-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
NSX a supercar?
- Thread starter NSX78__
- Start date
I would say this is correct.
The 348 & F355 were the "entry" model Ferraris. The F40 or F50 were the Ferrari "super cars" at that time.
Well, take a read on this article, nice mention of the NSX (towards the end of the article), and the Ford GT ( 
)
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2014/08/05/as-market-expands-classic-car-values-rev-higher/
)http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2014/08/05/as-market-expands-classic-car-values-rev-higher/
- Joined
- 1 August 2014
- Messages
- 25
No where did I ever say 61k is chump change. It was in fact a lot of money back in 1991. In all honesty, I don't understand why you're getting so upset about someone elses opinion. Do I think the NSX was ever a super car? No. I never asked you to agree with me. Andt that doesn't mean it's not one hell of a car regardless, and a car to still look up to, in terms of braking, handling and chassis.
OMG I've only been on prime for 5 days! So? You've been around for 12 years. So?
And no, I don't have an NSX. Hence the name. I am however looking for the right one, and yes, I do have the funds available. Because I didn't buy one in 1991 makes me what?
PS- I'm pretty sure I saw you rolling around Qualicum Beach last summer, unless someone else has a black NA1 in the area. Nice car.
I don't know how to do that popcorn-eating emoji but i believe it could be appropriate here.
(insert wink and smile emojis here)
(insert wink and smile emojis here)
Chill. What was stated here is these kind of topics tend to pop up with a nice regularity and always from newcomers who havent got the car.
What i infer (and i concur) is when you have it you dont need to ask this kind of question, since the answer comes naturally once you are behind the wheel.
- Joined
- 1 August 2014
- Messages
- 25
No, fair enough. I've been lurking Prime for some time now. The reason I hadn't bought an NSX in the past was more to do with age, than anything. Now I'm in a position to move forward, however, I'm looking for the right one, and they don't come up everyday. I've had seat time behind the wheel of a NA2 '98 NSX about a dozen or so times now. I know what they are about and they truly do put a smile on my face- how could they not??
First let's look at your supposition that a supercar needs good numbers plus a high price to qualify in your mind to be a supercar.
When we are talking about money, there's three elements to consider, cost, price and value.
A Ferrari 348 back in 91 was priced at about $115K, the NSX at $61K.
Now let's consider cost.
Do you think the 348 cost $50K more to build than the NSX?
I don't know the real costs of a 348 vs. or an NSX but I doubt there was $50 K more in cost in the Ferrari.
Now let's look at value
Do you think there was $50K more in value in a 348 over an NSX?
The world has told us and keeps telling us the NSX had superior value.
So if the NSX had better performance numbers and offered better value why wasn't it priced the same or higher than a 348.
If Honda had priced it at or over a 348 then by your definition it would have been a supercar.
They didn't price it at 348 levels because no one would have bought it at that price.
The reasons are manifold but Honda knew they couldn't command the premium for the Ferrari marque that was built into the 348 price.
So they offered a much lower price to ensure the NSX had a successful launch.
So the 1991 NSX had superior performance and value to the Ferrari but was priced much lower.
In 1991 the NSX was universally seen as and labelled in the world media a supercar.
You should read the article by Gordon Murray on the NSX to gain an appreciation of the car from 1991 eyes.
However by your definition, as long as the NSX price remained below that of a Ferrari/Lamborghini/etc. no matter how much the NSX outperformed and out valued the competition, it was not a supercar.
Consider the new NSX.
If the new NSX has performance levels comparable to a 458 (or better) but is priced at 100K less you will say it's not a supercar.
That means price will make your determination of the supercar label, ignoring the essence of a performance car, its superior numbers, and ignoring the endearing consumer point, its value.
Do you really think that makes sense?
Let's finish this part on what the original Honda launch strategy means to you.
Offering superior performance and value at launch assured Honda of a successful launch.
However Honda USA was optimistic in the extreme and placed a sales forecast with Honda Japan for far more NSX's than could be sold after the initial flurry.
This resulted in unsold NSX's sitting on the docks in Long Beach and discounting an already discounted price to move the inventory.
