Gordon Murray's take on Honda's NSX

[overst33r]

My existing appreciation for the NSX grew exponentially more after reading his opinion about the NSX. Amazing to know that it inspired what some consider the pinnacle of supercars to date, the McLaren F1.

http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dggtsppm_6cgtnscht

To this day, the NSX is still a car that is near and dear to my heart. I put 75,000 Km on my NSX over the course of six or seven years.

It's very difficult to discuss the NSX using current values and sensibilities. When the NSX debuted, the word "supercar" was still a relatively new idea in Europe. There are some who would say the Lamborghini Miura from the late 1960s was the first supercar. However, the truth is the explosion of modern supercars really started at the end of the 1980s.

At the end of the 80s was the time when McLaren Cars was conceiving the idea for the McLaren F1. To that end, I was concentrating on coming up with what I wanted in a road car.

To my thinking, the ideal car is one in which I could get in the driver's seat and be out for a drive in downtown London, and then want to continue straight on to southern France. A car that you can trust, with functional air conditioning, and retains daily drivability. No offset pedals allowed. No high dashboards restricting your view either. Having a low roof hitting your head every time you go over a bump in the name of aerodynamics and styling is out of the question. It is essential that a supercar be a pleasure to drive, and anything detracting from that must be excised.

I started by driving the cars known then as "supercars." The Porsche 959, Bugatti EB110, Ferrari F40, Jaguar XJ220. Unfortunately, none of these fit the pattern of the supercar we were trying to build. What we wanted was a relatively compact, usable driver's car. The Porsche 911 had the usability, but with the engine packed in the back, it had a weakness in its handling stability.

During this time, we were able to visit with Ayrton Senna (the late F1 Champion) and Honda's Tochigi Research Center. The visit related to the fact that at the time, McLaren's F1 Grand Prix cars were using Honda engines.

Coincidentally, I spotted an NSX prototype parked near the course. I also learned at the time that Ayrton was assisting in the development of the NSX. And that Honda rear mid-engined sports car--the NSX--was the friendly supercar that we had been looking for. This car had perfectly functional air conditioning, a reasonably roomy trunk, and of course, it was a Honda, with the high levels of quality and reliability that implies.

Then I had the opportunity to drive it. Along with Ron Dennis (President, McLaren Cars) and Mansour Ojjeh (Tag McLaren Group Representative), we drove the prototype on the Tochigi Research Center test course. I remember being moved, thinking, "It is remarkable how our vision comes through in this car."

Of course as you know, the engine has only six cylinders; however, the NSX's very rigid chassis is excellent and would easily be capable of handling more power. Although it's true I had thought it would have been better to put a larger engine, the moment I drove the "little" NSX, all the benchmark cars--Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini--I had been using as references in the development of my car vanished from my mind. Of course the car we would create, the McLaren F1, needed to be faster than the NSX, but the NSX's ride quality and handling would become our new design target.

When working on the development of a new car for years, it's easy to be caught in certain pitfalls. When you drive the car under development for testing every day (in truth, I was responsible for two-thirds of the testing for the McLaren F1), in that time, you can unknowingly convince yourself you are making progress when in fact you are not. For example, it's human nature that at the end of a long day you may want to think that your efforts to reduce low speed harshness are working better than they are. It is at times like this when you need a car to compare with. In those situations, the NSX time and again showed us the path in the areas of ride quality and handling, and also helped us recognize when we weren't making as much progress as we thought.

In my opinion, the NSX's most special quality has long been overlooked.

That could be summarized with the words, "The NSX's suspension is amazing."

Both the body and suspension are aluminum, and it probably couldn't be helped that journalists' attention has been focused on praising the aluminum body. However, the suspension is the much more impressive use of aluminum.

It's lightweight, tough, yet compliant. Also contributing to the refined NSX's handling and ride quality are 17 inch wheels and tires that are not overly large. The NSX's suspension is truly an ingenious system, and back then I imagined the development costs must have been enormous. To achieve that unparalleled accuracy and superior ride quality, longitudinal wheel movement is allowed via the use of a compliance pivot. (?)

