fficeffice" /><o
></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>></o>
I bought a 91 because...
More headroom = PFFFF 0.3mm? OMG so much, I can wear a Viking Helmet lol!
Lightest of all models = Lighter by 100 lb's (removing the a Targa cover + spare tire does the trick) but still SLOWER than a stock Na2
Stiffer chassis than a T = I'll give you that, but unless you race you NSX @ the nationals you will not really feel any performance loss
Less expensive to buy = THAT'S IT
OBD1- can custom tune ECU = PFFF Unless you are with BIG Turbos you don't really care about it
1. I have a friend who told me he got an extra 20-30 HP by just doing a tune. So I thought I would ask if its true. I thought If I did a tune, perhaps I should dyno it to see what HP and Torque increases it created. I assume the car was tuned for performance already... maybe its more an issue with the chevy cobalt he drives.
2. My getting pulled over story: I really didnt even realize my speed was increasing until I saw the State Police car pull out from the center median and accelerate to intercept. Seems traffic was doing about 65 to 70 when I first got on the expressway. Then cars started pulling up and speeding ahead... Before I knew it I was doing three digits. It was so smooth that I didnt even realize it at all. It seemed safer at 100 than my 3.2TLS felt at 75. So smooth, no shaking, solid... no sense of speed really.
Anyway, if you can beleive it, he let me go. I thought for sure I was toast when I saw him pull out and intercept, when I looked down and saw the speedometer reading.. I figured it would be worse than just a ticket.
Used the cruise control the last two days... but there is no law about how fast you get to the speed limit right?
></O>></O>></O> ></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>[/QUOTE]Used the cruise control the last two days... but there is no law about how fast you get to the speed limit right?
<O
<O
></O>></O>></O>ath o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></Vath><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock><v:shape id=Picture_x0020_1 style="VISIBILITY: visible; WIDTH: 12pt; HEIGHT: 12pt; mso-wrap-style: square" alt="http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif" type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1027"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\James\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.gif" o:title="tongue"></v:imagedata></v:shape><O></O>></O><O
<O<O
Yeah, they said that at first - not now with the 997.2! The first water coolers had tons of problems and did until the 997 and even it had problems - like the RMS or the intermediate shaft bearing failure - read - ENGINE BLOW on the bearing deal for the 996 and even into the first 997s! Wouldn't have one - but the new one is promising. I'd still love to have a stable where I could have a 67S and etc., ending with a Carrera S. Don't forget - Walter Rohl - Porsche test car man and great racer - is now driving a new Turbo with -----PDK - paddle shifters -yep that's right! Course he gets super discounts - right. But here's a man that has driven them all.
></O>></O>></O>></O>> </O><O
<O<O
OK, sure get the pristine model that is perfect has had all the maintenance brought up to date - just perfect - right - OK - now go find me one! I mean I'm with you there - low price - entry level - perfect condition - they come along once in a blue moon! <O
The point was in my advice that I believe you missed is this - cause your example is the mega exception- by getting the newest model you have more time before you have to do expensive maintenance - that was the point. The other point is this - the later model got you a targa roof, more power/displacement and a 6 speed and the interior is nicer - for most drivers - that's a nice trade up! Now does that mean I don't like my 91 - NO - not at all - I love my 91 - but is it getting a bit old - yes - did it need lots of maintenance - enough, yes and it came with a pile of receipts and only 42k on the odo. I still spent 6k on the car and now have 34k in a 91 - is that a good deal ???? Could I sell it for that??? You tell me. <O
So point I'm trying to make and that Bruce Anderson was trying to make with that "buy the newest model and best example you can afford" goes for any point you choose to enter the market! Buy the best example and newest cause you'll have less problems and have a "better" car - subjective statement perhaps. <O
Many don't want a project car - many just want a new car with the latest and greatest and the last of the NSXs fits that bill for them. That's what I meant. Now for those that want to mod their cars - well I might recommend an entirely different tact. For those that want a car they can afford cause they can't buy the latest model with the lowest miles - they might opt for your idea - a low mile early model in perfect shape and they might wait to get one for - ooooohhh I'd say 2 years and maybe more. Time is moving on and those low mile pristine early cars are fast fading away and those that remain are in the hands of individuals that WANT them. That's my guess. <O
So tell us - How long did it take you to find your pristine perfect "red" one? Just give us the particulars of that car - and remember red is the easiest to find - cause they're more of them it seems. You try that with white and see what you get? I've seen really one in the last year that I had to have and it was gone in 12 hours! Every other low miler I found needed a ton of maintenance cause nothing was done and the dealer - right dealer cause they're apparently the ones that get them- wanted a SUPER premium for em even with the maintenance not done - most aren't willing - me included- to bite on that - most are willing to spend 40k+ on a 93. Not when my good buddy here in Atlanta found a 2004 in the 40k range with 23k miles on it. That's what I'm talkin bout - now those deals don't grow on trees either - he got a super deal, admittedly. Might cost anyone else more - but I think that more folks would agree with me on the latest model best example you can afford deal. And that statement runs the gammut - it actually includes your example - so in the final analysis we most likely agree with one another.
></O>></O>></O>></O>></O><O
<O<O
Now, you can't be saying you wouldn't want one - could you??? LHD that is..... I mean an R - late model - R - you wouldn't like to have that? How bout the first gen R ???? I'll take either one but I can't afford either - so it's moot. Richard Hammond slammed the R - he was a turkey for that!I know everyone would agree with me there! Well most anyway.<O
Love discussions like this - no dis MakemineRed. I like your posts and I think we are both pretty much on the same page if we were talking to one another. So long for now.<O
Tim
></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>></O>
BAHAHHA Awesome, I thought you were been extra googly crazy like:
<EMBED src=http://www.hulu.com/embed/JT14-vlfFLr0Q8QuNBXTCA width=512 height=296 type=application/x-shockwave-flash allowFullScreen="true"></EMBED>
....lol. :smile:
Agree...
... I dinoed mine on the very conservative DINODYNAMICS @ 260 @ the wheels .. the only other NSX i have driven was a full stock Na2, and it felt a bit slower.
It turns out that the 4.235 R&P was added to the NSX-R because race drivers were complaining that the NSX was sluggish on uphill sections of the track in 4th and 5th gear. Normally, the solution would have been to just increase engine power. However, at the time, Honda was still subject to the "gentleman's agreement" limiting power to 276- they couldn't add power. So, they reduced the final gear ratio to add more driven torque to the wheels. This made the car quicker on the uphill sections in high gear. Your Comptech headers do the same job as the 4.235 R&P.
