Motor Trend NSX article
- Thread starter NetViper
- Start date
- Joined
- 29 July 2004
- Messages
- 251
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks NetViper. So much better than the original HSC. My only gripe are those ducts on the hood, the hood should have ducts similar to the NSX-R. The mirrors and the larger scoops makes it look so much more agressive. And finnally NO MORE REVERSE B-PILLAR.
Yeah. It looks pretty freaking cool. Later in the Mag they say 4.0L V8 and 400HP. I doubt that is true.
looks like a Gallardo on a Jenny Craig Diet =)
*thats hot*
*thats hot*
Late 2006, that would be cool.. My prediction would ring true and I could choose between this and The Gallardo...
I like everything except the Hood...
If the car really looks anthing close to this, you have to call it a NSX...
Is this a real article?
I like everything except the Hood...
If the car really looks anthing close to this, you have to call it a NSX...
Is this a real article?
Last edited:
That drawing is specatcular. I hope Honda really hits one out of the park like they did with the 1991 NSX.
the hood vents make no sense...they are not directing air from anywhere..
Osiris_x11
Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
Thanks for the scanned excerpt from Motor Trend! Anything NSX-related, especially about the next-gen./replacement is all that much sweeter!
I believe that sketch of what the NSX successor may look like is just an artist's creative imagination employing NSX-traits and current sportscar/supercar trends... {I personally prefer more angles, facets... indicative of actual style/design & function, not just trends and curvy-lines which seems to be design du'jour in sportscars lately!
}
(Lambo side-intakes, Ferrari F430 front-dam & fender intakes near the B-pillar, HSC canopy & stance, etc)
It almost looks like a fresher Mclaren F1 upon a quick glance!?!
Performance wise, who cares how much the final hp or torque numbers are! If it's only 400bhp from a 4L V10, yet it does 0-60 in 3.9s, 1/4mi in 11.8s @ 120mph+, tops out @ 190+ mph, EPA 23mpg+ city / 33mpg+ highway, but maintains the balance, civility, ease of a daily-driver and the reliability, dependability, quality of a Honda... ALL that at -or- below the current MSRP: hot damn! :biggrin:
For the record, I still want all my tech/gadgets/wizzardry/comfort/hi-fi stuff too! lol. . .
I believe that sketch of what the NSX successor may look like is just an artist's creative imagination employing NSX-traits and current sportscar/supercar trends... {I personally prefer more angles, facets... indicative of actual style/design & function, not just trends and curvy-lines which seems to be design du'jour in sportscars lately!
}(Lambo side-intakes, Ferrari F430 front-dam & fender intakes near the B-pillar, HSC canopy & stance, etc)
It almost looks like a fresher Mclaren F1 upon a quick glance!?!
Performance wise, who cares how much the final hp or torque numbers are! If it's only 400bhp from a 4L V10, yet it does 0-60 in 3.9s, 1/4mi in 11.8s @ 120mph+, tops out @ 190+ mph, EPA 23mpg+ city / 33mpg+ highway, but maintains the balance, civility, ease of a daily-driver and the reliability, dependability, quality of a Honda... ALL that at -or- below the current MSRP: hot damn! :biggrin:
For the record, I still want all my tech/gadgets/wizzardry/comfort/hi-fi stuff too! lol. . .
While I really like the above "interpretation" of a NSX successor, moreso than the HSC itself, I wouldn't get to worked up over a magazine conceptual drawing, unless it's been officially signed off by Honda. Those magazine drawings always pull ideas from contemporary vehicles to fill in the "blanks".
For example, I remember seeing this "drawing" of a possible Honda truck back in late 2001, and we all know what become of this idea.
For example, I remember seeing this "drawing" of a possible Honda truck back in late 2001, and we all know what become of this idea.
Osiris_x11 said:
I think those stats are unrealistic if you look at what the Z06 needs to achieve its performance figures. Lbs/HP
However, if Honda can do 2900lbs and 4.5L 450HP V10, it should have Z06 performance. The questions is, can they do that and still make it a comfortable daily driver like the current car.
