Many people fear change. They want the same thing recycled hence the success of many seasons and episodes of the same stuff found on TV over the years - for a media that is about as old as the automobile. The same can be said for restaurants, clothes, or anything related to art. There's nothing truly wrong with the same stuff recycled, but there comes a time when there's going to be change. We've been consuming the same stuff for ages, but when someone tries to make a smart progression, there's always going to be the nay-sayers and doubters with no profound logic behind the negativity.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
Jay Leno's Garage reviewing NSX G2...
- Thread starter ciscokid
- Start date
Many people fear change. They want the same thing recycled hence the success of many seasons and episodes of the same stuff found on TV over the years - for a media that is about as old as the automobile. The same can be said for restaurants, clothes, or anything related to art. There's nothing truly wrong with the same stuff recycled, but there comes a time when there's going to be change. We've been consuming the same stuff for ages, but when someone tries to make a smart progression, there's always going to be the nay-sayers and doubters with no profound logic behind the negativity.
Remember the all the NSX rumors to what big changes were coming leading up to the new 2002. I do. What a letdown for
most of us.
Reason I purchased a 2005 was because they announced in advance that was the end of production (had a 2001 Spa Yellow at the time)
+ the car was still very desirable to me....kept for 5 years while patiently awaiting the all new NSX to happen.
most of us.
Reason I purchased a 2005 was because they announced in advance that was the end of production (had a 2001 Spa Yellow at the time)
+ the car was still very desirable to me....kept for 5 years while patiently awaiting the all new NSX to happen.
Last edited:
I think your point on origins has some validity but it seems that a majority of the original "meat" for the car (motor, shape, engineering, suspension, etc.) came from Japan...it's just now being all "processed" in American from here forward. Overall opinions on all you brought up will vary based upon frame of reference I think. There are at least 3 ways I can think of this question being processed and an opinion garnered: marketing principle, concept principle and design principle.
Marketing
From a marketing standpoint, as pointed out Acura owns the term "NSX" and are free to use it, brand it, kill it, milk it etc. however they want. It makes perfect sense for them to leverage the brand equity built into the original showstopper and use this 3 letter platform as a foundation...the mere mention of a new NSX sent excitement ripples throughout the auto landscape for over the last decade. It got milked a bit much when they canned names like the Legend, the Integra, the Verno (81-95...Vigor in US towards the end) and followed suit with a literal A thru Z exploitation of ARX (Le Mans), CSX (Civic in Japan), ILX, MDX, RDX, RLX, RSX, TLX, TSX, XXX, ZDX. As far as marketing is concerned they need to make their product known (and using 'NSX' greatly helps them obvioulsy), take competition seriously, be ardent about relating to their customers, and progress at the speed of the market. There is no doubt in my mind that their recent era of design-by-committee hampered the company's ability to do these things like they had in the past or why else did they just pull a corporate about face. From this standpoint it is an uber mess that will require years of cleanup.
Concept
From a conceptual standpoint, I think it is commonly agreed both here and publicly warranting very little comment that this version not only conceptually but in real-time has brought new tech to the table, a new lower price point for hang-with-ferrari performance (still needing to be proven tho), and pioneered some revolutionary platforms for years to come. From this outlook, it looks like it is going to have great reliability and perform quite well against much higher priced options. From this standpoint it is a complete win.
Design
And finally from a design standpoint (not the engr aspect just the bare essential of recognition/appearance), it is arguably a miss and here lies the giant disconnect with a significant market audience with it's very hatchback-like rear, sedan-like hung headlights, and embossed mesh faux-grill, none of which can be used in the same sentence to describe the 1.0. It's understood that the economy and other uncontrollable variables (Tsunami '11) only added to preventing a timely successor from having become incarnate. But from strictly a design perspective, whoever thought they could circumvent needed and gradual design iterations as proven necessary in the industry and forcefully skip a couple decades and label it as such took an enormous risk on behalf of the brand. The value of something as simple as the element of its appearance should not be underestimated. And with big risks we all know you'll either get big rewards or big losses (also, still needing to be proven w/time).
