Last edited:
-
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
I'm curious..... For people who really like this car & think it's really the new "NSX". I think there alot of issues, it seems to me that Acura is using the NSX name & nostalgia to sell this car. In my opinion has nothing to do with our beloved classic.
Now, I know it's using the latest technology just like the classic.
Here are a few problems:
-No pininfarina styling. This is a big issue for me, styling done by somebody who recently got out of school?
-not made in JAPAN. C'mon it's made in the USA
-Not worked on by Honda top engineers from Japan
-No development from race cars drivers: Ayrton Senna, Bobby Rahal, S. Nakajima (F1)
To me it honestly seems like corporate use of rehashing & using nostalgia & not making a true NSX. I honestly don't believe it should have been called that, it should have used another name. Obviously, in my opinion wrongly using the name is to draw attention & help sales. It's not in my opinion a true honda product coming out of japan coming from it's birthplace at Tochigi.
- - - Updated - - -
I completely agree. Everytime he's talking it sounds like some cheap ad, marketing campaign, political corporate nonsense.
As a comparison, look at Porsche's main man here:
He is just honestly talking about the car & seems to love it. Does not forced corporate marketing speak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRxbgACxlec
Now, I know it's using the latest technology just like the classic.
Here are a few problems:
-No pininfarina styling. This is a big issue for me, styling done by somebody who recently got out of school?
-not made in JAPAN. C'mon it's made in the USA
-Not worked on by Honda top engineers from Japan
-No development from race cars drivers: Ayrton Senna, Bobby Rahal, S. Nakajima (F1)
To me it honestly seems like corporate use of rehashing & using nostalgia & not making a true NSX. I honestly don't believe it should have been called that, it should have used another name. Obviously, in my opinion wrongly using the name is to draw attention & help sales. It's not in my opinion a true honda product coming out of japan coming from it's birthplace at Tochigi.
- - - Updated - - -
I completely agree. Everytime he's talking it sounds like some cheap ad, marketing campaign, political corporate nonsense.
As a comparison, look at Porsche's main man here:
He is just honestly talking about the car & seems to love it. Does not forced corporate marketing speak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRxbgACxlec
The car may have been built here in 'Merica, but that drivetrain is Japanese, through and through. Maybe the car wasn't made in Japan, but don't think for a minute that top Japanese Honda engineers were not involved.
whats with the smurph leggings...LA faux biker leather jacket and work boot ensemble....
HOT.... Especially with that boo... tey. :biggrin:
Ha ha. Taken by itself (such as looking at your avatar, Paul), the 02-05 looks undeniably great with no excuses needed.
Seen in the video next to a Gen-2, yeah you see some datedness but I think that's like looking at a 23 year old 5'10" amazon hottie new kid on the block next to your loving 5'4" wife of the past 10-15 years who's still a hottie in her own right.
Edit: And which one would you choose to go home to at night, knowing it's a one-time decision that you can't go back on, and that the 23 year old is going to age too eventually. (Something tells me I know how any 80+ year old former bankers or CEO's here might answer that...)
Last edited:
Beautiful car! Who ever took the picture also deserves :applause: !
To me the NSX always had it's special look and I never compared it against anything else, now that the 2.0 is out the car suddenly looks a bit dated, especially if you park them next to each other.
- - - Updated - - -
Thanks for being a friend
In my view whatever Honda labels as an NSX is an NSX, just like whatever Porsche labels as a 911, is a 911.
Honda owns the NSX name, built the first car using it, and, of course, are now using that to help sell the second NSX.
Honda wouldn't be astute if they didn't use the brand equity built up with the first NSX.
Of course this NSX is different from the first.
25 years have gone by.
Different factory, different designers, different testers and so on.
But I'm certain the best engineers Honda has worked on this NSX, Japanese, American, British or from wherever.
It's a Honda corporate halo car like the first NSX, and I believe reflects the best Honda has to offer.
Why build in America?
I'm thinking Honda is building this NSX in America because they want to shed the image of a Japanese only car company and prefer to be seen as a global company.
I understand Accords made in Ohio are exported to Japan, a reverse of the norm 20 years ago.
The HondaJet is built in America too, and I think for the same reasons.
NSX buyers may like this approach, may not like it, or be indifferent.
Honda seems prepared to take this risk and let the car speak for itself.
Getting "older" too ha!
2005 GPW - white/black interior (Zanardi mats). 1 of 2 made for the final year in this combo. Initially wasn't sure,
but turned out to be my favorite.
Last edited:
Agree.
Kind of makes you wonder what NSX 2.0 could have been if it had been more focused in purpose and not a "one size fits all" approach.
Too bad the NSX design team didn't have someone like Andreas on board to call the shots. Like it or not, the target market for the 911R is undeniably razor focused. I don't think Honda would have the guts to produce a car like this anymore.
That being said, I think the 911R is ugly and typical generic Porsche in appearance. The bright red stripes look amateurish, and yell "boy racer", not purist sports car.
The problem with Honda or Acura is their reputation does not rely on producing a sports car to be solvent as a company as specialist manufacturers like Porsche have been doing and perfecting for decades. Yes, they make the Macan, Panamera, and Cayenne but these vehicles still have "sporting" intentions in their segment.
Maybe there will be an NSX-R in the future. Let's hope it doesn't end up just being a diluted and overpriced version of the regular car.
