NSX finally killed

[69cougar]

About time Honda put this thing out of it's misery.....

http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/news/industry-news/honda-to-discontinue-acura-nsx-build-new-supercar-112154.php

:clap:

[mike0989]

I love the new concept :drool:

[GSR Zero]

Definitely about time to put the NSX to rest. It was an amazing car back in the day. I can't wait to see the new one. Isn't it supposed to be a hybrid with electric motors driving two wheels?

[KleanCord]

That was my all time favorite car but just yesterday I was talking to a guy about them and just how back in the day they were one of the best values in sports cars. Now since they havent changed the engine design since 91 they have grown outdated. But I think it is saying something when a car lasts that length of time with almost no design changes other than a slight increase in displacement and a new headlight design and maybe some ground effects differences.

[b_t]

the NSX lasted a long time, but I think the Lotus Esprit still holds the record for the most enduring sports car design.
a new concept... as much as I want to say it will be exciting, I am not holding my breath.

[bonnieclyde240]

i think the nsx is dope!! :clap:

[mac_82]

link isn't working for me :dunno:

**edit nm i got it to work

[/////AMG]

Thank god

[rahim]

Originally posted by GSR Zero
Definitely about time to put the NSX to rest. It was an amazing car back in the day. I can't wait to see the new one. Isn't it supposed to be a hybrid with electric motors driving two wheels?

think they killed that too

[FiveFreshFish]

It still turns heads today. I wouldn't mind having one.

[Shoebox//Racer]

Originally posted by KleanCord
... Now since they havent changed the engine design since 91 they have grown outdated. ...

I think outdated is the wrong word here. More like graduated to a classic design. It will never be outdated. Same goes with the Lotus Esprit... my all time fav car.

[yohan4ws]

the supercar looks sick, but really ... $90k for a 290HP is a bit out of range.

Especially when you consider new entry level vehicles like the SRT-4 running such low times, and the lancers as well. The competition is much lower priced, though I still think nothing compares to looks to the NSX when you factor bang for buck.

I'd love an NSX but I'm very excited to see the next line of Honda exotic.

[rahim]

I don't think the srt-4 and the lancers were competition for the NSX, people who spend 90K+ on a car don't usually base their decisions on 1/4 mile times

[rmk]

werd. they should kill it. they are not what they used to be and they can't really do much more with the name. amazingly fun car to drive though, although stock, is underpowered.... time to move on and create something new from a fresh sheet of paper. :burnout: they had their time :burnout:

[3G]

Does that mean the value of the nsx goes up?

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by yohan4ws
the supercar looks sick, but really ... $90k for a 290HP is a bit out of range.
.........snip.

Sad part is that the MSRP for a 2005 model is $142,000. Can't really see the value in that.

[EK 2.0]

Originally posted by FiveFreshFish
It still turns heads today. I wouldn't mind having one.

Agreed.

and it's not about 290HP for $142,000...

It's about the poise, the style, the power, the handling, the balance, the braking, the status, the whoa factor.

Combine all those things into a car, and the NSX is an unbeatable value.

[962 kid]

Originally posted by EK 2.0


Agreed.

and it's not about 290HP for $142,000...

It's about the poise, the style, the power, the handling, the balance, the braking, the status, the whoa factor.

Combine all those things into a car, and the NSX is an unbeatable value.

last I checked, a honda doesn't mean high status lol... the car is most definitely not worth the money.

However... if they do build the HSC I wouldn't have them change a thing. that is one of the all time hottest concept cars ever

[EK 2.0]

Originally posted by 962 kid


last I checked, a honda doesn't mean high status lol... the car is most definitely not worth the money.

However... if they do build the HSC I wouldn't have them change a thing. that is one of the all time hottest concept cars ever

pffffft, what do YOU know about high status cars??;) haha...

it's not about the "H" plate being high status...it's about you rolling up to your destination in an NSX...you will get oo-ed and ahh-ed...and a few chickie's phone numbers...haha

[habsfan]

i still think today, that the earlier flip up headlight NSX is one of the sexiest cars on the road. deisgn is totally classic and in my opinion utterly beautiful. sure, very expensive, but you aren't buying a 1/4 mile stormer when you get an NSX, you're getting a balanced, taut prestige car. regardless if it's a honda. ;)

[rice_eater]

Originally posted by EK 2.0


Agreed.

and it's not about 290HP for $142,000...

It's about the poise, the style, the power, the handling, the balance, the braking, the status, the whoa factor.

Combine all those things into a car, and the NSX is an unbeatable value.

the nsx has always been a blueprinted ferrari, i think they even admited that they coppied ferrari when they made it. so it's never been anything special, just a wannabe try hard (like most hondas )

[heavyD]

Still one of the best looking cars you will see on the roads today. It's still just as advanced as any car available today even if it doesn't have blazing straight line speed. One of the few $75000+ cars that are as reliable as a Civic or Accord also. It's a classic IMO.

[QuasarCav]

Originally posted by rice_eater


the nsx has always been a blueprinted ferrari, i think they even admited that they coppied ferrari when they made it. so it's never been anything special, just a wannabe try hard (like most hondas )


The car that made Ferrari rethink their build quality.

[speedracer]

Originally posted by EK 2.0


Agreed.

and it's not about 290HP for $142,000...

It's about the poise, the style, the power, the handling, the balance, the braking, the status, the whoa factor.

Combine all those things into a car, and the NSX is an unbeatable value.

It's a car that could be when it came out. But I wouldn't say "unbeatable value". The z06/z07 puts the NSX to shame.

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by EK 2.0
snip..........

it's not about the "H" plate being high status...it's about you rolling up to your destination in an NSX...you will get oo-ed and ahh-ed...and a few chickie's phone numbers...haha

And a shiny black Porsche 911 with decent rims would not get looks and not considered high status? Can be had for a lot less $$$ but not appear that way.

I rather be rolling in a new Porsche 997 than the NSX. I just like the style, prestige and pedigree the Porsche name gives. I realize Honda has one as well, but it's all about people's perception.....as they are the ones we are trying to impress with these cars.

At least the NSX is a decent deal used though and with small touches...can look very modern and comparable to the new NSXs. I especially like the few I have been seeing on the road lately, an Orange Lava'ish one and a dark blue one. Only lowered with rims, but looks damn good.

