I agree 100% It wasn't cause Honda/Acura had one of the fastest cars that lured me to it, It was the fact that they showed that when you balance everything out, you don't need tons of hp to compete. Now I will probably never be able to afford the next Gen NSX, but I will be able to (eventually) pick up my own NA1, if I play my cards right maybe a NA2.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
Lexus LF-A: NEW KING OF THE 'RING
- Thread starter liftcontrol
- Start date
I agree 100% It wasn't cause Honda/Acura had one of the fastest cars that lured me to it, It was the fact that they showed that when you balance everything out, you don't need tons of hp to compete. Now I will probably never be able to afford the next Gen NSX, but I will be able to (eventually) pick up my own NA1, if I play my cards right maybe a NA2.
Just consider these facts...
The GT-R can go 0-60mph in 3.3 seconds, 1/4 mile in 11.6 seconds, the Nurburgring laptime was 7:38 with semi-wet condition.
The NSX was good, while Honda didn't really change a lot since 1990, look at Ferrari. 348 -> F355 -> 360 Modena -> F430.
I don't think being a F430 fighter is acceptable. They will have F460 or F500 by the time Honda introduce the new NSX. Nissan will be bringing the GT-R Spec V(more powerful and light-weight version of the GT-R) Lexus will have the V10 coupe with 7:24 laptime. If Honda can't even get at least 7:25 laptime or faster, people will look down upon the NSX.
Also the Porsche 911 GT2 might go faster than the Lexus' 7:24.
Honda could just offer an NSX Turbo. Look at the Porsche 911...since its debut, I think they have kept the 911's basic structure, they just started offering more models when the 911 Carrera was not good enough. (911 Turbo, 911 GT2, 911 GT3, etc)
The GT-R can go 0-60mph in 3.3 seconds, 1/4 mile in 11.6 seconds, the Nurburgring laptime was 7:38 with semi-wet condition.
The NSX was good, while Honda didn't really change a lot since 1990, look at Ferrari. 348 -> F355 -> 360 Modena -> F430.
I don't think being a F430 fighter is acceptable. They will have F460 or F500 by the time Honda introduce the new NSX. Nissan will be bringing the GT-R Spec V(more powerful and light-weight version of the GT-R) Lexus will have the V10 coupe with 7:24 laptime. If Honda can't even get at least 7:25 laptime or faster, people will look down upon the NSX.
Also the Porsche 911 GT2 might go faster than the Lexus' 7:24.
Honda could just offer an NSX Turbo. Look at the Porsche 911...since its debut, I think they have kept the 911's basic structure, they just started offering more models when the 911 Carrera was not good enough. (911 Turbo, 911 GT2, 911 GT3, etc)
While you are certainly entitled to your view, that would make you and Honda in the great minority amongst "sports car" enthusiasts and EVERY SINGLE OTHER SPORTS CAR MAKER IN THE WORLD. It is sticking to this mentality that has cost Honda its once cherished position of makers of a car that took on and beat Ferrari and Porsche at their own game.
If they wish to make econo boxes for the future, there is nothing wrong with that but they would then have buried that glorious past with their founder Mr. S. Honda.
Clearly Honda has seen the folly of this thinking and are therefore finally working on something more in line with their glorious past which included dominating Formula One in the ninetees. Better late than never.
Great speech bro ,but people here won't listen. I've never understood that about so called life long Honda fans. Honda has never been high hp yet they b*tch about hondas never having enough hp. The NSX wasn't as powerful as the 348 or ZR1 back in the day so why are so many of these guys screaming for it to be equal or more powerful now
I agree that the next NSX doesn't need to best Corvette, Ferrari, Nissan and others in terms of top HP. My bitch - and probably many others agree - is that there was basically no increase in HP over the 16 years of NSX production while others basically gained 50% or more. Every other Honda model gained power along the way - to the point where the Accord, RL, TL and Odyssey were all within 10-30 HP of the NSX.
I agree that the new NSX doesn't need 550 HP, but 400 HP should be easy. Porsche gets 415 HP from its NA 6-cylinder (GT-3) while providing great fuel economy. The base Vette now makes 430 HP while getting ~25 MPG highway.