JD, I'm quite sure Accords are not exported to Japan anymore. I don't think Civics are even sold there at this point, as they are considered too large for that market.
Do we know if the 911R or any other laser-focused example has had the reliability of the 01-05 and that's expected of the gen-2? Just a thought, as I backpedal a bit about my critiques for weight. I'll happily stick with 270HP and 3000 lb of virtual bulletproofness, and would put up with more weight for bulletproof 500+ HP. Just a thought.
Last edited:
You could well be right.
I read this on the Honda corporate website.
"American Honda became a net exporter in the U.S. for the first time in 2013 - exporting 108,705 U.S.-made Honda and Acura vehicles versus the 88,537 vehicles it imported from Japan"
it doesn't state where Honda USA exported to so maybe none went to Japan.
- - - Updated - - -
I think it's quite easy for Porsche to make specialized models from their 911 base car.
In Honda's case they are still on the base car.
Hard to compare.
Hopefully as time passes Honda will be also able to offer variants on the NSX base.
Type-R, Cabriolet's, non-hybrid models and so on.
Then a comparison would be fair.
Just imagine how good the tape deck would be! [emoji4]
The base wheels are nice, but to me they are just too much of a look alike to all the other "Y" spokes out there already.
I find the interwoven's are at least more unique and different, though in "3 D " machined version they are a little too much over the top, and not suiting the car. (IMHO)
So I'm doing a compromise and going with polished interwoven. And speaking of compromising, Acura did just that with the interwoven's as it appears (so far) they are all the same (other than front and rear sizing) vs a properly executed asymmetrical. (even the i8 has asymmetric wheels) As such, don't look quite right on passenger side with their forward lean when car is at rest... suggesting it is going in reverse. On driver side they lean to rear suggesting forward motion even though still. Just MHO.
PS
ACURA... I hope your reading and listening
On tires we still don't know what we are getting once in production. I heard that all the Conti bad press has led to only Michelin PScup sneakers. And there was no sneaker choosing on the building site. Good I say... sorta' Unless they can find something between a more track tire design (with good dry and wet handling) and the non performer Conti.
Last edited:
The first NSX was not done by Pinn. It was designed by a Japanese designer just like the 2012 concept was.
The American team refined the design in small details and such as stated in the review also. The engine and powertrain are manufactured in Japan so it's technically still made in Japan. They are assembled in the US. What difference does that make tho?
- - - Updated - - -
O and any 911 variant, no matter how fast one may be, is never going to be exclusive like the NSX even if public perception has Porsche on near exotic status and never look as good either IMO.
- - - Updated - - -
Getting "older" too ha!
2005 GPW - white/black interior (Zanardi mats). 1 of 2 made for the final year in this combo. Initially wasn't sure,
but turned out to be my favorite.
This is the purest JDM fanboy's wet dream combo right here!
- - - Updated - - -
If the optional wheels were symmetrical for each respective side, then it would make them better. I like the dynamic look of the directional wheel, but I hate that if you damage one, you have to buy a specific wheel which makes it harder to get. I guess that's why they are not individually made for each side.
I think you'll be a minority for the wheels and that'll set you apart. I still prefer radial symmetrical wheels tho.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 29 March 2015
- Messages
- 202
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.
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.
About Porsche.....one thing that really pisses off owners/potential owners is how they
make everything optional w/ outrageous pricing & limited production numbers of new
desirable cars. Gives flippers (dealers?) a license to steal.
Funny though, they get away with it year after year.
I think the only options on the NSX (that I purchased anyway), were CD player in the trunk and towards the end - keyless unlocking (slushbox was an unloved option too)
Acura's formula to offer a few variations of each model has worked well on the bread & butter MDX & RDX. Perceived built in value.
Don't get that feeling with the new NSX.
make everything optional w/ outrageous pricing & limited production numbers of new
desirable cars. Gives flippers (dealers?) a license to steal.
Funny though, they get away with it year after year.
I think the only options on the NSX (that I purchased anyway), were CD player in the trunk and towards the end - keyless unlocking (slushbox was an unloved option too)
Acura's formula to offer a few variations of each model has worked well on the bread & butter MDX & RDX. Perceived built in value.
Don't get that feeling with the new NSX.
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.
^^^ because I agree with what you posted.......Brilliant !!!!!!!:biggrin:
- Joined
- 23 February 2016
- Messages
- 2,570
Just to get an easy point in, I think the upper wings of the seat backs look like those in the gen 1
- Joined
- 29 March 2015
- Messages
- 202
Porsche is definitely the quintessential example, along with Corvettes and Mustangs. When I purchased my 996TT, there was a raging debate fueled by 993 owners that the 996 deviated too much from the 993 (primarily because of the air cooled engine, but also the headlights). Then, when I purchased my 997TTs, 996 owners criticizing the supposedly inferior engine block in the 997TT. 458 owners criticize the 488's turbo charged engine (ditto v10 M6 owners visa-vie the current model M6). C6Z06 owners criticize the A6 tranny in the C7ZO6. Weight increases commonly associated with the integration of new technology are also frequently criticized, even if the heavier new model out-performs the lighter prior model. The complaints may change, but the debate among prior and current model owners is ever-present, and not likely to dissipate.
Similar threads
