Acura Is Stopping Production On NSX
 

http://autonet.ca/Spotlight/NewModel...07/12/nsx1.jpg

http://autonet.ca/Spotlight/NewModel...2/1128057.html

DH

Good, now they can further concentrate on making crappy mid-level front wheel drive "sports luxury" cars.

car was a piece of shit-
my buddy who owned one had to replace his tires every 12,000 miles?
They had a design defect and the tires wore like shit-
It was a very costly lesson for my friend-
He had a 4 yr lease and went through 14 sets of tires

lots of buzz about the prototype thats been at some car shows

http://www.sportbilen.se/forum/bildf...ura_hsc_04.jpg

might be something similar to a successor

I'd import a 1990 japanese Honda NSX, just because the steering wheel is on the wrong side. Except, they haven't depreciated like other japanese cars have, a 90 will still set me back about $45-50,000 Canadian dollars :mad:

To bad Acura is halting production though, the NSX is a phenominal car in every aspect. It's not everyday you get behind the wheel of a honda and think, "wow, this thing has torque" :winkwink:

that rather sucks but it can't exactly be a huge money maker for them.

It is a nice looking car, but I read some bad reviews about them.

If you want to sink money into repairs for a fast foreign car....buy a 2008 Lotus Esprit

If by design defect, you mean the tires that were custom made for the car.

[A/H] The Yokohama/ Bridgestone tires that originally came on the NSX and the NSX-T were designed for this car. Very hard sidewall, built in bias, VERY soft compound. The target for the car was "The best handling production car." Many magazines have given the NSX that title.

Clearly, if you're friend didn't understand the concept behind soft compound tires, he should have bought a civic :2 cents:

Edit: And why didn't he tell the dealership he wanted less aggresive suspension settings? The tires wore very quickly because the settings were geared towards handling, not tire economy.

[KJ] The front tires typically wear out on the inside long before the outside is worn. Reducing or even removing the front toe-out and minimizing the camber improves the tire wear, at the cost of some turn-in crispness and, high speed stability. Even with no camber or toe, the front Yokos would wear on the inside due to their internal bias that pre-tensions them for turning. The rears have the opposite bias, so negative camber acts to balance the wear between outside and inside.

It was the top care back in the early 90s, never really improved though :(

Ya they go through tires, but only cause they handle so well and you can take corners doing mach 3.

right, i have an s2000 and they go through tires like nothing as well, front ones every 2 years, back ones yearly

i was told that z rated tires are high performance, therefore soft and wear out quickly

12k on an exotic is actually pretty good.I change the rears on my 911turbo about every 8k and the fronts every 14k.Bridgestone S02's.

Yup! Out with the old and in with the new. This is whats is suppose to replace the NSX.

The early NSX's did have a defect that made the tire wear faster, They later fixed this.

For all your NSX needs :thumbsup

http://nsxprime.com

Yup Z rated is like driving on Erasers :1orglaugh I Love the ride though :thumbsup

man - i didn't even know they still made those things!

14 sets of tires in 4 years and he got 12,000 miles per set? So he drove 168,000 miles in 4 years in an exotic sports car? Seems like he liked it a lot. :upsidedow

that prototype is damn sexy! there were rummours about an acura rsx type r but I haven't seen anything about it being produced yet.

It looked nice but wasn't worth the money for what was under the hood in my opinion.
WG

Similiar to the type S or something different?
WG