Honda NSX ?

Silvera

What do you guys think of the Honda NSX ?

I always liked the look of them, and they always got great reviews.

I'd image running an older one could be expensive - parts wise that is.

Looks great from behind too !!!

AlienGav

They're a beautiful car!

I'd sell my mother for a spin in one!
I'm suprised we don't see as many of them around as we do with skylines, supras and rx-7's.

They're really gorgeous! Anyone on Boards ever owned one?

BrianD3

I think they're great although I have never been in or driven one so my opinion is based on rave reviews in car mags, the looks of the car and the Ayrton Senna connection. Also, the car is supposed to sound vaguely like an F1 car at high revs.

Last time I checked the price of used NSXs I was shocked! The cars I priced were 10-12 years old but and were much more expensive than I thought they would be, obviously they are still held in very high regard.

For anyone that's interested, there's a road test in this months Classic and Sportscar magazine - NSX vs Ferrari 308.

BrianD3

lomb

once u hear one with the throttle floored u will never forget it. fabulous fabulous roar. absolutely unforgettable

CJhaughey

AlienGav wrote:

I'm suprised we don't see as many of them around as we do with skylines, supras and rx-7's.

Thats because an NSX is a true supercar, all of the above apart from maybe the skyline GTR are merely fast cars.

Kersh

True true

lomb

CJhaughey wrote:

Thats because an NSX is a true supercar.

i disagree with that statement. it actually isnt a supercar at all. it isnt that fast-top speed is about 165mph, 0-60 about late 5 seconds i think. cost wasnt too high new, only about 60 or so grand stg. now bear in mind a well specced bmw 740 or s500 costs this, and these are as common as muck. servicing is resonable, and a granny could drive it.

it competed and still does sort of with the 911 carrera, which is not a supercar at all. on the other hand a 911 turbo is a supercar, with a higher list price and much much faster.
at about 100grand stg u enter the real supercars-ferrari 360s, 911 turbos, aston vantage v12's.

this doesnt take from the fabulous engine, the aluminium body, jap hi tech styling. allot of japs have modified them to up the power considerably. the engine is its biggest asset and the interior its biggest liability.

Delta_ie

Forget the regular NSX
You have to go for the NSX-R
Click

Or if you have the money what about 1 of only 5 NSX-R GT
Click

CJhaughey

I would call the car a supercar, you may have your own definition of supercar, but I think it is.
This point has been argued about for Some time
But as I recall, the original advertising was along the lines of " A supercar that your mum could drive"
and being a Honda, servicing should be reasonable.

lomb

CJhaughey wrote:

I would call the car a supercar, you may have your own definition of supercar, but I think it is.
This point has been argued about for Some time
But as I recall, the original advertising was along the lines of " A supercar that your mum could drive"
and being a Honda, servicing should be reasonable.

out of interest would u regard the following cars as supercars? bmw 740i(almost as fast as the nsx with it 4400cc engine.
porsche boxster
porsche 911 carrera
honda s2000 (as fast as nsx)
golf gti

CJhaughey

lomb wrote:

out of interest would u regard the following cars as supercars?
bmw 740i(almost as fast as the nsx with it 4400cc engine.
NO

porsche boxsterno

porsche 911 carreraIn what context?
70's 80's 90's? maybe.. depends...

honda s2000 (as fast as nsx)[FONT=Comic Sans

MS]no[/FONT]

golf gtino

I am totally subjective about this [URL=ttp://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Supercar&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1]subject[/URL]

unkel

lomb wrote:

i disagree with that statement

LOL, was gonna post something similar until I reckoned it is hard to define "supercar"

Great car, no disrespect, but not Lambo / Ferrari / (real) Porsche territory

ds20prefecture

lomb wrote:

at about 100grand stg u enter the real supercars-ferrari 360s, 911 turbos, aston vantage v12's.

Hmmm. So by this logic, a Maybach is a supercar? How about a TVR Tuscan 2? It's STG50, and would murder most of the above in terms of looks, speed, interior and raw experience. It would then headbutt the corpse. Yet it costs less than the NSX.

Show any of these cars a minor road in Ireland or the UK and a Subaru Imprezza or Mitsubishi Evo n would eat them for breakfast. As would an NSX, Ariel, Caterham, Elise or even a VX220

The term "Supercar" tends to be applied to those cars that exceed the capability and budget of the hacks reviewing them. Hence the Lambos, Ferraris, Paganis, Koenigseggs et al easily "qualify". The NSX "fails" because it s so accessible, so practical, affordable, reliable. It's damned by heavy praise.

