New video from MotorTrend

[liftcontrol]

I don't need the fastest car I need a car with a great driving experience. This review makes it sound like a GTR that's overpriced

Unfortunately, that is quite true.

When HONDA introduced the original NSX, it won the hearts of almost every car magazine and car enthusiasts around the world, not because it was the fastest BUT because it was so fun and engaging to drive; how connected it felt. It never was the fastest around the track or in a straight line...but it felt the best every mile it was driven.

That was and has always been HONDA's formula for making a sports car.
They have thrown in the towel and made a technically brilliant car that is crazy fast, but without the legendary HONDA feel.

BUT at least the NSX is [almost] back...it can only improve in the coming years :wink:

 

[blue_myriddn]

Influences, before and after, and designs from the 80s are nothing alike the NSX. The C4 Corvette and 180SX had more in common with the NSX than the Ferraris of that time

I guess different eyes see different things. When I park next to a 328 the resemblance is very obvious and the similarities in the 355 line are equally clear.

 

[N Spec]

Both the 348 and 355 came after the NSX's finalized design debuted. Look to the 308 and 328 as I posted above.

- - - Updated - - -

I guess different eyes see different things. When I park next to a 328 the resemblance is very obvious and the similarities in the 355 line are equally clear.

This is a F355.

 

[blue_myriddn]

This is a F355.

Which was is a wonderful example of 90s Pininfarina design. The type of thing the NSX designers were looking for. The 355 is one incarnation of a more modern styled 328 and the NSX is another.

However, if you want to be stubborn (because it seems silly to think that you assumed I didn't know I was parked next to a 355 or that the 355 was released after the NSX) - here is a photo of my car next to a 308

Body lines flow in a very similar manner.

 

[N Spec]

Proportions are similar mostly because they are both mid-engine but the details and look are not. Ken penned the HP-X, which had not much to do with the actual NSX we see today aside from the black top canopy:

Masato Nakano would be the man ultimately responsible for the NSX exterior with Hiroshi Zaima overseeing overall design direction. There is no mention of Pininfarina in the later/more important stages of the NSX development process.

I'm not being stubborn about the truth and reality of the NSX design. People seem to think the 348 and 355 influenced the NSX, with some good ol boy mentality that it was Italian designed, but they came after the 1989 NSX debut design was already finalized. The 328 and 308 look nothing like the NSX in detail nor build quality.

 

[docjohn]

they look pretty similar to me.......the only big differences are the continued use of 70's design and engineering principles on the Ferrari like the bumpers,and the 60 series tires.

 

[N Spec]

I agree. The 80's Ferrari retained the 70's styling whereas the late 80s NSX is much more futuristic and looks like something from the 2000s still, sans the pop-ups style headlights of course.

The proportions are similar back then like the new NSX is similar is proportion and height to the 458 and modern McLarens, but that's about all they ever had in common...

 

[fastaussie]

i think a lot of you fellas are missing the point. it didn't sound like a glowing review to me, it sounded rather disappointing. there seemed to be more complaints than compliments, and you're only hearing what you want to.

I respectfully disagree. First, to the extent that any NSX reviewers made a passing reference to the lack of an optional manual transmission, that was at most a passing observation, as opposed to a genuine criticism. The vast majority of reviewers (some more reluctantly than others) have come around and accepted DCTs -- many have fully embraced DCTs. Second, I have owned several DCT equipped cars and, IMHO, there is no diminishment in enjoyment or connectivity as compared to a manual. In DCT manual mode, the driver has complete control over all up and down shifts. The only difference is that the driver can exercise that shift control quicker using a steering wheel paddle, as compared to a stick shift. Why is that less enjoyable or less connected? Third, while everyone certainly has the prerogative to embrace antiquated manual transmissions and remain firmly entrenched in the 20th century, it is undeniable that paddle shifting DCTs provide vastly superior performance. Manual transmissions can be fun to drive (without traffic), but I'll take the superior performance provided by a DCT. The fact that paddle shifters are more convenient in traffic is an extra bonus I don't mind.

yup, i agree 100 + 1% on all of that.

they look pretty similar to me.......the only big differences are the continued use of 70's design and engineering principles on the Ferrari like the bumpers,and the 60 series tires.

