RE: Honda NSX-R: Spotted
Discussion
yonex said:
There was a grey manual 3.0 for sale at £13k as recently as 5 years ago.
Yep I seem to remember mid teens being the low point and now even early 91-92 cars with automatic gearboxes seem to be going for late 20's to 30's. Why on earth you'd want an NSX with an auto gearbox, let alone paying that much money for one I don't know. It seems everyone seems to want in on the "NSX tax".I blame articles like this for the inflated prices, it seems a week can't go by without some journo extolling the virtues of the NSX or other cars from this era, even cars that were originally panned seem to be getting some loving. What happened, did they all have a meeting and decide cars from the 90's where now cool or is it a sad indictment of the fact the modern cars just aren't delivering what enthusiasts really want any more?
yonex said:
hondansx said:
And you've driven an NSX-R?
Are you totally convinced that the pinnacle of 80's engineering is 'it'. Things evolve, it's a great car but it is still yesterday's hero in terms of pace and power. Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
The NSX also has a great story behind it. It's a shame so manny are ignorant to the vision behind the making of the car and what it achieved.
I almost bought a £10k NSX a few years ago. Absolute dog. In hindsight though, should have kept it for parts. The same car would probably be worth £30k now.
hondansx said:
What is your point? You could say that about 250 GTO.
Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
The NSX also has a great story behind it. It's a shame so manny are ignorant to the vision behind the making of the car and what it achieved.
I almost bought a £10k NSX a few years ago. Absolute dog. In hindsight though, should have kept it for parts. The same car would probably be worth £30k now.
My point is that people shouldnt be subject to this sneery attitude because they look at cars objectively. I think it's a uniquely Honda enthusiast trait, DC2, 5, EK's, S2K...very similar in their vociferous defence of the brand, it's very odd. It's like a reasonable person has made the 'sensible' choice, the 'informed' choice and then is seriously aggravated when someone questions why? As an investment it is a great car, I don't care about investments, it's not why I would ever buy a car. I found more of a bond in a Caterham, more exciting, purer. A Caterham and an R8 for the price of the NSX-R, that's the value for me. Each to their own. These days a 3.0 auto for £25K+ is just silly. The real crime is that they are all going to locked away with the values continually rising and most will never get the chance to drive them. It'll only fuel the mystery around them further and that great story that big H envisioned becomes all that's important. Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
The NSX also has a great story behind it. It's a shame so manny are ignorant to the vision behind the making of the car and what it achieved.
I almost bought a £10k NSX a few years ago. Absolute dog. In hindsight though, should have kept it for parts. The same car would probably be worth £30k now.
There is something called the refresh program where you can send your NSX to Honda and it can return brand new, but the factory is used to build other more mainstream cars now. I don't think many people realise how different the NSX-R is to the standard NSX for them to see the value; understandable given they weren't sold here.
yonex said:
hondansx said:
What is your point? You could say that about 250 GTO.
Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
The NSX also has a great story behind it. It's a shame so manny are ignorant to the vision behind the making of the car and what it achieved.
I almost bought a £10k NSX a few years ago. Absolute dog. In hindsight though, should have kept it for parts. The same car would probably be worth £30k now.
My point is that people shouldnt be subject to this sneery attitude because they look at cars objectively. I think it's a uniquely Honda enthusiast trait, DC2, 5, EK's, S2K...very similar in their vociferous defence of the brand, it's very odd. It's like a reasonable person has made the 'sensible' choice, the 'informed' choice and then is seriously aggravated when someone questions why? As an investment it is a great car, I don't care about investments, it's not why I would ever buy a car. I found more of a bond in a Caterham, more exciting, purer. A Caterham and an R8 for the price of the NSX-R, that's the value for me. Each to their own. These days a 3.0 auto for £25K+ is just silly. The real crime is that they are all going to locked away with the values continually rising and most will never get the chance to drive them. It'll only fuel the mystery around them further and that great story that big H envisioned becomes all that's important. Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
The NSX also has a great story behind it. It's a shame so manny are ignorant to the vision behind the making of the car and what it achieved.
I almost bought a £10k NSX a few years ago. Absolute dog. In hindsight though, should have kept it for parts. The same car would probably be worth £30k now.
As in the problem with Porsches thread, new cars are getting objectively better on paper with every iteration. But are they really better? It depends what you value from a car in my book.
I don't think anyone is brave enough to call an NSX an 'investment', but this NSX-R has been a good test of what the market will bear. As an NSX fan, it's good to see the car is at last getting the recognition it deserves. Whilst i completely agree an automatic NSX is a abomination (unless you have some kind of physical disability), you will pay more than £25k for a far more common Porsche 993 Tiptronic.
hondansx said:
Whilst i completely agree an automatic NSX is a abomination (unless you have some kind of physical disability), you will pay more than £25k for a far more common Porsche 993 Tiptronic.
