The first gen NSX was technically not a huge success as far as sales went, which was a good thing for depreciation actually. They just met their target of producing some 20,000 units worldwide across 15 years whereas all of the other 90s sports car ceased around 97 or earlier. So if Honda can ship out another 8K production run of the new NSX in the US, then I'd say that is an excellent balance to maintain the status quo. We shall see when it finally hits the market though.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
Jalopnik Article 10/7
- Thread starter Dhalsim
- Start date
The first gen NSX was technically not a huge success as far as sales went, which was a good thing for depreciation actually. They just met their target of producing some 20,000 units worldwide across 15 years whereas all of the other 90s sports car ceased around 97 or earlier. So if Honda can ship out another 8K production run of the new NSX in the US, then I'd say that is an excellent balance to maintain the status quo. We shall see when it finally hits the market though.
Don't forget the new Civic Type R too!
According to a sidebar article in the latest Car and Driver, the TLX is a hot seller, bypassing the MDX as top seller. They observe that this bodes well for the new NSX because it helps with the financials.
+1 on your observations...specifically the white space reference all the way to the reliability laurels which can no longer be rested upon.
since the reliability quotient has now been more equally distributed across the playing field;
and sub 4 sec 0-60 performance times by various manufacturers are being achieved;
and gross usage of assisted handling, assisted launches, instantaneous torque, greater mileages, etc. and all the other latest-n-greatest technologies are being brilliantly applied by the various automakers...
...that pretty much leaves only 3 remaining variables that acura can differentiate themselves from what is out there to truly offer a unique value proposition:
1. design (appearance)
2. pricepoint
3. brand perception
working backwards (point 3), as others have observed, brand perception for acura has been waning badly, which makes it pretty difficult for them to be able to successfully demand a high price point regardless of the final production's specs and performance. a good example of this was the vw phaeton. in the early 2000's vw was doing quite well and wanted to compete in the prestige market (bmw & mercedes) since they (b & m) were expanding downwards into vw's market. they made a beautiful car (i sat in one) with incredible leg room and all the bells and whistles...problem is, in all their at-the-time grandeur, vw forgot that brand affluence can only trickle one way, down, so bmw and mercedes would prove to be the winners in their market expansion into the economy class and vw's phaeton would go down as the loser in the prestige class in more ways than one...so much so that it is considered as being one of europe's biggest loss-makers in the entire auto industry. to put it plainly, in the mind of the consumer it just would not suffice to be strolling down the street to arrive at the big dinner party with a big ol' "VW" on your front grill if you had $100 grand to spend on any luxury car of your choice. acura is pretty much in the same boat cause their brand cannot trickle upwards in just one move (the 2.0). it takes years of repeated performance, lots of "moves" that are consistent in getting better and more importantly getting people's attention. let's hope they do not repeat history here and think their only way to succeed is to demand a high price point.
with that said, acura has to be very strategic (and careful) about their price point (point 2) so as to result in having the right value proposition being presented. the prospective buyer will be asking himself, "why am i going to spend $125 grand on this car when i can buy that car?" if the performance specs of the cars being considered are relatively similar, then the answer will undoubtedly rest in the appearance of the vehicle as well as in the brand's current perception is at the time. this is also important, and here's an example, when i bought my nsx almost 9 yrs ago while registering at the DMV, the lady's jaw dropped and she said in shock and horror, "you paid X amount on a 90's acura?!" i just said "yes!" with a big smile on my face as it made no sense to her at all. but if the vehicle title had said it was an 80's lamborghini, a 90's lotus, a 60' porsche, a 70's ferrari...she wouldn't have even batted and eye because those brands carry enough weight to warrant high prices decades later. the point is acura's brand has really not made any significant headway in the last dozen years to be any more prestigious today that it was in the hay day of nsx 1.0 glory.
and finally the saddest, part (point 1) i can't stress enough was how disappointed i was when i finally saw the "final" design of 2.0. i've heard the "it looks much better in person" argument and what not, but why don't we have to make these excuses for lambos, ferraris, and porsches? and even worse, we never had to make this excuse for 1.0! in my opinion the new body lines lost any chance of establishing any type of a recognizable design heritage for carrying a future legacy like what porsche, lamborghini, ferrari and even the corvette has done.
so with two-thirds of the above already hurting...the only big move or remaining power play they have for positioning themselves properly in the market place is with their price point. keep in mind that even if they are able to launch boasting the best performance numbers on the track, one only needs to give it a year or two, perhaps three, before someone (or many) will have one-upped the guy before. they'll just need to get busy on the nsx 3.0 at that point...not.
the value proposition when considering buying one, and i don't mean us diehards who will buy one just to buy one anyways, i mean the broader market base they hope to acquire is looking like:
scenario: $120,000 to spend on a car
goal: biggest bang for the buck
1. overall design/appearance: meh (looks better in person tho)
2. current brand perception in desired competitive market: low to poor (even with jerry and jay's help at the super bowl!)
3. performance: let's just say and hope off the charts and ahead of everyone!
4. price-point: better be right to compensate for the weaknesses of 1 & 2
so i agree, i also don't see a 2.0 that is over $110k-$120k being successful no matter how well it performs because the market won't agree with the overall value proposition being that high dollar.
since the reliability quotient has now been more equally distributed across the playing field;
and sub 4 sec 0-60 performance times by various manufacturers are being achieved;
and gross usage of assisted handling, assisted launches, instantaneous torque, greater mileages, etc. and all the other latest-n-greatest technologies are being brilliantly applied by the various automakers...
...that pretty much leaves only 3 remaining variables that acura can differentiate themselves from what is out there to truly offer a unique value proposition:
1. design (appearance)
2. pricepoint
3. brand perception
working backwards (point 3), as others have observed, brand perception for acura has been waning badly, which makes it pretty difficult for them to be able to successfully demand a high price point regardless of the final production's specs and performance. a good example of this was the vw phaeton. in the early 2000's vw was doing quite well and wanted to compete in the prestige market (bmw & mercedes) since they (b & m) were expanding downwards into vw's market. they made a beautiful car (i sat in one) with incredible leg room and all the bells and whistles...problem is, in all their at-the-time grandeur, vw forgot that brand affluence can only trickle one way, down, so bmw and mercedes would prove to be the winners in their market expansion into the economy class and vw's phaeton would go down as the loser in the prestige class in more ways than one...so much so that it is considered as being one of europe's biggest loss-makers in the entire auto industry. to put it plainly, in the mind of the consumer it just would not suffice to be strolling down the street to arrive at the big dinner party with a big ol' "VW" on your front grill if you had $100 grand to spend on any luxury car of your choice. acura is pretty much in the same boat cause their brand cannot trickle upwards in just one move (the 2.0). it takes years of repeated performance, lots of "moves" that are consistent in getting better and more importantly getting people's attention. let's hope they do not repeat history here and think their only way to succeed is to demand a high price point.
with that said, acura has to be very strategic (and careful) about their price point (point 2) so as to result in having the right value proposition being presented. the prospective buyer will be asking himself, "why am i going to spend $125 grand on this car when i can buy that car?" if the performance specs of the cars being considered are relatively similar, then the answer will undoubtedly rest in the appearance of the vehicle as well as in the brand's current perception is at the time. this is also important, and here's an example, when i bought my nsx almost 9 yrs ago while registering at the DMV, the lady's jaw dropped and she said in shock and horror, "you paid X amount on a 90's acura?!" i just said "yes!" with a big smile on my face as it made no sense to her at all. but if the vehicle title had said it was an 80's lamborghini, a 90's lotus, a 60' porsche, a 70's ferrari...she wouldn't have even batted and eye because those brands carry enough weight to warrant high prices decades later. the point is acura's brand has really not made any significant headway in the last dozen years to be any more prestigious today that it was in the hay day of nsx 1.0 glory.
