RE: NSX worth the wait? PH Blog
Discussion
I could be wrong (as I wasn't around when it was released) but I get the impression that the original NSX wasn't appreciated at the time. Very simple looks, 270bhp & 1345kg with 0-62 taking 6secs.
When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
Fittster said:
Honda badge.
The last one was completely overshadowed by offerings from Porsche and Ferrari and it anything the image of Honda has got worse over the last decade.
There's a lot of rose tinted specs when it comes to the original NSX.
Have you seen NSX prices recently? They've gone up by around 30% over a couple of years. The last one was completely overshadowed by offerings from Porsche and Ferrari and it anything the image of Honda has got worse over the last decade.
There's a lot of rose tinted specs when it comes to the original NSX.
Not hard to see why...
StottyEvo said:
I could be wrong (as I wasn't around when it was released) but I get the impression that the original NSX wasn't appreciated at the time. Very simple looks, 270bhp & 1345kg with 0-62 taking 6secs.
When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
Might not be impressive now, but those stats were normal for the time (Ferrari 348, 964/993).When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
From Autocar: "The original NSX could top 168 mph on long straight. It took 5.7 seconds to accelerate from 0-60 mph and 13.1 seconds to 100 mph"
"The NSX is the best-handling and the most accomplished sports car in the world - a genuine marvel."
It was the badge that held it back, and the price. But Honda put a lot of effort into it; virtually hand built in a brand new, dedicated factory with exotic materials.
k-ink said:
hondansx said:
Erm, isn't that point? It's how they justify building the NSX and we - the consumer - should surely just be happy that there is another option in the marketplace?
You think the point is to make a halo model so dull and boring that nobody in the world looks twice? Maybe you should get a job at Honda as they obviously agree with you. Luckily other manufacturers 'get' what a halo model is all about.StottyEvo said:
I could be wrong (as I wasn't around when it was released) but I get the impression that the original NSX wasn't appreciated at the time. Very simple looks, 270bhp & 1345kg with 0-62 taking 6secs.
When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
The original was appreciated at the time, especially by the magazines.When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
As an Esprit fan, I think the original NSX was ill proportioned, ugly, and soulless. It might be my least favorite exotic ever. However, it has its fans and has from the beginning.
hondansx said:
StottyEvo said:
I could be wrong (as I wasn't around when it was released) but I get the impression that the original NSX wasn't appreciated at the time. Very simple looks, 270bhp & 1345kg with 0-62 taking 6secs.
When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
Might not be impressive now, but those stats were normal for the time (Ferrari 348, 964/993).When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
From Autocar: "The original NSX could top 168 mph on long straight. It took 5.7 seconds to accelerate from 0-60 mph and 13.1 seconds to 100 mph"
"The NSX is the best-handling and the most accomplished sports car in the world - a genuine marvel."
It was the badge that held it back, and the price. But Honda put a lot of effort into it; virtually hand built in a brand new, dedicated factory with exotic materials.
poobah said:
Whilst I think they've missed a trick visually with the NSX, I think I might be the only person on the planet right now that thinks the new Ford GT looks like it was designed by committee. It looks like people locked in seperate rooms designed the front, middle and rear.
Referencing the post about the smooth lines of the original NSX, the Ford designers have also missed the mark when you compare the new GT to the previous model and the GT40. Certainly no design classic!
You're not alone, yeah of course the GT is interesting and will turn heads but... It just does nothing for me, the front and the back just look a mess to my eyes. If my numbers came up it wouldn't even make the bottom of the list but full marks to Ford for getting stuck in.Referencing the post about the smooth lines of the original NSX, the Ford designers have also missed the mark when you compare the new GT to the previous model and the GT40. Certainly no design classic!
The NSX gets my vote. It looks compact. The proportions are managed extremely well (unlike the original), the surfacing has clearly been painstakingly considered, and the details are spellbinding. It's a thoroughly modern and technical piece of design that by contrast makes the Ford GT look heavy-handed and uncouth.
Perhaps on this occasion the book can quite accurately be judged by it's cover...
Perhaps on this occasion the book can quite accurately be judged by it's cover...
hondansx said:
It was the badge that held it back,
TBH I think that's just one of many clichéd automotive excuses. See also - Lotus. If a car doesn't look right and/or has the wrong number of cylinders it will struggle.Truth is that if the cars are right people will buy them. There certainly wasn't any magic in the "Mazda" badge which enabled them to shift sportscars by the bucket load.
Ian974 said:
I'd say part of the issue is that the gt has seemingly come out of nowhere, while nsx concepts have been kicking about shows since 2012, possibly earlier. If there hadn't been previous show cars it may have had more of the spotlight.
I'd agree with this but why on earth did Honda preview the car three long years prior to production with a concept that was remarkedly close to the final production car. I can't think of a recent car launch where the concept lagged by such a period yet was stylistically so close. Remember the launch NSX is still 1/2 a year away from first deliveries. Ford have timed the GT launch much better preview now deliveries next year no concept.
celicawrc said:
The new NSX it a complete mess!
Why the hell did Honda get the yanks to design and build it!? The design is terrible and has no styling cues to the original NSX atall. Add in the fact it has unnecessary, heavy electric motors, twin turbo, 9(WTF!)speed dct. How much does it weigh again?
This car is going to cost around £150k and just look at that typical American interior! Dreadful cheap materials taken straight from a Corvette.
Honda is building cars in America for more than 30 years, they sell more than one million units of American made cars in their own country per annum alone, if there build quality was so bad, we'd be hearing about. Don't forget the old Accord and Civic coupe were American built too, no issue with them especially the EM1 vti.Why the hell did Honda get the yanks to design and build it!? The design is terrible and has no styling cues to the original NSX atall. Add in the fact it has unnecessary, heavy electric motors, twin turbo, 9(WTF!)speed dct. How much does it weigh again?
This car is going to cost around £150k and just look at that typical American interior! Dreadful cheap materials taken straight from a Corvette.
Furthermore, the initial concept styling was from Japan, with Christensen putting the final productions touches to it.
The engine was also designed in Japan, nothing happens within Honda/Acura without say so from Japan HQ.
The reason America is seen to be in charge is because it'll be the main market for it. Why else have they concentrated on zero to gut wrenching speed, cos off the line speed matters in the big aul US of A!! Not that we won't appreciate either.
And the rumour of a sub 7 minute Ring time also won't matter where it's built either.
I would take the build quality of the New NSX over the build quality of the new CTR any day, Swindon's losing it, and thankfully the Turbo from that is developed in Japan too!!
b0rk said:
Ian974 said:
I'd say part of the issue is that the gt has seemingly come out of nowhere, while nsx concepts have been kicking about shows since 2012, possibly earlier. If there hadn't been previous show cars it may have had more of the spotlight.
I'd agree with this but why on earth did Honda preview the car three long years prior to production with a concept that was remarkedly close to the final production car. I can't think of a recent car launch where the concept lagged by such a period yet was stylistically so close. Remember the launch NSX is still 1/2 a year away from first deliveries. Ford have timed the GT launch much better preview now deliveries next year no concept.
Watch the Acura launch vid on youtube, lots of info given.
Claudia Skies said:
TBH I think that's just one of many clichéd automotive excuses. See also - Lotus. If a car doesn't look right and/or has the wrong number of cylinders it will struggle.
Truth is that if the cars are right people will buy them. There certainly wasn't any magic in the "Mazda" badge which enabled them to shift sportscars by the bucket load.
You're comparing the market the MX5 is in to what the NSX was up against? You have to appreciate that at the £70k it was priced at, most owners aren't genuine enthusiasts but after a status symbol and an ego boost. It was a particular problem in the UK; they sold plenty in the States.Truth is that if the cars are right people will buy them. There certainly wasn't any magic in the "Mazda" badge which enabled them to shift sportscars by the bucket load.
mikEsprit said:
StottyEvo said:
I could be wrong (as I wasn't around when it was released) but I get the impression that the original NSX wasn't appreciated at the time. Very simple looks, 270bhp & 1345kg with 0-62 taking 6secs.
When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
The original was appreciated at the time, especially by the magazines.When the new car is driven, who knows, dynamically it could be absolutely phenomenal and I hope it is.
As an Esprit fan, I think the original NSX was ill proportioned, ugly, and soulless. It might be my least favorite exotic ever. However, it has its fans and has from the beginning.
Dave Hedgehog said:
its an utter design mess, so fussy, random bits, bumps and lumps shoved all over the front end
made worse by the fact the original cars design was so clean and pure
What a beauty ^^^^^^^. made worse by the fact the original cars design was so clean and pure
Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Wednesday 14th January 13:34
Shame the new one is such an awkward looking thing. I wouldn't look twice at it. The Ford GT is interesting IMO.
Claudia Skies said:
TBH I think that's just one of many clichéd automotive excuses. See also - Lotus. If a car doesn't look right and/or has the wrong number of cylinders it will struggle.
Truth is that if the cars are right people will buy them. There certainly wasn't any magic in the "Mazda" badge which enabled them to shift sportscars by the bucket load.
Different markets though. Entry level sports cars and prestige market show-ponies are not alike, with very different dynamics. When built, the original NSX was the best high-end sports car on the plane, for the money, and sent all the other manufacturers back to the drawing board. But the commercial appeal didn't last very long (exactly 12 months really) before the people who wanted one bought it, and those who were more concerned about what other people thought decided to stick to the significantly worse contemporary Ferraris and the like, in order to impress the people who judge by badges rather than merit. Honda then comprehensively failed to keep the car sufficiently updated to retain appeal in later years, although that also is a blessing if an NSX is actually what you really want.Truth is that if the cars are right people will buy them. There certainly wasn't any magic in the "Mazda" badge which enabled them to shift sportscars by the bucket load.
It's still an issue today, with people dismissing more proletarian-badged cars as being lesser (the "badge you can be proud of" idiocy).
It will struggle to sell, but I don't think Honda care. They've said production will be "demand minus one", so they're not doing this for the profit, I think.
b0rk said:
I'd agree with this but why on earth did Honda preview the car three long years prior to production with a concept that was remarkedly close to the final production car. I can't think of a recent car launch where the concept lagged by such a period yet was stylistically so close. Remember the launch NSX is still 1/2 a year away from first deliveries.
Ford have timed the GT launch much better preview now deliveries next year no concept.
Which tells you who's spending time developing the engineering work.Ford have timed the GT launch much better preview now deliveries next year no concept.
It took them a long time reportedly to get the electric motors to do the torque vectoring they wanted in the right way, and they apparently redesigned the engine. The styling is the box that the important stuff comes in, rather than something that actually takes a long time.
juicy sushi said:
Honda then comprehensively failed to keep the car sufficiently updated to retain appeal in later years
Not massively convinced it wasn't appealing even towards the endhttp://www.z06vette.com/forums/f4/best-enemies-148...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff