Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more ..

On Mar 27, 2:49 pm, " Frank" <norep... RemoveThis @nothome.net> wrote:
> The Nissan GT-R is awesome and so will be the new V10 front engine "NSX."
> But do we need 500hp monsters doing 0-60mph under 3.5 sec and over 200mph on
> the street? I would prefer the old mid-engine NSX both in styling and fuel
> efficiency with a combine city/highway of 18mpg. That's what my kid gets on
> his Civic Si.
>
> A few years back Acura was talking about the new "NSX" with performance like
> this but with a fuel efficiency of something like 40mpg. What were they
> talking about?

While the old NSX was a fine car, my 2003 Corvette 6-speed manages to
eek out 27 mpg when used for my daily commute (mostly highway). It
gets about half that when I drive it for "pleasure." I've had one
mechanical issue with the car that was taken care of by Chevy at zero
cost to me. Certainly, the Corvette handles much differently than the
NSX but there's no doubt that it is faster around any racetrack, costs
much less to buy and apparently is more fuel efficient. I hear the
2008 Corvette, despite making 430 HP (vs 350 HP in my 2003) is even
more fuel efficient, handles better and is a more comfortable car.
True, not the snob appeal, excuse me - exclusivity, of the NSX but GM
has shown some dedication to the sports car while Honda let both the
NSX and S2000 die slow and agonizing deaths.

Unlike Honda, GM is building its sports car to become lighter weight,
more powerful, better handling and consume less fuel. While I think
the Honda Accord is the best, low-cost family sedan available right
now, I gotta give GM credit where credit is due. From what little has
been leaking to the Press regarding the next generation Corvette, it
will not be a mid-engine car (too expensive) but rather the same
layout as now but on a new, smaller frame. I wouldn't be surprised to
see a significantly smaller base engine achieving well over 30 mpg
highway.
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

" Frank" <noreplay DeleteThis @nothome.net> wrote in
news:6fSdnewfGfrHcXbanZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@comcast.com:

> The Nissan GT-R is awesome and so will be the new V10 front engine
> "NSX." But do we need 500hp monsters doing 0-60mph under 3.5 sec and
> over 200mph on the street? I would prefer the old mid-engine NSX both
> in styling and fuel efficiency with a combine city/highway of 18mpg.
> That's what my kid gets on his Civic Si.


He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that car,
then.


>
> A few years back Acura was talking about the new "NSX" with
> performance like this but with a fuel efficiency of something like
> 40mpg. What were they talking about?
>


No idea. Maybe a hybrid version?

If you don't like gas swilling behemoths, you can always buy a Fit.
Nobody's forcing anybody to buy a V10.

And it's not a question of "need".If we were reduced to buying things only
on the basis of "need", all the things that make life fun would be gone.
The things that make life fun satisfy our /desires/.

I find it interesting that the V10 is happening considering Honda's
previously-stated intention to never build anything bigger than a V6,
because anything bigger wouldn't be "green" enough (that's why the
Ridgeline only has a V6 in a market dominated by V8s).

There is some merit to the concept of a V10 of moderate displacement:
Smaller cylinders mean better control over emissions, which dovetails
nicely with Honda's core philosophies.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

I will try to be as gentle as possible, but comparing a Corvette to an NSX
or any supercar is not reasonable. A Corvette uses 50-year old technology,
a pushrod engine, I thin it still has rear leaf springs!, it is plastic
inside -- an interior similar to a Chevette. I looked at Corvettes and
walked away thinking how could they sell these things. They are simply
inferior to a supercar in every conceivable way. They are manufactured on
an assembly line.

Of course, Corvettes are noisy and relatively quick in a straight line, but
at high speed, like all pushrod engines, they run out of power. My NSX
would rev much higher, but the rev limiter limits rpm to a bit over 8000,
and it is pulling even harder once the VTEC kicks in at around 6000 rpm. If
you have never driven a true supercar, you may think a front-engine car is
impressive. One drive in a mid-engine true supercar and your opinion will
be forever changed.

