• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

The next NSX has already been built!

liftshard said:
...There are enough cars already in the 70-120k range, too. You have MB and Porsche and a huge glut of used Astons and Ferraris. Hell, you can get a 550M for less than $120k now. 996TTs for 70 or 80. Pretty cheap. There are just so many cars available and not that many buyers...

The NSX, to succeed, has to be priced at or near the Viper and Z06, but perform like a Ferrari. NOBODY, no matter how well it performs, even Carrera GT, is gonna buy a Honda at $140k, or a Lexus, for that matter.


Faster drag times elicit "so what?" among F-car guys. It's because their car has far superior chickmagnet coefficient. So, Honda, to sell, HAS to outperform the cars with similar CmCs. Basically, this is the opposite of the Acura/MB/BMW/Lexus strategy!

I think this is pretty accurate, believe it or not. This is a pretty rational statement, and I'm glad it's moving away from "scrap the plans" talks we've heard before from liftshard...we should think constructively about the future of the NSX.

If Honda can match the F430 for <100K, then they'll have a winner, no doubt. The looks have to be there too. It does have to have a lot of chickmagnetism.

You don't really need Enzo/CaGT performance. No one can even handle those cars anyway. And no one is driving ZO6's around Germany and the UK. Nobody thinking of buying an Aston Martin would EVER EVER buy a ZO6!!

liftshard's right. NO ONE will pay 140K for a Honda. Lexus may have slightly better results, but it will still fail from a profit/sales standpoint.

I think Honda's philosophy should be "let's show everyone in the 70-125 market that there is simply NO better car to purchase for all these reasons."

AND GET THE CAR INTO THE PUBLIC EYE!!!

I wonder how much Honda could have recouped if they spent some of those hundreds of millions they "lost" on the NSX on better advertising.

This strikes me: to me, I see about as many Vipers as NSXs on the road here in SoCal. Many people don't know what an NSX is. I've NEVER heard a Viper called something else. No one seems to get confused there. The NSX, 15 years later, is still an enigma! Honda CAN'T let that happen again!

nsxtasy said:
When it was first introduced, the NSX was "hot", a highly prized car for the automotive enthusiast.

I think that the marketing was responsible for further declines but only later in the decade, with a lack of advertising, lack of visibility (few showrooms had one on the floor), and too great a spread between the MSRP and dealer cost. The marketing faults were combined with product faults such as a lack of substantial enhancement to the performance and styling while competitors were enhancing their products, particularly in sheer horsepower numbers.


There are so few buyers, you must maximize your market influence.

The new NSX is going to have to be a much better car than the original was at it's introduction. Only then can it even have a chance of being a sales "success" for Honda.

Even the price needs to be less. What was $65,000 in 1991 dollars? I bet pretty close to $100,000 2005 dollars. So at <$100K, the new NSX will be cheaper than the original. And it has to be.

Unless of course Honda is just planning on throwing more money away on the project... :rolleyes:...which they may be. :confused:
 
Last edited:
NSXGMS said:
I wonder how much Honda could have recouped if they spent some of those hundreds of millions they "lost" on the NSX on better advertising.

This strikes me: to me, I see about as many Vipers as NSXs on the road here in SoCal. Many people don't know what an NSX is. I've NEVER heard a Viper called something else. No one seems to get confused there. The NSX, 15 years later, is still an enigma! Honda CAN'T let that happen again!

Well, look at the NAME. It's all about the name. Lexus sounds like "sex." Their marketing department pursued a strategy aimed correctly. Chick-ish luxury cars rhyming w/ "sex." Winner. Acura...ok, their logo is a compass. Total technerd, geek stuff. And, the NSX is a geeky car in a lot of ways. "No passion, no soul." Blahblahblah. I guess it needed to break down more and leave drivers stranded so they can wistfully sigh.

But, the name thing. People know what a 350Z is. The Z car. Corvette. Viper. People knew about Viper before it came out. Yeah, it's car the "American Made Rulez, Brother...(made in Canada/Mexico)" crowd on its side b/c it's from a 1920s American company which may or may not be wholly owned by a foreign firm. But, the point is that half the morons out there don't even know who MAKES the Corvette. Or the Viper. It's its own entity. The Viper is not "really" a Dodge. And the Vette ain't really a Chevy. If they were, nobody'd buy them. That's one of the immensely idiotic things about the Ford GT. What you gonna say to a girl in a club? A Ford GT? Oh, yeah, my brother has one of those, oh, wait, no, his is a Cobra, so I think it's a little faster than yours. I mean you could strangle everyone in the joint before anybody'd figure it out.

