RE: PH Heroes: Honda NSX

[Harry Monk]

NoelWatson said:

Harry Monk said:

Dialling in understeer was a 'fix' to prevent snap oversteer. Not sure where you're going with that one.

Sounds like it has a fundamental body control issue

Of course not. That would mean admitting something was imperfect.

[Harry Monk]

havoc said:

Harry Monk said:

scampbird said:

Finally, on Mr Becker - wasn't this the chap that made the S2 Elise understeer like a pig? My abiding memory of my S2 Elise was either horrific understeer or dramatic snap oversteer.

Dialling in understeer was a 'fix' to prevent snap oversteer. Not sure where you're going with that one.

And you're suggesting that the NSX (which has been reported as one of the most forgiving rwd cars, once the limit has been exceeded) doesn't handle as well???

Hmmm...




To be fair, the Elise has always had weight distribution against it - the twin-cam in-line 4's sit quite tall in the back (even more so the VVTi Toyota engines). That said, Lotus had a very one-dimensional brief with the Elise - handling above everything else. So it SHOULD be a yardstick for others to be measured against...

NoelWatson said:

Harry Monk said:

This was 2004 and the NSX felt as if its sell-by date had passed.

It seems to have slipped badly since 2002 when Autocar placed it 5th in their handling day, ahead of the 996. Why is the NSX any different to an S1 Elise in terms of roll oversteer?

Here's the first mention of an Elise in this thread. If you want to compare Elises to NSXs, ask Mr Watson. He's the one who wants to discuss Lotus Elises.

[havoc]

Harry Monk said:

Here's the first mention of an Elise in this thread. If you want to compare Elises to NSXs, ask Mr Watson. He's the one who wants to discuss Lotus Elises.

Don't be so disingenuous. You refer to your 'week away' with an Exige, a VX and Matt Becker. So YOU brought the subject up, in direct comparison to the NSX.


Now do you want to continue with a reasoned discussion or just play semantics when your points get pulled apart?

[Harry Monk]

havoc said:

Harry Monk said:

Here's the first mention of an Elise in this thread. If you want to compare Elises to NSXs, ask Mr Watson. He's the one who wants to discuss Lotus Elises.

Don't be so disingenuous. You refer to your 'week away' with an Exige, a VX and Matt Becker. So YOU brought the subject up, in direct comparison to the NSX.


Now do you want to continue with a reasoned discussion or just play semantics when your points get pulled apart?

In my experience, reason and Honda enthusiasm do not always sit very squarely. I wish I knew why.

[havoc]

Harry Monk said:

In my experience, reason and Honda enthusiasm do not always sit very squarely. I wish I knew why.

Same can be said of most 'enthusiast' brands. There are plenty of Lotus owners who won't hear a bad word said about their cars, and let's not start on fast Fords, VWs or Audis...


So - you were saying the Exige and VX handled better than the NSX, and then you mentioned the Elise S2 (so same chassis as VX and Exige) had a snap-oversteer problem which had to be cured by dialling-in understeer...

Do you need assistance in removing your foot from your mouth???

[Harry Monk]

havoc said:

Harry Monk said:

In my experience, reason and Honda enthusiasm do not always sit very squarely. I wish I knew why.

Same can be said of most 'enthusiast' brands. There are plenty of Lotus owners who won't hear a bad word said about their cars, and let's not start on fast Fords, VWs or Audis...


So - you were saying the Exige and VX handled better than the NSX, and then you mentioned the Elise S2 (so same chassis as VX and Exige) had a snap-oversteer problem which had to be cured by dialling-in understeer...

Do you need assistance in removing your foot from your mouth???

Not as badly as you need assistance in reading comprehension.

[mvm]

I don't think there is much point in discussing the 'handling' of a car or cars if we don't even have some quantifiable yardstick by which to measure this 'handling'.

Same goes for the 'character' of a car, or 'feel'.
These are all highly vague terms which might mean totally different things between people.
Yes, one particular car might feel very different from another, but, at the same time, that different car might also need a different approach to get the most out of it.

Personally, I think the Elise and NSX are two totally different cars which totally different design objectives. One is just a fun car and not much else, the other was ment to be useable as a daily driver, wherever you might want to take it two. The Lotus Evora is much more like the NSX than the Elise ever will be.

[Dagnut]

Harry Monk said:

In my experience, reason and Honda enthusiasm do not always sit very squarely. I wish I knew why.

