GREAT video! Thanks for sharing. :biggrin:

If that video doesn't make you want to own an NSX, I don't know what would! heh.

What's up with it overheating at the end of the race though... Was he pushing it too hard?

And out of all the cars in the field, I can't believe the Modena had a little problem with the brakes fading. :eek:

trying to fend off a murcilago(sp) and a gallardo with about 200hp more than u will probably make ur car overheat...probably pushing the limits in the straightaways did it

Hi, I am asking this in the most sincere way possible. Why would you want to buy an NSX? The 2004 model is about $90,000 before taxes etc. and it offers a mere 210lb of torque which you could get from a car that costs 20k. And at $90,000 you have a huge amount of choices of cars to get. I even think the '30 Dodge Viper at 400+ lb of torque is at 79k.

Now remember I'm not out to put down the NSX, I just want to know why you would choose it over the many other choices like a viper or a porsche or a used lamborghini, BMW or Mercedez-Benz. Or even a new Subuaru Impreza.

Because weight, litres & of course upgrades :naughty:

You have to remember too that the NSX when it came out in 1991 beat the Corvette ZR1 which was going for $65,000 IF you knew a dealer very well, up to $75,000 if you didn't. (back then the NSX was much cheaper) Psssst.... and slower than the 97+ models. Now, with the new H S C coming out, well, it will be interesting.

You have to remember too that the NSX when it came out in 1991 beat the Corvette ZR1 which was going for $65,000 IF you knew a dealer very well, up to $75,000 if you didn't. (back then the NSX was much cheaper) Psssst.... and slower than the 97+ models. Now, with the new H S C coming out, well, it will be interesting.

it will be very interesting indeed. :icon16:

i thought they canned any future plans for an NSX replacement for the time being.....

You have to remember too that the NSX when it came out in 1991 beat the Corvette ZR1 which was going for $65,000 IF you knew a dealer very well, up to $75,000 if you didn't. (back then the NSX was much cheaper) Psssst.... and slower than the 97+ models. Now, with the new H S C coming out, well, it will be interesting.

I believe, no, I am sure that you are ,mistaken. At first I thought you had confused the ZR1 with a base model Vette, then I realized that either the LT5 LT4 or LT1 Vettes were all faster than the NSX. They did not make the ZR1 in 91 either if I remember correctly.
91 Corvette
0-60 5.3
1/4mile 13.9

90 ZR1
0-60 4.5
1/4mile 12.8

91 Acura NSX
0-60 5.8
1/4mile 14.4

I believe, no, I am sure that you are ,mistaken. At first I thought you had confused the ZR1 with a base model Vette, then I realized that either the LT5 LT4 or LT1 Vettes were all faster than the NSX. They did not make the ZR1 in 91 either if I remember correctly.
91 Corvette
0-60 5.3
1/4mile 13.9

90 ZR1
0-60 4.5
1/4mile 12.8

91 Acura NSX
0-60 5.8
1/4mile 14.4


The following column was in the Chicago Sun Times A few months ago. I cut and pasted it from something I left at that time on this site. it is again:

BY DAN JEDLICKA AUTO REPORTER


Few cars become instant classics, but the slinky-looking 1991 Acura NSX exotic sports car is one of them. It was a wonder.

Acura dealers were charging customers up to double the price of the hand-built NSX when it arrived for 1991. Some customers were laying out $20,000 just to be put on a waiting list. The car's first year was its best sales year, with 1,940 sold.

The innovative two-seat NSX was the world's first aluminum production car, with an aluminum engine, body and suspension. Honda knew high fuel economy and lower emissions from light cars would be top priorities in the future and thought it could meet those challenges by making a light exotic sports car, which also would improve Acura's image. So it came up with the NSX.

"Auto writers at the 1991 NSX media preview in Japan wanted to know about things such as the car's top speed and handling, but Honda really wanted to talk about such things as the car's innovative use of lightweight aluminum and its fuel-saving design,'' auto analyst Maryann Keller told this reporter after attending the preview. "The NSX was fast and sleek and all that, but that wasn't what the car was really all about.''

The styling of the NSX initially grabbed the most attention. The low-slung car had a canopy-forward design inspired by the F-16 fighter jet. A driver sat in a race-style cockpit well organized around him in a supportive buttery soft leather-covered seat while looking through a sharply raked windshield. There were plenty of comfort and convenience items, including automatic climate control.

The NSX had a race-style mid-engine design and competition-style 24-valve V-6 with variable valve timing and a variable volume induction system for sharp throttle response. The engine had titanium connecting rods used in Grand Prix race engines and whisked the NSX to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and took it all the way to 165 mph.

The NSX was the first car with electronically driven power steering. Light and quick, it offered the sensitive road feel of race car steering. A traction control system eliminated wheel spin on slippery roads.

The NSX could compete with sports cars from established exotic automakers such as Italy's Ferrari and Lamborghini and England's Lotus. Car and Driver magazine found on a race track that the NSX outdid most of the world's top exotic cars: Ferrari 348, Porsche 911 Carrera 4, Lotus Esprit Turbo SE and the special Corvette ZR-1, which had a unique hand-built engine largely designed by Lotus.

The NSX came from Honda's upscale Acura division. It had a list price of $60,000 with a five-speed manual gearbox, making it the most expensive Japanese car ever sold in America. (The posh Acura Legend sedan had been the first Japanese car to break the $20,000 barrier.)

Some industry observers thought the NSX really should have been priced at more than $100,000, considering its technical sophistication and performance.

"Just look at the NSX's exquisite aluminum suspension components -- even Ferrari doesn't have them,'' said Chicago area Acura and Ferrari dealer John Weinberger.

Other high-performance 1991 sports cars with exotic nameplates weren't meant to be driven daily because they lacked reliability, quality and civility for such use. That wasn't the case with the NSX; it came from Honda, which wasn't about to sell a car that couldn't be used on a daily basis without fuss.

Fuel economy of most exotic cars was awful, but the NSX provided an estimated 18 mpg in the city and 24 on the highway.

Besides its weight-saving goals, Honda set out to make an exotic mid-engine sports car that would establish new levels of prestige, performance, refinement, driveability and reliability.

"The NSX is not only extremely fast, but also smooth, refined, comfortable, surprisingly quiet and easier to drive than most high-performance cars,'' Consumer Guide said. "It doesn't require the driving skills of Mario Andretti to enjoy [but] if you're a highly skilled driver, you'll probably find the NSX is just as rewarding to drive as any of the European exotics.''

The NSX changed the way people viewed exotics. If the Japanese NSX could compete with Ferrari and Lamborghini and still be practical, why couldn't high-performance European sports cars?

This reporter found the car wasn't perfect, with a small cargo area and special tires that helped provide outstanding road grip but only lasted about 15,000 miles. It was hard to find inside door handles and power window controls in the dark and aluminum-intensive construction meant costly repairs.

The NSX also had high steering effort when parking with the five-speed manual gearbox because power steering came only with the four-speed automatic transmission model, which cost an extra $4,000.

The manual-transmission version had a 270-horsepower V-6, while the automatic transmission model had a 252-horsepower version of the engine because Honda lacked an automatic to handle 270 horsepower.

Still, I gave the NSX high marks in nearly all areas. The manual transmission version was the most fun, with its nifty short-throw shifter, light clutch and higher horsepower. The automatic-transmission NSX was plenty fast, but that transmission seemed out of place in such a high-performance sports car.

The NSX continues to be sold, although the lack of an exotic nameplate has made it fall far short of sales expectations. The 2004 model remains essentially the same as the 1991 model. The manual transmission version now has 290 horsepower, and the retractable headlight covers were dropped in 2002, when front and rear styling were slightly revised.

The price remains reasonable at $89,000 for both manual and automatic-transmission versions. A 1991 model in top shape is valued at $35,875. That's more than half its original list price, but it's worth every penny.

I believe that the First year the ZR-1 Was slower than that......the next 2 years the ZR-1 aquired a faster motor. This I found out from my boss who owns a Corvette (his second).

I believe that the First year the ZR-1 Was slower than that......the next 2 years the ZR-1 aquired a faster motor. This I found out from my boss who owns a Corvette (his second).

Yea that's when Lotus sold the LT5 to GM and they put it in the ZR1. 1990 was the fastest ZR1, they slowed over the years:
92
0-60 5.6
1/4 13.9
93
0-60 4.7
1/4 13.1
They changed from the expensive LT5 to the LT1-4, The NSX is an awesome car, but they have never been faster than a vette, base model or top line. I checked carstats to be sure. Not trying to start an argument, but personally, if I am wrong I like to be given the right info.

Yea that's when Lotus sold the LT5 to GM and they put it in the ZR1. 1990 was the fastest ZR1, they slowed over the years:
92
0-60 5.6
1/4 13.9
93
0-60 4.7
1/4 13.1
They changed from the expensive LT5 to the LT1-4, The NSX is an awesome car, but they have never been faster than a vette, base model or top line. I checked carstats to be sure. Not trying to start an argument, but personally, if I am wrong I like to be given the right info.

the nsx outdid the vette and other exotics on a race track, meaning a course track, not a drag race. also, on the 1/4 mile, the nsx runs lo to mid 13's.

the nsx outdid the vette and other exotics on a race track, meaning a course track, not a drag race. also, on the 1/4 mile, the nsx runs lo to mid 13's.

He was talking about speed and the 91 model, and yes they are better on the road, but not 1/4 mile.

98 the NSX did 12.9, all the other years were mid to high 13's and low 14's

He was talking about speed and the 91 model, and yes they are better on the road, but not 1/4 mile.

yellownsx said it beat the zr1, he didn't mention 1/4 mile, i believe u did. he then brought evidence of it beating the zr1 and other exotics with that article. also, with 1/4 mile times, just because a car recieve a certain time, this doesn't always mean they can't get better times, this is a general idea of how well they do depending on driver experience, but for this specific arguement we'll just go off those times.

heres a link to see how well some nsx's do. its just too bad the U.S. don't get any of the other models such as the nsx type s or the nsx-r, these are fast on the 1/4 mile and the track. just go to media archives:

http://www.runeb.org/www_docs/Jexoticasite/frames/jexmain_all.htm

yellownsx said it beat the zr1, he didn't mention 1/4 mile, i believe u did. he then brought evidence of it beating the zr1 and other exotics with that article. also, with 1/4 mile times, just because a car recieve a certain time, this doesn't always mean they can't get better times, this is a general idea of how well they do depending on driver experience, but for this specific arguement we'll just go off those times.

heres a link to see how well some nsx's do. its just too bad the U.S. don't get any of the other models such as the nsx type s or the nsx-r, these are fast on the 1/4 mile and the track. just go to media archives:

http://www.runeb.org/www_docs/Jexoticasite/frames/jexmain_all.htm

Yea, I checked on some other cars on that sight that I got the times off of and I they apparently have some horrible drivers, the times were not anywhere close to being right. You are correct on that.

Yea, I checked on some other cars on that sight that I got the times off of and I they apparently have some horrible drivers, the times were not anywhere close to being right. You are correct on that.

did u check out the skyline r33 vs the mclaren f1? man, it made the skyline look like trash, hehe. but of course, the mclaren is one of the top exotics of the exotics. oh heres some fyi, guess what company mclaren originally wanted to build their motor? not ferrari, not lamborghini, and not mercedes, i'll let u guess :icon16: it was too bad this company declined, grrr.

Why am I thinking Acura?

Why am I thinking Acura?

hehe, close. honda, honda makes acura. heres the article and link:

What makes the McLaren F1 such a special car? Performance. No other road car accelerates as fast, no other road car has a maximum speed of well over 230 mph. It can outperform every other road car by a large margin. But there is much more to it.

The McLaren F1 materialises the dream of a single man. Not just any man, but one of the most imaginative and successful engineers that Formula 1 racing has known. Gordon Murray designed the Brabham-Alfa Romeo "fan" car that in 1978 won its first and only Grand Prix-- then was immediately banned because it simply dwarfed the opposition. Murray was probably the first man to incorporate carbon fibre into the structure of Formula 1 cars, and he designed the world champion Brabham- BMW of 1983. When he moved to McLaren, it was to design a sports car to beat the world, and he was given carte blanche by Mansour Ojeh and Ron Dennis to pursue the dream, regardless of cost. The target Murray set was that the car should be as compact as possible, yet practical, weigh no more than 1000 kg. (2205 lb.) dry and be powered by an atmospheric engine (for immediate response) developing at least 550 BHP.

At the time, McLaren was racing successfully with Honda engines, and it seemed logical to approach Honda for an engine meeting Murray's requirements. But the Japanese declined, feeling that they could not spare the capacity to develop such a project. So Murray then turned to BMW Motorsport and his old friend Paul Rosche, who had provided the engines to the Brabham team while Murray was in charge. Rosche enthusiastically accepted.

Starting from a clean sheet of paper, Rosche and his team designed and developed a superb, all- aluminium 6.1-litre, 48-valve V-12, and it was a huge success right from the start. It immediately produced the required power and went on to develop as much as 627 BHP. Concurrently, the American Traction Company developed a fantastically compact transverse transaxle incorporating a differential with a 40-percent locking factor. To reach his weight target, Murray had no choice as to the material to be used for the car's structure: It could be only carbon-fibre composites, mostly in the form of an aluminium honeycomb sandwich, while, wherever possible, the mechanical parts were made of aluminium and magnesium.

There is hardly a component in the car that has not been specially designed for it, mostly to save weight. A typical example is the Kenwood CD stereo system. The unit proposed by the manufacturer weighed 37.5 lb. Murray said he would accept only half that weight. The company took on the challenge and eventually came up with a system even better than the original, weighing only 18.7 lb. Finally, the car weighs 1100 kg. (2425 lb.) dry, and Gordon Murray's biggest disappointment is that he had to give up the idea of carbon brake discs, as used in racing cars. It proved impossible to make them grip sufficiently at low temperatures, especially in wet conditions. The switch to cast-iron discs cost him 39.7 lb. In the end, however, Rosche more than made up for the 220 lb. beyond the target weight by extracting some 75 BHP more from his engine than originally required by Murray.


go to did u know? and theres a link on that page.
http://www.runeb.org/www_docs/Jexoticasite/frames/jexmain_all.htm

WOW! I did not know that.

There were also some years the the Corvette was sinfully slow. In the middle 1970s some of those cars only had 200 hourse power!

Don't get me wrong, I still think you get the most bang for the buck on a new Vette. I just didn't want to be another Vette owner ( the same argument might also be made for the Cobra Mustang )

By the way, I will eat up a non ZO-6 on any twisty curvey track, You've got balls, but I've got balance, Hell, look what it was fending off for three out of 4 laps!

Not dis'ing the Corvette, both cars are good at something. I have beaten a Vette or two with just 270hp, and in turn gotten beat.

By the way I thought the Saleen S-7 had a slightly better 0-60 than the McLaren F1 (sorry for drifting off topic) Both are great cars but the McLaren does not pass EPA standards in America, to make it come close slows the car down!

How dose the 50,000 dollar vette always get thrown into this.....

Im not even an NSX owner but I can tell you why some one wuld want one....

1) your getting somthing more rare than most people recognize..

Even if it is a Honda...

Look through an exotic car calander and theres a good chance that the NSX will be there...

You wont see a 350Zor an WRX sti..

Normally the leaste expensive car in th calander will be the corvette....

50 grand is like the bottom end for super cars.....
Aything under 50 grand ( reguardless of the performance) is just to mainstream..

Most people can afford 20 thousand dollar cars ....

Many can afford 30 thousand..

40 thousand is where he average person calls the line..

And 50 grand is where your considered well off or well above averag...

Most people dream of owning the 50,00 vette or BMW M3 or the numerous other top line 50 grand and up cars....

A brand new NSX goes for 80-90 grand...

This is tuly a car that not every one can aford.....

Neighter is a 50,000 vette....But defiently more people could have one than an NSX..

