Re: Acura's GT...
1SICKLEX said:
One thing I don't get is how its "Cool in a stubborn way" and "timeless" to have a 911 basically evolve for 20+ years before they went water cooled but the NSX did the SAME thing, IMO but it got dated and lost respect.
Hell the Lotus Espirit hasn't changed in 30 years.
I think Honda should have taken the 911 route and just continued to evolve the NSX. They took too long, IMO for a facelift though. The NSX-R should have been offered in America.
Also, how about some better marketing? However, Honda like Toyota seems to be concerend with SUVs and trucks....sigh....(they do make money though)
Good points. I think that the 911 and the NSX were never similar in that the 911 has never set any bar. It was never a "halo" car. It was never out to prove anything.
The NSX represented a crowning achievement for Japan and Honda--and the automotive world. Once you introduce such a car it's a little strange to just leave it hanging out there essentially unchanged for 15 years. I believe the maker is left with two choices: constantly upgrade and push or discontinue it.
Honda's day-late, dollar-short upgrades over the NSX's life baffle me quite frankly. It's pretty clear that each NSX change should have come 1 era before it did. IOW the 3.2L 6-sp should have appeared in 1994; the 02+ facelift should have appeared in 1997, etc. The Supra had a 6-sp and 320HP in 1993. Waiting until 1997 is unforgivable.
So what this means to me is that Honda was interested in upgrading but did so at the last possible minute. It only makes sense that Honda had better things to do and that the "NSX needs help" memo got pushed from inbox to inbox until finally it couldn't be ignored. And by then there was no time to really develop a substantial improvement. To me, that's failing a car. :frown:
You mean to tell me that in 7 years Honda couldn't come up with a better platform than the C30/C32? Not to mention it's just a re-worked Legend block that was 11 years old then (1985-86)! Of couse they could. But Honda procrastinated so long they had to hurriedly bore out a 3.2L and call it an improvement--which it was--but they really could have done so much better. 7 years to think about it and all Honda could do is bore it out by .2L? Gimme a break.
Honda was very capable of over 100HP/liter by then. Starting from scratch with the Legend block they easily could have produced a 3.5L 400HP motor by 2001 which is when the HSC should have debuted as a 2002 model. But Honda procrastinated again and waited until 2003 to start showing it. By then the F430 was right around the corner and Honda (wisely) pulled it knowing that the 350HP HSC would be a laughingstock. Even with 350HP the HSC would have been ok for 2001-2002. With heavy R & D by 2004-2005 they probably could have had a 400-450HP Type-R version available to compete with the F430.
And don't forget lack of advertising. That's undeniable. How about putting one in every Acura showroom? Nope. TV? Nope. Billboards? Nope.
So even though the 911 has slowly evolved it seems like a trite car that has been just brought up to standards an infinite number of times, always lagging just a bit behind. The NSX was introduced as an boundary-pusher and should have remained that way.
