NSX beats C6 ??

[Gansan]

Here are some cars that are significantly faster under $100k (not all are direct competitors, but still faster):

1. M5
2. C6 Coupe
3. ZO6
4. Viper SRT-10
5. Mustang Cobra
6. SLK55
7. E55
8. 997 Carrera
9. 997 Carrera S
10. GT3

Why am I buying an E60 M5? To replace my current M5. I want the best sports sedan on the planet; and in my opinion, it's the new M5. Of course the new C6 ZO6 (I have one on order) will out accelerate the new M5, it should since it is a focused sports car, but it doesn't have enough seats to take my kids to the park.

All out acceleration is not my primary focus. I want a blend of power, handling, braking and quality. I thought the NSX was Honda's equivalent to the GT3 (only $15k cheaper). However, after driving a GT3 upon buying my NSX, I saw the light. The GT3 was superior to the NSX in all perfomance aspects; it's an amazing sports car for the money. I will probably replace the ZO6 with a 997 GT3 when introduced, but not before I have some fun trashing the ZO6.

I do not compare the NSX to any modern Ferraris. The NSX is no longer worthy of such comparisons. In the early 90s it provided the wakeup call, but Ferrari has since improved their products light years ahead of the NSX.

With that said, I still think the NSX is a wonderful car, but not for $89,765. The NSX is the only car that Honda produces that is not competitively priced and is at least $20,000 overpriced in my opinion. For $70,000, the NSX would be a good buy.

Cerberus, if you are comparing engineering prowess and general performance level, wouldn't a more apt comparison be the NSX-R (or S zero) vs. the GT3? After all, the GT3 is Porsche's track-oriented model in the 911 lineup (aside from factory race cars), and it would seem appropriate to compare it to Honda's track-oriented model.

If you are limiting the comparison to what you are able to obtain in the U.S., then we should also lament the marketers who have decided it's not worth bringing these models to this country, but not knock the NSX as a whole, just because the trim level we want is not available.

Note that I am not disagreeing with your general statement that the GT3 is a better performance car than the regular NSX. The GT3 would be my first choice for a Porsche as well.

 

[khappucino]

Pontiac Solstice, would it compete with the new Miata? I mean wow the Solstice has 2.4L engine!!! 0.4L bigger than the new Miata!!! OK sure, Miata will make approximately 160HP or so from 2.0L engine, and Solstice makes 177HP from 2.4L engine...and weighs almost 500lbs more. Yes, if you buy a solstice, you will get BIGGER engine and MORE weights.
But people say Solstice is bang for buck just because their MSRP is lower than the miata.
I would personally say the Miata is more bang for buck than the Solstice. Look how much money you pay and how much you get.

off topic but hehe screw the Solstice, the Saturn Sky looks way better, and by way better i mean at least it looks like the Speedster its inspired by =-), a Turbo Solistice wouldn't be too horrible :biggrin: kinda like a MR2 turbo w/o mid engine

 

[LJSB]

Which version of the M5?
I've driven a 2003 and it didn't give me that impression. I was not thrilled at all. Felt like a big heavy car. Fast for it's size but not very nimble at least to me.
A 997S does 0-60 in 4.8 that's significantly faster?
Your car should be doing that.

 

[Timpo]

off topic but hehe screw the Solstice, the Saturn Sky looks way better, and by way better i mean at least it looks like the Speedster its inspired by =-), a Turbo Solistice wouldn't be too horrible :biggrin: kinda like a MR2 turbo w/o mid engine

It doesn't matter. The sky is basically the same thing as Solstice. They both will weigh approx 500lbs more than the Miata.

Sure GM might bring Supercharged or Turbocharged Solstice or Sky, then Miata will bring the Turbo Mazdaspeed Miata.

What would you take? I would take the Mazdaspeed Miata. Miata has over 15 years of proven reputation as a light-weight roadster.

 

[qirex]

Well for starters...you cant buy an NSX R/s/zero whatever in the states - whilst a GT3 is readily available. Another one for the list is the 40th ann 996. 345HP and tons of options for $90k. Another one is a plain old 996 C2. with 320HP. What many ppl (me included) fail to understand about 911s is the HUGE traction advantage that the RR setup gives with acceleration. I tooled around with my 91 NSX against my buds 996 C2, and was shocked at how decisively of a drubbing i received. So maybe the 3.2 290HP would make a big diff? prolly not. For some weird reason german horses seem stronger than japanese ones (germans underrate engines).

Either way, anybody who thinks an nsx (w/o FI) will threaten a C6 vette in any way (except style and quailty) is smoking the bad crack!

 

[LJSB]

Never had a problem keeping up or pulling a little on a 996 c2 or c4. Speed and gear choice does make a difference and so much depends on the driver's skills (of course not anyone here, we're all great! :biggrin: ) and vehicle condition. Not all older NSX's are equal.

 

[khappucino]

It doesn't matter. The sky is basically the same thing as Solstice. They both will weigh approx 500lbs more than the Miata.

Sure GM might bring Supercharged or Turbocharged Solstice or Sky, then Miata will bring the Turbo Mazdaspeed Miata.

What would you take? I would take the Mazdaspeed Miata. Miata has over 15 years of proven reputation as a light-weight roadster.

well not meaning to be too serious there, but the solstice is just alot uglier than the sky, IMHO

 

[khappucino]

Well for starters...you cant buy an NSX R/s/zero whatever in the states - whilst a GT3 is readily available. Another one for the list is the 40th ann 996. 345HP and tons of options for $90k. Another one is a plain old 996 C2. with 320HP. What many ppl (me included) fail to understand about 911s is the HUGE traction advantage that the RR setup gives with acceleration. I tooled around with my 91 NSX against my buds 996 C2, and was shocked at how decisively of a drubbing i received. So maybe the 3.2 290HP would make a big diff? prolly not. For some weird reason german horses seem stronger than japanese ones (germans underrate engines).

Either way, anybody who thinks an nsx (w/o FI) will threaten a C6 vette in any way (except style and quailty) is smoking the bad crack!

isnt the weight transfer for MR cars similar to RR since the engine is basically over the rear axle anyhow? or is the RR just that much better of a weight transfer

 

[jlindy]

Which version of the M5?
I've driven a 2003 and it didn't give me that impression. I was not thrilled at all. Felt like a big heavy car. Fast for it's size but not very nimble at least to me.
A 997S does 0-60 in 4.8 that's significantly faster?
Your car should be doing that.

Not as nimble as the NSX but very nimble for it's size. Both are fun to drive, but in a different way, but trust me the M5 E39 that you are referring to is a lot faster than the 3.0 NSX I had. The 3.2 is about the same, but I have never had the opportunity to drive or ride in one of those. :frown:

Will an NSX beat a C6? Not without a lot of help. Will it beat a Z06? Never, unless you take a trip to FactorX at Vegas first. Does any of this affect our decision on what to drive? Not me.

 

[Timpo]

Will an NSX beat a C6?

NSX can do Nurburgring in 7:56...what about the C6?

 

[RPM217]

Here are some cars that are significantly faster under $100k (not all are direct competitors, but still faster):

1. M5
2. C6 Coupe
3. ZO6
4. Viper SRT-10
5. Mustang Cobra
6. SLK55
7. E55
8. 997 Carrera
9. 997 Carrera S
10. GT3

Why am I buying an E60 M5? To replace my current M5. I want the best sports sedan on the planet; and in my opinion, it's the new M5. Of course the new C6 ZO6 (I have one on order) will out accelerate the new M5, it should since it is a focused sports car, but it doesn't have enough seats to take my kids to the park.

All out acceleration is not my primary focus. I want a blend of power, handling, braking and quality. I thought the NSX was Honda's equivalent to the GT3 (only $15k cheaper). However, after driving a GT3 upon buying my NSX, I saw the light. The GT3 was superior to the NSX in all perfomance aspects; it's an amazing sports car for the money. I will probably replace the ZO6 with a 997 GT3 when introduced, but not before I have some fun trashing the ZO6.

