Why was Honda NSX not a great seller?
Discussion
Autocar 'Handling Day', oct 1994,
HONDA NSX
'A confusing car this. Several years ago this was the standard bearer, although it never had a lot of character. It still impresses with its amazingly wide power spread, swift gearbox, stability and driving ease. But the new power steering maintains the manual-steered car's load-up in high speed bends and turn-in is less than sharp by the very best standards. Some even called it ponderous.'
miles says: "handling seems sanitised and rather ponderous (possibly im spoiled by frequent contact with the Esprit sport 300). New power steering gives good low-speed manouverability but by 40mph most of the assistance has gone, leaving disproportionate weighting up in the corners - a perception of understeer before it actually happens. NSX is nowhere near as willing to turn in as MR2, and engine has a rather synthetic induction/exhaust note.
At the conclusion of the test it was put in the 'losers' pile along with Ceica GT4, 106 rallye and Clio RSI. The winner that year/day was the Porsche 993 carerra 2.
"For our money, the 911 has the most of everything: brilliant engine, huge brakes, delightful chassis, big performance, great visibility, small-car manoeuvrability."
HONDA NSX
'A confusing car this. Several years ago this was the standard bearer, although it never had a lot of character. It still impresses with its amazingly wide power spread, swift gearbox, stability and driving ease. But the new power steering maintains the manual-steered car's load-up in high speed bends and turn-in is less than sharp by the very best standards. Some even called it ponderous.'
miles says: "handling seems sanitised and rather ponderous (possibly im spoiled by frequent contact with the Esprit sport 300). New power steering gives good low-speed manouverability but by 40mph most of the assistance has gone, leaving disproportionate weighting up in the corners - a perception of understeer before it actually happens. NSX is nowhere near as willing to turn in as MR2, and engine has a rather synthetic induction/exhaust note.
At the conclusion of the test it was put in the 'losers' pile along with Ceica GT4, 106 rallye and Clio RSI. The winner that year/day was the Porsche 993 carerra 2.
"For our money, the 911 has the most of everything: brilliant engine, huge brakes, delightful chassis, big performance, great visibility, small-car manoeuvrability."
Anh said:
TomJS said:
Simple answers to the question posed:
1) It was a Honda, which has no supercar lineage, or even sportscar lineage
2) It didn't come with a proper engine (V8 or V12)
3) It was short on power
4) It wasn't that pretty
5) It had a naff interior
6) It was expensive for any car, let alone a Honda
If it had a V8 with 100+ more HP and looked prettier then it would have been a hit. But neither of those things were in place, so it was lucky to sell what it did.
Congratulations you have searched your inner petrolhead wisdom and have somehow concluded that Honda should have made the NSX to be like that german agro-barge called the 9281) It was a Honda, which has no supercar lineage, or even sportscar lineage
2) It didn't come with a proper engine (V8 or V12)
3) It was short on power
4) It wasn't that pretty
5) It had a naff interior
6) It was expensive for any car, let alone a Honda
If it had a V8 with 100+ more HP and looked prettier then it would have been a hit. But neither of those things were in place, so it was lucky to sell what it did.
It's like music really. To make lots of money in the music industry, you need a song with a weak beat, a warbling singer who can't hold a note, a basic but catchy tune, and some sex appeal. Nobody's pretending that's a recipe for good music (even good pop music) or enduring music that will be talked about in ten or twenty years time. It's what sells though. Same with cars.
Honda started with a clean sheet of paper and set about making the ultimate sports car. They probably didn't achieve it, but they came far closer than the competition at the time, and they made a car that people like me still lust after twenty year's later. That doesn't necessarily translate to sales success in a world where Cheryl Cole sells more records than <insert name of classic artist or composer here>.
sleep envy said:
jackal said:
Anh said:
Congratulations you have searched your inner petrolhead wisdom and have somehow concluded that Honda should have made the NSX to be like that german agro-barge called the 928
you sound really happy with your Anh said:
jackal said:
you sound really happy with your old skyline
Yes very happy thanks, no matter what people like you think of it.Anh said:
Yes very happy thanks, no matter what people like you think of it.