There is no doubt though that the final design of the NSX was very inspired by Pininfarina design. If you do have any doubts, park your NSX next to a Ferrari of that era.

come on blue_, you know there is no way N-Spec will ever agree with you if you bash the precious NSX!

Great review. Explains why I have no desire to own one. I don't need the fastest car I need a car with a great driving experience. This review makes it sound like a GTR that's overpriced

not that it's the fastest car, but i gotta agree with Blacknot and Jason from Motor Trend on this one. i've zero interest in this car for all of the reasons stated in the video (far too many to list individually). it was a great video. well done, impartial and hit on every important point both good and bad. some people are ignoring a lot of the negative points, and that's fine. when they put this car up against the new or current crop of Supercars, i'd say it's a massive foregone conclusion. the only thing the NSX may do better is have less lag, as if anyone in the other cars will give half a shit about. they'll be too busy grinning from ear to ear while the NSX driver will be diligently trying to explain the connection between torque vectoring and why they have no idea what's happening at the steering wheel.

i too think Honda should've not tried to capitalise on the NSX's heritage and namesake only to keep virtually no lineage at all. they seem very confused at Honda these days? the fact that the pride of a Japanese automotive giant is an American car makes no sense at all.

and it sounds like Honda's insistence on making this car so incredibly high tech, has actually detracted significantly from the driving experience.

Jason summed it up perfectly, and i have to agree emphatically, "their rationality ruins their product". there shouldn't be pre-existing excuses. if you're going to build a Supercar, just build a bloody Supercar...

 

[blue_myriddn]

For starters, I agree - the review was very balanced and that is one of the things I really liked about it. I also thought that it comments were entirely fair, I just disagree with his final conclusions

if you're going to build a Supercar, just build a bloody Supercar...

This is the part I disagree with. I recall a statement that Ted Klauss made at NSXPO 2 years ago where he said that there are people who drive silver cars and people who drive red cars. He finished it by implying that the NSX is more of a "silver" car whereas Ferraris & Lambos are more "red" cars and now that I understand the new NSX a bit more I undersand what he means. I think it is great that buyers have choices. If you want the typical "supercar" experience of wild crazy adventure - go buy a Ferrari. There is no reason for Honda to reinvent the wheel - Ferrari already does it quite nicely. They made a different product. I can respect and applaud that.

 

[Blacknot]

For starters, I agree - the review was very balanced and that is one of the things I really liked about it. I also thought that it comments were entirely fair, I just disagree with his final conclusions



This is the part I disagree with. I recall a statement that Ted Klauss made at NSXPO 2 years ago where he said that there are people who drive silver cars and people who drive red cars. He finished it by implying that the NSX is more of a "silver" car whereas Ferraris & Lambos are more "red" cars and now that I understand the new NSX a bit more I undersand what he means. I think it is great that buyers have choices. If you want the typical "supercar" experience of wild crazy adventure - go buy a Ferrari. There is no reason for Honda to reinvent the wheel - Ferrari already does it quite nicely. They made a different product. I can respect and applaud that.

This is true. Some people like automatics, traction control and launch control. This makes everyone a great driver and the car helps you look like a better driver. Some people prefer to drive the cars themselves and get feedback through the steering wheel and a driving experience of a sports car. I have owned many Lexus models and they are very smooth to drive but numb. That's great to drive to work. On the weekend I want a supercar. Like the review said 99% of the market that's spending 180k on a supercar are not driving it everyday. I live in Florida and can drive a sports car 365 days a year. I appreciate the technology in the new Nsx and it's a amazing car but I prefer a race car experience or the experience you get in a Ferrari. The Nsx, S2000 and TypeR models were never fast but gave you that incredible experience. Honda has lost touch with what got them to the dance. There is no denying it

 

[N Spec]

Everyone has a different take on what they think a supercar is. Many people want the pure Ferrari experience or a driver's car with minimal nannies. The reality is that a 600+ hp car is going to have some form of electronic nanny to help manage and make your car more efficient and effective at being a "Supercar."

