Acura NSX Details Emerge - in Today's Autoweek

[N Spec]

Again, stop taking my examples to the extreme. I gave you a perfect example of a livable, daily-driven supercar. You said the NSX cannot be touted as practical, because it is a sportscar, but it has in fact proven very practical for me in real world situations. If the McLaren F1 was not so expensive and rare, it could be daily driven. 3 passengers and 100,000 miles is pretty impressive, even for a multimillion dollar car. I'm not talking about sports car taking the role of a family sedan or WRX.

You talked about raising the bar in the other thread - going fast can be done by anybody if that's all they care about, but it takes a tremendous amount of effort to make a vehicle that goes fast, looks good, appeal intellectually, built to last reliability, gets better than average fuel mileage and maintain an excellent price point value. This idea is "raising the bar" in modern cars with super/hyper/flagship cars leading the forefront of this ideal. It's no longer about who simply has more horsepower to weight ratio.



As for the 911 or 458 target, let's not forget the R8 and MP4-12C was also spotted in mix. Yes, the 458 is a beast to be reckoned with, but I honestly think that many people are putting the 458 on the pedestal. The GTR puts out similar performance levels at a much heavier weight and less advertised hp. Granted it also has twin turbos and 4WD assisting it, but the NSX is apparently taking a similar approach but in a much more attractive package and build. If it goes sans turbo, the V6 would have be close to 4 liters like the GT3 to be able to compete in the same league.

 

[fastaussie]

Again, stop taking my examples to the extreme. I gave you a perfect example of a livable, daily-driven supercar. You said the NSX cannot be touted as practical, because it is a sportscar, but it has in fact proven very practical for me in real world situations. If the McLaren F1 was not so expensive and rare, it could be daily driven. 3 passengers and 100,000 miles is pretty impressive, even for a multimillion dollar car. I'm not talking about sports car taking the role of a family sedan or WRX.

my point exactly. sports cars exist for sporting purposes. that is why they're not practical. when someone buys a sportscar, they do not buy it for practical reasons. they buy it for sporting reasons. practicality has nothing to do with buying a sports car.

As for the 911 or 458 target, let's not forget the R8 and MP4-12C was also spotted in mix. Yes, the 458 is a beast to be reckoned with, but I honestly think that many people are putting the 458 on the pedestal. The GTR puts out similar performance levels at a much heavier weight and less advertised hp. Granted it also has twin turbos and 4WD assisting it, but the NSX is apparently taking a similar approach but in a much more attractive package and build. If it goes sans turbo, the V6 would have be close to 4 liters like the GT3 to be able to compete in the same league.

all of those cars are magnificent. but people absolutely put the 458 on a pedestal, for good reason. it's simply the best sports car on the road. it is also very reliable (possibly moreso than an NSX?), has super low maintenance, has a trunk, etc. but that is not what you hear anyone talking about...

 

[Juice]

my point exactly. sports cars exist for sporting purposes. that is why they're not practical. whence someone buys a sportscar, they do not do it for practical reasons.

I don't agree necessarily. There is a good reason I don't own a Noble; it doesn't have a boot.

 

[fastaussie]

There is a good reason I don't own a Noble; it doesn't have a boot.

because having a boot is not a concern for Noble. they don't design cars renowned for their trunk space...

 

[robr]

I also bought the NSX because it was practical. It had a good sized trunk and was reliable and had most of the amenities one would need to comfortably drive thousands of miles in a car. If the NSX had no trunk, or was not reliable, or comfortable or lacked A/C for example I would not have purchased it. After putting over 100K miles on it, I sold it when it was no longer practical for my lifestyle (ie, I had my second child).

 

[fastaussie]

ok, i give up on the "practicality" issue of Supercars.

truth be told, i could take my $30,000 one-seater, R-spec Ducati and ride it across the country to New York. or ride it every day in L.A. freeway traffic. but i don't think anyone would call that practical?

this is my take on the practicality debate:

the NSX is/was certainly the most practical of Supercars. but Supercars themselves are not practical machines...

 

[krea.tion]

practicality has nothing to do with buying a sports car.

You couldn't be more wrong.

 

[N Spec]

ok, i give up on the "practicality" issue of Supercars.

truth be told, i could take my $30,000 one-seater, R-spec Ducati and ride it across the country to New York. or ride it every day in L.A. freeway traffic. but i don't think anyone would call that practical?

this is my take on the practicality debate:

the NSX is/was certainly the most practical of Supercars. but Supercars themselves are not practical machines...

