The next NSX has already been built!

[effer]

I am refering to the 10,000RPM redline. What is the point of that other then you want to drive an F1 car. Honestly do you want that simply because it would be awesome? How often are you going to be driving the car up to 10k? Most people complain about the fact that engines like the S2000 have to be spun so high to get power that it was annoying. It was fun when used, but realistically it was not that functional. Honda modded the S2000 motor so that the redline was lower, why do you think that they will make a new motor with an even higher redline?

Everytime I drive my NSX I reach the 8300 rpm and it is easy, fun, musical, intoxicating, IOW everything but annoying.

So I am sure it would be the same with a new NSX V10 redlining @ 10k rpm because the NSX philosophy is to offer a flat broad torque curve NA high revving engine.

The V6 3,0L and 3,2L were gems, so imagine what they will achieve with TEN cylinders!!!

This new engine will be, IMO, undoubtedly a breakthrough and the new reference. I suspect this because actually Honda is having one ( if not ) the most powerful F1 engine ( 3,0L @ more than 960 hp ) and it is a V10!!! With such expertise no wonder why it won't be a V8.

Will it rev to 10K? I don't know, but being at their place, I would struggle hard to offer such a flat broad torque high revving engine as reliable as the one founded in the first gen NSX. Or at least to bring a higher redline than original 8,3k rpm ).

Think about only a 325 lbs ft peak torque @ 7800 rpm and redlining at 10K...( I leave you the hp calculation! ).

This makes think about guessing the new engine numbers concerning:

Displacement: ( 4,4L )
Peak torque: ( over 325 lbs ft )
Redline: ( over 9000 rpm )
Power: ( over 525 hp )

I assume Honda can do better output than the S2K engine...or a least equal.

I repeat it this new engine will bring the same philosophy of its predecessor.

Go Honda!

 

[effer]

A 10K redline on a street car would be silly. Honda needs to stick with 8K and bump up the low-end TQ.

That's right! But having both is conceivable with a V10 in the hands of Honda!

 

[nuccaJB]

If it makes so much sense and is so possible, why did honda change the s2k motor? I am not trying to debate and argue with you about this, I just want to understand. I don't have an NSX yet, but I had a GSR and I used to redline it all the time with a raised fuel cutoff. How reliable would the car be with 10k redline and would the car have any torque if it is a small displacement 10k redline V10? If the car has low torque it takes away from the daily driveablity.

 

[NetViper]

If it makes so much sense and is so possible, why did honda change the s2k motor? I am not trying to debate and argue with you about this, I just want to understand. I don't have an NSX yet, but I had a GSR and I used to redline it all the time with a raised fuel cutoff. How reliable would the car be with 10k redline and would the car have any torque if it is a small displacement 10k redline 10? If the car has low torque it takes away from the daily driveablity.

I want the car to have at least 300lbs at 2000rpm.

 

[MoreRPMs]

The whole point of the 10k redline is because Honda can! That's the car's niche; there's no other new ground to cover in sports cars (hybrid-crap excepted :tongue: ). Aluminum space frames, carbon tubs, paddle shift trans., etc. - these are all technologies that made their way into production autos since the NSX debuted.


With small displacement (assuming it won't be a 5 or 6 liter) the only way you can make up the lack of torque (w/o turbocharging) is to rev the SOB ala S2000. Those dreaming about V10 of 4 liters having tons of bottom end grunt are going to be mighty disappointed.

 

[Bryan]

A 10K redline on a street car would be silly. Honda needs to stick with 8K and bump up the low-end TQ.

A bigger engine with more torque is easier to develop, but more RPM gives you a lot of possibilities too.

Which would you prefer? Flat 300 ft-lbs torque from 2000 to 8000 rpm or flat 240 ft-lbs torque from 2500 to 10000 rpm? If the car is geared correctly for both engines you won't be able to tell the difference (other than the sound.) They will have the same horsepower rating (~450HP), drive exactly the same and have exactly the same performance profile. If it's done right the high rpm engine would probably weigh a little less (because the displacement would be ~20% smaller.) I prefer the high tech solution if for no other reason than it is cool.

I'm sure it's technically challenging to build a usable (e.g., flat torque curve, long service life) 10K rpm street engine, but I would love to see Honda do it the same way they handled 8K rpm in 1989.

(Of course we'd all be more happy with 300 ft-lbs of torque from 2000 to 10000 rpm :biggrin: That gets us to the 550hp mark or so. )

 

[TC]

Not neccesarily. Honda's goal will be to out ferrari-Ferrari and Lamborghini.

Honda will not be able to out-Ferrari Ferrari, just as no one has been able to do. Porsche has wisely remained down stream of Ferrari with the bulk of its cars in the $60k to $130 range. Porsche cut back the production of the Carrera GT by 250 units given soft demand. Lambo has had some modest success selling high-end cars, mainly due to their over-the-top styling (to compensate for not being a Ferrari). The Gallardo was an attempt to out Ferrari the 360/430, but it didn't work. You can buy a new Gallardo for less than MSRP while the 430 sells at a large premium. The McLaren SLR is a major sales disappointment, as was the F1 (sold 100 units when they originally planned 300). Today, used Enzo's, F50's and F40's still sell above their original MSRP (assuming that they are in good condition). Consider that a used Enzo (at nearly 2x its MSRP) costs about the same as a brand-new Bugatti Veyron (only 16 have been ordered so far). If the Veyron can't out-Ferrari, it can't be done.

Assuming that Honda brings a 500 HP V10 with F1-shifter, launch control, electronically adjustable suspension, etc. to market - it would be on par with the F430 in terms of specmanship. And it is highly unlikely that it would approach Ferrari in terms of styling. And remember that the F430 is the entry-level Ferrari - with the FXX being the supreme Ferrari today and who knows what will be available in 3-5 years from now.

Ferrari has made beautiful and passionate cars that enthuiasts have been admiring and collecting for 50+ years. Honda bringing a supercar to market once every 20 years isn't going to change that. Perhaps, had they continually improved the NSX since 1991 they might have had a chance to become an established player in the supercar market.

The $200K and up supercar market belongs to Ferrari. The $60k-$130K market belongs to Porsche. Corvette's market is in the $50-65k range. GM was very wise to price the new Z06 at $65k - the market premium for a brand-new Z06 is only about $10k and that will reduce over the next few months has more cars are delivered. You might not like Ferraris, Porsches or Corvettes, but they know their respective markets and buyers and they have built sustainable, profitable businesses around them.

Has any one else had long-term sucess in the supercar/sportscar market? Lotus? Some, but in low numbers that were not profitable. Aston Martin, probably the same limited success as Lotus. The previous reincarnation of Bugatti (the EB110)? No. Vector? No. Jaguar (J220)? No. Ford? The new GT is selling well and Ford wisely made it a one-time limited production run, not a new product line. Mercedes? I guess one could point to the SL - clearly a solid, profitable product line for MB. Dodge? The Viper has a 10 year history, so that's a start. And it's wisely slotted well below Ferrari.

The new NSX - particularly if it is priced over $50k - should be a limited run model - maybe 2000 units WW over 3 years. The first NSX sold over 60% of its total lifetime sales in its first 3 model years. If the new car is going to be an engineering showcase as was the first NSX, then it should have a limited run, otherwise in a few scant years it becomes old and obsolete technology, which defeats the purpose of a showcase.

Out-Ferrari Ferrari - it can't be done. Produce a stunning engineering showcase that sells a few thousand over 2-3 years, that's doable.

 

[NSXGMS]

Honda will not be able to out-Ferrari Ferrari, just as no one has been able to do. Porsche has wisely remained down stream of Ferrari with the bulk of its cars in the $60k to $130 range. Porsche cut back the production of the Carrera GT by 250 units given soft demand. Lambo has had some modest success selling high-end cars, mainly due to their over-the-top styling (to compensate for not being a Ferrari). The Gallardo was an attempt to out Ferrari the 360/430, but it didn't work. You can buy a new Gallardo for less than MSRP while the 430 sells at a large premium. The McLaren SLR is a major sales disappointment, as was the F1 (sold 100 units when they originally planned 300). Today, used Enzo's, F50's and F40's still sell above their original MSRP (assuming that they are in good condition). Consider that a used Enzo (at nearly 2x its MSRP) costs about the same as a brand-new Bugatti Veyron (only 16 have been ordered so far). If the Veyron can't out-Ferrari, it can't be done.

I don't think anyone is suggesting Honda is going to knock Ferrari off their perch. And I don't know about the term "out-Ferrari", but Honda did sure make a laughingstock out of the 348 with the NSX. But people still bought them undoubtedly because it is a Ferrari.

