The first gen NSX was highly praised and revered, but the second gen NSX not so much, why so?

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

The new one is too expensive and heavy. But that a problem all sports cars face. It’s impossible with today’s safety and emissions regulations to recreate the light nimble and simple / easily tunable cars of the 90s. Not to mention the cost… the people that really want these cars (usually young male before having a family) very rarely have the disposable income to get such a car. And by the time they have the money, they are too old for such a car. It’s a catch 22. The demographic that really want these cars and the demographic that can afford them rarely intersect. And this bitterness come out as complaints…

[-]

Administrative-Round@reddit

Please name the emissions regulations that limited the NSX but allow for the GT 350 etc….

[-]

Studio_Life@reddit

I mean it’s not IMPOSSIBLE. I daily a Miata that’s super tunable, has a 2400 lb weight, and is obtainable.

[-]

bigdogdame92@reddit

Yeah but is there really any other examples that are also cheap?

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

No it’s not…

A Miata new costs ~35k €. The average 25yr old, if it has started working barely makes 12k€/yr net. Just saving up to buy it the average young dude needs 4-5 years and that’s without even eating. So no it’s not affordable. Even an engineer that makes 20k€/yr would seriously struggle to save up 35k€ in a sensible time span.

[-]

eidrag@reddit

uhh have you checked minimum wage on your area? I just checked for UK, you're supposedly minimum wage 25k, add that if you're doing fulltime jobs with experience/certs.

And above poster comparing new nsx vs miata, miata price doesn't jump as much compared to nsx old vs new

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

Yes I have. Min wage in Greece is 880€ gross / 743€ net. That’s per month. x14 thats 12.300€ gross / 10.402 net. And the vast majority of the workers get only that. The median net is about 1000€/m. Even and engineer with years of experience will barley hit 2000€/m. That’s the reality…

[-]

mar78217@reddit

What does one drive in Greece? (My daughter aspires to get the hell out of the U.S. and move to Greece and live there forever. I'm not sure how good the job market is for an engineer from America.

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

If you make peace with your self that you’ll be getting at most 1/4 what you’d make on the US. Granted the cost of living is lower, bit still in the end your disposable income will be lower. So if you have grand aspiration about building wealth, then staying to the US is the better choice.

That said, if you can make 20k €/yr (which is quite reasonable for an engineer), with the current cost of living it’s very feasible to rent an apartment alone, have a car and general be very solid middle class.

As what to people drive… Mainly small - mid size hatchbacks. And the last decade a surge of small crossovers. Mind that the average age of privately owned cars in the country is 17 yr old (the highest in the EU), so you see a lot of 20+ yr old shitboxes unfortunately driving around. Also the vast vast majority of cars have engine sizes of <2 L (any car with an engine size of >2 is considered a luxury car and get hit with a ridiculous annual tax). I’d say the most prevalent cars are mid size hatchbacks like VW Golf, Opel Astra, Ford Focus, Seat Leon, Renault Megane, Hyundai i30 etc. Also if they are diesel they are preferred (diesel is ~30% cheaper than gasoline). Insurance is quite cheap for EU and very cheap for US standards. Fuel is very expensive, on par and even more expensive that other EU countries with much higher disposable income, so for someone coming from the US, it would feel like buying gold. Also the tolls on the highways are quite expensive. If you have a relatively efficient diesel car, it’s not unreasonable the toll cost to match your fuel cost on a long trip.

Anything else you’d like to know ?

[-]

mar78217@reddit

She doesn't want to own a car at all, but I don't know how feasible that is in Greece. I know, overall, Europe has much better public transit than a vast majority of the US.

Almost everyone in our ?"Neighborhood"? (I don't know what to call it, I grew up in a rural small town that was far smaller than the piece of St. Louis, MO we live in called Dutchtown.) Everyone here lives in 120 year old homes and drives 20+ years old cars

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

It’s quite hard to not have your own car/bike. Unless you live in the center of Athena or Thessaloniki and the metro system has you covered. But then you have to live in bit city which is another problem of it’s self. The intercity bus network is extremely developed, efficiently and quite cheap so traveling from city to city is not an issue. But suburban traveling and commutes? There you need a car/bike. City buses are mediocre at best and non existent at worst. And most places have only buses with no other means of transport. So yeah it’s pretty car centric country.

[-]

mar78217@reddit

That is what I thought.

[-]

eidrag@reddit

ah you're from not 1st world countries, hi from 3rd world country. Imported Cars here have 100% tax on top, so new mx5 is like 12 year of minimal wage lmao.

I can't buy those sport cars, but what I can do is buy cheap car, enjoy cheap mod and drive hella lot of 'em. If I want speed, motorcycle are cheap way to get to 300kmh

[-]

mar78217@reddit

We (the US) are no longer a first world country either. Not sure where we fall. We have many of the richest people in the world, and many more of the poorest dying in the street because they cannot afford medical care. I know people who died at home to keep their family.

[-]

slamallama@reddit

I do not argue the factual basis of what you're saying but no one is basing pricing on whatever a floor sweeper in Athens earns.

Life is deeply unfair and here's an example but it's not Mazda's job to make their cars affordable to you. Frankly in the entire history of Greece I would be shocked if minimum wage earned enough to purchase a new sports car

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

Why are those numbers so low

In the US, Miatas are affordable

[-]

mar78217@reddit

In the U.S. new cars are not affordable for most people. But you can get a used Miata on the cheap.

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

but US has high incomes and low cost for cars/tax which makes getting cars a lot easier compared to other countries

[-]

rickdapaddyo@reddit

I mean not really. Most Americans don't buy a brand new car in their entire lives.

[-]

Studio_Life@reddit

I daily a Miata. It cost less than a civic. I know a few other middle class folks like myself that have done the same.

[-]

Ok_Elephant6640@reddit

Not for a new one. Base trim Civic is $25,790 and a base trim Miata is $31,360 in US dollars. If you live somewhere with severe weather, rain or snow, most people will take the Civic. A Corolla today is $24,395 and that includes 2yrs/25k miles free maintenance and road side assistance.

The cheapest new car (us) is a 5 speed manual Nissan Versa for $18,385. That’s roughly$5,000 more than the 2019 model….

[-]

Rapom613@reddit

Just because most people would take a civic, does not mean the Miata cannot be a daily driver. I have a customer that uses his GT3 touring daily, including in snow with proper tires.

For many people (myself included) having a cool/fun car is a bit of a priority, rather than simply the cheapest car, I know a few people who’s car payments exceed their house payments. Is it smart? No, not at all, but it sure makes them happy

[-]

mar78217@reddit

I mean, I agree. So I drive a 2002 Civic Si.

[-]

Nstraclassic@reddit

Civics go up to $35k for higher trims. $50k for the type r which is what most miata buyers would compare it to

[-]

Ok_Elephant6640@reddit

That’s weird trying to compare a 35k rwd with a 48k fwd.

[-]

Nstraclassic@reddit

I mean they both appeal to the same type of person..

[-]

ZenithRepairman@reddit

No it doesnt? Miata sport sits at 30k, 35k for a grand touring, civic starts at 25k.

[-]

Rapom613@reddit

I would imagine someone is comparing a civic si to a Miata, not a base civic

[-]

stu54@reddit

I drive a Civic cause the base model Miata cost 35% more than the base model Civic in 2019.

[-]

DrJupeman@reddit

Odd that this comment is downvoted. Reddit being Reddit.

[-]

Nstraclassic@reddit

The average spent on a new car is about $50k. Total mixed average (new and used) is around $33k which is the price of a brand new miata. Very afforable especially if youre buying used

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

A lot of young folks daily their miatas

The well off oldish people get the fancy miata, the boxster

[-]

Flyinmanm@reddit

In the UK I see anyone from 20 to 70 driving MX5s (as they're called here) round mine.

Not many 30-45 year old family dudes though.

I wanted a MK1 as my first car in the mid 2000s but it was out of my price range and was 'convinced' by others it wasn't practical. I mean they were right. The fuel economy and insurance would have killed it for me as I went back to uni in 2006 and could never have afforded to run a relatively fuel hungry car like that Vs the 40-50 mpg 1.1l Peugeot I ended up with plus I did fill the back of my car regularly moving round 'stuff' which the MX5 never could.

[-]

Furryyyy@reddit

That's not the average income of a young person in a fully developed country. From what I remember, the average is ~30-50k euros for countries like Germany or around 30k pounds for the UK. In America, it's about $50k USD. I'm a bit over a year out of college in the US and make $65k, which is why I bought a GR86 for $33k OTD.

Obviously, income varies greatly among people in their 20s, but in more developed nations it's not unrealistic to be able to afford a cheap new sports car early in your career.

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

I know it really depends on the country....

Im in Greece. Its considered a developed country by all measurable standards. But compared to other developed countries its one of the poorest in terms of purchasing power and disposable income. Im an engineeri with 5 yr of exp and im at the \~20k/yr mark. And that considered very good cause most of my peers (which are not in engineering) make about half that. And the GR86 costs 57k € here. So even for me (which im a bit above average in income) it would take me over a decade to save that much.