I'm actually quite sure Honda will release a non-hybrid or simplier version either in NSX or S2000 successor form if the rumors prove true. However, don't get to used to all of these old school things like manual steering and brakes vs. electric steering and brakes. It's pretty much inevitable for the future in one form or another.

I'll reserve my ultimate judgement until I drive the new NSX and see for myself.

I look forward to seeing it going against the other cars in comparisons in the future and see if the extra 400-500 lbs are worth the trouble besides anti-turbo lag.

 

[fastaussie]

For starters, I agree - the review was very balanced and that is one of the things I really liked about it. I also thought that it comments were entirely fair, I just disagree with his final conclusions.

a lot of people seem to have the same final conclusions, that's the problem.

This is the part I disagree with. I think it is great that buyers have choices. If you want the typical "supercar" experience of wild crazy adventure - go buy a Ferrari. There is no reason for Honda to reinvent the wheel - Ferrari already does it quite nicely. They made a different product. I can respect and applaud that.

again, nothing wrong with choices. but all i'm hearing is excuses for this car. and i have several mates who have driven it hard, on the street and track, in all the modes. and they weren't impressed. Honda doesn't have to reinvent anything, but at least make it worthy of it's namesake.

This is true. Some people like automatics, traction control and launch control. This makes everyone a great driver and the car helps you look like a better driver. Some people prefer to drive the cars themselves and get feedback through the steering wheel and a driving experience of a sports car. I have owned many Lexus models and they are very smooth to drive but numb. That's great to drive to work. On the weekend I want a supercar. Like the review said 99% of the market that's spending 180k on a supercar are not driving it everyday. I live in Florida and can drive a sports car 365 days a year. I appreciate the technology in the new Nsx and it's a amazing car but I prefer a race car experience or the experience you get in a Ferrari. The Nsx, S2000 and TypeR models were never fast but gave you that incredible experience. Honda has lost touch with what got them to the dance. There is no denying it

i think the point of a Supercar is for it to be special, and not an everyday driver. i believe that's the angle the moto-journalists are commonly going for. and i get the other side also. i live in Los Angeles, i drive my car every day too. and as it's been said many times before now, any Porsche 911 variant, Audi R8, Ferrari 458/488 and even a Lamborghini Huracan are all every day drivers. all much better than our current old school NSX's. they're all doing that now, my grandma could drive anyone of them as easily as a bloody Buick. we're talking about Supercars here, that look, sound and go like one should. i'm agreeing with you again Blacknot, i think Honda doesn't have a clue.

Everyone has a different take on what they think a supercar is. Many people want the pure Ferrari experience or a driver's car with minimal nannies. The reality is that a 600+ hp car is going to have some form of electronic nanny to help manage and make your car more efficient and effective at being a "Supercar."

I'm actually quite sure Honda will release a non-hybrid or simplier version either in NSX or S2000 successor form if the rumors prove true. However, don't get to used to all of these old school things like manual steering and brakes vs. electric steering and brakes. It's pretty much inevitable for the future in one form or another.

I'll reserve my ultimate judgement until I drive the new NSX and see for myself.

I look forward to seeing it going against the other cars in comparisons in the future and see if the extra 400-500 lbs are worth the trouble besides anti-turbo lag.

no one is talking about nannies, they all have that. i'd say we're talking about the general consensus and lack of excitement. if there's one thing a Supercar should be above ALL else, it is exciting...

 

[Valkyrie Pilot]

a lot of people seem to have the same final conclusions, that's the problem.


again, nothing wrong with choices. but all i'm hearing is excuses for this car. and i have several mates who have driven it hard, on the street and track, in all the modes. and they weren't impressed. Honda doesn't have to reinvent anything, but at least make it worthy of it's namesake.


no one is talking about nannies, they all have that. i'd say we're talking about the general consensus and lack of excitement. if there's one thing a Supercar should be above ALL else, it is exciting...

Fastaussie - Would you say that this characterizes the Chris Harris Review? Your silence on his review was deafening after predicting that he was going to give it a thumbs down.

 

[fastaussie]

Fastaussie - Would you say that this characterizes the Chris Harris Review? Your silence on his review was deafening after predicting that he was going to give it a thumbs down.

deafening silence? shit, i didn't realise everyone was waiting for my review of his review?!?!

haven't seen it, will have to give it a go later. sorry mate, been busy...

 

[N Spec]

no one is talking about nannies, they all have that. i'd say we're talking about the general consensus and lack of excitement. if there's one thing a Supercar should be above ALL else, it is exciting...

You may not be, but many people have expressed their dismay in that aspect.

I find the new NSX exciting for my own reasons. For whatever reason you don't like it, but you haven't driven it yet. Go into it without preconceived notions. That would be the fair approach.

 

[docjohn]

aren't all your notions preconceived...just sayin:wink:

 

[Superfluous]

On the weekend I want a supercar. Like the review said 99% of the market that's spending 180k on a supercar are not driving it everyday.

This is where we differ. I have tried driving a regular car during the week, and a special car on the weekend. That paradigm does not work for me. I want the enjoyment of the special car every day of the week and, therefore, I inevitably abandon the regular car and drive the special car 95% of the time. Thus, I have changed my approach. I daily drive my special car and only use my back-up regular car when circumstances render the special car impractical (e.g., a ski trip or Costco run). Thus, I intend to daily drive the NSX. It appears that Acura designed the new NSX to, among other things, accommodate the daily driver. In so doing, Acura necessarily had to make certain compromises. A daily driver necessarily will not be optimal for the track. Likewise, a GT3RS is not a practical daily driver. Some may opine that Acura made too many compromises in order to accommodate the daily driver. I personally don't think so. Based on what I have read, and without the benefit of a test drive, the NSX appears to seamlessly integrate and harmonize the attributes of a supercar with the requirements of a daily driver. The slightly diminished steering and road feel described by certain reviewers is, IMHO, an acceptable sacrifice in order to otherwise achieve supercar performance in a daily driver.

The Robb Report said it well:

"Unlike exotic cars intent on communicating every last nuance of the road to the driver, the NSX delivered a surprisingly refined ride at the Sonoma Raceway. Although it can accelerate to 60 mph more quickly than a Porsche 911 Turbo, the NSX feels fleet and secure, never harried nor violent, with its carbon-ceramic brakes providing strong stops. And despite its cornering prowess, the steering wheel does not convey surface irregularities with any remote sensations of intrusion or perturbation. The experience becomes even more impressive on the road, where the NSX’s ability to corner hard, brake, and accelerate comes across as effortless and seemingly infinite. Sophisticated, modern, and surprisingly graceful, the NSX (with an estimated starting price of $150,000) may not satisfy those seeking an audaciously vibrant ride, but it certainly matches the original car’s spirit while infusing generous heaps of technology, innovation, and good old-fashioned muscle."

If you want a track car that enables you to feel every "surface irregularity" and "sensations of intrusion or perturbation," the GT3RS is a better option. If you want a more "refined ride" that is "fleet and secure" and "never harried or violent," with"effortless and seemingly infinite" acceleration that is faster than a 911 Turbo, the NSX is the better option. I obviously fall into the second category.

If one is desirous of owning both a daily driver and a separate weekend/track car, the perfect combo might be the NSX for daily driving, and the GT3RS (or some other track car) for the weekend.

 

[fastaussie]

I find the new NSX exciting for my own reasons. For whatever reason you don't like it, but you haven't driven it yet. Go into it without preconceived notions. That would be the fair approach.

aren't all your notions preconceived...just sayin:wink:

that was extremely funny!