The cars you refer to above are all $400K+ vehicles with the exception of the 911TT. Again, apples and oranges.

The Gallardo is a success in my eyes because it lacks terribly in performance compared to the F430 (and the ZO6, 911TT, etc.) and it's price is great for what it is. Maybe I'm wrong, but does anyone consider it a failure?


And as far as a limited run I agree. Unless Honda decides to update and market the vehicle on a regular basis, something they never did with the current car. Who doesn't think that if Honda put in the effort, they could have sold nearly twice as many NSX's as they have? Updating does work. The 911 seems fine to me. That's the most updated car ever! (And Corvette)

Performance isn't what these car buyers are necessarily looking for. But for Honda to do this right, they have to concentrate on being the best in every category. That's the only way you're going to sway the right people. And many, many people will still buy the inferior Ferrari. That will never change. But anything worth doing is worth doing right.

No one will ever be Ferrari but Ferrari. That is certain. The goal for Honda should be to create a car which is better, just because they can. And sway as many people as they can. Honda isn't doing this for a direct profit but, even so, they need to do it as best they can.

Implementing the positive strategies that have been outlined in this thread and putting together the right package will help them achieve the best possible results and, hopefully, avoid the mistakes they made on the previous NSX endeavor.

Everytime I drive my NSX I reach the 8300 rpm and it is easy, fun, musical, intoxicating, IOW everything but annoying.

So I am sure it would be the same with a new NSX V10 redlining @ 10k rpm because the NSX philosophy is to offer a flat broad torque curve NA high revving engine.

Took the words right out of my mouth!! :biggrin: :biggrin:

 

[nuccaJB]

And many, many people will still buy the inferior Ferrari. That will never change. But anything worth doing is worth doing right.

I don't follow this comment. The 348 may have been a crap ferrari, but the 360 and 430 are amazing. The 430 is an extremely technologically advanced car. What else are you looking for that this car does not provide other than price? If price was no object I would want a 430 (escpecially a Stradale) in a heartbeat.

 

[TC]

The cars you refer to above are all $400K+ vehicles with the exception of the 911TT. Again, apples and oranges.

My point was that when it comes to sportscars above $150,000, no one has been able to successfully challenge Ferrari in that market segment, regardless of how good or technically sophisticated the car is. Ferrari sells nearly 4,000 cars a year - all above the $150k mark. No one else comes close.

The Gallardo is a success in my eyes because it lacks terribly in performance compared to the F430 (and the ZO6, 911TT, etc.) and it's price is great for what it is. Maybe I'm wrong, but does anyone consider it a failure?

Previous to the Gallardo, Lambo sold a few hundred cars per year. The mission of the Gallardo was create a higher volume product line - something that would sell a couple of thousand units per year. At the time, the 360 was selling about 3k units per year. The Gallardo had 100 hp over the 360, AWD, F1-shifter (e-gear) and just about everything else to make it a Ferrari 360 alternative. The Gallardo sells about 1/5th of its target - few hundred instead of 2,000. F360 sales remained red-hot even after the Gallardo was launched and F430 sales are even hotter, while Gallardo's are selling at a discount. So, from a form/function standpoint, you could say the Gallardo is a success. From the standpoint that it was supposed to give the 360/430 a run for its money in the marketplace, it is a failure.

 

[Tony Montoya]

What's wrong with the Gallardo? Why was it called a VW? That's like calling the NSX a Honda.
Seriously, is the Gallardo not a good car? I heard the depreciation off the lot was horrible. Something like it lists for 160 but sells for 135.
It's good then because you can get a used one very cheap.

 

[TC]

What's wrong with the Gallardo? Why was it called a VW? That's like calling the NSX a Honda.
Seriously, is the Gallardo not a good car? I heard the depreciation off the lot was horrible. Something like it lists for 160 but sells for 135.
It's good then because you can get a used one very cheap.

Given that Lambo's are now designed and built by VW/Audi, I'm sure that they are well built. But Lambo's originally captured the attention of the world for being so outrageously styled, which they had to do to make up for not being a Ferrari. The Gallardo does not have that over-the-top quality, which is why, perhaps, it doesn't sell too well. If you are a Lambo traditionalist, the Gallardo probably doesn't meet your expectations. If you are a Ferrari enthuiast, the Gallardo doesn't offer you anything over the F430 (other than price, but then you have the steep depreciation). As you point out, that's great if you are looking for a used Gallardo. A slightly used Gallardo is probably a great buy for someone without a brand preference.

