which year NSX is best, in your opinion?

[Midnight_Raven]

Isn't an 01 coupe better than a 91 in every way? And if you really want to get nit picky, isn't a Zanardi even better still?

I would agree the 01 coupe and Zanardi are IMO the best NSX ever available in our country. But the fact that 01 coupes and Zanardi are almost impossible to purchase would mean the 91 coupe would probably be a best acquirable choice if what you are looking for is a track car. Best cruiser would probably be the targa top and the 02-05 models would be the best for overall longevity since it's a newer car.

They are all great it really depends on what you want it for.

 

[fastaussie]

my car, like my motorcycles, will certainly see some track time...

 

[butter78]

I like em all but prefer the 02+ cause I have an 03 : ) and I like the updated look which makes the car look more modern and the fact that they are rarer model than the pre 02s. My preference is totally based on the styling more than anything else...granted there are minor performance upgrades.

 

[LJZ]

Fastaussie, you are getting good input here and upshot is that all model years of the NSXs are very special cars. I doubt you will go wrong with a well cared for/loved car no matter what year. I'm partial to the /02-05 refresh. I have a pristine /94 with just a shade over 30,000 miles on the clock but there is something to be said for having something a bit newer and IMHO the upgrades in the /02-05 over the /94 are worthwhile.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned but one additional thing to consider is how the roads are in your neck of the woods. If you are in a warm climate where roads are in decent shape then a stiffer car like the NA1 is great. I'm up here in MI and we have what has to be among the worst roads in the country (you'd think that the "Motor City" might have decent roads but they are horrific). There are times that I would gladly trade my /94 for a 2002-05 that I am given to understand has a slightly more forgiving ride. As an aside, I spent this past weekend in Ontario -- same winter weather as in MI but roads were for the most part terrific.

Good luck with the search.

Best,
Jeff

 

[tbromley]

Ha, I knew I would get heat from the 1991 defenders club. Where did I say that the 1991 was not a great year? I also believe a 1991 is the right choice for the OP. However, he concluded after 5 posts that 1991 was his pick and newer models were out of his price range. Did you guys notice that none of those first 5 posts put in a vote for the 91? For a topic that comes up once a week you guys sure give a lot of leeway. Where are the search police when you need them?

And yes, my NSX-T is very heavy and slow compared to your rocketship. :wink:

My post was the third post and I believe I mentioned that the 91 was a good choice. I like the 91 - I have a 91 - why wouldn't I vote for it.

I like the one fellows post that said to which is the best - "the one you buy"!!! That's the right answer too.

All of them are great cars and if you put, like Honcho said many posts ago - JDM gears and good headers on the car there is very little difference in the speed! I also mentioned that if you're in the mountains on the east cost going thru the turns that long second would keep you most likely in second the whole route - of the Tail and some others . With a top end of 85 in 2nd gear - that's pretty fast in the turns in the mountains - doubtful you'd need more speed than that!

Harry mentioned also what I said - some wouldn't have anything but a 91 or 92 cause they were the lightest! They can be made awfully fast even without an SC!

These cars are awesome and also Sidwac was right on too - the 95 and 96 were great cars often passed over cause they were "the slowest" ....his post was a good one and worth remembering!

Lots of good answers here!

 

[fastaussie]

very true, all great points. and as a very experienced motorbike racer, it's much easier to add power than to reduce weight on an already lightened machine. a stiffer chassis isn't usually a bad thing either. thanx Butter, Jeff and Tim...

 

[usafdarkhorse]

The answer is, like mentioned earlier, whichever NSX with which you end up.

Personally, since the NSX changed marginally with each new iteration, and since it is a fairly classic and historical car, might as well get the first year. 1991 (or last year I suppose). All other points are water under the bridge.

Which NSX is faster than another NSX gets pretty insignificant with cars being much MUCH faster in today's day and age.

 

[cad_vtec]

I would also cast my vote for the 2002 model as the "best", but if I were on a budget I would settle for a 1998.

Why? Well 2002 for it's updated look, and upgrade of interior parts, especially the stock HID's.

