The public introduction of the Evora 400 will be at Geneva in three days time. It should be the exact car pictured above.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
NSX 2.0 Body Kit
- Thread starter vf2ss
- Start date
The public introduction of the Evora 400 will be at Geneva in three days time. It should be the exact car pictured above.
I am driving a Evora S in the next couple weeks... The 400 should be a little better.
for any who thought HSC "looked" promisingbasic idea: HSC front bumper kit
As much as I love the HSC, this just wouldn't work on the new car IMO. It is much too bulbous and upright to be that sexy. That's why the front of it has to cheat so much with the stacked details to downplay its height. Some might blame pedestrian impact concerns but then you could just look at the 458/12C and know that's nonsense. They should have just aimed at Ferrari styling again rather than the R8 when the whole thing began. It's too far gone to do anything with its TSX front face, best thing would be to just buy an alternative used exotic rather than try to fix the new car.
Last edited:
I agree and don't think it's pedestrian impact regulation calling the shots since there's no "top of the engine" to be hitting (screen grab from an old issue of Car and Driver below).
You might be right here (on getting an alternative used exotic)...however, if you really desire new (or perhaps even an alternative used exotic), there is going to be a limitation hurdle where there probably isn't going to be another car at this price point that is going to perform this well which creates a performance for the cash quandary. And I really think that with only a few cosmetic modifications to the front bumper, the 2.0 can be greatly enhanced since a reasonable chunk of owning an exotic is genuinely enjoying its appearance. Speaking of enhancing its looks, body kits...Body Kits...BODY KITS!!!
<iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fwuUcD0leJk?rel=0&showinfo=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
Having worked in the auto industry for 9 years, I'm recalling how most every region or area of a car other than the open airspace in the cabin and trunk is ferociously battled over by various engineering groups who need real estate to do what they need to do. So many trade-offs occur... One of the Honda engineers at NSXPO mentioned about how a good bit of work was done regarding cooling and how it had impacted the cabin design, particularly I think in the center console area. That suggests heavy focus on the radiator/cooling between front & rear, and even Ted mentioned work being done to improve thermal management - has anyone seen the front hood opened up? I can only guess there's a lot of hardware up there for cooling that could have a large effect on the front fascia size & profile. I'm no fan of The Beak and sure think it could have been done more attractively, but I'm only guessing that cooling needs have impacted the front design, maybe taking the place of the engine in a FWD car, regarding front pedestrian impact considerations.
None of those are concerns when the concept is sketched. It was heavily influenced by the R8 design which at the time was all the rage and all the engineering work you mention is done to more or less fit within the design. The design can't be too far outside engineering limits and the engineering can't be too far outside the design limits you are correct but those come during design development work and are therefore irrelevant. People can make all the excuses they want (especially about the infamous high hood and pedestrian impact) but the bottom line is that look at what Ferrari did with the 458 and 488, and how low and sleek that form is compared to the F430 even. That tells you it is possible to make the car low and sleek like the original NSX, but that was not the goal. The goal is apparent; an R8 body style with an Acura brand identity face. I'm not making excuses for them like everyone else will just because we are far down the path of "let it go" time.
Last edited:
If you say so!
As soon as I read that something weird happened...it was like someone pushed play in my head and I heard a female voice belt out "Let it go". (Have not seen Frozen...even with 2 daughters, but it still just gets played and marketed everywhere!) Anyways, speaking of "let it go", NSX's, TSX's, "beaks", etc....
You're the only one still that seems to believe it looks like an R8:
The new NSX is clearly proportioned to be 458/12C like, not the bulbous R8 my friend. The NSX is 47 inches tall like the 458 and the hoodline is much lower than the R8.
You're the only one still that seems to believe it looks like an R8:
[/URL]
The new NSX is clearly proportioned to be 458/12C like, not the bulbous R8 my friend. The NSX is 47 inches tall like the 458 and the hoodline is much lower than the R8.
