Lets put this to a rest....any NSX in Chicago area wanna do a fun highway-run 
Run against a C5 coupe
- Thread starter peiserg
- Start date
Sure, I'll race you. Oh, excuse me. I mean, I will "engage in a a spirited drive."
Since you will undoubtedly pound my keister into the ground on my stock '00, kindly pull into a circle-K or 7-11 minimart at the end of the race and get me a cold soda, so when i finally catch up i won't have to wait in line.
Since you will undoubtedly pound my keister into the ground on my stock '00, kindly pull into a circle-K or 7-11 minimart at the end of the race and get me a cold soda, so when i finally catch up i won't have to wait in line.
NSX/MR2
Suspended
Peiseg,
O-ace didn't mean nothing by that satement. We all know he likes the NSX. Most, if not all sport car drivers drive spiritedly every now and then.
O-ace didn't mean nothing by that satement. We all know he likes the NSX. Most, if not all sport car drivers drive spiritedly every now and then.
Z06 = quality
I don't know what you're smoking when you say that the NSX is a higher quality car than the Z06. I've never even heard of a problem with the Z06 and we've never had a problem with ours. As for my NSX. I had to put 10k into parts and maintenance just to make it livable (sure it's 8 years old, but it only had 29.5k certified miles on it!).
The Z06 is more comfortable, faster, and at least as high quality as the NSX. If the NSX was made in America, the cost would probably be almost exactly the same. Honda has notoriously high priced cars. About 6 years ago I was looking at Acura Integras. What a waste of time. By the time I optioned out A/C, leather, !power windows, etc... the cost was unreasonable. I ended up buying a BMW 323i for just a little bit more money.
Matt
I don't know what you're smoking when you say that the NSX is a higher quality car than the Z06. I've never even heard of a problem with the Z06 and we've never had a problem with ours. As for my NSX. I had to put 10k into parts and maintenance just to make it livable (sure it's 8 years old, but it only had 29.5k certified miles on it!).
The Z06 is more comfortable, faster, and at least as high quality as the NSX. If the NSX was made in America, the cost would probably be almost exactly the same. Honda has notoriously high priced cars. About 6 years ago I was looking at Acura Integras. What a waste of time. By the time I optioned out A/C, leather, !power windows, etc... the cost was unreasonable. I ended up buying a BMW 323i for just a little bit more money.
Matt
Acuras do not have stand alone options like power windows, etc. They only have different trim levels (unless you count dealer installed accessories). So I am not sure how you optioned one out. As for quality, please do not try to pass off the interior of the Z06 as equal in quality to the NSX. My Duramax Silverado has about the same interior quality as the Z06, and it is nothing to brag about. In my opinion, your comparing the quality is apples to oranges. Take a 8 year old vette for a spin, and give me some feedback. I am not saying that they are junk, by any means, but they are not in the same league as the NSX.
It's all about perceptionof quality and value. Some say the C5, some say the NSX, I say 'Horses for courses', or to put it another way, what you like is what you drive. Vive la difference, eh?
No problem buddy...do you prefer Coca Cola or is Pepsi OK?peiserg said:Sure, I'll race you. Oh, excuse me. I mean, I will "engage in a a spirited drive."
Since you will undoubtedly pound my keister into the ground on my stock '00, kindly pull into a circle-K or 7-11 minimart at the end of the race and get me a cold soda, so when i finally catch up i won't have to wait in line.
Btw...everyone here has to realize that some people have different TASTE in cars. Anyone who can buy a Z06 can easily buy an NSX as well. One can get a nice 97+ low-mileage NSX in the $50K range, which is around what a Z06 costs. I don't think the NSX is in a "league of its own". It's definitely a nice car; I love the view of the road when driving an NSX; the interior is certainly better quality than a Corvette, but when I was looking for a sports car, I wanted POWER! I wasn't looking for a nice interior or a comfy ride. That's what the daily driver is for
I think it's been said many times....different strokes for different folks!
Have fun....and remember, it's just a car.
Coke...definantly Coke
NSX/MR2 said:
No offense was taken. I was doing the roll-the-eyes because of how many users state they were "going on a spirited drive" instead of stating they were speeding/racing, thinking it that calling the same thing by a different name somehow qualifies it as something different. that has nothing to do with ace-o. that is the point i was making with the initial thread starting statement i.e. inches per hour and utah salt flats I was making a tongue in cheek acceptance of his challenge, since i know a 620hp ANYTHING will waste my 290HP nsx. unless it's a school bus or semi or something.
oh, and coke, definitely coke.
