2002 NSX or 2001 BMW Z8??

[insx]

IMHO the new Z8 should be more trouble free than other BMW cars produced. It is not fair to compare BMW on a 1995 year model with 2002 year model cars, the quality on the newer BMW cars is getting better. IMHO there are always some defective cars in any production, unless you can achieve 100% Total Quality Control, Total Quality Management... etc. Nothing is perfect!

Back to the topic

Those are definitely 2 different cars.
Test drive both and decide what level of
FUN/Comfort you want.

You should have the same feeling when driving the Z8 as driving your Aston Martin.

If I were you, I would get the NSX for different feeling and joy

------------------
--
'94 NSX Brooklands Green Pearl/ Onyx
- 9k miles
- GruppeM Intake & Exhaust V.3
'01 M3 Laguna Seca Blue/ Grey - 4k miles
'93 300SE MBZ - 95k miles and running strong

 

[Mike O]

One the one hand, if you can stroke the check for the Z8, that's what you need to buy...especially if you get silver/red or black/red.

On the other hand, you could buy the new NSX and a fully restored '67 Corvette Convertible for the same $$$ as the new Z8, which wouldn't be a bad deal either.

 

[NetViper]

Well.. money obviously is not an issue.. so drive each car and see what you like more. If you end up like the NSX more, but wish it had the power of the Z8.... then you have MANY options to fix that problem. Simple as that.

 

[Poloman]

Hey, why not buy both!!!!

 

[nsxtasy]

Regarding the overall reliability of various brands of cars...

In its April 2001 issue, Consumer Reports summarized the reliability of 28 major brands of 2000 model year automobiles. Reliability was defined as the problem rate (number of problems per 100 cars) and the overall average for all cars was 20. They ranked the brands by overall average, and showed the range of problem rates for the various models within each brand.

Infiniti came in first, with a rate of 6 problems per 100 for all models. Lexus was second, with a range of 6-8 problems for its models. Acura was third with 9 problems for all models. Honda was fourth, with a range of 5-19 problems for all its models. (Individual models were not listed, but I would be willing to bet that the model with 19 problems was the Isuzu-built Passport.)

All of the 8 Japanese brands were ranked higher than any of the 20 non-Japanese brands.

The brand ranked ninth - the most reliable non-Japanese brand - was BMW, with a problem rate for its models of 13-23. IMO this means that BMW's reliability is pretty good - not as good as the Japanese brands, but still above average in the industry.

FWIW, Porsche and Ferrari were not listed, presumably due to insufficient data.

 

[Juice]

Interesting. I would never have suspected Infiniti to do so well. The rest comes as no surprise.

[This message has been edited by Juice (edited 06 September 2002).]

 

[Rubber Chicken]

For your price range, you couldn't get a better car than a 996 911 Turbo. Hailed by many as the most daily drivable supercar.

The only thing I don't like about it, is its common lines it shares with the Carrera. Only automotive enthusaists will really see the car for what it is. And while granted it is still a Porsche, Boxter's are/have quickly brought the name down to near commonplace.

I wouldn't get a used F355... Ferrari's aren't known for their reliability. And maintenance on them is absolutely horrendous. Plain forget about it if its no longer under warranty.

Other cars to consider are the Esprit, which is a nice car, but not my style. A Lotus is meant to be minimalist.

And as far a used Diablo goes, you'd probably have to get a mid-early 90's model, which I wouldn't recommend spending around 100 grand on any car that's 7-10 years old.

------------------
Ken

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Rubber Chicken:
And while granted it is still a Porsche, Boxter's are/have quickly brought the name down to near commonplace.

I know. I think what they really need to build up recognition of their brand name for exclusivity is an SUV that stickers for $90K. Oh wait...

 

[insx]

Regarding car reliability and ownership experience, check out the winners of Strategic Vision 2002 Total Quality Awards http://www.vision-inc.com/

BMW was both the highest scoring brand and had two segment winners in the Strategic
Vision 2002 Total Quality Index: the 3 series and X5. Unfortunately Z8 and NSX were not included in this research.

