I know.. Jeff makes me NOT want to buy an NSX and start dumping more money into my FD

This is my take on FD vs NSX..
I think FDs could of made easily to be classified as an exotic, if they increase the top speed to 160+ from factory and added few little things (maybe electric seats.

FD's are light like the NSXs (lighter)
FD's perform as well as NSXs (Better)
FD's have unique engines as NSX's midengine configuration (More unique in my view)
FD's went thru as much designing as NSX's (Ahh.. seq. turbos? vs some Ti rod?? and AL body)

Only thing I could see are the some fitments and finishes (minor stuff) and top speed.

 

Until you've driven a "true" mid-engine car on a road course, you really have no idea why mid-engines are 'that' desireable.

herblenny,

I would suggest you also talk to other NSX owners (even better if you can find someone local with one to talk with them face to face). Once again, I'm not saying Jeff is a "bad representation"; but just like the FD, the ones having the problems are the ones that scream/talk the loudest. If you read this forum as an outsider, you'd think the FD never has proper boost.

BTW, my father's '03 Z06 has battery problems since he doesn't drive it all the time. My E46 M3 doesn't always start on the first try. And I can go on. Expensive doesn't mean 'no problems'. You just need to find something you like and can 'put up with'.

 

Mahjik,

I agree with ya. I've already contacted a guy in Huntsville, AL about getting a ride and maybe driving his. I did drive one before, but its been a long time and before my FDs.

 

I think "ballance" is usually a euphamism for "not very fast"...

 

'Balanced' means better/good engineering. Fast doesn't always equal that.

 

Are we operating under the asumption that the NSX is better engineered than the RX7? I don't think it is, or at least don't think that the fact that it's mid-engined makes it so.

Mid-engine config is of limited value for a road car. It was done in racecars for packaging purposes, but with a full body, it isn't necessarily better.. paricularly vs. a "front mid engine" design like the RX7's that manages 50/50 weight distribution, and a very small frontal area.

In the NSX's case, they used the layout because the car was meant as a bit of a "showcase" for their Formula One success.

 

Once again, read my message above.

https://www.rx7club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=125

Obvisouly it doesn't mean much on the street. But then again neither does 500hp has 200hp as enough to get a speeding ticked.

50/50 weight distribution really means jack. Its all in how the car was designed. Do you think the Lotus Elise's 30/70 (or whatever it is exactly) means that it handles like crap? In a road racing scenario, the mid-engine cars truely shine in their stability.

But like I said earlier, some people like a "driving challenge". You often hear some drivers say "I love that its so hard to get (name any car here) around the track! Its great fun". Some people don't want to fight the car all around a track (or the town).

Were you the same one saying that you should have the stickiest tires for street driving for those spirited occasions? So, I guess having a good behaved car doesn't matter for the street then...

 

I'm not sure if NSX is better balanced car than FD. Like I said, I think its fitments and finishes are slightly better than FD.

If you go by what the car can do (I haven't owned one so I can't compare.. maybe Jeff can) I think FD is better. Go look at SCCA stock class where FD is classified vs NSX. Maybe NSX is better in HIGH speed (hence its consider SUPER CAR, top speed is higher)??

 

The top speed isn't more than 5 or 6 mph more than a stock FD if I remember right.

 

Absolutely it is when you are really pushing it. Once again, it has to do with how quickly the car can get out of control and back in control. I've seen some good and bad road course drivers with cars like the NSX and Elise's; those cars can really make a driver look MUCH better than they really are...

 

Issue 1:
I understand your post, but I don't think "harder to get out of control" or even "more stable" equals "better ballanced", "better handling", or "better engineered".

It often means dumbed-down handling... lower polar moment, less aggressive suspension geometry, etc. Often, the best handling car IS knife-edged... more stable cars are generally designed that way so that lesser drivers can can go semi-fast without killing themselves.

No 50/50 is the end-all, be-all, bud neither is "mid-engined". I think the RX7 is a better handling car, with a higher handling capability.... Meaning higher grip, and higher direction-changing capability, better feedback, etc. There's nothing that I know of in the NSX chassis/platform design that was any more state-of-the-art than the RX7's.

Issue 2:
When I say that mid engined config isn't necessarily as desireable on street car, it has nothing to do wioth the type of driving done on the street like your tire example was. It has to do with the design goals. The main reason racecars use a mid-engined config has to do with packaging, not handling.... an F1 car is a good example. For cars with V8, V12, or V16 motors, you can imagine the advantage in frontal area, driver placement, etc.... but for a car with a small compact powerplant that will cary a fully-enclosed road car's 2-seater bodywork, at roadgoing height, I don't see the advantage.

The RX7 actually IS mid engined. Front-mid engined. That was part of the design philosophy... to gain the handling advantages of mid engine, without the tradeoffs (which for road cars with two passengers, that would be packaging of the occupants relative to the front wheels... THAT's why the McLaren F1 uses a central driving position).

 

I guess I'm not stating what I want to say correctly so bear with me. My question was what makes a car a so called exotic. I then tried to pick out advantageous reasons why the NSX was considered one by some. Light weight is a good thing and Acura/Honda made it a point to brag about the all aluminum body. Again that's a nice bragging point, but the FD was lighter in a similar performance minded model line. A Civic will never be in that category so it's weight being less than both is mute point. I'm trying to divine the differences people use to justify the exotic price tag the NSX came with and also how Acura/Honda set that high of a price tag for the car when all I can think of is the economies of scale being the biggest issue. Just like the rotary engine, the overall cost of the engines, hand built, specialized pieces made for a specific line up that only produces 1000 a month or a year would make the price tag for that car higher than one produced for a line up that was for 10000 a year, capacity not being an issue. So it looks like the NSX engine is hand built with Ti pieces, and they brought over 7500 total for the model to the US. That's one reason for the higher cost. Was the car actually hand built/assembled like most Italian exotics? Again if so, then that would add to it's price tag.

As far as prestige, I think you'd have a hard time getting a buyer that bought one from 93-95 NOT to say they thought they were getting some prestige when they bought the car. What they determine that prestige to be is another thing. Build quality, reliability, performance, fit and finish of the interior, brand and model image...anyone who would buy a car in the 35K to 42K back in 1993-1995, a car made for a specific individual, not JOHN Q PUBLIC, would have to think they were buying themselves some sort of exclusivity with their purchase. 35K to 42K in 2006 isn't as much as car prices have risen in that time, but back then it was.

Tim

 

But the similarities are so striking!

 

You are correct.. But what i remember its the 160ish mark that makes the difference between how the car is classified... well, that's what I remember and not 100%.

I think it is also the reason why a lot of BMWs are limited at 155 (I took couple of BMW in 2002 to its limit and it was 155MPH)

 

Motortrend got a base FD to do 161 mph in one of their top speed test many years ago. It was second only to the Corvette ZR-1.

Some good info on the NSX here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_NSX

The NSX featured a super-light all aluminum chassis, body, and suspension, a first for a production car.
The NSX was the first production car with VTEC yo!
It's also handmade on the same line as the S2000's are made.

While I have always liked them and have thought about getting one myself, I never have understood what the big fuss is about.

 

Yes... Thank you GoodFellaFD3S... That's exactlyhow i feel... It's slow stock, u can't do much with it on the stock N/A engine, and it's HELLA expensive to mod!!!! And if u think ur just gonna slap a turbo on it an you'll be golden.... Don't count on it... The stock block can't handle the power from forced induction and it will start to crack.... So you have to get a cuztom built block and change all the engine internals and only then will and NSX be a good car... and that is HEEEELLLLAAA Expensive to do!!!!!!

 

Go and drive one.

I didn't get to "use" the car as the owner was a little uptight before I bought it. Just try and drive the car in a corner accelerating. You can definitely feel the cars front end slide on acceleration in a tight corner with the engine weight in the back.

I don't know about Mahjiks experience but a light braking before the corner entry will help the front tires bite much like the feel of a Pantra, 911 or Fiberglass Buggy.

Check out how vague the "Cable Shifter" is. They now make 2 different "cams" to shorten the throw but the shift is so vague that most people only use the up/down "cam" and not the side to side as you will miss gears. After you look at the cable design you can see why it shifts so sloppy. Basically you have two cables running under the car from the shifter brackets and "cams" to two levers on the bottom of the transmission. I had a reverse Bug trans in a sand rail that shifted cleaner using the tail shaft at the rear of the car

Rub your hand from the inside to the out side of each rear tire. You will find all the wear on the inside. They are trying to make an aftermarket fix for the rear camber: http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showt...highlight=rear

I keep reading how great the interior is? I replaced all the leather surfaces, seats, inner door panels, center divider, ect, ect...But the worst part about the interior is Honda covered a silver plastic dash, center climate control, radio, and side door arm rests in a matt black finish over some kind of chrome plastic. I have never seen "except at the showroom" where the matt black was not peeling from the outside edges to the center showing the white/chrome plastic base. Inner door handles are always dinged up black over white plastic evan on the showroom floor. But for ~$300 you can get aluminum ones.

One guy (on Prime) and Dali Racing do a CF overlay of the problem areas, door handles, replacement center, and the door arm rests.

