Evo mag saying no new NSX too! :-(
- Thread starter comquat1
- Start date
I think it'd be a mistake. What it says to the massive and growing and influential sportcar market is that Honda can't keep up. All the while furthering the notion that Honda is an economy car specialist and is sticking to it's core competencies.
But I highly doubt that Honda would get rid of all TWO of it's sportcars. What did Sochiro say about what Honda was...?
But I highly doubt that Honda would get rid of all TWO of it's sportcars. What did Sochiro say about what Honda was...?
That is bad news. I hope it is just yet another smokescreen from honda..
It reads as if it was written the guy who wrote the Automobile article, Peter Nunn. The two article seem nearly identical in content as well as format. If it was authored by the same guy, appearing in an additional publication does not automatically make the rumor more credible.
Last edited:
Simply a smokescreen..............
This is an interesting read. Honda unveils it's "mid-term plan."
http://www.auto-asia.com/viewcontent.asp?pk=9501
No mention of the NSX/HSC. But it may be in the "long-term plan."
http://www.auto-asia.com/viewcontent.asp?pk=9501
No mention of the NSX/HSC. But it may be in the "long-term plan."
Heard a rumor the last couple of days as well from some Acura folks that the NSX replacement will go down market (back to the $60,000 price point with 3.5L still placed midship. Anyone here anything like that yet?
Basically, Honda figured they have to go world beater ($150,000 range) or go back to great all around (ala base porsche, Z06, Viper, etc.). I dunno, interesting thought though.
Basically, Honda figured they have to go world beater ($150,000 range) or go back to great all around (ala base porsche, Z06, Viper, etc.). I dunno, interesting thought though.
dnyhof said:
I heard that too. But I heard that they won't call it an NSX, but it will replace the NSX as their flagship sports car.
I also heard that a new 260+hp sportcar won't be named NSX and will be in the 60k $ bracket... the source is not bad and proved to reliable until now about all Honda products. This car won't be the NSX successor...
The same source guaranteed a new NSX for mid 2005 when we met at Geneva Motor Show in March... unfortunately now it does not seem that sure of it anymore.
I start to think that we won't see a new NSX in the next 5 years...
But I cannot blame Honda for this, the supercar market is getting very crowdy and it would be very difficult to sell a new NSX for the price of a 2-3 years old Ferrari/Lambo/Aston/PorscheTT/...
Unfortunately for many us being able and/or happy of buying the used NSX at sub 40k$ soimebody had to buy the original 90k$ one...
The same source guaranteed a new NSX for mid 2005 when we met at Geneva Motor Show in March... unfortunately now it does not seem that sure of it anymore.
I start to think that we won't see a new NSX in the next 5 years...
But I cannot blame Honda for this, the supercar market is getting very crowdy and it would be very difficult to sell a new NSX for the price of a 2-3 years old Ferrari/Lambo/Aston/PorscheTT/...
Unfortunately for many us being able and/or happy of buying the used NSX at sub 40k$ soimebody had to buy the original 90k$ one...
- Joined
- 26 May 2003
- Messages
- 201
dnyhof said:
GREAT NEWS!! An Acura sports car that out performs the NSX, 3.5L V6 that puts out 350bhp(speculating), looks the part, and can be purchased out the door(options, tax, etc..) for close to $70K. That's sounds just about right. I always believed that the NSX is overpriced. Don't get me wrong.. I purchased an '03 for $84K. When you have C6, Noble, Esprit, ZO6, 911, etc... for the same or less then the current NSX, we're all very glad that a $150K NSX didn't come out. Most of us could not afford it. I think Honda is doing the right thing. Give us a beautiful exotic that out performs the C6/NSK/Elise for under $70. WOW!!! I'll buy it!!
Look what Lotus did with the Elise... $39K exotic that out performs most Ferraries...
Keep up the great work HONDA!!
Well, the 1991 NSX cost 60K, so if they can get a new car close to 70K, that would be pretty good. 350 HP I guess would compete with the 997 carerra S?
NetViper said:
Which are becoming cheaper and cheaper every day (used). The 911 is looking more and more attractive if no HSC
NetViper said:
$60K in 1991 is not the same as $60K today.
Im surprised that anyone who actually bought an 03 would be happy to see Honda release a superior performing car, based on modern technology, that looks the part, for $18k less.
This would render the NSX essentially valueless and would be a clarion call to brands like Porsche and Ferrari that understand the value of maintaining ownership loyalty.
I would be really, really shocked to see Honda do this, but if they did, I would certainly not be interested. You just don't do that to the elite minority of high end buyers that kept the brand alive (such as it is).
Not to mention that if they came out with a Carrera analog for $70k they will have essentially made NO progress whatsoever (since C2 performance improves with the 997).
They would be FAR better served by making a GT3 analog, keeping the current price point, and letting the dreamers keep dreaming. Anyone honestly ponying up $70k (and not spending their last cent to do it) can and will pony up $90k for a significantly better car.
They should either do that, or just drop the car and focus on an S2000 on steroids to deliver a more serious challenge to the Boxster.
Hitting some weird middle ground with slightly lower price point and slightly higher performance puts them in a ridiculous limbo where the Corvette is STILL running quicker and STILL less expensive, the Carrera is STILL at price and performance parity with MUCH higher brand power and the serious challengers like the Viper and Ferraris are so far ahead in every measure that it isn't a serious contest.
The $70k segment is dominated by high end luxury and sport sedans. It's not a good place for an actual sports car to be. You either go way low and deliver a lot of SOMETHING for a little cash ($50-$60k TOPS) or you get IN it and deliver a lot for a lot (stay in the $80k+ area)
This would render the NSX essentially valueless and would be a clarion call to brands like Porsche and Ferrari that understand the value of maintaining ownership loyalty.
I would be really, really shocked to see Honda do this, but if they did, I would certainly not be interested. You just don't do that to the elite minority of high end buyers that kept the brand alive (such as it is).
Not to mention that if they came out with a Carrera analog for $70k they will have essentially made NO progress whatsoever (since C2 performance improves with the 997).
They would be FAR better served by making a GT3 analog, keeping the current price point, and letting the dreamers keep dreaming. Anyone honestly ponying up $70k (and not spending their last cent to do it) can and will pony up $90k for a significantly better car.
They should either do that, or just drop the car and focus on an S2000 on steroids to deliver a more serious challenge to the Boxster.
Hitting some weird middle ground with slightly lower price point and slightly higher performance puts them in a ridiculous limbo where the Corvette is STILL running quicker and STILL less expensive, the Carrera is STILL at price and performance parity with MUCH higher brand power and the serious challengers like the Viper and Ferraris are so far ahead in every measure that it isn't a serious contest.
The $70k segment is dominated by high end luxury and sport sedans. It's not a good place for an actual sports car to be. You either go way low and deliver a lot of SOMETHING for a little cash ($50-$60k TOPS) or you get IN it and deliver a lot for a lot (stay in the $80k+ area)
spookyp said:
Toyota did that to the Supra when the released the Special Edition for 10K less than the previous year model. I bet they made A LOT of people very angry.
spookyp said:
I don't understand that. The S2000 is already faster than the boxster and can give a boxster S a run for its money. All of that for 20K LESS than a Boxster S. How is that not a serious challenger?
NetViper said:
That's a failure story. You don't want to emulate a failure story. There's no significant difference between the "Special Edition" and the "regular" MKIV that history has remembered. This was basically a discount program for the last few years of the Supras life to try to stimulate sales.
What you're talking about here would have been Toyota releasing a "Supra 2" that was faster AND $10k less in 1999. That would have been an EVEN BIGGER disaster...
NetViper said:
Because a Porsche is a Porsche I guess. Either that or there is something better about the Boxster because I've NEVER seen a publication give the knod to the S2000 over the Boxster...
spookyp said:
I think Car and Driver and Motor Trend have given the nod to the S2000 over a Boxster a few times. Never over a Boxster S though.
The S2000 does lack the midrange power of a boxster though, however I think the 04 is supposed to be much better. I have not driven one.
Yes, Porsche is a Porsche and a Ferrari is a Ferrari. So what? Honda makes a great product for 2/3 the price.
I should have specified the Boxster S. The point I'm making is that Honda (or anyone really) has to do a lot to overcome the built-in brand recognition of Porsche or Ferrari.
Think of it this way... It was supposedly the Honda North American divison that said they want a car to "better compete with the Boxster", right? So something is wrong somewhere...
With the current 986 Boxster ramping down, a lot of people are awaiting the next gen. This car will, as usual, generate a lot of press and interest and will see a high degree of initial demand. Why? Because it's a Porsche. That's what Honda (and any other car company entering the segment) are up against.
To beat this, they have to be a CLEARLY better performer with no exceptions AND be cheaper to capture potential Boxster buyers who are possibly open to something else.
For the NSX, the story is about the same, but versus the 911, the Corvette C6 (regular AND forthcoming C6 since the base C6 will outperform the NSX easily), and the Viper. Plus, for some buyers, the M3, M5, RS6 and various AMG Benzes.
