10th gen Civic, Si / Type R coming to US
04-13-2015, 09:09 PM
#111
Jonboy you're missing the point. Given hondas track record as of late puerile remain skeptical about honda actually being able to deliver a performance car, unless you think a six speed tl is as fun to drive as a bmw which you have said something to the effect of. The fact, per you, that they had to scrap it a few times shows a) the competition was better or b) they didn't have faith in it given market conditions, both of which bolsters the point. The gtr, and probably more to the point, and the lfa cane out during a shaky economy. The i8, la ferrari, p1, abd the porsche hybrid managed to come out from rumor to fruition in less time than the nsx. Hell honda had to keep rumoring it to inject done excitement into the brand image. But it didn't matter, per you sales are great therefore appeasing a small niche isn't important, and bit because they can't do it but because it didn't make financial sense. Points you've made. Yet here they are, making the nsx, something apparently they have been trying to produce due to one excuse (market wasn't right, they wanted to stay from scratch again abd again because they want to more perfecter). Funny, thought they didn't care about potential money losers. Anyway I'm sure you'll semantically argue this whole thing Because all of us multiple honda owners and enthusiasts are all honda bashers. That may be true, But i know I'm not a honda fanboi.
04-14-2015, 06:40 AM
#112
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k' timestamp='1428949013' post='23576158
Jonboy, you're slamming the GTR for being physically large as well as heavy. Well size is one thing, but weight is more important. There's no prize to be had for "most dense" sports car. The C7Z is significantly heavier than the C6Z due to it's motor and open top design. Done to broaden it's appeal; an unfortunate sign of the times when Chevy makes large concessions for it's hard core track model.
Remains to be seen if all the extra weight heaped onto the NSX (batteries, electric motors) is worth the trade off. I surely hope so, but I wonder. Nimbleness is one thing, but will the NSX's electronic trickery allow for it to go through track day consumables at a rate similar to a much lighter car? Fingers crossed the answer is yes.
Remains to be seen if all the extra weight heaped onto the NSX (batteries, electric motors) is worth the trade off. I surely hope so, but I wonder. Nimbleness is one thing, but will the NSX's electronic trickery allow for it to go through track day consumables at a rate similar to a much lighter car? Fingers crossed the answer is yes.
People buying $150K cars aren't worried about consumables. It's a moot point at that price point - they can afford $2500 in tires the way us "normal" sportscar owners can afford a set of $1200 tires, plus brake costs, etc, etc.
Seriously, you just keep pulling up questions to try and bash the NSX. About time you face it - you don't want it to succeed. Why try and hide behind a facade of doubt when it's obvious that you've already judged the car as a failure?
'ing do well! I was just taking issue with you calling the GTR heavy but not the new NSX, which, I don't care how you slice it, is going to be heavy if it is indeed 3700 lbs. I want this car to do well, competition improves the breed. And if this car does well it will only increase the changes (I guess) of Honda developing more sports cars again..crap most of us can afford.Honestly, I would much rather see Honda build a modern version of the original NSX (3000lbs, 300-350 hp V6, mid engine layout) instead of this techno-orgasm, but whatever. Think of a Porsche Cayman but with Honda reliability and that's exactly what I'd like. But instead we get a moonshot that most people don't give a
about.
04-14-2015, 07:14 AM
#113
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k' timestamp='1428949013' post='23576158
Jonboy, you're slamming the GTR for being physically large as well as heavy. Well size is one thing, but weight is more important. There's no prize to be had for "most dense" sports car. The C7Z is significantly heavier than the C6Z due to it's motor and open top design. Done to broaden it's appeal; an unfortunate sign of the times when Chevy makes large concessions for it's hard core track model.
Remains to be seen if all the extra weight heaped onto the NSX (batteries, electric motors) is worth the trade off. I surely hope so, but I wonder. Nimbleness is one thing, but will the NSX's electronic trickery allow for it to go through track day consumables at a rate similar to a much lighter car? Fingers crossed the answer is yes.
