reviews are out

fastaussie said:

not sure if you've been reading the same reviews as everyone else, but 90% of them are lukewarm at best. some reviewers don't think it's exciting, some question whether it's even a Supercar at all. don't be mad at me, i'm not raining on any parades, i haven't written any of the reviews.

you're assertion that a Supercar must be mid-engined is silly, and that Merc has never made one is also a bit absurd. perhaps doing a little research?

Click to expand...

No, I said Ultimate Supercar. We've discussed this over and over. It's beating a dead horse. You like big engine, old school supercars. I am open to cutting edge stuff. Leave it at that. I can appreciate both and all aspects. We were discussing F1 tech and the trickle down affect and the correlation it has with making road cars. Mercedes makes cars for old people and rich college kids On the occasion that they do enter supercar territory, many enthusiasts have been left underwhelmed. BMW makes more exciting driver's cars.

Look around. People are excited. There's nothing but new posts about the creation of the NSX from the factory and it's impressive on any level. Reviews are most good for the new NSX. Look at them all. They do not share the same sentiments as your mind. But you can see what you want to see buddy. I'm not hear to change your mind. I think only you and about 3 others on here are the few politically inclined to hate the new NSX for mumbo-jumbo reasons :biggrin:

Its fascinating how two people can read, or listen to, the exact same review, and walk away with meaningfully different interpretations of the reviewer’s overall opinion of the car. We inevitably focus on comments that comport with our preconceived notion/bias, and frequently ignore comments that belie our prejudices. FastAussie consistently focuses on the negative aspects of the reviews, and stridently ignores the positive comments. Others -- likely me included -- focus much more on the positive comments, and arguably do not give enough credence to the negative observations. The resulting discussing is rather discordant.

Our interpretation of reviews is also significantly impacted by our intended use of the car and our personal preferences with respect to sports cars in general. One who is track-centric will interpret a review very differently than one looking for a daily driver, with no intent to track the car. Given that I am looking for a daily driver and have no intent to track the NSX, complaints regarding the handling of the NSX on a track are largely irrelevant to me. Similarly, amorphous comments regarding the lack of “feeling” on the track, or otherwise, do not resonate with me. Reviewers said the same thing about the GT-R – it “drives itself” – and yet I loved my GT-R. Again, my personal experiences and preferences dictate my interpretation of a reviewer’s comments. Others – e.g., FA – find such observations profoundly disturbing based on their personal preferences, and walk away from the same review with a very different impression.

I have read, and listened to, almost every NSX review in the public domain. I have yet to come across a single review that was universally positive. Not one reviewer has anointed the NSX the “perfect car.” That said, most of the reviews are far more positive than negative. Nevertheless, by focusing on the minority negative comments and ignoring the majority positive comments, one can spin/characterize almost any review as primarily negative. Some here are particularly adept at this. Of course, these negative spin doctors will say the same about me in the opposite direction, and there is probably some truth to that.

Very well said, Superfluous. Personally, I like to focus on the negatives up front because I fear regret. I get a lot of grief from fan boys on other forums for highlighting arguably minor issues and comparing cars with others I know or own-- sometimes going so far as suggesting the the brand associated with the forum is NOT in fact the best car in the world in every respect.

I value the fresh perspective of a critical eye much more than another fan who piles on.

The proof is in the pudding. I'm inhaling data as fast I can find it and conclude, gasp, that the NSX is not perfect and has room for improvement. I'm going to buy one.

My remaining fear is that Acura will announce a significantly improved car in a year or two. I'm betting that this software-defined car will allow (a la Tesla) for some of the future refinements to be applied to the original models via software patches.

So I say: lets hear more from the professional and amateur critics about why the NSX sucks. I want to go into this purchase with eyes open.

I think the nsx sucks for many ...... because they cant' afford it...:tongue:

docjohn said:

I think the nsx sucks for many ...... because they cant' afford it...:tongue:

Click to expand...

The P1, LaFerrari and 918 really suck!

personally the zonda cinque sucks the most ...awful car:biggrin:

chrisn said:

I'm betting that this software-defined car will allow (a la Tesla) for some of the future refinements to be applied to the original models via software patches.

Click to expand...

In my history of "updatable" devices, Tesla's approach is extremely rare. While many devices are even intentionally designed to be upgradable, it rarely works out. (I'm mostly talking about consumer electronics, which offer pretty easy paths for software upgrade.) My wife just leased a Model S and it has been nice to see that software updates are actually practiced by Tesla. I think it has a lot to do with the fact that the car is designed around having a data system--it constantly communicates with home base, as I understand it, and has persistent WWAN and WiFi connectivity. But I highly doubt that Acura will do anything like that with the NSX. I wish they would but think that the conventional thinking of a motor company is too much to overcome. And I have heard nothing about the car's data systems to suggest that upgrades will be anything like the Tesla approach. Perhaps more like the Alfa 4C, which has received some software updates applied by dealers to remedy issues with the transmission and auxiliary systems.