Yea, but I bet you will hate every minute of the ride after 30 minutes of riding. Your triceps and forearms will be burning from fatigue unless you mod for a cruise control device and it's all straight-aways. A sport cruiser like the FZ6 or 650R would be better suited for long rides, but even then the wind noise would become annoying after a while, if not succumbing to helmet soreness.

The general consensus has weighed in on practicality my firend. I told you, this is 2013, not 1980. Really, in Honda's terms, this is 1990, not 1980. You can have your cake and eat it. The NSX proved it back then and there are still more opportunities for other manufacturers to do so too. If the 370Z was not designed as a best seller by quantity and had an exterior stance reminiscent of the Mid4 or 300ZX with a price tag that was $60K today with ~380-400 hp all NA (or performance levels in that arena), it would be consider a practical, exotic-ish supercar. Instead, Nissan wanted to deliver a more affordable sports car, a step below the "super car" tier.

 

[robr]

You couldn't be more wrong.

Says the guy with the GT-R. Exactly what I would own as a practical supercar if I had the means. Insane performance with room for my wife, kids and space left over to pack for a weekend trip.

 

[fastaussie]

Yea, but I bet you will hate every minute of the ride after 30 minutes of riding. Your triceps and forearms will be burning from fatigue unless you mod for a cruise control device and it's all straight-aways. A sport cruiser like the FZ6 or 650R would be better suited for long rides, but even then the wind noise would become annoying after a while, if not succumbing to helmet soreness.

you might think that, but honestly it can be ridden for hours. even droning down the straight 405 to San Diego. would i prefer to ride it coast-to-coast, over say, a Goldwing? hell no! would i ride either of those motorcycles you just mentioned for practical purposes? not a chance! even though they are absolutely more practical for everything other than the race track. you yourself N Spec said that motorcycles were impractical. but many people use them every day for practical purposes. so i suppose the term is quite relative? you mentioned the McLaren F1 having three seats as part of its practicality. however it was only designed that way because Gordon Murray wanted the driver sitting in the middle of the car, like a race car, for the optimum driving position with the best vantage point. had absolutely nothing to do with transporting an additional person in the car pool lane. the F1 is actually a reasonable daily driver for what it is, but do you think that was at the top of the priority list when the car was being designed?

let me word it another way:

would you buy your next sports car based on its sporting ability? or its practicality?

if the new NSX is a super performer, will more people buy it? or will it sell more if it's super reliable and has a nice big trunk?

 

[N Spec]

you might think that, but honestly it can be ridden for hours. even droning down the straight 405 to San Diego. would i prefer to ride it coast-to-coast, over say, a Goldwing? hell no! would i ride either of those motorcycles you just mentioned for practical purposes? not a chance! even though they are absolutely more practical for everything other than the race track. you yourself N Spec said that motorcycles were impractical. but many people use them every day for practical purposes. so i suppose the term is quite relative? you mentioned the McLaren F1 having three seats as part of its practicality.

I have commuted on a daily basis on a motorcycle for a year or two and one summer picking up a passenger. It was not fun in traffic. In the summer, the radiator fan will spin all day when the bike is at low speeds, blowing the heat on me, making it even more uncomfortable. I am amazed there are not more bike engines damaged from this situation. Needless to say, unless I was in a financial pinch, I would not use a bike as a daily commute ever again, especially if there was rush hour traffic. I reckon this is why most people commute with bikes because it's cheap or there may be an extremely small minority that are idealistic about bikes like you are about impractical, no compromise race cars labeled as sports cars I used to be diehard about bikes too until I daily commuted in one for a few seasons.

you mentioned the McLaren F1 having three seats as part of its practicality. however it was only designed that way because Gordon Murray wanted the driver sitting in the middle of the car, like a race car, for the optimum driving position with the best vantage point. had absolutely nothing to do with transporting an additional person in the car pool lane. the F1 is actually a reasonable daily driver for what it is, but do you think that was at the top of the priority list when the car was being designed?

The F1's unique seating pattern was for the experience, but when you say "only" reason, that is never the case for anything in this world. Gordon could have still chose to only put one seat to the right of the driver and leave the left side for cargo space, but he didn't, because an open seat can still be used for cargo space. This was the more efficient path. There are always more than one reason for every action. I wish more companies would explore the 3 seater layout, but I suppose government mandates have issues with this. The McLaren F1 had practicality and reliability in mind, even though it was an extremely expensive car. They chose NOT to go turbo for reliability purposes. They incorporated luggage compartments even though they did not need to, as you say. There was a reason why the NSX was a benchmark for that the McLaren F1 road car.

Don't kid yourself in believing that successful companies make sports car without concerns of efficiency. Who does not want to maximize cargo space when considering chassis weight goals, aerodynamics and safety.The GTR has already been brought up as a practical supercar and let's not forget Porsche. Yes, they sway towards the side of larger/bloated appearing vehicles, but the NSX is a very lean and compact car that provides exceptional trunk AND front bonnet space if you were to use it. I personally believe the NSX is a perfect compromise and there should be more cars like it. In fact there is. The SW20 1990s MR2. It is also a mid-engine sports car that has decent trunk space, front bonnet space and much more seating/cargo space than the NSX. This is a car that weighs ~2800 lbs and it is smaller in width and length when compared to the NSX.

let me word it another way:

would you buy your next sports car based on its sporting ability? or its practicality?

if the new NSX is a super performer, will more people buy it? or will it sell more if it's super reliable and has a nice big trunk?

What don't you get about this? Why do I have to keep repeating myself? I think I speak for many sports car enthusiast and Especially NSX enthusiast by saying we expect the new NSX to meet certain levels (top tier) of sports performance, exotic appeal, fit/finish, practicality and reliability for a sports car. And of course we want competitive value/pricing. If the NSX was just simply a good sports car and lacked many of the aforementioned categories like fit/finish and exotic appeal, it would be a Corvette, or GTR. If it lacked reliability, it would be the Twin Turbo 300ZX or Rx7 from the factory. If it lacked practicality and fit/finish it would be a Lotus or some other kit race car that has to source engines or other components made by different manufacturers. The NSX maximizes efficiencies and excels in all fields. It is expected that the next one continues this legacy, while pushing the bar.

 

[robr]

would you buy your next sports car based on its sporting ability? or its practicality?

if the new NSX is a super performer, will more people buy it? or will it sell more if it's super reliable and has a nice big trunk?

Both.

And yes, I believe with great certainty that the NSX will sell A LOT more if it's super reliable and has a big trunk. Those are key reasons that so many of us own (or have owned) one.
I was seriously cross shopping a Ferrari Mondial at the time I bought my NSX (circa 1996). The NSX won not due to performance but due to reliability and practicality.

 

[heySkippy]

I would have never bought an NSX if it didn't have room in the trunk and comfort in the cabin for a long solo road trip.

 

[NSX2398]

I bought mine because it was the only high end sports car that (a) was reliable, and (b) I could drive in the winter without worrying about it rusting out. But I'm guessing that's not high on their criteria for the new one .. and wouldn't attract extra buyers if it was. I hear that cold weather badly affects hybrids batteries .. unless, like the Tesla, they use some of the power to run heaters to keep the batteries warm. So, it's probably not for me anyway.

 

[fastaussie]

What don't you get about this? Why do I have to keep repeating myself? I think I speak for many sports car enthusiast and Especially NSX enthusiast by saying we expect the new NSX to meet certain levels

this is of course an NSX forum full of NSX owners and like minded individuals who purchased the NSX because it was the most practical supercar, and evidently that was the major point of consideration. there is no doubt you speak for NSX enthusiasts, as most NSX enthusiasts share the same outlook on sportscars as yourself. again, because they bought them. however i can speak for many other sportscar enthusiasts who would rather own a Corvette for "half or a third of the money" because it's "way faster, and why would you pay more money to be slower?" we have all heard it before. Lotus guys will tell you their cars are the best because they're the lightest and designed by F1 greats. the Porsche blokes will tell you their cars are superior because they've evolved over 50 years into the best thing ever, etc. each has its own loyal fanbase.

what i've noticed since the introduction of the new car, is that there's doubt amongst some of this forum's members about the new car and its performance, and the gimmicks used to achieve it. undoubtedly, the greatest purchasers of the new NSX will be previous or current NSX owners, there is no question in my opinion. i don't know if that's enough cars to satisfy Honda? the original worldwide run was under 9000 correct, over a 15 year time period? like i said much earlier in this thread, it's not us Honda needs to sell the car to, we're guaranteed buyers, it's the rest of the general public. i'm not convinced they're as interested in practicality. that's the reason a lot of people didn't buy the NSX the first time around, and why a lot of people didn't consider it a true exotic. many people considered the car dull and boring because your grandma could drive it to the grocery store. NSX owners consider that one of the car's strengths, non owners consider it a weakness.