I do not compare the NSX to any modern Ferraris. The NSX is no longer worthy of such comparisons. In the early 90s it provided the wakeup call, but Ferrari has since improved their products light years ahead of the NSX.

With that said, I still think the NSX is a wonderful car, but not for $89,765. The NSX is the only car that Honda produces that is not competitively priced and is at least $20,000 overpriced in my opinion. For $70,000, the NSX would be a good buy.

I don't know of many people who have bought a "new NSX" and paid list recently. When I bought my new 02 in Feb of 03, my price was 74m, and for that, I don't think that there was anything that could compare in a way that would convince me to spend my $$$ elsewhere, and I also tried the Maserati Spyder (a car left out of all posts) for a number of reasons, and at 20,000 more than the NSX, it couldn't hold a candle (except in exhaust sound)!! JMHO :biggrin:

 

[LJSB]

trust me the M5 E39 that you are referring to is a lot faster than the 3.0 NSX I had. ... Does any of this affect our decision on what to drive? Not me.

Well I'm surprised. Some cars feel faster because the power comes on so early and the NSX comes on late when others are reaching the top.You've had both and certainly know what you feel and that's cool.
I trust you but the 3000 mile M5 I drove was not a lot faster than my 96, if it was as fast. The arm chair guys will say no the 95-96 was the slowest but
I've driven more than a few NSX's and they are different from car to car (and driver to driver?) and the spread on the NSX magazine numbers seem to support that. It difficult to launch for a drag and on a roll pick the wrong gear and oops! Launch well and keep the revs up and it will rock.

For me it's not one thing but the sum of them all on the NSX.
The sound, the drivers view, the seats(cockpit in general), the shifter, trunk,
reliability and yes the speed are what I love.

Driving this car out in the country on roads where I can keep it 3500 plus on the tach and listen to it sing is so much fun. The cars on the numbered lists above, that I've driven, don't do that for me.

The punch of the heavy torque cars is great but is gone for me after a few hits.
If I wanted a street light racer I'd build one or start with a older Vette like a 71' LT1 Vette not a Viper or ZO6. That's just me.

I have a friend down the street that has a nice carriage house filled with nice performance cars. He has a newer M3 and acknowledges how fast the car is and it tremendous road capability but finds it not as fun to drive as his older "slower" cars. We agree a lot.
I like feeling connected to a car and seeing it work in my head as I drive. Some of the cars mentioned in this thread may indeed be faster but not as satisfying for me. The NSX for me is like the sports cars that I loved growing up, MG's, Jags. Alfa,Triumph, Ferrari etc. without the problems or disappointment of it not being ready to go when I am.
I loved my MG back in the sixties and though I went on to the muscle cars for a while, they never had the same feel that kept me smiling drive after drive. That's just me and to each his own.

Your last sentence is right on with me, I couldn't agree more.

 

[jlindy]

Well I'm surprised. Some cars feel faster because the power comes on so early and the NSX comes on late when others are reaching the top.You've had both and certainly know what you feel and that's cool.
I trust you but the 3000 mile M5 I drove was not a lot faster than my 96, if it was as fast. The arm chair guys will say no the 95-96 was the slowest but
I've driven more than a few NSX's and they are different from car to car (and driver to driver?) and the spread on the NSX magazine numbers seem to support that. It difficult to launch for a drag and on a roll pick the wrong gear and oops! Launch well and keep the revs up and it will rock.

For me it's not one thing but the sum of them all on the NSX.
The sound, the drivers view, the seats(cockpit in general), the shifter, trunk,
reliability and yes the speed are what I love.

Driving this car out in the country on roads where I can keep it 3500 plus on the tach and listen to it sing is so much fun. The cars on the numbered lists above, that I've driven, don't do that for me.

