HondaGuy347

The NSX does cost about 60% of what a 488 goes for, though. And you don't have to fellatiate a Ferrari dealer to get one.

juniorbean

iTrader: (5)

Already owned a 911. Would want something different next

nist7

Since we both agree now that the NSX is not real real yet...both of our points are moot I guess huh?

Definitely won't be as reliable as Civic. But in Acura terms..the 1st NSX was known as a daily supercar and I think Honda is trying hard to keep that alive relative reliability against other supercars.

Agreed on the development hell and many supercars have come and gone. I can see the sentiment of fans really wanting the NSX to blow others out of the water but....on paper it doesn't REALLY stand out in either arena.

They banked on the advanced SH-AWD as a new tech but we will have to see how time and the new independent torque motor assisting turning wheels will be viewed on the track/test of time....


Looking at the cars posted in order of descending total car hp and with NSX for comparison:

C7 Z06 - 650
Viper - 640
S65 AMG - 620
NSX - 573
V12 Vantage - 565
570S - 562
991 Turbo S - 552
i8 - 357

Two other cars in similar segment for comparison:
R8 V10 - 602
GT-R - 545

Looks like the NSX is right there and very competitive with current market.

The weight though....that is a killer and a valid point for concern. Though GT-R suffers from same fate as well...hence the need for super high tech AWD systems to compensate.

Costco

Let's be real here, at best 1 in 30 of us here will actually go and test drive the NSX. That's if they actually allow people to test drive without committing.

And how many of us here will actually buy the new NSX?

So there's no point arguing the practicality of it all. There are a list of cars I'd buy before the NSX as well, but I don't think they'll have trouble selling most of them. Many people asked, who would pay $400k for a Lexus? Yet they sold most of them fairly quickly, I believe.

nist7

Heh. Yeah.

Maybe more like 1-2/100. I'd think you'd probably want to be in the 1% or 2% of the upper income percentile to comfortable afford a 200k car. To be in the 1% the yearly income is something like 400k/yr which is probably good for a 200k car

vern1999

It was fun to configure one; I can't get past the shock of the 3800 lb weight of the vehicle. A lot of specs for the car are also on the website. Never mind the $1200 floor mats. 3800 lbs!

juniorbean

iTrader: (5)

I'd say higher. Definitely a high 1%'er. $400k/year, unless you have no other obligations, would be tight to buy a $200k car. Typically people making 7 figures are the ones buying these types of cars...

I'll start looking at the used market in 2030...

HondaGuy347

Depends on how long you've been making $400k/yr, no? Your first year, probably not, but year 20 it's probably not a problem.

nist7

Good point. Actual buyers probably earn closer to 7 figures and above.

I guess if you have a 400k/yr guy/gal who is very frugal in other areas of life (mortgage is low or done, not much other high expenses)...and they are VERY enthused/enamored with the NSX (apparently a bad spend of 200k for a few...hehe) ....then probably not too bad to carry a 200k car note (essentially another mortgage sized payment each month).

Taking a very rough guesstimation of net pay for a 400k salary, maybe 250k take home..so about 20k/month paycheck...with say 2000/mo payment...possible. Of course at that high income earning level they will have more capital gains/other sources of income that's not taxed at the same rate as most wager earners...

But yeah it'll be VERY interesting to see what cars are out in the next 10-30 years and see how the NSX fares over time.

Was in a discussion on reddit's r/car sub and one poster made a insightful comment about owning expensive cars (100k and up):

HondaGuy347

Interesting theory, but it also depends on the intended time horizon of ownership. For instance, if you DD an S550, you're always going to want one, or something equivalent.

But if you think of a $$$ sports car as a once or twice in a lifetime purchase, not a "lifestyle accessory" it is different. If your dream is to, say, own a 911, and you hit 50 or make VP or whatever and decide to pull the trigger, and you don't look at it as "I'll drive this for 3 years and then get the next one that comes out" it's different than "I'll lease or buy a new S550 every time I get sick of the color."

nist7

Yeah good point. If someone always lives under some highly debt-laden/depreciating asset year after year...(like say turning over for cars) they may be less likely a car enthusiast than a keeping up with the Joneses-enthusiast.

Sometimes it is more than just about pure math/financial sense.

I remember reading several years ago about a story of a very middle class guy who worked hard all his life and his ultimate dream was the Ford GT (not the current one of course). He didn't earn a high income either...again middle class income.

And he saved for many years IIRC and actually bought a Ford GT and was living the dream. For that and to him it was worth it....financially may not be 100% kosher but sometimes the heart wants what it wants.

Couldn't find a story though....would be nice to see a follow up to that....

SamDoe1

If you're in the market for a $200k car, I'm guessing another $100k isn't an issue to have a Ferrari badge on the hood.

The 1G NSX didn't have a ton of unique one off parts only for that car. It used a C series engine that was similar to one used across a number of models, standard gearbox, standard interior bits, standard electronics, etc... The only thing that made the 1G NSX great was the chassis and suspension tuning. That's what made that car fast, it certainly wasn't the motor.

If I made $400k a year, I would not drop 50% of my pretax income (post tax is a different story, thanks Obama) on a car. I've grown up and learned enough to know that's a terrible idea to spend that kind of cash on an enormously depreciating asset.

nist7

Yup, most likely. When you're buy a car that's worth about the same as most people's homes...you're probably gonna have money to buy probably things 50-100% more of that cost.

Still, 911 Turbos and R8s and lots of 200k range cars gets sold....so probably people buy multiples or heck they sell the older supercar to get the new one...even if its an Acura!


Very true. One common gripe is its under-powered motor.

I think your implication is right though...this new NSX probably shares less components with the rest of the Acura/Honda line than the 1st gen NSX. IIRC they wanted to use a transverse-mounted motor/drivetrain (similar to 1st gen NXS) but existing Honda motors would not fit for that so they had to make a whole new motor for the NSX. (someone more knowledgeable than me can confirm/deny this part)

So there certainly concern for reliability...and again only time will tell.


Same here personally. And as I posted above...an insightful comment was that highly luxurious/discretionary spending should have VERY FEW impact on your own financial well-bring....as in it doesn't even feel a dent. That's when you can truly feel something is comfortably affordable.

After some reflection, I did say that in my original post a bit too quickly in claiming that 400k/yr is "probably good." It would certainly have to be on a very specific set of conditions.

The presumption is that a 400k/yr guy/gal would have a generally expensive lifestyle with higher than avg monthly expenditures...but if one were very frugal in other areas of life and for some reason they really really wanted a nice 200k car...it is doable.

Essentially, it will be a mortgage-sized payment. And as a tongue in cheek saying goes...you can sleep in your car but you can't drive your house!

I mean there are tons of people driving around in 40-50k SUVs and pickup trucks and the median income for US is 50k. So lot of people are probably driving way too much car for their income.

Of course as car enthusiasts we also know that cars are more than just depreciating assets and they provide intangibles to us that may be worth more than the value of the car if we put it in investments. Otherwise everyone should be driving a 10 year old civic or something. There was a story of a middle class guy who was just in huge love with a Ford GT and saved up years to actually buy one. Can't find the story now though so wonder how that ended up....

juniorbean

iTrader: (5)

Definitely possible, but most of the folks I know in that bracket, even if they've been making that kind of money for a while, are not dropping 50% of their annual pre-tax income on a car. The smart ones have their money in other investments and continue to diversify and grow their portfolio year over year. I supposed if it's been a few decades and they've been very diligent with their investing over time and liabilities are decreasing they may potentially have enough saved up to drop $200k+ on a car.

Probably depends on a number of other factors too, but I would guess that a lot needs to fall in place for that to happen. Still, someone making 7 figures on a regular basis will have a lot more disposable income to throw are depreciating assets like a car...

Legend2TL

it's pointless and silly to make acceleration and handling comparisons to other cars when the 2G NSX has not even been media instrument tested yet.

As for reliability, I suspect the 2G will be in the similar range of reliability as other H/A products. And will also probably be reasonable for maintenance as well, with probably the exception of tire wear considering the power and owners.

Also suspect alot of powertrain growth with ~1bar of boost, so sorta expecting a higher performance version at some point. The rear transaxle looks huge so I'm guessing it's designed to take alot more power.

I'm curious to see how well it does in the $150-200k marketspace. I suspect most potential buyers are also looking in the mid-engine exotic market (R8, 570/650, 488, Huracán...). I think the main differentiate for the NSX will be it's tech (SHAWD and hybrid drivetrain, DBW brakes, ...) which puts the 2G tech (but not power levels) up there with cars costing multiple times (P1, 918, LaFerrari) but in the $200k market. The McLaren (and Alfa 4C but that's really in a lower class) is also an exception by being the only in the $200k exotics to offer a carbon tub (with aluminum front and rear structure for engine and suspension).

If anything I suspect having the Acura name may be more of a detriment than an advantage initially but perhaps would change if it does very well in reviews and such. The one thing that truely made the 1G NSX special was it's overall balance in handling and feel that made it easy to drive up to 10/10 Something that many from Mario Andretti to Gordon Murray praised, it's the one area that during the press demo day was not apparent but perhaps some final tweaking in the months since to the drivetrain firmware has changed?

Legend2TL

The 1G NSX C30A motor had special heads (vTEC, DOHC), Ti con rods, and a partial lower end bearing bridge that made about the only C-motor major carryover component was the block. Same goes for the gearboxes, both the 5MT/6MT and 4AT had limited slip disc style differentials which required unique housings and were not used on Honda products. Same goes for the interior, although it looked like a Honda/Acura all the gauges and center stackup were unique. There was probably some reuse of standard components (i.e. window motors, ignition key....) but the 1G NSX was not parts bin engineering. Most of the components under neigh I'm guessing were not standard.

FamilyGuy

hp numbers alone mean nothing.

KaMLuNg

iTrader: (5)

correct

synth19

It's not 100% clear, but it sounds like all of the new NSX's will be built to order. So with that said there will NOT be any inventory available at any dealerships to test drive. I'm waiting for Honda/Acura to confirm this... but 90% sure this is what Acura is planning on doing.

KaMLuNg

iTrader: (5)

that's weird... when i was at the dealership looking at Bob's NSX, i was talking to the Sales Manager and he said that Honda/Acura already confirmed allocating 5 NSXs to their dealership... if that is the case it seems like those would have to be built to be able to have in inventory???

TacoBello

Wow, is this ever SO wrong, on SO many levels, lol.

There was nothing similar about that engine compared to the other C series engine, besides, well, the letter "C". Like, completely different. The Legend was the only other car to use the "C" engine, but the NSX and Legend engines were completely and utterly different. No idea why Honda used the "C" for both, but they had very little, if anything, in common.

That gear box was not a "standard gearbox" either. And when the 6MT showed up in 1997, it was completely bespoke to the NSX. Same with the interior, the body, the suspension, the brakes... All unique to that car.

There may have been some interior bits that were carryover, like the seat belts, but otherwise completely unique.

VR1

Mine came to $176k. No idea why power seats or XM are not standard in a 160k car. Would rather have a Gallardo Superleggera for this price.

brian6speed

iTrader: (5)

$3600 for Carbon Fiber engine cover. Hope that is F1 grade Carbon fiber atleast.

This is problem with cars at these price points. Manufacturers know buyers have way too much money and don't even care if they pay $1200 for floor mats, etc.

Even if I could afford cars like this, still would not buy them. Prefer buying cheaper cars and building how want to.

There are even parts for original NSX that are identical to part for other Honda/Acura, but because it is listed for NSX the price is double even though part is identical.

Only new expensive car I'd consider would be the Cayman GT4, love that car.

synth19

So.... what that means is that a person who is interested in purchasing and snags up one of those spots (built to order), and so forth. It doesn't mean that the dealership gets 5 cars sent to them and someone walks in and picks. Also, I'm fairly sure that all the add-ons are done in the factory.

SamDoe1

wow, you guys get butthurt about everything on here.

Just because the engine was unique to the NSX does not at all mean that it was unique overall. That is a terrible decision for damn near any large volume auto manufacturer. Want to know why a Ferrari 488 is so expensive? Because they have zero other models to leverage to lower R&D costs for the V8 motor.

The C series engine in the NSX is still a C series engine regardless of how much you don't want to believe it. Yes it has a few bespoke bits in it, but at the end of the day I bet a lot of the base design work was pretty much the same, the layout was the same, the cooling system is the same, the power steering (not the rack) was the same, the AC was the same, the alternator was the same, etc...

There's likely quite a lot more similarities than you think or care to believe.

And in terms of the interior (other than the seats), everything else is bang on for that era of Honda in terms of gauge cluster, switches, radio, speakers, carpeting, etc.

It all comes down to the fact that there's a reason that the NSX was cheaper than a Ferrari and it's not because Honda was being nice about it.

TacoBello

Look who's getting butthurt

Do some learning Sam. It Ain't the same engine. No one said anything about the alternator or similar. Just by the way you're talking, it's clear you haven't spent much time in an NSX, or other 90s Hondas. Even the window regulators are not the same. There's a reason they go for $500 a piece.

Yes, they LOOK like 90s Honda parts... But duh... Were you expecting something completely different? Id say at least 80% of that car is all original. Go look at the part numbers. I guess you must think all the guys on Prime are dummies for not using the same civic parts when fixing shit in their NSX

And as far as the engine goes, the legend C engine did not have VTEC. It was SOHC vs the NSX DOHC. The bottom end could not rev as high as the NSX can. Etc, etc, etc.

