Acura: NSX News
01-31-2016, 09:10 PM
#6721
Senior Moderator
And I really love the Mercedes AMG GT...
The following users liked this post:
00TL-P3.2 (02-01-2016)
01-31-2016, 10:36 PM
#6723
Moderator
The following users liked this post:
AZuser (02-01-2016)
01-31-2016, 11:36 PM
#6724
Senior Moderator
02-01-2016, 08:32 AM
#6726
AZ Community Team
I figured that, he kept using "spec" in the wrong context
and most manufacturers don't release many performance numbers. There are so many variables (pavement, environment, ...) that affect them, it tends to cause more trouble that it's worth to publish.
It's Acura being still cagey about the specs of the car...and those specs had to be through initial test drives by journalists
02-01-2016, 09:40 AM
#6727
Moderator
02-01-2016, 10:27 AM
#6728
There's nothing wrong with this new NSX. It's a really good car. But for me, there are other cars out there for the same price or less that I'm more attracted to.
I'm not drawn to it like I was with the 1G NSX. When the 1G NSX came out, I was
With the 2G NSX, I'm like "It's nice."
02-01-2016, 12:46 PM
#6729
Safety Car
There's nothing wrong with this new NSX. It's a really good car. But for me, there are other cars out there for the same price or less that I'm more attracted to.
I'm not drawn to it like I was with the 1G NSX. When the 1G NSX came out, I was
With the 2G NSX, I'm like "It's nice."
Fair enough of course. Cars are very subjective and we are free to love or hate on whatever.
I still wonder how much is the young naivete/vs now we are older and expect more. I was only about 5yo when NSX came out so I had no idea obviously lol....but now after seeing all these other cars it's definitely not as "WOW" as some of the other ones.
Just a bit interesting to me....in this thread obviously lot of complaints about delays, weight, hybrid, few complaints on looks, and some genuine car-related concerns.
And then there are also the purely subjective soul-stirring factor, so to speak. Which also many on here have shared their opinion.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just an observation. Is there some unconscious force that makes us hate the new NSX because it was over-promised and under delivered?
I mean obviously impossible to please everyone...but even if the NSX was a LaFerrari killer with gorgeous looks...would people still complain...probably.
But just an observation I had.
And what are some of the intangible factors that makes a car soul-stirring? That may be a good discussion and may be useful for car makers to look into.
Of course there are cars that may be gorgeous looking but terrible as a car and not a super track monster either (ie Aston Martin).
Maybe it's that the NSX is too well rounded...so it doesn't standout in either category...its got great looks imo, except for the rear, and its more a daily than a 488, though not as gorgeous as the ferrari or the AM/MB or the pedigree of those as well.
Anyway, just an interesting discussion I thought we can have.
02-01-2016, 01:37 PM
#6730
Team Owner
I think the fact that the original NSX kind of showed up out of nowhere in 89-90, and began selling in '91, and kicked the shit out of pretty much every rival it had at the time has now set some really big shoes for the successor to fill, even though it simply is just impossible to do that without either raising the price, or lowering expectations these days. And if Acura does either, the criticism begins to fly.
It also comes back to, as you and others have mentioned, the extensive delays (why tell us about the project 4 years in advance?) and the fact that the original NSX remained highly unchanged for almost 15 years and then completely absent for the subsequent decade. I too was young when the original came out, but anyone who was even remotely been a Honda fan, knew about the NSX.
Finally, the complete disconnect of the 2G from the 1G makes people wonder why the same name was even used. I think if this NSX was actually a 3G, and there was an intermediate model between the two, eight to ten years ago, people would look at this car differently. Don't get me wrong- it looks wonderful and the idea of the car is great, It's just such a drastic departure from the original.
It also comes back to, as you and others have mentioned, the extensive delays (why tell us about the project 4 years in advance?) and the fact that the original NSX remained highly unchanged for almost 15 years and then completely absent for the subsequent decade. I too was young when the original came out, but anyone who was even remotely been a Honda fan, knew about the NSX.
Finally, the complete disconnect of the 2G from the 1G makes people wonder why the same name was even used. I think if this NSX was actually a 3G, and there was an intermediate model between the two, eight to ten years ago, people would look at this car differently. Don't get me wrong- it looks wonderful and the idea of the car is great, It's just such a drastic departure from the original.
The following users liked this post:
weather (02-01-2016)
02-01-2016, 01:57 PM
#6731
Moderator
See, now, this is another car that doesn't really get me too excited. Is it nice? Absolutely. Does it have amazing performance? No doubt. For whatever reason, I don't look at that car and think "I would LOVE to have that someday..."
02-01-2016, 02:04 PM
#6732
Safety Car
Interesting and I can see that.
It's almost as if the incredible success of the NSX set such a high standard that it became Honda's own worst enemy.
Agreed that the expectation may have been quite high.
Though with the concept of the original NSX, it was a new "eXperimental" sportscar that Honda made and it really was great as you said...beating Ferraris while having Honda-like reliability/daily drive-ability. Incredible.
And it has departed much from the original idea...which gleaming from all the latest PR that Acura is pushing...may be exactly what they are trying to do.
It seems that Honda doesn't WANT to just make another modern NSX with similar drivetrain/chassis. After all the spirit of the NSX seems to be more than just a car...but a concept..a new idea of a new kind of sportscar.
So it may be that Honda is expressing their view of a "New Sportscar eXperimental" through this 2G NSX.....now obviously the exact direction/execution of the idea may be up for debate (and at least on Azine, it seems to see more criticsm than praise).
It's almost as if the incredible success of the NSX set such a high standard that it became Honda's own worst enemy.
Agreed that the expectation may have been quite high.
Though with the concept of the original NSX, it was a new "eXperimental" sportscar that Honda made and it really was great as you said...beating Ferraris while having Honda-like reliability/daily drive-ability. Incredible.
And it has departed much from the original idea...which gleaming from all the latest PR that Acura is pushing...may be exactly what they are trying to do.
It seems that Honda doesn't WANT to just make another modern NSX with similar drivetrain/chassis. After all the spirit of the NSX seems to be more than just a car...but a concept..a new idea of a new kind of sportscar.
So it may be that Honda is expressing their view of a "New Sportscar eXperimental" through this 2G NSX.....now obviously the exact direction/execution of the idea may be up for debate (and at least on Azine, it seems to see more criticsm than praise).
02-01-2016, 02:23 PM
#6733
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
^
+1. That to me is why it's called the NSX - New Sportscar eXperimental. If it's using similar drivetrain and chassis, then that's more like OSX - Old Sportscar non-eXperimental.
25 years, Honda showed what a modern sports car should be like with the 1G NSX. Now, Honda is again showing what a modern sports car should be like with the 2G NSX.
As to why Honda announce the NSX back in 2012, I think the answer is quite straightforward. After 2007/2008, Honda didn't have any exciting products - S2K, NSX, RSX, Type S, etc were or nearly all gone. In 2010, the tier-1 plans and V10 RWD HSV got cancelled. The 4G TL, along with the beak, were poorly received. Honda needed something as criticisms were coming in left, right, and center.
