SLegacy99

It's smaller, though it doesn't look like much smaller. So perhaps this will offer something that the Accord hybrid does not. Greater efficiency? Lower price?

Fizzboy7

Impala, yes. Not a successful design to go after. The current Impala is a stale and dated car being pushed out with massive incentives and to rental companies. I do not believe Honda even knows about the Impala. Pure coincidence due to lack of American market knowledge.

The front is far nicer on this than the new Accord. Same with the rear, where there's an actual trunk instead of a frump droop-butt. This should slot above the Civic, if I read correctly. However, it just should have been a Civic to begin with. The body, along with the dash, looks more upscale and complete than the current feminine Civic mess.

As far as mistakes, the nav screen is so poorly mounted, that it actually blocks the air vents (!). We've reached such a new low with these tacked-on screens, that they can't even clear the vents. A sorry, sorry day in automotive design. Also, rear taillights are way too big. It appears the designers were doing their job, then had a drink, and then finished the taillights.

mmarshall

Agreed that this car, size-wise, should probably be the new Civic. Strongly disagree, however, on the Impala....past Impalas were exactly as you describe them, but not this latest one by any means, which is a complete transformation from the past-generation. True, it's not selling, but none of the big GM sedans are...the sedan market itself is depressed compared to the past.

Sulu

You may disagree about the Impala but the opinion of one (or just a few) may not be enough to make it a good car. A car, especially a mass-market car like the Impala, is not merely about how good it is technically. A mass-market car must be looked at as a complete package because that is how its audience will look at it, and if its audience does not receive it well, it is a failure.

It may be the styling (which we have greatly diverging views about in this forum); or it may be the price (too high or too low for its intended audience); or it may be that there may be too many competing products in its automaker's lineup (perhaps it is too close to the Malibu); or it may be the name (consumers may now associate "Impala" with "rental car special").

Again, why does a "mediocre appliance" like the Camry sell while the "complete transformation" Impala not sell? The Camry is obviously a better whole package than the Impala.

Fizzboy7

You explained things well there. While sedan sales are not what they were five years ago, they are still strong and a huge part of the market. To say the GM sedans aren't selling due to SUV popularity is more of an excuse than reality. As you mentioned, well-rounded models like the Accord and Camry are still flying out of lots throughout the region. The current Impala is improved over it's predecessor, but not well-rounded enough to be a viable option for most.

97-SC300

iTrader: (17)

They should have come up with a new name for this car. Why would they want to re-use the name of their clear-failure model Insight?

Chevy and other American brands know what they are doing with names....every time they make a giant POS, they just call it something else when the next generation model comes out ie. Cavalier>Cobalt>Cruze or Dodge Neon>Caliber>Dart

mmarshall

OK, then....never mind what my opinion (or those like me) was on the car. See what Consumer Reports had to say about the present-generation Impala. It was one of the highest scoring sedans they had ever tested in their history. And not only are they professional test-drivers, but notoriously leery of American-badged products.

https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...orts/index.htm

Sulu

It is easy to argue and defend technical excellence in mass-market cars. That is what all of these magazines -- both online and print -- try to do (even though they are often arguing opinions rather than facts). But it is extremely difficult to argue that elusive factor known as "all-roundedness" (especially when the critic is enamored of low 0-to-60 numbers and high skid-pad numbers).

So, according to the autopress, the Impala and the Mazda 6 (for example) may possess excellent technical credentials, yet be missing some je ne sais quoi (literally translated from French as "I don't know what") that makes them unattractive to the buying public.

As has been suggested, this new Honda Insight may prove to have excellent technical credentials -- Honda's latest 2-motor hybrid is proving to be excellent -- but still not sell because of missing some elusive factor. That missing factor may be a good name -- Honda's earlier Insight was not popular because it did not have a particularly good hybrid system, so the name "Insight" may be tainted.

We won't know truly how "good" this new Insight is until it starts to sell. If it sells well, it is easy to say "It is a Honda so it will sell well". If it does not sell well, there will -- inevitably -- be arguments such as "It does not sell BUT it is an excellent technical product".

Fizzboy7

Using the Insight name will not cause any harm. Past Insight(s) were barely known. Very few sold and few are going to know they once existed. To the public, this is pretty much an all-new car, all-new idea, and an all-new name.

mmarshall

I agree with Fizzboy on this one. Only us car nuts, here on forums, are likely to remember the duds that the last couple-generations of Insight were, with its relatively primitive IMA and toy-like road manners. And, unlike the Prius, there simply wasn't enough of them sold.

jadu

iTrader: (42)

to add, the last Insight looked like a Prius anyways and IMO most will think it's a Prius till you see the Honda emblem, so, I agree no harm in recycling the name

if they do come up with another name, does that mean they would have to file patents/copyrights? if so, not sure how much that costs or how long it takes but that's just more added cost to development and deployment and delay to market, which I'm sure Honda could easily afford, but if it's an unneeded expense they could avoid and not sure they would want to wait for the rights either.

97-SC300

iTrader: (17)

Okay.... that may be true, but why can't they just call it something else? No creativity?

mmarshall

These days, coming up with all-new names is not necessarily as easy as it looks. First, so many new vehicles have been introduced, over the years, with both alphabetical, letter/number, and all-number designations, that there aren't a whole lot of legible or reasonable combinations left. Second, if you get too close to a name that another manufacturer already has a patent or copyright on, there could be legal trouble.

Aron9000

You think GM would go after somebody trying to sell a 4 door car called the Gazelle lol??? I know the law can be a bit vague regarding alphanumeric designations, I think Ford tried to sue Toyota back in the 90's for using T100 on their midsize pickup, too close to F100, which was a designation Ford had retired in the late 70's/early 80's ontheir full size 1/2 ton trucks. Or maybe they thought it was too close to F150, which is what they called their half tons by the 90's.


Anyways, I think Insight is kind of an odd choice for name considering its past. The 1st car with that name was a rather oddball but IMO awesome engineering exercise with limited mass market appeal, while the 2nd gen tried to be mass market and looked like a Prius, but was technically inferior.

mmarshall

There is, in fact, a vehicle called the Gazelle. It is marketed by a Russian company (GAZ) that produces light commercial vehicles, trucks, and minivans.