There was a test done by one of the car magazines that tested several cars
including the NSX and Corvette, as well as the 911, and jokingly a Camaro.
The test was 0 to 150 mph to 0. The only car that beat the NSX was a Viper.
Nothing else beat the NSX. It is a true supercar, holding its value as no
new Corvette does. I have owned my NSX for 5 1/2 years now, and it is worth
at least as much as I paid for it. It has never been in the rain, and of
course, never in snow. This is not much of a hardship here in California as
it only rains perhaps 10-20 days per year.

I guess it's good that more people don't comprehend the value of supercars
like the NSX -- I couldn't have afforded one. Of course, now that I have
one, let the prices increase!

I will post the 0-150-0 in a new post.

- Russ in SB



On 3/28/08 4:20 AM, in article
aaccb234-328c-47fe-ba0a-02e8a50c3e16.RemoveThis@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com, "ACAR"
<dimndsonmywndshld.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mar 27, 2:49 pm, " Frank" <norep....RemoveThis@nothome.net> wrote:
>> The Nissan GT-R is awesome and so will be the new V10 front engine "NSX."
>> But do we need 500hp monsters doing 0-60mph under 3.5 sec and over 200mph on
>> the street? I would prefer the old mid-engine NSX both in styling and fuel
>> efficiency with a combine city/highway of 18mpg. That's what my kid gets on
>> his Civic Si.
>>
>> A few years back Acura was talking about the new "NSX" with performance like
>> this but with a fuel efficiency of something like 40mpg. What were they
>> talking about?
>
> While the old NSX was a fine car, my 2003 Corvette 6-speed manages to
> eek out 27 mpg when used for my daily commute (mostly highway). It
> gets about half that when I drive it for "pleasure." I've had one
> mechanical issue with the car that was taken care of by Chevy at zero
> cost to me. Certainly, the Corvette handles much differently than the
> NSX but there's no doubt that it is faster around any racetrack, costs
> much less to buy and apparently is more fuel efficient. I hear the
> 2008 Corvette, despite making 430 HP (vs 350 HP in my 2003) is even
> more fuel efficient, handles better and is a more comfortable car.
> True, not the snob appeal, excuse me - exclusivity, of the NSX but GM
> has shown some dedication to the sports car while Honda let both the
> NSX and S2000 die slow and agonizing deaths.
>
> Unlike Honda, GM is building its sports car to become lighter weight,
> more powerful, better handling and consume less fuel. While I think
> the Honda Accord is the best, low-cost family sedan available right
> now, I gotta give GM credit where credit is due. From what little has
> been leaking to the Press regarding the next generation Corvette, it
> will not be a mid-engine car (too expensive) but rather the same
> layout as now but on a new, smaller frame. I wouldn't be surprised to
> see a significantly smaller base engine achieving well over 30 mpg
> highway.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

>
>
> He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that car,
> then.
>
Most of the driving is in San Francisco. Something like 80% city, 20%
highway.
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

On 2008-03-28 21:56:31 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay.TakeThisOut@nothome.net> said:

>>
>>
>> He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that car,
>> then.
>>
> Most of the driving is in San Francisco. Something like 80% city, 20%
> highway.

He may have a point - unless he's driving totally leadfooted the whole
time, which is a possibility, he should be doing better than that. My
rsx, which is almost totally leadfooted city driving gets around 25 mpg.
--
-----------------------------
I only talk like that in the movies
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

"Yoda" <yoda DeleteThis @Dagobah.net> wrote in message
news:2008032822302716807-yoda@Dagobahnet...
> On 2008-03-28 21:56:31 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay DeleteThis @nothome.net>
> said:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that
>>> car,
>>> then.
>>>
>> Most of the driving is in San Francisco. Something like 80% city, 20%
>> highway.
>
> He may have a point - unless he's driving totally leadfooted the whole
> time, which is a possibility, he should be doing better than that. My rsx,
> which is almost totally leadfooted city driving gets around 25 mpg.
> --
> -----------------------------
> I only talk like that in the movies
>

Thanks. No, he doesn't have a lead foot. My other son does and redline it
all the time on his 98 GSR and still gets 32mpg. (80% highway, 20% city) Go
figure!