Remains to be seen if all the extra weight heaped onto the NSX (batteries, electric motors) is worth the trade off. I surely hope so, but I wonder. Nimbleness is one thing, but will the NSX's electronic trickery allow for it to go through track day consumables at a rate similar to a much lighter car? Fingers crossed the answer is yes.
People buying $150K cars aren't worried about consumables. It's a moot point at that price point - they can afford $2500 in tires the way us "normal" sportscar owners can afford a set of $1200 tires, plus brake costs, etc, etc.
Seriously, you just keep pulling up questions to try and bash the NSX. About time you face it - you don't want it to succeed. Why try and hide behind a facade of doubt when it's obvious that you've already judged the car as a failure?
The GTR is a GT car, grand tourer. Sure you can track it also, if you want, but that could be said about many. You want a "track" car, go buy an Atom and shut up.
An AWD, twin turbocharged monster isn't what I would pick for a track car. Hell I wouldn't pick an AWD car for a track car but I sure would for a daily, or road car, it would be my #1 choice for all weather conditions. I really admire the GTR for what Nissan was able to achieve and have dismissed all the hate since day 1. I've driven one, would love to own one, just don't want to spend my money on a car of that price, any car, and tie up my $. No thanks. If it was 50k I'd have one in the garage.
The NSX being heavy-er, I don't have a problem with it. They are just extremely late to the party and so late, well I hope this car is a hybrid powerhouse, for their sakes. And even if I prefer an AWD car, and the Focus RS will probably be my next purchase, I will drive the Type R, if available, and hope it does well in the marketplace because more choices the better. I'm very tired of nothing but cookie cutter choices in the marketplace (Sedans only).
04-14-2015, 07:49 AM
#114
Of course I want it to 'ing do well! I was just taking issue with you calling the GTR heavy but not the new NSX, which, I don't care how you slice it, is going to be heavy if it is indeed 3700 lbs. I want this car to do well, competition improves the breed. And if this car does well it will only increase the changes (I guess) of Honda developing more sports cars again..crap most of us can afford.
'ing do well! I was just taking issue with you calling the GTR heavy but not the new NSX, which, I don't care how you slice it, is going to be heavy if it is indeed 3700 lbs. I want this car to do well, competition improves the breed. And if this car does well it will only increase the changes (I guess) of Honda developing more sports cars again..crap most of us can afford.
Honestly, I would much rather see Honda build a modern version of the original NSX (3000lbs, 300-350 hp V6, mid engine layout) instead of this techno-orgasm, but whatever. Think of a Porsche Cayman but with Honda reliability and that's exactly what I'd like. But instead we get a moonshot that most people don't give a about.
about.
That said, you'll like what Honda comes out with at the end of 2017 (if development plans continue)...
04-14-2015, 08:57 AM
#115
Yeah let's hope.
Seriously though, why couldn't they just sell is a midengined sports car for $40k and change? Poor man's Cayman/Evora. Yeah it would require a bespoke chassis, but the powertrain already exists.
Seriously though, why couldn't they just sell is a midengined sports car for $40k and change? Poor man's Cayman/Evora. Yeah it would require a bespoke chassis, but the powertrain already exists.
04-14-2015, 09:46 AM
#116
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Somewhere in Oregon
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the 1st time since the early 90's that I don't have a Honda in my garage. Honda created a very dynamic car at a great price point back in the day, even a lowly Civic was a'fun' car, crisp handling, sprightly performance, very grin worthy even if it wasn't a track monster. I was never one of the guys building up Civics, Crx's or 'Ludes as I never found the investment worth the gain relative to other platforms. So for me they were very practical and fun. I saw the S2K as a 'real' sports car, an evolution of all that made Honda fun. The aftermarket embraced it, the racing community couldn't laugh it off as just a 'Honda', when I bought mine they were besting 987's in autocross. The performance gains are phenomenal with the S2k, I'm not sure of another platform that takes to modding so eagerly within 'everymans' budget. The rest of the car world 'woke' up during the end of the S2k years, by the time production ended it was a tired, tested and bested platform. You can't take anything away from what the S2K represented, it's still a phenomenal care to me. However I'm not blindly loyal to anything, if something comes along that lights a fire under my butt I'm intrigued. Toward the end of the 2005-2010 time period, Honda didn't do anything except regurgitate a well worn chassis. Think of the possibilities Honda ignored by dropping the S2K, they had momentum on their side, they had the community on their side, the S2K shouldn't have sat static. Honda missed a huge opportunity by letting everyone else catch up and pass them by in the performance world. Once you've been bypassed it takes 10x more effort to re-engage the market, a lot of us have moved on, other car manufacturers are continually investing in performance platforms, Honda decided it would embrace it's core market, the commuters. As a commuter car they've even been bypassed. I think I represent a lot of the market that's not pulled by brand but by innovation, quality, dynamics and technology. Where does Honda fit in that scenario? For me, it doesn't. The classic case of a producer sitting on it's laurels thinking that branding will sell anything they make. I really don't see anything in Honda's future that seems like a 'better' platform than the many already out there. The SI/TR is going to have an uphill battle with the GTI/RS/STI or even an ST. Like a Honda it will be overpriced compared to the domestic offerings and won't offer anything better than we're already seeing. My wife was in love with her Odyssey, then she loved her Pilot, now she's pleased as punch with her Expedition and thinks Pilots are ugly (not my doing, I always thought they were ugly). My daughter replaced her Accord w/a 4Runner, my son replaced his Civic with an Legacy. I didn't have anything to do with that, I'm sorta liking Fords these days. I see it as a market trend, all that Honda used to be everyone else is but better. All one guys opinion obviously 
04-14-2015, 10:01 AM
#117
Because Honda is incapable of going toe to toe with any affordable performance car. The fact that they had to scrap the plans of the NSX shows they have a hard time even in the 100k+ market, a market where restrictions and budget are less limited since you're justifying price through desirability, not value (see even us poor folks understand this). Perhaps this new NSX and CTR will change course, but gosh darnit given Honda's tendency of saying what they can/going to do but not actually doing it, color me skeptical. I'm surprised that they're even doing this since, per Jonboy, Honda is about sales and not appeasing enthusiasts who make up a trivial amount of the marketplace. The 40-70k market is a highly competitive market when it comes to confection vehicles, there isn't anything they can build off of or use that can compete in either performance or desirability. Honda's wheelhouse isn't in the 300+hp realm.
But back on topic, I do wonder if this new CTR will be Honduh reliable, which is why I'd be more excited about a k series type of motor in a CRZ than a ultra extreme turbo fwd hot hatch. Yes it'll probably be faster than its competition, but will it be a better value and Honduh reliable? Color me skeptical again. But a CRZ with a k series would be very affordable, very reliable, decently quick and therefore a hoot to drive, a true modern CRX. It would be a perfect weekday DD that could be rewarding going through a mountain pass road or at a local autocross event. It's unusual because what I described is more Honda's style which actually resonates with enthusiasts like me.
But time will tell.
