Audi R8

[STAXX59]

I think Audi is coming closer to producing the new NSX than Honda is.... sigh.
The design isn't that great but man, do they have the concept down.

The R8: Two-seater, aluminum frame, mid-mounted, and a 610-horsepower V-10.
http://www.autoclub.com.au/uploaded_images/audi-le-mans-quattro-759246.jpg

Even Lotus is coming close.
http://www.autoclub.com.au/uploaded_images/lotus-europa-2007-765993.jpg

We're BEGGING you, Honda. Please don't disappoint us with the all the trash we've been seeing online. Astound the automotive world, AGAIN, by setting the bar for all other cars to be measured by........ think they're listen?

 

[BioBanker]

The 610 HP rating is news to me; I thought it was around 450.

But do not forget that if Honda sticks with the NSX's "sportscar" heritage, that the R8's AWD may put it in a different bracket.

 

[rk-nsx]

there will be two different engines offered in the r8. imo this will be the closest thing to a "new" nsx in the next few years, can't wait to see one in person.

 

[Klayton]

The 610 HP rating is news to me; I thought it was around 450.[..]

Well the engine used in the concept and the test mules is a 5 liter biturbo V10 putting out 610hp. The NA V10 used in the S8 is a detuned Lambo engine and turns out 450hp, possible engine for the R8 too. We'll have to wait for an official audi announce or till the car comes out 07.

Klayton

 

[SugrueNSX]

I think Audi is coming closer to producing the new NSX than Honda is.... sigh.
The design isn't that great but man, do they have the concept down.

The R8: Two-seater, aluminum frame, mid-mounted, and a 610-horsepower V-10.
http://www.autoclub.com.au/uploaded_images/audi-le-mans-quattro-759246.jpg

Even Lotus is coming close.
http://www.autoclub.com.au/uploaded_images/lotus-europa-2007-765993.jpg

We're BEGGING you, Honda. Please don't disappoint us with the all the trash we've been seeing online. Astound the automotive world, AGAIN, by setting the bar for all other cars to be measured by........ think they're listen?

Nice post! Thanks.
It does remain to be seen that these cars will come to fruition and if they do, how much will they cost? The NSX could not compete with the F40 that was launched in 1987 but it was not trying to because that car cost $400,000 ish and was in a different class. What the NSX did was blow away the competition in it’s price range with a fair bit to spare. Can they do it again. Hope so! But it looks like the competition is making it harder as time passes. I’m surprised/worried that Honda seems to have locked themselves into a V10. If they had the option to go with a rotary. Maybe a new super duper rotary that would give them a chance to blow everything else out of the water again. Or maybe an infinitely variable transmission would give them the edge they need?


Regards,

Patrick

 

[2slow2speed]

Looks like the final design has been announced at the Paris Auto Show.
http://microsites.audi.com/audir8/html/index.php
http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightline/1546

BTW: It's a V8, perhaps based on the 4.2 used on the RS4? Hopefully it will be lighter than the Gallardo from which it is based on, and hopefully it will be offered with a standard 6 Speed alongside the R-tronic (sequential)

 

[RacingHeart]

I think Audi is coming closer to producing the new NSX than Honda is.... sigh.
The design isn't that great but man, do they have the concept down.

I agree with you totally. The R8 seems to have alot in common with the NSX concept - an all aluminium, mid engined user friendly sports car.

Audi beat Honda to it. Just making a new NSX wont do now - Honda truly must bring something new and innovative in order to be able to market and sell the NSX successor.

Interresting video of the R8 from Paris motor show.
http://www.automotorsport.se/tv/?m=114

Introduction is in Swedish, but the interresting bit (Interview with one of the R8s "fathers") is in english.

 

[whiteNSXs]

If it has the reliability to back it up, looks like it is a winner. Just wish Honda had the balls to carry on Soichiro's legacy.
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/autoexpresstv/spyshotvideos/200300/audi_r8.html
Steve

 

[needspeed]

I can't say I love the look, but I give AUDI credit for building such a car. I just don't know if Honda has it in them to build another world beater, but the bar is raised really high if this car comes in around 110-120K........Steve

 

[WingZ]

I can't say I love the look, but I give AUDI credit for building such a car. I just don't know if Honda has it in them to build another world beater, but the bar is raised really high if this car comes in around 110-120K........Steve

Well I think the problem is that people have expectations raised to high for Honda. People who really followed the NSX know that in comparisons it won for it's civilized demeanor and drivability not outright performance numbers. Well thanks to Honda almost all sportscars are civilized now and they changed the segment. Why not move onto something else. People need to realize that by not buying an NSX ( new ) they told Honda that wasn't really something they wanted.

Now people want to pressure them into building a new Supercar that's even more expensive. If you were Honda what would you do?:wink:

 

[needspeed]

Well I think the problem is that people have expectations raised to high for Honda. People who really followed the NSX know that in comparisons it won for it's civilized demeanor and drivability not outright performance numbers. Well thanks to Honda almost all sportscars are civilized now and they changed the segment. Why not move onto something else. People need to realize that by not buying an NSX ( new ) they told Honda that wasn't really something they wanted.

Now people want to pressure them into building a new Supercar that's even more expensive. If you were Honda what would you do?:wink:

I understand where you are coming from, but then what inspired them to take on the world in 91 with such an an impressive product. Has the company changed so much that they don't want or need to beat the competition in this class of car....Steve

 

[WingZ]

I understand where you are coming from, but then what inspired them to take on the world in 91 with such an an impressive product. Has the company changed so much that they don't want or need to beat the competition in this class of car....Steve

Company hasn't changed so much as the market. What area have these new sportscars missed that Honda hasn't shown them they could be better at. They now even display the "balance" that Honda thought they were missing when it brought the NSX to the game.

Now the luxury super coupe market is missing all the things the supercar sportscar market was missing back then so why not target it.

Our best chance was the HSC ,but most Honda fans ignored it and turned up their noses. So Honda shelved it. Can you blame them( Honda )? They lost money offering the NSX at the price they did and lost more with low sales. People need to stop complaining. Honda is a business first not a charity!

People who were still buying new NSX's were getting dissed, even though new car sales are what keeps a company interested in making a newer better model. Just about every magazine said " this car is a bargain" even when it was listed at $89k. Porsche and ferrari weren't offering any bargains. Everytime they made their cars closer to what the NSX was what did they do??? yep raised the price! Honda did their best to keep the cars ( NSX ) price down and it's sales dropped! It was still far ahead of it's competition so they just kept tweaking it. They raised the hp a bit because Honda has never been about being the Hp King ,while still holding the price down and guess what?? sales continued to drop.

Ferrari and Porsche now pretty much catch up in the liveability/reliability departments while continuing to raise prices on their cars. They get praised ,people are willing to pay more money for them and say well "Honda you should've raised the performance of your vehicle because it's just too much money for the performance it's now offering". Honda goes "WTF" ???? We offered a better product than them for years and you people basically ignored us! Now you say we charge too much for a hand built mid engine exotic and other lesser priced cars are "too close" in performance!!!! kiss our rising sun!

The NSX was/is still only a few ticks off in performance of the 360/430 yet it is listed for less than half the price of those cars and people want to compare it to a 350Z or Evo or M3????? why don't they compare those cars to the ferraris as they're not that far off since they're close to the NSX performance numbers. Why because "it's a ferrari" or it's "a $200k status symbol" puh-leze

Sorry Steve not meaning to rant ,but I'm very fed up with people talking about Honda not stepping up to the plate when they already did and lost a ton of money doing so. Now people are saying come on Honda "do it again" and Honda is saying "whatever". End rant:smile:

 

[TURBO2GO]

Well said Wingz. Thats why I don't think the new NSX will be near the breakthrough it was again.

Just because one car was great doesn't mean the next one will be. I had a Supra and it was great then went away... I bought a Lexus SC400 and it was great then it turned into an inverted bathtub, I bought a Mercedes CL and it was replaced by an ugly version of the S class, I bought an NSX and I am not counting on the next NSX being what will be my next car.