To help this situation, they announced the 2G NSX concept, and said it would be in production by 2015. Now, whether you agree with Honda's decision to make that announcement in 2012 or not, that's a personal opinion.
+1. That to me is why it's called the NSX - New Sportscar eXperimental. If it's using similar drivetrain and chassis, then that's more like OSX - Old Sportscar non-eXperimental.
25 years, Honda showed what a modern sports car should be like with the 1G NSX. Now, Honda is again showing what a modern sports car should be like with the 2G NSX.
As to why Honda announce the NSX back in 2012, I think the answer is quite straightforward. After 2007/2008, Honda didn't have any exciting products - S2K, NSX, RSX, Type S, etc were or nearly all gone. In 2010, the tier-1 plans and V10 RWD HSV got cancelled. The 4G TL, along with the beak, were poorly received. Honda needed something as criticisms were coming in left, right, and center.
To help this situation, they announced the 2G NSX concept, and said it would be in production by 2015. Now, whether you agree with Honda's decision to make that announcement in 2012 or not, that's a personal opinion.
02-01-2016, 02:44 PM
#6734
Safety Car
Yeah, while we clamor for the "good ol days" I think deep down most know that another modernized 1G NSX wouldn't really work at all.
For me personally I am not a fan of all the new hybrid/electro-motor stuff so that is one area where I am disappoint....and would've wanted Honda to take the new NSX in a diff direction but alas it may have been an industry pressure to do more with hybrid sportscars and whatnot.
It seems closer to a baby Porsche 918, with it also weighing about 3700lbs and not as powerful (918 is the least power out of the Trinity) but also in the MR config. The P1 and Laferrari are of course top of the hypercar game.
I would've at least liked the Ferrari approach...basically minimal battery assist and keeping weight still super low.
Would've liked to see a bigger motor for more NA/turbo power baseline...and drop the weight...
For me personally I am not a fan of all the new hybrid/electro-motor stuff so that is one area where I am disappoint....and would've wanted Honda to take the new NSX in a diff direction but alas it may have been an industry pressure to do more with hybrid sportscars and whatnot.
It seems closer to a baby Porsche 918, with it also weighing about 3700lbs and not as powerful (918 is the least power out of the Trinity) but also in the MR config. The P1 and Laferrari are of course top of the hypercar game.
I would've at least liked the Ferrari approach...basically minimal battery assist and keeping weight still super low.
Would've liked to see a bigger motor for more NA/turbo power baseline...and drop the weight...
02-01-2016, 03:13 PM
#6735
TacoBello....Man you sure have a way of making great posts! (#6730)
The following users liked this post:
TacoBello (02-01-2016)
02-01-2016, 03:28 PM
#6736
Safety Car
The AMG GT? Eh....ok a V8 sport touring coupe....cool but not soul stirring in the least.
It would be interesting to discuss what exactly would make a car soul stirring.
It seems there may be two camps:
Those who "like" the new NSX but is not in mad, car enthusiast love with it.
Those who really disagree with the direction of this New Sportscar eXperimental as a new sportscar (weight, hybrid, styling, handling, etc. etc.)
Of course I think Acura's loss of continued sportscar pedigree in the recent years is also to blame...in that those of us really wanted Honda to blow the competitors out the water....and so far it seems to not live to expectation and thus the critical view....even if it is a great sportscar.
Guess time will tell...maybe it'll age better
02-01-2016, 03:31 PM
#6737
Yeah, while we clamor for the "good ol days" I think deep down most know that another modernized 1G NSX wouldn't really work at all.
For me personally I am not a fan of all the new hybrid/electro-motor stuff so that is one area where I am disappoint....and would've wanted Honda to take the new NSX in a diff direction but alas it may have been an industry pressure to do more with hybrid sportscars and whatnot.
It seems closer to a baby Porsche 918, with it also weighing about 3700lbs and not as powerful (918 is the least power out of the Trinity) but also in the MR config. The P1 and Laferrari are of course top of the hypercar game.
I would've at least liked the Ferrari approach...basically minimal battery assist and keeping weight still super low.
Would've liked to see a bigger motor for more NA/turbo power baseline...and drop the weight...
For me personally I am not a fan of all the new hybrid/electro-motor stuff so that is one area where I am disappoint....and would've wanted Honda to take the new NSX in a diff direction but alas it may have been an industry pressure to do more with hybrid sportscars and whatnot.
It seems closer to a baby Porsche 918, with it also weighing about 3700lbs and not as powerful (918 is the least power out of the Trinity) but also in the MR config. The P1 and Laferrari are of course top of the hypercar game.
I would've at least liked the Ferrari approach...basically minimal battery assist and keeping weight still super low.
Would've liked to see a bigger motor for more NA/turbo power baseline...and drop the weight...
I think hybrid tech is where it's at right now. capable of instant torque with electronic motors and no drop in power between shifts. p1 and laferrari are also a hybrids.
02-01-2016, 04:25 PM
#6739
Safety Car
I honestly think we are in a "golden age" for cars right now. I do still like a lot of 90's cars, but that's probably because I turned 16 in the 90's.
I think hybrid tech is where it's at right now. capable of instant torque with electronic motors and no drop in power between shifts. p1 and laferrari are also a hybrids.
I think hybrid tech is where it's at right now. capable of instant torque with electronic motors and no drop in power between shifts. p1 and laferrari are also a hybrids.
Again not a overall fan of electronic motors imo.....guess you're right in that cars are now moving into that direction overall.
Actually I suspect and wonder how many ACTUALLY wanted a 1991 NSX when it first came out. Sure it was a great car but I suspect the stigma and pedigree worked against the Honda car...I mean if you were super rich why would anyone buy a Honda over a Ferrari at that time (mostly due to the Ferrari being used as a status symbol of course...and bragging about reliability/handling on a track won't drop many panties or make your neighbor jealous). Again no knock on the original NSX at all....just a thought I had and wonder how the buyers reacted to the original NSX and did it actually take away Ferrari/Porsche buyers.....maybe not...but did draw in new fans to Acura/Honda as many have mentioned here.
So in this regard it's easy to say the NSX won't be on anyone's top list...and Honda isn't trying to compete with the 918/P1/LaFerrari of the world.....I mean Honda is a massive company and with enough money they could, I theorize, make a car similar to say a P1/918/LaFerrari....but would be much less reliable, much more costly...and probably wouldn't make them sell lot more Civics than Corollas...which in end will keep them afloat.
Of course none of us knows exactly what went on during those board/R&D meetings on the new NSX program...so may be all conjecture.
I was on the CorvetteForum the other day and saw an interesting Q&A with the chief engineer of the Corvette answering a question on what could the Corvette guys do if GM had given them more money for the program, and I think we may be able to use this to draw parallels to the Honda NSX program as well:
Bwright asked:
Bob Lutz said recently that for development of the C7 the team asked for $900mm but instead was only given $250mm. Given how good the C7 is I am curious, how might the car have been different if the team had been given say an extra $100mm? Just trying to get a better sense of how much $100mm buys on a program like the Corvette today.
