IMHO the 97-01 years, sold not so many, has the 3.2, 6speed, minus the lights, I like the pop-ups, but an Stock 02+ needs little mods to look awesome, while the 91-01 needs a lot of things to get it looking right ...
You should have a category for 2000 - 2001 coupes. < most Golden!
funny about the 2002 - 2005 headlamps. My brother in law was looking at my NSXPO2012 pictures and he thought the "bug-eyes" was a bad mod! His comment: " why would anyone do that to such a beautiful car?" <- his comment, not mine...
If I could choose any NSX I would take a 2005 Type R. That is the best NSX. The newest, lightest, fastest.
But "golden years" is not really the right term because by 2005 many other cars had surpassed its performance and safety standards. "golden years" to me sounds like the years where it defined a category of car, and in that light I would say those years were the early 90's. That was the golden years for the NSX.
Why are you guys talking as if someone has insulted the 95-96 models? All I said was it's not the "Golden years" of the NSX. How can it be? It just doesn't have any advantages over any of the other groups. I see 6 votes now. Which tells me people will vote for their own car, despite the actual question.
All NSX's are great.
One can perhaps argue that a 95-96 enjoys the advantage of a targa over a coupe. Not all will agree, but... at least the argument can be made. But how can anyone say that a smaller engine, smaller brakes and less gears have an advantage over a larger motor, more gears and slightly improved brakes of the 97 to 2001? Maybe someone can really reach and say "well if you wanted to install sleeves when modifying the block" or something like that, but that really has nothing to do with the car in its stock form. Which is the question here.
Also, IMO, as I stated before, the "golden years" means best years compared to the market. By the 2000's the competition had certainly caught up, and so the "gap" between an NSX and another sports car of similar pricing had narrowed even if we don't admit the car was surpassed. By 2002 with the facelift, or 2005 which is my year, there were a whole host of cars that were superior in many ways.
But the NSX was so good out of the box that a decade and a half later it was still a competitive car and still superior in some ways. Those certain areas where it is superior are very important to me hence why I chose a 2005 NSX over an Aston Vantage, a Maserati GS, a 997C4S, etc.
The "Golden years" were indeed the earliest years, where the largest "gap" existed between it and any other car that sold for 60K back in 1991 (before it went up to 90K), before others had caught up, before its performance was somewhat tamed with electric steering and an open top for the sake of more sales. Anyone that is voting otherwise just isn't answering the question IMO, but voting as if their own car is in some sort of contest that they want to win.
I am going to put on my flame suit here and say the Golden years were 1991-1994 at the latest with 1991 being THE golden year of the NSX.
Hey, I own a 2005, but I am not so blinded by my own car that I would say so otherwise.
+1 agreed... I was very young at the time but I can imagine the excitement car enthusiasts felt when they realized what this machine meant for the future of performance cars... probably about 10x anything that I have felt about the FRS/BRZ lately.
I wish they had made a 97-01 NA2 Midnight Pearl... that would be my ideal NSX. I could get one and paint it, but given the limited numbers that would just be wrong (and expensive).