NSX vs 348

[Agent]

See, I beg to differ on that. They're just as exotic. I've seen more ferrari's actually than NSXs...your average Joe doesn't know what an NSX is really and therefore his own mind wonders. If you know your stuff, you respect both cars.

I agree. I was on the hunt for a Ferrari for several months and my NSX is being delivered on Monday. 99% of the people I talked to about my new car didn't have a clue what it was. But when they see it, their just going think it's an awesome car that they wish they had. And admit it, that is a big part of why people like us constantly discuss and spend lots of money on these "exotic cars".

 

[Roadrunner]

Congrads on the new aquisition...
But actually,I just got the car for my driving pleasure! ;>
Hope you enjoy!!!

 

[shiri]

there are some contradictioons here, you need to make up your mind on what the car is going to be used for...

But looking at the list of the cars you have, keep the GTR for everyday use and pose in the 348 at the weekend?!

Weekend car. Sorry for the confusion, any contradictions were not intended.

I would take the NSX if I didn't have the Z, but I've been a Fairlady fan for a long long time. Sorry for wasting everybody's time. I was able to depict a clearer picture of comparing the 2 cars during the course of this thread, which helped a lot.

Thanks again.

 

[shiri]

Let me say that I had no intention of trying to make the NSX look bad. One of the best thing about it is that it is an NA, I am a fan of NA cars.

But, just to give you an indication of how it stack up to my current cars :

vs GTR - GTR seats 4-5 people quite comfortably. AWD means that you will have no problems driving in the wet or snow. And of course the TT engine, which is king in Japan with a massive market for upgrades. Fuel economy is OK until you upgrade it. Looks like a shopping trolley though, not really sleek looking like the NSX. A little expensive, but a great family car.

vs 300zx - The Z also seats 4 people, but not as comfortably. Better look than the GTR, IMO a little better than the NSX. Engine is fairly strong, People talk alot about the Supra, but never realised that the Z had been doing this highway run years before the Supra came out. Its extremely cheap to buy and fairly cheap to upgrade and maintain. Fuel economy is not great, but it is an easy supercar to afford that's why I still have it. Furthermore, it will go to my dad, who prefers to have some space in the car.

My other cars aren't worth mentioning as they are pretty embarrassing

 

[Roadrunner]

The other cars are always worth mentioning! We all have roots
to a cheaper car or still own beaters so we can go to a movie theater and not sweat bullets worring about the car.
I passed on the later Z due to weight. I did own a 280Z years ago but there is no comparison with the NSX.
The 300Z was too expensive so I bought a Stealth in 93 and
traded it on the NSX in 2000.
Once I drove the NSX it was all over for my bank account.

 

[NSXLuvr]

Re: nsx or no ferrari but a 360 modena?

If you can afford the 360 then you wouldnt look to the nsx not even for a second.

lets put this in perspective. When the NSX was launched in 1991, it was superior to the 328/348 from a performance/balance/handling/reliability/ergonomics standpoint. Ferrari realized that it needed to improve its product line. They built the F355- most people think is better than the nsx in most performance categories, but more expensive, less reliable.

They replaced the F355 with the F360 in 1999. If you look at the specs of the 360- aluminum body, similar length, width as the nsx, you realize it took ferrari almost 8 years to build a copy of a nsx. Ofcourse, its still carries the ferrari tradition of unreliability, and ridiculous maintenance costs.

No thanks, i'll keep my nsx.

as for shiri, go with the 348. seems like thats what u really want.

 

[brahtw8]

I remember a few things about the NSX v. 348 when both cars were new.

Car and Driver did a supercar comparison in 1990. If I recall correctly, the order (last to first) was Lotus Esprit Turbo, 348, Corvette, 911 C4 and NSX. (I am sure about the NSX being first and the C4 second).

I also recall that the 348 was described as absolutely horrible to drive at speed, and that one of the magazines (R&T or C&D) said that they almost aborted their top speed run with the 348, for the first time in magazine history, because of the poor stablity of the car over 100 or 120 mph.

