Why is it not selling??

I'd buy it

File: 1494643113236.png (259KB, 634x692px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 634x692px

>>17275808
>From $156,000

answered your own question

for that price, someone could get something more exotic, faster, or better looking (maybe even a combination of those 3?)

also, it was a huge letdown

>>17275812
this.

the pricing is the biggest factor, but it's a damn good car, and it's fun to trigger boomer faggots in their dinosaur NSXs.

>100k
>for a acura

here in the us acuras are for poorfags

File: sad massa 1.png (178KB, 459x309px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 459x309px

>>17275808
- Too expensive to compete with the GT-R, even if it's a better car.
- Less tuning potential than the GT-R.
- Has nothing in common with the OG NSX, so it doesn't appeal to those buyers either.

I can't stand R35 owners, and yet I get why this thing doesn't sell.

File: Drake-MAIN.jpg (44KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 615x409px

>>17275830
>acuras are for poorfags
>he says as he bitches about the price

like pottery

File: 1106_dsc_0820.jpg (295KB, 1612x1075px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1612x1075px

>>17275808
The numbers look good but the car doesn't. Yet it might be the best looking brand new Honda.

>>17275838
No I'm saying why you you spend over 100k for a car people think is a generic poor fag mobile

>>17275852
>Backtracking

Stay BTFO. GM fangurl

File: 1492372395547.jpg (3MB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1280px

>>17275869
There is no need to be upset this is just why it is a big fat failure

>>17275808
At that price I would rather an Audi R8.

Whoah is that a Ferrari? What is that? Oh it's an Acura

Looks like shit.
Tony Stark drove it in the Avengers 5 fucking years ago.
What the fuck is Acura supposed to be anyway?

>>17275808
because people buying $150,000+ cars care about brand prestige of which Acura has precisely none.

>>17275883
That car just looks like testosterone

>>17275985
I don't think it's going to age well either. I think it will go down in history as the slowest hybrid supercar. It won't even have any "perfect chassis" memes to save it.

>>17275999
>it will go down in history as the slowest hybrid supercar

Its the (only) hybrid super car unless you compare it to limited production cars that are no longer in production. does anyone remember how slow the old one was?

Honda isn't winning in F1. Original NSX sold because muh Senna. Honda doesn't have enough brand to sell a hypercar without winning in racing, unlike Lambo or Koeningnhaskjdeegegegeg or Pagani

and that only reminds me what a piece of fucking art the huayra is

As other anons have said, you spend this kind of money on a car purely for the prestige/collector's value rather than the car itself. This has neither.

>>17275997
Because you're a pussy who lacks test

>>17276024
I know I'm just saying that not only will it probably be significantly slower than most if not all hybrid supercars of the future it won't even have the distinction of being remembered as the first. It just doesn't stand out in any way to anybody.

>>17275808
>Hybrid NSX
>Pricing near enough to actual exotics
Honestly, did anyone even want this in the first place

>>17276049
>slower than most if not all hybrid supercars of the future
Those cars are likely going to cost twice the price as well. most companies haven't even put their hybrid technology in mass production form and when they do its going to cost them significantly more than this. the sales will probably start to pick up as people realize $150,000 is a lot better than paying $300,000 or $400,000 for some of the other hybrid sports cars.

>>17276062
I'd much rather pay $300,000 for a hybrid supercar that's significantly faster than a GT-R than $150,000 for a hybrid supercar that's slower than a GT-R.

>>17276062
I'm pretty sure the $300K car will have some nice premiums compared to the NSX, of course assuming its a Porsche, Mclaren or Ferrari

>>17276078
"nice premiums" usually mean more fragile stuff that's expensive to repair. i can definitely see there being an appeal for this car for the people who don't want to deal with that stuff and would just rather own a car from a manufacturer who's got it together already and isn't in the early experimental phase of car fires and whatnot.

>>17276071
Porsche probably thought the same thing in the early days of the tesla roadster where it never really sold as well as the other sports cars and since Tesla kinda got an early foothold in the market with their EVs other companies like Porsche who think people would rather pay $300,000 for their "tesla killer" that would also be "faster than a GTR" or much faster in general don't really care much for the extra cost of that and just want a mass production fast enough electric car or in this case hybrid.