As for the 1998, it was the second year of the 3.2 engine, and had some of the FASTEST 0-60 times for these cars, and for that reason alone, I would get that one.

 

[NSX UNITED]

I would also cast my vote for the 2002 model as the "best", but if I were on a budget I would settle for a 1998.

Why? Well 2002 for it's updated look, and upgrade of interior parts, especially the stock HID's.

As for the 1998, it was the second year of the 3.2 engine, and had some of the FASTEST 0-60 times for these cars, and for that reason alone, I would get that one.

I have owned my '98 for almost 10 years now and I can vouch for it.

However, I must admit 02+ look have really grown on me. If possible, I would get the latest '05 and lowest mileage possible.

 

[rbilder]

My vote would be 91 :smile: (oh, I just so happen to own one, with headers)

I would take any year. The newer ones have some of the bugs worked out. I would say 93 or above have more safety for a passenger, if anybody is conserned about the passenger side airbag.

I normally cruise with my bride, so it would be nice to have some added safety for her. But I suspect there are plenty of times where it is just the driver and the car... yeeee haw! ! :biggrin:

Zanardi's sound great, but I believe I have only ever seen one for sale, and if I remember correctly it had some history, as in an accicent. I could be wrong. Plus if one does come up for sale, I'm sure it will be at a premium (purchase two 91/92's for the price of one... possibly, maybe not quite that much difference in price, but I suspect close).

Newer coupes are very hard to find.

For me, it would be 91-02. But that is mostly because I like the looks of the NSX with the pop-up lights. It is all pretty much subjective.

They definitely become more rare as the years go by... production really dropped off.

And like somebody above mentioned, I don't see the difference in speed between a 91 with headers and the 97 and above being all that significant. Especially if you want fast, then newer cars have more performance.

My vote is the one you have, or the one you purchase... that's the best year.

 

[shawn110975]

quote: Tbromley ( With a top end of 85 in 2nd gear )

What???? I didnt know that. my 6-speed transmission is sitting on the ground waiting to install.... Yikes I better get'R done.

I just have no time to do anything to any of my NSX's . my 1992 hasnt been waxed in who knows how long and its a DD.

I did clean out the trunk the other day. LOL it was getting full and I didnt want the trunk heat to catch the shit on fire LOL


but to the OP 2001 coupe and the Zanardi are Unicorns now-a-days you will never see them for sale. and the Zanardi's that do come up for sale have major issues, like the same 2-3 that pop up on E-bay again and again and again.

so getting a coupe 91 and doing lots of upgrades is the best option I think.

 

[tbromley]

I have owned my '98 for almost 10 years now and I can vouch for it.

However, I must admit 02+ look have really grown on me. If possible, I would get the latest '05 and lowest mileage possible.

Yeah and then drive the poo out of it - right! That's what I'd do!

 

[shawn110975]

I agree but will never admit it.

the 02+ is growing on me I pull into my driveway and see the 2004 sitting there and keep tring to tell myself I like the bubble eyes.

but then I tell myself I like my pop-ups. uggghhh what a battle

 

[cad_vtec]

I have owned my '98 for almost 10 years now and I can vouch for it.

However, I must admit 02+ look have really grown on me. If possible, I would get the latest '05 and lowest mileage possible.

I think the 1998 is getting passed bye.....it makes sense to go with 1998. It is a year were the car had been produced long enough for Honda to know what it's doing...and...the previous year they introduced a larger displacement (3.2). So, with the rule of thumb (stating that you should never get the first year of a new model), the second year afterwards they tweeked it enough to smooth out the transition period.

It's cheaper than a new body (02+), it quicker than previous years, you get the benefit of being able to mod a better engine...makes perfect sense to me! :wink:

 

[socalx]

^ 1997+ w 6 speed are na2
1991-2005 w auto are na1

 

[cad_vtec]

^ 1997+ w 6 speed are na2
1991-2005 w auto are na1

Corrected!

Thanks!

 

[Jin1976]

91 for me. Not because mine is also 91 but you could used all the factory wheels. I like the 91-93 wheels design. Just wish they get slightly wider at the back. If I have to do it over again, I'd go for a bone stock red/black 91 and don't change a thing.

