[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
2015 Accord goes on sale today, "Gets Multiple Feature Upgrades"
More.......................
NSX prototype smolders at the 'Ring
More.......................
2016 NSX Spied at the 'Ring, Part II
More.......................
Production 2016 Acura NSX caught testing at the 'Ring!
More.......................
2015 CR-V MMC info, with color list. CVT confirmed
More.......................
2015 TLX Pricing info released over the holiday weekend
More.......................
American Honda Reports June 2014 Sales
More.......................
This is probably the very first look at the 2016 Pilot. Spied by a TOV member in So Cal.
More.......................
TLX --> Re: My test-drive in 2.4 TLX Base
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Honda to modify 12,000 redesigned Fits sold in US
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: CR-Z Supercharger released.
Join Discussion......
RLX --> Re: Where are the sport hybrids???
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Valid reason for an ILX Type-S 2.0t/SH-AWD
Join Discussion......
CR-Z --> Re: CR-Z Supercharger
Join Discussion......
Accord --> Re: 2013 Accord EX-L V6 mileage. Thought I would share.
Join Discussion......
Accord --> Re: Accord Sport vs. Civic Hybrid.....thoughts...
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Wife and I test drove a TLX 4cyl with Tech pkg.
Join Discussion......
IMA/Hybrids --> Re: Civic Hybrid vs. Accord Sport - thoughts...
Join Discussion......
CR-V --> Re: 2 months until 2015 MMC?
Join Discussion......
TLX --> Re: Driven 6cylinder Advanced.
Join Discussion......
TLX --> Re: Competition heating up
Join Discussion......
Strictly Technical --> Re: N22B
Join Discussion......
Pilot --> Re: Pilot Spy Shots
Join Discussion......
TOV First Drive: 2015 Acura TLX
Read Article....................
Photo Gallery: 2015 Acura TLX 2.4 P-AWS
Read Article....................
Photo Gallery: 2015 Acura TLX 3.5L SH-AWD
Read Article....................
TOV Photo Gallery: 2015 Honda Fit
Read Article....................
PR Photo Gallery: 2015 Honda Fit
Read Article....................
TOV Dyno Test: 2014 Accord Hybrid
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
TOV Forums > General Talk > > Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?

Go to:

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12
Author
  Post New Thread
notyper
Profile for notyper
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-12-2012 18:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
dampflok wrote:

That illustrates another problem with a transverse orientation: It's hard to "up-engine." In a previous post or two from a while back, I observed that a longitudinal layout enables such things as swapping a domestic V8 into a Mazda Miata. Going back to the topic of Audi, the previous-gen S8 had a 5.2-liter V10, and the previous-gen S4 had a 4.2-liter V8. Would a 5.2-liter V10 fit in the RLX? Would a 4.2-liter V8 fit in the TSX or ILX? With a north-south engine orientation, other premium marques can "go to eleven." Acura can't even make it to ten.



That's a really excellent point that I had never considered. Going from a V6 to a V8 in a longitudinal setup typically requires little more than compensating for a slightly longer engine (on the order of 4-6"). Even if you han't planned on it in your original chassis design, it can't be that tough. OTOH, trying to go from a V6 to a V8 in a transverse setup requires widening the whole chassis if you hadn't originally designed for it - move the shock towers, possible change suspension pickup points, everything (or you could just widen the whole car - riiighttt).

And of course, we know that both production lines and roadways are more likely to be width constrained than length constrained, so adding length to a vehicle is easier from that perspective too.

Heck, look at the S2000. There is so much room under the hood (if you delete the monster stock airbox), that you can slam in a smallblock Chevy, a Supra I6, or pretty much any engine you want to. Hell, if a Supra I6 fits, then I'll bet a V12 could be done with a little work.

Not that I'd do such a thing (sacrilege), but it's been done and demonstrates your point to perfection. Why wouldn't Honda want that sort of flexibility???

SC
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-12-2012 19:02
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
dampflok wrote:
Chocs wrote:
dampflok wrote:
Actually, the case for Honda/Acura is even worse than that. The engine-ahead-of-front-axle, longitudinal layout chosen by Audi enabled the implementation of the original quattro system. So while the layout had (and has) dynamic drawbacks, it also enabled dynamic advantages. By going transverse for Acura, Honda didn't have any such justification. It was pure cheapness.
In the case of RLX, Acura might want to maximize interior space with its use of transverse layout. That's a justification-- but maybe not one we're satisfied with.
Well, I was discussing history and the reasoning behind the "Original Sin," as I call it, not the RLX in particular. I believe that Honda flipped the Legend/RL's engine 90 degrees solely or primarily to enable platform-sharing with the Accord. As for the hypothesis that cabin space played a role, I remember reading reviews of the current-gen TL that said rear-passenger space wasn't all that great, and thinking to myself, "The FF-transverse layout is supposed to maximize interior room, and they couldn't get even that right?!"

And while Audi required the longitudinal layout to implement their quattro system, Acura should be able to implement their eSH-AWD regardless of engine layout due to the independent electric motors. Design flexibility is a sure sign of engineering prowess, ain't it?
Yeah, but if eSH-AWD can be applied to any drivetrain layout, why didn't Honda switch to a longitudinal orientation and its advantages like every Tier 1 company, and slap eSH-AWD on that? :-) At any rate, I'm cautiously optimistic about the upper-trim RLX. It seems like a good effort at making a silk purse from a sow's ear. On the other hand, note that the eSH-AWD drivetrain requires that big hump running down the center of the rear-passenger area, just like in an FR car, nullifying one advantage of a conventional FF setup. Also, shorn of the eSH-AWD doodads, the lower-trim FWD RLX will put out 310 hp -- hardly sufficient for a supposed premium flagship. (It's not even three ILX hybrids!)

That illustrates another problem with a transverse orientation: It's hard to "up-engine." In a previous post or two from a while back, I observed that a longitudinal layout enables such things as swapping a domestic V8 into a Mazda Miata. Going back to the topic of Audi, the previous-gen S8 had a 5.2-liter V10, and the previous-gen S4 had a 4.2-liter V8. Would a 5.2-liter V10 fit in the RLX? Would a 4.2-liter V8 fit in the TSX or ILX? With a north-south engine orientation, other premium marques can "go to eleven." Acura can't even make it to ten.




I guess the point is that Acura never intends to pursue a V8 engine (at least for the next platform), instead relying on hybridization and maybe forced induction. I'm thinking the plan is to roll the system out over the next generation or so.

But if you're sticking with an eSH-AWD, I really don't see much point in the longitudinal layout either. It's a bit harder to package the engine in this configuration (or rather, it's a LOT harder to package the firewall). Nor does it give any dynamic advantage in eSH-AWD configuration. Exhaust packaging?
dampflok
Profile for dampflok
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-12-2012 19:57
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
notyper wrote:
dampflok wrote:
That illustrates another problem with a transverse orientation: It's hard to "up-engine." In a previous post or two from a while back, I observed that a longitudinal layout enables such things as swapping a domestic V8 into a Mazda Miata. Going back to the topic of Audi, the previous-gen S8 had a 5.2-liter V10, and the previous-gen S4 had a 4.2-liter V8. Would a 5.2-liter V10 fit in the RLX? Would a 4.2-liter V8 fit in the TSX or ILX? With a north-south engine orientation, other premium marques can "go to eleven." Acura can't even make it to ten.
That's a really excellent point that I had never considered.
My eyebrows just shot up and flew off my head. C'mon, given your expertise and experience, surely you've thought about it before. You've simply forgotten that you did. :-)

Why wouldn't Honda want that sort of flexibility???
I know your question is rhetorical, but here's the answer: Honda attaches more importance to the cost savings of platform-sharing.

Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-13-2012 05:48
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
notyper wrote:
dampflok wrote:

That illustrates another problem with a transverse orientation: It's hard to "up-engine." In a previous post or two from a while back, I observed that a longitudinal layout enables such things as swapping a domestic V8 into a Mazda Miata. Going back to the topic of Audi, the previous-gen S8 had a 5.2-liter V10, and the previous-gen S4 had a 4.2-liter V8. Would a 5.2-liter V10 fit in the RLX? Would a 4.2-liter V8 fit in the TSX or ILX? With a north-south engine orientation, other premium marques can "go to eleven." Acura can't even make it to ten.



That's a really excellent point that I had never considered. Going from a V6 to a V8 in a longitudinal setup typically requires little more than compensating for a slightly longer engine (on the order of 4-6"). Even if you han't planned on it in your original chassis design, it can't be that tough. OTOH, trying to go from a V6 to a V8 in a transverse setup requires widening the whole chassis if you hadn't originally designed for it - move the shock towers, possible change suspension pickup points, everything (or you could just widen the whole car - riiighttt).

And of course, we know that both production lines and roadways are more likely to be width constrained than length constrained, so adding length to a vehicle is easier from that perspective too.

Heck, look at the S2000. There is so much room under the hood (if you delete the monster stock airbox), that you can slam in a smallblock Chevy, a Supra I6, or pretty much any engine you want to. Hell, if a Supra I6 fits, then I'll bet a V12 could be done with a little work.

Not that I'd do such a thing (sacrilege), but it's been done and demonstrates your point to perfection. Why wouldn't Honda want that sort of flexibility???

SC



Don't forget the significance of tranny packaging too.

It can be a big, noisy lump (S2000) to put near/inside the cabin. NVH is more inportant in RLXs and stuff.

I'm not sure that these bulky e-CVTs with which Honda are obsessed can easily be placed in such a location; they favour transverse end-on better.

That may be one reason that Audi's engine location is still compromised - the necessity to etronise their cars means a lot of space at the back of the engine bay is required.

Volvo by necessity designed a very short three-shaft tranny (they used to have a truck-making division!) so that they could fit a transverse six. They also manage to fit a lovely Yamaha V8 in its place, but I don't know what that does to the mass distribution/accessibility.

Mind you, accessibility's terrible on many modern cars.

notyper
Profile for notyper
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-13-2012 09:57
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Nick Graves wrote:
Don't forget the significance of tranny packaging too.

It can be a big, noisy lump (S2000) to put near/inside the cabin. NVH is more inportant in RLXs and stuff.

I'm not sure that these bulky e-CVTs with which Honda are obsessed can easily be placed in such a location; they favour transverse end-on better.

That may be one reason that Audi's engine location is still compromised - the necessity to etronise their cars means a lot of space at the back of the engine bay is required.

Volvo by necessity designed a very short three-shaft tranny (they used to have a truck-making division!) so that they could fit a transverse six. They also manage to fit a lovely Yamaha V8 in its place, but I don't know what that does to the mass distribution/accessibility.

Mind you, accessibility's terrible on many modern cars.




I'm not so sure tranny noise is all that big a deal. Between helical gears, stiff cases and the fact that the center tunnel is already well insulated thanks to exhaust heat and such, I think it's pretty minor. Not to mention that tranny whine is generally a high frequency noise which is easier to insulate against.

Regarding CVTs and such, I agree, but I think that's more of a design choice than a necessity. I think that Honda's choices for eSHAWD, CVTs, etc. are all born of trying to keep the transverse FWD platforms and grow them into other segments. I don't think they have a good fundamental technical reason for keeping them that way.

Ever seen the powertrain layout on the Volvo transverse I6? That tranny seems to reside partially _under_ the engine, so it probably increases powertrain packaging height noticeably. Then again, Volvo has never had a problem designing tall, boxy front ends, have they? Also, it has an accesory belt drive on the tranny side of the engine! They had to really push to make that thing fit.

SC
Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-13-2012 13:32
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It's not quite like the Austin 2200 set-up of years ago - remember the most versions of the T6 are 4WD and the long casing contains the PTO/centre diff, front diff & some of the control gear.

Subaru has managed to package an inline CVT (they, like Honda, tell us it's for efficiency) but it's still quite a tall tranny.

The full hybrid is bulky.

I think (I'd forgotten) the eSHAWD actually comes with a regular (bought-in) DCT and genset. It's probably shared with some German Hybrids, so in fact it may be perfectly possible to package it in the tunnel, with the best of 'em.

But I'd have thought it's easier to stick such a variety on a S4/V6 transversely betewwn chassis legs.

Ultimately, that's I suspect just another justification to plank-share with the Accord, though! If they did the Vigor layout before, they COULD do it again, if they wanted to. They even installed it in a smaller car (Civic/Domani-based) in Japan, which looked a bit BMW-odd in its proportions.
dampflok
Profile for dampflok
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-13-2012 17:27
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
notyper wrote:
I think that Honda's choices for eSHAWD, CVTs, etc. are all born of trying to keep the transverse FWD platforms and grow them into other segments. I don't think they have a good fundamental technical reason for keeping them that way.
Given my previous posts, I fully agree, of course, but it would be funny if eSH-AWD turned out to be a great system and made the RLX a standout in the premium segment, and the Tier 1-1.5 companies couldn't adopt something similar without a transverse layout.

revvin
Profile for revvin
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-13-2012 23:01
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
notyper wrote:
Nick Graves wrote:
Don't forget the significance of tranny packaging too.

It can be a big, noisy lump (S2000) to put near/inside the cabin. NVH is more inportant in RLXs and stuff.

I'm not sure that these bulky e-CVTs with which Honda are obsessed can easily be placed in such a location; they favour transverse end-on better.

That may be one reason that Audi's engine location is still compromised - the necessity to etronise their cars means a lot of space at the back of the engine bay is required.

Volvo by necessity designed a very short three-shaft tranny (they used to have a truck-making division!) so that they could fit a transverse six. They also manage to fit a lovely Yamaha V8 in its place, but I don't know what that does to the mass distribution/accessibility.

Mind you, accessibility's terrible on many modern cars.




I'm not so sure tranny noise is all that big a deal. Between helical gears, stiff cases and the fact that the center tunnel is already well insulated thanks to exhaust heat and such, I think it's pretty minor. Not to mention that tranny whine is generally a high frequency noise which is easier to insulate against.

Regarding CVTs and such, I agree, but I think that's more of a design choice than a necessity. I think that Honda's choices for eSHAWD, CVTs, etc. are all born of trying to keep the transverse FWD platforms and grow them into other segments. I don't think they have a good fundamental technical reason for keeping them that way.

Ever seen the powertrain layout on the Volvo transverse I6? That tranny seems to reside partially _under_ the engine, so it probably increases powertrain packaging height noticeably. Then again, Volvo has never had a problem designing tall, boxy front ends, have they? Also, it has an accesory belt drive on the tranny side of the engine! They had to really push to make that thing fit.

SC



Speaking of audis, have you ever looked under the hood of a b7 rs4? That's a hell of a lot of engine kissing the rad support. For audi it seems to come down to a need to preserve precious interior space and field a modular engine bay for v8s, v6s, turbo 4s and their transmissions. That and alot of stubbornness.

Honda solved audi's ongoing problem with having the engine well over the front axle back in 1989 in their first attempt to make an audi 90 competitor. So well, the car could be advertised as front midship like the nissan does with the 370z, even though it had 2 more cylinders in length to cover. It even kept the low honda hoodline to boot.

They just slanted the 5 cylinder to one side, ran the diff and driveshafts through the oil pan, and pushed the firewall well into the interior cabin which opened up a nice gap between the front door and front wheel. However, rear seat room suffered, so the car sold poorly, and honda will never revisit that again with all the man max machine min restrictions now.

Looking back they should have gotten the 4 door coupe nonsense started with that car, and styled it accordingly, seeing as you already sit on the floor, and no one could sit behind you.

As for audi, it took them 20 years but they're finally gleaned some of what honda achieved in their first attempt. I haven't seen a b8 rs4 up close, but the a4 in general has a larger gap between the door and wheel, the firewall is set back as far as an audi can go and the weight distribution is greatly improved. They still run the driveshafts through the sides of the transmission which is a major compromise, and mount the engine upright but it's understandable considering how many engines go into that platform.

BMW did one better and employ almost the same methods as honda to achieve 4 wheel drive and maintain superior weight distribution. Though not as elegantly or efficiently. (Isn't that always the case?)



To mount the six with near perfect weight distribution, the transmission has to come way back into the interior compartment, but this doesn't effect interior room, noise significantly and there is still enough space to accept the active hybrid system up top and route power to the front wheels down the side of the transmission. Honda said initially after discontinuing them that longitudinal engines aren't crash worthy enough. But there's no excuses.

Bottomline, I wish Honda went back to bespoke platforms for acura with renewed fervour, and let the engineers loose again.

Anything else is stifled progress, when we could do a much better job than audi and bmw, before they ever put pen to paper.
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-14-2012 00:18
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
dampflok wrote:
notyper wrote:
I think that Honda's choices for eSHAWD, CVTs, etc. are all born of trying to keep the transverse FWD platforms and grow them into other segments. I don't think they have a good fundamental technical reason for keeping them that way.
Given my previous posts, I fully agree, of course, but it would be funny if eSH-AWD turned out to be a great system and made the RLX a standout in the premium segment, and the Tier 1-1.5 companies couldn't adopt something similar without a transverse layout.




There's absolutely no reason why eSH-AWD can't be adapted in longitudinal or transverse layouts. The advantage is that in terms of packaging it's still very simple, in fact much more so than trying to package a unique transmission, driveshaft and axles.
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-14-2012 00:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
revvin wrote:

As for audi, it took them 20 years but they're finally gleaned some of what honda achieved in their first attempt. I haven't seen a b8 rs4 up close, but the a4 in general has a larger gap between the door and wheel, the firewall is set back as far as an audi can go and the weight distribution is greatly improved. They still run the driveshafts through the sides of the transmission which is a major compromise, and mount the engine upright but it's understandable considering how many engines go into that platform.