File: AudiR8.jpg (18KB, 429x262px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 429x262px

>>17275808
Who in their right mind would buy it over pic related?

File: 15.png (284KB, 1308x1864px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1308x1864px

Because If I am spending more than 100k in a super car made by Japanese manufacturer I expected it to be made in Japan and not in the US.

File: drake-marvins-room_0-1.png (208KB, 540x408px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 540x408px

>>17276155
who's this semen demon

>>17276164
He's from some canned Nick cartoon, Tough Puppy or something

>>17276130
I certainly hope you're right. because Honda did take a big gamble not just making this a standard mid engined super sports car

File: Jaguar XJ220 Prototype.jpg (293KB, 1600x1044px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1600x1044px

>>17275818
also the problem with the og nsx
that was a cheep 328 and the current one is a cheep r8

also the xj220 outside of other factors
http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/v12_archives.php

>>17275962
>>17275836
I'd have a hard time choosing between the GTR and this

>>17275808
its ugly and its just a big computer

It's another awd automatic v6 hybrid boremachine, while it was supposed to be just a properly made sportscar with some power.

File: IMG_1635.png (637KB, 693x693px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 693x693px

>>17276225
What are you even talking about? Your point is the only invalid one in this thread. SMFH....

>>17276215
Right? The original NSX was the supercar that a regular Joe could afford to buy and maintain if he tried hard enough.

If they'd kept this generation of NSX under $100k they would have stayed true to that. But no, they made it a richfag mobile, and at that point, as a richfag, for what reason would you buy it over things like the GTR or the R8, or just wait for the mid-engine Corvette Zora to come out?

File: 1493596492464.png (585KB, 631x717px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 631x717px

>>17275808
>looks like ass
>sounds like shit
>V6
>electric motors
>electric steering
>nothing like the original
>glorified honda
I dunno why it isn't selling

When the NSX came out in 1991, it was a $60,000 car - roughly equal to $100,000 today.

>>17276294
>If they'd kept this generation of NSX under $100k

You realize adjusted for inflation the original NSX costed $130,000? this one is just $20,000 more. if the regular joe can afford a $130,000 car whats an extra $20,000 for a lot more car compacted in the deal?

>>17276432
No, adjusted for inflation, 60k 1991 bucks equals 100k 2017 bucks.

This NSX has a base price of 156k. Over 50% higher.

Screw the little guy and his want for a supercar, I guess.

>>17276302
He had to have fucked up somewhere, or simply wasn't used to some NSX weirdness.

I understand the GT350R is a seriously fast car, but the NSX is faster in a straight line to 60, and there's no way in hell it's not faster in the twisties.

File: nlsb85fhwaeuthm2ddte.jpg (702KB, 800x3200px) Image search: [Google]

702KB, 800x3200px

>>17276448
It didn't stay that price for long and eventually went to $80,000.

The NSX was never the little guy's super car. in 91 it was about as fast as a C4 Corvette and as time went on it was slower than an M3.

The little guy can't afford $100,000 cars either.

File: IMG_1049.jpg (53KB, 468x301px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 468x301px

>>17276302

>>17276432
First, >>17276448

And second, wages haven't risen with inflation so the argument is pointless. By both measures, the car is simply much more expensive.

>>17276528
Now that I think about it, doesnt this thing have fucked acceleration at high speeds compared to its competitors

>>17276528
arm chair engineer here so I may make myself sound retarded, but an alectric motor provides the most torque at 1 rpm, so to have them going faster (i.e. at high speeds around a track) it will provide diminishing returns for how heavy it it requiring the engine to work harder. the nsx is also heavier while only putting out ~50 more lbf·ft and ~50 more hp. plus ford magic and it's a honda lmao

>>17275997
well yeah, it is a muscle car.

>>17276024
The old one was only slow because it went from 270 hp to 290 hp over 13 years without major improvements and in that same time the base Corvette went from 245 horsepower to 400 horsepower.

The NSX was competitively fast in 1991.

It's just that it was NA so unlike it's other "Gentleman's Agreement" era competitors, you couldn't break the agreement just by replacing a wastegate spring.

File: NSX vs C4.png (219KB, 330x363px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 330x363px

>>17278766
>400 horsepower.
That's the horsepower of the highest trim and most expensive corvette.

Base (LT1) model was making nowhere near 400hp and was fat compared to the NSX.

>>17278795
The base Corvette made 400 horsepower the last year the OG NSX was made.

Can you read?

>>17278795
Also the base Corvette in 1991 was still using the L98, not the LT1.

File: oorakan.jpg (1MB, 4488x2458px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4488x2458px

>>17275808
Because no one wants to pay $150k+ for an Acura when you can get a pre owned Lamborghini Huracan or a McLaren 570s for just a couple dollars extra. It's not special enough to try and compete with the big boys. If it was $50k cheaper it would sell.

>>17278805
Why are you comparing a C6 to an aging NSX if it was barely faster than C4s in the early 90s? that isn't fast at all.

>>17275808
>Curb weight: 3,803 lbs
also hybrid bullshit they should have just gave it a 3.5 twin turbo

>>17278829
That was my point, that the old one was competitive at introduction, but suffered from lack of development over it's (really long) production lifespan.

Again, can you read?

>>17275808
It's sorta of a let down the performance doesn't really blow away the competition the interior is cheap compare to other competitors and acura doesn't have the prestige like other companies

>>17275808
The original NSX filled a gap in the market.

Today the market is flooded at every level. It's just another performance car.

>>17278881
But we don't even have to get into lack of development to make it look slow from the start and again, its a base model C4 Corvette. a car that was designed in 83... why is that the baseline for being competitive?

File: black-guy-ferguson-elementary-3rd-grade-watermelon-outfit.jpg (221KB, 735x1065px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 735x1065px

>v6

gee wonder why it's not selling

>>17278914
but they could have built a worthy successor that was priced reasonably which would bring in fans of the old nsx. Instead we got nu-nsx and no one wants it

>>17275808
>Why is it not selling??
designed by a woman

File: 914_1.jpg (94KB, 645x650px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 645x650px

>>17275808
For the same price you can have an R8 or a GT3, and if you do the extra mile you can have an huracan or a 488, all these cars (maybe outside of the R8) are guaranteed to keep their values.

>>17275808
>700lbs more than the old one
>Old one was sex on wheels, this one looks like a GTA supercar mashup
>Old one is arguably one of the best drivers cars ever built, the new one is completely numb and disconnected
>Old one came in manual, this one does not

>>17275808
If I was going to spend that much on a car why wouldn't I just get a Ferrari? Or spend a bit more and get a Huracan? Honda is not a sexy brand, if they want you to shell out six figures for a car it had better be something AMAZING to compensate, but it's not. It's okish but nothing special and no-one is going to be impressed by my 150k Honda the way they would be if it was 150k Ferrari

File: tossoff.png (140KB, 684x389px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 684x389px

>>17275808
they are fucking selling them for 400k in aus

>>17279354
It really is insane how much everything gets marked up by here. Yeah the Australian dollar is weak and it costs a bit more to get shipped here, but jesus, thats almost 350k USD.

>>17279356
That's what you get from liberal policies.

>>17275808
I'd honestly rather have the first gen NSX.

>>17276528
>He had to have fucked up somewhere
This is a professional driver mate. He does this shit for a living.

>>17279451
Then you're stupid. It was very underperforming even in its time, and overpriced.

>>17279467
>underperforming
>overpriced
I see not much has changed.

>>17275808
Slower than an electric 7-seater family sedan

>>17275808
>not particularly fast for its price
>not particularly luxurious for its price
>does not appeal to le supreme enthusiasts
>does not appeal to badge whores

The only reason I want one is because nobody else does.