The other successful sports cars have a NAME. But, a Lexus is a Lexus, a MB is a MB, a Porsche is a Porsche, and a BMW is a BMW. I ask people "what kind" ALL the time on these cars. "Dunno, it's a ____." They DON'T KNOW what model it is. Boxsters are virtual scrap junk, can be had for dirt cheap. Yet, they still get Porsche's aura, the halo.

The Acura NSX was an ACURA. Named to be "an Acura." An Acura is an Acura. The RL, TL, TSX, all the same in the public's eyes. I don't know how Honda breaks a $80,000 sports car out of that. They cannot get a midsize sedan out of it. Hell, Bentley sells more Arnages than Infiniti sells Qs, so necessarily just putting a V8 sedan out there is not a good idea. It's hard as hell to break out of the perception.

Honda rightfully SHOULD have acquired another company WITH ITS OWN Halo. But, the japs like to do it on their own, Toyota and Nissan too. VW got Lambo and Bentley because - and I hope they realize this - nobody is willing to buy a Phaeton. If they REBADGED that car as a Bentley, people would line up around the block for it. How I know that? Well, hell, LEXUS has been doing it for YEARS! They rebadged Camrys and Land Crushers. Honda's a great automotive engineering company, but Lexus is a great badge engineering company. Still, they ain't got no BMW halo, make no mistakes about that.

So, Honda needs to come up with another BRAND to market this car on, because Acura cannot carry it. And another meaningless 3 letters is foolish. Gotta come up with something sexy and sticky. Make it its own car, don't worry about trying to Halofy things. The Viper don't halo Dodges and the Vette don't halo Chevys. Those companies can barely SELL any cars; even giving them away seems no longer to do the trick.

Honda understands this. The Accord. The Civic. Even the S2000. People KNOW those names. But, Acura has gone to try and be a "prestige marque" and it just hasn't worked.

So, perhaps instead of HSC, we should now all brainstorm to come up with names for the "new NSX" instead of something dippy like "HSC" or "NSX." Numbers and letters ain't gonna cut it.
 
NSXGMS said:
Even the price needs to be less. What was $65,000 in 1991 dollars? I bet pretty close to $100,000 2005 dollars. So at <$100K, the new NSX will be cheaper than the original. And it has to be.

Unless of course Honda is just planning on throwing more money away on the project... :rolleyes:...which they may be. :confused:

I don't really believe this. People don't want to pay $4 for gas because it seems too high to them. You compare prices to the past and present and with inflation it should be much higher. 100k still seems like a lot of money for a car, even a fast sports car. There is no way a 100k Acura sports car will sell. The Z06 is in the 70's. Get real, the next car has to be at that or less. Anyone talking about better gas mileage and supercar specs is a lame ass selling point. Do you really think the person who is in the market for a car of this price caliber gives a damn about gas prices? If he did I doubt he would be buying this car. He would be that guy in his 40's buying a scion because it makes sense. No Fcar guy says to his girlfriend or buddies "This thing gets amazing mileage, it is the best on long trips!", get real. I follow lift on the name plate, only guys and miamimermaid know about the NSX, it is a techy geek supercar. Does not have the sex appeal even though it is a very sexy car.
 
When I wrote whether there were enough performance car afficionados out there to justify a 140 thousand dollar machine I was thinking optimistically, but realistically knowing that the market wouldn't support such a project.

People constantly bring up "heritage" with a sports car brand or model; let me ask you, what heritage does Horacio Pagani have? Yet he's got people waiting in line to buy his $400K to $650K cars! What has he ever accomplished on the racetrack? Nada. Lamborghinis? Same thing. Yet a glorified Audi, with an unoriginal V10 can sell for $160K+....to thousands a year worldwide.

You tell me that with the proper marketing Honda couldn't make tons of enthusiasts (and non-enthusiasts) lust for a carbon fiber-tubbed 2700 pound, north of 10,000 redline, go-head-to-head-with-the-"big guns" car? For $50,000 more than the current underpowered, mediocre performing flagship?! Make people realize that this engine manufacturer, winner of several constructors' championships in the highest level of motorsport, can sell you a world-beating supercar, while having virtually the same reliability and service requirements of the Accord that you have parked next to it. You'd have kids in their early twenties willing to work 70 hours a week, and men in their late 60s scraping up the money from wherever for a chance to own such a car.

If they were to build something in the price range of the 911s and Vipers, I'd take a guess and say it would fall far short in lots of performance parameters; just like the current car. Even in '90, when introduced at 60 large, it was deficient in the power department relative to cars 1/2 its price.

