500 is the new 400

[fastaussie]

no one was comparing the old NSX to any of the modern cars, not sure what you're talking about? it's the new NSX we're obviously talking about, and the fact that all of the new cars from everyone else are just as practical, reliable, comfortable, luxurious, etc. as this next model from Acura/Honda should be.

no one is wanting the new NSX to sell in massive 'Ford Mustang' numbers either. again, not the point.

I'm presuming you've never driven the Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo, McLaren MP4 or Ferrari 458 just to name a few? these cars are all as well rounded as anything on the road in the category, certainly including the old NSX. they're supremely easy to drive under any conditions, road or track. very easier to get in and out of, very comfortable, etc. my Mum could easily drive any of the aforementioned cars above around town no worries.

I think all that people are saying, is simply, they hope Acura/Honda will get off their arse and make the car all that it can be. it is a performance car, quite an expensive one. it has to perform...

 

[N Spec]

no one was comparing the old NSX to any of the modern cars, not sure what you're talking about? it's the new NSX we're obviously talking about, and the fact that all of the new cars from everyone else are just as practical, reliable, comfortable, luxurious, etc. as this next model from Acura/Honda should be.

no one is wanting the new NSX to sell in massive 'Ford Mustang' numbers either. again, not the point.

I'm presuming you've never driven the Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo, McLaren MP4 or Ferrari 458 just to name a few? these cars are all as well rounded as anything on the road in the category, certainly including the old NSX. they're supremely easy to drive under any conditions, road or track. very easier to get in and out of, very comfortable, etc. my Mum could easily drive any of the aforementioned cars above around town no worries.

I think all that people are saying, is simply, they hope Acura/Honda will get off their arse and make the car all that it can be. it is a performance car, quite an expensive one. it has to perform...

To say all expensive 500 hp+ modern cars meets a certain level of refinement, luxury, practicality and exoticness* would be a low standard blanket statement.

I've only driven the 911 turbo. The other's I've had intimate inspections of the details, but never driven. Four car you've mentioned are rather refined, luxurious and practical even. However:

*Audi R8 - It is exotic enough by number, and nicely built, but the looks are a hit or miss for people. The original, the Gallardo, looks better IMO with the leaner stance and I'm sure the majority of people who compare the R8 with other exotics will say the same. Performance levels are also not top tier.

*911 Turbo - It's not exotic. The stance has never been lean enough either, even if it's a rather light car. I don't care what anyone says. Selling 20,000-30,000 911 chassis a year make this sports car a best seller, not exotic. It's an expensive EVO Lancer or STI WRX in coupe form with 2 extra cylinders. Aside from that, yes, it's better built than the Corvette and performs just as well if not better, along with the levels of practicality. Holds value a little better, but nothing spectacular.

*McLaren MP4 - Very exotic and the performance is definitely there. Build quality is definitely not better than Ferrari or Honda tho and the depreciation value shows this.

*Ferrari 458 - I have nothing bad to say about this car. A little more ass please, and more affordability? Lol. It's the cream of the crop apparently.

I'm not disputing their practicality solely, but also just to be technical most 911s or R8s do not have 500 hp either. I'm disputing every single detail at once: The reliability, depreciation, price value, comfort, exotic appeal, build quality, etc.

Case in point. I NEVER said the new NSX was the Only One to be truly balanced. I just asked how many 500+ hp cars are truly balanced and covers all fields? Besides the Ferrari 458, which is in another ballpark for pricing, how many cars can do what the NSX is trying to do tho? I'm not against 500 hp at all. I'm just saying it's dubious to say if X car does not have 500 hp, then X car will not be able to hang with the big boys. The GTR already laid that myth to rest at its introduction, and again, it weighs ~500 lbs more than the average sports car.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope Honda feels the pressure tho. It's interesting to see all of this fuss over a car with no announced specs yet. You will know that Honda makes the best engines out of the big three in Japan, especially if you have extensively owned a 90s sports car or two from Nissan, Toyota and Honda. If Nissan can make the competition sweat with the megazoid GTR at 485 hp and now 545, then I don't see how Honda with their superior engineering cannot deliver a superior car with an already smaller/lighter/better looking chassis.

