Arata said:
Sometime I cannot resist being geeky... on a Saturday night...
BUT
1991: 60.000$ x 135 yen/$ = 8.1 mio yen
Today it would translate to: 8.1 mio yen / 112.25 yen/$ = 72.000$
and not 81.018$
But maybe it is late and I am confused!
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
Frist drive of HONDA HSC!!
- Thread starter NetViper
- Start date
Sometime I cannot resist being geeky... on a Saturday night...
BUT
1991: 60.000$ x 135 yen/$ = 8.1 mio yen
Today it would translate to: 8.1 mio yen / 112.25 yen/$ = 72.000$
and not 81.018$
But maybe it is late and I am confused!
"But the major issue I have still is that I haven't seen any evidence in 20 years that Americans will purchase a Japanese car that costs more than $70k." MAKO
How many Japanese cars have there been that cost more than $70K?? Other than the NSX, and maybe an optioned out LS430, I can't think of many more. The NSX is a dated design, so I don't think you can extrapolate from one or two cars the buying habits of americans on $70K+ japanese cars. As an owner of a 2004 model NSX, I guess at least 1 or 2 of the 2002+ NSXs have found homes as compared to your "zero buyer" statement.
Also, Maserati is a brand with a past. A past of horrific reliability and mechanical problems. They are a brand that has not even been in the US for over 10 years!! They've barely came back to the US, and you are saying they have already failed? I'm not a big Maserati fan, but I think it's WAY too early to say they're dead in the US. They seem to have addressed a lot of the issues they had when they left the market. However, to compare them with Honda in any way is ridiculous.
In your discussion about horsepower, you talked about other marques upping their horsepower drastically. That has happened over the last 12 years with competitors of the NSX, and it still remains one of the world's best. It's not all about horsepower. Like Arata said, the NSX should not be competing with the Boxster in price or performance. The S2000 gives the current Boxster all it can handle. As to the sarcasm to Arata's "What If" scenarios....What if you had some foundation to your points, rather than pulling things ($1 billion re-tooling cost?) out of thin air? Arata made some excellent points IMO, and he also refuted your responses admirably.
Whether it's turbocharged or not, HSC or NSX, it will be a fantastic car. I think we all agree on that. There's no need to bang our heads against a rock on what it will be. I could say that it will have a cargo bed on the back for hauling 4x8 sheets of plywood, and I would be just as close to the rest of the speculation going on. I think I'll enter that contest on here with that. Oh, and it will have a Hemi engine in it as well, with a Pontiac Aztec tent system in the back. I'd be as close as the rest in the contest at this point. Oh well, I know I'll get shredded for my comments. Shred away!!
How many Japanese cars have there been that cost more than $70K?? Other than the NSX, and maybe an optioned out LS430, I can't think of many more. The NSX is a dated design, so I don't think you can extrapolate from one or two cars the buying habits of americans on $70K+ japanese cars. As an owner of a 2004 model NSX, I guess at least 1 or 2 of the 2002+ NSXs have found homes as compared to your "zero buyer" statement.
Also, Maserati is a brand with a past. A past of horrific reliability and mechanical problems. They are a brand that has not even been in the US for over 10 years!! They've barely came back to the US, and you are saying they have already failed? I'm not a big Maserati fan, but I think it's WAY too early to say they're dead in the US. They seem to have addressed a lot of the issues they had when they left the market. However, to compare them with Honda in any way is ridiculous.
In your discussion about horsepower, you talked about other marques upping their horsepower drastically. That has happened over the last 12 years with competitors of the NSX, and it still remains one of the world's best. It's not all about horsepower. Like Arata said, the NSX should not be competing with the Boxster in price or performance. The S2000 gives the current Boxster all it can handle. As to the sarcasm to Arata's "What If" scenarios....What if you had some foundation to your points, rather than pulling things ($1 billion re-tooling cost?) out of thin air? Arata made some excellent points IMO, and he also refuted your responses admirably.
