Just suppose other sportscars had 280 HP then where would...

[MvM]

the NSX be.

Just for the sake of argument.
When the NSX came out cars like the Porsche 911, the Ferrari 328/348 had all comparable horsepower, around 250-300. Since then, a lot of cars have been upgraded or replaced by new models with bigger engines and more HP. The 911 now has 320, the 911-TT has 420, the 360 Modena has 400, the Z06 has something like 400. The NSX lags behind with only 290 HP and there are lots of complaints that it should need more to stay competitive.
I am wondering though. Suppose the Japanes rule of 280HP for street cars was applied everywhere and the cars mentioned above had similar HP as the NSX at around 280-300, then where would the NSX stand in terms of handling and performance, both on the street and on the track. In other words, take the NSX-competitors with all their new suspension geomitries, their computer-controlled shocks etc. but with engines at 300 HP and pit them against the NSX as sold today (or yesterday, or back in '95). How would it rank?

Personally, I think the NSX would be in the top 5 but then again, what do I know

 

[dougjgreen]

Very Simple - It would rank within the top 1.

On the other hand, I personally don't find the NSX to be under-powered. I find it to be a superb balance between efficiency and power, relative to the car's weight. I am personally of the view that putting a bigger powerplant in the car would make it less attractive as a daily driver. But I don't race the car. I also assume that anyone who DOES race the car would add mods such as a Supercharger or Nitrous to the power plant.

 

[Brian2by2]

Ummm...I believe that even with 290 hp the NSX is still one of the Top 5 sports cars out there...

 

[dougjgreen]

BTW, the definition of a "sports car" is one that offers spirited, enjoyable, high performance driving on the road. It is NOT: "the fastest car in a straight line", nor is it even "the fastest car around an oval track".

By this definition, I think it's pretty clear that the NSX IS STILL the top sports car out there, with only the Porsche 911 - 996 family being in the same league.

To even suggest that anyone would WANT to drive a Viper over an NSX, when there was ANY goal other than to win a straight line sprint, is ludicrous. And I don't drive straight line sprints. The 17 year-olds in my area who own Rice-rockets do. And they tend to kill people in the process.

I drive from one destination to another. Sometimes stop and go, sometimes interstate highway, and often-times on twisty mountain roads. And I want to do it fast, yet safely, but most important, very enjoyably. And I want a fast, attractive, comfortable, and reliable car to do it in. And for this purpose, there is not a single vehicle out there that can TOUCH an NSX. Certainly not a P-O-S Viper, which frankly, can't match an MR2 or even a Mustang in this mission, let alone an NSX.

 

[NSX/MR2]

The Viper is not a bad car to serve its purpose, go fast. However, the thought of owning one never cross my mind, beside the owner group seem to be a bit more arrogance than what would consider be tolerable.
It is hard to compete with the NSX when it come to looking for a vehicle with a whole package. If I want to go fast, I would easily get about 300-320hp from the MR2, a mini-NSX in my eyes. Ya, that little mid-engined with that much power can put a lot of other cars into trouble, and to top it off, it's still more reliable than a Viper. However, don't push the MR2 too much, though, because any hp power beyond the spec that I already mentiond and you would be in trouble. I love the NSX/MR2 combo, one for daily driving, one for the weekend, and both vehicles can be track, or sometime drag race if you want to test your driving skill. Just my opinion, of course!
Take Care,
De

 

[dougjgreen]

Well, I'm now wrestling with the dillema of whether to sell my MR-2 Spyder, now that I got my NSX. My BIG car, when I need to haul passengers or a full trunk of stuff, is an E55 - Ironically, it's faster than a stock '95 NSX in a straight line. But it's not anywhere near as fast on anything with turns. In fact, it's rather startlingly boring to drive. I would describe the E55 as a living room encased in a bank vault, with a rocket engine attached to it.

It's really hard to rationalize owning TWO 2-seat sports cars, although there places I sometimes go that I wouldn't drive either my NSX or my E55, and the MR-2, while nice, is not so valuable as to have me afraid to park it in the street. In reality, the MR-2 is a very practical car for 1 person to use as a commuter, if they own a larger vehicle as well, but it can't carry a passenger and a grocery bag at the same time. I suppose that it will come down to whether I can get over $18K for it, in which case I'd sell it. If I can only get $15-16K for it, I'd probably just keep it. It's the range in the middle that has me torn.

- '95 NSX-T black/black stock w/49.9K miles
- '01 MR-2 Spyder silver/charcoal w/27.5K miles
- '02 Mercedes AMG E55 silver w/6k miles

 

[NSX/MR2]

No, it's not rational to own 2 two seat sport cars when you have other things, like luggage or family in mind. I didn't know that the MR2 that you have is the third gen. I, myself prefer the second gen. for some reason. That 3SGTE, and the body line can really put on a show if you want it to. I know at least two guys with the NSX/MR2 combination. As far as sport cars go, I only think MR2 and up, nothing below. You can come out to the meet that I already pm you about and check out all the cars if you want to on the 14th.

