Ford's Crown Vic, Chevy's Impala, etc. These are full-size cars with no Japanese competition. What gives? The Impala sold like 23k copies last month. Do Toyota and Honda not think it's worth making an affordable full-size because the US would be the primary market interested?

The Avalon is "supposed" to fill in that niche.

Do you realize most Crown Vics are sold to fleet sales for government agencies and rental car agencies, taxi companies and etc? That's the main reason.

The Avalon is "supposed" to fill in that niche.

Do you realize most Crown Vics are sold to fleet sales for government agencies and rental car agencies, taxi companies and etc? That's the main reason.

But the Avalon is barely larger than the Camry. Same goes for the Maxima. (BTW, are they supposed to compete, being flagships of each respective company?)

I dunno, still seems there's a market. I see a lot of Impalas, if not Crown Vics, being driven by civilians. $25k for an LS430-sized car. Not bad if you need the room.

Just checked toyota.com, and I guess you're right. The new Avalon is 197.2". Previously I think it was more like 191 or something, though, because I remember it being much closer in size to the Camry's 189. Anyway, that makes sense, then. However, I'm still not sure why the other Japanese companies don't have full-size models (or at least in the US). Honda, Nissan, Mazda, Mitsubishi, etc. are all giving away a reasonably sized market to the Americans. I guess VW is, too.

The Avalon has always had better backseat room than the Crown Vic. My parents have a Mercury Grand Marquis. The back seat in that car is not nearly as roomy as what one might expect from such a giant. The Avalon's interior volumn puts that car in the 'full-size' catagory. I think the Avalon competes very well against the LeSabre, Impala, and Crown Vic. And the new Avalon has even more room than before.. Detroit's large sedans have relatively huge external dimensions. But when it comes to interior room and comfort, they fall short of the Avalon's standard.

Just checked toyota.com, and I guess you're right.

But of course. :)

A few years ago as a Honda owner I discovered that the company actively discourages sales to rental companies and the government. While Detroit has always made "special prices" (deep discounts) for large fleet buyers, Honda won't even enter the bidding.

Why? One very smart marketing move . . .

While Detroit has always thought of the rental companies as providing "demonstrators" for the flying public (the "upscale" demographic they want, although with today's discount airfares, almost any mutt can fly . . . ). By putting their latest products into the hands of expense-account business travelers, they believed they could influence the decision of that person's family car when it came time to buy.

Not so, said Honda - those ex-fleet cars flooding the market artificially depress the value of a used car, accounting for the poor resale values of particularly Chrysler products, but Ford and Chevy as well. Honda took the opposite tack - without having to discount large numbers of cars to compete for the fleet market, they can sell to the public without having to make up losses from their fleet sales. They support their dealer pricing, while keeping large numbers of used cars from returning every year or two to compete with the pre-owned cars on the dealer's lot.

Result? Better prices, happy dealers, and fewer rent-a-wrecks on the street contaminating the brand image. A little convoluted reasoning, but so far, at least, it's worked for them! :)

Sure, Honda doesn't do fleet sales, but I don't see why that means they can't produce a full-size car... Besides, it'd give them good practice for when they come out with their V8 flagship that slates above the RL. ;)

Ford's Crown Vic, Chevy's Impala, etc. These are full-size cars with no Japanese competition. What gives? The Impala sold like 23k copies last month. Do Toyota and Honda not think it's worth making an affordable full-size because the US would be the primary market interested?

Toyota Avalon is a 'Full Size' car. :rolleyes: :cool: The Avalon is very close in overall dimensions to the LS 430 actually! :D Hope your not suggesting the LS is a 'mid-sized' vehicle? :confused:

Sure, Honda doesn't do fleet sales, but I don't see why that means they can't produce a full-size car... Besides, it'd give them good practice for when they come out with their V8 flagship that slates above the RL. ;)
The question is, will they ever have one ? :dunno:

The question is, will they ever have one ? :dunno:

One can only hope.

Incendiary has a point here. I'm familiar with the new Avalon...I gave a new XLS a long test-drive a few months ago. The Avalon may have a 197" length but it is far from what I would call "full-size"....even with the additional length it is basically a stretched Camry. And its ride......even the non-Touring version I drove.....while not harsh, is far from what I would call really smooth.

Maybe I am just living too much in the past, but the true full-size cars I grew up with...the Cadillacs, Lincolns, and Imperials...were 225-230" in length, had wheelbases of 125-130", weighed around 5000 lbs, and, believe me, RODE like it. Auto manufacturers today advertise a "smooth ride"....they have NO IDEA what a truly smooth ride is.

GM was the first company to corrupt the term "full-size" in 1977 by downsizing their big cars into what was formerly the compact and mid-sized class yet still calling them "full-size".....Ford and Chrysler followed by 1980. Since then the GM " full-size " cars have been even FURTHER downsized, yet they still stubbornly call them " full-size ".
The first car I ever drove...a compact Plymouth Valiant .....was larger than many of today's " full-size " cars.

So....not surprisingly...........I laugh when I hear Toyota, Buick, Cadillac, and others call their flagships "full-size" cars. :gotnx:
Even the Lincoln Town Car.....one of the largest production cars made today...is mid-sized by early 1970's standards.

Incendiary has a point here. The Avalon may have a 197" length but it is far from what I would call "full-size"....even wih the additional length it is basically a stretched Camry.

Maybe I am just living too much in the past, but the true full-size cars I grew up with...the Cadillacs, Lincolns, and Imperials...were 225-230" in length, had wheelbases of 125-130", weighed around 5000 lbs, and, believe me, RODE like it. Auto manufacturers today advertise a "smooth ride"....they have NO IDEA what a truly smooth ride is.

GM was the first company to corrupt the term "full-size" in 1977 by downsizing their big cars into what was formerly the compact and mid-sized class yet still calling them "full-size".....Ford and Chrysler followed by 1980. Since then the GM " full-size " cars have been even FURTHER downsized, yet they still stubbornly call them " full-size ".
The first car I ever drove...a compact Plymouth Valiant .....was larger than many of today's " full-size " cars.

And now you're content with your not too smooth riding, not very full size 176" IS300. :thumbup: ;)

This could be its own thread topic, and maybe I'll start a new thread later, but if I were starting a non-luxury car company now, here would be my lineup:

166" hatchback, 2 and 4 doors, MT and AT, 4-banger and turbocharged 4, FWD
178" sedan, coupe, wagon, MT and AT, turbocharged 4 and V6, FWD and AWD
190" sedan, coupe, wagon, MT and AT, turbocharged 4, V6, V8, FWD and AWD
202" sedan, AT, V6 and V8, FWD and AWD
160" roadster convertible, MT and AT, turbocharged 4, RWD

As I expanded, I suppose I'd add SUVs, pickups, and a minivan or two. Safety, reliability, and handling would be the emphases. I think with just those core models listed above, though, and maybe just all in 4-door forms to start with, it would be a solid start.

And now you're content with your not too smooth riding, not very full size 176" IS300. :thumbup: ;)

This.

True....you don't buy an IS primarily for ride comfort...although with the 16" wheels and all-season tires the ride is acceptable by my standards. The 17" low-profile tires were a little harsh.

One other point, though, that is important......today the terms compact, mid-sized, and full-sized are determined by EPA measurments of interior volume, not exterior length or weight like years ago. For example, legally the Prius, by EPA standards, is a mid-size car.

One other point, though, that is important......today the terms compact, mid-sized, and full-sized are determined by EPA measurments of interior volume, not exterior length or weight like years ago. For example, legally the Prius, by EPA standards, is a mid-size car.

Government determinations maybe, but Edmunds, car mags, etc. all seem to have their own definitions of what fits in each class and what competes with what. I'd take into consideration exterior length, price, engine, interior room, basically the gestalt, before deciding what's full, mid, compact, or subcompact sized. However, I still look at length as the primary determinant since it's a very easy way to distinguish cars.

Ford's Crown Vic, Chevy's Impala, etc. These are full-size cars with no Japanese competition. What gives? The Impala sold like 23k copies last month. Do Toyota and Honda not think it's worth making an affordable full-size because the US would be the primary market interested?
The Avalon was orignally intended to be the Buick competition. It offered a front bench option and was based on the Camry with a stretched wheelbase and only 100lbs more than the Camry. The Avalon has built a good name for itself as the Japenese full size car. Today, it extends on those values.