Also, by sitting on the sideline, Honda is way behind in other areas important to the modern high-performance car. Ferrari is on its 4th generation of manu-matic transmission - Honda has yet to do its first. How about electronically adjustable suspension? Electronic differential? Multi-adjustable stability control? A 6, 7 or 8 speed automatic tranny?
I personally don't care if the next NSX doesn't have 500+ HP. But I hope that whatever Honda does, they remember those two key words that have made Honda products great - continuous improvement. The Accord, Civic and Odyssey are top sellers because of continuous improvement. Why the NSX and S2000 never got anything but tweaks is beyond me.
I'm sorry but I'm not sure I understand this post. I think you're trying to give Honda credit for abandoning their philosophy and developing the V-10. If that's your opinion I just don't agree with that.
The NSX was far from an econobox but compared to it's rivals it was. Sticking with that philosophy is what I'm talking about. A big engine isn't necessary to achieve world-class performance. Honda is about efficiency, balance and smoothness--all of which the NSX had. A V-10 works against that philosophy.
I'm not sure how you can associate the V-10 in the ASCC with F1 success--the engine is just a very small part of any team's F1 success. The NSX was born from their F1 success and it's got a relatively small NA engine that was developed when F1 was still in the turbo era.
The statement "clearly Honda has seen the folly of this thinking" suggests that Honda are doing everything right now and had been wrong for the last 20 years. Is that really your position? Between F1 disaster, declining reliability and lack of a sports car the facts clearly show Honda's folly is now.
You claim "sticking to this mentality" has cost Honda...how? Again, I'm not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean Soichiro's mentality? He created the NSX! He brought championships to F1! He gave Honda the tools to make Acura a luxury brand! He revolutionized reliability and efficiency for road cars! Very little Fukui has done has proved fruitful. Seems to me like sticking to Soichiro's mentality is better than the current one.
Unfortunately Honda scored yet another industry first - they hired Fukui. Unless Toyota follows Honda's lead and manages to hire an equally incompetent president and CEO, Honda will have a difficult time catching up. Honda's past engineering triumphs alone do not guarantee success. It requires leaders and visionaries like Soichiro and Uehara, and both of them are gone.
-- Joe
Just because he didn't built you a MR car does not make the guy incompetent. That is the most ignorant thing I have heard so far on this thread. Don't get me wrong, there are lots of disappointed NSX owners out there and I'm one of them, but a statement was made 17 years ago and they probably don't need to make it again. However, it would be nice if they do.
There is a reason why he's the boss and your not. Don't forget, while he is on top, Honda achieved record sales year after year. Do you really think a car company should focus on a car that will not sell rather than achieving global domination?
Think about it, under this CEO, Honda developed more models than any of his predecessors, also Honda probably spend more money on Auto sport than any other companies out there. This guy has to worry about product sales, model line up (which includes production cars, green cars, jets, robots, lawn mowers, etc) and he had to take the heat when their factory racing team is taking billions and not producing, I bet you the last thing on his mind is to have a car that will do absolutely no impact for the company.
Toyota on the other hand, did not develop a MR car but people are praising the LF-A.
Double standard maybe?
I don't know, if I'm the CEO of the company, I will probably be more concern with what will sale, instead of a single model that will not only cost more to develop than their best seller, but a car that is most likely to have absolutely no impact on the market. Don't forget, for being a CEO does not means he can do what ever he wants, as the company grows, so is the member of the board.
BTW, it ONLY took Nissan 7 years to come up with a new Skyline GTR, and 17 plus years for Toyota to do some thing... I think we are in a pertty good shape to see a running prototype of the NSX replacement after only... 2 years and 8 days after the last NSX was built.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
Let's not forget the Miata. It is a successful sports car which did not capitalize on excess horsepower.
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
In this "second generation NSX" forum, somehow many of the threads always end up discussing how Honda’s leadership has failed the NSX community. This is typically followed by responses from die hard Honda fans to defend Honda.
With this subject constantly recurring, this is a result of the many frustrated owners out there ready for an upgrade. Many of us merely want a modern and fully updated version of the original NSX. Because Honda has not delivered, the forum becomes the continued outlet to voice the complaint.
Some of us still have hope that Honda will deliver. Some of us stopped holding their breath.