Osiris_x11
Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
just my own insights!
Those numbers would be unrealistic w/ the aforementioned displacement & powerplant -IF- GM was the manufacturer. :biggrin: Jeez Dave, don't compare GM to Honda!?! IMHO, that Z06 7L+ should be making even more power!
The NSX has always over-achieved w/ it's 3.0L 270bhp & 3.2 290bhp relative to other cars w/ similar outputs. If someone would tell me a NA 3.2L w/ 290bhp can give 0-60 of 4.6-4.8s, I'd be like: hell no... So, 400ponies from a 4.0L V10 w/ copius torque would be more than adequate for a sub 4s 0-60 and sub 12s 1/4. Extensive use of composite/CF materials and advances in Aluminum/alloys over the years since 1990 should make the curbside weight even less, as you suggested! A high-revving V10 w/ 9K+ rpm's seems feasible. Also, there's the fine-tuned & properly balanced suspension along w/ efficient gearing which both go a long way to help performance #'s. Combine all those things w/ possibly a SH-variant AWD system, and some very impressive performance numbers are possible.
I use this mental equation for the high-end sportscars makers when comparing the NSX...
NSX = Other makes + 100bhp (ie. C6, 360/F430, GT3, 55AMG)
9/10 performance = 10/10 performance
It seems we're always handicapped ~100bhp yet perform 90% or higher vs. more powerful contemporaries!
I think the whole h.p. #'s thing is just for owner's ego's sake...
NetViper said:
Those numbers would be unrealistic w/ the aforementioned displacement & powerplant -IF- GM was the manufacturer. :biggrin: Jeez Dave, don't compare GM to Honda!?! IMHO, that Z06 7L+ should be making even more power!
The NSX has always over-achieved w/ it's 3.0L 270bhp & 3.2 290bhp relative to other cars w/ similar outputs. If someone would tell me a NA 3.2L w/ 290bhp can give 0-60 of 4.6-4.8s, I'd be like: hell no... So, 400ponies from a 4.0L V10 w/ copius torque would be more than adequate for a sub 4s 0-60 and sub 12s 1/4. Extensive use of composite/CF materials and advances in Aluminum/alloys over the years since 1990 should make the curbside weight even less, as you suggested! A high-revving V10 w/ 9K+ rpm's seems feasible. Also, there's the fine-tuned & properly balanced suspension along w/ efficient gearing which both go a long way to help performance #'s. Combine all those things w/ possibly a SH-variant AWD system, and some very impressive performance numbers are possible.
I use this mental equation for the high-end sportscars makers when comparing the NSX...
NSX = Other makes + 100bhp (ie. C6, 360/F430, GT3, 55AMG)
9/10 performance = 10/10 performance
It seems we're always handicapped ~100bhp yet perform 90% or higher vs. more powerful contemporaries!
I think the whole h.p. #'s thing is just for owner's ego's sake...
FuryNSX said:While I really like the above "interpretation" of a NSX successor, moreso than the HSC itself, I wouldn't get to worked up over a magazine conceptual drawing, unless it's been officially signed off by Honda. Those magazine drawings always pull ideas from contemporary vehicles to fill in the "blanks".
For example, I remember seeing this "drawing" of a possible Honda truck back in late 2001, and we all know what become of this idea.
That's the Honda Brat isn't it? :tongue:
Re: just my own insights!
I see what you are talking about. My issue would be unless this 4.0 V10 makes a ton of TQ, it will be no fun on the streets at all. The Z06 does 60MPH in 1st gear. I would HATE that with a 9000rpm, low tq motor. Unless the car has tons of TQ, it would not be any fun at all on the streets.
Osiris_x11 said:Those numbers would be unrealistic w/ the aforementioned displacement & powerplant -IF- GM was the manufacturer. :biggrin: Jeez Dave, don't compare GM to Honda!?! IMHO, that Z06 7L+ should be making even more power!
The NSX has always over-achieved w/ it's 3.0L 270bhp & 3.2 290bhp relative to other cars w/ similar outputs. If someone would tell me a NA 3.2L w/ 290bhp can give 0-60 of 4.6-4.8s, I'd be like: hell no... So, 400ponies from a 4.0L V10 w/ copius torque would be more than adequate for a sub 4s 0-60 and sub 12s 1/4. Extensive use of composite/CF materials and advances in Aluminum/alloys over the years since 1990 should make the curbside weight even less, as you suggested! A high-revving V10 w/ 9K+ rpm's seems feasible. Also, there's the fine-tuned & properly balanced suspension along w/ efficient gearing which both go a long way to help performance #'s. Combine all those things w/ possibly a SH-variant AWD system, and some very impressive performance numbers are possible.
I use this mental equation for the high-end sportscars makers when comparing the NSX...
NSX = Other makes + 100bhp (ie. C6, 360/F430, GT3, 55AMG)
9/10 performance = 10/10 performance
It seems we're always handicapped ~100bhp yet perform 90% or higher vs. more powerful contemporaries!
I think the whole h.p. #'s thing is just for owner's ego's sake...
I see what you are talking about. My issue would be unless this 4.0 V10 makes a ton of TQ, it will be no fun on the streets at all. The Z06 does 60MPH in 1st gear. I would HATE that with a 9000rpm, low tq motor. Unless the car has tons of TQ, it would not be any fun at all on the streets.
I hope they dont market the new NSX in imola orange. As much as I love the colour, not everyone does and it potentially goes in and out of fashion. They should use a timeless red/silver/black/white or pink. 
Also having seen the HSC, they dont need hood intakes (except on the Type-R version
).... the HSC looked fine - simple & concise design the honda way. Those hood intakes make it too busy. Glad to see the side intakes are HUGE!
Also having seen the HSC, they dont need hood intakes (except on the Type-R version
).... the HSC looked fine - simple & concise design the honda way. Those hood intakes make it too busy. Glad to see the side intakes are HUGE!
Re: just my own insights!
lol define 'ton' =)
i think that 400 ft/lb of torque would be about enough to snap most heads in a sub 3000 lb car =) if they go with electromotive assist, i think the torque numbers should be pretty good coming from electric motor
if the car weighed 2700 lbs, and had 500 horsepower @ 400 ft/lbs that would be pretty nasty indeed
NetViper said:
lol define 'ton' =)
i think that 400 ft/lb of torque would be about enough to snap most heads in a sub 3000 lb car =) if they go with electromotive assist, i think the torque numbers should be pretty good coming from electric motor
if the car weighed 2700 lbs, and had 500 horsepower @ 400 ft/lbs that would be pretty nasty indeed
Does anybody else find a debut in 'late 2006 as a 2007 model' to be a bit of a stretch?? You're talking about almost exactly a year from now and no test/development mules have been spotted, no firm details locked down on drivetrain, layout, etc. I wish it were possible for Honda to develop a replacement this quickly but I find it extremely far fetched :frown:
Nate
Nate
I agree Nate!!
Re: just my own insights!
NO ELECTRIC MOTOR!
khappucino said:
NO ELECTRIC MOTOR!
Big_nate said:
Well, I have to say, I cannot possibly see why it would take 3 years to make a V10. On top of that, nobody actually knows what was in the HSC concept car. It is possible they have been testing a V10 for a while.
What is even more rediculous is how Honda says it will also take 3 years to make a V8. What the hell? How long can it possibly take to make a V8? Everyone else seems to be able to do it in no time. Take 2 S2000 motors and voila! Ford did it with their cars. I can't recall which 2 motors it was though. I am thinking 2 contour motors for some reason.
Osiris_x11
Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
(2) S2K motors, mmm!
I'd agree if that was the time to create just 8cylinder powerplant. But I'm thinking maybe Honda is trying to incorporate that overdrive-supression concept in which during undemanding conditions extra cylinders don't fire, so to speak... ie. 6th gear on the highway at 75mph, possibly 2 or 4 cylinders will be inactive, therefore improving fuel economy. I'm sure such a system would require a fair amount of time to develop upto Honda's standards!
And regarding the V10 development, perhaps Honda has been on it longer than we actually know of. I don't know how much F1 racing R&D would help in developing a similar engine in terms of size (displacement) and same number of cylinders for a roadcar. But Honda's been doing the V10 thing for atleast 5yrs.
I would consider the unofficial start of the development of the V10 & NSX successor the day the Honda President said, "Ferrari killer." :biggrin:
(of-course it was well before that, but we never got any insights publicly)
Dave, I totally agree about not wanting to be at 9-10,000rpm's just to get some ooomph or mojo' while around town! Low-end torque would be heaven-sent. Honda is a bit anemic and stingy w/ torque, hence why I left that number out of my desired specs'! I'm thinking at max 275ft/lbs on a NA 4.0L V10 w/ a 9-10,000rpm redline that produces 400bhp. Of-course more torque would be welcome, lol! Now to get the 300ft/lbs+ of torque, Honda would need an electric motor in addition w/o a doubt.
Let's just say I'll have an endless orgasm if Honda makes the NSX successor w/ 500bhp, lol!
But I think a HSC'esque 4.0L V10 powered super-exotic w/ all the advances (SH-type AWD, possible elec. motor for added torque, ultra-light composite/CF materials, cutting-edge tech. for gearing/susp.) w/ ~400bhp should rival everything below $350K (sans' Enzo, Zonda, Koenigsegg, Veyron, S7, SLR, Carrera GT... they are in a different league!)
Out-dueling the Viper, C6 Z06, 911 Turbo, 911 GT2, Ferrari F430, Ferrari 612, Ferrari Superamerica, Lamborghini Gallardo, Lamborghini Mucielago, AMG's, Aston Martin DB9, Aston Martin Vanquish... now that would be something to strive towards!!! (always aim high, ehhh)
Ok, I need a cold shower now.
NetViper said:
I'd agree if that was the time to create just 8cylinder powerplant. But I'm thinking maybe Honda is trying to incorporate that overdrive-supression concept in which during undemanding conditions extra cylinders don't fire, so to speak... ie. 6th gear on the highway at 75mph, possibly 2 or 4 cylinders will be inactive, therefore improving fuel economy. I'm sure such a system would require a fair amount of time to develop upto Honda's standards!
And regarding the V10 development, perhaps Honda has been on it longer than we actually know of. I don't know how much F1 racing R&D would help in developing a similar engine in terms of size (displacement) and same number of cylinders for a roadcar. But Honda's been doing the V10 thing for atleast 5yrs.
I would consider the unofficial start of the development of the V10 & NSX successor the day the Honda President said, "Ferrari killer." :biggrin:
(of-course it was well before that, but we never got any insights publicly)
Dave, I totally agree about not wanting to be at 9-10,000rpm's just to get some ooomph or mojo' while around town! Low-end torque would be heaven-sent. Honda is a bit anemic and stingy w/ torque, hence why I left that number out of my desired specs'! I'm thinking at max 275ft/lbs on a NA 4.0L V10 w/ a 9-10,000rpm redline that produces 400bhp. Of-course more torque would be welcome, lol! Now to get the 300ft/lbs+ of torque, Honda would need an electric motor in addition w/o a doubt.
Let's just say I'll have an endless orgasm if Honda makes the NSX successor w/ 500bhp, lol!
But I think a HSC'esque 4.0L V10 powered super-exotic w/ all the advances (SH-type AWD, possible elec. motor for added torque, ultra-light composite/CF materials, cutting-edge tech. for gearing/susp.) w/ ~400bhp should rival everything below $350K (sans' Enzo, Zonda, Koenigsegg, Veyron, S7, SLR, Carrera GT... they are in a different league!)
Out-dueling the Viper, C6 Z06, 911 Turbo, 911 GT2, Ferrari F430, Ferrari 612, Ferrari Superamerica, Lamborghini Gallardo, Lamborghini Mucielago, AMG's, Aston Martin DB9, Aston Martin Vanquish... now that would be something to strive towards!!!
(always aim high, ehhh)Ok, I need a cold shower now.
