Edmunds 2002 NSX review

[NUK3M]

I predicted this didnt i?

Any idiot could have seen it coming, except for the wigs at H.

Come on lets face it, making a big stir out of a poorly done refresh was asking for the wrong attention. I think this comes down to plain F#Cking arrogance displayed by whoever at H.

Hopefully they have learnt a lesson - though i doubt it.

IMO they might as well bring back the prelude with iVTEC V6 and give the world a real (no going half way)V10 supercar - then charge whatever they want because its an exclusive HONDA.

 

[nsxtasy]

First of all, it's not a "poorly done refresh". It's a refresh - pure and simple. If you don't like the idea of a refresh - fine. Actually, I think they did pretty well, considering that it's impractical to come up with an entirely new drivetrain unless you're going to redesign the entire car (which is coming). And apparently most folks at NSXprime agree, since the current poll shows that members are in favor of the refresh by more than two to one.

As far as "idiots" and "arrogance", pleeeeeeeeease. Get real. Remember, this is the car company that stuck with its top of the line sports car while its competitors were ditching theirs (Supra, MR-2, RX-7, 300ZX, etc). AND they're working on an all-new NSX, even though the sales of the current one are dismal. IMO they deserve our appreciation, not our scorn.

 

[CChung]

Couldn't agree with you more Ken. Though there is a several year wait on a new 360 Modena at the authorized Ferrari dealerships in my area. Like I said, they're not even taking anymore deposits! You probably can get a preowned one with no wait though.

------------------
'00 NSX-T, silverstone/blk, #252

 

[gheba_nsx]

nsxstasy,
are you sure the ratio is really 2 to 1? I think most people here like the new style only because it looks *different* from the old one and since we (crazy

) read NSXPRIME the whole day and look at our nsx the rest of the time

we are so used to the old look that we need some change.
Many work collaegue of mine, that see my nsx only once per week, like more the old design... the same for many friends I asked their opinion!

 

[nsxtasy]

Responses to Lud's poll are currently 62 percent in favor, 27 percent opposed. It doesn't ask whether people like the new one better than the old one, only whether they like it.

 

[gheba_nsx]

Ken,
I play *your* role now

You wrote "members are in favor of the refresh by more than two to one", this could really easily lead to the conclusion that you were comparing the two models, or not?

 

[NUK3M]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
First of all, it's not a "poorly done refresh". It's a refresh - pure and simple. If you don't like the idea of a refresh - fine. Actually, I think they did pretty well, considering that it's impractical to come up with an entirely new drivetrain unless you're going to redesign the entire car (which is coming). And apparently most folks at NSXprime agree, since the current poll shows that members are in favor of the refresh by more than two to one.

As far as "idiots" and "arrogance", pleeeeeeeeease. Get real. Remember, this is the car company that stuck with its top of the line sports car while its competitors were ditching theirs (Supra, MR-2, RX-7, 300ZX, etc). AND they're working on an all-new NSX, even though the sales of the current one are dismal. IMO they deserve our appreciation, not our scorn.

I got nothing against HONDA keeping the production of the NSX for over 10 years, i think its great.

I am in favour of the refresh too - but not like that my friend. why bother going to lengths with a poor 360 refresh when the sales ARE low and the next gen is 2 odd years away? i wasnt asking for a drive train and new engine blah blah blah....

I think its a poor decision to fake out the NSX thinking that it would somehow increase sales - your right this isnt arrogance, its plan ignorance and stupidity. This is reflected in pretty much every review.

 

[nsxtasy]

You wrote "members are in favor of the refresh by more than two to one", this could really easily lead to the conclusion that you were comparing the two models, or not?

Not IMO, but perhaps you see it that way. The "more than two to one" refers to the numbers in the poll regarding the refreshed version, with more than two votes in favor for each vote opposed.

 

[NetViper]

Wow, this topic sure generated a lot of responses.. time for mine.

I think the refresh is pretty nice, though I am not sure that I like it more than the original car. I also like the colors and all the new interior choices.

That being said, I am very dissapointed that they did not bump the HP to at least 310. I think if they had done that, we would not be seeing negative reviews about the 2002 model. That seems to be their biggest gripe and I have to agree. The car is near flawless except for being a little light on HP.

I consider the porsche 911 the NSX's prime competition as far as price and performace. The 911 has bumped the horsepower quite a few times over the past 5 year and is now pushing around 320. It also costs less than the NSX, so it is understandable to me why the reviews have generally been negative.

Anyway, I still love the NSX more than any other car, regardless of HP (that can be fixed with BB

). I just wish they had given it a little bump to get back in the comparison tests and talked about again until they launch the new car.



------------------
NetViper -= 100% Stock EBP 2000 Civic Si =- Still looking to get an NSX, but at least I can live life at 8,000 RPM!