Thanks in advance
Bob Lutz said recently that for development of the C7 the team asked for $900mm but instead was only given $250mm. Given how good the C7 is I am curious, how might the car have been different if the team had been given say an extra $100mm? Just trying to get a better sense of how much $100mm buys on a program like the Corvette today.
Thanks in advance
Thanks for the question, Bwright: First of all, my recall of the budget requests for new Corvette programs differs a bit from Bob's recollection and I can't quote the actual figures because that is a trade secret. Suffice it to say, the auto industry is very capital intensive and operates on relatively thin margins. In a typical car program, we spend hundreds of millions of dollars years before producing the product intended to pay back that capital. The way GM works, and I suspect most auto companies do the same, is to evaluate each car program as a financial investment with potential risks and rewards. Corvette is no different. When we go to the leadership of GM with a proposal for a new Corvette, we have to understand the full cost structure including how much we have to pay for tools to make the parts, how much the development cost will be, how much it will cost to change over the assembly plant to produce the new vehicle, how many we expect to sell and how much we are going to make on each car (price minus variable cost per unit). We have strict financial goals that must be met to be granted program approval. These are Board of Director-level decisions on major programs.
This long-winded preamble is to point out that we are not "given the hundred million", we are loaned it and are obligated to pay it back with interest and profit. On a low volume program like Corvette, $100M is an enormous debt that is very tough to pay back without adding more price (not popular with customers and would reduce sales) or cutting cost on each unit (would lose performance and would reduce sales). So this is a multifaceted problem we have to solve: How can we do a new car, add technology and performance, make it more appealing so sales increase, but hold the line on cost so we don't have to raise price significantly. We have been quite successful at solving this conundrum on the seventh generation Corvette and so are enjoying excellent business results that gives GM leadership confidence that Corvette programs represent a good investment. I have to thank our customers at this point, because without them, we have nothing, no brand, no business, and no great product for we engineering geeks to work on.
So if I was asked how to improve the Corvette with an extra $100M in the budget, what would I do? Probably increase customization, make more models catering to individuals preferences. We could expand the bandwidth on the performance end by producing more hard-core cars and track-only models. On the luxury end, we could have more unique interior options - both aesthetic and functional. Of course all this would come at a price... We would have to pay back that hundred mil somehow.
Read more: [ANSWERED] What does $100mm get you? - Corvette Forum
This long-winded preamble is to point out that we are not "given the hundred million", we are loaned it and are obligated to pay it back with interest and profit. On a low volume program like Corvette, $100M is an enormous debt that is very tough to pay back without adding more price (not popular with customers and would reduce sales) or cutting cost on each unit (would lose performance and would reduce sales). So this is a multifaceted problem we have to solve: How can we do a new car, add technology and performance, make it more appealing so sales increase, but hold the line on cost so we don't have to raise price significantly. We have been quite successful at solving this conundrum on the seventh generation Corvette and so are enjoying excellent business results that gives GM leadership confidence that Corvette programs represent a good investment. I have to thank our customers at this point, because without them, we have nothing, no brand, no business, and no great product for we engineering geeks to work on.
So if I was asked how to improve the Corvette with an extra $100M in the budget, what would I do? Probably increase customization, make more models catering to individuals preferences. We could expand the bandwidth on the performance end by producing more hard-core cars and track-only models. On the luxury end, we could have more unique interior options - both aesthetic and functional. Of course all this would come at a price... We would have to pay back that hundred mil somehow.
Read more: [ANSWERED] What does $100mm get you? - Corvette Forum
02-01-2016, 05:39 PM
#6740
Team Owner
The first year of the NSX sold like hot cakes. Look at for sale ads anywhere and you're guaranteed to see a 91 for sale. It dropped drastically after that, but it was initially very well received. Honda expected the sales to continue that way, but such was not the case.
02-01-2016, 07:12 PM
#6741
If the batteries can be made lighter I would be all for it...and P1 and LaFerrari seems to at least be saving as much weight as possible...and the LaFerrari seems to be using a minimal battery assist vs the other two.
Again not a overall fan of electronic motors imo.....guess you're right in that cars are now moving into that direction overall.
Again not a overall fan of electronic motors imo.....guess you're right in that cars are now moving into that direction overall.
Ha, of course. If any of us won that big PB lotto or if we were billionaire VERY few would have a NSX at the top of the list.
Actually I suspect and wonder how many ACTUALLY wanted a 1991 NSX when it first came out. Sure it was a great car but I suspect the stigma and pedigree worked against the Honda car...I mean if you were super rich why would anyone buy a Honda over a Ferrari at that time (mostly due to the Ferrari being used as a status symbol of course...and bragging about reliability/handling on a track won't drop many panties or make your neighbor jealous). Again no knock on the original NSX at all....just a thought I had and wonder how the buyers reacted to the original NSX and did it actually take away Ferrari/Porsche buyers.....maybe not...but did draw in new fans to Acura/Honda as many have mentioned here.
So in this regard it's easy to say the NSX won't be on anyone's top list...and Honda isn't trying to compete with the 918/P1/LaFerrari of the world.....I mean Honda is a massive company and with enough money they could, I theorize, make a car similar to say a P1/918/LaFerrari....but would be much less reliable, much more costly...and probably wouldn't make them sell lot more Civics than Corollas...which in end will keep them afloat.
Actually I suspect and wonder how many ACTUALLY wanted a 1991 NSX when it first came out. Sure it was a great car but I suspect the stigma and pedigree worked against the Honda car...I mean if you were super rich why would anyone buy a Honda over a Ferrari at that time (mostly due to the Ferrari being used as a status symbol of course...and bragging about reliability/handling on a track won't drop many panties or make your neighbor jealous). Again no knock on the original NSX at all....just a thought I had and wonder how the buyers reacted to the original NSX and did it actually take away Ferrari/Porsche buyers.....maybe not...but did draw in new fans to Acura/Honda as many have mentioned here.
So in this regard it's easy to say the NSX won't be on anyone's top list...and Honda isn't trying to compete with the 918/P1/LaFerrari of the world.....I mean Honda is a massive company and with enough money they could, I theorize, make a car similar to say a P1/918/LaFerrari....but would be much less reliable, much more costly...and probably wouldn't make them sell lot more Civics than Corollas...which in end will keep them afloat.
Of course none of us knows exactly what went on during those board/R&D meetings on the new NSX program...so may be all conjecture.
