nsx
 

new honda nsx looks nothing similar, won't ever be sold
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/11/r...ng-in-supergt/

ya I saw that as well. The thing I don't like about the new nsx is that its too big compared to previous NSX's. The same can be said for the GT-R.

huh, I thought it was packin' V10, but I guess I misread the nsx to lfa. Well, either way, they took out the mr layout and went for fr layout, so never care to read bout it.

The production model was supposed to have a V10, and yes they went to a FR layout. Doesn't matter much since they scraped their RWD program. :cry:

- Doesn't matter, NSX is mid-engined no front engined car (or SH-AWD) could truly be an NSX.

- Production version should have been V10. The race car will be V8 because Super GT mandates it.

-It will never be sold.

It's already been noted that the production version was a V10 and that Honda canceled their entire RWD program which included the NSX, S2000 replacement, and RWD Acura.

what is with car companies and FWD? it seems ridiculous to try and balance all that out in the front instead of trying to push some of the transmission components back further; is the world really just full of fools who can't drive and don't know any better and thus FWD is essential to safety?

/rant

Honda canceled their RWD program to focus on more fuel efficient cars, hence the CR-Z, as well in major part, because of the economic downturn. The only RWD they still had in production was the S2000 since the NSX ceased production with the 2005 MY. The S2000 consistently decreased in sales after 2002, such that in 2008 the sales were the lowest since the car released in 1999.

Sucks for this Honda fanboi but that's just the way it is.

so they are doing what Toyota is doing? are they just restructuring their sports car program or definite cancel of the sports car program or just the US side.

Yes, I can read, I noticed. I was explaining WHY the race car has a V8 and not a V10. Problem?

I'm pretty sure they're done with their sports car program, RWD and FWD. The CR-Z is a measely attempt at something but it's nowhere near what they were doing in the early-mid 90's. I would not be surprised if someone decides to swap a K20 or K24 into a CR-Z. It's certainly not a worthy successor the CR-X that it should be.

Fuck honda! seriously they cancel all the fun cars to give us Hits like the ZDX, and the Crosstour.... :barf:

the cr-z isn't all bad, it's got possibly the same engine from the fit (~117hp, though that brochure rumor claims 114), a supplement 13hp motor, and weighs around 2800lbs? i hardly see it actually competing against the fit or a yaris simply b/c they are more simplistic and lighter; but if honda changed any one of the 3 factors on the crz it'd be a nice entry level hybrid with some liveliness...keep in mind it has very similar dimensions to the s2000, not to mention launches at 60 ft-lbs torque right off the bat.. it's not all a loss-- though i'll totally get giddy when top gear does some obscene test with a crx :D

Just because it has nearly the same dimensions as the S, doesn't mean it will come within a football field of the S. I'd rather go back and buy a 89 CRX than have this trash, although the Mugen CR-Z looked sexy as hell. Matter of fact, I wouldn't mind having that Mugen CR-Z and drop a K24 in it.