The market apparently agrees, as 348 prices have dropped so low that they are at or in some cases below the price of a nice 328, which IMHO is a much better looking car.

Another Ferrari that has dropped like a rock is the Testarossa. They have now gone to the low $60k range, with some being sold in the upper $50k range.

If I had to have a modern prancing horse and couldn't spend more than $60k, I would buy a 328 or save up for a 355. I would not buy a Ferrari unless I could afford a 360 Modena, and even then I would probably pass for reasons of personal taste.

YMMV.

 

[shiri]

The other cars are always worth mentioning! We all have roots
to a cheaper car or still own beaters so we can go to a movie theater and not sweat bullets worring about the car.
I passed on the later Z due to weight. I did own a 280Z years ago but there is no comparison with the NSX.
The 300Z was too expensive so I bought a Stealth in 93 and
traded it on the NSX in 2000.
Once I drove the NSX it was all over for my bank account.

If Nissan never made a 2+2 for the Z, then I would definitely have gotten the NSX no question. Its simply the best japanese NA sports car.

The Z is a great beater car, that's all I can say about it!

 

[PHOEN$X]

If Nissan never made a 2+2 for the Z, then I would definitely have gotten the NSX no question. Its simply the best japanese NA sports car.

In your opinion, of course. There are many of us who beg to differ.

 

[shiri]

I remember a few things about the NSX v. 348 when both cars were new.

Car and Driver did a supercar comparison in 1990. If I recall correctly, the order (last to first) was Lotus Esprit Turbo, 348, Corvette, 911 C4 and NSX. (I am sure about the NSX being first and the C4 second).

I also recall that the 348 was described as absolutely horrible to drive at speed, and that one of the magazines (R&T or C&D) said that they almost aborted their top speed run with the 348, for the first time in magazine history, because of the poor stablity of the car over 100 or 120 mph.

The market apparently agrees, as 348 prices have dropped so low that they are at or in some cases below the price of a nice 328, which IMHO is a much better looking car.

Another Ferrari that has dropeed like a rock is the Testarossa. They have now gone to the low $60k range, with some being sold in the upper $50k range.

If I had to have a modern prancing horse and couldn't spend more than $60k, I would buy a 328 or save up for a 355. I would not buy a Ferrari unless I could afford a 360 Modena, and even then I would probably pass for reasons of personal taste.

YMMV.

I have to say that it is because of this reason, "drop in prices for Ferraris", that had motivated me in buying a supercar. You only have 1 chance in life to drive/own one. I'm taking the chance to buy one and maintain it for as long as I can afford to. Also, I love the idea of rebuilding a classic to the best possible condition (in performance and maintenance).

 

[NetViper]

I'm taking the chance to buy one and maintain it for as long as I can afford to.

Not exactly the best route to take IMO.

 

[RyRy210]

I have to say that it is because of this reason, "drop in prices for Ferraris", that had motivated me in buying a supercar.

348 a Supercar? You have some pretty low standards.

It just so happens that Road and Track did a comparison test between a '91 NSX and a '91 Ferrari 348, and the NSX beat it in every performance category except in Lateral accel (.90g vs .91g, hardly anything noticeable. The NSX had better braking, better acceleration (0-60, 1/4 mile), salom, etc. They also said that the NSX was the better car. If an NA1 NSX can be better than the 348, the NA2 will annihilate it.

This magazine is no longer in print but the entire article can be found on page 32 in this book:

This book is really good. It is a compilation of articles from different car magazines across the globe on the NSX.

It is a magazine's job to be unbiased in their comparison/reviews of cars, and I think they did a good job on this article.

If Nissan never made a 2+2 for the Z, then I would definitely have gotten the NSX no question. Its simply the best japanese NA sports car.

The Z is a great beater car, that's all I can say about it!

My neighbor had a 2+2, so did my friend, and both will disagree with your statement. Actually, I think every single automotive publication/media will disagree. I personally have driven it and all I can say is that it wasn't very good. Sometimes I wonder why you started this thread as it seems that you have already made up your mind before you even started this thread.