 

[liftshard]

Honda cannot outcompete the prestige marques. Period. So, it doesn't largely matter how this car looks and WHAT it's made of.

The car will compete with the Vette and Viper. Honda, like the domestics, can aspire no higher. So, what matters is HP and 0-60. It has to break 4. Some available version of it must break 4s. Otherwise, it's an also-ran.

The original NSX had less hp than Vettes. And, the Vette guys talked sh!t about it. If you said, well the Vette has more hp than the 348, "oh well, that's a FERRARI." The right badge makes all the difference.

Nobody CARES about V10s and high revs and carbon fiber. Nobody does. If Honda wants a technical showcase, produce a McLaren F1 at $400,000, and sell 100 of them. They could sell that. Ford sold GTs, didn't they?

A series car for Honda's got to be in the 50s-70s. Just slotted right below or at a stripper 911 or around the Cayman. And, it's got to beat the hell out of that car, in every metric. It should be faster than a 911, fast like a Turbo, fast like a C6. Make the performance issue moot versus the Porsche. Porsches are so ubiquitous you might get crossover buyers if you save them money. Vettes make a lot of sales on ppl who would rather have a 911 but cannot afford or justify the cost premium for LESS performance. Cheap, gofast thrills. Fast & Furious. People who don't want/can't afford a SVT or some other big iron got smaller Civics etc. and tuned them up.

Honda can compete with Corvette in prestige, period. Acura could with enough promotional literature and a higher ad budget. Part of the Vette's sell is that it is sold in Chevy dealers, so it gets TONS of eyeballs. Acura is doing pretty well now on account of TLs and TSXs and MDXs, so there are people in the showroom, but not as many as in a Honda dealer. People have to talk about the car. Perhaps the base is a Honda but the higher perf H06 is the Acura. That would be a sound philosophy.

But, the sh!t's got to have 500hp, or else. Without 500hp in its top model, people will do tons of benchracing and dog it. 3.9 or faster, or else.

As for the Ferrari competitors, well, those are Ferraris. You're buying tradition and soul and stuff. Styling, sex, all of it. The MB McLaren...what a joke. A turbo engine to do what the Enzo does NA? MB engines are a laugh now. And, nobody wants to pay hundreds of thousands for a MB. They sell Koenigseggs up there or Rolls Royces and airplanes and stuff.

Sure I want Honda to produce the best car ever made and to give me one for free. But, I don't expect that. I want a prudent decision from their company to create a sustainable model. Instead of the NSX, which has a 15 year run w/ no improvements. This way, Honda can work their way up from Corvette to Porsche. Maybe they can go no higher; nobody else can. Neither Jag, Aston, MB, BMW, even Lambo, has made a serious dent in Ferrari's ownership of the premium sports segment. It's almost futile to try; Ferrari's a cult almost.

So, aim for a car you can take on head-to-head. The Accord aimed at the Taurus and won. All Hondas aimed at domestics and beat them. Honda can do this. A 5 or 6 year model cycle at or above C6 performance without any compromises like only 240lb-ft and they can cement a mild halo at $60-$75k. Then, assuming that the world economy doesn't tank completely, they can make a run at the 911, another car which really isn't challenged. The Vette and Viper take its table scraps, but they don't compete head-on.

 

[MoreRPMs]

Honda cannot outcompete the prestige marques.

Not in prestige. True. But, they can obliterate them in build quality/reliability, serviceability. They can essentially give people the same driving experience (if they wanted to) for significantly less.

Nobody CARES about V10s and high revs and carbon fiber.

I'll bet 100% of the real enthusiasts do. Why do you own an NSX, Liftshard? Is it for the great seats, or the crappy Bose? I didn't think so.

A series car for Honda's got to be in the 50s-70s.

Agree. But NOT the flagship. The planned V10 sportscar should be a showcase for their engineering skills as the world's foremost engine manufacturer. We don't need another underpowered, overpriced 6 cylinder. What's it gonna compete against...400 hp, huge torque, $45K Vettes? If so, then build a 375 hp V6 for around 50K. And beat the Chevy at everything else except power. That can easily be done. (The C6 to me is a nice car, but it feels like a 2 door version of a touring sedan.)

Sure I want Honda to produce the best car ever made...

They did, at the $60K price point. Now do it at $100K ish.

