Honda Motor September 2009 Sales

[Justin Bimmer]

10/01/2009 - TORRANCE, Calif. -

American Honda Motor Co., Inc., posted total September vehicle sales of 77,229, a decline of 23.3 percent compared to September 2008, based on the daily selling rate*. Honda Division posted September sales of 69,970, a decline of 22.5 percent versus September 2008.

Honda total car sales decreased by 20.4 percent, to 41,982. Honda light-truck sales decreased 25.4 percent, to 27,988. Pilot sales increased 0.5 percent, to 5,438.

The Acura Division posted sales of 7,259, a decline of 30.3 percent compared to September 2008. The MDX was the brand's best-selling vehicle with 2,220 units sold.

*The daily selling rate is calculated with 25 days for September 2009 and 24 days for September 2008. The year-to-date daily selling rate is calculated with 229 days for 2009 and 230 days for 2008. All percentages reflect the daily selling rate.

Fit sales dropped dramatically compared to last year, a whole 51.6%. It looks like post-clunkers sales have dropped back to the expected levels. With inventories depleted, many people are probably waiting for the 2010s to arrive so they can get what they want. According to truecar.com, current prices are also very high for any remaining 09s, most likely due to low inventory. Prices probably won't go down until late Nov. or Dec. when dealerships are full of cars again, but with the recession being unofficially over, don't expect to get the good deals from earlier this year.

__________________

[regfootball]

Fit sales dropped dramatically compared to last year, a whole 51.6%.

they found out its not that awesome of a car

[A Horse With No Name]

The same could be said of the aveo, the cobalt, the focus, the sebring, the corolla, the yaris, the versa, the sentra...all other small cars are down by a similar amount.

Try $4.35 a gallon gas vs. $2.35 a gallon gas...

The Fit is infinitely better than the Yaris, the Aveo, the Sebring, the Corolla, the Sentra, et. al.

Consider also the premium the Fit sells at over other small cars.

Chris

[CK001]

Consider also the premium the Fit sells at over other small cars.

Chris

The same can be said for any vehicle that Honda produces. Just because there are idiots blind to reality does not make the Fit or any of Honda's other offerings worth the money people are willing to pay for them.

[siegen]

The same can be said for any vehicle that Honda produces. Just because there are idiots blind to reality does not make the Fit or any of Honda's other offerings worth the money people are willing to pay for them.

It doesn't not make them worth the money people are willing to pay for them either.

[A Horse With No Name]

The same can be said for any vehicle that Honda produces. Just because there are idiots blind to reality does not make the Fit or any of Honda's other offerings worth the money people are willing to pay for them.

This begs the question. How do you define Honda buyers as idiots blind to reality?

The same remark could be made of GM buyers, Ford buyers, BMW buyers, Benz buyers et al.

Chris

[NEXTEL CUP]

The Fit is a Great Car!! It's great sales numbers in my opinion is beacuse it is the best well equipped car you can get that gives you great Gas MIlage. Just look interior pictures of the Fit: Example: The Steering Wheel it has Bluetooth, audio controls with the ability to scroll your ipod from the steering wheel. The interio also is the most driver friendly in the segment with 10 cup holders. Also add in it has a fold flat back seat and it makes it the most functional small car in it's segment.

http://automobiles.honda.com/fit/interior-photos.aspx

[siegen]

The Fit is a Great Car!! It's great sales numbers in my opinion is beacuse it is the best well equipped car you can get that gives you great Gas MIlage. Just look interior pictures of the Fit: Example: The Steering Wheel it has Bluetooth, audio controls with the ability to scroll your ipod from the steering wheel. The interio also is the most driver friendly in the segment with 10 cup holders. Also add in it has a fold flat back seat and it makes it the most functional small car in it's segment.

http://automobiles.honda.com/fit/interior-photos.aspx

Nice sarcasm Reg.

[CaddyXLR-V]

This begs the question. How do you define Honda buyers as idiots blind to reality?

The same remark could be made of GM buyers, Ford buyers, BMW buyers, Benz buyers et al.

