I guess you were so focused on the emotional tone of the reviewer that you missed all the negative things he said....
1. It makes a worse daily driver than the NSX
"getting in and out of this car is not exactly easy"
"everything is controlled by a screen and it's not exactly usable, but it's beautiful"
"most McLarens ride like a Rolls Royce, but this thing rides stiff"
2. The NSX has superior linear acceleration
"every time you hit the gas the 1980's calls and asks for its turbo lag back"
3. The NSX's handling is more secure
"I don't know how he does 120 mph on that corner in a car that loves to be sideways"
"that car is fast and loose"
"when I got it on the track I didn't entirely trust it"
"[the 650S is] more controllable in the corner, but this thing is alive. I'm having to constantly counter steer when aiming for the apex"
"it's loose when entering the corner"
"on the street drive I didn't think the brakes were that good"
4. The NSX is a super car, but the 570S is a sports car
"this McLaren looks like a super car but it's actually a sports car."
I just love how the NSX critics are saying the new NSX contains too many compromises, yet the 570S is filled with compromises in order to make it "fun". McLaren has said the 570S was designed to provide less down force than the 650S in order to make it feel more "loose" when cornering. Care to defend this as a desirable trait for a super car? If not then perhaps we should view the 570S as being a really fun high end sports car and not a true super car.
So a fully optioned 570S will cost about $50,000 more than the NSX and it will have slower lap times. But the 570S provides more emotional appeal.
I agree. In fact, I posted similar observations a couple of days ago and, in response, I was told that I should buy a Buick (the exchange was subsequently deleted).
Every car has certain compromises in order to achieve the balance desired by the particular manufacturer. That's because buyers seek different balances. There is no absolute correct balance. Rather, there are only subjective preferences. If a buyer seeks a looser, tossable car that is more fun to drive on the track (and perhaps also spirited canyon driving) by someone with superlative driving skills, and the buyer is not dissuaded by difficult ingress/egress, nor meaningful turbo lag, nor the other identified shortcomings, the 570s is likely as great option. I personally am looking for a slightly different balance. I prefer precise, planted and predictable over loose and tossable, less turbo lag, and manageable ingress/egress (not necessarily sedan ingress/egress, but not back breaking ingress/egress). I am looking for a sports car/supercar/whatever label you prefer that I can comfortably drive every day. I am willing to make certain compromises to achieve this balance (although for me, the lack of turbo lag and lack of propensity to "go sideways" are not compromises, but rather, improvements). For some, my compromises go too far, and reflect a dilution of what a supercar/sports car/whatever you call it should be. So be it. I respectfully disagree.
These same arguments have gone on for years with other models. Owners of GT2s and GT3s have historically disparaged Turbos as being too demure and sedate. The GT2 and GT3 indisputably are more "fun" to drive by a skilled driver on a track. Nevertheless, I choose the Turbo (996 and 997) because it reflected the balance better suited for my needs. Others criticized the GTR as being too easy to drive. That did not bother me one bit. I have no problem if my car is easier to drive well, and does not require superlative driving skills to enjoy. In fact, I prefer if my car is easier to handle and drive fast on a spirited canyon drive, and less prone to going sideways. The truth is that I don't have the driving skills to manage a wildly loose car that easily goes sideways. I'm not that good. Therefore, such a car is NOT more fun for me. To the contrary, such a car is far LESS fun for me. "Fun" is also a subjective balance. What a track-centric reviewer perceives as "fun" is not what many regular folks, with less developed driving skills, perceive as fun.
I have been skiing for 40 years. I learned how to carve a turn on relatively narrow and straight skis, when the ability to properly carve a turn was a meaningful accomplishment. Now, with modern parabolic skis, every Tom, Dick and Harry can carve a turn after only a few outings. It is exponentially easier to carve a turn on parabolic skis . . . . stated another way, parabolic skis practically carve themselves. Thats just fine with me. Even though I was perfectly able to carve a turn using straight, narrow skis, I switched to the parabolic skis and I now take advantage of the new technology. The parabolic skis are easier to use, and require less effort, which is also just fine as I age.
My wife loves the look of the new Alpha Romeo 4C. A few months ago, we went to the Alpha dealership. She was willing to deal with the lack of certain technology. However, the insanely difficult ingress/egress was a deal breaker. The 4C is wildly difficult to enter and exit. Fine for an occasionally used track car (which is precisely what Alpha was shooting for), but not practical for a daily driver. I don't know if the 570s is as difficult to enter/exit as the 4C -- if it is, that alone would be deal breaker for me (again, because I seek a daily driver).
With the NSX, Acura sought a particular balance. This balance is not for everyone. If you want a loose, tossable car -- with meaningful turbo lag -- that is more fun for a highly skilled driver who is comfortable and capable of pushing a car to its limits on a track, the NSX is not the best option. Rather, a 570s appears to be a better option. Conversely, if you do not require these characteristics and/or prefer a fast, great handling, more precise, planted and predictable car that is easier to drive without superlative skills, and has no turbo lag, the NSX may be the better option. For some, the compromises made by the NSX are too much. For some, the NSX balance no longer qualifies as a "supercar" or a "sports car" or whatever label you want to use. I don't care about the label. The balance achieved by the NSX -- as described by the reviewers -- is what I am looking for, notwithstanding the necessary compromises (again, all cars have compromises).