Anyway taking the Civic Si to the dealer on a recall and have them look at
the gas consumption too.
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

On Mar 28, 9:56 pm, Russell Lombardo <rll_....TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:
> I will try to be as gentle as possible, but comparing a Corvette to an NSX
> or any supercar is not reasonable. A Corvette uses 50-year old technology,
> a pushrod engine, I thin it still has rear leaf springs!, snip

yet the 2008 Corvette gets around a track pretty well for half the
price of a NSX.

some define supercar by the specifications
others define it by performance
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

"ACAR" <dimndsonmywndshld RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:49f6088a-7acc-4a71-bcda-5d99b23a93d4@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 28, 9:56 pm, Russell Lombardo <rll_... RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
>> I will try to be as gentle as possible, but comparing a Corvette to an
>> NSX
>> or any supercar is not reasonable. A Corvette uses 50-year old
>> technology,
>> a pushrod engine, I thin it still has rear leaf springs!, snip
>
> yet the 2008 Corvette gets around a track pretty well for half the
> price of a NSX.
>

Corvette still use brute force? In the old days (1970s) I see the Corvette
leaving the Lotus Europa in the dust on a straight runway but the Europa
catches up on the curves. The Lotus has only about 130hp 4 banger and gets
close to 40mpg vs. a huge block V8 on the Corvette.



> some define supercar by the specifications
> others define it by performance
>
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

On 2008-03-29 19:35:01 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay RemoveThis @nothome.net> said:

>
> "Yoda" <yoda RemoveThis @Dagobah.net> wrote in message
> news:2008032822302716807-yoda@Dagobahnet...
>> On 2008-03-28 21:56:31 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay RemoveThis @nothome.net>
>> said:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that
>>>> car,
>>>> then.
>>>>
>>> Most of the driving is in San Francisco. Something like 80% city, 20%
>>> highway.
>>
>> He may have a point - unless he's driving totally leadfooted the whole
>> time, which is a possibility, he should be doing better than that. My rsx,
>> which is almost totally leadfooted city driving gets around 25 mpg.
>> --
>> -----------------------------
>> I only talk like that in the movies
>>
>
> Thanks. No, he doesn't have a lead foot. My other son does and redline it
> all the time on his 98 GSR and still gets 32mpg. (80% highway, 20% city) Go
> figure!
>
> Anyway taking the Civic Si to the dealer on a recall and have them look at
> the gas consumption too.

It could be something as minor as underinflated tires - I was having
exceptionally bad mileage for a while, and although they looked fine,
one of the tires was about 8 lbs low, which was causing my mileage to
drop to an average of 22 mpg. So if there are several in this state,
you could get down to 18 pretty quickly...
--
-----------------------------
I only talk like that in the movies
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

"Yoda" <yoda RemoveThis @Dagobah.net> wrote in message
news:2008033110253916807-yoda@Dagobahnet...
> On 2008-03-29 19:35:01 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay RemoveThis @nothome.net>
> said:
>
>>
>> "Yoda" <yoda RemoveThis @Dagobah.net> wrote in message
>> news:2008032822302716807-yoda@Dagobahnet...
>>> On 2008-03-28 21:56:31 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay RemoveThis @nothome.net>
>>> said:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that
>>>>> car,
>>>>> then.
>>>>>
>>>> Most of the driving is in San Francisco. Something like 80% city, 20%
>>>> highway.
>>>
>>> He may have a point - unless he's driving totally leadfooted the whole
>>> time, which is a possibility, he should be doing better than that. My
>>> rsx,
>>> which is almost totally leadfooted city driving gets around 25 mpg.
>>> --
>>> -----------------------------
>>> I only talk like that in the movies
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. No, he doesn't have a lead foot. My other son does and redline it
>> all the time on his 98 GSR and still gets 32mpg. (80% highway, 20% city)
>> Go
>> figure!
>>
>> Anyway taking the Civic Si to the dealer on a recall and have them look
>> at
>> the gas consumption too.
>
> It could be something as minor as underinflated tires - I was having
> exceptionally bad mileage for a while, and although they looked fine, one
> of the tires was about 8 lbs low, which was causing my mileage to drop to
> an average of 22 mpg. So if there are several in this state, you could get
> down to 18 pretty quickly...
> --
> -----------------------------
> I only talk like that in the movies
>

