I say this all the time and Kevin gives me shit about it. That is why I complain that GM has nothing except the Camaro. When I was younger, I had multiple shitty Ford/Mercury vehicles. My friends had multiple shitty F-150's. Everyone I knew that had any Dodge/Chrysler product was a total pile of shit. For the most part, and especially the Cavalier Z24, the GM vehicles I owned were light-years better. You don't think this might have something to do with why I am not really a Ford or Dodge fan, but have wanted to get back into a GM car that I would like for 20 years now? I would bet that if the Cavalier sucked, I would be looking at a used Supra or RX-7 instead of a Camaro or Monte Carlo. Mainly because my Mazdas and Toyotas have been very reliable and cheap to maintain.I would argue that the reason many people are buying Accords, Pilots, CR-Vs and other more expensive Honda products now is because of a positive Civic experience when they were younger. If you can't attract new buyers to the brand with a good entry level product, you'll never keep the pipeline full years down the road.
2016 Civic has its mojo back
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
I guess what I'm saying is, unless brand loyalty is a very strong thing, and expected to become a very strong thing, it isn't of the utmost criticality that every automaker make sure their brand is the brand a first time car buyer picks, or else they'll never buy another brand again.
I think among people that DON'T care much about cars or driving, and they buy a product, and it seems to work ok, they'd buy it again. Or maybe they wouldn't. I also think there are enthusiasts who look around at different brands (and may even like the variety). Just my counter point.
I think among people that DON'T care much about cars or driving, and they buy a product, and it seems to work ok, they'd buy it again. Or maybe they wouldn't. I also think there are enthusiasts who look around at different brands (and may even like the variety). Just my counter point.
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
I think brand loyalty is a strong thing. Look at the Toyota buyers. People that buy those cars don't even look at anything else. People get grotesque money for those Tacomas due to brand loyalty. Kind of what the American companies had until the 90's. Honda also seems to have that loyalty. Albeit maybe less now than the late 90's early 2000's but, yeah, I do think brand loyalty is a thing. Maybe less extreme in some cases, but generally, I think if someone buys a car and it was reliable, they go right back to the same dealership to get another one rather than take a chance going somewhere else.
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
I think all I'm saying is brand loyalty varies, and there may be some interesting statistics on there on that. There's never good reason NOT to make a quality product when given the choice, but in business, it's all about where you put your resources.
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
Is this the first recorded instance of a car powered by a small turbo exceeding EPA ratings? After years of failing by Ford, Honda made it happen.
http://www.edmunds.com/honda/civic/2016 ... ghway.html
http://www.edmunds.com/honda/civic/2016 ... ghway.html
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
I'm willing to apply a small asterisk due to the drop in elevation over the 400+ miles, but still impressive.
Re: 2016 Civic has its mojo back
2,400 ft elevation drop? That's a pretty big asterisk. Needs more data. Likely the mileage is good for the power but I dunno about 50.