 

[fastaussie]

I think the majority of car enthusiasts would disagree with you and consider those four vehicles to be well and truly in the realm of exotic cars. I've driven all of these cars, quite extensively, and they all exhibit incredible levels of refinement, luxury, and practicality on the street, and barking mad mental behaviour when set loose on the race track. each of these cars also have well in excess of 500 horsepower. i was specific about saying 911 Turbo S, but not about saying R8 V10, which now makes 550. the Porsche 560. the 458 has between 562 and 597 horsepower depending on the model, the MP4 almost 620.

it seems as though a lot of previous NSX owners on this forum now have 911's and R8's in their garages. and there is a lot of positive opinions of those cars. your opinions seem very biased towards the NSX (naturally), and also rather uninformed. everybody wants the NSX to be awesome in every way, but don't under estimate the competition. the Supercar landscape is not like it was in 1990...

 

[N Spec]

I think the majority of car enthusiasts would disagree with you and consider those four vehicles to be well and truly in the realm of exotic cars. I've driven all of these cars, quite extensively, and they all exhibit incredible levels of refinement, luxury, and practicality on the street, and barking mad mental behaviour when set loose on the race track. each of these cars also have well in excess of 500 horsepower. i was specific about saying 911 Turbo S, but not about saying R8 V10, which now makes 550. the Porsche 560. the 458 has between 562 and 597 horsepower depending on the model, the MP4 almost 620.

it seems as though a lot of previous NSX owners on this forum now have 911's and R8's in their garages. and there is a lot of positive opinions of those cars. your opinions seem very biased towards the NSX (naturally), and also rather uninformed. everybody wants the NSX to be awesome in every way, but don't under estimate the competition. the Supercar landscape is not like it was in 1990...

Most R8s are V8 and most 911s are not top performers. You can't call a 911 exotic when Porsche is churning out 30,000 of them a year. That goes against the whole idea of being exotic. The 370Z sells about 30,000 cars a year in the US also. Think about how abundant those $40K sports cars are.

I'm not disputing the exotic nature of the R8, McLaren or Ferrari. Don't misconstrued my words. Again, besides the 458, name a car that can cover all of the fields as I asked. Apparently we just have different views on design and build quality. I can assure you that I try to stay informed as much as possible.

 

[fastaussie]

no need to repeat myself or some of the other posters by relisting the cars already mentioned which you don't perceive to be exotics or usable street cars. it would appear that the new NSX will be the only car in the world to cover all the bases you've mentioned. so it will definitely be a huge success, no need for any of you to remain concerned... :smile:

 

[2slow2speed]

no need to repeat myself or some of the other posters by relisting the cars already mentioned which you don't perceive to be exotics or usable street cars. it would appear that the new NSX will be the only car in the world to cover all the bases you've mentioned. so it will definitely be a huge success, no need for any of you to remain concerned... :smile:

You have to remember that there are SOME here on Prime that are part of a cult that reveres the NSX, as such they have neither owned nor driven other major sports cars yet they spend their entire time bashing them without having a clue of what in the world they are talking about .

 

[N Spec]

You have to remember that there are SOME here on Prime that are part of a cult that reveres the NSX, as such they have neither owned nor driven other major sports cars yet they spend their entire time bashing them without having a clue of what in the world they are talking about .

I don't see how my critique of certain details about any car would be bashing them. I wasn't talking about about driving experience, or personal ownership. I'm talking actual details. I've critiqued various details of the new NSX Concept, but it is what it is. They are just my own opinions. I don't like the like the shape of the 911 or R8, but I never said they were horrible cars in practical senses or performance areas.

If the new NSX does not deliver when and if it's ever produced, then it does not. I'm not blindly defending it because I'm a loyalist to Honda. I'm just stating that Honda does have better design and engineering prowess than Nissan, and Nissan has set many benchmarks with the GTR. Honda's direction may be viewed as unfavorable at times, but their ability to craft a car is certainly top notch.

 

[2slow2speed]

I don't see how my critique of certain details about any car would be bashing them. I wasn't talking about about driving experience, or personal ownership. I'm talking actual details. I've critiqued various details of the new NSX Concept, but it is what it is. They are just my own opinions. I don't like the like the shape of the 911 or R8, but I never said they were horrible cars in practical senses or performance areas.

If the new NSX does not deliver when and if it's ever produced, then it does not. I'm not blindly defending it because I'm a loyalist to Honda. I'm just stating that Honda does have better design and engineering prowess than Nissan, and Nissan has set many benchmarks with the GTR. Honda's direction may be viewed as unfavorable at times, but their ability to craft a car is certainly top notch.

FWIW, the various figures and numbers that you throw around are inaccurate, for example Porsche does not sell 30,000 911 a year in the US.

They sell between 8,000-10,000 911 of various types a year (depending on model year as well as how new the car is).

Total number of 911 Turbo variants, GT3 (RS), GT2 (RS) are substantially less than the regular 911.

Just because you don't like the particular look of a car (911, R8, etc, etc) it does not mean that the car does not fall into a certain category of sports cars (high performance sports car with a 100K+ price tag that are somewhat exotic).

Seriously if you are so psyched up about the NSX2.0, do instead of just talk. Put down a deposit and get in line and buy one brand new from the dealer at MSRP when it comes out. Instead of just having these endless discussions about how the car will be better than car X, Y, Z when in fact you have neither driven nor owned most of the other cars that you are thrashing.

 

[krea.tion]

N Spec, I don't think the issue is our "low standard blanket statement" but rather your unwillingness to believe that cars these days are really as good as they are. If you look for bad things to say about a car, you will find them. No car is truly uncompromising in EVERY single category of judgement. In viewing the new NSX, people could just as easily scoff it away since it doesn't have the exotic badge regardless of how good of a car or truly exotic feeling it really is.

 

[N Spec]

FWIW, the various figures and numbers that you throw around are inaccurate, for example Porsche does not sell 30,000 911 a year in the US.

They sell between 8,000-10,000 911 of various types a year (depending on model year as well as how new the car is).

Total number of 911 Turbo variants, GT3 (RS), GT2 (RS) are substantially less than the regular 911.

Just because you don't like the particular look of a car (911, R8, etc, etc) it does not mean that the car does not fall into a certain category of sports cars (high performance sports car with a 100K+ price tag that are somewhat exotic).

Seriously if you are so psyched up about the NSX2.0, do instead of just talk. Put down a deposit and get in line and buy one brand new from the dealer at MSRP when it comes out. Instead of just having these endless discussions about how the car will be better than car X, Y, Z when in fact you have neither driven nor owned most of the other cars that you are thrashing.

I never said US. It's worldwide. Don't take it personal because you own a Porsche or whatever. I respect the posts you make on this forum and the experience you share. Don't take mine as bashing your choices. I am simply expressing my opinion. I don't like the 911's look. I love the 918 or Carrera GT look. That's just my preference.

Acura is the only one offering a mid-engine proportion and platform car that can compete with Ferrari at a "bargain" price. Ford no longer makes the GT. They should revive it again and revisit it. If GM/Cadillac made one, then maybe they would be worth a look. I'm still waiting on Nissan to make the MID4 or Mazda to make the Furai, but it looks like that will never happen. Even the Emerge looks like it'll never happen. Nissan almost never makes their concepts. Toyota is too busy teaming up with BMW or Subaru to make FR cars that they can sell in mass quantities versus something exotic.

I'm simply saying, who else is trying to make an alternative or competitive product? I personally don't like the R8, that's just my personal opinion. There's the Gallardo that's more in line with the 458, versus the Aventador which is notch a higher IMO. When and if I'm ready to buy, I'll probably look to the Gallardo to be honest. I would like to have alternatives; from any manufacturer if the car fits the bill.

- - - Updated - - -

N Spec, I don't think the issue is our "low standard blanket statement" but rather your unwillingness to believe that cars these days are really as good as they are. If you look for bad things to say about a car, you will find them. No car is truly uncompromising in EVERY single category of judgement. In viewing the new NSX, people could just as easily scoff it away since it doesn't have the exotic badge regardless of how good of a car or truly exotic feeling it really is.

You're right, it could be viewed as not exotic. But please tell me how the first gen is still commanding such high residual values, even with 100K+ miles and people will pay it. You can't say the same for the 300ZX, 3000GT, Rx7 or even Supra or Skyline GTR. There's only about ~8K NSX in the US, less than 20K in the whole world across 15 years of production. That's quite exotic IMO. All I'm saying is you guys are hating on a car that hasn't been released. Let's wait to see what the car can do and offer before we say it's a failure. I've should have known better than to get into the horsepower debate again haha.

 

[JD Cross]

This is an interesting thread.
Also interesting is most posts are from non NSX owners.

 

[fastaussie]

I don't like the 911's look. I love the 918 or Carrera GT look. That's just my preference.

Acura is the only one offering a mid-engine proportion and platform car that can compete with Ferrari at a "bargain" price.

I personally don't like the R8, that's just my personal opinion. There's the Gallardo that's more in line with the 458. I would like to have alternatives; from any manufacturer if the car fits the bill.