Matt,
when you called some one smoking, you have to check yourself first buddy. If you pay a little more money for your BMW 323i compare to an integra, then you probably bought your 323i with only wheels and engine, not including interior. I usually don't like to confront people, but in this case I couldn't help but join in. I have been driven Hondas most of my life, and I have never seen a Hondas come with different options like BMW. Hondas only have trims, what you see is what you get. If you want a moonroof, you have to by another trim, and that trim will come with other options. Just recently, they added the Nav as an option. In the BMW case, they even charged you for floormats let alone power window . I almost bought a BMW, but they wanted to charge me an advertising fee for the car???... now that is ridiculous. So WHAT HAVE U been smoking Matt???.
when you called some one smoking, you have to check yourself first buddy. If you pay a little more money for your BMW 323i compare to an integra, then you probably bought your 323i with only wheels and engine, not including interior. I usually don't like to confront people, but in this case I couldn't help but join in. I have been driven Hondas most of my life, and I have never seen a Hondas come with different options like BMW. Hondas only have trims, what you see is what you get. If you want a moonroof, you have to by another trim, and that trim will come with other options. Just recently, they added the Nav as an option. In the BMW case, they even charged you for floormats let alone power window
. I almost bought a BMW, but they wanted to charge me an advertising fee for the car???... now that is ridiculous. So WHAT HAVE U been smoking Matt???.
You're kidding... right?slashmatt said:
You sure do have a problem with accuracy, don't you? Fact: All Integras came with A/C and power windows as standard equipment.slashmatt said:
BTW, when comparing Acuras vs BMWs for standard equipment, there is NO comparison. Acura provides more standard equipment than any other luxury marque, and BMW is notorious for making lots of equipment optional at extra cost. For example, let's compare the 2004 Acura TL (with 270 hp) against the 2004 BMW 330i sedan (with 225 hp). Let's list all the features that are standard on the Acura, and optional on the BMW:
Homelink Remote System
Leather Seats
Front Heated Seat
Fold-Down Rear Center Armrest
Cassette
Compact Disc Changer
HID Headlights
Moonroof
Now, let's list all the features that are standard on the BMW, and optional on the Acura:
None
That's why the base sticker price on the Acura is only about $2300 less than the BMW ($33.2K vs $35.5K), but the difference when they're comparably equipped becomes more like $8K ($33.2K vs $40.9K). The simple fact is, any $30K+ luxury car nowadays should come with leather, heated seats, HID lights, and sunroof as standard equipment. And most of them come with these features. But BMW charges extra for them, and Acura does not.
Please try to get your facts straight in the future. When your assumptions are so far from reality, your conclusions become meaningless.
The last sentence made you sound like Mr. Spock...cool!
You should see my ears...NoSeX4U said:
...facinating...
We can all throw out whatever figures support our case as I stated previously. The numbers I stated were from the last time CD tested the NSX and it happened to be in 1999. As far as the Viper and Z06 be careful what you compare. The new Viper is certainly quicker than the 405 Z06 but the older version cannot "easily beat" the Z06-405. Better stick with what you know best - the NSX.
An entirely accurate statement would be that the Viper and Z06 - 405 can "easily beat" the NSX.
An entirely accurate statement would be that the Viper and Z06 - 405 can "easily beat" the NSX.
NoSeX4U said:
Fascinating too!
nsxtasy said:
Not to question you, as you are surely more knowledgeable than I am about the subject at hand (no sarcasm intended), but the base model Integra's and I think the Type R did not come with A/C standard. Still, I agree wholeheartedly with the opinion you expressed.
You are correct, Shumdit, but only for a single year when comparing with the BMW 323i.Shumdit said:
The third-generation Integra ('94-01) was available in four different model trims: the Type R, the GS-R, the LS, and the RS. The GS-R and the LS both came with air conditioning as standard equipment. The RS did not come with air conditioning as standard equipment, but was discontinued after the 1998 model year - the same model year that the 323i was introduced by BMW. Thus there was only one model year, 1998, when you could buy the base model Integra without air conditioning and the 323i. However, even for that year, the base model Integra came with power windows as standard, and leather seats were optional on the 323i, so two of the three options alleged as differences between the standard equipment of the two models were not differences at all. And, as previously noted, the difference in price between those two models was substantial (I believe list prices were roughly $17K for the base Integra vs $25K, roughly 50 percent higher, for the 323i).