Personally I have a hunch from what I've read that the decision to skip goes back to somewhere between '06-'09 w/the original concept drawings paired with a staunch commitment to "the beak" and in desperation unintentionally losing their ability to relate to their (at-the-time) loyal audience. Even just a few years before this the HSC ('03) was vying to be a very visible successor but this changed obviously. I don't think the 'skip-iterations' decision rests on Torrance HQ but rather Honda Japan, and Acura USA had to deal with whatever they'd been given practically in every aspect. When the powers that be realized more power was needed, that obviously sent this thing back to the drawing board but now they were in a massive time crunch and had to focus on just fitting it in there! Btw I said desperation because if you look at their numbers back then times were tough and making a big move seemed quite necessary.
...For those who think the new NSX 2.0 diverges too much from the original, take a look at the evolution of the Corvette:
I am hard pressed to find any linkage whatsoever between the current design and the original design. They are completely different cars.
Thank you for this graphic that helps make this point with oh let's see...30 examples to demonstrate this phenomena. The bottom of the poster spells it out nicely. You cannot and should not go directly from version 1.0 to version 30.0 and call it a 'Corvette'. You cannot and should not go directly from version 1.0 to version 30.0 if you want to establish 'heritage'. And you cannot and should not go directly from version 1.0 to version 30.0 and not expect to disenfranchise some customers, tv car critics, automotive magazine journalists, and the like. You are most certainly right that you cannot please everyone.
I respectfully disagree that this would have happened with regard to the outward design (they already were going to incorporate state of the art technology no matter what). I am hard pressed to even think of an example of when has a sequel car ever been accused in a negative light of "riding the coattails of its predecessor" if the predecessor was that good? It's the other way around and riding it is to be expected if it's that good so you can build upon it and lay down your heritage.
I think this NSX hit 1.5 out of my 3 variables above. I think performance-wise and reliability-wise it's going to knock it out of the park. Being stronger in some variables has more clout than others. You could have the most AMAZING technology under the hood (one category) but if it is genuinely displeasing to the eye (another category) you will be hard pressed to sell the product and this doesn't just apply to cars. Make no mistake, the new NSX is not an ugly car by any stretch of the word...it truly is beautiful in its own right. Looking at Prime posts on facebook and around here it becomes quite clear that it boils down to how one interprets all these variables (the tech, the price, the name, the appearance, the performance, the brand, etc.) which forms their personal expectations and how they are met. I am genuinely happy to see that there are folks on here whose expectations have been entirely met so far. To be honest I am quite jealous of you because I had hoped that would be me, and that the expectations I had dreamed up over the yrs for the design would be met. But hey, that's my problem and nobody elses :smile:
Last edited:
You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. There is no way that Acura could have satisfied all constituencies. Had the NSX 2.0 been overly similar to the 1.0 and/or failed to incorporate state of the art technology, people would have complained that the NSX did not evolve enough during the 12 year lapse between models. The posts would read: “Acura is trying to ride the coattails of the original, rather than updating the design and creating something new” or “Acura failed to take advantage of the new technologies now available and used by other super cars.” Instead, people complain that the new design diverges too much from the original, and incorporates too much new technology. In short, complainers will complain. There is no perfect car for everyone.
For those who think the new NSX 2.0 diverges too much from the original, take a look at the evolution of the Corvette:
I am hard pressed to find any linkage whatsoever between the current design and the original design. They are completely different cars.
In order to make a new model attractive to buyers who own the prior model, car manufacturers must create something meaningfully different. Otherwise, current owners will not buy the new model because it is not sufficiently different from their existing car.
Acura could not release multiple independent versions of the NSX 2.0 all at once, each one designed to appeal to a different segment of the high performance sports car market – that’s simply not realistic under the circumstances. Acura is understandingly, appropriately and necessarily proceeding cautiously. Perhaps there will be different versions of the NSX down the line. However, for the time being, with the risky re-introduction of a car that had been largely absent from the automobile landscape for 12 years (except to a small niche), Acura has to start with a single base NSX and see how things go. Thus, Acura necessarily endeavored to strike a balance among the countless factors that comprise a high performance sports car. By definition, a balance is not ideal for everyone. I personally applaud the balance that Acura struck with the NSX 2.0.