- Joined
- 29 April 2004
- Messages
- 1,567
Re: (2) S2K motors, mmm!
don't forget,
Honda doesn't just supercharge an existing engine and throw it in a new body and call it a supercar (a.la. Ford GT)
I was suprised to hear there would be another NSX-type of car from Honda. I believe since they decided to tackle one, they're gonna do just that. The super-engineers @ Honda will have that thing running like any other engine you've never seen. It will still be able to drive 100,000 miles w'out a hickup. Say that about any of the other supercars, even the new [ sarcasm ]FINGER OF GOD Z06 [/sarcasm ]... you can't do it.
I'll let them have the extra year to get it right, so that I'll have something amazing to buy in 9-10 years when i have the $$$.
don't forget,
Honda doesn't just supercharge an existing engine and throw it in a new body and call it a supercar (a.la. Ford GT)
I was suprised to hear there would be another NSX-type of car from Honda. I believe since they decided to tackle one, they're gonna do just that. The super-engineers @ Honda will have that thing running like any other engine you've never seen. It will still be able to drive 100,000 miles w'out a hickup. Say that about any of the other supercars, even the new [ sarcasm ]FINGER OF GOD Z06 [/sarcasm ]... you can't do it.
I'll let them have the extra year to get it right, so that I'll have something amazing to buy in 9-10 years when i have the $$$.
- Joined
- 1 September 2001
- Messages
- 4,123
automobile.com
If you havent already heard, Honda is ceasing production of its mid-engine NSX sports car before bringing an all-new model out in the near future. Word from the Automotive Coroners Office is that its death was due to an inability to pass increasingly strict global emissions regulations, which are said to take effect in 2006. According to Acura spokesman Mike Spencer, "The bureaucrats have harpooned one of the best sports cars on the road."
Its true. Acuras NSX is considered to be one of the easiest supercars ever made for driving quickly. Its aluminum body and exotic mid-engine layout placed it head and shoulders above the offerings from Dodge, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Toyota, and Nissan, which retained conventional layouts for their Stealth, RX7, 3000 GT, Supra and 300SX respectively. None managed to offer the same balance, style or excitement, and due to this the NSX enthralled owners and enthusiasts alike.
Now those enthusiasts mourn the passing of the 175 mph Japanese sports car, a car endowed with a Formula 1 pedigree and classically proportioned design bold and brave enough to tackle Ferraris headlong. But still, not many have been at their local Acura dealers purchasing them either. Now priced at $89,000, there are few takers for the 290-horsepower two-seater that, due to not seeing more than a facelift since its 1990 introduction finds itself less powerful than the four-door RL sedan in the Honda-built luxury divisions lineup. Its also less powerful than many sports cars and sport sedans that are much less expensive. After all, it can only muster a 0 to 60 mph time of 5.7 seconds. Chop $20,000 and a full second off of such a sprint from Porsches base 911. Overall, Acura has sold approximately 9,000 NSXs in the U.S. since the car was introduced as a 1991 model, and about 18,000 worldwide under the Honda nameplate. Sales have slowed to a trickle in recent years, with June sales at only 17 units and year-to-date sales at only 121 units. In comparison, the sporty little RSX sold 2,034 units in June and 10,933 units for all of 2005 so far, and sales of this model are actually down by 4.2 percent compared to last year during the same period.
Due to the lack of interest came the need to move NSX production from Hondas small Tochigi, Japan plant, to one in Suzuka - necessary to free up space at Tochigi to produce more compact, alternative-fuel vehicles.
But despite the doom and gloom, there seems to be good news ahead for Acuras mid-engine sports car. The current cars design, while still appealing to the eyes is now dated, and when 2003s HSC concept arrived at Tokyos auto show it certainly checked all the right boxes as a potential replacement. A 330-horsepower V6 (no V8 as Honda has sworn never to build one), paddle-shift gearbox, scissor doors, and an aluminum frame with carbon fiber and alloy panels in a form that crossed NSX with Enzo (Ferrari), made enthusiasts believe that the HSC was a foreshadowing of the NSX replacement. That is, until it was announced stillborn earlier this year by company insiders, the money originally put aside for the project being diverted to the firms quest for developing gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles.