Whether it's turbocharged or not, HSC or NSX, it will be a fantastic car. I think we all agree on that. There's no need to bang our heads against a rock on what it will be. I could say that it will have a cargo bed on the back for hauling 4x8 sheets of plywood, and I would be just as close to the rest of the speculation going on. I think I'll enter that contest on here with that. Oh, and it will have a Hemi engine in it as well, with a Pontiac Aztec tent system in the back. I'd be as close as the rest in the contest at this point. Oh well, I know I'll get shredded for my comments. Shred away!!
It will be very interesting to see how it plays out.
Honda can't afford a mistake at this level. Again, we're talking about over a BILLION dollars of total development cost on the new car, from the very start to the first one rolling off the line.
And that's being conservative. Toyota spent over $2B on the development of the SC430 convertible. Yikes.
Plus it doesn't help that the company failed outright in their first attempt in this sector (based on Honda's own stated sales goal for the NSX of 3k per year in 1991, and actual sales of less than 800 units per year average over model lifespan).
Don't get caught in the middle Honda. Go high or go low.
Deliver a Ferrari-beater for $125k, or deliver a Carrera-beater for $60k.
Anything else is death.
Honda can't afford a mistake at this level. Again, we're talking about over a BILLION dollars of total development cost on the new car, from the very start to the first one rolling off the line.
And that's being conservative. Toyota spent over $2B on the development of the SC430 convertible. Yikes.
Plus it doesn't help that the company failed outright in their first attempt in this sector (based on Honda's own stated sales goal for the NSX of 3k per year in 1991, and actual sales of less than 800 units per year average over model lifespan).
Don't get caught in the middle Honda. Go high or go low.
Deliver a Ferrari-beater for $125k, or deliver a Carrera-beater for $60k.
Anything else is death.
If development costs AND production costs are 1 Billion Dollars
And profits on each car are $50,000, $40,000, $30,000 $20,000
They would have to sell :
20,000 cars @ $50,000 profit To break even
25,000 cars @ $40,000 profit to break even
33,000 cars @ $30,000 profit to break even
50,000 cars @ $20,000 profit to break even
I do not think the 1 billion dollar number is realistic.
Thanks for the correction on the earlier math, please check this also.
And profits on each car are $50,000, $40,000, $30,000 $20,000
They would have to sell :
20,000 cars @ $50,000 profit To break even
25,000 cars @ $40,000 profit to break even
33,000 cars @ $30,000 profit to break even
50,000 cars @ $20,000 profit to break even
I do not think the 1 billion dollar number is realistic.
Thanks for the correction on the earlier math, please check this also.
Arata said:
You're right, the $1B figure isn't realistic. It's likely too low.
A trip to the bookstore or library can go a long way in helping you see exactly the type of massive financial committment that new models incur on their creators. Even light facelifts, like the sort that added the new front and rear ends to the NSX in 2002 cost hundreds of millions of dollars to implement. I believe Honda pegged the 2002 upgrade at $200M to be exact, but someone will have to check me on that.
And of course they'll never make the investment back, not by a long shot. The NSX is a halo car, produced only for the status it brings its maker. It's a loss leader basically, getting people into dealerships for Accords, and Civics, and RSXs, etc. It makes a profit for the company in other ways besides unit sales.
Anyway:
1. The average car is manufactured with a 40 - 60% gross margin, meaning if the car has an MSRP of $100k, then it cost Ford, or Honda, or whoever, approximately $40 - $60k to manufacture it. Again, this is gross.
2. This doesn't apply as equally in the sports car niche, because car mfgs sometimes will manipulate the price of the car based on market demand, either lower or higher. If the mfg is a status marque that's hot at the moment, like say Bentley, or Ferrari, etc, then the msrp is adjusted higher.
