[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeROC

According to my brother in law that worked there and recently left, people inside Honda know they are currently riding on their past rep as "being reliable" (the rest of the industry has caught up and many surpassed them). And finally, Honda is betting on hydrogen for the future.

This ^

My ‘09 Accord is built cheaper than my 2000 Prelude was. Cheaper hard plastics, rattles, stuff I really didn’t pay attention to till after I bought it.

In my early 20s I admit to having been a Honda “fanboy” after getting screwed by GM with the paint recall on my 1990 Beretta. And the seatbelts failing to extend and actually making me have to fight them to replace them for free.

I’ve grown to be much more open minded. And GM has caught up to and passed Honda.

The Camaro is built better than my Accord.

There was a time not too long ago when people would have looked at me like I had 3 ears if I’d have made that statement.

[HCI2000SS]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

This ^

My ‘09 Accord is built cheaper than my 2000 Prelude was. Cheaper hard plastics, rattles, stuff I really didn’t pay attention to till after I bought it.

In my early 20s I admit to having been a Honda “fanboy” after getting screwed by GM with the paint recall on my 1990 Beretta. And the seatbelts failing to extend and actually making me have to fight them to replace them for free.

I’ve grown to be much more open minded. And GM has caught up to and passed Honda.

The Camaro is built better than my Accord.

There was a time not too long ago when people would have looked at me like I had 3 ears if I’d have made that statement.

Obviously everything comes down to a matter of opinion, but in mine, my girl's 2019 Accord Sport is in many ways better than my 2018 Camaro RS. Of course I prefer my Camaro, but that's just my personal taste. Compared to my 2004 Accord this 2019 is way better in overall quality. As far as overall reliability and long-term I have no idea, but I do agree that Honda reliability as a whole is not what it used to be.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

Those potentially new upcoming hybrids for the type-r and such would almost certainly be all wheel drive (with the electrics powering the wheels that the gas isn't).

Pushing all your torque on two wheels when you have 4 leads to slower acceleration, poorer handling. Things that matter to the general public more than how much fun it is to swing rear ends of cars around turns on a non-public road.

Unfortunately, with a RWD setup, you can't make use of good weight distribution by having electric motors over the wheels the gas engine isn't powering for an AWD setup. All the weight will be up front and crammed ...or you'll have to move the gas engine or turn it into a gas engine powering the front wheels only.

So a hybrid camaro almost certainly will have to deal with electric and gas not putting power down to the ground at the same time on different wheels. Putting it at a disadvantage to cars that can (fwd or rear engine).

The thing is that hot hatches are built to appeal to enthusiasts that have a budget and need practicality. If you are not an enthusiast, why pay the extra when you can just buy the family variant of it? None of them have the badge appeal, either, to attract casual buyers with money.

This is the issue with Acura NSX. From what I have seen, it's generally agreed that yes, the tech is impressive, but it's very overengineered and it's not that geared towards enthusiasts. Best MOTORing has an episode comparing the old and new NSX. The old one(albeit modded) gets a lot more praise than the new counterpart, with nannies kicking in even when you specifically turn them off. Brakes feel off because the feel is simulated and artificial.

So basically, a hybrid setup based on the Acura NSX adds cost, weight and complexity while taking away feels and control. Just the thing every hot hatch buyer is looking for, right?

It's the same thing with driving a manual. There is no objective reason to drive one anymore, really, but it's about the feels, and that plays a big part when it comes to enthusiasts.

[3.8TransAM]

Hybrids are nothing but overly complicated pieces of crap

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

The thing is that hot hatches are built to appeal to enthusiasts that have a budget and need practicality. If you are not an enthusiast, why pay the extra when you can just buy the family variant of it? None of them have the badge appeal, either, to attract casual buyers with money.

This is the issue with Acura NSX. From what I have seen, it's generally agreed that yes, the tech is impressive, but it's very overengineered and it's not that geared towards enthusiasts. Best MOTORing has an episode comparing the old and new NSX. The old one(albeit modded) gets a lot more praise than the new counterpart, with nannies kicking in even when you specifically turn them off. Brakes feel off because the feel is simulated and artificial.

So basically, a hybrid setup based on the Acura NSX adds cost, weight and complexity while taking away feels and control. Just the thing every hot hatch buyer is looking for, right?

It's the same thing with driving a manual. There is no objective reason to drive one anymore, really, but it's about the feels, and that plays a big part when it comes to enthusiasts.

The NSX sells like literally a couple hundred units a year. I dont think anything about it can be used as an example of what the masses like..

Budget enthusiasts will be the only market for pony cars that have profitable volume because the market has been and will continue to shrink for people who can afford the more expensive models but dont end up purchasing an SUV or CUV or truck because they tend to want to be able to fit more than 1 passenger in the car and their wife will probably need to drive the car and the average woman doesn't seem to be comfortable driving sports cars that favor "fun" over easy.

So yea.. the SS competes with the M3 and all.. That's great. But it's also competing with the Corvette in price and high end SUV's and CUV's that are more practical for the kind of person who has 50k to burn.

The future of pony cars is in the lower end of the price spectrum ...for young people before they're being forced to drive a family car.

[foshjowler]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeROC

This I absolutely agree with and why I said they need to make the 7th gen appeal to and legitimately affordable for Gen Z. And if it's affordable to young people new to the workforce, it will be more affordable to the Mom or Dad looking for a weekend fun car, but with all the expenses of kids.

That really gets into the whole new cars are too expensive debate, not just sports cars. If you can even call it a debate.

[DIYguy]

Would you take a 6th Gen V6 Hybrid @ 40 MPG & 400 HP over a 455 HP SS V8?

No...