Superfluous said:

Its fascinating how two people can read, or listen to, the exact same review, and walk away with meaningfully different interpretations of the reviewer’s overall opinion of the car. We inevitably focus on comments that comport with our preconceived notion/bias, and frequently ignore comments that belie our prejudices. FastAussie consistently focuses on the negative aspects of the reviews, and stridently ignores the positive comments. Others -- likely me included -- focus much more on the positive comments, and arguably do not give enough credence to the negative observations. The resulting discussing is rather discordant.

Click to expand...

Superfluous said:

I have read, and listened to, almost every NSX review in the public domain. I have yet to come across a single review that was universally positive. Not one reviewer has anointed the NSX the “perfect car.” That said, most of the reviews are far more positive than negative. Nevertheless, by focusing on the minority negative comments and ignoring the majority positive comments, one can spin/characterize almost any review as primarily negative. Some here are particularly adept at this. Of course, these negative spin doctors will say the same about me in the opposite direction, and there is probably some truth to that.

Click to expand...

Super, you're of a less bias opinion than some die hard Primers, as am i. when i watched the Leno NSX review, the next thing i did was watch the Leno Audi R8 review back-to-back. i'm looking less at each's review's specific comments, negative or positive, as i am comparing the two reviews directly to each other. this is probably not something most people do. they simply watch the review of their chosen favourite car, revel in the positives and dismiss the negatives. human nature, it's to be understood. a car can be terrible or magnificent until you compare it against something else. right now there are no comparison tests from the media, so we make our own opinions based on what we have ascertained.

you said yourself, there hasn't been a universally positive review of the new NSX. this is certainly true,

please take note N-Spec

Click to expand...

i'm going to finish my point by responding to N-Spec below.

N Spec said:

No, I said Ultimate Supercar. We've discussed this over and over. It's beating a dead horse. You like big engine, old school supercars. I am open to cutting edge stuff. Leave it at that. I can appreciate both and all aspects. We were discussing F1 tech and the trickle down affect and the correlation it has with making road cars. Mercedes makes cars for old people and rich college kids On the occasion that they do enter supercar territory, many enthusiasts have been left underwhelmed. BMW makes more exciting driver's cars.

Look around. People are excited. There's nothing but new posts about the creation of the NSX from the factory and it's impressive on any level. Reviews are most good for the new NSX. Look at them all. They do not share the same sentiments as your mind. But you can see what you want to see buddy. I'm not hear to change your mind. I think only you and about 3 others on here are the few politically inclined to hate the new NSX for mumbo-jumbo reasons :biggrin:

Click to expand...

actually, you're mistaken. i don't particularly like big engined, old school tech. if that were the case, i'd be a massive Corvette or Viper fan, of which i am definitively not! the Audi/Lambo V10 is a pure masterpiece, however i wouldn't lump that engine in with that mix. try it yourself in either iteration, then get back to me. personally, i prefer the smaller engined, high winding Ferrari approach, which i thought you knew. the McLaren and Porsche way is pretty damned impressive too.

you're seriously in denial if you haven't noticed that many Primers have bought other cars, or aren't that jazzed about this NSX. there's a lot more than three.

this thread is about the reviews. and you're obviously not reading them if you think the NSX is getting glowing reviews. there is simply no denying that.

this car doesn't particularly do anything for me, but i don't hate it either. i actually like it more than i used to, true story.

while i'm not a massive Mercedes fan specifically, just like i'm not a massive Audi fan, i will give credit when credit is due. and the original maker of the automobile does make incredible F1 cars (old and new) and also superb road/sports/Supercars (old and new). while you've already alleged that Mercedes' forays into the Supercar echelon have been underwhelming, i'm gonna have to dispute that. case in point, the AMG GT. google a few dozen reviews, and let me know if you find any that are lukewarm. please, take your time.

while you may dismiss Merc's attempts, the reviewers would seem to disagree with you. you want to talk about glowing and wholly positive reviews, these quotes seem pretty good?

Bold claim; pretty car. Actually, let's get that out of the way first: the car is GORGEOUS. Stunning. The first time you see one in the metal, it takes a second to realize you're doing the slack-jawed yokel thing. I'm doing it now, just remembering the car.

Credit the extremely stiff aluminum spaceframe chassis, the low center of gravity, dynamic engine and transmission mounts, and the 47-53 front-to-rear weight distribution—this car is nigh unshakeable at speed.

