Ever since Honda revealed the reborn Prelude, people on the internet have wondered whether 200 horsepower was enough. Now that this sport compact has made it stateside, a YouTube channel by the name of AeroflowDynamics picked one up and reported an 8.28-second zero-to-60 mph run. Not exactly a quick time. While the resulting video has lit the internet up, there are reasons why you might not want to take it as gospel.
See, a lot more goes into those shiny zero-to-60 MPH numbers seen in magazines than people think. Testing equipment and procedures can make a huge difference, just as the conditions of an acceleration run can. Is it possible to compare this viral video with other specifications you see listed online? No, and here’s why.
Right off the rip, the acceleration run in question involves using the Prelude’s simulated gearshift mode, where the powertrain mimics the behavior of a paddle-shifted transmission. Of course, the Prelude doesn’t actually have a transmission as such, instead relying on electric propulsion for primary drive with the gasoline engine able to clutch in on a fixed ratio when needed. It’s no secret that shifts make a car slower as they interrupt torque, so performance in this mode isn’t indicative of what the Prelude may be able to do if left to its own devices.
Secondly, the zero-to-60 MPH times you see in the major magazines are all GPS-verified and weather corrected, for a few good reasons. We can see in the Prelude acceleration video that the speedometer jumps from 59 MPH to 62 MPH, so it’s not exactly the most precise instrument in the world. We also don’t know what the slope of the road is from video footage alone, whereas a 25 Hz or even a 10 Hz multi-axis GPS box will give you an accurate reading of whether or not the surface you complete an acceleration run on is actually flat. Put simply, GPS will give you data you can’t accurately glean from simply counting frames of footage.
As for weather correction, it’s no secret that air density varies based on ambient temperature, altitude, and humidity. A naturally aspirated car on a humid, 100-degree day 1,000 feet above sea level will make substantially less power than one driven on a dry, 60-degree day at sea level. To correct for this, the Society of Automotive Engineers has a standard known as J1349. It corrects output to an environment that’s 77 degrees Fahrenheit with 29.2348 inHg of barometric pressure and no humidity. As a result, acceleration times by an outlet using J1349 for weather correction can be compared against each other, but they can’t be directly compared against what you might run at home.
Oh, and magazines usually deduct rollout, a legacy holdout from the days when drag strips were the testing ground of the time. When you roll up to the tree at a drag strip, there’s a beam of light just ahead of where your front wheels sit once you’re staged. Breaking that beam of light starts the reaction time, um, timer, and having it reconnect once your front tires pass it completely starts the actual timer you see on the big board. That foot or so of tire movement between breaking the beam of light and clearing it amounts to a couple tenths of a second.
However, there is another reason why this claimed eight-second zero-to-60 mph run probably isn’t a big deal, and that’s because our brains lie to us. See, a magazine-spec zero-to-60 mph time also usually involves an aggressive launch, something most of us just don’t do on our daily commutes. That little bit of wheelspin can fire a car out of the hole quickly, but the gap between most cars’ zero-to-60 mph times and their times when accelerating from a slow roll is worth keeping in mind. An extreme example is the Toyota GR Corolla. While Car And Driver clicked off a zero-to-60 mph run of 4.9 seconds from a Circuit Edition model, the 5-to-60 MPH run took a second-and-a-half longer at 6.4 seconds. Not only does a zero-to-60 mph time not tell you how hard a car pulls through the gears, but there’s a good chance that in the real world, your car is slower than you think it is.
What this all means is that we can’t really pass final judgement on how quick the new Honda Prelude is until someone publishes weather-corrected, GPS-verified acceleration figures. I suspect that without the fake shifts, it’ll likely land somewhere around the Civic Hybrid, which is already quicker than the Civic Si. For context, Car And Driver managed a 6.2-second zero-to-60 mph time and a 7.2-second 5-to-60 mph time out of a current Civic Hybrid. Quick enough? Quite possibly.
Top graphic images: YouTube/AeroflowDynamics
It seems to be more an updated CRZ than a Prelude. Perhaps an offspring of the two combined..
This…is a good take.
I was invited to a pre-launch of the CR-Z (because I had recently purchased a CBR). At the time I thought it was awesome but was dissuaded by the price and the two seats.
I know the $15K extra included a few gee gaws, but JFC who is paying a $15K “market adjustment” over MSRP for these things? Other than YouTube guys, is there really that much of a market to support that kind of pricing?
I feel your question is rhetorical, but if not, the answer is NO. There is no market in late 2025/early 2026 that supports that.
It’s an FWD petrol hybrid, about as sporty as a Prius, just slower and less practical.
Looks just like a Prius too.
This is some high effort cope. We already know a few things. The primary one is that this powertrain has been tested not just by magazines, but numerous people who have posted their runs on youtube. Doing a brake torque (engine is only generating at low speed so its fake) allows the powertrain to race to 6k rpm and sit there. Doing this will and easily get the civic to 60 in about 6.5 seconds and an ocean of social media posts and videos will tell you this.
This is kind of a dumb quirk but if Honda will sell a “sports car” to us, the car should launch consistently and be faster than the economy car its both more expensive than and shares a powertrain with. Also this guy is based and got his car in so cal, and based on the clip, didn’t seem to be up in the mountains (why would be for this test), so there’s no weather condition I can think of that would add 2 seconds to this cars best possible 0-60 time.
The fact that Honda isn’t offering this in yellow is criminal. Honda has had the best yellows outside of Stuttgart IMO and they are either relegated to a special edition or not used at all.
My 25 year old insight averages north of 63mpg, can this beat that with 25 years of development?
Is it all Aluminum and never rusting like their 25 yr old car?
Color me simply unimpressed.
Can your Insight protect you as well in a crash?
When people compare cars from complete different decades, they often just pick the selective bits that add to their argument while ignoring everything else.
Isn’t this on-brand for Prelude? Don’t get me wrong, I know 200 HP is disappointing in modern terms, but the engine has never been the center of Prelude’s draw – even the tuners didn’t really go for it, and the 4th and 5th gen Preludes were squarely of that era.
I get where everyone is coming from on this one. Thomas is basically saying “hey toxic Honda fans they’re actually trying to build something interesting and you are shitting all over it like it’s The Last Jedi or something – you deserve all the Nissan Rogues the world can produce.” But, if Honda isn’t going to build something good, was there ever a point to trying? The trucklet crowd is never going to buy it and enthusiasts aren’t going to buy something that doesn’t inspire enthusiasm. Accounting Department strikes again?
It looks great, gets good MPG, handles nicely, is comfortable, and has a bigass hatch in the back. Ya know, the same reasons the Datsun S30 and S130 are so well-regarded 40 years after they left the market. Hell, this even has the same power-weight ratio as my Datsun 280ZX but probably 95% fewer vacuum lines. I don’t see a reason to be Big Mad about this.
240z had an MSRP of around 30k (in a time with higher buying power), this certainly does not. A modern car should also probably have a much better power to weight ratio than a car from the late 70s…
Because its SLOWER THAN A CIVIC for 50% more money. That’s why. We’re not cross shopping this with a 240zx. People will cross shop it with other cars they can buy new TODAY and the current nissan Z can be had for 50k and offers wayyy more performance than this.
Car Internet is defending the living crap out of this thing. Every other article is like “you may have seen that the Prelude is expensive, here’s why it doesn’t matter” or “you may have seen that the Prelude is slow, here’s why it’s not a big deal”.
This thing strikes me as a dud. It’s very good looking with (presumably) great fuel economy, but as a sports car it’s expensive, slow, and will likely lack real engagement. It wants to be a Toyobaru but lacks a stick, RWD, affordability, and the fun of a straight combustion powertrain.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad it’s not another crossover. I’m just saying maybe they could’ve given it a bit more power so you’re not door to door with an Odyssey, or a lower starting price. You got $45k to spend on a fun car? Go buy a Giulia, I bet there’s some smoking deals.
100% I don’t see how this car is over $10k more than a Civic hybrid.
Yup. In a world where the BMW B58 engine exists which has essentially democratized 300+hp (not counting tuning), there’s no justification making a “sporty” car with 200hp. Heck, I’ll even acknowledge that 200hp is fine, but not in something this heavy.
This is the CR-Z 2.0, but even more pointless being wildly more expensive.
Only journalists. I think 85% of car enthusiasts hate it.
It’s always annoyed me how cars are thrashed to get the numbers when almost nobody is doing that with a car they’re paying for. For some cars, it’s also worse for the numbers. I wasn’t that interested in the Focus ST when my SE got totaled, but decided to take it for a drive thinking the poor numbers I saw that weren’t significantly better than the SE might have been down to too much wheel spin. As it turned out, the real life number was about a second quicker, reflective of competitors with a similar power/weight ratio, but it wasn’t easy to hit as it required balancing wheel spin and boost and I suspect many journos dumped the clutch like they would with low torque engines, spinning through the first second. Anyway, even if a launch was difficult to get just right, in the real world of accelerating while already moving, that didn’t bother it.
That said, for all the flack the (cheaper) GR86 and BRZ get for being slow, they’re going to have a field day with the Prelude as it really is a dog—my FWD 1990 Legacy wagon was 8 sec. flat FFS. That’s midrange 15-20 year old hatchback territory, which seems like a big ask for something this sporty in an age where nearly everything is fast when it’s also expensive and there’s a more practical version for cheaper that doesn’t try to look all that sporting and may even be quicker due to lighter weight. Coupes and sports cars sell largely on image (this is by no means exclusive, but it’s a large percentage as evidenced by the common practice of fattened, more comfort-oriented follow up generations that go on to sell better than the more pure originals), which is why a manual is important at the lower end—not for the numbers sold with that transmission, but for the numbers of total cars that the “driver’s car” cred from an offered manual sells. If nobody is talking about how cool the car that’s got the cool car form factor is—or worse—dismissing it, even fewer people will pick it over the cheaper, more practical alternative that doesn’t need explanation. As others have mentioned and I’ve brought up as a concern before, this stinks of CRZ and is likely going to do about as well. I hope I’m wrong and, like stocks, past history is not an indicator of future performance, but this looks like a very small niche. I don’t own Honda stock, so I shouldn’t care, and Honda can shrug off the potential failure, but people who are paid very well to know the industry have specced this thing and that annoys the shit out of me. Time will tell if they’re the geniuses or not, but I know where my money would be were I a betting dog.
The problem with THIS car is that the poor performance here makes it a tough sell over the 3 other, more usable, cheaper, and somehow faster alternatives with the same powertrain. There isn’t a single car i can think of with a less justified MSRP than this below the $200k range.
I’m still trying wrap my head around the fake shifts. Is that something the computer is throwing into the acceleration run, or does it require the driver to flip the paddles? (I’m assuming there’s not a fake clutch pedal in the mix, though I won’t be surprised if somebody will develop such a thing for the aftermarket.)
Why, exactly, is it a good thing to kneecap the vehicle’s performance with artificial shifts that really don’t need to be there? I just don’t get it. That would be a feature I’d turn off the first time I drove the car, and never turn on ever again.
Thomas, I know you’re excited for a non-crossover car of any type, but you don’t have to be such a Preludepagandist. It’s slow, it’s expensive, it’s auto only, it’s a DUD. Hopefully Honda Jazzes (pun intended) it up to something that matches the styling, but I really doubt it.
This car is to cruise around and feel sporty, not be sporty, but to feel like it in your head. Looks nice as you walk out to get in it. Sits low and and probably tight enough steering to feel fun.
But it isn’t fast, it may not even be quick, if you buy it and care about 0-60 times, you have yourself to blame. On the other hand, it’s OKAY to be slow and enjoyable. Just sell it honestly.
100% true! I would shop this car against something like a Mazda 3 (which has always been close to the top of the fun slow cars list.) If the suspension is dialed and its fun to drive, then smiles will be found behind the wheel.
The mazda 3’s quicker than this even without the turbo. There’s a difference between not being too fast and being slower than a CR-V
I would agree were this car low $30ks tops, but mid 40s? How big can that market possibly be? I worked with a guy who got a bog standard mk3 Mazda3 sedan and he and his wife acted like it was a midlife crisis car because it was red. For normies like him (and I can’t think of too many other people who’d be interested), the cheaper Civic Hybrid would impress about as much for less and be more salable to a spouse for the practicality. I get the car and want to like it and I get why it’s expensive, but I don’t get the business case and am curious about Honda’s expectations.
Have you ever heard the phrase “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”? I feel like this is a great example of that. Anyway, I still predict this to barely sell, because who exactly is the market for this? Enthusiasts aren’t going to buy it (plenty of better & cheaper options), Environmentalists aren’t going to buy it (plenty of better and cheaper options), Regular people aren’t likely to buy it (it’s not a white/black/silver jelly bean). Who is this product meant for?
Good to know that my 13-year old Ford Flex with 260k miles on it will outrun a brand new ‘sports’ coupe.
There are already plenty of Japanese youtube videos of the Prelude doing 0-100kph in 8s range with the fake shift.
Yes yes yes there are so many tools to accurately measure the performance but they are mostly used to skew the performance. Unless it is measured and accurately reported without the governments decision to add 10 mph because they have used green sourced manure for insulation does the accuracy items really matter when it is massaged?
Just show a camera on the speedometer from take off and I will allow for different scenarios. I don’t want experts lying to me.
uuuuhh, so +/- 1 second on this time the dude got to account for testing inaccuracy is still a shitty 0-60 for a car in 2025 that costs over $40k and claims to be “sporty”. I can get that in my 12 year old diesel cayenne no problem and with no accounting for rolling starts and other BS trickery. And I could have bought two of those Cayennes for the price of that Honda.
No, just no. Thomas is the chief Prelude apologist, but this is missing the mark on every metric. I haven’t seen Honda fail this dramatically since the 2012 Civic, which they hurriedly refreshed. Was that so long ago that their institutional memory has really lapsed?
I recall the stunning and controversial 1997 Prelude. Those alien headlights, the tactile feel of the textured upholstery, and the divine manual. And, the handling purity. It was something special, but not bizarre. Honda could have replicated that easily now, but it would have been a greater contrast to the modern market and all the more desirable for it. Unfortunately, we get this milquetoast sadness.
To this day, I’ve never driven a car that shifted better than my 4th Gen Prelude. Between that, the deep bucket seats, and the wraparound dash it felt like piloting a space ship.
I’ve always thought the drivetrain of the 99 Accord made spaceship noises under load.
They betrayed their heritage.
Is this the hill that the Autopian staff wants to collectively die on?
Why are all the automotive sites falling over themselves to make excuses for this car? Ohhh, the 0-60 time isn’t THAT bad. Ohhh, the price isn’t THAT bad when you take inflation into account. Soon it’ll be ohhhh the sales aren’t THAT bad. The rushed mid-cycle refresh doesn’t look THAT bad. The price didn’t increase THAT much for 2027. Good grief. It’s like no one wants to say anything bad because they’re afraid Honda won’t invite them to parties anymore. This is not the car we wanted. Honda didn’t listen and they just built what they wanted and they’re going to have to deal with the fallout from that. If Honda brought back the Fit they’d sell a hell of a lot more of those than the rebooted Prelude.
It’s the CRZ all over again. Do I want a new CRX? YES. Do I want a new Prelude? YES. Just, not like this.
Car outlets are always way nicer to new cars than they should be. That’s not new.
The zero to sixty doesn’t bother me at all. Let’s talk about the $59,000 sticker. What the actual bloody flipping Hell! What someone is willing to spend for a car is none of my business, but have the decency to be ashamed.
Completely agree.
I just optioned a Prelude online and it was nowhere near $59K.
In the video, the car has a combination of the protection package (wheel locks, cargo tray, splash guards, paint protection glaze, window tint) and market adjustment of $14995. So probably around $14K of market adjustment alone.
Worth it for the clicks.
The zero to sixty should bother you. This thing is now the second slowest car Honda sells in America, after the BASE model civic. That shouldn’t be the case for anything that isn’t larger than the civic or cheaper. I would tolerate an 8.2 second time for my mom’s car, let alone in a prelude.
I appreciate The Autopian for the thorough journalism here; and I get the appeal of having a contrarian take on the Prelude, especially in the face of vicious internet discourse.
But let’s be honest with ourselves here – this thing is a dud and makes no sense, even if the “real” 0-60 is in the 6 vs 8 second range.
There’s no defending this Honda at its current price point, and y’all look out of touch justifying it.
Its rambling at best. No car becomes 33% slower to sixty based off weather or how you launch it unless traction is an issue, which it wasn’t in the clip. Thomas was just talking nonsense.
When you roll up to the tree at a drag strip there are questions. Is the tree felled or fallen? This is the big one, because a neatly felled tree will be pullable back down the drag strip that the engine has created, a fallen tree is a job for the slicing machine, the big horses are good at pulling the logs down the drag strip then, disconnect the saw, turn about and follow the horses. I might be thinking of a rather different drag strip.