Chris

Exactly. There are people biased towards each brand. GM probably still gets a lot of sales just because they are American, and people feel they are the better car for that reason alone.

Can anyone honestly say the Aveo is better than the Fit? Not unless they are biased.

[CaddyXLR-V]

they found out its not that awesome of a car

Look at it's competetion. Would you rather have an Aveo, Rio, Versa, or Yaris? Given those choices, the Fit seems like a great car.

[regfootball]

i would guess most Fits sell OTD for 17k.

at that price, i am not buying. i would move up to a compact that is more solid in return i give maybe 3,4 mpg. or something used.

conversely, the Fit interior is annoying despite its function. It drives nicely, but so does a basic VW Golf.

I would guess most Versas sell OTD in the 14 range on average. So these are not directly comparable.

A mazda3 2.0 starts looking good with my 17 grand instead of the Fit. Real world i don't see much difference mpg wise and the 3 will be as enjoyable for nearly all buyers. Even if the mazda3 ends up a grand higher its more of a substantial car.

The real fools are the Yaris buyers.

Most folks shopping appliances will move up to say, an Elantra. In fact, the Elantra touring is nice upgrade over the Fit. You lose some of the sprite character, but the Elantra touring would probably be a better car for most of the people who seem drawn to the Fit and Hondas in general (i.e. old ladies, retiring baby boomers, women who insist on shopping only based upon what consumer reports tells them).

What i am saying, the majority of the public doesn't recognize or appreciate the handling differences the Fit has to offer, but will quickly notice things like the cabin noise, not comfortable ride, cheap fabric and plastic, video game dash, lack of power and torque, thin sheet metal and such.

For those that like the Fit's virtues, thats fine. I am saying the Fit's virtue set is non as permeable with shoppers as people who are blinded by the H would think.

If this car had anything besides a Honda badge on it, it wouldn't sell 1/2 or 1/3 what it does.

Edited October 3, 2009 by regfootball

[CaddyXLR-V]

I agree, I would never shop for a subcompact when I could get a good compact for the same price, with the exception of the Mini. That's also why I prefer to buy used. You can get a much better car for the same price.

Edited October 3, 2009 by CaddyXLR-V

[A Horse With No Name]

Can anyone honestly say the Aveo is better than the Fit? Not unless they are biased.

Bingo. The Fit is the quality of the small car GM should have been building all along.

Methinks things will get interesting with the Focus and the Fiesta.

[A Horse With No Name]

I agree, I would never shop for a subcompact when I could get a good compact for the same price, with the exception of the Mini. That's also why I prefer to buy used. You can get a much better car for the same price.

Depends. If you were a 23 year old just out of college with your first job and needed reliable wheels the Fit would work out great.

Esp. if you lived in an urban area...

Esp. if you were perhaps female...

And esp. if you didn't want to drive a Yaris or Versa or some other crap box.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Nice sarcasm Reg.

I don't think that was reg, unless it was his sock puppet.

Chris

[CaddyXLR-V]

Depends. If you were a 23 year old just out of college with your first job and needed reliable wheels the Fit would work out great.

Esp. if you lived in an urban area...

Esp. if you were perhaps female...

And esp. if you didn't want to drive a Yaris or Versa or some other crap box.

Chris

Used cars can be reliable too. Instead of buying a new Fit, or Cobalt, you can buy a used GTO for around the same price right now. You can buy a used Mini for $12k-$14k with low miles.

[siegen]

i would guess most Fits sell OTD for 17k.

at that price, i am not buying. i would move up to a compact that is more solid in return i give maybe 3,4 mpg. or something used.

conversely, the Fit interior is annoying despite its function. It drives nicely, but so does a basic VW Golf.

I would guess most Versas sell OTD in the 14 range on average. So these are not directly comparable.

A mazda3 2.0 starts looking good with my 17 grand instead of the Fit. Real world i don't see much difference mpg wise and the 3 will be as enjoyable for nearly all buyers. Even if the mazda3 ends up a grand higher its more of a substantial car.

The real fools are the Yaris buyers.