The punch of the heavy torque cars is great but is gone for me after a few hits.
If I wanted a street light racer I'd build one or start with a older Vette like a 71' LT1 Vette not a Viper or ZO6. That's just me.

I have a friend down the street that has a nice carriage house filled with nice performance cars. He has a newer M3 and acknowledges how fast the car is and it tremendous road capability but finds it not as fun to drive as his older "slower" cars. We agree a lot.
I like feeling connected to a car and seeing it work in my head as I drive. Some of the cars mentioned in this thread may indeed be faster but not as satisfying for me. The NSX for me is like the sports cars that I loved growing up, MG's, Jags. Alfa,Triumph, Ferrari etc. without the problems or disappointment of it not being ready to go when I am.
I loved my MG back in the sixties and though I went on to the muscle cars for a while, they never had the same feel that kept me smiling drive after drive. That's just me and to each his own.

Your last sentence is right on with me, I couldn't agree more.

Don't get me wrong, I loved my NSX and don't know if there is another car that I would love as much especially with the feeling of being so connected to the road. The M3 is much closer to that feel than the M5, but I wanted a powerful V8 vs. inline 6 and needed four doors. I guess I just needed a change. I hope to get a 993 turbo someday, but generally I want try something different every few years to see what else is out there. :smile:

 

[LJSB]

I want try something different every few years to see what else is out there. :smile:

Yep. I get that. :wink:

 

[nsxrock]

Yep leaf springs. But the C6 is better at the limit then an NSX.

I run 2 seconds faster at Moroso in my C6 than my NSX.

The power could have somting to do with it though.

I run 12.5 at 111 bone stock in my Auto C6. My best time in my 2000 NSX was 12.9 at 108.

 

[khappucino]

Yep leaf springs. But the C6 is better at the limit then an NSX.

I run 2 seconds faster at Moroso in my C6 than my NSX.

The power could have somting to do with it though.

I run 12.5 at 111 bone stock in my Auto C6. My best time in my 2000 NSX was 12.9 at 108.

is that a 2000 coupe? thats pretty good driving there :biggrin: :biggrin:

 

[nsxrock]

It was a T. Sea level in the winter. I ripped a 1.9 60 foot.

 

[NSX-Racer]

NSX can do Nurburgring in 7:56...what about the C6?

That was the NSX-R (probably with some "tuning") from Honda Japan - the NSX-R tested by "sport auto" and the stock 3.2 liter NSX were slower - lap times are already posted on Prime.

Astonishing new fact: "sport auto" just lapped the C 6 on Hockenheim short course with 1,14.8 which is only a tad bit slower than the NSX-R and way faster than the stock NSX (1,18.4) back in '97.

 

[CerberusM5]

That was the NSX-R (probably with some "tuning") from Honda Japan - the NSX-R tested by "sport auto" and the stock 3.2 liter NSX were slower - lap times are already posted on Prime.

Astonishing new fact: "sport auto" just lapped the C 6 on Hockenheim short course with 1,14.8 which is only a tad bit slower than the NSX-R and way faster than the stock NSX (1,18.4) back in '97.

From what I have read online, the generally accepted "Ring time" for a stock NSX-R was 8:09. The time for the standard 3.2 NSX was 8:38. However, I also saw an 8:34 time for a car described with 276 ps.

I was surprised to see the SL55 record an 8:12. The standard GT3 accomplished the same feat in 7:54.

Cerberus, if you are comparing engineering prowess and general performance level, wouldn't a more apt comparison be the NSX-R (or S zero) vs. the GT3? After all, the GT3 is Porsche's track-oriented model in the 911 lineup (aside from factory race cars), and it would seem appropriate to compare it to Honda's track-oriented model.

If you are limiting the comparison to what you are able to obtain in the U.S., then we should also lament the marketers who have decided it's not worth bringing these models to this country, but not knock the NSX as a whole, just because the trim level we want is not available.

Note that I am not disagreeing with your general statement that the GT3 is a better performance car than the regular NSX. The GT3 would be my first choice for a Porsche as well.

