UPDATED: Can an auto company call mea culpa?

Last week, Motor Trend gave a Quick Drive review of the 2013 Honda Civic, asking the question whether the car is back on track ("Has the Civic Gotten its Groove Back?"). In spite of great sales for 2012 (254,716 units sold through October), Honda recognized that its new-for-2012 Civic was not up to its lofty standards and rolled out a revised car for 2013 that follows big brother Accord, which was also refreshed for 2013.

2013 Honda Civic

To me, the interesting story is not whether the new car is an improvement - how could it not be? I'm more focused on the fact that a car company placed a higher value on its brand than on its bottom line. 

As an inexpensive, volume car, the average lifespan of a Civic platform is 4-5 years, with a mid-cycle refresh tucked in somewhere. That means that the 2012 Civic should have continued with only minor changes through the 2016 model year. 

Changing a model after only one year means that Honda will spend more money on R&D after never having fully recouped the expenses of developing the original car. Had they chosen to wait 1-2 more years, even average sales would have saved them considerably.

Honda is not the first company to call a mea culpa when it comes to erroneous designs. In 2002, BMW launched a drastically altered 7-Series flagship sedan, dubbed E65, under the leadership of former design chief, Chris Bangle. That car, which was mocked mercilessly for its "Bangle Butt" in the media, still managed to continue with strong sales, ultimately becoming the best-selling 7-Series. But, in 2006, when the 7-Series would normally be receiving a mild refresh, BMW rolled out a car with new front and rear fascia, and a revised iDrive system. Keep in mind that unlike the $20,000 Honda, a top-line BMW takes a little more work and money to update, so a turnaround after three years is very much akin to what Honda has done this year.

Again, that both the Honda and BMW were able to revise for the better is good, but not the point. Both were willing to sacrifice certain profitability to protect the perceived quality of their brands. To me, that is a quality worthy of praise.

In the case of BMW, the E65 platform carried on with praise for its updates, and was replaced in 2008 with the current version of the model. As BMW designs have become more conservative, there have been some comments expressing regret for the loss of Chris Bangle and his boundary-pushing designs - proof that BMW was able to successfully put the negative attitudes in the rear-view mirror. 

Will Honda be so lucky? It's off to a good start.


UPDATE!

This week, Car & Driver Magazine reported online that the Chevrolet Malibu would also be undergoing an unscheduled and relatively dramatic mid-cycle refresh ("Chevrolet Malibu to Get Early Mid-Cycle Makeover"). For the article, General Motors CEO, Dan Akerson confirms that engineers are working on an update to be revealed next year, and acknowledged the "unflattering reviews" of the 2013 car, which undoubtedly contributed to the bold decision. 

Power of the press? Power to the people? Whatever the source, the power is having its way with the auto industry's heaviest hitters.  

Good-bye BMW M3

Photos are starting to make their way around the circuits of the pre-production BMW 4-Series, set to make it's official debut at the Detroit Auto Show. I'll be honest, I like the car. But then, what's not to like? It's based on the 3-Series.

But that's where my problem lies. It's no longer a 3-Series. Frankly, to me that's a little sad.

Supporters of the new nomenclature will likely point to the precedent set by the 6-Series. But the 6-Series has its own history. It's a good history, complete with it's own M-badge. Also, that car was designed to be more than a 2-door 5-Series. It was created to compete with the ritzy, expensive Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, and a 5- designation simply would not work.

Other people who like this move may look at Audi and its popular A5. That comparison, to me, is shortsighted. Audi has never had a 2-door variant of the A4, making the A5 a completely new animal. Again, the 3-Series coupe has always been there, and it has always been a "3".

But now, here is my biggest horror from this move: No more M3. It's gone. Yes, I know there will be a 3-Series sedan with an M-badge. But that's not what an M3 is to me. During the years when an M3 sedan existed (there have been plenty when it didn't), it was just that - an M3 SEDAN. It had its own name, because it wasn't a true M3.

Ultimately, my concern is that BMW was willing to sacrifice a key brand for the sake of an expanded lineup. To me, this kind of mistake rings like something that GM would have done in the 80's or 90's. Back in the day, GM was bent on expansion and didn't always consider the more intangible elements such as brand value. The thing about a brand image is that once you make a change like this, you cannot undo it.

Take a look at some of the history that we say good-bye to: