Great car.. expensive to maintain. The clutch is absolutely buried in that thing. I hear

 

tiger740, sent you PM

 

That was me five years ago. I had driven an NSX a few times and thought that is how I would go. Then I saw the SSM concept and I wanted to wait to see if Honda would build it. They did (calling it an S2000) and I bought the first red one I could. I never looked back. You can toss an S2000. Try doing that with an NSX and you can get into trouble real fast. Give me a roadster with 95% of the NSX's performance and I will take the roadster every time.

 

If it's not a convertible, what's the point?

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wlfsmith
[B]Although the NSX is a beautiful car, I don't think I would buy a used NSX over a new S2k.

 

New S2000 or 91-93 NSX?
Tough choice......

91-93 NSX:
PRO:
1. True exotic car. Probably more of a babe magnet.
2. Good reliability on a lower mileage car (60,000 or less)
3. Faster than S2000 on street and on track. (unless real twisty track, then the S2000 will give it a run for the money)
4. No power steering, so good road feel(at least for 91-92, I think the 93 also)
5. Engine is very reliable if kept stock. (no supercharger/turbo/NOS used on it)

CON:
1. If something does break, it could be expensive.
2. Timing belt at 90,000 miles will be $1200-$1500.
3. If it needs a clutch, another $1300-1700
4. Cost prohibitive to turn into a track car, go-fast parts fairly expensive.
5. Minor things tend to break on older cars. Trunk struts, window motors, speakers, etc.

New S2000:
PRO:
1. Won't break, so you maintenace cost should be nil for the first couple of years
2. Convertible. You will turn into a roadster wimp and all your cars will need to have the top come off.
3. Track tires are cheaper.

CON:
1. Not a "super exotic" car.
2. Smaller cockpit than NSX. (but fits good)
3. Irritating rear boot for the convertible top. I just don't use the boot anymore.

So I guess I would say that if you can afford to have some minor things break and don't mind getting them fixed, and you really don't want a convertible, go with the NSX. If you want something that probably won't go to the shop other than for oil changes and you want the top to come off, go with the S2000.

Just my humble opinion, I could be wrong,
-Doug

 

for the same price i would rather get the s2000 instead of a used NSX, if you have enough
$ to get the 1997+ version, i would go with the NSX instead... as to 1996 and lower models. they will perform just a little bit faster than the s2000, but i would rather have a brand new car instead.... for 30k, your not going to find a good condition NSX with good leather etc...

 

Doug summed it up pretty good. Listen to him, his experiences are invaluable.

 

I think this topic has been covered a couple of times already, so you might do a search to get some additional feedback.

When I replaced my '01 S2K, I very seriously considered a 1994 NSX. In the end, I couldn't get comfortable spending that kind of money (I am financing my car) for an out of warranty 8 year old car. The truth is that if you find a good used NSX, they are very likely to be every bit (if not more) reliable than a new S. The problem is that it only takes one thing to go wrong ($2K clutch, $2K timing belt/water pump changes) to make a major dent in my wallet. I have the luxury of not relying on my car as everyday transportation, but I couldn't get comfortable with going that far out on a limb.

I think that if I were in a position to pay cash for a car outright, I might have made a different choice. So be it...

The NSX is a simply phenomenal car. It may not "post" magazine numbers that are all that much faster than the S, but trust me, it feels a lot faster. The cockpit is simply breathtakikng with the sights, sounds, and feel that Honda put together. Plus, as rare as the S is, you just don't see that many NSX's. Finally, NSX owners are a great bunch of guys. THe NSX club of america might not be as big as the members of this board, but they've got some very enthusiastic, mature, and passionate owners in their ranks.

Good luck with your decision either way.

 

I have both as well; a 00 stook and a 96-nsx-t.If well maintained the nsx is a trouble free used car.The problems arise because there are many abused misrepresented used nsx's.You have to do your homework.The nsx community has a core group of dedicated enthusiastic owners just like you all,we can help through sites like nsx prime.I think the choice shouldn't be predicated by price point,Both are very different.I rarely have a tough time deciding which one to drive.Besides the obvious convertible vs targa ,the stook is more nimble and more fun to drive every day.This is born out by autocross times.My nsx is 1-2 seconds slower on any given tight course,I know because I have driven both on the same day,same course.On road courses however that differential is reversed and then some,but to be fair to the s2000 the nsx is more modified but still NA.The biggest eye opener is to drive them!The nsx is more luxurious and and refined,smooth,as you work it harder it tightens up and gets better.The stook is a little rougher and edgy, but still consistent in its character to redline.The stook is also amazingly stiff.It has more rigidity then the nsx!Stock brakes are a toss up.The nsx has the best seats bar none!Oh and don't snub torque.When you feel the difference between the 2liter 4pot and the 3liter 6 pot you realize or fantisize(hopefully) that the next Honda super motor will be a 4liter v8! Also the vtec on the stook is more noticeable and is more radical.All in all not a bad choice to have.Both are outstanding value at this price point.One last consideration: both hold value well but with the nsx you've factored in more depreciation and like a Ferrari,you can resell with little loss.Good luck.