I loved the NSX when it came out, and I still have a soft spot for it, but not for the price that they are selling it for these days. I never remembered them to be this expensive.

[962 kid]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns


And a shiny black Porsche 911 with decent rims would not get looks and not considered high status? Can be had for a lot less $$$ but not appear that way.

I rather be rolling in a new Porsche 997 than the NSX. I just like the style, prestige and pedigree the Porsche name gives. I realize Honda has one as well, but it's all about people's perception.....as they are the ones we are trying to impress with these cars.

At least the NSX is a decent deal used though and with small touches...can look very modern and comparable to the new NSXs. I especially like the few I have been seeing on the road lately, an Orange Lava'ish one and a dark blue one. Only lowered with rims, but looks damn good.

I loved the NSX when it came out, and I still have a soft spot for it, but not for the price that they are selling it for these days. I never remembered them to be this expensive.

:werd: times a billion!!!

[Xtrema]

NSX has always been my fav. Just can't afford one.

The concept is scrapped because Honda America killed it even thu Japan wants it built.

American Honda dealers want a plush powerful ride for grandpas a la Lexus SC430. They don't want another stripped down racer.

[schurchill39]

I havent seen many nsx's in little medicine hat here but from what I have seen they are really nice cars. I know i like them I hope the new one can keep up the nsx "legacy"

[EK 2.0]

Originally posted by speedracer
It's a car that could be when it came out. But I wouldn't say "unbeatable value". The z06/z07 puts the NSX to shame.

somewhat agreed...I mean the new C6 Vette, really doesnt do for me what the C5 did and still does in terms of rubbernecking...

[Seanith]

Yeah Corvettes are a great value in terrms of performance and raw power, but it takes a really nice corvette for me to even look twice.. the NSX though :hitit:

[Wildcat]

after seeing more C6's on the road and in person, its really grown on me. i didnt like it too much in the magazines, but the pics never did it justice anyway. the price of a C5 has gone down quite a alot, you might be able to find a decent zo6 for ~40k.

oh ya, the nsx is a supreme piece of shit, good riddance.

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by Shoebox//Racer
I think outdated is the wrong word here. More like graduated to a classic design. It will never be outdated. Same goes with the Lotus Esprit... my all time fav car.

Maybe not in design, but he's talking about performance. If you were the one choosing a car to spend 100k (US) on, it wouldn't be an NSX. A base C6 can be had for half the price of an NSX, with better performance and much better sound in my opinion. A C6Z06 will still clock in at a lower price with 505hp and outrageous performance. And of course we can't forget the 911s... or even the Boxster S and Cayman, all outperforming the NSX. Plus the Boxster is much, much more fun to drive than an NSX, has a much nicer interior, and is a fresh design.

There are way too many alternatives to this car nowadays. I'm amazed they even sell them any more.

[88CRX]

how can some of you guys even start compairing the NSX to neons, lancers and to a lesser degree vettes?

i want an nsx :D

[dkny_stylez]

thank god

[Wildcat]

in all honesty the car had absolutely no market, im surprised it lasted 16 years. the only person who would buy this thing is a guy with too much money who knows jack shit or some honda fanboy who just won the lotto.

[EK 2.0]

Originally posted by Wildcat
in all honesty the car had absolutely no market, im surprised it lasted 16 years. the only person who would buy this thing is a guy with too much money who knows jack shit or some honda fanboy who just won the lotto.

or Alex Zanardi...

Adam Saruwatari...

Peter Cunningham...

Paul Tracy...

these gentlemen sure knew jack shit...:rolleyes:

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by EK 2.0


or Alex Zanardi...

Adam Saruwatari...

Peter Cunningham...

Paul Tracy...

these gentlemen sure knew jack shit...:rolleyes:

Not to mention that Ayrton Senna helped nail down the car's handling and the NSX Type-R has proven itself on the Nurburgring.

The car is quite capable performance wise, no doubt about that.

[Weapon_R]

The NSX has never been an 'unbeatable value'. It was actually one of the most underpowered exotic vehicles you could buy for the price.

The Corvette is an 'unbeatable value'. For the price, nothing can touch it, and most cars twice as expensive have a hard time competing with it.

[Police]

Originally posted by rice_eater


the nsx has always been a blueprinted ferrari, i think they even admited that they coppied ferrari when they made it. so it's never been anything special, just a wannabe try hard (like most hondas )

the NSX out performed ferarris in many aspects when it first came out(IN 1991), get your facts straight dumb ass(NEON PRIDE BOY!).:guns:

[cycosis]

i dont care what u guys say, ill miss it very much. everything about it i loved

[alpha]

who cares if its lacking in the power area, tack on an extra 10 thousand, give or take, and you could have a well done and reliable forced induction setup that would make up for the reduction in hp compared to other cars in its market.

Then you would have a high powered car that looks fantastic IMO, and handles great. theres your bang for your buck. No matter how old it is I always do a double-take when I see one, and I know girls do too. not to mention they are somewhat rare. This car will be sorely missed.

[max_boost]

A low maintenance super car, I'll take an 02 when it depreciates to $80K :bigpimp:

[Wildcat]

Originally posted by EK 2.0


or Alex Zanardi...

Adam Saruwatari...

Peter Cunningham...

Paul Tracy...

these gentlemen sure knew jack shit...:rolleyes:

lol, like these guys really have a choice buddy.

[CokerRat]

Originally posted by Wildcat
lol, like these guys really have a choice buddy. Yah, I'm sure they were forced to drive their cars at gunpoint. Granted, they probably each have 4 or 5 exotics in the garage. But guys like Senna and Zanardi had every oppotunity to say "no thanks" to getting involved in the development of the car.

I'm disappointed Honda hasn't evolved it more through the years. The 1991 car was light years ahead of its time and it held its own with the best in the world right up to around 2000. It's only in the last 5 years, with the Ferrari 360 and C5 Z06 models, that the car was left behind. The 97+ was able to run with the F355, 996, and C5. The car suffers mainly from a power deficit of about 100 horses, which could have been cured by installig a Comptech supercharger from the factory.


Originally posted by iceburns288
or even the Boxster S and Cayman, all outperforming the NSX. Plus the Boxster is much, much more fun to drive than an NSX, has a much nicer interior, and is a fresh design.

