Find Reviews by Make:
Honda will show off a concept version of their next generation Crosstour, and since we all know that “concept” is just “thinly disguised production car” in Honda vernacular, we’ll be getting a good look at the replacement for one of the most maligned cars of the last decade. Coverage of the New York Auto Show will start here at TTAC on April 4th.
54 Comments on “2013 Honda Crosstour Concept To Debut At New York Auto Show...”
Read all comments
I am awaiting this with great interest. Not because I am a fan of the Crosstours, but I’m just curious to see what they could do to turn a sow’s ear into a silk.
The crosstour only needs one thing fixed: It’s FUGLY. Fix that and it will sell. Honda management lives in a damn bubble.
It needs at least TWO fixes: cargo space is still lousy. Isn’t that the purpose of a crosshatchwagon body style? Fold the Crosstour’s seats and you have less space than inside the Fit. The Venza has a much more useful shape.
Cargo space is less lousy than the sedan.
If you want a box wagon, Honda already has you covered with the CR-V, the Pilot, the RDX, the Odyssey, the MDX and at the time this was introduced they had the Element too.
It’s repulsive looking but at least they tried something different.
A third fix is in order – visibility is just awful in these things…
@ Dan – Those are all SUV’s (ok, so the Ody is a minivan…) i think the “want” is a wagon ;-)
Call me crazy, but I think looks is one thing the CT has going for it. Along with a sleeper length flat cargo floor and, for a Honda, low interior noise levels.
The new one needs; the corporate 2.4 engine and corresponding 5mpg improvement, better handling without being too stiff riding, a bloody manual, less raked hatch for more cargo space, and a no more than $25,000 price tag. Leave the 6 for the slushbox.
+1 I agree with you, I don’t think is a bad looking vehicle. Glad I am not alone!
“The new one needs; the corporate 2.4 engine and corresponding 5mpg improvement, better handling without being too stiff riding, a bloody manual, less raked hatch for more cargo space, and a no more than $25,000 price tag. Leave the 6 for the slushbox.”
They already make one of those. It’s called a Subaru Outback.
I hear you, though. This car would be apealing with a K24 and a stick. Don’t hold your breath.
@Stuki
You’re crazy :-) the thing’s ugly squared! I see one in my parking garage every day and I’m always gagging.
The big issue I have with this car is not only is it ugly as can be – it is also really heavy and needs a torquey engine to move it which means bad mpg. So to fix it they put in a 4 cylinder which now makes it just slightly higher mpg but really slow.
Large EPA treadmill margin to the contrary, CR only measured a 1 mpg drop for the AWD Crosstour against the FWD V6 sedan.
Drop 200 lbs of AWD and that small difference would likely disappear entirely.
The Crosstour is a low MPG failure in the same sense that the Equinox is a 32 MPG world beater – only on paper, because that’s where out stupid federal government lives.
…as well as where all possible governments live.
Honda used to make lighter cars that were fun to drive and fuel efficient – now they seem to focus on making large heavy family vehicles that are engineered to be average. The Fit is one of the few cars that seems to have any spirit left in it and the Civic has been so badly compromised its a shame. Honda has spent so much time and money playing 2nd fiddle to the Prius with hybrid failure after failure – you’d think Honda would instead give up and focus on making their non hybrid cars lineup better (that is where they sell volume).
(H)ybrid
(O)r
(N)othing
(D)ammit
(A)ll!!!
Very interested to see the new concept. Siginificant exterior design changes are needed. On paper it is a decent car, but it is just so ugly from nearly all angles.
I’d have preferred a new Element instead. Did they really sell enough to merit a second generation?
I agree, a new Element would have been great. Especially if it became a 5 seater which would add to its functionality (for me anyway).
A shame Honda left the Element, S2000 and Ridgeline to whither away when all three of them were great entries in their respective classes.
I wish they hadn’t left the Ridgeline to die, too.
But to be fair, the only thing really wrong with it is the crap 12 year old powertrain and Honda hasn’t kept that up to date in the products they pay attention to either.
Agreed on the Element and S2000 – don’t see the point of the Ridgeline. It has the fuel consumption of a “real” truck, but doesn’t offer the same capability. The “trunk” under the load floor is just silly, it is impossible to access if there is anything in the box. The lockable toolboxes on the side of some new RAM trucks make way more sense.
