New NSX coming out.

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: boyRacer
I'm sure Honda can build an engine... hey they built 6 for the all conquering McLaren F1 team...

Anyway... i do agree that Honda's philosophy isn't exactly popular here in the US where everyone is sooooo concerned about top speed... HP... 1/4 times. Europe just adores the NSX though... probably because they appreciate driving dynamics more. The Viper and Corvette isnt as successful over there either... theyd much rather have a TVR.

"The NSX, which has a small but passionate following among performance enthusiasts, has not been fully remodeled since it debuted in 1990. Reflecting its age, worldwide sales last year totaled only 364, with the U.S. market accounting for 233.

The car's worldwide sales peaked at more than 4,500 in 1991"

They "just adore it" to a max sales of 131 cars all last year?

 

[nan0bug]

Originally posted by: Gulzakar
If you can afford 90k for a car, I don't think you have to worry about having enough money in life.

People who buy the NSX have a little class... "oh but it's a Honda" well for a 50k vette you could say "oh, it's a GM". Doesn't matter who makes it to make it impressive. The corvette is a flimsy piece of GM crap...most people who buy them aren't exactly wealthy. It's something to strive for if you're a redneck. The NSX is for someone who already has toys and wants more toys...why do you think they sell so few? It's not cash crop, it's a niche vehicle.

"Yeah, you could buy a 911 for that money" well yeah, the person that owns the NSX probably already has or has had a 911.

What exactly is classy about the NSX? Its a nice looking car, thats about it. Some of you people are making it out to be the holy grail of sports cars when it's pretty fvcking far from it.

The fact is that the NSX doesn't sell well because it isn't worth the money. Its just not fast enough, its resale value isn't high enough, and it lacks the prestige associated with cars like Porsches, Ferraris, and Lamborghinis.

Taking the corvette out of the equation for a second, do you realize just what kind of car you can buy for $90k if you're not looking for a brand new car?

Right now on ebay, you can pick up a 97 Ferrari 355 Berlinetta with 13k miles on it for $85k. 375bhp, 1/4mi in 13 seconds flat -- and its a FERRARI, not a Honda.
For $80k you can pick up a limited edition 2002 Jaguar XKR 100 with 4500 miles on it. 375bhp, 1/4mi in 12.7 sec. Someone said something about interior quality?
For $79k you can buy a 2003 Maserati Spyder Cambiocorsa (pics are of 2002 model) with 921 miles on it. 390hp, 1/4mi in 12.8 seconds. More interior quality that puts Honda to shame. By the way, you can also pick up the 2002 model (basically the same) for $10k less, with only 2000 more miles on it.

These are all buy-it-now prices, so if you felt like trying your hand at bidding you could probbably get each of these a little cheaper.

All three of these vehicles perform equally or better, have more prestige and 'class' as you like to put it, and all three of them will hold their value a whole lot better than any Acura ever will.

Then of course bringing up the rear is the Z06 Corvette. I found a 2003 model with less than 2000 miles on it for $39k, which would leave $50k to put into engine, suspension, interior, etc. Hell, with $50k you could have a custom body kit made for the friggin thing, it wouldn't even have to look like a corvette.

Cliffs notes: The NSX is a waste of money. Anyone with a real appreciation for cars can see that.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Whoever said the SRT-4 Neon could BEAT a Viper is smoking crack, unless you mean modified, it won't. And even modified it'll only win in 1/4 mile. Rally an SRT-4? Why is that important? How many people go rallying in thier street cars? Autocrossing yes, road racing yes, drag racing yes. People do those all the time. And sure, the SRT-4, EVO, and WRX can get by with alot less power, but they also get by with a much smaller price tag as well. The NSX would be an excellent car to compete with the $40-50k crowd, but it's price tag doesn't put it there. It puts it with the $80-100k crowd. As has been illustrated, there's alot of alternatives that can best it in any given area and there's enough cars to suit any taste when you have $100k to spend.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: boyRacer
I'm sure Honda can build an engine... hey they built 6 for the all conquering McLaren F1 team...

Anyway... i do agree that Honda's philosophy isn't exactly popular here in the US where everyone is sooooo concerned about top speed... HP... 1/4 times. Europe just adores the NSX though... probably because they appreciate driving dynamics more. The Viper and Corvette isnt as successful over there either... theyd much rather have a TVR.

"The NSX, which has a small but passionate following among performance enthusiasts, has not been fully remodeled since it debuted in 1990. Reflecting its age, worldwide sales last year totaled only 364, with the U.S. market accounting for 233.

The car's worldwide sales peaked at more than 4,500 in 1991"

They "just adore it" to a max sales of 131 cars all last year?

You're only taking into account last years sales... but anyway even if you went a couple of years back it still wouldn't have sales figures that would blow your mind away.... if i made it look like it was financially successful in the UK I apologize, but i never said anything that it was... what i meant is that it is much more highly regarded over there than over here... despite lacking sales. Read CAR and Top Gear... most of their NSX reviews always praise the car probably because they do more than just go fast on the freeway. People here whine about how there's not enough power... which is probably why the Viper is so successful because it gives you lots of it for less money.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: boyRacer
People here whine about how there's not enough power... which is probably why the Viper is so successful because it gives you lots of it for less money.

I'm glad we're in agreement

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Originally posted by: boyRacer
People here whine about how there's not enough power... which is probably why the Viper is so successful because it gives you lots of it for less money.

I'm glad we're in agreement

lol... doesn't mean i like the viper more because of it... but i'll gladly take a blue/white GTS please ... but not over an NSX-R.

 

[nan0bug]

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: boyRacer
I'm sure Honda can build an engine... hey they built 6 for the all conquering McLaren F1 team...

Anyway... i do agree that Honda's philosophy isn't exactly popular here in the US where everyone is sooooo concerned about top speed... HP... 1/4 times. Europe just adores the NSX though... probably because they appreciate driving dynamics more. The Viper and Corvette isnt as successful over there either... theyd much rather have a TVR.

"The NSX, which has a small but passionate following among performance enthusiasts, has not been fully remodeled since it debuted in 1990. Reflecting its age, worldwide sales last year totaled only 364, with the U.S. market accounting for 233.

The car's worldwide sales peaked at more than 4,500 in 1991"

They "just adore it" to a max sales of 131 cars all last year?

You're only taking into account last years sales... but anyway even if you went a couple of years back it still wouldn't have sales figures that would blow your mind away.... if i made it look like it was financially successful in the UK I apologize, but i never said anything that it was... what i meant is that it is much more highly regarded over there than over here... despite lacking sales. Read CAR and Top Gear... most of their NSX reviews always praise the car probably because they do more than just go fast on the freeway. People here whine about how there's not enough power... which is probably why the Viper is so successful because it gives you lots of it for less money.

Really, its not just the power, its the whole package. For $90k, the level of refinement doesn't even match what you can get from Jaguar or MB or other Luxury-Performance cars, and the performance only matches them. The NSX tries marketing itself as an exotic, but the only thing that makes it exotic is that it's hand built. Beyond that, it really has nothing to offer that you can't get better somewhere else.

 

[incallisto]

Originally posted by: Jetblade
Old news!

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: nan0bug

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: boyRacer
I'm sure Honda can build an engine... hey they built 6 for the all conquering McLaren F1 team...

Anyway... i do agree that Honda's philosophy isn't exactly popular here in the US where everyone is sooooo concerned about top speed... HP... 1/4 times. Europe just adores the NSX though... probably because they appreciate driving dynamics more. The Viper and Corvette isnt as successful over there either... theyd much rather have a TVR.

"The NSX, which has a small but passionate following among performance enthusiasts, has not been fully remodeled since it debuted in 1990. Reflecting its age, worldwide sales last year totaled only 364, with the U.S. market accounting for 233.

The car's worldwide sales peaked at more than 4,500 in 1991"

They "just adore it" to a max sales of 131 cars all last year?

You're only taking into account last years sales... but anyway even if you went a couple of years back it still wouldn't have sales figures that would blow your mind away.... if i made it look like it was financially successful in the UK I apologize, but i never said anything that it was... what i meant is that it is much more highly regarded over there than over here... despite lacking sales. Read CAR and Top Gear... most of their NSX reviews always praise the car probably because they do more than just go fast on the freeway. People here whine about how there's not enough power... which is probably why the Viper is so successful because it gives you lots of it for less money.

Really, its not just the power, its the whole package. For $90k, the level of refinement doesn't even match what you can get from Jaguar or MB or other Luxury-Performance cars, and the performance only matches them. The NSX tries marketing itself as an exotic, but the only thing that makes it exotic is that it's hand built. Beyond that, it really has nothing to offer that you can't get better somewhere else.

Well its more than 10 years old without any major redesign... anyone who plunks down $90k for a late model one is crazy IMHO... but a used one for $30-35 wouldn't be bad at all. It was exotic in the early 90s... and they couldn't just drop that title but it just didn't fit the image as the car got older without any major update.

 

[Ryan]

[q[What exactly is classy about the NSX? Its a nice looking car, thats about it. Some of you people are making it out to be the holy grail of sports cars when it's pretty fvcking far from it. The fact is that the NSX doesn't sell well because it isn't worth the money. Its just not fast enough, its resale value isn't high enough, and it lacks the prestige associated with cars like Porsches, Ferraris, and Lamborghinis. [/quote]

Not fast enough?!? The NSX can keep up with all of the cars you've listed below (remember, Car and Driver was able to get the vehicle to a 12.9s quarter mile, stock), so what exactly is your point? And as for resale value, I wouldn't call a $25k resale value on a car that originally cost $86k bad. Yea, it doesn't have the pedegree of those vehicles, but it was never meant to. The NSX is supposed to be a supercar that can actually be a daily driver, and an extremely reliable one at that. No other supercar is as reliable as the NSX, and no other supercar requires as little maintenance as the NSX does. Can you take your supercars well past 100k miles and not have major problems/repairs?

IMHO - prestige is for badge whores.

Taking the corvette out of the equation for a second, do you realize just what kind of car you can buy for $90k if you're not looking for a brand new car? Right now on ebay, you can pick up a 97 Ferrari 355 Berlinetta with 13k miles on it for $85k. 375bhp, 1/4mi in 13 seconds flat -- and its a FERRARI, not a Honda. For $80k you can pick up a limited edition 2002 Jaguar XKR 100 with 4500 miles on it. 375bhp, 1/4mi in 12.7 sec.

I can pick up a 2002 NSX for $75k, what's your point? We're looking at cars which have buyers who do not care about the price, 89K for a vehicle is nothing to them. Every car buyer has different priorities, if they want a vehicle that they can count on, and not have to worry about it breaking down or exobinent maitenence costs, the NSX is a car they consider. If they're badge shopping, the NSX is out of the picture. Again, the current NSX has gotten long in the tooth, but with the next incarnation due out soon, the reason to purchase one will become even more compelling.

Someone said something about interior quality? For $79k you can buy a 2003 Maserati Spyder Cambiocorsa (pics are of 2002 model) with 921 miles on it. 390hp, 1/4mi in 12.8 seconds. More interior quality that puts Honda to shame.

THe interior argument was in compairison to the Corvette. The people on the same side as the corvette could make the same argument towards the Maserati, hell, one could even consider the Corvette better because it can be more easily tuned to go faster, is more reliable, cheaper to repair, and it has a larger aftermarket community. Good luck finding a Maserti dealer to do warranty work on your vehicle when it breaks down (which it will, it's a Maserati), and be prepaired to spend a crapload of money for regular maintenence. I don't see the interior of the Maserati holding up if the vehicle is used at a daily driver, and goes over 100k+ miles.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

I seem to remember that the Maserati's engine was made by Ferrari.

 

[Sunny129]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Turbo Porsche's are quick, the N/A versions are nothing special. Less power than the Z28 Camaro. They are in the same boat as the NSX, price is not worth the performance given. Even then, the non-turboed Porsches are still cheaper than an NSX and puts out more power.

Yes, but one is a porsche and one is a honda/acura.

i second that...not to mention there are other things that justify the price difference between a carrera and a Z28. the carrera is lighter, have a lower center of gravity, and handle like wet dreams. i've driven both, and while the Z28 is fast, it just feels sluggish compared to the 911...especially in turns.



I think most Lambos are mid-engined, but the Modena has the engine in the front IIRC.

no dude, the modena is a mid-engine car as well...395bhp V8 screamer...

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Ciber
Now, this is a real sports car, for the same money.

Yum... I'll take the GT 2 though.

yeah i'd also take the GT2, but you have to marvel at the fact that the GT3 is a narually aspirated opposed-6 putting out 380 bhp. that's insanse for a 6-cylinder engine w/ out a turbo or a supercharger.

 

[Supahfreak]

Originally posted by: Sunny129

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Turbo Porsche's are quick, the N/A versions are nothing special. Less power than the Z28 Camaro. They are in the same boat as the NSX, price is not worth the performance given. Even then, the non-turboed Porsches are still cheaper than an NSX and puts out more power.

Yes, but one is a porsche and one is a honda/acura.

i second that...not to mention there are other things that justify the price difference between a carrera and a Z28. the carrera is lighter, have a lower center of gravity, and handle like wet dreams. i've driven both, and while the Z28 is fast, it just feels sluggish compared to the 911...especially in turns.



I think most Lambos are mid-engined, but the Modena has the engine in the front IIRC.

no dude, the modena is a mid-engine car as well...395bhp V8 screamer...

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Ciber
Now, this is a real sports car, for the same money.

Yum... I'll take the GT 2 though.

yeah i'd also take the GT2, but you have to marvel at the fact that the GT3 is a narually aspirated opposed-6 putting out 380 bhp. that's insanse for a 6-cylinder engine w/ out a turbo or a supercharger.

Ironically, 78.439% of the people posting in this thread drive Tercels or Sentras

FreAk