A great benefit to the buyers for sure, but the element of exclusivity so essential to this market segment was lost, sales volumes began to fall, and Honda slowed and finally stopped development of future NSX models.
The benefactors of all this, are future buyers like yourself. You can purchase a mid-engined hand made car with tremendous engineering and reliability (high value) for a faction of the price of a similar car from another marque. It doesn't have a aura of a Ferrari/Lamborghini but it's a better value by far.
Now as far as me taking umbrage at some of your comments, you implied I had paid say $30 K over list for my car and so I had overpaid and shown bad judgment.
Insulting really from a newbie non-owner who won't answer questions nicely asked.
I'll assume you were 5-10 years old when the NSX came out so perhaps some additional homework with some of your statements might be appropriate.
I've been on Prime for 12 years and owned my NSX for 23. There are two black NSX's in Qualicum Beach.
Last edited:
I guess if we look at prices, let's assume a 1991 car sells for 2.5x now in 2014. So a top of the line $18,000 (1991) Mustang and top of the line $10,000 (1991) Civic are now $45,000 and $25,000 respectively. So an NSX would be in the $150,000 region while now the Ferrari 458 is in the $250,000+ region. Almost the same price differential as the NSX and 348 of their time. $150,000 still keeps most of the cheaper Porsches, and every other marque out of the picture. Can you buy a super car for +/- $150,000 today? Hell yes! Audi R8 V10, Porsche GT3 RS, Porsche Turbo, Aston Martin Vantage V10, Mercedes SLS, Maserati Gran Turism...
are all these "super" cars? My opinion, yes. are they all "exotic" cars? Hard to say a Porsche GT3 RS or Turbo is exotic, but it sure handles and has all the performance of a super car plus some. Then you have a different stratosphere with "Hyper" cars, the Porsche 918, McLaren P1, Bugatti Veyron, Carrera GT, etc. So yes, I think the NSX was released as a super car, time doesn't change that, all super cars from 25 years ago are now a lot slower than they seemed back then, the early versions of the countach had 6 second 0-60s, a Hyundai Sonata does that now.
are all these "super" cars? My opinion, yes. are they all "exotic" cars? Hard to say a Porsche GT3 RS or Turbo is exotic, but it sure handles and has all the performance of a super car plus some. Then you have a different stratosphere with "Hyper" cars, the Porsche 918, McLaren P1, Bugatti Veyron, Carrera GT, etc. So yes, I think the NSX was released as a super car, time doesn't change that, all super cars from 25 years ago are now a lot slower than they seemed back then, the early versions of the countach had 6 second 0-60s, a Hyundai Sonata does that now.
Last edited:
Well in my place of mind -- I drive my wife's former (not former wife) 97 CRV with 170 km most of the time - when I do drive my NSX ... well - it's my wannabe super car.
I get plenty of praises - talk to people who wouldn't talk to me in my CRV - I'll just pretend it's a super car - even if it's from the past.
I can't wait for the next drive - like most (if not all ...) owners think. Bunch of fun.
I get plenty of praises - talk to people who wouldn't talk to me in my CRV - I'll just pretend it's a super car - even if it's from the past.
I can't wait for the next drive - like most (if not all ...) owners think. Bunch of fun.
The recurring debate about the subjective definitions used to describe a supercar indicate there are flaws in the reasoning for them. Million dollar car, 200mph+, letc. I think too heavy a focus on performance characteristics drive a definition that's un-usable beyond a relatively narrow span of time.
I've always felt the definition of a "supercar" is a car that is designed by its manufacturer to expand the "definition" and perception of the automobile itself in groundbreaking ways. In that endeavor the manufacturer doesn't compromise those objectives based on profitability or marketability. A supercar isn't built solely to make money; by design its meant to be inherently special and manifest an expression of corporate excellence in every aspect of automobile design and manufacture. Its will always represent the absolute best a manufacturer can do without the constraints that normally affect the design of "ordinary" production cars. If successful a supercar will always stand out and above its contemporaries. Its virtues and significance will be appreciated long beyond its production life.
This defintion is applicable independent of when a car is manufactured or sold normalizing the performance and function inequalities that make the normal meaning difficult to apply to older but no less significant automobiles (like the NSX) .
So applying this definition: the F-40, Porsche 959 are clearly supercars as are the Veyron, Lexus LFA, Pagani Zonda, Mclaren MC12, VW Phaeton and probably the Tesla Model S as well.
Yes the NSX, at least the original 1991 model, also fits this definition.
Limiting the application of the term supercar by performance and price statistics alone is too restrictive to allow it to be useful as a category for the generations of automobiles its generally applied to. That is why I believe it remains so misused and controversial.
Last edited:
^^ What he said. It's all about no-compromise, game changing designs, more than pure numbers.
For instance what makes the Cobra a true supercar ? It was the game changer, not its modern evolutions (Viper..). The Porshe 959 was a technological marvel - the GT is too, but run-of-the-mill 911's while truly fast are not considered as such, because they bring nothing new. The LFA is also a pure muscle flexing exercise, a show piece, to demonstrate that Toyota engineers can still deliver (especially when you know how the project went internally..) and that is indeed a supercar.
The NSX was also a no compromise car in a way: the all aluminium construction, for instance, makes it truly exotic. The way it was designed by Honda with the help of their F1 drivers was not too common as well (i know that Ferrari, Toyota and others did too..). The F16 canopy, the incredible suspension design, or even the way they made it streetable without compromising its performance: that's not in the same category as "regular" production cars, yes even 911's or M3's that are probably faster. Apart from the aluminium construction the game changer was that Honda made a "streetable supercar", and that's how everyone in the media named it back in the 90's and that's how it's being remembered now.
For instance what makes the Cobra a true supercar ? It was the game changer, not its modern evolutions (Viper..). The Porshe 959 was a technological marvel - the GT is too, but run-of-the-mill 911's while truly fast are not considered as such, because they bring nothing new. The LFA is also a pure muscle flexing exercise, a show piece, to demonstrate that Toyota engineers can still deliver (especially when you know how the project went internally..) and that is indeed a supercar.
The NSX was also a no compromise car in a way: the all aluminium construction, for instance, makes it truly exotic. The way it was designed by Honda with the help of their F1 drivers was not too common as well (i know that Ferrari, Toyota and others did too..). The F16 canopy, the incredible suspension design, or even the way they made it streetable without compromising its performance: that's not in the same category as "regular" production cars, yes even 911's or M3's that are probably faster. Apart from the aluminium construction the game changer was that Honda made a "streetable supercar", and that's how everyone in the media named it back in the 90's and that's how it's being remembered now.
- Joined
- 1 August 2014
- Messages
- 25
JD- I will concede my original statement- you do bring up some very valid points. I by no means intended to sound rude, although RE-reading my original statements, I can see what you mean. I wouldn't call it bad judgement having to pay X dollars over MSRP- the demand for the car existed and like any dealership at any point in time, they were capitalizing on it. I more meant that it was a 61k car, regardless for what it was selling for. But like you said, the Ferrari being at 115k doesn't necessarily show the value for the price.
That being said, both Ferraris of the time and the NSX were hand built, but I think Honda had a much more efficient method of getting the car built. Now that you mention it, besides the name (oh my gosh, Ferrari!), I'm not sure where the 50k in price difference came from between the NSX and 328/348.
Rather than being ignorant and creating "enemies", I feel I should listen more, as I feel there is much I can pull from Prime.
Men seem to like it, but not women. They will look at a Porsche, but pay little attention to an NSX.
- Joined
- 1 August 2014
- Messages
- 25
That's funny, because I'm the opposite way around.
Although Porsches are nice cars, they do little for me. Maybe it's because there are so many of them around. The odd time I do see an NSX, regardless of year, I'm always mesmerized.
no my point was that you said NSX was not a supercar.
and I was wondering if entry level Ferraris are NOT supercars because they're NSX rival.
My comment was "So at the time of introduction the NSX was truly a supercar."
Not sure what point you are trying to make.
- Joined
- 24 May 2002
- Messages
- 1,431
Good thing no one has mentioned the automatic transmission NSX.
thats easy... yes
Lol, and after that let me know if it's a classic
Similar threads