The Boxster S does not outperform the NSX. While the Cayman will be a faster car than the new Boxster S, on paper, it should still be slower. I can't say I've driven a Boxster S, so what exactly is it about the Boxster S that makes it so much more fun to drive than an NSX?

[Police]

some idiots on here will still think low hp numbers=slow cars, how stubborn.:thumbsdow

[962 kid]

Originally posted by CokerRat
The car suffers mainly from a power deficit of about 100 horses, which could have been cured by installig a Comptech supercharger from the factory.


but thats the point of owning a supercar :dunno: you should'nt have to change anything on the car for it to be able to keep up imo anyways




The Boxster S does not outperform the NSX. While the Cayman will be a faster car than the new Boxster S, on paper, it should still be slower

actually, the older boxster S lapped 6 seconds faster than a NSX on the nurburgring and the cayman S with an extra 50hp, 150% stiffer body, better suspension and PCCB's should give even the NSX-R a run for it's money


Originally posted by Police
some idiots on here will still think low hp numbers=slow cars, how stubborn.:thumbsdow

wow thanks for the blinding insight, tool. Perhaps you could enlighten us with some more incredible observations.... or hopefully... not

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by alpha
who cares if its lacking in the power area, tack on an extra 10 thousand, give or take, and you could have a well done and reliable forced induction setup that would make up for the reduction in hp compared to other cars in its market.
Who cares? Anyone wanting to buy one. Considering they're already US$40k higher priced than they should be in the first place, I wouldn't want to spend even MORE on it because it's so lacking. I, personally, would not buy an NSX. Yeah sure they look good, but there's not much else going for them. For the same price you can get a much better 355.

Originally posted by CokerRat
The 1991 car was light years ahead of its time and it held its own with the best in the world right up to around 2000.
hah. Yeah right. A 348 could probably take on an NSX. And even if it can't, it still looks better, sounds better, and has gobs more driving feel. An NSX drives just like any other Honda, except MR. A 348 or 355, well they drive... like Ferraris. It may sound stupid but Ferraris have a completely different driving feel than anything else out there; that's why customers keep coming back.

The car suffers mainly from a power deficit of about 100 horses, which could have been cured by installig a Comptech supercharger from the factory.
962 kid is right here, when buying a car that costs this much you shouldn't be almost forced to upgrade it right off the lot.:rolleyes:

The Boxster S does not outperform the NSX. While the Cayman will be a faster car than the new Boxster S, on paper, it should still be slower. I can't say I've driven a Boxster S, so what exactly is it about the Boxster S that makes it so much more fun to drive than an NSX?
A Boxster S does outperform an NSX. Apparently it can almost compete with a CGT or Enzo through corners. Coming out of them is a different story, but still. The old one can easily take an NSX... while at the same time have an interior with much greater quality and feel to it, and not to mention a better sound. And an outstanding drive quality; Road and Track didn't make call it one of the most fun cars to drive for no reason.

[b_t]

Originally posted by Police
some idiots on here will still think low hp numbers=slow cars, how stubborn.:thumbsdow

uhhmmm last I checked, horsepower is what moved your car down the road.
the NSX IS slow. it also keeps with the proud Honda tradition of having absolutely terrible low-end power.
I would drive one, but only for the looks, not because it is a "performance" car. I could get a car that handles the same for a lot less, and a car that is a lot faster for a lot less, but none of them will have the same allure.

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by b_t
uhhmmm last I checked, horsepower is what moved your car down the road.
the NSX IS slow. it also keeps with the proud Honda tradition of having absolutely terrible low-end power.
I would drive one, but only for the looks, not because it is a "performance" car. I could get a car that handles the same for a lot less, and a car that is a lot faster for a lot less, but none of them will have the same allure.

Since when does a Porsche have less of the 'exotic allure' of an overpriced Honda?

[GQBalla]

what is the price for a brand new nsx???

[88CRX]

Originally posted by iceburns288


Since when does a Porsche have less of the 'exotic allure' of an overpriced Honda?

do you even know what an nsx even looks like

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by GQBalla
what is the price for a brand new nsx???

I mentioned it in the last page. The base MSRP for a 2005 model is $142,000 according to acura.ca . A great value!.....according to some.

[EK 2.0]

Look, it's obvious that the Honda people will stick up for the Honda. The Ferarri folks will stick up for the Ferarri...and that 962 Kid will stick up for anything Euro and Exotic...haha;)

The NSX is a great car, and yes, new ones are overpriced...but a couple years from now are a nice value. It has been a long run vehicle, in both styling and technology. It after all brought VTEC to the "masses". Anyway...it will be sad to see it go...I loved that lil aluminum car...

and hopefully in the future will have the priveledge of having one in my driveway...

[heavyD]

Originally posted by EK 2.0
Look, it's obvious that the Honda people will stick up for the Honda. The Ferarri folks will stick up for the Ferarri...and that 962 Kid will stick up for anything Euro and Exotic...haha;)

I'm not a Honda person by any means but I'm also not ignorant that's why I acknowledge that the NSX is a special car. I'm not a European enthusiast or muscle car guy, I'm an automobile enthusiast plain and simple, not some 16-22 year old hater.

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by 88CRX
do you even know what an nsx even looks like
Yes. What's your point? :rolleyes:


Originally posted by EK 2.0
Look, it's obvious that the Honda people will stick up for the Honda. The Ferarri folks will stick up for the Ferarri...and that 962 Kid will stick up for anything Euro and Exotic...haha;

I'm not going to stick up for just Ferrari (but at least I can spell it;) ). The NSX is a good car. I like it a lot, I've seen several of them up close and I really do like their styling a lot, who wouldn't. It's just not a great car to me. I don't think I could ever bring myself to buy one. Sure, I could get a 2000 NSX for about US$40k. Then to make it more competitive I could get a 10k Comptech package. The problem is I'm now out 50k with a car with no warranty and its astounding reliability shut down by my forced induction. And I could have taken a brand new C6 convertible with gobs more power, an amazing throaty sound, a warranty and in my opinion a more appealing car.

The NSX is a good car, just not a great one.

[Nissanaddict]

The NSX is like a Fiero with a Ferrari bodykit on it. Damn some of those look AMAZING....but some are still sporting a 2.5L 4 banger with no power, that my old Corsica could give a run for its money (with the weight of the kit, etc.)....ok fine, not THAT bad....but if you absolutely hate any car with over 2 seats, it's a daily driver, and that's it.

[Akagi Redsuns]

Originally posted by Nissanaddict
The NSX is like a Fiero with a Ferrari bodykit on it. Damn some of those look AMAZING....but some are still sporting a 2.5L 4 banger with no power, that my old Corsica could give a run for its money (with the weight of the kit, etc.)....ok fine, not THAT bad....but if you absolutely hate any car with over 2 seats, it's a daily driver, and that's it.

Huh??? What are you talking about. What is the point you are trying to make?

The NSX is like a Fiero with a bodykit? I so don't think so. The NSX has a great and capable chassis and quick, where the Fiero..well until the latest interation, it was a pile of crap and still would not come anywhere close to what the NSX can do. You are seriously underating the NSX, even more so then the anti-NSX people in the thread.

I don't understand your post at all and frankly I don't think you added anything to the discussion at hand.

[iceburns288]

The successor to the NSX is supposed to have a V10. Takeo Fukui said it himself:


We are now focused on the development of a new model to succeed the NSX for a new era. We would like to debut a new super sports car equipped with a V10 engine in 3 to 4 years. Please look forward to seeing the NSX successor.

[Moonracer]

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by Akagi Redsuns


Huh??? What are you talking about. What is the point you are trying to make?

The NSX is like a Fiero with a bodykit? I so don't think so. The NSX has a great and capable chassis and quick, where the Fiero..well until the latest interation, it was a pile of crap and still would not come anywhere close to what the NSX can do. You are seriously underating the NSX, even more so then the anti-NSX people in the thread.

I don't understand your post at all and frankly I don't think you added anything to the discussion at hand.

I think what was trying to say is not that an NSX is comparable to a Fiero, but rather it's a bit of a sheep in wolf's clothing. It looks great, but lacks the power to back up the good looks. Just like a Fier-ari can't compete with the real Ferrari, the NSX lacks the raw power to compete with other high-end cars in its price range.

[Z_Fan]

I just about bought one of these in 1994.

It was a 1992 model, so it was only a couple years old. Unfortunately, I had just bought a 92 Twin Turbo 300zx. The ZX had a few mods and was developing about 405hp.

When I took the Black NSX out for a spin I was seriously NOT impressed with its lack of go. It wasn't just slow, it was embarrassingly slow! However, had I bought that car I'd still be able to sell it for what I paid for it based on what happened with the pricing of those vehicles. See, early on the cars were cheap [ish] So this one was selling for $42k used. It was a bargain now that I think back to it. But it was just way too slow.

So I test drove a 1992 corvette.

What a piece of shit that was. Nothing like the new ones. Nothing like them at all. That 1992 corvette was the the biggest piece of shit vehicle I'd set foot in. It was about the same quickness as the Z I already had [maybe slower by a hair], but it was rough as hell. It bounced all over the place, turned like a total POS. I was surprised. Rattled and clunked OMFG it was horrible. So I went home in my 405hp Twin Turbo Z knowing my car was FAR superior to both of those crappy POS cars.

Now, the NSX was at least nice to drive. It handled well - real well. But it lacked power in a big way up top and that I just couldn't live with. Still a nice ride though it is extremely (and I mean about 75k) overpriced nowadays. A new vette will absolutely smoke it. Hell my SRT-4 will wax its ass down the 1/4. New vette is far superior vehicle. If you had that money, you'd be a lot smarter to buy a new Viper IMO. Way more car than the NSX ever thought of being.

Good riddance. Hopefully they make a new car that is worth the pricetag.

[Moonracer]

Z-Fan, how can you say that man...lol The NSX back then had basically the same performance specs as the TT Z car. 0-60 in 5.3 seconds isn't exactly slow. And had at least as good and even better stats than some ferraris.

[Seanith]

Originally posted by Moonracer
Z-Fan, how can you say that man...lol The NSX back then had basically the same performance specs as the TT Z car. 0-60 in 5.3 seconds isn't exactly slow. And had at least as good and even better stats than some ferraris.

His was modified to 405hp apparently.. not exactly a fair comparison? :dunno:

[Moonracer]

ya but stock for stock they were similar

[Wildcat]

Originally posted by Z_Fan
I just about bought one of these in 1994.

It was a 1992 model, so it was only a couple years old. Unfortunately, I had just bought a 92 Twin Turbo 300zx. The ZX had a few mods and was developing about 405hp.

When I took the Black NSX out for a spin I was seriously NOT impressed with its lack of go. It wasn't just slow, it was embarrassingly slow! However, had I bought that car I'd still be able to sell it for what I paid for it based on what happened with the pricing of those vehicles. See, early on the cars were cheap [ish] So this one was selling for $42k used. It was a bargain now that I think back to it. But it was just way too slow.

So I test drove a 1992 corvette.

What a piece of shit that was. Nothing like the new ones. Nothing like them at all. That 1992 corvette was the the biggest piece of shit vehicle I'd set foot in. It was about the same quickness as the Z I already had [maybe slower by a hair], but it was rough as hell. It bounced all over the place, turned like a total POS. I was surprised. Rattled and clunked OMFG it was horrible. So I went home in my 405hp Twin Turbo Z knowing my car was FAR superior to both of those crappy POS cars.

Now, the NSX was at least nice to drive. It handled well - real well. But it lacked power in a big way up top and that I just couldn't live with. Still a nice ride though it is extremely (and I mean about 75k) overpriced nowadays. A new vette will absolutely smoke it. Hell my SRT-4 will wax its ass down the 1/4. New vette is far superior vehicle. If you had that money, you'd be a lot smarter to buy a new Viper IMO. Way more car than the NSX ever thought of being.

Good riddance. Hopefully they make a new car that is worth the pricetag.

your talking about a 92 corvette, a ghetto C4. well no shit buddy a retarded monkey couldve told you that. the car is ancient

[alpha]

he was referring to when he was testing out cars in 1994, which would make that car 2 years old. hardly an ancient relic. did you even read his post? :banghead:

[Z_Fan]

Wildcat -> Pay attention! LOL. ;)

You were probably 8 or 9 years old when this happened. Since it was early in 1994, those cars were barely 2 years old. Basically brand new. :rolleyes:

[Redlyne_mr2]

One thing I love about the NSX is it's reliability. The annual driving costs of a mid nineties NSX will be much less than the annual maintenance costs of a 911 or a 348. The NSX will never have the same "class" of the euro cars but its still an awesome looking car. IMO I'd much rather own a car that I can drive all the time and enjoy rather than own a car that can do 300kmph and 0-60 in under 5 seconds but requires maintenance every 2 weeks.

[Z_Fan]

Originally posted by Moonracer
Z-Fan, how can you say that man...lol The NSX back then had basically the same performance specs as the TT Z car. 0-60 in 5.3 seconds isn't exactly slow. And had at least as good and even better stats than some ferraris.

Well, back then (not sure why) the NSX didn't have the same wow factor IMO. I mean, nowadays I think the pricetag of an NSX influences peoples opinions. But when they came out they were much cheaper [though still overpriced IMO]. But yeah, they did have the same performance specs or very close.

Note: SRT-4 has a 0-60 of 5.4 stock. LOL.


Originally posted by Seanith
His was modified to 405hp apparently.. not exactly a fair comparison? :dunno:

That's true. It wasn't a fair comparison - but getting 405hp out of the Z was easy at that time when compared to the NSX. It would have been an arm and a leg and a left nut to get that kind of power out of the NSX. With the Z it was just a few thousand bucks.


Originally posted by Moonracer
ya but stock for stock they were similar

True.

[Wildcat]

Originally posted by Z_Fan
Wildcat -> Pay attention! LOL. ;)

You were probably 8 or 9 years old when this happened. Since it was early in 1994, those cars were barely 2 years old. Basically brand new. :rolleyes:

hahaha, your old :D

[Z_Fan]

Originally posted by Wildcat


hahaha, your old :D

LOL

Yeah. :(

But not really old. :dunno:

[bundi]

NSX - Cool car.... lots of money... wouldn't spend it though.

This thread turned out ghey, I came here thinking that people would actually have some good technical info on the car or at the very least, some nice pics...

Instead there' a bunch of assholes with NO PICS! trying to bench race eachother

and who the fuck cares how much your car is worth or how prestigious it is... I respect someone who buys a car to enjoy it and have fun rather than to impress people who can't afford to waste their money the same way.

still a cool car, but for $140K it better start givin head when I put it into cruise

[962 kid]

Originally posted by bundi
This thread turned out ghey, I came here thinking that people would actually have some good technical info on the car or at the very least, some nice pics...

Instead there' a bunch of assholes with NO PICS! trying to bench race eachother


ok, pal, where's your technical info? :rolleyes: because you know, thats what this thread is all about. technical info and bench racing. by the way I found a great site with lots of NSX pics:

google.ca (http://www.google.ca)



and who the fuck cares how much your car is worth or how prestigious it is... I respect someone who buys a car to enjoy it and have fun rather than to impress people who can't afford to waste their money the same way.

see, you've missed the point here. There are plenty of more enjoyable, faster or better looking cars for the same or even less money. The nsx junkies (cool peeps btw) just say that the prestige of a nsx is worth buying it

[Inzane]

Originally posted by heavyD
I'm not a Honda person by any means but I'm also not ignorant that's why I acknowledge that the NSX is a special car. I'm not a European enthusiast or muscle car guy, I'm an automobile enthusiast plain and simple, not some 16-22 year old hater.

Couldn't have said it better myself. :thumbsup:

[Inzane]

Originally posted by iceburns288
A 348 could probably take on an NSX. And even if it can't, it still looks better, sounds better, and

ROFL! Do you even know anything about Ferraris? The 348 was the POS in their stable from the 90's. And don't even put the 348 in the same class as its sibling 355.

NSX > 348. As far as looks go that's subjective of course. But the 348 is no 355. The 348 was the pretender Italian exotic, neither powerful nor very well built.


Originally posted by iceburns288
and has gobs more driving feel.

LOL... And I love posts like this. Exactly how many times have YOU driven each of those cars (NSX vs 348)?

[962 kid]

Originally posted by heavyD


I'm not a Honda person by any means but I'm also not ignorant that's why I acknowledge that the NSX is a special car. I'm not a European enthusiast or muscle car guy, I'm an automobile enthusiast plain and simple, not some 16-22 year old hater.

:werd: it is a special car.... I just don't think it's special enough to justify its price tag


Originally posted by Inzane

ROFL! Do you even know anything about Ferraris?


haha...

[heavyD]

Originally posted by Z_Fan
Hell my SRT-4 will wax its ass down the 1/4. New vette is far superior vehicle. If you had that money, you'd be a lot smarter to buy a new Viper IMO. Way more car than the NSX ever thought of being.

Good riddance. Hopefully they make a new car that is worth the pricetag.

I have an SRT-4 and I doub't it will wax an NSX's ass down the 1/4 mile. My Eclipse will absolutely smoke my SRT-4 all day any time does that mean that my Eclipse should be talked about as a superior car to the NSX? I don't think so as it's not just about straight line speed.

[QuasarCav]

Originally posted by heavyD


I have an SRT-4 and I doub't it will wax an NSX's ass down the 1/4 mile. My Eclipse will absolutely smoke my SRT-4 all day any time does that mean that my Eclipse should be talked about as a superior car to the NSX? I don't think so as it's not just about straight line speed.


But according to most people on here It has to scream in a straight line to be "fast".

You guys dont understand that Honda made this car, that is an accomplishment on it's own. It wasn't the fastest or the best handling car when it was in the market but it was backed by a large corporation and had the same drivability and reliability as a modern day Accord.

962kid: whats the haha about? If you own or have driven both back to back why dont you post up some info about why you chose one over other? Let the cat out of the bag man.

[Z_Fan]

Originally posted by heavyD
My Eclipse will absolutely smoke my SRT-4 all day any time does that mean that my Eclipse should be talked about as a superior car to the NSX? I don't think so as it's not just about straight line speed.

I'm not saying it's not a nice car - cuz it is - and it has its place among the sexiest cars ever built. BUT - it needed more go juice IMO.

[Z_Fan]

I just got thinking about this...

When was the last time you saw an NSX run the quarter mile at Race City?

Last one I saw there was in the parking lot. I asked the guy why he wasn't racing it and he seemed almost ashamed to answer. He knew it was slow. ;)

[Toms-SC]

Originally posted by Z_Fan
I just got thinking about this...

When was the last time you saw an NSX run the quarter mile at Race City?

Last one I saw there was in the parking lot. I asked the guy why he wasn't racing it and he seemed almost ashamed to answer. He knew it was slow. ;)

But I can take you in the corners, yo.


The engine has been annouced, a V10 producing 600 HP with 112 Foot Pounds of torque at a 10,000 RPM red-line.

[Z_Fan]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
The engine has been annouced, a V10 producing 600 HP with 112 Foot Pounds of torque at a 10,000 RPM red-line.

I like the HP figure, but I think you got the torque figure wrong. See, now this power level would be worth the money.

Another problem I have with the NSX is the fact that it was a fantastic car in the early 1990's. It was truly an excellent japanese automobile. Aluminum chasis! Wow! And that was great for many years, but I'm sorry, virtually nothing changed over the cars *FIFTEEN YEAR* run and that is just lame. Sure they had special versions. NSX-R and the targa version too! Oh my! But they needed to re-tool this car to continue it's appeal. Since they didn't do that, the car lost it's appeal to me about a decade ago. Again, don't get me wrong, anything Aryton Senna touched has to be fantastic. But I'm sure he's been rolling in his grave for the last decade knowing the potential the NSX could have seen had a rework been done 7-10 years ago!

I know the new one they make will be awesome and indeed a worthy supercar.

It's kind of like they forgot to retire it when it was on top of things. You know, like a hockey player who stays 3 years too long and then just becomes an embarassment to the league! Instead Honda continually upped the price for the same product and the car was surpassed by many others with superior all around performance for far less cash. That was the mistake of the NSX IMO.

Bottom line - when I see an NSX I think - hey, that was a nice car 15 years ago. It's the same thing I think when I look in my garage! Hey, a decade ago that was a nice car. But now? I think not.

[CKY]

I've realized that for all these years the only thing about the NSX that really appealed to me was the exterior, nothing else about it did, seriously. Their interior looks just like when is first came out, not to mentions other parts. It's just been that great classic look thats keeping me in

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by Inzane
ROFL! Do you even know anything about Ferraris?
No, I don't. You caught me, I'm gonna go back into my little cave and cry.:rolleyes:

The 348 was the POS in their stable from the 90's. And don't even put the 348 in the same class as its sibling 355.

NSX > 348. As far as looks go that's subjective of course. But the 348 is no 355. The 348 was the pretender Italian exotic, neither powerful nor very well built.
You said the NSX looks better than the 348 (which, in my opinion, it doesn't. It looks good, but not better than a 348), which makes it better. Dumb. If people wanted to buy a car for looks, the 300C would cost 100k. There's other factors when buying a car. If the 348 is shit compared to the NSX, can you tell me why a 348 is worth (literally) 3 to 4 times as much as a same-year NSX?

LOL... And I love posts like this. Exactly how many times have YOU driven each of those cars (NSX vs 348)?
I'm putting my money down that you haven't driven or even taken a ride in a 348 OR NSX. But I have. I've had rides in several 348s, and talked to the owners of more. I've also talked to the owners of several NSX owners. I've had enough talk to make a reasonable comparison by 2nd-hand experience. Oh, and BTW, my dad used to own a 348 too.:rolleyes:

[Inzane]

Originally posted by iceburns288
You said the NSX looks better than the 348 (which, in my opinion, it doesn't. It looks good, but not better than a 348), which makes it better. Dumb.

No, I did NOT say "the NSX looks better than the 348". You are misquoting me. When I said "NSX > 348" that was meant as my overall opinion of the cars' total combined merits. My "looks is subjective..." statement was the next sentence and another separate point (basically that in the looks department it could go either way, depending who you ask)... and I didn't give you MY opinion on which I think looks better (but its irrelevant anyway).

But I will say confidently that 355 > 348, in the LOOKS department (as well as many other areas).




If people wanted to buy a car for looks, There's other factors when buying a car.

No shit. And like I stated above, you misquoted me and are thus barking up the wrong tree continuing on this point/counter-point.



If the 348 is shit compared to the NSX, can you tell me why a 348 is worth (literally) 3 to 4 times as much as a same-year NSX?

You know as well as I do that the BADGE on the hood gets most of the credit for that. It doesn't matter how good or bad it is, the 348 will still get the "OOOOO... its a Ferrari!" wow-factor from the general public.



I'm putting my money down that you haven't driven or even taken a ride in a 348 OR NSX. But I have.

Well you'd be half-wrong then. I have driven an NSX. And a very good friend of mine owns one. But I have not driven a 348.



Oh, and BTW, my dad used to own a 348 too.:rolleyes:

And that's supposed to impress me? WOW, your Dad owned the LEAST desireable Ferrari that's been made in the last 15 years. Congratulations. And of course, that makes you an expert too, because your Dad owned one.

Well you know what, my Dad is a great golfer. So you know what... that must make ME an expert on golf, eh. :rolleyes:

[Seanith]

Originally posted by Inzane



And that's supposed to impress me? WOW, your Dad owned the LEAST desireable Ferrari that's been made in the last 15 years. Congratulations. And of course, that makes you an expert too, because your Dad owned one.


:rofl:
Don't worry about him he is a Ferrari fanboy and nutswinger. If I remember correctly he isn't able to drive anyways so imo most of what he says is pure speculation and second hand testimonials :poosie:

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by Inzane
No, I did NOT say "the NSX looks better than the 348". You are misquoting me. When I said "NSX > 348" that was meant as my overall opinion of the cars' total combined merits. My "looks is subjective..." statement was the next sentence and another separate point (basically that in the looks department it could go either way, depending who you ask)... and I didn't give you MY opinion on which I think looks better (but its irrelevant anyway).

But I will say confidently that 355 > 348, in the LOOKS department (as well as many other areas).
Ok, that's fine. You just weren't clear. If there was a comma where there should have been, I would have been able to read it properly. BTW I'd agree with you that a 355 looks better than a 348. I still have no idea why you keep bringing up the 355 though.



Well you'd be half-wrong then. I have driven an NSX. And a very good friend of mine owns one. But I have not driven a 348.

