NSX Featured in Latest Car and Driver

[clean_green]

Agreed. If Car and Driver has a favorite, it's Honda. Cars from Honda have made the 10 Best list 80 times. In 2nd is Toyota, way down at 38 times on the list.

In the mid 90s to early '00s I would agree that Honda was "most favored" at C&D but now they are firmly pro-German and in particular BMW. Other than the horrible iDrive, C&D rarely has a bad word about them

 

[Valkyrie Pilot]

In 9 years, the 2005 lost roughly 1/3 of it's value (msrp) and they think it'll drop another 40% from that in 5 years??? Right... Maybe they think the new NSX will drive early first gens down.

Great point N Spec. To expand on this, the car went from $90K new to $57,650 which is a $32,350 reduction in ten years or $3,235 per year. If it is worth $22,543 in 5 more years then they are saying it will depreciate $7,021 per year going forward. Their little circle graph also indicates this as the dark circle (value in 2014) is closer in size to the silver circle (2005) than the light circle (2019) even though it represents half the time. In other words, they are saying that the car is going to depreciate at more than double the rate of depreciation to date. This contradicts the general expectation as described in this wikipedia reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_costs#Depreciation which shows automobile depreciation to generally be between 15% to 20% year off the car's current value and therefore the overall cost reduction actually slows over time. Even if we applied the same rate from the past 10 years, the value of the car only drops $16,175 to $41,475 making the NSX the cheaper of the two in terms of cost per mile. Of course none of this takes into account market forces that cause some cars to be collectible. This consideration would only make their anticipated value even more inaccurate.

The good news here is that for those of us who are still looking to pick up another NSX, they may have just saved us a little money. For those of us that already have one, we will have to see if this example of poor journalism has any lasting effect.

One other thought: I believe the article says they got their depreciation values from Black Book which is a paid subscription service so I could't verify that they had the correct reference. If anyone is a dealer or has access to that subscription, it would be interesting to see if they could verify that BB actually had those numbers. I find it hard to believe that a company dedicated to being experts in car values could blow it that badly.

 

[91 X]

Great point N Spec. To expand on this, the car went from $90K new to $57,650 which is a $32,350 reduction in ten years or $3,235 per year. If it is worth $22,543 in 5 more years then they are saying it will depreciate $7,021 per year going forward. Their little circle graph also indicates this as the dark circle (value in 2014) is closer in size to the silver circle (2005) than the light circle (2019) even though it represents half the time. In other words, they are saying that the car is going to depreciate at more than double the rate of depreciation to date. This contradicts the general expectation as described in this wikipedia reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_costs#Depreciation which shows automobile depreciation to generally be between 15% to 20% year off the car's current value and therefore the overall cost reduction actually slows over time. Even if we applied the same rate from the past 10 years, the value of the car only drops $16,175 to $41,475 making the NSX the cheaper of the two in terms of cost per mile. Of course none of this takes into account market forces that cause some cars to be collectible. This consideration would only make their anticipated value even more inaccurate.

The good news here is that for those of us who are still looking to pick up another NSX, they may have just saved us a little money. For those of us that already have one, we will have to see if this example of poor journalism has any lasting effect.

One other thought: I believe the article says they got their depreciation values from Black Book which is a paid subscription service so I could't verify that they had the correct reference. If anyone is a dealer or has access to that subscription, it would be interesting to see if they could verify that BB actually had those numbers. I find it hard to believe that a company dedicated to being experts in car values could blow it that badly.

Just plain lazy ass journalism.....made entire article look ridiculous after seeing that stupid depreciation graph.

Look at autotrader.com or cars.com or even eBay and Craigslist for a quick 5 minute browse and that would give you a better feel for what these cars are going for these days....that's what drives me nuts about kbb also, they seem to just go by some generic standard of depreciation of cars rather then actually do any real research.

 

[stuntman]

91 X dunno about "other" research, like depreciation/value/etc. But I can tell you they indeed performed research! :biggrin:

Thanks for posting!

I was going to look into if they actually went to the KnC rig to determine the Cg. Who did the calculations?

 

[alum04org]

Don Sherman performed the calculation(s).

 

[stuntman]

Do you have a better pic of those scribbles?

 

[nsx-sf]

I splurged at Hertz while on holiday over the Memorial Day weekend, and spent a few days with a brand new Cayman - not the S, but the base model which has comparable HP to the NSX. As soon as I got back, I hopped back in my '94 NSX and hit my favorite driving road while the memory was still fresh. My observations, for what they're worth:

1. The Cayman has an absolutely beautiful interior with great ergonomics. It really is stunning and oozes quality. In particular, I love the big rev counter right in the middle of the instruments and the simple steering wheel unadorned with useless buttons. Visibility all round is great - better than the NSX, in that there's less blind spot in the B Pillar area.

2. The Cayman's PDK (my first dual clutch experience) is actually quite fun, once I figured out the way the paddles operate (pull backward to downshift and push forward to upshift, on both paddles - which was counterintuitive to me). However, the fully automatic mode never seemed to know what gear I wanted to be in. After novelty wore off I usually found myself wishing it was a manual.

3. I was surprised to find that the Cayman got a thumbs-up from passing Porsche guys and a few compliments in parking lots, even though I honestly felt it like a bit of a knob driving it (negative "show-off" brand association) and it's lowly status in the Porsche family tree (i.e. The Hairdresser's Porsche).

4. The Cayman's engine makes a pretty nice snarly noise, but it's got nothing on the NSX - the NSX is leagues more exciting and visceral.

5. Speaking of, in they Cayman you can't actually see or get to the engine. I have no bloody idea how you get in there.

6. There was incessant interior squeaking and rattling coming from the engine compartment the whole time I was driving the Cayman, but then again this isn't a Honda we're talking about here...

7. The Cayman definitely felt very planted in the twisties with less body roll than in my NSX. It wasn't particularly soft going over the bumpy stuff - I'd say they're about equal in that regard. I was very much aware that there's lots of torque vectoring and other computerized gubbins going on the whole time in the Cayman, which diminished the experience a bit for me personally - I like to feel like I'm driving and not along for the ride.

8. There's not very much steering or pedal feel in the Cayman - getting back into the NSX afterward was a revelation, in that I could really feel a lot more of what's going on with the car. I can see why Porsche guys are throwing a fit over the latest gen cars going electric. I've not driven older Porches but I suspect they're more like the NSX.

9. The original article is spot on about the lower driving position in the NSX being more exciting and race-car-ish.

Bottom line: although you can argue it's quantitatively it's not as good as the Cayman, the NSX is definitely a much more exciting car, and put a bigger smile on my face. There's honestly no scenario where I'd choose the Cayman over the NSX except if it were my only car ... perhaps it would be a better DD.


Clarification: as we all know the Cayman is basically a Boxter with a roof, so a '94 NSX to Cayman comparison is technically the same as a T-Top to Boxter comparison :smile:

 

[Cap'n Carl]

Great write up, NSX-SF.

 

[Supra TT]

nsx values are largely dependent on what we decide to eventually sell our cars for...
if we decide to sell, that is