Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
CAR reveals spy shots of McLaren P11 supercar
2010 Chevrolet Camaro priced: LS $22,995, SS $30,995
BREAKING: GM and Chrysler talking about merger
Spy Shots: Nissan 370Z again, with interior shots
2010 Mazda3 unveiled ahead of LA Auto Show
In the Autobog Garage: 2009 Chevy Cobalt SS Turbo
Knight Rider: The Liveblog -- Season 1, Episode 3
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Mazda RX-8 R3, return of the "hummer"
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Chevy Corvette Z06
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this thread(Page 1 of 1)
TwinTurbo3000GT @ Jan 22nd 2008 9:01AM
i didnt think there was anything wrong with the old NSX...other than slow sales. They talk about it like it was an outdated looking car, lol. Whatever that thing up there is, it appears to be front engine, so scrap that. Keep with the mid-engine theme fo sho.
MikeW @ Jan 23rd 2008 4:38PM
Honda should have used a 60 degree V6 for transverse mid-engine. That would have shortened the tail of the car.
If they were going to use the 90 degree engine, it should have been longitudinal (with a 6 speed transmission).
Gordon Murray also said something to the similar (in 1990 I think)
-rear vision not bad, tail feels too long for parking
-overall size of the car is perfect-except tail length for parking