You're right, it could be viewed as not exotic. But please tell me how the first gen is still commanding such high residual values, even with 100K+ miles and people will pay it. You can't say the same for the 300ZX, 3000GT, Rx7 or even Supra or Skyline GTR. There's only about ~8K NSX in the US, less than 20K in the whole world across 15 years of production. That's quite exotic IMO. All I'm saying is you guys are hating on a car that hasn't been released. Let's wait to see what the car can do and offer before we say it's a failure. I've should have known better than to get into the horsepower debate again haha.

it's well documented on this forum that you're not a fan of many of what (most of us agree are) today's legitimate exotic Supercars. and you seem to consider non-Supercars as exotics also. the RX-7, 300ZX, 3000GT, Supra, etc., are not Supercars or exotics mate. no more than a Corvette is. and while the looks of either the 911 Turbo or Audi R8 V10 are not my outright favourites, I have driven both of these cars softly and hard, and I can give testament to their qualities in either category, and as performers they are both Monster Supercars, plain and simple. and at the same time, my Mum could easily drive either to buy groceries, or take my 5-year old nephew to school. the point many have had on this forum which you seem to continually miss is that the new NSX is not the only car with the a well-rounded, well tailored, demeanor. these threads in general are not wanting the new NSX to fail, they are merely speaking of the level of competition it faces. something you seem to constantly deny, as if Honda is the only company in the world who knows how to make a car. this is how I was able to easily surmise that you'd never driven any of these cars of which you constantly claim can't stand up to the standards of a car none of us have even seen in production yet. unfortunately, Honda is more typically known to underwhelm than overwhelm with their design theories. it is exactly the same in the production motorcycle world. and then there is Ducati, the cousin to Ferrari if you will? they simply build bad arse shit, no excuses. some times with flaws left in, but they are the winningest of all of the manufacturers put together in Superbike racing. and each year their sales have been 50% higher than the last for a few running now. Ferrari, seller of ridiculously expensive automobiles, made more profit last year than previous years also. once more, a no-excuses approach, and also the winningest and most revered of all automotive manufacturers. again, I think the general theme of these threads is that we all hope Honda knocks the new model out of the park, way out. instead of the new NSX being "almost comparable to the current crop of Supercars for a reasonable price." that's not a good advertising pitch in my book.

and, at the "bargain price" you speak of so often, will it even be comparable to the 458? price point or not, that is the current benchmark.

do you really think Honda only intended to sell less than 20,000 cars over a 15 year run? honestly? that was the most they could sell from their best efforts.

This is an interesting thread. Also interesting is most posts are from non NSX owners.

I personally have a '96 myself, and will be purchasing a 2005 shortly. I do think the majority at the very least have owned an NSX at some time, but have since moved on. why else would they be here?

 

[N Spec]

it's well documented on this forum that you're not a fan of many of what (most of us agree are) today's legitimate exotic Supercars. and you seem to consider non-Supercars as exotics also. the RX-7, 300ZX, 3000GT, Supra, etc., are not Supercars or exotics mate. no more than a Corvette is. and while the looks of either the 911 Turbo or Audi R8 V10 are not my outright favourites, I have driven both of these cars softly and hard, and I can give testament to their qualities in either category, and as performers they are both Monster Supercars, plain and simple. and at the same time, my Mum could easily drive either to buy groceries, or take my 5-year old nephew to school. the point many have had on this forum which you seem to continually miss is that the new NSX is not the only car with the a well-rounded, well tailored, demeanor. these threads in general are not wanting the new NSX to fail, they are merely speaking of the level of competition it faces. something you seem to constantly deny, as if Honda is the only company in the world who knows how to make a car. this is how I was able to easily surmise that you'd never driven any of these cars of which you constantly claim can't stand up to the standards of a car none of us have even seen in production yet. unfortunately, Honda is more typically known to underwhelm than overwhelm with their design theories. it is exactly the same in the production motorcycle world. and then there is Ducati, the cousin to Ferrari if you will? they simply build bad arse shit, no excuses. some times with flaws left in, but they are the winningest of all of the manufacturers put together in Superbike racing. and each year their sales have been 50% higher than the last for a few running now. Ferrari, seller of ridiculously expensive automobiles, made more profit last year than previous years also. once more, a no-excuses approach, and also the winningest and most revered of all automotive manufacturers. again, I think the general theme of these threads is that we all hope Honda knocks the new model out of the park, way out. instead of the new NSX being "almost comparable to the current crop of Supercars for a reasonable price." that's not a good advertising pitch in my book.

and, at the "bargain price" you speak of so often, will it even be comparable to the 458? price point or not, that is the current benchmark.

do you really think Honda only intended to sell less than 20,000 cars over a 15 year run? honestly? that was the most they could sell from their best efforts.

