Does anyone know why the new engine has neither of the features the original was famous for (VTEC and titanium connecting rods)?
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
Where are all the Production deliveries ??
- Thread starter thunderNSX
- Start date
let you guys decide which cars look more exotic:
Those stripes look like my 5 YO slapped them on. Look how far they're off in relation to the Lambo emblem!
No VTEC or Ti rods because not allowed in GT Racing(GTE or GT3).
So why does R35 and 911 and AMG GT have forms of variable valve timing and exotics con rods?
Because they want to?
If it's banned from GT3, are you saying they all must remove those features in their racing versions whereas the NC1 does not ?
Mogami, So the same guy who thought that a hybrid version of the once beloved CRX that was reincarnated as the CR-Z also was the same guy that green lighted the new NSX all because he wanted a hybrid? If so that speaks volumes and it sheds some light on a comment one of the sales guys mentioned to me. He drew parallels to the CRX vs CRZ and the gen 1 vs gen 2 NSX. He predicted that the new NSX will suffer a similar fate as the CRZ and maybe worse due to the limited carrying capacity of the NSX and elevated price point limiting its appeal with the greenie crowd.
Correct
My friend was on the FR 5.0L V10 NSX team that would of debuted in 2009.He told me the in house NSX replacement talks in the early 2000's was crazy(changed like a 100 times).
The CEO finally decided on going Tier 1(2006) and FR with Acura.He was 100% sure the Americans wanted a better Corvette/Aston Martin/Ferrari 575. He put very high goals for the project(fastest at the Ring with best Supercar MPG) but still be able to drive it daily.That 5.0L V10 would of been about 550-560hp in base and 625hp in Type-R but there was talk to raise displacement to 5.5L(650-680hp) in the Type-R(fastest at the Ring).No market collapse in 2008 and we would of have a different Honda Company today!
That car was 99% done when it was cancelled in late 2008!!!
Then when they restarted the NSX project in 2011 the talk was that they went way to far with the V10 NSX(specs....the best... and price....200+k) so that is why they decided on the RLX Power-Train MR NSX(less than 100k).
The American team worked on the bosses to at least get the NSX to match the 458(that was like pulling teeth from awake lion!).
The CEO finally decided on going Tier 1(2006) and FR with Acura.He was 100% sure the Americans wanted a better Corvette/Aston Martin/Ferrari 575. He put very high goals for the project(fastest at the Ring with best Supercar MPG) but still be able to drive it daily.That 5.0L V10 would of been about 550-560hp in base and 625hp in Type-R but there was talk to raise displacement to 5.5L(650-680hp) in the Type-R(fastest at the Ring).No market collapse in 2008 and we would of have a different Honda Company today!
That car was 99% done when it was cancelled in late 2008!!!
Then when they restarted the NSX project in 2011 the talk was that they went way to far with the V10 NSX(specs....the best... and price....200+k) so that is why they decided on the RLX Power-Train MR NSX(less than 100k).
The American team worked on the bosses to at least get the NSX to match the 458(that was like pulling teeth from awake lion!).
Last edited:
ok just to see what the fuss is all about I had a 458 for the day today. It was nice, view almost as good as 1st gen nsx, better than 2nd gen. Drivability was good if you mashed the throttle but from a stoplight and traffic I didn't care too much for it. I'm still going to buy one but it wont be a daily driver. More trunk space than 2nd gen nsx and it could at least go up my driveway (but not down) but I definitely need one with a front lifter. Looks better than 2nd gen nsx for sure but looks aren't everything
Used 458 is brand new base gen 2 NSX money, I looked a few weeks ago and was pleasantly surprised you could find them for $150k-160k. Put a crazy exhaust on one and it’s glorious. You could probably at least think about driving a 458 daily.
fastaussie
Suspended
you need to run it up and down a curvy mountain road, or take a few laps...
easily... :biggrin:
And when your 458 gets some miles on it, you can take it back to the greasy dealer and get them to hit the reset button on the odometer.
Thanks for the background info on the phenomenal Honda V10. A 680HP NSX Type R ten years ago would have redefined the automotive landscape, spooked the competition like the NA1 did, and forced auto manufacturers to change their roadmaps. At $200K+ though not sure how well the Type R or the base model would have actually sold but it would have definitely been more of a game changer than NC1, with a profound impact from a psychological warfare perspective and in terms of sheer performance metrics.. The irony is that the C block taken from the 80's Legend to form the basis for the C30A in NA1 was a superior DOHC design than the lethargic
SOHC J block in the RLX intended for use in NC1...never understood why Honda bailed on a DOHC V6 design as its base engine config...
