RE: Time for Tea? Why the Honda NSX is brilliant...
Discussion
havoc said:
Alfanatic said:
To be fair, there were a fair number of road testers in the early days who preferred the Ferrari 348. The argument was that if you wanted a mid engined junior supercar to have fun in, the Ferrari was more of an event to drive, had more drama, looked and felt exotic, and that the Honda, for all its good manners and high limits and solid build quality and reliability, kind of missed the point.
Not so sure. Ferrari have always had their own market, or rather two:-- those who HAVE to have a Ferrari badge
- those who want something which is an event to drive
The first is the reason the original NSX bombed in the UK. And is the reason the (GTO-beating) LF-A is also receiving a rather lacklustre welcome over here.
The second is part of the area the NSX targeted...and I guess in a way it did miss the mark - by being so accessible, so easy to drive and so reliable/well-built, it left those wanting the "TVR/80s Ferrari" ownership experience cold.
As exemplified here, which is quite ridiculous* given the current crop of Ferraris and the hype around the GTR:-
Dave Hedgehog said:
but for me the car was just too easy to drive and bordering on boring to drive at road speed for how it looked, it felt like a civic, using the top gear analogy it had no fizz in relation to how it looked, it didn't feel like a supercar to me
To me, this sort of car being accessible to an amateur like me is part of the attraction, as I've said already - here is a car I can drive and have fun in without worrying about what the car will do (whatever the weather). I do agree with Alfanatic here - Ferrari have now gone even further in this direction, with the cars now almost driving themselves, for the amateur - what the NSX did with a competent chassis and benign handling, Ferrari now do with electronics!As for those road-testers - guys like David Vivian, I'll wager, who can't keep their prejudices off the page. Guys like Chris Harris who want to boast about their hairy-chestedness. The NSX wiped the floor, dynamically, with the 348 and 964. It was also a more rounded package than either, and sounded at least as good. Looks and badge aside, and this spurious "too easy to drive" comment, what is there to prefer about the 348??? OK, probably steering feel, but that'd be about it.
* Probably the only car to have been criticised for benign and accessible handling. Actually - this and the Boxster!
the NSX looked (still does) amazing but for me just whizzing around fairly sensibly I may as well have been driving a civic, certainly in relation to how it looked, flat out on track it may be a very different beast, that I cant comment on. I came out after 30 mins disappointed, a car like the NSX should make you grin even going at 30 mph imo.
The GTR is a techno wonder piece and is perfect for low skilled drivers like me as all its electricery will flatter my limited ability. I would have bought one but the running costs just push it over what I am comfortable to spend. But its a different animal to the NSX, but i can see that for skilled drivers all this electronics is making their skill somewhat redundant
Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Wednesday 8th February 07:30
havoc said:
The NSX wiped the floor, dynamically, with the 348 and 964. It was also a more rounded package than either, and sounded at least as good.
I think the 348 comes in for a fair bit more criticism than it deserves. Certainly people that have actually owned one seem to think it's a great car. Whilst the NSX is a much better car dynamically, there is no way it could compete with a 348 fitted with a Larini exhaust on the sound side of things as that is just 
LuS1fer, I think you're confusing point to point pace with driver involvement and finesse - you may as well say the RS3 is quicker and grippier than an NSX, 355 or 993 - doesn't make it a better car, let alone a more desirable or more entertaining one!
Dave, you appear to be contradicting yourself - you dislike the NSX for being "too easy" or too mundane at low speeds, yet you love the GTR because the electronics make it easy to drive. You're going to have to be more precise chap...sounds a little hypocritical right now! Do you really mean the GTR gives you instant turbo'd gratification while you need to work the NSX to see the real performance???
If so, then you're missing the point of the car entirely - which is fine, it's not for you. But at least be honest about why...
Dave, you appear to be contradicting yourself - you dislike the NSX for being "too easy" or too mundane at low speeds, yet you love the GTR because the electronics make it easy to drive. You're going to have to be more precise chap...sounds a little hypocritical right now! Do you really mean the GTR gives you instant turbo'd gratification while you need to work the NSX to see the real performance???
If so, then you're missing the point of the car entirely - which is fine, it's not for you. But at least be honest about why...
havoc said:
Alfanatic said:
To be fair, there were a fair number of road testers in the early days who preferred the Ferrari 348. The argument was that if you wanted a mid engined junior supercar to have fun in, the Ferrari was more of an event to drive, had more drama, looked and felt exotic, and that the Honda, for all its good manners and high limits and solid build quality and reliability, kind of missed the point.
Not so sure. Ferrari have always had their own market, or rather two:-- those who HAVE to have a Ferrari badge
- those who want something which is an event to drive
The first is the reason the original NSX bombed in the UK. And is the reason the (GTO-beating) LF-A is also receiving a rather lacklustre welcome over here.
The second is part of the area the NSX targeted...and I guess in a way it did miss the mark - by being so accessible, so easy to drive and so reliable/well-built, it left those wanting the "TVR/80s Ferrari" ownership experience cold.
As exemplified here, which is quite ridiculous* given the current crop of Ferraris and the hype around the GTR:-
Dave Hedgehog said:
but for me the car was just too easy to drive and bordering on boring to drive at road speed for how it looked, it felt like a civic, using the top gear analogy it had no fizz in relation to how it looked, it didn't feel like a supercar to me
To me, this sort of car being accessible to an amateur like me is part of the attraction, as I've said already - here is a car I can drive and have fun in without worrying about what the car will do (whatever the weather). I do agree with Alfanatic here - Ferrari have now gone even further in this direction, with the cars now almost driving themselves, for the amateur - what the NSX did with a competent chassis and benign handling, Ferrari now do with electronics!As for those road-testers - guys like David Vivian, I'll wager, who can't keep their prejudices off the page. Guys like Chris Harris who want to boast about their hairy-chestedness. The NSX wiped the floor, dynamically, with the 348 and 964. It was also a more rounded package than either, and sounded at least as good. Looks and badge aside, and this spurious "too easy to drive" comment, what is there to prefer about the 348??? OK, probably steering feel, but that'd be about it.
* Probably the only car to have been criticised for benign and accessible handling. Actually - this and the Boxster!
to that!I do think that the NSX has been far more influential than its market perception suggests. Either Ferrari got scared into trying to compete directly with it, or the NSX was simply an unusually accurate glimpse of the future.
I don't doubt the ability of the NSX to entertain when the driver wants it to and to be honest I can't summarise my thoughts any other way than, well, I'd want a mid engined junior supercar to be a bit of a challenge to drive - all of the time. I would want it to have something that makes it always focus the mind that little bit more when driving it. Something that is constantly reminding you that you are in something that's out of the ordinary. I guess I'm saying I'd want some compromise in the daily driver side of it.
To put it in perspective, the first time I drove an crappy old Alfetta GTV: The steering was heavy when parking, then instantly responsive and brimming with feedback as soon as the car was above walking pace. The clutch was heavy. After driving the company Sentra I'd hop in the Alfa and put my foot on the clutch pedal to select a gear, and the pedal wouldn't move. The brakes were heavier but again completely full of feel. The windscreen started just above my knees and ended an inch from my forehead. The gearchange was... well actually that was just completely s
t to be honest. The car was always an event to drive in a way that a passenger would never feel, and in a way that always made it feel special. I'd expect Ferrari 308s and 328s and 348s to be like this, but much more exotic and special, but I've never had the pleasure of driving any of these.Much more recently I had the opportunity to drive a Ferrari 360, with paddles
t ..I mean paddleshift. I was underwhelmed. The feedback was there, the ability was there, it was definitely lovely to drive fast, but the challenge wasn't there. I got in, I drove it, I was instantly comfortable, didn't have to acclimatise to anything, the steering was light, the paddles were clunky but uninvolving, and so on.I walked away thinking what a great car that is, the 360. Talkative and competent when you're on it, quiet and out of the way when you're not. That's the appeal of the car, and I guess also of the NSX. The 360 was, on the track, most certainly an exotic sportscar. In the parking lot though, it could have been anything.
The problem is, that's exactly what I'd want in a hot hatch. Or an executive saloon. It's not what I'd want in a sportscar, but that's just me.
I completely accept that should I one day be lucky enough to drive an NSX I may realise I'm talking total b
ks
Edited by Alfanatic on Wednesday 8th February 09:58
No, you're not. Agree with your last paragraph...for what you and others want. For me, I test-drove a Chimaera and a C6 'vette, and in both I couldn't live with the offset pedals, silly-heavy clutch and woeful gearchange...
...which are part of the 'exotic character' that to others defines a special car. The Japs just don't do that sort of thing though - anathema to them.
So in that regard the NSX is rather ordinary, and for some not enough of a sense of occasion*. Doesn't make it boring though...more like a girlfriend that's great in bed but doesn't throw a mental every other day out of it!
