2004 Honda S2000 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Is the original Acura NSX a perfect supercar?

The long-awaited arrival of the second coming of the Acura NSX has naturally brought with it many deep retrospectives on the first Acura NSX. Xcar is the latest with a stint in the time capsule, lining up three NSXs to sample at a track in the UK. There's the red wonder that started it all, the standard aluminum-bodied car that went on sale in 1990, so simple and easy-to-drive, extracting more joy than many thought possible from a 3.0-liter V6 with 'just' 270 horsepower and 210 pound-feet of torque. The 25-year-old exotic shows its years, but mostly because of an automatic transmission that dampens throttle response and doesn't like changing gears. The praises it earned in the day, however, still remain, namely excellent steering, handling, and feedback. After that comes laps in the first NSX Type R, the model that lost more than 250 pounds by having no air conditioning, sound deadening, or stereo, and lightweight tweaks like carbon seats and thinner glass. Although it the tuning makes it much harder, the presenter wants to know, "Why isn't Honda making a car like this today?" Then there's the 2002 model, the one that would only last three years before closing the door on a fifteen-year run. It got better at the same time as it got softer, but by then the NSX had nothing left to prove; it hit every one of its targets, it realigned the segment in ways we're still benefiting from, and for at least half of its run nothing else could touch it. Based on the reviews so far, that might include the brand new, very good and very complicated NSX. Check out the video above for Xcar's take. Related Video: News Source: Xcar via YouTube Acura Honda Coupe Luxury Performance Videos xcar honda nsx

2015 Australian Grand Prix all about grooves and trenches [spoilers]

We can't remember the last time 90 percent of the action in Formula One had nothing to do with cars setting timed laps. Yet that's was the situation at the Australian Grand Prix, continuing the antics from a scarcely believable off-season with blow-ups, driver and team absences, a lawsuit, and a clear need for some teams to get down and give us 50 pit stops. Nothing much has changed from a regulation standpoint, and at the front of the field nothing has changed at all. Lewis Hamilton in the Mercedes-AMG Petronas claimed the first position on the grid like someone put a sign on it that read, "Reserved for Mr. Hamilton;" teammate Nico Rosberg was 0.6 behind in second, Felipe Massa in the Williams was 1.4 seconds back in third. Sebastian Vettel proved that Ferrari didn't do another Groundhog Day routine this off-season, slotting into fourth. His teammate Kimi Raikkonen was not even four-hundredths of a second behind, ahead of Valtteri Bottas in the second Williams, Daniel Ricciardo in the first Infiniti Red Bull Racing, and rookie Carlos Sainz, Jr. in the first Toro Rosso. Lotus, now powered by Mercedes, got both cars into the top ten with Romain Grosjean in ninth, Pastor Maldonado in the final spot. However, even though the regulations are almost all carryover, in actual fact, everything has changed this year. Mercedes is even faster. Renault is even worse. Ferrari and Lotus are a lot better. Toro Rosso is looking like anything but a junior team. And McLaren is – well, let's not even get into that yet. Furthermore, this weekend was shambles: 15 cars started the race, the smallest naturally-occurring grid since 1963. Manor couldn't get its cars ready before qualifying. Bottas had to pull out after qualifying when he tore a disc in his back and couldn't pass the medical clearance tests. The gearbox in Daniil Kvyat's Red Bull gave out on the lap from the pit to the grid, and to give misery some company, the Honda in Kevin Magnussen's McLaren blew up on the same lap. When the lights went out, Hamilton ran away and was more than a second ahead of his teammate at the end of Lap 1. The advantage disappeared, though, because behind him, at the first corner, we got our first pile-up. As Raikkonen drove around the outside of Vettel at the right-hand Turn 1 it looked like Vettel, going over the kerbing, hopped to his left and bounced into Raikkonen.

Design Handbook explains the difference between design and styling

It's easy to confuse the terms 'design' and 'style,' but Jim Hall attempts to explain the difference between the two in his latest Design Handbook video column for Autoline. Before relating the terms to cars, Hall first uses other, non-automotive-related examples to prove his point, such as a well-designed glass versus a well-styled glass. Both do their job well as a result of good designs, he claims, but one stands out more because it also was styled.
When he relates his lesson to cars, he uses the 2013 Honda Accord and the new Chevrolet Impala as examples, but you'll have to watch the video below to find out which car he thinks is merely designed and which one has been styled.
We've also included a gallery of the Honda and a gallery of the Chevrolet so you can decide for yourself which one of these vehicles has been designed, and which one has been styled.