NO NEED TO YELL AT ME, we've all heard this stuff before. from the media, and out of the mouths of car enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts alike. whether or not its true doesn't really matter, it was a general perception by some. Supercars aren't Camry's, i don't think the majority of buyers are shopping as they would for an Accord. the new car will be a Honda. it will be super reliable, it will be practical, it will be fuel efficient, have a reasonable trunk, comfy seats, a good air con system. truth be told, which new Supercars don't? the fit and finish on a new Ferrari or McLaren is amazing. i don't know that being superior in fuel mileage is gonna sell more cars than Audi or Porsche if there's less or even equal performance? the other cars have pretty much all caught up at this stage. the NSX can no longer claim the superiority it once had in so many areas other than performance. new Corvette's have much bigger trunk capacity, and get stupid fuel mileage. even the bloody Italian cars are reliable, who'd have ever thought this was possible?! again, you have to take yourself out of your NSX shoes, and put yourself in the non-NSX enthusiast's shoes. the question is, will the new car be good enough to sway prospective buyers away from the Corvette, 911, GTR, or R8 in the same price range? or an MP4, 458, etc. for those who aren't on a budget? what do you reckon?

how well do you see the NSX competing with that competition?

- - - Updated - - -

I was seriously cross shopping a Ferrari Mondial at the time I bought my NSX (circa 1996). The NSX won not due to performance but due to reliability and practicality.

now that all the cars are pretty equal on the reliability and practicality playing field? how will the NSX win?

 

[N Spec]

Woo, I just re-read my post and it's a huge wall of text. I would be surprised if you or anyone reads this Lol.

this is of course an NSX forum full of NSX owners and like minded individuals who purchased the NSX because it was the most practical supercar, and evidently that was the major point of consideration. there is no doubt you speak for NSX enthusiasts, as most NSX enthusiasts share the same outlook on sportscars as yourself. again, because they bought them. however i can speak for many other sportscar enthusiasts who would rather own a Corvette for "half or a third of the money" because it's "way faster, and why would you pay more money to be slower?" we have all heard it before. Lotus guys will tell you their cars are the best because they're the lightest and designed by F1 greats. the Porsche blokes will tell you their cars are superior because they've evolved over 50 years into the best thing ever, etc. each has its own loyal fanbase.

The drawback of the Corvette is exotic appeal, aesthetics (more so on the interior), and fit/finish. There is no exotic appeal to me for any Porsche except the Carrera GT, even if their fit/finish is much better and thus price reflects that. There is no doubt the 911 and Corvette are top sellers, but that has more to do with price, history and market segment command. Porsche has been evolving the same platform for years, very much like what the Iphone is doing now and so they have many loyal and unified fans that are emotionally attached. However, best sellers do no necessarily equate to best quality.

what i've noticed since the introduction of the new car, is that there's doubt amongst some of this forum's members about the new car and its performance, and the gimmicks used to achieve it. undoubtedly, the greatest purchasers of the new NSX will be previous or current NSX owners, there is no question in my opinion. i don't know if that's enough cars to satisfy Honda? the original worldwide run was under 9000 correct, over a 15 year time period? like i said much earlier in this thread, it's not us Honda needs to sell the car to, we're guaranteed buyers, it's the rest of the general public. i'm not convinced they're as interested in practicality. that's the reason a lot of people didn't buy the NSX the first time around, and why a lot of people didn't consider it a true exotic. many people considered the car dull and boring because your grandma could drive it to the grocery store. NSX owners consider that one of the car's strengths, non owners consider it a weakness.

First, I want to say that in the 90s, almost all sports car sales dwindled in the middle of that decade. The economy back then was very shaky and dynamic. Notice how all of the other 90s "super cars" went out of production by 1995-1997 except for the NSX??? The NSX sold quite well considering all things and now the market has it accessible to a point where those who can afford can buy one and not have to search forever for one, but it's rare enough to demand an esteemed exotic price tag for a 20 year old Honda. 8K per generation is perfect for exotic numbers IMO. A Corvette or 911 typically averages 20-30K per year. Plenty to go around, I would say. How special would the NSX be, if there were 20K per year?

Honda planned from the beginning to produce 20,000 units for the original NSX. Sales just happened to be ~8K in the US and ~8K for the rest of the world and it took a little longer than expected thanks the 90's situation. The remaining 2-3K units/parts are extras being distributed across the world to help fix up wrecked/savaged cars I reckon. Honda was smart about the contract. They didn't lose money producing the NSX, because they had a plan and knew what they were doing unlike Lexus. The same can be said for Nissan's GTR; they have a plan too obviously. The new NSX is going to have set amount of cars per year or pre-set contract like the first.

Like those who made the close-minded grandma statement, I once viewed the NSX as rubbish too. I had a twin turbo 300ZX and questioned how the hell can a 290 hp car be $90K? Boy was I wrong, when I finally drove an NSX. Now the other note, Hybrid technology is meant to be practical and driven often. Hybrid tech is designed to be practical, but it could also augment performance. You can read the other ongoing thread about my argument for the new NSX and hybrid tech, but my main point is that Corvette or 911 owners may not care about hybrid tech, but there is still and will be a market for the new NSX. More on that later, but first.

Even IF the general public may not be interested in practicality, the refined, intelligent and shrewd consumers will always strongly consider these priorities. I'm not trying to make a comment on the general public or your taste, but when one reach a level of awareness of the industry, one will know where practicality and efficiency lies in every product that one consumes. The rest of the world can go frivolously spending based on emotions alone, but we all know how that can get you in trouble ultimately. There is a reason why the majority are colloquially called cash cows.

So I don't want to make the NSX appear pretentious, but it's a very refined and efficient product when considering all variables, and only a certain percentile of the population can appreciate and recognize this when they have a desire to buy a vehicle that represents their progressive personality.

NO NEED TO YELL AT ME, we've all heard this stuff before. from the media, and out of the mouths of car enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts alike. whether or not its true doesn't really matter, it was a general perception by some. Supercars aren't Camry's, i don't think the majority of buyers are shopping as they would for an Accord. the new car will be a Honda. it will be super reliable, it will be practical, it will be fuel efficient, have a reasonable trunk, comfy seats, a good air con system. truth be told, which new Supercars don't? the fit and finish on a new Ferrari or McLaren is amazing. i don't know that being superior in fuel mileage is gonna sell more cars than Audi or Porsche if there's less or even equal performance? the other cars have pretty much all caught up at this stage. the NSX can no longer claim the superiority it once had in so many areas other than performance. new Corvette's have much bigger trunk capacity, and get stupid fuel mileage. even the bloody Italian cars are reliable, who'd have ever thought this was possible?! again, you have to take yourself out of your NSX shoes, and put yourself in the non-NSX enthusiast's shoes. the question is, will the new car be good enough to sway prospective buyers away from the Corvette, 911, GTR, or R8 in the same price range? or an MP4, 458, etc. for those who aren't on a budget? what do you reckon?

Never once in my mind did I imagine myself yelling my statements... People make the argument of practical car versus sports car all the time to me about my NSX and then I explain how practical my NSX and many are pleasantly surprised. Some will never understand, but that's OK. You obviously have been bitterly replying to those kinds of people "that Sports cars are not meant to be practical" and have been taking idealistic approach to heart. :tongue:

Anyways, Audi and Porsche are still not THAT reliable. When I mention reliability and practically, I also take in cost/maintenance. Most people don't drive Ferrari enough to prove their long term reliability due to value depreciation/appreciation, so I'd say the verdict is still out on Ferrari reliability. Maybe we will see in the near future, but I wouldn't compare Ferrari's reliability to Honda. The MP4-12C's fit and finish is still not the best IMO. You can compare McLaren's interior to the NSX Concept's interior if you have a sharp eye. I also have some doubts for reliability since it's their first stand-alone engine.

I do not think Honda wants the NSX to outsell Audi, Porsche or Nissan, etc. They want to claim a missing segment and provide something that unique and different to the market, again "grey area", not the black or white. Like I said above, Honda plans to sell a certain limited quantity that will meet exotic levels and still make money for them while showcasing their flagship tech. This is the same approach that Nissan has taken with the GTR obviously. Even though they have thrown the gauntlet out at Porsche for publicity, they never truly intended the GTR to outsell the 911. I'm sure they wouldn't complain if they could, but that's not their goal.

People keep making the comparisons of the 458 or Mclaren to the new NSX, but the price difference is going to be huge and they are not in the same market. It's not going to be hard for Honda to outperform Audi. Let the sheep flock to Audi thanks to their cool marketing schemes, but I don't really see much substance in any of the their products IMO. Porsche is going the be the biggest thorn for Honda, but the new NSX will most likely be priced below Porsche's market either way, so I don't think sales is a huge concern for Honda.

how well do you see the NSX competing with that competition?

now that all the cars are pretty equal on the reliability and practicality playing field? how will the NSX win?