The notion that the NSX was designed exclusively by Americans, without any input from Japan, is nonsensical. Acura undoubtedly integrated the input and contributions of its best and brightest from both sides of the Pacific.
For the past 60 years, owners of prior model cars – who are often particularly attached to their existing car – have frequently criticized and rejected new models for many different reasons. While the proffered grounds for rejecting the new model may vary, the tension and resulting debate is all too common. This divide is often exacerbated when the new model is economically not an option for the owner of the existing model.
Lastly, I am amused by those attempting to read Leno’s mind, and attribute disfavor to Leno based on what he didn’t say. You guys should put your talents to better use . . . the Psychic Friends Network is currently hiring.
This is bang on. Some great posts on this thread.
Fun post to read, you raised some good points. I suspect tho that more than a few could debate that now you're reading the minds of many an existing model owner, proffering some of the divide as stemming from economic sour grapes while not acknowledging the possibility of just not being enough of the right stuff for their preferences that would've allowed them to easily justify the economics.
Fun post to read, you raised some good points. I suspect tho that more than a few could debate that now you're reading the minds of many an existing model owner, proffering some of the divide as stemming from economic sour grapes while not acknowledging the possibility of just not being enough of the right stuff for their preferences that would've allowed them to easily justify the economics.
Spot on.
I think your point on origins has some validity but it seems that a majority of the original "meat" for the car (motor, shape, engineering, suspension, etc.) came from Japan...it's just now being all "processed" in American from here forward. Overall opinions on all you brought up will vary based upon frame of reference I think. There are at least 3 ways I can think of this question being processed and an opinion garnered: marketing principle, concept principle and design principle.
Marketing
From a marketing standpoint, as pointed out Acura owns the term "NSX" and are free to use it, brand it, kill it, milk it etc. however they want. It makes perfect sense for them to leverage the brand equity built into the original showstopper and use this 3 letter platform as a foundation...the mere mention of a new NSX sent excitement ripples throughout the auto landscape for over the last decade. It got milked a bit much when they canned names like the Legend, the Integra, the Verno (81-95...Vigor in US towards the end) and followed suit with a literal A thru Z exploitation of ARX (Le Mans), CSX (Civic in Japan), ILX, MDX, RDX, RLX, RSX, TLX, TSX, XXX, ZDX. As far as marketing is concerned they need to make their product known (and using 'NSX' greatly helps them obvioulsy), take competition seriously, be ardent about relating to their customers, and progress at the speed of the market. There is no doubt in my mind that their recent era of design-by-committee hampered the company's ability to do these things like they had in the past or why else did they just pull a corporate about face. From this standpoint it is an uber mess that will require years of cleanup.
Concept
From a conceptual standpoint, I think it is commonly agreed both here and publicly warranting very little comment that this version not only conceptually but in real-time has brought new tech to the table, a new lower price point for hang-with-ferrari performance (still needing to be proven tho), and pioneered some revolutionary platforms for years to come. From this outlook, it looks like it is going to have great reliability and perform quite well against much higher priced options. From this standpoint it is a complete win.
Design
And finally from a design standpoint (not the engr aspect just the bare essential of recognition/appearance), it is arguably a miss and here lies the giant disconnect with a significant market audience with it's very hatchback-like rear, sedan-like hung headlights, and embossed mesh faux-grill, none of which can be used in the same sentence to describe the 1.0. It's understood that the economy and other uncontrollable variables (Tsunami '11) only added to preventing a timely successor from having become incarnate. But from strictly a design perspective, whoever thought they could circumvent needed and gradual design iterations as proven necessary in the industry and forcefully skip a couple decades and label it as such took an enormous risk on behalf of the brand. The value of something as simple as the element of its appearance should not be underestimated. And with big risks we all know you'll either get big rewards or big losses (also, still needing to be proven w/time).
Personally I have a hunch from what I've read that the decision to skip goes back to somewhere between '06-'09 w/the original concept drawings paired with a staunch commitment to "the beak" and in desperation unintentionally losing their ability to relate to their (at-the-time) loyal audience. Even just a few years before this the HSC ('03) was vying to be a very visible successor but this changed obviously. I don't think the 'skip-iterations' decision rests on Torrance HQ but rather Honda Japan, and Acura USA had to deal with whatever they'd been given practically in every aspect. When the powers that be realized more power was needed, that obviously sent this thing back to the drawing board but now they were in a massive time crunch and had to focus on just fitting it in there! Btw I said desperation because if you look at their numbers back then times were tough and making a big move seemed quite necessary.
Thank you for this graphic that helps make this point with oh let's see...30 examples to demonstrate this phenomena. The bottom of the poster spells it out nicely. You cannot and should not go directly from version 1.0 to version 30.0 and call it a 'Corvette'. You cannot and should not go directly from version 1.0 to version 30.0 if you want to establish 'heritage'. And you cannot and should not go directly from version 1.0 to version 30.0 and not expect to disenfranchise some customers, tv car critics, automotive magazine journalists, and the like. You are most certainly right that you cannot please everyone.
I respectfully disagree that this would have happened with regard to the outward design (they already were going to incorporate state of the art technology no matter what). I am hard pressed to even think of an example of when has a sequel car ever been accused in a negative light of "riding the coattails of its predecessor" if the predecessor was that good? It's the other way around and riding it is to be expected if it's that good so you can build upon it and lay down your heritage.
I think this NSX hit 1.5 out of my 3 variables above. I think performance-wise and reliability-wise it's going to knock it out of the park. Being stronger in some variables has more clout than others. You could have the most AMAZING technology under the hood (one category) but if it is genuinely displeasing to the eye (another category) you will be hard pressed to sell the product and this doesn't just apply to cars. Make no mistake, the new NSX is not an ugly car by any stretch of the word...it truly is beautiful in its own right. Looking at Prime posts on facebook and around here it becomes quite clear that it boils down to how one interprets all these variables (the tech, the price, the name, the appearance, the performance, the brand, etc.) which forms their personal expectations and how they are met. I am genuinely happy to see that there are folks on here whose expectations have been entirely met so far. To be honest I am quite jealous of you because I had hoped that would be me, and that the expectations I had dreamed up over the yrs for the design would be met. But hey, that's my problem and nobody elses :smile:
Vf - I love your analysis. There is no doubt that the new car carries very little over from the old. Similarities that I see include the three intakes on the front (only that there are three not their design), bulges over the front wheels, the narrow A pillars, the size and shape of the front windshield, the coke-bottle central taper and the long thin upper edge of the tail light. More obviously are the differences - the proportions of the car, the pointed front and rear edges (and the central crease), the fast back B pillars and the whole side intake design area. I agree that the similarities are minor and the differences are more significant as a whole. The problem I am having is coming up with a contemporary design that captures enough of the original model's style and proportions. This is especially true with regard to the B pillar and the glass hatch which has just gone completely out of style now that it is 26 years later. Perhaps this is also true of the long rear overhang although I still like it. But to your point, they clearly did not have to adopt the hanging headlights, the pointed front and rear and the "interwoven" side intakes and 'flying buttress' B pillars to make it fresh. But apparently they could not resist going in a new and more radical direction.
Having said all that, I do think it looks pretty amazing going down the road - especially in black.
Are there any major design areas in 2.0 that you would be willing to keep in your evolutionary design?
How would you handle the glass hatch?
Of all the colors I think black compliments the design overall the best.
I think that hatch-back look must absolutely stay...they worked so incredibly hard in that area just to make sure it was getting enough air and that is simply just next-to-impossible to revise.
