Leno says "Honda couldn't do it with the NSX..."
- Thread starter Jim
- Start date
History and heritage come with age. Honda was no where to be found when Ford was making cars. Give Honda and other Japanese car companies some time. But it is just like Leno and Stewart, as Honda gets more historical, Ford will be even older and build up more heritage.Maybe it is a no win situation.
Some of the classic cars from the old days are still great cars,despite the lack of modern technology and horsepower. Maybe NSX will be one of those in a few decades. To keep the same NSX body style for over a decade and people still buy it says something about the car. It is like retro style as the Ford GT40 without skipping out decades of non-production.
911 still looks like a 911 even with all the minor changes in body styles.Going from round to teardrop lights ,and back to round lights.
I wonder what Leno said about the NSX when it was first introduced.He probably loved it too. This article could be just a PR for Ford, so Leno to get the first production vehicle.
Some of the classic cars from the old days are still great cars,despite the lack of modern technology and horsepower. Maybe NSX will be one of those in a few decades. To keep the same NSX body style for over a decade and people still buy it says something about the car. It is like retro style as the Ford GT40 without skipping out decades of non-production.
911 still looks like a 911 even with all the minor changes in body styles.Going from round to teardrop lights ,and back to round lights.
I wonder what Leno said about the NSX when it was first introduced.He probably loved it too. This article could be just a PR for Ford, so Leno to get the first production vehicle.
I'm not buying this "heritage" concept. I don't think anybody cares how long something has been around...it has to be cool and/or high quality.
I bring forth the VW Beetle, Saab and the RX-7 for thought...all cars with a long heritage. Mazda even won the 24 Hour Lemans in 1991 with a rotary engine (the engine was promptly banned: the authorities scared nobody would/could race if such a bizarre engine could beat a piston engine...but I digress). Nobody cares much about those cars.
The Ford GT40 represents "Winner Take All". A car that beat Ferrari, every race and swept each race for years. If you were driving a Ferrari in those years YOU DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE. I'll repeat that: If you were driving anything other than a GT40, you were *going to lose* and you knew it.
Now, taking heritage into account, give it all the weight you want. It is 1968, you a driver in the 24 Hour Le Mans and you want to win....which car did you want to drive? A Ferrari that has decades of "winning heritage" or some sort of barbarian upstart called a "GT40"?
The only reason the GT40 was sold in Ford dealerships was to comply with racing rules. Which makes it more even incredible: street legal; drive to race and drive home. Awesome! Henry Ford wrote the check to beat Ferrari at any cost.
Now it is too bad that it took 40 years for Ford to remake a equal competitor to the Ferrari and Porsche.
And FWIW: Leno bought his at list price for auctioning off #11 for charity. He got #12. The first 1-10 went to the "Ford Family".
Like I said: there is room for one in my garage. I'm waiting for them to come down to MSRP. Maybe never? Then I'll get one of these CAV GT40 ; Even the Japanese want to be associated with winning American cars.
I seriously considered buying an original, but three things: the car makes an awful daily driver, the mild steel monocoque will simply melt in the ocean air and if I damage it: I've damaged history. So a modern GT40 or an accurate reproduction will suit me fine. The reproduction will be "vintage raced" since there really isn't much use for it....doubtful the wife will want to drive around in it with me.
The NSX will always remain my daily driver. I really doubt the GT is anywhere as good as the NSX.
Drew
/Who dreamed about owning a GT40 he was ten. I built my life around trying to make enough money to buy a GT40....with one rule: I'm only allowed to spend a small percentage of my liquid value on a car. Every day for 25 years I made almost every decison on "Does this get me closer to a GT40?".
BTW: It took Leno 40 years to buy a GT40.
I bring forth the VW Beetle, Saab and the RX-7 for thought...all cars with a long heritage. Mazda even won the 24 Hour Lemans in 1991 with a rotary engine (the engine was promptly banned: the authorities scared nobody would/could race if such a bizarre engine could beat a piston engine...but I digress). Nobody cares much about those cars.
The Ford GT40 represents "Winner Take All". A car that beat Ferrari, every race and swept each race for years. If you were driving a Ferrari in those years YOU DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE. I'll repeat that: If you were driving anything other than a GT40, you were *going to lose* and you knew it.
Now, taking heritage into account, give it all the weight you want. It is 1968, you a driver in the 24 Hour Le Mans and you want to win....which car did you want to drive? A Ferrari that has decades of "winning heritage" or some sort of barbarian upstart called a "GT40"?
The only reason the GT40 was sold in Ford dealerships was to comply with racing rules. Which makes it more even incredible: street legal; drive to race and drive home. Awesome! Henry Ford wrote the check to beat Ferrari at any cost.
Now it is too bad that it took 40 years for Ford to remake a equal competitor to the Ferrari and Porsche.
And FWIW: Leno bought his at list price for auctioning off #11 for charity. He got #12. The first 1-10 went to the "Ford Family".
Like I said: there is room for one in my garage. I'm waiting for them to come down to MSRP. Maybe never? Then I'll get one of these CAV GT40 ; Even the Japanese want to be associated with winning American cars.
I seriously considered buying an original, but three things: the car makes an awful daily driver, the mild steel monocoque will simply melt in the ocean air and if I damage it: I've damaged history. So a modern GT40 or an accurate reproduction will suit me fine. The reproduction will be "vintage raced" since there really isn't much use for it....doubtful the wife will want to drive around in it with me.
The NSX will always remain my daily driver. I really doubt the GT is anywhere as good as the NSX.
Drew
/Who dreamed about owning a GT40 he was ten. I built my life around trying to make enough money to buy a GT40....with one rule: I'm only allowed to spend a small percentage of my liquid value on a car. Every day for 25 years I made almost every decison on "Does this get me closer to a GT40?".
BTW: It took Leno 40 years to buy a GT40.
I thought the Ford GT was made in the Saleen plant in Troy Michigan as are the mustangs and SR7's.
"I thought the Ford GT was made in the Saleen plant in Troy Michigan as are the mustangs and SR7's."
The Ford GT is hand built at the Ford Wixom Assembly Plant in Wixom, Michigan.
The 2005 Mustang is now built at the Ford/Mazda AAI Assembly Plant in Flat Rock, Michigan.
The Ford GT is hand built at the Ford Wixom Assembly Plant in Wixom, Michigan.
The 2005 Mustang is now built at the Ford/Mazda AAI Assembly Plant in Flat Rock, Michigan.
Juice said:
ahhhh disco kandi...
great stuff.
oh yeah, i agree w/ leno
imagewise, lexus>infiniti>>>>>acura.
I guess that the integra/vigor kinda set the stage for acura's "luxury".
Also, lex and infiniti have always had big V8s. Acura had none and it prolly hurt their image.
I'm sure that lexus would have NO trouble selling a six figure car. They did a great job w/ their branding and content to the degree that it pulled toyota upmarket.
drew said:
Really? Wow, I'm impressed with your dedication and drive.
Leno is a comedian not a car authority. He COLLECTS many old vehicles, I would not really take his commentary seriously at all.
Boys, Boys , Boys!
Leno has driven and owns the finest modern cars built: including: a Porsche GT, he is a huge Lambo collector (including the latest). I believe he is more of an authority on cars than almost everyone on Prime.
Ford GT: hand built, sub 4 second 0-60, incredible handling and screwed together pretty well. How many of you critics have even been in one to judge quality.
Mine arrives this month, I have not lost sleep since selling MY NSX in Febuary.
I have been offered over $100 grand over sticker for it. I will probably take the money and get another.
Get the facts straight: " I hate Ford" does not make the GT a Pinto.
LOL :biggrin:
Leno has driven and owns the finest modern cars built: including: a Porsche GT, he is a huge Lambo collector (including the latest). I believe he is more of an authority on cars than almost everyone on Prime.
Ford GT: hand built, sub 4 second 0-60, incredible handling and screwed together pretty well. How many of you critics have even been in one to judge quality.
Mine arrives this month, I have not lost sleep since selling MY NSX in Febuary.
I have been offered over $100 grand over sticker for it. I will probably take the money and get another.
Get the facts straight: " I hate Ford" does not make the GT a Pinto.
LOL :biggrin:
Leno writes a LOT of articles on cars. Care, maintenance, restoration and fabrication. He just doesn't buy the finished product....he makes them too.
He goes so far as to reproduce complicated obsolete parts from scratch. He has two employees that work under his direction.
He also spends a lot of time with cars, spends a lot of money on them and learns about their history. If that doesn't make one an expert: I'm not sure what does.
See here:
http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/celebrities/jay-leno/index.php
Read through a few of the articles, pretty impressive guy.
Drew
FWIW: I find [good] comedians to be exceptionally intelligent and quick thinkers. Don't write them off because they are "funny", you have to be smart to be funny.
He goes so far as to reproduce complicated obsolete parts from scratch. He has two employees that work under his direction.
He also spends a lot of time with cars, spends a lot of money on them and learns about their history. If that doesn't make one an expert: I'm not sure what does.