N Spec, i haven't driven it, but i will one of these days. my notions however do come from my mates who have driven it. some where in attendance when this video was shot. and drove the car as the MT journalist did, same modes and (Michelin) tires. another of my mates works for the very company which built the car. which is why i was able to give you some insight back in the summer.

This is where we differ. I have tried driving a regular car during the week, and a special car on the weekend. That paradigm does not work for me. I want the enjoyment of the special car every day of the week and, therefore, I inevitably abandon the regular car and drive the special car 95% of the time. Thus, I have changed my approach. I daily drive my special car and only use my back-up regular car when circumstances render the special car impractical (e.g., a ski trip or Costco run). Thus, I intend to daily drive the NSX. It appears that Acura designed the new NSX to, among other things, accommodate the daily driver. In so doing, Acura necessarily had to make certain compromises. A daily driver necessarily will not be optimal for the track. Likewise, a GT3RS is not a practical daily driver. Some may opine that Acura made too many compromises in order to accommodate the daily driver. I personally don't think so. Based on what I have read, and without the benefit of a test drive, the NSX appears to seamlessly integrate and harmonize the attributes of a supercar with the requirements of a daily driver. The slightly diminished steering and road feel described by certain reviewers is, IMHO, an acceptable sacrifice in order to otherwise achieve supercar performance in a daily driver.

The Robb Report said it well:

"Unlike exotic cars intent on communicating every last nuance of the road to the driver, the NSX delivered a surprisingly refined ride at the Sonoma Raceway. Although it can accelerate to 60 mph more quickly than a Porsche 911 Turbo, the NSX feels fleet and secure, never harried nor violent, with its carbon-ceramic brakes providing strong stops. And despite its cornering prowess, the steering wheel does not convey surface irregularities with any remote sensations of intrusion or perturbation. The experience becomes even more impressive on the road, where the NSX’s ability to corner hard, brake, and accelerate comes across as effortless and seemingly infinite. Sophisticated, modern, and surprisingly graceful, the NSX (with an estimated starting price of $150,000) may not satisfy those seeking an audaciously vibrant ride, but it certainly matches the original car’s spirit while infusing generous heaps of technology, innovation, and good old-fashioned muscle."

as i have said before, the 458, R8, Huracan, 911, etc. are all supremely streetable daily drivers. yet their steering and excitement levels are not lacking.

since no one has tested the NSX, how is anyone saying it's faster than a 911 Turbo? the Turbo S routinely does 0 to 60 launches of 2.4 seconds all day long. if the NSX can beat that, that is something indeed. based on watching the video, the NSX does seemed geared very low in the bottom gears. it appeared in the video that an upshift to 4th gear was in order at between 80 to 90 mph at redline in 3rd. i presumed that was the reason for a 9-speed gearbox, lightning fast acceleration.

in the interest of fairness, i have watched the video again. it's not a terrible review, but it's definitely not a glowing, accolade laden review either. it's just sort of ho hum at best. he actually bags on the car pretty hard in several parts of the video. he states throughout that Honda made the wrong car, shouldn't have made it, that it's not an engaging car to drive, sounds terrible ("you just want the engine to shut up!"). he's clearly not a fan of the looks from any angle, or the torque vectoring, and actually said that "Ayrton Senna is probably rolling around in his grave". if you guys take that to be a decent review, i can't imagine what a bad one would be?

 

[Elistan]

I appreciate the technology in the new Nsx and it's a amazing car but I prefer a race car experience or the experience you get in a Ferrari. The Nsx, S2000 and TypeR models were never fast but gave you that incredible experience. Honda has lost touch with what got them to the dance. There is no denying it

And yet the S2000 has consistently been criticized for having numb steering, just like what the new NSX is being criticized for. If the S2000 can deliver an incredible experience despite numb steering, why can't the new NSX? For me, the incredible driving experience of the S2000 comes from things like the stiff suspension, the steering precision, the quick response to driver inputs, the always-audible engine, the firm and easily modulated brake pedal, the balance between under and oversteer, the seating position...

 

[naaman]

I respectfully disagree. First, to the extent that any NSX reviewers made a passing reference to the lack of an optional manual transmission, that was at most a passing observation, as opposed to a genuine criticism. The vast majority of reviewers (some more reluctantly than others) have come around and accepted DCTs -- many have fully embraced DCTs. Second, I have owned several DCT equipped cars and, IMHO, there is no diminishment in enjoyment or connectivity as compared to a manual. In DCT manual mode, the driver has complete control over all up and down shifts. The only difference is that the driver can exercise that shift control quicker using a steering wheel paddle, as compared to a stick shift. Why is that less enjoyable or less connected? Third, while everyone certainly has the prerogative to embrace antiquated manual transmissions and remain firmly entrenched in the 20th century, it is undeniable that paddle shifting DCTs provide vastly superior performance. Manual transmissions can be fun to drive (without traffic), but I'll take the superior performance provided by a DCT. The fact that paddle shifters are more convenient in traffic is an extra bonus I don't mind.

Absolutely. There is no denying the superior performance. I, for one, prefer having a proper stick shift, even in traffic. Also, the difference in performance is negligible for a street car. The only significant advantage I have seen is on the drag strip. I am not aware of any significant gains on road courses due to the DCT, though, I have not searched it out. I have seen some vids (Randy Pobst, for example) where a direct comparison is made between the CTS-V in a manual vs the 8-speed automatic, which GM claims is even faster than a DCT. The difference on the road course was, if memory serves, less than 2/10ths.... might have been less than .5 secs... I'd have to go look it up. Anyway, point is, the "antiquated" stick shift still provides a certain level of enjoyment not found in the DCT. The paddle cars I have driven turned me off, and I have no need to how much better a true DCT is than a paddle shifted automatic. Its the physical activity of shifting gears that I enjoy, and that is why I have zero interest in the new car. It is the single most important quality in a sports car for me.

The reported numbness of the steering is also somewhat off-putting: in my current car, I have taken measures to reduce numbness and increase feedback. Cars that are "too smooth" bore me to tears... at least for now. We'll see how things change as I get older. In any case, it is a no-brainer that eventually, true manuals will not be available even as an option. But, until then, I'll continue to enjoy them when I can.

- - - Updated - - -

This is where we differ. I have tried driving a regular car during the week, and a special car on the weekend. That paradigm does not work for me. I want the enjoyment of the special car every day of the week and, therefore, I inevitably abandon the regular car and drive the special car 95% of the time. Thus, I have changed my approach. I daily drive my special car and only use my back-up regular car when circumstances render the special car impractical (e.g., a ski trip or Costco run). Thus, I intend to daily drive the NSX. It appears that Acura designed the new NSX to, among other things, accommodate the daily driver. In so doing, Acura necessarily had to make certain compromises. A daily driver necessarily will not be optimal for the track. Likewise, a GT3RS is not a practical daily driver. Some may opine that Acura made too many compromises in order to accommodate the daily driver. I personally don't think so. Based on what I have read, and without the benefit of a test drive, the NSX appears to seamlessly integrate and harmonize the attributes of a supercar with the requirements of a daily driver. The slightly diminished steering and road feel described by certain reviewers is, IMHO, an acceptable sacrifice in order to otherwise achieve supercar performance in a daily driver.