Instead of saying what I would keep at this point I'd rather just say the one and only thing I would really like to see removed/changed. In the video, we could see designer Michelle Christensen's purest taste...she likes the simpler Y-spoke wheels (I think they are the best as well), she likes the pure form/function of the stock rear deck-lid which in and of itself provides sufficient downforce and appearing to not be so fond of the $3000 dollar carbon add-on (at 3K I can easily agree
). One of the things we all really appreciate with our Gen 1's is the genuineness of every design element...everything having real purpose and not just for show for ex. our side vents really function unlike fake ones we often see (think Mustangs). I especially really appreciated the airflow animation showing how they controlled the flow in and through the entire car continuing to guide it all the way till its off the tail! That right there is extremely innovative. So with all of this purist design philosophy, special attention to aero-dynamics, and functionality in its truest form, riddle me this....why oh why is more than three-quarters of the center front grill not real mesh? Meaning, why is it an embossed stamp/mold imitating hexagonal mesh? Which doesn't even match the hexagonal size of the real side mesh? 
Imo updating this alone would do wonders for the front end. At certain angles you can see the actual opening towards the very bottom that they need for cooling. I've tried to reconcile this design element wondering why go fake up front with a molded pattern when everything else on the entire stinkin' car has purpose and/or is real?
Excellent observations and comments
Ms Christensen and the team are clearly good designers and the nose is the part that somehow isn't quite right.
I'm sure they know this and struggled with the nose of the car a great deal.
There's usually reasons for these things
I'm thinking that part of the issue might be related to the electric front wheel drive system.
From the driveline pic it looks fairly large and sits up relatively high.
Perhaps that kept the front of the hood higher than great design would dictate and the solid grill piece was necessary to keep water and debris out of the electrics.
Perhaps that left the designers with few options how to join the end of the hood with the bottom of the grill.
If the solid grill piece was left smooth and painted body color I don't think that would have worked well.
Perhaps giving it a textured appearance (faux mesh) helped blend it in and not highlight a difficult design compromise.
I agree. But I don't think it speaks well for the design. My favorite cars look great in every color.
Excellent observations and comments
Ms Christensen and the team are clearly good designers and the nose is the part that somehow isn't quite right.
I'm sure they know this and struggled with the nose of the car a great deal.
There's usually reasons for these things
I'm thinking that part of the issue might be related to the electric front wheel drive system.
From the driveline pic it looks fairly large and sits up relatively high.
Perhaps that kept the front of the hood higher than great design would dictate and the solid grill piece was necessary to keep water and debris out of the electrics.
Perhaps that left the designers with few options how to join the end of the hood with the bottom of the grill.
If the solid grill piece was left smooth and painted body color I don't think that would have worked well.
Perhaps giving it a textured appearance (faux mesh) helped blend it in and not highlight a difficult design compromise.
I think you're right...they seemed to spend a lot a time in that area and try to solve the design issue of where all these planes intersect.
From what I saw, the nose not "meshing" right, aside from the innards, was one of the 2 most noticeable changes from concept to production...that, and the flying buttress vent...
And they really seemed to try to explore different materials and shapes in that area. To me it is a mystery as to exactly what degree of cooling the electric front wheel drive system (if that really is what it's all about) ends up requiring. The front grills visible volume air intake capacity changed quite a bit from prototype to production as well as the actual design of this whole area.
We went from the original...
that fleshed out to...
but after being mocked up as...
which got blackened out like...
which later got (some sorta glass treatment)...
which kinda resembles...
which we see "resurfacing" (as a tangent) on...
which in final production became...
which attempts to look like...
when it should look like...
but instead (since it's fake) reminds me of...
But on the other hand if a wind tunnel engineer came up to me and said, "Actually that mold pattern up front functions as a disruptor to "splash" the air pattern into multi-directional spray currents which better allows the body contours and vents increased control of navigating the air flow across the entire automotive surface and greatly increases downforce" then I guess I will gladly eat my words and prepare my slice of pie-ala-humbled :tongue:
Agreed. I guess in this case the black color ends up becoming the final variable factor to cap all the previous attempts to help blend in the nose grill and even further conceal whatever difficult design compromises that might have occurred.