But hey, you're free to believe whatever you like

TacoBello

You're right. And when you buy a Ferrari, you're also paying big time for the name and brand prestige. Something the original NSX did not have.

MSZ

Actually California T and Quattroporte GTS both shared the F154 V8 with 488. Not 100% identical of course, but design wise they are mostly the same thing.

Legend2TL

You'd lose alot of those bets, then again you're the same person who said turbo's don't have bearings either and failed there.

To prove you wrong, yet again the Ferrari F154 motor is also used in the Maserati Quattroporte GTS as well as the 488 and 458.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_F154_engine

From what I've seen the vast majority of the interior bits on the NSX are unique to it. There was no reuse of a gauge cluster/HVAC control/radio/... from a Legend or other Honda's for it. I imagine the vast majority of non-fastener components are unique and limited. As I already pointed out the C30A is very special and about the block was the only major component shared between it and the other C motors.

One of the biggest problems areas for development of the NSX was the AL chassis, it caused all sorts of grief in terms of getting TIG/MIG welding consistent. Also galvanic corrosion was a problem.

WheelMcCoy

There's a lot of unique stuff in the first NSX; I was floored when I learned Honda / Acura put the gas tank near the middle of the car so the weight balance would remain the same regardless of the fuel level.

And Edmunds' did a suspension walk around and found some weird and clever stuff:

1991 Acura NSX: Suspension Walkaround

No butthurt here... Ferraris are beautiful, and I prefer them to Lamborghinis. But credit where credit is due: the 1G NSX was a fantastic feat of engineering, and made Ferrari reliable and drivable.

Rick_TL-S

I think what surprises me most is a full-spec NSX was reportedly just over the MSRP of the Huracan LP580-2.

I'm interested to see how the NSX does after its first year or two on the market.
In fairness, Ferrari didn't exactly have much prestige when the NSX came out, either. They were building mediocre sports cars relying on the name to move them. Some kudos go to Honda for getting Ferrari back on track with the 355.

KaMLuNg

iTrader: (5)

if i had to bet, probably as well as the GS-Fs are doing flying off all the Lexus lots...

SamDoe1

So three models that sell in two years what an Accord sells in two weeks. Not really a great way to distribute R&D expenses to lower vehicle cost. There is a lot in the Ferrari badge tax but certainly not that much.

Look, all I'm trying to say is that what makes the NSX special and fast is the chassis, steering, and suspension. It's certainly not the motor. Having 100% bespoke components does not make a car cheap and reliable in the same way that I doubt the Lexus LFA is at all a reliable super car. They leveraged a lot and things were modified here and there to make it better and faster but not a ground up development in terms of a lot of stuff in there.

Turbos have oil bearings which allows the turbine shaft to spin on a thin layer of oil with very little friction. These are are called sleeve bearings/bushings which don't have any metal to metal contact when in use. There are thrust bearings on either end of the shaft that prevent it from flying out the side but that's about it in terms of physical bearings. I don't think I lost any argument with that, I've done quite a lot of work with turbine systems during my school years and have designed and assembled several of them myself. Take that for what it's worth.

Unique =/= bespoke.

I'm not taking credit from the 1G NSX at all so please don't take it that way. It's a dream car of mine that I hope to own one day when prices come back down to reality.

Legend2TL

You were wrong with the exclusive use of the Ferrari V8 motor and you were multiple times wrong about turbo bearings (you said they have no physical bearings and that ball bearings in turbo's wear out in minutes).

You said
Be a man and admit you were wrong, and when you're wrong try to read the links I posted from Garrett and learn something .

https://acurazine.com/forums/car-tal.../#post15509426

https://acurazine.com/forums/car-tal.../#post15511288

https://acurazine.com/forums/car-tal.../#post15508220

Journal Bearings vs. Ball Bearings | Turbobygarrett

TacoBello

You're on drugs.

So you just admitted that prestige was selling their cars

SamDoe1

I'll admit defeat on the Ferrari comment but I'm not backing down from my turbo comments at all. Like I said, I've done a lot with them for quite a long time.

If someone has invented ball bearings that work in that application then I'm not aware of it (don't work in that industry) and it would be something new in the past few years. If it is new and real then it would be a huge improvement over oil bearings since they avoid the issue of sludge buildup due to stagnant hot oil in the turbine housing.

Legend2TL

Journal Bearings vs. Ball Bearings | Turbobygarrett

FamilyGuy

There goes this thread

Sam, honda also tuned the nsx with input from Ayrton Senna, but I guess that's not exclusive enough for ya huh

SamDoe1

Never claimed it wasn't exclusive nor have I ever claimed it wasn't special.

It's definitely both of those things

Nexx

its built to order so test is a no go