With the exception of the RS6, ALL of those choices carry more powerful brand power than the NSX. Corvette has the Corvette heritage (and Chevy moves a LOT of those things) and the Viper has developed a "king of the hill" rep.
Honda has to do something serious to compete or get out of the game. Any halfway attempts and they will just get lost.
Not as cool nor as fast as the big guys, yet slower (by a lot) than an Evolution MR.
Think of it this way... It was supposedly the Honda North American divison that said they want a car to "better compete with the Boxster", right? So something is wrong somewhere...
With the current 986 Boxster ramping down, a lot of people are awaiting the next gen. This car will, as usual, generate a lot of press and interest and will see a high degree of initial demand. Why? Because it's a Porsche. That's what Honda (and any other car company entering the segment) are up against.
To beat this, they have to be a CLEARLY better performer with no exceptions AND be cheaper to capture potential Boxster buyers who are possibly open to something else.
For the NSX, the story is about the same, but versus the 911, the Corvette C6 (regular AND forthcoming C6 since the base C6 will outperform the NSX easily), and the Viper. Plus, for some buyers, the M3, M5, RS6 and various AMG Benzes.
With the exception of the RS6, ALL of those choices carry more powerful brand power than the NSX. Corvette has the Corvette heritage (and Chevy moves a LOT of those things) and the Viper has developed a "king of the hill" rep.
Honda has to do something serious to compete or get out of the game. Any halfway attempts and they will just get lost.
Not as cool nor as fast as the big guys, yet slower (by a lot) than an Evolution MR.
spookyp said:
I don't think Honda will ever overcome the built-in brand recognition of Porsche or Ferrari. The reason being all they make are high performance/high dollar sports cars. (and a SUV..blah). Honda makes cars for all people. A 16 y/o could go get a brand new Honda Civic but will probably never be able to afford a new Ferrari.
Such is life. I will stick with my good old reliable honda
NetViper said:I don't think Honda will ever overcome the built-in brand recognition of Porsche or Ferrari. The reason being all they make are high performance/high dollar sports cars. (and a SUV..blah). Honda makes cars for all people. A 16 y/o could go get a brand new Honda Civic but will probably never be able to afford a new Ferrari.
Such is life. I will stick with my good old reliable honda
Don't want to beat this to death, but somehow, DODGE did it... The Viper became a performance benchmark that still sits unchallenged, can actually scare Ferraris at the track, and carries exclusivity. It outsells the NSX 8 fold, I believe, and is still being developed (cool stuff like the competition coupe, the forthcoming SRT 10 based GTS, and the rumors of a 600hp edition). And lets not forget, the Dodge premiered waaaay back in 1992.
Why can't Honda challenge Dodge? They did it in 1991 when the NSX was born. The NSX of today is just nowhere near the car of the NSX of 1991. They can CHOOSE to do it again today if they wanted to.
My main point is that they should either get in, or get out, and not go half way.
If Honda does decide to go the route of mid-engine, 3.5L V-6 with 300+ horse for the 60-70,000 price point, I think it will be spectacular success. Let's look at what all the other Japanese manufacturers did or will most likely do with their sports car replacements. They delivered more or same ammount of car for less money (i.e. Nissan Z for sure, Mazda RX-8 could be argued but surely Rx-7 if it comes like they say it will, and rumers of Toyota replacing the Supra - jury could be out on that one). Everyone has complained about the balooning price of the NSX since it came out with really what could be argued as minor improvements over the original 1991 model.
We have to remember that Honda today is not like it was in the 80's and they will most likely want a profitable business case for the replacement. Not an automobile where they will sell 200 units a year in America..... I bet they'd like to see 3000 like the 91 started out as. That would probably give them some profits to make it feasible to do given how long it's lifespan will be (if it's as long as the current generation).
I dunno, just my two cents. If they don't replace the NSX with something comparable I'm gonna get the Skyline when it comes out. Well, I'd like to be to the point where I could get both actually..... I certainly wouldn't complain at least.
We have to remember that Honda today is not like it was in the 80's and they will most likely want a profitable business case for the replacement. Not an automobile where they will sell 200 units a year in America..... I bet they'd like to see 3000 like the 91 started out as. That would probably give them some profits to make it feasible to do given how long it's lifespan will be (if it's as long as the current generation).
I dunno, just my two cents. If they don't replace the NSX with something comparable I'm gonna get the Skyline when it comes out. Well, I'd like to be to the point where I could get both actually..... I certainly wouldn't complain at least.