It still looks like the R8 starting point it was derived from. It changed proportions during development for the better, but it can't belie its roots. Exhibit A is the hanging front headlight treatment. Also, by your own example you'll notice where the headlights are on those two cars above- ON THE TOP of the car not visible from the side whereas the R8 and NSX2 you can clearly see the front end resemblance. Furthermore, plenty of people think it looks like an R8 still so wrong again. Just check out the Facebook groups and YouTube commentary.
From the people I have talked to that have actually seen the car/concept (latest) They all say in person it looks nothing like the R8. Its lower, doesn't look as fat, and even the front end doesn't appear as flat as pictures mislead.
The proportions didn't change much. It got longer, wider and slightly taller, but they did not tweak proportions much.
Typical people think the NSX was a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Corvette, etc. because the NSX name is not household like the R8. They will name the first brand they can think of.
Ah whatever, they definitely tweaked the proportions significantly to improve upon the bulbous shape. I remember new praise for the production version getting the "stance" right but this is why I don't bother to come to this 2nd gen forum (this is where the defender fans patrol to strike down criticisms). Just get back to the topic of this thread which is already trying to "fix" a broken car design with an alternate redesign, even before it's released.
Same shape as the original 2012 concept but with interior and updated details, and before production changes for the Longitudinal V6. Some basic idea in proportions and shape.
- - - Updated - - -
Original patent filed in China when the 2012 concept debutted. This shot is with no perspective and what I used to 3d CAD model my own model for the NSX. So I am very familiar with the new NSX shape.
- - - Updated - - -
Lastly, the R8 side profile, no perspective. They do not resemble each out in shape much.
Yes, I do remember you also tried to change the shape with your own modeling because you weren't happy with what they were doing. You are probably so in tune with the shape you see all the little changes and have forgotten how to look at the car big picture. Just like we all love to nitpick about the incremental changes from year to year and how big a difference they are, when in reality the impression they give upon first glance is the strongest message conveyed. The car borrowed the two most identifiable parts of the R8 and modified them no matter what you believe- the hanging headlight design and side strake. They chiseled the form to make it less bulbous than the R8 but it's still not like the tectonic design of the original NSX or 458. I can see design elements and I can see overall qualities of a design because I'm a professional designer. You're really not proving anything to me at all by posting these images so let's just let the thread continue about the body kit please.
The Lamborghini profile is the nicest IMO. Not a lot of difference between the R8 and NSX overall. They are more alike than say a NSX profile and a GTR profile ...
In real, the R8 looks very good but unfortunately, it seems not always work on pictures ... Some cars are less photogenic, especially from certain angles ...
In real, the R8 looks very good but unfortunately, it seems not always work on pictures ... Some cars are less photogenic, especially from certain angles ...
Everyone would tweak something to their own liking, but it wasn't because I thought it looked like the R8. I made a model with larger side intakes and longer spoiler. Guess what? Honda did that with the production NSX.
I don't expect to change your mind Nero. I just wanted the facts/evidence presented for a fairer comparison. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but comparisons of shapes can still be quantified somewhat.
Fwiw...I also think that the immediate gut level response it heralds is an R8. I resort back to the layman's reference point of the face of the car as a key identification marker in which the hanging headlights sealed the deal. To make matters more inimical, Acura already introduced the new NSX's segmented style of headlight into their lineup more than a year before the flagship came out. This seems like a huge no-no, don't you lead with the halo, and let everything follow, aspiring to be the halo? Didn't they needed to wait until the NSX was out before implementing so it could pave the way for the rest of their line-up to follow? Here they jumped the gun pretty early it seems, perhaps causing the reverse affect. It's the difference between people saying, "Meh, that sporty Acura that won all those awards just looks like the rest of their existing line-up" instead of, "Wow, their line-up is looking more and more just like that sporty Acura that won all those awards!"
As a quick aside the "has to be seen in person" that will inevitably be heard from here on out...is just for lack of a better term, lame, from an all around design execution standpoint. At 160+ grand, it really should also work for the camera...especially when there are cars out there that can pose successfully for <$150K. Is it just a coincidence that the only two cars from the pic below that seem to regularly struggle in this area are none other than the R8 and the NSX?
Speaking of perspectives, hanging headlights, non-wedge design, etc. as mentioned in an earlier post there's a visual effect observed with the S2000 from a diagonally rear-to-front vantage point where the section in front of the fore wheel-well appears to be lopped off. This perspective photo from another thread seems to demonstrate that this effect will be seen in person from the same rear-to-front vantage point.
This and other forums are inundated by varying opinions on its looks when the reality of the design of the 2.0 is actually somewhere in the unexciting middle of the extremes. The new NSX is promising, hopefully able to meet many expectations (especially at the current price point). The current design doesn't appear from what we've seen on the test track and the production model as yet to be the failure some critics may want it to be, but neither can the raving fans cover up it's obvious to-date shortcomings. That comfortable middle ground that this car has achieved (is that a good thing?) is probably what is the most maddening, making it difficult to steer clear of being disappointed about the NSX's apparent mediocrity. It's no supercar, and it's no R8, yet in an ironic forlorn twist, it is.
Back to body kits that are poppin' up on the net...
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
As a quick aside the "has to be seen in person" that will inevitably be heard from here on out...is just for lack of a better term, lame, from an all around design execution standpoint. At 160+ grand, it really should also work for the camera...especially when there are cars out there that can pose successfully for <$150K. Is it just a coincidence that the only two cars from the pic below that seem to regularly struggle in this area are none other than the R8 and the NSX?
Speaking of perspectives, hanging headlights, non-wedge design, etc. as mentioned in an earlier post there's a visual effect observed with the S2000 from a diagonally rear-to-front vantage point where the section in front of the fore wheel-well appears to be lopped off. This perspective photo from another thread seems to demonstrate that this effect will be seen in person from the same rear-to-front vantage point.
This and other forums are inundated by varying opinions on its looks when the reality of the design of the 2.0 is actually somewhere in the unexciting middle of the extremes. The new NSX is promising, hopefully able to meet many expectations (especially at the current price point). The current design doesn't appear from what we've seen on the test track and the production model as yet to be the failure some critics may want it to be, but neither can the raving fans cover up it's obvious to-date shortcomings. That comfortable middle ground that this car has achieved (is that a good thing?) is probably what is the most maddening, making it difficult to steer clear of being disappointed about the NSX's apparent mediocrity. It's no supercar, and it's no R8, yet in an ironic forlorn twist, it is.
Back to body kits that are poppin' up on the net...
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
Comparisons of shapes can be quantified somewhat- that's why I can see the more than coincidental similarities from the rip off concept. The larger side intakes and longer tail on the production version were a by product of them switching to twin turbo packaging and longitudinal layout... Not stylistic exercises.
The shapes have been quantified in blueprint/orthogonal form as shown and it clearly shows the NSX and R8 bears little resemblance in geometry.
The length of the car was elongated to suit the new layout. That has nothing to do with extending the rear/spoiler and larger side intakes were inevitable actually. Michelle claimed the styling choice of the spoiler to coincide with aerodynamics testing....
But the longer tail/spoiler lends to losing the illusion of the stubby-ness or that snub look.Let's talk about art for a second tho since I went back and re-read your R8 comments and how objects makes different people feel certain ways. Yes, art has almost no logic and it's ultimately up to the spectator and how he/she feels about the work. However, let's introduce some logic into your associations. You claim the new NSX is copying/mimicing the R8 because of the headlight design and almost vertical side intake.
-Wouldn't the first NSX be copying the C4 vette's C pillar? As the C4 debuted in 1984, a full 5 years before we saw the NSX surface.
-The first gen also has pop headlights like many other sports cars, so it's copying that too?
-The Gallardo, R8 and then 12C actually mimics the NSX's unique long side intake from door to rear quarter panel, but no one claims they are copying the NSX.
-The Evora and MP4-12C mimics the NSX's unique integrated spoiler tail, but no one really claims they are copying the NSX.
-Then others can argue that the NSX's rear tail is a conservative version of the F40's tail, but that's a long shot.
-The 12C's side intake bears more resemblance with the R8 because of the high contrast 2 tone inserts, but no one seems to be making that association eh?
The R8 is the closest in virtue to what the NSX was when it first come out and I honestly think that's why the new NSX is being compared to the R8. Leap-Frog Effect as the first NSX influenced the R8 a lot.
By the rules of art, you can claim whatever you want about your own feelings, but by logic, you can't target a very particular detail and say because of that one detail of similarity, that they are very similar or copies. Now, if they were laid out the same way in a sense of blueprint style thinking, then it would be a clear copy. Like a hotel stealing floorplans from another competitor's hotel.
This is why the shape or proportions are important. The Corvette and NSX have a lot in common in details, but one is FR and the other MR, so they have different profiles/shapes/layout and most car people recognize that. The R8 while mid-engine, mostly resembles a FR car with it's bulbous stance. One can clearly tell the new NSX is mid-engine as it was never as bulbous as the R8 and now ever more so refined to be sharper. I agree that the taller flying buttress intake and headlight hang is reminiscent of the R8, but so are a lot of details on any cars. You can say the same for music, food, movies, etc.
I just wanted to put my 2 cents in on details since I overlooked it the first time.
- - - Updated - - -
vf2ss, I can't wait for people to start modding the new NSX and see what they actually come up with because those chops look very enticing.
Last edited:
Haha that's just funny. It's more than a little presumptuous and self indulgent to ASSume the way you do that your point of view is "logical" and I am looking at it illogically. I'll let that this end there since you obviously have to have the last word and can't let the thread continue about the topic.
I, for one, don't see the R8 in the NSX. Are there some subtle similarities? Sure, just like there are similarities to the 12C. Regardless whether one believes there to be certain influences from another car, what the hell difference does it really make?! If someone likes or doesn't like the car, or has an opinion about what it looks similar to, it shouldn't impact how someone else feels about it. Cars can elicit a very profound emotional response; both positive and negative. They are universally polarizing, as not all people agree on what is appealing or beautiful.
I waited over a year to receive my Z07, and wavered damn near the entire time about whether I could come to accept the departure of the standard Corvette rear end. In fact, when I first saw the official images, I thought about canceling my order, because the rear of the car looked ridiculous to me. However, once I finally had an opportunity to live with the car, I began to appreciate the architecture and design elements. Does everyone like the new Corvette design? Of course not. Do I care? Of course not.
While I do wish the new NSX was a bit more aggressive looking; with a shorter snout, lower roof line, and slightly longer tail, I bet lots of others won't agree with me. Moreover, it doesn't change my interest in purchasing the car. Having owned an R8, it doesn't remind of that car. But, I can see why the general public might draw parallels between the R8 and NSX...because I get asked if my vette is an F12 quite often. True car guys will know the difference between an R8, NSX, and a dump truck. To others, they're pretty much the same. A friend of mine has a 12C and is constantly asked what year his Ferrari is...
I waited over a year to receive my Z07, and wavered damn near the entire time about whether I could come to accept the departure of the standard Corvette rear end. In fact, when I first saw the official images, I thought about canceling my order, because the rear of the car looked ridiculous to me. However, once I finally had an opportunity to live with the car, I began to appreciate the architecture and design elements. Does everyone like the new Corvette design? Of course not. Do I care? Of course not.
While I do wish the new NSX was a bit more aggressive looking; with a shorter snout, lower roof line, and slightly longer tail, I bet lots of others won't agree with me. Moreover, it doesn't change my interest in purchasing the car. Having owned an R8, it doesn't remind of that car. But, I can see why the general public might draw parallels between the R8 and NSX...because I get asked if my vette is an F12 quite often. True car guys will know the difference between an R8, NSX, and a dump truck. To others, they're pretty much the same. A friend of mine has a 12C and is constantly asked what year his Ferrari is...
Similar threads
- Locked