Near-Luxury Car Segment
Rank:
#1 BMW 3-Series total score: 919
#6 Acura TL total score: 891
#7 Acura CL total score: 885

Small Specialty Coupe Segment
Rank:
#2 Acura RSX total score: 890

Luxury Sport-Utility Segment
Rank:
#1 BMW X5 total score: 904
#3 Acura MDX total score: 898

Luxury Car Segment

#4 BMW 5-Series total score: 911
#8 Acura RL total score: 900

7-series is NA

It is good to see Acura at the top ranks in the categories too

 

[SJJ28]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Hmmm... I'm not sure I agree.

Two years ago you could buy a new 2000 NSX-T for $70-75K. Those cars are now worth around $63K, give or take a couple grand. They have depreciated roughly the same percentage as the Z8, certainly no more so.

ahh, but you are taking the selling price, not the MSRP!! I would think this adds to the collectibility argument, If they sold them for 10k below sticker NEW, how will they ever become collectible???

Steve

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by insx:
Regarding car reliability and ownership experience, check out the winners of Strategic Vision 2002 Total Quality Awards

This survey "measures the complete ownership experience, including the emotions generated".

While the emotions generated during the purchase might be an interesting indicator of customer satisfaction, I wouldn't quote this survey as a measure of reliability.

 

[insx]

Thanks for the clarification Ken.
You are absolutely correct, that's why I put the word "and" on the sentence - so people know that this report is actually a combination of factors - not reliability issues alone.
If you check all my statements above, you will find that I never mentioned "reliability" alone

You already covered the reliability factors from your Consumer Reports quotes.
I just quoted from the resource:

"Strategic Vision has captured in its unique Total Quality Index score a comprehensive measure of the experience of the owner that encompasses positive product characteristics, reliability (things-gone wrong), the dealership experience and the emotional response."

 

[nsxtasy]

Yes, we are in agreement.

One thing that Acura and Honda have never seemed to excel at is the sales experience. Their customers tend to be very satisfied, but it is mostly because of the product attributes, rather than the treatment they receive at the dealers. Not that the dealers treat the customers poorly; I think the biggest problem is a lack of consistency, where some dealers treat their customers great, and others don't. And this can be true on the sales side as well as on the service side.

I suspect BMW is actually quite similar - winning over its customers through the overall excellence of its products, more so than the dealerships themselves. BMW and Honda/Acura actually have quite a bit in common - they consider themselves engine and engineering companies rather than car companies, both make motorcycles, both are more driver-oriented and performance-oriented than their competitors, who tend to be luxury-oriented (and this is reflected in generally firmer suspensions and more precise drivability in their cars), etc.

 

[zoomnsx]

Originally posted by insx:
IMHO the new Z8 should be more trouble free than other BMW cars produced. It is not fair to compare BMW on a 1995 year model with 2002 year model cars, the quality on the newer BMW cars is getting better.
..........................................
-1995 BMW M3 E-36 engine problem: oil scavenging during lateral acceleration causing engine damage
-2002 BMW M3 E-46 engine problem: engine
blowing up
-BMW's quality program is inherently weak

 

[insx]

zoomnsx,
Are you referring "quality" or "reliability"?

quality:
degree of excellence : GRADE

reliability:

1.the quality or state of being reliable
2.the extent to which an experiment, test, or measuring procedure yields the same results on repeated trials

A product can be manufactured using quality parts and processes, but the final product is not always going to be reliable (i.e., Ferrari).

As I said before: Nothing is perfect, there will always some defective products.

The hardest task of every manufacturer in the world is to caught or reduce the number of defective products in their production.
This is why "Quality oriented" manufacturers have been benchmarking other "Top Quality" companies to design their own Total Quality Management (including quality control) to caught (reduce) defective products in their production process.

to be continued...


[This message has been edited by insx (edited 09 September 2002).]

 

[insx]

If you said the "2002 BMW M3 E-46 engine problem: engine blowing up" maybe you means they are not reliable.

I will not stamp that "M3 E46 engine is not a quality engine" since you are only mentioning only a very small percentage of the thousands of M3 produced. I am suspecting that they have some defective products once in a while since not ALL (100%) M3 E46 engine blown up (I will not rule out the possibility of improper maintenance/driving by their owners). M3 manual book has specific instructions on how to "break-in" the engine, I am sure that not all owners actually read their books

We all know that some people do not know or care on how to maintain/ properly drive their cars.

Isn't this why we always want to check a car maintenance history and ask Acura dealer to do 100 plus points inspections to see if the the car is in good condition before we buy a used NSX.

to be continued ...

------------------
--
'94 NSX Brooklands Green Pearl/ Onyx
- 9k miles
- GruppeM Intake & Exhaust V.3
'01 M3 Laguna Seca Blue/ Grey - 4k miles
'93 300SE MBZ - 95k miles and running strong

 

[insx]

I know most NSX owners are mostly car enthusiast who really care about their cars
(i.e., change engine oil every 3000 miles, do 90k maintenance on low mileage car, change timing belt and water pump as NSX prime FAQ suggested, etc.).

The majority of M3 owners are not car enthusiasts. Most people will not do research on the previous generation M3 problems to do important maintenance action (i.e, oil change). I think most people who are either CHEAP or CLUELESS will only change oil every 15,000 miles as the BMW dealer will do it for FREE. We all know that even a synthetic oil will not ACTUALLY going to last that long when driven hard everyday! Also FYI, actually people are supposed to do the first oil change at 1,500 miles. It is stated on the engine label. I am sure not a lot of people read that, unless they clean their engine and read all the information there.

Since the engine rev really fast, I believe many owners will go over that specified RPM limit and the specified Speed limit within their specified stages of break-in period.

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by insx:
I know most NSX owners are mostly car enthusiast who really care about their cars
(i.e., change engine oil every 3000 miles, do 90k maintenance on low mileage car, change timing belt and water pump as NSX prime FAQ suggested, etc.).

The majority of M3 owners are not car enthusiasts. Most people will not do research on the previous generation M3 problems to do important maintenance action (i.e, oil change). I think most people who are either CHEAP or CLUELESS will only change oil every 15,000 miles as the BMW dealer will do it for FREE.

I don't agree with either of these statements.

I'm not saying that M3 owners have a greater tendency to be car enthusiasts than NSX owners. But there are a huge number of moderate-mileage '91-95 NSXs running around overdue for the timing belt change. And there are a lot of M3 owners who are enthusiasts and maintain their cars by the book.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 09 September 2002).]

 

[insx]

Ken,
I am just trying to illustrate my points

I know I cannot be really accurate on my opinion on the number of car enthusiasts without actually doing a survey.
I am discussing about the importance of the oil change and maintenance because Mercedes Benz representatives and Certified Service Centers recently discussed MBZ Free regular maintenance (by the book) program. There have been many broke down engines because the owners ACTUALLY follow the book manuals to change oil every ~12,500 miles (also depends on driving characteristics, my CLK320 and G500 changed the time to do oil change automatically).

 

[nsxtasy]

Oh! Now I see the point that you are raising. And you are correct; the amount of maintenance can indeed have an effect on the "perceived" reliability of a brand.

The best illustration of this is when Hyundai first entered the U.S. market with its $7000 Excel. It sold very well, but many people bought it and did not keep up with the recommendations for scheduled maintenance. Over their first few years, the cars developed a high frequency of problems, and this was one of the main reasons. Hyundai addressed the problem by providing the scheduled maintenance FREE, and reliability improved.

However, I don't think that this is a differentiating factor between M3 owners and NSX owners, both of whom tend to be enthusiasts (and neither of whom is perfect regarding maintenance recommendations).

Thanks for the clarification.