But theres bright news for fans of the mid-engined Honda: in his annual, mid-year speech, Honda CEO Takeo Fukui said, "We are now focused on the development of a new model to succeed the NSX for a new era." In plain words, yes, a new car is coming. In his speech, he pointed to a new direction, "We would like to debut a new super-sports car equipped with a V10 engine in three to four years. Please look forward to seeing the NSX successor." The claim was also backed by Motoatsu Shiraishi, President of Honda R&D, who said, "Weve got to be the top of a top [group] in producing engines."
Like BMWs 5.0-liter V10 which was supposedly derived from Formula One technology, the new V10 will draw from BAR-Hondas experience in the worlds most elite racing series. The new V10s size and power will be less than the M5/M6 powerplant, however, with predictions of a 4.0-liter engine featuring up to 450-horsepower.
Of course, the latest version of Hondas VTEC variable valve timing system will be an essential component to allow the engine to achieve the sky-high redline expected. Outside of motor sports, Honda has plenty of experience building high-revving engines. From its S2000 roadster to any number of performance-oriented motorcycles, Japans number three brand is world renowned for engine leadership.
If there is any conflict to powering the next-generation NSX with a V10, its that an FIA ruling will cause all F1 teams to switch from V10s to a V8 engine configuration for 2006, reducing the marketing tie-in to Jensen Buttons F1 car, if he will still be driving for BAR-Honda in 2006. But now is a good enough time as any for Honda to begin, or resume work on a replacement for the NSX. Since 2001, other Japanese manufacturers have been at work developing super sports cars. The Nissan GT-R Concept, a harbinger of the next generation GT-R supercar will most likely arrive in 2007 as an Infiniti, while this years Lexus LF-A concept could be a reality as early as next year.
As for the NSX replacement, expect to see something as soon as 2008, with an expected price-tag between $80,000 and $100,000, putting it nose to nose with global high-performance competition. All things considered, expect to see a rematch of the Japanese titans, like in the early 90s, except this time the NSX will be more powerful, and as a result, a lot faster.
source:
http://car-reviews.automobile.com/C...sx-successor-to-feature-v10-powerplant/1341/1
If you havent already heard, Honda is ceasing production of its mid-engine NSX sports car before bringing an all-new model out in the near future. Word from the Automotive Coroners Office is that its death was due to an inability to pass increasingly strict global emissions regulations, which are said to take effect in 2006. According to Acura spokesman Mike Spencer, "The bureaucrats have harpooned one of the best sports cars on the road."
Its true. Acuras NSX is considered to be one of the easiest supercars ever made for driving quickly. Its aluminum body and exotic mid-engine layout placed it head and shoulders above the offerings from Dodge, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Toyota, and Nissan, which retained conventional layouts for their Stealth, RX7, 3000 GT, Supra and 300SX respectively. None managed to offer the same balance, style or excitement, and due to this the NSX enthralled owners and enthusiasts alike.
Now those enthusiasts mourn the passing of the 175 mph Japanese sports car, a car endowed with a Formula 1 pedigree and classically proportioned design bold and brave enough to tackle Ferraris headlong. But still, not many have been at their local Acura dealers purchasing them either. Now priced at $89,000, there are few takers for the 290-horsepower two-seater that, due to not seeing more than a facelift since its 1990 introduction finds itself less powerful than the four-door RL sedan in the Honda-built luxury divisions lineup. Its also less powerful than many sports cars and sport sedans that are much less expensive. After all, it can only muster a 0 to 60 mph time of 5.7 seconds. Chop $20,000 and a full second off of such a sprint from Porsches base 911. Overall, Acura has sold approximately 9,000 NSXs in the U.S. since the car was introduced as a 1991 model, and about 18,000 worldwide under the Honda nameplate. Sales have slowed to a trickle in recent years, with June sales at only 17 units and year-to-date sales at only 121 units. In comparison, the sporty little RSX sold 2,034 units in June and 10,933 units for all of 2005 so far, and sales of this model are actually down by 4.2 percent compared to last year during the same period.