Last edited:
I don't see how the Lambo or Audi pulls off the grille better at all. They all look distracting to me. I agree that the design language would be cleaner without the grille mesh completely, but there is a level of function behind them... I personally would remove all of the mesh and live without them, even if it means cutting the front bumper if need be.
Lastly, on the NSX branding. This new NSX has proven to increase the NSX notoriety where it's more of a household name like Ferrari instead of a fanboy name. The new NSX is more well known than the first gen now, which is only famous among most car guys and I do mean that in a gender specific situation also :frown: So first gen NSX owners should be thanking Acura for elevating the NSX brand, and not "defiling" it as some would put it. You bunch of ingrates hahah :wink:
Only the performance status quo and reliability for the new NSX has yet be proven... And that's just around the corner now.
Lastly, on the NSX branding. This new NSX has proven to increase the NSX notoriety where it's more of a household name like Ferrari instead of a fanboy name. The new NSX is more well known than the first gen now, which is only famous among most car guys and I do mean that in a gender specific situation also :frown: So first gen NSX owners should be thanking Acura for elevating the NSX brand, and not "defiling" it as some would put it. You bunch of ingrates hahah :wink:
Only the performance status quo and reliability for the new NSX has yet be proven... And that's just around the corner now.
fastaussie
Suspended
an excellent point, when it's almost unanimous that the car looks best in the colour that hides the overabundance of details...
- - - Updated - - -
i dunno about that, since only people who already know about the previous model NSX have been bothered to speak to me about the new one. what makes you proclaim the second generation has already surpassed the notoriety of the original?
Social media trending. Videos of the new NSX spotting posted by various demographics and the excitement or emotions gauged in those videos/posts. My own friends posting or tagging me in posts about the new NSX. There's some videos in another thread but I'm too lazy to dig it up. The new NSX may not be more popular among enthusiasts yet*, but it's certainly more noticed and thus popular on an overall level for the public.
Also, the new pricetag is going to elevate the perception of the new NSX along with the decent new HP levels also.
- - - Updated - - -
Let's not ignore the recent jump in first gen pricing also... It's not by coincidence.
Also, the new pricetag is going to elevate the perception of the new NSX along with the decent new HP levels also.
- - - Updated - - -
Let's not ignore the recent jump in first gen pricing also... It's not by coincidence.
I'm with you
My experience is the only people talking about the new one are those who know the old one.
Maybe I travel in small circles?
The social media I've seen has been on NSX sites.
As far as the price rise of the first generation I'd suggest it's more to do with buyers realizing it was undervalued.
Well to counter. 99% of my friends are not "car guys" and they've shown more interest in the new car than my own.
If you search the hashtag #NSX , you will find it now being overwhelmed by the new NSX in majority when there are new events/news and many of the posts are coming from non-car enthusiasts - much higher than before like 2-3 years ago when the hashtag was barely tallying with occasional pics of the NSX. The total number of posts have tripled since the introduction of the 2nd gen NSX, from less than 100K to 340K+ to date.
That's just one measure. The new NSX had Superbowl coverage and is only getting started. The first gen has had 25+ years to get acquainted with people.
If you search the hashtag #NSX , you will find it now being overwhelmed by the new NSX in majority when there are new events/news and many of the posts are coming from non-car enthusiasts - much higher than before like 2-3 years ago when the hashtag was barely tallying with occasional pics of the NSX. The total number of posts have tripled since the introduction of the 2nd gen NSX, from less than 100K to 340K+ to date.
That's just one measure. The new NSX had Superbowl coverage and is only getting started. The first gen has had 25+ years to get acquainted with people.
fastaussie
Suspended
all my non-car enthusiast mates also tell me all about the new NSX (like i don't already know). however i'll guarantee they're not telling their other non-NSX owning friends.
as far as social media, if a Kardashian farts discreetly, everyone in the world will know about it within seconds. this is the age we live in, but i don't think many non car enthusiasts care nearly as much as you think...
