Honda Element -- Ugliest New Car this Century?

[famousdavis]

It wasn't too many weeks ago that I saw my first Honda Element. I was floored -- this vehicle is so ugly that I couldn't believe that Honda engineers had foisted this box-on-wheels upon the public.

Apparently, unlike me, some folks must actually like the vehicle's design -- I've seen an increasing number of them on the roads these days.

Why would Honda do this?

Ugly, or not ugly? What do you think?

[Kati Compton]

I vote ugly. Ugh-leeee. ;)

[Sunnyone]

Shoebox on wheels. Really, really ugly.

[Jeff Rutledge]

It reminds me of the car I made in my basement when I was around 5 or 6 years old. It was a big cardboard box with fake wheels. The Element is just missing the word "Police" scribbled in crayon on each side. 8)

[Steven Cedrone]

Yeah, ugly now has a new spokesmodel. :wink: Look it up in the dictionary...

Steve

[GoldKey]

I don't think it looks too bad, I mean it is not Pontiac Aztec ugly. If Hummer made an H4 or H5, it would probably look similar.

[Yogyakarta]

Yep! I have to agree. But, the Pontiac Aztek is equally as ugly. Seeing these monstrosities on the road brings back memories of those two mid-70s horrors: the AMC Pacer and AMC Gremlin. As I recall, there were plenty of those around at the time too, so somebody must have liked them.

Paul

[JustinGTP]

I like it, but not enought to own one :D

-Justin.

[arnage2]

apparently you havent seen the caddy srx, anything kia, (new) chevy impala, chevy aveo, and the pontiac aztec.
Oh yeah, the AMC DeLorean.

I am a car enthusiast when the pda is turned off, so this is also an area of my expertise.

<--- Check out my 1955 Chevy Bel-air nomad. (not ugly)

[Falstaff]

This car is incredibly ugly, every time I see one, I wonder who would drive it. On "The Greatest Page in the Universe," there is a section for the four ugliest cars (http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=ugly_cars) (Element included). Be warned, the site isn't G-rated, but I think the comments on these cars (Honda Element, Pontiak Aztec, Subaru Baja, and Chevy Avalanche) are great.

[Jacob]

This car IS incredibly ugly. No question.

[JustinGTP]

AMC DeLorean

AMC!!! AMC!!!!

You mean DMC, I hope anyways, Mr. Car Expert...

-Justin.

[dh]

I think the Pontiac Aztec and Chevvy Caprise Classic were just as bad. (Were they both designed last last century so not included, I wonder?) It's nice to see Honda (the company, not Justin) giving GM some competition in this area though. :D

[JustinGTP]

The Cadillac SRX Cannot be compared to the Honda Element because of the fact that the SRX is a Cross Over vehicle, car and SUV. The Element is supposed to be a Sport Activity Vehicle, along with the Pontiac Aztek. They are both underpowered in my opinion and lack the agressiveness of a real SUV. They Aztek features a tent in the back, while the Element has the doors that open so that you have a huge space to put things at the side. (Double doors_). While they all guzzle too much gas anyways, I would suggest that you dont go with Ford! They are getting way to be and environmentally unfriendly, it is not even funny. Looking at the new F series trucks, I wonder where that company is going. Apart from the fact that all fords are ugly....

-Justin.

[famousdavis]

Yep! I have to agree. But, the Pontiac Aztek is equally as ugly. Seeing these monstrosities on the road brings back memories of those two mid-70s horrors: the AMC Pacer and AMC Gremlin. As I recall, there were plenty of those around at the time too, so somebody must have liked them.

Paul

AMC Pacer (http://www.amcpacer.com/), you say? Ahhhh, yesssss..... :roll:

[ignar]

I voted for ugly. It's beyond me why people want to buy such a design. Personally, I can't stand Odyssey either.

[Pat Logsdon]

Nope. I've seen uglier.

Four words:

Buick Roadmaster & Chrysler LeBaron.

Specifically, the convertible '92 LeBaron with fake wood sides and the lovely maroon interior. 8O

[Pat Logsdon]

The Cadillac SRX Cannot be compared to the Honda Element because of the fact that the SRX is a Cross Over vehicle, car and SUV. The Element is supposed to be a Sport Activity Vehicle, along with the Pontiac Aztek.
Nope. The SRX is based on GM's Sigma (car) platform. Not a true "SUV", which should be built on a ladder frame, not a unibody frame (historically speaking, of course). The Element is based on the CRV platform, which is itself based on the (surprise!) Civic platform. The Aztec is based on a minivan platform.

Thus, the SRX CAN be compared to the Element, while the Aztek is more of a question mark.

Don't believe the marketing. :wink:

They are both underpowered in my opinion and lack the agressiveness of a real SUV.
The Element has a 160 hp, 2.4 liter i-VTEC engine. Same amount of horsepower as the Honda Civic Si. :mrgreen:

While they all guzzle too much gas anyways, I would suggest that you dont go with Ford!
What? Was someone looking to buy a Ford? I must have missed that post... If you were talking about the Cadillac and Pontiac, I agree with you - Cadillac DEFINITELY thumbs their collective noses as fuel efficiency - just look at the Northstar engine! Very powerful and well engineered, but drinks like a fish...

Looking at the new F series trucks, I wonder where that company is going. Apart from the fact that all fords are ugly....
I like the new F-150, and I like the new Mustang, too. Not enough to make me abandon VW/Audi, but still - they're nice cars.

[Yogyakarta]

Yep! I have to agree. But, the Pontiac Aztek is equally as ugly. Seeing these monstrosities on the road brings back memories of those two mid-70s horrors: the AMC Pacer and AMC Gremlin. As I recall, there were plenty of those around at the time too, so somebody must have liked them.

Paul

AMC Pacer (http://www.amcpacer.com/), you say? Ahhhh, yesssss..... :roll:

:lol: One of my buddies from high school had a Pacer. It was a complete and utter lemon. A mutual friend of ours refered to it as a "pregnant roller skate." He was always having problems with it.

[arbitrajeu]

<--- Check out my 1955 Chevy Bel-air nomad. (not ugly)
So you say :wink:

[Mitch D]

Hmmm... having been the owner of both a Suzuki SJ410 and a Samurai I think the Element looks ok (Keep in mind that both the Suzuki's listed above where boxes as well). Would I own one? I have tossed it around but with the Hummer H3 coming out I would rather spend my money there.

[PetiteFlower]

It's pretty bad, yeah, but I think the new Corollas win the Ugly prize. They're so bad that I haven't seen a single one on the road yet....I've only seen them on TV commercials.

[Palmguy]

While they all guzzle too much gas anyways, I would suggest that you dont go with Ford! They are getting way to be and environmentally unfriendly, it is not even funny. Looking at the new F series trucks, I wonder where that company is going. Apart from the fact that all fords are ugly....

-Justin.


:roll:

Ford has been making progress each and every year with regards to efficiency and friendliness to the environment. The new 3v 5.4 used in the F-150 represents a good improvements in both fuel economy and emissions.

Where is the company going? They're due for an upswing. The new F-150 has set a all-time record for units sold in a month, this coupled with the co-release of the Nissan Titan. Interior quality is at an all-time high and is now a very high priority on Ford's list. The new Mustang should be a big hit, it will be the first new chassis in 25 years and is loosely based on a Jaguar chassis (as well as the T-Bird and Lincoln LS). The GT is all set for it's release and it is the real deal. Also many new vehicles are coming out this year or early next. The Escape hybrid should have very respectable efficiency and still decent power. The Five Hundred sedan and the Freestyle crossover both look to be very nice automobiles, and ugly aren't words I would pick to describe them, they are actually conservatively styled. The Focus has a well-deserved freshening coming up this year.

I didn't see anyone even bring up Ford however...I don't know where that came from.

[Kevin C. Tofel]

Every time I see an Element on the road, I expect it to pull over and see 14 clowns get out of it....you know.....like at the circus where the clowns keep coming out of the little car....just when you think they're all out, another pops out.....maybe it's the styling, maybe it's the silly 2 tone paint job.....I don't know......

KCT

[Jeff Rutledge]

Every time I see an Element on the road, I expect it to pull over and see 14 clowns get out of it....you know.....like at the circus where the clowns keep coming out of the little car....just when you think they're all out, another pops out.....maybe it's the styling, maybe it's the silly 2 tone paint job.....I don't know......

KCT

:rotfl:
Thanks for that Kevin. I needed a good laugh today.

[JustinGTP]

Ford has been making progress each and every year with regards to efficiency and friendliness to the environment. The new 3v 5.4 used in the F-150 represents a good improvements in both fuel economy and emissions.

That was not my point, this engine, 5.4 litre is completely not needed in today's society. People are buying these gas guzzling vehicles because they think they need them, most people are not even using them for what they were designed for. Most people I know don't need to go climbing cliffs in their 4x4s to get to the shopping mall everyday. While I know that some people need it for pulling horses around on farms etc., generally these vehicles are not needed.

Where is the company going? They're due for an upswing....Interior quality is at an all-time high and is now a very high priority on Ford's list

I was not questioning their quality, we are talking about fuel effiency in the environment. While I also believe that Ford has an ugly style and look these days, that is totally irrelavent.

The new F-150 has set a all-time record for units sold in a month, this coupled with the co-release of the Nissan Titan.

I also don't need to know that more of these gas guzzling vehicles are beingp ut on the road for simply travelling from point A to B. Maybe they should design a road engine that has about 1.5L and 190hp.

The new Mustang should be a big hit, it will be the first new chassis in 25 years and is loosely based on a Jaguar chassis (as well as the T-Bird and Lincoln LS). The GT is all set for it's release and it is the real deal. Also many new vehicles are coming out this year or early next. The Escape hybrid should have very respectable efficiency and still decent power. The Five Hundred sedan and the Freestyle crossover both look to be very nice automobiles, and ugly aren't words I would pick to describe them, they are actually conservatively styled. The Focus has a well-deserved freshening coming up this year.

Once again, I don't care about all this information about the company itself - it's where they are leading the way with their ridiculous engine sizes.

Seen the new Infinity QX56? V8, 5.8L engine, built on the Nissan Armada platform. Terrible economy. Hybrids are the way to go, look at the Lexus RX330 Concept.

I didn't see anyone even bring up Ford however...I don't know where that came from.

Same to you, you were the one just preaching about interior quality and the new Mustang (which is ugly by the way)

-Justin.

[pacemkr]

While they all guzzle too much gas anyways, I would suggest that you dont go with Ford! They are getting way to be and environmentally unfriendly, it is not even funny. Looking at the new F series trucks, I wonder where that company is going. Apart from the fact that all fords are ugly....

-Justin.


:roll:

Ford has been making progress each and every year with regards to efficiency and friendliness to the environment. The new 3v 5.4 used in the F-150 represents a good improvements in both fuel economy and emissions.

...The new Mustang should be a big hit, it will be the first new chassis in 25 years and is loosely based on a Jaguar chassis (as well as the T-Bird and Lincoln LS). The GT is all set for it's release and it is the real deal. ... The Focus has a well-deserved freshening coming up this year.

I didn't see anyone even bring up Ford however...I don't know where that came from.

Ford is not the one to blame for the environmental unfriendliness of SUVs. They simple build what is popular. And lets face it SUVs are the number one selling cars in the US. I do not know why it is like that, but its just is.

Personnaly, I get pissed when I see a Lincoln Navigators being used to go get some bread at the grocery or pick up your kids. The car (any SUV for that matter) is a monster. I live in NYC and SUVs are all over, but you never see any of these people going to conquer mountain in these cars like you see all the time in commercials. I can understand a Hummer being used in the military, they need it. WHO in the world needs a Hummer to drive around the city? Especially the new Hummers made by Crysler, these are just pathetic in my opinion. I belive it made it to the list of 10 worst cars list of Car and Driver Magazine a few times last year (do not remmber details on this).

The 2005 Mustang by Ford is absolutely beautiful in my opinion, but I would never get it, it still uses way too much gasoline. Ford Focus was right on target, but it lacks a little bit in the looks.

So I agree with Honda_, 5.4L is WAY too much for most people.
Sorry for going totally of topic...

[JustinGTP]

Thank-you Pacemkr,

Someone can finally see the point of these monstrosities! They are simply not needed, despite the fact that they are popular. It just goes along with the "perfect American dream", and that's what all people what to maintain and boast about. Sad, is life....

-Justin.

[pacemkr]

Thank-you Pacemkr,
...It just goes along with the "perfect American dream", and that's what all people what to maintain and boast about. Sad, is life....
-Justin.

I dont think it is going to be like that for long though. I see my generation (I'm 17) looking more at cars that have balanced efficiency, speed and handling. Generally 6 cylinder engines with about 150-250 hp. It still not perfect, but these cars are much more efficient than SUVs. I do not know one person that would want an SUV when he/she can afford a car or already has one. Although who knows, views might change.

[Palmguy]

Honda,

Everything I said about the company that you didn't want to hear was in response to your comment "I don't know where that company is going".

I'm not backing SUVs entirely...I get pissed when I see Navis or H2s or whatever at the grocery store as well.

Honda is jumping on board as well too...their Pilot has a moderately sized V6, I just saw that they are releasing an SUT as well.

As far as a road engine with 1.5L and 190 hp, if you are referring to being used in the trucks that is unrealistic. Even if it had twice that horsepower there would be zero torque. Sure, the S2000 engine makes 240 hp, but what is the torque on that thing? 150 or so ft-lbs at 7500 RPM? A bigger engine is necessary in these vehicles as torque is more important than horsepower.

I did discuss hybrids by the way...the Escape is coming out this year and more will come eventually, even with the full size trucks.

As far as efficiency, Chevy's LS2 concept had the potential to make 35 mpg on the highway. Real world is close to 30 mpg. And that is in a "old school" :roll: 6.0L pushrod V8. I have gotten consistently 30 mpg in my 4.6L V8 Cougar. It is possible to get respectable efficiency with a 8 cylinder engine. That will only increase when hybrids to become more commonplace.

Like it or not though, trucks/SUVs are here and there is not much that any of us can do about it.

Sorry to annoy you with useless info about Ford, but everything that I said was in response to your one comment.

Back on topic however the Honda Element is butt-ugly. No way around it.

[JustinGTP]

As far as a road engine with 1.5L and 190 hp, if you are referring to being used in the trucks that is unrealistic. Even if it had twice that horsepower there would be zero torque. Sure, the S2000 engine makes 240 hp, but what is the torque on that thing? 150 or so ft-lbs at 7500 RPM? A bigger engine is necessary in these vehicles as torque is more important than horsepower.

How is this unrealistic? If the average North American can loose their ego for just one second, they can have the image of the truck - if they aren't obviously using the truck for what it was designed for, who needs the power?

Also - if they aren't using the truck for climbing hillsides and getting out ditches, they don't need the torque either! This is a simple concept that you just won't seem to acknowledge, obviously because you seem to want to destroy the earth with your "my v8 is so efficient statement" It is not! You may think it is good, but you dont think of the pollution it is causing! Not everything is about how much gas it takes!

-Justin.

[Wiggster]

My Hyundai Accent had over 400 miles on its last tank, with a little over 10 gallons put into it, and that lasted almost three months since I hardly drive. That's the limit about what I know about cars.

There, now the animosity can be directed towards me instead of each other :wink:

[Palmguy]

As far as a road engine with 1.5L and 190 hp, if you are referring to being used in the trucks that is unrealistic. Even if it had twice that horsepower there would be zero torque. Sure, the S2000 engine makes 240 hp, but what is the torque on that thing? 150 or so ft-lbs at 7500 RPM? A bigger engine is necessary in these vehicles as torque is more important than horsepower.

How is this unrealistic? If the average North American can loose their ego for just one second, they can have the image of the truck - if they aren't obviously using the truck for what it was designed for, who needs the power?

Also - if they aren't using the truck for climbing hillsides and getting out ditches, they don't need the torque either! This is a simple concept that you just won't seem to acknowledge, obviously because you seem to want to destroy the earth with your "my v8 is so efficient statement" It is not! You may think it is good, but you dont think of the pollution it is causing! Not everything is about how much gas it takes!

-Justin.

How would you propose that the average North American lose their ego? It ain't gonna happen...you know that and so do I. That said, A 5,000+ lbs. vehicle sure as heck needs torque just to power itself. This is just how it is. If Ford put the 2.5L I-4 in the F-150 or Navigator or say for some reason Dodge dropped in a 240 HP 2.0L S2000 motor in the Ram, the trucks themselves would not be able to get out their own way. It is not a simple concept that I am refusing to acknowledge. As long as 2.5 ton plus vehicles are being produced, they will need torque to move themselves.

I'm really not trying to be a dick but I don't forsee the mindset of your average SUV-driving-North American to change any time soon.

I'm not making the claim that my engine is the most efficient thing on the face of the earth. Of course not. I do believe that many people have no clue what an eight cylinder engine is capable of however.

[GoldKey]

Don't group all SUV's together. I have a CRV and find it to be a great balance between space and fuel economy. And while I think the H2 is pretty cool, not many people really need that kind of vehicle.

[pacemkr]

...That said, A 5,000+ lbs. vehicle sure as heck needs torque just to power itself. This is just how it is. If Ford put the 2.5L I-4 in the F-150 or Navigator or say for some reason Dodge dropped in a 240 HP 2.0L S2000 motor in the Ram, the trucks themselves would not be able to get out their own way. It is not a simple concept that I am refusing to acknowledge. As long as 2.5 ton plus vehicles are being produced, they will need torque to move themselves.

I'm really not trying to be a dick but I don't forsee the mindset of your average SUV-driving-North American to change any time soon.

I'm not making the claim that my engine is the most efficient thing on the face of the earth. Of course not. I do believe that many people have no clue what an eight cylinder engine is capable of however.

No offense, but a much smaller engine with right power to torque conversion would most definitely work. You say that a 5000 pound vehicle needs the high power engine to drive itself. However, the 5714 lb. Navigator has a towing capacity of 6000 lb. This is way more than the vehicle needs to drive itself. The 300 hp that Navigator has is used to produce power to climb mountains, not speed. I believe it can have a 6 cylinder engine with right ratio and drive quite well with less towing capacity. Most Navigators are used to drive in the city. And while they use the gasoline, all they produce is towing capacity which is never used, therefore wasted. Once the engine is made, most cars do not have the ability to get the power when they need it and then disable a few cylinders to stop wasting energy.

You are right however on the fact that SUVs are probably here for a long time. But SUV is a form factor (I did generalize before, sorry Goldkey). Lets use the CRV as an example, as it was brought up, the car is an SUV and has a 4! cylinder engine and is still able to deliver. Im sure it drives quite nicely and still has a 1500 lb of towing capacity. Now this I can understand, 1500 lb sounds like something a person would be comfortable with. Who needs more than 1500lb of towing capacity? (talking about the city here)

Also, please consider that this is my point of view. There are plenty of people on both sides of the argument, so lets keep it a calm discussion.

[Palmguy]

No offense, but a much smaller engine with right power to torque conversion would most definitely work. You say that a 5000 pound vehicle needs the high power engine to drive itself. However, the 5714 lb. Navigator has a towing capacity of 6000 lb. This is way more than the vehicle needs to drive itself. The 300 hp that Navigator has is used to produce power to climb mountains, not speed. I believe it can have a 6 cylinder engine with right ratio and drive quite well with less towing capacity. Most Navigators are used to drive in the city. And while they use the gasoline, all they produce is towing capacity which is never used, therefore wasted. Once the engine is made, most cars do not have the ability to get the power when they need it and then disable a few cylinders to stop wasting energy.

You are right however on the fact that SUVs are probably here for a long time. But SUV is a form factor (I did generalize before, sorry Goldkey). Lets use the CRV as an example, as it was brought up, the car is an SUV and has a 4! cylinder engine and is still able to deliver. Im sure it drives quite nicely and still has a 1500 lb of towing capacity. Now this I can understand, 1500 lb sounds like something a person would be comfortable with. Who needs more than 1500lb of towing capacity? (talking about the city here)

Also, please consider that this is my point of view. There are plenty of people on both sides of the argument, so lets keep it a calm discussion.

You are right, to an extent. I've mainly been arguing with Honda, trying to be civil however, but he brought up a theoretical sub 2 liter 190 horse engine. Such an engine would not be sufficient to power a Navigator.

[Palmguy]

obviously because you seem to want to destroy the earth with your "my v8 is so efficient statement" It is not! You may think it is good, but you dont think of the pollution it is causing! Not everything is about how much gas it takes!

-Justin.

Here's a little something for you to think about...

http://www.mn12tbird.com/misc/emissions.jpg

My car is powered by a Ford 4.6L SOHC V8 with a 4R70W automatic behind it.

[pacemkr]

My point is not so much conserning polution (except CO2 which is becoming a real issue), technology in that field has gone far. My main consern is the effect such high amounts of gasoline consumtion have on the nation as a whole. What we do to get our gasoline and what is done to keep oil prices low. And consider how much influence such things have on economy and politics. I think oil is the gold of our time and if we do not reconsider our source of energy, we are going to end up in a frenzy for oil, wars all over the place just for the sole purpose of getting what we want, not need, to keep our way of life. This is going to deep, but its all linked together.

Palmguy, dont take this as an insult against you or your car. This is just the way it is in US, and its has to change eventually no matter what (when the oil is simply not there), so the key is to find a new energy source. Going back to the topic, the Element reminds me of a typical hybrid car. Why do they make hybrid cars so ugly or inferior looking? There is no way they can become more popular unless the manufacturers put some style into their designs.

[pacemkr]

And about the new energy source. Did anybody hear anything new about hydrogen cells? I remember Pres. Bush saying that he is putting some money into research that would help to develop the technology more. Did it ever happen?

[PetiteFlower]

Bush was lying. He comes from Texas and he OWNS AN OIL COMPANY! Or did at one time, I'm not entirely sure if he still owns it. Big Oil is WAY too powerful for alternative fuel research to ever really get very far. The research already exists for several different types of alternatives to be tested, but the money isn't going to them, and it won't as long as the oil companies have america in their pockets.

I'd consider a gas-electric hybrid if I didn't do mostly highway driving; since I'd be using the gas engine at highway speeds anyway I don't think it would make much of a difference. But I may get one in the future.

Seems like gas prices as high as they are now should be enough of an incentive for people to not buy huge SUVs that they don't need, but hell, people are stupid. I hate SUVs and I will never buy one, I don't plan to drive on any mountains and if/when I have more then 2 kids I will get a MINIVAN before I'll get an SUV, "soccer mom stigma" be damned! I hate being behind them on the road and I hate the consumptionist culture they represent. Even the efficient ones still block my view on the road and MOST of them seem to be driven by idiots who think that because they are sitting a foot and a half higher off the ground then me that they own the road!

Ok sorry /rant

Oh BTW I wouldn't try to tow ANYTHING with a CRV, at least not if I planned on keeping it. Just because the specs say it CAN tow that much doesn't mean it can do it without hurting the engine; you're just putting it under so much more stress then its used to taking that you'd be seriously reducing the life of the engine. If you really do need to tow things, then you have an excuse to get a pickup or a big SUV. Some people need them, and those people I have no beef with. But ideally if you're one of those people, then you have another little fuel efficient car that you can use when you're not hauling or towing ;)

A friend of mine has a huge SUV for his winter vehicle; he doesn't tow or haul but he does live in a pretty remote area where the roads get really bad in winter. His summer vehicle, though, is a motorcycle :) I think that mostly makes up for the monster car!