[anonymous-user]

Absolutely, said it pages ago, NSX owners are as versifarous as Civic owners and in some cases just as biased

I might even have to go to Japfest and put an unofficial stopwatch if anyone is on track. It's a shame that you can't discuss the weaknesses as an ex owner without being called a troll by experts but I did find it struck a chord in the article talking about body control, which I always found very average.

Most of them are getting on and the dampers and general bushes despite being fitted to the NSX and having special properties are going to be tired. Otherwise I am sure they would be lapping faster than Skylines and Evo's at Combe given like for like enthusiasts driving them?

[scampbird]

yonex said:

Absolutely, said it pages ago, NSX owners are as versifarous as Civic owners and in some cases just as biased

I might even have to go to Japfest and put an unofficial stopwatch if anyone is on track. It's a shame that you can't discuss the weaknesses as an ex owner without being called a troll by experts but I did find it struck a chord in the article talking about body control, which I always found very average.

Most of them are getting on and the dampers and general bushes despite being fitted to the NSX and having special properties are going to be tired. Otherwise I am sure they would be lapping faster than Skylines and Evo's at Combe given like for like enthusiasts driving them?

With perhaps one exception I think the NSX lot have been pretty honest about the cars shortcomings, and most of the debate seemed quite balanced. I don't have an issue with the naysayers, everyone is different after all, and we all want different things out of a car.

Saying that, coming on here with the line of "I spent a day with a Lotus engineer and this, third hand, is what he said" isn't a great argument. And, as I think has been pointed out, even if that is true, its just a little silly coming from the man that created a car significantly worse handling than its predecessor.

[havoc]

I've just posted it elsewhere but it bears repeating here.

Lap-times are an irrelevancy when judging the merits of a road car!


When did we get this fascination with them, anyway?!? Top Gear doesn't help, and manufacturers chasing 'ring times is both cause and effect. But in reality all we're getting is stiffer and stiffer cars with bigger and bigger rubber and they're no longer FUN, except at stupid speeds.


(Whether the NSX is a better handler* than the Elise/Exige is partly irrelevant - Mr Monk brought it up, BTW. What is relevant is whether a car does the job it's designed for. The Elise and Exige do this in spades, no question about that. But let's leave that one there...)




* A friend (also on here on rare occasions) owns a 355 GTS and an S1 Elise, and he says the S1 Elise is so much more involving and 'fun' to drive in the UK. Does this make the 355 a bad car?!?

[Mermaid]

havoc said:

I've just posted it elsewhere but it bears repeating here.

Lap-times are an irrelevancy when judging the merits of a road car!


When did we get this fascination with them, anyway?!? Top Gear doesn't help, and manufacturers chasing 'ring times is both cause and effect. But in reality all we're getting is stiffer and stiffer cars with bigger and bigger rubber and they're no longer FUN, except at stupid speeds.

Well said

The E30 M3 proves this very valid point. 16" rubber 45 profile tyres and 200ps originally.

[NoelWatson]

yonex said:

Otherwise I am sure they would be lapping faster than Skylines and Evo's at Combe given like for like enthusiasts driving them?

Not sure that is strictly true. I was at Castle Combe in my R26.R at a Lancer track day and I was overtaking most things (and I am a distincty average driver). I wouldn't be anywhere near as fast in an NSX, despite them being broadly similar in capable hands.

[Harry Monk]

scampbird said:

Saying that, coming on here with the line of "I spent a day with a Lotus engineer and this, third hand, is what he said" isn't a great argument.

I drove the car extensively and consulted with Matt. I couldn't think of anything more first hand when it comes to assessing its qualities. But I guess that's not good enough for you and before you denigrate his work, it's probably fair to say that Mr Becker understands the requirements of Lotus' target market a good deal better than you.

havoc said:

When did we get this fascination with them, anyway?!? Top Gear doesn't help, and manufacturers chasing 'ring times is both cause and effect. But in reality all we're getting is stiffer and stiffer cars with bigger and bigger rubber and they're no longer FUN, except at stupid speeds.

Interesting that you mention Top Gear creating this fascination with lap times and then paraphrase the content of an article James May wrote about the Nurburgring. I'll have to ask him about that.

[NoelWatson]

NoelWatson said:

Not sure that is strictly true. I was at Castle Combe in my R26.R at a Lancer track day and I was overtaking most things (and I am a distincty average driver). I wouldn't be anywhere near as fast in an NSX, despite them being broadly similar in capable hands.

An example

http://groups.google.com/group/es.charla.motor/bro...

1997
Lap times around Castle Combe circuit, under damp conditions.


1 Ferrari F50 69.37
2 Ferrari 550 Maranello 72.04
3 Honda NSX 72.20
4 Chrysler GTS 72.86
5 Caterham Superlight R 73.17
6 Nissan Skyline GT-R 73.09
7 Lotus Esprit GT3 74.40
8 Porsche 911 Carrera 4 74.89
9 Jaguar XJR V8 76.20
10 Venturi Atlantique 76.71
11 Subaru Impreza Turbo 76.83
12 Porsche Boxster 77.52
13 Honda Integra-R 78.94
14 BMW Z3 2.8 79.02
15 Lotus Elise 79.05
16 Peugeot 106 GTI 79.63
17 Renault Sport Spider 79.83
18 Ford Puma 83.15
19 MGF VVC 85.80
20 Ford Ka2 94.81

[Harry Monk]

NoelWatson said:

An example

http://groups.google.com/group/es.charla.motor/bro...

1997
Lap times around Castle Combe circuit, under damp conditions.


1 Ferrari F50 69.37
2 Ferrari 550 Maranello 72.04
3 Honda NSX 72.20
4 Chrysler GTS 72.86
5 Caterham Superlight R 73.17
6 Nissan Skyline GT-R 73.09
7 Lotus Esprit GT3 74.40
8 Porsche 911 Carrera 4 74.89
9 Jaguar XJR V8 76.20
10 Venturi Atlantique 76.71
11 Subaru Impreza Turbo 76.83
12 Porsche Boxster 77.52
13 Honda Integra-R 78.94
14 BMW Z3 2.8 79.02
15 Lotus Elise 79.05
16 Peugeot 106 GTI 79.63
17 Renault Sport Spider 79.83
18 Ford Puma 83.15
19 MGF VVC 85.80
20 Ford Ka2 94.81

That is some ferocious pedalling in the Honda.

In that same link, found Car's subjective rankings interesting/baffling for any number of reasons.

1º Lotus Elise
2º Subaru Impreza Turbo
3º MGF
4º Honda NSX
5º Peugot 106 GTI
6º Caterham Superlight
7º Peugeot 306 GTI-6
8º Lamborghini Diablo SV
9º Toyota Supra
10º Mercedes Benz E36 AMG
11º Jaguar XK8
12º Nissan Primera Sri
13º Porsche 911
14º Nissan GT-RV
15º BMW M3 Evo
16º BMW 528i
17º Citroen Xantia Activa
18º Alfa Romeo GTV
19º BMW 318ti Compact
20º TVR Cerbera

[scampbird]

Harry Monk said:

I drove the car extensively and consulted with Matt. I couldn't think of anything more first hand when it comes to assessing its qualities. But I guess that's not good enough for you and before you denigrate his work, it's probably fair to say that Mr Becker understands the requirements of Lotus' target market a good deal better than you.

I was his target market. I've owned both S1 and S2 Elises. Fair enough, I'm not the driver he is, but I know what I like. And the S2 sucked donkey arse through a straw.

[NoelWatson]

Harry Monk said:

That is some ferocious pedalling in the Honda.

In that same link, found Car's subjective rankings interesting/baffling for any number of reasons.

1º Lotus Elise
2º Subaru Impreza Turbo
3º MGF
4º Honda NSX
5º Peugot 106 GTI
6º Caterham Superlight
7º Peugeot 306 GTI-6
8º Lamborghini Diablo SV
9º Toyota Supra
10º Mercedes Benz E36 AMG
11º Jaguar XK8
12º Nissan Primera Sri
13º Porsche 911
14º Nissan GT-RV
15º BMW M3 Evo
16º BMW 528i
17º Citroen Xantia Activa
18º Alfa Romeo GTV
19º BMW 318ti Compact
20º TVR Cerbera

I was impressed by the 106GTI - got close to Elise despite a weight penalty. I recall from a test (could be that one) that the GTI6 was not good on track, but excellent on the road.

[anonymous-user]

A second faster than an SLR at Combe eh, any owners fancy a day at Bedford?

[Harry Monk]

scampbird said:

I was his target market. I've owned both S1 and S2 Elises. Fair enough, I'm not the driver he is, but I know what I like. And the S2 sucked donkey arse through a straw.

I underwent some driver training at Hethel. While I was there, I used to see the punter days that Lotus ran and the standard of driving was genuinely appalling. Shocking stuff. I think the changes to the S2 Elise made it a better and massively safer car for maybe 90% of all Elise customers. I don't know what your level of driver skill is but I found it a real eye-opener that so many buyers of what is marketed as a focused performance car didn't have a clue how to drive.