Time Capsule Holds 3,000 NSXs ???

[Ski_Banker]

I'm the second owner of my '91. It had 40K miles on it when I got it ten years ago. Now it has 140K.

I drive it a lot.

Ken,
Do you remember what the early NSX market looked like back in '98? If history is *consistent* you should have seen a lot of 7 year old NSXs with 10-20k miles then. Or did you see most '91s with 25-50k miles even then?

The market for '92s, then, should have looked like the market for 2002s today, in terms of mileage, which is around ~30-35k miles nowadays.

 

[nsxman2001]

I have a 1996 red-t I bought with 18,100 mile in june 2006 from the second owner and today the car has 20,600 miles and I do drive as much as I can but I just don't have time too. I also entertained the idea of selling it but when ever I drive the car I say to myself Its worth having even though I don't drive much.

 

[TURBO2GO]

The NSX is one of a very few cars that used the old school mechanical odometers until 2005. These can easily be tampered with. I am surprised this topic has never come up. I think it is fairly easy to roll back milage on an NSX. I am sure it has been done more times than we think.

 

[goldNSX]

Wow, I don't know how you guys find these deals. I've NEVER seen an advertisement for an NSX or S2000 with so few miles for sale.

Main point: The seller was someone private, 1st owner. The price was 4k below dealer price but the car had some very minor door dings, $200 later it looked like new. Private seller means no guarranty! This keeps people backing out. I accepted that because the seller was honest and rich enough to not foul me. Of course, I've inspected the car from A to Z.

3 out of 4 S2000 buyers here can't pay cash and HAVE to finance the car.

Ergo: No guarranty and no cash: the car was for sale for about two months. As the money was waiting on my bank account and the spring was coming...here we go to hunt sweet, sweet chicks!

 

[Tony Montoya]

There's 48k kilometers on my 91 NSX. There are certain characteristics of the odometer that when compared to other low mileage NSX leads me to believe there is a problem with altered odometers.

I would buy based on condition and not miles.

 

[Ski_Banker]

Another thought, since every NSX owner I've met has been very much on the up and up. But used car dealers aren't always. I can see this happening a lot:

Guy trades in a '91 NSX. It has 80k miles. It goes through auction processes, and an unscrupulous used car dealer buys it. Used car dealer fixes the "problem" and sells it with low low cream puff miles of 34k. There's probably a way to get Carfax issues sorted out too, if you are in the business.

 

[latzke]

My 1991 has 47k miles. In the last two years I've driven it 5k miles, so 47k doesn't seem all that odd to me (at that pace it would have about 43k after 17 years).

First owner drove at at a similar pace...and I know the third (my dad) drove at the same pace for some time (10k in 4 years), then essentially stored it (1k in 3 years). If the second owner had a pace like the rest of us (2.5k in the year he owned it) it would have about 40k miles...but I think he daily-drove (10k in a year).

 

[ChopsJazz]

Ken,
Do you remember what the early NSX market looked like back in '98? If history is *consistent* you should have seen a lot of 7 year old NSXs with 10-20k miles then. Or did you see most '91s with 25-50k miles even then?

The market for '92s, then, should have looked like the market for 2002s today, in terms of mileage, which is around ~30-35k miles nowadays.

I wish I could answer this question, because then I would look like I was an informed NSX enthusiast. But the truth is, I was looking into buying a P-car and the salesman convinced me to test drive this '91. I'm glad he did. :wink:

I never saw another NSX on the market because I simply wasn't looking for one!

 

[Meeyatch1]

There is a '91 Black / Black NSX for sale locally that has 20,988 miles on it. The underside is beautiful, and the car was a 1 owner vehicle. The guy evidently did not drive it hardly at all. The kicker was that the dealer who has it told me they had to put over $6,200 into it getting everything right like the A/C system. Sitting for that long is not good for a car.

I had been considering buying it, but the dealer keeps raising the price on me, so my interest is gone. If anyone here is looking for one, let me know and I will point you in their direction.

 

[nsxsupra]

I know plenty of NSX owners locally that drive their NSXes even less than I do.

I bought my in 2003 with 22k miles.

Today after PAG meet 35k miles. I am fast approching 40k miles. For a pleasure car, I felt that I have driven it a lot. The miles is never a concern for me. 100k, 150k, 200k miles. No concern, not planning on selling, already got more than my money worth.

I am not wealthy at the moment, but in the future the more financial power I have, the less NSX will get driven.

Don't take it wrong or take it too seriously, here are some other factors:
-Leased vechicals get driven more. Dealer were giving them away with the sweet lease deal. If I remember correctly $699 or something like that.

-Some use it a everyday car becasue they can, and they consider life too short not to drive it everyday.

-Those who have two or more fun cars, will drive it less.