Why would having the driveshafts coming out of the sides of the transmission be a major compromise?
dampflok
Profile for dampflok
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-14-2012 01:30
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
CarPhreakD wrote:
dampflok wrote:
. . . it would be funny if eSH-AWD turned out to be a great system and made the RLX a standout in the premium segment, and the Tier 1-1.5 companies couldn't adopt something similar without a transverse layout.
There's absolutely no reason why eSH-AWD can't be adapted in longitudinal or transverse layouts. The advantage is that in terms of packaging it's still very simple, in fact much more so than trying to package a unique transmission, driveshaft and axles.
OK, then, I'll restate it: It would be funny if eSH-AWD turned out to be a great system and made the RLX a standout in the premium segment, and the Tier 1-1.5 companies faced considerable packaging difficulties adopting something similar because of their longitudinal layouts.

revvin
Profile for revvin
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-14-2012 11:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
CarPhreakD wrote:
revvin wrote:

As for audi, it took them 20 years but they're finally gleaned some of what honda achieved in their first attempt. I haven't seen a b8 rs4 up close, but the a4 in general has a larger gap between the door and wheel, the firewall is set back as far as an audi can go and the weight distribution is greatly improved. They still run the driveshafts through the sides of the transmission which is a major compromise, and mount the engine upright but it's understandable considering how many engines go into that platform.



Why would having the driveshafts coming out of the sides of the transmission be a major compromise?




weight distribution. the entire engine hangs out past the front axle.
DCR
Profile for DCR
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-14-2012 13:00
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Well, there is no car for me at the moment. I am stopping in there in about an hour to discuss:

1. How they screwed this up.

2. What they are going to do for me.

The troubling thing off the bat is that they have this auto listed for sale on their website. If that car is for sale, what do they propose to trade another dealer for my car?

I assume this will go badly, but it is nothing to go to Federal prison for. I will snap some pics of the blue one, for fun.
DCR
Profile for DCR
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-14-2012 23:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
In a closed door meeting with the Sales Manager and my salesman, I was courted with a nice apology and $500 off or a free 5 Axis spoiler.

This might be a slight blessing because I hated the Ultramarine in person. It was too dark, bordering navy blue, and I don't like that end of the spectrum. I placed another order for an Asphalt FR-S, and they are calling corporate on Monday to get a "favor" since they dropped the ball and want to gain a customer.

RyanDL
Profile for RyanDL
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 09:02
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
DCR wrote:
In a closed door meeting with the Sales Manager and my salesman, I was courted with a nice apology and $500 off or a free 5 Axis spoiler.

This might be a slight blessing because I hated the Ultramarine in person. It was too dark, bordering navy blue, and I don't like that end of the spectrum. I placed another order for an Asphalt FR-S, and they are calling corporate on Monday to get a "favor" since they dropped the ball and want to gain a customer.



After 11 pages of running commentary, I may have missed it, but why not cut the cord and go to Subaru? I think that's the version I'd prefer anyway. Plus, they may treat you better.

Ryan
DCR
Profile for DCR
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 11:52
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I initially started with a BRZ, but the waiting list had me pushed into December (this was a few months ago).

I prefer the front styling of the FR-S, though I do like the headlights and seats of the BRZ.
superchg2
Profile for superchg2
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 15:06
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
You would have thought the Scion dealer would have been able to distinguish the different model designations (6 speed, auto.)
on their allocation, and been aware of this foul-up before the automatic made it to the dealer.

superchg2
Profile for superchg2
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 15:17
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
You would have thought the Scion dealer would have been able to distinguish the different model designations (6 speed #6253, auto. #6252)
on their allocation, and been aware of this foul-up before the automatic ever made it to the dealer.

DCR
Profile for DCR
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 15:46
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Yeah, you'd think they would have caught it.

Here it is, anyway.

LudegarH22A7
Profile for LudegarH22A7
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 20:07
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I wasn't expecting a world rally or fiji blue but damn, that is quite drab.





Chocs
Profile for Chocs
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-15-2012 21:42
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
You think Subaru got dibs on the better blue?

CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 00:21
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
dampflok wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
dampflok wrote:
. . . it would be funny if eSH-AWD turned out to be a great system and made the RLX a standout in the premium segment, and the Tier 1-1.5 companies couldn't adopt something similar without a transverse layout.
There's absolutely no reason why eSH-AWD can't be adapted in longitudinal or transverse layouts. The advantage is that in terms of packaging it's still very simple, in fact much more so than trying to package a unique transmission, driveshaft and axles.
OK, then, I'll restate it: It would be funny if eSH-AWD turned out to be a great system and made the RLX a standout in the premium segment, and the Tier 1-1.5 companies faced considerable packaging difficulties adopting something similar because of their longitudinal layouts.




They wouldn't. The only packaging problems they would have would be for the controls and battery packs.
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 00:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
revvin wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
revvin wrote:

As for audi, it took them 20 years but they're finally gleaned some of what honda achieved in their first attempt. I haven't seen a b8 rs4 up close, but the a4 in general has a larger gap between the door and wheel, the firewall is set back as far as an audi can go and the weight distribution is greatly improved. They still run the driveshafts through the sides of the transmission which is a major compromise, and mount the engine upright but it's understandable considering how many engines go into that platform.



Why would having the driveshafts coming out of the sides of the transmission be a major compromise?




weight distribution. the entire engine hangs out past the front axle.



I see now, I thought you were referring to some technical disadvantage in terms of durability or function of the transmission.

That was one of my original points... did no one notice the photo I posted? Red is an older generation, blue is more recent:



There's obviously problems with the engine sitting over the front axle, and they don't have the opportunity to fix it with a transverse or longitudinal FWD layout ("mid-front engine").
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 00:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
DCR wrote:
Yeah, you'd think they would have caught it.

Here it is, anyway.




DCR, I think you made a nice decision, and at least you're getting a slight discount. I'd take the $500 ;)

Still, after this ordeal is over I'd be pretty hesitant about bringin my car back to that place. How the hell do you screw up such a simple (and extremely important) option?
DCR
Profile for DCR
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 10:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
As long as they figure out which hole the oil goes in, I don't think I will have many problems there. I hope.
Jovian8
Profile for Jovian8
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 18:31
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Australia Subaru BRZ 2012 allotment sells out in 3 hours!
all 201 of them @ $38,000 a pop!

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/07/16/subaru-brz-sells-out-in-australia-in-three-hours-online/
sadlerau
Profile for sadlerau
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 19:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Jovian8 wrote:
Australia Subaru BRZ 2012 allotment sells out in 3 hours!
all 201 of them @ $38,000 a pop!

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/07/16/subaru-brz-sells-out-in-australia-in-three-hours-online/



The interesting point being they were available for sale over the internet, a first for the Australian market I believe?

Saw my first one on the road this weekend. Couldn't tell you if it was a FRS or a BRZ :) OK looking car, bit frumpier than I expected - is this a car that looks better in photos than in the flesh?

All strength to "Toyaru" for building it, especially at the price point they have chosen.
NSXman
Profile for NSXman
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 19:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
CarPhreakD wrote:
DCR wrote:
Yeah, you'd think they would have caught it.

Here it is, anyway.




DCR, I think you made a nice decision, and at least you're getting a slight discount. I'd take the $500 ;)

Still, after this ordeal is over I'd be pretty hesitant about bringin my car back to that place. How the hell do you screw up such a simple (and extremely important) option?



Even though I have a picture of the Subie on my work PC, I think the Scion is the better overall choice. Its a shame, with my 17 month old daughter I couldn't even begin to justify this purchase. I got an 08 sedan Si to get it pass the wife's smell-o-meter of practicality.

The real unfortunate aspect of this mixup is that there is yet another automatic equipped sports car on the roads.
Trip
Profile for Trip
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 21:16
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NSXman wrote:
The real unfortunate aspect of this mixup is that there is yet another automatic equipped sports car on the roads.


Actually the automatic transmission isn't such a bad thing in this case. If it helps to make the car popular (talking about the sports car genre in particular), perhaps that will help the segment gain popularity. More auto makers will follow suit **CoughHondaCough** and maybe juuuust maybe the enthusiasts out there will have more to chose from. Hell, if the MT was relegated to a "special edition", I'd gladly pay a premium to get one...nicely equipped, thank you.

;)
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Sportcars are back! (FR-S & BR-Z) What is Honda's answer?    (Score: 1, Normal) 07-16-2012 21:41
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
The automatic is an unfortunate but necessary option, a sign of the times...

I WILL SAY (and I hope I don't offend) that the looks of the Toyobaru are merely reasonable in my eyes. It's not offensive, but I wouldn't call it a sexy piece of ass either.
 
Thread Page - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12
Go to:
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2014 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy