When JFK committed America to
landing a man on the moon, he
made the point that there are
some things you have to do because they
are hard, not because they represent the
path of least resistance.
Welcome to Acura’s moonshot.
With the 2017 NSX, Acura shows us
not only an amazing automobile but
also, perhaps even more important, how …
This content is available for GRM+ members and Grassroots Motorsports magazine subscribers only.
Read the rest of the story
My father in law took us too honda's open house at there anna plant when they were showing this car too the employees. Not usually a honda guy but that car and some of the tech involved is awesome.
Meh. I'll wait for the type-r model...
Whenever I spend time around an original NSX I fall in love all over again with those cars. But for some reason, nothing about this new NSX moves me one iota. Perhaps I'll have to spend some time with it in person?
Yeah, I'm also in the boat of cosmetic meh-ness.
Interesting that many of the early reviews also said it wasn't that great to drive, and certainly not as a performance car. When I read the article in the magazine, I couldn't help but wonder why it was so different from what I had read elsewhere. Maybe there's an option or different tires that is just that critical to have?
gearheadE30 wrote:
Yeah, I'm also in the boat of cosmetic meh-ness.
Interesting that many of the early reviews also said it wasn't that great to drive, and certainly not as a performance car. When I read the article in the magazine, I couldn't help but wonder why it was so different from what I had read elsewhere. Maybe there's an option or different tires that is just that critical to have?
I just don't get it, either. The capabilities and composure of the NSX are beyond reproach, but for some reason it gets a bad rap from some reviewers as "sterile" or even boring. But a refuse to believe that you have to sacrifice some great comfort or functionality in the name of "character" for a supercar to be super. In today's modern world there's no reason a supercar can't be, well... a Honda.
I wouldn't say it's a competitor to the 458 but I would say it's a competitor to the i8.
I was just kind of surprised at the weight!
Wait... did hte article say it was 3800lbs? 573hp and 3800lbs? Sounds like a Camaro ZL1 only 5 times as much. I don't get it. At the price point of the old NSX ($80k), that would be impressive-ish. But at $180k? It sounds just like the old NSX. Too much money, not enough performance. What's the new Z06? 3400lbs with 650hp for $80k? For that extra $100k you could have a FLEET of hybrids for the daily commute/crosscountry trek.
Once again, Honda has jumped the shark IMO.
gearheadE30 wrote:
Yeah, I'm also in the boat of cosmetic meh-ness.
Interesting that many of the early reviews also said it wasn't that great to drive, and certainly not as a performance car. When I read the article in the magazine, I couldn't help but wonder why it was so different from what I had read elsewhere. Maybe there's an option or different tires that is just that critical to have?
There's a lot of things that make it just "meh" I htink for a lot of people. We have Viper ACR's, Z06's, GT350R mustangs, even Ford GT's for less money with more performance and character. Why spend twice the cashola to get less car? Sure, it has electronic gee whizzery. I'm sure its composed as a daily driver. But aren't there MUCH better options for a quarter of the price? IT's decently quick as a track car, but again, aren't there much better options for half the price?
So the question becomes: What is the point? At this price point, it doesn't do anything better than anything else for half the money. Where does it fit?
EDIT: with that said, I think it is a beautiful car and there's some neat electronic gee-whizzery that I hope makes it down the line. I just think it's way over weight and waaaaaaayyyyy over priced.
The original NSX didn't have a 570 McLaren sitting there at the same price point
That's why I said this is an i8 competitor and not a 458 competitor - this car is a fancy gadget for technophiles first and a performance car second, much like the i8. It also costs a cool 100k less than the 458. The people who want an NSX or i8 would be bored with the crude simplicity of a Corvette or Viper or any of the other cars that make way more sense in dollars-for-performance.
Poor Acura, they spend all this $$ on developing a new supercar, and then make the critical mistake of launching it at the same time as the new Ford GT.
When both cars were displayed in Monterey--next to one another, most of us hadn't seen either yet. The Ford display was packed--- totally mobbed with people oooing and ahhing. The car was a sensation-- amazing, groundbreaking, breathtaking.
I think there were maybe 3 people checking the NSX out. It just was blown away by the Ford.
These are ego-gratification machines. How they look is #1, how they perform is secondary. (especially when they ALL perform amazingly well) I agree with what the others have said. Although this may be a wonderful car----- man, the competition is brutal out there. If I had $200K, or whatever these things cost, the NSX wouldn't' be on my list. It just doesn't do it for me aesthetically--- and for cars like this, that's a big deal.
So, I just went to the build it page. To get XM radio is $3300. You know, something that the majority of the cheapest of the econoboxes now offer standard. Yeah.... Shark has been jumped.
Impressive on paper, and I'm sure the Honda quality is top-notch in every way. I think it's an attractive car, but kind of looks like everything else out there in this class, to be honest. The old NSX didn't look like ANYTHING that was out at that time. It stood apart stylistically and yeah $80k was a lot of money then, but even with inflation it seems to me that would be more equivalent to $120k these days, not $180k. The old NSX price was at least something that a "normal" person could conceivably afford at some point. At $180k, I don't think that's the case at all.
Still, neat tech. But as mentioned, I don't see the appeal of it when you can get a Z06 or something for half the price with the same general performance.
Acura should have put their development into an affordable, fun car like the Integra/RSX. Something that is affordable to people who think of Acuras as a "high-end car." People who pay $180k for cars think of Ferraris and Porsches as high-end....not Acuras.
That said, looks like a better deal than the on-paper comparable performace (and WAY UGLY) Lexus LF-A, which costs twice as much.
In reply to irish44j:
the 1990 actually came out as a $60k msrp, or about $109k now.
In my opinion this new NSX is the ugliest supercar on the market, hands down. A mishmash of lines and angles and holes. 'Impressive on paper' doesn't amount to much of a value proposition--what would draw a buyer spend $170,000 on this car over anything else?
I think that it should be celebrated that if you're looking to spend 180-200k on a new sportscar there are close to a dozen options that a buyer doing their due diligence needs to sample.
I think it's a decent-looking car...not great but not bad. This is another Great Divider like the new Prius and Nissan Juke it seems. All cars I think are OK but many think are hideous.
Most of you don't understand that the technology on board this car is the source of the allure to the technophile buyer. I can understand it, I just like speed more than cool high-tech bits so I wouldn't pay for it 
irish44j wrote:
That said, looks like a better deal than the on-paper comparable performace (and WAY UGLY) Lexus LF-A, which costs twice as much.
You shut your dirty, whore mouth! 
The problem is that nobody wants an exotic supercar with a functional climate control system.
nderwater wrote:
what would draw a buyer spend $170,000 on this car over anything else?
The same thing that has been drawing Honda and Acura buyers for over a decade "Because its a Honda". What they don't understand is people with that mindset don't have $170k to blow on a car like this.
I will go on record as saying "This thing will flop like a fat guy in a belly-flop contest where the winner gets cake."