and finally the saddest, part (point 1) i can't stress enough was how disappointed i was when i finally saw the "final" design of 2.0. i've heard the "it looks much better in person" argument and what not, but why don't we have to make these excuses for lambos, ferraris, and porsches? and even worse, we never had to make this excuse for 1.0! in my opinion the new body lines lost any chance of establishing any type of a recognizable design heritage for carrying a future legacy like what porsche, lamborghini, ferrari and even the corvette has done.
so with two-thirds of the above already hurting...the only big move or remaining power play they have for positioning themselves properly in the market place is with their price point. keep in mind that even if they are able to launch boasting the best performance numbers on the track, one only needs to give it a year or two, perhaps three, before someone (or many) will have one-upped the guy before. they'll just need to get busy on the nsx 3.0 at that point...not.
the value proposition when considering buying one, and i don't mean us diehards who will buy one just to buy one anyways, i mean the broader market base they hope to acquire is looking like:
scenario: $120,000 to spend on a car
goal: biggest bang for the buck
1. overall design/appearance: meh (looks better in person tho)
2. current brand perception in desired competitive market: low to poor (even with jerry and jay's help at the super bowl!)
3. performance: let's just say and hope off the charts and ahead of everyone!
4. price-point: better be right to compensate for the weaknesses of 1 & 2
so i agree, i also don't see a 2.0 that is over $110k-$120k being successful no matter how well it performs because the market won't agree with the overall value proposition being that high dollar.
You raise some good points but I think you may be missing a few additional considerations:
1. Honda Technology and Innovation - They are bringing a unique all wheel drive hybrid system to the market that has the potential to improve handling, improve fuel economy and improve low-end response. If they succeed, they may have something that outshines even the hybrid systems of LaFerrari, P1 and 918. The closest would be the 918 with its 4 wheel drive but I believe the Honda system has more torque vectoring capabilities. Of course the NSX will not have the raw power of these million dollar machines.
2. Honda Feel - Honda still has a way with ergonomics though this may have diminished a bit since the original Legend. Nonetheless, they still have a preference for large airy cockpits with lots of glass and excellent visibility. And the dash in the Concept may be the best I've seen in a supercar. I really hope it makes it to production.
3. Honda User-friendliness - High reliability is just part of it. Honda may be the only supercar maker that knows how to keep maintenance costs down. About the only thing I don't like about the original NSX is the timing belt replacement requirements. I am hoping for a chain for NSX 2.0. The extensive Acura Dealer network may also present a level of user-friendliness that other exotics do not offer.
1. Honda Technology and Innovation - They are bringing a unique all wheel drive hybrid system to the market that has the potential to improve handling, improve fuel economy and improve low-end response. If they succeed, they may have something that outshines even the hybrid systems of LaFerrari, P1 and 918. The closest would be the 918 with its 4 wheel drive but I believe the Honda system has more torque vectoring capabilities. Of course the NSX will not have the raw power of these million dollar machines.
2. Honda Feel - Honda still has a way with ergonomics though this may have diminished a bit since the original Legend. Nonetheless, they still have a preference for large airy cockpits with lots of glass and excellent visibility. And the dash in the Concept may be the best I've seen in a supercar. I really hope it makes it to production.
3. Honda User-friendliness - High reliability is just part of it. Honda may be the only supercar maker that knows how to keep maintenance costs down. About the only thing I don't like about the original NSX is the timing belt replacement requirements. I am hoping for a chain for NSX 2.0. The extensive Acura Dealer network may also present a level of user-friendliness that other exotics do not offer.
Last edited:
1. This the key point. The NSX is being compared to cars that cost 3-5 times as much, but there is true value in a hyper-car that is "reasonably" priced and still delivers in performance. I hope it makes it to production too. There's a lot of pressure now and the economy is holding better these days, so there is hope.
2. The Honda touch in ergonomics and interior design is very special if you really know what you are looking at as far as design is concerned. I'm still impressed today and I really do not like to have allegiance to any particular brand. People do not want to acknowledge the Autoweek article that blatantly said Ferrari hired the Honda design team for the 458 interior. What else can be said about Ferrari, after a key engineer defected to Ferrari and suddenly the F430 and F458 were boundless in evolution and competition...
Similar threads