04-14-2015, 10:41 AM
#118
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the 1st time since the early 90's that I don't have a Honda in my garage. Honda created a very dynamic car at a great price point back in the day, even a lowly Civic was a'fun' car, crisp handling, sprightly performance, very grin worthy even if it wasn't a track monster. I was never one of the guys building up Civics, Crx's or 'Ludes as I never found the investment worth the gain relative to other platforms. So for me they were very practical and fun. I saw the S2K as a 'real' sports car, an evolution of all that made Honda fun. The aftermarket embraced it, the racing community couldn't laugh it off as just a 'Honda', when I bought mine they were besting 987's in autocross. The performance gains are phenomenal with the S2k, I'm not sure of another platform that takes to modding so eagerly within 'everymans' budget. The rest of the car world 'woke' up during the end of the S2k years, by the time production ended it was a tired, tested and bested platform. You can't take anything away from what the S2K represented, it's still a phenomenal care to me. However I'm not blindly loyal to anything, if something comes along that lights a fire under my butt I'm intrigued. Toward the end of the 2005-2010 time period, Honda didn't do anything except regurgitate a well worn chassis. Think of the possibilities Honda ignored by dropping the S2K, they had momentum on their side, they had the community on their side, the S2K shouldn't have sat static. Honda missed a huge opportunity by letting everyone else catch up and pass them by in the performance world. Once you've been bypassed it takes 10x more effort to re-engage the market, a lot of us have moved on, other car manufacturers are continually investing in performance platforms, Honda decided it would embrace it's core market, the commuters. As a commuter car they've even been bypassed. I think I represent a lot of the market that's not pulled by brand but by innovation, quality, dynamics and technology. Where does Honda fit in that scenario? For me, it doesn't. The classic case of a producer sitting on it's laurels thinking that branding will sell anything they make. I really don't see anything in Honda's future that seems like a 'better' platform than the many already out there. The SI/TR is going to have an uphill battle with the GTI/RS/STI or even an ST. Like a Honda it will be overpriced compared to the domestic offerings and won't offer anything better than we're already seeing. My wife was in love with her Odyssey, then she loved her Pilot, now she's pleased as punch with her Expedition and thinks Pilots are ugly (not my doing, I always thought they were ugly). My daughter replaced her Accord w/a 4Runner, my son replaced his Civic with an Legacy. I didn't have anything to do with that, I'm sorta liking Fords these days. I see it as a market trend, all that Honda used to be everyone else is but better. All one guys opinion obviously
Honda is still a very capable brand and a lot of followers still. Of course, other companies are starting to take their shares. I believe Honda is one of those NBA teams that can just turn on the switch when it comes playoff time and cruise their way.
Ford is really doing something right. I daily drive a Ford fusion hybrid and that car is amazing. It is not my car, its my companies, but after driving it, I am actually considering it when shopping for a car myself. Mustang, explorer. I like Ford now, which I would never expect myself to say ten years ago.
04-14-2015, 01:12 PM
#119
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Somewhere in Oregon
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, 10 years ago I wouldn't even look at Fords other than the trucks which I've always had. In my youth I was a Ford guy but that didn't last too long once I started to actually drive them. I got a '14 Focus ST to replace my TSX, then decided to do the Expedition. Both have met or exceeded our expectations, we're very happy with them. Even the Ford dealership I'm using feels more 'homey' then I ever felt at Honda. I've always had an anti-Chevy bent also (again, left over from my youth) however even those cars are pretty decent these days. Not really sure where the domestics will leave Honda but I do believe they are retaking some market share from them currently. You know what I'm finding odd, Buick has always been the 'old folks car' however lately it seems Accords and Camry's or mini-vans are the choice of the older generation these days. Maybe Honda's found they're niche there
04-15-2015, 07:09 AM
#120
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, 10 years ago I wouldn't even look at Fords other than the trucks which I've always had. In my youth I was a Ford guy but that didn't last too long once I started to actually drive them. I got a '14 Focus ST to replace my TSX, then decided to do the Expedition. Both have met or exceeded our expectations, we're very happy with them. Even the Ford dealership I'm using feels more 'homey' then I ever felt at Honda. I've always had an anti-Chevy bent also (again, left over from my youth) however even those cars are pretty decent these days. Not really sure where the domestics will leave Honda but I do believe they are retaking some market share from them currently. You know what I'm finding odd, Buick has always been the 'old folks car' however lately it seems Accords and Camry's or mini-vans are the choice of the older generation these days. Maybe Honda's found they're niche there
A little off topic, but how is the focus ST. I know the Fusion drives like a German car sometimes. At the time of my car shopping, I was fixated on Wagons, or hatchbacks. Mazda 3 was too expension IMO for what it is. Volvo V60 wagon didn't come out to the market yet. BMW & Audi wagons are too expensive for my budget. Didn't thought about the ST since I wanted a Automatic. I hope Ford make a wagon. So I picked up a 2013 TSX wagon, been great so far.