If it looked more like this....
...I'd get off my lazy ars and find a way to get one.
What car is this?
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
The Negatives of the NSX 2.0
- Thread starter liftcontrol
- Start date
What car is this?
I am not sure where you are seeing the Celica in this car...tuned or not tuned.
- - - Updated - - -
It was the Saleen Raptor concept. It never made it to production. It would have came out about the same time as the McLaren MP4-12c
That Raptor concept pays tribute to the original NSX alot more than the NSX 2.0. Look at the side intakes and taillights from this angle. The canopy shape and side window glass replicates the 2.0 as well.
- - - Updated - - -
Coincidence?
- - - Updated - - -
Coincidence?
The front end is also very striking as close to the 2002+ NSX in design.
If you call resemblance four tires and two doors then yeah. Past that there is no resemblance.
silhouette?
But wheel diameter will affect chassis dimension and hood height regardless. If the wheel well was 2 inches less, it would reduce hood height the front and overall height unless they are going for the wheel to height ratio of say, a 2001 Celica with a 24 inch diameter wheel at 51+ inch overall height
(Which looks nothing like the new NSX as some have pointed out.) Most exotic looking/low sports cars are less than 200% of the tire diameter when it comes to overall height. Non sports car's height will have the appearance of really small wheels due to a much higher ratio of overall height to wheel. This is the form and detail that most people don't see or recognize.- - - Updated - - -
Not even close.
RSX* maybe, but no NSX EVER.
Last edited:
Maybe with a black top it will look less massive... At the moment it's really fat. 2 days ago i saw a new Corvette Z06 in person (only saw photos before), i must say it's looking strikingly good. The front end is much cleaner than the NSX2.0, and rear end is quite slimmer with its 2-tone scheme. The overall body shape is a lot leaner too... And that exhaust note !! I always thought that Corvettes were cheap and plasticky apart from the original Stingray, and i think that one creates as much emotion as the Stingray itself. Too bad it's still front engine...
The black top will make it look leaner. The prominent flying buttress arch on the side is what makes the car look beefy as the actual dimensions are rather lean. If they did not go with that element and kept the C pillar, it would have looked much leaner or they could have trimmed down that element to make the arch much thinner in appearance. This is why most people keep trying to make the analogy of a 350Z or Celica, because of the Hatch style rear window and supporting frame. Even the new Corvette has loss the C pillar for reasons most likely because of safety laws. Can't really win either way, as with the C pillar, many people mistaken the old NSX for the more household name Corvette or even 240SX.
In Europe both are exotic I think there's more than that, the belt line of the NSX 2.0 is much higher, which is why many people compare it to Audi, since that high belt line was a trademark of the TT and then the R8. That makes the car looks fatter IMHO, it's then a matter of taste, many people like the Audi's, likewise many people prefer big boobs and fat rear ends
I think there's more than that, the belt line of the NSX 2.0 is much higher, which is why many people compare it to Audi, since that high belt line was a trademark of the TT and then the R8. That makes the car looks fatter IMHO, it's then a matter of taste, many people like the Audi's, likewise many people prefer big boobs and fat rear ends
Last edited:
Belt line is higher because of modern demand for larger diameter wheels and the buttress is part of it. If the old NSX had 26-27 inch tires, it would have a higher belt line and never sit at 46 inches tall in stock height.
It is a matter of taste at the end of the day though, but I truly don't see much resemblance with any Audi and the new NSX.
It is a matter of taste at the end of the day though, but I truly don't see much resemblance with any Audi and the new NSX.
fastaussie
Suspended
trust me the new car will be often miscued as a new R8,..or the new 300 Z....
and undoubtedly, more than anything else i reckon, the new Corvette. or whatever Corvette...
fastaussie
Suspended
it would be nicer, and more appropriate, if the NSX were more often compared to a Ferrari. since it was, in fact, built to compete with those cars...