Bear in mind the NSX was built and evolved to compete with the Ferrari 308, 355 and 360 in a time when Honda were dominant in F1 and Ferrari very much were not. In many respects, the car was much more accomplished than it's competitors (all-aluminium construction, VTec engine, handling) and in other ways very much their lesser (nasty interior, Honda badge, borderline kitsch styling)

this doesnt take from the fabulous engine, the aluminium body, jap hi tech styling. allot of japs have modified them to up the power considerably. the engine is its biggest asset and the interior its biggest liability.

I agree about the interior and engine. I can't imagine anything worse than giving one of the best balanced cars around more power.

</RANT value =0.02>

Kersh

The bmw 740i is like a Bentley/roller 4 door...a fat arses car. An nsx is a 2 dr coupe, that is wide, loud, big engined, mid engined and a supercar, like a 348/355/360/gallardo/430/miura/countach/diablo etc front engined supercar like 456/550/575, rear engined supercar like the 911, unlike the midengined mr2 2litre, front engined s2000 2 litre, boxster which is a bit too common and small.
Up above that is the limited run exotics - f40/f50/Zonda/enzo/koenigsegg etc.

Ratchet

lomb wrote:

out of interest would u regard the following cars as supercars? bmw 740i(almost as fast as the nsx with it 4400cc engine.
porsche boxster
porsche 911 carrera
honda s2000 (as fast as nsx)
golf gti

another wise choice BMW740

it goes with this previous hread about ST220 and BMW 7serries.


maybe i should call you a Lamb instead of Lumb, this is as close as BMW 7 goes with NSX. Well if you weight the car by its price and then call it supercar , that makes you trully valuable car entiusiast.


NSX is like clinical version of ferrari, maybe even too perfect in the way


NSX is a supercar

ds20prefecture

lomb wrote:

out of interest would u regard the following cars as supercars?

bmw 740i(almost as fast as the nsx with it 4400cc engine) - No it is not, and not nearly. It is a plutocratic barge with a little finesse, both slower and uglier than an NSX. Are you on a wind-up mission?
porsche boxster - A fine car, but clearly a class down from the NSX in terms of performance, and pitched at a somewhat different clientele ( or -elle?)
porsche 911 carrera - Yes, this is an NSX-class car. Much more compromised than the NSX, but somehow the better for it.
honda s2000 (as fast as nsx) - Again, no it is not. It's 150/6.2 vs 170/5.7 (as if these metrics are in any way meaningful)
golf gti - Ah, so you are on a wind-up mission.

unkel

ds20prefecture wrote:

Bear in mind the NSX was built and evolved to compete with the Ferrari 308, 355 and 360 in a time when Honda were dominant in F1 and Ferrari very much were not

Aye. It was a different ballgame in the early 90s alright

Back then, I suppose a place in the supercar league is deserved. Now, other supercars have stepped up a bit and the now old NSX is no longer a supercar compared to the likes of some of the offerings of the traditional supercars manufacturers

Kersh wrote:

An nsx is a 2 dr coupe, that is wide, loud, big engined, mid engined

mid engined, not big engined

Kersh

3.2, big enough for me, and I have 9 litres to play with....

unkel

Kersh wrote:

I have 9 litres to play with....

In one car?

Kersh

Not even 2 4.5 litre anythings, but 3 3litre ones, big enough when it comes to road tax times.

bazz26

unkel wrote:

In one car?

Dodge Viper?

bazz26

This is the new NSX:

lomb

bazz26 wrote:

This is the new NSX:

that DEFINATELY is a supercar. looks to compete with a db7 v12 vantage. sexier than a 911 turbo too.

528i

Alot of people hold the NSX in high esteem with its arton senna tuned suspension and mid-engined layout etc.. and this perceived supercar performance coupled with honda running costs & reliability warrants a second look, but just look at the prices, crazy money indeed €120,000 new buys a 3.8l Carrera S / E60 V10 M5 etc. which would blow this 3.2v6 into the weeds,. If they had knocked around 1/3 off the initial price it would have proved ALOT more popular, even secondhand (going by UK prices) its ridiculous at €40,000 for a '91 3.0l ! who in their right mind would even consider it.

I've seen a '97 at mondello and it wasn't particularly fast or loud or anything really.. just looked good, but im sure the owner wasn't pushing all that hard, the performance stats (particularly for the type-R) don't really stack up when you take the power/weight ratio & gearing from similarly specced cars, so you're surely looking at around 380bhp from that V6 rather than manufacturers quoted figures, with this in mind there's suddenly zero realistic tuning potential (compared with a twin-turbo GTR for instance) from its NA engine, and zero market secondhand so you're stuck with it for the long term,. with the >'03 (100k) stuff, you'd be cracked not to take a CSL / GT3 / 355 instead.

BrianD3

I think it's incorrect to say the NSX isn't a supercar. If the NSX isn't a supercar because it's no longer quick enough to compete with modern rivals then the Lambo Miura and Countach aren't supercars either. Only the Countach QV and Anniversary are substantially quicker than the NSX, the LP400/500 and most Miura versions are about the same as an NSX.

Engine size: well the Jag XJ220 only has a 3.5 litre engine which is not much bigger than the NSX, the engine in the Jag also sounds a lot worse. Then there's the Ferrari F40 which only has a 3 litre engine.

Ease of use: the NSX may be a car that your granny could drive but that doesn't mean she could wring its neck around a track. The NSX's abilities are way ahead of the average driver's abilities. Just as with other mid engined supercars, the driver is usually the limiting factor and he will run out of balls and talent long before the car runs out of ability.

Interior: not really important in a supercar and there is no such thing as a "real supercar interior" as there are so many variations eg
Counatch - just plain rubbish
911 - solid and relatively normal
F40 - non existant, ultra functional
XJ220 - luxurious but somehow bland
NSX - well made but bland

Badge and image: Just because the NSX has a Honda badge doesn't make it any less of a supercar. Honda has a good history in motorsport at this stage having won several drivers and constructors WCs in F1 as an engine manufacturer. In contrast Lamborghini has never even come close to winning an F1 race. And AFAIK the only success Porsche has had in F1 was with McLaren TAG in 1984-86 and then there was the debacle with the Footwork Porsche V12 in 1991.

Then you have the Ford GT and GT40 which have Ford badges, is teh new GT not a supercar because it isnt' made by Ferrari/lambo/Maserati/Aston Martin.

etc. etc.


BrianD3

unkel

BrianD3 wrote:

I think it's incorrect to say the NSX isn't a supercar. If the NSX isn't a supercar because it's no longer quick enough to compete with modern rivals then the Lambo Miura and Countach aren't supercars either

A 1978 V12 Countach has similar acceleration as a 2005 V6 NSX. The Countach is significantly faster. Forced to pick only one of these as a supercar, which would you pick?

Wanna start a poll?

ds20prefecture

Have a look at the times posted on
http://www.nurburgring.de/?rubrik=rekorde&lang=eng

Compare the NSX-R to 911 Turbo and Ferrari 360. All driven unmodified by the same driver (Horst von Saurma), it is as fast or faster.

By another driver, it is faster than a 360 Challenge Stradale, but presumably the car is modified (like the 360)

Either way it blows a 1999 M5 (400hp) "into the weeds", and by some margin. Shame nobody has posted lap times for the new M5. Interesting time for a 1976 BMW 3.0CSL (faster than a stock Porsche Carrera GT)

The stock NSX times seem well down on base 911s, which is surprising given their similar power/weights.

The NSX was a supercar. The NSX-R still is.

JB123

Download this video:
Lamborghini Murcielago vs. Lamborghini Gallardo vs. Porsche 911 vs. Honda NSX-R vs. BMW M3 CSL vs. Ferrari 360 Modena on the Montegi racetrack.
From http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/video.asp
Do u see the way the NSX-R kicks the 911 and the M3 CSL then the Ferrari 360 Modena.
Not a true supercar my ass.NSX-R is my Dream car I have an Integra R and I suppose at least i can rev it to 9000rpms and dream....

unkel

ds20prefecture wrote:

Have a look at the times posted

Von Saurma has a nice job alright

Like you and me he seems to have good and bad days at work. A BMW Z8 faster than a Ferrari F355, a lardy old man's car Mercedes SL500 faster than a Honda NSX, Audi S4 beating a Honda Civic Type R by a hefty 5 seconds...

Thumper Long

The Honda NSX is an amazing car from a drivers perspective. I used to work for a car importers and have been lucky to drive most high end motors with the exception of the really rare stuff like a koenigggggggegg / ferrari enzo / mclaren f1 etc, i dont want people to think im talking out of my arse but having driven most of the cars mentioned in the thread the NSX (1999) was definitely one of my favs, the driving position was superb and that unmisakable roar from the honda v6 as it approaches the redline at nigh on 10,000 rpm is spine shaking, for the relative price of the car there is no competition for value for money skylines, supras, imprezas are just crude when compared to the handbuilt aluminium NSX, and from a N/A engine the performance is brilliant. but if money is no object a 2001 911 996 turbo is just violent the acceleration is amazing if you have the bottle to keep your right foot planted, so all in all I would have to give the NSX the thumbs up, if I had the kind of disposable cash needed id buy one in the morning.

ds20prefecture

JB123 wrote:

Download this video:
From http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/video.asp
Not a true supercar my ass.

These videos are great. Interesting how the Lamborghinis are slow for the first lap then speed up. Must be tyres. I'd love to see a standard NSX vs a carrera 2 and a 355 - these are the cars it was designed to compete against.

Also, none of these prove a thing - the video may have been made by Honda, or the Honda could be tuned to bejaysus.