NSX price vs C7 price

[WingZ]

Hey guys since we're just kicking this around until we get more specs I saw this on CD about the C7 and thought it related to the NSX 2.0

advanced materials

To meet an ambitious 3000-pound weight target, C7 is constructed like an aircraft. The three-rail space frame GM patented for C5 continues with major improvements. The hydroformed-aluminum main members developed for Z06 and ZR1 are now standard across all C7s, an upgrade enabled by transferring frame manufacturing from an outside supplier to the Corvette’s Bowling Green assembly plant. Carbon-fiber (CF) floor and bulkhead panels adhesively bonded between the central backbone and the perimeter rails augment structural stiffness. We also expect CF to replace all the sheet-molded fiberglass exterior panels. A single-piece lift-off roof—a Corvette feature since 1984—remains standard on the coupe.

Chevy’s not-so-subtle hint confirming the move to CF came with last fall’s presentation of the new crossed-flag emblem on a black woven-cloth backdrop. CF has trickled down to the sub-$60,000 price range thanks to streamlined manufacturing processes implemented by supplier Plasan Carbon Composites that have reduced costs by 60 percent. Also, minor visual flaws are not an issue for the structural panels that live on the Corvette’s dark side, further trimming cost.

Looks like GM has the same weight target and will use CF body panels as cost has come down to the sub $60k range. I don't think for a minute GM can do something Honda can't so if it's not the use of CF driving the NSX up to $100k+ what would be??

 

[TURBO2GO]

LOL... man you are completely obsessed with the 2.0.

 

[WingZ]

LOL what makes you say that??

 

[nsx_2k]

I'd guess that a few things make the cost of NSX 2.0 inherently greater
1) Quality of components. I'm pretty certain that the interior of the new NSX will be at least as nice as their current offerings.
2) Much greater cost of development. The C7 from my perspective is an evolution of the C6. So the costs can't be anywhere near as much as designing a car de novo. I make this assumption because I thought the new NSX is not going to be based on our NSX's chassis. Now I will say that GM claims few parts carry over from the C6; however, from what I've seen the car isn't too far removed from the C6 so it maybe simply be a new GM parts bin.
3) Facilities cost. Honda is building a new facility for the new NSX. The C7 is being built at the same plant as the C6. In fact, they've moved the manufacture of the aluminum frame from out-of-house to the in-house facility trimming significant costs.

 

[NetViper]

One is a low-volume, exotic supercar, the other isn't.

 

[BD]

One is a low-volume, exotic supercar, the other isn't.

One is a Honda, and the other one is GM.

 

[fastaussie]

One is a low-volume, exotic supercar, the other isn't.

can't be said any better than that...

 

[Timpo]

LOL @ "C7 is constructed like an aircraft"

Unlike Honda, GM was NEVER involved in aviation...so what the hell do they know?

 

[myguitar]

I'd guess that a few things make the cost of NSX 2.0 inherently greater
1) Quality of components. I'm pretty certain that the interior of the new NSX will be at least as nice as their current offerings.
2) Much greater cost of development. The C7 from my perspective is an evolution of the C6. So the costs can't be anywhere near as much as designing a car de novo. I make this assumption because I thought the new NSX is not going to be based on our NSX's chassis. Now I will say that GM claims few parts carry over from the C6; however, from what I've seen the car isn't too far removed from the C6 so it maybe simply be a new GM parts bin.
3) Facilities cost. Honda is building a new facility for the new NSX. The C7 is being built at the same plant as the C6. In fact, they've moved the manufacture of the aluminum frame from out-of-house to the in-house facility trimming significant costs.

This

Update: I must mention - Post # 1000!!!!!!!!

 

[NA1MT]

I think the biggest difference is that the C7 actually exists.

 

[Ritesh]

Don't forget the C7 base engine already exists. They didn't have to engineer a new motor! A small block chevy motor has been around forever! That helps reduce cost. Personally I love the new C7. I would gladly scoop a Z51 with track package as long it's in the 2nd or 3rd year of production. ;-)

 

[Stephen@NCAutoUSA]

I think the biggest difference is that the C7 actually exists.

Don't mind NA1MT. He's just salty because by the time the new Nsx does come out, he still won't have his car back.

 

[drmanny3]

I do have to admit that GM did a pretty good job in improving the Corvette for 2014. They had done poorly in the interior of the car for many years. So to see the change is encouraging. I was also pleased that they brought some technology to the engine with variable intake and exhaust as well as the dry stump option. It is still a small block with push rods etcetera. A great engine for packaging and torque. The other big thing for Corvette is fit and finish. They never seemed to be able to get panels on the car to fit correctly without bulging. Now perhaps they will. This is meant to be a big runner for GM. They want to get back to numbers like 30,000 to 40,000 per year. For 2012 they dropped down to below 12,000 for the year. I remember talking with Shigeru Uehara when he visited my home in 2003 where he said that if they could sell 8000 to 9000 cars per year they would be ecstatic. Also consider that the new NSX will be a hybrid using a sophisticated combination of engine driving the rear and electric motors driving the front. They are pushing the technology whereas Corvette is evolving their car. What is interesting is that there is very little cross over between Corvette and other cars like Porsche, NSX, and others.