The key word is "precision."

It's a word you hear a lot from the AMG folks when talking about this car, in reference to everything from the variable-rate hydraulic rack steering to the throttle response afforded by the hot-inside V setup (meaning the two turbochargers are mounted internally), to the double wishbone suspension.
And the GT S lays claim to that word: the steering is indeed excellent—you can put that long nose wherever you want it

The "handcrafted by racers" tagline is no joke

Sure, it's marketing fluff, but there's some truth there, too. The carbon-fiber driveshaft weighs under 9 lbs and is used in Mercedes touring race cars. The cylinder liners feature a proprietary material called Nanoslide—essentially, they're twice as hard as conventional grey cast-iron liners, reduce friction, and are very durable—which was also used in Mercedes Formula 1 engines during the 2014 season. There are lots of cool little problem-solving or make-better bits the more you look.

Pull is immediate and ferocious—and mostly lag-free—throughout the rev range. The suspension is wonderfully agile and responsive, thanks in part to the use of forged aluminum for the wishbones, wheel mounts, and steering knuckles

It truly is stunning in the metal, one of those cars you'll find yourself visiting in the garage at three in the morning. Add in a 4.0-liter twin-turbo V8 that plays a constant symphony of roars and growls and other wonderful noises, plus the fact that it's properly quick around a racetrack—if only for some semblance of bragging rights, because I don't think anyone expects customers to track these cars—and you know they're going to sell every one they make.

<main id="main" class="site-main" role="main" style="box-sizing: inherit;">What We Think

In a comparison test that also included the Nissan GT-R and Porsche 911 Turbo S, the 2016 AMG GT S won because of its excellent handling, well-tuned gearbox, strong brakes, and powerful twin-turbo V-8.

Verdict

We never expected the Mercedes-AMG GTS to be bad to drive. But I for one never expected it to be this good. Intoxicatingly fast, comfortable over long distances and blessed with balanced, accessible handling it manages to be both a relaxed grand tourer and an inspiring sportscar.

It does, although I thought we’d settled the GT-R versus GT debate when James revealed on the TV show that the GT’s Dunsfold lap time in the hands of the Stig (1.17.5) was 0.3 seconds faster than the GT-R’s. Only apparently that GT-R was four years old, thus making the internet even more angry.
Point is, the Merc GT was enormously fast at the track: quicker than an old SLS Black, FOUR seconds quicker than the Jag, and ahead of a host of other stuff including the Koenigsegg CCX. Fast.

Every once in a great while, a car so singularly special comes along that it causes jaded auto critics like us to recall with fondness and in great detail the first mile in the driver’s seat, the first sweep of the tachometer to redline, the first lap of a racetrack, and the first time we closed the door and floated away uttering: “I’ve never driven anything like that. I was expecting great things, but this surpasses all of them and showed me a few more I hadn’t thought possible.” The Mercedes-AMG GT S is such a car.

Randy Pobst gave it top marks after hooning the stylish German around Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. The 2016 Mercedes-AMG GT S found its stride in Race mode, where it busted out a 1:35:57 lap time—smack between the faster Nissan GT-R Nismo (1:35.51) and Porsche 911 Turbo S (1:35.62). “I don’t know if I have ever driven a better-handling car,” gushed Pobst. “I love it that much.”

N Spec said:

We were discussing F1 tech and the trickle down affect and the correlation it has with making road cars. Mercedes makes cars for old people and rich college kids On the occasion that they do enter supercar territory, many enthusiasts have been left underwhelmed.

Click to expand...

i feel that you should perhaps retract that last statement. that is what i call positive reviews, and not "enthusiasts being left underwhelmed".

i've driven that car several times myself, and while it's not my personal preference for my favourite car, it's bloody good. and i would have to say it's not a car simply for college kids or rich people. it's a hell of a driver's machine. beautiful, fast, a handler, and the Motor Trend 2015 Best Driver's car. there's more than one way to skin a cat mate...</main>

fastaussie said:

you said yourself, there hasn't been a universally positive review of the new NSX. this is certainly true,
i'm going to finish my point by responding to N-Spec below.

Click to expand...

Your opinion is better heard and elaborated upon this time, but I still feel like you seem to want to debate with me for no real reason sometimes. I supposed it's just in both of our nature to debate or argue, but I think it's a matter of misunderstanding on both sides mainly because I think faster than I type (I meant mostly* positive not universal). I don't hate Mercedes and the comments I made about the kids and old people are on the joking side even if there is some truth behind it. I have respect for Mercedes's resources and would never underestimate them.

