NSX Insurance, again!

[MashimaroNSX]

Having owned the top three Honda/Acura lines before in the past I can say this. I bought the s2000 before even test driving it (big mistake) and was disappointed in its low end power and feel. It was definitely a fun roadster and it had great handling but I got aggrevated when it just never decently pushed below 6000 rpms (it had great high end power though). So I traded it for an Integra Type R which everyone thought I was insane for doing at the time, but the truth is for me the Type R was a much more impressive car then the s2000 in terms of performance not only because it was more balanced throught the powerband but it was a FF car that felt like a rear wheel drive (an incredible feeling). I finally traded it (with tears) and now I got an NSX and I can tell you that the NSX is extremely well balanced compared to the s2000. The balance is what makes my driving experience a pleasure with the NSX and it's not alittle but ALOT faster then the s2000. As for the type R, i'm looking to purchase another one since the current owner that I sold it to refuses to sell it back (I don't blame him) . Because the way I see it, depending on what mood i'm in, if I want to drive I'll use the Type R, if I want to fly then I'll use the NSX.

Hope this helps
-Rob

 

[jond]

As far as insurance, its the same situation for the Type-R guys. Type-Rs dont depreciate very quick, so the book value is way less then market value.

That said, I dont think I've seen anyone have a problem getting the market value from the insurance co when it gets stolen.

 

[nsxtasy]

I bought the s2000 before even test driving it (big mistake) and was disappointed in its low end power and feel.
.
.
.
the Type R was a much more impressive car then the s2000 in terms of performance not only because it was more balanced throught the powerband
.
.
.
the NSX and it's not alittle but ALOT faster then the s2000.

You're welcome to your opinion; however, all three cars are similar in their performance profiles, thanks to the variable valve timing. They all have relatively low torque figures, which often means slow acceleration, but they make up for it by maintaining that level of torque up to very high revs. What they don't have in torque, they make up for with gearing, because they don't have to upshift until very high revs, whereas most other cars need to upshift and thus lose acceleration due to the taller gearing of higher gears. This is explained in this article.

The S2000 can accelerate in a straight line a lot faster than an ITR, although not as fast as an NSX. (Magazine test figures for 0-60 are generally 6.2-6.6 for the ITR, 5.2-5.8 for the S2000, and 4.8-5.3 for the NSX.)

For each of them, for maximum acceleration, you need to accelerate all the way to their redline (8000 for the NSX, 8400 for the ITR, 9000 for the S2000) before upshifting. Anyone looking for fast acceleration at low revs is likely to be disappointed with any of these cars.

 

[MashimaroNSX]

You're welcome to your opinion; however, all three cars are similar in their performance profiles, thanks to the variable valve timing. They all have relatively low torque figures, which often means slow acceleration, but they make up for it by maintaining that level of torque up to very high revs. What they don't have in torque, they make up for with gearing, because they don't have to upshift until very high revs, whereas most other cars need to upshift and thus lose acceleration due to the taller gearing of higher gears. This is explained in this article.

The S2000 can accelerate in a straight line a lot faster than an ITR, although not as fast as an NSX. (Magazine test figures for 0-60 are generally 6.2-6.6 for the ITR, 5.2-5.8 for the S2000, and 4.8-5.3 for the NSX.)

For each of them, for maximum acceleration, you need to accelerate all the way to their redline (8000 for the NSX, 8400 for the ITR, 9000 for the S2000) before upshifting. Anyone looking for fast acceleration at low revs is likely to be disappointed with any of these cars.

I definitely agree, I was just bringing up the balance issue in the performance not the 0-60 times, if you look at the dyno charts of an s2000 and compare it to an NSX you will see that the torque curve on the NSX is completely flat which leads to the balance that I was talking about, the s2000 doesn't gain much torque on low rpm's which make it feel slugglish at low revs. But you're definitely right, they're similar in terms of the variable valve timing and each are not too far off from each other when it comes to 0-60 times when you look at them on paper, however even in that case I feel that fractions of a second make a huge difference in terms of acceleration because it approximately takes every $10,000 to make your car 1 second faster in terms of acceleration.:smile:

 

[MashimaroNSX]

As far as insurance, its the same situation for the Type-R guys. Type-Rs dont depreciate very quick, so the book value is way less then market value.

That said, I dont think I've seen anyone have a problem getting the market value from the insurance co when it gets stolen.

Definitely agree, 2001 type R's are in the books for under 15,000 and yet they're selling for 20,000 and up if they have around 30,000-50,000 miles. But yet the insurance company will pay the market value for these cars.

 

[nsxtasy]

Definitely agree, 2001 type R's are in the books for under 15,000 and yet they're selling for 20,000 and up if they have around 30,000-50,000 miles. But yet the insurance company will pay the market value for these cars.

Quite simply, the "book values" listed with sources such as Kelly and Edmunds are just plain wrong. They use depreciation formulas which tend to be valid for mass-market cars like Accords and Civics, but are woefully inaccurate for limited-volume cars like the ITR and NSX. The values shown on their websites have nothing to do with the actual market value for an ITR or NSX.

Incidentally, ITRs with 30-50K miles tend to sell for $17-18K if they're in excellent condition, not $20K and up.

 

[Daedalus]

I just talked to the insurance guy again. It went kind of like this:

ME: I got a quote for a G35 about 1 month ago. This quote for the NSX is more than double. Why is that?
HIM: Well, the reason is that it's a much older car, so it would be worth less. [ both cars are close in value]
ME: Um, so wouldn't the premium be less too then?
HIM: Oh, wait, you're saying the NSX quote is higher than the G35?
ME: More than double.
HIM: Oh, well, that's because it's a much older car, so parts would be harder to come by, and the NSX, you know, it's "up there". I mean, it's not an exotic, but it's, you know, close, so, yeah, that's why. And parts are harder to come by. [starts repeating himself until he thinks the confidence in his voice is at an acceptable level].

I hate being fed a line. He might be right, but he sounds like he's guessing. I'm getting it insured, but I also requested a quote from Wawanesa today. Based on feedback from Prime, I expect they'll do much better on the rate.

 

[nsxtasy]

Does that sound reasonable? It costs more than double to insure a '94 NSX than a 2004 G35 coupe?

No, it doesn't sound reasonable.

I suggest you use a website like insweb.com to get quotes from a lot of different companies, and see if that holds true for the quotes you receive.

 

[Daedalus]

Thanks. Wawanesa came in better than my current provider, but only by $100/year. Insweb's lowest quote came in higher than the first 2.

 

[EN93NSX]

I insure the NSX through Hagerty collector car insurance. If you have a daily driver and only use the NSX for weekend/ pleasure driving you can insure it, they consider it an exotic because it is newer than a typical collector car. If you have any other collector cars they put them all on one policy, and their value determination is up to you. In the event of a total loss they pay the agreed upon value. They are a great company to work with and even offer roadside assistance and guaranteed flat bed towing. We have an old Impala SS on the same policy as the NSX and we pay around $900 for the whole year.
Hope this helps!

 

[TyraNSX]

Double check Hagerty & Grundy. I called them both about a week ago & one of them will not let you reinstate collision & liability for 1 year from when you drop it. This can be a problem if you are in the snow belt & drop everything except comprehensive for the winter. You couldn't reinstate for the spring. I have St. Paul Travelers for the condo & both cars. I only have a 30 day wait to reinstate coverage and the rates are good.