Actually, there is an Acura NSX Type S (about 100 lbs lighter than standard NSX) - it is produced for the Japanese market only (MY97 - present). There is also an Acura NSX Type S Zero (w/o radio and A/C).

There is an extremely low probability that ANY of us will run into one of these versions of the NSX in the states.

 

My first post, thank you walkabt

 

I've owned both cars. First I had a My2001 Spa Yellow S2k. It was a great car until I totalled it. The speed wasn't all there down low, but it was faster than most cars on the road. The handling is simply amazing; it feels like a go cart, but oversteer sucks. The shifter feels great but notchy at times, you gotta love the 6 speed though. Plus it was great crusing down the beach with the top down! The HIDs were the best at night, better than any other HID system I've seen! The amounts of heads turned by the S2k is amazing. But since then, I've bought a 1993 Rx-7 Touring. I know the car is old and the paint isn't as great anymore, but it sure is a REAL sports car. I have 123K on the stock turbos with 40K on a new motor and it runs great. It's fast, and easy to drive it fast. It looks just as amazing as the S2k, but I'm sure I turn more heads with the Rx-7, but woman don't like the Rx-7 compared to the S2k Oh well! Sure it doesn't run as smooth as the S2k, but it's nearly 10 years old, any car 10 years old shouldn't be running as well as a brand new car. The handling IS better than the S2k, I know for sure. Although the S2k FEELs better, I have way more control in the Rx-7. In the S2k, when I corner too hard, it feels very unsafe and I could feel the tires slipping, but with the Rx-7, it feels great; it wants to be pushed harder! And with simple bolt on's, it could be a street beast. Although it does require more care than the S2k, it's well worth it. Only problem is, the 13BREW motor tends to blow up with time...not all of them, but most of them. But comparisons are close, both cars have similar characterlistics, but ones is a pure sports car and the other is a crazy roadster.

my Rx-7


my old S2k

 

Well maintained stock Rx-7 has more power if you integrate gear segments of the powerband over the corresponding range of RPMs, the same weight and it can hold >1g lateral acceleration on the skidpad vs 0.8g S2000. It also has much much better drag coefficient.
So, well maintained Rx-7 should beat an S2000 anytime anyday in any conditions (assuming drivers have the same skill). The only thing about RX-7 is that the turbos can kick in midturn (especially if it was converted from a bisequential) so it's easier to lose control than on a car with naturally aspirated engine. I think that's why they banned turbos from F1 and that's why Ferrari, McLaren, TVR et c. do not turbocharge their cars. Supercharging seems like a much better option in this respect.. Or do I misunderstand something?
I've heard that in case of a single turbo Supra the power jump from 4 to 5k rpm can exceed 250hp, imagine it happen in the middle of the turn

 

my Rx-7
http://www.abysstek.com/4.jpg

Picture is missing

Wish I had an extra $20K ... I would _love_ to have a 3rd gen RX-7 in addition to the S2000. But, my track car budget is more like $3.5K Plus, I am not a mechanic, so maintanence issues on a rotory vehicle are an issue. So, I'll probably get a Miata for the track, close as I can get to the S2000 at that price, so I don't have to worry about running 10/10ths at the track

 

This is so true about the RX-7 maintenance. You really need to be aware of all the little glitches of the stock 3rd gen car. If you modify the car, you are magnifying those weakness'.

The other hand, much is to be said for Honda technology. They argueably produce the best engines in the world. The S2000 is a technology tour-de-force. The S2000 is a sweet car and produces excellent results in its area of expertise.

I have a highly modded RX-7 with LOTS of money invested. Sure it is fast. However, the motor needs to be rebuilt every 50k miles (builder recommends - Redline Engineering). Also, oil needs to be changed every 2,000 miles or sooner. Lots of maintenance to do with the car - checking the fittings and hoses. The RX-7 is setup for autocross and track use mainly. My pics are here:

Wife's RX-7

The funny thing is, this is my wife's car. This car will be showing up at Sevenstock again this year.

I guess I am a car-whore. There is something good and worthwhile in every car. The S2000 especially, or RX-7 or even the new WRX. Every car is a compromise of something (power, handling, comfort, noise, looks, reliability, cash, etc.)

regards

Rick
2001 911 Turbo (RUF Exhaust, GT3-R seat)
2000 Acura TL
1993 RX-7 monster!
2001 Lexus LX-470
Irvine, CA

 

man, your FD looks great!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by p996tt2k
[B]This is so true about the RX-7 maintenance. You really need to be aware of all the little glitches of the stock 3rd gen car. If you modify the car, you are magnifying those weakness'.

The other hand, much is to be said for Honda technology. They argueably produce the best engines in the world. The S2000 is a technology tour-de-force. The S2000 is a sweet car and produces excellent results in its area of expertise.

I have a highly modded RX-7 with LOTS of money invested. Sure it is fast. However, the motor needs to be rebuilt every 50k miles (builder recommends - Redline Engineering). Also, oil needs to be changed every 2,000 miles or sooner. Lots of maintenance to do with the car - checking the fittings and hoses. The RX-7 is setup for autocross and track use mainly. My pics are here:

Wife's RX-7

 

Woah, there's some misinformation/confusion on this thread:

1. If ykim is looking at Options/Best Motoring videos then the conclusions are useless. First off, the Japanese RX7 makes somewhere in the vicinity of 280 hp. 2nd, the drag races they do are heads up races - they don't make multiple attempts to extract the best time possible. 3rd, those boys can't drag race for crap anyways (don't do too good on the road courses either IMO).

2. A stock, US RX7 (if you can find one) can stay close to a first gen (3.0 liter NSX), but the NSX tends to be faster. Yeah, it weighs 200 lbs more, but it puts a down a good 25-30 hp more to the wheels. A stock 3.2 NSX is even faster. I've never seen a stock US RX7 run high 12's/low 13's on streets. NSX's can and will (non-targas are faster).

3. Vs. an S2000, the RX7 is slightly quicker (stock for stock). The comparison is about like what you'd see with an M Roadster/Coupe. A couple car lengths over the quarter driven optimally. On the street there's not much in it. The RX7 actually suffers from the same malady as the S2K. A good portion of its accelerative prowess is due to light weight. At higher speeds bigger, more powerful cars (Supra Turbo, etc.) will come motoring on by thanks to the extra 50-70 hp. Of course the RX7 is vastly more aerodynamic than the S2K.

All bets are off once modded, and like any turbo car the RX7 gains nice power with simple mods. I look at the S2K as a kind of spiritual successor to the RX7. Light, compact, small high winding engine, quick, good handling car for a reasonable price. Had Mazda continued to refine the RX7 and kept it around I might well have purchased one - we'll see how the next gen does.

UL

 

UL....they did continue to refine the RX7 over the years. A MY2000 RX7 or newer pulls over 1.0g on teh skidpad sock as well as high 12s in the 1-4 mi stock. You can get one to the states for about 50,000$

 

Whats this talk of an s2000 only being able to pull high-fives to sixty. Road and Track has it going to sixty in 4.9 seconds (January 2001, "Sibling Rivalry", I'm pretty sure). It was in plain writing, check it if you want.