Honda Pouring $1 Billion Into Acura — Can It Recover OR Should Honda Save Its Check?

Without getting rid of the "beak" and every designer and project manager that has produced a model with that hideous front end, it's a waste of money.

It's not just a styling and performance problem. Acura has no clear positioning, or even aspirations of positioning. Sorta like Oldsmobile.

Of course its the STYLING. They don't have a lot to prove with reliability and quality. They always do a super job in that department. But too many of you Fanboys/girls think the BIRDBEAK is going overlike hotcakes. I hate to burst your bubble. The majority of people DISLIKE the beak look. Go back and check their sales prior to the beak. They had a nice niche going. Additionally, if you want your PREMIUM Division of your company to give the persona of being PREMIUM car pumping out 150 HP @6500 rpm for a 2.0 engine. (My bike with training wheels was faster than this). Give your premium division that EXTRA performance in the engine area; give it a few more upgrades of ammenities.

Why in the world would I want to buy an ILX, when I can goto my local Honda dealership and buy a beautiful Honda Accord, probably with a V6 in it for less or near the price of this car. Don't decrease what I am getting in the Honda; INCREASE the features, power and other in the Acura. If the beak was selling, they wouldn't be trying to keep it afloat.

There are a couple of things that I don't think the article really clarifies well. Yes, Acura's sales peak was in 2005, which is the year before they discontinued the highest-volume, lowest-priced model in its lineup, the RSX. You cannot discount the impact that had on its sales numbers. The mistake Acura made in that move was thinking that by putting a sportier tilt (with FWD) on their more expensive models would prove competitive. However, the bigger mistake Acura made was creating two cars that were so closely aligned, that one (the TL) sabotaged the sales of the other (the RL). Now, Acura is doing the same thing (again!) with the TSX and TL. However, that appears to be remedied soon with the rumors TLX.

The other thing the author seems to be completely ignorant of is the fact that BMWs and MBs are offered at lease prices that are not far from Acura's prices. That has a huge impact. Even Audi is struggling against that in the US and now Lexus is starting to feel the impact. This plays big in middle-class America where more and more people can afford to drive a BMW or MB. Yes, Acura also has partially stomped its own foot here since, being known as "affordable luxury", it's not as prestigious to drive one. So, in this case, I agree that Acura has an identity problem. Lexus handled this superbly when they first came out as another "affordable luxury" brand, then built its reputation to a Tier1 luxury marque. That's truly when it seemed like Acura's brain exploded a bit and they had no idea where they wanted to go.

The additional fact is that Acura isn't building bad cars as this article makes it want to appear. Is the styling controversial? Absolutely. But can anyone blame Acura? After years of being criticized for bland, safe styling, they took a risk and, critically, it didnt' pay off. But, let's remember that once the beak was introduced on the MDX, sales increased by 52% and stayed steady through last year. Additionally, the RDX is took off big and continues to experience good steady sales. The author complains about his hard-riding TL and favors his Genesis. Well, I don't remember the handling of the Genesis ever being almost equal to an Audi S4 as the TL was in an R&T comparison. And the TL's handling was only slightly lesser than the handling of the A7 in another direct comparison (and, actually, the reviewer there favored the TL).

I do think Acura is headed in the right direction. The momentum started with the change of the RDX to the current model. Acura needs to fix the powertrain options on the ILX. The MDX appears to be sticking with its proven formula which isn't a bad thing. The RLX is getting overall positive reviews. Yes, there's criticism of the styling, but once people get in it and drive it, they are impressed with the interior and the driving dynamics, despite FWD. When the SH-AWD version hits, it's going to really make a bang. And the NSX will just solidify things that much more.

...Well, Honda had better get with it pretty fast, like yesterday because Toyota and Lexus is leaving them like way, way behind and it's probably going to take them at least a decade to catch up. One Billion just might keep'em from falling way behind, considering they use that money very wisely! And for crying out loud! Get rid of the ugly duckling Acura TL front, side and rear look! Same for the Porky Pig look with Infiniti!

They can turn things around if these two things happen.

1. The NSX concept is their design direction moving forward. No more beaks or crappy ZDX designs (maybe no more women designers if they bring crap like that to market).
2. They decide where they are in the market and target it. I'd put them at tier 2 so they should focus on stealing sales from Volvo, Cadillac and Infiniti, even high end VWs and possibly Buicks.

If not, then that's just $1 billion good money chasing bad.

1) You don't have to get rid of the beak, just tone it down
2) You don't have to make a big RWD V8 sedan but bring back the fun to your cars.
3) You need an RSX/Integra successor
4) While the new NSX looks great, it isn't a true successor to the original.
5) Don't take away the manual transmissions, yes people still do buy them
6) Don't go vanilla on us.
7) Keep the TSX and kill the ILX. It looks okay but people aren't going to be so keen on spending nearly $40K on a gussied up Civic.