I was on the CorvetteForum the other day and saw an interesting Q&A with the chief engineer of the Corvette answering a question on what could the Corvette guys do if GM had given them more money for the program, and I think we may be able to use this to draw parallels to the Honda NSX program as well:
So looks like there may have been lot of behind the scenes excutive/management influence over the NSX and the NSX guys just had to do with the resources they were given
I was on the CorvetteForum the other day and saw an interesting Q&A with the chief engineer of the Corvette answering a question on what could the Corvette guys do if GM had given them more money for the program, and I think we may be able to use this to draw parallels to the Honda NSX program as well:
So looks like there may have been lot of behind the scenes excutive/management influence over the NSX and the NSX guys just had to do with the resources they were given
02-02-2016, 09:04 AM
#6742
Senior Moderator
Now if Honda were smart and forward thinking (the later of which we know they arent), they would already be working on gen 3
02-02-2016, 09:19 AM
#6743
Team Owner
According to SSFTSX, Honda is making eleventy billion dollars on every new NSX they sell, due to parts sharing amongst their entire lineup.
The following 4 users liked this post by TacoBello:
02-02-2016, 10:21 AM
#6744
Safety Car
The first year of the NSX sold like hot cakes. Look at for sale ads anywhere and you're guaranteed to see a 91 for sale. It dropped drastically after that, but it was initially very well received. Honda expected the sales to continue that way, but such was not the case.
source: https://www.nsxprime.com/wiki/Production_Numbers
Really surprising that Honda kept the NSX program alive as long as it did....
Quick comparison to the GT-R/R8:
source: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...-ever-january/
source: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html
Seems like if the NSX can keep close to 1000 units for several years it would be a "success" by relative standards.
That 2010 dip is interesting for the GT-R...may be due to the 1st gen transmission issues and then it has done very well since.
Will be interesting to see how the NSX sells in comparison....adjust for inflation the 1991 NSX would be selling at $105k....so it is about 50k more for the 2nd gen NSX. And with very good competition in today's market....
Last edited by nist7; 02-02-2016 at 10:24 AM.
02-02-2016, 10:25 AM
#6745
Team Owner
I actually thought they sold more NSXs than that in the first two years. Either way, even with the slightly bigger engine and 6MT they placed in the NA2 (1998+), sales really didn't change.
02-02-2016, 11:01 AM
#6746
AZ Community Team
1991 - ~1/3 of total NSX's sold from 1991-2005 (3163)
Add in 1992 US sales and Acura sold ~1/2 of the NSX's in the 1st 2 years, then took 13 more years to roughtly equal that.
Unfortunately there was not much growth potential in the powertrain and alot of the competition was also improving in the same period.
Add in 1992 US sales and Acura sold ~1/2 of the NSX's in the 1st 2 years, then took 13 more years to roughtly equal that.
Unfortunately there was not much growth potential in the powertrain and alot of the competition was also improving in the same period.
02-02-2016, 11:03 AM
#6747
AZ Community Team
I think he said before that he wasn't specifically talking about the M cars, he was talking about the bread and butter models, like the 320i, 328i, or even the 335i.
There's no need for that really (calling someone's new car "subpar"). Yes it's the internet but come on man, you are more mature then that!
Just congratulate for his purchase and move on.
There was a comment that people only buy Acura's because they can't afford something more expensive. His response was to clarify that. He only indicated that the RDX is exactly what his family needs and he made that pretty clear when he said "in my opinion." It's not like he's claiming all other SUVs are crap.
There's no need for that really (calling someone's new car "subpar"). Yes it's the internet but come on man, you are more mature then that!
Just congratulate for his purchase and move on. There was a comment that people only buy Acura's because they can't afford something more expensive. His response was to clarify that. He only indicated that the RDX is exactly what his family needs and he made that pretty clear when he said "in my opinion." It's not like he's claiming all other SUVs are crap.
+1, there's no reason for ad hominem in the discussions. It just cheapens the debate and arguments.
02-02-2016, 11:39 AM
#6748
Senior Moderator
I think the fact that the original NSX kind of showed up out of nowhere in 89-90, and began selling in '91, and kicked the shit out of pretty much every rival it had at the time has now set some really big shoes for the successor to fill, even though it simply is just impossible to do that without either raising the price, or lowering expectations these days. And if Acura does either, the criticism begins to fly.
It also comes back to, as you and others have mentioned, the extensive delays (why tell us about the project 4 years in advance?) and the fact that the original NSX remained highly unchanged for almost 15 years and then completely absent for the subsequent decade. I too was young when the original came out, but anyone who was even remotely been a Honda fan, knew about the NSX.
Finally, the complete disconnect of the 2G from the 1G makes people wonder why the same name was even used. I think if this NSX was actually a 3G, and there was an intermediate model between the two, eight to ten years ago, people would look at this car differently. Don't get me wrong- it looks wonderful and the idea of the car is great, It's just such a drastic departure from the original.
It also comes back to, as you and others have mentioned, the extensive delays (why tell us about the project 4 years in advance?) and the fact that the original NSX remained highly unchanged for almost 15 years and then completely absent for the subsequent decade. I too was young when the original came out, but anyone who was even remotely been a Honda fan, knew about the NSX.
Finally, the complete disconnect of the 2G from the 1G makes people wonder why the same name was even used. I think if this NSX was actually a 3G, and there was an intermediate model between the two, eight to ten years ago, people would look at this car differently. Don't get me wrong- it looks wonderful and the idea of the car is great, It's just such a drastic departure from the original.
Well-said.And I am no longer that concerned about the new NSX anymore. My NA2 will do me just fine. I don't care that it's not the fastest right now, it is the epitome of what Acura used to be: sporty, fun to drive, awesome-looking, and dead reliable. All that's left is the "fun to drive" in today's Acuras, and barely that.
It's sad that the most powerful current Acura (RLX Sport Hybrid) looks nothing like its performance indicates.
Last edited by neuronbob; 02-02-2016 at 11:42 AM.
The following users liked this post:
TacoBello (02-02-2016)
02-02-2016, 11:50 AM
#6749
Team Owner
Bob, I think you will be happy for years to come. And even if you sell the NA2, you'll likely get, at a minimum, 90% of your money back. Or even make money. So you can laugh all the way to the bank.
The interior is rather "spartan" compared to other cars these days. The car is kind of underpowered. But as soon as you turn that key, all the negatives go away and are replaced by a nice, big, goofy grin.
Still one of my all time favorite cars to drive. And that'll likely never change. There's just something about the original NSX...
The interior is rather "spartan" compared to other cars these days. The car is kind of underpowered. But as soon as you turn that key, all the negatives go away and are replaced by a nice, big, goofy grin.
Still one of my all time favorite cars to drive. And that'll likely never change. There's just something about the original NSX...
02-02-2016, 12:33 PM
#6750
Safety Car
Interesting. I wonder if the 1G NSX has developed such a huge cult following is the retrospective look back and people saw how great of a car it was.
Could it be the same for the 2G NSX? So far the opinion on Azine at least is that it won't.
Discounting the delay, which definitely has colored many opinions....I'm still interested to know what people think are the intangibles that make a great driver's car.
Some have posted about the technical aspects of the car and some cosmetic and others refer to a soul-stirring factor.
Drawing attention to what was posted above:
Could the new NSX still be sporty? Seems certainly so in Track Mode.