* Again, not unlike a Boxster.
...which are part of the 'exotic character' that to others defines a special car. The Japs just don't do that sort of thing though - anathema to them.
So in that regard the NSX is rather ordinary, and for some not enough of a sense of occasion*. Doesn't make it boring though...more like a girlfriend that's great in bed but doesn't throw a mental every other day out of it!
* Again, not unlike a Boxster.
havoc said:
No, you're not. Agree with your last paragraph...for what you and others want. For me, I test-drove a Chimaera and a C6 'vette, and in both I couldn't live with the offset pedals, silly-heavy clutch and woeful gearchange...
...which are part of the 'exotic character' that to others defines a special car. The Japs just don't do that sort of thing though - anathema to them.
So in that regard the NSX is rather ordinary, and for some not enough of a sense of occasion*. Doesn't make it boring though...more like a girlfriend that's great in bed but doesn't throw a mental every other day out of it!
* Again, not unlike a Boxster.
so the nsx is like dating kelly brook, but she will only do it missionary in the dark, the back doors are defiantly out...which are part of the 'exotic character' that to others defines a special car. The Japs just don't do that sort of thing though - anathema to them.
So in that regard the NSX is rather ordinary, and for some not enough of a sense of occasion*. Doesn't make it boring though...more like a girlfriend that's great in bed but doesn't throw a mental every other day out of it!
* Again, not unlike a Boxster.
Grovsie26 said:
To be fair mate, the soft top M3 was about 200-250kg heavier than the Coupe, it was a good chunk slower.
I don't know of a single cabrio which weighs near 200kg more than the fixed-head, even the Bentleys are going to be less than that!Stats seem to suggest between 80kg and 110kg extra for the E46 M3 cabrio, or a 5-7% increase. Will blunt performance, sure, but not that much...
(bhp/tonne: M3 coupe ~220, M3 cabrio ~205-210, NA1 NSX ~200, NA2 NSX ~210)
re: the NSX not getting great press, when the first one came out I was 8 and had never read a car mag, but I do rmr a test of the Gen 2 model w/ the exposed lights back in 2002 I think by EVO. There was the NSX, an MG SV, a Corvette Z06, a TVR and a 911 C4S. The 911 won but the NSX came second and evo gave it 5 stars and labelled it as an astonishing achievement.
Tiff in the original TG review said overall he liked it but said it drove like a Civic. He said the same thing in the FG retrospective but Tom, and Jason loved it.
And thats not an NSX video, THIS is an NSX video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...
Tiff in the original TG review said overall he liked it but said it drove like a Civic. He said the same thing in the FG retrospective but Tom, and Jason loved it.
And thats not an NSX video, THIS is an NSX video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...
I love the NSX. The first time I drove one I’d just climbed out of my Caterham having done an hour or so on track, and the NSX felt utterly amazing. If anyone on here owns a car like the 7 then they’ll realise how unusual that is, as most cars feel like lethargic heavy buses after driving a Caterham (genuinely – even something like an M3 feels like a tank in comparison). Perhaps my best and most significant memory of the NSX though was looking at the data in the fantastic Mclaren F1 book and realising that when they benchmarked the NSX against the other supercars of the time it pretty much came out top in every objective measure. So there you have it, subjectively and objectively fantastic – not many cars can claim that.
pagani1 said:
Except the NSX 2 was designed before the Huracan, so who looks like who?
Maybe the guys at Lambo knew that Honda would never build the NSX 2....To be fair to Honda, I think the NSX 2 is fairly likely to be produced now, but as a competitor to the i8. The years between the concept being announced and a couple of years ago were a time when environmental pressures would have stopped Honda, but the tech didn't exist to enable them to go ahead with an environmentally friendly version. Now that it does, a hybrid NSX 2 wouldn't surprise me. A 1350kg high revving n/a V6 NSX would be better though...
NSX was an impressive vehicle which suffered from a number of issues in the market,
The final editions were painful to watch as Honda struggled to keep an old model going.
- Not particularly exotic exterior
- Not particularly exotic interior
- Not a particularly good sound
- Not a V8
- Not a longitudinal layout
The final editions were painful to watch as Honda struggled to keep an old model going.
Ozzie Osmond said:
The 911 was an impressive vehicle which suffered from a number of issues in the market,
EFA!- Not particularly exotic exterior
- Not particularly exotic interior
- Not a particularly good sound
- Not a V8
- Not a longitudinal layout
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff