Maintenance cost/reliability of NSX vs. Porsche 911 or BMW M3?

[PiL]

Hello!

This is my first post. I discovered this site and WOW! I am now really considering a NSX. You guys have some sweet rides. What's funny is that I never really considered the Acura NSX. I knew they were nice cars, but never seen one tuned/modified. My next toy was narrowed down to a Porsche 964 Coupe or a BMW e36 M3. Now the Acura is in the running!

Now to my questions. How would maintenance cost differ from the BMW and P-car? Less with the NSX? And how is reliability of the Acura at higher miles? I am assuming that the Acura wins in both areas, but I want to know from you guys. I heard tht a guy with a Porsche 964 dumped over $40k into his car over a 10 year period on maintenance and repairs! Also, how do all of these great cars compare in performance?

Also, what is the seating configuration? Are there back seats in the NSX?

One last thing. This car would strickly be a weekend car. I have a company car and my wife drives our famliy car. Thanks for any advice/input!

 

[Eric5273]

How would maintenance cost differ from the BMW and P-car? Less with the NSX?

That is correct.

And how is reliability of the Acura at higher miles?

Well, I have heard that 964's are very reliable also. I've seen 964's with well over 100k miles and still running strong, so I'm not sure if one is better. Both cars can take a lot of miles.

how do all of these great cars compare in performance?

The NSX should out-perform the 964 unless you are talking a turbo. The turbo is faster than an NSX, especially the 3.6 turbo which was available in 1994 (the last year of the 964).

Also, what is the seating configuration? Are there back seats in the NSX?

Nope.......no back seats in the NSX, but the trunk is a bit larger than in the 964, and the seats in the 964 are so small I doubt you could fit anyone back there anyway.

This car would strickly be a weekend car. I have a company car and my wife drives our famliy car.

Then who cares about back seats. I would say that the NSX and 964 are both great cars and are both a step above the BMW. Just my opinion. You can't go wrong with either of those 2 cars.

 

[nsxtasy]

How would maintenance cost differ from the BMW and P-car? Less with the NSX?

It should be easy to figure out. Just make some assumptions regarding how many miles you would be driving over an extended period of time, and calculate the maintenance for that period. You can use the maintenance schedule and costs in the FAQ for the estimates for the NSX.

 

[4AU4LIFE]

I know this is going to sound stupid, but I have never heard of a P-car 964?

 

[RichH]

Before owning my NSX.

I owned numerous Porsche cars
(including Turbos) for more than 20 years.

THEY COST MORE TO MAINTAIN.

F Cars cost much more then the P-Cars!

NSX 7 years ownership experience. Very happy!!

 

[nsxtasy]

I know this is going to sound stupid, but I have never heard of a P-car 964?

I had never heard of it either. A quick web search showed that it's simply the version of the 911 that was produced from 1989 to 1993.

 

[Number9]

Regarding repair costs between the NSX and M3, the M3 repairs are generally cheaper but are required far more frequently than NSX repairs. Net maintenance on my NSX is cheaper than on my two (soon to be 3!) E36 M3s.

 

[insx]

Ted,
Please give me a ride in your M3
For me My E46 M3 cost me $0 in maintenance my 2 years of ownership.
No problem at all, ZERO problem.
I only have 7k miles as of now.
All maintenance covered under warranty for 3 years.

 

[CRX B16B VTEC]

hm... if I was deciding between those 3 this is my thoughts:

P cars look so dated in design as they keep on changing them slightly. Where I live, on my street (about 200 metres long) alone there are atleast 5 Porsche 911 variants, the number triples if you include Boxters. Oh and 911 looks too much like Boxsters.

M3... is just a saloon, so for a weekend car I don't need this. There are more M3s around here than Porsches. BMWs are so popular in London you see them as much as you see VW Beetle in Mexico City (yes I did live there). E36 are so cheap now it would be good to buy one to thrash around (on a track of course), then again, I don't like big saloons. Looks just like the 316, and E36 is now very popular in rough part of town... I guess because BMWs and Mercs are kind of dream cars, and a status... sorry I am not a BMW man, (my bro is, he buys nothing but BMWs)

NSX, this would be my choice everytime. Although, its much harder to find one to buy, and finding a good one. Maintenance costs I can't compare with other cars (as I don't know them), but I have another Honda, so I kind of trust their technology more... despite what the magazines say about NSX is just like owning a Civic, it does cost a lot more than a Civic to run!

What I considered when I was buying my NSX was 1998 BMW M Roadster, 1997 Porsche Boxter, 1998-2000 Lotus Elise, 2000 Honda S2000.

 

[PiL]

Regarding repair costs between the NSX and M3, the M3 repairs are generally cheaper but are required far more frequently than NSX repairs. Net maintenance on my NSX is cheaper than on my two (soon to be 3!) E36 M3s.

Thanks for the input. How do you compare the performance/handling of the M3 vs. the NSX?

 

[Number9]

Thanks for the input. How do you compare the performance/handling of the M3 vs. the NSX?

They both perform great but frankly for a weekend car, I wouldn't even consider the M3. The beauty of the M3 is that it is a practical, good-handling car, whereas my definition of a weekend car would be something that is just fun to drive without much regard for practicality. I prefer the NSX for the latter application and that's really the only time I ever drive it. For a pure track rat, I'd be more inclined to get the M3 just because the go-fast parts cost much less...

 

[nsxtasy]

Thanks for the input. How do you compare the performance/handling of the M3 vs. the NSX?

You are comparing an E36 M3 with an NSX. The performance and handling on the NSX are superior in every way. This is no sleight to the M3, which is very good, but the NSX is just better all over. Remember, you're comparing a car with 240 hp that weighs 3200 pounds, with an NSX that has 270 hp and weighs 3000 pounds (assuming it's a '91-94), and has a lower center of gravity and less frontal area.

The E46 M3 is a different story, and is a closer comparison. But of course, it's also more money.

 

[insx]

You better check this forum for E36 M3 to ask regarding costs and others:

http://216.118.86.224/m3forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=10

To read reviews from E36 owners:
http://m3forum.com/m3forumcgi/reviews/review.pl?Action=view&pid=2

 

[NSX-GUY]

The Porsche 964 is a 944 derivative, not a 911 derivative, no ?

 

[CRX B16B VTEC]

isn't that a 968?

 

[Eric5273]

isn't that a 968?

Correct. A 964 is the 911 model made from 1990-1994. The 993 is the 911 model made from 1995-1998 and the 996 is the current 911 model (made from 1999-current).

The 968 was the "redesigned" 944 made from 1991-1995.

 

[ChrisK]

The only thing I can offer is my 95 BMW E36 (Not M3, but 325i) cost me more in repairs in 4 months then my NSX has cost total thus far. Let see, I had ABS pump and control unit problems, SRS (Airbag) problems, brake light sensor failure warning problems, electrical problems (keeps blowing fuses after a while). I was not the original owners, but the car was on its 3rd tranny. It was replaced one under warrenty and goodwilled the last time.

 

[MvM]

Hi PiL,

First, welcome to this forum and good to hear to are thinking about the NSX as well.
I cannot comment on the cost of maintenance on the Porsche or M3, although I know that the Porsche are expensive to maintain (labor cost) where I live judiging from the remarks I have heard in talks with P-car owners.
As far as the NSX goes, I have had mine ('94) for a little over one year no and have doubled the mileage it had from 41000 km to 82000km (25K to 50K miles). Driven the car all year long in all kinds of weather, have taken it to the track on 6 different tracks in Europe, have done 150+ mph for hours at the time in Germany (and shorter times elsewhere) and have had literally ZERO problems except for changing my city-light bulbs and headlight bulbs. The car got its yearly mandatory (where I live) check-up three weeks ago and checked out OK with zero problems.
However, I do have to change my rears..... Again...

 

[1BADNSX]

For a pure track rat, I'd be more inclined to get the M3 just because the go-fast parts cost much less...

I also own both and strongly agree with this statement. Stock vs. stock, the NSX is about one second a lap faster than the M3 at tracks like Mid-Ohio. But a slightly modified M3 can be significantly faster than a stock NSX (same driver, yada, yada, yada).

Bob

 

[nsxtasy]

For a pure track rat, I'd be more inclined to get the M3 just because the go-fast parts cost much less...

A pure track rat spends most of his parts budget on brake pads and tires, not modifications. And those parts are just as expensive for the M3 as they are for the NSX.

BTW, Bob, that one-second figure doesn't jive with my experience (not for a stock E36 M3, anyway); I find that the difference in lap times at Mid-Ohio is significantly more than that... assuming comparable drivers, and that the driver doesn't tend to "baby" the NSX.

 

[Number9]

A pure track rat spends most of his parts budget on brake pads and tires, not modifications. And those parts are just as expensive for the M3 as they are for the NSX.

That's only true for you! Nobody else I know has the self-control to keep their track car stock. Heck, I can't even keep my street cars stock!

Also, if one were ever to have the misfortune of bending or breaking something, the difference in parts costs would probably be substantial...

 

[nsxtasy]

My car is not stock.

 

[1BADNSX]

Bob, that one-second figure doesn't jive with my experience (not for a stock E36 M3, anyway); I find that the difference in lap times at Mid-Ohio is significantly more than that... assuming comparable drivers, and that the driver doesn't tend to "baby" the NSX.

Ken, With a decent driver a stock NSX turns about 1:51 at Mid-Ohio and a stock M3 does about 1:52 (both numbers assume running the chicane on street tires). Adding just R compound tires puts the stock M3 at around 1:47. Modifying the M3 suspension in addition to R compounds puts the same driver at 1:44 (this assumes stock weight of 3175 lbs empty).

As you know, except for the back straight. Mid-Ohio isn't a power track and the M3 keeps up with the NSX during the turns (Car and Driver even claimed better).

Bob