So the NSX is expensive and rare.....




Thats more than enough reason to want one...

The performance is also NOT SLOW....

14.3 for a v6 is very good..

Sure a 350 Z mighty match it Through the quarter mile but in real life driving with turns the 350 woud be destroyed....


My Stock Corvette has beaten every stock NSX Ive raced by about a second though the quarter mile.....( quite a few of them here in Hawaii)

I usualy run a mid 13 to there mid 14...

Thats all kool...But Im no idiot...I knowtha on a road course were the real dynamics of the car come into play it would be a very tight race....

A C5 is also roughly a second behind he Z06 through most road courses as well...

This would be a true drives race.

Where for the most part a cars perfmace should be judged by it's 1/4 mile..

This is not true in the NSX..

They made te car quick enough...

But mostly focused on the handling..

The resut is car that despte having 60 HP less tha a C5 vette...
Can still hold it's own on an race course....

The C5 is a excellent handler.....And world reknown for it's performance..

But the NSX can handle better stock for stock...

Now to the most obvious reason..

The NSX is an extremely beautiful car...
To me it looks very similar to the Corvette only with a little more asian influece...

They look VERY simlar IMHO..

From the wide sqared rear end to the pop up lights and basic look....

But this isnt an car you will see often...

I see 3-5 C5's a week...

but maybe 1 nsx every month...

Would I rather have an brand new NSX over my C5????

YES......

I would hate to loose the straight speed excellration....I felt bad for the guys at the 1/4 mile when I beat them by a second......

But I would love having somthng more rare......

I woul love the ( even better) handling

I would be even with the styling since to me they look very similar....

To me the NSX is Japans finest offering....

You cant compare an 85 thousand dollar NSX to 150 thousand and up dollar Ferraris and Lamborginis..

That a mistake that people tend to make....


They say..Why buy an NSX instead of an Ferrari?????

Are you crazyor somthing?????

Corvettes....Vipers....NSX all usualy between 50 and 85 thousand brand new.....

These are cars that the above average to slightly wealthy can afford....

For example....My wife and I own a liquor store...

our take home yearly is 200 grand....

To the average person making 30 thousand a year we are rich....They think I coul afford a Ferrari...

In tuth I cant even afford a brand new NSX....

By the time I pay all the bills and take care of the 5 kids the most I could possibly afford woud be a 75 grand Dodge Viper.....

People might see me in te Viper and say....Man wy didnt you get an NSX...

So the reason for getting a NSX instead of a covette is obvious...
They are both pretty evenly matched but due to the pricing effieciency of Chevy the NSX will turn more heads and is a tue exotic as were the Corvette is an awesome car with a lot of history but is just to comon do to the 50 grand price tag in comparison....

The closest cmpetitor money wise and rarity wise is the Viper...

Asking apson why you got a viper instead of an NSX or visa versa is like asking some one why they bought an 350Z instead o a SS camaro....


These are just totaly different cars...

Mot guys into imports could care less if a v10 can run 11's from the factory...

Most guys into domestics could care less if a car is making awesome HP despite having only 4-6 cylinders or how well it handles.....

It just really depends on what you like and who you hang around.....

But just becaue some one can afford an NSX or VIPER in no way means the can jump up another 50-100 grand to get a Ferrari........

Thats just a common mis conceptin.....

I personal would rather have a Viper than an NSX.....


But look at what kinda car I drive righ now...

My best friend says he would rathr have the NSX......He currently drives a 04 M3.....

My first post........I Sorry i just had to get in on this one..

the nsx is over price..in australia..u can get a bad ass 92-93 Z32TT for 20 grand..while the nsx is nearly 100 grand..and Z32TT would smoke the nsx for breakfast,lunch and dinner..not worth it

Your missing the point.....

I could by a 2000 Z28 camaro..

put 15,000 dollars into modding it..

And smoke the NSX

My corvette

2005 dodge viper

And the Ferrarri Enzo ( the enzo wich is insane for stock...Only runs high 10's)

You can mke a Z28 run 10's for 15 grand.....

Just the blower would put you in the high 11's low 12's....

And youd still have 10 grand left after that....

Use the other 10 grand to build the drive train and forge the engine...

Then put on some tiers and BAAM.....


Go to the LS1 tech board and you'll see quite a few cars running 10's..


But in the end...Im stil in a Vette...

The other guys in a Viper....


Some one else is in his NSX...


And that one really lucky guy is in his ENZO.....

The guy who spent his 15 grand in modds is still in a Camaro....

Th same car that you can go buy right now for 8-11 grand used...

Comparing a 20,000 dollar car to a NSX becauseit's as fast o faster is just stupid....

You know how many expensive cars the 98 Z28 could smoke when it came out with the LS1 running a solid 13.7 1/4 mile.....

Thats still stronger than lots of 50-70 grand cars today...

About even with a 04 BMW M3 to compare one....

But wich car would you rathe have...

The 27 grand Z28...

Or the 55 grand M3.....


You rol up to my house in your 20,000 thats ran a 1/4 of 12.9 aussie car and I wont even give you a second look....


You roll up to my house in a 93 NSX that has only ran a best 1/4 mile of 14.8 w/ you driving and Ill go out and talk to you aout your nice car....

the point that people miss is that sure....u can goo out and buy a $4k civic invest $10k in it and be in the 10's with only $14k invested...but itz not about just the #'s which everyone seems to be stuck on...itz the car itzself

good example is when cheesefrog beat that viper in his civic...at the end of the day, which car woiuld you rather go home in?

Honda= engine lasts a very long time, meanwhile every single part of the car will fall off before the engine will ever break. Japanese and Chrysler use electrogalvanize steel which is less corosion resistant than regular galvanized steel that other companies like Ford and GM use. The advantage to using electrogalvanized steel is that it is cheaper and easier to weld and is cheaper to buy. So the quality of a honda is good engine wise, not body wise. Also they ship them accross the pacific and atlantic oceans for months at a time (the ones built in Japan) this is liek going through the worst winter of salt times 100 from the salt exposure at sea. I'd imagine they try to protect the cars from the salt, but thats difficult.

Hondas are reliable primarly because most their cars are 4 bangers and 4 banger cars in general are more reliable than V8s and V6s. they have less things on them to break, have more surface area to cool down.
It all really matters on how well you take care of a car on how long its going to last, my car will last a long time even though it is a ford because i take care of it well. I'd imagine that people who have ford's think they break more because they seemingly neglect them a lot. My dad for example didnt change his oil in his explorer for 7 thousand miles and it didnt start on the first 2 tries (gee wonder why) I wouldnt blame it on the Ford, but rather the fact he neglected it. Same goes with Japanese cars, some say they are less reliable engine wise some say better. I say, how well are you taking care of it? Also with corrosion, the mroe you keep it clean in the winter the less salt you get on the car, or if you live near the ocean the more you clean it the less salt residue deposits on the car.

I would never pay 90 grand for a car that is a 6 banger. I would and did pay 14 grand for a brand new 04 mustang with A plan (can't beat that). It looks cool, and for about 1,500 dollars i can get 300 HP out of it naturally aspirated. However i imagine my 3,200 lbs V6 mustang weighs a hell of a lot mroe than the NSX.

I normally dont like japanese car styling but the NSX is an exception, it looks italian and i think it is a great looking car, just over priced. The first time i ever saw one i thought it was a ferrari, and then i found out it was a honda and assumed it must cost maybe 30-40 at the top, and now that i found out it costs 90 i am shocked.

Just because it says honda on it doesnt mean it shouldnt be slow. The only truely fast car with the ford tag on it was the Mustang Cobra for years, now look what they've built, the new Ford GT (GT40 is the real name but they are dumb and sold the rights to it). What is in a name anyway? same goes with toyota, they only really have the celica and MR2 and when i think of toyota i think of camry, corrola, prius, not supra or MR2.

Now if you think buying a nice looking NSX for 90 grand is crazy, who in their God's name would buy a focus for 101,000???!?!?? I am not making this up, ford now has built a focus that beat a lamborguini. Saw it in motor trend magazine, not sure of the month, probably august 04 -oct 04. Its the new focus RS8, its on the ugly hatch back model with 5.0 450HP engine!!! I think the only reason why id want one is if i was so rich i had nothing better to do then pull up to a light next to a Viper/Vette/Cobra/Ferrari/Porsche and blow their doors off with my ugly, quiet stock looking focus. I think the owner of lamborguini company shot himself after the focus won, i would have lol. So buying an NSX might not be the best buy, but there are much worse things you could buy for the money.

You could build a lawn mower that could beat a chrysler ME412 also, but you are sacrificing a lot of things. Building a civic that can beat a viper for 14 grand maybe nice, but you will have crap reliability from the poor engineering of the aftermarket mods. You will also probably sacrifice fuel mileage (yes even worse than the viper) since the engine will be tuned up to its max. Also when you break the 2Hp/CI barrier on an engine its life expectancy drops a lot (unless engine is forged well), its like making a person faster by doing steroids. But then again you only paid 14 grand, its kind of disposable, just build a new one every year. In the long run it will end up costing you the same as a viper since you'll have to keep rebuilding the engine when it explodes.

Now my V6 mustang would be a challenge to beat the NSX in the quarter mile, and probably impossible in a track race since it is way out handled and is too heavy, but it is possible and would be cheaper than a NSX yet still look as good and in my oppinion better.

Oh and 05 Mustang is SICK and the new special edition ones have 5.4 Litre 400- 500 HP engines in them for only 40-50 grand when they come out. So if it were up to me, i'd rather havea C6 Corvette, or a new Mustang Cobra equivlant (dont know what they are calling it) and an old used WRX for winter AWD BABY!

You listed a bunch of cars that you say are a lot better buy than an NSX, but not one american car! How come? I swear people are so weird, they like refuse to buy american. Here are a list of american (real sports cars) that are a better buy than an NSX, Corvette, Viper, Camaro, Ford GT (costs more but its worth it), Cobra Mustang, New 05 mustang, the new Steada mustang, Cadilac XLR, Chrysler Crossfire SRT, oh forgot to mention the GTO too, Any LS1 can be made amazing with the addition of a blower. The LS1's capabalities are unbeatable for its costs, and just got better with the LS2, 6.0L!! That means that you can get over 550HP without major forging or internals changed for around 5 grand. Total cost of GTO 30-40 grand "Depending on how its loaded" and an additional 5 grand will make it incredibly fast. I do agree that the NSX is better looking than the GTO since pontiac hasnt changed their styling in 30 million years. And you may argue it isnt an american car since it is built on an Aussie car.

i guess itz a personal issue...IMO i would love to know i have a car that was built by hand rather than on an assembly line

You listed a bunch of cars that you say are a lot better buy than an NSX, but not one american car! How come? I swear people are so weird, they like refuse to buy american. Here are a list of american (real sports cars) that are a better buy than an NSX, Corvette, Viper, Camaro, Ford GT (costs more but its worth it), Cobra Mustang, New 05 mustang, the new Steada mustang, Cadilac XLR, Chrysler Crossfire SRT, oh forgot to mention the GTO too, Any LS1 can be made amazing with the addition of a blower. The LS1's capabalities are unbeatable for its costs, and just got better with the LS2, 6.0L!! That means that you can get over 550HP without major forging or internals changed for around 5 grand. Total cost of GTO 30-40 grand "Depending on how its loaded" and an additional 5 grand will make it incredibly fast. I do agree that the NSX is better looking than the GTO since pontiac hasnt changed their styling in 30 million years. And you may argue it isnt an american car since it is built on an Aussie car.

Should I bother to tell him that the GTO is not made here in the states?
Or that Ford took an NSX apart to see how it was made before building the GT? Nah! I better not!

Its not about where the car is built necessarly but rather where the proffits go. If an american car is built in mexico with 200 dollars worth of labor costs, that doesnt matter. The profits go to the united states primarily. If a japanese car is built here the cheap labor costs do not make up for the profits and R&D money going back to japan. the true jobs that run our economy are the engineering jobs in detroit and dont forget those corporate execs in detroit that reinvest back in the united states.



I don't blame ford copying the NSX, its a very very well built car. I just don't see why anyone would own one since you don't get the horsepower you should be getting for the near 6 figures it cost. Why reinvent the wheel? If there already is a nice car to copy off of, then do it, and make it better. Did you ever hear that the japanese learned everything they know about mass production assembly lines and automobile production from Ford. The Toyota founder also frequently visited the Rouge plant (dearborn michigan) in the 1950s and 60s. They took an already good idea and improved upon it. Then we took what they did and improved upon that and so on.

The NSX does not run the quarter mile in 14.3 - 14.8 seconds...WTF?

Look at the numbers in various magazines, look at videos, go to nsx prime and see what guys have ran STOCK.

Nsx 3.0 270 hp run in 13.6 - 13.8 range
Nsx 3.2 290 hp run in 13.2 - 13.4 range
Nsx 3.2 Type R run 13.0s flat
Nsx Type S Zero have ran 12.8 second quarter miles.

The NSX is a mid to low thirteen second car, that is equal to a C5 vette, Bmw M3.

Now, a Mustang V6 cant even beat my civic Si. So how compare it to an NSX. Even comparing a mustang GT is ridicoulous.

Because NSX's are hand built and are a masterpiece. o and it will out handle a dodge viper , which means if they raced on the track nsx would win.

The Civic SI would destroy a stock pre 99 v6 mustang yes. But not a 99+. Civic SI = maxed out already and not much left to do to it. Stock mustang v6 04 has about 19 lbs per RWHP. civic SI has almost half the torque as a v6 mustang with about 20 lbs per RWHP. With these numbers i doubt a civic si stock could be a 99+ v6 mustang stock. My mustang when i am done modying it in a few months or so will have 190 RWHP, and 240-260Ft lbs of torque at the crank. Thats enough to beat a New ACcord V6, 5.0 95 Cobra Mustang, and all hondas except the NSX and S2000.

Why do people buy civics for racing?

When purchasing an NSX, I believe that you are purchasing a potent mixture of technology and sophistication unmatched by 99% of cars under 150G's. I don't have 90-100G's to purchase a new NSX. (nor would I pay that much for one.)

I just have to become more imaginative in acquiring an NSX.

I think most would agree Honda makes excellent engines and quality cars. Ask NSX owners pushing 100,000 miles and many will honestly answer it still runs
"Like New."
A used 91' NSX may run about $25,000-$30,000 on websites such as autotrader.com. The majority of NSX owners garage, pamper, and maintain their cars as well as anybody.

Ok, enough of the small talk. Lets ALL make this thread more interesting. I wish to hear from everyone with an honest response.

-The scenario is a 24-hour race through a race track.
-$50,000 dollar limit on car + any parts you want.
-Your life depended on it.

What car would you choose now?
My answer is simple - A used $25,000 NSX, spend $25,000 to bullet-proof engine and suspension upgrade.

No longer factors:
-who has more HP?
-who has more torque?
-quarter mile is 14.0 instead of 13.5
-which car is cheaper!
-modded street cars

My Predictions:
Turbo powered cars- Overheating a major drawback, most turbos are good for short periods-but a 24 hr race full throttle? It might explode! The power of turbo decreases through long periods of increased heat as race goes on. (while V-Tech strives in intense heat!) AWD turbos such as Evo's and WRX's have limited top MPH speed.

Domestic V8's, V10's, V12's- The race track may present twists and turns not suited for these puppies. They may gain time on the NSX during staight sections, but NSX makes it up on turns. The NSX was given an exact weight ratio and horsepower to minimize the need for braking on turns. An NSX driver may REDLINE on turns while heavy cars are braking. I give Domestic V8's and up props, but they are not made for these conditions. An NSX is within a car lenght with a Viper on a straight section, then may seriously be ahead when entering turns. Multiply this single fact times a couple hundred times.

Street cars: For street cars such as a 350Z, the question isn't if a bullet proof NSX will lap you, its how many times it will lap you. And thats putting it in a nice way. Just think, 24-hours of engine redline, grinding through turns, braking, ect. Street cars have very limited top MPH.

Although a vette' zo6 under $50,000? may concern me,
I expect to win this type of race in a bullet-proof NSX.
The NSX also has looks that would kill.

My intent was to eliminate the cost factor by purchasing a used NSX. Replace minor comparisons with a drastic scenario. With that said, I want to hear from you NSX guys.

The Civic SI would destroy a stock pre 99 v6 mustang yes. But not a 99+. Civic SI = maxed out already and not much left to do to it. Stock mustang v6 04 has about 19 lbs per RWHP. civic SI has almost half the torque as a v6 mustang with about 20 lbs per RWHP. With these numbers i doubt a civic si stock could be a 99+ v6 mustang stock. My mustang when i am done modying it in a few months or so will have 190 RWHP, and 240-260Ft lbs of torque at the crank. Thats enough to beat a New ACcord V6, 5.0 95 Cobra Mustang, and all hondas except the NSX and S2000.

Why do people buy civics for racing?


i keep up with rustangs all the time with my 98 civic EX.... and beat them.

anyway back to the NXS
HP and tourqu isnt every thing. it is in the manner you use it
it is clear with the numbers that they are running honda is doing some thing right

The only car that I think might have the staying power would be a Lotus Espirit. Don't get me wrong I love the NSX ( and have one ) but an 8 cyl non-turbo lotus would probably have a field day. The same might be said for a couple of Porsches (928 s4 comes to mind).
This had been tried but not for the lenth of time you are speaking, on a track in Wisc. A Ferrari, An NSX a Porsche, and 2 racing lotus' (that were set up for this track).
The Ferrari overheated his brakes and was out until they changed the fluid, The NSX stayed with the Lotus' but the Porsche lost a lap.
At the end of just 25 laps the NSX was 3rd behind the two Lotus', The Porsche was back a lap and the Ferrari was out. So, was it luck, the drivers or the cars?

The only car that I think might have the staying power would be a Lotus Espirit. Don't get me wrong I love the NSX ( and have one ) but an 8 cyl non-turbo lotus would probably have a field day. The same might be said for a couple of Porsches (928 s4 comes to mind).
This had been tried but not for the lenth of time you are speaking, on a track in Wisc. A Ferrari, An NSX a Porsche, and 2 racing lotus' (that were set up for this track).
The Ferrari overheated his brakes and was out until they changed the fluid, The NSX stayed with the Lotus' but the Porsche lost a lap.
At the end of just 25 laps the NSX was 3rd behind the two Lotus', The Porsche was back a lap and the Ferrari was out. So, was it luck, the drivers or the cars?


I agree, the Lotus would provide serious competition. The Lotus you are referring to may have been turbo-powered (maybe even twin-turbo). 0-60 in mid to low 4 seconds I think, and somewhat of an affordable supercar like the NSX. ($49,000 for used 2000 v8 turbo model on autotrader.com the other day.) No question, the Lotus should jump on top early. But a used bulletproof NSX is the type of car that provides a high level of performance for a very long period of time via VTEC. The Lotus twin turbo should be good for maybe 10? hours, then the horsepower numbers drop gradually due to intense heat. (In F1 racing, top teams such as Honda and Ferrari do not use Turbo because of this drawback.) I think a used 25G NSX with 25 g's of race upgrades will beat an all-motor non-turbo Lotus.

nsx is the ownly reliable exotic car you can buy and not see too many out there....I would never buy a used ferrari or lambo unless you are crapping money out of your butt......for people that don't know the cost of ownership in owning a ferrari or lambo do some research......also you can get a brand new nsx for 79k.....dealers are usually pretty good a negotiating with the price since they want to sell the car........you will never know until you owned one.......another fellow nsxer owns a ferrari 360 modena and he likes the nsx much more than the ferrari......the nsx will warn you of losing control where the ferrari wont......if you ask people who owned lambos, ferraris, bugattis, mclarens, bentleys, pagona zondas like Mr. gosei of Gruppe M you will know that the nsx is the ownly car that he has kepted over the years and has truly enjoyed.....enuff said......nsxprime.com

The NSX does not run the quarter mile in 14.3 - 14.8 seconds...WTF?

Look at the numbers in various magazines, look at videos, go to nsx prime and see what guys have ran STOCK.

Nsx 3.0 270 hp run in 13.6 - 13.8 range
Nsx 3.2 290 hp run in 13.2 - 13.4 range
Nsx 3.2 Type R run 13.0s flat
Nsx Type S Zero have ran 12.8 second quarter miles.

The NSX is a mid to low thirteen second car, that is equal to a C5 vette, Bmw M3.

Now, a Mustang V6 cant even beat my civic Si. So how compare it to an NSX. Even comparing a mustang GT is ridicoulous.

OK, for the last time. A NSX is not a 1/4 mile car, period! If I wanted a 1/4 mile car I would have bought a Viper or like car.

In professional racing how many forms are there that a straight line?
Humm, Drag racing,tractor pulls.
How many forms include a curve? Too many to list!
Any fool can mash the pedal.
Sure, there are cars that will beat the NSX in a road course, but for the price I paid for mine, (26k) I can't think of any. I don't think I would spend the 89k for a new NSX when you could get essentially the same car for thousands less.

From car & driver *For all you drag racers:

Car 0-60 1/4 mile C&D issue
Acura NSX-T 4.8 13.4 July '97
Corvette (C5) 5.4 13.6 May '98
Ferrari 355 4.5 13.0 July '95
Lamborghini Diablo 4.5 13.4 Sep '94
Porsche 911 5.3 13.5 May '98
Toyota Supra TT 5.0 13. Aug '97

This is what I have for 26k

It runs perfect and has not one flaw in the body or interior.
Oh, did I mention it is handmade?

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wOTQxMDY3NnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE%3D.jpg

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wOTQxMDY2NnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE%3D.jpg

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wOTkwMjI4NnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE%3D.jpg

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wMTA1NDAxOTZzNDEzZGZkMzF5NTQx.jpg

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wMTA2MjI3NjZzNDEzZGZkMzF5NTQx.jpg

NSX murdering Vipers at tracks? Don't think so. You want to call the Viper a 1/4 mile car only, only to mag race 1/4 mile times for the NSX? For 26,000 dollars, there are plenty of cars that would murder an NSX at a road course. Put a Viper GTS against an NSX on a road course, with equal drivers, and the NSX is going to be put to sleep. You do own a beautiful car by the way, but for calling Vipers only good for tractor pulls, thats kinda lame. NSX overated....yes.

but for calling Vipers only good for tractor pulls, thats kinda lame.


In professional racing how many forms are there that a straight line?
Humm, Drag racing,tractor pulls.

read carefully :wink:

NSX overated....yes.

:shakehead

NSX murdering Vipers at tracks? Don't think so. You want to call the Viper a 1/4 mile car only, only to mag race 1/4 mile times for the NSX? For 26,000 dollars, there are plenty of cars that would murder an NSX at a road course. Put a Viper GTS against an NSX on a road course, with equal drivers, and the NSX is going to be put to sleep. You do own a beautiful car by the way, but for calling Vipers only good for tractor pulls, thats kinda lame. NSX overated....yes.

1-The Viper is not just a drag car. It is a great all around car. I used the Viper as an example of raw HP. *I didn't mean to imply the Viper is a tractor pull car. Please read post again.

2-I can't think of many cars that cost $26k that would "murder" an NSX.

3-Have you driven an NSX? The experience is so defining, so exact I can't describe it. The car is a wonder to drive slow as well as fast. There are many cars that can beat an NSX at many types of races. My point is that it is a very good road course car, not the best.
It has no suprises. It is an easy exotic to drive. it has wonderful ergonomics and looks to boot. As posted above, would I buy a 05 NSX. No, it is too much $ for what you get. Is it "overated." That is a very subjective question. Obviousley a NSX owner would disagree and someone who has not driven one would agree. Simply a matter of opinion.

Does it go as fast as a C6 Vette-no
Does it corner as good as a nobel-no
Does it have as much HP as many new exotic/sportscars-no
Does it have qualities other than those listed above-yes

Please just drive one and you will see what I'm talking about. The exactness of how it drives will amaze you.





http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wMTA1NDAyMDZzNDEzZGZkMzF5NTQx.jpg

This is a well written article on the NSX. It was written by a British Journalist. He just "gets it."

Of course it's only an opinion, but it's an interesting read.

*Misquoted rpm range. Should be 8000 RPM



Honda has abandoned Japanese build values and deigned that the NSX should be handbuilt four-times slower than other Hondas. The car took six years to develop — twice as long as more mundane Japanese machinery, and Honda has drawn deeply from its knowledge of race car engineering. The double-wishbone suspension is cast from aluminium instead of the usual steel. And the suspension was fine-tuned by, among others, Ayrton Senna.
But nowhere is the NSX’s engineering more impressive than in the engine, a quad-cam, 3.0-litre, 24-valve transverse V6 with variable valve timing and induction producing 270bhp at 7100rpm and 210lb ft of torque – remarkable for normal aspiration and just 2977cc.
It is a tour de force worthy of the greatest names in motoring. No question at all, this V6 will be remembered as one of the great powerplants.


On the road

Honda NSX (90-02) Coupe 3.0 2dr -
NSX sacrifices a little grip for benign breakaway
Its comparative lack of torque means the NSX hasn’t the legs of its best opponents. Not that it’s slow; any car that can pass 60mph in 5.8sec and cover the quarter mile in 14.2sec is obviously extremely quick. It’s just that the Porsche, Lotus and Ferrari are faster still. Flat out the NSX flew round Millbrook at an average of 159mph, beating all others, bar the Ferrari at 163mph.
And yet, we would happily lose a little outright speed for an engine like the NSX’s. It has a throttle response that would impress even Ferrari drivers, and real urge over an engine band at least 6000rpm wide. Enjoyment is enhanced hugely by the noise, comparable to no other road car engine in our experience. Anyone familiar with the struggle to cope with a mid-engined supercar’s gearchange will find the NSX’s light, well defined and balk-free gate a revelation.
For the first time, a sporting Japanese car can be bought with a chassis that has a solution to every problem. Most of the time that solution is grip, but it is its forgiving nature that distinguishes the NSX from the rest of the mid-engined brigade.
It has only fractionally less grip than a 348, but because it allows you your mistakes, it inspires more confidence than the snappy Ferrari. Which, in real terms, makes the NSX the faster car.
For most, it will more fun too, as only the exceptionally talented would drift a 348. And mid-engined cars tend to ride well – the NSX is no exception.