When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I know that's your position, but it's a nuanced one and it's not one I think the general car buying public (even the small portion likely to look at high dollar super cars) is likely to share. Honda/Acura had one supercar in its history. One. Then they discontinued it and toyed with various replacements in concept form. Emphasizing the importance of whether those concepts were called "NSX" is a legalistic read on the situation. Everyone knew the purpose of such a concept - be the successor to the NSX; whether it had the same badge or not. If they were ignorant of having created that perception, then it's just a further indication of how tone deaf management at this company has become relative to the mood of the market, etc.
I perfectly understand and share the frustration that car enthusiasts get with Honda teasing us with concept cars that are supposed to be the NSX replacement, and then subsequently cancelling them.
That's not a good thing from Honda and that's a mistake. Based on that, I understand the reasoning as to people saying Honda in the past decade was lost in direction, etc. That's perfectly fine.
So yea, from 2003 to 2010, they spent 7-8 years showing us HSC, ASCC, HSV, talking about tier-1 and what not.
However, the actual 2G NSX, from announcement to concept, and from concept to production is vastly different. From the first announcement, Honda has followed through on their promises. For instance, they said they would have the production verison by 2015. They have done that. And the 2G NSX as far as I know, is a clean sheet design from the ground up. Not exactly using anything from previous concepts.
So yes, it took Honda 10+ years to come up with the actual NSX replacement. But the development time is closer to 3-4 years.
Originally Posted by MeehowsBRZ
The Corvette didn't spend 3 years on the auto show circuit doing nothing except getting repainted either.
It would be very smart to show the C7 3 years prior to its release just so more people will buy the C6 or the C6 Z06.
Oy, this isn't the thread for Acura Apologetics. Chevrolet was cagey, but had a product with enough buzz to let it slide. Honda's actions over the years re: the NSX have created the perception (justified or not) of a company that can't make up its mind and can't get its house in order. I believe Yummy's position is that he believes they needed to come out strong and lay out all the details to really grab attention, rather than a slow strip-tease that leaves doubters able to say "I-told-you-so" if things don't come to fruition in a way that is consistent with the teases.
So now it's the thread for you Chevy Apologists.
Isn't it ironic don't ya thinK
Originally Posted by iforyou
As far as I know, the 2G NSX was initialized in 2011, first shown in 2012. And Sure, they made changes, but I wouldn't mind having a longitudinally boosted V6 instead of the NA J35.
HSC, HSV-010, ASCC, well, they were never called the NSX.
I understand Yumcha's point. Though there are really many ways to do things. And there are pros and cons.
Ferrari certainly has the power to pull this off with ease. They probably don't have that many models to show to world at every auto show too.
Also glad they stuck to longitudinal purpose built V8
Originally Posted by ttribe
I know that's your position, but it's a nuanced one and it's not one I think the general car buying public (even the small portion likely to look at high dollar super cars) is likely to share. Honda/Acura had one supercar in its history. One. Then they discontinued it and toyed with various replacements in concept form. Emphasizing the importance of whether those concepts were called "NSX" is a legalistic read on the situation. Everyone knew the purpose of such a concept - be the successor to the NSX; whether it had the same badge or not. If they were ignorant of having created that perception, then it's just a further indication of how tone deaf management at this company has become relative to the mood of the market, etc.
The auto enthusiast knew what the Honda/Acura high end sportcar concepts were for, the majority of the general car buying public had no clue as to what they were for.
Originally Posted by srika
yeah, I still have a soft spot for the Speciale.
btw, Ferrari's first V8TT since the F40.
Saw two F40's upclose last summer, they are amazing in person
Originally Posted by Mizouse
Geez so the 488 .5 second faster than the speciale and is 2 seconds faster than the 458 and Enzo around Fiorano.
Ferrari amazes me as to how their low-end sportscar eclipses their previous gen high end models in performance. Hats off to them
Originally Posted by cmschmie
NOT A HONDA APOLOGIST...
Yes Honda waited WAY too damn long to reveal the NSX and we still don't know when they'll start showing up at dealerships (probably after the 488 )
But is there any slack when you're comparing the performance of a $150k car to a $250k+ car?
Is it that Honda is saying "we can do as well as Ferrari et al for half the price?"
Be interesting to hear/read the inside story, kinda wonder if it's related to the hybrid problems of the RLX. I imagine some reuse of the RLX electric drivetrain for the rear diff was used up front on the NSX. Batteries shape looks alot different.
The Vette as we all know was released in the 3rd quarter of 2013.
But I think the above clearly shows that not all companies would reveal everything when the production version is shown in the auto show.
My guess on the C7 was alot was in tech development so it was not too easy to release numbers. A all new aluminum chassis (previous C6 Z06's chassis was outsourced to Alcoa) so GM was working on aluminum extrusions, stamped sheets/stock, and cast pieces and getting them in a automated welding/riveting tooling. GM used sand cast hollow aluminum control arms for the suspension which was a first AFAIK. Other tech was the DI LT1, electronic diff, and other goodies so much so they reused the 6AT while a new 8AT was phased in later on the 2015 model. Much nicer materials and components on the interior with minimal cost impact. So it took some time to ensure all that was gonna work into the schedule, releasing numbers was probably the least of their worries.
Originally Posted by iforyou
I perfectly understand and share the frustration that car enthusiasts get with Honda teasing us with concept cars that are supposed to be the NSX replacement, and then subsequently cancelling them.
That's not a good thing from Honda and that's a mistake. Based on that, I understand the reasoning as to people saying Honda in the past decade was lost in direction, etc. That's perfectly fine.
So yea, from 2003 to 2010, they spent 7-8 years showing us HSC, ASCC, HSV, talking about tier-1 and what not.
However, the actual 2G NSX, from announcement to concept, and from concept to production is vastly different. From the first announcement, Honda has followed through on their promises. For instance, they said they would have the production verison by 2015. They have done that. And the 2G NSX as far as I know, is a clean sheet design from the ground up. Not exactly using anything from previous concepts.
So yes, it took Honda 10+ years to come up with the actual NSX replacement. But the development time is closer to 3-4 years.
It would be very smart to show the C7 3 years prior to its release just so more people will buy the C6 or the C6 Z06.
My guess on the C7 was alot was in tech development so it was not too easy to release numbers. A all new aluminum chassis (previous C6 Z06's chassis was outsourced to Alcoa) so GM was working on aluminum extrusions, stamped sheets/stock, and cast pieces and getting them in a automated welding/riveting tooling. GM used sand cast hollow aluminum control arms for the suspension which was a first AFAIK. Other tech was the DI LT1, electronic diff, and other goodies so much so they reused the 6AT while a new 8AT was phased in later on the 2015 model. Much nicer materials and components on the interior with minimal cost impact. So it took some time to ensure all that was gonna work into the schedule, releasing numbers was probably the least of their worries.
That's what I'd do
You mean when the car was shown in January, there could still be things to be finalized before the official launch in the 3rd quarter of the same year?
You mean when the car was shown in January, there could still be things to be finalized before the official launch in the 3rd quarter of the same year?
Yeah, I imagine there are still small changes mostly related to production transistion going on up until production and even some after production has started (S/W and F/W).
Note to Acura - this his how you show your car at various shows. 1) Bring a couple that can actually be inspected up close; 2) Allow people to actually get close/in to the thing; and 3) release the specs!
Note to Acura - this his how you show your car at various shows. 1) Bring a couple that can actually be inspected up close; 2) Allow people to actually get close/in to the thing; and 3) release the specs!
Definitely a brilliant idea if Honda is as famous as Ferrari for making exotics.
It would also be such a great idea if Honda is releasing a new NSX every 6 years or so with special versions coming out every couple years, like what Ferrari has been doing to the their entry model for the past 15+ years:
Definitely a brilliant idea if Honda is as famous as Ferrari for making exotics.
It would also be such a great idea if Honda is releasing a new NSX every 6 years or so with special versions coming out every couple years, like what Ferrari has been doing to the their entry model for the past 15+ years:
There are more than enough exotic models from Ferrari to not have to "milk" for more press coverage.
