has any one test drive all of them?

[nautica918]

has anyone test drive 91-94 with 270HP, 95-96 with 270HP but add about 100lb because of targa, 97-01 with 290 HP and only increased less than 10lb compare to 95-96. than does it mean 95-96 is the slowest compare to them all?

 

[nsxtasy]

The '95-96 NSX-T is indeed the slowest of the various configurations of stock NSX with manual transmissions; the versions with the automatic are even slower. But they are all still pretty fast, and any NSX may be perfectly enjoyable to its owner.

 

[MRFreeze]

I prefer to use the term "least fast" when comparing the 95-96 targas to the other year NSXs. When you say slowest, although true, it makes the impression that it is a sub par performer. That is far from true. It's still a fast car just not quite as fast as the other years. Also, an experienced driver in a 95T would still be much faster than me around the track were I in a 97+, Zinardi, or even Type R as I am new to HPDE's.

 

[EIFFEL]

I have driven them all when I used to work at the Acura dealership, the 97> feels/are faster than the others, but the 91-96 all feels about the same. actual test figures shows otherwise. all are great fun, any one is a great car to own, regardless of year.

 

[Meeyatch1]

I have driven them all as well. Actually...I have probably driven about 20-30 NSX's in my time with a drivers license.