You're really missing the point. The wheel & OD are taken into consideration very early in the design phase, since it affects the dimensions of the chassis, gear ratios, etc...But wheel diameter will affect chassis dimension and hood height regardless. If the wheel well was 2 inches less, it would reduce hood height the front and overall height unless they are going for the wheel to height ratio of say, a 2001 Celica with a 24 inch diameter wheel at 51+ inch overall height
- - - Updated - - -
Not even close.
RSX* maybe, but no NSX EVER.
If you keep the greenhouse of the car the same (floor to roof, head room, etc...) A smaller OD tire will allow for smaller wheel wells and possibly a lower front fender, BUT given the constraints of the greenhouse size, ride heights (to meet the driveway approach angle targets for its given overhangs), etc... A smaller tire will have NO affect on the overall roof height or ground clearance of the car. The only way to lower the car is to sacrifice ground clearance (an important aspect for a production car) OR the height of the roof/greenhouse, which affects the cabin size inside the car, headroom, etc...
The new Ford GT is going to have an overall roof height quite a bit lower than the NSX and 488, while having similarly large 20" wheels with large ODs. But that car was designed from the start with a large OD tire and a very low roofline, greenhouse target. But that also means there's less room inside than the NSX or 488.
Last edited:
I don't think we are in disagreement at all haha, except in the choice of outer diameter wheels as it's a given that an expected of amount of interior/headroom is demanded for these cars. We see the same engineering outcome, just different takes on why we believe it should be A or B.
The greatest negative of the NSX 2.0 has become it's absence from becoming a reality.
What is the chance now that HONDA may cancel the entire project? Very small I think but better than it was a day ago in the minds of some.
What is the chance now that HONDA may cancel the entire project? Very small I think but better than it was a day ago in the minds of some.
Good idea!
It all started from these pictures:
Then, my initial comments:
Hmm.. I didn't pay too much attention to these pictures, but you are right.
That side profile shot from that angle makes the front end of the car look quite long.
Lame explanation and cheap comments offered from N Spec:
It's because of the short rear overhang. The original NSX has a long front and rear overhang.
- - - Updated - - -
Then don't buy one lol. Move on. Honda has let you down for how many years now? If you think it looks like a Viper, etc.
Compos sui effer, compos sui ...
Still not compos sui effer!
I agree. Personally I think if they got the front right, I could easily overlook ALL the other complaints and criticisms that are popping up and be a HUGE fan of the new NSX. In these shots from the #tour , when you couldn't see the front, the design looked so promising...
But once the veil was removed, it really does look more like an ordinary front engine car (w/its hung headlights) and you're left deflated with a sigh. If only the face paid better homage to the original (any of the below random examples do a better job imo), honestly I wouldn't care as much about the final power output, the interior, final weight, 0-60 times, etc. (that's just me)...since it's still going to be an amazing vehicle for the $ (remember folks, it's still a Honda). BUT since they got the face incorrect imo, I think it makes it easier to not like other stuff too.
I've already compared it in an earlier post. Just know that the hood line of the NSX is actually lower than the 458/488 and the overall roof height are the same for both cars. The longer, stretched out nose makes it look lower, but in fact it is not. I'll do another one later when I get a chance to sit down.
- - - Updated - - -
You quote a philosopher but can't make your own articulated rebuttal to me calling you a day dreamer.
So which is it Prime? Is the NSX too short and fat or too long in the nose. It's being accused of everything:
Same car. Different angles and cameras. The car has been made to look short/stubby, to medium length, and to long and lean. The truth is that the car is rather quite balance in fact for it look like both polar opposites very much like an average height man can be made to look shorter or very tall and athletic or fat on camera screen depending on the situation/variables.
Wait til you can walk up to it, sit in it, and drive the car. Then we can debate from there. None of this really matters if the car is not fast enough or will break down 3-6 years from now because of unreliable/poorly designed tech. Or even worse, non-existent tech, as in canned again. If we were to only debate the first gen NSX from pictures or quick walk-ups and supposed spec sheets, then I can promise you that it would be nitpicked to death too. However, most of us are enjoying owning one after the experience of driving and detailing one, so it's a different type of euphoria that cannot be garnered from speculation and waiting.
Worse and worse, don't feed the Troll effer ...
