SagarisGTB
Honda has improved in this area over the years. Nevertheless, the people that do the cabin for Aston Martin (I might ad that they are on Ford's payroll) are no different than the people who work on the NSX, both Human. Granted, the people at Aston may have more experience and what not, who is to say that the next NSX wont luck out with a great looking interior. Having said that, you shouldnt compare a GT's cabin to a sports car's cabin. The next gen NSX wont be competing directly with the DB9 anyway.
Firstly, the first NSX was always meant to be low production. Second, the fact that the first NSX wasnt the biggest hit is irrelevant. If I remember correctly, the first gen 911 didnt sell all that well either... The fact that the NSX lost sales due to age is completely understandable, of course it sold better back when it was a Ferrari killer, and not when it was a 10-15 year old car. The japanese hp agreement can be blamed for the lack of updates, (unlike Nissan, Toyota, Subaru and Mitsubishi, Honda generally stayed true to the caps), and by the time the cap was lifted, the car was over a dozen years old.
You know, something that amazes me. If the next-gen NSX wasnt meant to compete with Aston DB9, then
what exactly is it going to go head-on with? And if Honda wants to beat Aston and challege F430, then at some point the whole comparison of the interior, sheetmetal design and prestige is going to surface. And for your information, the Aston
is a sports car, alright? Ford GT has a great interior and thats a hardcore sports car. Its not a GT, but its a nicer place to spend time than in the NSX. And you also claim that Honda improved the interior over the years. Then,
why, why, why does those car mags criticize the
'05 Honda NSXs interior as looking too much like the one in '89? Please? Im confused
Yes, they are both human, buy why does some brands make better looking cars than others, and why do some brands create awful looking cars? I thought they were both human, why arent they made equal, can I ask? And what difference does the designers being on Ford's payroll make? I love Fords, whats wrong with that? Bigger company, more resources? I thought Honda had more money and was doing excellent compared to Ford, whose stock has been going downhill for the past few years and is in financial woe? Aston being owned by Ford does not make any difference; in fact Ford should be credited with reviving the legendary marque.
The 1st gen 911 did not sell well - I do not know if that is true or not. But then, instead of saying "oh, great, its not selling. Lets dump it" and giving up, they improved it, and made it
better!! What is Honda doing? "oh, NSX isnt selling, its interest is hitting all time low, lets dump it instead of making it better and more appealing." Thats the worst attitude a car maker can have. Im not sure if anyone read this, but on my last post I said that Honda was weighing its options on introducing the NSXs successor under a different name. Why do they do this? To distance the new model from the old one. The oldest trick in automotive book.
The hp agreement was a stupid thing, and almost no maker stayed true to that limit, except for Honda. You know, they gained nothing from obeying that limit, and it just hurted them. "Whats the most exciting car Honda produced ever? NSX. Whats the horsepower? 280.
280??" Why would anyone think of Honda as a fun brand when the most powerful car they offered was a 280hp overpriced overhyped exotic? No wonder they have been often seen as a conservatinve brand. And even with the cap in place, Nissan still managed to update the GT-R in such a fashion that it kept interest for a long time; Subaru updated their Impreza, without breaching the limit, for years and it retained popularity. NSX was Honda's biggest ever mistake, not because they offered it it, but because of their treatment of the car that reminds me of an orphan. Never received much updates, never got attention for a while, and never successful.
