CSX to be dropped from lineup

[acusen]

I just had my TL seviced and someone at the dealer mentioned that Acura is going to drop the CSX because it is now too close in price to the TSX. Has anybody else heard this?

[Tuckin17"s]

The rumors are true.

The 2009 will be the last year for the CSX!

[RiceBoy]

Doesn't surprise me. The 2009 TSX base model starts at around $33,000 (the US "base" model is equivalent to the Premium Package model in Canada). Also, with the Civic Si available as a sedan, offering the same power as the CSX Type S, the CSX seems a bit redundant. Acura has always talked about improving their "luxury" image, and a model like the CSX in their lineup was dragging that down a bit, even if it was the best selling Acura model in Canada.

Looks like I'll be out of a job here come 2010.

[babzog]

Well, that kinda sucks from a consumer POV. When I bought my EL in '02, it was only $300 more than the Civic Si and had a whole lot of extra features thrown in. Mind you, it was a four-door rather than the slicker coupe, but to get all those the upgrades for only $300 made it a no-brainer. I was hoping to get a CSX in four years (I like to get 10 yrs out of a car) but maybe I'll look for a decent, used TL or go back to Honda.

[Carmissimo]

I thought the 2007 would be the last model. Then it was the 2008 (which I recently bought, by the way). So now it sounds like there is going to be a 2009 but that will be the last one.

What I can't understand, being a very happy owner of an '08, is why Acura doesn't develop a Civic variant like the CSX for the North American market that, being built for a larger market, can be fitted with a more distinctive body and interior.

Really the only flaw for the CSX as it stands is that it's so similar inside and out to a Civic. Not that the Civic is a bad car to be similar to but from a marketing perspective, there is a problem.

I wish my CSX was a little more distinctive but as for what I think of the car in absolute terms, well, I think what a great value. The car is just the right size, gets reasonable gas mileage, is affordable even for someone on a modest income, as I am, yet it has a ton of power and is refined throughout.

With gas prices skyrocketing, a car the size of the CSX is something Acura would be wrong to not offer in Canada and the U.S. I suspect, though, that with Americans looking to smaller more efficient products, Acura could well have a car similar in size and all-around dynamics on the drawing board for the entire North American market. If that's the case, of course the CSX would be no more. But then again, if it means we get a more distinctive product that retains most of the CSX's virtues, this is not a bad thing.

Guess in my case the product cycle in the next couple of years hardly matters. I have my new car and I couldn't be happier with it. Anyone in the market for a decent, well-rounded performer with a ton of refinement could do a lot worse than check out the 2009 CSX, even if there ends up being a 2010.

[RiceBoy]

The fact is the CSX wasn't helping Acura's efforts to change their image to be a higher tier luxury brand. Also, the Civic Si actually surpasses the performance of the CSX, unless you get the Type S, which it just matches. With the new TSX now offered in a base trim with a much closer price point to where the CSX is, it was making less and less sense to keep the CSX around. And to be a luxury brand is all about "excess". If buying a fuel efficient vehicle is a top priority, the thinking is that one should be looking at a Honda instead, because after all, the Honda brand needs to sell vehicles, and I don't think Honda ever expects to sell more Acuras than Honda branded vehicles.

[Carmissimo]

Originally Posted by RiceBoy

The fact is the CSX wasn't helping Acura's efforts to change their image to be a higher tier luxury brand. Also, the Civic Si actually surpasses the performance of the CSX, unless you get the Type S, which it just matches. With the new TSX now offered in a base trim with a much closer price point to where the CSX is, it was making less and less sense to keep the CSX around. And to be a luxury brand is all about "excess". If buying a fuel efficient vehicle is a top priority, the thinking is that one should be looking at a Honda instead, because after all, the Honda brand needs to sell vehicles, and I don't think Honda ever expects to sell more Acuras than Honda branded vehicles.

To be a Tier 1 brand is all about excellence, not excess.

The TSX is still significantly more expensive than the CSX and less fuel efficient. It also has a different feel to it, something that is inevitable considering the size difference. A base CSX checks in about $6,000 lower than the TSX, before taxes. Maybe you don't think $6,000 is significant but I do. Regardless, there should be a car that is smaller than the TSX in the mix, no matter the MSRP difference.

I think you will find that as we go, fuel economy will become a priority even for buyers of Tier 1 products. In fact, I get the sense that it is becoming a good thing in the minds of many to be perceived as environmentally responsible.

Excellence should be the focus for Honda with their Acura brand if they really want to be taken seriously. If they are confused and pursue excess instead, they are doomed. There was nothing excessive about the car that really cemented BMW's reputation, that being the 2002.

Excess is easy. Any carmaker can play that game. More horsepower, more toys, and on and on. But to build cars that are simply superior products, now that's tougher and that's what great reputations are built on. Acura would do well to keep that in mind going forward.

[RiceBoy]

What is the definition of "excellence" when it comes to cars? Is it reliability, quality, and value? Well then, you have that in a Honda Civic.

Luxury by definition is "indulgence over necessity", which is just a more polite way of saying excess.

People don't buy or judge luxury cars on their fuel efficiency or reliability. Luxury really is about all the bells and whistles and the "indulgence over necessity". Have you heard anyone say, "I bought the BMW/MB/Audi because it's fuel efficient and reliable"?

[Carmissimo]

Originally Posted by RiceBoy

What is the definition of "excellence" when it comes to cars? Is it reliability, quality, and value? Well then, you have that in a Honda Civic.

Luxury by definition is "indulgence over necessity", which is just a more polite way of saying excess.

People don't buy or judge luxury cars on their fuel efficiency or reliability. Luxury really is about all the bells and whistles and the "indulgence over necessity". Have you heard anyone say, "I bought the BMW/MB/Audi because it's fuel efficient and reliable"?

Seems to me excellence is not necessarily excess. It's cars that are superior in quality and besides, an excessive product is one short on class.

We're not talking reliability. Every Honda product has that. It's not fuel economy, necessarily, though it is becoming the in thing to have a vehicle that isn't ridiculously inefficient. It's about components that feel better in day-to-day use. It's about power plants that are more impressive in how they function and I'm not talking strictly horsepower. It's about interiors that exude class, that are pleasing to the eye, well laid out, and in tactile respects very enjoyable to use.

Sure Hondas in general are high-quality products but it's a question of degree. You can always produce products that meet an even higher standard both in the quality of the materials and in execution. Surely it's not your view that the Honda Civic is such a spectacular automobile that no one could possibly produce one with superior characteristics. It is, after all, a vehicle engineered to achieve a relatively low price point.

By the way, if it's excess as you suggest, you don't need an Acura for that either. Bells and whistles, power and other insignificant items are easily tacked onto virtually any model Honda sells. You can buy a very excessive Accord, if that's your thing.

But if you want to be taken seriously as a carmaker, you have to deliver a car that is a cut above in every imaginable regard. We're talking quality feel as opposed to how many extras you can cram in, how much HP under the hood, and so on.

You need to build cars that are loved by the people who really know their cars. The rest of the marketplace will follow that influential group's lead but you have to win over the more discriminating car enthusiasts if what you want is the reputation that will result in a prestigious ranking. Try to fool that segment with insignificant items based on excess rather than quality and you're doomed to failure. They'll know the real thing when they see it.

[RiceBoy]

Yes, you don't need an Acura if you want excess, but even a loaded Accord still only has the "H" badge on it, right? For some, the "A" caliper, or 3-pointed star, or blue and white propeller mean everything, because a lot of what luxury cars are built on is image.

I don't disagree with you there. I like the current position Acura is out there, being more of an entry level luxury brand, one that offers you a pretty decent value for you money when it comes to luxury cars. But the pundits out there keep saying Acura has to have BIGGER engines, MORE cylinders, MORE power, MORE toys, to match what the competition offers. But do they really? They seem to be doing fine the way they are, but I guess every company needs to keep growing to keep their investors happy. Whether that is where Acura is headed and whether it is or isn't the right decision, time will tell.

I'm actually kind of sad to see the CSX go. After all, it was the EL, my last car, that got me into the Acura brand in the first place. I drove a CSX for the first time a few months ago when I had it as a loaner while I was getting my TSX serviced. It was a nice drive, I must admit, coming from a TSX. The car certainly had a lot more zip to it than I expected, and it certainly felt much larger from the inside than it looked from the outside.

[Carmissimo]

Originally Posted by RiceBoy

Yes, you don't need an Acura if you want excess, but even a loaded Accord still only has the "H" badge on it, right? For some, the "A" caliper, or 3-pointed star, or blue and white propeller mean everything, because a lot of what luxury cars are built on is image.

I don't disagree with you there. I like the current position Acura is out there, being more of an entry level luxury brand, one that offers you a pretty decent value for you money when it comes to luxury cars. But the pundits out there keep saying Acura has to have BIGGER engines, MORE cylinders, MORE power, MORE toys, to match what the competition offers. But do they really? They seem to be doing fine the way they are, but I guess every company needs to keep growing to keep their investors happy. Whether that is where Acura is headed and whether it is or isn't the right decision, time will tell.

I'm actually kind of sad to see the CSX go. After all, it was the EL, my last car, that got me into the Acura brand in the first place. I drove a CSX for the first time a few months ago when I had it as a loaner while I was getting my TSX serviced. It was a nice drive, I must admit, coming from a TSX. The car certainly had a lot more zip to it than I expected, and it certainly felt much larger from the inside than it looked from the outside.

What I especially appreciate when I'm behind the wheel is the standard tranny. Very, very smooth and definitely it has a higher quality feel compared to the stick in the Civic. It's something you use a lot while driving and it's the sort of detail that I mean when I talk about quality.

[Mike T.]

Originally Posted by acusen

I just had my TL seviced and someone at the dealer mentioned that Acura is going to drop the CSX because it is now too close in price to the TSX. Has anybody else heard this?

Yep. Was told this at my dealer last week.