 

[LJSB]

Nobody CARES about V10s and high revs and carbon fiber. Nobody does.

I care.

 

[NSXGMS]

The 430 is an extremely technologically advanced car. What else are you looking for that this car does not provide other than price?

1) Reliablilty

2) Daily Driveablity

3) Better handling (we hope...)

You can't diminish price though. Of couse we'd basically all have F430's if they were everything the NSX was. There wouldn't be a niche for the NSX if that were true!

Price is the whole idea! That's why people buy a ZO6 over a 430! Honda can put together a car better than any other. Ferrari may have it beat by a nanosecond here and there, but that's about it. So about the same performance and about half the price? Wow. And the Honda should be superior in every other way (subjective looks notwithstanding)

And liftshard, are you suggesting that people don't care about groundbreaking automotive technology? I care. And 250 million F 1 fans do too. As does everyone on this board. That is the kind of technology that will be necessary to produce the kind of car Honda needs to produce.

I want to ask you something, liftshard. Since you are suggesting Honda scrap any plans for a new NSX along the same lines as the old one, do you feel that Honda should never have produced the NSX in the first place?

Do you actually own an NSX? I'm just curious. If you do, why did you select it? It seems you have deemed the NSX project and any future projects as a failure (aside Honda's failures to update/market the car. That is Honda's fault, not the NSX's)

And personally, I don't think Honda needs to compete against anything. Honda is going into this assuming they will lose money. The decision to create a new NSX is a calculated move, as is their involvement in F1.

So if profit isn't an issue, why compete against anything or anybody? The performance and price should be dictated by Honda's best efforts. The best performing, most reliable, most comfortable, lowest price car possible. The price will reflect Honda's efforts.

Liftshard, Corvette isn't prestigious. They just sell a ton of them. Maybe if you're in the insurance salesman midlife crisis club. If that's the club the NSX is shooting for, then I don't want to be a member.

And the 911TT, well, that's the kind of car that you're going to show would be foolish to buy when the new NSX is available. There should be NOTHING the 911TT has to offer that the NSX doesn't do better.

Ferrari is prestigious, and Honda will never get to that level. They shouldn't try to be Ferrari. They should be Honda and smile knowing they produce the best sports car in the world. They should beat Ferrari, not be them.

The reason the price needs to be <100K is because that's the price that's in line with Honda's philosophy, not what sells! If you want to sell, sell a fast RSX for 50K. But the lowest price for the kind of technology you're going to get is going to be 95-100K, plain and simple.

 

[hatchback]

I agree with Shumdit.
No matter how accomplished the NSX replacement is, quality alone is not enough to justify its price. We have ample evidence of that in the sales figures of the current NSX.

In fact, if Honda prices the NSX at 125k or thereabouts, they WILL lose even some of their diehard NSX fans/owners.

Ferrari sells as many cars in one year as Honda sold NSXs in 15 years!!!
That is not to put Honda down in any way. That is just how pricing works. There are ceilings that only some marques can go over and still succeed.

I think that makes us, the enthusiasts, the winners. We can get better quality, reliability and comparable performance for less. :biggrin:

There is no such thing as a price ceiling for a brand, if the intrinsic attributes of the product (eg., performance, features, quality) support it. A high-end brand can offer a high-end product at a premium, but a low-end brand can always offer a high-end product at a discount and it will sell.

Who would pay $40k for a Toyota in 1990? A lot of people did since they called it a Lexus and it embarrased the Merc S class at half the price. Who would pay $60k for a Honda in 1991? A lot of people did since it killed the Ferrari 348 at a fraction of the cost. Who would pay $180k+ for a Ford in 2005? People routinely paid $30k+ over MSRP for the Ford GT earlier this year and even today most consider themselves lucky if they can find one within $10k of MSRP. FOR A FORD!!!!!! And who would pay $65k for a Chevy? Hmmmm.... Before the Z06 specs were published the Vette boards were full of naysayers saying no one would pay more than $55k for a Corvette coupe, no matter how awesome, just look at the ZR-1, what a failure that was because Chevy overpriced it. But now the only question anyone asks about the Z06 is how can I get some of that in my garage at that amazing MSRP. Who would ever believe that people would be fighting each other to pay MSRP for a domestic?

