Don't get an NSX, very bad engine, only a 5 speed tranny and you need will need 6 to do 65mph!
get a boxster
get a boxster
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
NSX or Boxster S ? Help!
- Thread starter sushi
- Start date
jaytip nsx said:I have never heard that said of the NSX engine beforeI'ts always been considered an excellent engine,especially the noise :biggrin:
Dont get me wrong, im not trying to put the nsx down, especially since i will most likely be an owner in a month or two :biggrin:
I dont particularly like the engine because it is low on torque... I like the boxster s 3.2 h6 a bit better for a few reasons... one being that it has a dry-sump, all be it not a 'true' dry sump.... but close enough, it uses timing chain in place of belts that break more easily... i like the H design as it allows a lower center of gravity... and the forged crankshaft...
But the engine does not make the car.... this is why i'm still siding with the nsx, because as a car, the nsx is in my opinion a much better automobile...
sushi said:
No disrespect intended but I think you're focusing too much on magazine racing and not enough on driving the cars. Forget what the spec sheet says about torque. Honda did a fantastic job of engineering this car and both the 3.0 and hte 3.2L motors have fantastic torque curves that are big and flat. Combine that with excellent gearing and you're never really lacking in torque. Never. Granted, the car will never be a Dodge Viper but you can probably only wind a Viper out to 8K RPM once and then watch it blow up :biggrin: .
Seriously... don't let others make your decision for you. Back away from your computer and actually drive the cars.
I have nothing at all against the Boxster S. In fact, I think the 997 is a fantastic car and I know this is heresy but I actually think the steering is better in the P car than my NSX but... it's garden variety around here and frankly... way too much money. If you could really get a well equipped 997 for $50K, then I say make the purchase. But last time I spec'd them out (in a dealership when I bought my second S2K and online when I bought the NSX) I was into the low to mid $60K range just by getting the paint I wanted, HID headlamps, interior color I wanted and heated seats. OUCH.
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
sushi said:
Personally, I think it almost does. The engine is definitely the centerpiece of most sporting cars. The Corvette, SRTs, M Series, AMG and many other cars all gravitate towards the engine as the focal point.
Granted, it doesn't make the car, but it sure is the most important ingredient to me.
CerberusM5 said:
It certainly does. If not we all would keep the dollars in our pockets and drive around in 'kit-cars'
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
Da Hapa said:
I agree. The NSX is faster than it's 224 lb ft of torque lead you to believe. I think the well spaced gearing should get a lot of credit for NSX's good acceleration.
However, I generally keep my car north of 4k at all times.
One other thing (and these guys here know much better that I).
In addition to the NSX getting a 6-speed instead of a 5 in '97, '97 was also the year the most changes were done to the NSX. It got a nice power bump that year as well. Something you might want to keep in mind.
Before I bought my '98 NSX awhile back, "97+" was a "pre-requisite". :wink:
And, FWIW, since you seem SO much "on the fence", in the final analysis you're just nit-picking, *I* would tell you, "Just go with your heart. Which one do you REALLY lust for ??? THAT'S the car you should get !" :wink:
In addition to the NSX getting a 6-speed instead of a 5 in '97, '97 was also the year the most changes were done to the NSX. It got a nice power bump that year as well. Something you might want to keep in mind.
Before I bought my '98 NSX awhile back, "97+" was a "pre-requisite". :wink:
And, FWIW, since you seem SO much "on the fence", in the final analysis you're just nit-picking, *I* would tell you, "Just go with your heart. Which one do you REALLY lust for ??? THAT'S the car you should get !" :wink:
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
sushi said:
Have you driven both the Boxster S and 3.0 NSX? Used Boxster S' are probably starting at about $30,000 (MY 00), which is probably the going price for a lower mileage 91 NSX.
This would be a tough decision for me, but I would probably choose a 2000 Boxster S over a 91 NSX, since I prefer newer cars. Personally, I would try to step up to a 97 NSX-T, which would turn the tables for me.
What is your budget?
Last edited:
Compared to a Porsche?
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
sushi said:
Go out and drive them both!
I think $25k-30k will probably put you into a 1991, unless you are willing to accept higher mileage on a newer model.
Good luck.
sushi said:
Not to hijack the thread...but whats wrong with rear engined?
Before i was the porsche believer I am now, I thought that the engine in the back made no sense...until I became initiated.
Basically, the whole rear end theory is all about traction. Sure, you can drive a 911 like any other car (most poseurs do just this) and never know the advantages. However, if you're a thinking driver, you'll soon appreciate the benefits of massive rear traction; off the line - faster acceleration, on the curves - far earlier use of max power. Sure its got its idiosyncrasies, but IMO I cant drive any thing else. At the same time, the braver drivers can use the rear end to massively rotate after *serious* drop throttle/late braking - then mop up the rest of the curve with *instant* massive traction.
That said, How can you even consider a boxster vs an NSX?
The NSX is far more desireable, better looking and hell....serious.
The new 987 Boxster S is *huge* step up in the masculinity dept, but after driving one last week, it was difficult to be excited. To be fair however, I did just "chip" my turbo to 493 HP!
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
qirex said:
Keep in mind he more than likely will be comparing a 1991 NSX with a 2000 Boxster S. The NSX is almost 10 years older than the already 5 year old Boxster. I think both cars have their own merits making them each a worthy choice.
Also, the mid-engine configuration is generally considered the ideal setup for handling performance. Most pure race cars, such as Formula One, I believe are mid engined (Indy and CART).
oh for sure MR is ideal for f1 etc.
however, i was pointing out out that RR has its own merits too. Most ppl never get to drive, let alone *understand* the RR difference however. RR combined w/ AWD is especially effective. I cant believe I feel this way. Prior to getting my TT, I thought AWD was fast on the track, but not very entertaining. That was before 2 months of TT ownership.
btw...cerberus do you still have your TT?
however, i was pointing out out that RR has its own merits too. Most ppl never get to drive, let alone *understand* the RR difference however. RR combined w/ AWD is especially effective. I cant believe I feel this way. Prior to getting my TT, I thought AWD was fast on the track, but not very entertaining. That was before 2 months of TT ownership.
btw...cerberus do you still have your TT?
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
qirex said:
Qirex,
I am pleased you happy with your turbo. Porsche has done miracles over the years with the 911's rear engine platform. Your car will handle even sharper if you put a set of PSS9's.
Unfortunately, I no longer have my turbo. :frown: It was the only car I ever regreted selling. I had the GIAC stage 1 on my car as well. The 996 turbo is a fantastic all around super car. However, I felt it was almost too composed. So, I am currently searching for the perfect used GT2, but I will have to sell my NSX to afford it. But then again, the GT2 will make my NSX obsolete.
I have the new ZO6 ordered for a twin turbo project in the future (aspirations of 1KHP), but the GT2 is my ultimate sports car within my budget. However, before I pull the trigger on a GT2, I think I want to see what the details are on the 997 GT3 first.
Take care and enjoy all 493 horsepower!
I've owned a 2000 Boxster S and now a 2005 NSX. They both give you the same mid engine balance and feel. The NSX is a mid engine aluminum exotic that you will grow attached to. Porsches are very common. They both have the best feeling manual transmissions around, tight fit, accurate and will never miss a shift. I never liked the sound of my boxster's engine with the top up. It truely sounded like an old VW bug! Unless you get an S the NSX will be faster. The sound of the NSX engine sounds like a formula 1 engine.
It's a tough call but I once saw a survey of car ownders of which car have more sex. BMW drives had the most sex and Porsche drivers had the least. For girls, Audi drivers had the most sex followed by VW's.
I think the NSX is a superior choice. :biggrin:
It's a tough call but I once saw a survey of car ownders of which car have more sex. BMW drives had the most sex and Porsche drivers had the least. For girls, Audi drivers had the most sex followed by VW's.
I think the NSX is a superior choice. :biggrin:
I guess you dont watch the Sopranos.
NSX, unless your into that "looking like a soccer mom" thing : :tongue:
Cars with back seat don't count, not to mention a big back seat like in the sapranos.Zennsx said:
Also want to correct that my Boxster S was definitely slower than the NSX.
ferris3001 said:It's a tough call but I once saw a survey of car ownders of which car have more sex. BMW drives had the most sex and Porsche drivers had the least. For girls, Audi drivers had the most sex followed by VW's.
That's why I let me wife drive the VW anytime she wants!
Or whatever you kids are calling it these days ...Back on Topic : I had a 99 Boxster, but not the S. I test drove an S while deciding on my NSX. Ultimatly, the Boxster was too comon in comparision to the NSX and also weighing in heavily was the fact that I had already owned a Boxster.
Best of luck on you decision
Here is some info that I received today. This is a 2004 Boxster if I am not mistaken.
My Boxster is getting a new engine at 18000 miles courtesy of Porsche. It seems that a small bolt came loose inside the engine and destroyed the timing so there was no compression in any of the cylinders. This happened in stop and go traffic at 5 mph with absolutely no warning, no noise, no vibration, no idiot light, no nothing. It just stopped in the middle of traffic on the approach to the Richmond Bridge at Rush Hour.
Warranty takes care of it FORTUNATELY.
YMMV.
My Boxster is getting a new engine at 18000 miles courtesy of Porsche. It seems that a small bolt came loose inside the engine and destroyed the timing so there was no compression in any of the cylinders. This happened in stop and go traffic at 5 mph with absolutely no warning, no noise, no vibration, no idiot light, no nothing. It just stopped in the middle of traffic on the approach to the Richmond Bridge at Rush Hour.
Warranty takes care of it FORTUNATELY.
YMMV.
sushi said:
You definitely need help for even considering that ugly little piece of shit German car. :biggrin:
Similar threads
