Personally, I would have to go for the S2000, because it is so much newer. It really depends on what you want it for as well, as a second car that you will only drive occaisionally the NSX may be a good bet.

 

A Johnny come lately but my 2 cents just the same.

Esthetics:

The NSX is one of, if not the most, graceful/beautiful production sport cars of all time. Remember the Ford GT-40? The S2000 is as good but in a different way. Remember the 289/FIA AC Cobra?

Ergonomics:

Both outstanding....with the S2000 in a smaller package but ok for my size (6' 2" 210lbs). The Cobra/GT-40 just too tight.

Engineering:

Honda at its best. The nod to the NSX re suspension and perhaps overall package and the nod to the S2000 re engine and transmission.

Practicality:

NSX for cruising and long trips. S2000 for the opposite. Again, GT-40 vs Cobra.

Conclusion:

The only competition for the NSX re performance/comfort is the 2001/2 Z06. The Viper is not even close re the latter. GM non-withstanding the Z06 is very impressive. The S2000 stands alone and is the most natural complement to the NSX. All four need one's greatest respect and caution on public roads.

Michael
'97 NSX
'02 S2000
'66 Ford GT-350 clone et al

 

hello all i'm a frequent lurker but passionate about both cars.I have the privlage of owning a 96 nsxt and a 00 s2000. I can tell you that for every day the stook is more entertaining and gives me the convertible option. the targa nsx is very loud and turbulant in the cockpit over 70 mph,which spoils the long distance high speed touring characteristics.that said the nsx is more entertaining to drive on the track and is visualy more exciting to look at in motion.the s2000 is a superior auto x car.but having put 45k miles on my nsx the maintanance is comparible to non exotic cars.the bottom line is that honda has done something amazing creating both and selling the stook for 32k.

 

and while i still can't sleep i'll continue pontificating.why i bought the nsx as soon as i could afford it was not because it was an nsx,but it was the embodiment of the exotic cars i lusted after in my pubescense.ferrari lamborghini anything mid engine and low and wide.i still remmember every exotic i ever got close to.have you ever seen a lambo espada or a jalpa,they were amazing looking.when you see a lowered nsx its 45 or so inches high and on the road its an amazing sight!and the first time you drive it with that wild engine behind you ,i mean you can hear the valves tapping away and that induction roar at wot is awsome.
now the stook i purchased because of what it does and how stiff the chassis is.i dont think the youngsters realize how stiff the s2000 is.and 120 hp liter is outrageous.so there should be no jealosy or envy between the two owners groups.not when you can cruise at 100 mph in a convertible that revs to 9000rpm.whew .thats enough.

 

I made a purchase and finally chose the NSX. I own an E36 M3 and an accord ex. The M3 will become my daily driver while the accord gets sold!!!
The S2000 was fun to drive, but the NSX was just amazing.

 

can this be right? maybe it's a wrecked one.....

http://www.autotrader.com/findacar/vdetail...8&ac_afflt=none

there's another 96 nsx with 60000 miles for $30000, that one sounds kinda too low also...

 

do these prices make sense to you guys? i always though the 91-92's would go for around $30k?

there's another 96 with 19000 miles for $29000

and this...

http://www.autotrader.com/findacar/vdetail...2&ac_afflt=none

an nsx for $13000?

maybe i should consider a used nsx as well as the s2k after all..

 

I've seen my fair share of NSX's that were not taken care of by their second owners who got the cars for a steal relative to the price of a new one. Most of the lower priced ones have badly repaired bodywork or have not been treated well. In most cases, you get what you pay for. If it's too good to be true...

 

I will really buy a McLaren F1 one day, no kidding
For the next few years an S2000 is cool enough for me.