3. As you mentioned in your post, you need volume in order for a totally new platform to amortize properly. Some mfgs, like Nissan of late with their popular FR Altima/350Z/G35 platform, share the engine/drivetrain platform across multiple models in order to amortize the original development costs. Sports cars don't have this luxury usually, because you can't take a 360's engine or chassis or tooling, and use it on any other Ferrari model due to perception problems. Sports car buyers want exclusivity, Gallardo owners for example barely tolerate the amount of component sharing that has gone on between their car's 5.0L V10 and the Audi 4.2L V8 that it was sourced from.
All three of these items turned the original NSX into an incredible cash burner for Honda over the past decade.
There was no sales volume to speak of past the initial launch year, 1992, and 1995, and they weren't able to share the platform, engine, or Tochigi's tooling with any other model, because the NSX's tooling was proprietary to that single car.
But again, Honda adds value to the NSX through the fact that it is a pinnacle product that shows what the company is capable of. In that light it's profitable, because who knows how many more low-end hondas were sold to people partly because the NSX was such a great figure-head.
But its their showcar so they might be willing to take a lost.
I prefer the car to remain an exotic and at 60k it will be only an expensive sports car at todays' prices for cars. The club will not so exclusive at 60k a car. Moreover, at 60k a limited production would hike the market price up at least 10k. I like to see it remain just below 100k and make less than 1000 cars a year. If it is still hand built, I'm not sure they could turn out that many anyway.
I prefer the car to remain an exotic and at 60k it will be only an expensive sports car at todays' prices for cars. The club will not so exclusive at 60k a car. Moreover, at 60k a limited production would hike the market price up at least 10k. I like to see it remain just below 100k and make less than 1000 cars a year. If it is still hand built, I'm not sure they could turn out that many anyway.
So...
Take a Ferrari Enzo for example. Let's assume that they could tool up an assembly plant and design that car for 1 billion dollars. It would be probably much higher, but let's use that figure. Then, if Ferrari only made 1,000 of the Enzos and made $1 million profit on each, they would just break even?? I don't think they are making a million dollar profit on each car, and if designing an NSX is multiple billions, then the Enzo must be staggering to design and build. Except, all Ferraris are halo cars. They don't have $15K Ferraris. How can they do that? I realize they have Fiat money too, but Fiat ain't no Honda as far as gross sales numbers.
I can't believe that it will cost billions for a new NSX. I want a new NSX design, but wouldn't believe that Honda would do something that financially stupid. The NSX hasn't been the loss leader type car. Hell, you couldn't even find one anywhere in a dealership to see for years. There was hardly any advertising and 90% of people don't know what the hell it is. Dodge's Viper maybe. Everyone knows what a Viper or Corvette is, but the NSX is not a big draw to the dealerships. I'll bet most Civic buyers have never heard of or seen an NSX, and dang sure didn't make the connection between a Civic and the NSX. They bought because of incredible media exposure, build quality, and economy. If getting rid of flip up headlights and adding some different rear blinker patterns and mild mods to colors and dash etc. cost hundreds of millions, then Honda was stupid to spend the money. Let's start our own forum business of modifying bilnkers and front and rear fascias for auto manufacturers. We'll be rich!!
Take a Ferrari Enzo for example. Let's assume that they could tool up an assembly plant and design that car for 1 billion dollars. It would be probably much higher, but let's use that figure. Then, if Ferrari only made 1,000 of the Enzos and made $1 million profit on each, they would just break even?? I don't think they are making a million dollar profit on each car, and if designing an NSX is multiple billions, then the Enzo must be staggering to design and build. Except, all Ferraris are halo cars. They don't have $15K Ferraris. How can they do that? I realize they have Fiat money too, but Fiat ain't no Honda as far as gross sales numbers.
