More Photos: 2010 Honda Accord Crosstour

I like it. Actually, the only Honda/Acura design (exterior) that I can't stand is the CR-V.

I like it. Actually, the only Honda/Acura exterior design that I can't stand is the CR-V.

I don't have a problem with the styling, per say.

What I do have a problem with is that the tiny rear-quarter window allows for terrible rear visibility.

Also, while all the gearheads may bitch and complain about the styling, very few Crosstour customers follow these sites. And those who do, are far more interested in how the vehicle works, how much it costs, what's the gas mileage, is it reliable, etc. Styling is just one of many issues, and not as important as may here seem to think. If it were, Toyota would be out of business...

I say the styling of the Crosstour is no worse than that of the current CRV, and it's sell quite well, thank you. I bet this will too.

More comments...

I think it will look much better in person. That's something I learned with Subaru. They almost always photograph poorly, yet almost always look better in person. I'm sure that will be the case here too.

Having said that, it won't fix that poorly designed and useless rear-quarter window. Should it have been a full-fledged wagon? Probably, as a hatch is ALWAYS a compromise design. It's neither a sedan nor a wagon, yet has most of both the pros and cons of each layout; a classic "compromise" design, if ever there was one.

The kicker here is we still don't know anything about the specs. To me that's FAR more important than the styling.

Ugly, ugly, and more ugly!!!

Bob's right.

Still, I'm concerned about this design. Americans are on the fence as it is about hatchbacks and wagons. Now Honda introduces this with the utility of a sedan and the styling of a wagon. That's not a good formula in my view.

I like the idea but the look is just wrong. Like so many recent Honda products, it just doesn't look good even though I can't really say why.

this is ridiculous. the rear end belongs on a different vehicle.

I'd imagine the young designer team, who converted the regular accord to the wagon, wanted to make something cool, so they made the back end.

Little did they keep in mind that the front ain't changing. total clash of stylings. 0/10 for collaboration.

"But if you're on the page and taking the trouble to type out a comment on the Crosstour's styling, the designers can't have gotten it all wrong."

Erin surely you jest. Lots of people talk about the Aztek to this day- doesn't mean it was attractive. People became fans just to comment on the page. Its hideous, period. Just pretend GM put this out and then give an honest opinion of what you think. Horrendous.

And I always thought this was the ugliest car. (the one in the link)

http://images01.olx.com/ui/1/93/50/2069350_1.jpg

@1487

The Aztek wasn't ugly IMO and it had some of the most unique options

http://images.thecarconnection.com/med/2001_pontiac_aztek_camper_100000303_m.jpg

http://www.dragtimes.com/images/18597-2009-Toyota-Venza.jpg

To me, the Venza looks a lot more thought out and expensive, with nice chrome detailing where the Honda has ugly black plastic. Toyota did an excellent job of designing the Venza's wheels, which are large, stylish, and 'fit' the vehicle very well.

That is the main problem for me with the Crosstour (besides the mutated Accord/Ford "Gillette" grille) - the wheels. They are ugly and look way too small for the bulbous rear end. This applies to all of Honda. I love the way they drive in general, but I won't consider them until they start designing some larger and more stylish wheels.

Case in point: the standard hubs on the Accord....hideous. I've never seen uglier hubcaps.
http://image.motortrend.com/f/2009_honda_accord/2309362010677492110+ppromo_mt_large/rear_view.jpg

It has unusual proportions like the Venza and X6. That's not to say it "bad" exactly, just different. A warning to Honda though: I've only seen one Venza and two X6's on the road since they came out. That doesn't bode well for Honda's similarly-styled vehicle.

Not sure why Honda expected a favorable reaction to this thing.

This reminds me of the SAT.

BMW 5 Series GT::Sylvester Stallone
Honda Accord Crosstour::Frank Stallone

I like Honda's. As long the the seat are softer and the road noise is nulled I'd consider buying another Accord. Until then I'll be shopping Acura or Camry.

The front is palatable but the rear needs remodeling. Especially the lights
Why don't they fit a V6 in the CRV and save money on this vehicle (make the Pilot a 7 seater if it isn't already...the pilot is too ugly for me to even research)?
Just because Toyota thinks there is a market for the Venza does not make it a untapped segment for Honda. I fail to see the product positioning (its eating into the CRV and accord.

It reminds me of the accord coupe with the back hacked off, a longer nose, raised height, and zoom set to 1.2x
It might look better the more you look at it (like the 06+ civic and both generations of the fit) cause I don't hate it as much as I did when I first saw it but something about the back below the window just looks wrong.
Same with the X6. It just seems too...high?
the rear sloping window suggests the car is low and sleek but then theres just so much stuff below the rear window
That front overhang is a bit much too but that's probably for pedestrian and crash safety so, can't be helped much

So are the Toyota Venza & the Honda Crosstour competing for the ugliest crossover?

I'd rather buy a 2009 Subaru Forester or the new Ford C-Max.

Even though I'm a Honda enthusiast, I cant say I like the styling as its just..........not explainable in words.

The Venza looks TONS better and is much more proportioned however the Honda should have much better driving dynamics vs the Toyota.

"I fail to see the product positioning (its eating into the CRV and accord."

I don't see it "eating" into neither of those cars, especially the CRV. I could see current Accord owners who want more utility and AWD (Pilot being to large for them/CRV being too small) but with similar features and cabin space as the Accord choosing this. However, if you want a sedan, you will buy a sedan. If you want a crossover-thingy you will buy a crossover-thingy.

The Crosstour wont steal CRV consumers either as they are entirely different in nature. The CRV pricing structure starts out much lower, it doesn't have a V6 option, nor does it offer higher end features ETC ETC. The majority of CRV owners are loyal to the CRV as they like that particular package that Honda has provided.

The Crosstour may meet sales targets but don't look for mass volumes like the Accord, Civic or CRV.

Is thing officially named the ACCORD Crosstour? If it is, then let's all remember that the inclusion of the other name means that this car can be counted in the parent car's sales numbers, a trick Toyota has used (Corolla Matrix, Camry Solara).

Maybe Bob's right that it'll look better in person, but I still think this thing's ugly. More importantly, I think the Venza, the X6, and even Honda's own ZDX are all much more elegant applications of this concept. Zoomzoom hit the nail on the head: whereas the Venza looks (and is marketed as) upscale, this thing looks kinda dumpy.

Honda would've been much better off marketing an Accord wagon and the Crosstour as a genuine Outback competitor. More incremental sales, less styling work, more utility.

I think the sheetmetal and quality looks better on this Honda than the Venza. It has a serious case of horseface however. Look at the ridiculous angle Honda took a photo from in the first picture to reduce the horseface.
Also the cargo capacity of this was compromised to enhance the looks of it and I think thats a large mistake.
It looks too carlike also and not enough SUV. Lets be honest its a horsefaced, hatchback.

As for the Venza fans, I hate to tell you this but the styling of that vehicle is already starting to look stale about a year out of the gate. Vehicles like the Equinox blow it out of the water.

This is weird world. Buick steps up and builds a top notch entry-lux sedan and in some cosmic void suckage left behind, it pulls some universal ugly to fill in the void.

It's not ugly enough to care, it's generic enough to pass through the crowd; skirting the edge of punch-it-in-the-face-ugly and Pat Boone-milk-toast.

Honda mastered the ugly yet generic aesthetic in the over $30K market with Acura. Now, I guess, they want to bring it to the masses.

Fugly. Why can't these boobs just design a nice wagon & call it that? This femininization of autos is bad. Earth to Honda idiots: who can see out the rear quarter window? What? Do you WANT us to crash?????!!!!!!!!

Why does every new vehicle have to be so darn heavy? Honda should CUT features & use this as a marketing gimmick to promote better overall PERFORMANCE including mpg, & every dynamic function.

"The Aztek wasn't ugly IMO and it had some of the most unique options"

No, no, no....The Aztek was hideous. Normally, I'd say that it's a difference of opinion... but the Aztek is so awful that I'd have to say that you're opinion is wrong.

This hatch is not to bad looking save for the overdone grill. BMW should have taken cues from Honda, Acura and Audi before they delved in to this foray styling wise! The question remains, is America ready to buy hatchbacks?

"The Aztek wasn't ugly IMO and it had some of the most unique options"

Aztek was useful, but still ugly. Same will go for this although I doubt it will match the Pontiacs versatility or innovation.

The VEnza isn't all that attractive but its far less polarizing that this. Honda has never dont polarizing in a good way. This is what you get from "American Honda"- something bloated, unoriginal and totally customized for American tastes. Honda is not unique or innovative when it comes to American products anymore. They are merely doing what GM or Ford would do except they wrap it in "legendary Honda quality" and uglier styling.

"As for the Venza fans, I hate to tell you this but the styling of that vehicle is already starting to look stale about a year out of the gate. Vehicles like the Equinox blow it out of the water. "

Exactly. The Chevy looks better inside and out and costs less. The Venza is for Toyota die hards and no one else.

"This is weird world. Buick steps up and builds a top notch entry-lux sedan and in some cosmic void suckage left behind, it pulls some universal ugly to fill in the void."

Buicks may have been a little stale, but never ugly. Buick designs may have lacked flair, but no one found them offensive. The Lacrosse, Lucerne, PArk Ave, etc. were decent looking cars. At least as attractive as contemporary Hondas and Toyotas.

Honda needs to hire designers from outside the company- PERIOD. People are talking about how GM needs a culture change, etc. Honda design needs a culture change. Its apparent they have no in house design talent and they need to drop the arrogance and get help. The Koreans have already hired designers from GM and audi and others.

Okay, it is a matter of opinion, but most will agree that this thing is butt ugly. Maybe not as ugly as the Aztek, but to be as ugly as the Aztek you need to try really hard.

It is not the hatchback of this car that causes it to be ugly. Look at the last generation Mazda 6. Adding the hatchback was just a subtle change. It wasn't the most beautiful car ever, but the hatchback actually made it look a little better to me.

I am just really disappointed in Honda/Acura as the styling of their vehicles lately is pretty bad. I have a last generation TL that I would trade right now if the new one wasn't hideous.

Although I wouldn't consider most Toyotas beautiful, I would say they are better looking than current Hondas except the Civic. Lexus styling is definately better than Acura. Same goes for Nissan/Infinity over Honda/Acura.

Yup. Still ugly. Let's see, ugly styling that hinders storage? What's the point? Make an Accord station wagon.

If I had to chose between Toyota or Honda styling I would chose neither. Honda is doing more offensive designs but Toyota has no styling direction whatsoever and continues to design new models that have no visual connection to existing models. I say skip both and by a Mazda, Ford or GM product. Those look better inside and out.

Who's going to buy this thing?

Oh, that is very poor. Very, very poor!

This is problem Honda has for years. They never create their own style. They always copy Germany.

Let's start with the good. If we ignore the lower half, it's actually quite attractive. The shape of the side windows is graceful and coupe-like, the cabin tapers nicely to the rear, and the hatch is well executed, but that's where the compliments end. Below the shoulder line lies an ungainly mess.

Viewed from the ground-up, it's clear that Honda/Acura has mastered the art of putting the largest possible car on the smallest possible wheelbase. Continuing up from there, the sporty taper of the cabin is not repeated in the rear quarters resulting in a ginormous badonkadonk. The Venza (which I also don't care for) has creased and squared-off lines in the rear, but the Crosstour has an overstuffed duffel bag of visual mass crushing those poor little wheels. Designers may have aimed for muscular haunches, but they ended up with thunder thighs. Swoopy character lines in the flanks try their darndest, but are ultimately too subtle for such a large vehicle.

It may drive like butter on velvet and endure for decades, but I'm not drawn to the car, let alone the driver's seat.

They should advertise it with..."As ugly as the Porsche Panamera"