Honda NSX

[flmkane]

I´d say... why would you NOT use as many gears as you can if you have a twin clutch?

Weight and complexity. Depends on the car of course. For an NSX 2.0 I'd have tried to make a lightweight beast, more akin to a mid engine MX-5 with a roof, than to the bloated grass muncher Honda is trying to sell. For a lightweight car, you'd need to shave off rather minuscule amounts of mass from each individual components, with the hope that the cumulative weight saving from thousands of parts end up being substantial.

In such circumstances, shoving in 9 gears into the transmission results in an unacceptable jump in weight, not just because of the 2-3 extra gears, but also because of the other parts required to make such a gearbox work. Can you imagine how depressing it would be, if you were trying to analyse each fastener to see if you could shave off weight, when the management suddenly decides it wants NINE SPEEDS for marketing purposes? If you make such compromises in every big sub system on the car, the total weight can become quite excessive.

[pgfpro]

1725 kg? They're calling a 1725 kg car "NSX"? That's blasphemy. This is more like a gtr than an nsx.

What a pig!!!
1725 kg and only 550HP this thing is going to be a slug. Why did Honda even bother to bring it back with these poor performance numbers???

[godlameroso]

1725 kg? They're calling a 1725 kg car "NSX"? That's blasphemy. This is more like a gtr than an nsx.

What a pig!!!
1725 kg and only 550HP this thing is going to be a slug. Why did Honda even bother to bring it back with these poor performance numbers???

It's not terrible. It's about as heavy as F82 M4, with the added complexity and weight of a hybrid power train. It'll be faster than a BMW i8. But it's a very expensive car, and I'm sure they're losing money on it.

[dren]

The max system power is 573hp. 500hp from the ice, a 47hp motor in the transmission and two 36hp motors at the front for true torque vectoring. Honda doesn't add all the power figures up like some other makes do since they have different power curves. If you do it like Porsche does, then it'd have 619hp. There is likely quite a bit of head room in the ICE for the Type-R and future variants.

The reviews have been fairly positive. Zero turbo lag, instant torque, easy to drive fast, 0-60 in about 3 seconds. This car will wipe the floor with the old NSX. The NSX was about showcasing technology; it again is showcasing technology. The main gripes have been the lack of steering feel and tire choice depending on which tires the car had on it when tested. You can get proper sports tires or all seasons when ordered.

It's close to 918 performance at a fraction of the cost.

[dren]

This puts the fear of god into me for the S2000 replacement. And is a good reason to invest in an S2000 while you can, anyone reading this...just do it.

The current rumor is a MR 2.0 I4 turbo based off the NSX platform. A higher output version of the K20 in the current Civic Type-R.

[pgfpro]

At 1725 kg I was thinking/hoping it would be more around 700+ HP. Even at 600HP I'm still disappointed at this weight.
Its power to weight ratio just doesn't do it for me.

[Andres125sx]

I´d say... why would you NOT use as many gears as you can if you have a twin clutch?

Weight and complexity. Depends on the car of course. For an NSX 2.0 I'd have tried to make a lightweight beast, more akin to a mid engine MX-5 with a roof, than to the bloated grass muncher Honda is trying to sell. For a lightweight car, you'd need to shave off rather minuscule amounts of mass from each individual components, with the hope that the cumulative weight saving from thousands of parts end up being substantial.

In such circumstances, shoving in 9 gears into the transmission results in an unacceptable jump in weight, not just because of the 2-3 extra gears, but also because of the other parts required to make such a gearbox work. Can you imagine how depressing it would be, if you were trying to analyse each fastener to see if you could shave off weight, when the management suddenly decides it wants NINE SPEEDS for marketing purposes? If you make such compromises in every big sub system on the car, the total weight can become quite excessive.

It´s not only marketing, and your idea of a light NSX is ok, but a light car will never be the flag ship of any manufacturer, wich is the purpose of this NSX. Flag ships always are heavy beasts

BMW´s tiptronic use 8 gears even on his 120i with only 177bhp and I don´t read so many complain, so to me one more gear for a 550bhp car is far from crazy


And thanks Cold Fussion for your efforts, I think your graphs show the reason Honda use 9 gears, almost constant power, similar to a CVT but you still can use the gearbox, lenghten (not sure if that´s the word in english) some gear, and hear different engine tones when upshifting or downshifting. It has the best of both worlds

[FoxHound]

This puts the fear of god into me for the S2000 replacement. And is a good reason to invest in an S2000 while you can, anyone reading this...just do it.

The current rumor is a MR 2.0 I4 turbo based off the NSX platform. A higher output version of the K20 in the current Civic Type-R.