The GTS is a very nice car, but it's not my cup of tea. The hot-V turbo V8 is impressive. It's going sell well and is a proper supercar competitor, but it's not an Ultimate supercar. I wish Mercedes would make a mid engine super car. The closest to that reality would be the Zondas. I just enjoy the proportions of a mid-engine car more vastly. No enthusiast has ever said, you know, I enjoy the look of the long nose hood over the short nosed, balanced proportion of a mid-engine car. The mid-engine proportion road car is the closest to universal appeal of drop-dead gorgeous looks. But again, everything is relative and subjective. To me, particular looks and proportions are very important.

I'm glad you've started to like the new NSX more for whatever it's worth. I've seen others grow warmer to the new NSX as I thought they would. It's just a matter of time. I knew since 2012, that it was going to shape up to be a nice car with minor tweaks. It could still look better, but the current new NSX is damn good looking! The first NSX's looks were not universal either, but many have grown to like it over the years.

I've never been blind to the shortcomings of any car/bike, and welcome the the negativity in a constructive form. Where we disagree is the level of intensity these negative light has been applied to the new NSX. Quite frankly tho, they echo the original NSX's short comings, so it's more a matter of philosophy/direction versus actual execution. One could argue the same would apply to the ambitious "size zero" approach of Honda F1. Honda wants a car that is not the epitome of passionate supercar, but more balanced on their own terms, unique and practical, like the first NSX.

- - - Updated - - -

O and to address your comment about first gen owners moving on to other sports cars. Good for them and I'm glad they found something that made them happy. I'm not the type of person that sits around and wonders what other people are doing with their money as it's usually not part of my job description. Who am I to get mad and say, "what! How dare you betray the NSX name?!" It sounds like you used to be a huge Honda fan and you watched your peers jump ship because they got impatient, so now you hold a grudge with Honda for letting you down? :tongue: That's a joke haha.

But really, who cares if other people went on to buy R8s or Corvettes or whatever. It has no relevance to the success of the new NSX as timing is vital in everything and relative at the same time. It clearly was not available at the time. I bet in a few years, if the NSX goes on to do well as it is projected to do, there will be some bandwagon hoppers again. But does that matter? No.

So my last point is, why are you so focused on bashing Honda? They've stumbled like any other car company. We are here to talk about the NSX, not directly about the Honda/Acura lineup or Mercedes or whatever brand in particular.

^ More great discussion.

FA: Its true that no NSX review has been entirely positive. However, the same is true of essentially every review of every car. Reviewers inevitably find issues, nits and/or things that they would change or prefer differently. Just as there is no perfect car, there is no perfect review of a car.

Interesting that the discussion has turned to the MB GTS. I had a GTS on order when I switched to the NSX. Then, when the NSX was delayed last Summer/Fall, I again contemplated a GTS, but could not bring myself to accept the compromise over the NSX. IMHO, the GTS pales in comparison to the NSX. At the recent auto show, my wife and I viewed the GTS and the NSX within minutes of each other, and both concluded that the NSX is far, far better looking. I have little doubt that the NSX will exceed the GTS in most performance metrics (certainly 0-60 times).

IMHO, expectations play an important part in the tenor of a particular review (the road to disappointment is paved with expectations). I think the GTS exceeded most reviewer’s expectations, and they were surprised by the performance of the car. Their unexpected enjoyment came through in their gushing comments. Conversely, given the state-of-the-art technology, I think most reviewers had very, very high expectations for the NSX. In the end, the NSX matched these high expectations for certain reviewers, and fell short for other reviewers, but did not thoroughly obliterate expectations for anyone (because the expectations were so high to begin with).

Its easy to cheery pick certain hyperbolic statements of praise for the GTS, and compare them with less exaggerated statements about the NSX, in order to suggest that the GTS is the superior car and/or the reviewer preferred the GTS. However, at the end of the day, I suspect that the vast majority of people would prefer the NSX over the GTS (excluding those motivated primarily by brand prestige considerations). I personally will have a big smile on my face every time I wax a GTS, and a waxing it will be.

Finally, keep in mind that Car and Driver praised the Mazda 6’s “sinuous styling, confidence inspiring handling, and rich interior.” “It’s a solidly built, well-executed, and fun-to-drive.” The New York Daily News observed that the Mazda 6 is “really good looking, with a bold front grill, muscular fenders, and an elegantly tapering roofline.” “The ride quality, handling, and flexibility of the powertrain give the 6 an athleticism that’s lacking from most mainstream cars.” The Car Connection described the Mazda 6 as “gorgeous,” with a “finely detailed rear end . . . its hard to find a bad angle on the car.” The transmission has “crisp, very quick shifts and almost the feel of a dual-clutch unit.” “Steering is quick and well-weighted.” It “handles well and is eager to change direction, with the nimble feel of something a size smaller.” “With a refined, masculine face and rippled, muscular-looking front fender lines, an arched roofline, and smooth but finely detailed taillights, the Mazda 6 is eye-catching.” It is “a satisfying, sporty-driving car, with . . . . responsive and vivid performance.” All this for $30,000. Based on the foregoing cherry picked comments, we all should abandon the NSX and go buy a Mazda 6.