[-]

bernardfarquart@reddit

Europoor numbers don’t count

[-]

Studio_Life@reddit

I mean my miata cost less then a Honda Civic. So if a Miata doesn’t count as an “affordable car”, nothing does.

Also no, the average 25 year old isn’t bringing home $16,000 a year lol. Wages here are bad but not THAT bad. And the ones that ARE living off that little aren’t shopping for new cars at all, let alone a “tuner car”.

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

You make the assumption that I’m in the US. I clearly wrote €. The US is on a different world in terms of how easy / cheap is to own a car.

[-]

GigaChav@reddit

Oh, ok. I guess nobody buys Miatas because you said so. The ones everyone sees all over roads everywhere must be mass hallucination.

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

Im not in the US. Which happens to be probably the best country in terms of car ownership in regards to how much disposable income you have and how cheap cars & fuel are. I’m judging based on my local situation.

[-]

GigaChav@reddit

Oh, right. How silly of me to assume based on objective observation that Mazda does in fact sell tons of Miatas worldwide.

[-]

KennyGaming@reddit

Those are truly poverty wages in the USA and you’re ignoring (at least in US context) the prevalence of auto financing

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

Im not in the US I’m judging based on my local situation.

[-]

Busterlimes@reddit

Yes, much of the US is living in poverty, welcome to the show.

[-]

Busterlimes@reddit

Those cars were never marketed to 20 year olds so I dont know why you are even bringing that up.

[-]

40thAE@reddit

I would also lump the mk8 GTI into “no it’s not”. It’s the same power to weight ratio as the ND RF. My 40th AE has 1” wider wheels, better suspension and seats from the factory than my RF did, plus electronic LSD.

It’s also more comfortable.

Before anyone says “yeah but FWD” go watch Misha Charodins love letter to the Civic.

“But it’s a hatch back it’s got a huge trunk in the back”

Meanwhile the cayman and boxter have two trunks.

“The GTI struts not shocks lmao poser”

So does the Cayman.

[-]

Theyseemetheyhatin@reddit

How do you like your gti?

[-]

jibsand@reddit

It’s impossible with today’s safety and emissions regulations to recreate the light nimble and simple / easily tunable cars of the 90s.

Laughs in Miata

[-]

revocer@reddit (OP)

If I may ask, what does the Gen 2 NSX have as mandatory, but the Gen 1 NSX can get away without.

[-]

lemmeEngineer@reddit

30+ years of evolution in safety and emissions tech.

The old nsx has to comply with the 90s regulation. The new nsx has to comply with today’s regulations. Today’s as in the time it’s sold. That means compared to the 90s…

Way more cruomple zones and structural rigidity. Many passive and active safety devices that didn’t/barely exist in the 90s. And a hybrid powertrain that also adds a lot of mass.

[-]

Bare_arms@reddit

In a lot of ways the c8 corvette is close to the idea of the original nsx. Simple high reving engine. No turbos. Rwd

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

The normal c8 has a really low limit for a sports car at 6.5k

It’s missing good looks and a manual

[-]

Bare_arms@reddit

Zo6 revs to 8600 thats pretty incredible. I just saw one on the street and talked to the owner. The nsx only reved to 8000. They have sold more zo6 c8 corvettes alone than all of the first generation nsx 1990-2005. Pretty incredible

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

yup the z06 version of the c8 is the only one that stands out. been on track with a few and they do sound great. just cant get over how awful it looks and no manual

[-]

drewthebrave@reddit

Great point. I think the Porsche Cayman is another contender for spiritual successor to the original NSX. I remember rumors on a Mazda mid engine sports car with Miata DNA - that could be an interesting development in affordable sports cars

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

When NA1 nsx came out, it only had driver airbag. Didn’t have passenger or side airbags like the gen 2 nsx

[-]

StarsandMaple@reddit

Stricter safety standards and emissions.

1st gen is less doesn’t have to adhere to much in comparison.

[-]

aruca-type-s@reddit

I have a 2022 type s. I don’t know what the hell you are talking about it being too heavy. Maybe drive one instead of looking at pictures in magazines.

[-]

Rapom613@reddit

Type s weight - 3200 lbs, 91 NSX weight - 3000 lbs.

Compare yours to its predecessor, the DC5, which weighs about 2600 lbs depending on year, and you are looking at a 23% increase in weight. It has also had a roughly 60% increase in power, but they only helps it accelerate, not stop or turn

Cars have gotten a lot heavier over the years, and while suspension does a great job masking it, there are still plenty of situations that you feel the weight,

[-]

aruca-type-s@reddit

Drive one. Then come back and tell me it’s too heavy. So ridiculous. DM me if you are in the Midwest. You can drive mine.

