tonite I met some guy with a 95 NSX with HKS intake and DC exhaust. The car has 34,061 miles and the car is in mint condition. Heres what caught me. He is selling his car for 35k and he told me he is very negotiable like 33-34, thats what he told me. I want this car so bad cause that is a steal of a price but its kinda nice not having any car payments right now. What do you guys think?

 

Can you handle the gas money and insurance on that sucker?

 

Market value for this car is around that price. Not having payments is kewl, it all dependson how difficult it is to make those payments, ie what in your life you will have to take away to start making payments on this new car. Good deal though for the car.

 

I was thinking about all that stuff too. Man I wish I was a little older and made a little more money

 

Insurance on a NSX sucks quite a bit. Being aluminum, if it's in the slightest accident, you're screwed.

 

maintenance costs is a bitch on an NS-X...very few of the parts are comaptible with the other cars in the honda line making them less accessible and expensive...The car may cheap, but its not a cheap car...if you know what I mean...

 

if you want it that bad, I say just buy it and becareful with it

 

You guys who obviously don't know anything about the NSX shouldn't be posting wrong information.

Insurance on an NSX is not particularly expensive. In fact, I'm paying less for insuring my NSX than I am for my ITR.

Maintenance - regularly scheduled maintenance - isn't much more for an NSX than for an ITR, either. Unexpected repairs may be expensive, though, such as $2K for a clutch replacement (on a '91-96, even higher on a '97+). So you ought to have money available for repairs. Also for tires, which wear quicker than on the ITR.

Gas money? Get real. The NSX is rated (realistically) at 19 mpg in the city, 24 on the highway, and I've gotten 28 on a long trip.

That price is unusually low for a low-mileage '95, in the "too good to be true" category. Does it have a salvage title? Does it have an automatic transmission? Has it been in an accident? At a minimum, I would suggest running a Carfax on it and having it checked thoroughly by a qualified tech with NSX experience before buying it.

If you're looking for more information on the NSX - true information, rather than the silly statements made in this topic - check out the NSX FAQ, which is located here.

 

nsxtasy

May I ask how old you are? And of course you have the multiple car discount right? And you probably claim the NSX as your "Weekend" driver? So being steve's primary car, and probably substantially younger than you, yes, insurance is going to be a bitch.

As far as tires go, they won't necessarily wear quicker than an ITR's tires. It depends on the brand and mileage of tires you buy. We're sure not talking about OE ones are we?

Gas money, the ITR is rated at 28 City, when on the higher lobe you'll get close to like 18 or less MPG! Now imagine being rated 19MPG and being on the higher lobe? It's pretty much common sense to me.

Don't be so quick to put down other people's information.

You guys who obviously don't know anything about the NSX shouldn't be posting wrong information.

If we're [us NON NSX owners] wrong about something, please correct it preferably without the arrogance, thanks bro.

 

Yup sounds right to me.

 

As far as I understand, from what my insurance company explained, the insurance on the NSX is based on the average age of the average NSX owner. Other factors come into play, like your personal record, location, and miles claimed to be driven in one trip, but due to older people owning NSXs, insurance is not as bad as one may think...


Jason

 

I think Im going to go check and see how much insurance would be on that thing tomorrow, if its a lot more than the ITR im not going to do that since I really dont want to spend too much a month on a car and insurance

 

Depending on the year etc of the NSX, it might be less than the ITR, and it probably won't be a whole lot more money. And that will hold true regardlesss of whether you get a multi-car discount, whether it's your primary car, etc. Those factors may make your rates higher or lower, but they will make your rates higher or lower for any car you own; the NSX still won't be a whole lot more than the ITR. If the insurance rate on the NSX is a bitch, it's almost certainly because your rates on any sports car are a bitch, because of factors having to do not with the specific car, but with you - your age, your driving record, your commute distance, etc. If Steve is paying $X for insurance on his ITR, then it's not going to be a whole lot higher if he sells it and gets an NSX. Skafia, when you claim that the insurance on an NSX is higher than other sports cars, even less expensive ones, that's just plain wrong.

However, whenever you're considering buying any car, you don't need to take someone's word for it. It's easy to check on insurance rates before you buy it. Just call your insurance company or use a website like http://www.insweb.com and you can find out how much it will cost you to insure whatever car you're considering.

Good idea. Please let us know how much it is and how it compares with your current rates on the ITR.

Pick a tire, any tire, and use it on both cars, and they will wear quicker on the NSX front than on the ITR, and quicker still on the NSX rear than on the NSX front. For example, pick the Bridgestone Potenza RE010 tire, which is a very sticky high-performance summer tire that comes as standard equipment on both the ITR and the NSX. I know from previous posts here that people's experience is all over the map, but most folks will get 15-20K miles on a set of RE010 on the ITR. (I'm still on my original RE010 set on my ITR and they've got about 13K miles on them and there's plenty of tread left.) On a '95 NSX, you might get 5-7K miles on a set of rear RE010, and 10-15K miles on a front set. That's significantly less than on the ITR. (On a '91-93 NSX with smaller sizes, you will get even fewer miles - 3-6K in the rear and 8-12K in front.)

If you try a different brand and model of tire, you will still likely get 2-3 times as many miles on the ITR as on the NSX rear, and 25-50 percent more miles on the ITR than on the NSX front. That ratio is likely to hold no matter what brand and model of tire you're considering, if you're using the same brand and model of tire on both cars.

Nope. The ITR is rated at 25 city (30 highway).

If you drive a lot of miles, which is the only reason you would worry about the cost of gas, chances are they're highway miles (usually commuting miles), not miles where you're in a lower gear with the revs up high. The EPA ratings are more accurate for the NSX than for the ITR, so they give the ITR the benefit of the doubt. Based on the EPA highway mileage, if you drive 18,000 miles a year - that's well above average - you will use 600 gallons in the ITR and 750 gallons in the NSX. So if you're driving a lot of miles, your gas cost might be $200 or so per year more in the NSX than in the ITR, which is about the cost of one NSX tire. $200 per year is not a huge difference in cost when you're comparing the two cars. You'll find that the difference in the cost of tires alone could be seven times that amount (based on RE010 tires on both cars at the above rates of tire wear).

We can all learn from each other and help him with his decision as long as true and correct information is posted. It doesn't help when people who have never priced insurance for an NSX and an ITR guess - and guess wrong - that NSX insurance rates are sky-high. They're not. It doesn't help when people who have never driven these cars and kept track of their mileage guess - and guess wrong - that you'll be paying a whole lot more in gas with the NSX than the ITR. You won't. It doesn't help when people who haven't had an NSX service guess - and guess wrong - how much the maintenance costs.

I know what costs what, for the ITR as well as for the NSX, because I own both cars. I'm happy to help out by providing information that I know to be true. It would be great if others would also provide information that they know to be true, too. That way we can all learn from each other. If you know something, please share it with us. If you don't know something, don't confuse things by guessing and possibly guessing wrong. That's even worse than saying "do a search" over and over again, like some folks here do.

Let's share what we know and use the information to help each other.



[Modified by nsxtasy, 1:58 PM 12/22/2002]

 

wow, good reply nsxtasy, I learned a lot My young age really shows here.

Anyway, how come NSX tires wear so quickly? Is it because more weight is on the rear tires?

I guess all of our opinions were more assumptions than anything.

What about the one piece aluminum issue? That is true right?


[Modified by skafia, 12:25 PM 12/22/2002]

 

a lot of good info

 

The rear end had a huge amount of toe in from the factory so that tires would only last around 5000 miles. The toe end was to try and keep the rear end stable for the average driver. Comptech made a kit that fixed that "problem" and will allow you to get more mileage out of a set of tires. I know the earlier years had this, but Honda may have fixed the later cars.

 

Close, but not exactly. There are a number of reasons why the tires wear quickly. One is that the OEM tires are designed for specific corners of the NSX. The rear tires have a slightly softer compound, increasing wear. Also, the bias in the tires is wound to work with the NSX alignment at each end of the car. The alignment is largely to blame as well. The original alignment recommended with the car's introduction in '91 wasn't designed for the average driver in mind, but rather, to maximize a quick turn-in and a precision handling feel to the car. It specifies toe in for the front, toe out for the rear, which is rather unusual. It was great for taking the car out onto the track, not so great for using it on the street.

The original, smaller (OEM) tires on the '91-93 cars typically lasted 4-6K miles in the rear. (With my highway miles mixed with track use, I went through eight sets of OEM rear tires in my first 28K miles; my third set of front tires was almost toast at the end of that time.) Around 1992, an NSX owner filed a class action suit against Acura because when he bought his car, he wasn't told that it would use tires that quickly. Acura settled the suit in 1993 by giving every NSX owner three sets of rear tires. They also changed the recommended alignment spec and made it retroactive for all years; the revised spec reduced the amount of toe in the rear, which extended the life of the tires somewhat, while reducing the precision feel in the tires slightly. This was what increased tire life, not anything from Comptech.

(Perhaps you are thinking of Comptech's non-compliance rear beam and toe link kit, which supposedly makes the handling a bit more predictable at the limit than the stock parts, but has nothing to do with improving treadlife AFAIK.)

You can read more about it in the NSX FAQ, in the Tire Tech section here and in the alignment section here.

