Danielrh
 |
|
|
Dren
|
|
|
I agree, but for the layout and market they are shooting with this new V10 car, I don't think we'll see the HSC type stying again. The HSC was awesome minus the tail light design. This new car has a sweet ass on it.
|
Potenza
|
|
|
I prefer the HSC as well. And guess which one was styled in Japan and which one was styled in California. Leave the styling to the Japanese for these important models, please!
|
Colin
|
|
|
Well, I've heard from good sources that the HSC was fine as long as you were shorter than 5'8" and didn't mind a 10 gallon fuel tank.....
|
Dren
|
|
Colin wrote:
Well, I've heard from good sources that the HSC was fine as long as you were shorter than 5'8" and didn't mind a 10 gallon fuel tank.....
|
That doesn't surprise me, it was a very very small car.
|
blu
|
|
|
I too like the HSC, but for some reason, it looks a bit dated now.
|
aznstuart
|
|
I think Acura should make a second sports car based off of the HSC styling. Make it MR with a V8 and make it an all out sports car and the real NSX successor. Price it around where the MY05 NSX was, $89k.
Then make a third sports car with a turbo V6 for around $50k.
Save the rest of the sports car market for Honda then.
|
Colin
|
|
aznstuart wrote:
I think Acura should make a second sports car based off of the HSC styling. Make it MR with a V8 and make it an all out sports car and the real NSX successor. Price it around where the MY05 NSX was, $89k.
Then make a third sports car with a turbo V6 for around $50k.
Save the rest of the sports car market for Honda then.
|
Now wouldn't that be a great "curve ball"!? Everyones watching the ASCC and they pull this out of left field! It would be a great opportunity to make that "sub-NSX" car that's been rumored and keep current (like me) S2000 owners in the family.
I say take a page out of the MR-2 playbook and take the transverse/FWD drivetrain and put it in the back to make a MR sportscar. Use the existing 3.2 or 3.5, put in a GOOD clutch and keep it around 40-45K.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Colin wrote:
aznstuart wrote:
I think Acura should make a second sports car based off of the HSC styling. Make it MR with a V8 and make it an all out sports car and the real NSX successor. Price it around where the MY05 NSX was, $89k.
Then make a third sports car with a turbo V6 for around $50k.
Save the rest of the sports car market for Honda then.
|
Now wouldn't that be a great "curve ball"!? Everyones watching the ASCC and they pull this out of left field! It would be a great opportunity to make that "sub-NSX" car that's been rumored and keep current (like me) S2000 owners in the family.
I say take a page out of the MR-2 playbook and take the transverse/FWD drivetrain and put it in the back to make a MR sportscar. Use the existing 3.2 or 3.5, put in a GOOD clutch and keep it around 40-45K.
|
I prefer the swage line of the ASCC; it would resolve the HSC's flanks, which was my problem with the design.
But yes, think of HSC as an 'S3500' if you will; it would be in a different market entirely. One Honda, the other Acura, if you like.
|
HONDAxACURA
|
|
|
Man Honda! WHY?! You guys been trying to keep the styling and car structure the same. Like the MDX, CR-V, Civic. Now you are killing the only high end powered exotic Honda sports car? I don't mind the styling, but a FR layout. No more MR? In the future, I see a big dispute in Japan GT Racing. And what's this deal with your whole car thing?
|
REDDZ
|
|
|
Can someone please add me to the HSC list of supporters. Thank you!
|
bukwheat
|
|
Potenza wrote:
I prefer the HSC as well. And guess which one was styled in Japan and which one was styled in California. Leave the styling to the Japanese for these important models, please!
|
Agreed.
|
techline
|
|
|
Where are all the people who said wanted a FR. Awful silent now that they have seen the styling of the car. Anyone have engine details. We need something to salvage here.
|
blackstripe77
|
|
Agreed. I don't live in the US, but the styling of the new Acura's (e.g. the Advance Sedan Concept) are hideous. Even the styling of the NSX rendition from BestCar Magazine was better.
Another thing the NSX was famous for was it's supercar performance combined with it's ease of use compared to many other supercars.
I also disagree with forced induction on Honda engines. They are very good at squeezing out insane amounts of power from little naturally aspirated engines, and should continue to do the same. While the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice produce 177bhp from a 2.4l, Honda have managed 220bhp from their 2.0l K20A engines.
|
bukwheat
|
|
bukwheat wrote:
Potenza wrote:
I prefer the HSC as well. And guess which one was styled in Japan and which one was styled in California. Leave the styling to the Japanese for these important models, please!
|
Agreed.
|
I'm gonna have to take back half of my "agreed". There are actually a few US designed vehicles that I've liked, i.e., Scion tC, Toyota FT-HS, '07 Civic Coupe, Saturn Sky and F-150....the '07 Tundra, too, if it was designed in the States. :)
|
danielgr
|
|
Danielrh wrote:
|
So do I.
If only, I would have make the HSC a little bit "bolder".
But anyway, Acura is going to people that wants a stronger image, one saying "power" and not necessarilly "beauty".
For that purpose, and although for me it's not "special enough" for a "supercar", I think that the design direction of the ASC is better than the HSC.
I also think that it is a pitty to drop mid-engined super-sports, because that was also a great difference between the NSX and many of its competitors. But I guess that with the SH-RWD it makes less sense, and that to fit that V10 they needed more room than a regular mid-engined car can provide.
Remember that when they designed the HSC they were talking about puting a V6 inside...
I would just hope as others had that they don't let the HSC die like this. If Acura's supercar has to be a high-tech V10 powered car, then it can have a small MR brother with a high reving V6 on it. Something with less technology but more driving envolvement (please give it a nice MT). A car for people that really love driving but don't need all the new fancy Acura image and don't want to pay the premium to feel "at the top". Just like many Honda's used to be.
|
bukwheat
|
|
Dren wrote:
Colin wrote:
Well, I've heard from good sources that the HSC was fine as long as you were shorter than 5'8" and didn't mind a 10 gallon fuel tank.....
|
That doesn't surprise me, it was a very very small car.
|
I don't think height really matters when it comes to supercars; most people who can afford these cars barely drive them anyway....besides, aren't they all fairly small. :P And I don't buy the excuse of not being able to fit a V10 in the HSC...it's a great design (very Enzoish) and they could've just stretched the car a bit longer or wider. I think Acura has lost focus with the next-gen NSX, as some have mentioned; similar to the rumors I've been hearing about the next S2000. :S
|
Dren
|
|
|
You guys will all change your mind once the specs come out for the car I am sure. This thing will run circles around the old NSX-R on the track, just wait.
|
kiwikungfu
|
|
it'll run circles around the old NSX-R at the track? maybe. but it will probably shift for me, adjust the throttle for me and modulate brake input. if I bought one and my neighbor bought one our track times would be the same regardless of skill. i'd rather have a < 2005 NSX and drive it myself, thank you.
put me on the list of people who prefer the HSC.
|
accord1989
|
|
|
HSC blows this out the water, BIG TIME!!
|
98 Accord
|
|
|
I definitely like them both. The HSC looks more like the new NSX. It is similar to the original as far as the body shape and structure. On the other hand, the ASCC looks a bit more bold and a fearless type of car (more Japanese if you will). It would really be a great idea to keep one as the new NSX and the other as a sub NSX or maybe even an S2000 replacement. These two designs are just too good to let any of them be thrown away.
|
RyanDL
|
|
Dren wrote:
You guys will all change your mind once the specs come out for the car I am sure. This thing will run circles around the old NSX-R on the track, just wait.
|
There's a problem with this statement. While I do agree that any new model NEEDS to exceed the performance of the NSX-R, it also has to deliver in the looks department. I would venture a guess that most sports cars of the NSX's caliber never see any track time and spend their days as weekend cruisers (sad but true). Therefore, potential buyers could care less if the car performs like a banshee but looks like trash. The looks need to mimick the performance, and I think this car has a ways to go in the styling department before that happens.
Ryan
|
silverf161
|
|
This ASC sports car will be at least 3700 lbs. More likely 3800 lbs. NSX-R will likely whip it ass in anything but a drag strip.
Stop dreaming, this thing will not be 3300 lbs. Ferrari 599 is 3500 lbs. Ferrari 612 is 3800 lbs. All of them do not have SH-AWD, which is another 200 lbs adder. M6 is 3900 lbs.
Do the math, this ASC is going to be a pig. The only fast it will do is straight.
Kill this project Honda. Nothing special here. FR is not exotic. This fat pig looks like Firebird, it won't corner, and you want how much for it? The only damn thing going for it is the V10.
Go back to the drawing board and start with the HSC. Clean up the HSC styling, and do give us more power than what the 350Z produces. Start the clock once again, Let's wait another 3 years for Honda to show us their NSX successor.
Its only been 17 years since the 91 NSX came out, what's another 3 years wait.
|
blackstripe77
|
|
bukwheat wrote:
Dren wrote:
Colin wrote:
Well, I've heard from good sources that the HSC was fine as long as you were shorter than 5'8" and didn't mind a 10 gallon fuel tank.....
|
That doesn't surprise me, it was a very very small car.
|
I don't think height really matters when it comes to supercars; most people who can afford these cars barely drive them anyway....besides, aren't they all fairly small. :P And I don't buy the excuse of not being able to fit a V10 in the HSC...it's a great design (very Enzoish) and they could've just stretched the car a bit longer or wider. I think Acura has lost focus with the next-gen NSX, as some have mentioned; similar to the rumors I've been hearing about the next S2000. :S
|
Well, the way I see it, I think its pretty important. Many NSX reviews say that not only does it look and perform like a supercar, it is also very practical, and even has a usable trunk behind the engine, which the car can be used as a daily driver. And there's no need for a V10 when they can squeeze so much more power out of a naturally aspirated engine compared to the other manufacturers.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Seems everyone misunderstands the poor NSX.
It's a luxury GT tourer with track potential, not vice versa
|
JMU R1
|
|
Nick Graves wrote:
Seems everyone misunderstands the poor NSX.
It's a luxury GT tourer with track potential, not vice versa
|
The NSX was NOT a GT Tourer. A GT tourer would be something like the 612, DB9, 6 series, Maserati Coupe. The NSX was a proper sportscar that just happened to be civilized enough to be a daily driver.
|
|
|
| |
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