I didn't claim any of the 90s Japanese sports cars are exotic except the NSX. I specifically said the NSX was the only one.

Honda probably expected their initial 20K units run to be met closer to 10 years versus 15 years. They kept the car in production in the US longer than any of the other sports cars available from the 90s, which only lasted 5-6 years due to lack of sales.

I get it. Hp is is important at the end of the day and I already said, I should have known better than to get into another hp debate again lol. All I'm saying is that hp is just one field, even if it factors in hugely with performance.

I want it to blow the competition out too and set new benchmarks. However, it may not be all performance benchmarks like the Corvette and GTR have already set with their pricepoint arguments. I don't want to extend this debate much longer. I'm simply saying the NSX can make new benchmarks like innovation, execution, design, etc. It doesn't all have to be performance or speed.

 

[JD Cross]

I personally have a '96 myself ...... why else would they be here?

Your posts bring perspective as you have earned a position to drive more exotics/sports cars than most.
As an owner you can place the NSX in the exotic/sports hierarchy with experience.
I've only owned an NSX and have the new one on order so am most interested in learning where other owners see the new one slotting in down the road.

 

[fastaussie]

that is a question only time can accurately answer. I'd like to see it slot in at the top, but that is a huge ask. time will tell...

- - - Updated - - -

I get it. Hp is is important at the end of the day and I already said, I should have known better than to get into another hp debate again lol. All I'm saying is that hp is just one field, even if it factors in hugely with performance.

nope, you're still missing it. it's not purely a horsepower debate.

the NSX has to have the power and numbers, no question because it's a Supercar market, performance comes first.

my point lately has been that the other cars already have the speed, AND the reliability, practicality, reasonable service/maintenance, ease of ownership, ease of driving, technology, warranties, etc. and all the other attributes the first NSX had and none of the others did (in 1991). it has to compete on every level. that's what you refuse to concede, how strong the other cars in the market already are. again, time will be the only indicator...

p.s. the only thing I ever hoped Honda would do was put a 4.0 litre V8 or V10 with 400 horsepower behind the seats of the 2002 NSX. how different would the sales and legacy of the NSX have been then?

 

[dquarasr2]

I think the majority of car enthusiasts would disagree with you and consider those four vehicles to be well and truly in the realm of exotic cars. I've driven all of these cars, quite extensively, and they all exhibit incredible levels of refinement, luxury, and practicality on the street, and barking mad mental behaviour when set loose on the race track.

Anyone else find it ironic that NSX 1.0 raised awareness and set a high bar for exotic performance mixed with everyday "incredible levels of refinement, luxury, and practicality" (and reliability), and that now we are worried that Honda's NSX 2.0 will have to exceed the bar since further raised by other manufacturers ? At a "bargain" price point?

 

[Osiris_x11]

Dilemma for me on this end being that for ~$150k+, there's a good bit more A-W-E-S-O-M-E offerings available (whether new or used) at this time than there were when $30k-$45k NSX-shopping 10 or so years ago. Back then, it was Corvette, ESPRIT, Elise, and nada...

I like the new forthcoming NSX-v2, but I don't necessarily love it (yet). For many who take a foray into such a market segment, there has to be that lust and/or emotional draw to something. I feel blessed that the NSX was "affordable" for me, as if it was $60k'ish vs. $30k'ish I still would've acquired one. I was "sold" in 1990...

The ~$150k+ strata can (now) buy 12C, upcoming P13 (~$160k'ish), among many others that enthusiasts may fancy (Murcielago, Gallardos, R8s, Ford GTs, etc).

But, of-course it's not fair to compare a brand-new vehicle with more upmarket pre-owned models, both in a similar price realm. But, that's how I'm viewing it. Then again, I'm not someone who would spend $100k for BMW 6-series, $125k for a Gran Turismo, $150k for a Vantage, $175k for an SL, $200k for a DB9, etc.

Now, more on-topic...