>>17275830
So uh, where is acura actually being sold? The US, japan and canada? Europoor here, I've never seen acura here. I thought it was one of those badge engineered brands like nissan and infiniti, or ford and lincoln. You know, the US only ones

>>17276152
Someone who doesn't want to blend into the crowd or look like a swag fag
Seriously I've seen highschoolers with R8s

>>17278818
Looks like an Arab mobile

>>17275808
Every time you show someone your car you'll have to answer "Why didn't you buy a 488?"

>>17279010
Basically you want the old NSX again

Let's assume they did build it and sold it for $60k like they did in '91 without adjusting for inflation, you idiots would bitch that it's too expensive and would complain that they should have made an S2000 successor

>>17280080
The real world doesn't work that way, kiddie

>>17278943
ferd gt tho

>>17280080
I would never buy whatever ferrari is current gen. It's only one step down from driving a base model lambo.

>>17280103
I'm not surprised it sold out due to people trying to invest in a collector car but I'd be very surprised if it continued selling after people realized it's not really that compelling of a supercar.

>>17280080
rubbish

>>17276152
because audi is trash for poorfags in europe.
You can have a lot of nice old supercars and you pick a shitty upbranded VW driven mostly by chavs and white trash poorfags who think they're classy enlightened gentlemen.
Fuck audi, garbage brand for garbage people.
Every time I have met a massive stuck up cunt whos overly agressive and as dumb as a bag of rocks they always have an audi.
At least BMW has RWD.
(r8 is kind of okay but ruined by the 4 cockrings)

>>17280123
Nice rant, kid

>>17278818
>Lamborghini
>McLaren

I'd rather the NSX than either of those two. Boring af. A high trim 911 or Ferrari on the other hand...

>>17280124
Thanks man.

>>17275836
GTR is more expensive. Atleast the Nismo is 170k usd

>>17275808
Can get a 911 turbo for same price.

Sage.

>>17280300
it costs 50% more than a base GT-R and is equivalent in performance to it.

>>17275883
>pigfat
>lolcantturn

>>17280324
The NSX is also undertuned as fuck

And have you ever sat in a GTR or driven one? They're actually so awful

Because its 156k and its not as beautiful as the original

File: IMG_4897.jpg (113KB, 800x482px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 800x482px

>>17275808
>hybrid trash drivetrain
>muh ANGERY normie styling
>literally overpriced by $60k
>gets shat on by a GTR from 10 years ago

>inb4 some stupid nigger brings up a P1, 918, or LaFerrari & tries to compare muh electric motors to this Acura shitheap

original NSX objectively a best.

>>17275808
>156k for a jap car
I'm legitimately surprised the GTR is still around, Even though the base model is much cheaper.

>>17275808
A Corvette gets more MPG from a 6.2L V8 and no electric motors. Probably because it doesn't weigh literally 3900lbs.

>>17275808
I'd buy it if I could afford it. I'd even pick it over the 570S, gtr, corvette, 911 gt3 rs, and 2 really clean 1st gen nsx's

File: 1478730362083.jpg (58KB, 387x506px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 387x506px

>>17275808
Designed and built in Ohio.
There's your answer folks.

>>17280484
I probably would too but I would drive it semi-ironically.

>>17280441
But you've driven neither of them

>>17280282
This, you can get a 911 Turbo S for that price.

>>17278916
>why is that the baseline for being competitive?
Because that's about how fast most higher end sportscars were unless you were spending Diablo money? (Excepting the ZR1 and the OG Viper).

>>17276528
>there's no way in hell it's not faster in the twisties.
This is where you're wrong. It might be able to put power down sooner on corner exit than the GT350R, but the GT350R will carry more entry speed and have greater midcorner road holding.

>thread is unironically using gtr as a comparison when Porsche exists and is better in every way to both cars

Idiots

The worst thing about this car is that it drove up prices of the original NSX. I was saving for one and then the prices practically doubled overnight. Fuck this shit.

File: Screenshot_20170511-062228.png (277KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1440x2560px

Faster than literally anything with a roof that isn't a million dollar hyper car or a discontinued road legal track car

>>17281326
Prices were going up well before this car, they were following the air cooled 911 bubble

>>17281416
This triggers /o/

because no one wants to pay 160 grand for a honda. the nsx didnt sell either.

>>17279517
>electric 7-seater family sedan
Yeah, but those suck balls

>>17281416
Doesn't matter if it doesn't get the blood pumping to the loins. Supercar buyers generally don't want a pigfat TTV6 they want a V8 or V10.
NSX and the GT are meant to drive sales in other product lines.

>>17281900
>going fast doesn't matter
>being slow and having a heavy shitty sounding engine is what matters
Lmao

>>17281913
do you mean to say that the NSX doesn't sound like shit?
Think for a moment. Do the playboys that buy supercars go for fastest laps or even race them? naw. they get the cars to look like a douche and get women. A large part of that is having a car that doesn't sound like ass i.e. have a TTV6.

>>17281935
People who buy expensive cars do so for reasons you don't actually understand,
A YouTube personality is not representative of all expensive car buyers so keep trying

Nsx does not sound like shit just because huur v6
You are just a meme spewing carthrottle tier retard

>>17275985
This is exactly what they said about the original.

Yeah, how'd that turn out?

File: McLaren-570S-at-Dream-Cruise-10.jpg (711KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

711KB, 2048x1365px

>>17275808
>Same price as a Mclaren 570s
>911 turbo s
>3x the price of a lotus evora

you see why

>>17282096
>faster than a 675lt
>918 tier
>not a shitty toy car
Huur

>>17282109
What?
Its slower than the 570s in every metric

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UZFbVi4paU

>>17282124
See >>17281416

>>17275852
Yes, everyone would make that mistake looking at an NSX. You're the kind is badgetard that made Acura exist in the first place.

>>17282131
A single track it could be quicker than some cars sure
Its slower in every metric compared to the 570s

>>17276589
>ford magic
Is this code for cup tyres?

>>17282084
pretty well for the relatively few people who bought them?

>>17282084
>>17282720

9000 NSXs were sold in the U.S. between 1991 and 2005
that's about how many 911s were sold in the U.S. annually each year

>>17275808
>Too little.
>Too late.
>Too much.
>Too slow.

The original NS-X was a game-changer - this is a me-too disappointment.

>>17279256
I'll give you a hint, nigger: no one makes a supercar in Manuel anymore outside of the Viper.

Manuel's are outdated, slow, and the people who can afford these cars don't want them.

>>17282766
Tell that to Horacio Pagani you faggot.

>>17279279
Fuck brand. I'm not Arab, so I don't give a shit about that. I want something special, rare, and built to last. That's the nsx.

Just look at the old one and how desirable it is today. That's what the nsx is about. It was never the fastest (though the new one is certainly up there), it was never the cheapest (buy a Corvette if you want cheap), but it was special without the badge douchebaggery that comes with German and Italian shit

>>17279517
Kek, for the first 2 minutes maybe. Then the "7seater" will overheat and enter retard mode, informing you that you're retard for trying to face a legit supercar using a shitty American toaster

File: maxresdefault.jpg (353KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1280x720px

>>17282795
luckily you don't need more than 2 minutes to embarrass your shitbox on the road. you only need 2.28 seconds

File: 23968814.jpg (79KB, 380x256px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 380x256px

>>17280123

This, so much this. Audi is the ragecuck brand du nos jour - a VW for BMW money - you literally have to be retarded to fall for it. I'd take the 2nd rate Honda over one any day of the week.

>>17282774
>Italian

A boppityboopity to you, Francesco

>Mazda doesn't have a halo car currently
>everyone still sucks their dick
>Honda finally releases a halo car
>lol it's fucking slow overpriced garbage
I swear /o/ just hates Honda for no reason.

>>17278943

Really though. This

If it was a V8 it would be selling. Hell an i6 would have sparked more interest. But a space saving econocar design? Sheesh

File: senna.jpg (463KB, 1600x1083px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 1600x1083px

>>17282846
it is though. it's just not good at anything. at least the first NSX was "le real driver's car"

>>17275808
because it's a fucking civic

>>17282811
>Let's take them to the track
>ok
>Model S melts after 1 lap