extoics from japan
07-11-2003, 11:08 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: silver spring, MD, usa
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
extoics from japan
ok i know the nsx is a supercar but is the supera or rx7 ? if TOYOTA does not make a supra again will the supra be come a classic? what do you think make a car a exotic sports car or classic. I think the supra is a nice car so is the rx7. If you could not buy a nsx would you buy a rx7, supra, 350z
07-11-2003, 12:30 PM
#2
H-T Order of Merit
Re: extoics from japan (Black-Stang)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Black-Stang »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">ok i know the nsx is a supercar but is the supera or rx7 ? if TOYOTA does not make a supra again will the supra be come a classic? what do you think make a car a exotic sports car or classic.</TD></TR></TABLE>
The questions you are asking are a matter of semantics. Everyone has his own notion of what a particular word means. Define "supercar", and depending on your definition, the Supra or RX-7 (and the NSX, for that matter) may or may not fit. Same thing for "exotic" and "classic".
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Black-Stang »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you could not buy a nsx would you buy a rx7, supra, 350z </TD></TR></TABLE>
No.
RX-7: WAY too unreliable.
Supra: Heavy muscle car (heavy weight and lots of power to overcome it), has more in common with a Mustang or Camaro than an NSX. Not my cup of tea.
350Z: A bit overweight and underpowered. Compare 0-60 times for the 350Z, typically from 5.5 to 5.8 seconds, with those of the early NSX (5.2-5.3) or the WRX STI and the 350Z comes up short. Also not particularly classy in terms of interior materials (which it has in common with the WRX STI).
Of all the cars I am familiar with, the one that comes closest to the NSX in performance, configuration, etc is the Ferrari F355. I don't know if that's what I would buy today. It was not on the market at the time I bought my NSX.
The questions you are asking are a matter of semantics. Everyone has his own notion of what a particular word means. Define "supercar", and depending on your definition, the Supra or RX-7 (and the NSX, for that matter) may or may not fit. Same thing for "exotic" and "classic".
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Black-Stang »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you could not buy a nsx would you buy a rx7, supra, 350z </TD></TR></TABLE>
No.
RX-7: WAY too unreliable.
Supra: Heavy muscle car (heavy weight and lots of power to overcome it), has more in common with a Mustang or Camaro than an NSX. Not my cup of tea.
350Z: A bit overweight and underpowered. Compare 0-60 times for the 350Z, typically from 5.5 to 5.8 seconds, with those of the early NSX (5.2-5.3) or the WRX STI and the 350Z comes up short. Also not particularly classy in terms of interior materials (which it has in common with the WRX STI).
Of all the cars I am familiar with, the one that comes closest to the NSX in performance, configuration, etc is the Ferrari F355. I don't know if that's what I would buy today. It was not on the market at the time I bought my NSX.
07-11-2003, 01:36 PM
#3
Painting Masterpieces
Re: extoics from japan (nsxtasy)
List of cars to own before I take a dirt nap:
F355 Spyder
NSX check
ZR-1
993 911 C4S
Well, the list is long but distinguished.
F355 Spyder
NSX check
ZR-1
993 911 C4S
Well, the list is long but distinguished.
07-11-2003, 06:36 PM
#5
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NH (south canada)
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan
I DEFINETLY want a 2003 NSX....well ANY NSX for that matter. The RX-7 or Supra, arent even compatible with the NSX. Look at ALL AROUND PERFORMANCE AND SPECS!!!!
07-12-2003, 02:28 PM
#6
Re: extoics from japan (Ntegd Ya)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ntegd Ya »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I DEFINETLY want a 2003 NSX....well ANY NSX for that matter. The RX-7 or Supra, arent even compatible with the NSX. Look at ALL AROUND PERFORMANCE AND SPECS!!!!</TD></TR></TABLE>
agreed
agreed
07-15-2003, 01:17 PM
#7
El Chico
Re: extoics from japan (kxkal)
*I fart in your general direction.*
Yes, all of those cars I consider to be in the same league along with the 300ZX TT and the Skyline TT. I might even throw in the VR4 TT if I was in a good mood.
Yes, all of those cars I consider to be in the same league along with the 300ZX TT and the Skyline TT. I might even throw in the VR4 TT if I was in a good mood.
Trending Topics
07-15-2003, 01:25 PM
#8
El Chico
Re: extoics from japan (nsxtasy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
The questions you are asking are a matter of semantics. Everyone has his own notion of what a particular word means. Define "supercar", and depending on your definition, the Supra or RX-7 (and the NSX, for that matter) may or may not fit. Same thing for "exotic" and "classic".</TD></TR></TABLE>
Agreed.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
No.
RX-7: WAY too unreliable.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's a racecar, what do you expect? They are not all unreliable either.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Supra: Heavy muscle car (heavy weight and lots of power to overcome it), has more in common with a Mustang or Camaro than an NSX. Not my cup of tea.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well, more in common with the Camaro and Mustang if you mean faster than the NSX, more bang for the buck than the NSX and more reliable than most NSX's.
I really don't agree at all, the Supra is surprisingly balanced for it's weight and although I'd consider it more of a GT than anything, it still stomped the snot out of the NSX every year it was offered in the states.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
350Z: A bit overweight and underpowered. Compare 0-60 times for the 350Z, typically from 5.5 to 5.8 seconds, with those of the early NSX (5.2-5.3) or the WRX STI and the 350Z comes up short. Also not particularly classy in terms of interior materials (which it has in common with the WRX STI).
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Agree 100%, good idea, bad execution. An insult to the Z heritage.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Of all the cars I am familiar with, the one that comes closest to the NSX in performance, configuration, etc is the Ferrari F355. I don't know if that's what I would buy today. It was not on the market at the time I bought my NSX.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
God I hate it when you guys call the NSX comparable to a Ferrari. maybe a 1989 308 GTB, not an F355 though. Well, I guess if you consider within a second or two of each other comparable performance. *shrug*
The questions you are asking are a matter of semantics. Everyone has his own notion of what a particular word means. Define "supercar", and depending on your definition, the Supra or RX-7 (and the NSX, for that matter) may or may not fit. Same thing for "exotic" and "classic".</TD></TR></TABLE>
Agreed.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
No.
RX-7: WAY too unreliable.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's a racecar, what do you expect? They are not all unreliable either.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Supra: Heavy muscle car (heavy weight and lots of power to overcome it), has more in common with a Mustang or Camaro than an NSX. Not my cup of tea.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well, more in common with the Camaro and Mustang if you mean faster than the NSX, more bang for the buck than the NSX and more reliable than most NSX's.
I really don't agree at all, the Supra is surprisingly balanced for it's weight and although I'd consider it more of a GT than anything, it still stomped the snot out of the NSX every year it was offered in the states.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
350Z: A bit overweight and underpowered. Compare 0-60 times for the 350Z, typically from 5.5 to 5.8 seconds, with those of the early NSX (5.2-5.3) or the WRX STI and the 350Z comes up short. Also not particularly classy in terms of interior materials (which it has in common with the WRX STI).
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Agree 100%, good idea, bad execution. An insult to the Z heritage.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Of all the cars I am familiar with, the one that comes closest to the NSX in performance, configuration, etc is the Ferrari F355. I don't know if that's what I would buy today. It was not on the market at the time I bought my NSX.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
God I hate it when you guys call the NSX comparable to a Ferrari. maybe a 1989 308 GTB, not an F355 though. Well, I guess if you consider within a second or two of each other comparable performance. *shrug*
07-15-2003, 01:27 PM
#9
El Chico
Re: extoics from japan (Ntegd Ya)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ntegd Ya »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I DEFINETLY want a 2003 NSX....well ANY NSX for that matter. The RX-7 or Supra, arent even compatible with the NSX. Look at ALL AROUND PERFORMANCE AND SPECS!!!!</TD></TR></TABLE>
All around performance and specs?
You DO know you are supposed to wear a mask while painting, right?
Performance and specs considered ONLY?
Supra and RX-7 > NSX.
That's not opinion, it's fact, preference is something totally different though.
All around performance and specs?
You DO know you are supposed to wear a mask while painting, right?
Performance and specs considered ONLY?
Supra and RX-7 > NSX.
That's not opinion, it's fact, preference is something totally different though.
07-15-2003, 03:08 PM
#10
H-T Order of Merit
Re: extoics from japan (Knightsport)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well, more in common with the Camaro and Mustang if you mean faster than the NSX, more bang for the buck than the NSX and more reliable than most NSX's.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Stock vs stock, according to most tests, the Supra has more in common with the Camaro and Mustang in being slower than the NSX. However, all three cars can be modded fairly inexpensively to be faster than a stock NSX. Just like any car can be modded to be faster than any other car.
You're kidding about that part about being more reliable than the NSX, right? Remember, the NSX beat the Supra in reliability (and every other car available, except for the Lexus LS400, with which it tied) when it was named the most reliable car after five years of ownership by J. D. Power.
Not that the Supra is unreliable; it's pretty reliable, unlike the Camaro and Mustang. But the NSX is simply more so.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I really don't agree at all, the Supra is surprisingly balanced for it's weight and although I'd consider it more of a GT than anything, it still stomped the snot out of the NSX every year it was offered in the states.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Not true. Not true at all. Look at the 0-60 times:
NSX
Automobile 3/94 5.0
AutoWeek 8/26/91 5.3
Car & Driver 9/90 5.2
Sports Car International 12/90 5.03
Supra
Motor Trend 3/93 5.4
Road & Track 2/94 5.3
Hardly what I would call "beating the snot" - if anything, it looks like the NSX "beat the snot" out of the Supra. I think there was one magazine test somewhere where the Supra was faster, but in all the other tests, the NSX beat the snot out of the Supra.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">All around performance and specs?
You DO know you are supposed to wear a mask while painting, right?
Performance and specs considered ONLY?
Supra and RX-7 > NSX.
That's not opinion, it's fact, preference is something totally different though.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Clearly, someone here must be high, by claiming "fact" out of his inability to recognize that 5.2 < 5.4
Oh, BTW...
RX-7
Motor Trend 8/93 5.3
Road & Track 4/92 5.5
Those are published numbers. THOSE are facts - and easily to verify. Look 'em up.
Stock vs stock, according to most tests, the Supra has more in common with the Camaro and Mustang in being slower than the NSX. However, all three cars can be modded fairly inexpensively to be faster than a stock NSX. Just like any car can be modded to be faster than any other car.
You're kidding about that part about being more reliable than the NSX, right? Remember, the NSX beat the Supra in reliability (and every other car available, except for the Lexus LS400, with which it tied) when it was named the most reliable car after five years of ownership by J. D. Power.
Not that the Supra is unreliable; it's pretty reliable, unlike the Camaro and Mustang. But the NSX is simply more so.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I really don't agree at all, the Supra is surprisingly balanced for it's weight and although I'd consider it more of a GT than anything, it still stomped the snot out of the NSX every year it was offered in the states.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Not true. Not true at all. Look at the 0-60 times:
NSX
Automobile 3/94 5.0
AutoWeek 8/26/91 5.3
Car & Driver 9/90 5.2
Sports Car International 12/90 5.03
Supra
Motor Trend 3/93 5.4
Road & Track 2/94 5.3
Hardly what I would call "beating the snot" - if anything, it looks like the NSX "beat the snot" out of the Supra. I think there was one magazine test somewhere where the Supra was faster, but in all the other tests, the NSX beat the snot out of the Supra.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">All around performance and specs?
You DO know you are supposed to wear a mask while painting, right?
Performance and specs considered ONLY?
Supra and RX-7 > NSX.
That's not opinion, it's fact, preference is something totally different though.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Clearly, someone here must be high, by claiming "fact" out of his inability to recognize that 5.2 < 5.4
Oh, BTW...
RX-7
Motor Trend 8/93 5.3
Road & Track 4/92 5.5
Those are published numbers. THOSE are facts - and easily to verify. Look 'em up.
07-15-2003, 03:27 PM
#11
H-T Order of Merit
Re: extoics from japan (Knightsport)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">God I hate it when you guys call the NSX comparable to a Ferrari. maybe a 1989 308 GTB, not an F355 though. Well, I guess if you consider within a second or two of each other comparable performance. *shrug*</TD></TR></TABLE>
God I hate it when you make wild-*** claims that just aren't true.
Here you go:
Ferrari 348:
Motor Trend 9/93 5.6
Road & Track 9/90 6.0
The 348 was the entry-level Ferrari (I'm sure the Ferraristi love to hear that phrase) when the NSX Coupe was on sale during 1991-94.
Ferrari F355:
Motor Trend 10/95 4.9
Road & Track 10/94 4.9
The F355 came out at the end of 1995, and yes, it was about three tenths of a second faster than the NSX Coupe (and a bit more than that faster than the removable-roof NSX-T then on sale). That lasted less than two years, since the 3.2-liter NSX-T started posting similar test numbers when it went on sale for 1997.
So where is that "second or two" that you claimed? Can't support it, huh? What a surprise.
God I hate it when you make wild-*** claims that just aren't true.
Here you go:
Ferrari 348:
Motor Trend 9/93 5.6
Road & Track 9/90 6.0
The 348 was the entry-level Ferrari (I'm sure the Ferraristi love to hear that phrase) when the NSX Coupe was on sale during 1991-94.
Ferrari F355:
Motor Trend 10/95 4.9
Road & Track 10/94 4.9
The F355 came out at the end of 1995, and yes, it was about three tenths of a second faster than the NSX Coupe (and a bit more than that faster than the removable-roof NSX-T then on sale). That lasted less than two years, since the 3.2-liter NSX-T started posting similar test numbers when it went on sale for 1997.
So where is that "second or two" that you claimed? Can't support it, huh? What a surprise.
07-15-2003, 03:32 PM
#12
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan (Knightsport)
According to May 1997 Motor Trend (in case you want to see how later models compare tested on the same day)
NSX-T (3.2, 6spd) vs. Supra
Top speed: 162.2, 158.1
NSX
Wet lateral acceleration: 0.83, 0.88 Supra
0-60: 4.8s, 5.1s NSX
1/4 mile: 13.3s @ 106.7, 13.6s @ 106.0 NSX
Dry lateral acceleration: 0.94, 0.94 tie
Slalom: 69.5mph, 68.9mph NSX
0-100-0: 11.8+4.5=16.3, 12.3+4.5=16.8 NSX
1 mile: 34.0s @ 150.2, 34.7s @ 149.7 NSX
60-0: 120', 115' Supra
Road course: 41.5s, 41.3s Supra
NSX-T (3.2, 6spd) vs. Supra
Top speed: 162.2, 158.1
NSXWet lateral acceleration: 0.83, 0.88
Supra0-60: 4.8s, 5.1s
NSX1/4 mile: 13.3s @ 106.7, 13.6s @ 106.0
NSXDry lateral acceleration: 0.94, 0.94
tieSlalom: 69.5mph, 68.9mph
NSX0-100-0: 11.8+4.5=16.3, 12.3+4.5=16.8
NSX1 mile: 34.0s @ 150.2, 34.7s @ 149.7
NSX60-0: 120', 115'
SupraRoad course: 41.5s, 41.3s
Supra
07-15-2003, 03:47 PM
#13
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan (Knightsport)
Since, we're talking about facts, I pulled out a 1995 Car & Driver Buyers guide. In the back it listed:
Acura NSX (5/94):
0-60: 5.2s
1/4 mi: 13.7s
top speed: 162 mph
Mazda RX-7 (9/93):
0-60: 5.3s
1/4 mi: 14.0s
top speed: 157 mph
Supra Turbo (9/93):
0-60: 5.2s
1/4 mi: 13.8s
top speed: 154 mph
Ferrari 348 Spyder (12/93):
0-60: 5.3s
1/4 mi: 14.0s
top speed: 154 mph
Ferrari 348tb (3/93):
0-60: 5.4s
1/4 mi: 14.4s
top speed: 165 mph
Ferrari 348ts (12/91):
0-60: 6.0s
1/4 mi: 14.5s
top speed: 166 mph
Acura NSX (5/94):
0-60: 5.2s
1/4 mi: 13.7s
top speed: 162 mph
Mazda RX-7 (9/93):
0-60: 5.3s
1/4 mi: 14.0s
top speed: 157 mph
Supra Turbo (9/93):
0-60: 5.2s
1/4 mi: 13.8s
top speed: 154 mph
Ferrari 348 Spyder (12/93):
0-60: 5.3s
1/4 mi: 14.0s
top speed: 154 mph
Ferrari 348tb (3/93):
0-60: 5.4s
1/4 mi: 14.4s
top speed: 165 mph
Ferrari 348ts (12/91):
0-60: 6.0s
1/4 mi: 14.5s
top speed: 166 mph
07-15-2003, 04:23 PM
#14
H-T Order of Merit
Re: extoics from japan (ojas)
Yup, all very consistent. Most of the magazine test numbers for acceleration show that these cars would fall into the following groups, from fastest to slowest. Cars that are in the same group are approximately as fast as each other, and neither would "beat the snot" out of the other - despite any such claims above, by me or anyone else.
Group 1 (0-60 ~4.9)
'97+ NSX-T
'95+ F355
Group 2 (0-60 ~5.2-5.4)
'91-94 NSX Coupe
'9?-95 Supra Turbo
Group 3 (0-60 ~5.3-5.6)
'9?-95 RX-7
Group 4 (0-60 ~5.4-6.0)
'??-94 348
Incidentally, the weight and hp figures for these cars are as follows, off the top of my head:
'91-94 NSX 3010 lbs 270 hp
'97+ NSX-T 3160 lbs 290 hp
'9?-95 Supra Turbo 3500 lbs 320 hp
'9?-95 RX-7 2850 lbs 255 hp
'95+ F355 ???? lbs 375 hp
'??-94 348 ???? lbs 300 hp
Horsepower on the Ferraris was usually overrated, and weight was often not the curb weight (full fluids) that is usually quoted - which is why the performance numbers never seemed to match the potential that the power and weight would indicate.
Group 1 (0-60 ~4.9)
'97+ NSX-T
'95+ F355
Group 2 (0-60 ~5.2-5.4)
'91-94 NSX Coupe
'9?-95 Supra Turbo
Group 3 (0-60 ~5.3-5.6)
'9?-95 RX-7
Group 4 (0-60 ~5.4-6.0)
'??-94 348
Incidentally, the weight and hp figures for these cars are as follows, off the top of my head:
'91-94 NSX 3010 lbs 270 hp
'97+ NSX-T 3160 lbs 290 hp
'9?-95 Supra Turbo 3500 lbs 320 hp
'9?-95 RX-7 2850 lbs 255 hp
'95+ F355 ???? lbs 375 hp
'??-94 348 ???? lbs 300 hp
Horsepower on the Ferraris was usually overrated, and weight was often not the curb weight (full fluids) that is usually quoted - which is why the performance numbers never seemed to match the potential that the power and weight would indicate.
07-15-2003, 08:53 PM
#15
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan (Ponyboy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ponyboy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">List of cars to own before I take a dirt nap:
F355 Spyder
NSX check
ZR-1
993 911 C4S
Well, the list is long but distinguished.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's Spider. With an "i."
F355 Spyder
NSX check
ZR-1
993 911 C4S
Well, the list is long but distinguished.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's Spider. With an "i."
07-15-2003, 09:12 PM
#17
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan (Jason W)
Just a little OT:
The only Ferraris ever to be called "Spyder" (with a Y) from the factory was the 1948 Ferrari 166 Spyder Corsa, the 1957 Ferrari 250 GT PF Spyder Speciale, and the 1966 Ferrari 275 GTB/4 and GTS/4 NART Spyder.
The modern convertables are all Spiders.
The only Ferraris ever to be called "Spyder" (with a Y) from the factory was the 1948 Ferrari 166 Spyder Corsa, the 1957 Ferrari 250 GT PF Spyder Speciale, and the 1966 Ferrari 275 GTB/4 and GTS/4 NART Spyder.
The modern convertables are all Spiders.
07-16-2003, 01:04 AM
#18
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: silver spring, MD, usa
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan (Knightsport)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I really don't agree at all, the Supra is surprisingly balanced for it's weight and although I'd consider it more of a GT than anything, it still stomped the snot out of the NSX every year it was offered in the states. Agree 100%, good idea, bad execution. An insult to the Z heritage.,</TD></TR></TABLE> 
do guys even think about heritage any more **** i do thats way i like mustangs. And the z has the longes heritage of all the japanes cars = 240,260,280Z ,300 350Z,
I really don't agree at all, the Supra is surprisingly balanced for it's weight and although I'd consider it more of a GT than anything, it still stomped the snot out of the NSX every year it was offered in the states.
Agree 100%, good idea, bad execution. An insult to the Z heritage.,</TD></TR></TABLE> do guys even think about heritage any more **** i do thats way i like mustangs. And the z has the longes heritage of all the japanes cars = 240,260,280Z ,300 350Z,
07-16-2003, 07:07 AM
#19
H-T Order of Merit
Re: extoics from japan (Jason W)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason W »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's Spider. With an "i."</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason W »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The modern convertables are all Spiders.</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's convertibles. With an "i."
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jason W »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The modern convertables are all Spiders.</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's convertibles. With an "i."
07-16-2003, 08:47 AM
#20
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: extoics from japan (nsxtasy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
It's convertibles. With an "i."
</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's convertibles. With an "i."
</TD></TR></TABLE>
07-16-2003, 09:25 AM
#22
Honda-Tech Member
Re: extoics from japan (falconGSR)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Performance and specs considered ONLY?
Supra and RX-7 > NSX.
That's not opinion, it's fact, preference is something totally different though.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I can't believe anyone even responded to this. Everyone knows knight secretly wants an NSX, just as everyone knows the NSX>Supra or RX7 . He only does this to ruffle feathers.
Modified by nsxxtreme at 10:41 AM 7/16/2003
Supra and RX-7 > NSX.
That's not opinion, it's fact, preference is something totally different though.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I can't believe anyone even responded to this. Everyone knows knight secretly wants an NSX, just as everyone knows the NSX>Supra or RX7
. He only does this to ruffle feathers.Modified by nsxxtreme at 10:41 AM 7/16/2003
07-16-2003, 09:58 AM
#25
H-T Order of Merit
Re: extoics from japan (Jason W)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Not true. Not true at all. Look at the 0-60 times:
NSX
Automobile 3/94 5.0
AutoWeek 8/26/91 5.3
Car & Driver 9/90 5.2
Sports Car International 12/90 5.03
Supra
Motor Trend 3/93 5.4
Road & Track 2/94 5.3
Hardly what I would call "beating the snot" - if anything, it looks like the NSX "beat the snot" out of the Supra. I think there was one magazine test somewhere where the Supra was faster, but in all the other tests, the NSX beat the snot out of the Supra.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yup - the one pictured here is the one I was referring to. The only one. With a set of numbers that were never duplicated anywhere else.
I'm not surprised that the image is taken from a Supra website where it is posted. If I were a Supra fan, I would do the same thing as you're doing - going around to other boards, posting that image, and ignoring every other magazine story ever printed.
NSX
Automobile 3/94 5.0
AutoWeek 8/26/91 5.3
Car & Driver 9/90 5.2
Sports Car International 12/90 5.03
Supra
Motor Trend 3/93 5.4
Road & Track 2/94 5.3
Hardly what I would call "beating the snot" - if anything, it looks like the NSX "beat the snot" out of the Supra. I think there was one magazine test somewhere where the Supra was faster, but in all the other tests, the NSX beat the snot out of the Supra.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yup - the one pictured here is the one I was referring to. The only one. With a set of numbers that were never duplicated anywhere else.
I'm not surprised that the image is taken from a Supra website where it is posted. If I were a Supra fan, I would do the same thing as you're doing - going around to other boards, posting that image, and ignoring every other magazine story ever printed.