If the NSX-v2 has some sort of "torque-fill" using electric/hybrid power for the turbo-lag and at other instances in the power-band, I believe top-end HP doesn't have to be 600hp or even 500hp. Timely torque is the key. With that said, it better be at least on par with the 458, R8 V10, et'al in terms of performance metrics considering the SH-AWD, DCT, twin-turbo, and electric/hybrid power.

Case-study being the McLaren P1, performing at a 1,250hp+ level though with less than ~950hp (combined combustion/electric output).

And my self-serving obligatory troll comment, if the NSX-v2 had swan-like/flip-up doors, there would be zero cross-shopping!

 

[fastaussie]

Your posts bring perspective as you have earned a position to drive more exotics/sports cars than most.
As an owner you can place the NSX in the exotic/sports hierarchy with experience. I've only owned an NSX and have the new one on order so am most interested in learning where other owners see the new one slotting in down the road.

the NSX was, and still is a magnificent car. the reason I still drive one and will purchase another '02 plus, the last iteration of the original model. the other reason being I cannot reasonably afford a Ferrari 458 and its $4900 a-month car payment. :frown: yep, the first time I drove one I called my bank and checked if it was feasible immediately!

truthfully, my old school analog NSX gets heaps more street cred than any Ferrari on the streets, save an Enzo or something. there's simply dozens of them around on any weekend here in SoCal, along with MP4's, Lamborghini's, etc., whereas an NSX is a pretty rare car to see most places, even here in L.A. it's massively outdated powerwise, but packs more than enough for street use. and as I commonly drive the latest and greatest Supercars all the time, my speed fix is well taken care of at the track almost every weekend. I also have a 200hp Ducati motorbike which destroys anything short of a fighter jet.

I did toy with the idea of buying a 360 about 9 months back, but decided I just enjoy the NSX way too much. and the 360 was not twice the car for twice the price, simple as that. it is a better performance car, but not miles better. and again, the NSX is a bit of a classic these days.

p.s. the photo below shows Jay Leno checking out my NSX. he pulled up in his McLaren F1, and headed straight for my car, telling me everything there is to know about the car shortly thereafter, including how it was the benchmark for his car, arguably the greatest Supercar of all time, the F1.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone else find it ironic that NSX 1.0 raised awareness and set a high bar for exotic performance mixed with everyday "incredible levels of refinement, luxury, and practicality" (and reliability), and that now we are worried that Honda's NSX 2.0 will have to exceed the bar since further raised by other manufacturers ? At a "bargain" price point?

were it not for the original NSX, modern Supercars would not be nearly as good in non-performance parameters today, full stop...

- - - Updated - - -

The ~$150k+ strata can (now) buy 12C, upcoming P13 (~$160k'ish), among many others that enthusiasts may fancy (Murcielago, Gallardos, R8s, Ford GTs, etc).

But, of-course it's not fair to compare a brand-new vehicle with more upmarket pre-owned models, both in a similar price realm. But, that's how I'm viewing it. Then again, I'm not someone who would spend $100k for BMW 6-series, $125k for a Gran Turismo, $150k for a Vantage, $175k for an SL, $200k for a DB9, etc.

I dunno about that? I reckon it's fair, I'd be shopping for a year or two old vehicle in the same price range as a brand new one. if you can (personally) get a slightly pre-owned and depreciated car for the same price as a brand new one, why wouldn't you? it's relevant I think...

 

[Osiris_x11]

I dunno about that? I reckon it's fair, I'd be shopping for a year or two old vehicle in the same price range as a brand new one. if you can (personally) get a slightly pre-owned and depreciated car for the same price as a brand new one, why wouldn't you? it's relevant I think...

Point I was trying to make was that a new $250k-$300k 12C, 458, etc. aren't cross-shopped with $150k'ish vehicles with "what-if's." It is only when they depreciate, etc. they then present interesting alternatives to those navigating that price-segment (ie. $100k, $150k, etc.)...

... and that's a dilemma that McLaren may face with their P13 (at ~$165k+) and the now-settled preowned 12C ($175k-$185k will buy a 2012 MP4-12C Coupe)!

In-a-nutshell: "ZOMG - our 12C is now being shopped-around alongside Vantages, Californias, and SLs!" said no McLaren executive ever!

 

[krea.tion]

You're right, it could be viewed as not exotic. But please tell me how the first gen is still commanding such high residual values, even with 100K+ miles and people will pay it. You can't say the same for the 300ZX, 3000GT, Rx7 or even Supra or Skyline GTR. There's only about ~8K NSX in the US, less than 20K in the whole world across 15 years of production. That's quite exotic IMO. All I'm saying is you guys are hating on a car that hasn't been released. Let's wait to see what the car can do and offer before we say it's a failure. I've should have known better than to get into the horsepower debate again haha.

Whoa whoa whoa, we are not hating on the new NSX. We are all wildly interested in it which is why we are discussing (passionately lol) and speculating. I want the new NSX to succeed as much as the next guy. The debate was only sparked because you believe NSX 2.0 can be successful without comparable power. Which, in my opinion, is not a option in today's buyer's market. Having the best handling NSX2.0 with 400hp would kind of be like having the best veggie burger in town. No matter how hard you try, it just won't be competitive in the marketplace. We live in a time where power, handling, comfort and practicality are no longer mutually exclusive. I just hope Honda knows this as well as they should and they don't skimp on any one category with the excuse of "Well we didn't focus on X because a true driver's car revolves around Y." Its just nonsense.

 

[fastaussie]

I just hope Honda...don't skimp on any one category with the excuse of "Well we didn't focus on X because a true driver's car revolves around Y." Its just nonsense.

nuff said...

 

[N Spec]

that is a question only time can accurately answer. I'd like to see it slot in at the top, but that is a huge ask. time will tell...

- - - Updated - - -

nope, you're still missing it. it's not purely a horsepower debate.

the NSX has to have the power and numbers, no question because it's a Supercar market, performance comes first.

my point lately has been that the other cars already have the speed, AND the reliability, practicality, reasonable service/maintenance, ease of ownership, ease of driving, technology, warranties, etc. and all the other attributes the first NSX had and none of the others did (in 1991). it has to compete on every level. that's what you refuse to concede, how strong the other cars in the market already are. again, time will be the only indicator...

p.s. the only thing I ever hoped Honda would do was put a 4.0 litre V8 or V10 with 400 horsepower behind the seats of the 2002 NSX. how different would the sales and legacy of the NSX have been then?

I view things a bit a differently from the new car buyer. I personally don't care about warranty or customer service at the dealership usually as I prefer to visit them as little as possible if ever. Although it looks like this may change with the complexity of the hybrid drivetrains of the future.

The other key component I am looking for is the vehicle make me feel when I walk up to it and then proceed to sit in it. I've had close inspection of the MP4-12C for example. My opinion is that it's not as well built as it could be. Even my old 22 year old NSX seemed to be put together better, just older in tech and materials. I'm sure driving the 12C beast will compensate for the details that distract me, but I have a different eye when it comes to details and design. The 458 is better made than the MP4-12C. The R8 was also crafted better, but the shape of the 12C is much more appealing to me. There is a difference between shapes and details. These points are important to me.

I'll take your word on the practicality of the MP4-12C or 458, but I never questioned it in the first place. I viewed your input on the 458 as reinforcing what I already heard. Again, there's not a huge sea of cars with 600+ hp Yet tho. Out of the 400-500+ hp cars, you can name one from Ferrari, McLaren and Audi that fits the "mold" or requirements of engine in the back, exotic in nature, etc. I would like to see more manufacturers step up to the plate and offer competitive alternatives to these cars. There are certainly not that many to choose from. Limited production "supercars" made by companies that come from obscurity or nowhere are not really streetable or proper road vehicles. Look at Lotus. McLaren is certainly struggling with this reality as they are venturing into making their own components. The 500 or 600 hp front engine GTs from Germany or UK are not my cup of tea as i said.

Regarding the PS. I would have loved if Honda could have squeezed a V10 back there, but it's not part of the original design of the chassis. We already know Honda is stubborn and eccentric with their directions at times. The NSX and Honda legacy would have been interesting and the sales would have been novel. However, the R8 did something similar, and although it is well respected among most, it did not exactly set any sales records or benchmarks. It's that car that did "ok" among the others like the Gallardo, F430, then 458 and 12C. I think people were more excited that there is a new choice to be had in this small arena.

I'll say it again though. I hope Honda can achieve a new and unique tone for the TT V6 they are making. It should sound exotic and easily recognizable as the NSX's engine and not just another turbo V6. If they achieve this, then that is a new benchmark and would be an everlasting refinement to enjoy. I mean the F355 is not that fast at all really, comparable to the original NSX in performance, but the sound enhances the experience that much more!

- - - Updated - - -

Whoa whoa whoa, we are not hating on the new NSX. We are all wildly interested in it which is why we are discussing (passionately lol) and speculating. I want the new NSX to succeed as much as the next guy. The debate was only sparked because you believe NSX 2.0 can be successful without comparable power. Which, in my opinion, is not a option in today's buyer's market. Having the best handling NSX2.0 with 400hp would kind of be like having the best veggie burger in town. No matter how hard you try, it just won't be competitive in the marketplace. We live in a time where power, handling, comfort and practicality are no longer mutually exclusive. I just hope Honda knows this as well as they should and they don't skimp on any one category with the excuse of "Well we didn't focus on X because a true driver's car revolves around Y." Its just nonsense.

No, I said it's dubious to say a car is immediately marked a failure if it doesn't quite meet the 500 or 600 hp mark. Again, if it came in at 480 hp with a lightweight chassis, then the potential would still be there for it to be faster up to 100 mph than most of the competitors and if it already has the jump at point, then the rest should take care of itself. I honestly don't see how Honda could make less than 480 hp from the TT motor itself, because, again, Honda has made better engines than Nissan and 500 hp for the GTR is not much of an issue for that motor.

We still live in a time where the choices of mid-engine supercars are limited and Design levels/direction (which is very important to me and design is different from engineering) are not always top notch and universal. We could disagree on design aspects forever tho so I don't care to debate this factor anymore.

 

[bngl3rt]

I'm pretty sure the latest (991) GT3 doesn't quite clear 500hp. Isn't it like 475?

- - - Updated - - -

I'd be happy if the NSX2 is the car you buy if you otherwise would have bought a 991 GT3 but want something slightly cooler looking and/or know in your soul you're just not a Porsche person. I don't really care if it competes with cars I can never imagine affording anyway (458/12C/whatever).

 

[Craigy]

I view things a bit a differently from the new car buyer. I personally don't care about warranty or customer service at the dealership usually as I prefer to visit them as little as possible if ever.

+1 me too. I don't care how good the warranty experience is; I'd prefer not to have a warranty issue in the first place.

No, I said it's dubious to say a car is immediately marked a failure if it doesn't quite meet the 500 or 600 hp mark. Again, if it came in at 480 hp with a lightweight chassis, then the potential would still be there for it to be faster up to 100 mph than most of the competitors and if it already has the jump at point, then the rest should take care of itself. I honestly don't see how Honda could make less than 480 hp from the TT motor itself, because, again, Honda has made better engines than Nissan and 500 hp for the GTR is not much of an issue for that motor.

We still live in a time where the choices of mid-engine supercars are limited and Design levels/direction (which is very important to me and design is different from engineering) are not always top notch and universal. We could disagree on design aspects forever tho so I don't care to debate this factor anymore.

I think in theory you're correct and I'd love to see a truly lightweight car where 480 horsepower is more than enough. However, given the fact that this car is going to have modern amenities, full airbags, all wheel drive and a dual electric motor + turbocharged engine powertrain, likely with a dual clutch unit of some sort, tells me that this car is going to be anything but light. All of these things weigh tens and hundreds of pounds, and together the car will be well north of 3,000 lbs. The 12C uses a full carbon tub and still weighs in over 3k pounds, and it doesn't have some hybrid drivetrain to lug around. If the NSX was going to be a tiny car like the F1 it could potentially weigh less, but it's going to be 3300, 3400, 3500 pounds and the laws of physics will need 500++ combined horsepower for it to compete

The recent offerings from Nissan, Corvette, McLaren have pushed all of the competition up considerably over the past decade. All of these cars have distinctive design, thorough engineering and build quality, superb performance and reliability, simply because they can't afford not to.

 

[fastaussie]

I'd love to see a truly lightweight car where 480 horsepower is more than enough. However, given the fact that this car is going to have modern amenities, full airbags, all wheel drive and a dual electric motor + turbocharged engine powertrain, likely with a dual clutch unit of some sort, tells me that this car is going to be anything but light. All of these things weigh tens and hundreds of pounds, and together the car will be well north of 3,000 lbs. The 12C uses a full carbon tub and still weighs in over 3k pounds, and it doesn't have some hybrid drivetrain to lug around. If the NSX was going to be a tiny car like the F1 it could potentially weigh less, but it's going to be 3300, 3400, 3500 pounds and the laws of physics will need 500++ combined horsepower for it to compete

The recent offerings from Nissan, Corvette, McLaren have pushed all of the competition up considerably over the past decade. All of these cars have distinctive design, thorough engineering and build quality, superb performance and reliability, simply because they can't afford not to.

well said...