Am I the only one that thinks the NSX has no appeal whatsoever- what the hell is the point of getting a new one? Can someone explain that to me?

As far as technical competence an NSX probably won't be able to touch newer cars. After all, it was first sold in 1991 (and was quite an amazing car at that time, totally fulfilling its mission in being on par with a Ferrari). But these days there are cars that are just as fast, just as practical, and cost less. I think Honda should have stopped building it a few years ago.

Here are some sales figures I dug up (these are for sales within the US of the NSX)

1991 3159
1992 1274
1993 608
1994 524
1995 759
1996 470
1997 115

1999 238
2000 221
2001 182
2002 233

They should have stopped producing it in 1996 when sales REALLY fell off..

For the price, it isn't:

..as fast as the other cars in its class
..as luxurious as the other cars in its class
..as exotic as the other cars in its class
..as exciting as the other cars in its class

Are you putting it in a class based on specs or price? The differences are substantial.

Are you putting it in a class based on specs or price? The differences are substantial.
Performance wise, its up there with the WRX, M3, S4, EVO 8, Corvette- all cars that are sub 50 (and most sub 40).

Shut up, Kenny.

Shut up, Kenny.
Cheater came after me in IM after this post and he asked why the 360 is worth the money. If you have to ask, it's not.

If you've ever seen the car in person you know why its worth the 150k+/- price tag. For one, its rare. Two, great performance. Three, great sound. Four, good quality interior/cabin. Five, its a Ferrari.

Consider when NSX was designed, it could give the same perios 348 a run for its money, and it had the Japanese reliability on its side, something can't really be said for any Ferrari(other than their modern V10 F1 car, which ironically carries a engine that was designed by former Honda engineer....). As it started, it started well as a bargain alternative for a Ferrari.

Obviously though as the time progress this became a less and less convincing argument. NSX is no doubt a capable car, but for the price it went well out of where it is supposed to be. As the new NSX-R shows, there are still some trick in the old horse, but all in all it needs a replacement....

I'd say its in the same shoe as Esprit....

Consider when NSX was designed, it could give the same perios 348 a run for its money, and it had the Japanese reliability on its side, something can't really be said for any Ferrari(other than their modern V10 F1 car, which ironically carries a engine that was designed by former Honda engineer....). As it started, it started well as a bargain alternative for a Ferrari.

Obviously though as the time progress this became a less and less convincing argument. NSX is no doubt a capable car, but for the price it went well out of where it is supposed to be. As the new NSX-R shows, there are still some trick in the old horse, but all in all it needs a replacement....

I'd say its in the same shoe as Esprit....
Don't disgrace the Lotus that way.

Lotus has better performance, is more unique, more exotic and has much more appeal (IMO) then the NSX.

It is also rediculously costly and unreliable.....and also badly in need of replacement....

It is also rediculously costly and unreliable.....and also badly in need of replacement....
Not as unreliable as everyone thinks, all the owners I know absolutely love their cars..

Well, they either need to just stop making the car or stuff a V8 under the hood to up the performance. Why spend all that money trying to squeeze a couple extra ponies under the hood and not go with a torquey V8 engine?

Not as unreliable as everyone thinks, all the owners I know absolutely love their cars..
Just like all the NSX owner absolutely love their car, and think there is little wrong with it......I mean NSX was praised by Gordon Murray and was set as a benchmark for usability in a supercar when he set out to do McLaren F1.....

Cheater came after me in IM after this post and he asked why the 360 is worth the money. If you have to ask, it's not.

If you've ever seen the car in person you know why its worth the 150k+/- price tag. For one, its rare. Two, great performance. Three, great sound. Four, good quality interior/cabin. Five, its a Ferrari.

Well, the NSX is rare, has devastating amounts of grip, exotic but classily understated looks, ultra-reliablility and is still 70k cheaper than the 360. The 360's cockpit already looks dated and the quality is not that great, the performance is trounced upon by cars far cheaper (your argument against the NSX) and the "it's a ferrari" argument only works for your sleezy hedge-fund manager ferrari club friends.

Disgrace the Lotus? The NSX is a far better car in practically everyway, except it doesn't look as exotic, which seems to be your real main concern when it comes to car. You're too shallow.

ps-shut your futile facial, tom.

Car magazine or EVO rated the NSX-R as the best car of 2002 (or 2003?) That's pretty freaking cool...

The engineering behind the NSX is still marvellous (full aluminium monocoque, sweet differential, still a way cool engine, low weight), and in the sense of it being handbuilt, hand-finished and one of the most labour-intensive cars to produce today it's definitely exotic.

If you're familiar with automotive engineering, you really shouldn't have to ask why the NSX commands its' price tag. And, I mean, really... the Modena's faster, but only by a few tenths... doesn't it cost twice as much too?

Don't disgrace the Lotus that way? LOL... don't disgrace one of the best-engineered cars in production today. The Lotus isn't that fast, it certainly isn't that easy to drive, it's definitely archaic (doesn't it still have an open differential) and at this point is selling on its' badge alone...

LOL@ kenny getting owned by everyone.

The nsx is a great all around car but there is no point in buying one new. You can get a used 97-98 in the 50s and they will drive as good as new.

Tom, for the love of this board, shut your redneck face for once about those torquey V8 you HAVE to post about every single ****ing post you make.

Obviously you don't have the brain capacity to comprehend that not everybody want's a V8, or that a V8 is a solution for every concept.
So shove it and find something else to post about....high insurance rates or something :o

LMAO@misinformed kenny

Topic is a joke... And it aint' hard to pull out a bag of faults with any car.

Anyway I like the NSX and fine it appealing... More so than a 360M... Though to compare the two would be suicide.

But would anyone spend the MSRP for a new NSX?

Not I!

But would anyone spend the MSRP for a new NSX?

No, but that's more just because I'm more interested in used and older cars. An Esprit would be the last car on God's green earth I'd pay MSRP for, and recent Ferrari models wouldn't be far behind...

But would anyone spend the MSRP for a new NSX?

If you prefer the 2003 to 97+ cars, warranty & service, because it's new etc.

Why buy a brand new any car when you can buy one that's already taken a depreciation hit while still basically new?

I wouldn't buy an nsx or esprit new because once you sign the papers you lose 25 grand on the spot. Used is the way to go, especially for a reliable car like the nsx. The Lotus also depreciates faster than any other car on the planet. Most people would buy them used.

The Lotus also depreciates faster than any other car on the planet. Most people would buy them used.


Correction, a Bentley or RR depreciates faster than any other car on the planet.. :)

No one who spends over $100,000 on a car does so as a cost-conscious decision. If the NSX does it for you emotionally, then why not get one?

I can't see any greater technical justification for getting an Esprit over and NSX, given that both are still fairly expensive and are outperformed by newer, cheaper cars. In this sense, at least the NSX is more practical and more reliable. However, some people (like I) will still go for the Esprit instead.

Owning both an Esprit and an NSX, the Esprit outhandles, outperforms, and IMO outlooks not only the NSX but most cars out there. 0-60 in 4.4 0-100 in 9.5 sec 1/4 at 12.8 and those are the times they got in 97 with old clutch set up and old ECU. Tested in England the sport350 which is very similar to todays esprit did 0-60 4.4 sec 0-100 9.3 sec and the 1/4 in 12.8 in the POURING RAIN. No NSX did that stock and none will if they keep that puny 6 in there. Biggest gripe of all NSX owners-wish it had more BALLS. Me personally I like the NSX but just can't jstify speending close to 10 grand to make it go faster with a supercharger. Maybe if I find a used one I will buy one and install it. They NEED more power and that's why there is a dropoff in sales. This isn't 10 years ago. They are building m5, amg 55 nowadays that blow the doors off most cars not to mention subarus and evos and dodge srt4. NSX and Ferrari need to get with the program

Owning both an Esprit and an NSX, the Esprit outhandles, outperforms, and IMO outlooks not only the NSX but most cars out there. 0-60 in 4.4 0-100 in 9.5 sec 1/4 at 12.8 and those are the times they got in 97 with old clutch set up and old ECU. Tested in England the sport350 which is very similar to todays esprit did 0-60 4.4 sec 0-100 9.3 sec and the 1/4 in 12.8 in the POURING RAIN. No NSX did that stock and none will if they keep that puny 6 in there. Biggest gripe of all NSX owners-wish it had more BALLS. Me personally I like the NSX but just can't jstify speending close to 10 grand to make it go faster with a supercharger. Maybe if I find a used one I will buy one and install it. They NEED more power and that's why there is a dropoff in sales. This isn't 10 years ago. They are building m5, amg 55 nowadays that blow the doors off most cars not to mention subarus and evos and dodge srt4. NSX and Ferrari need to get with the program
How is the NSX by the way? How many miles do you have on it now?