Selling to young hardly Element-ary (http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/newspaper/premium/printedition/Sunday/transportation/chi-0604300028apr30,1,2784857.column?ctrack=1&cset=true)

Honda learned a valuable lesson when it created the Element in 2003 to attract young buyers: You can ask, but you can't tell, youth what it wants to buy.

Element arrived as a compact sport-utility, though crossover seems more apropos for its SUV function in the look of a boxy wagon.

It took a novel approach to design--look different than anything else on the road with front and rear bumpers, lower fenders and rocker panels consisting of gray plastic rather than body colored sheet-metal--to cater to youth.


By Jim Mateja, Chicago Tribune

Pretty decent review but what's with the idea that "folding over" the seats is better than stowing them to the side (or taking them out altogether). Folding over seats are a PITA -- no matter what you do they are NEVER flat and you certainly wouldn't be able to fit a TV or a couch in the E with "fold over" seats. I LIKE having the entire cargo floor for hauling stuff - Honda, forget the "fold over seat idea, OK. Just leave the rear seats the way they are.
I think the reviewer also must be kind of a wimp - I am 5' and 100lbs and I don't find stowing the seats to the side difficult or hard - in fact I find it EASIER that folding the seats down in our Durango or our Explorer was. And I HATED those fold down seats - everything that wasn't wedged in just slid right down the incline everytime you braked - and there was no way to easily tie or strap anything down inside. With the flat floor in the E one bungee and everything is good to go for the whole drive.
I wish sometimes these reviewers could spend a day with an E owner before they take off on their own. I think they miss or just plain don't "GET" half the features.

I agree, Tango. I couldn't read the linked review (registration required) but if the writer was arguing for foldover seats, I say bah! That would make the E like most all other SUV type vehicles out there, and compromise the E's wonderful utility - which is after all, a full third of the SUV acronym. :grin:

I for one don't want a vehicle that caters to the least common denominator, I want a vehicle that provides the best solution for ME. As a new E owner I'm viewing the vehicle's few quirks as character more than inconvenience. I bet you're right that if reviewers spent more time in the E, they'd learn to think outside of their usual box and inside the box we think in at EOC! :D

The first couple of times I folded up the seats, I fumbled a bit with the clips, but it's fast becoming a quick, muscle-memory action. The reviewer just needs to "give E a chance." ;)

From the Article by Jim Mateja - jmateja@tribune.com Chicago Tribune

"When Element first came out, the second row seats lifted up against the side wall to increase rear cargo room.
Novel, but time consuming.
And because they extend into the cargo hold, the folded seats make storing tall or wide items a chore. Too bad the SC doesn't go with the more traditional flip and fold seat."

AND the overview......
"PLUSES:
More stylish with body-colored panels and door handles replacing dull gray plastic.
Can't be accused of lookalike or cookie-cutter design.
Roomy cabin and ample cargo capacity.
Rear seats fold against side walls for more room.
All-wheel-drive standard.
Decent price fully equipped.

MINUSES
Low mileage.
Not much oomph from the 4.
Would rather fold seats over than pile them against the walls.

Design upgrade and more potent 4 coming for special SC version this fall."


But I don't WANT "flip and fold seats" and since when is AWD "Standard" on the E? Umm scuze me but AWD is an OPTION - it's more like FWD is the "standard" since you have to pay more for AWD.

Heh, should have put the reviewer in a FWD 5 speed MT like mine. I have no complaints about oomph - even though I traded in an S2000 for the E to end a string of sports/sporty cars. No, it won't pin you back in your seat, but no problems merging or passing. I know I would have felt those frustrations with the auto trans, based on my experiences with an auto AWD CRV.

Thanks for posting the text, Tango!

I have the AUTO and I feel it is plenty "peppy" enough for Dallas traffic. No - it's not a Top Fuel Dragster but pulling G's is kinda overated in daily life anyway. I do have the FWD vs the 4WD which I did note, makes the auto E a bit more responsive - I am sure the weight does make a difference.
And I have been driving a Vette daily for the last 10 years so I know a bit about acceleration. To be honest - anything any faster than the E is wasted here - you never actually NEED blow-back acceleration in daily life. What are you gonna do in wall to wall traffic - race up your driveway?

I think the reviewer also must be kind of a wimp - I am 5' and 100lbs and I don't find stowing the seats to the side difficult or hard - in fact I find it EASIER that folding the seats down in our Durango or our Explorer was.

Did my first seat-pull out this weekend. Agreed, it couldn't be simpler, but you just brought back a funny memory. I have this brochure for the Chevy Suburban from the late 80's that shows a woman of average build pulling out the third seat. I tell ya, I'm a big guy and it's a huge chore to pull that seat out (not to mention that you injure yourself about 1/3 of the times you do it) - how in the heck did they really think that average Mom was going to get it done? :???:

This is a little surprising in that Jim Mateja is a well respected reviewer and has been for many years. My guess is that the E is just unconventional enough that he just "didn't get it" in a relatively short period of time.

By the way, do you think a clueless salesman showed him how it hang the seats?:D

This is a little surprising in that Jim Mateja is a well respected reviewer and has been for many years. My guess is that the E is just unconventional enough that he just "didn't get it" in a relatively short period of time.

By the way, do you think a clueless salesman showed him how it hang the seats?:D
Probably :D
I knew way more about the E when I arrived to look at it for the 1st time than my salesperson OR the sales manager did. By the end of the 1st visit I had pretty much figured out how everything worked. Within the 2 day test drive I had done every seat configuration, had the seats OUT, had decided the Wranglers sucked, had changed the AC so the light came on with the defrost, and was ordering carpet, mats and an armrest from HandA. I KNEW it was a good one - and the ONE for me. I was almost afraid to give it back so they could put on my OEM stuff for fear they'd mess it up and I would have to start over with a different one.
Jim should have found an EOC memeber so he could get the REAL lowdown on the E. Most salespeople are useless when it comes to the Element.

This is a little surprising in that Jim Mateja is a well respected reviewer and has been for many years. My guess is that the E is just unconventional enough that he just "didn't get it" in a relatively short period of time.

By the way, do you think a clueless salesman showed him how it hang the seats?:D

Back when I used to read the Trib every week, I never really liked his column... it always seemed just like one looong advertisement for whatever car he was 'reviewing' that week :neutral: every car he reviewed, he absolutely 'loved'... I'm too lazy to get one of those free registrations (thanks for the exerpts!)....

I've always thought that for the most part, Jim Mateja's reviews and answer columns were well written--he mussed up somewhat on the E. However there is a quote in the review that is bothersome, "The SC won't have those hose-down rubber mats" said John Mendel, Senior VP of Honda. :shock:

Oh, but you CAN hose down those rubber mats! ...You just cannot do it in the car! :rolleyes:

Heh, should have put the reviewer in a FWD 5 speed MT like mine. I have no complaints about oomph - even though I traded in an S2000 for the E to end a string of sports/sporty cars. No, it won't pin you back in your seat, but no problems merging or passing. I know I would have felt those frustrations with the auto trans, based on my experiences with an auto AWD CRV.

Thanks for posting the text, Tango!

What is the 0-60 time on the MT 4x2? I've never heard of any Element breaking the mid-8's, which is middling at best. The Mazda5 has been criticized for similar acceleration and lbs/hp, though it seems sufficiently powerful to me.

I've seen 8.8 for 0-60 on one of the review sites for the 2wd MT. It's not a very impressive number, but the MT Es at least aren't total slugs, unlike the ATs (which I've seen listed as over 11 seconds 0-60...).

All this time to 60 Mph stuff just shows that you are too young to have driven the old 36 HP VW. My collage hand me down car back in 1960. Now that had no power. The E is like an F-1 car by that standard!:D

Dom

That's funny, I DO have a 36 hp VW. 0 to 60 by Tuesday!
My other car has a 300hp V8 and does 0 to 60 in 5.8 seconds. My 5 speed auto AWD E is slower than my V8 car but it has entirely adequate performance for hiway on-ramps, etc.. I'm quite pleased with it's performance. I just floor it and it does what I need every time.

Here are quarter mile times for the E

0-60 1/4 mile

1991 Honda CRX Si 8.7 16.50

2003 Honda Element EX 8.7 16.60

2002 Honda Insight CVT 11.1 18.30

Taken from this site
http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm

Did my first seat-pull out this weekend. Agreed, it couldn't be simpler, but you just brought back a funny memory. I have this brochure for the Chevy Suburban from the late 80's that shows a woman of average build pulling out the third seat. I tell ya, I'm a big guy and it's a huge chore to pull that seat out (not to mention that you injure yourself about 1/3 of the times you do it) - how in the heck did they really think that average Mom was going to get it done? :???:

Agreed...the seats in the back are easy to pull up to side.... I have no problems even with a childseat in the back that I have to take out and reinstall everytime I use the seats, and I have no complaints.

My 4wd Auto E goes and passes just fine.You want a sportscar then drop the coin to match.Its plenty peppy for a 4.I bought it cause it is utilitarian and it suits me not to streetrace.I hate car reviews.blah blah...

0-60 times are very over rated. How many times do you have come to a complete stop before you have to merge onto a highway? Well with the exception of the idiot in front of you that gets scared at the end of the ramp and slams on the brake. It is more important to look at rolling acceleration times like 35mph to 65mph and similar.

0-60 gives you a good idea of the acceleration overall, and if 0-30 times are provided, show you how linear it is. As for merging, it's simply a matter of shifting into the correct gear... if you bought an old-man transmission, you can pop it out of overdrive or down to "2" if necessary.

Some Hondas can be notably reluctant to downshift, and I personally believe that an auto tranny doesn't belong in a car without a lot of midrange torque on call (i.e. just about all low-end 4-cylinders).

8.7 Seconds seems to be just about average. Consumer Guide gives a "5" for 8-9 second 0-60 times in their acceleration rating. 7-seconds would be more appropriate for the "sport concept" edition of a compact SUV. I guess Honda doesn't want to step on sales of the Vue Redline.