I am interested to hear from anyone who owns either an '89 944 turbo or an evo (or more specifically Evo MR). How does the NSX compare to either of these two cars in handling, acceleration, comfort, etc. Please let me know. I drove a '91 NSX many moons ago (in '92) - it felt like a slot-car - but because it was so long ago, I don't know how it stacks up against either of the two referenced cars.
Comparing '95/'96 NSX to Evo MR or '89 944 Turbo
- Thread starter MarkDK
- Start date
I drive a CTSC 92 NSX, had an 86 951 and had a EVO and they are really all in different classes. Whats your main concern? speed, looks, price or whatever?
The evo MR feels more like a go-kart since it has 2.1 lock to lock stearing with 13:1 ratio. The MR is AWD and will win againt the NSX in an auto X situation since the gearing is also shorter. The ride on the MR is great but my NSX-T is even softer 
Strangly i believe the NSX is more stable in long sweeper turns but the MR has a longer wheelbase.
Anyway, personally i feel the electric power steering on the NSX feels strange since it is like sometime feel manual and sometimes power? The steering is slow but probably set up for understeer and less responsive since it is a mid engine rear drive configuration which was probably a handful to design to handle well.
If I were to race someone on the track i'd take my evo since I feel it is easier to drive fast and takes less efforts. As long as it's under 130mph the evo would probably win in a race.
Compaing my 2 cars my evo wins in Accel, Handling, Braking, Comfort, Headroom, storage, and entry/exit. My NSX wins in Style, Top speed, road bumps, and probably reliablity.
Strangly i believe the NSX is more stable in long sweeper turns but the MR has a longer wheelbase.Anyway, personally i feel the electric power steering on the NSX feels strange since it is like sometime feel manual and sometimes power? The steering is slow but probably set up for understeer and less responsive since it is a mid engine rear drive configuration which was probably a handful to design to handle well.
If I were to race someone on the track i'd take my evo since I feel it is easier to drive fast and takes less efforts. As long as it's under 130mph the evo would probably win in a race.
Compaing my 2 cars my evo wins in Accel, Handling, Braking, Comfort, Headroom, storage, and entry/exit. My NSX wins in Style, Top speed, road bumps, and probably reliablity.
The power assist is variable, and there is no assist at all when the car is traveling over 35 mph.gtr said:
Dumped my two year old TransAm and bought a new 89' 944 Turbo way back when. Boy it was an upgrade. The TransAm was about to fall apart in just two years of ownership and ending up paying my dealer just to get rid of it.......At least he help me got out of the finance deal.
The 944 turbo was in a class of its own those days. Very nimble and great handling. I drove it side by side and swap cars with my friend's 300ZX Turbo in the early 90's and it was pretty much even. Somehow the 944 felted more of an extension of the driver. Hey the small 4 banger actually put out close to 300hp, at least it felt like it.
I remember drooling for the NSX when they first came out. Caught behind one at NJ Turnpike in the early 90's. The NSX was way way before its time and driving behind him made me felt so insignificant. The 944 Turbo was evolutional but the NSX was revolutional.
Its been over 10 years but I do recall that the 944 reads the road better but not necessary handles better. It's is easier to power slide the 944 out of corners and hold a steady state 4 wheel drift. Afterall, the weight distribution was theoretical 50/50. The steering feel was very direct but a little numb at large steering angles. There is a good deal of kick once the turbo spools up and can give our NSX a good run up to 70-80mph. So in a slower track, don't pick on the 944 Turbo.
Ultimately, the NSX is much more sophisticated. The VTEC is smoother than the turbo kick and it may feel subjectively slower in that range. In actuallity, the NSX has more lower end torque leading up to the VTEC. Stock NSX is sprung a little soft which isolates the driver more than the 944. Understeer is more pronounced and once the backend comes around, unexperience drivers may snap the rear end around easily. But overall performance limit of our NSX is much higher than the 944 Turbo.
If you see a low mileage 944 Turbo in excellent condition for under $10k, go for it. It is a great reliable little car. If it is in Guardsman Red and you don't want it, please drop me a line. I'll try to convince my wife to let me buy another car just for sentimental reasons. Yes I missed my 944 Turbo.
Best Regards
Paul Siu
PS: 89' 944 Turbo was the last year this turbo option was imported. Porsche had a hard time meeting the Smog requirement with this car beginning 1990. This is actually the same car as the Turbo S in the previous year. It can outrun the 911 of the same year.
The 944 turbo was in a class of its own those days. Very nimble and great handling. I drove it side by side and swap cars with my friend's 300ZX Turbo in the early 90's and it was pretty much even. Somehow the 944 felted more of an extension of the driver. Hey the small 4 banger actually put out close to 300hp, at least it felt like it.
I remember drooling for the NSX when they first came out. Caught behind one at NJ Turnpike in the early 90's. The NSX was way way before its time and driving behind him made me felt so insignificant. The 944 Turbo was evolutional but the NSX was revolutional.
Its been over 10 years but I do recall that the 944 reads the road better but not necessary handles better. It's is easier to power slide the 944 out of corners and hold a steady state 4 wheel drift. Afterall, the weight distribution was theoretical 50/50. The steering feel was very direct but a little numb at large steering angles. There is a good deal of kick once the turbo spools up and can give our NSX a good run up to 70-80mph. So in a slower track, don't pick on the 944 Turbo.
Ultimately, the NSX is much more sophisticated. The VTEC is smoother than the turbo kick and it may feel subjectively slower in that range. In actuallity, the NSX has more lower end torque leading up to the VTEC. Stock NSX is sprung a little soft which isolates the driver more than the 944. Understeer is more pronounced and once the backend comes around, unexperience drivers may snap the rear end around easily. But overall performance limit of our NSX is much higher than the 944 Turbo.
If you see a low mileage 944 Turbo in excellent condition for under $10k, go for it. It is a great reliable little car. If it is in Guardsman Red and you don't want it, please drop me a line. I'll try to convince my wife to let me buy another car just for sentimental reasons. Yes I missed my 944 Turbo.
Best Regards
Paul Siu
PS: 89' 944 Turbo was the last year this turbo option was imported. Porsche had a hard time meeting the Smog requirement with this car beginning 1990. This is actually the same car as the Turbo S in the previous year. It can outrun the 911 of the same year.
MarkDK said:
nsxtasy said:
I haven't track the NSX before but is it difficult to counter steer the NSX if there is no assist over 35mph? Or are there G sensors that powers the assist on when needed?
MarkDK said:
What is funny is that I like driving the NSX more. I don't know if it's because of the way it looks or the way it feels, the way it sit or because of the open top with engine behind
You can steer it however you like. It's not difficult at all. (Which is why so many of us enjoy the '91-94 with its manual steering.)gtr said:
No.gtr said:
drive an Evo MR and it will make up your mind.
In my mind, they can't be compared. I am very confident the Evo is a nice and quick car for the money, but as a grown man, to me it looks like a teenagers' car. I saw a 944 yesterday, a car I loved in the 80's but it looks so very old now, the styling did not transend time despite its hallowed handling.
I admit I prefer aesthetics to speed/handling/etc., if I have to choose between cars that are close in those categories.
The NSX oozes sensuality, is art on wheels, was well before its time, is one the best handling cars in the world, shouts refinement and prestige, turns heads everywhere and looks much more expensive than it costs; so, for me, a comparison is fruitless... I am clearly an NSX snob.. :wink:
I admit I prefer aesthetics to speed/handling/etc., if I have to choose between cars that are close in those categories.
The NSX oozes sensuality, is art on wheels, was well before its time, is one the best handling cars in the world, shouts refinement and prestige, turns heads everywhere and looks much more expensive than it costs; so, for me, a comparison is fruitless... I am clearly an NSX snob.. :wink:
NSX ix exotic and its looks make up for any less performance
- Joined
- 17 June 2004
- Messages
- 695
MarkDK said:
If you want a factory warranty, there is only one choice, the Evo MR.
The 89' 944 Turbo is a great car. I had one back in 1990 with some work done by Andial. The car was a lot of fun to drive and relatively strong. The handling was top notch. If you go for the 951, expect to change water pumps and clutches. At least that was my experience.
A clean 95 NSX will definitely cost a lot more than the 951. I personally would choose the NSX over the 951 because it is more refined and has aged much better over the last 15 years than the 944 series cars in my opinion. However, if you only want to spend $15k, a nice 89 944 turbo would be a good choice. My 89' turbo spanked a friend's 91' NSX numerous times. Then again my car was modified and we were in higher altitude conditions (5,000 ft).
However, it is hard to compare a $35k car to a much older $15k one. Have you considered the 968? It would be a lot nicer than than the 951 with its 3.0 motor and more modern appearance, but no boost and is still cheaper than the NSX.
In regards to the Evo, I think they are hideous looking and would not be seen driving one. I appreciate the performance of the Evo/Sti type cars, but can't stand looking at them.
I say go for a low mileage NSX.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky