Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Follow the Audi Mileage Marathon starting Monday morning
Paris 2008: MINI Crossover Concept
Paris 2008: Aston Martin One-77 (partially) revealed
Paris 2008: The GT by Citroen. No, the whole thing this time
Paris 2008: Lamborghini Estoque LIVE
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Chevy Corvette Z06
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Paris 2008: Le Day 1 Wrapup
Knight Rider: The Liveblog -- Season 1, Episode 2
By the Numbers - September 2008: Nobody Wins Edition
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this thread(Page 1 of 1)
aaron @ Aug 10th 2007 2:20PM
I always blame Honda NA for their boring cars and half-ass Si variants. Also blame the fact that Honda does not want Type R cars competing with Acuras. They think if it's real performance, then they slap some leather on some of the cars, jack the price, give it a lame three letter name, and call it an Acura.
Euro Honda Accord: TSX
Honda Integra: Acura RSX
Eventual rear-wheel drive car to compete with the new AE86: Acura ?SX
Hondas in other countries are fine be me.
Toyota is making slow progress. They've had their eggs all in one basket (which is/was hybrids), and now since that is working, why not something actually sporty?
Why does it also seem that both Honda and Toyota want to avoid insurance companies? How liable would they be if they made relatively inexpensive performance cars?