(?) Compliance refers to when you travel over a bump, the tire experiences a longitudinal force, which the tire and suspension must move with and absorb the shock. The pivot couples the upper and lower arms. It is connected to the arms via ball joints so that they move as a unit. When encountering input, the pivot rotates, keeping alignment changes to near zero while retaining compliance (see diagram). The inspiration obtained from this NSX suspension system would later influence the development of the McLaren F1's suspension.

The NSX was also the first car to use DBW (Drive By Wire). It felt very pleasing. DBW is when instead of using a mechanical cable, an electronic signal is used to communicate throttle position. It achieved a very natural, linear feeling throttle, and I can now hide my embarrassment and confess that I copied the idea during the development of the McLaren F1 (laughs).

The low-slung NSX's driver's seat position also provided just the right head clearance and an amazing field of view. The NSX development team moved the air conditioning unit away from the dash and deep into the NSX's nose in order to obtain more space. That air conditioning unit is an excellent one, and normally, you don't notice whether it's on or not.

On the day I bought the NSX, I pressed the "Auto" button and since then until selling it, I never had to touch it. It was that perfect. Ah, I also remember the audio system as being very good.

However, the media wrote up the aluminum body, and the many merits and advantages I perceived in the NSX have largely been overlooked.

In my opinion, the NSX, while being such a great sports car, had two large flaws in it's marketing. First, at the time, the public was not ready to accept a Japanese car that was this expensive. The second is that for supercar customers, the power figures were not quite high enough. Of course, the prototype's engine was not bad, and soon the VTEC engine was added. Whenever I hear that VTEC sound it's amazing. I am repeating myself, but the NSX's excellent chassis would have been capable of handling much more power.

With just a slightly lower price, or possibly selling it with a different brand name and a different badge, or perhaps endowing it with a touch flashier and more aggressive styling and additional power, there is no question the NSX would have reigned as a cult star of the supercars.

However, during that time, in Honda's philosophy there was a resistance to large engines with many cylinders. I am not certain, but probably at the time, the voluntary restraint on power limits was a factor. Being a fan of Honda engines, I later went to Honda's Tochigi Research Center on two occasions and requested that they consider building for the McLaren F1 a 4.5 liter V10 or V12. I asked, I tried to persuade them, but in the end could not convince them to do it, and the McLaren F1 ended up equipped with a BMW engine.

The NSX's development costs must have been enormous. Everything on it is unique. The chassis, powertrain, even the air conditioning are peerless. That aluminum body was very expensive. The numerous hurdles overcome by the NSX to reach production in areas such as spot welding, corrosion, and repairability make it a monumental work in automotive history. The philosophy of creating a car for human beings is apparent throughout. If it were me, I probably would not have obsessed over the aluminum and would have settled for a steel structure with aluminum panels to try to achieve a similar weight reduction. But what I really want to emphasize is the suspension. It is a a groundbreaking use of aluminum.

There are a few things that could be improved on the NSX. First, the tires are too soft. Over the seven years I ran mine, I went through 14 sets of tires. After changing over to harder-compound Michelins in the rear, my tire life increased. As a result, rear grip was decreased slightly, but driving became more fun. The NSX's traction control and ABS are first generation systems and as a result are somewhat slow-acting. I also missed having more storage space in the interior. However, such things hardly seem significant in a sports car of this caliber.

The NSX is a landmark car. It awoke not only a lazy Ferrari, but Porsche as well and sparked advances in usability, ergonomics, and handling. It may not have achieved success from a marketing standpoint, but many influential and important people have owned them. The NSX is also unusual in that it continued to be on sale for so long. If I were to looking for that type of car now, I would--without a doubt--gladly own an NSX

 

[thomsbrain]

Good read. I've always felt that the NSX was just 200 HP shy of an all-time legend. They are starting to get affordable enough that mere mortals can consider them now, too.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I like the NSX, but I think the perception is that its too sterile in looks and execution. It has that feeling of being created wholly by engineers, and lacks the passion and emotion of cars in that price range, especially sports cars. I feel that BMW is similar in their newer cars (M5, M3), however they have engines that are enough to overcome it. The NSX had a Honda V6, which few people felt was special. If they'd made it a V8, pushing 300 horsepower, it would have been quite popular. There's also some issues I have with the appearance, which while good in basic shape, I felt was too boring in the details. While the refresh a few years back did help alleviate it, at that point time had already passed the NSX by. The thing with the NSX though, that made it so great is that the car was not about all out speed, but rather balance. Sure the chassis could take the extra power, but I don't know that it would have really been beneficial for the car as it very well could have destroyed the balance it had. So very few people are interested in that when it comes to fast cars, and it ends up hurting the ones that do because the car ends up with lower power or something that turns people off from it. While I love that we live in a world where you can buy 1000+ horsepower machines, there comes a point where the extra power is just completely unnecessary (of course that is the point).