Lol, so your last resort is to try and attack me personally, but I don't personally know you so your attempts are feebly wasted. I'm asking you for a real reply to the debate over a car based on pictures and specs when the forum, not as a whole, but in spirit of negativity has been contradicting their thoughts and opinions about car in development for 3, going on 4 years, versus a 20+ year old car that they can personally find tangible and enjoy already.
Both the new Corvette and 458 have taller hoodline than the new NSX. The NSX has lowest possible hoodline that is regulated as shown. The 458 has a long nose to make it appear like it has a thin nose and the Corvette's long front engine hood has the same effect even if the front bumper is short overhang due to the front wheels being pulled towards the tip. The new NSX's controversial front bumper treatment gives it the illusion that it has a stocky hoodline, but in fact it does not. I've talked about this already, but people don't seem to realize it. And then, just recently people want to complain that the hood is too long like a Viper??? Neither of these descriptions are true.
Again, something is better than nothing. The new NSX is supposed to be better than most of the market in terms of performance for the dollar, even if it's out of reach for many pre-owned first gen NSX owners now. The car is ~90% acceptable in present form IMO. The details can be fixed either through oem refresh cycles or aftermarket offerings. I'd rather Acura release one soon with working and competent components, then for them to shelf it again like they did 5-6 years ago and the HSC and start all over. No car is perfect, especially our first gens no matter how much we love it, but this new NSX certainly does not deserve the amount criticism that is thrown at it because Acura as a brand cannot offer a proper V8 or FR platform that many luxury buyers want.
- - - Updated - - -
Wrong again ... Just try to be intellectually honest please. Nice photoshopped pictures aren't enough to transmute biased bull sh it into truth ...
There we are!
Both the new Corvette and 458 have taller hoodline than the new NSX. The NSX has lowest possible hoodline that is regulated as shown. The 458 has a long nose to make it appear like it has a thin nose and the Corvette's long front engine hood has the same effect even if the front bumper is short overhang due to the front wheels being pulled towards the tip. The new NSX's controversial front bumper treatment gives it the illusion that it has a stocky hoodline, but in fact it does not. I've talked about this already, but people don't seem to realize it. And then, just recently people want to complain that the hood is too long like a Viper??? Neither of these descriptions are true.
Again, something is better than nothing. The new NSX is supposed to be better than most of the market in terms of performance for the dollar, even if it's out of reach for many pre-owned first gen NSX owners now. The car is ~90% acceptable in present form IMO. The details can be fixed either through oem refresh cycles or aftermarket offerings. I'd rather Acura release one soon with working and competent components, then for them to shelf it again like they did 5-6 years ago and the HSC and start all over. No car is perfect, especially our first gens no matter how much we love it, but this new NSX certainly does not deserve the amount criticism that is thrown at it because Acura as a brand cannot offer a proper V8 or FR platform that many luxury buyers want.
Blah, blah, blah ... Useless in this discussion. From where do you start? Pictures of early prototypes?
Your efforts are really cute but if the final product differs from your early prototypes models, I would rather qualify them as ... lame.
We are actually talking about the three NSX showed by gleibig. This is where it starts. These NSX do not look like the others ...
The question is:
are these NSX having a bigger and longer front end or is it a picture distortion as pointed out by 2slow2speed?
I tend to actually believe that these pictures are not enough distorted to explain all the extra nose length ... ( Why? Look at the front wheels and the stage ... )
When we compare these two different NSX, nose of prototype seems to be shorter when you look at the centre grille section compared to the rolling pre production example showed on the second picture. It is subtle ... I am not sure, picture angles are different ...
Last edited:
I think it has less to do with lens distortion and more to do with the angle of the shot and the design of the front. Because the design of the front has it angled as it approaches the center grill it appears to look bigger when you from a three quarter perspective. Conversely when the car is viewed from a slight rear perspective the front overhang looks very small. This is also true of the design of the rear which looks nice and long when viewed from a slight rear perspective but looks very short when viewed from a slight forward perspective
Although it is true that cars have been known to grow overhangs as they move from concept to production with the Porsche Boxster being a prime example
Similar threads