Look what Mitsubishi did with the very successful turbo eclipse years ago, turned it into a V6 pansy boulevard cruiser and sales pulmetted.

I don't think Honda planned on selling 300 NSX's a year. So something will have to give. Once you try to appeal to more people, you inherently compromise your product. We are all enjoying exclusivity and high resale on our NSX's because it was a financial mistake for Honda.

Honda may build one again for showcasing their talent and not care about sales, but then they may not. Probably will not. We will probably see a compromised NSX designed to appeal to more people. It will not be so costly to produce, will have more margin, be less exotic, and more expensive.

In the meantime, knowing Audi's resale values, I am loving this R8... sitting back and waiting for a clean used baby to come to pappa.

 

[TURBO2GO]

I understand where you are coming from, but then what inspired them to take on the world in 91 with such an an impressive product. Has the company changed so much that they don't want or need to beat the competition in this class of car....Steve

What inspired them may have been the thought they could take some sales away from Porsche and Ferrari... didn't work out that way. Maybe they saw Lexus LS's and Infinity Q45's getting into the market of MB and BMW. I don't know...

Anyway I think it was a financial failure, but they made up for it by basically producing the same car for 15 years and recovering their investment. I don't think They'd want to do it again just to show they have talent. I don't think having an NSX will help accord sales. No one cares.

 

[TC]

Now the luxury super coupe market is missing all the things the supercar sportscar market was missing back then so why not target it.

What is missing in the super coupe market? High styling? Ferrari, Aston, Mercedes (and others) have that covered. High HP? It's there. High luxury? Check. Livability? Check.

Our best chance was the HSC ,but most Honda fans ignored it and turned up their noses. So Honda shelved it. Can you blame them( Honda )? They lost money offering the NSX at the price they did and lost more with low sales. People need to stop complaining. Honda is a business first not a charity!

I can blame them - they announced the HSC had 300 hp - in the age of 400+ HP cars. That made it an immediate laughing stock for just about everyone including many hard-core NSXers. It was a concept car - you're allowed to say anything you want about a concept car.

I agree that Honda is a business and the NSX should not be a money losing proposition. But NSX sales had fallen by about 80% by the 3rd model year, and what did Honda do? Nothing. It was their choice to keep selling the same car at micro-volumes - a few hundred units annually against the original plan to sell a few thousand annually.

People who were still buying new NSX's were getting dissed, even though new car sales are what keeps a company interested in making a newer better model.

It's the other way around - a newer better model is what keeps the buyers interested. If Honda was waiting for NSX sales to increase before investing in improvements, then that was plain stupid. That's like Ford saying we'll make a better family sedan as soon as people start buying more of our current model over Camrys and Accords.

Ferrari and Porsche now pretty much catch up in the liveability/reliability departments while continuing to raise prices on their cars. They get praised ,people are willing to pay more money for them and say well "Honda you should've raised the performance of your vehicle because it's just too much money for the performance it's now offering". Honda goes "WTF" ???? We offered a better product than them for years and you people basically ignored us! Now you say we charge too much for a hand built mid engine exotic and other lesser priced cars are "too close" in performance!!!! kiss our rising sun!

"kiss our rising sun!?" You don't get it, as apparently Honda does not get it. If you want people to hand over nearly $100,000 for a new car, you kiss the buyers' rising suns.

When a new Ferrari or 911 comes out, who get in line first to buy it? 80% of the buyers are current owners - they love their car company and love to have something newer, different, better. Right? 10% of the buyers are people buying new in that category for the first time and have no brand loyalty. And the other 10% are people who are disaffectioned with their current brand and switch.

If a new NSX came out in 1996, how many 1991 owners would have bought a new one? A lot. And a bunch of first-time exotic buyers. And a few Ferrari and Porsche owners. And if there was another new one in 2001, same thing. And so on. That's how you build a customer base. If I owned a 355 in 2000 and wanted a new car, what reason would I have to leave Ferrari for an NSX? The 360 is a hell of a car. It's new and therefore interesting. Honda has been selling the same product for 10 years and therefore don't appear to be committed to this market.

Honda built success in every other market - small cars, family cars, minivans - by building a better product and then continually improving it at a faster rate than the competition. With the NSX, Honda started out with a better product but forgot the continuous improvement part. They did the same thing with the Legend/RL - they started out with a better lux sedan but forget the continuous improvement. No wonder these are the two markets that Honda has failed in.

The NSX was/is still only a few ticks off in performance of the 360/430..

Few ticks? Maybe 0-60. An F430, Z06, 911 GT2 do it in about 4 seconds versus 4.8 for the NSX. 0-100, its about 8.5 seconds versus 12. 0-150, its 18 seconds versus 50. That's not a few ticks. That's a different time zone.

Sorry Steve not meaning to rant ,but I'm very fed up with people talking about Honda not stepping up to the plate when they already did and lost a ton of money doing so. Now people are saying come on Honda "do it again" and Honda is saying "whatever".

No one told Honda to keep selling the NSX after sales had plunged. It was their responsibility to either stop production (and the annual losses) or increase the sales. Honda had lots of off-the-shelf technology that could have easily improved the NSX over the years. Navigation system - available on lesser Honda's such as the Odyssey mini-van but not on the flagship. Better audio system (I think by 1995 every other Honda model had a better stereo). The entire market for automatic transmissions was basically lost - which could have nearly doubled sales or more, if you look at the split of buyers of the Porsche Tiptronic and Ferrari F1 transmissions versus a manual gearbox. Come on, who would - or should - spend $90k for a detuned 250 HP engine mated to a 4-speed transmission? Other Honda's (TL, CL) had 5-speed trannys with 270 HP.

As for doing it again, Honda is the one that keeps saying a new NSX is on its way. At the first NSXPO, they gave us written surveys as to what we wanted in the next-gen NSX. The VP of Acura told us that a new NSX would be soon on its way. The CEO of Honda in 2003 that the HSC would go into production in 2005. When the NSX was killed in 2005, the Honda press release said that there would be a new car "just as groundbreaking" as the original NSX. Now the CEO has announced a V10 - as if expectations weren't high enought already. No one told them to say and do these things, they did it on their own.

As the auto press tells the domestics when they lose market share to the Japanese, "its the product, stupid." It doesn't matter how good a product is at launch, no car can be successful on the market more than 4 or 5 years (let along 15+ years) without change. That's why Ferrari replaced the 360 with the 430 at the peak of its sales, because if they waited until sales started to decline, that would have meant lost market share. Honda know this - and I can't believe that there is a sole at Honda that doesn't regret the mishandling of the NSX.

 

[WingZ]

What is missing in the super coupe market? High styling? Ferrari, Aston, Mercedes (and others) have that covered. High HP? It's there. High luxury? Check. Livability? Check.

Okay here we go. Durability no check? Reliability no check? Lower maintenance cost? no check

I can blame them - they announced the HSC had 300 hp - in the age of 400+ HP cars. That made it an immediate laughing stock for just about everyone including many hard-core NSXers. It was a concept car - you're allowed to say anything you want about a concept car.

300+hp and only $60k. Would've run circles around a Cayman S at the Cayman S starting price. Heck that's cheaper than a boxer. Also I can only think of one sportscar at the that time that had 400hp for the $60k or under price and that's the C5 Z06. So HSC would have been a great choice and a fine car in the $60k bracket. Very affordable and great performance w/o spending $200k for the only other mid engine car ( Ferrari ). Of course you can still blame them because it's a free country:wink:

I agree that Honda is a business and the NSX should not be a money losing proposition. But NSX sales had fallen by about 80% by the 3rd model year, and what did Honda do? Nothing. It was their choice to keep selling the same car at micro-volumes - a few hundred units annually against the original plan to sell a few thousand annually.

Actually not really their choice as one of the other threads explained they were locked into I believe ( but don't quote me ) it was using so many parts and when that was up they cancelled the car.

It's the other way around - a newer better model is what keeps the buyers interested. If Honda was waiting for NSX sales to increase before investing in improvements, then that was plain stupid. That's like Ford saying we'll make a better family sedan as soon as people start buying more of our current model over Camrys and Accords.

A good counter ,but not always true. Using your own example you see and know that Ford was constantly upgrading ,but still losing sales. Camry and Accords were being known as a better car ,because of reliability and durabilty while the Taurus was a more powerful car ( Think SHO ). NSX had this by leaps and bounds over Ferrari and Porsche. If it's correct as you say that they were losing sales by the third year ,Honda did do something. They came up with the targa. The car didn't need more power or a redesign as it was still a superior product to the 348 , 911 and Lotus

"kiss our rising sun!?" You don't get it, as apparently Honda does not get it. If you want people to hand over nearly $100,000 for a new car, you kiss the buyers' rising suns.

Actually I do get it that's why I bought a new NSX. The NSX at it's most popular was selling at $100k due to mark up so they got it right right out of the box w/o kissing the buyers rising sun:biggrin:

When a new Ferrari or 911 comes out, who get in line first to buy it? 80% of the buyers are current owners - they love their car company and love to have something newer, different, better. Right? 10% of the buyers are people buying new in that category for the first time and have no brand loyalty. And the other 10% are people who are disaffectioned with their current brand and switch.

Ferraris does that buy guaranteeing a high trade in for their car. Most owners know durability wise it's just a weekend car ( i.e some rich guy's plaything ) ,but the one upmanship works better when you have the capital they do and their not looking for a bargain. Porsche gets more repeat sells on status. Their enthusiasts don't change up every five years they usually keep the old Porsche as well because it means something to them. Sentiment:wink:

If a new NSX came out in 1996, how many 1991 owners would have bought a new one? A lot. And a bunch of first-time exotic buyers. And a few Ferrari and Porsche owners. And if there was another new one in 2001, same thing. And so on. That's how you build a customer base. If I owned a 355 in 2000 and wanted a new car, what reason would I have to leave Ferrari for an NSX? The 360 is a hell of a car. It's new and therefore interesting. Honda has been selling the same product for 10 years and therefore don't appear to be committed to this market.

Ferraris sell out even at two to three times the price tag of the NSX. Not offering a better product ,but offering a Ferrari. This is where your argument gets tricky and one of the problems with the NSX. Honda offered a better product than the 348 and an even product with the 355. Yes the 360 had marginally better performance but look at it's cost ratio to the NSX. Now if you had the money to buy a 355 or 360 the NSX wouldn't appeal to you ,not because of it's performance but because of it's price. People I've met who spend Ferrari money on a car aren't looking for durability or reliability. They're not bargain shopping so they stick with Ferrari. Same with Porsche buyers. At their price range it's status and Honda doesn't have that. Lambo's out perform Ferrari's ,but don't have the status and therefore don't sell out like Ferraris do.

Honda built success in every other market - small cars, family cars, minivans - by building a better product and then continually improving it at a faster rate than the competition. With the NSX, Honda started out with a better product but forgot the continuous improvement part. They did the same thing with the Legend/RL - they started out with a better lux sedan but forget the continuous improvement. No wonder these are the two markets that Honda has failed in.

FORBES magazine rates the new RL as a better buy than the MB S class and the BMW 7 series. They say it offers everything the others do ,but at half the price. It still doesn't sell. People buy power ,but don't use it. So Honda says why waste it. People don't take their Lexus ( most lexus owners anyway ) to the track nor do they drag race every other big luxury car they see ,but still they want a V8. It's stupid imho ,but people get to make a choice and most want to be wasteful. It's like buying an Escalade when you have one or two kids and then saying the kids need "space"??? You know doggone well they don't need that much space and could do just as well in a CR-V ,but hey it's their money and they want to spend it on a bigger more powerful vehicle. It's all status at that point man

Few ticks? Maybe 0-60. An F430, Z06, 911 GT2 do it in about 4 seconds versus 4.8 for the NSX. 0-100, its about 8.5 seconds versus 12. 0-150, its 18 seconds versus 50. That's not a few ticks. That's a different time zone.

