IDK if anyone has seen the numbers in perspective but...

[95nsxtc]

http://oppositelock.kinja.com/the-nsxs-competition-by-the-numbers-1738715414

its really bad when you look at it like that... those numbers are poopoo...

And say what you want, but the biggest thing to me that's undeniable, this is a heavy ass car, and that fundamentally kills it imo

I hope, like the author says it manages some gtr magic and outdoes its power to weight but im slightly skeptical

 

[docjohn]

I've heard through social media that the car can do sub 3 second 0-60 times

 

[95nsxtc]

I've heard through social media that the car can do sub 3 second 0-60 times

Im sure it can, but so can its competition

 

[docjohn]

lol so what performance characteristic to you would set it apart from the sub 3 second crowd?

 

[95nsxtc]

It doesnt have one..? Im saying this car is going to flop and its only going to be bought by pure enthusiasts/fanboys/whatever you want to call it from the name bc the interior is blah, the car is now a FAT PIG by weight, sure its drivetrain is slightly unique but the fact that the ICE is 500 hp and the electric motors only make 70 more hp means it wont be that different... all this = bad for potential buyers who are thinking of any other model/value for their money

 

[docjohn]

I would call 3800lbs zaftig...:wink:

 

[95nsxtc]

I would call 3800lbs zaftig...:wink:

lol

 

[Valkyrie Pilot]

It doesnt have one..? Im saying this car is going to flop and its only going to be bought by pure enthusiasts/fanboys/whatever you want to call it from the name bc the interior is blah, the car is now a FAT PIG by weight, sure its drivetrain is slightly unique but the fact that the ICE is 500 hp and the electric motors only make 70 more hp means it wont be that different... all this = bad for potential buyers who are thinking of any other model/value for their money

Does anybody know why they can't just add the horsepower figures from the engine and motors? That would equal 619. Is it because as you accelerate, they produce their power at different times (i.e. the electric motors first and the ICE later)?

Combined torque would be 623.

 

[jwmelvin]

Does anybody know why they can't just add the horsepower figures from the engine and motors? That would equal 619. Is it because as you accelerate, they produce their power at different times (i.e. the electric motors first and the ICE later)?

Combined torque would be 623.

Yes you have to add HP or torque of the electric plus ICE at each rpm to find the combined peaks.

 

[kookoo4nsx]

It seems that the electric motors only producing only 70hp are barely enough power to offset their added weight of probably 500lbs including motors and battery. I imagine they would be of use getting your 0-60 times lower.
I think yanking out all the electric junk would drop the car down to sub 3300 lbs which is more in line with corvette/Porsche and 500hp from the 3.5 is plenty of power.

On the track, after a 20 minute blast the electric battery will be toast and then your hauling around dead weight.

 

[Adamantium]

I've watched video reviews where they hooned around on track all day and didn't complain about running out of electrical power. They said no overheating or brake fade issues too.

 

[Bigwave]

Nearly 4k pounds is just too high. I'd rather have a NA v10 at about 800 pounds less.

 

[Zygrene]

Nearly 4k pounds is just too high. I'd rather have a NA v10 at about 800 pounds less.

Amen. NA V10, 3000lb curb weight, Honda HSC concept styling. That's the new NSX I wanted to see.

 

[nsx_2k]

I agree with many about the weight being surprisingly greater than anticipated. Certainly, I suspected that it would be somewhat heavier due to the addition of hybrid tech, but the listed weight does seem rather high.

At this point, my biggest concern is the consistent commentary from reviewers about how the steering lacks communication. For me this is a major issue. The NSX v1 has one of the nicest views (which I'm delighted they managed to keep even with the limitation imposed by safety standards) and has a communicative, fun feel from the steering wheel. The absence of the later really bugs me for I somehow feel that it can be properly "tuned" electronically but they didn't in order to make it feel more "everyday". Some reviews state a technical reason for the lame feel (other than tires), but I'm having a difficult time accepting it. Heck they made a 3800lb do 0-60 in 3s or less, they can make the feel from the steering wheel robust.

 

[Jinks]

I think the horsepower has tons to improve on in the new nsx. The waste gates are electronic and in the hands of the right tuner could produce way more. Lots of forged steel engine internals makes for safe high boosting. Anyone here know what psi they are getting this horsepower number at? The major downfall to the nsx is the price in my mind.

 

[jwmelvin]

They are running at 105 kPa (15.2 psi). http://nsx.acura.com/specs

 

[BB]

I've heard through social media that the car can do sub 3 second 0-60 times

Im sure it can, but so can its competition

Wrong! There are no competitors that buyers are likely to cross shop who can do sub 3 second 0-60.

911 Turbo (3.2 sec)
911 GT3 (3.0 sec)
570S (3.1 sec)
R8 V10 (3.4 sec)
R8 V10 Plus (3.1 sec)

The only possible exception is the GTR, but that car's sedan like body makes it unlikely to be cross shopped.

 

[kookoo4nsx]

You're not silly enough to think batteries can last an "all day"
track session let alone a 20 to 30 minute non stop session????

I've watched video reviews where they hooned around on track all day and didn't complain about running out of electrical power. They said no overheating or brake fade issues too.

 

[clean_green]

Nearly 4k pounds is just too high. I'd rather have a NA v10 at about 800 pounds less.

Yes, it is heavier than we would all like but to put it in perspective, it's only 100 lbs more than a Porsche 918 packing similar hardware. Just tell the little lady to pack lightly and call it even :smile:

 

[docjohn]

Wrong! There are no competitors that buyers are likely to cross shop who can do sub 3 second 0-60.

911 Turbo (3.2 sec)
911 GT3 (3.0 sec)
570S (3.1 sec)
R8 V10 (3.4 sec)
R8 V10 Plus (3.1 sec)

The only possible exception is the GTR, but that car's sedan like body makes it unlikely to be cross shopped.

I have been told from a reliable source that the car in launch mode is in veyron territory

 

[Elistan]

You're not silly enough to think batteries can last an "all day"
track session let alone a 20 to 30 minute non stop session????

As long as the energy spent isn't greater than the energy regenerated (accounting for efficiency losses,) they certainly can last all day long. Whether Honda programmed it that way remains to be seen.

 

[sadlerau]

I think you guys are totally missing the point of this car!

eSH-AWD should be mind bending in it's ability to get you around a race track, or winding road. I've experienced SH-AWD on my Legend on the race track and streets, and it totally resets your parameters of what 4 wheels can achieve.

Think R35 GTR, but only better [torque vectoring to individual wheels makes a huge difference]. I've been waiting since November 2006 [the date I actually tracked my Legend, and saw the real benefits of SH-AWD] for Honda/Acura to put this tech into a proper chassis so that average hacks could get their head around the tech. Looks like it will take a bit longer. I'm sure when they do track comparisons with other supercars, the penny will start to drop.

Of course that doesn't mean they will necessarily like it any more than now!

 

[NSX2398]

It seems that the electric motors only producing only 70hp are barely enough power to offset their added weight of probably 500lbs including motors and battery. I imagine they would be of use getting your 0-60 times lower.
I think yanking out all the electric junk would drop the car down to sub 3300 lbs which is more in line with corvette/Porsche and 500hp from the 3.5 is plenty of power.

On the track, after a 20 minute blast the electric battery will be toast and then your hauling around dead weight.

I think you're all forgetting that any of the 3 electric motors can use battery power to convert to torque .. or, in regen/braking mode, they can convert torque into electrical power to top up the battery. Likewise the electric motor attached to the V6 also uses the batteries to do torque fill as needed but should also be able to work in regen mode once the turbos spool up, the RPMs rise, torque fill isn't needed, and all that electricity that's generated goes back into the batteries. Essentially you've got a gas powered generator and all the battery top up you'll ever need.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you guys are totally missing the point of this car!
Think R35 GTR, but only better [torque vectoring to individual wheels makes a huge difference].

I think the real debate will start once someone does a direct comparison test between a GTR and the NSX. Both are heavy, AWD .. but only one in hybrid with torque vectoring .. and we'll see if that strategy pays off.

The other review that will be very enlightening is when Chris Harris drives it and compares it to the 918 and P1 .. and hopefully makes a comment about whether the performance comparison ratio is less or more than the price comparison ratio .. ie. is it 50% of the performance capabilities for 20% of the price? Anything more than the price ratio will confirm that it's a bargain.

 

[jwmelvin]

I'm not sure it's all that interesting to compare the NSX 2.0 to other heavy cars. Perhaps it's the best of the fat pigs but I'd like to see it compared to a 570S, which seems to be getting praise. Two very different design approaches, each (let's assume for now) optimized in their own space. Each designed primarily as a daily-driver sports car. And comparable in price. To me, that will be interesting. But I suppose seeing how it fits into the market can only happen with comparisons in all directions.

 

[BB]

This acceleration video shows 0-60 coming in about 3 seconds, and 0-100 mph in just a little over 7 seconds. Although aren't most of these other car's stats done using rolling starts?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure it's all that interesting to compare the NSX 2.0 to other heavy cars. Perhaps it's the best of the fat pigs but I'd like to see it compared to a 570S, which seems to be getting praise. Two very different design approaches, each (let's assume for now) optimized in their own space. Each designed primarily as a daily-driver sports car. And comparable in price. To me, that will be interesting. But I suppose seeing how it fits into the market can only happen with comparisons in all directions.

As far as being a daily driver, I don't think the 570S is a good comparison. The 570S's unusual doors, wide side sills, and deep race like seats making getting in and out of the car more difficult. Plus the 570S is less discrete looking and likely has more prohibitive long term maintenance costs. And when it comes time to sell the 570S, how many people will feel confident buying your high millage McLaren without an absurdly expensive extended warranty? While the 570S may make a decent daily driver, it's likely less suited towards this task than the NSX. A better comparison would be the 911 or R8-- both cars that can be serviced at regular dealerships located everywhere.