We haven’t been posting on all the twist and turns of this story and certainly not with the flair and insight of former TTACer and current Autoblogger Jonny Lieberman (nor his Knight Riding cohort Mr. Nunez). But the gist is simple enough: 1. Honda designs an ugly CUV. 2. Honda releases images of ugly CUV. 3. The internet explodes with surfers crying “Whoa, Dude! That CUV is UGLY!” 4. Honda’s Facebook page is inundated with posters informing the company of this opinion 5. Honda blames its own photographs, claiming the ugly CUV looks better in the flesh 6. Honda tries again, with photos of a red-colored example of their ugly CUV. 7. No one is convinced. The internet sniggers at Honda’s Old School PR efforts. 8. Honda removes the pictures from Facebook, clears off their entire wall and prevents new posts. 9. Honda leaves the “new” images on their main website under “future cars.” Talk about managing expectations. Or not.
The only thing worse than a Venza is a Venza wannabee.
Of course, the Venza is in turn an Edge wannabe.
However, the Edge and Venza are decent looking, if nothing special.
This Honda… thing… is a special, hateful, new breed of fugly.
Viral marketing can have a downside. This is what it looks like when it goes wrong.
Although I am a multiple Honda owner, previous owner, and fan, I must say that Honda styling the last 10-15 years, especially Acura, leaves a lot to be desired.
I believe their latest atrocity is fixable. The back of the crosstour does not look half bad. It is the front that looks ugly, as well as out of proportion to the rest of the car. I bet if they shell out a few millions to pininfarina or other good Italian studio, they will mightily benefit from it. AND next time they design a dog, why not FIRST run it by some demanding car connoiseurs, then announce it to the public?
Honda has really lost any sense of styling…was really hoping for that euro-accord diesel hatch then that ugly duck shows up! That one gonna sit all by herself on the side of the dancefloor…
What, exactly, is the purpose of this car? It’s not a wagon (the sportback roofline certainly compromises interior space, doesn’t it), there’s not a lot of clearance, so it’s not like anybody’s going off-roading, and it’s probably not rated for any heavy towing capability.
It’s a 5 passenger sporty 4-door hatchback with limited storage. It’s probably got a limited audience as well. This is just going to cannabalize sales from the CR-V.
I thought the Venza and X-6 were ugly. This is almost Aztek ugly.
#3 and #7 are the most interesting parts of the story.
Leave the Prius and Venza to Toyota; the Insight and Crosstour are ‘Abominations. By Honda.’
I don’t know what you guys are talking about. This vehicle is a thing of beauty.
Well, we’ll see if Honda gets the message. People are fed up with these incredibly poorly styled and ugly new cars. The Pilot, Acura TL, MDX and ZDX, the new Subaru Legacy/Outback, the Taurus tank, various blobs from Nissan and Toyota, and whacked out Mazda 3’s are a blight on the landscape.
It costs no more to style a car to look half-decent in the first place, but the Japanese as a whole are producing all the ugly ducklings. Cannot imagine why they pay their stylists. Send them home and hire schoolchildren with drawing talent instead.
Then there’s this gun turret look with tiny windows that manufacturers think is a great idea. It isn’t.
As for Honda, gotta say they are the worst. The point is, are they going to do something about it, or just sulk?
Better plan on an early mid-model correction (MMC) for the new CUV, just like they’re planning on for the Insight.
It all started when they made the Accord nearly the size of a Crown Victoria.
The Venza is just a Camry wagon but it is marketing death to use the words “station wagon”. The U.S. market requires these cars to be tall so they can be seen from all the trucks and huge SUVs. A good example is the tall, ugly U.S. Honda Odyssey versus the low,sleek Odyssey used in other world markets.
This thing isn’t as ugly as the Flex…
I don’t think it looks that bad. If you asked me what a crossover version of the Accord would look like, this is probably what I would imagine.
The next car in the Honda pipeline is the CR-Z, so I still have faith that they can make hot looking cars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Honda_CR-Z.JPG
A great example how NOT to use social media in marketing.
Scratch that. It’s a great example of how not to build a Honda.
When I look at this picture, all I can think of is the Chevy Citation. It wasn’t a good look in 1981 and isn’t a good look now. I can take the front, but the rear 1/3 of the car is just awful. And I like Hondas. (and I also like the Flex. And the Venza.) Howabout they bring us the JDM Odyssey and forget this one.
Let’s be fair, folks, and not judge until Honda have had a chance to remove the “Allure” badges and install “LaCrosse” ones. Oh, wait…
@GrandCharles:
Honda has really lost any sense of styling
Well, no, it’s more that they decided to design American-market cars in America by Americans. Because, y’know, Americans don’t like furn cars designed in someplace like Yurrup, and stuff.
@wmba:
Then there’s this gun turret look with tiny windows that manufacturers think is a great idea. It isn’t.
Sure it is — from their perspective. Remember, we’re in the North American market of SUVs designed and advertised to make Carl and Carla Consumer feel safe. We’re talking about vehicles specifically designed to create the perception (i.e., the illusion) of security, often at the expense of actual safety. Things like small and darkly-tinted windows, which have been found to create the sensation of safety and security despite their strongly negative effect on visibility. As stupid and thoughtless as it sounds, enough people feel safer when swaddled in a car with small dark windows than when exposed in a car with large clear ones—or at least that’s what they state in focus groups—that this is what automakers are making.
Now if Honda did a launch like this for the current Civic – It likely would have gone much more successfully – you’d still get the gripes about the 2 tier dash but it was at least a good looking car. Why they wanted to launch a CUV that is ugly in pictures this way I’m not sure. Honda’s just gotten stupid as of late trying to be a me 2 automaker rather than being original and one of the best automakers. The apple has fallen far from the tree.
I look back at the Element – it was a love it or hate it design that wound up polarizing people but it was a great CUV and more importantly it was very distinctively styled compared to its competition. The Crosstour does nothing original from its purpose to its styling.
The Venza might be a “Camry wagon” but it’s not a proper or traditional wagon.
They mutated a Camry, jacked it up and put a hatch on the back. The result is hideous, I truly don’t know how anyone can think otherwise. Without the elongated rear cargo area of most normal wagons I also find it’s usefullness questionable, just as I do in the Ford Edge (which is expensive, only holds five people, not much stuff and guzzles gas).
Now Honda has followed them with their own mutant Accord and it is absolutely ghastly. In red it honestly reminds me of the Aztek, except dare I say the Aztek was so ugly that it had some appeal deep down somewhere whereas this is simply ugly and wholly unappealing compared to the Accord.
Why can’t they just offer a real Accord wagon? Like the one they sell in Japan? God knows the Accord itself is nearly the size of the now-dead Dodge Magnum and people bought droves of those and weren’t afraid of the fact that they were a wagon. The Subaru Legacy wagon is also gigantic now, so where’s yours Honda? At least GM isn’t shying away from the word when it comes to their CTS wagon. Maybe GM should be given more credit for that car on this site.
Now I see what’s wrong in it. The wheelbase is too short for the length of the car. The overhangs front and rear are far too big. Had they stretched the wheelbase on both sides, it wouldn’t at least have such an awkward stance.
Sounds like GM denial, “Problem! What problem? There’s nothing wrong here”. Then they go and “detwitter” that stupid looking battery powered Buick anyway.
Well the bright side is BMW no longer holds the “ugliest vehicle for sale” title. The Crosstour shows the few marginal ways BMW got actually it right on the X6.
Echoing Autosavant – I too am a long term Honda/Acura owner who still is holding on to his ’95 Legend LS Coupe and ’96 Accord Wagon. I’m daily driving my grandma’s ’90 Civic sedan (35 MPG @ 80-85MPH straight as an arrow!). I can appreciate the desire to not make vanilla appliances (Toyota) but give me a break on some of the recent designs. Give me the EuroAccord “estate”, please. I’m holding out hope for the CR-Z as a replacement for the ’90 Civic.
Honda is telling us to ignore the little man behind the curtains.
Sebring owners everywhere breathe a sigh of relief at no longer driving the weapons grade eyesore benchmark of the industry.
Honda has raised the bar on fugly. And Mazda as well.
While i don’t find it attractive, i don’t find it hideous either. Change the front end and give it a more wagon like rear…oh, wait, just redesign the whole thing.
Since the Crassturd has been beaten to a pulp, I’ll add that I too like the bold, original CR-Z. But will pedestrian safety regulations (and other factors) compromise it?
Poor, poor Honda (and even more hopeless Acura). But it’s typical of the Asians in general to have that ‘can-do’ attitude, although it’s never true in the styling department. (I assume the American-styled cars still have to be signed off in Japan.) And it’s such a shame they won’t hire a proper design studio, especially when there’s so much French and Italian goodness (but also a fair share of goofy) that would be totally fresh in America. (Mazda3 is an example of copying a goofy Peugeot.)
Can anyone list 10 classically handsome Japanese cars? Original TSX, 83 Supra, 90 300ZX, NSX, Legacy GT wagon, 87 Legend Coupe…?
It’s not that bad by (admittedly low) CUV styling standards, until you get to the fastback roofline…
“Ingvar :
September 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Now I see what’s wrong in it. The wheelbase is too short for the length of the car. The overhangs front and rear are far too big. ”
Many, many other cars have the same problem, esp. front wheel drive cars have very ungainly overhangs, even “cute” designs like the Fit and the Golf, look at them from the side, and the front overhnag looks terrible. MAny long US cars have very short wheelbases.
These are just two of many reasons I appreciate my “Magnificent 7″ BMW pre-bangle 98, huge wheelbase and minimal front overhang.
” Had they stretched the wheelbase on both sides, it wouldn’t at least have such an awkward stance.”
That helps in every car.
Just saw a new CRV in the flesh, and it makes the crosstrainer or whatever it’s called look good.
Well, the pictures of the red one are more flattering, but the tush looks enormous. And it still looks like function is trailing form by a mile on this thing, which isn’t what Honda ought to be doing.
Does the Obama administration run Honda too? Guess I missed that one.
“That helps in every car.”
@Autosavant:
Yes, of course. But the phenomena is especially prevalent on this design. It looks like they tried to mount a too big body on a too small platform. The wheels look like they are tucked underneath.
I dunno. Just slap a 911/Boxster front end on the thing and it would hardly be distinguishable from a Panamera.
I don’t understand what’s so horrible about the design. Look at some of the other stuff out there. I’m sure it’s a decent vehicle if it’s made by Honda.
No offense intended toward their owners, but is it really that much worse looking than the current Accord sedan, a pitiful pastiche of styling cues (though without any real style)? Sad to say, it hasn’t gotten any better with time, either!
Whoa, Dude! That CUV is UGLY!
Yo Honda! find a way to graft the front end of a Accord Coupe on to the CT. Lose the snout and the design team responsible for this debacle.
well i hope it has a reversing camera as standard because the rear vision looks like it will be awful. tho backing it into a wall will likely improve the looks
I typically hate CUVs, but I don’t think this is a CUV, and I don’t see what’s so ugly about it. I’d say it’s one of the most attractive family cars out there right now.
Hmm… looks like a Sebring hatchback…
Now, if that isn’t the ultimate insult around here, I don’t know what is…
I hate Facebook, and it is an ugly car.
Of course, the Venza is in turn an Edge wannabe.
No, the Venza is how the Edge would have been done if it was done right the first time.
Hmm… I hope that this is an indication that Honda is going back to the drawing board.
No, the Venza is how the Edge would have been done if it was done right the first time.
We test drove both in our quest for a new car for my wife. The Edge wins, hands down. Better, smoother, sportier drive. The Venza was quieter but Toyota numb.
The Edge is (in our opinion) by far the better looking car.
I’d take this over a Caliber.
Of course, that’s like being the “(b)est gas station sushi bar in the southeast!”
Compared to the hideous psycho-bird beak Acuras of late, the front end gets a pass from me…it’s the bottom-heavy wide-ass look of the rear that ruins this CUV…
The Accord coupe and sedan, both lighter and smaller, have tortured, overdone ‘flame surfaced’ front and rear bumper caps, but at least it visually lightens the car…then on the big, large overhang CUV, they use a smooth-surfaced bumper design that makes it look even bigger and heavier?
It just don’t make no sense…get it together Honda, please, I’d like to desire your cars again.
Is this car Ugly??
Are you kidding me?
Aren’t you the same ones who admire the Ford Flex (aka refrigerator-on-wheels) as very cool and sophisticated?
Only in America!!!!
I mean seriously. Get a grip, people!
No wonder the non-generic designs are looked down upon in America.
The J6P simply doesn’t get them!
My confession: I used to be a Honda diehard. From my bulletproof 1985 Big Red and superquick (for the day) 1100 Sabre, to my beloved 1988 Civic hatchback in which I earned my driver’s license.
I drove the snot out of all these vehicles, and loved every minute of it.
My first brand-new car was a 2002 Civic DX Coupe. This car bored me so badly I nearly cried. I was expecting the tossability and driving enjoyment of the 1988 hatchback! I sold the poor, marginal thing to my parents, where it has at least found respect as a reliable daily driver.
For the last few years Honda/Acura have been smoking something in their design department. I don’t know what it is, but I hope no other designers get hold of it. (It may be too late for the BMW X6.)
The single protruding bucktooth of the current Acura line is unforgivable! I wonder who approved that design direction? It is truly terrible in my eyes.
Now, Honda has given us their version of the X6 (minus the monster motor and track prowess.) It is being rightfully shamed by the internet, and for Honda’s own sake I hope this translates into terrible sales figures followed by a quick death for this abomination.
Then, maybe Honda can get back to building exciting, good-looking, driver’s cars.
Since 2002 I have not been a Honda driver. I will not be until they get their design back in order.
I don’t mind the front styling at all. It’s that frumpy rear 1/3 that wrecks the overall styling.
FUGLY
How about an Acura TSX er… Euro Honda Accord Aerodeck (or whatchamacallit Estate, Wagon, – pick one). But, for crying out loud, keep the original grill!!! Just put an Acura badge, if you must.
“My first brand-new car was a 2002 Civic DX Coupe. This car bored me so badly I nearly cried. I was expecting the tossability and driving enjoyment of the 1988 hatchback! I sold the poor, marginal thing to my parents, where it has at least found respect as a reliable daily driver.”
It is kind of horrible that a used, older Honda is, on the whole, more of a real driver’s car. Not only that, the older Honda models look better too. It’s kind of like… a perfect Super Famicom (aka SNES) game that just DESTROYS a lame Wii title.
Somehow, it just ain’t like how it used to be.
Honda seems a little confused. Now there is Hyundai to worry about. Much competition. So there is this attempt to read the American market and make it very American. Yet, somehow it backfires. Their much hyped Insight Hybrid got trounced by the Prius. Honda had better act fast to get back to basics otherwise Hyundai is going to hurt them badly.
Honda should be basic. Honda should be cheap. Honda needs to be more of a driver’s car than a Toyota. To hear that the Insight drives WORSE than the Prius is horrendous in the extreme. Honda interior should be basic and Asian, not nerdy overwrought sci fi bling.
Dude, seriously the wheelbase on that CUV thing is just wrong.
To be fair, that 01-05 Civic was an anomaly in the poor handling department. The new model Civic coupe handles really well. It’s set for a re-design for the next model year, so we’ll see if they decide to make it bloated and soft.
# quasimondo :
September 5th, 2009 at 11:54 am
I don’t know what you guys are talking about. This vehicle is a thing of beauty.
Well, if you have a thing for hunchbacks, but then didn’t old Quasi’ have a thing for shapely Esmeralda?
Well, no, it’s more that they decided to design American-market cars in America by Americans. Because, y’know, Americans don’t like furn cars designed in someplace like Yurrup, and stuff.
Daniel, are you sure that Honda has a studio in the US? Toyota, Nissan and Hyundai do, but I’ve never seen reference to a US design facility for Honda.
Face it, ever car company has made an ugly car at one time or another.
Inside Buick the Rendezvous was known as “not as ugly as the Aztek”.
Had they stretched the wheelbase on both sides, it wouldn’t at least have such an awkward stance.
Not as awkward as if they had only stretched the wheelbase on one side of the car.
I assume you meant both the front and back ends of the car, not its two sides.
Ronnie Schreiber: “Inside Buick the Rendezvous was known as “not as ugly as the Aztek”.”I wonder why Honda felt compelled to build what will very likely turn out to be their own version of the Aztek.
Can anyone list 10 classically handsome Japanese cars? Original TSX, 83 Supra, 90 300ZX, NSX, Legacy GT wagon, 87 Legend Coupe…?
A nice list, the 300Z is a particular favorite of mine and an underappreciated car, both styling wise and in terms of mechanical/performance.
I have a rule of thumb with Japanese carmakers. If it looks like an insect, it was probably designed back home. Compare the 3rd gen RX-7, by Tom Matano in California, to the RX-8 that was done in the home office in Hiroshima.
BTW, Matano says that his favorite design is the RX-7 because it’s an original design whereas his Miata was based on the Lotus Elan.
# Jeff Waingrow :
September 5th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
No offense intended toward their owners, but is it really that much worse looking than the current Accord sedan, a pitiful pastiche of styling cues (though without any real style)? Sad to say, it hasn’t gotten any better with time, either!