 

[NSX2F1]

It would be hard to push the C32B upward to 310HP, outside revision of exhaust/header, which won't give out much. When they bumped the output to 290HP in '97, they basically bored out the C30A to the upper safety/reliability limit. I believed, the cylinder wall is thin enough as it is.

The only way to improve it quickly is forced induction, but Honda has never done it to their road cars.

 

[nsxtasy]

I am very dissapointed that they did not bump the HP to at least 310. I think if they had done that, we would not be seeing negative reviews about the 2002 model.

I think if they had done that, we would not be seeing an all-new NSX a couple of years from now.

 

[grippgoat]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:

3. There is a corollary to your analysis. You note how it will be difficult to believe that Honda can equal the performance of the 360 or 996 for much under $100K. I agree. The conclusion to be drawn is that they have a choice between (a) continuing to sell the NSX at a price equal to or greater than today's, with the likelihood of continuing dismal sales and its probable demise, or (b) giving up the performance war and selling a car that is not much quicker than today's NSX for a lower price (say $50-75K MSRP), thereby incurring the wrath of those who want it to be competitive with the best in the business. A Hobson's Choice, to be sure.

I think it's pretty clear that the S2000 is intended to go after the low road, and it's doing it quite well. However, I do think there'd be a definite market for a 3000-pound S2000-style coupe with a 300-350hp V6, with killer looks, and selling in the 40-60k price range. Of course, I definitely don't think they should call it an NSX.

I certainly hope they go the high road with the NSX. Granted, it will hurt a lot of buyers that don't have a lot of money. But I'll just do what I with my current car. I'll buy one when it's 10-years old and still a killer car, at a great price. Until then a super-charger will take care of the power problems.

-Mike

 

[gheba_nsx]

nsxtasy,
I think that what you wrote can be read in both ways... anyway IMO even if two third of the NSXPRIME readers like the new look (I am still undecided) I prefer the old look for sure!

About the fact that a "tasty" look upgrade (bigger wheels, better/lower suspension, some minor mod, ... like when Porsche modified the 1990 Carrera into the 993 that basically was the same car, not like the 996 that is a completely new one) and a bigger engine would have not needed a completely redesigned nsx I agree, but who would have needed it? As I wrote before a 350 hp bigger displacement redesigned engine would have been enough, not?

 

[NetViper]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:

I think if they had done that, we would not be seeing an all-new NSX a couple of years from now.[/B]

I think even a bump to just 300 HP would have stopped a lot of complaints. If the new car is indeed going to be a V8 with 400+ HP, I don't see why a little bump in the current motor wasn't done. Granted, if the engine is currently the best it can be by size restraints, then I have no arguement left.

------------------
NetViper -= 100% Stock EBP 2000 Civic Si =- Still looking to get an NSX, but at least I can live life at 8,000 RPM!

 

[gheba_nsx]

"Granted, if the engine is currently the best it can be by size restraints, then I have no arguement left." -> I would be willing to loose 50% of the trunk in order to have 350ps!

 

[MYNSX]

Why dont they stop f#$%@#$ng around and just get with Marga Hills/Taitec and Mark Basch and "factory super charge"(look at porches turbo s's,I dont even like porche too much but you gotta admit 0-60 in 3.2 is baaad) all the cars (of course with a up-graded suspension.) etc AND CHARGE ACCORDINGLY!!

Japan great Sushi/nice people IMO terrible marketing insite on what "this American" wants.
ABC BILL

------------------

 

[MAJOR STONER]

-Great job retyping the press release by another bozo that has never even driven an NSX.

-New colors, air-dam, and lights, it must be a new car. Honda says it is. So what do we call it. 2002 NSX? NSX-2? NSX-2K2? NSX-ZS? New NSX vs. NSX-Classic. Why don't they just put the car's name on the back (like every other)?

-This update needed to be done years ago with a 340 hp i-VTEC engine. Still looks like a '87 Datsun ZX, maybe even more so now. Black chrome? How eighties!

-I always thought that "auto-up" windows were dangerous to children and dogs.

-Strong engine vs. fast engine. Should the next NSX have a V-8, or V-6 with electric motors driving the fronts? If Honda can't sell the current NSX in numbers, will they change the formula, from exotic mid-engined two seater, to something else? If Audi can make a production based car out of aluminum, Mercedes can offer engines up to almost seven liters, and Subaru can make a Porsche designed 4WD 275 hp turbo for $23K, what niche will Honda hope to fill?

 

[nsxtasy]

People certainly do seem to have a problem with numbers around here.

The tests done by the major magazines show that the current Porsche 911 Turbo does 0-60 in 4.0 seconds, not 3.2. Even the GT2 - which sells for $180,000

- only does it in 3.6 seconds. It's fast - as fast as anything out there - but let's stick with the truth.

