Acura: NSX News
#3481
Instructor
The rich men's toys are always about Guinness-record horsepower, 0-60, and never about fuel mileage. This will never change, unless the world runs out of crude oil supply.
The new NSX may change the whole world in building future non-super-cars, but it has no bearing in changing the fact that fuel mileage is the last priority in building supercars.
Also, in the future, there is no such thing as "mpg". Gasoline/diesel motors will be outlawed completely. No fossil fuel, no emission, and thus no pollution.
Vehicle propulsion will be based on electricity, fuel-cell, or even mini nuclear reactor.
The new NSX may change the whole world in building future non-super-cars, but it has no bearing in changing the fact that fuel mileage is the last priority in building supercars.
Also, in the future, there is no such thing as "mpg". Gasoline/diesel motors will be outlawed completely. No fossil fuel, no emission, and thus no pollution.
Vehicle propulsion will be based on electricity, fuel-cell, or even mini nuclear reactor.
I get what you're saying man. I don't disagree. For whatever reason, Honda's chosen this route. It's not like Honda's trying to chase the world record 0-60 or top speed record with their NSX anyways, I think they are chasing technological ideals. I can understand that. If they're not going to compete with Bugatti, might as well do what they do best.
#3482
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
You know, I keep wondering why a $100+K 400+hp flagship supercar has to give much attention about fuel economy.
Anyone paying $100+K for an automobile will never care about the gas price, and a 400+hp supercar should put more emphasis on high hp, low 0-60 figure, and high handling performance, rather than on fuel economy.
Is it realistic to think that someone, who's buying a high power supercar, will walk away from the deal just because the 400hp supercar only manages 15mpg ?
And besides, the new NSX will be a very low volume car in the Honda/Acura lineup. So even if it can manage 25mpg, it's contribution is almost negligible in helping to pull up the entire fleet CAFE rating.
Anyone paying $100+K for an automobile will never care about the gas price, and a 400+hp supercar should put more emphasis on high hp, low 0-60 figure, and high handling performance, rather than on fuel economy.
Is it realistic to think that someone, who's buying a high power supercar, will walk away from the deal just because the 400hp supercar only manages 15mpg ?
And besides, the new NSX will be a very low volume car in the Honda/Acura lineup. So even if it can manage 25mpg, it's contribution is almost negligible in helping to pull up the entire fleet CAFE rating.
However, for Honda, it's not about creating the fastest car with the highest hp in $100k supercar market.
We need to go back and look at the original NSX. That car wasn't the fastest in a straight line in its price range back then. It was about creating a reliable, comfortable, user-friendly supercar that can embarrass a 911 or 348tb. The R32 GT-R was faster than the NSX while being significantly cheaper. That didn't make the NSX a failure.
We need to remember NSX stands for "New Sportscar eXperimental." It's about putting the newest and latest Honda technologies into the car. That's why the NSX had things like all-aluminum body and chassis, titanium conrods, VTEC, etc. For the new generation of NSX, it seems like efficiency is a design factor. No one has really done it yet in the $100k market. So that's something "eXperimental."
You seem to focus mostly on specs and objective numbers. There's nothing wrong with that. I mean, for most people their dream cars are usually powerful supercars. I don't think the NSX is designed to be everyone's dream car in that sense. That is true for the 1st gen NSX too. You could've bought a GT-R or Corvette for less money while having higher performance. But then there are the subjective factors too - handling feel, steering feel, how engaging is the drive, etc. The NSX succeeded in those aspects. It seems like the new NSX will have those qualities too.
I think it's good that Honda is offering something unique.
I get what you're saying man. I don't disagree. For whatever reason, Honda's chosen this route. It's not like Honda's trying to chase the world record 0-60 or top speed record with their NSX anyways, I think they are chasing technological ideals. I can understand that. If they're not going to compete with Bugatti, might as well do what they do best.
#3483
6G TLX-S
Like qingcong, I get what you mean.
However, for Honda, it's not about creating the fastest car with the highest hp in $100k supercar market.
We need to go back and look at the original NSX. That car wasn't the fastest in a straight line in its price range back then. It was about creating a reliable, comfortable, user-friendly supercar that can embarrass a 911 or 348tb. The R32 GT-R was faster than the NSX while being significantly cheaper. That didn't make the NSX a failure.
We need to remember NSX stands for "New Sportscar eXperimental." It's about putting the newest and latest Honda technologies into the car. That's why the NSX had things like all-aluminum body and chassis, titanium conrods, VTEC, etc. For the new generation of NSX, it seems like efficiency is a design factor. No one has really done it yet in the $100k market. So that's something "eXperimental."
.....
However, for Honda, it's not about creating the fastest car with the highest hp in $100k supercar market.
We need to go back and look at the original NSX. That car wasn't the fastest in a straight line in its price range back then. It was about creating a reliable, comfortable, user-friendly supercar that can embarrass a 911 or 348tb. The R32 GT-R was faster than the NSX while being significantly cheaper. That didn't make the NSX a failure.
We need to remember NSX stands for "New Sportscar eXperimental." It's about putting the newest and latest Honda technologies into the car. That's why the NSX had things like all-aluminum body and chassis, titanium conrods, VTEC, etc. For the new generation of NSX, it seems like efficiency is a design factor. No one has really done it yet in the $100k market. So that's something "eXperimental."
.....
Honda isn't building the fastest car with the highest hp in $100k supercar market. Honda is simply attempting to build a high-tech supercar with Honda's "me first" technologies, which is not to be on top of, but at least capable to be on par with the others. 400+hp is definitely no lame duck.
The point I want to make is that excellent fuel economy is never a valid selling point for supercars. So boosting class-leading fuel economy for a $100+K 400+hp supercar will mean nothing to these potential supercar buyers.
#3484
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
Definitely. It seems like other than fuel economy, the other main focus is on handling. It seems like this car with its mid-engine layout and advanced AWD system would make this car a beast on the track.
400hp is still too little even if the handling is the best in class. But I'm thinking 500hp would make this car very competitive when we talk about all-round performance.
In summary, this is what I think the NSX will have:
- Good straight line performance
- Nearly the best, if not the best handling in class
- Best in-class fuel economy
400hp is still too little even if the handling is the best in class. But I'm thinking 500hp would make this car very competitive when we talk about all-round performance.
In summary, this is what I think the NSX will have:
- Good straight line performance
- Nearly the best, if not the best handling in class
- Best in-class fuel economy
#3485
I feel the need...
Let's get real here please.
BTW, I rolled through an Acura dealer just to see if a new MDX was on the backlot yet. Holy cow, total power plenum overload batman! It was as if all the ILX, RDX's plenums were staring at me like angry bird pigs.
#3486
Right, the question isn't whether a hybrid can be used in a performance setting. The question is - given identical space requirements, is a hybrid system or pure gas engine the best for getting maximum performance? That's what I don't know. My guess is that if Honda wanted to make the fastest NSX they could, they'd have gone with a big gas engine. Instead they wanted to squeeze a bunch of MPGs out of it as well, so they went with the hybrid platform.
Again, look at the Tesla Model S, the performance model is a $90k car that can do sub 4s acceleration. The BMW i8 is a $122k diesel/electric hybrid that can do it in 4.7s and gets 75 mpg.
#3487
Race Director
For the same reasons that other makers stagger the intro of derivative models/drivetrains. Why does BMW not intro the diesel or hybrid at the same time as the gas drivetrains? Why does it delay the coupe vs. the sedan? Marketing, development not finished, supply issues, etc.
#3488
I feel the need...
Acura diesels? Nope.
Acura coupes? Nope.
Acura convertibles? Nope.
Acura sports cars? Nope.
Acura RWD V8's? Nope.
The RL has been getting stale on the shelf for nine years. No excuse to not get maximum bang for the buck with the RLX.
NSX has to be a grand slam home run.
#3489
AZ Community Team
I get what you're saying man. I don't disagree. For whatever reason, Honda's chosen this route. It's not like Honda's trying to chase the world record 0-60 or top speed record with their NSX anyways, I think they are chasing technological ideals. I can understand that. If they're not going to compete with Bugatti, might as well do what they do best.
The most pointless exercise on the planet has got to be this four-wheel-drive thousand-horsepower Bugatti. I think it's incredibly childish this thing people have about just one element - top speed or standing kilometre or 0–60. It's about as narrow minded as you can get as a car designer to pick on one element. It's like saying we're going to beat the original Mini because we're going to make a car 10mph faster on its top speed - but it's two foot longer and 200 kilos heavier. That's not car designing - that just reeks of a company who are paranoid...
—Gordon Murray<sup id="cite_ref-94" class="reference">
IMO Honda is aiming the NSX to be the best overall exotic sportscar as whole, not just HP, straight speed,.....
It's the overall package and how it works together for the driver is what really matters. This is much more than a numbers spec sheet, that is what distinguished the McLaren F1 from other exotics was it's purist driving experience and the overall vehicle in terms of style and quality of build/materials/features. It's far more than just the maximum HP.
All these rambling on about how it needs this much HP in order to compete is pointless dialog. How it performs will matter the most in this market space. If HP was king then Chrysler would have ruled over Ferrari years ago with the Viper.
</sup>
—Gordon Murray<sup id="cite_ref-94" class="reference">
IMO Honda is aiming the NSX to be the best overall exotic sportscar as whole, not just HP, straight speed,.....
It's the overall package and how it works together for the driver is what really matters. This is much more than a numbers spec sheet, that is what distinguished the McLaren F1 from other exotics was it's purist driving experience and the overall vehicle in terms of style and quality of build/materials/features. It's far more than just the maximum HP.
All these rambling on about how it needs this much HP in order to compete is pointless dialog. How it performs will matter the most in this market space. If HP was king then Chrysler would have ruled over Ferrari years ago with the Viper.
</sup>
The following users liked this post:
AZP-TL (06-15-2013)
#3490
AZ Community Team
For the same reasons that other makers stagger the intro of derivative models/drivetrains. Why does BMW not intro the diesel or hybrid at the same time as the gas drivetrains? Why does it delay the coupe vs. the sedan? Marketing, development not finished, supply issues, etc.
+1 Exactly, anyone who has ever designed and developed anything knows this. There are limited number of resources at any given time.
#3491
Senior Moderator
Yep, but lets be realistic. Its needs a certain amount of HP to reach all those targets. There's no way this will weigh anywhere close to 2500 lbs. So these pipe dreams of a 2500lbs 400HP car are a fantasy.
#3492
AZ Community Team
Agree but if there were two cars with the same HP/weight I'd rather have a lighter vehicle all else being equal.
That said I would like to see a 2800-3000lb 2G NSX, not sure how that can be done with the hybrid drivetrain thought.
That said I would like to see a 2800-3000lb 2G NSX, not sure how that can be done with the hybrid drivetrain thought.
Last edited by Legend2TL; 06-14-2013 at 03:53 PM.
#3493
6G TLX-S
^^^^^
Especially that the high-storage-density battery packs, for the hybrid drive, are heavy like hell.
Especially that the high-storage-density battery packs, for the hybrid drive, are heavy like hell.
#3494
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
At the risk of accusing you of drinking too much kool-aide, why would Honda delay the RLX w/ e-AWD and not debut it at the same time as the new gen to reach maximum marketing punch.
Let's get real here please.
BTW, I rolled through an Acura dealer just to see if a new MDX was on the backlot yet. Holy cow, total power plenum overload batman! It was as if all the ILX, RDX's plenums were staring at me like angry bird pigs.
Let's get real here please.
BTW, I rolled through an Acura dealer just to see if a new MDX was on the backlot yet. Holy cow, total power plenum overload batman! It was as if all the ILX, RDX's plenums were staring at me like angry bird pigs.
I suppose you might have a valid point if Acura was a global brand with a complete line up of cars which would explain a slow roll.
Acura diesels? Nope.
Acura coupes? Nope.
Acura convertibles? Nope.
Acura sports cars? Nope.
Acura RWD V8's? Nope.
The RL has been getting stale on the shelf for nine years. No excuse to not get maximum bang for the buck with the RLX.
NSX has to be a grand slam home run.
Acura diesels? Nope.
Acura coupes? Nope.
Acura convertibles? Nope.
Acura sports cars? Nope.
Acura RWD V8's? Nope.
The RL has been getting stale on the shelf for nine years. No excuse to not get maximum bang for the buck with the RLX.
NSX has to be a grand slam home run.
Since the plan has always been do launch the RLX AWD later in 2013, if Acura fails to launch that car before 2014, then that's a delay, and then I'd say yes, there could be some hiccups with the eSH-AWD system.
#3495
Instructor
IMO Honda is aiming the NSX to be the best overall exotic sportscar as whole, not just HP, straight speed,.....
It's the overall package and how it works together for the driver is what really matters. This is much more than a numbers spec sheet, that is what distinguished the McLaren F1 from other exotics was it's purist driving experience and the overall vehicle in terms of style and quality of build/materials/features. It's far more than just the maximum HP.
All these rambling on about how it needs this much HP in order to compete is pointless dialog. How it performs will matter the most in this market space. If HP was king then Chrysler would have ruled over Ferrari years ago with the Viper.
I agree. The HP wars come across as childish to me considering there's so much more to consider in a car than HP. People keep saying the Civic Si is "falling behind" because it doesn't have 250hp like a Speed3 or Focus ST. Well, with a 0-60 that's no slower than those two cars, better real world MPGs, limited slip diff, and a proven reliable NA powertrain - I'd take the overall package of the Si over its turbocharged friends. The same goes for a lot of other Honda/Acura products. Others may have more flash, but Hondas and Acuras just have that overall balance.
#3496
Moderator
I agree. The HP wars come across as childish to me considering there's so much more to consider in a car than HP. People keep saying the Civic Si is "falling behind" because it doesn't have 250hp like a Speed3 or Focus ST. Well, with a 0-60 that's no slower than those two cars, better real world MPGs, limited slip diff, and a proven reliable NA powertrain - I'd take the overall package of the Si over its turbocharged friends. The same goes for a lot of other Honda/Acura products. Others may have more flash, but Hondas and Acuras just have that overall balance.
#3497
AZ Community Team
Of course the ZDX and 4G TL have been pinnacles in styling and balance
I know it's been 3 decades but the original NSX was a big inspiration to Gordon Murray and his McLaren F1 design.
http://translate.google.com/translat...hl=en&ie=UTF-8
I know it's been 3 decades but the original NSX was a big inspiration to Gordon Murray and his McLaren F1 design.
http://translate.google.com/translat...hl=en&ie=UTF-8
- He put 75K kms during the time he owned his NSX
- In designing the McLaren F1 he drove a Porsche 959, Bugatti EB110, Ferrari F40, Jaguar XJ220 and others. But none satisfied their desire for a usability benchmark -- Offset pedals, high dashboards, unreliable A/C, and too-low roofs were all unacceptable. But the NSX satisfied these conditions for us.
- He felt that the NSX had a chassis that would have easily accepted a larger engine and more horsepower.
- "I copied the drive-by-wire throttle idea for the F1. I can admit to this now. (Laughs.)"
- He set the "full auto" A/C setting when he took ownership of the car, and never touched the button again.
- "Journalists focus on the aluminum body, but for me the use of aluminum for the suspension was far more significant. It's a perfect match for the not-too-large 17-inch wheels."
- "Honda philosophy at the time seemed against higher cylinder counts, and maybe that's why the NSX never got a larger engine. Which it should've had. Maybe it had something to do with the self-imposed restraint on horsepower output."
- "I so loved Honda engines that I personally visited the Tochigi labs twice, and asked them to build a 4.5L V10 or V12 for the F1. But they couldn't be convinced to do it, so the F1 ultimately got a BMW engine."
Last edited by Legend2TL; 06-15-2013 at 10:52 AM.
#3498
Senior Moderator
I agree. The HP wars come across as childish to me considering there's so much more to consider in a car than HP. People keep saying the Civic Si is "falling behind" because it doesn't have 250hp like a Speed3 or Focus ST. Well, with a 0-60 that's no slower than those two cars, better real world MPGs, limited slip diff, and a proven reliable NA powertrain - I'd take the overall package of the Si over its turbocharged friends. The same goes for a lot of other Honda/Acura products. Others may have more flash, but Hondas and Acuras just have that overall balance.
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2WJBLJnIq
#3499
Instructor
put down the bong.. Both are mid 5sec 0-60. The civic si at best is a 7.3. Both out handle it as well, with Focus ST being called one of the best-handling front-wheel-drive cars ever built.
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2WJBLJnIq
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2WJBLJnIq
Motor trend's Carlos Lago tested the 2013 Civic Si at 6.1s and Focus ST at 5.9s. Focus ST is getting rave reviews, no doubt. That car's great. Lets review it in 10 years to see how the direct injection and turbocharger hold up on the Focus ST and then we can see which one was worth the money. For reliability, I'm going with the 2.4L in the Civic Si. For me, reliability is a key aspect, maybe not for other folks who switch cars every 3 years. That's what I'm saying, different priorities for different folks. Those who want max power for their money and are willing to take a risk on reliability, get a Speed3 or Focus ST. Those who want proven reliability and real world MPGs, Civic Si represents a better choice.
#3500
6G TLX-S
^^^^^
To sum it up,
Performance : Speed3/Focus-ST > Civic-SI
Reliability in 10 years : Civic-SI > Focus-ST.
To sum it up,
Performance : Speed3/Focus-ST > Civic-SI
Reliability in 10 years : Civic-SI > Focus-ST.
The following users liked this post:
qingcong (06-18-2013)
#3501
"Proven reliability" lol
That is a flawed viewpoint... just because it's a Honda or a certain brand doesn't mean it will be proven to be reliable or unreliable. I'm not saying there isn't anyone here that does, but how many of us keep the same car for up to 10 years?
Forget about all the synchro issues in the 8G Civic. And the issues with the hybrid's battery. Never mind the class action lawsuit regarding the premature brake wear, as well as the premature tire wear (due to struts). One of Honda's main bread and butter models and they can't get it perfect.
It really isn't a Honda unless it has a cheap paint job, crappy brakes, transmission issues (automatic or manual) and excessive wind noise. I'm sure the NSX replacement won't have any of these issues though.
That is a flawed viewpoint... just because it's a Honda or a certain brand doesn't mean it will be proven to be reliable or unreliable. I'm not saying there isn't anyone here that does, but how many of us keep the same car for up to 10 years?
Forget about all the synchro issues in the 8G Civic. And the issues with the hybrid's battery. Never mind the class action lawsuit regarding the premature brake wear, as well as the premature tire wear (due to struts). One of Honda's main bread and butter models and they can't get it perfect.
It really isn't a Honda unless it has a cheap paint job, crappy brakes, transmission issues (automatic or manual) and excessive wind noise. I'm sure the NSX replacement won't have any of these issues though.
#3502
I feel the need...
I'm sure the NSX replacement won't have any of these issues though.
#3503
I feel the need...
#3504
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
put down the bong.. Both are mid 5sec 0-60. The civic si at best is a 7.3. Both out handle it as well, with Focus ST being called one of the best-handling front-wheel-drive cars ever built.
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2WJBLJnIq
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2WJBLJnIq
Motor trend's Carlos Lago tested the 2013 Civic Si at 6.1s and Focus ST at 5.9s. Focus ST is getting rave reviews, no doubt. That car's great. Lets review it in 10 years to see how the direct injection and turbocharger hold up on the Focus ST and then we can see which one was worth the money. For reliability, I'm going with the 2.4L in the Civic Si. For me, reliability is a key aspect, maybe not for other folks who switch cars every 3 years. That's what I'm saying, different priorities for different folks. Those who want max power for their money and are willing to take a risk on reliability, get a Speed3 or Focus ST. Those who want proven reliability and real world MPGs, Civic Si represents a better choice.
http://wot.motortrend.com/2013-honda...#axzz2WUYj0P7F
C/D got the same time too:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review
No need to mention about 1/4 mile time since qingcong was only referring to 0-60mph.
The following users liked this post:
qingcong (06-18-2013)
#3505
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
"Proven reliability" lol
That is a flawed viewpoint... just because it's a Honda or a certain brand doesn't mean it will be proven to be reliable or unreliable. I'm not saying there isn't anyone here that does, but how many of us keep the same car for up to 10 years?
Forget about all the synchro issues in the 8G Civic. And the issues with the hybrid's battery. Never mind the class action lawsuit regarding the premature brake wear, as well as the premature tire wear (due to struts). One of Honda's main bread and butter models and they can't get it perfect.
It really isn't a Honda unless it has a cheap paint job, crappy brakes, transmission issues (automatic or manual) and excessive wind noise. I'm sure the NSX replacement won't have any of these issues though.
That is a flawed viewpoint... just because it's a Honda or a certain brand doesn't mean it will be proven to be reliable or unreliable. I'm not saying there isn't anyone here that does, but how many of us keep the same car for up to 10 years?
Forget about all the synchro issues in the 8G Civic. And the issues with the hybrid's battery. Never mind the class action lawsuit regarding the premature brake wear, as well as the premature tire wear (due to struts). One of Honda's main bread and butter models and they can't get it perfect.
It really isn't a Honda unless it has a cheap paint job, crappy brakes, transmission issues (automatic or manual) and excessive wind noise. I'm sure the NSX replacement won't have any of these issues though.
#3506
Suzuka Master
#3507
Race Director
3.5L/450-hp*/450-lb-ft* twin-turbo DOHC 24-valve V-6 plus two 30-hp*/60-lb-ft* front and one 50-hp*/100-lb-ft* rear electric motors; 560 hp/650-lb-ft*comb
#3509
Suzuka Master
The suspense keeps building
#3510
AZ Community Team
#3512
I feel the need...
Bumped into the sales manager at my local Acura dealer today while checking out the new MDX.
Me: Hey, what do I need to do to get on the wait list for an NSX.
Mgr: We've been told dealers will be allocated ONE per year for the first three years and we're not taking deposits yet.
Me: Wow, I'm guessing their will be hefty markups.
Mgr:
Me: Hey, what do I need to do to get on the wait list for an NSX.
Mgr: We've been told dealers will be allocated ONE per year for the first three years and we're not taking deposits yet.
Me: Wow, I'm guessing their will be hefty markups.
Mgr:
#3513
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
^^^ Just like the GTR...
I was at the Nissan dealership inquiring and even thought the online price was listed as 75-85K, the dealer wanted 120K since "do you know how rare the car is going to be"....
I smiled, shook hands and walked out LOL
I was at the Nissan dealership inquiring and even thought the online price was listed as 75-85K, the dealer wanted 120K since "do you know how rare the car is going to be"....
I smiled, shook hands and walked out LOL
#3514
I feel the need...
I would take a victory lap for accurately predicting this, but then it's not really a victory is it?
Also, I'm pretty sure this puppy is going to be priced at the higher end of our plebeian estimates. My guess: $150,000 smackeroos.
Also, I'm pretty sure this puppy is going to be priced at the higher end of our plebeian estimates. My guess: $150,000 smackeroos.
#3515
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
150K is a lot....thats Maserati GT and stuff....
am guessing 118-120K....a smudge above the GTR
am guessing 118-120K....a smudge above the GTR
#3516
Drifting
Back when worked for Nissan, I almost sold a GTR, but my managers wanted me to back off since they said it would cost too much if they had to service it.. Anyway, could have gotten a 2012 black edition(in 2011) at the time for 95k, but it had over 10k in mark up.
#3517
AZ Community Team
#3518
Race Director
The $140K guesstimate from Motortrend seems reasonable. In that article they compare the NSX to other cars with the same technology (LaFerrari, McLaren P1 and Porsche 918) - all of which have MSRPs 7-10 times that of the NSX. I can see the marketing now - get your NSX with LaFerrari technology at 1/10 the price.
#3520
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
100K would be a bargain....I dont think they will price with with C7 in mind...hell a 2002 NSX low miles is 35-40K ...a new C7 is what 55-60?....
It will be priced closer to SRT Viper and Zr1 (and C7 version of it) which will be ~120K
It will be priced closer to SRT Viper and Zr1 (and C7 version of it) which will be ~120K