My advice would be to act like it then and stop throwing your anger around. At the moment you're just fastracking yourself to a ban. No one's knocking japanese cars or you personally and no one is saying the NSX is a bad car either so just chill fella. jackal said:
Autocar 'Handling Day', oct 1994,
HONDA NSX
'A confusing car this. Several years ago this was the standard bearer, although it never had a lot of character. It still impresses with its amazingly wide power spread, swift gearbox, stability and driving ease. But the new power steering maintains the manual-steered car's load-up in high speed bends and turn-in is less than sharp by the very best standards. Some even called it ponderous.'
miles says: "handling seems sanitised and rather ponderous (possibly im spoiled by frequent contact with the Esprit sport 300). New power steering gives good low-speed manouverability but by 40mph most of the assistance has gone, leaving disproportionate weighting up in the corners - a perception of understeer before it actually happens. NSX is nowhere near as willing to turn in as MR2, and engine has a rather synthetic induction/exhaust note.
At the conclusion of the test it was put in the 'losers' pile along with Ceica GT4, 106 rallye and Clio RSI. The winner that year/day was the Porsche 993 carerra 2.
"For our money, the 911 has the most of everything: brilliant engine, huge brakes, delightful chassis, big performance, great visibility, small-car manoeuvrability."
The Autocar 2002 handling test placed it 5th - marked down for steering, brakes and tricky handling beyond limit - it beat the 996 in that test. Maybe magazines have different priorities, or maybe the cars are that variable deoending on tyres, or maybe, as mentioned, Honda make subtle changes.HONDA NSX
'A confusing car this. Several years ago this was the standard bearer, although it never had a lot of character. It still impresses with its amazingly wide power spread, swift gearbox, stability and driving ease. But the new power steering maintains the manual-steered car's load-up in high speed bends and turn-in is less than sharp by the very best standards. Some even called it ponderous.'
miles says: "handling seems sanitised and rather ponderous (possibly im spoiled by frequent contact with the Esprit sport 300). New power steering gives good low-speed manouverability but by 40mph most of the assistance has gone, leaving disproportionate weighting up in the corners - a perception of understeer before it actually happens. NSX is nowhere near as willing to turn in as MR2, and engine has a rather synthetic induction/exhaust note.
At the conclusion of the test it was put in the 'losers' pile along with Ceica GT4, 106 rallye and Clio RSI. The winner that year/day was the Porsche 993 carerra 2.
"For our money, the 911 has the most of everything: brilliant engine, huge brakes, delightful chassis, big performance, great visibility, small-car manoeuvrability."
indi pearl said:
Interesting article here and only a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.classiccars4sale.net/classic-car-review...
Not that I am the slightest bit biased of course!!
"The manual version has been road tested at 172 mph with 0-60 mph in 4.8 and 0-100 in just 10.9 seconds"http://www.classiccars4sale.net/classic-car-review...
Not that I am the slightest bit biased of course!!
That was the (in)famous test car. Must've had around 330bhp. Wonder what Honda did to it.
NoelWatson said:
indi pearl said:
Interesting article here and only a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.classiccars4sale.net/classic-car-review...
Not that I am the slightest bit biased of course!!
"The manual version has been road tested at 172 mph with 0-60 mph in 4.8 and 0-100 in just 10.9 seconds"http://www.classiccars4sale.net/classic-car-review...
Not that I am the slightest bit biased of course!!
That was the (in)famous test car. Must've had around 330bhp. Wonder what Honda did to it.
jackal said:
At the conclusion of the test it was put in the 'losers' pile along with Ceica GT4, 106 rallye and Clio RSI. The winner that year/day was the Porsche 993 carerra 2.
And at this point you can safely disregard the entire article, as any right minded person would realise that an article which puts a Celica GT4, 106 Rallye and an NSX in the 'losers' pile is clearly not worth the paper it's printed on!P-Jay said:
'underpowered' AFAIK they had pretty competitive power/weight ratios at the time, the Japanese gentleman’s agreement limiting power to 276bhp (from memory) really hurt in the pub bore stakes though because no one really cared about Power to weight or weight in general back in the early 90's it was power.