 

[brahtw8]

If Nissan never made a 2+2 for the Z, then I would definitely have gotten the NSX no question. Its simply the best japanese NA sports car. ]

I read this statement as saying that the NSX is the best japanese NA sports car, not that the Z is the best, as others have interpreted it. It does not make sense any other way. If shiri really thought the Z was the best, he would have purchased one over an NSX, even if the Z did not have the 2 + 2. The 2 + 2 was what convinced him to buy the Z over the superior 2-seater NSX.

I don't think many people believe a stock NA 300 ZX is superior to a stock NSX. I even think the Z forum would agree.

The Z is a great beater car, that's all I can say about it!

The Z is a fantastic value in the used sports car market. Well kept, early 90s twin-turbos are going for $10-12k all day. Indeed, I recommend them to those looking for a sports car in that price range.

 

[shiri]

I read this statement as saying that the NSX is the best japanese NA sports car, not that the Z is the best, as others have interpreted it. It does not make sense any other way. If shiri really thought the Z was the best, he would have purchased one over an NSX, even if the Z did not have the 2 + 2. The 2 + 2 was what convinced him to buy the Z over the superior 2-seater NSX.

I don't think many people believe a stock NA 300 ZX is superior to a stock NSX. I even think the Z forum would agree.



The Z is a fantastic value in the used sports car market. Well kept, early 90s twin-turbos are going for $10-12k all day. Indeed, I recommend them to those looking for a sports car in that price range.

Thanks, you've read my post correctly!

 

[shiri]

348 a Supercar? You have some pretty low standards.

It just so happens that Road and Track did a comparison test between a '91 NSX and a '91 Ferrari 348, and the NSX beat it in every performance category except in Lateral accel (.90g vs .91g, hardly anything noticeable. The NSX had better braking, better acceleration (0-60, 1/4 mile), salom, etc. They also said that the NSX was the better car. If an NA1 NSX can be better than the 348, the NA2 will annihilate it.

This magazine is no longer in print but the entire article can be found on page 32 in this book:

This book is really good. It is a compilation of articles from different car magazines across the globe on the NSX.

It is a magazine's job to be unbiased in their comparison/reviews of cars, and I think they did a good job on this article.



My neighbor had a 2+2, so did my friend, and both will disagree with your statement. Actually, I think every single automotive publication/media will disagree. I personally have driven it and all I can say is that it wasn't very good. Sometimes I wonder why you started this thread as it seems that you have already made up your mind before you even started this thread.

OK, I won't argue with you.

 

[PHOEN$X]

I read this statement as saying that the NSX is the best japanese NA sports car, not that the Z is the best, as others have interpreted it.

Whoops, my bad.

 

[RyRy210]

Thanks, you've read my post correctly!

My apologies too!

 

[8000RPM]

Re: Re: nsx or no ferrari but a 360 modena?

Plenty of well-known people with high net worths such as Larry Ellison (Oracle) or Phil Knight (Nike) or Steve Wozniak (Apple) buy, drive and publically recommend NSXs.

In fact, both Ellison and Wozniak own not just one NSX, but multiple.

I believe Ellison even said during an interview that "everyone should own an NSX before they die..."

Ellison's affection for the NSX was so well known that one of his former female employees once asked him to buy her an NSX as a way of flirting with him.

 

[scottjua]

Re: nsx or no ferrari but a 360 modena?

but a ferrari is a ferrari

I Beg to differ. The 348 and the early Testarossa were some of the worst driver's cars I've ever driven. The Ferrari name and cache can only go so far. Not every marque is up to building great cars year after year, and if Luca can admit that the 348 was an abomination...

Think of it like Chrysler's new schpiel..."WE know we sucked once..." etc etc... Ferrari Figured out fast that it couldn't go on producing what it was, so the NSX was it's wake up call. I think that's an easy one to see. I say if you MUST have the badge...just be aware of what you get into. Don't do it for the name... you're gonna drive it right? Make sure you like how it drives.

Or maybe...this is all futile...I think he knows what he wants to do.