All the info I've had so far indicates an smaller NSX. Which means all wheel drive, hybrid, turbo. It's about as far removed from the original concept as can get.
My preference, is something with natural aspiration, rear wheel drive and very lightweight.

The old S2000 weighs in at 1260kg's, and with a bit of attention this can be reduced to under 1200kgs stock. With a test pipe, you can even get 40mpg with a steady right foot.
The replacement will likely be coming in at around 1400-1500kg's with batteries and hybrid systems.
After 10 years, these will likely be defunct systems that the ICE will have to carry around without the benefits...or the likely expensive replacement.

I also have reservations of whether a hard driven Hybrid is much more efficient than a hard driven non hybrid. The extra mass of the systems, along with the associated losses will have an adverse effect. I'm by no means suggesting it is not more efficient, just that the difference is not worth sacrificing the spirit of the concept.
I can live with it being a turbo, so long as it can rev high and is mated to a decent manual gearbox where heel and toe, and rev matching is possible. Not computerised rev matching done via paddle shift.

But it's not out yet...and if it does for hybrids what the S2000 did for roadsters, then I'll come back and eat my words.

Here's some Honda patent imagery for the S2000 replacement in case you missed it...

[dren]

I've never seen anywhere close to 30mpg in my AP2, so I find that 40mpg really hard to believe... I do see 32mpg in my supercharged BRZ, though.

As for the patent images, yes, I've seen them. There is also this:


It looks like a new Civic front end smashed onto an XJ220. I'm not really liking it much even though I like the idea of MR. I read those patent drawings were a design for the NSX that wasn't used. Don't know if that's true or not. I've also read that the base model will be MR RWD with a MT. There -might- be hybrid variants. The target price point for the base will be around $50k. If they had a very mild hybrid (not eSH-AWD) that eliminated turbo lag and didn't add much with battery weight, I might be interested in that. I think Honda's current hybrid IMA system adds around 130lbs?

[FoxHound]

I think there may be a slight discrepancy in US mpg and that of the UK.

I regularly get 35 mpg in my AP1. Granted it's a motorway(highway) commute, but a lot of the time the UK motorways are just glorified car parks.
I've read the S2ki forums and there are plenty of guys saying a test pipe will reduce the load on the engine to push the exhaust gasses out. 40 mpg was a figure many posters used.
I've yet to try it, but it's currently on my Ebay watchlist....along with some koni adjustables and a new brakeline kit.

As for the image, they surfaced about a year ago after the NSX was shown to the public in camouflage form.
Also, the car looks visibly smaller than the NSX, even though not by a large amount.
My recollections also lead me to the canned NSX project which had a screaming V8...around the same time Honda canned their F1 project in late 2008.

Now here is a car Honda should be making, especially given that the NSX is a £100k plus car these days. They can save the planet other ways rather than worrying about a few thousand of these monsters making music with dead trees and dinosaurs.


Oh and then of course there's the sound of a high revving engine..



The new NSX maybe a fantastic thing, but it is in the mould of the GTR Nissan, itself a devastating weapon.
The aforementioned cancelled NSX was the spiritual next step, and had it been made, I'd forgive Honda making this techno beast today.

[dren]

Actually, that version of the NSX was to be based on the ASCC which was to have a 5.0l V10 and be FR. It was more a GT car than a MR sports car. That HSV Super GT car ran a 3.4l V8. The road going V10 car was just about ready for production when Honda dropped it and pulled out of F1. Honda convinced Super GT to let them run the car in the series anyway since it was a 'finished' road car.

Here is another snippet of a review of the new NSX from Chris Harris:

“Traction is predictably impressive, but the mind games really begin when you switch all the clever traction control off and see what happens when you provoke the NSX… The search uncovers only good things. You can play with this car – allow the front to push, use that mid-engined layout to alter the line and rotate the rear. It’s not as easily playful as a 488 or an R8 because those pesky front motors always ultimately want to drag the car straight again. But it is way more fun than I’d imagined it would be and, most importantly, it demonstrates the depth of chassis development that has been undertaken to make this car worthy of the NSX badge.” – Chris Harris, evo Magazine

Also, Motor Trend is claiming a 0-60 time of 2.6 seconds.

[FoxHound]

Yes the V10 car didn't see the light of day, but the HS-V10 was the NSX in drag minus the V10.

I did a search and there are some videos of the NSX v1.5 test mule doing the rounds at the Nurburing.
Still sounds gorgeous...



The engine was front mounted but behind the front axle...making it "mid engined" in the S2000 sense. Had the same proportions to an S2K too.