The Robb Report said it well:

"Unlike exotic cars intent on communicating every last nuance of the road to the driver, the NSX delivered a surprisingly refined ride at the Sonoma Raceway. Although it can accelerate to 60 mph more quickly than a Porsche 911 Turbo, the NSX feels fleet and secure, never harried nor violent, with its carbon-ceramic brakes providing strong stops. And despite its cornering prowess, the steering wheel does not convey surface irregularities with any remote sensations of intrusion or perturbation. The experience becomes even more impressive on the road, where the NSX’s ability to corner hard, brake, and accelerate comes across as effortless and seemingly infinite. Sophisticated, modern, and surprisingly graceful, the NSX (with an estimated starting price of $150,000) may not satisfy those seeking an audaciously vibrant ride, but it certainly matches the original car’s spirit while infusing generous heaps of technology, innovation, and good old-fashioned muscle."

If you want a track car that enables you to feel every "surface irregularity" and "sensations of intrusion or perturbation," the GT3RS is a better option. If you want a more "refined ride" that is "fleet and secure" and "never harried or violent," with"effortless and seemingly infinite" acceleration that is faster than a 911 Turbo, the NSX is the better option. I obviously fall into the second category.

If one is desirous of owning both a daily driver and a separate weekend/track car, the perfect combo might be the NSX for daily driving, and the GT3RS (or some other track car) for the weekend.

I tend to agree here. For me, a car is only worth having if it functions flawlessly as a daily commuter. Only when the car is incapable of accomplishing the task at hand (family trip out of state, for example) does the other one come out of the garage. This is one reason why I will probably never buy a new sports car: too expensive to justify the depreciation from frequent use.

 

[fastaussie]

Absolutely. There is no denying the superior performance. I, for one, prefer having a proper stick shift, even in traffic. Also, the difference in performance is negligible for a street car. The only significant advantage I have seen is on the drag strip. I am not aware of any significant gains on road courses due to the DCT, though, I have not searched it out. I have seen some vids (Randy Pobst, for example) where a direct comparison is made between the CTS-V in a manual vs the 8-speed automatic, which GM claims is even faster than a DCT. The difference on the road course was, if memory serves, less than 2/10ths.... might have been less than .5 secs... I'd have to go look it up. Anyway, point is, the "antiquated" stick shift still provides a certain level of enjoyment not found in the DCT. The paddle cars I have driven turned me off, and I have no need to how much better a true DCT is than a paddle shifted automatic.

there's absolutely no comparison between a proper dual clutch transmission and a paddle shifted automatic transmission, none. one is astounding, the other is total crap.

while i couldn't give you specific numbers, i would have to say that a DCT car is just as engaging as a manual 3-pedal one, and the difference of laps times should be sizeable, as over the course of a lap there's many more shifts than the 3 or 4 on a drag strip. you're also able to shift at times where you simply couldn't with a clutch pedal on the floor...

 

[N Spec]

FA, atleast we agree upon the DCT situation/transition haha.

 

[ForumNinja]

The cts-v does not come with three pedals.The comparison was the ats-v,not that that matters. Some very good points in this thread.I wanted to like this 2.0 car,but right now it is too early to give a final verdict. Owning a supercharged first gen
I get the questions about the new car all the time,price is my answer to most of them! You guys got to stop hatin on the GTR,it made your numb,drives its self,video game,too much tech,next gen car possible!
P.S. love my GTR too!

 

[naaman]

there's absolutely no comparison between a proper dual clutch transmission and a paddle shifted automatic transmission, none. one is astounding, the other is total crap.

while i couldn't give you specific numbers, i would have to say that a DCT car is just as engaging as a manual 3-pedal one, and the difference of laps times should be sizeable, as over the course of a lap there's many more shifts than the 3 or 4 on a drag strip. you're also able to shift at times where you simply couldn't with a clutch pedal on the floor...

Well, in particular, I was talking about GM's 8-speed, which they claim can out-shift a DCT. Know anything about it on the Z06 or CTS-V... or ATS-V as the case may be.

 

[fastaussie]

Well, in particular, I was talking about GM's 8-speed, which they claim can out-shift a DCT. Know anything about it on the Z06 or CTS-V... or ATS-V as the case may be.

nope, not really. but that sounds like a full on bullshit claim from GM. i have driven the ATS-V. lovely car, but i don't remember the gearbox being that good...