AMG GT GT3 doesn't use the production car's turbo engine. It uses the older gen NA v8
fastaussie
Suspended
wasn't this dealers doing it for their pre-owned inventory? i'm presuming not resetting it completely, but lowering the mileage considerably? was this known by the Ferrari factory?
3rd bulletpoint to me says they knew it was going on...
The DEIS tool could NOT be used independently whenever the dealer wanted...each time they used it required authorization from Ferrari HQ.
However, I've read that the DEIS tool can only roll back to zero and only if the mileage is <311mi, and can only be done once. So if you consider that, perhaps there isn't an epidemic of rolled back odometers going on but who knows (this all started and/or was discovered when a guy rolled back his La Ferrari from 243 to 0).
The DEIS tool could NOT be used independently whenever the dealer wanted...each time they used it required authorization from Ferrari HQ.
However, I've read that the DEIS tool can only roll back to zero and only if the mileage is <311mi, and can only be done once. So if you consider that, perhaps there isn't an epidemic of rolled back odometers going on but who knows (this all started and/or was discovered when a guy rolled back his La Ferrari from 243 to 0).
Last edited:
<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc ;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>From motortrend's VIR times, think some of the prices are a bit off. Dollar/second favors cheap cars first. Dollar/second improvement over a base case (r8+ 2017) is more interesting
<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
<tbody>
</tbody>
If you look at the price segment vs the Ford GT as benchmark:<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
<tbody>
</tbody>
If we benchmark vs the slowest of the group:<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
<tbody>
</tbody>
Apply your personal filter for if the car is DD-able (no for NIMSO for me), and you have an idea of where the NSX falls<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style><style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
| Car (Model Year) | price | seconds | time gain vs r8 2017 | price over r8 | $/second vs r8 |
| Nissan GT-R Track Edition (2017) | $128,490.00 | 173.2 | 2.8 | -$65,910.00 | -$23,539.29 |
| Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 (2017) | $61,500.00 | 170.1 | 5.9 | -$132,900.00 | -$22,525.42 |
| BMW M4 GTS (2016) | $137,000.00 | 172.9 | 3.1 | -$57,400.00 | -$18,516.13 |
| Dodge Viper SRT10 ACR coupe (2008) | $87,000.00 | 168.6 | 7.4 | -$107,400.00 | -$14,513.51 |
| Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport (2017) | $65,495.00 | 167.1 | 8.9 | -$128,905.00 | -$14,483.71 |
| Mercedes-AMG GT S (2016) | $132,400.00 | 171 | 5 | -$62,000.00 | -$12,400.00 |
| Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 1LE (2018) | $69,995.00 | 165.7 | 10.3 | -$124,405.00 | -$12,078.16 |
| Porsche 911 GT3 (2015) | $132,395.00 | 170.4 | 5.6 | -$62,005.00 | -$11,072.32 |
| Acura NSX (2017) | $136,000.00 | 170.2 | 5.8 | -$58,400.00 | -$10,068.97 |
| Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (2015) | $81,585.00 | 164.6 | 11.4 | -$112,815.00 | -$9,896.05 |
| Nissan GT-R NISMO (2015) | $149,990.00 | 169.4 | 6.6 | -$44,410.00 | -$6,728.79 |
| Dodge Viper ACR (2016) | $118,795.00 | 164.2 | 11.8 | -$75,605.00 | -$6,407.20 |
| Mercedes-AMG GT R (2018) | $157,000.00 | 163.4 | 12.6 | -$37,400.00 | -$2,968.25 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S (2014) | $182,095.00 | 171.2 | 4.8 | -$12,305.00 | -$2,563.54 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S (2017) | $188,100.00 | 166.8 | 9.2 | -$6,300.00 | -$684.78 |
| McLaren 570S (2016) | $188,600.00 | 167.4 | 8.6 | -$5,800.00 | -$674.42 |
| Lamborghini Huracán LP610-4 (2015) | $199,800.00 | 167.5 | 8.5 | $5,400.00 | $635.29 |
| Porsche 911 GT3 RS (2016) | $206,000.00 | 167 | 9 | $11,600.00 | $1,288.89 |
| Ferrari 488 GTB (2016) | $252,800.00 | 165.1 | 10.9 | $58,400.00 | $5,357.80 |
| Ferrari 458 Italia (2012) | $230,000.00 | 169.9 | 6.1 | $35,600.00 | $5,836.07 |
| McLaren 650S Spider (2015) | $260,000.00 | 165.8 | 10.2 | $65,600.00 | $6,431.37 |
| Ford GT (2017) | $453,750.00 | 163 | 13 | $259,350.00 | $19,950.00 |
| Ferrari 430 Scuderia (2008) | $250,000.00 | 174.6 | 1.4 | $55,600.00 | $39,714.29 |