I can't believe that it will cost billions for a new NSX. I want a new NSX design, but wouldn't believe that Honda would do something that financially stupid. The NSX hasn't been the loss leader type car. Hell, you couldn't even find one anywhere in a dealership to see for years. There was hardly any advertising and 90% of people don't know what the hell it is. Dodge's Viper maybe. Everyone knows what a Viper or Corvette is, but the NSX is not a big draw to the dealerships. I'll bet most Civic buyers have never heard of or seen an NSX, and dang sure didn't make the connection between a Civic and the NSX. They bought because of incredible media exposure, build quality, and economy. If getting rid of flip up headlights and adding some different rear blinker patterns and mild mods to colors and dash etc. cost hundreds of millions, then Honda was stupid to spend the money. Let's start our own forum business of modifying bilnkers and front and rear fascias for auto manufacturers. We'll be rich!!
I've given all the information that's relevant to the discussion and won't engage in endless debates about a car I'll likely never want to own. Conclusions can be drawn from the data I've presented, or cast aside as readers see fit.
Honda won't likely be answering any of the questions we're asking until 2008 or later, so it's all futile anyway.
As a final note, I urge everyone that claims to have an opinion on the economics of new model introductions to go check out their local Borders or Amazon.com. There are some great books that would help your end of the discussion and understanding where the market comes from immensely, unfortunately mine are all packed up awaiting a move at the moment so I can't give any titles for now!
Best.
Honda won't likely be answering any of the questions we're asking until 2008 or later, so it's all futile anyway.
As a final note, I urge everyone that claims to have an opinion on the economics of new model introductions to go check out their local Borders or Amazon.com. There are some great books that would help your end of the discussion and understanding where the market comes from immensely, unfortunately mine are all packed up awaiting a move at the moment so I can't give any titles for now!
Best.
Doc C said:
Actually they are very close in sales and production numbers:
http://kari.hmc.co.kr/indcar/G2001gpsm.pdf
There is a 13% difference between the two makers.
MAKO said:
Yeah I bet all the words you said are correct.
A lot of people don't understand that the NSX, Ferrari, and even the Maclaren were no profit vehicles by themselves. But the status that they make more than justify the money spent on developing them
Ferrari makes a lot more money out of advertisement. Honda does make money by getting that high image that was created by the NSX.
So, like advertisement, you loss money on the car but you gain it in image which makes a lot of money despite your product, just ask the currant Mercedes lineup about it.
to restate the above, im thinkin a couple bil investment in a new halo car every 15 yrs is NOT considered particularly expensive to Honda. If they were trying to compete on 5-7 yr cylces and investing that much money, thata would be different.
gheba nsx,
Thanks for the info. I stand corrected. And stunned. I can't believe Fiat can have that many sales without being in the US market. Wow. I'll bet right now that everyone that is down on the new NSX on this forum will be standing in line for the new model when it's released. It WILL be an amazing vehicle.
When a company as coservative as Honda comes out and says that it will compete with or beat Ferrari, then I don't think we have anything to worry about!!!
Thanks for the info. I stand corrected. And stunned. I can't believe Fiat can have that many sales without being in the US market. Wow. I'll bet right now that everyone that is down on the new NSX on this forum will be standing in line for the new model when it's released. It WILL be an amazing vehicle.
When a company as coservative as Honda comes out and says that it will compete with or beat Ferrari, then I don't think we have anything to worry about!!!
No problem, I can imagine that it sounds "exotic" to you.
FIAT is market leader in many countries, Italy of course but also Poland, Brasil and several other South American and Eastern European country.
In 1990 they were the third producer in the world!
FIAT is market leader in many countries, Italy of course but also Poland, Brasil and several other South American and Eastern European country.
In 1990 they were the third producer in the world!
You cannot compare Honda with Fiat.
This is the same when you compare a 3-Point Michelin Restaurant with a Pizzeria.
1st of all, Fiat is selling a lot of cheap crap! they also do allocate some other crap brands like Lancia or Alfa in their sales numbers.
We should consider sales numbers concerning the incomes of car sales.
Beside Toyota Company, Honda is the only one which enjoys a Triple A (best Rating!!!).
Fiat has been slashed and upgraded to junk-bond status last year!
This is the same when you compare a 3-Point Michelin Restaurant with a Pizzeria.
1st of all, Fiat is selling a lot of cheap crap! they also do allocate some other crap brands like Lancia or Alfa in their sales numbers.
We should consider sales numbers concerning the incomes of car sales.
Beside Toyota Company, Honda is the only one which enjoys a Triple A (best Rating!!!).
Fiat has been slashed and upgraded to junk-bond status last year!
George, so many times you are so full of hate for everything not-Honda...
We were speaking about production&sales numbers. Not quality...
But whatever, write what you want.
We were speaking about production&sales numbers. Not quality...
But whatever, write what you want.
Giussi, you overstate it!
I meant..
1) Sales numbers are always a facile and simple way to compare 2 car manufacturers.
What is wrong about it??
it's just my point of view, men. Are we in an internet forum or are we in north corea ???
Anyway, what about the car sales in 2002 or 2003?
2) Concerning quality:
I was never talking about me or my personal tastes or my personal hates, I just tried to tell what real facts are saying like:
BBC, JD Power, Tüf, Dekra, TCS, AutoBild, and so on...
3) my 4 favorite cars beside NSX are:
Honda LS 430
Honda FX45
Honda GT40
and Honda Mustang.
btw!
Giussi, next week I'll be in phoenix/Arizona. If you need something from "Scienceofspeed", let me know.
i
I meant..
1) Sales numbers are always a facile and simple way to compare 2 car manufacturers.
What is wrong about it??
it's just my point of view, men. Are we in an internet forum or are we in north corea ???
Anyway, what about the car sales in 2002 or 2003?
2) Concerning quality:
I was never talking about me or my personal tastes or my personal hates, I just tried to tell what real facts are saying like:
BBC, JD Power, Tüf, Dekra, TCS, AutoBild, and so on...
3) my 4 favorite cars beside NSX are:
Honda LS 430
Honda FX45
Honda GT40
and Honda Mustang.
btw!
Giussi, next week I'll be in phoenix/Arizona. If you need something from "Scienceofspeed", let me know.
i
Ok ok you are right...
turbo
honda uses a turbo on there jet ski. i think if they use it on the nsx we may see a twin turbo. one for low end then a secondary turbo for the mid to high rpm. I have faith the next nsx will be heads and shoulders above everyone else. hope it looks like an s 2000's bigger meaner brother. Have faith,think big, honda put the supercar world on its head in 89 and it will do it again..
honda uses a turbo on there jet ski. i think if they use it on the nsx we may see a twin turbo. one for low end then a secondary turbo for the mid to high rpm. I have faith the next nsx will be heads and shoulders above everyone else. hope it looks like an s 2000's bigger meaner brother. Have faith,think big, honda put the supercar world on its head in 89 and it will do it again..
I think the article is bogus
I think the article is false. I don't believe Honda is as stupid as they currently appear to be regarding the HSC.
First of all. The current HSC is not a good looking car. It doesn't come close to looking as good as the offerings from Ferrari, Lambo or even the 911 Turbo. I, as well as many others bought my NSX on it's exotic looks, not it's mediocre power. I do not think Honda would release the HSC with it's currnt looks.
Secondly, Honda cannot be foolish enough to offer a V6. Most people buy for bragging rights and looks. It doesn't matter how much power the Honda V6 makes. A V6 is NOT EXOTIC. People want a bare minimum of 400hp in their exotic car and a V10 or at least a V8 for God's sake.
Honda is either playing games with us and disguising the HSC/NSX or they are stupid. Let's hope they are joking with us and are about to release something that we all have been asking them for. An EXOTIC LOOKING, N/A V8 OR V10 400+HP SUPERCAR that can beet the offerings from Ferrari, Lambo and Porsche.
I think the article is false. I don't believe Honda is as stupid as they currently appear to be regarding the HSC.