I’d prefer an Element like shape built on Accord underpinnings. And with an Si driveline :)
I used to own a AWD EX Element with 5 speed and loved that little trucklet. Did all the soft roading I needed and was pleasant to drive on road. It was also unique and created a huge cult following (a friend of mine bought it from me and she still has it). Honda had the ability to cultivate this vehicle but instead it seems Honda spent most of its resources and time trying to play hybrid catch up to Toyota (Honda still is an also ran in the hybrid market).
It’s actually a pretty nice car. It addresses some of the concerns of the current Accord (road noise, limited cargo space, somewhat staid shape).
Unfortunately, it adds ride height, compromised handling, questionable styling details and a lot of MSRP. My guess is Honda didn’t want to do a simple Accord wagon or hatch because they couldn’t charge as much for it vis a vis a “crossover”.
I’d like to see a five-door hatchback Accord. I like the Accord Coupe, but can’t justify two doors and a traditional trunk.
I’m a Honda fan boy. If they had made a Accord wagon or hatch, I would have bought one. I remember the spy photos of test rigs on the road and that was what everyone thought it was going to be.
Instead of this “thing”. I ended up with a CRV. Not a stunning looker, but it has everything I needed in it.
By concern about limited cargo space, do you mean that
A) the Accord’s trunk is a few cubic feet smaller than other mid sizers, or
B) vs. a wagon.
If its A it really doesnt matter to most consumers. My accord and my Taurus before that has never had more than two bags in it, and it wont. While many people call midsizers a “family sedan”, I dont know anyone who uses one that way – to haul 4 people and luggage. We have a mini van or SUV for that. Accord used to drive to work, or to drive a a couple w/o kids on trips. Few people with means to get a minivan or SUV will use a mid size sedan for kid hauling duty. Its just far less convenient, whether the trip is 5 miles or 500.
If its B, then its not a “concern”. Its well known that wagons have more cargo space than sedans. They also are noisier, look goofy to some people, and sell like turds here in the US.
You are dead on about the road noise, my accord is notably louder than most cars.
Is the ZDX going to get an upgrade/update, or has that been axed altogether?
Is it true, subjectively speaking anyway, that the Crosstour ended up being better than its “better” cousin, the ZDX?
Insideline had good write ups on the platform differences between the two.
Cliff’s notes, the Crosstour is an Accord underneath and the ZDX is a Pilot. Not a matter of debate which of those makes a better driving car.
Of course the real point of the ZDX wasn’t to be driven at all. It’s conspicuous consumption for the benefit of strangers and in that sense it’s better than any mere Honda. But not good enough to sell against euro badges.
The Crosstour is basically a very good Accord with a lift kit and lower levels of road noise. Aside from styling and somewhat compromised handling, it’s a good car because the Accord is also a good car.
The ZDX is an MDX with all the virtues removed. The MDX isn’t bad, but imagine taking everything good about it (ease of access, packaging, etc) and taking those things away.
There’s not many cars I revile, but I had some choice words for the ZDX here:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/03/whats-wrong-with-this-acura/#comment-1721429
I don’t find the looks particularly good or bad but the curb weight seems excessive and it offers disappointing fuel economy. Tow rating is a little subpar for the class at 1K lbs. And the price seems high, although I guess the Venza is probably just as much. Well, there’s other fish in the ocean and maybe Honda will do something about the 2013 CrossTour that will make it more compelling.
The Venza is similarly disappointing (except in tow rating). I don’t know why these two vehicles should be so much heavier and more expensive than the sedans on which they’re based or offer fuel economy that seems so poor by comparison. Maybe Toyota will update the Venza with the 2012 Camry platform and we’ll see some improvements there. And maybe not.
If Hona would pull heads from butts and restyle this thing as a true competitor to a softroader wagony thing like the Outback, Allroad or (forbidden fruit) Passat Alltrak, it would sell by the Baker’s dozen.
Maybe Honda can get some advice from BMW since their X6 is a very similar configuration (and is such a success). The product planners at each organization seem to be running in the same circles.
Bah they chose to be inspired by the 5 GT instead of the X6! ;)
Why not just sell an Accord wagon? It would be more attractive and more useful.