 

[Matt_337]

After having owned my 2002 for almost 6 years and lusting after one since I was in high school back in 1990, if I had to do it all over again, here is my list from top to bottom:

1. 99 Zanardi
2. NA2 coupe
3. 2002-2005 manual
4. 1991-1994 manual
5. 1997-2001 manual targa

I'm not that big of a targa fan (rarely take mine off as it is) since it's so humid here in Houston (would be a different answer if I lived in Socal or a place like it). I'm also not a big fan of the rear and side skirts of the pre-02 models (flip ups don't bother me as much). My valuation is based on rarity and performance.
Of course, all of my NSX's must have a CTSC in categories 3-5 to keep me happy. :smile:

 

[NetViper]

Having had a NSX with both power steering and non-power steering... I wouldn't go back to non.

I had a 93 coupe, a 95 targa and a 00 targa. The 00 is easily the best of the bunch.

 

[Aaron94T]

I would agree that the Zanardi and NA2 coupe are the rarest NSXs. 80% of the people on prime and the members I meet in person would call those two the "best" of the breed. However, I have a different opinion as I would not own a non-targa NSX. The targa adds so much to the experience IMO. Unless I am on a long trip I feel like something is missing when the top is on.

For that reason the best NSX, to me, is the newest one you can afford. So 2005, then 2004, 2003 etc. (Assuming similar mileage and condition.) Having spoken to owners that have had multiple NSXs, they have all noticed the newer car driving better. Honda did make improvements over the years and there is something to be said about having a 10-15 year newer car.

 

[Caustic]

After having owned my 2002 for almost 6 years and lusting after one since I was in high school back in 1990, if I had to do it all over again, here is my list from top to bottom:

1. 99 Zanardi
2. NA2 coupe
3. 2002-2005 manual
4. 1991-1994 manual
5. 1997-2001 manual targa

I'm a 6 year owner of a 2002 as well. If I could do it all over again, my preference list would be identical to yours.

 

[funkynsx]

I have a 94 and love it!
but in my opinion every model nsx needs help in the power and brake department. I dont think the 3.2 is much of advantage. The 3L has a better power curve when boosted than the 3.2(more linear acceleration) and also revs higher.
I wouldnt hold the 2002+ models power in high regard considering many of today's 4 door family cars can out acellerate it.
What ever model nsx you get if you want a genuine super car a bit of work is required.

 

[Arfiman]

Got the best of both worlds here - 91 with +02 exterior conversion and NSX-R gearing! JetPilot the previous owner bought an 02 and did comment that the driving experience was very different - definitely felt less rigid though the steering feel, if I remember correctly, was still good!

 

[naaman]

I've never even driven one, but I think I would go for a 91-94 for the simple fact that the after market is more flexible with those cars (once I get one, it's getting modded, for sure).

I currently drive a convertible and there are some downsides to it besides the extensive flex. A lot of the time, the open top experience puts the sun right in your eyes, whereas the roof of the car would have provided a nice "visor" for you. If you're with a passenger, the wind noise on highways can stifle conversation.

And the flex really is a draw back if you're performance oriented.

If you're planning on building up the engine, parts for the NA1 are generally less expensive or else bolt directly on (whereas the NA2s and T-top models often require modification to make certain parts fit).

As for my plans for my future NSX (which will be a long term project car) it comes down to whether I want to swap a 6-speed into an NA1, or a 3.0L (to be bored/stroked) into an NA2 coupe. The other differences and refinements in suspension etc are virtually irrelevant, as I'm looking at putting in the 02+ Type S or Type R suspension.

When it boils down to it, taking my immediate funds and borrowing power into account, an NA1 coupe 5 speed is likely to be my choice as the "best" NSX for my plans.

If I wanted a car to drive in stock (or nearly stock) form, then I would almost certainly hold out for an NA2 coupe. I'd take a Zanardi if they came in ANY other color.

 

[gleibig]

'91's are the best.





Well, only the silver ones.