Fun to drive. We'll have to wait and see real world drives, but seems premature to base that opinion...though the heavy set weight is a concern. Prelim reviews show under-steer in daily mode and slight feel of disconnect at the track. Though no turbo lag and the torque vectoring has impressed reviewers.
Awesome-looking. I think we can all agree that Honda hit a homer with the looks (rear end has always been the only area for criticism in my opinion).
Dead reliable. Again this will have to wait until real world time tested results.
And even if there are some negatives (such as the underpowered motor with the 1G NSX) there seems to still be that intangible "put a huge grin on your face factor" that people always tout. We'll have to again seem to wait for more real world examples to come out and see.
Anyway, just asking some questions and honestly I'm quite surprised at the reservation for the new NSX. SO was wondering what does make one truly drool for a car...even with its known flaws or negatives.
Could it be the same for the 2G NSX? So far the opinion on Azine at least is that it won't.
Discounting the delay, which definitely has colored many opinions....I'm still interested to know what people think are the intangibles that make a great driver's car.
Some have posted about the technical aspects of the car and some cosmetic and others refer to a soul-stirring factor.
Drawing attention to what was posted above:
Originally Posted by neuronbob
what Acura used to be: sporty, fun to drive, awesome-looking, and dead reliable
Originally Posted by TacoBello
The car is kind of underpowered. But as soon as you turn that key, all the negatives go away and are replaced by a nice, big, goofy grin.
Fun to drive. We'll have to wait and see real world drives, but seems premature to base that opinion...though the heavy set weight is a concern. Prelim reviews show under-steer in daily mode and slight feel of disconnect at the track. Though no turbo lag and the torque vectoring has impressed reviewers.
Awesome-looking. I think we can all agree that Honda hit a homer with the looks (rear end has always been the only area for criticism in my opinion).
Dead reliable. Again this will have to wait until real world time tested results.
And even if there are some negatives (such as the underpowered motor with the 1G NSX) there seems to still be that intangible "put a huge grin on your face factor" that people always tout. We'll have to again seem to wait for more real world examples to come out and see.
Anyway, just asking some questions and honestly I'm quite surprised at the reservation for the new NSX. SO was wondering what does make one truly drool for a car...even with its known flaws or negatives.
02-02-2016, 01:10 PM
#6751
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
Yeah, while we clamor for the "good ol days" I think deep down most know that another modernized 1G NSX wouldn't really work at all.
For me personally I am not a fan of all the new hybrid/electro-motor stuff so that is one area where I am disappoint....and would've wanted Honda to take the new NSX in a diff direction but alas it may have been an industry pressure to do more with hybrid sportscars and whatnot.
It seems closer to a baby Porsche 918, with it also weighing about 3700lbs and not as powerful (918 is the least power out of the Trinity) but also in the MR config. The P1 and Laferrari are of course top of the hypercar game.
I would've at least liked the Ferrari approach...basically minimal battery assist and keeping weight still super low.
Would've liked to see a bigger motor for more NA/turbo power baseline...and drop the weight...
For me personally I am not a fan of all the new hybrid/electro-motor stuff so that is one area where I am disappoint....and would've wanted Honda to take the new NSX in a diff direction but alas it may have been an industry pressure to do more with hybrid sportscars and whatnot.
It seems closer to a baby Porsche 918, with it also weighing about 3700lbs and not as powerful (918 is the least power out of the Trinity) but also in the MR config. The P1 and Laferrari are of course top of the hypercar game.
I would've at least liked the Ferrari approach...basically minimal battery assist and keeping weight still super low.
Would've liked to see a bigger motor for more NA/turbo power baseline...and drop the weight...
Right now, the 3.5L TT engine is at its lowest tune. Its peak boost I believe is around 15psi, which is even lower than the new Civic's 1.5T engine. And that engine also does NOT have VTEC. But the higher tune is saved for the Type R.
The first year of the NSX sold like hot cakes. Look at for sale ads anywhere and you're guaranteed to see a 91 for sale. It dropped drastically after that, but it was initially very well received. Honda expected the sales to continue that way, but such was not the case.
02-02-2016, 02:03 PM
#6752
Fair enough of course. Cars are very subjective and we are free to love or hate on whatever.
I still wonder how much is the young naivete/vs now we are older and expect more. I was only about 5yo when NSX came out so I had no idea obviously lol....but now after seeing all these other cars it's definitely not as "WOW" as some of the other ones.
Just a bit interesting to me....in this thread obviously lot of complaints about delays, weight, hybrid, few complaints on looks, and some genuine car-related concerns.
And then there are also the purely subjective soul-stirring factor, so to speak. Which also many on here have shared their opinion.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just an observation. Is there some unconscious force that makes us hate the new NSX because it was over-promised and under delivered?
I mean obviously impossible to please everyone...but even if the NSX was a LaFerrari killer with gorgeous looks...would people still complain...probably.
But just an observation I had.
And what are some of the intangible factors that makes a car soul-stirring? That may be a good discussion and may be useful for car makers to look into.
Of course there are cars that may be gorgeous looking but terrible as a car and not a super track monster either (ie Aston Martin).
Maybe it's that the NSX is too well rounded...so it doesn't standout in either category...its got great looks imo, except for the rear, and its more a daily than a 488, though not as gorgeous as the ferrari or the AM/MB or the pedigree of those as well.
Anyway, just an interesting discussion I thought we can have.
I still wonder how much is the young naivete/vs now we are older and expect more. I was only about 5yo when NSX came out so I had no idea obviously lol....but now after seeing all these other cars it's definitely not as "WOW" as some of the other ones.
Just a bit interesting to me....in this thread obviously lot of complaints about delays, weight, hybrid, few complaints on looks, and some genuine car-related concerns.
And then there are also the purely subjective soul-stirring factor, so to speak. Which also many on here have shared their opinion.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just an observation. Is there some unconscious force that makes us hate the new NSX because it was over-promised and under delivered?
I mean obviously impossible to please everyone...but even if the NSX was a LaFerrari killer with gorgeous looks...would people still complain...probably.
But just an observation I had.
And what are some of the intangible factors that makes a car soul-stirring? That may be a good discussion and may be useful for car makers to look into.
Of course there are cars that may be gorgeous looking but terrible as a car and not a super track monster either (ie Aston Martin).
Maybe it's that the NSX is too well rounded...so it doesn't standout in either category...its got great looks imo, except for the rear, and its more a daily than a 488, though not as gorgeous as the ferrari or the AM/MB or the pedigree of those as well.
Anyway, just an interesting discussion I thought we can have.
Quite simply the launch has been botched. We've seen it for almost 5 years and its old news. In this age of sub 2 sec performance offerings from multiple manufactures, currently available, the NSX just doesn't have a shot. Fancy AWD and hybrid setups have already been done. In the eyes of enthusiast these esoteric differences with be noted, but to the general public Porsche, McLaren, Ferrari, Nissan have already beat them to the punch.
Although I wouldn't call the design ugly, its very generic, and appears designed by committee, the interior belongs in the TLX, and the it sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Honda has forgotten how much these non tangibles matter. Say what you will about the Jaguar, AM, or LFA, there soundtracks are masterful and they really stimulate out right brain. Lets see how "quite mode" plays. I wish them well but this car is going to go over as well as the RLX SH-awd.
02-02-2016, 02:13 PM
#6753
Team Owner
Interesting. I wonder if the 1G NSX has developed such a huge cult following is the retrospective look back and people saw how great of a car it was.
Could it be the same for the 2G NSX? So far the opinion on Azine at least is that it won't.
Discounting the delay, which definitely has colored many opinions....I'm still interested to know what people think are the intangibles that make a great driver's car.
Some have posted about the technical aspects of the car and some cosmetic and others refer to a soul-stirring factor.
Drawing attention to what was posted above:
Could the new NSX still be sporty? Seems certainly so in Track Mode.
Fun to drive. We'll have to wait and see real world drives, but seems premature to base that opinion...though the heavy set weight is a concern. Prelim reviews show under-steer in daily mode and slight feel of disconnect at the track. Though no turbo lag and the torque vectoring has impressed reviewers.
Awesome-looking. I think we can all agree that Honda hit a homer with the looks (rear end has always been the only area for criticism in my opinion).
Dead reliable. Again this will have to wait until real world time tested results.
And even if there are some negatives (such as the underpowered motor with the 1G NSX) there seems to still be that intangible "put a huge grin on your face factor" that people always tout. We'll have to again seem to wait for more real world examples to come out and see.
Anyway, just asking some questions and honestly I'm quite surprised at the reservation for the new NSX. SO was wondering what does make one truly drool for a car...even with its known flaws or negatives.
Could it be the same for the 2G NSX? So far the opinion on Azine at least is that it won't.
Discounting the delay, which definitely has colored many opinions....I'm still interested to know what people think are the intangibles that make a great driver's car.
Some have posted about the technical aspects of the car and some cosmetic and others refer to a soul-stirring factor.
Drawing attention to what was posted above:
Could the new NSX still be sporty? Seems certainly so in Track Mode.
Fun to drive. We'll have to wait and see real world drives, but seems premature to base that opinion...though the heavy set weight is a concern. Prelim reviews show under-steer in daily mode and slight feel of disconnect at the track. Though no turbo lag and the torque vectoring has impressed reviewers.
Awesome-looking. I think we can all agree that Honda hit a homer with the looks (rear end has always been the only area for criticism in my opinion).
Dead reliable. Again this will have to wait until real world time tested results.
And even if there are some negatives (such as the underpowered motor with the 1G NSX) there seems to still be that intangible "put a huge grin on your face factor" that people always tout. We'll have to again seem to wait for more real world examples to come out and see.
Anyway, just asking some questions and honestly I'm quite surprised at the reservation for the new NSX. SO was wondering what does make one truly drool for a car...even with its known flaws or negatives.
The 1G NSX is forever remembered as a game changer and butt kicker, compared to anything else in its time. Part of the reason people still love it, aside from its timeless design, is its short but true pedigree.
Even if the 2G NSX meets the tangibles of the 1G NSX, it's now nothing much to be remembered by. At least so it seems. I'm not saying it's bad. But what sets it apart from the rest? I've said it before and I'll say it again- it's not that the car is bad. It's just that it's 10 years too late. This SHOULD have been the 3G NSX, not the 2G.
The E30 M3 is still remembered as being a game changer for when it came out and is still one of the most sought after M3s, even though every iteration since then is faster, quicker, better, etc. The 2nd gen M3 (E36?) doesn't even stand a chance. And it's not BMWs fault. There's nothing they could have done to meet the feelings and nostalgia of the E30 M3. And even though the 2nd gen M3 may have been better, it'll never live up to what the original was.
Same goes for the NSX.
The following users liked this post:
00TL-P3.2 (02-02-2016)
02-02-2016, 05:00 PM
#6754
Safety Car
I can see your point. The 1G NSX was so legendary that indeed the successor, even if it was incredibly awesome, may not have been able to live up to its father.
So there is that one intangible that the 2G NSX could not overcome...the father of the 1G NSX is already too great.
And the 2nd biggest problem, as you said, is time. At this time and age it is not revolutionary or cutting edge....many other cars have similar technology as another poster mentioned.
I too also think it will not be nearly as of a huge legend as the 1G NSX. But again only time will tell...in the next 10-20 years.
So looks like the two major problem that will signal the downfall of the NSX name seems to be:
- Coming in too late to the game (which in 2005 not sure if it was cost appropriate to have all these torque vectoring hybrid tech....I mean SH-AWD was just coming out...may have priced the NSX quite a bit more)
- Will forever be in the shadow of the 1G NSX which has become way too successful in car enthusiast terms that combined with the late coming.
And as you said, with the example of the M3...even its successors cannot live to the intangible father figure of the original E30...but each generation does have its own following and positives and negatives.
The other question then is....can we celebrate the NSX by its own merit? Or...as it seems it will forever be haunted by its delay and its loss of true cutting-edge factor in todays highly competitive car world. As many competitor cars would be similarly tech'ed and driven around a track.
So there is that one intangible that the 2G NSX could not overcome...the father of the 1G NSX is already too great.
And the 2nd biggest problem, as you said, is time. At this time and age it is not revolutionary or cutting edge....many other cars have similar technology as another poster mentioned.
I too also think it will not be nearly as of a huge legend as the 1G NSX. But again only time will tell...in the next 10-20 years.
So looks like the two major problem that will signal the downfall of the NSX name seems to be:
- Coming in too late to the game (which in 2005 not sure if it was cost appropriate to have all these torque vectoring hybrid tech....I mean SH-AWD was just coming out...may have priced the NSX quite a bit more)
- Will forever be in the shadow of the 1G NSX which has become way too successful in car enthusiast terms that combined with the late coming.
And as you said, with the example of the M3...even its successors cannot live to the intangible father figure of the original E30...but each generation does have its own following and positives and negatives.
The other question then is....can we celebrate the NSX by its own merit? Or...as it seems it will forever be haunted by its delay and its loss of true cutting-edge factor in todays highly competitive car world. As many competitor cars would be similarly tech'ed and driven around a track.
02-02-2016, 05:46 PM
#6755
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
Based on the above, pretty much everything in the market is not cutting edge or revolutionary....
911 - still RR and boxer engine
Corvette - still FR and big V8
GTR - still good at the track with turbo power and fancy AWD tech
LaFerrari - Just a Ferrari with some electric motors
918 - Just a Porsche with some electric motors
P1 - Just a McLaren with some electric power
Ford GT - more of the same, but with ecoboost power and a very high price tag
LFA - Yet another FR sports car with a high price tag and V10 engine
R8 - just a poor man's Huracan
911 - still RR and boxer engine
Corvette - still FR and big V8
GTR - still good at the track with turbo power and fancy AWD tech
LaFerrari - Just a Ferrari with some electric motors
918 - Just a Porsche with some electric motors
P1 - Just a McLaren with some electric power
Ford GT - more of the same, but with ecoboost power and a very high price tag
LFA - Yet another FR sports car with a high price tag and V10 engine
R8 - just a poor man's Huracan
Last edited by iforyou; 02-02-2016 at 05:49 PM.
The following users liked this post:
jwong77 (02-03-2016)
02-03-2016, 11:43 AM
#6756
Safety Car
Based on the above, pretty much everything in the market is not cutting edge or revolutionary....
911 - still RR and boxer engine
Corvette - still FR and big V8
GTR - still good at the track with turbo power and fancy AWD tech
LaFerrari - Just a Ferrari with some electric motors
918 - Just a Porsche with some electric motors
P1 - Just a McLaren with some electric power
Ford GT - more of the same, but with ecoboost power and a very high price tag
LFA - Yet another FR sports car with a high price tag and V10 engine
R8 - just a poor man's Huracan
911 - still RR and boxer engine
Corvette - still FR and big V8
GTR - still good at the track with turbo power and fancy AWD tech
LaFerrari - Just a Ferrari with some electric motors
918 - Just a Porsche with some electric motors
P1 - Just a McLaren with some electric power
Ford GT - more of the same, but with ecoboost power and a very high price tag
LFA - Yet another FR sports car with a high price tag and V10 engine
R8 - just a poor man's Huracan
But your post illustrates a very good point: that there are probably ALOT of engineering/thought/research that goes into each super/hypercar that we laymen probably can barely understand and so we tend to focus on the obvious (platform, motor size, HP, looks, subjective feel, non-car related factors).
Looking at NSX's technical PR news release they tout new technical details such as:
-New casting technique for multi-material frame construction (carbon fiber, aluminum, steel, etc.)
-Advanced SD-AWD with torque vectoring with the twin units up front and a unit coupled to the motor in the back.
-etc.
Obviously it's a PR piece so of course everyone will toot their own horns.
Now the torque vectoring technology is definitely fairly new and we'll have to wait in time to see how it affects vehicle driving/track dynamics.
There have been cars with various forms of torque vectoring: some Audi cars iirc, Porsche 918, the P1 and LaFerrari do not have independent axle/wheel torque vectoring...but their electric motor are basically boost units for the main motor as far as I understand.
GT-R from wiki shows rear-axle torque vectoring.
But seems like NSX is the first major production supercar to have independent electric motor units up front by the two wheels for dynamic vectoring that way. The PR piece at least touts the Honda's vision for precise and immediate input from the driver into the wheels for instant handling response.
This is way over what I can fully comprehend in terms of engineering/handling dynamics/etc. and how it fits historically into the technological race over time...
But in the end again I think your post, if I see your obviously sarcastic post right....is to point out that each car has likely things that we are either unaware or unable to comprehend and its much more than just a badge, a motor, a drivetrain platform and the HP/torque numbers.
So in the end...it will take time to see how the car world/father time judges this new NSX. At the outset the Azine opinion is that of disappointment it seems. And it may be colored by the protracted delay in its release. But maybe father time will see the NSX as a future legend years down the road...who knows.
edit: some of your examples are actually not that far off: Ford GT and R8 seems to be fairly similar to their older brothers. The P1 and LaFerrari have more in common than the 918 (Porsche also making advanced torque vectoring) which as far as I understand P1 and LaFerrari is more of a direct boost-power unit to the motor and not targeted at wheel-specific torque adjustments
Last edited by nist7; 02-03-2016 at 11:49 AM.
02-03-2016, 11:52 AM
#6757
Senior Moderator
What got me to love the original NSX was that it was Honda REALLY pushing the envelope with 1 intention in mind: PISS OFF FERRARI.
And frankly, they did. The original NSX is legendary because of what it was able to achieve and do on the track. It PUSHED the envelope...it was a benchmark.
Can we say that for this incoming vaporcar...? That's part my perceived "lukewarm" enthusiasm. This car is arguably very good per the initial reviews by the test-drivers from the car review sites...BUT, is this car going to make the head of Ferrari swear under their breath and go, "Holy ravioli, we need more mozzarella and spicy meatballs in our Ferraris going forward! Redo the 488!!!"
Nope. Ferrari probably yawned.
And frankly, they did. The original NSX is legendary because of what it was able to achieve and do on the track. It PUSHED the envelope...it was a benchmark.
Can we say that for this incoming vaporcar...? That's part my perceived "lukewarm" enthusiasm. This car is arguably very good per the initial reviews by the test-drivers from the car review sites...BUT, is this car going to make the head of Ferrari swear under their breath and go, "Holy ravioli, we need more mozzarella and spicy meatballs in our Ferraris going forward! Redo the 488!!!"
Nope. Ferrari probably yawned.
02-03-2016, 12:05 PM
#6758
Team Owner
Unfortunately, Ferrari learned a value lesson in 1990, and as such, Acura would have to build a 1.5 million dollar hypercar that would eat up the poopdick mc fartington. Not gonna happen.
In 1990, it was crazy to have a big, mid mounted V8, RWD, a manual gear box, power windows and AC. That's not the case anymore. Acura will never again battle for supremacy with Ferrari.
In 1990, it was crazy to have a big, mid mounted V8, RWD, a manual gear box, power windows and AC. That's not the case anymore. Acura will never again battle for supremacy with Ferrari.
02-03-2016, 12:21 PM
#6759
Safety Car
^^^ Agreed with the points above.
Honda can probably spend hundreds of millions to develop a hypercar that can probably trounce even the LaFerrari if they want to but obviously they don't want to nor would it be a good business decision to compete on that area.
Ferrari is a 3billion/yr business and Honda is a 100+billion/yr business.
They know they have to carve out a new niche of the supercar market and it's not viable or realistic to actually compete with Ferrari anymore on a head to head basis.
And obviously things have become much more competitive in the modern days where tech and science and materials has advanced so much. It's harder and harder to probably do ground breaking of anything now vs the 1990s many things were still waiting to be discovered/invented.
And as I posted above with the insight into the Corvette program and its relations to Chevy/GM...NSX program leadership probably had to go to Honda/Acura executives and ask for a budget for the NSX and it probably kept changing with the 08/09 recession and continuing changes in the finances/direction of the car.
I mean in a similar vein to the CorvetteForum member who asked about what they could've done with an extra 100million....
It would be nice to dream about what the NSX program guys could've done with the car if they had unlimited budget for the car.....
Honda can probably spend hundreds of millions to develop a hypercar that can probably trounce even the LaFerrari if they want to but obviously they don't want to nor would it be a good business decision to compete on that area.
Ferrari is a 3billion/yr business and Honda is a 100+billion/yr business.
They know they have to carve out a new niche of the supercar market and it's not viable or realistic to actually compete with Ferrari anymore on a head to head basis.
And obviously things have become much more competitive in the modern days where tech and science and materials has advanced so much. It's harder and harder to probably do ground breaking of anything now vs the 1990s many things were still waiting to be discovered/invented.
And as I posted above with the insight into the Corvette program and its relations to Chevy/GM...NSX program leadership probably had to go to Honda/Acura executives and ask for a budget for the NSX and it probably kept changing with the 08/09 recession and continuing changes in the finances/direction of the car.
I mean in a similar vein to the CorvetteForum member who asked about what they could've done with an extra 100million....
It would be nice to dream about what the NSX program guys could've done with the car if they had unlimited budget for the car.....
Last edited by nist7; 02-03-2016 at 12:25 PM.
02-03-2016, 12:36 PM
#6760
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,521
Received 846 Likes
on
526 Posts
I assume you're replying to NopeNope4425's post above which essentially said there is nothing technically new/exciting with the NSX.
But your post illustrates a very good point: that there are probably ALOT of engineering/thought/research that goes into each super/hypercar that we laymen probably can barely understand and so we tend to focus on the obvious (platform, motor size, HP, looks, subjective feel, non-car related factors).
Looking at NSX's technical PR news release they tout new technical details such as:
-New casting technique for multi-material frame construction (carbon fiber, aluminum, steel, etc.)
-Advanced SD-AWD with torque vectoring with the twin units up front and a unit coupled to the motor in the back.
-etc.
Obviously it's a PR piece so of course everyone will toot their own horns.
Now the torque vectoring technology is definitely fairly new and we'll have to wait in time to see how it affects vehicle driving/track dynamics.
There have been cars with various forms of torque vectoring: some Audi cars iirc, Porsche 918, the P1 and LaFerrari do not have independent axle/wheel torque vectoring...but their electric motor are basically boost units for the main motor as far as I understand.
GT-R from wiki shows rear-axle torque vectoring.
But seems like NSX is the first major production supercar to have independent electric motor units up front by the two wheels for dynamic vectoring that way. The PR piece at least touts the Honda's vision for precise and immediate input from the driver into the wheels for instant handling response.
This is way over what I can fully comprehend in terms of engineering/handling dynamics/etc. and how it fits historically into the technological race over time...
But in the end again I think your post, if I see your obviously sarcastic post right....is to point out that each car has likely things that we are either unaware or unable to comprehend and its much more than just a badge, a motor, a drivetrain platform and the HP/torque numbers.
So in the end...it will take time to see how the car world/father time judges this new NSX. At the outset the Azine opinion is that of disappointment it seems. And it may be colored by the protracted delay in its release. But maybe father time will see the NSX as a future legend years down the road...who knows.
edit: some of your examples are actually not that far off: Ford GT and R8 seems to be fairly similar to their older brothers. The P1 and LaFerrari have more in common than the 918 (Porsche also making advanced torque vectoring) which as far as I understand P1 and LaFerrari is more of a direct boost-power unit to the motor and not targeted at wheel-specific torque adjustments
But your post illustrates a very good point: that there are probably ALOT of engineering/thought/research that goes into each super/hypercar that we laymen probably can barely understand and so we tend to focus on the obvious (platform, motor size, HP, looks, subjective feel, non-car related factors).
Looking at NSX's technical PR news release they tout new technical details such as:
-New casting technique for multi-material frame construction (carbon fiber, aluminum, steel, etc.)
-Advanced SD-AWD with torque vectoring with the twin units up front and a unit coupled to the motor in the back.
-etc.
Obviously it's a PR piece so of course everyone will toot their own horns.
Now the torque vectoring technology is definitely fairly new and we'll have to wait in time to see how it affects vehicle driving/track dynamics.
There have been cars with various forms of torque vectoring: some Audi cars iirc, Porsche 918, the P1 and LaFerrari do not have independent axle/wheel torque vectoring...but their electric motor are basically boost units for the main motor as far as I understand.
GT-R from wiki shows rear-axle torque vectoring.
But seems like NSX is the first major production supercar to have independent electric motor units up front by the two wheels for dynamic vectoring that way. The PR piece at least touts the Honda's vision for precise and immediate input from the driver into the wheels for instant handling response.
This is way over what I can fully comprehend in terms of engineering/handling dynamics/etc. and how it fits historically into the technological race over time...
But in the end again I think your post, if I see your obviously sarcastic post right....is to point out that each car has likely things that we are either unaware or unable to comprehend and its much more than just a badge, a motor, a drivetrain platform and the HP/torque numbers.
So in the end...it will take time to see how the car world/father time judges this new NSX. At the outset the Azine opinion is that of disappointment it seems. And it may be colored by the protracted delay in its release. But maybe father time will see the NSX as a future legend years down the road...who knows.
edit: some of your examples are actually not that far off: Ford GT and R8 seems to be fairly similar to their older brothers. The P1 and LaFerrari have more in common than the 918 (Porsche also making advanced torque vectoring) which as far as I understand P1 and LaFerrari is more of a direct boost-power unit to the motor and not targeted at wheel-specific torque adjustments
Basically, I feel that some of us are jumping to a conclusion way too soon....when the final actual production model hasn't even been extensively tested by the general media.
What got me to love the original NSX was that it was Honda REALLY pushing the envelope with 1 intention in mind: PISS OFF FERRARI.
And frankly, they did. The original NSX is legendary because of what it was able to achieve and do on the track. It PUSHED the envelope...it was a benchmark.
Can we say that for this incoming vaporcar...? That's part my perceived "lukewarm" enthusiasm. This car is arguably very good per the initial reviews by the test-drivers from the car review sites...BUT, is this car going to make the head of Ferrari swear under their breath and go, "Holy ravioli, we need more mozzarella and spicy meatballs in our Ferraris going forward! Redo the 488!!!"
Nope. Ferrari probably yawned.
And frankly, they did. The original NSX is legendary because of what it was able to achieve and do on the track. It PUSHED the envelope...it was a benchmark.
Can we say that for this incoming vaporcar...? That's part my perceived "lukewarm" enthusiasm. This car is arguably very good per the initial reviews by the test-drivers from the car review sites...BUT, is this car going to make the head of Ferrari swear under their breath and go, "Holy ravioli, we need more mozzarella and spicy meatballs in our Ferraris going forward! Redo the 488!!!"
Nope. Ferrari probably yawned.
What the NSX excelled at was its user-friendliness. It is easy to drive - light clutch, slick gearchange, smooth power delivery, superb all-round visibility and ergonomical cockpit. It displayed excellent road manners that were unheard of while being more comfortable than the 348 and 911 at the time.
And what made the 1g NSX a legend is that, it's still the one and only Japanese car that can stand proudly beside Ferraris and Porsches, go as well and keep millionaires loyal to.
As to what the new NSX can do? To me, it's too early to tell. The initial impressions for the pre-production model seems to be very good, but there were some negatives too. But it seems like Honda have been working on those negatives since the media event a few months ago.
The following users liked this post:
skd2k1 (02-03-2016)