If Honda put a 600hp high-revving V10 in a balanced 2500lb mid-engined car with Honda reliability and Honda ergonomics and Honda handling, they would sell more cars than they could make even at $125k. It'd be like buying a Carrera GT with a 70% discount and 25% extra performance without the stigma of a Porsche.... How could anyone in the market for a supercar say no to that? Die-hard NSX fans might not be able to afford a $125k supercar, but Ferrari/Lambo/Aston/Porsche buyers sure can. Some would stick with the name plate, but others would snap up an amazing performance bargain like they are currently lining up to buy their Z06s.

There are only three things that would kill the NSX replacement in the market. The first is if the car doesn't offer amazing price/performance because then most people in the market for a supercar will see no reason to buy it. The second is if Honda decides to make a hybrid sports car because no supercar buyer cares about gas mileage or emissions and no holier-than-though Prius buyer is going to drop $125k on a sports car even if it gets 125mpg while single-handedly reversing global warming. The third is if Honda tells everyone that Jenson Button was involved in the design of the car like Senna was with the NSX because so many F1 fans loathe Button and pretty much everyone liked Senna.

 

[liftshard]

Not in prestige. True. But, they can obliterate them in build quality/reliability, serviceability. They can essentially give people the same driving experience (if they wanted to) for significantly less.

You just don't GET IT, do you? NOBODY cares about this! Ferraris break down on the road because of bad gauges, man!

I'll bet 100% of the real enthusiasts do. Why do you own an NSX, Liftshard? Is it for the great seats, or the crappy Bose? I didn't think so.

100% of WHOM?

You couldn't fill a ROOM with people like me or with "real enthusiasts." NO company should ever market stuff to "real enthusiasts."

Agree. But NOT the flagship. The planned V10 sportscar should be a showcase for their engineering skills as the world's foremost engine manufacturer.

WHY? This is a SERIES CAR, not a SHOW CAR. A showcase is a show car. If Honda wants to do that, then fine. Not a series vehicle. Ford couldn't sell the GT if it was a series vehicle. Nobody would pay $180k for a Ford unless there were only 200 of them.

And liftshard, are you suggesting that people don't care about groundbreaking automotive technology? I care. And 250 million F 1 fans do too.

OMG. PLEASE stop staying insane things. Just, please stop. 250 million? WHO AMONG THEM IS BUYING this car? A freaking F1 fan does NOT a customer make. You have to have RICH F1 fans, and FERRARI has an F1 program, too, and they're WINNING.

Fking have you people even NOTICED, all you supposed F1 fans, that RENAULT has a F1 program? Ever, like, notice that? Do THEY produce F1-inspired supercars for the street? NO. They KNOW BETTER. BMW has no F1 sports car, despite being in F1.

The V10s in F1 are so radically different from street engines in so many ways that there is no point whatsoever in calling a street engine F1 derived because of something so TRIVIAL and superficial as having the same # of cylinders! It's a marketing ploy.

I want to ask you something, liftshard. Since you are suggesting Honda scrap any plans for a new NSX along the same lines as the old one, do you feel that Honda should never have produced the NSX in the first place?

Do you actually own an NSX? I'm just curious. If you do, why did you select it? It seems you have deemed the NSX project and any future projects as a failure (aside Honda's failures to update/market the car. That is Honda's fault, not the NSX's)

I have owned TWO NSXs. One of them is in my avatar. Honda should not have built the original NSX, as a business decision. Their bet failed.

If Honda put a 600hp high-revving V10 in a balanced 2500lb mid-engined car with Honda reliability and Honda ergonomics and Honda handling, they would sell more cars than they could make even at $125k

So, now it's got SIX hundred hp? The hp specs of this fantasy car just keep going up and up.

We have a 600 hp, 2500lb, all carbon fibre, F1 engine having, supercar for $100,000. Yeah, a sales smash, surely. Why stop there, though? Why not have it make 6000hp with daily drivability? Throw on as many infeasible absurdities as you'd like in the future.

I personally want a teleportation switch on the shifter knob, and the ability to make all other cars on the road disappear and have my car be invisible and be able to pass through solid objects. If you guys are going to dream, dream big, please. Little fantasies are so uninspiring.

The point is that there are NOT enough people who CARE about carbon fiber and the rest of this crap to make this car successful.

The average Ferrari owner NIETHER KNOWS nor CARES what his car is made of. What matters is the BADGE ON THE HOOD. Got it??!?

No CHICK who would be impressed by said car KNOWS NOR CARES what it is made of. What matters is the BADGE ON THE HOOD.

