New NSX to have V-10

[BMWDave]

Honda says it will build a V10 engine; new powerplant scheduled for NSX replacement
YUZO YAMAGUCHI | Automotive News
Posted Date: 7/20/05
TOKYO -- Honda Motor Co. has long maintained that it wouldn't develop a V8 production engine.

But it now says it will develop a V10.

Honda will install the powerful engine in a successor of the current NSX sports car, which is powered by a V6. Production of the current NSX will stop at the end of this year.

The V10 will be more powerful than any other engine Honda has built for its production vehicles.

The NSX successor will debut in "three to four years," says Takeo Fukui, Honda's president. He would not elaborate the plan. The new sports car will be sold worldwide.

It isn't known if Honda plans to use the V10 in any other vehicles."What we're aiming at next is not a V8 but a V10," says Motoatsu Shiraishi, president of Honda R&D Co., Honda's engineering arm. "We've got to be the top of a top (group) in producing engines."

[Raghavan]

wouldn't it be easier to make a v8? stick together two (old) S2000 engines and get a 4.0 V8 with 480hp. That'd make a really sweet NSX.

[NomisR]

I don't think that's how it works...  but couldn't they just drop in a turbo 6?  They're experienced with turbos from F1s, they can pull it off.  If Porsche can do turbo 6, why can't Honda?  I don't see why all the bitching about Honda having a 6 cyclinder, Porsches don't cost any less with their NA 6 and nobody pisses all over them, it's anti japanese bias.  

[Raghavan]

I don't think that's how it works...  but couldn't they just drop in a turbo 6?  They're experienced with turbos from F1s, they can pull it off.  If Porsche can do turbo 6, why can't Honda?  I don't see why all the bitching about Honda having a 6 cyclinder, Porsches don't cost any less with their NA 6 and nobody pisses all over them, it's anti japanese bias.

yeah, just stick em together at the crank.

[Run Away]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

I'll believe it when i see it.

[Raghavan]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

he said that he doesn't htiink you can join two engines together.

[NomisR]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

Yeah, turbo 6, even if newly developed would be fine, I don't really see any need for a V8 or V10.  Plus, I don't think they can just join 2 I-4 to make a V8.  2 V4 might work though I'd think.  Or maybe 2 V6 to make a V12??  

[BMWDave]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

Yeah, turbo 6, even if newly developed would be fine, I don't really see any need for a V8 or V10.  Plus, I don't think they can just join 2 I-4 to make a V8.  2 V4 might work though I'd think.  Or maybe 2 V6 to make a V12??

2 V6 make a W12, like VW's.

[Secret Chimp]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

Yeah, turbo 6, even if newly developed would be fine, I don't really see any need for a V8 or V10.  Plus, I don't think they can just join 2 I-4 to make a V8.  2 V4 might work though I'd think.  Or maybe 2 V6 to make a V12??

2 V6 make a W12, like VW's.

Not if you stick them end to end, duh    

[NomisR]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

he said that he doesn't htiink you can join two engines together.

Not from S2000 engines anyways, it's I4 and would make a really long engine if they tried to make a I8.  

[Raghavan]

Did you even read what he said? He said turbo one of their current V6s, not join two existing engines together.


Anyways, I'd prefer if they had made a V8, but I'm sure the V10 will be sweet anyways.

he said that he doesn't htiink you can join two engines together.

Not from S2000 engines anyways, it's I4 and would make a really long engine if they tried to make a I8.

yes you can. stick them side by side and join them at the crankshaft, not end to end.

[giant_mtb]

Over at C/D someone made a thread similar to this and asked if they were going to use the F1 V-10...         What an idiot...NEWBIE!    

[Raza]

A V10 in that?  Sweet!





4-5 years for the next NSX?

[R33 GT-R]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

[giant_mtb]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

You should buy one... ^_^

[BMWDave]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

You should buy one... ^_^

I dont like the NSX's styling....its very nice, but definitely not on par with a supercar.  It seems to plain, and plebian, if you will.

[giant_mtb]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

You should buy one... ^_^

I dont like the NSX's styling....its very nice, but definitely not on par with a supercar.  It seems to plain, and plebian, if you will.

Ehhh sorta...I still think it's a very good looking car and there arent any other cars on the road that look anything like it, but you are right, it isn't on par with other supercars.

[NomisR]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

You should buy one... ^_^

I dont like the NSX's styling....its very nice, but definitely not on par with a supercar.  It seems to plain, and plebian, if you will.

Ehhh sorta...I still think it's a very good looking car and there arent any other cars on the road that look anything like it, but you are right, it isn't on par with other supercars.

Yeah, it doesn't have the huge panel gaps and the low rent interior like the super cars, WTH was Honda thinking charging so much for such a low quality car... full leather interior, aluminum body with little gaps, they need to do what other manufacturers did, lots of plastic and huge gaps..    

[BMWDave]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

You should buy one... ^_^

I dont like the NSX's styling....its very nice, but definitely not on par with a supercar.  It seems to plain, and plebian, if you will.

Ehhh sorta...I still think it's a very good looking car and there arent any other cars on the road that look anything like it, but you are right, it isn't on par with other supercars.

Yeah, it doesn't have the huge panel gaps and the low rent interior like the super cars, WTH was Honda thinking charging so much for such a low quality car... full leather interior, aluminum body with little gaps, they need to do what other manufacturers did, lots of plastic and huge gaps..  

What supercars have low rent interiors :o ?

[Raghavan]

I saw a yellow NSX yesterday, the car never changes but always looks good.

You should buy one... ^_^

I dont like the NSX's styling....its very nice, but definitely not on par with a supercar.  It seems to plain, and plebian, if you will.

Ehhh sorta...I still think it's a very good looking car and there arent any other cars on the road that look anything like it, but you are right, it isn't on par with other supercars.

Yeah, it doesn't have the huge panel gaps and the low rent interior like the super cars, WTH was Honda thinking charging so much for such a low quality car... full leather interior, aluminum body with little gaps, they need to do what other manufacturers did, lots of plastic and huge gaps..  

What supercars have low rent interiors :o ?

the F430.

[NomisR]

What doesn't?  Name an Italian one and check the interior, it's definately not top quality, the only thing that's making it expensive looking is the prancing horse and the raging bull.

[BMWDave]

What doesn't?  Name an Italian one and check the interior, it's definately not top quality, the only thing that's making it expensive looking is the prancing horse and the raging bull.

I have to disagree there...

This would be low rent -->

[Raza]

The NSX isn't a supercar.  It's a sports car/GT that costs 90 grand.  The idea was to outperform a 348 (which it drew several styling cues from, and subsequently, the 355 as well) for less money.  Which it did.  It needed more power in later years to keep up with cars like the Corvette and Viper that offered a more brutal experience for a lower price.  Styling was classic and beautiful until the bulbous fixed headlights became standard equipment and not aftermarket fare.

[NomisR]

The NSX isn't a supercar.  It's a sports car/GT that costs 90 grand.  The idea was to outperform a 348 (which it drew several styling cues from, and subsequently, the 355 as well) for less money.  Which it did.  It needed more power in later years to keep up with cars like the Corvette and Viper that offered a more brutal experience for a lower price.  Styling was classic and beautiful until the bulbous fixed headlights became standard equipment and not aftermarket fare.

Well, considering that it perform on par than the cars that costs more than it, is more reliable, and drivable.  Hell even the cheaper cars like the ones you listed are better at that and people complain about the Honda?    

[Raza]

The NSX isn't a supercar.  It's a sports car/GT that costs 90 grand.  The idea was to outperform a 348 (which it drew several styling cues from, and subsequently, the 355 as well) for less money.  Which it did.  It needed more power in later years to keep up with cars like the Corvette and Viper that offered a more brutal experience for a lower price.  Styling was classic and beautiful until the bulbous fixed headlights became standard equipment and not aftermarket fare.

Well, considering that it perform on par than the cars that costs more than it, is more reliable, and drivable.  Hell even the cheaper cars like the ones you listed are better at that and people complain about the Honda?  

I know it didn't sound like it, but I was supporting your argument.  The thing is that the NSX didn't really evolve when it was in a market segment that has made leaps and bounds from when the NSX was first concieved 15 years ago (this, of course, was due to no Accord parts being in the NSX).  It was a faster and better handling car than the 348, but then the C5 Corvette came on the scene with its brutish LS1 and a price tag that's half of the NSX's, and the Viper, which was even more brutish, but costs almost equal to the NSX.  The NSX was a failure because it was seen as an overpriced competitor to the Corvette C5, when it was really a lower priced alternative to a Ferrari 348 and eventual 355.  It was a sports car reliable enough to be driven everyday, much like the C5, but its exclusivity is what made it more of a competitor to low end Ferraris than to Corvettes.  The biggest problem the car had was in market perception, and the fact that people were not as willing to shell out 90 grand for an Acura as they were to spend 50 grand on a car that has been around for decades, or 120 grand for a car from a company that is one of, if not the, most fabled names in automotive history.

[NomisR]

The NSX isn't a supercar.  It's a sports car/GT that costs 90 grand.  The idea was to outperform a 348 (which it drew several styling cues from, and subsequently, the 355 as well) for less money.  Which it did.  It needed more power in later years to keep up with cars like the Corvette and Viper that offered a more brutal experience for a lower price.  Styling was classic and beautiful until the bulbous fixed headlights became standard equipment and not aftermarket fare.

Well, considering that it perform on par than the cars that costs more than it, is more reliable, and drivable.  Hell even the cheaper cars like the ones you listed are better at that and people complain about the Honda?  

I know it didn't sound like it, but I was supporting your argument.  The thing is that the NSX didn't really evolve when it was in a market segment that has made leaps and bounds from when the NSX was first concieved 15 years ago (this, of course, was due to no Accord parts being in the NSX).  It was a faster and better handling car than the 348, but then the C5 Corvette came on the scene with its brutish LS1 and a price tag that's half of the NSX's, and the Viper, which was even more brutish, but costs almost equal to the NSX.  The NSX was a failure because it was seen as an overpriced competitor to the Corvette C5, when it was really a lower priced alternative to a Ferrari 348 and eventual 355.  It was a sports car reliable enough to be driven everyday, much like the C5, but its exclusivity is what made it more of a competitor to low end Ferraris than to Corvettes.  The biggest problem the car had was in market perception, and the fact that people were not as willing to shell out 90 grand for an Acura as they were to spend 50 grand on a car that has been around for decades, or 120 grand for a car from a company that is one of, if not the, most fabled names in automotive history.

The car mostly died from perception and not the actual performance of the car.  Even after 15 years in the market and relatively unchanged, it still performance on par with cars that costs more.  And providing what you get for the money, simply the car being hand crafted alone, it is worth just as much as their competitors.  C5 is an exception though, it was designed as a mass produced vehicle with high performance and GM did really well with the car.