I was assuming cars sold in the U.S. However, it would be great to buy such cars like the GT3 RS, M3 CSL and NSX-R. However, the GT3 RS would be the hands down winner out of the three in my opinion.

Which version of the M5?
I've driven a 2003 and it didn't give me that impression. I was not thrilled at all. Felt like a big heavy car. Fast for it's size but not very nimble at least to me.
A 997S does 0-60 in 4.8 that's significantly faster?
Your car should be doing that.

I meant the E60 M5. However, even the E39 M5 will slowly out accelerate the NSX, especially at higher speeds.

I have driven several 997 Carrera S cars and they are definitely faster than my car. Road and Track recorded a 3.9 second time, which has been questioned previously by forum members. However, I think most magazines have been getting low 4s. I feel pretty confident I could accomplish 4.8 in my car, especially with my factory wheels. It's after that point where I feel the other cars have the advantage.

Not as nimble as the NSX but very nimble for it's size. Both are fun to drive, but in a different way, but trust me the M5 E39 that you are referring to is a lot faster than the 3.0 NSX I had. The 3.2 is about the same, but I have never had the opportunity to drive or ride in one of those. :frown:

I love my e39 M5. I think it is an amazing sport sedan that does literally everything well. It becomes even better after you visit Steve Dinan a couple of times. There is nothing in its class with the same agility, power and refinement. The E55 is fast, but it feels absolutely lifeless in its handling and braking characteristics. The RS6 is close, but I don't prefer all wheel drive. I can't wait to get my new E60.

I don't know of many people who have bought a "new NSX" and paid list recently. When I bought my new 02 in Feb of 03, my price was 74m, and for that, I don't think that there was anything that could compare in a way that would convince me to spend my $$$ elsewhere, and I also tried the Maserati Spyder (a car left out of all posts) for a number of reasons, and at 20,000 more than the NSX, it couldn't hold a candle (except in exhaust sound)!! JMHO :biggrin:

I bought my 04' new about a year ago for $85k. I was originally looking for a GT3, but they were very difficult to find a year ago. Had the 997 Carrera S been available at that time, I probably would have opted for the 997S instead. I feel that car offers a lot more performance, better handling and is more refined than the NSX. The Carrera has come a long way since the NSX was introduced in 1990.

I have always wanted an NSX since they were introduced, but could not afford one back then. I guess my NSX expectations were much greater than the actual reality. I have been disappointed with a lot of aspects of the NSX, but also appreciate its many good qualities as well. However, if I had the chance to redo my purchase decision over again, I would not change it. I met a great friend through my NSX ownership and that in itself is worth all the frustrations I have experienced with my NSX.

 

[Timpo]

who cares.

NSX is better than Corvette.

LOL @ plastic interior
LOL @ cheap material
LOL @ GM
LOL @ leaf springs
LOL @ Corvette

Hahahaha wow SUPERB!!! Ferrari 360 Modena wannabe headlights!!! HUGE V8!!! with low HP/L and Torque/L ratio!!! Made by GM!!! and only from GM!!!

GM used to have this slogan... "Chevrolet -The Heartbeat of America is Winning-" hmm....oookkaayyy?????

GM suck, they don't know what they're doing. They ask Japanese companies for help, such as asking them to raise the price of Japanese cars. Then they failed...Wow good job GM!!!

I would never spend my hard earned money into GM cars. They're such rip off considering the built quality and re-sale value.

 

[NSX-Tuner]

who cares.

NSX is better than Corvette.

LOL @ plastic interior
LOL @ cheap material
LOL @ GM
LOL @ leaf springs
LOL @ Corvette

Hahahaha wow SUPERB!!! Ferrari 360 Modena wannabe headlights!!! HUGE V8!!! with low HP/L and Torque/L ratio!!! Made by GM!!! and only from GM!!!

GM used to have this slogan... "Chevrolet -The Heartbeat of America is Winning-" hmm....oookkaayyy?????