If you were lucky enough in 1992 to be walking about with £50-£60k or whatever it was in your back pocket to spend on a Car.
I guess they could have done a Lexus and rebranded it and sold a few more
Three things. If you were lucky enough in 1992 to be walking about with £50-£60k or whatever it was in your back pocket to spend on a Car.
I guess they could have done a Lexus and rebranded it and sold a few more
The NSx was light, and mid engined, and had big rear tyres. It put the power down well and was geared well for a low 0-60 time.
Power did matter, drag race from a rolling start a Supra and an NSX, the Supra will just pull and pull on it.
Secondly, buyers of this kind of car rarely go and spend 60k cash on a car. Its finance, they hand it back or sell it on after two or three years and move to a new model, the cost over that time is dependant on depreciation and its a hidden cost, but many buyers of this sort of car knew enough to know it would more value over their ownership than the porsche etc.
Thirdly, the Acura brand in the USA was an attempt at doing a Lexus and it did seem to work in the USA.
I suppose rarest NSX in UK must be F-matic targa - taking the pee at 74k new
Trouble was NSX was over 10k more expensive than nearest Jap rivals -so i suspectthey were maximising profit margins rather than outright sales
UK sales -seems after the launch hype it badly fell away
1991 125
1992 41
1993 47
1994 19
1995 55
1996 38
1997 35
1998 10
1999 17
2000 11
2001 8
2002+ 23+
Trouble was NSX was over 10k more expensive than nearest Jap rivals -so i suspectthey were maximising profit margins rather than outright sales
UK sales -seems after the launch hype it badly fell away
1991 125
1992 41
1993 47
1994 19
1995 55
1996 38
1997 35
1998 10
1999 17
2000 11
2001 8
2002+ 23+
Anh said:
jackal said:
you sound really happy with your old skyline
Yes very happy thanks, no matter what people like you think of it.Edited by Gunk on Wednesday 1st June 20:51
tali1 said:
I suppose rarest NSX in UK must be F-matic targa - taking the pee at 74k new
Trouble was NSX was over 10k more expensive than nearest Jap rivals -so i suspectthey were maximising profit margins rather than outright sales
UK sales -seems after the launch hype it badly fell away
1991 125
1992 41
1993 47
1994 19
1995 55
1996 38
1997 35
1998 10
1999 17
2000 11
2001 8
2002+ 23+
Do you have the figures fo total worldwide sales per year?Trouble was NSX was over 10k more expensive than nearest Jap rivals -so i suspectthey were maximising profit margins rather than outright sales
UK sales -seems after the launch hype it badly fell away
1991 125
1992 41
1993 47
1994 19
1995 55
1996 38
1997 35
1998 10
1999 17
2000 11
2001 8
2002+ 23+
Anh said:
TomJS said:
Simple answers to the question posed:
1) It was a Honda, which has no supercar lineage, or even sportscar lineage
2) It didn't come with a proper engine (V8 or V12)
3) It was short on power
4) It wasn't that pretty
5) It had a naff interior
6) It was expensive for any car, let alone a Honda
If it had a V8 with 100+ more HP and looked prettier then it would have been a hit. But neither of those things were in place, so it was lucky to sell what it did.
Congratulations you have searched your inner petrolhead wisdom and have somehow concluded that Honda should have made the NSX to be like that german agro-barge called the 9281) It was a Honda, which has no supercar lineage, or even sportscar lineage
2) It didn't come with a proper engine (V8 or V12)
3) It was short on power
4) It wasn't that pretty
5) It had a naff interior
6) It was expensive for any car, let alone a Honda
If it had a V8 with 100+ more HP and looked prettier then it would have been a hit. But neither of those things were in place, so it was lucky to sell what it did.
Baryonyx said:
And at this point you can safely disregard the entire article, as any right minded person would realise that an article which puts a Celica GT4, 106 Rallye and an NSX in the 'losers' pile is clearly not worth the paper it's printed on!
Yeah does seem a bit weird. the 968cs was a loser as well.. which won the previous year ! Thats the mags for you i guess.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff