Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Acura Delays NSX Production Due To New Engine, Now Coming As 2017 Model

      Acura Pushes Back the Production Start for the NSX

    The long wait for the Acura NSX continues. Automobile reports that Acura has pushed back production from this fall to next Spring due to a change in engine layout. The original plan was to use a naturally-aspirated V6 for the vehicle, but it was decided to add turbochargers to the engine. This has caused Acura to build a bespoke twin-turbo V6 and change the engine layout to a longitudinal configuration.

     

    This delay puts the transformation from the NSX being a concept car to production car at about four years.

     

    One item that is still up in the air is when the Acura NSX will go on sale. Jon Ikeda, Acura VP and general manager tells the magazine that meeting with dealers in October will hold the answer.

     

    Source: Automobile

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    So adding twin turbo's, a large increase in weight, this will be interesting to watch if they can really get it into production with only a 6 month change.

     

    I would avoid the first one built that is for sure.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    WTF are they doing over there at Acura?? This thing has been in the pipeline long enough to get a refresh by now. Is the car even going to be relevant when it comes out? I can't imagine there will be too many enthusiasts still frothing at the mouth for this car in another 6+ months.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Only rabid Honda / Acura fans will still like it in another 6 months. My gut tells me this will become a pig with pathetic performance due to the bloated twin turbo V6 and the changes that are needed.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Every year a sports car gets delayed is another nail in the coffin.

     

    When the NSX concept bowed in 2011, 500 horsepower pushed sports cars into supercar territory, and a sub-4 second 0-60 was a benchmark of top tier of performance. Now there's a monster Corvette that hits 60 mph in 3.0-3.2 seconds and top tier performance is in the sub-3 second range.

     

    I predict underwhelming results similar to the LFA that–for $400,000–couldn't match the performance or ride quality of cars less than half its price from day 1.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Every year a sports car gets delayed is another nail in the coffin.

     

    When the NSX concept bowed in 2011, 500 horsepower pushed sports cars into supercar territory, and a sub-4 second 0-60 was a benchmark of top tier of performance. Now there's a monster Corvette that hits 60 mph in 3.0-3.2 seconds and top tier performance is in the sub-3 second range.

     

    I predict underwhelming results similar to the LFA that–for $400,000–couldn't match the performance or ride quality of cars less than half its price from day 1.

    It is an near-exact replay of the LFA in terms of product planning. It's like the Japanese still think it's 1990 and the competition is still asleep at the wheel.

    Which makes it even more fun that they're doing it. I do not see this ending well for Honda.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    why not just a simple manual trans and a new high tech force fed v6?

     

    I'm wondering the same thing. I wish they'd offer a "base-model" NSX with a simple RWD layout and manual transmission or DCT. That would appeal to purists. Hybrid sports cars don't do much for me, personally.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I hope this car fails miserably. Just out of spite. These decade plus long development plans are insane. Did they learn nothing from the LFA?

     

    I mean, Ford completely engineered and built a complete GT 'concept' in what, 2 years? Hell, look at the short turnaround from 918 concept to production car.

     

    You're a joke, Acura. And Infiniti, too. Japanese brands in general right now, really.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I hope this car fails miserably. Just out of spite. These decade plus long development plans are insane. Did they learn nothing from the LFA?

     

    I mean, Ford completely engineered and built a complete GT 'concept' in what, 2 years? Hell, look at the short turnaround from 918 concept to production car.

     

    You're a joke, Acura. And Infiniti, too. Japanese brands in general right now, really.

    Agreed.

     

    Honestly, I think they could have taken 15 years to make the car as long as it wasn't shown at an autoshow 15 years before production. They should have either been better at getting it finished or not shown it at auto shows anywhere close to how early they did.

     

    The Ford GT could have been hidden for 2 years.. they just kept it under wraps, like they should have and like Acura should have.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I forgot to say....it seems  the world would likely to see a mid-engined Corvette before the world will see another NSX.

     

    After all the negativity posted in this thread about the upcoming NSX,  regardless that some people wish it to fail, I for one, cant wait for it to grace its presence.

    The NSX looks fantastic and although the LFA was never on my radar screen, other than that V10, I am smitten with the new NSX...

     

    Oh...just another painful reminder on how long ago Acura is telling us a new NSX is on its way...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    They should just delay it until 2027.

     

    Watch the production model show up with a turbo 3.5 liter Accord V6 making 400 hp and it will get outrun by Mustang GT's and M3's that cost 1/3 as much.  The NSX is a sham, the 90s car had like 270 hp and 220 lb-ft of torque with 5.8 second 0-60 times and they wanted to call that a super car.  Lame.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Personally I think GM is too late to the Hybrid party and rather than spend and write off all the billions of dollars on their EVs that are actually selling well, they should have stayed the course and not followed Stupid Ford and Idiot47. GM has a 'handful of hybrids' coming - but are they the ones you want? I do not see GM actually doing well in this space as they are already too far behind.
    • On a more positive note, travel related stuff ... A historic milestone was achieved by Cunard Line within the last week.  When she was built, Queen Mary 2 (QM2) was too big to transit the Panama Canal.  The same was true for other supersized passenger ships.  In the interim, new larger locks were engineered and put into service. https://travelweekly.com.au/queen-mary-2s-first-transit-through-panama-canal-on-way-to-australia/ I saw the QM2 enter San Francisco Bay in 2007 because I was living out West.  It came in on a Sunday and I spent the weekend south of the city and near SFO.  I went there in a rented 2007 Monte Carlo costing less than $25 a day and stayed at one of the cheap chain hotels near SFO costing about $50 a night, which was ridiculously cheap even then. The ship went around South America and sailed northward up the Pacific.  As such, it's not a trip they would be making too often with the QM2. QM2 transited the Panama Canal for the first time just days ago.  She is headed to Los Angeles AND San Francisco.  To clarify the article's headline, Australia is just its next leg - this is the full world cruise.  She was last in Los Angeles in 2006 when she saluted her namesake Queen Mary and last in San Francisco in 2007 and seeing the passage under the Golden Gate Bridge was unforgettable.  These were the only visits to these ports.  With the new Panama Canal locks, her visiting the North Pacific Ocean and its major ports is much more likely to be on future world voyages. In the Panama Canal transit, the nail biter was supposedly going under the Bridge of the Americas - the one with the curved top.  I saw this YouTube with passengers cheering and motorists up above honking. I blame my parents for this!  They took us across the Atlantic a time or two too many when we were kids and this fascination began.
    • WTF kind of article is this? Piss-poor grammar and sentences. "By the time the odometer ticked past that 160,000 kilometre mark, equivalent to 160,000 kilometres, 99,000, the pack still retained over 90 percent of its original net capacity." Then it jumps to 91% remaining capacity somehow...? And when jumping to 91% capacity remaining, I don't think they did any math at all. See below for a paragraph that shouldn't be made as evidence of anything. As an engineer, this kind of "facts" should infuriate you.  "Battery health statistics can sound abstract until you translate them into the range figure you see on your dashboard. In this case, the Volkswagen ID. 3 Pro S started life with a usable pack of 77 kWh, and independent testing recorded an initial real world range of 77 k and 272 miles on a full charge. After the long term trial, the car still had 91% of its battery capacity, a figure that aligns with separate reporting that the Volkswagen ID 3 retained 91% battery capacity in a 160,000 kilometre test. In practice, that meant the car lost only around eight miles of usable range, a change small enough that you would struggle to notice in daily driving." 272 x .09 = 24.5 miles. Theoretically losing 9% would lose the owner about 25 miles of range, not 8 miles. It is now a 248-mile range EV.  This looks like some garbage AI-generated article.  Just for the record, I'm not saying that EVs don't have good battery management and degradation. I'm just saying this article was an embarrassing example to stand by.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search