I've seen the NSX click off more than than 4.8 in different articles. So even if we split the difference we're talking half a sec. Z06 is a different story and the NSX has never outperformed it. Again start looking at the prices of the cars you list and you see what a bargain the NSX is. Save for maybe against the Z06 ,but it shares a lot of parts with it's sub $50k sibling so they can afford to offer it at a little less than $70k even though it's current market value is $85-90k. You mentioned several cars ,but from my findings ( huge old and new CD mags with R&T mixed in) only the new Z06 does it in 8.3-8.6. F355 took 11.2 and the F360 took 11.1 to the NSX's 11.6-11.8. Once again not another time zone just a few ticks for again double the price.

No one told Honda to keep selling the NSX after sales had plunged. It was their responsibility to either stop production (and the annual losses) or increase the sales. Honda had lots of off-the-shelf technology that could have easily improved the NSX over the years. Navigation system - available on lesser Honda's such as the Odyssey mini-van but not on the flagship. Better audio system (I think by 1995 every other Honda model had a better stereo). The entire market for automatic transmissions was basically lost - which could have nearly doubled sales or more, if you look at the split of buyers of the Porsche Tiptronic and Ferrari F1 transmissions versus a manual gearbox. Come on, who would - or should - spend $90k for a detuned 250 HP engine mated to a 4-speed transmission? Other Honda's (TL, CL) had 5-speed trannys with 270 HP.

I'm glad Honda was still selling it so I could buy one..LoL Good points on the auto trans and I honsetly have no anwser on that. Although I do know someone who bought a new one in auto and absolutely loves it so to each his own. Hmmm navi on an NSX ...now we're talkin:biggrin:

As for doing it again, Honda is the one that keeps saying a new NSX is on its way. At the first NSXPO, they gave us written surveys as to what we wanted in the next-gen NSX. The VP of Acura told us that a new NSX would be soon on its way. The CEO of Honda in 2003 that the HSC would go into production in 2005. When the NSX was killed in 2005, the Honda press release said that there would be a new car "just as groundbreaking" as the original NSX. Now the CEO has announced a V10 - as if expectations weren't high enought already. No one told them to say and do these things, they did it on their own.

Glad you brought that up. I honestly think it must be an inside joke with Honda and that it's nothing they're really concerned about. And if you read between the lines as to what they say you can tell it's not a priority ,because as you say they make more money selling other types of car

As the auto press tells the domestics when they lose market share to the Japanese, "its the product, stupid." It doesn't matter how good a product is at launch, no car can be successful on the market more than 4 or 5 years (let along 15+ years) without change. That's why Ferrari replaced the 360 with the 430 at the peak of its sales, because if they waited until sales started to decline, that would have meant lost market share. Honda know this - and I can't believe that there is a sole at Honda that doesn't regret the mishandling of the NSX.

I don't know about this part boss..Ferrari losing market share because they didn't update. Ferraris could ( and did back in the 80's ) make poop put an F on it and rich people would say it's not regular poop it's imported and xxx dollars , but hey I'll go with ya on this because I love the "it's the product stupid " part eeven though Honda wasn't selling a poor product.

TC ...your as long winded as I am:biggrin:

 

[TC]

Okay here we go. Durability no check? Reliability no check? Lower maintenance cost? no check

Durability and reliability - absolutely, not to mention excellent warranties. Lower maintenance costs, no, but people in this segment don't care about lower maintenance costs. Compared to the cost of buying the car and insurance, maintenance is next to nothing. Also, companies such as BMW with the M6 offer built-in maintenance.

300+hp and only $60k. Would've run circles around a Cayman S at the Cayman S starting price. Heck that's cheaper than a boxer.