You do have to get rid of the beak. Why "tone it down" Your telling your loyal base, we're going to keep some form of it even though the MAJORITY of you dislike it. I noted this in a post last year when the CEO or some high ranking Kronie said they decided to keep it, even though they had proven feedback people dislike it. WOW - what a better way to cut your profits and decrease cars being sold then NOT to listen to my customer's input. What kind of winning strategy is this.

Listen I owned 2 Acura TLs (2004 and 2006). I loved them. I also have owned 4 Honda Accords and Love them (and still impressed with the Accord's value). But I didn't buy another TL because I HATED the beak. If they lost me as a customer, after I have bought 6 previous cars from Honda, how many more customers felt the same way. Obviously quite a few must have. Acura is suppose to be a FLAGSHIP brand, the ILX is sorely missing POWER (150 HP from the 2.0)

Acura and Infiniti both have the same problem. It has nothing to do with RWD or FWD or V-8's or not (as clearly Infiniti builds RWD cars and offers an M56). It has everything to do with image. The BIGGEST problems for both marques are a lack of a proper FLAGSHIP sedan to really compete with the big dogs of the S-Class, 7 Series and LS. For Acura/Honda, that problem seems to originate on their incessant need to count the beans. They've spent too much money and time developing, delivering, then retracting truly good/great cars because of their low-volume, specialty segments. Examples: NSX, S2000, CL Coupe, Prelude, CRX. Acura/Honda doesn't realize the reputational lifts these types of products have on the overall brand and how that drives customers into the showrooms, despite their low-volume sales.
As much as I know the RLX is a fantastic car, and the SH-AWD version is going to be that much better, it's still not a FLAGSHIP car that this maker needs. It needs to build that ultra-luxury, high-performance car to go toe-to-toe with the big dogs. This, IMO, is what really helped Lexus separate itself from the crowd and solidified its place at the top tier.

Acura, Infiniti, and Audi also share another challenge in the US: stripping that air of prestige that Americans hold for BMW and MB. Lexus did it with luxurious cars and bullet-proof reliability, and a phenomenal service experience.

As I said earlier, Acura is headed in the right direction. Their 27% sales increase from 2011 to 2012 (to 156k) is a good sign. If the ILX sales continue to increase, and with the intro of the new MDX and RLX, they could possibly see sales numbers that rival their peak in 2006 (of 209k). As long as the TL, TSX, and RDX maintain their sales positions as well, if not increase.

Just keep rebadging the Hondas.Save the 1 Billion since the Asians and Indians will buy it no matter what it looks like.From the bird beak lets move to another animal. Why not a Monkey face or a Rhino head. I also love the headlights popping out on the Japanese cars. Must be a trend in Japan. Especially the Nissan Leaf!!!!

I'm pretty sure the Japanese buy them with Honda badges because they respect Honda more than some made up Acura name. Is Acura even a brand in Asia?

Wow, what an ignorant comment from this nut who calls himself "Fijian" who obviously isn't. You should change your name back to your real name - "bumpkinian".

Fijian - you're pretty funny. Sadly, you're swimming against the tide with your American-fervor, and I'm speaking as an American. For you to imply that these Asian cars are purchased by Asians in the US is laughably hilarious. Having said that and getting back to the topic at hand, IMHO, Acura is a lost cause. Acura and Lincoln are black holes in terms of their ambition to become a legitimate luxury-car brand. Same thing for Hyundai and their aspiration. I'm not saying their cars are bad, I'm just saying they will not be considered to be luxury cars.

A billion dollar in the car business just is that much for a whole line, a lot of manufactures spend that on one car.

Heck, obama can and does urinate away billions of YOUR taxpayer dollars every day. And he doesn't even bat a crooked eyelash. That is the power of his HATE for America.

LOL@ Mercedes. "truly lame cars"? Really? Is that why the TL was compared favorably to the S4 in direct comparison? Is that why the MDX was always very competitive or beat the X5 and ML? Is that why Acura's sales increased last year and trounced two other makes that people drool over on these pages? Explain to me, if Infiniti is building these so-called ideal cars with RWD, decent styling, etc, that Acura smashed their sales #'s the past two years by almost 30%? Well??? Just because your precious "Mercedes" is doing well in sales, doesn't mean crap. When 80% of the C-Classes are C250s, that sure as hell doesn't mean anyone wants performance, does it? Or even E350s vs. 550s. Not too many people clamoring for these high-displacement engines that everyone says Acuras needs to have in their lineup. No, MB and BMW have continued to take advantage of America's ridiculous notion of success and prestige by driving a 3-pointed star or blue and white roundel. I'll add Lexus in here, too, since their two most successful cars, the ES and RX, are two of the safest, blandest drives around.

And let me add, as I've said before, that the problem with the RL wasn't that it was a bad car. Actually, when first introduced, it was compared very favorably and actually beat, many of its direct competitors and even made C&D's 10Best list. The problem was its too-close alignment with the TL, and it's higher price tag.

The problem with Acura is simple. With the exception of the MDX, the cars are just plain ugly and uninspired and have been for years. They've definitely lost there way.