Due to the lack of interest came the need to move NSX production from Hondas small Tochigi, Japan plant, to one in Suzuka - necessary to free up space at Tochigi to produce more compact, alternative-fuel vehicles.
But despite the doom and gloom, there seems to be good news ahead for Acuras mid-engine sports car. The current cars design, while still appealing to the eyes is now dated, and when 2003s HSC concept arrived at Tokyos auto show it certainly checked all the right boxes as a potential replacement. A 330-horsepower V6 (no V8 as Honda has sworn never to build one), paddle-shift gearbox, scissor doors, and an aluminum frame with carbon fiber and alloy panels in a form that crossed NSX with Enzo (Ferrari), made enthusiasts believe that the HSC was a foreshadowing of the NSX replacement. That is, until it was announced stillborn earlier this year by company insiders, the money originally put aside for the project being diverted to the firms quest for developing gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles.
But theres bright news for fans of the mid-engined Honda: in his annual, mid-year speech, Honda CEO Takeo Fukui said, "We are now focused on the development of a new model to succeed the NSX for a new era." In plain words, yes, a new car is coming. In his speech, he pointed to a new direction, "We would like to debut a new super-sports car equipped with a V10 engine in three to four years. Please look forward to seeing the NSX successor." The claim was also backed by Motoatsu Shiraishi, President of Honda R&D, who said, "Weve got to be the top of a top [group] in producing engines."
Like BMWs 5.0-liter V10 which was supposedly derived from Formula One technology, the new V10 will draw from BAR-Hondas experience in the worlds most elite racing series. The new V10s size and power will be less than the M5/M6 powerplant, however, with predictions of a 4.0-liter engine featuring up to 450-horsepower.
Of course, the latest version of Hondas VTEC variable valve timing system will be an essential component to allow the engine to achieve the sky-high redline expected. Outside of motor sports, Honda has plenty of experience building high-revving engines. From its S2000 roadster to any number of performance-oriented motorcycles, Japans number three brand is world renowned for engine leadership.
If there is any conflict to powering the next-generation NSX with a V10, its that an FIA ruling will cause all F1 teams to switch from V10s to a V8 engine configuration for 2006, reducing the marketing tie-in to Jensen Buttons F1 car, if he will still be driving for BAR-Honda in 2006. But now is a good enough time as any for Honda to begin, or resume work on a replacement for the NSX. Since 2001, other Japanese manufacturers have been at work developing super sports cars. The Nissan GT-R Concept, a harbinger of the next generation GT-R supercar will most likely arrive in 2007 as an Infiniti, while this years Lexus LF-A concept could be a reality as early as next year.
As for the NSX replacement, expect to see something as soon as 2008, with an expected price-tag between $80,000 and $100,000, putting it nose to nose with global high-performance competition. All things considered, expect to see a rematch of the Japanese titans, like in the early 90s, except this time the NSX will be more powerful, and as a result, a lot faster.
source:
http://car-reviews.automobile.com/C...sx-successor-to-feature-v10-powerplant/1341/1
Um....by the way. The NSX mentioned in that last post was going uphill with a 75mph headwind and was pulling a 5th wheel camping trailer. That's why it took 5.7 seconds to get 0-60!!!! :smile: What kind of crack is the author of that article smoking????
Why are you guys so enamored with gaudy torque?
What is wrong with revving to 10,000 RPM? The NSX is not a torque-heavy car, but it's about how fast you get up to speed, man, not about how hard the car pushes you in the seat.
My dad has an RX-8 and that is pretty torque anemic. Buddy had an s2000 and it was similar. Both can rev to the moon. So, I hold first gear a lot longer. I got no problem with that. Gearing multiplies torque and it's how the first s2000s can hit 0-60 in 5.3 w/ only 152lb-ft. I know the C5 was a huge thrust rush but it hit 60 and 100 about the same time as the NSX. If anything, I can do without the frantic push and just take a nice, smooth acceleration across a huge powerband. I didn't mind lollygaggin my dad's RX around town at 6000rpm.
What we need to do, as a government, is start a racing league using quasiturbine engines. The gov't could spend $1B on prize money and it'd last a decade. The manufacturers would enter race cars using this recent engine technology and then we could get some high revving freakin cars, using sh!t like biodiesel. Subsidize the contest by negotiating a royalty to the patent owner. You know, PREPARE for any upcoming oil shortages and stuff.
We need some investment in the future here, Congress. Maybe stop blowing stuff up all the time.
Some type of hybrid is a great idea because the turbine-style engines, such as the wankel, quasiturbine, and actual turbine, don't spin up so quickly. That's why cars use recip engines, because of their immediate torque. You're pushing directly away on something, instead of helping it merrygoround. Put an electric motor coupled to a rotary plant and you have much more immediate torque but also the incredible HP potential that you get from the revability.
How about a 1.3L QT producing 500hp and even 200lb-ft. This car would essentially be the RX except with a redline 2x as high, and a hybrid torque addition helping w/ 50lbft to get spooled up. A car like that would do 0-60 as fast as other cars w/ 500hp and would go as fast as other cars w/ 500hp. There's no functional limit to how fast rotary engines can rev. The Wankel is limited because it's a more primitive rotary system and has emissions problems due to incomplete combustion. But it was the 1st step in the right direction. Technologically, it has allowed Mazda to compete with engines 3x its size, do a midship car w/ a straight driveline, 50/50 weight, etc., in a tiny little 1.3L thing that looks like an oval toaster oven. With money and R&D spent on improving on that design, improving its emissions, we'd have viable rotating powerplants by now instead of one niche product from a smaller japanese vendor.
I would rather see Honda produce some visionary technology instead of just another recip V10.
What is wrong with revving to 10,000 RPM? The NSX is not a torque-heavy car, but it's about how fast you get up to speed, man, not about how hard the car pushes you in the seat.
My dad has an RX-8 and that is pretty torque anemic. Buddy had an s2000 and it was similar. Both can rev to the moon. So, I hold first gear a lot longer. I got no problem with that. Gearing multiplies torque and it's how the first s2000s can hit 0-60 in 5.3 w/ only 152lb-ft. I know the C5 was a huge thrust rush but it hit 60 and 100 about the same time as the NSX. If anything, I can do without the frantic push and just take a nice, smooth acceleration across a huge powerband. I didn't mind lollygaggin my dad's RX around town at 6000rpm.
What we need to do, as a government, is start a racing league using quasiturbine engines. The gov't could spend $1B on prize money and it'd last a decade. The manufacturers would enter race cars using this recent engine technology and then we could get some high revving freakin cars, using sh!t like biodiesel. Subsidize the contest by negotiating a royalty to the patent owner. You know, PREPARE for any upcoming oil shortages and stuff.
We need some investment in the future here, Congress. Maybe stop blowing stuff up all the time.
Some type of hybrid is a great idea because the turbine-style engines, such as the wankel, quasiturbine, and actual turbine, don't spin up so quickly. That's why cars use recip engines, because of their immediate torque. You're pushing directly away on something, instead of helping it merrygoround. Put an electric motor coupled to a rotary plant and you have much more immediate torque but also the incredible HP potential that you get from the revability.
How about a 1.3L QT producing 500hp and even 200lb-ft. This car would essentially be the RX except with a redline 2x as high, and a hybrid torque addition helping w/ 50lbft to get spooled up. A car like that would do 0-60 as fast as other cars w/ 500hp and would go as fast as other cars w/ 500hp. There's no functional limit to how fast rotary engines can rev. The Wankel is limited because it's a more primitive rotary system and has emissions problems due to incomplete combustion. But it was the 1st step in the right direction. Technologically, it has allowed Mazda to compete with engines 3x its size, do a midship car w/ a straight driveline, 50/50 weight, etc., in a tiny little 1.3L thing that looks like an oval toaster oven. With money and R&D spent on improving on that design, improving its emissions, we'd have viable rotating powerplants by now instead of one niche product from a smaller japanese vendor.
I would rather see Honda produce some visionary technology instead of just another recip V10.