-Too many factors. Mileage usually will reflect on the condition. Besides Carfax, service record and smog record can be used as additional evidence.

-Earlier owners who bought new back then and keep it for a long time are more likely to drove it less than those who bought them used. Those who paid $70k~$80k back then vs those who paid $25k~$50k now. No offense, but there is got to be some differences, even though some of us theat the car all the same regardless how much we paid. This of course is purely my own personal assumption.

 

[Eclipsed]

My friend Darren here in town has a pristine 1997 Black/black Targa NSX with 12k orignial miles sitting in his garage. He Never drives it, in fact it still has the factory wax on it. Its never seen rain or snow. He's looking into buying another nsx so he can keep the 97 in the garage. I think he paid 55k for his 97 around 2 years ago and it only had 10k miles on it

 

[veronsx]

23,655 on 12-06-04 now a whopping 30,233 Enjoyed every one of those miles.

 

[lunchman]

I bought my 91 w/ 35K last May, it now has 39K. I'm amazed that I put 4k miles on it given the number of months I drove it last year and the fact that I've got two other cars to choose from. It's killing me right now to have two cars under cover for the winter, but they're both fair weather cars as far as I'm concerned.

 

[chado]

Bought my 93 last May with 20,000 miles on it. I just rolled over 30,000 (1500 from the drive back to california alone), however I don't plan on driving it as much as I have the last year. I had to demo it to all the friends and family .
Also another thing I was talking with Jason about last night was that there is something to the saying "absence makes the heart grow fonder". I know the best times I have driving the car is after its been sitting in the garage for a week or two, sometimes I try not to even see it for a while. After a week or so in my automatic daily driver the NSX feels amazing!
And I must say that mileage isnt an issue for me. I don't have any plans of selling, only possibly adding on with an 02+.

 

[Ski_Banker]

23,655 on 12-06-04 now a whopping 30,233 Enjoyed every one of those miles.

So, if *all* owners before you drove at the same, very limited, rate (7k miles/3 years) -- your car would have ~42k miles. The previous owners from the earlier 15 years must have taken better care of the car/mileage.

 

[scorp965]

Keeping the mileage down only serves to save the car for the next owner; also, if this is your intention, the premium a low mileage car fetches over an average mileage car is not really significant.

Would you rather put three times the mileage on your car, and end up selling it for $5k less after 5-10 years? 25k miles vs 75k miles, across 5-10 years, for $5k? Sounds like a bargain.

These cars are meant to be driven, do your part and take your nsx somewhere this weekend :wink:

 

[nsxsupra]

So, if *all* owners before you drove at the same, very limited, rate (7k miles/3 years) -- your car would have ~42k miles. The previous owners from the earlier 15 years must have taken better care of the car/mileage.

Assuming it is 1 owner car, the first owner obviously paid full pop, back then the car is far more significant than now. This is one of many possible reasons that is worth considering.

Someone who paid $70~80k new vs someone who paid $25~$35k used. In this scenario who are more likely to use the car more? While many including myself don't care about how much I drive the cars under enjoyable condtions, but that may not apply to everyone.

Keeping the mileage down only serves to save the car for the next owner; also, if this is your intention, the premium a low mileage car fetches over an average mileage car is not really significant.

Only applies to the owners who intend to sell. Mileage "may" reflects on conditon, not everyone can handle eye sores. We all enjoy PAG meets and enjoy looking at nice kept rides.

Would you rather put three times the mileage on your car, and end up selling it for $5k less after 5-10 years? 25k miles vs 75k miles, across 5-10 years, for $5k? Sounds like a bargain.

Very true for owners who only intend to keep the car for a few years and if they can put up with driving it everyday.

Driving multiple fun cars is a great option to have. Imagine eating suchi or Chicken:biggrin: everyday, it gets old no matter how much you like it. There are other great food choices.

 

[Ski_Banker]

Assuming it is 1 owner car, the first owner obviously paid full pop, back then the car is far more significant than now.

Someone who paid $70~80k new vs someone who paid $25~$35k used. In this scenario who are more likely to use the car more? While many including myself don't care about how much I drive the cars under enjoyable condtions, but that may not apply to everyone.

Who do you think paid "full pop" for, and has still driven the newer NSXs? Seriously, do an autotrader search. Most 2002 NSXs have the same, or only slightly fewer miles than *many* 1991 NSXs for sale. That's irrefutable.

We can discuss statistics, population sampling and demographics if you want -- doubt the conclusion would favor the "Early NSXs should have fewer miles" argument. lol

 

[Jetpilot3]

I am owner #4 and my '91 still only has 65K on the odometer.

I'm exactly the same! 4th owner and just hit 65094.

 

[nsxsupra]

Who do you think paid "full pop" for, and has still driven the newer NSXs? Seriously, do an autotrader search. Most 2002 NSXs have the same, or only slightly fewer miles than *many* 1991 NSXs for sale. That's irrefutable.