 

[Ponyboy]

I'd guess that a few things make the cost of NSX 2.0 inherently greater
1) Quality of components.I'm pretty certain that the interior of the new NSX will be at least as nice as their current offerings.
2) Much greater cost of development. The C7 from my perspective is an evolution of the C6. So the costs can't be anywhere near as much as designing a car de novo. I make this assumption because I thought the new NSX is not going to be based on our NSX's chassis. Now I will say that GM claims few parts carry over from the C6; however, from what I've seen the car isn't too far removed from the C6 so it maybe simply be a new GM parts bin.
3) Facilities cost. Honda is building a new facility for the new NSX. The C7 is being built at the same plant as the C6. In fact, they've moved the manufacture of the aluminum frame from out-of-house to the in-house facility trimming significant costs.

All true. However considering all of those cost savings measures that GM enjoys, from the financial side, GM and Honda's Operating Margins are very close to each other (4.67% vs. 4.80%). Of course, this is for GM and Honda as a whole and not broken down by division. That said, because the Corvette is exclusive to Chevy, there'll be a limit on costs that can be shared with other models and divisions. I'm sure they'll be some switchgear and mechanical parts that are shared but the vast majority of R&D, production, etc costs will have to shouldered by the Corvette cost center. The difference in costs may be closer than we may realize.

The difference in price, IMHO, will come from each respective company's profit margins. I just calculated the PMs for GM ((4.44/150.94)x100 = 2.94%) and Honda ((4.23/115.06)x100 = 3.67%). Of course, these models may be company outliers with way different fiscal goals but if, all else being equal, they keep to their company fiscal percentages, then that may be where any price differences stem from.

EDIT: after thinking about it - These are halo cars for and, IMHO, it's highly likely that their costs and profits will be substantially different than that of each company's other models and the above may not apply.

 

[jond]

if it's not the use of CF driving the NSX up to $100k+ what would be??

You think Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc cost $300,000 in materials?
Just depends what you want. I would rather have an Audi R8, Nissan GTR, or Acura NSX over a Corvette.
Just not the same class to me, regardless of performance.

 

[drmanny3]

Let’s face it, owning or driving a car is an emotional decision. It goes beyond just transportation. It is often an extension of who we are or who we aspire to be. The C6's lowest production year to date was 2012 where approximately 12,000 cars were sold. That is more than all the years of NSX in the US. That is a sobering statistic. Even though our cars are over 22 years old in design (91 model) they are still great looking vehicles. With a supercharger or turbo they also go pretty quickly. The Corvette and NSX are considered Halo cars. However I have read that people who come to the dealership looking at Corvettes do not end up purchasing other Chevy vehicles. This was not the case with the Nissan Z, or Acura NSX. While we might not cross purchase the Corvette, I do admire that Corvette has been racing their cars over the years and taking what they have learned to improve their vehicles. Porsche has done the same. I am anxious to see Acura get back into racing with the NSX.

 

[NA1MT]

There is no hybrid class in racing, so that's out.

 

[Ponyboy]

HPD has already said that they'll be racing it.

Race organizations (ALMS, Super GT, FIA, etc) will fit the car in. Whether in a hybrid class or experimental or some other class.

 

[drmanny3]

I suspect that ALMS will let Acura run the new NSX. Afterall they have been pushing alternative forms of power for some time now. I believe that having a front wheel driven by electric motors will kill most in the tight turns. It should be very interesting.

 

[Nukem]

Well That depends...ALMS is merging with Grand-Am.

 

[JD Cross]

I think until the day GM offers a modern OHC direct injected engine, the Corvette will remain an example of taking old technology and continuing to make it better.
No question the Corvette offers terrific value for the money perhaps because of much lower technology costs than other marques.
And I suspect the Corvette market has much different demographics than the NSX or other sports cars.

Jim

 

[NA1MT]

I think until the day GM offers a modern OHC direct injected engine, the Corvette will remain an example of taking old technology and continuing to make it better.
No question the Corvette offers terrific value for the money perhaps because of much lower technology costs than other marques.
And I suspect the Corvette market has much different demographics than the NSX or other sports cars.




Jim

Guess its officially arrived then, as this new motor does have direct port injection.

 

[JD Cross]

Guess its officially arrived then, as this new motor does have direct port injection.

I should have checked on the direct port injection before I opened my mouth
Still waiting for OHC before I'll say the Corvette has arrived though
Time for the pushrods to go.

 

[latzke]

I do have to admit that GM did a pretty good job in improving the Corvette for 2014. They had done poorly in the interior of the car for many years. So to see the change is encouraging.

I was also excited about this change, then I saw a picture. Very disappointed. Reading more about it I'm lead to believe they're not changing the fugly design/layout of the interior so that it doesn't suck...they're just using better materials (stitched leather/pleather instead of hard plastics, stuff like that). I find it hard to want to sit in this (taken from official site):

 

[JD Cross]

The 2014 Corvette side view somehow reminds me of a GTR
Like the last generation Corvette reminded me of an NSX