That is why I don't consider the NSX a supercar. Not because it was not very special, but because supercars are all about emotion, extravagance, and extremes. The NSX is the ubiquitous nice guy trying to compare to the flamboyant Italians or bad boy Americans, or the consummate gentleman (Porsche, Aston, BMW).

From what it sounds like Ferrari and Porsche seem to be getting very close to crossing the line where the technological things they're doing is actually hurting the car, as its getting rid of the emotion that they're known for. The Nissan GTR seems to be a prime example of this, and while its an amazing car, in some ways I think it feels like we're losing something. With cars like the Viper and big V8 front engined Vettes possibly on the outs, we seem to be losing more and more of that as time goes on.

I hope Honda really looks at bringing another car that is as good as the NSX was. I think the competition will force it to be even better, and probably for a lot less money as well. Hopefully if they do, they will also do a bit better job of matching the car's apperance with its character. The GTR I think is exceptional in that respect, as are the newer Porsches and Ferraris (and the latest version of the Viper). Honda could really hit one out of the park, as with the changing times, a car like the NSX will be even more coveted than ever (light weight, efficient engine, good performance, good usability).

 

[thomsbrain]

Well when it came out, it was only 30 HP shy of the Ferrari 348, and the NSX was lighter. So it was fairly competitive at the time. But the other companies responded with lots more power and Honda never made significant increases. At the end, they weren't even using their most powerful V6 in the NSX, let alone developing something to compete with the new breed of 500 HP monsters.

I'm somewhat disappointed to see Honda doing the same thing with the S2000. Only tiny changes to what was initially an amazing car that was ready for more power from the start. Now it's nearly 10 years later, and the car is still good, but when you can get more horsepower in an Accord for less money, and that old interior starts to look dated... It's hard to get quite as excited, especially for a new-car sale. And when I hear talk of ending production, with no rumors of an equivalent replacement... I just have to shake my head. That CRX replacement will be cool, but I'm not going to cream my jeans over a FWD hatch.

Honda has so much engineering talent, but the company's stubborn idealism and dedication to principle occasionally takes precedence over smart business sense and even the maximization of the potential of their own ideas. The Insight is another perfect example of this. A great idea for a car, doomed from the start by their unwillingness to make even the smallest compromises in vision. The result was Toyota ran away with not only hundreds of thousands of sales, but the market's perception of "Greenest Company."

 

[senseamp]

It's a typical Honda, great engineering, but too soulless and minimalistic for a supercar. It's engineering for the sake of engineering.

 

[summit]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
Well when it came out, it was only 30 HP shy of the Ferrari 348, and the NSX was lighter. So it was fairly competitive at the time. But the other companies responded with lots more power and Honda never made significant increases. At the end, they weren't even using their most powerful V6 in the NSX, let alone developing something to compete with the new breed of 500 HP monsters.

I'm somewhat disappointed to see Honda doing the same thing with the S2000. Only tiny changes to what was initially an amazing car that was ready for more power from the start. Now it's nearly 10 years later, and the car is still good, but when you can get more horsepower in an Accord for less money, and that old interior starts to look dated... It's hard to get quite as excited, especially for a new-car sale. And when I hear talk of ending production, with no rumors of an equivalent replacement... I just have to shake my head. That CRX replacement will be cool, but I'm not going to cream my jeans over a FWD hatch.

Honda has so much engineering talent, but the company's stubborn idealism and dedication to principle occasionally takes precedence over smart business sense and even the maximization of the potential of their own ideas. The Insight is another perfect example of this. A great idea for a car, doomed from the start by their unwillingness to make even the smallest compromises in vision. The result was Toyota ran away with not only hundreds of thousands of sales, but the market's perception of "Greenest Company."

Honda has always been a motor company. They build some of the most reliable/efficient motors. They are unlike other companies and they are still very successful. Low cost and high scale are what Honda has always been about. They are the blue-collar car company. They have projects every once in awhile nsx/s2000/supercub which show their engineering superiority. The do have smart business sense look at their success.

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's a typical Honda, great engineering, but too soulless and minimalistic for a supercar. It's engineering for the sake of engineering.

Define "soul" please?

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's a typical Honda, great engineering, but too soulless and minimalistic for a supercar. It's engineering for the sake of engineering.

Define "soul" please?

I agree. That's an arbitrary, but understandable opinion of the NSX. I happen to disagree. I liken the NSX to minimalist art. It's very clean, balanced, and beautiful in it's elegant simplicity. It doesn't have the rage of the more powerful and flashy supercars, but it's a legend, and it's far from a 'typical' Honda. It's Honda principles taken to 11. Which would be the 'soul' of engineering > flamboyance.

 

[996GT2]

I'm really amazed at how well the NSX holds up some 20 years after its initial introduction. Even today, the NSX-R NA2, with its 280 HP VTEC V6, can match and even best the lap times of many modern Porsches and Ferraris, including the track-oriented 997 GT3. Keiichi Tsuchiya once reflected after a Best Motoring battle that Japanese manufacturers really focused on the handling and grip aspects of their cars once the 280HP voluntary limit was imposed. During this time, cars such as the NSX-R, Lancer Evolution, and Skyline GT-R could more than keep up with European sports cars such as the Porsche 911 or Ferrari 355/360 despite the large deficit in power. Had honda installed a larger V8 into the NSX or offered it with a twin turbo setup similar to many Japanese cars of the era, it would have been a legendary car.

 

[ponyo]

One of the most beautiful cars ever made. It was my dream car in high school and for some reason or another, I never bought one. My cousin had a '93 which I loved but sadly he sold it before I could graduate from college and buy it from him. I still would like to own one someday.

 

[foghorn67]

It was just overpriced when it came to the later 'supercars'. When it was first released, it held it's own. Minimal power increases over the years (at least with the American marketed Acura, IDK about overseas specs) and huge price increases killed it here.
I want to own one, but if I could afford any car like that, there are several on the list that way before that came into the picture. But I love it's instant connection you would get as soon as plopping down in the driver's seat.
A friend of my family's had one. He did experience the same as Murray. The oem tires really lasted about 8-10k miles .

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's a typical Honda, great engineering, but too soulless and minimalistic for a supercar. It's engineering for the sake of engineering.

Define "soul" please?

That which Honda lacks.
They are too conservative. They hold themselves back because they are too afraid of excess. That works well for boring cars, but supercars are meant to be excessive. They should have made NSX much more powerful. They got overshadowed by the GT-R in the 90s because Nissan is not too shy to add some panache and excess to their cars.

 

[summit]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's a typical Honda, great engineering, but too soulless and minimalistic for a supercar. It's engineering for the sake of engineering.

Define "soul" please?

That which Honda lacks.
They are too conservative. They hold themselves back because they are too afraid of excess. That works well for boring cars, but supercars are meant to be excessive. They should have made NSX much more powerful. They got overshadowed by the GT-R in the 90s because Nissan is not too shy to add some panache and excess to their cars.

soul is not selling out. soul is sticking to your guns. soul is honda. they have kept their focus on improving motors as a company line for a very long time.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Great car. Interesting article, but man, does he have a boner for AC or what?!

 

[Demon-Xanth]

The NSX was a great car when it was released in 1992, but it went far too long without a major update. Especially to the powertrain. If Honda wanted to make a new NSX, I'd hope that they'd do something like make a 3.5L V8 with around 400HP and keep the weight below 3000LBs.

 

[Dunbar]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
The NSX was a great car when it was released in 1992, but it went far too long without a major update. Especially to the powertrain.

I agree, the NSX embarassed supercars of the day when it was introduced. It had similiar performance with a much nicer interior, refinement, reliability, comfort etc. But Honda basically sold the same car for 15 years with minor updates. The competition kept evolving while the NSX stayed the same. It seemed like more of an engineering exercise than a profitable product which is probably why they didn't spend much money updating it.

 

[Howard]

I'd like to see Honda reproduce the NSX with only minor updates across the board - gotta put in a turbo V8 though. For their sake.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

i wonder wheres the NSX info on the honda/acura website... i can't seem to find it.

love the car tho, is it still handmade like it was years ago?

 

[Dunbar]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
love the car tho, is it still handmade like it was years ago?

They stoppped making it in 2005.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Dunbar
It seemed like more of an engineering exercise than a profitable product which is probably why they didn't spend much money updating it.

I think that's really all it was ever meant to be. A statement by Honda that it's possible to build an incredible sportscar that is still easy to live with day in and day out. In many ways I think that it was really a reward for Honda's engineering department. As though someone in management said, "Hey, you guys in engineering, build something that you want to build. And have fun with it!"

ZV

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: Summit

Honda has always been a motor company. They build some of the most reliable/efficient motors. They are unlike other companies and they are still very successful. Low cost and high scale are what Honda has always been about. They are the blue-collar car company. They have projects every once in awhile nsx/s2000/supercub which show their engineering superiority. The do have smart business sense look at their success.

I can really get my soap-box going on this.

Well, they certainly aren't retarded. Like I've said in the past, there will always be a market for cost-efficient, well-engineered, engaging cars (including me!). But Honda seems to hope that those qualities alone will be enough, and that's not always true for lots of Americans. Americans tend to either like really boring cars or cars that you buy purely on emotion. Hondas are neither boring to drive nor emotional purchases. Right off the bat, they've alienated a large chunk of the market. And next to Ford, they have the worst TV commercials on the planet. Give us 30 seconds of intercut shots of the S2000 and the earth-painted F1 car power-sliding around the Nurburgring set to heavy metal and the slogan "This is who we R," with R looking all racey and type-R-like. Bam, that'll catch more people's attention than every commercial they've ever released and it took me 10 seconds to think of it. But as others have mentioned, they play it too conservative when it comes to this stuff.

Look at how late they were to the SUV game. They were one of the last big companies to release an SUV of any kind, and even then it was a panic-reaction deal with Izuzu for the Rodeo and Trooper (they sold about two Acura-badged Troopers). They knew perfectly well that SUVs were going to be huge, but just like their idealistic refusal to develop a consumer V8, they refused to build an SUV because there is no logical reason for small SUVs to exist. But logic does not equal emotional consumer demand and they let Toyota and GM run away with the ball. When they finally got around to releasing the Pilot and CR-V, they were way better than any competing product on the market, as usual. But by then the other companies had already established huge marque-recognition. The one thing they got right was making the CR-V "cuter" than the RAV-4. That made it the emotional choice.

As I mentioned already, they blew the hybrid market completely with the ground-breaking but no-chance Insight, the incognito Civic hybrid, and the performance-oriented Accord hybrid. Non of those models ever had a chance of competing with the Prius, all for different reasons. As usual, Toyota didn't need to be first OR the best, because they just flat-out judged the market properly.

Just as Nissan, Toyota/Lexus, GM, and Chrysler are blowing the sports car market wide open... Honda is killing their only sports car, ensuring they are left out of this party just like they were left out in the early 90's.

Acura, which once again was the first of its kind and blazed trails with a legendary model (pun intended), blew its chances with continued FWD/V6 models. Yes, they were the logical choice. Yes, they were damn good cars. Americans wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole. The last TL was a success due to spacey styling and gobs of power for the money, but it would have DESTROYED the market with RWD or even SH-AWD.

If Honda wants to kick ass, they'll make a dedicated Prius-fighter with the body of the FCX, and they will advertise it heavily. They'll design a 100-HP/liter V8 and stuff it in the next RL, Pilot, and Ridgeline. The next Ridgeline won't look like a sad joke. The Accord/TL will get SH-AWD, at least as an option. There will be a successor to the S2000, with forced induction and no less than 300 HP. And the NSX replacement will get the rumored V10 instead of the V6 they are talking about using now. The cars will still be great because they'll be designed by Honda, but now they'll check all the right American emotional boxes.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: Summit

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: senseamp
It's a typical Honda, great engineering, but too soulless and minimalistic for a supercar. It's engineering for the sake of engineering.

Define "soul" please?

That which Honda lacks.
They are too conservative. They hold themselves back because they are too afraid of excess. That works well for boring cars, but supercars are meant to be excessive. They should have made NSX much more powerful. They got overshadowed by the GT-R in the 90s because Nissan is not too shy to add some panache and excess to their cars.

soul is not selling out. soul is sticking to your guns. soul is honda. they have kept their focus on improving motors as a company line for a very long time.

qft. Honda isnt cowering away in fear and shame for not creating excessively powerful engines. They are holding their head up high for sticking to their principles. And yet they are highly profitable. If there's any car company I have respect for, it's Honda. IMO they are the real green car company

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain

Originally posted by: Summit

Honda has always been a motor company. They build some of the most reliable/efficient motors. They are unlike other companies and they are still very successful. Low cost and high scale are what Honda has always been about. They are the blue-collar car company. They have projects every once in awhile nsx/s2000/supercub which show their engineering superiority. The do have smart business sense look at their success.

I can really get my soap-box going on this.

Well, they certainly aren't retarded. Like I've said in the past, there will always be a market for cost-efficient, well-engineered, engaging cars (including me!). But Honda seems to hope that those qualities alone will be enough, and that's not always true for lots of Americans. Americans tend to either like really boring cars or cars that you buy purely on emotion. Hondas are neither boring to drive nor emotional purchases. Right off the bat, they've alienated a large chunk of the market. And next to Ford, they have the worst TV commercials on the planet. Give us 30 seconds of intercut shots of the S2000 and the earth-painted F1 car power-sliding around the Nurburgring set to heavy metal and the slogan "This is who we R," with R looking all racey and type-R-like. Bam, that'll catch more people's attention than every commercial they've ever released and it took me 10 seconds to think of it. But as others have mentioned, they play it too conservative when it comes to this stuff.

Look at how late they were to the SUV game. They were one of the last big companies to release an SUV of any kind, and even then it was a panic-reaction deal with Izuzu for the Rodeo and Trooper (they sold about two Acura-badged Troopers). They knew perfectly well that SUVs were going to be huge, but just like their idealistic refusal to develop a consumer V8, they refused to build an SUV because there is no logical reason for small SUVs to exist. But logic does not equal emotional consumer demand and they let Toyota and GM run away with the ball. When they finally got around to releasing the Pilot and CR-V, they were way better than any competing product on the market, as usual. But by then the other companies had already established huge marque-recognition. The one thing they got right was making the CR-V "cuter" than the RAV-4. That made it the emotional choice.

As I mentioned already, they blew the hybrid market completely with the ground-breaking but no-chance Insight, the incognito Civic hybrid, and the performance-oriented Accord hybrid. Non of those models ever had a chance of competing with the Prius, all for different reasons. As usual, Toyota didn't need to be first OR the best, because they just flat-out judged the market properly.

Just as Nissan, Toyota/Lexus, GM, and Chrysler are blowing the sports car market wide open... Honda is killing their only sports car, ensuring they are left out of this party just like they were left out in the early 90's.

Acura, which once again was the first of its kind and blazed trails with a legendary model (pun intended), blew its chances with continued FWD/V6 models. Yes, they were the logical choice. Yes, they were damn good cars. Americans wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole. The last TL was a success due to spacey styling and gobs of power for the money, but it would have DESTROYED the market with RWD or even SH-AWD.

If Honda wants to kick ass, they'll make a dedicated Prius-fighter with the body of the FCX, and they will advertise it heavily. They'll design a 100-HP/liter V8 and stuff it in the next RL, Pilot, and Ridgeline. The next Ridgeline won't look like a sad joke. The Accord/TL will get SH-AWD, at least as an option. There will be a successor to the S2000, with forced induction and no less than 300 HP. And the NSX replacement will get the rumored V10 instead of the V6 they are talking about using now. The cars will still be great because they'll be designed by Honda, but now they'll check all the right American emotional boxes.

Here's the thing though: Honda remains profitable. Honda, very frankly, isn't interested in being the world's largest car company. I honestly do not think they are at all worried about competing with Toyota for sheer size. IMO, the smartest thing that Honda has done is decide not to compete in every possible market. I get the feeling that Honda is right where they want to be.

ZV