Japanese cost of new NSX(and other inquiries)

[Troll Patrol]

RX8 sounds like a wonderful car. Have fun with it! And thanks for stopping by.

 

[Devilish]

Enjoy your RX-8.

Thanks man, I am sure I will. Enjoy your NSX, and dont be ashamed to give the thumbs up to lesser cars that display novel engineering and performance on the road. For what it is worth, the generalizations of the NSX owners I have come across dont apply to you.

 

[Devilish]

I get your point, but you don’t get ours. You are asking for our opinions and we gave it. Right now it just seems like you don’t like what we are trying to tell you, and trying to convince us that we are wrong. I weighed in your price and time constraints, and thought that the RX8 is better for you based on those factors only.



You say you’ve done your research, but this is another statement that show’s that you haven’t read the FAQs. First off, the car in my sig is a ’95 NSX-T. It is relatively the same as the older coupes except for the T-Top. I own a ’01 NSX-T. The changes are not minute in 97. All the major mechanical changes happened in 97.



There will always be problems with cars. The main concept is that how many NSXs relative to the entire NSX population have problems? Not a lot. How many RX8s have problems relative to the entire population? I still feel its too early to tell.

I don’t doubt there are some owners that are still running their original engine, but the problems in the FD3S RX7 are well documented. Opinion is not fact.

Also, I see more contradictions here from your previous posts. You claimed in your previous post that they break down after 150K. Now you claim you know of many that can go beyond that mark with no problems.



Okay, another contradiction and demonstration of your lack of research. They sold more RX8s already, so out with the last 2 factors on your list. The FD did not have a 10 year run. Everyone knows that! It was only available from ’93-’95.

http://alecto.bittwiddlers.com/vehicles/rx7-numbers.shtml



Like I said, we already gave it. You just refuse to listen. Get the RX8.

I think your heart is in the right place, so I am going to break it to you lightly. They made FD's until 2002 in Japan. They have sold more RX-8s than they have ever made FD's, anywhere. Also, the FAQ here led me to believe that the major changes in 97 were the addition of a 6-speed, targa top, and body styling; as well as a slight power boost. I dont consider these MAJOR changes, though they were definately great changes. Also, i never said they break down after 150k, I said they break 150k.....just a slight reading error. Also, the reliability of the FD is not an issue, as they were twin turbo 13b's. I was referring to the NA rotaries in the FC3S, the predecessor to the FD.

You're opinions were considered, although few gave any reasoning other than they wanted me to stop asking questions. Thats not much justification in my book. Thanks for not tarnishing the reputation of the NSX community like so many others that posted in this thread.

 

[RyRy210]

Re: Re: Re: Apologies and explainations

As opposed to what, the old RX-8's? Do I even need to comment on your intelligence level?

Don't even go there. Although I haven't had the pleasure to meet Ken in person, he is one of the most intelligent and unbiased individuals on this board.

You are a hypocrite. Talking about how we are biased when its obvious the only person who is biased is you.

 

[RyRy210]

I think your heart is in the right place, so I am going to break it to you lightly. They made FD's until 2002 in Japan. They have sold more RX-8s than they have ever made FD's, anywhere. You're opinions were considered, although few gave any reasoning other than they wanted me to stop asking questions. Thats not much justification in my book. Thanks for not tarnishing the reputation of the NSX community like so many others that posted in this thread.

Devilish, if you've read other threads I've participated in, you will know that I'm well aware of this fact. With the Spirit R being the last for the FDs. However, I thought we were only talking about the US market.

Obviously, if you have to talk about it on a global level, that's a whole different story, and obviously will open a whole new can of worms....

 

[Devilish]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Apologies and explainations

Don't even go there. Although I haven't had the pleasure to meet Ken in person, he is one of the most intelligent and unbiased individuals on this board.

You are a hypocrite. Talking about how we are biased when its obvious the only person who is biased is you.

His comment was completely unbacked and is the same that would come out of a Honda Civic fan's mouth about any car. He deserved that. No major reviewer has said the 8 was horrible. If he is so intelligent, he could definitely do a better job of showing it.

 

[nsxtasy]

His comment was completely unbacked and is the same that would come out of a Honda Civic fan's mouth about any car. No major reviewer has said the 8 was horrible.

Which comment is that, exactly? The one that said you hadn't done your research (which you have shown, over and over)? The one that said that you picked the worst results for the '91-94 NSX (which, if you had done your research, you would know are virtually identical for all years)? Or the imaginary one - since you are implying that I said the RX-8 is horrible - which I never said?

Thanks for the support regarding my intelligence, guys, but anyone can read this topic and judge for himself the intelligence (or lack thereof) of those who post things like "You're an idiot". At least, until Lud gets around to deleting those posts...

 

[Devilish]

Which comment is that, exactly? The one that said you hadn't done your research (which you have shown, over and over)? The one that said that you picked the worst results for the '91-94 NSX (which, if you had done your research, you would know are virtually identical for all years)? Or the imaginary one - since you are implying that I said the RX-8 is horrible - which I never said?

Thanks for the support regarding my intelligence, guys, but anyone can read this topic and judge for himself the intelligence (or lack thereof) of those who post things like "You're an idiot". At least, until Lud gets around to deleting those posts...

I feel I owe you an apology. I was confused as to who Ken was and I assumed it was Modernceo. That is who i said needed to back up his intelligence level. I merely called you an idiot to justify you're claim that I was being "hostile". (It was sarcasm) Up until that point I had said nothing hostile. Im sorry that this sites stats are not correct. I apparently mistakenly assumed that the NSX forum FAQ would have correct information in it. My mistake. I didnt pick the worst results, I picked the only good compilation of stats I could find. If you have a better one, please provide the link. I have nothing against learning something new.

BTW that link was great, thanks for the information. I am hardly a mathmatician or engineer.

 

[Modernceo]

How much torque does your NSX have at 1000 RPMS? The eight has about 130. It doesnt rise much, but it starts higher than most. Torque really only matters when you are getting the car started moving, HP takes over after that.....You must have drove a different car than any major reviewer I have ever run across, NO ONE has reported being remotely disappointed with the car. Several reviewers were actually pleasantly surprised with the cars driving experience. Take your hot shot mouth to another thread please.

Devilish, I think the RX8 peak has like 150 lbs of torque. Ill bet at 1000 rpms the Rx8 has something silly like 90-110 lbs of torque at that point. Would be interesting to see a dyno sheet though.

 

[nsxtasy]

I feel I owe you an apology.

Accepted.

Im sorry that this sites stats are not correct. I apparently mistakenly assumed that the NSX forum FAQ would have correct information in it. My mistake. I didnt pick the worst results, I picked the only good compilation of stats I could find. If you have a better one, please provide the link. I have nothing against learning something new.

The stats in the FAQ (here) include a lot of the published numbers; you can also view a lot of the magazine articles themselves in links on this web page in the FAQ. As I indicated earlier, the test results vary, but for the '91-94 NSX, they cluster around 5.2-5.4 0-60 and 13.7-13.8 1/4 mile. Yes, Motor Trend got 5.6 on a '93, and Sports Car International got 5.03 on a '91, and Automobile 5.0 on a '94, but these are really outliers, as are the 1/4 mile times outside of the "consensus" range.

 

[Modernceo]

Re: Re: Re: Apologies and explainations

As opposed to what, the old RX-8's? Do I even need to comment on your intelligence level?

As opposed to just about any car thats marketed as a sports car.

Why is the RX8 such a piss poor seller in the market ? Is it because its designed as a sports car and has no performance to back it up ? Yes. Is it because its overrated performance wise by the manufacturer and has been publicly flogged for overrating its performance ? Yes .

Mazda has done an outstanding job with their new lineup of cars in the marketplace, and I think out of their entire lineup of cars the RX8 has let a lot of people (including diehard mazda enthusiasts) down.

Comment on my intelligence level ? Is that your best comeback to a discussion we are having on a car ? When we are talking about cars and you have to break it down to an intelligence issue, it makes me think you have no other facts to back yourself up with so you have to take it to a personal level. Thats pretty lame in my book.

Have another try, come back with some good facts about the Rx8 and its performance and handling and how it compares to all other cars under 35k then we can continue our discussion. Then we will see whos got the intelligence.

 

[nsxtasy]

I think the RX8 peak has like 150 lbs of torque.

According to Edmunds, the peak torque of the RX-8 is 159 ft-lbs at 5500 RPM, and peak horsepower is 238 at 8500 RPM. This compares with around 210/270 for the 3.0-liter 5-speed '91-96 NSX, and 224/290 for the 3.2-liter 6-speed '97-04 NSX. The curb weight of the RX-8 is similar to the '91-94 NSX Coupe (3,0xx pounds).

 

[Modernceo]

Better yet, ill just name off some cars for you to compare the RX-8 to Devilish. Investigate the power, torque, quarter mile times and slaloms of a few cars. In case you cant find the specs on these cars which are in the same general price range ill share you the results (all of these cars are superior to the RX8 performance, and handling wise) and are true sports cars for their price in the 27-35K range.

350Z
Subaru Sti
Evolution 8

Hell, lets even toss in the new 2005 Mustang thats coming out. Thats going to have 300 hp and 315 torque. I didnt include this in the listing above as I figured you wanted to compare japanese sports cars.

 

[gheba_nsx]

No... really... nice car!


go for it...

 

[Modernceo]

According to Edmunds, the peak torque of the RX-8 is 159 ft-lbs at 5500 RPM, and peak horsepower is 238 at 8500 RPM. This compares with around 210/270 for the 3.0-liter 5-speed '91-96 NSX, and 224/290 for the 3.2-liter 6-speed '97-04 NSX. The curb weight of the RX-8 is similar to the '91-94 NSX Coupe (3,0xx pounds).

Exactly. Thanks for posting the exact numbers nsxtasy. The extra 60lbs of torque for a car with similar weight really helps !

Devilish, I want to try and end this thread with a note : My posts were never meant to be personal, I just think there are other better values for your money. If you are dead set on the Rx8, then dont listen to me, but if your partially open to other cars, check out the 350Z, the G35 coupe, the Evolution 8 and Sti, check out the new Gto from Pontiac if you dont mind Domestics, etc.

If your still set on the Rx8, well then go for it.