Oh and BTW
The fact that so few NSXs are built should mean something.

If Honda built half as many s2ks as they have been for the past 3 years... do you think you would've still gotten the car for less than 32k?

 

Isn't it still true that Honda loses money on every NSX they build? I wouldn't be surprised if Honda loses money on every S2000 built. Neither car is produced in sufficient enough numbers to make up for the extreme amount of money Honda spent on R&D. Even after all that, Honda has been paying allot of money for warranty work and recalls.

I have seen allot of talk about the S2000 being the most profitable car Honda has ever made, but that is a bunch of crap. It may be a profitable car for the dealers, who get it for list, then sell it for thousands over MSRP, but Honda is just getting list price.

 

First of all, while the NSX carries a retail price tag of some $90,000, the selling price can be quite lower. I purchased my new 95 NSXT (after rebates totaling $10,000 and a deep dealer discount) for $60,000 and my new 00 NSXT (end-of-year discount)for $72,000. Are they worth the cost of admission? Unless one has owned and lived with an NSX, please reserve judgement. Given my experiences with three NSXs, a 355 F1, 94 and 97 911 Turbos among others, the answer is YES. And BTW, there is a reason Ferrari's 348 and 355 series were so short lived. Namely, the NSX, whose performance (in Coupe form, particularly) is superior to the pre 360 Ferraris.

 

I am an avid (rabid, even?) NSX fan, having driven them before (my father owned two). However, I don't know about the NSX being superior to an F355 in performance - I've seen BEST numbers for an NSX match an F355's AVERAGE numbers, but I have rarely seen it beat an F355 in anything except practicality (except the Zanardi edition or NSX-R or NSX-S).

Best NSX numbers I've seen:

0-60 4.5s (coupe)
1/4 mile 12.8s @ 109mph (coupe)
Lateral g 0.97 (coupe), 0.99 (Zanardi edition)
Braking 60-0 112 ft

Average F355 numbers I've seen:

0-60 in 4.6s (seen as low as 4.5s)
1/4 mile 12.9s @ 110 mph (seen as low as 12.5 @ 111.x mph)
Lateral g 0.97 (seen as high as 1.00)
Braking 60-0 111 ft (seen as low as 109 ft)

Those are very close all around (the NSX wins some, loses some), but taking the best numbers, the NSX isn't quite there. Also remember, it's very tough to get a hardtop coupe these days - almost all NSXs in the USA or Canada are targas.

I love the livability and drivability of the NSX (never driven an F355, but they're supposedly not nearly so well laid out) and its reliability, but I wouldn't call it a superior performer. Equal, maybe, but on average I'd say it's a little bit behind and rarely if ever superior.

That said, I'll buy an NSX over an F355 any day - it may not be quite as exciting or fast at the very limit, but how often do I (or anyone) drive at the limit on the street? Also, the maintenance costs on a Ferrari are stupendous.

No flame intended, just offering my thoughts.

 

I agree with everything said except this

"And why does Acura think that $89,000 is a fair price to pay for the NSX, which has a 290 hp V6, when a Corvette Z06 has a 405 hp V8 for $51,000."

I'm lost for words..

Im sure people above already explained why. I'm not going to.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by nastinupe1
[B]I just finished visiting the Acura website and noticed that the RL has a V6 225 hp engine, almost identical to the TL, except for a slight difference in torque.

 

Another thing to keep in mind about NSXs. Look at JD Powers' long-term owner satisfaction reports. Pretty much every year since the NSX was introduced, it has been the #1 car in owner satisfaction, bar none. One reason seems to be reliability - clearly many former Porsche and Ferrari owners found something they like. Anecdotally (car mag long term tests and owner surveys), owners frequently say it is the combination of performance, quality/reliability and driveability that makes them so satisfied.

Why do they sell so few? Comparatively few year-to-year model tweaks (compared to Porsche especially), a very small advertising budget (much smaller than Porsche or Ferrari), and - the big one in my mind - the country club parking lot prestige factor. Any bucks-up schmoe will react with a "wow" if you drive up in a Porsche or Ferrari, but go completely blank on an NSX.

I am perpetually amazed at the curb-side reaction that my wife's Boxster gets - it's a plain old black convertible with no visible mods, just like my S2000. Yet nearly all people are amazed when they learn that: a) the Boxster didn't cost $80k, and b) the S2000 is faster.

Let's face it, many people buy sports cars to be noticed and to have bragging rights. If that's what you're after, and a Boxster gets you more "wow" than an S2000, and you have the cash, you're going to buy a Boxster. Same effect in my opinion re: the NSX. Human nature. Thank god Honda is there, making any number of these babies for us!

 

Question: Is $35K for a '91 NSX with around 35K miles a good price?

-B