Problem is that Honda said that the HSC targetted Ferrari. If they said it was a Boxster competitor, then it might have been better received. But the HSC was no Ferrari killer.

Actually not really their choice as one of the other threads explained they were locked into I believe ( but don't quote me ) it was using so many parts and when that was up they cancelled the car.

Whatever, but they locked themselves it - whether building a factory just for the NSX or guaranteeing suppliers so many parts. If that is the case, if they were obligated to keep making the NSX, then why they didn't do more to make it more saleable is even more shocking.

A good counter ,but not always true. Using your own example you see and know that Ford was constantly upgrading ,but still losing sales. Camry and Accords were being known as a better car ,because of reliability and durabilty while the Taurus was a more powerful car ( Think SHO ).

Power had nothing to do with it - SHO was a niche car. In the 80's, the Taurus hit the market and immediately vied with the Accord and Camry as the best selling car in the US for a few years. Just like the NSX sold as many or more units than the 348 in 1991/1992. Then what happened? The Accord and Camry got better faster then the Taurus, the Taurus lost market share and will be cancelled by Ford next year. Think of it, the Taurus went from the best selling car in the US 17-18 years ago to be taken totally off the market. Sound familar?

Lambo's out perform Ferrari's ,but don't have the status and therefore don't sell out like Ferraris do.

For many years, Lambo was in limbo - independent, sold to Chrysler, sold to some eastern asian company, sold to VW. And through all of that, they sold a few hundred cars per year. Now that they are focused on building compelling products, putting in the required investment and they sell about 1700 cars per year. Its simple, make a good product, be committed to the product and the market, improve - and you'll succeed. You might not be #1, put you'll make money and have a sustainable business.

FORBES magazine rates the new RL as a better buy than the MB S class and the BMW 7 series. They say it offers everything the others do ,but at half the price. It still doesn't sell. People buy power ,but don't use it.

My wife has an 05 RL. Good car. If it were my choice, I would have gone with the M45 or A6 V8. The RL is a peaky engine in a piggy car - even my wife complains about acceleration 0-30 or when you need to pass. If the engine isn't revving, it feels realllly slow. The car has a 5 speed, which is part of the problem. Another gear would help. As you know MB has a 7-speed auto tranny, and Lexus, 8-speed. You can get a 6-speed auto tranny in a Ford or Saturn today, so again, what is the problem with Honda making a 6- or 7-speed for the RL? Also, resale on the RL is crap, especially compared to Lexus. So I don't know what Forbes is talking about.

I'm glad Honda was still selling it so I could buy one..LoL

I agree - Honda's loss has been good fortune for many NSX owners. I bought my car new in 1996, Honda had a $10k rebate on the car at the time and my dealer gave me another $2k off - I paid about $73k.

And if you read between the lines as to what they say you can tell it's not a priority ,because as you say they make more money selling other types of car

Exactly, the NSX isn't and hasn't been a priority for many years. Either play to win or get out.

I don't know about this part boss..Ferrari losing market share because they didn't update.

Ferrari isn't losing market share today. If anything, Ferrari is gaining market share, mind share, buzz, bling, whatever you call it. True, in the 80's and early 90's, their cars weren't very good (still looked great, through). Honda must be credited with giving them a serious jolt to their complacency. But they responded and have been turning out great products. Car and Driver calls the F430 the best car ever made.

TC ...your as long winded as I am:biggrin:

I don't post often, but when I do, I write a book.

My final point, Honda's mentality is ill suited to the exotic car and luxury car market. They give us what we "need" not what we "want." In the market for mini-vans and compact cars, the market wants what it needs. But in the luxury market, what we want is far beyond what we need - which is sorta the definition of luxury. So you're right, Honda is probably going "... WTF is wrong with a 300 HP engine in the HSC - it will do everything you need?"

nice chatting with you.

 

[WingZ]

I agree - Honda's loss has been good fortune for many NSX owners. I bought my car new in 1996, Honda had a $10k rebate on the car at the time and my dealer gave me another $2k off - I paid about $73k.