You won't compete against the Vette in its class; one class higher than, well we all know where that got 'em; so why not put all your eggs in one basket and produce a car that exceeds all the Euro crap in every category for one forty-ish? Honda certainly has the means, they've got the know-how. Quit the mediocrity and the excuses, step up and create a new standard that hasn't been written before. Take what the current gen NSX is, and quadruple it, but only raise the price by 50%. Even taking some loss on gen 2, so what? They'd be building an incredible reputation and following among all car buyers.
 
Zonda has the target to sell 40-60 cars per year? Of course people have to wait in line ;) .

Lambo has no racing heritage but has a HUGE tradition and incredible brand recognition ("What do you drive?" "A Laborghini" - the asking guy will have his jaw on the floor).

Honda has to aim at the 70k$ market, I know I sound like a broken record (it is two years I keep repeating this but I cannot see who would buy an Honda for more than that money, it didn't work the first time when the NSX was a perfect car and the competition was crap). And in the ~70k$ market people still care about not having 10 mpg.
 
nuccaJB said:
There is no way a 100k Acura sports car will sell. The Z06 is in the 70's. Get real, the next car has to be at that or less. Anyone talking about better gas mileage and supercar specs is a lame ass selling point.

I don't think I've seen anyone in this thread harp on gas mileage as being a serious selling point with the new NSX. I don't really see that as so much of a critcal factor in the marketing of the new NSX. People who buy 70K+ cars simply could give 2 rats' heinies about gas prices. And quite frankly, I hear a lot of whining about gas prices but see more Ford Excursions and Escalades every day :rolleyes: . It's simply complaining to complain. And BTW, yes, gas isn't that high when adjusted for inflation.

Yes, the ZO6 is 70K. But it's a bucket of bolts. To expect any manufacturer to build a quality automobile with that performance and sell it for 70K is a pipe dream. It's not reality.

The current NSX is 90K. It's 15 YEARS OLD AND HAS 290 HP! Of couse it's not selling.

If Honda had updated it and marketed it properly, you would see a 100K Acura sports car sell. And the new NSX will sell if done right. But...they've got to do it right. And I was the first one to say they MUST keep it <100K. Under 90K is virtually impossible, though.
 
NSXGMS said:
People who buy 70K+ cars simply could give 2 rats' heinies about gas prices. And quite frankly, I hear a lot of whining about gas prices but see more Ford Excursions and Escalades every day :rolleyes: . It's simply complaining to complain.

Ok, true... but also people that buy 70k+ cars do not buy NSXs. We are speaking of a new possible market, following thetraditional one simply won't work IMO. People that buy 68'700$ cars that are not Porsche, Viper, Z06, MB, BMW (because the new "NSX" buyer will have to choose the NSX over those cars, priced about at the same price) could still care about sparing 1-2000$ per year in gas, don't you think?


NSXGMS said:
The current NSX is 90K. It's 15 YEARS OLD AND HAS 290 HP! Of couse it's not selling.

It did not sell even when it was "4 YEARS OLD AND HAD 285 HP" either. And the competition was really crappy anyway back then... so it is not the age&power the real point here.
 
MoreRPMs said:
You tell me that with the proper marketing Honda couldn't make tons of enthusiasts (and non-enthusiasts) lust for a carbon fiber-tubbed 2700 pound, north of 10,000 redline, go-head-to-head-with-the-"big guns" car? For $50,000 more than the current underpowered, mediocre performing flagship?! Make people realize that this engine manufacturer, winner of several constructors' championships in the highest level of motorsport, can sell you a world-beating supercar, while having virtually the same reliability and service requirements of the Accord that you have parked next to it. You'd have kids in their early twenties willing to work 70 hours a week, and men in their late 60s scraping up the money from wherever for a chance to own such a car.

That's an interesting point, but I can't see that as a successful marketing strategy.

I think it's already been discussed whether Honda should create a Carrera GT performing car and just sell it at 140K. It was shot down pretty quick.

You are going to have a hell of a time getting someone who is willing to spend 140K on a car to spend it on a Honda/Acura. Just ask liftshard :biggrin:

The ONLY possible way that would work is to create another badge and so completely disassociate it from Honda that no one even knows what the damn thing is. How much money will that cost Honda? Now you have Honda trying to get people to drop 140K on a first-year first-model car. Very tough to do.

I think it a better move to closely tie it to Honda, use that as the major selling point that it is, take your lumps from the brand aversion, and keep the price down as much as possible.

As I stated before, if you start going too far down in price, you'll lose performance/quality/R&D. If that's your strategy, then just market a trumped-up RSX/TL type thing with 330HP and a 45K price tag.

I wonder if someone could tell me the sales figures for the Gallardo. Is that not considered a success? How many have they sold at 160K or whatever the actual MSRP is?

Call me crazy, but I contend a serious new NSX w/ F430 performance and a <100K price tag would blow away the sales #s of the Gallardo.
 
gheba_nsx said:
Ok, true... but also people that buy 70k+ cars do not buy NSXs. We are speaking of a new possible market, following thetraditional one simply won't work IMO. People that buy 68'700$ cars that are not Porsche, Viper, Z06, MB, BMW (because the new "NSX" buyer will have to choose the NSX over those cars, priced about at the same price) could still care about sparing 1-2000$ per year in gas, don't you think?QUOTE]

That potential buyer will choose the NSX over those cars because, if done right, the new NSX will have:

1) Performance only matched by a $300,000 car (excluding the ZO6)

2) Unmatched quality

3) Earth-shattering looks

4) Cutting edge racing technology.

5) Everyday driveablilty.

Lots of reasons, in my opinion.

Again, if Honda can do this right, they will have a car that will be so undeniably good, no one in their right mind who has 90K to spend will spend it anywhere else.

And I think speculation on "new" markets is not a good idea. Spending several hundred million on an unproven/"potential" market is scary territory.
 
gheba_nsx said:
It did not sell even when it was "4 YEARS OLD AND HAD 285 HP" either. And the competition was really crappy anyway back then... so it is not the age&power the real point here.


It needed an update in 1994. By the time the 1997 updates came along, it was a day late and a dollar short. And marketing continued to vaporize. No car that remains updated un un-marketed can expect to sell. Ferrari, Porsche and Lambo constantly update and change, for good reason. How many mutations did the 911 go through? And Ferrari keeps changing the name along with the car! 348, 355, 360, 430.
 
We have a lot of misconceptions here.

People keep talking about the Gallardo and how we can "outperform" it.

OK. THIS is the problem. STOP thinking with your left hemisphere. The Gallardo is a LAMBORGHINI. If that sentence right there doesn't IMMEDIATELY tell you EVERYTHING you need to know about why the original NSX was a sales failure and the Gallardo isn't, then you are disqualified from speaking ever again on this topic.

What people here are saying is that Honda needs to be PERFECT. An all CF car lighter than everyone else, more powerful than everyone else, better in every technical respect than everyone else. Cool. So, Honda must produce a perfect car.

You know what, supposing they do...it STILL WON'T SELL at Ferrari or Porsche money. Why? Cuz PRESTIGE car sales are driven by issues of PRESTIGE, NOT "performance." This is why F-car guys DO NOT CARE if the Z06 can smoke them, but I can make a little jokey joke on the Ford GT thread here and almost get banned from the board.

The Corvette sells for Corvette reasons, because people want a car with a ton of horsepower that doesn't do a lot of things really well. They're ok with it being flimsy and cheap. That's what they can afford and are willing to spend. Same issue w/ the PonyCars and F-bodies. Cheap, disposible thrills. People like the big, ballsy V8 or Viper V10. It's American. It's Harley-ish. And it has a great name. And it's cheap.

I think Honda needs to make a cheap car. Not a pricey one. They can't sell a pricey one because F360 owners are not dumping their Modenas to go get faster Z06s. Or even faster 911TTs. OR EVEN M6s.

There are some SPECTACULAR cars out there which cannot go head-to-head with technically inferior Italian autos in pricing. Also, Ferraris break down so frequently that it's a running joke about them...has that stopped them selling? It DID with Jaguar, oh yeah. But, Ferrari has enough of a halo that people will EXCUSE even sheer incompetence in the vehicle.

Honda needs to aim at the Corvette. Just as Nissan aimed at the Stang w/ their 350Z. The Vette and Viper are sitting there in the 50-70k range and there aren't a lot of cars. The high-end is totally saturated. So many models. Astons, Bentleys, Ferraris, Lambos, high-end Porsches whose owners overspent, etc. But, in that tweener range above the performance and price level of the s2000, Z, and Stang, there is a gap up to the Corvette. Beyond the Corvette, the 911 owns the sports space up to the Italian marques. Honda can compete in prestige w/ Chevy, but not with Porsche. They may be tempted to aim at the 911, because it's a loner in its space, but the Vette is the better target. Yes, largely there is a tunnel-visioned market for the Vette among people who are loyal to THAT specific car or "American-made," just as there always were for Rustangs. But, the recent lower-end Japanese sports cars like the RX8 and 350Z proved that there are enough people around who were only buying Stangs because there was no other alternative. Give me a Honda Corvette without the drawbacks of a Vette and I am a freaking buyer. I.e., do what worked in 1980. Match performance at higher quality. Honda will sell that. They always have.

