Rumor mill: Type R coming in 2020

[RSO 34]

In 2016, Honda spent $1.38 billion on marketing in the USA.

In 2018, a 30 second commercial during the Super Bowl was a little over $5 million.

Giving every purchaser of a new NSX a $30,000 rebate (assuming a sales rate of 250 per year, slightly more than the later years' sales of the Gen 1) would cost $7.5 million.

One would think that making 250 customers happy and getting more vehicles on the road to showcase your brand would be worth it from a marketing cost analysis...........

 

[BATMANs]

IMO
the new NSX looks much better than the GTR
definitely more exotic look

NSX is lower and has more "modern" look than the GTR.

But the issue I have is that front grill that looks like the rest of their other line up from a generation ago.

MDX and RDX has that new look..... imagine that.... a none halo product that is cheaper and looks newer.

 

[fastaussie]

In 2016, Honda spent $1.38 billion on marketing in the USA.One would think that making 250 customers happy and getting more vehicles on the road to showcase your brand would be worth it from a marketing cost analysis...........

except many people have never actually seen one. i have personally seen three since the car came out almost 2 years ago, and i live in L.A., very close to Beverly Hills and get out to Malibu quite often also. i've yet to even see one at a car show in the area. all three i've seen were on the 405 or 101 highways.

and i saw one in Monaco last year sitting at a Honda dealership...

 

[nsx878]

The GTR is fast, but who here likes the way it actually looks and stands?

Not me...... I looked at brand new one, and the design just did nothing for me, so I moved on. I felt differently when seeing my first NSX, and bought one 2 weeks later..... GTR is dated. Good performance, but it will win no beauty contests.

 

[fastaussie]

GTR is dated. Good performance, but it will win no beauty contests.

flat out ugliest Supercar out there...

 

[bboxer]

I had my 09 GTR for 7 years. Only saw its hood and the interior when I was having REAL fun driving. Some of us sometoimes buy cars for what they do rather than what they look like. I have always felt great looking at my first generation NSX’s when I walk into my garage but rarely has a road car satisfied me when driving a canyon road or coming out of an apex on the track like the GTR did.

 

[Axxlrod]

I couldn't care less about the GTRs performance. I never considered buying one because it's UGLY.

 

[Z06nsxcts]

https://jalopnik.com/the-2019-mercedes-amg-e53-gets-a-huge-torque-boost-from-1826232036

Hmmmm


MC

 

[nsx878]

The "hybrid" thing is not going away..... It is the future. All cars are heading that way. Even the mid engine Corvette promised is rumored to be coming with electric motors in the front eventually. Some day, we will look back, and see how forward looking the NSX really is/was. Sometimes change is hard to accept.

 

[fastaussie]

The "hybrid" thing is not going away..... It is the future. Some day, we will look back, and see how forward looking the NSX really is/was. Sometimes change is hard to accept.

i'd imagine most people would be more accepting of change if it proved to offer superior performance...

 

[Gondo89]

i'd imagine most people would be more accepting of change if it proved to offer superior performance...

This. All the delays, years of engineering redos, internal political fiascos, and the NSX 2.0 does not win in any single metric. Not 0-60, not 0-100, not 1/4 mile, not 0-150, not top speed, and it's clearly not a track winner either (a Ford Mustang GT350 with dinosaur tech beats it). The point of all the electrical integrations in the 918 and LaFerrari is that they made the cars go faster than anything else on the road at the time.
So all the engineering efforts by Porsche and Ferrari delivered tangible, undisputable results. In contrast, the NSX 2.0 seems to be all about the intangibles. "Don't focus on the performance numbers, but, it sure feels good though."
Well, that doesn't sell cars.

 

[nsx878]

The hatred continues.......

 

[dshinke21]

This. All the delays, years of engineering redos, internal political fiascos, and the NSX 2.0 does not win in any single metric. Not 0-60, not 0-100, not 1/4 mile, not 0-150, not top speed, and it's clearly not a track winner either (a Ford Mustang GT350 with dinosaur tech beats it). The point of all the electrical integrations in the 918 and LaFerrari is that they made the cars go faster than anything else on the road at the time.
So all the engineering efforts by Porsche and Ferrari delivered tangible, undisputable results. In contrast, the NSX 2.0 seems to be all about the intangibles. "Don't focus on the performance numbers, but, it sure feels good though."
Well, that doesn't sell cars.

It does sell cars when you put them in the drivers seat. Which was the entire reason for the exposure program which allowed dealers to host VIP test drives of the NSX. This was huge in being able to sell the cars, 2 of the 3 2017 NSX's sold at our dealership were due to the test drives we offered in the exposure program. Most super cars are purchased based on the numbers on paper because most people aren't allowed to test drive them before they buy. Allowing customers to drive means a lot. If they can drive the NSX and love it, but the Audi dealer won't let them drive the R8 or they can't drive a GTR at the Nissan dealership, chances are they are going to lean towards an NSX. Then after the drive I can say "sure feels good huh?".

The most important part of selling cars is not spewing facts about chassis stiffness or suspension damper reaction times, it is about demonstrating why the technology benefits them. Best way to do this is put them behind the wheel and pick a route that that showcases all of the key features and benefits of the awesome technology that lies under the skin of the NSX.

Those "intangibles" are very tangible when you get behind the wheel. That's the most important part of any car, super car, or hyper car, the way it makes you feel behind the wheel. Some may not love the way the hybrid system benefits your driving experience, and some may. In the end all that matters is that you find a car that you enjoy. As I've said many times the NSX is nowhere near a perfect car, but it is a damn good first try. Let's see what they can do when they crank everything up a notch.

If I learned anything from meeting Ikeda and other executives it is that Acura is sick of being on the defensive, and that it is time to build a product that allows us to go on the offensive. 2019 RDX is truly the first look at what that is and they crushed it on that car. I'm reserving my judgement until we get details on 2019 NSX updates for now.

 

[gleibig]

Why does everyone think the NSX has to be faster than the fastest cars out there that cost 2,3,4x's as much? How much faster do people think cars are going to get? NSX sucks. It really needed to do 0-60 in .9 seconds.

 

[powdbyrice]

Hondas have never been about being the best on the stat sheet, maybe the exception being the new CTR and its 'Ring time.

but for those rich people looking at supercars, its all about dick swinging and attention.

 

[tbuff]

This. All the delays, years of engineering redos, internal political fiascos, and the NSX 2.0 does not win in any single metric. Not 0-60, not 0-100, not 1/4 mile, not 0-150, not top speed, and it's clearly not a track winner either (a Ford Mustang GT350 with dinosaur tech beats it). The point of all the electrical integrations in the 918 and LaFerrari is that they made the cars go faster than anything else on the road at the time.
So all the engineering efforts by Porsche and Ferrari delivered tangible, undisputable results. In contrast, the NSX 2.0 seems to be all about the intangibles. "Don't focus on the performance numbers, but, it sure feels good though."
Well, that doesn't sell cars.

Why buy a GTR? A 911 Turbo is faster.

 

[Gondo89]

Why buy a GTR? A 911 Turbo is faster.

A GT-R you can pick up brand new for $90K or less. A 911 Turbo you'd be lucky to find new for less than $170K. So about $80-$100K difference is the reason I'd pick the GT-R.

 

[fastaussie]

This. All the delays, years of engineering redos, internal political fiascos, and the NSX 2.0 does not win in any single metric. Not 0-60, not 0-100, not 1/4 mile, not 0-150, not top speed, and it's clearly not a track winner either (a Ford Mustang GT350 with dinosaur tech beats it). The point of all the electrical integrations in the 918 and LaFerrari is that they made the cars go faster than anything else on the road at the time. So all the engineering efforts by Porsche and Ferrari delivered tangible, undisputable results. In contrast, the NSX 2.0 seems to be all about the intangibles. "Don't focus on the performance numbers, but, it sure feels good though." Well, that doesn't sell cars.

The hatred continues.......

you say hatred, but Gondo89 is right.

the NSX is a nice car, but it isn't selling for crap, or making any impact on the automotive world or Supercar landscape. it's not hatred, it's just facts. you guys will have to get over it eventually...

A GT-R you can pick up brand new for $90K or less. A 911 Turbo you'd be lucky to find new for less than $170K. So about $80-$100K difference is the reason I'd pick the GT-R.

obviously not the same budget, but i'd spend twice the money on a 911 Turbo S. any day of the week...

 

[gleibig]

you say hatred, but Gondo89 is right.

the NSX is a nice car, but it isn't selling for crap, or making any impact on the automotive world or Supercar landscape. it's not hatred, it's just facts. you guys will have to get over it eventually...



obviously not the same budget, but i'd spend twice the money on a 911 Turbo S. any day of the week...

I don't understand. Why don't you find a vehicle you like and join one of those forums and sing it's praises? 99% of your posts on here are bashing the car. What's the point? It's gotten old. Why do you waste so much of your time on a forum complaining about a car? It's really odd.

 

[EuroBoutique]

Yeah, and with the 488 you could keep going back to the greasy dealer and getting the odometer rolled back. That's real value.

Not sure what you mean by this statement?

 

[tbuff]

A GT-R you can pick up brand new for $90K or less. A 911 Turbo you'd be lucky to find new for less than $170K. So about $80-$100K difference is the reason I'd pick the GT-R.

MSRP on cheapest GTR is $100k
MSRP on cheapest 911 Turbo is $160k

I don't see the point in buying the GTR when for 60k more you get a faster car?

 

[tbuff]

you guys will have to get over it eventually...

It's an opinion, dude.

You have to accept the fact that some people like it.

 

[bngl3rt]

It's an opinion, dude.

You have to accept the fact that some people like it.

Indeed. I don't need something to be earth shattering or part of some gigantic revolution to quietly, privately enjoy the shit out of it for myself.

If only a few hundred/thousand people out in the world have the values and the disposition that makes them connect deeply with this car, I'm fine with that. Nothing wrong with being in a small exclusive club

 

[RyanRA]

I don't understand. Why don't you find a vehicle you like and join one of those forums and sing it's praises? 99% of your posts on here are bashing the car. What's the point? It's gotten old. Why do you waste so much of your time on a forum complaining about a car? It's really odd.

Maybe ”speedydownunder’s” endorphin levels elevate when he elicits a response.

 

[docjohn]

I think he is more upset that as an enthusiastic owner of a NA2 , and a guy who is able to play with most sports cars, and a guy who values the opinion of the motoring press he did not get a roaring V-10, or a honda re-imagining of the 570 ,458, R8-GT , which were the benchmark in the class at the time.If memory serves he uses hair products to match the color of his Imola...