I don't think the interior is all that great and was never a high point of the car.

One other funny thing is you Have to change your own oil or have Acura do it. The only proper oil filter is from Acura "and you can't buy it from Honda " as the RSX filter will fit but it is less than half the capacity and you need an "Oil Filter CRUSH WASHER" with each oil change. WTF: Why do I need a crush washer for an oil filter???? I don't know. But you do get to buy one $12 filter plus $2 crush washer from Acura for each oil change and if you reuse the washer it will leak. Jiffy lube will try a Fram filter (for the RSX) use it and it leaks.

Have fun, Jeff

 

That's a load of huey. You should read/talk to some of the professional drivers. That admit to feeling like they were in a war after doing 2-3 hours in a GT Porsche verses other GT cars like the BMW and Ferrari's. However, they weren't necessarily going any faster.

There is a difference between driving a car on the edge and a car being unstable.

I never said the RX7 wasn't a better "handling" car. I never said the NSX chassis is more "state of the art" either. I said the NSX was a better balanced car, which is true. That is the goal and reason for "mid-engine" mounting.


Oh really?

"Mid-engine designs are usually used in sports or racing cars, as the engine placement provides a low polar moment of inertia by keeping most of the mass close to the center of the vehicle. This aids in quickly changing the direction of the automobile's travel, albeit at the price of reduced straight line stability."

Yes, I knew someone would bring this up which is why I mentioned "true" mid-engine a few post back. Obviously there is a trade off with space, but with a sports car, are you really that concerned with how much carrying space you have?

Actually, the RX7 was in the price range back then with the Corvettes, 300zx TT's and a few other cars which were all pretty common back then (as my father was deciding whether to trade in his Vette on a newer one or get an FD). Granted, those cars were not cheap back then, but none of those were ever considered exotics.

I don't think anyone will really know what and why cars are considered exotics. I think everyone can agree that the #1 factor is $$$$$. When you look at sights like this:

http://www.chooseyouritem.com/exotics/

it seems they are mainly looking at price to put the word "exotic" on a car. That's also why I mentioned that the C6 Z06 will probably approach that point real soon.

 

BMW does the same thing (at least on their M cars).

 

Mahjik, did you get to drive the NSX or just instruct?

I have the most respect for the instructors on the track. I know I have frightened a few. I love to learn more about how to make myself a better driver (and rider on my bike) just for the thrill of getting it right.

I think the NSX has potential but the FD just seems easier to drive faster or maybe it's just time behind the wheel or a different driving style.

My NSX is not a good street car. At only 6" longer (than the FD) it scape's on every entry. Trying to go at a 45* angle it will still scape and we (North Ca.) have some of the best roads.

 

I drove an older one ('92 IIRC) years ago. I didn't drive the SC'd one though. However, I praise Acura for the job they did on the NSX. If it weren't for them, I would have not lived through the day when I instructed the SC NSX. That driver thought Grand Turismo 4 was real.

I agree that the NSX is probably not a great every day car. IMO, unless someone just has a ton of money to throw away (i.e. a practical car and then something sporty), something like a BMW 300 series or a Mercedes C series is a better fit. But you'll always have people that want to be "everyday race car drivers".

For me, a FD replacement would most likely end up being an NSX or a 993 Porsche. Those are about the only two cars that I would care to put up with.

 

Well atleast we can agree it's the price, although how the NSX price tag was established and set is something that's hard to describe. Even in the early to mid 90's, the buyers that were looking at the FD, 300zx, Vette, Supra price and performance range tended not to be the ones actually looking at buying the NSX. It would be easier as a buyer to justify why you bought the car's named above rather than the NSX since you were still paying a decent price for a more rare car than a camaro/mustang, but were "smart" enough not to buy (since it was more than likely outside their fiscal reach anyway) the NSX with its hefty price tag (that has similar performance as the ones mentioned above). What would be interesting would be the demographic reseach from that time frame to see who was buying what, avg household income type thing.

Tim

 

I think you should stay with the 7

 

I think we are on the same page. With training (and major dollars) this car could do well on a short road track but as a DD it sucks. I have also noticed that getting in and out of it is a real PAIN. You sit so low, doors so long (they hit everything) and the engine in the mid section and low it kills my lower back (scratches the paint too) to do any maintenance.

 

I think there's a big difference between truly hand built cars and those that claim so. The Diablo, as far as I know, had each one of its steel body panels beat into shape by a human. The NSX, on the other hand, has its aluminum panels stamped by expensive machines. I personally don't care about the bragging rights and would take the higher tolerances and build quality of the NSX over the Italian when it comes to consistency and uniformity of fit.