Again, reliability and practicality levels have been raised in the industry, but I would not exaggerate it to the point that they are equal to Honda's unusual NSX in a sense. How many Porsche, or Ferrari owners have you seen happily breaking the 100K or 200K mile mark. The biggest costs over those mileage are timing/belt waterpump and clutches for the NSX. That's ~$3-5K per 90K miles. How much would cost for a Porsche or Ferrari to drive to 100K miles? How many trips to the dealership would that entail versus driving the NSX (not counting the typical oil change)?

Nonetheless, I think you bringing up sales as a argument is sign of soreness in this debate. You've been ranting on and on about flagship cars like the LFA only needing 500 units, but then you make an argument for sales? You are not the only one to have brought sales up, but I think it's sort of funny that people compare NSX sales to Corvette or 911 sales numbers. I don't want the NSX to sell Corvette/911 numbers and I am sure Honda does not either. They will have another vehicle lined up to attempt that (S2000 successor or mini-NSX).

There is nothing exotic about 30,000 cars per year! That's me yelling :wink:

 

[robr]

Now this discussion is getting interesting. I like your most recent post fastaussie, seems you're starting to understand how many of us think about the NSX.

 

[heySkippy]

the original worldwide run was under 9000 correct, over a 15 year time period?

That was the USA imports. Worldwide was about twice that.

 

[docjohn]

I'm on the sidelines watching the tennis.....

 

[SFNSXguy]

I'm sitting next to docjohn. : - )

 

[docjohn]

...............I hope it doesn't rain.....

 

[krea.tion]

Says the guy with the GT-R. Exactly what I would own as a practical supercar if I had the means. Insane performance with room for my wife, kids and space left over to pack for a weekend trip.

I think thats the best part about the car really. Not to mention with the AWD, you can put some Blizzaks on in the winter (I live in Canada) and it can hang out in the snow all day. Sadly, I sold the car earlier this year. I'm hoping that the NSX is everything the GT-R offered but with that extra touch of sexiness and exoticness.

 

[NZNick]

That was the USA imports. Worldwide was about twice that.

The figures that I have say that there were more than 19,000 NSX produced, of which more than 16,500 had the 3.0l engine (incl. all automatics), less than 2,500 had the 3.2l engine.
This equates to less than 1,200 per year average over 16 years - however more than half the total number of cars were made before 1992 (~11,000).
The data I have shows a discrepancy of 382 units (19,005 produced, 18,623 sold by the end of 2005), so there is some flexibility over the precise numbers.

Source

[TABLE="width: 1200"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Calendar Year[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1990[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1991[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1992[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1993[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1994[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1995[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1996[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1997[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1998[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1999[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2000[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2001[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2002[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2003[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2004[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2005[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Production[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2548[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8422[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1272[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]704[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]917[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1515[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]504[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]535[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]509[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]341[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]289[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]286[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]369[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]320[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]235[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]239[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]19005[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cum. P[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2548[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]10970[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]12242[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]12946[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]13863[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]15378[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]15882[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]16417[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]16926[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17267[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17556[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17842[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18211[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18531[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18766[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]19005[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sales[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2025[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]6514[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2225[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1421[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]986[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1405[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]751[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]717[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]456[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]364[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]313[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]245[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]363[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]327[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]240[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]271[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18623[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cum. S[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2025[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8539[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]10764[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]12185[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]13171[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]14576[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]15327[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]16044[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]16500[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]16864[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17177[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17422[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]17785[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18112[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18352[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18623[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]stock[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]523[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2431[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1478[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]761[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]692[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]802[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]555[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]373[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]426[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]403[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]379[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]420[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]426[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]419[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]414[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]382[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]382[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]

 

[N Spec]

The figures that I have say that there were more than 19,000 NSX produced and sold, of which more than 16,500 had the 3.0l engine (incl. all automatics), less than 2,500 had the 3.2l engine.
This equates to less than 1,200 per year average over 16 years - however more than half the total number of cars were made before 1992 (~11,000).
The data I have shows a discrepancy of 382 units (19,005 produced, 18,623 sold by the end of 2005), so there is some flexibility over the precise numbers.
Source

I knew my memory was close. So it was closer to 9-10K units worldwide. I'd say the NSX had quite a reception when it was first introduced.

 

[Midnight_Raven]

N-Spec it's about 18-19K worlwide, not 9-10K units worldwide.

Either way please continue....