[-]

PCho222@reddit

I've driven a gen 2.5 nsx. It drove like a cross between a base C8 and rental i8 my friend once had. Understeered like hell in the canyons even worse than the C8 on stock alignment and it made worse noises.

Wasn't a Type S but reading up on what the S improved on I'd still take a Z06 11 times out of 10, be faster/more nimble/better sounding and pocket the rest. That's the crux of the car's problem; there's too much competition these days to settle for milquetoast that loses half its value in a few years.

[-]

Rapom613@reddit

And at that price point you’ve got a lot of interesting options. 240-300k as of this writing per cars.com (too lazy to look anywhere else)

That gets you into gt3/gt3rs, a few McLarens, not to mention Lamborghini and Ferrari.

There are just so many better options at that price

[-]

Rapom613@reddit

Have driven handfuls of them (manager at a large dealer group) and yes, it’s good, but yes I can feel the weight. Not saying it’s too heavy to work, or that it’s a bad car, just that it’s heavier than prior models, and with that weight comes some design changes and compromises.

A 992 feels heavier than a 996 or 997, even though it is also basically velcroed to the ground. When managed properly the weight isn’t the end of the world, but it does make for a different driving experience

[-]

stjarnalux@reddit

I drove a gen 2 NSX for a few years before trading up... It's heavy on paper but it absolutely does not drive heavy. I had so much fun in that car.

[-]

B5_S4@reddit

To add to this, the original NSX was cheaper, more reliable, and as performant as the Ferrari's of the day. The new NSX does the same thing, but there were no true hypercars in the 90s, if you look at the new NSX next to a McLaren P1, Porsche 918, or LaFerrari, you see the value. The problem is when you look at other $180k cars you can get the same or greater performance, so the value proposition is lost. No one is cross shopping NSXs and P1s, so the NSX doesn't sell lol.

[-]

all_worcestershire@reddit

There’s plenty of easily tunable cars. They added a hybrid system to the NSX that’s what weighted it down.

[-]

Busterlimes@reddit

Didn't know the average 22 year old bought the first gen NSX. . .

[-]

Aggravating-Ear-3729@reddit

I had one, car is gorgeous imo, much better looking than the turbo s I was deciding against. Its a fantastic GT car, not so much a sports car. It was comfortable, easy to drive, enough power and quiet. As a sports car it sucked, steering feedback was garbage, exhaust was too quiet, and wasn't enough power for the weight. The car had no fun factor. The interior is also very Acura, i liked it but for a car in this price range it needs to look better than a 40k SUV. If they released it 500lbs lighter and not a hybrid it would have a been a much better car.

[-]

51line_baccer@reddit

It looked stupider'n fuck

[-]

brownroush@reddit

I forget the second gen existed

[-]

icemonsoon@reddit

The original only became popular after it was discontinued.

Its usability also made it less special and the Japanese gentlemans agreement works fine with a turbocharged underated hp engine not so much with a peaky naturally aspirated

[-]

Benderbluss@reddit

Right? When it was launched, I just remember everybody reading the torque specs, chuckling under their breath, and turning the page.

When I saw The Wolf driving one in Pulp Fiction, I thought of it as a rare miss in a movie that new what cool was otherwise.

[-]

icemonsoon@reddit

A six cylinder supercar made by a not flashy brand was always going to struggle.

Nobody bought the lotus evora either which is basically the same recipe

[-]

ajm91730@reddit

Always bothered me that he offered to take 4 people in a 2 seat car.

[-]

sohcgt96@reddit

That's the thing. While it was revered as an awesome track car and driver's car, the reality is it sold very poorly. It was expensive for its segment and had significantly less power than anything else in its price range. The awesome looks weren't enough to make up for it.

[-]

phatmatt593@reddit

“It”s 30 minutes away. I’ll be there in 10.” Good coffee.

[-]

revocer@reddit (OP)

What do you mean Japanese gentlemen’s agreement?

[-]

Successful_Ad_9707@reddit

Japanese companies had a general agreement that their performance cars would not exceed 276hp.

[-]

revocer@reddit (OP)

Why was that?

[-]

BoldNewBranFlakes@reddit

Important thing to note was the agreement was to only list the car’s specs having no more than 276hp. Some cars had more horsepower but due to the agreement it wasn’t disclosed.

[-]

icemonsoon@reddit

Turbos make it easy to hit x power , bmw m naturally aspirated engines were always down on the official power rating then up on power when they went turbo

[-]

Novogobo@reddit

to reduce vehicular mayhem on the streets of japan. CEOs thought it was antisocial to sell products to the public that would inevitably result in gruesome crashes.

[-]

solus_riparius@reddit

There was concern, less with the NSX and more with the turbo engines in the RX-7, Supra, and Skyline, that the horsepower race was going to lead to government regulations capping horsepower. So the Japanese manufacturers all agreed to a voluntary cap in an effort to keep a potentially more restrictive legal cap from being put in place.

[-]

Successful_Ad_9707@reddit

To keep things competitive with a level playing field.

[-]

cuminabox74@reddit

The new one didn’t know what it wanted to be. It had too much future tech for one, and two didn’t do a good job invoking the original’s design or spirit.

For example, look at that new tribute to the McLaren F1 that Gordon Murray just built. People are going apeshit over it and rightly so. It doesn’t have 6000 hp or any hybrid systems, or forced induction or this or that. It’s just a fully legitimate modern take on the legendary and iconic McLaren F1. Had Honda/Acura basically just copied that approach to the original NSX, they would have had a banger.

[-]

Powerful_Relative_93@reddit

The speedtail exists which is an F1 derivative. It’s just not street legal in the US

[-]

Imtherealwaffle@reddit

Disagree on #2. I think the new car was 100% built in the spirit of the old one.

The purpose (so they say) of the first nsx was to make a sportscar that offered the experience established sports/supercars at a lower cost, with better reliability while being more liveable.

And the first car also had some "future technologies" like an aluminum unibody vvt, electronic stability control etc.

Fast forward to 2016/17 and they made a relatively affordable hybrid, awd, dct, supercar that was also very liveable. Plus some new manufacturing techniques like additive manufacturing and ablation casting And again, at the time, this kind of setup was otherwise only available on the holy trinity so $1m+ cars. And only 5-6 years later did other brands start making entry level hybrid sports and supercars.

Obviously the car was kind of a letdown on debut because it was heavy, not really faster or more exciting than all the other entry level supercars, unlike the original nsx which was well received. But i think the new car had the same ethos as the old one. If they had built a car just like the original nsx in 2016 then it wouldnt really have been true to the name imo.

[-]

aruca-type-s@reddit

I have a 2022 type S. It very much knows what it wants to be.

[-]

AcrobaticAmoeba8158@reddit

I had a 91, it was a well engineered boring car. I've never missed it. Elise was the same. Too much hype by people who've never owned them. I enjoyed my Fiesta ST more than either. Bring on the hate, lol.

[-]

Ok-Bill3318@reddit

Two words: Design focus.

Some cars have it. NSX gen1 had it. New one does not.

[-]

jonatroy@reddit

Agreed. The new one seemed more like a marketing exercise than anything else.

The chrome bit on the front was appalling, only added for cohesiveness with the rest of the lineup even though it and the chrome handles do not belong on a modern supercar.

The Type S fixed some of it but the damage was done.

[-]

aruca-type-s@reddit

Hilarious.

[-]

revocer@reddit (OP)

Fascinating take. You could very well be right. TBH, I was expecting a car that looked similar to the original NSX, just modernized, but we got something totally different.

[-]

PrinceRicard@reddit

Hot take: Senna never touched it and it doesn't have pop ups.

Probably: cars have usually got heavier and less responsive through the ages - another example, people love the E46 M3, but I rarely see someone who's drove an E36 say the newer one is better.

[-]

Rapom613@reddit

There is also a big difference between a euro e36 and a USDM E36, the us car was neutered

[-]

PrinceRicard@reddit

Very true. Basically a 328i.

[-]

revocer@reddit (OP)

It’s so crazy how they got heavier. You would think they would get lighter through time.

[-]

JollyGreenGigantor@reddit

You should look up how light a lot of the American steel muscle cars are.

[-]

KeeganY_SR-UVB76@reddit

Also how small they are. Even the luxobarges of the time are short (in height) and narrow compared to modern cars. They're just long.

[-]

JollyGreenGigantor@reddit

Full legroom in the backseat and a big enough trunk to sleep in

[-]

GhostriderFlyBy@reddit

I got to drive an E36, E46, E90, F80, and G87 all in the same weekend on track. By far the E36 was the most exhilarating.

[-]

GasOnFire@reddit

How would you stack rank them?

[-]

glm409@reddit

On the right track, the E30 M3 was more exhilarating than the E36, but I think the E36 M3 Sedan is one of the best daily drivers I've ever owned.

[-]

mruns@reddit

Totally agree, it’s such a wonderfully balanced car. I daily drove mine for 5 years

[-]

GhostriderFlyBy@reddit

I don’t doubt it. My takeaway was that light weight is really what makes a car fun.

[-]

glm409@reddit

The E30 was also a fabulous autocross car. Whenever I took someone for a ride-along, they couldn't believe how quickly it could transition from one corner to the next and the brakes. Some of the best comments describing the ride were, "I think I'm going to puke, that's crazier than the'Wild Mouse rollercoaster'" and that it had "Boat Anchors for brakes." If you ever get a chance to drive one, do it.

[-]

clydetorrez@reddit

On a track, sure. As a daily driver though, the E46 was an improvement IMO.

[-]

GhostriderFlyBy@reddit

I am inclined to agree. I love my E46.

[-]

delicate10drills@reddit

According to reviewers:

Old one- analog & raw

New one- digital & overly refined

According to styling:

Old one- tastefully gorgeous

New one- childishly tacky

[-]

lumpialarry@reddit

Old one - analog and raw

Which is funny because when it was new it was best described as “sterile” compared to contemporary Porsche, Ferrari, Corvette.

[-]

jondes99@reddit

That’s because it worked and was well thought out. Back in those days, a lot of the charm of exotics (and Italian and British cars) were the terrible compromises. The original NSX could be driven daily without shedding parts or driving the owner mad, which was not true of a contemporary Lotus or Ferrari.

[-]

delicate10drills@reddit

I find it sad that cars have gotten so sterile that that’s where we’re at- a tolerably sterile car is now comparatively raw.

[-]

mar78217@reddit

The first one was a new look. Everything about it was out of the box thinking. The newer one looked like a McLaren but with cup holders, and a trunk big enough to carry a set of clubs.

[-]

AZMotorsports@reddit

The OG NSX was not very popular until late 2000s. This is very much a recency bias. In the late 90s a used one was dirt cheap. Now that Gen X has gotten older and have money they want all the cars they dreamed about as kids. The prices have since skyrocketed and everyone loves them again.

Compared to the cars the NSX was running against at the time (F355, Lotus) they handled better, and significantly better quality and reliability. However the NSX wasn’t nearly as powerful or glamorous which left them overlooked.

[-]

Holiday-Poet-406@reddit

The ones dating from 1990 had a reliable power plant, a dreamy chassis looked not dissimilar to a Ferrari of a similar era and could be your daily driver if you had 50k burning a hole in your pocket, by 2005 when production ended the automotive world had moved on a long way.

[-]

gumby_twain@reddit

The first gen was praised because the media really wanted there to be a Japanese supercar. It wasn’t really that special, didn’t really stand out in any objective way by the numbers.

[-]

HP844182@reddit

Especially when it comes to sports cars, it's not always about the numbers. If it's not fun to drive it doesn't matter what the numbers say

[-]

gumby_twain@reddit

Tell me you drive a Miata without telling me you drive a Miata…

I’m it sure how old you are, but I was there. The NSX was revered because there was a generation of middle aged men who loved their Japanese economy cars and needed a Japanese corvette with Japanese reliability. The exotic look only made it that much better. And it had VTEC!!!!!

Other than that, it was an also ran in every comparison it ever competed in. You can get the oil changed at the same dealer as your accord too! And let’s face it, most buyers of these cars never even exceed the speed limit let alone push triple digits or get out on a track.

That’s why it was so revered. Exotic looks with Honda maintenance for men who hated domestic products and couldn’t afford Italian.

[-]

YT_Milo_Sidequests@reddit

The original one was very good at everything but not necessarily the best at one thing (performance wise). When compared with the C4 Corvette ZR1, Ferrari 348, 911 Carrera, and Esprit Turbo, the NSX felt the most well-rounded and most refined of those cars (according to the C/D magazine back in 91). It became legendary due to a number of things. It wasn't the quickest and wasn't the fastest. But it was able to punch above its weight and looked good while doing it. It was a driver's car, it was engaging, it felt connected to you and connected to the road. It had a soul and it was fun to drive. Essentially it was able to do what sports and super cars were able to do without the super car price and super car reliability issues. To add more to its resume, the legendary Ayrton Senna helped develop the vehicle (and owned 3 of his own).

The 2nd gen was also very good at everything (I've been fortunate enough to be able to drive multiple new NSX's, including a Type S). It's fast, it handles very well, it's reliable, and it looks good imo. But it did everything only as well as every other car it was competing against. It also felt like it lost its soul, you didn't feel connected to the car or to the road, it felt more like I was playing a video game. It just wasn't as fun to drive. And I think that was one of the main reasons why it's not as revered. Still a great machine, but definitely lacking the soul.

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

Ironically, the gen2 did so many things that the original was lacking. But it wasn't enough Even though the R35 was a beast of its own, in the early years so so many people complained that it was like driving with cheat codes. The new NSX has this problem too- it was objectively a fantastic car in a vacuum but it wasnt 'raw' enough and it was definitely too expensive in certain markets. I remember In early highschool the WHEELS and MOTOR magazines had a price guide on the back pages. The nsx was $125k AUD brand new back then (2001) and was a legitimate option for people who wanted NA Porsche like performance. The new Gen2 NSX was 400k AUD. After inflation, it just wasn't justifiable. I've been told that other markets felt the same way, although not as insanely priced. Also worth noting, the original NSX didn't sell well, despite being a fantastic car

[-]

Ok-Bill3318@reddit

Most modern car manufacturers have forgotten then point of a sports car.

Tip: it’s not to win lap times. It’s to entertain the driver.

Somewhere along the way this got lost and continually chasing lap time and raising the performance ceiling at massive cost (both in terms of money and driver engagement) just means these cars are just not usable as per the original brief.

They’re objectively amazing but utterly pointless.

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

I agree, but we are seeing a swing back. First the 86. Then the turbo civics. The supra, despite the hate,is a real drivers car. The Z still feels like a Z. I wish the Z had a 4cyl turbo version ... Call it a Silvia if you will lol. But he's, generally speaking I agree. It's not like the golden she where there was dozens of driver focused options.

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

There is a car similar to 4cyl turbo z, 2.0 supra

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

Yeah but that's not a Nissan :)

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

😂 that’s a good thing. Nissan is a disaster

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

The Z and GTR say otherwise. :)

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

Huh gtr is discontinued and new z is a sales disaster

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

GTR is getting a new model. Z is still a fantastic car. You should drive one This is a conversation about cars that are good drivers cars. It's not about sales numbers. Keep up.

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

Pretty sure gtr isn’t gonna come back. Nissan the company is struggling financially.

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

Absolutely all current information indicates otherwise, about the GTR.r36 has been confirmed

[-]

withsexyresults@reddit

But sports cars will get crucified if they don’t put up competitive lap times.

Entertaining the driver could be many things. Reckon most buyers get entertained just by 0-60 times and not steering feel or how the chassis behaves

[-]

aruca-type-s@reddit

Found the guy who hasn’t driven a modern sports car.

[-]

suboptimus_maximus@reddit

Value and price are obviously different things, and whatever Honda did with gen 2 it apparently wasn’t appealing to people who can afford it. I live in a high income area with a lot of expensive cars everywhere, like higher trim 911s are a dime a dozen, the Urus was basically trending when it came out, see quite a few proper exotics regularly but the NSX might as well not exist, I see more gen 1s out on the weekends. I saw a gen 2 yesterday in traffic and was really surprised, I know I’ve seen them before but I really can’t remember specifically.

[-]

aruca-type-s@reddit

Well a big reason for that is there were 19,000 gen 1 Nsx’s built, and 3000 gen 2’s. I have a 2022 type S. It’s always the best car wherever I go.

[-]

MillyMichaelson77@reddit

Yeah they fumbled it hard with pricing and marketing. We sold 9 in Australia. It's entirerun. Lmao

[-]

JaySee55@reddit

Car guys are boomers. They hate new tech and say it's bad before trying it. NSX means new sports car experiment. If the 2nd one was like the first, it'd make no sense. Honda made an actual NSX, but boomers wanted the same old dog with new makeup. The NSX isn't defined as an all aluminum body with a high revving NA V6. The original NSX had groundbreaking tech to see what a sports car can be as does the 2nd Gen. That's why it's an NSX.

Stupid things car guys have said to me. Fuel injection is not NA. Turbos suck. ABS sucks. Traction control sucks. Dual-clutches suck. Sequential gearboxes are great. Hybrids suck.

[-]

VirgoJack@reddit

Who do you think bought the original NSX? Boomers.

[-]

JaySee55@reddit

I'm talking about the mentality, not the actual generation. A lot of the whiners now are Gen X and millennials who have no clue what the NSX really was.

[-]

Successful_Ad_9707@reddit

Not everyone who wants a light, nimble and simple car are boomers. Not everyone wants to drive a sports car that weighs nearly 4k lbs.

The people who had sports car money didn't want something with a Honda/Acura badge on it. At least if they made something closer to a modern successor to the original and charged less for it they could have sold well to the demographic that's paying $100k or more for the 1st gen.

[-]

JaySee55@reddit

Case in point. This guy can buy a Miata to fulfill his wants, but wants to rant about the 2nd Gen NSX. HE has no clue what an NSX was when it was released. It was never meant to be a "simple" car. It was a technological marvel. If Honda wanted to make a simple, lightweight sports car, they would not name it NSX.

[-]

Successful_Ad_9707@reddit

When did the Miata get a high reving V6? Yes, the original NSX had a lot of cutting edge tech at the time, but it also wasn't heavy and refined to the point of being less fun to drive than the competition.

[-]

JaySee55@reddit

The NSX used all the latest and greatest tech at the time that Honda had to make a supercar to rival Ferrari. It was named NSX for that reason. A lightweight simple car with a V6 is not an NSX.

[-]

Successful_Ad_9707@reddit

So, being heavy and overly refined makes it an NSX? Ok cheif. Being lightweight with an NA screamer was what made people fall in love with the car in the first place.

[-]

JaySee55@reddit

Good job failing to read the comment you replied to. The NSX, new sports car experiment, was all the best tech Honda had at the time to make a Supercar. They had a 280ps limit, no V8, and no turbos. So they beefed up a Legend motor. The best transmission they could make was a 5 speed manual. Their automatics were trash, so they had to nerf the engine to put a 4 speed auto. If they had access to a DCT or CVT that could handle the power and torque and keep the engine in VTEC, they would've used that. The NSX never aimed to be a simple car with a V6. The NSX is all the latest and greatest tech Honda has at hand to build a supercar. That's EXACTLY what the 2nd Gen is. A true NSX worthy of the name. Not some wimpy simple V6 with a manual which isn't even what the original was. You totally forget the NSX came in a crappy 4 speed auto with a nerfed motor because Honda couldn't make a proper automatic.

And you're totally wrong about why people loved the NSX. It has nothing to do with a high-reving V6 or manual transmission. The standard at the time was a manual. The V6 was a complaining point for not having a V8. People complained it was underpowered. People marveled at the 1st ever all aluminum body. The double wishbone suspension tuned by Senna. The reliability vs a Ferrari.

Boomers who know nothing about it claim to like it as a lightweight "pure" sports car, but that was never the intent or purpose when it was designed and built.

[-]

-CerN-@reddit

They have nothing in common but the name.

[-]

phatmatt593@reddit

Idk about the old one, but the new just doesn’t invoke that driving experience you feel in your plums.

I loved driving that car. It’s crazy fast, fun to drive, responsive, looks great inside and out, and reasonably comfortable. On paper and driving it, it’s technically a great car. It just doesn’t feel super special for some reason.

[-]

Ok-Bill3318@reddit

The first one was a no compromises, stylish, lightweight sports car you could daily in a time when anything comparable spent more time being worked on than driven. It had no real peer in the industry.

The new one is a pointless piece of shit. It’s just “meh” vs pretty much the entire segment.

[-]

Porschenut914@reddit

An aspect of the hate is that it was being teased for 10 years before release.

https://acuranews.com/en-US/releases/release-d0c0e834c1e8f2984fbbd5004c34c1cf-acura-developing-a-successor-to-nsx

They issued a press statement in 2005. to which everyone then rightly thought it would be their ASCC concept car with a v-10. it set super high expectations. "are they going to make a reliable v-10?!?!?" which later showed up as the HSV-010 with a v-8

then the financial crisis hit and discretionary spending was slowed, then 2012 the realized they had to move the engine layout causing significant project delays.

though great reviews it just took so long, and didn't really stand out when the rest of the field.

[-]

BoldNewBranFlakes@reddit

In my opinion the hate was inevitable. Give it about a decade and people will claim they’ve always loved the 2nd gen and how it was “innovative” for being one of notable first hybrid supercars.

[-]

dragonitexy@reddit

This wasn't the car we were expecting to receive, in short. A great vehicle, no doubt, but still.

[-]

therin_88@reddit

Hybrid garbage.

[-]

Low_Progress007@reddit

the first one was very hyped because of Senna, while the second one came out with a very expensive retail price in a market with a lot of very established supercars models of different brands. A friend of mine has one of the few gen 2 NSX in the UK and he loves that, but personally speaking, I need to have 20 cars before buying that one. It look decent, but it has no sound, and I do not thing is that special. Apparently is very fast, also on the track, but would you buy that instead of a porsche gt3 or an audi r8? I would not! and I think that's why!

[-]

Successful_Ad_9707@reddit

Heavier, the engine doesn't feel as special and no manual.

[-]

Tiny-Fisherman4747@reddit

The first generation nsx wasn’t loved it was slow and had mini van engine until a few years ago. The cheapest one I remember seeing for sale was maybe $25k