Most folks shopping appliances will move up to say, an Elantra. In fact, the Elantra touring is nice upgrade over the Fit. You lose some of the sprite character, but the Elantra touring would probably be a better car for most of the people who seem drawn to the Fit and Hondas in general (i.e. old ladies, retiring baby boomers, women who insist on shopping only based upon what consumer reports tells them).

What i am saying, the majority of the public doesn't recognize or appreciate the handling differences the Fit has to offer, but will quickly notice things like the cabin noise, not comfortable ride, cheap fabric and plastic, video game dash, lack of power and torque, thin sheet metal and such.

For those that like the Fit's virtues, thats fine. I am saying the Fit's virtue set is non as permeable with shoppers as people who are blinded by the H would think.

If this car had anything besides a Honda badge on it, it wouldn't sell 1/2 or 1/3 what it does.

You make a whole lot of assumptions, guesses, and "it's close enough" statements.

Let's look at some statistics, which may not be without error but are certainly much closer to facts than assumptions and guesses.

Autotrader US-wide average price:

Honda Fit: $17,666

Mazda 3: $21,093

That includes the Mazda 3 sedan and 5-door. If I were to isolate the search to the 5-door only, the Mazda 3's average price would probably go up a bit.

Fueleconomy.gov's numbers:

Honda Fit: 35 mpg average

Mazda 3 (2.0L): 29 mpg average

EPA cargo volume:

Honda Fit: 20.6 cu. ft.

Mazda 3 (5-door): 17 cu. ft.

Mazda 3 (4-door): 11.8 cu. ft.

Consider that the Fit has "magic" seats that also fold flat, making it far more usable and functional than the Mazda 3 5-door (let alone 4-door).

This isn't to say that the Mazda 3 isn't a better car than the Fit. It is in a higher class, is larger, and may have better features and materials compared to the Fit.

A lot of people who are buying new aren't willing to buy used, otherwise they would be comparing a used Mazda 3 to a used Fit.

Edited October 4, 2009 by siegen

[A Horse With No Name]

Used cars can be reliable too. Instead of buying a new Fit, or Cobalt, you can buy a used GTO for around the same price right now. You can buy a used Mini for $12k-$14k with low miles.

Not everyone wants a GTO...nor a car that gets 14 mpg.

And a used Fit is probably more reliable than a new MINI.

The MINI's that are available cheap tend to be 2002-2004, when BMW was still sorting them out.

Not every one wants a used car.

Different strokes for different folks.

Chris

[CaddyXLR-V]

Not everyone wants a GTO...nor a car that gets 14 mpg.

And a used Fit is probably more reliable than a new MINI.

The MINI's that are available cheap tend to be 2002-2004, when BMW was still sorting them out.

Not every one wants a used car.

Different strokes for different folks.

Chris

You can also get a new lemon also, so I don't see how that's relevant. Of course not everyone wants a used car, that's why new cars sell. You can't deny that you can find more desirable, low mileage used cars, for the same price as less desirable new cars.

And my GTO has never come close to getting 14 mpg. I averaged 21, and got as high as 27 on a longer trip. Lowest I EVER got, was 18.5, when driven hard frequently.

Edited October 5, 2009 by CaddyXLR-V

[regfootball]

You make a whole lot of assumptions, guesses, and "it's close enough" statements.

Let's look at some statistics, which may not be without error but are certainly much closer to facts than assumptions and guesses.

Autotrader US-wide average price:

Honda Fit: $17,666

Mazda 3: $21,093

That includes the Mazda 3 sedan and 5-door. If I were to isolate the search to the 5-door only, the Mazda 3's average price would probably go up a bit.

Fueleconomy.gov's numbers:

Honda Fit: 35 mpg average

Mazda 3 (2.0L): 29 mpg average

EPA cargo volume:

Honda Fit: 20.6 cu. ft.

Mazda 3 (5-door): 17 cu. ft.

Mazda 3 (4-door): 11.8 cu. ft.

Consider that the Fit has "magic" seats that also fold flat, making it far more usable and functional than the Mazda 3 5-door (let alone 4-door).

This isn't to say that the Mazda 3 isn't a better car than the Fit. It is in a higher class, is larger, and may have better features and materials compared to the Fit.

A lot of people who are buying new aren't willing to buy used, otherwise they would be comparing a used Mazda 3 to a used Fit.

thats a skewed analysis. the mazda3 sales will include speed which skews the number. also i am comparing the 2.0 mazda3 to the fit. the 2.5 mazda3 will again have higher transaction prices, but will also have a lot of options that the fit doesnt, like leather. leather is prob a frequent option on the 2.5. also i am guessing the automatic is a much higher take rate on the 2.5 the take rate of the 2.0 manual on the mazda3 will more closely approximate the take rate on the fit. the 2.0's real world mpg will be closer to the fit and will not be skewed by the 2.5 automatics and speed turbos either. i don't always trust fuel economy.gov as their sample rate is never that large. even if the fit scores 33-35 mpg, the 2.0 mazda will score at least 30 mpg, and chances are the mazda3 will be cheaper to insure than an 'H' car, offsetting the marginal different in fuel economy.

i think most folks if a gun was to their head would get the mazda3, even if it cost slightly more.

mazda 3 25/33 mpg. fit 27/33 not much diff. only thing 2.0 not avail on the HB. at least you don't get the loud cabin with the 3.

almost 18 grand for a car with only 117 hp? sounds like a rip off to me. can't even use the H excuse on that one. If honda gets 18k for a Fit routinely then they should be offering a 150hp version on one of its models. yes, i know, it still won't have torque even if they did that.

Edited October 5, 2009 by regfootball

[siegen]

thats a skewed analysis. the mazda3 sales will include speed which skews the number. also i am comparing the 2.0 mazda3 to the fit. the 2.5 mazda3 will again have higher transaction prices, but will also have a lot of options that the fit doesnt, like leather. leather is prob a frequent option on the 2.5. also i am guessing the automatic is a much higher take rate on the 2.5 the take rate of the 2.0 manual on the mazda3 will more closely approximate the take rate on the fit. the 2.0's real world mpg will be closer to the fit and will not be skewed by the 2.5 automatics and speed turbos either. i don't always trust fuel economy.gov as their sample rate is never that large. even if the fit scores 33-35 mpg, the 2.0 mazda will score at least 30 mpg, and chances are the mazda3 will be cheaper to insure than an 'H' car, offsetting the marginal different in fuel economy.

i think most folks if a gun was to their head would get the mazda3, even if it cost slightly more.

mazda 3 25/33 mpg. fit 27/33 not much diff. only thing 2.0 not avail on the HB. at least you don't get the loud cabin with the 3.

almost 18 grand for a car with only 117 hp? sounds like a rip off to me. can't even use the H excuse on that one. If honda gets 18k for a Fit routinely then they should be offering a 150hp version on one of its models. yes, i know, it still won't have torque even if they did that.

I'll give you that the Autotrader averages are skewed by MS3 and 2.5 models. Good point.

The fueleconomy.gov number I quoted was for 2.0L only; you can check out the site for yourself. Like I said, there is room for error but it is a lot better than guessing.

No reason to believe insurance would be higher on the Fit than the Mazda 3, unless you have gotten quotes for both to show otherwise.

The majority of Fits sell with automatic transmission.

[A Horse With No Name]

IIRC it's like 85% or so automatic.

Wife wanted a manual Fit last year (thankfully we decided against that) and Manual fits were really hard to find.

Esp. the "Sport" model of the Fit in manual.

Chris

[Robert Hall]

IIRC it's like 85% or so automatic.

Chris

Amazing..I couldn't imagine driving a subcompact with an automatic....

[A Horse With No Name]

Neither could I.

Chris

[siegen]

Amazing..I couldn't imagine driving a subcompact with an automatic....

The best cheap automatic, period.

[A Horse With No Name]

Thanks for the link, Siegen.

Pretty cool little car. Hope Honda brings more like it our way.

I'd rather have that a thousand to one over a corolla.