Good deal. You beat me by a grand. I always salute a good negotiator.

Ferrari isn't losing market share today. If anything, Ferrari is gaining market share, mind share, buzz, bling, whatever you call it. True, in the 80's and early 90's, their cars weren't very good (still looked great, through). Honda must be credited with giving them a serious jolt to their complacency. But they responded and have been turning out great products. Car and Driver calls the F430 the best car ever made.

I agree except on the F430 part as I can't afford one.

I don't post often, but when I do, I write a book.

:biggrin:

My final point, Honda's mentality is ill suited to the exotic car and luxury car market. They give us what we "need" not what we "want." In the market for mini-vans and compact cars, the market wants what it needs. But in the luxury market, what we want is far beyond what we need - which is sorta the definition of luxury. So you're right, Honda is probably going "... WTF is wrong with a 300 HP engine in the HSC - it will do everything you need?"

nice chatting with you.

I agree as exotics and practicality should'nt be mixed. Of course I'm still glad they did it.

Nice talking with you as well.

 

[WingZ]

In the meantime, knowing Audi's resale values, I am loving this R8... sitting back and waiting for a clean used baby to come to pappa.

I'm thinking the same thing except on a Cayman S:biggrin:

 

[2slow2speed]

Yikes!

This thread has gone downhill yet again , it's about the R8 and not about Honda's corporate strategy (or lack of a strategy for their higher end products).

BTW: I totally agree with Steve's comments:

Just wish Honda had the balls to carry on Soichiro's legacy.

 

[1SICKLEX]

I subscribe to forbes but their automobile reviews/opinions should be taken very lightly at best.
I think that new Audi looks fantastic, lets hope the dynamics match.

 

[AU_NSX]

I love the look of the R8 but with only the 420hp V8... It's not the 500hp + V10 I was wanting... And no Audi is worth $125K when it eventually does arrive!

So, with no new Honda NSX available... I'm placing an order for a Cayman S!

Finally Porsche has made a true mid-engine sportscar and worthy NSX replacement.

The 911 IMO is a family car with back seats :biggrin: !

Will be interesting to see a (relatively) affordable mid-engined V10 from Porsche to replace the GT. Just as the 959 was the predecessor to the Carrera 4...

 

[2slow2speed]

Looks like a manual 6 speed will be offered on the R8 , it's defintely in the to drive list once it comes out

 

[AdnanVCS]

I think Audi is coming closer to producing the new NSX than Honda is.... sigh.
The design isn't that great but man, do they have the concept down.

The R8: Two-seater, aluminum frame, mid-mounted, and a 610-horsepower V-10.
http://www.autoclub.com.au/uploaded_images/audi-le-mans-quattro-759246.jpg

Even Lotus is coming close.
http://www.autoclub.com.au/uploaded_images/lotus-europa-2007-765993.jpg

We're BEGGING you, Honda. Please don't disappoint us with the all the trash we've been seeing online. Astound the automotive world, AGAIN, by setting the bar for all other cars to be measured by........ think they're listen?

Nope the concept car has the V10 production car has a V8 with 410HP

It looks ugly and is not special in it's performance plus it is not practical!

 

[bling]

Nope the concept car has the V10 production car has a V8 with 410HP

It looks ugly and is not special in it's performance plus it is not practical!

According the the head guys at VAG, a different, yet more powerful engine is in the future plan of the R8.

Personally, I like the look of the R8. Again, that is a personal thing

An all-aluminium, mid-engine car that is AWD and can go from 0-60 in 4.6 ticks is pretty special to me...:tongue: BTW, its production number would be less than 1/10 of the Porsche 911 line-up...that's quite exclusive in my book for the car in the price range...

The R8 has a full front boot and can store 2 sets of golf clubs behind the seats, I think that has more cargo room than the NSX or 911...:wink:

Sorry, but those are just my opinon :biggrin: I love my NSX but IF I have to replace it with another car, the R8 would be it...I just want Honda to put together something in similar package... oh well...