While Fukui may have good intentions by focusing on volume vehicles, his vision is short sighted. When one focus on volume vehicles, eventually you build the type of vehicle to please the 350,000 annual buyers. After several iterations of building these type of vehicles, the product becomes boring. It may be a good car for what it was intended, but its styling will not be daring and the driving experience will be muted. In the end, you have a compromised car geared for a wide target audience. Eventually, the manufacture becomes a slave by continuing to build these “reliable refrigerators” in order to sustain its volume.
With this approach, you can forget the pure-ness in your NSX replacement. At best, you get a compromised sports car such as Fukui’s ASCC. And if Honda cannot make a profit on the NSX, they better figure out how without diluting the pure-ness of the NSX formula.
Finally, a CEO’s focus on market share and corporate profits has no bearing to the buyer. Many buyers simply want the “best” sports car. If Honda will not deliver it, buyers will look to other marques.
With this subject constantly recurring, this is a result of the many frustrated owners out there ready for an upgrade. Many of us merely want a modern and fully updated version of the original NSX. Because Honda has not delivered, the forum becomes the continued outlet to voice the complaint.
Some of us still have hope that Honda will deliver. Some of us stopped holding their breath.
While Fukui may have good intentions by focusing on volume vehicles, his vision is short sighted. When one focus on volume vehicles, eventually you build the type of vehicle to please the 350,000 annual buyers. After several iterations of building these type of vehicles, the product becomes boring. It may be a good car for what it was intended, but its styling will not be daring and the driving experience will be muted. In the end, you have a compromised car geared for a wide target audience. Eventually, the manufacture becomes a slave by continuing to build these “reliable refrigerators” in order to sustain its volume.
With this approach, you can forget the pure-ness in your NSX replacement. At best, you get a compromised sports car such as Fukui’s ASCC. And if Honda cannot make a profit on the NSX, they better figure out how without diluting the pure-ness of the NSX formula.
Finally, a CEO’s focus on market share and corporate profits has no bearing to the buyer. Many buyers simply want the “best” sports car. If Honda will not deliver it, buyers will look to other marques.
They don't need to figure out how not to dilute the pureness of the NSX, because we have one already. It's call the NSX.:biggrin: That's probably why a FR is on their mind. You can't replace a masterpiece. I would like to think 360 and F430 is the replacement for the NSX, just by another manufacture.
Perhaps people should look at other marques. After all, for a new MR NSX to out perform a C6, F430, 997TT/GT3 will definitely have a price tag of over $100k, perhaps $120k plus, which again, will not bring in new buyers. Badge snobs will still buy European cars!!! As I have indicated on other threads, most current NSX owners will not be able to afford one even if there is a new car, and most of us will NOT sell our cars because we love it so much...
So what's up? We want a car we wouldn't buy, and we wouldn't sell the car we have because it is a wonderful piece of machinery... :biggrin:
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
Manufacturers will continue to update their "masterpieces" - Corvette, 911, F-cars. Once a generation is done, another generation is re-created. Not updating an NSX shows either a lack of technology within Honda to update a masterpiece or lack of commitment from Honda to extend the NSX legacy. I believe it is the latter.
Honda lack of commitment is driven by fear of failure on not able to make this a profitable program. That alone is why Honda is cautious and the source of its delay and its internal struggles.
From the owners stand point, some may be happy with this masterpiece. Yet many want an updated version. If one lost the car in an accident, or if the car is well worn, will there be another NSX masterpiece at Honda for you to replace it with?
Ever seen the Porsche TV commercial that involves a small boy asking a salesman if he can sit behind the wheel of a 911 coupe? Having "test sat" the car, he climbs out, asks for the salesman's business card and leaves with the words "see you in about 20 years."
I wish Honda sports cars have the timeless legacy much like Porsche has. It won't because Honda is not a sports car company. Sports cars are not their core business. For that, sport car programs will likely be an after thought unless the program is driven by a leader who has the authority and the passion to bring greatness to a car. For every great sports car, there is a great man leading a passionate team. With Fukui's leadership, I do not expect great things for the next NSX.
