LexFather

That is their head designer???
The NSX forum hates it
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81401

rosskoss

This car was styled at Acura's American studios. The HSC was styled in Japan. Acura is losing it. Designs like this will only make it even more difficult for the brand to gain traction. First the absolutely horrible looking MDX and RDX and now this monstrosity. Acura, please close up the American design studio and lets see some designs from Japan again.

DrUnBiased

Thats why it's a good thing we are all entitled to our own opinions. I'm sure I'm not the only person who see's it.













It is the side and rear shots that really remind me of the DB9.

LexFather

The C-pillar is the same. Otherwise, you are doing the DB-9 a disservice.
I just posted where I said it looks like a vette and winding road agrees with me
Whatever, I'm reading 2 threads on the NSX forums and they very disappointed.

I think it needs a new name or maybe bring out another car, RWD, mid-engined as the NSX.

rosskoss

Yeah, we're all entitled to our own opinion.

DB9 - gorgeous! (minus front overhang)

Acura NSX - ugly.

DrUnBiased

Exactly.

I guess it's like the LS460 being said to look like the Camry or the RL like the Accord. Some see it, some don't.

DrUnBiased

That freak designed the freakish Acura Advanced Sedan Concept. I heard he has been demoted since. lol.

Japanese native John Ikeda designed the Acura Advanced Sports Car Concept.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

The HSC concept is sooo much better. Damn Acura's designer.

UDel

I would not say this new concept is ugly by any means and it is actually a nice looking car, it is just a big disappointment as a replacement for the NSX (I think the MDX and RDX are nice looking SUVs with very nice interiors). As for a dissapointment for being a NSX replacement the main thing is the front engine layout instead of the mid engine layout. The next is its kind of bland styling that looks more like a coupe then a exotic sports car. It just does not have the gorgeous head turning exotic looks of the original NSX. It does not look like a 70K+ car either from the pictures let alone 90K or 100K. I know Acura knew that this is not what the previous owners wanted for the next NSX so it was probrably executed for what was best for Acura and not for the buyers of this car. I may have been a little hard on the concept and I will reserve final judgement for the production car especially till I see it in person since the concept is really too radical for what the production car would look like and I hope they don't tone it down or make it any more conservative when it hits production. If this was some type of higher end coupe to slot above the RL and below a real NSX replacement then it would be a perfectly good car but it is a dissapointment replacing the NSX. I know they could have come up with something more exotic looking and head turning then this even if it was front engined. Who knows maybe the production version will not weigh much more then the last NSX and will outperform it and all its competition in every category while maintaining a high level of driver feedback, if it does this then I will give it the proper respect it deserves. If they can keep the costs of it around the high 60's and spawn other models off its platform then that is all the better.

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

I'm one Honda enthusiasts that absolutely hates that dual staked exhausts. I think the rear end of this car is ugly. I like the side profile. Front profile is okay. Kind of looks Viper ish, or Corvette ish. The rear has to do, as well as those exhausts tips.

Gojirra99

That's the way I think about it too . . . & I don't think there's anything seriously wrong with thre rear as some of the others do either . . .

MR_F1

HSC concept looks 10x better.
The NSX also needs to remain mid engined. V10 is nice though. Dont care for the SH-AWD, but I could live with it.

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

My post above I said the rear is ugly and I even took the Acura survey and said so as well. The more I look at it though you guys are right. The rear is not ugly. What made it ugly for me is those stupid stacked dual exhausts. That turns me off so much I just saw the whole rear end as ugly.

What was mentioned above about the disappointment about this car not really being the car itself but being an NSX replacement is right on I think. As someone that owned an NSX I just can't see the NSX being anything but mid engine. Acura making a front engine GT car is more than fine with me. They just need to let us all off the hook and officially say the NSX name is dead.

The price also needs to stay way down. When the NSX came out in 1990, it made people talk and ask the question why buy a Ferrari when you could buy this for much cheaper. The problem I see with this GT car is if the price is too high and along side its other GT car competition, people will ask why buy this Acura when you can buy a Lexus LF-A, Astin Martin, BMW M6 and such. If Acura was smart they would distance this car from the original NSX, call it something else, and sell if for no more than $70K.-$80K.

LexFather

Chris, I am confused also. If this is front engined and V-10, I see M6 competitor. With SH-AWD though, it will probably be a better handler than it but like you said a GT, not a all out sports car like the NSX.

The LF-A is a V-10, not sure front or rear but the DIMENSIONS are of a sports car. The LF-A is smaller than a 911!!! This car is 180 inches long, that is he size of a TSX/IS350.

The GT-R will I feel blend both, 4 seats but harder edged than the Acura . Front engine, V-6 TT though will simply not convert those that want displacement.

Imagine a front engine V-8 911???? This is what Acura is doing to the NSX. I also hope they change the name.

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

Technology wise I have little doubt that this car will perform great. Just like I have no doubt the LF-A performance will be great. That is why I question this type of car coming from Acura being placed head to head with another Japanese competitor like the LF-A. The only way I see it being a great success is if it cost $30K less than an LF-A and other competitors. The size doesn't really concern me as small GT car or large GT car both the LF-A and ASC seem to be that that, a GT car. If Acura surprises us all and this car really does under cut the competition in MSRP by a good margin, I'd take it all back. That would be a great move. However, if this car lists anywhere near $100K, I just don't understand why Acura would want to compete in that segment when they could have easily cornered the $100K mid engine exotic car market and again have something that no other company had unless you wanted to drop down another $100K.

About the V10. I rather this car have a V8 and be priced no higher than $70K with 350-400HP than to have this car have a V10 with 500+ HP costing $100K.