See here:
http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/celebrities/jay-leno/index.php
Read through a few of the articles, pretty impressive guy.
Drew
FWIW: I find [good] comedians to be exceptionally intelligent and quick thinkers. Don't write them off because they are "funny", you have to be smart to be funny.
Jay is a car guy, we have to give him that. However, there is one MAJOR flaw in his arguement.
He states Ford didn't rename the car something else, Fjord or so. He states Toyota did with Lexus, Nissan Infiniti. The FLAW is, when those brands (and Acura) debuted, they debuted all new cars, as in no heritage, no history, here is a new LS 400. Lexus for instance did not RETRO a Toyota 20000GT and call it a Lexus.
Ford is doing a RETRO, the new GT (44) is a spiritual successor to the GT 40. It would make NO SENSE for Ford to badge it something else. It then would lose ALL credibility.
And QUITE FRANKLY, this car is the LAST thing Ford should have done. THey let the new Ford 500 have a anemic 203hp V-6 as its ONLY engine. Their car sales are horrendous to the people they SHOULD be worried about.
Their 2004 YEAR OF THE CAR was a FLOP. The GT 44 was an ego car for the new Ford in the Chair seat. BTW, I am NOT saying the car is sensational. The motoring press loves the car.
He DOES make a point about the "Brand" of a car. Remember 45k Toyota SUpras, Nissan 300ZXs, Mazda RX-7s and Mitsubishi 3000GTs in the 1990s? The price was wrong for the brand. The cars were sensational, but at that price, people balked and all 4 got discontinued. The NSX has always had the same problem, its adored by the motoring press but in America, a 60-90k Acura is balked at and in Europe, a 60-90k Honda is even more avoided, no matter what EVO, CAR and Top Gear says.
But if you want to mess with Jay, "Hey Leno, what is Lincoln to Ford"? :biggrin:
He states Ford didn't rename the car something else, Fjord or so. He states Toyota did with Lexus, Nissan Infiniti. The FLAW is, when those brands (and Acura) debuted, they debuted all new cars, as in no heritage, no history, here is a new LS 400. Lexus for instance did not RETRO a Toyota 20000GT and call it a Lexus.
Ford is doing a RETRO, the new GT (44) is a spiritual successor to the GT 40. It would make NO SENSE for Ford to badge it something else. It then would lose ALL credibility.
And QUITE FRANKLY, this car is the LAST thing Ford should have done. THey let the new Ford 500 have a anemic 203hp V-6 as its ONLY engine. Their car sales are horrendous to the people they SHOULD be worried about.
Their 2004 YEAR OF THE CAR was a FLOP. The GT 44 was an ego car for the new Ford in the Chair seat. BTW, I am NOT saying the car is sensational. The motoring press loves the car.
He DOES make a point about the "Brand" of a car. Remember 45k Toyota SUpras, Nissan 300ZXs, Mazda RX-7s and Mitsubishi 3000GTs in the 1990s? The price was wrong for the brand. The cars were sensational, but at that price, people balked and all 4 got discontinued. The NSX has always had the same problem, its adored by the motoring press but in America, a 60-90k Acura is balked at and in Europe, a 60-90k Honda is even more avoided, no matter what EVO, CAR and Top Gear says.
But if you want to mess with Jay, "Hey Leno, what is Lincoln to Ford"? :biggrin:
yeah, but ALL sports cars basically got killed off or did very poorly when the rx7/supra/300zxTT got killed off.At least at the time, the jap 3 offered phenomenal performance for the money. The NSX's poor success has only to do with its performance for value. Basically, all you get for your $90K for a brand new one is the exclusivisity. For some folks thats enough...
In the sports car market, its sad but there seems to be a MORE POWER is the answer struggle going on. For a sports car, just ask Gordan Murray, its about low weight and simplicity.qirex said:
The NSX was a hand built (is it?) all aluminum exotic with Honda reliability. The hp ratings were good back in 1990 but for 2005, the car will be overlooked b/c people will say its low on power.
The 996 jumped from 300 to 320hp from 98-04 at a cheaper price (base Carerra).
The NSX was part of the reason Ferrari woke up. The NSX was a threat to Ferrari. But UNLIKE the Germans, Italy took the threat serious and got ON THE BALL.
Not arguring, just talking here.
the germans woke up too!!
I bet a 987 Boxster S will give an NSX a run for its money on a track. the new 997 is totally fab. The older 996 in all its variants (gt3, gt2, tt, c2) are all better street and track cars than the present (old) nsx.
