RE: Honda NSX: Review

[PunterCam]

Dan Trent said:

Just in case it wasn't entirely clear...

the article said:

...eager to rev out to its 7,500rpm peak, the sound channelled from an additional intake chamber and into the cabin via speaker-like exits behind the seats.....

This is NOT noise over the speakers; the duct that channels the mechanical sound from what was described to us as 'an additional throttle body' and into the cabin runs the width of the rear bulkhead behind the seats and has perforated grilles beside the B-pillar that *look* like speaker grilles. They're not though - I'll try and get the cutaway image from Honda but it clearly shows a pipe running the full width of the car with 'horns' at each end, covered by the grilles. Similar tech to that used by many others, including BMW, Ford and Porsche ( the 991 has a similar resonator system) but, definitively, not synthesised, artificial or electronic. Contrived, yes! But not 'false'.

Cheers,

Dan

Edited by Dan Trent on Wednesday 13th July 10:38

Honda will be the first to make it work, if it works. These tuned pipes just amplify a particular resonant frequency, and usually they sound ste. The Porsche 991 one was like a fking sine wave buzzing my skull - unpleasant. It is synthetic, in my opinion. You can argue an exhaust is tuned and is synthetic too, but these take the piss. Just make your cars sound better please.

[spodrod]

Dave Hedgehog said:

We live in a consumer based marketing led world, brands live on a prestige ladder. The top of the auto prestige ladder is occupied by companies like porsche and bently the bottom by the likes of vauxhall and dacia. Honda are at best in the middle of ladder.

Now for some people this will not matter, but for many when they are looking at handing over 130-150k for a car they will look at companies like porsche and mclaren first regardless of how much a technical show case the NSX is.

I understand that. I just find it strange that the same was said of the original NSX and now that doesnt seem to matter - everyone raves about it; Usability this, Senna that; its become the supercar of chopice for 'car hipsters' up and down the land, who laud how far ahead of its rivals and sneer at the folk who couldnt look past the badge in the early 90s.

And yet when a new one is released, the badge is suddenly a problem again.

[Dan Trent]

PunterCam said:

Honda will be the first to make it work, if it works. These tuned pipes just amplify a particular resonant frequency, and usually they sound ste. The Porsche 991 one was like a fking sine wave buzzing my skull - unpleasant. It is synthetic, in my opinion. You can argue an exhaust is tuned and is synthetic too, but these take the piss. Just make your cars sound better please.

I'd agree and it's something all manufacturers struggle with in the modern age, even with normally-aspirated engines, let alone turbo ones. But if it's a choice between some sort of amplified 'real' noise and totally synthetic sound over the speakers I'd say the former is the lesser of two evils. In Track mode the NSX is definitely 'loud' in the cockpit, more so than it sounds from the outside when we conducted the all important (if not especially scientific) tunnel test on the launch route. Of all the rival cars mentioned in the story the R8 is, by far, the nicest sounding. But even it does contrived popping and banging to sound 'more exciting' through the little peashooters contained within the bumper trim 'exhaust' tips.

If you don't like the NSX's noise I guess you could remove the grilles on the sound outlets and stuff a couple of socks in! Easier than skinning your knuckles wrestling with the cable connecting a BMW M4's Active Sound Design, as I know from personal experience!

Dan

[jason61c]

Turquoise said:

Put your money where your mouth is and buy one then.

Yes, very sensible.

I'm not a powerfully built ph director type. Given the cash I'd have something with a nice n/a engine.

[DegsyE39]

Hardly for the masses at 140k...

[Artey]

Terminator X said:

CH loved it, nuff said. Junior 918.

TX.

Oh no you're one if them aren't you.

[Dave Hedgehog]

spodrod said:

I understand that. I just find it strange that the same was said of the original NSX and now that doesnt seem to matter - everyone raves about it; Usability this, Senna that; its become the supercar of chopice for 'car hipsters' up and down the land, who laud how far ahead of its rivals and sneer at the folk who couldnt look past the badge in the early 90s.

And yet when a new one is released, the badge is suddenly a problem again.

Harris does not like it, and got my deposit back on one after a test drive as for me it was far to civic like to drive

[footsoldier]

dinkel said:

How much is a 570 then?

Loving the looks and the way it goes - from what I can see on the clips.

So it's 2016 and supercars look like this. Pah. Great innit? Can't wait to see a cheeck-to-cheek with the R8, 570 and the likes on a decent track.


The NSX looks good, even in Jap white.