And that's supposed to impress me? WOW, your Dad owned the LEAST desireable Ferrari that's been made in the last 15 years. Congratulations. And of course, that makes you an expert too, because your Dad owned one.
I didn't claim to be an expert, but you'd think I'd have ridden in it more than just a few times to be able to have some idea what I was talking about. And desirability is an opinion. Personally I think the 456 is the least desirable. I really, really don't like them.

Originally posted by Seanith
:rofl:
Don't worry about him he is a Ferrari fanboy and nutswinger. If I remember correctly he isn't able to drive anyways so imo most of what he says is pure speculation and second hand testimonials :poosie:
I can drive you fool. I couldn't when I joined this forum over a year ago, but times change ya know. I've been able to drive for a few months now. Second hand testimonials are more than you'll be able to give anyways, so don't get too far into callin the kettle black.

[Chandler_Racing]

The way people down play the NSX is rediculous. The car was designed 15+ years ago and was way ahead of its time. The car was not designed to be a high hp car, but rather a balanced car. Even so, i've seen 1/4 mile times at 13 seconds flat out of a stock NSX, although in no way was the car made for the 1/4 mile.

This was taken directly off temple of vtec: "During its 15-year run, the NSX has been showered with accolades including, Automobile Magazine's "Automobile of the Year and Design of the Year" awards, Popular Science's "Best of What's New," Road &Track's "Ten Best Cars in the World" list. Motor Trend magazine also named the NSX to its "Top Ten Performance Cars" list and touted it as "the best sports car ever built."

Through out the years it also one its fair share of championships.

For the guy comparing the NSX to the srt-4, wake up man. Heres a video of the NSX-R which has a few differences from the north american NSX, but nothing major as far as i am aware. Its lap time were only about two seconds slower than the f50.

http://www.runeb.org/www_docs/Jexoticasite/soundandvideo/Best_Motoring-SuperCar_Race.mpg

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by Chandler_Racing
The way people down play the NSX is rediculous. The car was designed 15+ years ago and was way ahead of its time. The car was not designed to be a high hp car, but rather a balanced car. Even so, i've seen 1/4 mile times at 13 seconds flat out of a stock NSX, although in no way was the car made for the 1/4 mile.

This was taken directly off temple of vtec: "During its 15-year run, the NSX has been showered with accolades including, Automobile Magazine's "Automobile of the Year and Design of the Year" awards, Popular Science's "Best of What's New," Road &Track's "Ten Best Cars in the World" list. Motor Trend magazine also named the NSX to its "Top Ten Performance Cars" list and touted it as "the best sports car ever built."

Through out the years it also one its fair share of championships.

For the guy comparing the NSX to the srt-4, wake up man. Heres a video of the NSX-R which has a few differences from the north american NSX, but nothing major as far as i am aware. Its lap time were only about two seconds slower than the f50.

http://www.runeb.org/www_docs/Jexoticasite/soundandvideo/Best_Motoring-SuperCar_Race.mpg

Yeah it was definitely a great car...in 1991. The car should have been improved more in those 15 years than it has been, or at least cancelled 5-6 years ago. It's waayy past its prime now.

BTW, I dunno what vid that is but is it a vid of an NSX-R, 360, 996, and some other stuff? Did they forget to mention that the NSX-R was on semi-slicks instead of normal street tires like it should have been?

EDIT wrong video, but the NSX-R is still on better tires than all those other cars, plus you don't think a Japanese car show is going to be biased towards the NSX when it's racing some of Europe's finest?:rolleyes:

[Chandler_Racing]

I agree, it was long over do for some major reworking.

Care to prove that or is it just something that you concieved to downplay the car further? I've got other videos of the NSX from other sources they still produce the same results. I'm sure they used the tires that came stock on the NSX and i'm sure the f50 had better tires than the NSX. Pretty safe assumption.

[Inzane]

Originally posted by Chandler_Racing
Even so, i've seen 1/4 mile times at 13 seconds flat out of a stock NSX,

Out of a 97+ NSX, that's possible. But not a 91-96. The difference in the two iterations was more than just a subtle 20hp bump in power. There were signicant changes to the transmission/gearing as well. The 97+ is signicantly quicker than the initial version. (just had to point that out).

[Inzane]

Originally posted by iceburns288
I still have no idea why you keep bringing up the 355 though.


Because you did, in your post on page 2 of this thread.

You casually threw it in there, almost as if the 348 and 355 are of the same caliber, and I was just trying to remind you that they are not.

[iceburns288]

Just because the NSX endured both the 348 and 355's time periods. In either one of those (or even for a third period, that of the 360) you could have a 348 or 355 as an alternative. Just pointing that out...

BTW I don't know why you think it's a safe assumption the F50 has better tires than an NSX-R. hmm... I just looked it up on Google and I saw that Honda had Bridgestone design tires for the NSX-R. Supposedly like R-compound track tires, but with a little more street life. Similar to the M3CSL.

[Inzane]

Originally posted by iceburns288
Just because the NSX endured both the 348 and 355's time periods. In either one of those (or even for a third period, that of the 360) you could have a 348 or 355 as an alternative. Just pointing that out...

Of course... but for a lot more money. When new vs. new, wasn't a 348 twice the price of an NSX (say circa 1994 a NSX was in the range of ~$75k-$80k USD, a 348 was ~$130k-$140k)?
And a 355 (which replaced the 348) was even more money...

[iceburns288]

I think 348s were around US$105-110k. I have no idea how much NSXs were:dunno:

Yeah, 355s were expensive too, I guess the relative price of a 360-NSX nowadays as well:dunno:

[CokerRat]

Originally posted by iceburns288
BTW I don't know why you think it's a safe assumption the F50 has better tires than an NSX-R. hmm... I just looked it up on Google and I saw that Honda had Bridgestone design tires for the NSX-R. Supposedly like R-compound track tires, but with a little more street life. Similar to the M3CSL.
I'd bet the NSX-R had very similar tires to the other cars there. All are high-performance summer rubber, but none are slicks. The NSX-R in Best Motoring Super Battle (2004) came out ahead of a 360 Modena, BMW M3 CSL and Porsche 911 Turbo. It was beat in the last lap by the Murcielago and Gallardo, because the NSX-R overheated. Granted it is only one race, and the results may have come out differently if the race ran again, but I was pretty impressed by that kind of performance. And it is not the first time an NSX would out-brake and out-corner Diablos and F50's, only to be left behind on the straights. Power is an acknowledged limitation. Many NSX fans are very excited about the prospect of a V-10 in the next iteration.


Originally posted by iceburns288
A 348 could probably take on an NSX. And even if it can't, it still looks better, sounds better, and has gobs more driving feel. An NSX drives just like any other Honda, except MR. ...and...

Originally posted by iceburns288
Plus the Boxster is much, much more fun to drive than an NSX, has a much nicer interior, and is a fresh design....and...

Originally posted by iceburns288
But I have. I've had rides in several 348s, and talked to the owners of more. I've also talked to the owners of several NSX owners. I've had enough talk to make a reasonable comparison by 2nd-hand experience. Oh, and BTW, my dad used to own a 348 too.:rolleyes:
Ohhhhhh I see! You talked to some people, so now you know how an NSX drives and you're qualified to make motherhood statements about how they drive, feel, and which ones are most fun. And sounds like the same story for the other cars you've talked about. LOL... Walter Mitty, no doubt.

Listen, I'm not preaching that the NSX is better or more fun to drive than any other car, just refuting the misinformation that gets so easily taken for fact around here. The FACT is I have driven an NSX very hard on a track, but I will be the first to admit that I don't know how a Boxster S or a 348 drives. What I've seen (first hand experience) is an NSX at Race City pass numerous Boxsters (base and S's, all the 1st gen style) over numerous laps. At a recent autocross, an NSX ran 2 seconds faster (best times for a 2 lap run) around Race City's south section than a "new" (ie. the new style 2005) Boxster S. Both NSXes were bone-stock, right down to the tires. The driver is an amateur, probably no better than the other drivers. Draw your own conclusions.

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by CokerRat
I'd bet the NSX-R had very similar tires to the other cars there. All are high-performance summer rubber, but none are slicks. The NSX-R in Best Motoring Super Battle (2004) came out ahead of a 360 Modena, BMW M3 CSL and Porsche 911 Turbo. It was beat in the last lap by the Murcielago and Gallardo, because the NSX-R overheated. Granted it is only one race, and the results may have come out differently if the race ran again, but I was pretty impressed by that kind of performance. And it is not the first time an NSX would out-brake and out-corner Diablos and F50's, only to be left behind on the straights. Power is an acknowledged limitation. Many NSX fans are very excited about the prospect of a V-10 in the next iteration.
LMAO! It 'overheated'! Best thing I heard all day. I'm not trying to knock you or anything, but having driven an NSX on a track you should know that it won't overheat so easily. You should also know that an NSX probably can't overtake TWO cars on the OUTSIDE in just one turn. Maybe two lesser performing cars, but a Murcielago and a modded Porsche? On the same tires? I don't believe it. BTW I'm excited about the V10 as well, just as long as they don't try to charge US150k for it



Ohhhhhh I see! You talked to some people, so now you know how an NSX drives and you're qualified to make motherhood statements about how they drive, feel, and which ones are most fun. And sounds like the same story for the other cars you've talked about. LOL... Walter Mitty, no doubt.

Listen, I'm not preaching that the NSX is better or more fun to drive than any other car, just refuting the misinformation that gets so easily taken for fact around here. The FACT is I have driven an NSX very hard on a track, but I will be the first to admit that I don't know how a Boxster S or a 348 drives. What I've seen (first hand experience) is an NSX at Race City pass numerous Boxsters (base and S's, all the 1st gen style) over numerous laps. At a recent autocross, an NSX ran 2 seconds faster (best times for a 2 lap run) around Race City's south section than a "new" (ie. the new style 2005) Boxster S. Both NSXes were bone-stock, right down to the tires. The driver is an amateur, probably no better than the other drivers. Draw your own conclusions.
Now you're the only one who knows what he's talking about in this thread, which is honestly fantastic because no one including me has logged track time in one, except maybe rage but he's not around. I was going to make a comment of how driving a 348 or NSX on the street only gives you practicality and quality judging, and power if you can find the space. Track time is what matters when judging handling...
BTW I never claimed to know how an NSX drove, I just forwarded what I told you I had heard. I even said that it wasn't from my own mouth but that what I was saying was taken from the mouths of owners and drivers. They were just telling me what they think and now I've been telling you. What I KNOW for FACT is that some people I know believe that their Boxster S's or 348s are more fun to drive than NSXs.
Ok, thanks for the info about your local NSXs. You say they looked faster to you (and were faster while timed). Fantastic.

[Toms-SC]

Wow, this thread really turned to the shits

Lets talk about how the new C6 Z06 would own all of these cars mentioned? :eek:

[Police]

iceburns288: stfu you lil biatch i'm not even gonna bother quoting your dumb shit. Who gives a crap who you TALKED to or what you RODE in HAHAHAHA talking and riding is the only thing a lil bitch like you can do. Talk is garbage, riding someone elses car and thinking you know shit by sitting in the passenger seat is just as bad, you amateur. And Since you JUST got your drivers what do you drive again? dads minivan? haha must be an exotic van. :thumbsdow


Originally posted by 962 kid

wow thanks for the blinding insight, tool. Perhaps you could enlighten us with some more incredible observations.... or hopefully... not

WOW you're obviously the "stubborn idiot" i was referring to or atleast one of, thanks for coming out TOOL. I don't have to enlighten you with SHIT, keep thinking more HP=faster car haha maybe someday you'll figure it out just maybe and when you do please hit yourself in the head for sounding so stupid. :thumbsdow :guns:

[962 kid]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
Wow, this thread really turned to the shits

Lets talk about how the new C6 Z06 would own all of these cars mentioned? :eek:

:werd:


Originally posted by Police

WOW you're obviously the "stubborn idiot" i was referring to or atleast one of, thanks for coming out TOOL. I don't have to enlighten you with SHIT, keep thinking more HP=faster car haha maybe someday you'll figure it out just maybe and when you do please hit yourself in the head for sounding so stupid. :thumbsdow :guns:

uh, earth to dumbass... HP = speed no matter how you put it. It's not the only factor, which is probably what you meant to say but were obviously unable to find words to voice your enlightened opinions. Perhaps some day when you realize that you are not the alpha and the omega of car gurus on beyond, and that you in fact know little more than the average car dude, you will shoot me a PM apologizing, and stating what a phool you were in the past. thanks :)