GM suck, they don't know what they're doing. They ask Japanese companies for help, such as asking them to raise the price of Japanese cars. Then they failed...Wow good job GM!!!

I would never spend my hard earned money into GM cars. They're such rip off considering the built quality and re-sale value.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AGREE!!!

 

[RPM217]

From what I have read online, the generally accepted "Ring time" for a stock NSX-R was 8:09. The time for the standard 3.2 NSX was 8:38. However, I also saw an 8:34 time for a car described with 276 ps.

I was surprised to see the SL55 record an 8:12. The standard GT3 accomplished the same feat in 7:54.



I was assuming cars sold in the U.S. However, it would be great to buy such cars like the GT3 RS, M3 CSL and NSX-R. However, the GT3 RS would be the hands down winner out of the three in my opinion.



I meant the E60 M5. However, even the E39 M5 will slowly out accelerate the NSX, especially at higher speeds.

I have driven several 997 Carrera S cars and they are definitely faster than my car. Road and Track recorded a 3.9 second time, which has been questioned previously by forum members. However, I think most magazines have been getting low 4s. I feel pretty confident I could accomplish 4.8 in my car, especially with my factory wheels. It's after that point where I feel the other cars have the advantage.



I love my e39 M5. I think it is an amazing sport sedan that does literally everything well. It becomes even better after you visit Steve Dinan a couple of times. There is nothing in its class with the same agility, power and refinement. The E55 is fast, but it feels absolutely lifeless in its handling and braking characteristics. The RS6 is close, but I don't prefer all wheel drive. I can't wait to get my new E60.



I bought my 04' new about a year ago for $85k. I was originally looking for a GT3, but they were very difficult to find a year ago. Had the 997 Carrera S been available at that time, I probably would have opted for the 997S instead. I feel that car offers a lot more performance, better handling and is more refined than the NSX. The Carrera has come a long way since the NSX was introduced in 1990.

I have always wanted an NSX since they were introduced, but could not afford one back then. I guess my NSX expectations were much greater than the actual reality. I have been disappointed with a lot of aspects of the NSX, but also appreciate its many good qualities as well. However, if I had the chance to redo my purchase decision over again, I would not change it. I met a great friend through my NSX ownership and that in itself is worth all the frustrations I have experienced with my NSX.

I test drove the C4S cab, and while it was nice, it didn't "stir the soul", and in my neck of the woods, you'll see yourself coming and going, no exclusivity or individual feeling. I had just finished a 39 month lease on a C5 Convertible, and I totally enjoyed the car. It was still rattle free (but the malibu type radio had the numbers rubbed out already), but I was ready to see it go. I wasn't getting the feeling, you know, that when you walk to the parking lot, that the key to the ingition that you have, starts the car that you want, I was ready to get out of the car. I have less than a year left on my lease, and I don't have a clue what I would get right now, that would give me more satisfaction. If there is no HSC, I could see myself buying the car off lease and being happy (for how long, I can't say, but for now, it's the car I want....and have). As I've said many times before, on this forum, a "sports car" is an emotional thing, if it doesn't stir you, don't do it. People should respect eachother's opinions, because that's what they are, your own individual opinions. Hopefully, we're mature enough to share with one another, and enjoy what brings us pleasure, sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't, that's life! :biggrin:

 

[liftshard]

Here are some cars that are significantly faster under $100k (not all are direct competitors, but still faster):

1. M5
2. C6 Coupe
3. ZO6
4. Viper SRT-10
5. Mustang Cobra
6. SLK55
7. E55
8. 997 Carrera
9. 997 Carrera S
10. GT3

The SLK55 is not significantly faster than the NSX. I have times from between 4.3-4.9 on the 0-60. The NSX ranges from 4.5-4.8 consistently now. The C6, I will grant. The Z0 is functionally the same car w/ a bigger engine. Viper, sure. Mustang Cobra, no. I see 4.5 at best. E55? Comparable. 997? BS. Same times. Carrera S, perhaps a tick faster. NOT significantly. GT3, I see as high as 4.8 0-60, some as low as 4.3. Again, NOT significantly faster.

W/ the M5, you have to be joking. It ain't gonna hit 4.1, dude. It'll break 5 and that's about it from a car that size even with the V10. 4.5 would be great, but that's, again, ON PAR with the NSX.

But, either way, you've failed the test. NONE of these cars are significantly faster. In fact, the fastest NSX times are faster than some of the slower times of these cars, excepting the Vette and Viper. People could actually argue that the NSX is a tick faster, using 0-60. But, it's inarguable that they are VERY close to one another and NONE of them that you mention, except for the big American muscle, is SIGNIFICANTLY faster and under 80k!

Why am I buying an E60 M5? To replace my current M5. I want the best sports sedan on the planet; and in my opinion, it's the new M5. Of course the new C6 ZO6 (I have one on order) will out accelerate the new M5, it should since it is a focused sports car, but it doesn't have enough seats to take my kids to the park.

All out acceleration is not my primary focus. I want a blend of power, handling, braking and quality. I thought the NSX was Honda's equivalent to the GT3 (only $15k cheaper). However, after driving a GT3 upon buying my NSX, I saw the light. The GT3 was superior to the NSX in all perfomance aspects; it's an amazing sports car for the money. I will probably replace the ZO6 with a 997 GT3 when introduced, but not before I have some fun trashing the ZO6.

I do not compare the NSX to any modern Ferraris. The NSX is no longer worthy of such comparisons. In the early 90s it provided the wakeup call, but Ferrari has since improved their products light years ahead of the NSX.

With that said, I still think the NSX is a wonderful car, but not for $89,765. The NSX is the only car that Honda produces that is not competitively priced and is at least $20,000 overpriced in my opinion. For $70,000, the NSX would be a good buy.

The M5 is certainly the premier sports sedan out there. Only the Phaeton is even in the same mention and it's a far larger car with a different purpose. As far as midsizes go, the new M5 will be champ, no question. The S8 is a great car, but bigger and less powerful, obviously. I understand the M5 for you, I have kids too and keep a sedan for those purposes.

As for the NSX to modern Ferraris, it certainly is not on par with the 360. 355 and before, yes. It's their equal or better. But, the latest ones, no. But, they sell for 2x the price at least, new. Even the used 360s hitting the resale market are asking $140k and crap like that. There will be a huge glut, so anyone who wants one should just bide their time and wait for the deluge.

But, again, the NSX isn't priced like a Ferrari. It's priced like a REALISTIC 911. And, you cite 911s, but gimme a break. The base Carrera is a $80-90k car once you put ANY real options into it. Nobody buys strippers and base MSRPs on Porsches are grossly unrealistic. They can easily push $100k. The GT3 is a purpose-built sports car, essentially a track package. The NSX ain't.

As for price, I agree that $90k for the NSX is too much. $75-mid 80s would be more on-target. Honda is paying a price for being all-aluminum and expensive to build. If they could drop the price 15k and add a SC option, I think they'd be in the ballpark. FI to get hp should not be what Honda ever needs, but the market is certainly amenable to it. MB cannot get high output w/o it. The Ford GT40 is a joke needing a SC to get 500hp. But, people still are raving, calling it a supercar. It's a laugh. But, if Honda won't make the C32 put out 340 like it should, then you have to tack a blower on it.

 

[nsxrock]

Timpo,

I have had 4 NSX's and the C6 is better in most ways. How many have you had? What years?

Go home boy.

 

[Patdeisa]

The NSX is an underperforming car from an acceleration standpoint if you take it's $80k+ price into consideration. The competition walks away from the NSX in any speed.

At $80k, here are 3 cars slower than the NSX, but cost about the same or more as tested by Road and Track:
1. Jaguar XJR
2. Maserati Coupe
3. Maserati Spyder

Due to the lack of updates and cost, the NSX isn't competing with Porsche, the Corvette, Ferrari, or the Viper much anymore. However, it's still competitive to other luxury sports cars, even with it being 15 years old.