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by foshjowler

That really gets into the whole new cars are too expensive debate, not just sports cars. If you can even call it a debate.

well it gets into the can pony cars exist with this identity of being whatever the top end trim is when they actually depend on selling cars that aren't that trim.

Pretending like the camaro that everyone knows and sees isn't the 4 banger or even the v6 is like pretending that a hamburger is some artisan burger you get from a chef and not what the fast food businesses churn out.

If you dont start really focussing on the bottom trims and pushing them up on a pedestal as your focus ...you're going to lose the potential buyers you have there to brands that do (like the crappy imports).

and what's left isn't large enough in numbers to sustain the cars. V8 sales wont keep them alive and your customers you do have dont want to be treated like second class customers in a brand that depends on them.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by 396ssrat

Nothing at all wrong with a v6 Camaro. It keeps the company working.
The little 6 is a puny 221 inches of n/a horsepower. That is 1.33 hp per cubic inch
The 6.2 liter 378 inch v8 n/a is 1.20 hp per cubic inch
Clearly the v6 is more efficient and doesn't require premium or a gas guzzler tax.
Be careful what you wish for on ending the Camaro name. All that modern plastic won't live on like the earlier versions of the Camaro.
You are all going to be force fed electric cars in the future anyway.

The V6 is a nice engine has good HP for its size. What it lacks is low end Tq.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

The majority of Camaros sold have the 2.0T or the V6 so........

That's always been the case. The base model always outsells the base model from the beginning of performance cars. The performance cars are the ones that hold value. No one seeks a 1967 six banger camaro.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

I dont consider anything after the F-Body to be a camaro really. Just a new car that stole the brand name. Like what they're doing with all these crossovers that are named after previously popular cars.

But a hybrid camaro is certainly do-able. I dont think they would marry it to the V6, they'd marry it to the V8 or discontinue the V8 entirely and have it on the V6.

Hybrids are sold to deal with fleet pollution controls. Unless you're a hypercar and then they're there to boost low end power and not care about mileage.

I dont think anyone would pay almost v8 prices for a hybrid that's intended as an efficiency booster vs power augment. Might be different story if the electric motor was setup primarily as a power augmenter for low end takeoff and AWD. Though it would probably go hand-in-hand with a smaller V6 that's tuned more for high end perf - which may not be as cost-impacting if they didn't have to deal with low rpm perf.

tldr: no... but the na big displacement v8's are not going to be around in the future. Best get comfy with that reality.

You can look at any 5th or 6th Gen camaro and see the roots of a Camaro. Looks more like a Camaro than a 2002. I never cared much for the Camaro after the 73' 2nd gen. camaro. The 74' slanted front end turned me away from Camaros. Never went back until the 5th Gen.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by MackSteelPrivateEye

You can look at any 5th or 6th Gen camaro and see the roots of a Camaro. Looks more like a Camaro than a 2002.

I dont know what drugs you're on...but no.

For about 30+ years the camaro was a decade long evolution from the 2nd gen to the 4th gen. The 1st gen existed for 2 years. It is not the identity of the camaro. Looking like it (which the 5th and 6th gen do not) is not being closer to a camaro than the 4th gen is.

A 4th gen camaro is closer to the identity of what a camaro is than the 1st gen is. I still see more 3rd gens on tv than 6th or 5th gen ...or 4th or 2nd or 1st. It's like one of the more popular extra cars that studios like to blow up or crash or otherwise trash. But like it or not, the camaro brand exists in people's minds and a car that existed for 2 years in the late 60's isn't what people associate with the word. Nor should it be when significantly different cars held the name for 20x as long.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

What I hear you saying is that compared to today's cars....they are inferior in basically every measure except length.

There are plenty of examples of state of the art tech from 20 years ago that was awesome then but I'm not going to hold it up on a pedestal against today's. It was good then, it's garbage now.

But even looking back at then, american cars didn't lead the pack in automotive breakthroughs ...most were sold with drum breaks. Most had leaf springs. Old crap even then. You had carbs going even though fuel injection was in some chevy's and other cars in the 50's. Seems like lots of innovation that happened just ended in the 50's and everything sold in the 60's and 70's was whatever was the cheapest thing people would buy and we dont start seeing any real advancement over the tiny iterative improvements to automatic transmissions until cars began getting heavily regulated for safety and emissions.

You got what you paid for in American cars, style, luxury cruisers, straightline performance. No one thought about independent rear suspension in a highway cruiser, it would be a big waste of money. The cars were made for highways not carving canyons. In the 50s and 60s Japanese cars were truly junk. No one even knew Japan made cars. And the ones they made were subsidized by American tax payers as America helped rebuild both Japan and half of Germany that the Russians didn't control. European cars were not dependable and cost a lot more than your typical American car.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

It's still an ugly copy of the Batmobile. And this is coming from a guy who's owned two Hondas over the last 20 years (2000 Prelude 5 speed and 2009 Accord EX-L V6 6 speed).

Honda does some things really well. Others, really bad. They need to stop with the Fast and Furious thing. That went out in like 2003. 10 foot tall spoilers and coffee can farting exhaust tune is also old. That got old in 1998. Another cheesy thing is that the Brembos on the Type-R are only fronts - the rear brakes are stock Civic. Just looking at them from the side screams cost cutting and "who are you kidding". The car is for kids with more money than car brains. Serious car enthusiasts laugh at it.

Now, if they do the right thing and put that 2.0 turbo into a proper sports sedan that doesn't look like a nightmare and is rear or all wheel drive, you would definitely be right.

Plus, front wheel drive..... I never once claimed my Prelude or Accord could ever out perform an F-Body Camaro then. Never did and still don't today. That Type-R won't out handle our SSs on the track..... The SS is M3 territory now.

You could add 2000hp and a bucket size muffler on a Honda Civic and the sad fact is it still just won't be a cool car.