Yeah, its easy to say that the italians woke up, but you HAVE TO realize that ferrari's cost 3-4 times what an avg porsche does. So yeah, a 997 seems kinda plain compared to an f430, but look at the price delta.
Either way, its all about great cars and great driving yay?
I bet a 987 Boxster S will give an NSX a run for its money on a track. the new 997 is totally fab. The older 996 in all its variants (gt3, gt2, tt, c2) are all better street and track cars than the present (old) nsx.
Yeah, its easy to say that the italians woke up, but you HAVE TO realize that ferrari's cost 3-4 times what an avg porsche does. So yeah, a 997 seems kinda plain compared to an f430, but look at the price delta.
Either way, its all about great cars and great driving yay?
Anybody with a 26 inch chin that can make 800 million dollars a year pretending to be funny is the anti-christ and thusly must know what he's talking about.
Good point about the Germans waking up but I think more so Lexus and to a lesser extent Infiniti waking up Benz/BMW/Audi.qirex said:
With Porsche the 911 was always improving and always getting more and more power in the 80s and 90s. Porsche never stayed stagnant with the 911.
Well... maybe give the GT-40 owners five years, and see how those "I'd rather have the Ford than the Lambo" guys are doing?
If history is any idication, we may be able to pick up a GT-40 for about $30k in 2010. Probably not...but who knows.
I, for one, think it is rediculous to prefer a Ford GT over a Lambo or Enzo... Unless it was a '66 model or so.
Nevertheless, for $150k I can think of plenty of cars I would rather have.
If history is any idication, we may be able to pick up a GT-40 for about $30k in 2010. Probably not...but who knows.
I, for one, think it is rediculous to prefer a Ford GT over a Lambo or Enzo... Unless it was a '66 model or so.
Nevertheless, for $150k I can think of plenty of cars I would rather have.
Well, previous to that article, I thought he was a car guy. Now he's just ignorant to the NSX experience. Nobody can deny that the NSX was and still is a great car. I never get tired of looking at them. When I FINALLY get one, I'll probably camp out in the garage for a month or so just soaking it up!
BTW, If anyone knows of a good project NSX that a guy could pick up for a steal....let me know.
Barn
BTW, If anyone knows of a good project NSX that a guy could pick up for a steal....let me know.
Barn
tewills said:
Coming from a younger generation (Suppsedely I'm generation X and I'm 33 years old) I would say the younger guys will always opt for the Ferrari or Lamborghini vs the Ford GT. You see, guys like me don't care about history. We care about what is good today :biggrin: No doubt the Ford GT is a great car, but the Ferrari and Lamborghini is still what we as kids dreamed about and not a Ford. Now I can see it from the older generation and baby boomers side where they grew up in the Muscle Car era and maybe all those memories and emotions are moreso attached to the Ford than an Italian exotic. I can almost see people wanted the Ford GT over an 360 or Gallardo, but over an Enzo and Mercialago?
>You see, guys like me don't care about history.
Stipulate point #1
>We care about what is good today No doubt the Ford GT is a great car,
It is, stipulate point #2.
>but the Ferrari and Lamborghini is still what we as kids dreamed about
That would be the PAST. See your recently made point #1.
>and not a Ford.
Never dreamed of the Ford Mustang? Not even the 64,65,66,67,68 or 69 Ford Mustang? Maybe you've dreamed of the Shelby Mustang of the same years?
Interesting, because the GT40 was developed and raced in that same exact time period.
>Now I can see it from the older generation and baby boomers side where >they grew up in the Muscle Car era and maybe all those memories
My beloved 65 Mustang was built before I was born. People would come up to me an asked me "if I was the original owner". Must be these same people.
BTW: See point #2...buying the "best car".
> and emotions are moreso attached to the Ford than an Italian exotic.
Victims of better marketing? Besides Ford was in the business of building "family cars".
Ford negoiated with o'l Enzo to buy Ferrari and he reneged at the last moment. An upset Henry decided to show Enzo who could build a better race car...I think the results show for themselves. (history hint: Ferrari was shut out for several years, and later taken out and shot.)
I'm hard pressed to explain the series of 4-seater Ferrari's that came out. It appears they were trying to compete with Ford for the family sedan (can't beat 'em at racing...How about 'building family sedans?). I'd say Ferrari overall beat Ford in the worst fit+finish, worst reliability and highest defects per car.
So Ferrari is linked to Ford a lot more than you might think.
> I can almost see people wanted the Ford GT over an 360 or Gallardo,
>but over an Enzo and Mercialago?
Yep. I want a GT, probably will get one soon.
Ferrari's standard $1200 oil changes and Lambo's $10K clutch jobs just might to make you reconsider. Ferrari may not support getting parts for your car either, you can wait a couple of years for your spare parts order to be filled. I hear Lambo is even worse...
Of course, if Ford never came out with the new GT, I would have an 360F1 in the garage right now. Which means I can spend my time and money on something else that I wish. I've got money-is-no-object friends with Ferrari's, they spend a lot of undesireable/down time with them. Money is easily replaceable...time is not.
Also, in Real Life you can only drive the Ferrari to certain places or it is considered rude or overly showy. Driving around a Ford does not seem to have this problem, another check in the "plus box".
Drew
/Saying all that: The 360 really is a nice car.
Stipulate point #1
>We care about what is good today No doubt the Ford GT is a great car,
It is, stipulate point #2.
>but the Ferrari and Lamborghini is still what we as kids dreamed about
That would be the PAST. See your recently made point #1.
>and not a Ford.
Never dreamed of the Ford Mustang? Not even the 64,65,66,67,68 or 69 Ford Mustang? Maybe you've dreamed of the Shelby Mustang of the same years?
Interesting, because the GT40 was developed and raced in that same exact time period.
>Now I can see it from the older generation and baby boomers side where >they grew up in the Muscle Car era and maybe all those memories
My beloved 65 Mustang was built before I was born. People would come up to me an asked me "if I was the original owner". Must be these same people.
BTW: See point #2...buying the "best car".
> and emotions are moreso attached to the Ford than an Italian exotic.
Victims of better marketing? Besides Ford was in the business of building "family cars".
Ford negoiated with o'l Enzo to buy Ferrari and he reneged at the last moment. An upset Henry decided to show Enzo who could build a better race car...I think the results show for themselves. (history hint: Ferrari was shut out for several years, and later taken out and shot.)
I'm hard pressed to explain the series of 4-seater Ferrari's that came out. It appears they were trying to compete with Ford for the family sedan (can't beat 'em at racing...How about 'building family sedans?). I'd say Ferrari overall beat Ford in the worst fit+finish, worst reliability and highest defects per car.
So Ferrari is linked to Ford a lot more than you might think.
> I can almost see people wanted the Ford GT over an 360 or Gallardo,
>but over an Enzo and Mercialago?
Yep. I want a GT, probably will get one soon.
Ferrari's standard $1200 oil changes and Lambo's $10K clutch jobs just might to make you reconsider. Ferrari may not support getting parts for your car either, you can wait a couple of years for your spare parts order to be filled. I hear Lambo is even worse...
Of course, if Ford never came out with the new GT, I would have an 360F1 in the garage right now. Which means I can spend my time and money on something else that I wish. I've got money-is-no-object friends with Ferrari's, they spend a lot of undesireable/down time with them. Money is easily replaceable...time is not.
Also, in Real Life you can only drive the Ferrari to certain places or it is considered rude or overly showy. Driving around a Ford does not seem to have this problem, another check in the "plus box".
Drew
/Saying all that: The 360 really is a nice car.
I wouldn't get all worked up about any opinion that Leno has. The guy has no concept of reality. He probably has 500+ cars. He can have or make any vehicle he wants. The guy took an extremely rare and valuable, front wheel drive Toronado and butchered it into a rear wheel drive burnout machine.
How retarded is that?
If I had 500 cars I probably wouldn't be impressed with the NSX either. Let's see. I'll drive the S7 on Monday. Enzo on Tuesday. Vector on Wednesday. MacLaren on Thursday. Ford GT on Friday...........
How retarded is that?
If I had 500 cars I probably wouldn't be impressed with the NSX either. Let's see. I'll drive the S7 on Monday. Enzo on Tuesday. Vector on Wednesday. MacLaren on Thursday. Ford GT on Friday...........
drew said:
Yes he decided to show Enzo what to do... he took out a lot of money, went to England and hired Eric Broadley, the owner and designer of Lola Cars, who designed a car based on his existing Lola GT which was V8 powered. The entire car was British designed and built. Let's give Fords ome credit: the engine was given by Ford but "Lola" tuned it.
So Mr Pinto could hire the Koenigsegg team and claim that they produced a McLarenF1 smashing supercar...
drew said:
I do agree that you have to have some what intelligent to be funny. But most of his work is written by a team of people. I do like Jay Leno and I agree he is extremely funny. I do believe he has a lot of experience with cars, my friends sell cars, live cars, work with cars, fix cars, modify cars, and they think this or that the nsx sucks also, thats great but its not like I really take it to heart.
the ford gt40 is an awesome car, dont get me wrong. I love all cars regardless of the make.
Similar threads