I bet in 20 years from now, you could pull up to a grocery store in either NSX and you will still have people ask you, "What kinda car is that?"
This I shall not disagree with! :biggrin: Unless Acura somehow rises meteorically
I wouldn't underestimate social media tho. It's developing deeply in the younger generations and it's only going to evolve in the future. So the adults of tomorrow will be even more dependent on it. It has already proven to be a good way to gauge or quantify public opinions easily as pro for the internet tool.
I think you're right...they seemed to spend a lot a time in that area and try to solve the design issue of where all these planes intersect.
From what I saw, the nose not "meshing" right, aside from the innards, was one of the 2 most noticeable changes from concept to production...that, and the flying buttress vent...
Vf - First of all let me say its great to have you resurface on Prime so we can have your amazing insights. Secondly, thanks for putting the red and gray model in a side view comparison so we can see what they did. I have to say, I really like the direction they took it in this case. It seems that in addition to increasing the size of the side intakes, they also raised the rear haunches (to use Jay's word) thereby creating a greater slope on the side creases so the car seems a bit more aggressive, exotic and even a bit shorter. Also contributing to this improved look is moving the C pillar attachment point forward emphasizing the mid-engined proportions. Hope they didn't hurt visibility much in the process.
Finally, I like the Avengers car quite a bit too. It is so much simpler than the production car and I think that is the right direction. Can you imagine if the blacked out panels below the silver line were open (removed)? I know that would create hanging headlights (not your fav) but I think it would look pretty aggressive and simple too.
Last edited:
I'm surprised nobody is talking about what Jay said right after he reflects on the car driving experience and I think it's actually a pretty big complement for the Acura team.
Jay states that the New NSX reminds him of his 1964 Honda S600 on a massive amount of steroids. He was praising how it was very involving and how it's an amazing car. For a guy who has so many special vehicles in his garage, for him to call the car amazing and involving is kind of big, considering it's a hybrid awd setup.
That was one of the main concerns people had when they started talking about the hybrid setup that the car would be boring to drive. Jay doesn't seem to think so since he practically had a big grin every time he starts to push it. Looks like a positive review of the car.
Jay states that the New NSX reminds him of his 1964 Honda S600 on a massive amount of steroids. He was praising how it was very involving and how it's an amazing car. For a guy who has so many special vehicles in his garage, for him to call the car amazing and involving is kind of big, considering it's a hybrid awd setup.
That was one of the main concerns people had when they started talking about the hybrid setup that the car would be boring to drive. Jay doesn't seem to think so since he practically had a big grin every time he starts to push it. Looks like a positive review of the car.
Thanks Valk...it's great to be back! I'm pretty sure that red/gray image pairing was something nspec put together awhile back :smile:...all I did was add the circle highlights.
Your Avengers car comments I had never considered! Simplify, simplify, simplify so I tinkered with it for your imagination...
Original...
Darken gull-wing slats...
Reduce delineator on the slats...
Graft in beak (keeping darkened bottom half and wish center mesh was real)...
Remove faux mesh on front grill (leaving existing opening for cooling electric fwd sys)...
So although it's simpler I continue to see more and more why and how difficult it mighta been to present a design solution to this specific converging area.
That is a great point...he seems to have ALOTTA fun with this guys S600 (bmw/miata hybrid)
The front grill on the new R8 is atrocious. It's a huge black expanse without much of anything breaking it up.
Even Audi knows this. Look at how Audi always displays the new R8 with the front license plate holder in place together with a placard that reads "R8 V10 Plus". I cannot think of a single other super car that is displayed at car shows with the front license plate present. Hell even plebeian cars like the TLX are not displayed at shows with a front license plate! But in the case of the R8 the inclusion of a front plate apparently enhances its looks.
Watch the episode of Jay Leno's Garage where he reviews the new R8. Audi brings him a sample car with the front license plate placard on it. Jay finds it odd so he asks them why it's there and the Audi manager has no answer beyond saying "you can remove it".
Similar threads