The car that Subaru sells in the States is 227 hp, not 275 hp, and it sells for $24,520, not $23K. Based on reports I've heard from people who have owned them, it's also a piece of cr@p.

Those who want the NSX to have the performance of other $180,000 cars are asking for it to sell for $180,000. And if it does, there won't be many in showrooms, there won't be many sold, and it will be destined for a quick cancellation.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 09 January 2002).]

 

[grippgoat]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
The car that Subaru sells in the States is 227 hp, not 275 hp, and it sells for $24,520, not $23K.

Base MSRP on Subaru's site is 23,495 for the wagon and 23,995 for the sedan. And last I checked, it wasn't designed by Porsche (do people think Porsche is the only company that makes horizontally-opposed engines?)

Based on reports I've heard from people who have owned them, it's also a piece of cr@p.

Well, compared to an NSX, yeah. I haven't driven one, but everyone I know who owns one (autocrossers and rally enthusiasts) are happy with them, except for some understeer (which I'd fix with suspension mods and differential upgrades... the problem is with tuning, not really the car itself).

If you compare it to everything else out there in the 20-25k range in a 4-door sedan or sport wagon, and then consider the customization options (LOTs more HP cheap, suspension tuning, short shifters, SS lines), it starts to look really good. Especially since everything else is FWD (except maybe the A4 Quattro which starts at like $26xxx). If I could afford a second car in that price range, it's the first thing, and I suspect last thing, I'd test drive.

-Mike

 

[nsxtasy]

Base MSRP on Subaru's site is 23,495 for the wagon and 23,995 for the sedan.

Plus $525 transportation charge.

One of our local NSX/ITR/S2000 owners (also a rally driver) had a WRX wagon. He hated the suspension, hated the brakes, and had a number of problems with it (things that needed to be fixed). He sold it after putting only 800 miles on it.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 09 January 2002).]

 

[ncdogdoc]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
I am very dissapointed that they did not bump the HP to at least 310. I think if they had done that, we would not be seeing negative reviews about the 2002 model.

I think if they had done that, we would not be seeing an all-new NSX a couple of years from now.

Then why do anything for 2? years. Even if the "new" model comes out in 2004 as a 2005 model, then Honda would have spent this money to "improve?" a really great car just to scrap it in 24 months. Has me worried about when and if the next model will happen. If it had not been for P.D. Cunningham saying his cost no object car would be a McLaren or a 2004 NSX, I would really believe nothing is coming out any time soon.

------------------
Gary Yates
1995 Red/Tan

 

[Lud]

I would not worry too much based on the refresh... It is not uncommon for Honda to refresh a model just a couple years before introducing a new generation of that model.

I'd worry more about the sales numbers..

[This message has been edited by Lud (edited 09 January 2002).]

 

[grippgoat]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
One of our local NSX/ITR/S2000 owners (also a rally driver) had a WRX wagon. He hated the suspension, hated the brakes, and had a number of problems with it (things that needed to be fixed). He sold it after putting only 800 miles on it.

I don't doubt that at all. But look at a '91 NSX. It's arguably under-powered, doesn't have a 6-speed, has ugly little wheels that are tucked too far under, doesn't have big enough brakes for serious track use (with race tires and more HP), etc, etc, etc.... But it's still an awesome car. I'm 100% sure that if I bought a WRX, I would almost immediately put in a short-shifter with stiffer bushings, stainless steel brakes lines, as well as upgrading at least swaybars. What makes the WRX a great car is the fact that you CAN do that, because there's lots of options out there. As for the problems.... I don't know, haven't heard any reports directly. Sometimes lemons do happen, though.

-Mike

 

[NSX2F1]

Sorry, slightly off topic;

For you WRC fans out there;
I went to the LA Auto Show, and saw the Lancer Evolution VII. It looks like a lot nicer alternative to the WRX. It is coming to our shore in January 2003. However, the Sti version of the WRX is also coming this year. Unfortunately, the real McCoy, the Sti-22B will not come anytime soon, nor is Civic Type-R or RSX Type-R.

 

[MAJOR STONER]

Just got the mag in the mail. I have seen magazines after "returning my seat to the upright position" that were more interesting. The car shots are the same airbrushed photos from the website mixed in with three factory shots from 1990 and the old NSX. Sad that Acura can't even get newer shots of the factory (in this day and age of electronic comunication and digital photography) because they are very poor quality. The article claims that the NSX began development in '84, instead of '87. It talks about the advantages of the short-nose/long-tail design and is the same stuff you heard about the F-16 inspired design. It did mention a 1500 meter indoor test-track for checking the functions of major components in every NSX.