| Porsche 918 Spyder (2015) | $890,000.00 | 163.1 | 12.9 | $695,600.00 | $53,922.48 |
| Lexus LFA (2012) | $500,000.00 | 175.1 | 0.9 | $305,600.00 | $339,555.56 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
If you look at the price segment vs the Ford GT as benchmark:<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
| Car (Model Year) | price | seconds | dollar/second | time vs ford gt | price under ford gt | $/second vs ford gt |
| Audi R8 V-10 Plus (2017) | 194400 | 176.1 | 1103.918228 | 13.1 | 259350 | 19797.70992 |
| Audi R8 V-10 Plus (2014) | 139950 | 177.5 | 788.4507042 | 14.5 | 313800 | 21641.37931 |
| BMW M4 GTS (2016) | 137000 | 172.9 | 792.3655292 | 9.9 | 316750 | 31994.94949 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S (2014) | 182095 | 171.2 | 1063.639019 | 8.2 | 271655 | 33128.65854 |
| Mercedes-AMG GT S (2016) | 132400 | 171 | 774.2690058 | 8 | 321350 | 40168.75 |
| Porsche 911 GT3 (2015) | 132395 | 170.4 | 776.9659624 | 7.4 | 321355 | 43426.35135 |
| Acura NSX (2017) | 136000 | 170.2 | 799.0599295 | 7.2 | 317750 | 44131.94444 |
| Nissan GT-R NISMO (2015) | 149990 | 169.4 | 885.4191263 | 6.4 | 303760 | 47462.5 |
| Lamborghini Huracán LP610-4 (2015) | 199800 | 167.5 | 1192.835821 | 4.5 | 253950 | 56433.33333 |
| McLaren 570S (2016) | 188600 | 167.4 | 1126.642772 | 4.4 | 265150 | 60261.36364 |
| Porsche 911 GT3 RS (2016) | 206000 | 167 | 1233.532934 | 4 | 247750 | 61937.5 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S (2017) | 188100 | 166.8 | 1127.697842 | 3.8 | 265650 | 69907.89474 |
| Mercedes-AMG GT R (2018) | 157000 | 163.4 | 960.8323133 | 0.4 | 296750 | 741875 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
If we benchmark vs the slowest of the group:<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
| Car (Model Year) | price | seconds | dollar/second | time vs slowest | price vs slowest | $/second vs r8 2014 |
| Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport (2017) | 65495 | 167.1 | 391.9509276 | 10.4 | -74455 | -7159.134615 |
| Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 1LE (2018) | 69995 | 165.7 | 422.4200362 | 11.8 | -69955 | -5928.389831 |
| Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (2015) | 81585 | 164.6 | 495.6561361 | 12.9 | -58365 | -4524.418605 |
| Nissan GT-R Track Edition (2017) | 128490 | 173.2 | 741.8591224 | 4.3 | -11460 | -2665.116279 |
| SRT Viper TA (2014) | 123080 | 169.9 | 724.426133 | 7.6 | -16870 | -2219.736842 |
| Dodge Viper ACR (2016) | 118795 | 164.2 | 723.4774665 | 13.3 | -21155 | -1590.601504 |
| Mercedes-AMG GT S (2016) | 132400 | 171 | 774.2690058 | 6.5 | -7550 | -1161.538462 |
| Porsche 911 GT3 (2015) | 132395 | 170.4 | 776.9659624 | 7.1 | -7555 | -1064.084507 |
| BMW M4 GTS (2016) | 137000 | 172.9 | 792.3655292 | 4.6 | -2950 | -641.3043478 |
| Acura NSX (2017) | 136000 | 170.2 | 799.0599295 | 7.3 | -3950 | -541.0958904 |
| Audi R8 V-10 Plus (2014) | 139950 | 177.5 | 788.4507042 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nissan GT-R NISMO (2015) | 149990 | 169.4 | 885.4191263 | 8.1 | 10040 | 1239.506173 |
| Mercedes-AMG GT R (2018) | 194000 | 163.4 | 1187.270502 | 14.1 | 54050 | 3833.333333 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S (2017) | 188100 | 166.8 | 1127.697842 | 10.7 | 48150 | 4500 |
| McLaren 570S (2016) | 188600 | 167.4 | 1126.642772 | 10.1 | 48650 | 4816.831683 |
| Lamborghini Huracán LP610-4 (2015) | 199800 | 167.5 | 1192.835821 | 10 | 59850 | 5985 |
| Porsche 911 GT3 RS (2016) | 206000 | 167 | 1233.532934 | 10.5 | 66050 | 6290.47619 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S (2014) | 182095 | 171.2 | 1063.639019 | 6.3 | 42145 | 6689.68254 |
| Ferrari 488 GTB (2016) | 252800 | 165.1 | 1531.193216 | 12.4 | 112850 | 9100.806452 |
| McLaren 650S Spider (2015) | 260000 | 165.8 | 1568.154403 | 11.7 | 120050 | 10260.68376 |
| Ferrari 458 Italia (2012) | 230000 | 169.9 | 1353.737493 | 7.6 | 90050 | 11848.68421 |
| Ferrari 430 Scuderia (2008) | 250000 | 174.6 | 1431.844215 | 2.9 | 110050 | 37948.27586 |
| Audi R8 V-10 Plus (2017) | 194400 | 176.1 | 1103.918228 | 1.4 | 54450 | 38892.85714 |
<tbody>
</tbody>
Apply your personal filter for if the car is DD-able (no for NIMSO for me), and you have an idea of where the NSX falls<style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style><style type="text/css"><!--td {border: 1px solid #ccc;}br {mso-data-placement:same-cell;}--></style>