Feel free to ask more questions. I hope you understand that I wasn't trying to give anyone a hard time earlier; it just makes it easier to discuss when we get the story straight.



[Modified by nsxtasy, 5:31 PM 12/22/2002]

 

Incidentally, '95-96 are the least desirable years if you're interested in performance driving. All NSXs were coupes in '91-94. In '95, they introduced the NSX-T with the removable roof panel (like Porsche's targa top) and very, very few fixed-roof coupes were made after that, with the exception of 50 Zanardi NSXs in '99. The coupe was discontinued after '01.

The NSX-T weighs a couple hundred pounds more than the NSX coupe, due to added reinforcement to compensate for the loss of rigidity without a fixed roof, and that affects performance. In '97, they introduced the bigger engine with 20 more hp (290 vs 270) which compensated for the weight increase. That's why the '95-96 is the "slowest NSX" - more weight, without more power.

To give you an idea of the differences, here are typical 0-60 times, according to the magazines:

'91-96 3.0-liter five-speed NSX Coupe - 5.3
'95-96 3.0-liter five-speed NSX-T - 5.6
'97-03 3.2-liter six-speed NSX-T - 4.9
'97-01 3.2-liter six-speed NSX Coupe - 4.6

They also make an automatic, but only with a slightly different 3.0-liter engine that makes 252 hp rather than the 270 from the one with the 5-speed. And we won't mention their 0-60 times, because if you care about them, you're going to get a manual tranny anyway. (Automatics are about 9 percent of total NSX sales in the U.S.)

The '95-96 is also the least rigid. The coupes are more rigid than the NSX-T. They added some reinforcement in '95 to compensate when they removed the top. They added more reinforcement in '97, so the '97-03 NSX-T is more rigid than the '95-96 NSX-T, while still not as rigid as an NSX coupe.

You'll typically pay ~$8K or so more for a '95-96 NSX-T than for a similar '91-94 NSX coupe, and another ~$8-10K for a '97 NSX-T than for a '95-96. As a result, the '95-96 is perfect for someone who really wants the removable top but isn't as interested in performance, and would prefer to save money rather than spend more for the bigger engine of the '97+. The '97-03 are the quickest - the few '97-01 coupes even more so - but also the most expensive. The '91-94 are the least expensive, and decent performers; if you don't mind the fixed roof, they're a great deal.



[Modified by nsxtasy, 5:51 PM 12/22/2002]

 

So, what changed the power output from the 91-94 and the 97+? I know more displacement, but anything else? Has anyone ever swapped a 97+ NSX motor into a 91-94 coupe? Is it even possible, physically. Is it even worth while from an monetary and performance aspect?
Just curious, if I could find someone wanting to work a trade for an NSX that involved my ITR, it would be hard to hold back.


Jason

 

Primarily the displacement. I believe they increased the bore, using the same technology for the cylinder liners that they had previously introduced in the Prelude. I believe the headers/exhaust are more efficient also.

They also added the six-speed in '97, which is a much better gearing arrangement than the five-speed (not only because of the number of gears, but they are closely spaced). That doesn't affect the power output, but does affect the acceleration.

Yes, people have swapped 3.2-liter engines and six-speed trannies into the '91-94 coupe. However, the engines and transmissions are expensive and not easy to find. (The 3.0-liter engines and five-speeds are more plentiful.) So, along with the labor required, it's not a hugely popular swap (although the six-speed swap is more common than the engine swap). It might be worthwhile if you blow the engine with a money shift, so you have to replace it anyway, but otherwise it's not real great in terms of bang-for-the-buck. Superchargers are a much more popular mod. Oh, and Zanardi NSXs aren't too hard to find, and they come with the bigger motor and a fixed roof.

 

wow, I just learned alot. I think I will pass this NSX up and if I really wanted one I would get a 91-94 now since they are cheaper or wait a few years and get a 97+. If anyone is interested in this NSX let know it is in mint condition

 

What year did the NSX's start having HID. Cause this car had it and for some reason I didnt think they had it

 

HID headlights are stock on the NSX beginning with the 2002. You can retrofit aftermarket kits, but it's not easy to install the generic kits. Science of Speed makes a great kit specifically for the NSX for $585.

 

This is the kit that I remember, but I thought it helped with tire wear and was one of the main reasons behind it or maybe it was just an added benefit.

Thanks for all the good info

 

Hard to believe that Zanardi's are not tough to find being only 50 were produced.

http://www.nsxprime.com is a killer site and has a very active board too. I was semi-seriously looking into a '91-'92 NSX before I bought the R. It would have costed me over $900 a month to own one. Not worth it for me, yet sometimes I wonder if $600/month to insure, store and make payments on my R will last the full 4 years of my loan.