Tire pressure should be ok as it was checked a month ago. (It was low but
that was before the bad mileage was noticed, will check pressure again) Car
is in the dealer now and they said nothing could be done about the bad
mileage unless the check engine light comes on.
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

On Mar 31, 1:15 pm, " Frank" <norep....RemoveThis@nothome.net> wrote:
>
> Corvette still use brute force? In the old days (1970s) I see the Corvette
> leaving the Lotus Europa in the dust on a straight runway but the Europa
> catches up on the curves. The Lotus has only about 130hp 4 banger and gets
> close to 40mpg vs. a huge block V8 on the Corvette.
>
>
Here's a quote from an August 2007 Car & Driver article; comparison of
various sports cars at Virgina Int. Raceway

"LL2: 2007 Chevrolet Corvette - Feature
The Lightning Lap, 2007

There were several surprises in this class--and the biggest was the
astonishing performance of the base Corvette equipped with the Z51
package. The Vette was a returnee to VIR because we experienced a data
problem with its quickest lap last year. We had to publish its second-
quickest lap time (3:09.3) then, which we didn't think represented the
car's capabilities.

Those suspicions were dead on, because this time around the Z51 blazed
around the course in 3:03.6, nearly six seconds quicker. That time
bests those of the Audi R8 and Porsche 911 Turbo, cars that cost more
than twice as much as the Z51's base price. As we've learned,
Corvettes are lap dogs when it comes to obeying commands from the
helm, and they have wonderful fade-free brakes and benefit from a
smooth 400-hp V-8. But they initially feel spooky, partly because the
steering is a bit numb. Once a driver learns to trust the Vette's
chassis, the Chevy can embarrass almost any other car on the track,
even if it isn't as confidence inspiring as a Porsche 911. "
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

On Mar 28, 9:56 pm, Russell Lombardo <rll_... RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
>
> I guess it's good that more people don't comprehend the value of supercars
> like the NSX -- I couldn't have afforded one.  Of course, now that I have
> one, let the prices increase!
>

Oh, people comprehend.
There's some other reason the NSX is priced like a used car and not a
Ferrari.
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more .. 

On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 17:35:01 -0700, " Frank"
<noreplay.DeleteThis@nothome.net> wrote:

>
>"Yoda" <yoda.DeleteThis@Dagobah.net> wrote in message
>news:2008032822302716807-yoda@Dagobahnet...
>> On 2008-03-28 21:56:31 -0500, " Frank" <noreplay.DeleteThis@nothome.net>
>> said:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He gets 18mpg from a Civic Si? There's something very wrong with that
>>>> car,
>>>> then.
>>>>
>>> Most of the driving is in San Francisco. Something like 80% city, 20%
>>> highway.
>>
>> He may have a point - unless he's driving totally leadfooted the whole
>> time, which is a possibility, he should be doing better than that. My rsx,
>> which is almost totally leadfooted city driving gets around 25 mpg.
>> --
>> -----------------------------
>> I only talk like that in the movies
>>
>
>Thanks. No, he doesn't have a lead foot. My other son does and redline it
>all the time on his 98 GSR and still gets 32mpg. (80% highway, 20% city) Go
>figure!
>
>Anyway taking the Civic Si to the dealer on a recall and have them look at
>the gas consumption too.

My 94 GSR gets about 22 in city driving driven very hard. The Si
would be heavier, and has about the same power. Still 18 seems pretty
low.
 >> Stay informed about: Cars are getting bigger, heaver, uglier and consumes more ..