Incidentally, air conditioning was optional on The Type R '97-98, standard '00-01. The reason it was originally optional was for weight savings on this model that was built for the track and is not comparable with a 323i, which makes it quite a different issue.
Glad to see that you're suddenly qualifying your statements by limiting them to the 405 hp version of the Z06.wildrice said:
Good luck with your Z06. Especially if you go up against a Viper or a 911 Turbo.
See Nsxtasy, I told you that you knew more than me!! Thanks for the additonal info.
If you look at my first post my Z06 comments were directed toward the 03 Z06. In 03 the only Z06 produced was the 405hp version. The only year of the 385 hp was 01. So, I did not "suddenly" qualify my statements. I just was more precise in one of my posts.
Indeed the Viper will better the acceleration of the 03 Z06 in the 2003 SRT-10 version. The prior versions, RT-10 and GTS, will probably also take the 03 Z06 but i would not want to bet any money on the outcome.
As far the 911 Turbo (aka 930 Turbo, Porsche Turbo, Turbo) that model has been manufactured, on and off, since the 1970's. So you need to qualify what model you are comparing the 03 Z06 to. Any model prior to 1990 will be killed by the 03 Z06. Later models tested as follows in the 1/4 mile:
2001 - 12.3 (CD)
1998 - 12.5 (RT)
1997 - 12.3 (MT)
1996 - 12.3 (MT)
(RT did a test in 1989 and the 911 Turbo ran a 13.6 second 1/4 mile.)
So you see that even the later models are very much in the same performance range of current model Z06. And again, I would not want to unconditionally put my money on the 911 Turbo. And speaking of money, the new Viper is $80k+ and the new 911 Turbo is $110K+ and the new Z06 is $52k+. So with the additional $30K - $60K of dough saved I can buy a pristine condition NSX.
Indeed the Viper will better the acceleration of the 03 Z06 in the 2003 SRT-10 version. The prior versions, RT-10 and GTS, will probably also take the 03 Z06 but i would not want to bet any money on the outcome.
As far the 911 Turbo (aka 930 Turbo, Porsche Turbo, Turbo) that model has been manufactured, on and off, since the 1970's. So you need to qualify what model you are comparing the 03 Z06 to. Any model prior to 1990 will be killed by the 03 Z06. Later models tested as follows in the 1/4 mile:
2001 - 12.3 (CD)
1998 - 12.5 (RT)
1997 - 12.3 (MT)
1996 - 12.3 (MT)
(RT did a test in 1989 and the 911 Turbo ran a 13.6 second 1/4 mile.)
So you see that even the later models are very much in the same performance range of current model Z06. And again, I would not want to unconditionally put my money on the 911 Turbo. And speaking of money, the new Viper is $80k+ and the new 911 Turbo is $110K+ and the new Z06 is $52k+. So with the additional $30K - $60K of dough saved I can buy a pristine condition NSX.
Last edited:
I bought my Integra GSR in 98 for $21k I put $5k into it with a Greddy 18G turbo kit and suspension. For a total of $26k I had a car that beat every single car in its class in performance. I drove it to work every day. It would run high 12 sec 1/4 miles, High 2:40 lap times @ Road America. Would gain on Z06's @ Gingerman. In the 6 years of ownership and 50k miles (many at the track) it has NEVER seen the dealership for a repair. Granted I sold it to buy an NSX but thats just cause I want to run 2:30's @ Road America now!
That sounds like a nice ride, T Bell. The Integra I had an opportunity to drive had no mods and was not the GS-R or R-Type, but well appointed for all that. The experience left me cold. I didn't feel any emotional response. That's the only knock on them I can say. But it's a subjective impression. On paper it's a great value.
- Joined
- 19 March 2003
- Messages
- 3,442
i conquer
I do agree with integras, i had three and they are great cars, I just dont like how some of them can be distasteful in cosmetics with raspy sounds. Nothing like a turboed 4 banger. My 92 hatch went 12.67 then a year later down to 11.98 1/4 mile and then driven home with slicks in the back. IMO acura do make great cars.
I do agree with integras, i had three and they are great cars, I just dont like how some of them can be distasteful in cosmetics with raspy sounds. Nothing like a turboed 4 banger. My 92 hatch went 12.67 then a year later down to 11.98 1/4 mile and then driven home with slicks in the back. IMO acura do make great cars.
Similar threads