I had 2 white CRXs and a Championhsip White Integra Type R (for 8years and shouldn't have sold it) definitely a well deserved soft spot for them..
I have a 570GT coming in September, but would definitely consider this as an alternative in future. I'll bet it's a great useable supercar that wil never let you down,

[kambites]

Sounds like they've done a decent job of what they set out to do; the question is whether what they've set out to do is actually wanted by people with enough money to buy it.

Personally, I'd far rather own an original NSX but then I'd rather have an original NSX than any current supercar.

ETA: The only thing that really interests me in the car you barely touch upon - and that's the throttle response. Does the torque-fill aspect of the hybrid drive-train actually work or does it still feel turbocharged?

Edited by kambites on Wednesday 13th July 16:14

[SuperVM]

Rumblestripe said:

SuperVM said:

I hope someone gets hold of one of these and removes the electric motors, etc. and then increases the power output of the IC engine.

Did you hear that?

That was the sound of several dozen Honda engineers going "D'Oh!"

Oh wait...

No, it was just silence as the Honda Engineers gently shook their heads. Oh. Dear.

Ah yes, you're a hilarious one.

I never suggested I thought it would be a better car with the motors, etc. removed, but I would be very interested to see how it would compare to a standard car. Did they add the hybrid element because they felt it would give the best driving experience or was it something pushed down to them from above? It might well be that the standard car would be far better than a lighter, non-hybrid variant, but I think it would make an interesting comparison one way or another.

[Quickmoose]

SuperVM said:

Rumblestripe said:

SuperVM said:

I hope someone gets hold of one of these and removes the electric motors, etc. and then increases the power output of the IC engine.

Did you hear that?

That was the sound of several dozen Honda engineers going "D'Oh!"

Oh wait...

No, it was just silence as the Honda Engineers gently shook their heads. Oh. Dear.

Ah yes, you're a hilarious one.

I never suggested I thought it would be a better car with the motors, etc. removed, but I would be very interested to see how it would compare to a standard car. Did they add the hybrid element because they felt it would give the best driving experience or was it something pushed down to them from above? It might well be that the standard car would be far better than a lighter, non-hybrid variant, but I think it would make an interesting comparison one way or another.

It's a really interesting car this in terms of debate.
You have to agree, that if this lost 300kg and was just RWD, it would be great, a driver's car...which they've proved they can do with the S2000 and Integra (but would it be noticed or in any way forward looking up against R8's etc)
Honda clearly want to replicate the "usable Supercar" label again, but do they, or have they gone too far? with a faster-Civic experience? drive by wire braking..

Adding 300kg is not good... but the 3 extra motors give instant torque more power and a level of independent wheel control that will should be (or is?) surreal.

The 918 is pretty lardy too against the Ferrari and McLaren stuff.... still quicker though.

Feel vs outright speed then?

[E65Ross]

DegsyE39 said:

Hardly for the masses at 140k...

My thoughts exactly when I read that line!

[kambites]

E65Ross said:

DegsyE39 said:

Hardly for the masses at 140k...

My thoughts exactly when I read that line!

I'd imagine it's roughly the same in real terms as the original in 1990 and I think people used the term for that? I don't actually know what the UK list price for the original NSX was?

But yes, not many people can afford to spend 140k on a car.

[MrwReckless]

Quickmoose said:

SuperVM said:

Rumblestripe said:

SuperVM said:

I hope someone gets hold of one of these and removes the electric motors, etc. and then increases the power output of the IC engine.

Did you hear that?

That was the sound of several dozen Honda engineers going "D'Oh!"

Oh wait...

No, it was just silence as the Honda Engineers gently shook their heads. Oh. Dear.

Ah yes, you're a hilarious one.

I never suggested I thought it would be a better car with the motors, etc. removed, but I would be very interested to see how it would compare to a standard car. Did they add the hybrid element because they felt it would give the best driving experience or was it something pushed down to them from above? It might well be that the standard car would be far better than a lighter, non-hybrid variant, but I think it would make an interesting comparison one way or another.

It's a really interesting car this in terms of debate.
You have to agree, that if this lost 300kg and was just RWD, it would be great, a driver's car...which they've proved they can do with the S2000 and Integra (but would it be noticed or in any way forward looking up against R8's etc)
Honda clearly want to replicate the "usable Supercar" label again, but do they, or have they gone too far? with a faster-Civic experience? drive by wire braking..

Adding 300kg is not good... but the 3 extra motors give instant torque more power and a level of independent wheel control that will should be (or is?) surreal.

The 918 is pretty lardy too against the Ferrari and McLaren stuff.... still quicker though.

Feel vs outright speed then?

Interesting debate indeed!

