The NSX is making a return...

  • Thread starter Brend
  • 1,074 comments
  • 94,327 views
I think what people are missing here is that Acura has gone about building a practical, everyday, pseudo-supercar. More or less, exactly what they set out to do with the first one. Its never going to be as hard-edged as the original. Safety equipment, modern technology, and the demands of luxury buyers would all but eliminate the car from being anywhere near a consideration these days. Dictations on size and comfort also write off a lot of what made the first car so great. But everyone's looking at the old NSX (just the same, the Supra, et al) with the kind of rose tinted glasses that'll never allow for progress.

Personally, I really like this new NSX. It looks great, sounds great, and overall seems to have the kind of approachable appeal that a lot of cars in its class lack. The clever Quiet Mode is a nice touch for people who live in the city and want to max out eco driving, or have fussy neighbors who complain about the number of clippings on their lawn. The overall capability of the car seems to be quite good, and the idea of the car steadily letting you do more and more as you step it up is good, too. Although I'd certainly echo C/D's concern over the lack of a "full control" mode, I'd certainly expect something like that down the road with a Type-S or Type-R. Acura wants to sell usable cars, not hard-edged track toys. I guess to me, it seems like they're going after the "Playstation Kid" group that fawns over the R35 GT-R, and honestly, the NSX comes off as a much better day-to-day option.

Everyone else who wants a pure performance car can keep waiting for the Civic Type-R, or whatever that smaller sporty coupe is. Until then, at the very least, we're getting a goddamn NSX.
 
I think what people are missing here is that Acura has gone about building a practical, everyday, pseudo-supercar. More or less, exactly what they set out to do with the first one. Its never going to be as hard-edged as the original. Safety equipment, modern technology, and the demands of luxury buyers would all but eliminate the car from being anywhere near a consideration these days. Dictations on size and comfort also write off a lot of what made the first car so great. But everyone's looking at the old NSX (just the same, the Supra, et al) with the kind of rose tinted glasses that'll never allow for progress.

Personally, I really like this new NSX. It looks great, sounds great, and overall seems to have the kind of approachable appeal that a lot of cars in its class lack. The clever Quiet Mode is a nice touch for people who live in the city and want to max out eco driving, or have fussy neighbors who complain about the number of clippings on their lawn. The overall capability of the car seems to be quite good, and the idea of the car steadily letting you do more and more as you step it up is good, too. Although I'd certainly echo C/D's concern over the lack of a "full control" mode, I'd certainly expect something like that down the road with a Type-S or Type-R. Acura wants to sell usable cars, not hard-edged track toys. I guess to me, it seems like they're going after the "Playstation Kid" group that fawns over the R35 GT-R, and honestly, the NSX comes off as a much better day-to-day option.

Everyone else who wants a pure performance car can keep waiting for the Civic Type-R, or whatever that smaller sporty coupe is. Until then, at the very least, we're getting a goddamn NSX.
Pricing is supposed to be starting in the mid-$150k range, so $160k+ after taxes.
 
Pricing is supposed to be starting in the mid-$150k range, so $160k+ after taxes.

Which, by all means, is a fair price in my book.

You're getting a car that's capable of some spooky levels of performance (with the right tires), but still manages to have a liveable and likely reliable reputation that'll far exceed almost all of its competitors. Not shattering my spine on expansion joints is a good start, same with an EV/Hybrid mode to save on gas, but still capable to blow the doors off a 911 Turbo is a good way to win me over.
 
Why do things have to be retro? Why does it have to be exactly like the original? What I think they did was great with the car. Instead of making things now that are based on the past, people should make new outrageous things that will become retro in the future.
Exactly. The original NSX was all about pushing available technology to the limits. If you were to make the new NSX "retro," it would mean betraying the spirit of the original.
 
I believe the chassis was the first car to have a semi-monocoque body with a new alloy frame in it. Suspension was pretty sophisticated for Honda thanks to Senna's involvement as well.
 
Wow I never knew a GT 2 seater or 2+2 couldn't at the same time be classified as a Super car cause you know it's a vague territory where cars that are sports-cars in a normal trim and then given massive power and sell north of 100k USD, with some of the most technological stuff for cars are known to live.

But sure the NSX though following all that vague criteria and being called a super car by actual pundits...is a GT car, yeah I buy that.
 
I don't remember the NSX being that advanced, could you elaborate?

It had an all aluminum chassis which at the time only a few cars were made of such. The engine was the crown jewel: F1 derived naturally aspirated VTEC engine that pumped out 270 hp (3.0L) then 295 (3.2L), and redlined at 8000 RPM which very few cars could replicate at the time. Mind you other cars had 300+ hp like the 300ZX-T and Supra but those were turbos and didn't rev as high as the VTEC. This engine basically revolutionized how small displacement engines could generate lots of horsepower without boost.
 
acura-nsx-02-1.jpg


acura-nsx-03-1.jpg
 
Honda/Acura has had terrible timing with this car. The final production version was first shown when the spotlight was squarely on the new Ford GT and now the media reviews will have to compete with the Mazda RX-Vision's press attention.
 
As a lifelong fan of the first NSX, I must say the weight ruins everything for this car. I don't mind the styling, I don't mind the hybrid AWD, I don't mind the price hike, but weight is just performance/efficiency killer. No excuse really. I think they are trying to go the GT-R route of using heavy weight to generate grip instead of aero in the interests of usability, but you can't beat physics. Even with torque vectoring you will still feel that heft.

When I think of the original NSX, there are 3 things that defines it in my mind:
1) Pure analog driver's car
2) Everyday usability
3) Ability to punch way above what its performance numbers suggest

This new car is definitely not #1. It satisfies #2 and maybe #3. In terms of cutting edge technology, compared to the competition it's really not doing anything as groundbreaking as the old one. As an everyday supercar, it's not the only one anymore. In a nutshell, it's a great car on its own, but compared to its competitors it's so-so. Kinda like Gran Turismo games now.
 
Last edited:
Honda/Acura has had terrible timing with this car. The final production version was first shown when the spotlight was squarely on the new Ford GT and now the media reviews will have to compete with the Mazda RX-Vision's press attention.
That's just a concept car, to be fair. Road tests and concept cars tend to occupy different spaces in car magazines.
 
-> ...
They should've made the HSV-10 instead :P
^ As an Acura dedicated car, while this should be an exclusive Honda product (without the EV-doodads & AWD).

-> Imagine, this should've been the Acura ARX:

spied-acura-nsx-front-three-quarter-view.jpg

acura_nsx_lars_1.jpg
1305305839_new-honda-nsx-rear.jpg


:indiff:

-> Isn't it obvious? That the NSX had a similar case of GT5 when it was launched? Think about it!
 
This can be an arguement about : is this really an NSX? The way the RX Vision may or may not be(come) an RX-7.

To me, this isn't an "NSX". Yet, I don't think anyone cares what it's named.
 
Back