If....and this is a big if, if Honda want to continue the NSX legacy and commit to being sports car maker, it needs to build on the formula that it started with and control the cost. Soichiro Honda method of "Cost be damned so you can build me the best sports car" does not fly anymore in this competitive market. 911 and Corvettes have been around for many generation with almost no gaps in time. These cars have been consistent with their formula. With every generation, you make it slightly better and faster. They don't go from a V6 to a V10 in one design cycle. Porsche and Corvette's consistency help buyer understand the car and the heritage. After several generations, it becomes such an icon that Americans grow up equating Corvette as their dream car much like Germans do with the 911. This is how you build your customer base.
The first generation NSX was painful for Honda from a commerical standpoint. Yet the car was praised worldwide. That type of recongnition doesn't come often and when it does, Honda should have capitalized on it by continuing to properly update the car in a timely manner. They needed to fix the cost problem and I believe the HSC was a cost conscious NSX successor. Numbers were not published, but the way the HSC was marketed appeared to be a $60K car and it would be profitable. The "at least 300Hp" statement is misleading. The HSC likely had 350-380 hp and if brought to production, would have been the true second generation NSX and Honda would be on its way to making an icon of the NSX much like the Corvette and the 911.
That did not happen. Fukui killed the continuation of what could be an NSX legacy.
He cited that the HSC would not be competitive. He forgot that Honda doesn't compete based on Horsepower.
I am not alone here. If Honda builds a true NSX successor much like the HSC, I would buy it and the dream would still be alive.
Honda lack of commitment is driven by fear of failure on not able to make this a profitable program. That alone is why Honda is cautious and the source of its delay and its internal struggles.
From the owners stand point, some may be happy with this masterpiece. Yet many want an updated version. If one lost the car in an accident, or if the car is well worn, will there be another NSX masterpiece at Honda for you to replace it with?
Ever seen the Porsche TV commercial that involves a small boy asking a salesman if he can sit behind the wheel of a 911 coupe? Having "test sat" the car, he climbs out, asks for the salesman's business card and leaves with the words "see you in about 20 years."
I wish Honda sports cars have the timeless legacy much like Porsche has. It won't because Honda is not a sports car company. Sports cars are not their core business. For that, sport car programs will likely be an after thought unless the program is driven by a leader who has the authority and the passion to bring greatness to a car. For every great sports car, there is a great man leading a passionate team. With Fukui's leadership, I do not expect great things for the next NSX.
If....and this is a big if, if Honda want to continue the NSX legacy and commit to being sports car maker, it needs to build on the formula that it started with and control the cost. Soichiro Honda method of "Cost be damned so you can build me the best sports car" does not fly anymore in this competitive market. 911 and Corvettes have been around for many generation with almost no gaps in time. These cars have been consistent with their formula. With every generation, you make it slightly better and faster. They don't go from a V6 to a V10 in one design cycle. Porsche and Corvette's consistency help buyer understand the car and the heritage. After several generations, it becomes such an icon that Americans grow up equating Corvette as their dream car much like Germans do with the 911. This is how you build your customer base.
The first generation NSX was painful for Honda from a commerical standpoint. Yet the car was praised worldwide. That type of recongnition doesn't come often and when it does, Honda should have capitalized on it by continuing to properly update the car in a timely manner. They needed to fix the cost problem and I believe the HSC was a cost conscious NSX successor. Numbers were not published, but the way the HSC was marketed appeared to be a $60K car and it would be profitable. The "at least 300Hp" statement is misleading. The HSC likely had 350-380 hp and if brought to production, would have been the true second generation NSX and Honda would be on its way to making an icon of the NSX much like the Corvette and the 911.
That did not happen. Fukui killed the continuation of what could be an NSX legacy.
He cited that the HSC would not be competitive. He forgot that Honda doesn't compete based on Horsepower.
I am not alone here. If Honda builds a true NSX successor much like the HSC, I would buy it and the dream would still be alive.
Last edited:
You said it best, they don't go from V6 to V10 in a regular model cycle change. This so call NSX replacement is a replacement for the NSX in Honda's line up, not a direct NSX replacement such as C5 to C6, or 996 to 997, or 355 to 360 to 430. Simple reason is because the car is so damn good that it out lasted three generations of its competitor.
Regardless what every one says, you, me, others, I think the new FR will be a monster, even though it is not going to be what the current NSX owners want. As long as Toyota is in the game, Honda will not lag behind.
Some how, I have the feeling that Honda will introduce a new MR car after the ASC. Maybe a five years or so, but I believe they will. A steel body NSX at a lower price with similar performance of the current NSX shouldn't be a tough thing to do. Perhaps when the S2k's life cycle ends.
As for now, I'm keeping my NSX, perhaps a GTR after my S2k is paid off.:smile:
Regardless what every one says, you, me, others, I think the new FR will be a monster, even though it is not going to be what the current NSX owners want. As long as Toyota is in the game, Honda will not lag behind.
Some how, I have the feeling that Honda will introduce a new MR car after the ASC. Maybe a five years or so, but I believe they will. A steel body NSX at a lower price with similar performance of the current NSX shouldn't be a tough thing to do. Perhaps when the S2k's life cycle ends.
As for now, I'm keeping my NSX, perhaps a GTR after my S2k is paid off.:smile:
Fundamentally, I have always agreed with this but I've heard you make this statement a lot and got to thinking about it and I don't know how close to reality this really is.
To make the claim that the NSX "outlasted" its competitors isn't exactly reality. Sure, the NSX was "competitve" up until it's death in 2005 but it was certainly always the slowest car in it's class after 1999 or so.
There are a few things about the NSX that give the illusion that it was more competitive than it was. Things that it still does better than other cars today such as balance, reliability, ease of use and timeless looks. But I see those features more as inherent to the car's design than evolution and improvement.
Consider if Porsche had not changed the 993 TT until 2008. The 993 TT would still be very competitive on paper--425 hp, 0-60 in ~4.3 sec, 1/4 mile in ~12.5 sec, some claim timeless looks, relatively low price, etc. But the reality is that NOBODY claims the 993 is "competitive" today or that the 993 would have "outlasted" it's competitors for 15 years. The fact is that by the time the 996 debuted the other cars in it's class were starting to catch up. By 2003 the F430, Ford GT, Lambos, etc. would have blown it out of the water. It would have been too late. They saw that early, introduced the 996 well before that and has the 997 ready well before the new F4xx, Lambo, etc has theirs ready. The point is Porsche has it right and Honda had it wrong and because we are Honda/NSX people we tend to wear our rose-colored glasses and ignore reality.
The brutal reality is that the F360 and 996 smacked the NSX down in the late 90s. Honda had plenty of time to update the NSX beyond the NA2 by then and didn't do it. The NA2 should have been introduced in 1994 and the NA3--whatever that would be--in 1997. Either a 3.5L V-6 with 325 hp or a 3.0L FI engine along with the 02+ updates and the Zanardi suspension would have been sufficient to keep up with the F360/996. Then the HSC in 2002, well before the F430 and Gallardo. With 350-375 hp the HSC would have been right there with them. This is the way Porsche does things and obviously they do pretty well. Maybe they know something.
I do think it's very impressive the NSX was still as competitive as it was in 2005 but the reality is the 993 would have been just as competitive in 2008. Why don't we give that car the same props? There are things the NSX will always do better, even in 20 years, which is a testament to the original design of the car. But the more I think about it the more I realize how badly Honda dropped the ball. If they thought the car was "perfect" they should have limited the production run like the Ford GT. And clearly Honda didn't think it was perfect because they still went ahead with the day-late-, dollar-short NA2 and 02+ upgrades. To let sales sink to an embarrassing level before mercifully pulling the plug was excruciating to endure.
There was no reason the NSX couldn't have become the 911. Acura had a chance to establish a brand nearly equal to Porsche as Lexus has now done (at least in N. America) and kept the NSX priced even less than the 911 with better performance. If each of the NSX updates had come one era earlier it might have kept the car swimming.
The first statement is correct ONLY if 993 was small part of a model line up instead of a main model as their #1 seller. Without 911, Porsche will not exist. The reality is, Porsche can update their cars with record sales while the NSX's sale was pulled down to none existence after 1993. In order for a car manufacture to do any major update, it has to make financial sense. I'm sure if Honda can sell projected 6000 NSXs per year, I'm sure there would have been a nice replacement during the late 1990's.
Needless to say, Porsche also enjoyed record sales during the 90's. But if 993/996 is that wonderful of a car, Porsche shouldn't have to update it to 997 early. The crude reality has always been their massive over steer, even when a car is as nice as a 993/6, Porsche as a company, understand the problem has to be resolved. NSX on the other hand, clearly not as fast as 360, but it still out handle the car. It is an unfortunate event that the Type R model never made it to the States. If Honda brought out the Type R model earlier and export to American, I'm sure they will sell a lot more car; than again, Honda kept the production to minimal; therefore, they probably couldn't have increase the production even if they can sell 2x or 3x amount of cars.
I'm not a fan of FI, but any one with a well tuned CTSC will tell you a the car will out run and out handle the 360 easy. Heck, NSXSUPRA/Jason's 1992 NSX with piggy back tuning can do nil to 60 right around 4 seconds without trying (it's on Youtube).
Regardless what Honda did and did not do, I think NSX at its peak with the type R running 4.4 0-60mph is extremely impressive, and C & D's test on the 1999/2000 car of 4.5 may have been a fluke, but they achieved the number. Porsche on the other hand, did not achieve similar result until 2005 with the 997S. The over all picture is rather simple, people don't like old stuff when it is not consider as classic, and the NSX is old and not yet a classic!
Anyway, I do agree with every one of you that the NSX should have been updated more often, mainly on output, but we also have to consider the handicap of the self imposed HP limit in Japan. Than again, I'm contempt with what it is, even as of today.
There are many of us on Prime can afford a 997s over an NSX, but we still choose this car, maybe we know something Porsche owners done know?:biggrin:
I appreciate that response. :smile:
I understand Honda's reluctance to do any major updating due to projected sales. But they did minor updates. Clearly they knew something had to be done but did it late and half-heartedly. I do for the most part buy into the NSX perfection view as you do and therefore Honda should have made it a limited run if they didn't intend to support it, IMO.
Porsche has a lot of flaws IMO but to say they that's why they have to update it as often is a fallacy IMO. ALL competitive manufacturers update every 4-7 years, including Ferrari, Lambo, Porsche and even Corvette. And no one can claim there's something "wrong" with the F430.
I too think the NSX-R was a great achievement and a CTSC NSX-R is a force to be reckoned with, even today, and would most certainly spank a F430 and Gallardo SL. on the 'ring. It would toast a 360 to say the least.
BTW, I can't find a F360 time or a NA2 NSX time on the 'ring but the 360 CS' time was identical to the NA2 NSX-R time: 7:56. Based on this I'm not sure you can definitively call the NSX faster than the 360. By my estimates the NSX-R was more aggressive in relation to the NSX-T than the 360 CS was to the F360. I would say if anything the NSX remained competitve until then--1999. The introduction of the 360 CS and the 996 TT and the lack of the NSX-R pretty much sealed the deal for competitive comparison of the NSX-T.
As far as Porsche, I'm not sure where you got those 0-60 times. All the times for the 993 TT reflect 4.3-4.5 sec. They got there well before the 997 and before the 996. The 996 TT times I see are all in the high 3s-low 4s. The 997 TT is in the mid-low 3s.
I just think that all of us have such a large expectation on Honda to built some thing that can regain their pride, which is also directly connected to each NSX owners, to the point that we starts to dislike what ever they are currently doing. The passion is a good thing to have, but some times can cloud our judgement.
It is an unfortunate event this has to happen.
Let's wait and see when all the cards are on the table so we can make a final judgement:smile: LF-A, ASC, etc.
It is really pointless to say any thing because none of us will change Honda's mind about some thing that is already in motion.
It is an unfortunate event this has to happen.
Let's wait and see when all the cards are on the table so we can make a final judgement:smile: LF-A, ASC, etc.
It is really pointless to say any thing because none of us will change Honda's mind about some thing that is already in motion.
Last edited:
While I can afford a Porsche Turbo or a F430/460, I still cannot help but wait for the NSX replacement. Honda makes a superior product. My current NSX is sexier than any Porsche and is as reliable as any Civic. I can only imagine what the NSX replacement will be like........at least I want to see what it looks like and what its performance is to be before I decide on my next car. If it is not the NSX replacement, it would have to be the LF-A, about which we should know much more in the coming months.
If neither, I would consider either a P or a F car.
If neither, I would consider either a P or a F car.