While Honda has made some attractive cars, I think more than other car companies, at Honda styling is a low priority. Remember, they run ads with all their lawn mowers, cars, bikes, generators, etc. with the tag that they all have “motors”. Honda sees itself as a motor company, an engineering shop. And they make superb engines. Anyone here ever blow up a Honda mill?
Still, the US Accord is bloated and way too big. My brother bought one of the first Accords sold in North America and my dad had a 2nd gen Accord, which was a nicely styled car for its day. I think both of them were about 2/3 the size of the current Accord.
Couldn’t someone write an editorial on Japanese car design? From what I understand, historically, the Japanese have had a very schizoid view, alternating between Italian and American-influenced designs. They have had a lot of cars designed by renowned Italian masters, especially in the late 60’s, on the same time they had cars that looked like Virgil Exners worst nightmares. I think that schizoid view have remained to this day, I can’t really say Japan has a design language of its own.
The Crosstour is fugly. Honda has jumped the shark. Honda / Acura have completely lost it on styling for several years now. The new Accord when one sits in it is very bloated and has a high cowl to try and look over now. I’d rather keep driving my 2000 Accord than a new one.
Honda has lost its way.
What does Honda really stand for now? Compared to previous Hondas we’ve owned, our experience with owning a certified used 2005 CR-V has not been very good. Thus Honda has not only lost it for styling, they are losing it for service, quality and reliability.
I can honestly say that I’ve stopped recommending and trying to influence friends to consider or buy a Honda/Acura. Time to pay a lot more attention to Hyundai. I know my friends are.
RichardD has got it nailed. Take the Honda logo off the back and that shot from the rear IS A PANAMERA.
That’s why the rear is good, it is because it looks like a Panamera.. approximately.
Many Honda (exterior) designs were inoffensive and have withstood the test of time. Including the original LEgend coupe, even the second gen LEgend and even the RL, Accord 90-93, also Accord 98-02 wasn’t bad, as well as 03-06. The current Accord is bigger, and may be great inside, but the front is rather poor. The CRXs were great, even if too short. The S2000 was not half bad.
The second gen Odyssey looks great, is the best full-sized minivan both looks- and performance-wise.
Subarus have always been butt-ugly, but they sell like KRazy. Maybe the likes of Suzy Orman want a car that looks like its owner? Esp. that Tribeca (renamed and redesigned B9) fat SUV, the front was as ludicrous as the original Edsel.
It has the looks and appeal of a bloated tick.
As a fan of the old Nash Airflyte and the AMC Marlin, I love the look.
It’s stylish, but not as practical as an Aztek in that the floor is too close to the ceiling and the sides are not cladded and thus more susceptible to dings and dents.
I like that it doesn’t have the “suppository on dubs” look of the Edge or the Venza. It looks like its wheels fit it.
The front end is fine, too.
I’m glad that Honda is trying to break away from
the Ford Super Duty’s Uglier Brother front-end look of the Ridgeline and Pilot and the Hummer’s Deformed Little Brother overall look of the Element.
I for one am not happy, let me count the ways…
1. I’m not happy with the styling trend of late model Asian cars, particularly, Honda, Toyota and Nissan (with several small exceptions).
2. I’m not happy when car companies tell me “it’s comparable to so and so” (meaning: we looked at our competitors and did one slightly better).
3. I’m not happy with car companies that try to convince me to “try and like their designs” by changing photos/colors (if it doesn’t look right, forcing myself to like it won’t help).
4. I’m unhappy with car companies who built their reputations on sound fundamental principals, spent years convincing me why it was better and ultimately abandon them when it no longer suits their needs.
5. I’m unhappy with car companies who no longer innovate and start copying other bad designs.
6. I’m unhappy with car companies who try to convince me why their cars have grown large, overweight and unattractive and then insult my intelligence by saying “the market demands it and it was a business decision.”
7. I’m unhappy with Asian cars who built their reputation on high quality, cost-effective cars who now offer diminishing quality and value insisting they are still superior.
8. I am unhappy with car companies who patronize their customers and believe they will always come back.
9. I am unhappy with car companies who still operate in a “vacuum or silo” and refuse to provide a channel for legitimate open dialogue between customers and corporate decision makers.
10. Finally, I am unhappy with Honda, Toyota and Nissan because they have become all of the above…
When you no longer satisfy a customer and they leave – competition will ensure someone else will fill their need.