I continue to be amazed at the utterly meaningless reasons why the NSX is a better car than a Vette or anything else.

Aluminum construction?

8000 RPM redline?

An exotic body?

Aluminum control arms?

Titanium conecting rods?

A "better" interior?

Someone explain to everyone how any of the above translates naturally to a better car. The Z32 300ZXTT has 4-wheel stering and the NSX doesn't. I doubt anyone, including Z owners, would argue that as a reason their car is better than anyone else's hands-down. When you tally up the reasons being used to force others to believe in the NSX religion, it just doesn't make any sense.

The *ONLY* tangible benefits, by numbers alone, that an NSX has over a Vette or anything else is its reliability (even that is a maybe) and gas mileage (maybe by a very thin margin). Steve C would disagree with me on reliability, but I'd bet on a high mileage NSX before I would a Supra TT or anything else from Japan. That's just me. The superior balance argument is another subjective thing, as only race drivers can determine that, and that's debateable. If the NSX is so freaking good, how come Honda doesn't put 3 or 4 on the Mulsanne straight in June and prove it (btw, arguing their JGTC record to counter me doesn't count)? Mazda did it with the usually unreliable rotary design. Honda should be able to take this race no-contest by some peoples' measure.

All other benefits, again by numbers alone, go to the Vette or other cars, especially when considering price. I'm not going to argue emotional attachment, like some of you insist on doing as a proxy for losing the numbers arguments.

 

[QUOTE=s2kpdx01,Jan 26 2005, 07:43 PM] Yeah, because assertion of superiority followed up with "I know the answer, but don't want to find it" was classic internet bullshit.

 

That's a very poor attempt to make the NSX lighter than the z06. So now I can only use the weight of a early model NSX when comparing it to other cars? That's stupid. I don't see how the Z06 is a "barebones" vette. It has everything the standard vette does as far as options goes. So your argument is null, as much as a newer NSX is somehow a "luxury" version. It has the same stuff the early ones did, except now it has a targa top.

I don't remember implying it was a better build engine or more reliable, I was asking for proof to back up the assertion that it isn't as reliable. I won't even try to find a 200k+ miles E46 M3.. because the car has only been out since 2001. Ask me in another 10 years or so.

 

I know, cuz there were so many Z06's in 91-94!

This is typical. Mixing and matching years when it suits them. Let's talk about HP...how many are going to quote the 91 nsx then!! It is just silly. At least he tried using some evidence there....

 

Who gives a shit what year the car was made?

Compare the hardtop NSX to the hardtop C5. Apples to apples.

I don't see a targa Z06.

 

It's an NSX isn't it?

One might conclude that your logic is stupid.

The current NSX does not have the same stuff the earlier one's had. Educate yourself.

 

please educate me.. besides revised suspension, wheels, brakes, body cladding, and possibly a few interior bits. how much different are they?

I love the nsx, and would own one in a heartbeat, but man some of the people here are a bit extreme.

 

http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/General/changesbyyear.htm

Take a look and see what was added in 93, 94, 95, 97 and 2000.

 

Thanks.

 

That is a quote from steve's first post in this thread
stupid
moron

and it looks like you are one of those superficial pricks who drive a Porsche because it says Porsche on it.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but one day your demeanor will bite you in the ass. to you my friend.