Not digging at any of you specifically here:

Chris Harris seemed to like it from his review on Top Gear, I seem to recall he said the hybrid bits made the car "greater than the sum of it's parts" to paraphrase.

As I understand it, this is meant to be a cut price hybrid supercar (compared to the über expensive 918 hypercar). Going without the hybrid stuff wasn't part of the initial design brief so why discuss it so much? It is what it is, it'll be up to Honda to see what fun they can have losing the hybrid for what could become the Type R.

They could certainly have made another lightweight Lotus type car, but that already exists. I'm not aware of there being that many hybrid supercars that aren't limited edition and/or silly-priced. Why should Honda build a Lotus? Much better to push the design envelope and do something new rather than follow someone else's ideas.

I applaud Honda for doing something "new" for the people who aren't on Ferrari's good books or have half a million Euro to spend on a 918. They'll get a head start on hybrid technology and development and I don't get why they should be so criticized for just that. Batteries, hybrids and electric motors are still relatively new to the car world so I can excuse them for making that stuff adding 300kgs to the weight. Things will eventually come full circle past obesity down to fitness levels again in a future product.

As a brilliant artists 2nd album I think it's great they have changed their musical style and produced something different to their past. All to easy to stick with the first albums style and get stuck churning out the same boring stuff every other year.

Regards

[soad]

kambites said:

E65Ross said:

DegsyE39 said:

Hardly for the masses at 140k...

My thoughts exactly when I read that line!

I'd imagine it's roughly the same in real terms as the original in 1990 and I think people used the term for that? I don't actually know what the UK list price for the original NSX was?

But yes, not many people can afford to spend 140k on a car.

Would have set you back £55,000 new in 1991, iirc. NSX-R GT is the one to have though..?

[Ozzie Osmond]

Well, since that's the equivalent of only about £107,000 today you can see that Mr Honda has acquired rather grand aspirations!

[dobly]

soad said:

Would have set you back £55,000 new in 1991, iirc. NSX-R GT is the one to have though..?

Only 5 NSX-R GT's were made - none have appeared for sale since they were allegedly sold in Japan. Only 1 is confirmed to have been produced. Homologation specials IIRC.

http://www.crest-mx.com/nsx_history/salesdata.html

Edited by dobly on Thursday 14th July 04:01

[dobly]

kambites said:

I'd imagine it's roughly the same in real terms as the original in 1990 and I think people used the term for that? I don't actually know what the UK list price for the original NSX was?

But yes, not many people can afford to spend 140k on a car.

In the UK, the NSX price varied over the 15 years that the car was sold, as you would expect for a car made in Japan, so subject to exchange rate fluctuations, as well as marketing forces.
The list price was up to over 72k around 2000, but dropped almost 10k with the introduction of the facelift 02+ model, before climbing a bit for the final few cars in '04 & '05.
Type T cars with the removable roof panel were a few thousand more than their coupe brothers at introduction in '95, and specifying the auto gearbox was a similar price (and performance) penalty whatever year of car.
The introduction of the 6-speed gearbox and 3.2l C32B engine after '97 caused a price and performance bump - thing is, so few were sold in the UK, that the 3.0l C30A engine is in 80% of cars, and 100% of those with an auto box.

Edited by dobly on Wednesday 13th July 18:39

[greenarrow]

I love this car...I think CH nailed it, its a junior 918....just so happy to see Honda getting its mojo back and wish it would introduce some more models.
A new S2000 would be a start....

There's been a lot of negativity over this car and for me the only negative was its lap time on Top Gear. I just expected more than a 1 min 18 lap...seeing as the MP4-12C knocked out a 2 sec quicker lap 5 years ago.

Chris Harris was never an original NSX fan and we all know he loves his Porsches so when he raves about what a great car the new NSX is, I think people need to take notice

[dobly]

The new car is interesting - Honda are trying to come up with a more intelligent solution to the performance versus emissions debate. As turbocharging is a requirement to achieve a certain level of both, the downside (lag) has been overcome by the use of electric motors, and furthermore additional electric motors have been implemented to overcome the balance effects and weight penalties caused by the need for a battery pack.
Would an NSX without electric motors be desirable in 2016? In my opinion no, as they did this so well back in the day. Why stay still, when there is always progress (not merely change) to be made?
Would an all-electric NSX be desirable? In my opinion no, because it wouldn't be an NSX, but to have the instant power of electric motors more than fill the gaps left by turbocharging is the way forward, especially if the goal is to have great balance and feel on the road. That said, an all electric sports Honda must be on a drawing board somewhere.
I won't be diving into buy this version of the NSX, as I'm more than happy with my turn of the century Type S, but I am keen to see what they do next.