I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing the link between making exotic cars more frequently and having a clue how to promote it to the press. Perhaps you could enlighten me or, at least, give me some insight into your thought process on this.
I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing the link between making exotic cars more frequently and having a clue how to promote it to the press. Perhaps you could enlighten me or, at least, give me some insight into your thought process on this.
My bad for being unclear.
Ferrari is well known for making exotics. As such, Ferrari doesn't have to do much marketing/advertising to let the world know about its latest and greatest offerings. People will just know, and the press will just report it.
Not only that, but Ferrari actually updates its entry level model very frequently as I've shown. That means Ferrari does not need to "milk" for more press coverage. Conversely, the last generation of NSX came out in 1990, and received very little updates for 15 years or so. There's not much to talk about for many years. As a result, Honda is trying to get free press coverage by releasing info gradually which obviously pisses some people off.
Ferrari is well known for making exotics. As such, Ferrari doesn't have to do much marketing/advertising to let the world know about its latest and greatest offerings. People will just know, and the press will just report it.
Not only that, but Ferrari actually updates its entry level model very frequently as I've shown. That means Ferrari does not need to "milk" for more press coverage. Conversely, the last generation of NSX came out in 1990, and received very little updates for 15 years or so. There's not much to talk about for many years. As a result, Honda is trying to get free press coverage by releasing info gradually which obviously pisses some people off.
See, to me, this means Honda/Acura needed to go the extra mile, not half-ass it. IMO, they've half-assed it the whole way through.
For me, I'd reserve my judgement until I see some lap times, performance numbers, and test reviews.
I'm not talking about it's actual performance. That goes with out saying that it needs to get in the hands of testers. No, I'm referring to a company that trots out one version of the car in Detroit, then shows up in Toronto with a cleverly disguised shell, neither of which are subjected to close inspection of any kind. None. The failure to disclose specs is just the icing on the cake. I think all of this will promote skepticism (given Acura's history) rather than an appetite for more information.
Ferrari, on the hand, shows up in Geneva with two complete prototypes. Allows close inspection by the press corps (hell, they had them on lifts for people to every part of the car) and comes to market on day one with specs.
Acura says it wanted to benchmark Ferrari with the NSX. Well, time to look to Ferrari as a benchmark for how to market it as well, Acura.
I'm not talking about it's actual performance. That goes with out saying that it needs to get in the hands of testers. No, I'm referring to a company that trots out one version of the car in Detroit, then shows up in Toronto with a cleverly disguised shell, neither of which are subjected to close inspection of any kind. None. The failure to disclose specs is just the icing on the cake. I think all of this will promote skepticism (given Acura's history) rather than an appetite for more information.
Ferrari, on the hand, shows up in Geneva with two complete prototypes. Allows close inspection by the press corps (hell, they had them on lifts for people to every part of the car) and comes to market on day one with specs.
Acura says it wanted to benchmark Ferrari with the NSX. Well, time to look to Ferrari as a benchmark for how to market it as well, Acura.
This goes back to my previous about how Ferrari is Ferrari, and that Honda is no Ferrari. Everyone knows what Ferrari is all about. There's no need to make many appearances for the same car over and over. People are familiar with the entry MR exotic by Ferrari (360 Mondena, F430, 458 model, etc). Models from this line up comes out every 2 years or so. There's no real need to generate buzz. Can the same be said about the NSX? I'm not so sure. Just because Ferrari can do it, doesn't mean Honda can follow be be successful. I mean, Ferrari can charge $250k+ for the 458, can Honda charge the same starting price for the NSX without getting people apeshxt on them? Probably not.
I don't know about you, but I think there's a huge difference between the status of the NSX nameplate and the status of the Ferrari nameplate.
This goes back to my previous about how Ferrari is Ferrari, and that Honda is no Ferrari. Everyone knows what Ferrari is all about. There's no need to make many appearances for the same car over and over. People are familiar with the entry MR exotic by Ferrari (360 Mondena, F430, 458 model, etc). Models from this line up comes out every 2 years or so. There's no real need to generate buzz. Can the same be said about the NSX? I'm not so sure. Just because Ferrari can do it, doesn't mean Honda can follow be be successful. I mean, Ferrari can charge $250k+ for the 458, can Honda charge the same starting price for the NSX without getting people apeshxt on them? Probably not.
I don't know about you, but I think there's a huge difference between the status of the NSX nameplate and the status of the Ferrari nameplate.
You seem to be missing my point. Let me try this - Honda isn't generating additional "buzz" about the NSX with this strip-tease approach and trotting around mock-ups of the prototype to some shows while putting the real one at others in some silly side-show shell game. No, not buzz, just more skepticism. That's why I made the comment I did. Let the press look at the car up close. Explain the car down to its lowest technical detail. Don't be cagey. The current method is going to backfire (if it hasn't already).
In short, what you are saying is that you think Honda's method of introducing the NSX is not ideal because of different reasons. And that Honda should look at how Ferrari introduces its cars.
What I'm saying is, Ferrari and Honda are two different companies with very different background. The same can be said for the 430/458 vs the NSX. What works for Ferrari doesn't mean it will work for the NSX.
I'm not saying what Honda doing now is the best and cannot be improved on. Likewise, I also don't think what Ferrari does is the best method for Honda to follow too. For instance, by following the Ferrari method, that means Honda would only launch the 2G NSX production model with all the details announced at once, no concept, whatsoever. That would be quite a bit for the press to cover and not also much exposure, don't you think so?
For the GT-R, Nissan launched a few protos starting in 2001. The production model was on sale in December 2007. But even by late 2007 (2009 Nissan GT-R - Spied - Car and Driver), the exact details weren't available. The C&D article was still saying "in excess of 500hp" rather than 480hp.
In short, what you are saying is that you think Honda's method of introducing the NSX is not ideal because of different reasons. And that Honda should look at how Ferrari introduces its cars.
What I'm saying is, Ferrari and Honda are two different companies with very different background. The same can be said for the 430/458 vs the NSX. What works for Ferrari doesn't mean it will work for the NSX.
I'm not saying what Honda doing now is the best and cannot be improved on. Likewise, I also don't think what Ferrari does is the best method for Honda to follow too. For instance, by following the Ferrari method, that means Honda would only launch the 2G NSX production model with all the details announced at once, no concept, whatsoever. That would be quite a bit for the press to cover and not also much exposure, don't you think so?
For the GT-R, Nissan launched a few protos starting in 2001. The production model was on sale in December 2007. But even by late 2007 (2009 Nissan GT-R - Spied - Car and Driver), the exact details weren't available. The C&D article was still saying "in excess of 500hp" rather than 480hp.
you are absolutely right. The cars aren't similar in their scope and target.
The NSX is Acura (Honda)'s most special model, it's highest and most thought out and developed endeavor. By contrast, the 488 is a member of Ferrari's lowest lineage of cars. Ferrari's equivalent to the NSX would be it's highest end supercars, if anything. But even THAT is a lineage with multiple models.
The 488 isn't even a new model, it's designed as an update to the 458.
you are absolutely right. The cars aren't similar in their scope and target.
The NSX is Acura (Honda)'s most special model, it's highest and most thought out and developed endeavor. By contrast, the 488 is a member of Ferrari's lowest lineage of cars. Ferrari's equivalent to the NSX would be it's highest end supercars, if anything. But even THAT is a lineage with multiple models.
The 488 isn't even a new model, it's designed as an update to the 458.
For sure. I think there's a difference between bench marking and copying. With that said, I can totally understand why some people are frustrated with Honda withholding details.
My take is that Ferrari can be bold and do whatever they want as long since they know the 488 GTB is highly competitive and will meet their sales target. People know exactly what 355, 360, 430, 458 are, and they know the 488 is just a updated model of that range.
The NSX? People have no clue as the last one came out in 1990. Besides, my understanding is that even though the production model was shown, the final design is still not finalized. Things like the power output and percentage of CF/composite parts are yet to be finalized.
02-04-2015, 06:04 PM
)
it was shown in the video i linked above