Is this the Golden Era of performance cars, or what? Maybe not the Mazda 6 (which, IMHO, does look great for $30K), but lots of other cars in $30K range (Ford Focus RS, anyone?) and every other car mentioned in this thread would be a joy to own and drive on the street or the track.

For me, the NSX's unassailable claim to fame is uniqueness. It meets or exceeds very lofty design objectives through uncommon means, which is pretty cool. And, in cities where fancy cars are more commonly seen on the road than F-150s, the rarity of the new NSX will be a bonus treat.

Uniqueness and rarity in one car is unusual indeed. :smile:

My observations: Fastaussie posts and comments on threads that are negative towards the new NSX, yet he is silence on threads that have been positive. I think it is clear he does not like the new NSX. That's fine, but to go the extra mile to discredit the NSX over and over can get annoying. We hear you loud and clear. Go buy something else and get over it.

I think the new NSX is awesome. It's forward thinking. It might have less driver feel, but it inspires confidence with its great handling. This is the future. If you want a V10 supercar, there are many to choose from, stop complaining and go buy one of those cars.

Also, the reviews I've read have been mostly positive. I'd pick the new NSX over all of its competitors.

the car should have a low traction snow setting for us fools above the mason dixon line...:tongue:

Benjamite777 said:

My observations: Fastaussie posts and comments on threads that are negative towards the new NSX, yet he is silence on threads that have been positive. I think it is clear he does not like the new NSX. That's fine, but to go the extra mile to discredit the NSX over and over can get annoying. We hear you loud and clear. Go buy something else and get over it.

I think the new NSX is awesome. It's forward thinking. It might have less driver feel, but it inspires confidence with its great handling. This is the future. If you want a V10 supercar, there are many to choose from, stop complaining and go buy one of those cars.

Also, the reviews I've read have been mostly positive. I'd pick the new NSX over all of its competitors.

Click to expand...

you're clearly not paying attention. i actually much prefer a small displacement, high revving V8. but i love what Porsche does with sixes, and certainly what Audi does with V8's and V10's too. McLaren is ridiculous with their V8's. i have nothing against the drive train of the NSX, so i don't know where your argument is originating from?

i'll comment on everything, positive or negative. but i'm not discrediting anything, i haven't written any reviews. they speak for themselves...

Superfluous said:

^ More great discussion.

FA: Its true that no NSX review has been entirely positive. However, the same is true of essentially every review of every car. Reviewers inevitably find issues, nits and/or things that they would change or prefer differently. Just as there is no perfect car, there is no perfect review of a car.

Interesting that the discussion has turned to the MB GTS. I had a GTS on order when I switched to the NSX. Then, when the NSX was delayed last Summer/Fall, I again contemplated a GTS, but could not bring myself to accept the compromise over the NSX. IMHO, the GTS pales in comparison to the NSX. At the recent auto show, my wife and I viewed the GTS and the NSX within minutes of each other, and both concluded that the NSX is far, far better looking. I have little doubt that the NSX will exceed the GTS in most performance metrics (certainly 0-60 times).

IMHO, expectations play an important part in the tenor of a particular review (the road to disappointment is paved with expectations). I think the GTS exceeded most reviewer’s expectations, and they were surprised by the performance of the car. Their unexpected enjoyment came through in their gushing comments. Conversely, given the state-of-the-art technology, I think most reviewers had very, very high expectations for the NSX. In the end, the NSX matched these high expectations for certain reviewers, and fell short for other reviewers, but did not thoroughly obliterate expectations for anyone (because the expectations were so high to begin with).

Its easy to cheery pick certain hyperbolic statements of praise for the GTS, and compare them with less exaggerated statements about the NSX, in order to suggest that the GTS is the superior car and/or the reviewer preferred the GTS. However, at the end of the day, I suspect that the vast majority of people would prefer the NSX over the GTS (excluding those motivated primarily by brand prestige considerations). I personally will have a big smile on my face every time I wax a GTS, and a waxing it will be.

Click to expand...

a great discussion i would agree. and Super, you're less blatantly biased than most, which is good. you have more insight and perspective than merely sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "Honda is the best, i don't care what anyone says"!

the conversation turned to the GTS based on comments about F1 and trickle down technology finding its way into road cars, and Merc making some pretty spectacular models (the legendary SL, the SLS and now the GTS). so that's how we got there. it wasn't a direct comparison between the GTS and the NSX, because there isn't one, they're entirely different cars. however one can't simply dismiss a car with a 47/53 weight distribution, rear wheel drive, with more weight and less power that can run with or wax a Turbo Porsche and a Nismo GTR around the race track. that's a highly significant performance.

N Spec said:

The GTS is a very nice car, but it's not my cup of tea. The hot-V turbo V8 is impressive. It's going sell well and is a proper supercar competitor, but it's not an Ultimate supercar. I wish Mercedes would make a mid engine super car. The closest to that reality would be the Zondas. I just enjoy the proportions of a mid-engine car more vastly. No enthusiast has ever said, you know, I enjoy the look of the long nose hood over the short nosed, balanced proportion of a mid-engine car. The mid-engine proportion road car is the closest to universal appeal of drop-dead gorgeous looks. But again, everything is relative and subjective. To me, particular looks and proportions are very important.

So my last point is, why are you so focused on bashing Honda? They've stumbled like any other car company. We are here to talk about the NSX, not directly about the Honda/Acura lineup or Mercedes or whatever brand in particular.

Click to expand...

i agree with you 100%, the GTS isn't my cup of tea either. and i too absolutely prefer the visual proportions of a cab forward, (rear) mid engined car.

i'm not focused on bashing Honda, i just can't sit by and let the obvious Honda bias bash all the other brands. as you were doing with Mercedes,
and others have done with Audi, Porsche, etc. now and in the past. i'm not even a fanboy of those other brands. but i will stick up for them, because i know their achievements and because i have driven them all. just because it's not a Honda or an NSX doesn't mean it can be completely discounted on that merit alone, as happens far too many times on this website. i get it, it's an NSX website. but don't blindly put one car up while putting another down. at least get the facts right and know what one is talking about...

Probably a repost but it was nice to watch as well as read:

http://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/shootout-nsx-vs-nsx/

fastaussie said:

i'm not focused on bashing Honda, i just can't sit by and let the obvious Honda bias bash all the other brands. as you were doing with Mercedes,
and others have done with Audi, Porsche, etc. now and in the past. i'm not even a fanboy of those other brands. but i will stick up for them, because i know their achievements and because i have driven them all. just because it's not a Honda or an NSX doesn't mean it can be completely discounted on that merit alone, as happens far too many times on this website. i get it, it's an NSX website. but don't blindly put one car up while putting another down. at least get the facts right and know what one is talking about...

Click to expand...

You're saying you're not bashing Honda, but you do in fact promote a lot of negativity and rarely respond to the positivity in these forums. I'm not speaking for your own thoughts, but the proof are in your posts. I'm not here to make you look like a bad guy tho. I think you are a bit biased for whatever reason, quite possibly because you were let down by Honda like some others up here.... Well guess what, Honda is trying to make a comeback, and it's looking pretty good with the NSX and current CTR, with rumors of the new S2000 successor being mid engine also...

I've owned an E320, driven plenty CLKs, SLs, and extensively driven an SLK350 before deciding to buy my first NSX-T. The SLK was nice looking, but obviously I felt the similarly priced NSX was better at that time and still do. The 10 year+ older NSX had a nicer interior than the luxurious Mercedes interior IMO. Many other variables were better. These are my own analysis.

I'm not bashing any brand in particular. I think you misconstrued my point to the extreme. I should have utterly said upfront, they've never made a proper Ferrari mid engine competitor, if that's the benchmark we're all going for.

N Spec said:

I think you are a bit biased for whatever reason, quite possibly because you were let down by Honda like some others up here...

Click to expand...

funny shit, but Honda is not my Daddy who abandoned me as a toddler to run off with the sexy young Alfa Romeo down the street...

p.s. i just don't worship the ground Honda walks on. :wink:

fastaussie said:

funny shit, but Honda is not my Daddy who abandoned me as a toddler to run off with the sexy young Aston down the street...

p.s. i just don't worship the ground Honda walks on. :wink:

Click to expand...

Hahaha, neither do I, even tho it may seem like I do to You. I've just experienced a lot of cars and my sense is that Honda is the most balanced for my criteria with the NSX.

I actually have owned more Toyotas and Nissans than Hondas. I've own only 3 Hondas. 2 NSXes and a beater Accord in the past.

- - - Updated - - -

No I stand corrected. I've owned 2 Preludes too, but very briefly... haha

Fastaussie, what is your take on the 918, P1, and LaFerrari? Is it safe to assume these cars are not your cup of tea?

Here are many reasons why the new NSX is my #1 choice at $200k.
1. Amazing handling. Even if the drive might be more synthetic than a purer vehicle (GT3 for example) w/ less computerized controls, there's no doubt the NSX's Sport Hybrid SH-AWD system enhances one's abilities, especially through the corners. Not everyone who owns a supercar can drive like Hamilton, so I am all for technologies that promotes confidence, and the news is the new NSX makes it easy to drive fast.
2. Design. Appearance is subjective, but to me, the new NSX is definitely one of the better looking cars in this price range. Unlike a 991 turbo, which looks like a 981 Cayman to the untrained eye, and by that i mean someone who isn't an enthusiast. (not that i am knocking the 981 design, I think it looks beautiful), the new NSX looks more exotic.
3. Hybrid Performance. There's not a lot of options and I definitely cannot afford the 918, P1, nor the LaFerrari

Overall, I find the new NSX impressive. Although there are a couple of shortcomings like sound (does not sound exotic enough), the new NSX is a balanced car w/ wonderful technologies, that I have no doubt will be admired in the future as is the old one is today.

Benjamite777 said:

Fastaussie, what is your take on the 918, P1, and LaFerrari? Is it safe to assume these cars are not your cup of tea?

Click to expand...

not my cup of tea? why would you assume that?

i absolutely love all three, magnificent cars each and every one...

Benjamite777 said:

I think the new NSX is awesome. It's forward thinking. It might have less driver feel, but it inspires confidence with its great handling.

Click to expand...

I completely agree. I am willing to accept a tad less “driver feel” – a wildly subjective concept – for the proactive assistance provided by the NSX that greatly enhances and improves my driving experience. In other words, I not only don’t mind the help – I prefer it. Whatever “driver feel” might be sacrificed is vastly outweighed by the overall improved driving experience.

Benjamite777 said:

Here are many reasons why the new NSX is my #1 choice at $200k.
1. Amazing handling. Even if the drive might be more synthetic than a purer vehicle (GT3 for example) w/ less computerized controls, there's no doubt the NSX's Sport Hybrid SH-AWD system enhances one's abilities, especially through the corners. Not everyone who owns a supercar can drive like Hamilton, so I am all for technologies that promotes confidence, and the news is the new NSX makes it easy to drive fast.
2. Design. Appearance is subjective, but to me, the new NSX is definitely one of the better looking cars in this price range. Unlike a 991 turbo, which looks like a 981 Cayman to the untrained eye, and by that i mean someone who isn't an enthusiast. (not that i am knocking the 981 design, I think it looks beautiful), the new NSX looks more exotic.

Click to expand...

Don’t let this go to your head, but again I completely agree. Having owned two turbo Porsches, I now want something different . . . something more unique and interesting. Moreover, as you correctly observe, 99% of the population cannot distinguish a C4S from a Turbo (and, now, both are turboed).

Benjamite777 said:

My observations: Fastaussie posts and comments on threads that are negative towards the new NSX, yet he is silence on threads that have been positive. . . . Go buy something else and get over it.

Click to expand...

Dare I say, I think FA is slightly misunderstood. Yes, he disparages the new NSX with greater frequency than necessary to appropriately convey his distaste for the car. However, I don’t think his criticism is the product of some irrational psychosis. Rather, I think he has a very specific set of preferences and criteria that he applies when evaluating a car and, notwithstanding the NSX’s superlative qualities, it simply does not match FA’s subjective preferences. FA is a focused track guy (and, from what I gather, quite skilled on a track). Therefore, not surprisingly, he seeks cars that exhibit certain specific characteristics on a track, and which allow the driver to do certain things on a track.

Notwithstanding its long list of stellar attributes, the NSX is not a pure bred track car – it is not a GT3, Arial Atom or Caterham. That’s not to say that the NSX does not perform admirably on a track – it certainly does. In fact, most average drivers will be faster on a track in a NSX as compared to a Caterham. That's because the NSX incorporates certain technology and driving characteristics that are designed for, dare I say, more average drivers, and which might interfere with an expert driver’s surgical assault upon a race course. Focused track drivers, such as FA, seek a freer, more wide open, unassisted, uninterrupted driving experience and, therefore, stridently eschew the technologies and associated driving characteristics embodied by the NSX. On the other hand, for mere mortals, and lessor mortals such as myself, the NSX will be far easier to drive far faster on a track (and street), and more exhilarating and satisfying than a pure bred track car. Why more exhilarating and satisfying? Because we mere mortals cannot manipulate a car in the manner that a skilled racer, such as FA, can manipulate a car; and, if we tried, the exhilaration would be short lived before we were off track or, worse yet, into the wall.

Thus, FA’s dissatisfaction with the NSX does not arise from blind hatred or some sort of fanatical jihad. Rather, he merely seeks a car with different driving characteristics. My only gripe with FA is that, IMHO, has beats the drum more often than necessary or appropriate. I thank that FA was recently attempting to temper his criticism; I hope he continues to do so.