Honda should produce a car that competes directly with the Corvette. The Z06. The Viper GTS. Really fast-ass cars. Forget about trying to compete w/ Ferrari, being the "Japanese Ferrari." The Japanese Corvette is what they should aim for first. And, sell it as a Honda, not an Acura, because Acura's sales strategy is all effed up right now. The Vette is a VALUE proposition in many cases. If Honda offers a competing VALUE proposition, they've proven they can move that car.

This means a HSC that goes for $50,000. Maybe a second tier w/ more power that sells for $70,000. And, takes the Vette head-on, either equals or beats it in a straight line. Cornering, we know who'll win that, but bench racing is 0-60. Make the goal 3.9. Honda has to break 4 or people go "so what?" Nobody cares about 10,000 rpms or this other stuff. If the engine makes a gaudy HP number and the car goes 0-60 in 3.9 and costs a little bit more than a C6, they can sell that. The "S4000" or whatever, LEVERAGE an already *successful* brand name. And, compete against people you can beat. That means American makes, not European ones.

To do this right, the car has to enter a space where there are already NOT half a dozen competitive entries. Right now, there are more cars to choose from at $140k than at $55k, for a sports car. Think about it. With your RIGHT BRAIN this time.
 
liftshard said:
We have a lot of misconceptions here.

People keep talking about the Gallardo and how we can "outperform" it.

OK. THIS is the problem. STOP thinking with your left hemisphere. The Gallardo is a LAMBORGHINI. If that sentence right there doesn't IMMEDIATELY tell you EVERYTHING you need to know about why the original NSX was a sales failure and the Gallardo isn't, then you are disqualified from speaking ever again on this topic.

What people here are saying is that Honda needs to be PERFECT. An all CF car lighter than everyone else, more powerful than everyone else, better in every technical respect than everyone else. Cool. So, Honda must produce a perfect car.

You know what, supposing they do...it STILL WON'T SELL at Ferrari or Porsche money

I'm not sure if this is directed toward me, but I never said the new NSX has to "outperform" a Gallardo. I brought it up because I think it's the Gallardo buyer that Honda has to sway. And I also brought it up relative to its sales figures. Believe me, I know the Lambo and Honda are not even in the same ballpark.

I think you're right on with keeping this car a Honda. Use the Honda badge to your advantage. It's BAR Honda, not BAR Acura. But don't call it an S-4000 or anything like that. People will think it's the new S2000! Don't tie it to any existing model, including the old NSX! Just tie it to Honda.

I think you're right about aiming for ZO6 performance. Because ZO6 performance is essentially F430 performance!

You are correct that a new NSX won't sell at Ferrari or Porsche money, but be more specific. F money is 190K. P money is 120K (Carrera's even less), so where are you referring to?

You are also correct that the price must be very low.

But liftshard, do you really think Honda can actually try to sell a "perfect" car at $50,000? I feel that's totally unrealistic. Why not just sell it at 39K and go for ridiculous volume?

I think even though the price must be low, you've got to keep it high enough to keep a little dignity. Many people who buy 100K cars want others to know what they paid...I don't think you have this wih the ZO6 because you probably can't convince anyone you paid 70,000 for a corvette. It's going to sell OK b/c of ridiculously good performance and word of mouth.

If you want to go low, go real low. Otherwise, keep it at <100K and let the chips fall. Honda's goal here needs to be to break even. A smashing success to me would be not losing a lot of money. This is not their bread and butter. This is a halo car. This is not a profitable car in direct way, so just do what you have to do to break even and call it a day.

If Lambo's making money w/ the Gallardo, then the NSX should certainly break even *If done right*
 
NSXGMS said:
I'm not sure if this is directed toward me, but I never said the new NSX has to "outperform" a Gallardo. I brought it up because I think it's the Gallardo buyer that Honda has to sway. And I also brought it up relative to its sales figures. Believe me, I know the Lambo and Honda are not even in the same ballpark.

Then why do you continue to talk about Honda swaying buyers who aren't even in the same ballpark? There is NO intersection between Honda buyers and Lamborghini buyers.

I think you're right on with keeping this car a Honda. Use the Honda badge to your advantage. It's BAR Honda, not BAR Acura. But don't call it an S-4000 or anything like that. People will think it's the new S2000! Don't tie it to any existing model, including the old NSX! Just tie it to Honda.

Well, in 1986, "Honda" was seen as insufficient to sell a Legend. The Germans were fat and out of shape then, but none of the japlux mfrs truly crossed the gap to be in their echelon.

I think you're right about aiming for ZO6 performance. Because ZO6 performance is essentially F430 performance!

In a straight line, yes. The Ferrari has a 4.3L engine, high revs, lots of exotic materials, etc. Sure, so does the Z06, but everything is way scaled back and it's flimsy and the interior is cheap. Biggest difference is the engine.

You are correct that a new NSX won't sell at Ferrari or Porsche money, but be more specific. F money is 190K. P money is 120K (Carrera's even less), so where are you referring to?

Use the operator "or" here. It won't sell for F money OR P money.

But liftshard, do you really think Honda can actually try to sell a "perfect" car at $50,000? I feel that's totally unrealistic. Why not just sell it at 39K and go for ridiculous volume?

That's my POINT. It IS ridiculous to expect Honda to make a perfect car that can do everything the F430 can do at 1/3 the price. Honda needs to pick its opponents better. This isn't 1991.

I think even though the price must be low, you've got to keep it high enough to keep a little dignity. Many people who buy 100K cars want others to know what they paid...I don't think you have this wih the ZO6 because you probably can't convince anyone you paid 70,000 for a corvette. It's going to sell OK b/c of ridiculously good performance and word of mouth.

Nobody who buys $100k cars wants others to know they bought a HONDA. That IS the problem here.

If you want to go low, go real low. Otherwise, keep it at <100K and let the chips fall. Honda's goal here needs to be to break even. A smashing success to me would be not losing a lot of money. This is not their bread and butter. This is a halo car. This is not a profitable car in direct way, so just do what you have to do to break even and call it a day.

Halo car?!!?! There was NO HALO from the ORIGINAL Halo car! Honda WILL NOT get a halo here from another NSX. The 350Z is Nissan's "halo" car. It's a lot smaller Halo, but Honda's got to be realistic in NA.

If Lambo's making money w/ the Gallardo, then the NSX should certainly break even *If done right*

Huh? Stop bringing up Lamborghini. They aren't even in the same BALLPARK, remember? VW is making money with the Gallardo because they are selling a VW car under another's name to get the goodwill and prestige associated with it. This is why trademarks are valuable.

The problem here is that, after about 70 or 80k, performance CEASES to be the dominant criterion in the purchase equation. Like how, after about 30mph, rolling resistance gets passed by drag. And, prestige, like drag, is a square law figure. At 100mph, you can ignore rolling friction. It's negligible. At $200,000, you can ignore performance. Sure, all cars there are "fast," but the Z06 smokes every one of them. You got DB9s and other cars which are barely faster, if at all, than a base C6. Big MBs, Bentleys, etc. That's not the point. The point up above this range, RIGHT where Porsche's 911 begins, is prestige. The 911's *never* been the fastest. It's just been right where prestige starts dominating.

The Vette is the "American Porsche 911." Right? Watch that Top Gear C6 review again. It's OUR 911. The next NSX needs to be Japan's Corvette. This means, aim at that vehicle and either offer value with respect to it or outperform it at the same price point. Prior to the NSX, Honda thought they could just jump over the Vette and even Porsche and just skip to the #1 seed, Ferrari. No dice. Honda tried to leapfrog way out of class, up to Ferrari, and it didn't really work. The original NSX, kept as a Vette competitor would have accomplished what Honda needed to do. It would have been consistent with the ENTIRE jap premium segment, the Legend, Acura, all of it. A toehold at the lower end of the next higher prestigious segment. Had Honda done THAT, they could NOW be releasing a Porsche fighter or even a Ferrari fighter. You can't shortcut this stuff and try to rise above your station in one swoop. It just doesn't work.

The original NSX was the Japanese Ferrari and it was rebuked by the buying public. BMW's Z8 was rebuked too...it was a failure. Any entry by MB into a $150k+ segment will also be rebuked because they simply are overpriced up there. There are Continentals and such now and think about that - you're in a club, you have a MB CL65 or whatever and the other guy has a Continental GT or something. You say "Mercedes" he says "Bentley." Your car might cost more and be faster, but nobody cares. Everyone knows somebody who has a Benz, but a Bentley is otherworldly on name alone.

Honda is not aiming for Gallardo buyers; they have no SHOT at them. They should be aiming for Corvette buyers. Like I said, there are more gofast cars at $120k than at half that. The C6 is kind of there all by itself and there's enough room for a quality competitor. Just don't make the car so abstruse that nobody "gets it" except technerds and miamimermaid.
 
liftshard said:
Then why do you continue to talk about Honda swaying buyers who aren't even in the same ballpark? There is NO intersection between Honda buyers and Lamborghini buyers

Except I know several NSX owners who dumped their NSXs for Gallardos looking for more performance.

Halo car?!!?! There was NO HALO from the ORIGINAL Halo car! Honda WILL NOT get a halo here from another NSX. The 350Z is Nissan's "halo" car. It's a lot smaller Halo, but Honda's got to be realistic in NA.

As you state I keep bringing up the Gallardo, you keep bringing up 350Z, Carrera and C6.

I don't think you and I are on the same marketing page here. We agree on too much to disagree, so to clarify...

I think you're speaking in terms of Honda making a profit. I am not. A "successful" NSX, to me, is one that loses little or no money.

You speak as if it's even a legitimate possiblity that Honda will market and produce this car for profit. You might be 100% correct and they might. But I don't see that happening, not with a V10 and F1 technology that they have intimated for this project. With this in mind, your scenario seems more and more unlikely every day. The re-invention of the NSX as a pedastal piece seems increasingly more likely every day. So let's discuss what appears to be most likely at this time.

Your statements seem to go in line with "Honda, just make a marketable car" and forgetting the original NSX philosophy. That's fine. Every company is entitled to make a profit on every product they sell.

But if Honda wants to create another NSX that serves as a showcase for their racing program and sets the bar higher for sports cars as they did in 1990, who are we to complain? And based on comments coming from Honda, that appears to be what they are heading towards.We're discussing ways to make that philosophy work, not to figure out ways it won't.
 
NSXGMS said:
...But if Honda wants to create another NSX that serves as a showcase for their racing program and sets the bar higher for sports cars as they did in 1990, who are we to complain? And based on comments coming from Honda, that appears to be what they are heading towards.We're discussing ways to make that philosophy work, not to figure out ways it won't.

I agree here. And if Honda, as Lift says, should compete against the Vette at that price point, what the hail would be the point of spending tens and tens (maybe hundreds) of millions per year to build their name in F1 alongside Ferrari? Why not just go ALMS with whatever crap they've currently got?

Then they can keep doing what they're doing: Accord and Civic-based boxes. Isn't that what their $50K car is, afterall....AWD Accord, with nicer grade interior.

Mid $60s target is only double the S2000. The S2000 that uses cast iron suspension arms. The S2000 that is underpowered; not grossly, but some. What can they possibly offer us in that range? Not much, IMO. I don't want a Corvette competitor; at least not as the halo car. Go ahead and make one, IF there's still plans for a semi-exotic, just like there was in '90.

Bottom line is we know one thing for sure, maybe two: V10 and the HSC concept. Any bean counter (or anyone with 1/2 a brain) knows that you can't stuff an exotic 10 cylinder into a car at 60 or 70, or anywhere near that. Maybe if you use the Accord's chassis perhaps; but who the hell needs another gussied-up econobox masquerading as a true sports car. There's no prestige in the $30k to $60k slot. It's filled with sedan-based, mostly low-tech fillers. Hell, there's no prestige for a $87k Viper. Maybe for the few hillbilly buyers who think a truck engine the size of a house places them in the same company with the big guns. We know otherwise.
 
As an original owner, I probably fall into the demographics that Honda will target (bought new in 92, currently 44, 250+K.) In consideration of what is out there currently and what was out there back in 90/91, I would guess:

1) Something just above the F430 (think 348), with better styling and technical innovations (no guesses here) that will give the new NSX better performance overall while using 10% less horses. Straight line acceleration still not as important as handling and braking.
2) Mileage will be a factor (7 speed).
3) Platform: no more V6s will do (think XJ220) At the very least: 4.0 liter, V-8 cylinder, NA, 10K rpm.
4) Styling:Mid engine with angular/sharp lines and curves as seen on the HSC and other styling trends of late.
5) Price: 100K, not much more though.
6)The only departure from the previous strategy-Honda should seriously consider this: releasing readily available higher performance versions in larger numbers (think Z-06).
Just my guess at what I would pay given that brand loyalty has a big part to do with it.

Regards,
 
MoreRPMs said:
Who are rap "musicians" targeting? The homies in the hood don't have the moolah. Doctors and high paid execs aren't sold on Bentleys b/c some dude callin' himself 47 Cent drives it in his video.

The last 47 Cent video I saw he was driving a 645. Ever since that M6 whipped that Porsche 996TT I've been thinking of getting an M6.

BMW is not suffering from poor sales.
 
steveny said:
All good points. If the new NSX is priced around the same as the new Z06 I will buy the new NSX. If the new NSX is priced around an F360, I will wait for the new NSX to depreciate to the price of a new Z06. Then I will buy the NSX. :biggrin:

I would have bought an old NSX over the Z06. I don't understand why Honda didn't stick with the old car and offer it with some more features to up-date it. I also wanted a hardtop NSX and a SMG type transmission. Maybe it's all OK as in the long run I'm better off buying used NSX rather than depreciated Ferraris or expensive new BMWs.
 
I honestly feel that liftshard hit the nail on the head as to what honda should do and what makes the most sense market wise. TO ME, It sounds like there is a lot more emotional posts in this thread then logical (no offense to anyone). A V10 F1 engine with a 10,000 redline is not realistic for the street, name a car that has one. The reasone it is so hard is because it does not work reliably. The reason a bike can do it is because it is so small. The reason F1 can do it is because it is rebuilt all the time.

The best part about honda aiming for the 50k range is that instead of saving for a used NSX I can save for the new car. :biggrin:
 
Tony Montoya said:
The last 47 Cent video I saw he was driving a 645. Ever since that M6 whipped that Porsche 996TT I've been thinking of getting an M6.

BMW is not suffering from poor sales.

Yeah ,but the reliability of BMW is scary!
 
nuccaJB said:
A V10 F1 engine with a 10,000 redline is not realistic for the street, name a car that has one. The reasone it is so hard is because it does not work reliably. The reason a bike can do it is because it is so small. The reason F1 can do it is because it is rebuilt all the time.

:confused: In case you missed the news, There WILL be a V10 in the new NSX. I am perplexed as to why everyone keeps debating whether or not it's the way to go...It is REALITY.

And there is no other car that has one. That's the pont :confused: . It's called pioneering.

You do know that F1 engines are 3.0L V10 producing 800HP, right? They also rev to 19,000 RPM. You're comparing apples to oranges. I'm sure there were a lot of doubters when Honda debuted a 3.0L V6 producing 270HP and redlining at 8000 RPM. 15 years of proven NSX engine reliablilty and F1 technology later and there's debate about Honda's ABILITY to produce such an engine? Give Honda a little more credit than that please.

If BMW can produce a 5.0L revving to 8000 RPM, I'm not worried about Honda.

And if you expect to get a true sports car for $50K you and liftshard are both in for a big surprise.

I honestly feel that liftshard hit the nail on the head as to what honda should do and what makes the most sense market wise.

Define market wise? Is F1 market wise?

If Honda wants to sell volume and make a profit, then yes, sell trumped-up RSX/TL jobs for 50K. Is that what you really want? Anyone can do that. Who cares? It will sell and become as nondescript as everything else around.

Congrats Honda, you did something you've already done and something anyone else can do. Boy, I'm sure glad Honda is making money! I feel so bad for them because of that horrible, crappy stupid car they made 15 years ago called an NS...what was it again? Boy, I hope they never do anything like that again because I just couldn't sleep at night knowing Honda lost money on a specific project. They should pull out of F1 too. What a waste! They don't make a profit at all! How horribly un-market wise!!
 
Honda should just go ahead with the V10 NSX.

regardless of price.

really - i dont care if they want 100K.

Honda shouldnt care about having 3 digit yearly sales.

this is Honda's show piece - not bread and butter.

Liftshrd makes some good points but you could apply that to just about every other car maker.

Honda will do wat it needs to do.

I dont know many manufacturers that can boast having a Successful F1, CART and MotoGP stint.

NOT EVEN BAMBORGINI.
 
I never said it won't be a V10, and I see no problem with that. I am refering to the 10,000RPM redline. What is the point of that other then you want to drive an F1 car. Honestly do you want that simply because it would be awesome? How often are you going to be driving the car up to 10k? Most people complain about the fact that engines like the S2000 have to be spun so high to get power that it was annoying. It was fun when used, but realistically it was not that functional. Honda modded the S2000 motor so that the redline was lower, why do you think that they will make a new motor with an even higher redline?
 
nuccaJB said:
I never said it won't be a V10, and I see no problem with that. I am refering to the 10,000RPM redline. What is the point of that other then you want to drive an F1 car.

A 10K redline on a street car would be silly. Honda needs to stick with 8K and bump up the low-end TQ.
 
NetViper said:
A 10K redline on a street car would be silly. Honda needs to stick with 8K and bump up the low-end TQ.

Not neccesarily. Honda's goal will be to out ferrari-Ferrari and Lamborghini. 10K will be unbelievably intoxicating (9300 was awesome on the NA1).

Regards,
 
Back
Top