Yeah, yeah, CR-V is a jacked up station wagon. I didn’t jack up my old Ranger, and I don’t need a jacked up station wagon neither.
I own a jacked up station wagon, but that’s because the jacked up kind of wagon is the only kind that’s available — I need a compact wagon (for kid-hauling), and I need a 2000lb towing capacity (I’m homeowner and DIYer). I’d like my jacked-up wagon better if it were shorter, and I keep wondering if I can get it lowered without hurting the ride or putting those low-profile tires on it.
“Why not just sell an Accord wagon?” +1 billion
Somebody go and look at the 2013 Accord tourer and tell me WHY Honda thinks that the fat-assed Crosstour is a better idea?
Because this is America and people don’t buy anything with the label “wagon” in America. So they take wagons, jack them up, call then “CUV’s” and they sell. Go figger.
So call it a ‘Tourer’ like they have in Europe… ah man, no matter how long I live here, I still don’t understand people’s buying habits.
The Accord Wagon is already available, it is called the Acura TSX Sports Wagon (same as the Euro model just with a Acura badge – ala Buick Regal).
@mike978 – No TSX Wagon in Canada last time I checked. And unlike the US, we actually buy wagons in Canada when they are offered….
The TSX wagon was me and my wife’s favorite “everyday” car at the Atlanta auto show. In comparison, the Crosstour is unnecessarily HUGE on the outside and has less usable cargo room.
The main downside to the TSX wagon over the CT, is that the TSX is just a tad too short to be comfortable for sleeping in the back. A wagon built on the US Accord would have fixed that.
This is one of those cars that makes sense on paper, and from the interior of the car, but in no other way. It really is a 4-door Honda Pacer (which the photo above displays quite well).
Five bucks says the new one looks almost identical. The Accord Coupe “Concept” was virtually indistinguishable from the current car, and the new CR-V wears the same stupid Crosstour grill.
As a long time fan, I just don’t have words for how pathetic Honda’s U.S. lineup has become.
The best thing for me about the 2013 Accord coupe is that it left me with no worries that I’d want to trade up my 2011. :)
That thing makes a Pacer look like a Ferrari.
The Crosstour still – might – have a chance. The ZDX, on the other hand, was DOA upon release and isn’t any more alive now. Same goes for the CR-Z.
Honda is saving face, and will let the Crosstour wither away as the Element. In 3 or 4 years I predict it will ‘quietly’ be dropped.
I sat in one when they first came out. I was fairly impressed – AWD, standard V-6. But most importantly (for me) was it had adequate headroom. For me, a car with a sunroof means my head is rubbing the roof. I would have given the Crosstour serious consideration (I didn’t mind the looks at all), but I wasn’t in the market for a $40k+ car at the time.
It’s still ugly.
The CR-Z isn’t quite as bad as putting SS badges on a 177 HP Cavalier, but the idea is equally bad.
The ILX isn’t quite as bad as a Cadillac Cimmaron, but the idea is equally bad.
The Crosstour isn’t quite as bad as Pontiac Aztek, but the idea is equally…
I must be one of the few people who actually likes the look of the Crosstour (poor visibility aside). It kind of reminds me of a crossover fastback (and I always had a strange thing for fastbacks).
I just don’t understand a gas-hog, fat version of an Accord. If I want a Honda to haul stuff, I’ll buy a CR-V or if larger, a Pilot. A Crosstour? I think an Aztek is more practical.
Honda pretty much covered all the bases by making the “wagon” version of the Accord less appealing by giving it gawdawful styling and choosing form over function and killing its cargo capacity. Add a thirsty V6, fuel sapping 4WD, and ridiculous sticker price and you wonder why anyone would buy one of these when the 4 cyl Legacy Outback wagon is roomier and much cheaper.
I don’t know what the competition of this car is, maybe it’s the “active lifestyle middle aged empty nester” Venza Camry wagonoid failure–but even then the terrible Venza comes off as slightly more appealing.
This car is a brilliant example of what happens when a car company makes every attempt to make a wagon not a wagon, and why I wouldn’t even consider a trip down the road from the Subaru dealer to look at the Honda.
Well this should be interesting. Or not.
Is that grille a rip-off of the current VW family design?
Or did the Germs copycat the Honda?