Last edited:
fastaussie
Suspended
it's interesting, i don't know too much about how and why this was even done in the first place. i knew it wasn't a lot of miles, under 300 being virtually none however. it's not as if they were rolling 10,000 or 20,000 miles off cars. based on the info you've just supplied, i wouldn't be the least bit concerned about purchasing a used Ferrari...
not nearly as much as you thought...
Because everything you read on the internet is true! 
We have good friends at Ferrari dealers and that odometer thing was blown way over, highly doubt that is true and the ones that were done were approved by HQ as others have stated. We would not have qualms at all about buying a pre-owned Ferrari - looking at one now in fact! The quality cars are tracked just like how we track NSX VIN's here. Every car is well accounted for and as with any used car you just need to check the history diligently.
We have good friends at Ferrari dealers and that odometer thing was blown way over, highly doubt that is true and the ones that were done were approved by HQ as others have stated. We would not have qualms at all about buying a pre-owned Ferrari - looking at one now in fact! The quality cars are tracked just like how we track NSX VIN's here. Every car is well accounted for and as with any used car you just need to check the history diligently.
Because everything you read on the internet is true!
We have good friends at Ferrari dealers and that odometer thing was blown way over, highly doubt that is true and the ones that were done were approved by HQ as others have stated. We would not have qualms at all about buying a pre-owned Ferrari - looking at one now in fact! The quality cars are tracked just like how we track NSX VIN's here. Every car is well accounted for and as with any used car you just need to check the history diligently.
You're right everything on the internet isn't true, but everything on the internet isn't "fake news" either. Believe what you want to believe. No carmaker would ever do something shady, that's for sure. Can you spell Volkswagen? Oh never mind, just more fake news?
fastaussie
Suspended
You're right everything on the internet isn't true, but everything on the internet isn't "fake news" either. Believe what you want to believe. No carmaker would ever do something shady, that's for sure. Can you spell Volkswagen? Oh never mind, just more fake news?
whether it's true or not, i don't personally know? and i also don't even understand why Ferrari or anyone else would have a program to roll back a maximum of 300 miles (obviously except to say a car was brand new instead of 300 miles old - transport miles, demo miles?)? but knowing that fact now wouldn't deter me from purchasing a pre-owned Ferrari. i'm also guessing this was not likely a widely enacted practice?
back to the thread discussion at hand. i'll bet there are many more than 3 used Ferrari 458's being sold each month at well over new NSX MSRP...
That's really odd. I can't think of any situation where a dealer or the factory would be justified in rolling back 300 miles to zero. Cars have delivery miles on them, that's normal. I have a friend with a Ferrari SD tool and another with a Lamborghini Lara tool. I've played myself with the Lara hooked up to my car. These tools don't have any mileage rollback feature. The DEIS thing must be something new and dealer only.
I can't find any articles about the LaFerrari that prompted the lawsuit. I wonder what happened to that guy and if the Ferrari collector market shuns his car? It's mind blowing that people would value a 5 mile LaFerrari significantly higher than a 300 mile LaFerrari. Same with these guys that buy a Ford GT with delivery miles and park it. What's the point?
Comparing the NSX to the 458 is apples to oranges....
I can't find any articles about the LaFerrari that prompted the lawsuit. I wonder what happened to that guy and if the Ferrari collector market shuns his car? It's mind blowing that people would value a 5 mile LaFerrari significantly higher than a 300 mile LaFerrari. Same with these guys that buy a Ford GT with delivery miles and park it. What's the point?
Comparing the NSX to the 458 is apples to oranges....
Similar threads
