You have saved this page | See all saved pages
Honda Element
4724 messages, Last post on Jul 06, 2012 at 6:27 PM
You are in the Honda Element Forum.What is this discussion about? Honda Element, Hatchback, SUV
#1502 of 4724 Marketing (from a canadian car site). by vadp
Dec 27, 2002 (1:19 pm)
"Public interest for the Model X concept reached high levels on the auto show circuit. It earned a fast track into production for the 2003 model year, just in time to greet a rapidly emerging generation of new vehicle buyers between the ages of 22 and 32 – the upper spectrum of what is commonly known as Generation Y and the lower spectrum of Generation X.Honda Canada anticipates the 20- to 34-year-old demographic is expected to account for one- quarter of the vehicle buying public by 2006. Although Element is designed with "Gen X" and "Gen Y" in mind and is based on the generation’s unique vehicle wants, it’s expected to appeal more to a frame-of-mind (active, youthful) rather than an specific age group."
#1503 of 4724 Chris by rsholland
Dec 27, 2002 (2:40 pm)
<< has anyone else heard about a 675 lb load rating including occupants, cargo, accessories, and the tongue weight(if towing a trailer)? >>I double-checked the payload rating on both Elements at the DC auto show. Both stated 675 pounds payload on a sticker right on the inside edge of the driver's door, along with tire info.
Somebody earlier questioned the load rating of the tires. I remember seeing one Element wearing Goodyear Wrangler HT tires, which are light-truck tires. So, the tires should plenty capable.
Bob
#1504 of 4724 Hmmm... by rsholland
Dec 27, 2002 (2:44 pm)
<< Although Element is designed with "Gen X" and "Gen Y" in mind and is based on the generation’s unique vehicle wants, it’s expected to appeal more to a frame-of-mind (active, youthful) rather than an specific age group." >>Several of the folks at the DC show that were real curious about the Element were well into their 60s, I would guess. I'll be 58 in 6 weeks. Does that mean we're "youthful," or just "immature?"
Bob
#1505 of 4724 Colour(color) Marketing by ropedart
Dec 27, 2002 (2:49 pm)
I can see right thru Honda's marketing intent thru the color choices. The green and shoreline mist colors are nice but they scream BOOMER!The Xterra now offers an orange color this year.
Expect the Element to change the Suv/Minivan design forever. The rear part of the Element is brilliant. The clamshell door was tried in the 93? Civic but was too small to be effective. Scaled up to van size it makes sense. Swing out doors with mounted tires are plain stupid. They are inconvenient and susceptible to damage. Expect vans to have wipe out floors. Now that Honda has shown you can lick the sound proofing issues. Carpets are just a cheap way of hiding rough work and killing sound.
#1506 of 4724 by robertsmx
Dec 27, 2002 (3:48 pm)
What is the load rating of the tires? For all you know, 675 lb. payload may be Honda conservative to avoid any kind of tread separation issues. The number may be based on the worst-case scenario with every possible variable assumed to be present (fully loaded, 4WD, full tank, and a trailer being towed).#1507 of 4724 20-somethings by s852
Dec 27, 2002 (7:41 pm)
Some young people will be able to afford it. 22-25 year old college graduates will be able to afford it. There will also be plenty of teens and college students who's parents buy the vehicle for them.They probably will not be anywhere near 50,000 to 70,000 people per year in that age range who will want it and be able to afford it though.
Lots of older people will be buying Elements.
#1508 of 4724 Ancrynoms by ropedart
Dec 27, 2002 (9:31 pm)
Honda Canada wants to call the Element a ALV (Active Lifestyle Vehicle) and Pontiac wanted to call the Aztek a SRV (Sport Recreational Vehicle). Is one of these going to stick? SUVs are getting bad rap these days. Need to start changing names because the government wants to tax these things off the road. Did someone say the Element was a car?#1509 of 4724 by anonymousposts
Dec 28, 2002 (9:02 am)
It could pass for a tall 4WD car. It has a low emmissions 4 cylinder engine, gets decent fuel economy, and definitely won't be used to haul any heavy equipment.#1510 of 4724 robertsmx by rsholland
Dec 28, 2002 (9:29 am)
<< What is the load rating of the tires? >>I didn't check. However, they are 215/70x16 Goodyear Wrangler light truck tires. I'm sure they've got a decent load rating.
Bob
#1511 of 4724 tires and lbs by chris777
Dec 28, 2002 (10:08 am)
"215/70x16" I thought they looked a bit narrowsame width as the 13 inchers on my civic.
would different possibly wider tires affect payload that much?
I guess 675 isn't that bad only 125 from 800
it still throws into question the actual utility though
I wasn't planning on hauling a ton of concrete or bricks,
but if I went to pick up something large and heavy , say me and my helper rang in at a combined 400 lbs that only leaves 275 lbs to play with, I need to look at payload ratings on other suv/trucks I guess
To POST a message, please
Sign In.
Advertisement
Most Popular in Forums
Search Forums
Enter Keyword(s):
Learn More, Do More
Edmunds Community
Advertisement