We can discuss statistics, population sampling and demographics if you want -- doubt the conclusion would favor the "Early NSXs should have fewer miles" argument. lol

If you thought that I was arguing about early car should have less miles than 02+ cars. I wasn't. Even give you a smiley:smile:.

I may have interpret your post above incorrectly. I believe you might have got me wrong.
I merely stated the possible reasons for the faster rate of accumulating mileage on 2002+ cars. Are they legitimate or not, you be the judge.

Don't lease vechicals typically get driven more?
Do owners always end up buying the car after the lease expires?
Did Honda not gave an amazing lease deal?
Most of the 02+ owners I know locally do drive their NSX a lot!! I only have to been to a couple of meets:tongue: .

I honestly am not interested in ever getting into arguments with any fellow NSX owner. No time, no well, no point, no need. You should be able to tell my posting style is a little different than in the past.

 

[NSXBill2]

I have the oldest car on here...third owner (after two older rich guys-met and delt with both)...owned since 2000...42,000 mi...never seen rain. I doubt there were ANY leases in '91. People initially PAID to be in line to pay $20-$25K cash OVER sticker. '91 cars that were passed down, private-owner-to private-owner can easily have low miles. OTOH, cars that were traded in and were ever in the hands of auction or used car dealers are suspect. Not fair to make broad statements about odometers on '91s. I bet there are still many unusually low milage (less than 60K mi) '91's that have been sold privately that are ligitimate. Don't forget, almost a third of the NSX's are '91's, so there is a realatively large number of them. Also, $85K cash in September of 1990 is a lot more than $79K selling price car loan or lease for a new '05. The car was stunning in the early '90's (to everyone, not just us) and many owners treated them like trophies for many years. Its understandable that folks don't treat the cars that way in later '90's and '00's. Just do homework on history, and I don't mean just getting a carfax. :smile:

 

[latzke]

Also, $85K cash in September of 1990 is a lot more than $79K selling price car loan or lease for a new '05.

Using the US Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator:
$62,000 (MSRP) in 1990 (when 1991 NSX came out) = $98,400 in 2007 dollars.
$85,000 (what many paid) in 1990 = $134,800 in 2007 dollars.

Considering the US government is habitually low in its CPI/inflation calculation I'd trust the reality is much larger. Using 5% avg yearly inflation (still probably conservative/low compared to real/actual inflation) to SWAG, the numbers come out as $142,000 (in 2007=$62,000 in 1990) and $195,000 (in 2007=$85,000 in 1990).

Either way, these numbers may put what an Audi R8 costs today ($109,000 MSRP), or what the eventual NSX replacement might cost, into perspective. And it makes the 2005 NSX MSRP ($89,000) and likely selling price (lower) pretty cheap in comparison.

OTOH, cars that were traded in and were ever in the hands of auction or used car dealers are suspect.

This and other comments about or implying odometer roll-back are surprising to me. I really don't think it's that common because in many scenarios it would come to light. A dealer who has a car for a few months can only really roll-back the odometer by the amount he drove the car because the mileage was recorded at the sale/trade-in and will be recorded when it's again sold. Mileage going down between two official documents is likely to be noticed. In places like California (with mandatory emissions tests at regular intervals which note mileage, and all the VIN/mileage verification hassle one has to go through when transferring vehicle ownership), where a good portion of the North American NSXs are from, I would think rolling it back would be even be more difficult.

 

[NSXBill2]

Using the US Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator:
$62,000 (MSRP) in 1990 (when 1991 NSX came out) = $98,400 in 2007 dollars.
$85,000 (what many paid) in 1990 = $134,800 in 2007 dollars.

Considering the US government is habitually low in its CPI/inflation calculation I'd trust the reality is much larger. Using 5% avg yearly real inflation, which is still probably conservative, to SWAG the numbers come out as $142,000 (in 2007=$62,000 in 1990) and $195,000 (in 2007=$85,000 in 1990).

Either way, these numbers may put what an Audi R8 costs today ($109,000 MSRP), or what the eventual NSX replacement might cost, into perspective. And it makes the 2005 NSX MSRP ($89,000) and likely selling price (lower) pretty cheap in comparison.

Yeah! What he said....:biggrin:

BTW, MSRP in 1990 was $60,000 even. Dest was $600. My sticker had a "Market Adjust" on the MFG Sticker of $24,400....OTD = $85,000 even plus tax of course. There is no record of an initial lien, so the good doctor paid cash. Mine was one of the very first, having been sold in Sept of 1990.

 

[NSXBill2]

..This and other comments about or implying odometer roll-back are surprising to me. ...

My comments were actually to refute rampant roll-back.

 

[SWIFTVISION]

I am the 4th owner of my 95.

It has only 36k.