The new Nissan Maxima, I don't care how they market it, is pretty big and full size as well. I suspect there are some Buick owners that are buying this car b/c it is spacious, FWD, fast and the styling is different.

But even then, as MMarshall has stated, they are very small in comparison to what many view as full size. Thus the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis solider on with loyal buyers. The Chevy Impala is a pretty long car as well. The new 300C is 197" long too.

I think the basic reason you don't see large Japanese full size cars is it contradicts every companies humble beginings. Honda is the most conservative, they just offered a V-6 10 years ago. Japanese cars still to many equate small, fuel efficient cars.

I dunno, if they can offer large SUVs and pickups and minivans, I don't see why not a fullsize sedan. Anyway, regardless of their non-monetary reasons, they are losing out on a segment I bet they could easily dominate and make profit from.

Sure, Honda doesn't do fleet sales, but I don't see why that means they can't produce a full-size car... Besides, it'd give them good practice for when they come out with their V8 flagship that slates above the RL. ;)

It's easy to forget that Honda is a MUCH MUCH smaller company than Toyota. Remember Honda has JUST NOW produced its first truck. Toyota's been at it for what, a decade? It also had a Land Cruiser in the 70s (60s?) whereas Honda came from motorcycles lawnmowers and generators in the 70s.

Honda has a hard enough time keeping up with its existing lines, and the Acura line, let alone significant expansion.

Nissan has been in somewhat of a renewal along with their Infiniti division and they at least have had some backing from THEIR parent, Renault. I'd say Nissan/Infiniti have taken a page out of Chrysler's book - offer stylish or distinctive bang for the buck (Altima, Titan, G35, M, etc.).

But Toyota is just HUGE and as you guys see, it's taken them this long to get CLOSE to getting into the large mainstream sedan business. The new Avalon is pretty amazing.

About fleet sales, I bet there's also reasons Honda doesn't do it and also fleet carriers don't buy them. Ever noticed the rental cars often have 'odd' option combinations on their cars? They're like GM/Ford/Chrysler '2nds' it seems to me - I doubt Honda wants to do that being so careful about their brand. And if they don't want to do that with the cheap prices that '2nds' warrant, then the fleet guys don't want Honda's cars either because they're too expensive. You don't see many Toyota's in rental car companies either.

you dont need a car as long as the old huge 70s cars, when you can havve good interior space in a smaller package, as they are easier to manauver

When I visited Tokyo a few years ago I saw lots of larger cars / fleet cars. Lots of the cabs were CROWN cars with that funky mirror on the hood.

So they do make them, and they use them in fleets, but they don't import them.

you dont need a car as long as the old huge 70s cars, when you can havve good interior space in a smaller package, as they are easier to manauver

You're correct that today's cars are FAR more space-efficient than 30 years ago...and offer almost the same interior space in a much smaller package: and they are indeed more nimble, handling-wise, but they lack the bulk, weight, long overhangs front and rear, tall, high-profile tires, and soft suspension that contribute to ride comfort.

Of course, many people today don't want that.....they want sharp handling and are willing to give up comfort to have it.

The Avalon was orignally intended to be the Buick competition. It offered a front bench option and was based on the Camry with a stretched wheelbase and only 100lbs more than the Camry. The Avalon has built a good name for itself as the Japenese full size car. Today, it extends on those values.

The new Nissan Maxima, I don't care how they market it, is pretty big and full size as well. I suspect there are some Buick owners that are buying this car b/c it is spacious, FWD, fast and the styling is different.

But even then, as MMarshall has stated, they are very small in comparison to what many view as full size. Thus the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis solider on with loyal buyers. The Chevy Impala is a pretty long car as well. The new 300C is 197" long too.

I think the basic reason you don't see large Japanese full size cars is it contradicts every companies humble beginings. Honda is the most conservative, they just offered a V-6 10 years ago. Japanese cars still to many equate small, fuel efficient cars.

I agree 1SICK! :agreed: Like I said earlier in this thread......the Avalon is very close in dimensions (mostly interior space) to the LS 430 so it's hardly a mid sized car. :cool:

Sure, Honda doesn't do fleet sales, but I don't see why that means they can't produce a full-size car... Besides, it'd give them good practice for when they come out with their V8 flagship that slates above the RL. ;):uh: I certainly have no access to Mr. Honda's boardroom, but let's try out this logic:


The largest single market for "full sized" cars in the US is in fleet sales, as noted earlier. If Honda has elected not to pursue those sales, they have immediately eliminated a good share of their "full size" market.


Usable cabin space, the ability to comfortably accommodate five passengers and a fair amount of luggage is now possible in the larger "mid-size" range, although those qualifications remain debatable. The Avalon from Toyota and the Ford 500, the Buick LeSabre and even the smaller Lucerne, among the domestics represent this new packaging ethos well. If you think about it, as mmarshall said, the "full size" cars of the sixties and seventies were big boats with a good deal of passenger space, but in all the wrong places. Styling still dictated form - witness foot-thick doors of mid-sixties GM products, or the stretched fender lines that carried out the "aircraft" theme of the late fifties (remember tailfins?), but contributed nothing to payload space. Today, if you regularly haul six passengers, they'd be more comfortable in a van; If you really need a trunk that big for everyday hauling, buy a pickup.


Buyers looking to accommodate a large family have largely pursued other purchasing options: minivans and SUV's. Thus the overall market for "full-size" 4-door sedans is dwindling as the single “family car” is replaced by several special-purpose vehicles.


Increasing fuel costs in the last few months has limited sales of V8 engines in all segments except those where an acceptable alternative is not available, i.e.: large truck-based SUV's and large-displacement performance cars.


Honda has a long record of success with its current range of products - introduction of a new, incompatible model strictly for the mid-price market in the US isn’t likely to be justified by profits, considering the potential volume of sales.


The RL will sell as a premium line, not a “family sedan”, and given its projected price, it could creep into the realm of profitability – although as a low-volume product it may serve more as a halo than a practical addition to the balance sheet. (Replacing the NSX?)
Just my $.02. :dunno:

My parents have a Mercury Grand Marquis. The back seat in that car is not nearly as roomy as what one might expect from such a giant.

I hear you. There is a LWB Crown Vic known as the P70, which 6 inches of extra leg room in the rear. In the US they're only sold to fleet/police markets, which is sad really. Over at this end, its available upon demand along with the Grand Marquis GSL, which is the LWB version for the Grand Marquis.

It's easy to forget that Honda is a MUCH MUCH smaller company than Toyota. Remember Honda has JUST NOW produced its first truck. Toyota's been at it for what, a decade? It also had a Land Cruiser in the 70s (60s?) whereas Honda came from motorcycles lawnmowers and generators in the 70s.

I would think honda is pretty strong. remember, they sell not only Honda and Acura cars, but also motorcycles, atvs, scooters, generators, lawnmowers, etc.

My garage has two honda dirtbikes and a honda lawnmower. good stuff. don't worry though, I'm not to fond of there cars. I have two Lex to even things out. :)


toyota hass made a big boat of a car for years, we just don't get it here

century

America is the only country that makes large rear drive sedans that are fairly inexpensive. Other countries including Japan make large cars but reserve them for expensive luxury vehicles. It would be very difficult for Honda, Toyota, or Nissan to pull off a large inexpensive car like a Caprice, Impala, Grand Marquis, Crown Victoria, Lesabre etc because it would most likely need to be rear drive with a v-8 to be taken seriously and it would encroach on LS400, RL, and Q45 sales since people could get a large v-8 sedan for much cheaper then those cars from the same company that makes those vehicles. Large American sedans use outdated unsophisticated chasis, suspensions, and engines plus their interiors are pretty cheap and low quality in order to sell for low prices. Most likely Honda or Toyota would have to use crude chasis and engines and cheap materials to sell at competitive prices which would diminish the brand and people would complain about them loosing quality. Also there is not much of a market for them right now especially for younger buyers who want smaller more sophisticated high performance/luxury sedans. The market has changed and GM knows which is why they switched the Impala to front wheel drive and ditched the v-8 for a v-6. An Avalon or Maxima are pretty large now and compete with the new Impala. Unless it is an expensive luxury vehicle like an LS430, A-8, or S500 I doubt you will see a large v-8 rwd sedan coming from Europe or Japan since they consider large size, rwd, v-8 to be soley for high priced luxury vehicles.