Superfluous said:

most average drivers will be faster on a track in a NSX as compared to a Caterham. That's because the NSX incorporates certain technology and driving characteristics that are designed for, dare I say, more average drivers, and which might interfere with an expert driver’s surgical assault upon a race course. Focused track drivers, such as FA, seek a freer, more wide open, unassisted, uninterrupted driving experience and, therefore, stridently eschew the technologies and associated driving characteristics embodied by the NSX. On the other hand, for mere mortals, and lessor mortals such as myself, the NSX will be far easier to drive far faster on a track (and street), and more exhilarating and satisfying than a pure bred track car. Why more exhilarating and satisfying? Because we mere mortals cannot manipulate a car in the manner that a skilled racer, such as FA, can manipulate a car; and, if we tried, the exhilaration would be short lived before we were off track or, worse yet, into the wall.

Thus, FA’s dissatisfaction with the NSX does not arise from blind hatred or some sort of fanatical jihad. Rather, he merely seeks a car with different driving characteristics. My only gripe with FA is that, IMHO, has beats the drum more often than necessary or appropriate. I thank that FA was recently attempting to temper his criticism; I hope he continues to do so.

Click to expand...

thanks for the flattery and nice compliments Super. you rationale could be right on the money, if you were to offer me a GT3 and a GTR, you can bet your arse i'd pick the Porsche every single time over the Nissan. however, it has nothing to do with anything. every single Supercar out there, from a 911R, to a McLaren 675, to a Lamborghini Huracan, to a Ferrari 488 has such advanced electronic systems monitoring every wheel speed, slip angle, yaw control and anything else you can possibly imagine at any millisecond, that any driver of virtually any driving ability can take these cars right up to the edge all the while feeling like an F1 hero in almost complete relative safety. the NSX won't be any safer or easier to drive than any other, they're all brilliant with huge safety nets built in. and all of them have limits higher than 99% of the people who will purchase them.

i have no blind hatred or fanatical jihad for the new NSX. hell, not even a distaste for it. i am simply not as impressed with it as some others. it seems like a nice car, i want to be impressed, i'm just not...

fastaussie said:

...any driver of virtually any driving ability can take these cars right up to the edge all the while feeling like an F1 hero in almost complete relative safety. the NSX won't be any safer or easier to drive than any other, they're all brilliant with huge safety nets built in.

Click to expand...

I don't think that is true.

In general, good points made above. But I have to push back on the notion that, since all modern sportscars have great safety features, drivers can push the limits of each of them equally. This sounds good in theory, but in practice just isn't true. Some cars make you feel "safe" and invite you to dip into the potential, while others intimidate and threaten to bite you.

I will share a personal example. I'm a middle-of-the-road track day driver, doing maybe 5-10 days a year, running in the "fast" group, but NOT top 10% in that group. When I traded a Cayman for a 997TT, it took me several track days before by my 997TT lap times were as fast as in the Cayman, despite a massive step-up in potential. The Cayman was just easier (for me) to drive to the limit. I eventually got MUCH faster in the Turbo. When I later added a GT-R (first year-- 2009?) and brought it to the track, I recorded a lap in MY FIRST SESSION OUT that was faster than I had ever driven in the Turbo, even though the latter had been modified and was much more capable in expert hands. These are two AWD cars with all the nannies on (in track mode, but on). Others experienced the same thing: the GT-R just *felt* safer/more solid/more stable. When in doubt, feather in MORE throttle and all things seemed possible. The car was your friend-- it wasn't a tiger-by-the-tail trying to kill you.

My bet is that the NSX will be the next-generation of that GT-R feeling of confidence in all situations (and also not be ugly or have a DCT that craps out on track like my GT-R, but that's a different story).

Anyway, my point is: mere mortals are faster on track in cars that make them feel safe, and I suspect the NSX will be such a car.

chrisn said:

Anyway, my point is: mere mortals are faster on track in cars that make them feel safe, and I suspect the NSX will be such a car.

Click to expand...

If your goal is only to go around a track as fast as possible then the NSX seems good. If, instead, you want to develop driver skills and derive reward from such development, it seems very much suboptimal to me.

jwmelvin said:

If your goal is only to go around a track as fast as possible then the NSX seems good. If, instead, you want to develop driver skills and derive reward from such development, it seems very much suboptimal to me.

Click to expand...

Bingo. The Caterham is much better for those primarily seeking to hone their track skills with less assistance from the car. On the other hand, if you want an awesome daily driver that is also capable of tremendous track performance, the NSX is the way to go. I'll take the NSK