You can sell the Spyder, and if you want a fun and cheaper car for getting around, you can alway pick up another MR2 later on. The Mercedes is very convenience for other purposes, of course.
Take care

 

[dougjgreen]

BTW, I also used to own a 2nd generation MR-2 (a turbo). In 1995, I traded it for a Supra, which was the dumbest move I ever made with respect to car ownership. The MR-2 was a FAR more practical, and enjoyable car than the last gen. Supra.

I think that the gen-2 MR-2 WAS a better car than the current MR-2 Spyder. Mainly because it was more powerful, and it had a useable trunk, making it far more practical as well. But the MR-2 Spyder is more fun to drive as a stock machine, and also, it is a much less costly car than the gen-2 MR-2, which, when it was discontinued in the mid '90s, was selling for $30K, while the Spyder came out in '99 for $25K.

 

[NSX/MR2]

Ya, and I remember about how how all the parts hadve to be special order, too. Nowaday, you can pick one up (T or non T) for about 4.5- 6 grands, still a great deal in my opinion.

 

[Number9]

I'll take a Lotus Elise with 280 HP please. Now that would be one heck of a mixed duty track/street car... Given the original HP constraint, the NSX would be a contender, but seriously, all the major auto makers know how to develop big HP, so there's no practical reason for the constraint. Even for DE style track driving, big HP is fun - since you're doing a drag race from corner to corner anyway. I love the fact that we're in one of the rare periods where the manufacturers are engaged in an HP war (since I missed the prior ones) - 500HP showroom stock Mercedes, WOO HOO!!!

 

[dougjgreen]

There IS a downside to the HP war. The new E55 with close to 500 horses just blew the resale value of my 2002 E55 that had 350 HP right out of the water. Which is a darn shame, because who REALLY needs to take a 2 Ton, 4 Dr. sedan to 60 MPH in 4.5 seconds, as opposed to 5.3? All you'll do is frighten the wife and kids. And they're BOTH electronically limited at 180 MPH anyways.

 

[Number9]

I guess I just view cars differently from you. I think of them pretty much the way I regard computers - they have a utilitarian value and an entertainment value. If you want to be at the bleeding edge in GHz, HP, or other performance metric, you'll have to pay and you'll still be obsolete tomorrow. Upside is that you had a whole lot of fun today. C'est la vie...

BTW, I agree with you that one ought not explore the outer parameters of the automotive performance envelope on the street, with or without passengers.

 

[MvM]

I'm not sure if the US Evo and/or WRX are the same as those in Europe. Here are the specs I have:

Mitsu Evo VI - 280HP
0-100 km/hr: 5.0
0-200 km/hr: 20.7
Nurburgring: 8.25
Hockenheim: 1.18.4

Mitsu Evo VII - 280 HP
0-100 km/hr: 4.8
0-200 km/hr: 21.9
Nurnburgring: 8.25
Hockenheim: 1.18.2

Subaru WRX - 218HP
0-100 km/hr: 5.8
0-200 km/hr: 29.3
Nurnburgring: 8.37
Hockenheim: 1.19.4

Honda NSX-R - 280HP
0-100 km/hr: 4.9
0-200 km/hr: 18.2
Nurnburgring: 8.09
Hockenheim: 1.14.6

All these times are with the same semi-professional drivers from the German Sport-Auto magazine. The same drivers which will take part in the 24-hour race at the Nurnburgring this weekend and where one NSX-R and another NSX will take part as well.
The Mitsu times are equal to that of the BMW M3, M5, 911 and Audi RS4. The WRX is slower, but still faster than, say, a Aston Martin DB7, Audi TT, Audi S4 and about equal to a S2000.

Both the Mitsu and the Subaru are great cars, certainly for the money, they might be the best bang for the buck (the Mitsu a little more than the Subaru). With some tuning they can make life for ANY sportscar, whether NSX, Porsche or Ferrari very difficult although their strength lies in speeds from 0-200 km/hour. Above that, they run out of steam.

 

[NSX/MR2]

How about this for a change? I will keep buying the NSX, in addition to which ever cars that will cross my mind. I, myself respect every single sport car for what it is. Exactly because of that, every meet here in SD, we have NSX, 996TT, Modena, ZO6, S2K, M3, Supra, and MR2. One of the point that draw me to the NSX is its reliability, good view from the inside, exclusiness, and beautiful line. you keep buying whatever else that you like, provided if they don't break on you first, and I will stick with the NSX.

 

[mlambert890]

The NSX-R pulled a 7:56 at the ring... that's pretty damn respectable. As for the NSX being "overprice junk" its kind of hard to take someone who has displayed so little personal integrity seriously. Go ahead and flame me; it will only prove my point...

 

[NSXBOX]

I'm stuck in a similar scenario.. I currently have an M3.. and thinking to buy a differnt car.. the 03' Sti, 01 Tommi Makkinen Evo 6.5 and 94' NSX go for the same money here in OZ.. after much thought I'm going to pick up an NSX.. y ? the Sti and evo maybe newer and go down the 1/4 mile quicker and have more HP potential I still can't go past the fact its a subaru and mitubishi built from the same range as the normal imprezas and lancers.. whereas the NSX is a unique platform. I dont know bout the track but the NSX has presence on the street.

but true the NSX has lost out in the HP wars. I mean my M3 is making more power from the 3.2.. the NSX stock isn't breaking the N/A summit of 100HP/L.