicles.
The V6 Accord hybrid was a mistake, something I an many others said when it came out. However, Honda is a company which demonstrates that it learns from mistakes and moves forward. You hearing me GM?
An automatic transmission is the most complex mechanical system next to the engine. Replacing it with simple and durable planetary gears, and one more electric motor is reducing the complexity compared to auto transmission. It is just newer, not more complex.
Being able to drive in electric only mode is also a very big deal. It greatly improves stop and go efficiency.
The Toyota system really has the advantage in an auto transmission setup (replacement).
Though I like Honda for the manual capability, which I hope they offer on the GSH and CR-Z.
When considering the complexity, consider what is removed as well as what is added.
Good point Bytor, I stand corrected on the complexity comparison. I’m still concerned about the pedestrian safety issue. Maybe electric cars need to make a synthesized put-put sound like the “shutter” sound option on digital cameras.
I really hope common sense prevails over the ludicrous notion that electric drive vehicles need noise makers added to protect idiots from themselves.
I walk to work every day through a lot of multi speed traffic. I see/hear gassers/diesels/hybrids/electrics/bicycles.
Cars approaching you make mostly tire/wind noise, it is only as they move away from you that engine noise plays a significant part in hearing them.
bytor: My biggest concern is cars backing out of parking places. Many drivers hop in the car, fire up the cell phone and go into reverse. With an ICE powered car the pedestrian gets a chance to hear that someone has started their vehicle. With all the monster trucks in parking lots now it is quite easy for a Prius size car to be invisible until you are almost already behind it.
Some groups like the IIHS must be starting to collect statistics about this.