Cars like this, ANY sports car, are PRESTIGE ITEMs. That is INARGUABLE. Even the CORVETTE is a prestige item. Less prestige than a Lambo, but a lot more than a Malibu. Honda's badge does not carry enough prestige for it to compete with cars above the Corvette.

Without ENZO performance, it cannot take on the 911. It just cannot. If it has Z06 or C6 performance at a similar price, Honda CAN attack that market niche. It cannot best the 911 without a technically infeasible package.

Honda MUST aim lower than the original NSX was aimed. This would mean a car with the C6's performance with none of its drawbacks. I.e., a HONDA that goes like a Vette. Such a car would be faster than a 911 and far cheaper. This is a sales success, because such a Honda CAN match the Vette's prestige and CmC.

I don't know about you, but I kind of LIKE the idea of a Corvette made by Honda. It sounds good to me. I don't really NEED all-aluminum, carbon fiber, and the rest of that crap. Standard Honda technology will suffice.

My next sports car will be a Ferrari. I'm not going to pay $120,000 or more for a Honda, no matter HOW good it is. Because, *I* recognize that the entire REASON I bought a "sports car" in the FIRST place was because of how it drove and how I look in it. It's a luxury item, an accessory, NOT a necessity. I like driving it fast and I like the fact that the look is exotic and I don't see myself in one constantly. Chicks dig the hell out of the NSX. All good things.

But, if I'm going to PAY Ferrari prices, I don't want to have to EXPLAIN to some girl that "well, my car is really better than a Ferrari..." And, *I* am thinking like 99% of the REST of the buying public, REALISTICALLY.

 

[MAJOR STONER]

Everyone wants a $57K Porsche killer, and you would think that if anyone could do it, it would be Honda. The Toyota V10 car is rumored to be between 5-5.5L,...

 

[LJSB]

No CHICK who would be impressed by said car KNOWS NOR CARES what it is made of. What matters is the BADGE ON THE HOOD.

But, if I'm going to PAY Ferrari prices, I don't want to have to EXPLAIN to some girl that "well, my car is really better than a Ferrari..."

These comments speak volumes about you and is a appropriate frame for your opinion.
Good luck with your Ferrari and the "chicks" or "girls" you get because of it. :biggrin:

 

[foxy-abby]

Which is higher maintenance -- a Ferrari, or a chick who digs you because you drive a Ferrari? I won over my gal with a '92 Accord, and then I got my NSX. And all 3 treat me well, at a reasonable price. :biggrin:
Jesse

 

[effer]

But, if I'm going to PAY Ferrari prices, I don't want to have to EXPLAIN to some girl that "well, my car is really better than a Ferrari..." And, *I* am thinking like 99% of the REST of the buying public, REALISTICALLY.

I bought the NSX because I didn't want to have to explain to ignorants why this car is intrinsically such a masterpiece. :biggrin:

Seriously, I don't care what people think about my car because I bought it for my own selfish pleasure: carpe diem.

My behavior isn't regulated by what other people may think about my car and accordingly, I really don't care about justifying myself about it...

In my case, buying a car is an emotional act that is totally independant of badge consideration: it only has to light me up by its design, performance, quality, and efficiency ( results are important but it is also of paramount importance to consider how you achieve them: the reason why I will probably never buy a Viper... ).

Here are cars I like:

Acura NSX ( truly one of the nicest car ever designed ...),
Mc Laren F1 ( the absolute NSX ) ,
Lamborghini Diablo ( for ist look, wideness and power ),
Campagna T-Rex ( for its efficiency, look, lowereness, lightness, handling and formula monotype feeling ) ,
Ford GT and GT40

and in a lesser degre F355 ( cuteness and delightness of its addictive engine sound but the interior is horrible ) and the 328 ( but by today standards this is a nice museum nostalgical piece... ). The 360 although a better car than the F355 is too big, round and high: geez! I founded as easy to sit in it as in an Accord !!??!!

Liftshard, I don't want to say that your reasons for owning a Ferrari aren't good: if those are important for you that's ok, and this is honest with yourself: different folks, different strokes...

I only want to say that everybody do have theirs reasons and so it is for Honda. Consequently, some people behave in order to accomodate the masses and some other only for themselves and a limited number of connoisseurs... This world needs fantasy, and surely, the automotive world ended better and nicer because of the NSX creation...( at least it kicked Ferrari's butt to upgrade its Testarossa, 348 and 355!!! ).

Cheers!