Chris

[regfootball]

as much as it seems i am trashing the fit, i'm not. but i agree on the automatic. the gearbox is quite good on the Fit, why wouldn anyone want an automatic?

it just seems to me that the Fit albeit a good car, is oversensationalized. kind of like the prius. it has one trick. in honda's case, two.

the fit handles well. and it has a larger than you would expect cargo area that is flexible with magic seats.

i don't think either of those two traits should make it such a starlet in the market. most of the cargo area is if you fold the rear seat bottom up. if you compare accessible height, width, and depth of the cargo area of the fit to other hatches or small wagons, with the rear seat up, the advantage is not really there.

as far as the car handling well, yes it does, however, there are other compacts and cars in that price range that are almost or really close to as nimble, and offer more solidity and refinement.

So that is my beef with the car. Not that the car is bad, its not. I just don't think its a completely well rounded package. I'd love the Fit if it were 2-3 grand cheaper. Once you start looking at horsepower, noise, interior, styling, solidity, build quality, space, you generally can find a more well rounded machine for the same money. That's why the Civic exists though.

If they stuffed a Civic motor in the FIt, the mpg would prob not go down much. Give it a six speed, put some sound deadener in the car. Give it a decent dashboard (there's not much they can do about the styling at this point) and then I think it starts to be something that can be more than a narrowly focused vehicle.

I am kind of waiting to see how Kia's Fit clone turns out, if they sell it here, and how cheap it is and how it performs.

[regfootball]

IIRC it's like 85% or so automatic.

Wife wanted a manual Fit last year (thankfully we decided against that) and Manual fits were really hard to find.

Esp. the "Sport" model of the Fit in manual.

Chris

i would have seriously expected a 30% or higher take rate on the manual.

maybe with sales going down to sustainable levels, and now that the old ladies that hang out at the donut shops have bought them, maybe more of the serious Fit fans will push that manual take rate back up.

but if you think of manual cars in general, 15% is actually a very good take rate compared to what i thought i heard, 6% in the open market.

call me crazy, but pushing a steering wheel button is not a complete replacement for a shifter and clutch.

[regfootball]

Kia Venga photos

[NEXTEL CUP]

First, in regard to the Fit's Automatice: THE FIT SPORT COMES WITH A 5 SPEED AUTOMATIC. No car as small as the FIT offers a 5 speed automatic, and the automatice the fit has has paddle shifters.

Second, Anyone who knocks the FIT's back seat as not being functional and a class leading feature does not realize how poorly the other cars in this segment carry cargo. The FIT's seat folds absolutly FLAT. Not almost Flat. All the dam way!!. Also people should not knock the fold up feature either , beacause it is class leading also.

http://automobiles.honda.com/fit/interior-photos.aspx

Third, KIA has a car the goes head to head with the FIT. It is called the KIA RIO5. It has no fold flat back seat or a 5 speed auto with paddle shifter. And it also handles like the KIA it is.

Edited October 6, 2009 by NEXTEL CUP

[A Horse With No Name]

Which is why I am posting in this discussion. I am not a huge Fit fan, but belive it is the best subcompact on the market for a general subcompact.

MINI is cool also (you all know my passion of them) however it is more of a niche product.

The Kia might as well be remade into beer cans for all I care.

Chris

[regfootball]

First, in regard to the Fit's Automatice: THE FIT SPORT COMES WITH A 5 SPEED AUTOMATIC. No car as small as the FIT offers a 5 speed automatic, and the automatice the fit has has paddle shifters.

Second, Anyone who knocks the FIT's back seat as not being functional and a class leading feature does not realize how poorly the other cars in this segment carry cargo. The FIT's seat folds absolutly FLAT. Not almost Flat. All the dam way!!. Also people should not knock the fold up feature either , beacause it is class leading also.

http://automobiles.honda.com/fit/interior-photos.aspx

Third, KIA has a car the goes head to head with the FIT. It is called the KIA RIO5. It has no fold flat back seat or a 5 speed auto with paddle shifter. And it also handles like the KIA it is.

rio 5 is quite a bit cheaper so even though they may be the same 'size' the rio is in a different class to the consumer. price price price