First of all. The current HSC is not a good looking car. It doesn't come close to looking as good as the offerings from Ferrari, Lambo or even the 911 Turbo. I, as well as many others bought my NSX on it's exotic looks, not it's mediocre power. I do not think Honda would release the HSC with it's currnt looks.
Secondly, Honda cannot be foolish enough to offer a V6. Most people buy for bragging rights and looks. It doesn't matter how much power the Honda V6 makes. A V6 is NOT EXOTIC. People want a bare minimum of 400hp in their exotic car and a V10 or at least a V8 for God's sake.
Honda is either playing games with us and disguising the HSC/NSX or they are stupid. Let's hope they are joking with us and are about to release something that we all have been asking them for. An EXOTIC LOOKING, N/A V8 OR V10 400+HP SUPERCAR that can beet the offerings from Ferrari, Lambo and Porsche.
I see the 400ps as possible but I still believe more the power output to be in the 380 range.
But I strongly believe that the V8 or V10 thing won't happen... anyway, you spoke about the 911 Turbo in your email. Do you know the number of cylinders in that car?
But I strongly believe that the V8 or V10 thing won't happen... anyway, you spoke about the 911 Turbo in your email. Do you know the number of cylinders in that car?
FYI, 997 has been anounced.
FYI,
The Porsche 997 launch was announced a couple of days ago, the 997 is pretty much an evolution of the 996 and still makes use of the flat 6 engine and not a v8:
http://www3.us.porsche.com/Precision911/pcna.asp
As far as the HP figures they are higher than the 996's:
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133384
For some laptimes comparison at the Ring:
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133258
The rumored 998 *might* use a mid engine V8 but that car won't show up for another 4 years, so it's anybody's guess if that's going to turn out to be true.
Ken
MAKO said:
FYI,
The Porsche 997 launch was announced a couple of days ago, the 997 is pretty much an evolution of the 996 and still makes use of the flat 6 engine and not a v8:
http://www3.us.porsche.com/Precision911/pcna.asp
As far as the HP figures they are higher than the 996's:
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133384
For some laptimes comparison at the Ring:
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133258
The rumored 998 *might* use a mid engine V8 but that car won't show up for another 4 years, so it's anybody's guess if that's going to turn out to be true.
Ken
Re: I think the article is bogus
You will find this interesting even the folks who are paying the $$'s for the Carrera GT are having similar arguments about power, bragging rights, etc, so it's a never ending quest.
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=125977
Getting back to the topic.
Personally speaking I don't think that you can compare a car that might be in the 100K (2nd gen NSX) with other cars that will be in the 150K+ range, it's just not realistic.
What we can hope for is that the next generation NSX will be a well balanced car that looks good, has sufficient power and handles well. To this I will add NO Turbo
Ken
ryneen said:
You will find this interesting even the folks who are paying the $$'s for the Carrera GT are having similar arguments about power, bragging rights, etc, so it's a never ending quest.
http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=125977
Getting back to the topic.
Personally speaking I don't think that you can compare a car that might be in the 100K (2nd gen NSX) with other cars that will be in the 150K+ range, it's just not realistic.
What we can hope for is that the next generation NSX will be a well balanced car that looks good, has sufficient power and handles well. To this I will add NO Turbo
Ken
It sound like we are pretty evenly split on Turbo/No Turbo.
So, I again say, why not make a NA version and Turbo version just like Porsche.
It works for them.
That way all of you non-turbo can get a 3.5L 380 HP car.
All of the turbo fans can get a 3.5L 450HP Turbo.
Make the price of the NA car 70K and Turbo 90K. We have a winner!
So, I again say, why not make a NA version and Turbo version just like Porsche.
It works for them.
That way all of you non-turbo can get a 3.5L 380 HP car.
All of the turbo fans can get a 3.5L 450HP Turbo.
Make the price of the NA car 70K and Turbo 90K. We have a winner!
I would agree on that!
(ps: but I just see the fanatics from one or the other gorup not to like this idea... )
(ps: but I just see the fanatics from one or the other gorup not to like this idea...
)