In my book it just makes them both extremely bad value. Sorry but I have to agree with Yonex, I just don't "get" £95k for a 15 year old car and that isn't because it's a Honda. I also don't "get" £200k for an old Porsche and I think people who pay millions for a 60's Ferrari are just bat sh*t insane but what do I know. The purpose of a car is to be driven, not looked at, collected, revered, worshipped or whatever else so my measure of a cars worth is does it drive how I like and how does it make me feel while doing it.
Admittedly some of these older cars do have a certain something that seems to be missing from modern cars but is that really worth the inflated prices being asked, especially considering what they were selling for 5 years ago? We are in a bubble where the worth of a car is being artificially inflated which is a mugs game IMO as the only people who win out of that are people who aren't really interested in cars. I am willing to bet whoever bought this car doesn't ever drive it again, does that sound like the kind of legacy fit for an NSX-R?
Guvernator said:
hondansx said:
Whilst i completely agree an automatic NSX is a abomination (unless you have some kind of physical disability), you will pay more than £25k for a far more common Porsche 993 Tiptronic.
In my book it just makes them both extremely bad value. Sorry but I have to agree with Yonex, I just don't "get" £95k for a 15 year old car and that isn't because it's a Honda. I also don't "get" £200k for an old Porsche and I think people who pay millions for a 60's Ferrari are just bat sh*t insane but what do I know. The purpose of a car is to be driven, not looked at, collected, revered, worshipped or whatever else so my measure of a cars worth is does it drive how I like and how does it make me feel while doing it.
Admittedly some of these older cars do have a certain something that seems to be missing from modern cars but is that really worth the inflated prices being asked, especially considering what they were selling for 5 years ago? We are in a bubble where the worth of a car is being artificially inflated which is a mugs game IMO as the only people who win out of that are people who aren't really interested in cars. I am willing to bet whoever bought this car doesn't ever drive it again, does that sound like the kind of legacy fit for an NSX-R?
stephen300o said:
Sought after classics make more money, it's simple.
Oh I know they do but this car is 15 years old, not really old enough to be a classic in the true sense of the word which only leaves it's rarity as the defining factor which again is of no interest to me. I'd have actually preferred it if they made 50,000 of the buggers so that people who are interested in driving had a chance to get their hands on them rather then a few of them being sat in some collectors dehumidified garage.That also doesn't explain why they've shot up in value over the last 5 years. They were just as rare 5 years ago so why are they 3 times more expensive all of a sudden? Oh I know, people have realised their is a killing to be made in 90's nostalgia.
yonex said:
hondansx said:
What is your point? You could say that about 250 GTO.
Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
My point is that people shouldnt be subject to this sneery attitude because they look at cars objectively. I think it's a uniquely Honda enthusiast trait, DC2, 5, EK's, S2K...very similar in their vociferous defence of the brand, it's very odd. Older cars tend to offer something different; it's rare to get a modern sportscar that weighs 1270kg. You certainly won't find one without power steering or driver aids on skinny tyres (supposedly what people on Pistonheads crave, but never buy!). Ultimately it's about how they make you feel, not neccessarily how fast you're going.
(Objectively the NSX drives much better than any mainstream Ferrari pre-355, costs less to run/maintain, is robust and reliable enough to be used as a genuine daily driver and yet is safer in a crash and more economical. Yet they're (a long way) behind most Ferraris on price - how does that work? Same can be said in relation to the pre-996 911s. Care to comment on that objectively?)
Two comments in response to the Honda jibe:-
1) I don't think it IS just a Honda trait. Look at the Ford fanboys and their (arguably even more over-priced) Mk1/2 Escorts and Sierra Cossies (to a degree, also the E30 M3). Look at the Renault owners trying to convince everyone their cars won't fall apart every other weekend. And then there's 911 owners trying to persuade everyone that yes it is a supercar really, or Boxster owners trying to persuade everyone that they could have afforded a 911 but didn't want one. Audi / Lambo owners who honestly bought their car for the way it drives. etc. etc. etc...
2) Performance Hondas are criticised almost hypocritically, in the main, and I think that winds owners up:
- for the 'lack of torque', yet there's an equally large voice bemoaning the loss of n/a engines, throttle response, sound etc - all of which Hondas have typically delivered better than the competition. You can't have it both ways...
- for their 'boring roots' - yet the same applies to every other hot hatch. And what were the NSX and S2000 if not two completely clean-sheet designs, something that Porsche and BMW have (Z4 partially excepted) singularly failed to do for a long time - 986 shared a ton of parts with the 996, for example, Cayenne was a Touareg chassis, Z3 re-used E30 rear axle and other chassis components as well as all powertrains...
- for 'lack of character' - because they stereotypically need no tinkering/fettling/preventative maintenance by an enthusiast owner - the TVR/Ford/French/BL brigade view that as boring/characterless, because they confuse HAVING to get your hands dirty owning a car to bonding with the car to the car being intrinsically more engaging to own.
I'm not saying they're the best in their sectors (although good arguments have been made for the DC2, EK9 and NSX), but they're usually up there...yet attract more criticism than the European competition.
Guvernator said:
The purpose of a car is to be driven, not looked at, collected, revered, worshipped or whatever else so my measure of a cars worth is does it drive how I like and how does it make me feel while doing it.
Sure, the purpose of *your* cars is to be driven, not etc etc. As it happens, the purpose of *my* cars is also to be driven, not etc etc. But the purpose of someone else's car, their property, is what ever the hell he wants it to be, so long as it's legal.
Anyone who tries to tell me I *have* to drive my car is likely to get just as dusty an answer as someone who tells me I'm not allowed to.
Guvernator said:
stephen300o said:
Sought after classics make more money, it's simple.
Oh I know they do but this car is 15 years old, not really old enough to be a classic in the true sense of the word which only leaves it's rarity as the defining factor which again is of no interest to me. I'd have actually preferred it if they made 50,000 of the buggers so that people who are interested in driving had a chance to get their hands on them rather then a few of them being sat in some collectors dehumidified garage.That also doesn't explain why they've shot up in value over the last 5 years. They were just as rare 5 years ago so why are they 3 times more expensive all of a sudden? Oh I know, people have realised their is a killing to be made in 90's nostalgia.
2) The facelift cars have entered the investment market, which operates far more like the fine art market than the used-car market that we'd understand. Rules are totally different...I don't like it and I agree with all the sentiments above about cars being there to be used...but some people with money don't and they see classics as a better return on their money than the stock market etc...
havoc said:
1) The NSX has risen less in value than the rare/sought-after 911s and Ferraris - 5 years ago you could get all sorts of exotica for bargain-basement prices - sub-£30k V8 Vantage, sub-£20k 996 Turbo (!), sub-£30k 355, etc...
2) The facelift cars have entered the investment market, which operates far more like the fine art market than the used-car market that we'd understand. Rules are totally different...I don't like it and I agree with all the sentiments above about cars being there to be used...but some people with money don't and they see classics as a better return on their money than the stock market etc...
I get all that, doesn't mean I have to like it. I suspect like a few people, the NSX has always bee on my radar as a car I'd like to try one day, I even nearly bought one several years ago but the timing wasn't right. 2) The facelift cars have entered the investment market, which operates far more like the fine art market than the used-car market that we'd understand. Rules are totally different...I don't like it and I agree with all the sentiments above about cars being there to be used...but some people with money don't and they see classics as a better return on their money than the stock market etc...
Unfortunately they have now risen to a point where it no longer makes financial sense to me and this applies to other cars too, some of which you've also mentioned. Cars that we grew up reading about and had an interest in have now been put beyond the reach of us enthusiasts and into the hands of a few people who see them as nothing more than a way to increase their wealth.
This isn't sour grapes either as I have no interest in making money off cars, I have my business for that.
There are lots of other ways to make money so I wish these "investors" would bugger off and buy expensive paintings or something else instead tbh and leave the cars for people who you know, actually like cars.
havoc said:
(Objectively the NSX drives much better than any mainstream Ferrari pre-355, costs less to run/maintain, is robust and reliable enough to be used as a genuine daily driver and yet is safer in a crash and more economical. Yet they're (a long way) behind most Ferraris on price - how does that work? Same can be said in relation to the pre-996 911s. Care to comment on that objectively?)
I have looked at 355's and tbh in comparison to an NA1-R that would be my choice. The 996 has never really been overly attractive to me, not sure why as on paper it's a solid car? I recall going back into an NA1 a few years ago and being disappointed with it, this is after owning a sorted lightweight though so I guess it was always going to be weird. Is being 'safer to crash' and 'more economical' really a major consideration for someone looking to invest upwards of £50K into what is effectively a GT? havoc said:
Two comments in response to the Honda jibe:-
1) I don't think it IS just a Honda trait.
2) Performance Hondas are criticised almost hypocritically, in the main, and I think that winds owners up:
- for the 'lack of torque', yet there's an equally large voice bemoaning the loss of n/a engines, throttle response, sound etc - all of which Hondas have typically delivered better than the competition. You can't have it both ways...
They do lack torque, I found the DC2 and S2K quote tedious at times when you weren't in the mood, as you say that's the trade off for high specific outputs and if it bother you that much there are a number of cars with bigger NA engines out there. 1) I don't think it IS just a Honda trait.
2) Performance Hondas are criticised almost hypocritically, in the main, and I think that winds owners up:
- for the 'lack of torque', yet there's an equally large voice bemoaning the loss of n/a engines, throttle response, sound etc - all of which Hondas have typically delivered better than the competition. You can't have it both ways...
havoc said:
- for their 'boring roots' - yet the same applies to every other hot hatch. And what were the NSX and S2000 if not two completely clean-sheet designs, something that Porsche and BMW have (Z4 partially excepted) singularly failed to do for a long time - 986 shared a ton of parts with the 996, for example, Cayenne was a Touareg chassis, Z3 re-used E30 rear axle and other chassis components as well as all powertrains...
I'm not getting into the S2K debate, I don't rate them, any of them it's as simple as that. The NSX was a masterpiece of design which pushed the boundaries of metallurgy and construction back in the day. Every process was quite fascinating, even down to the paint. Honda have always been a geeks dream and the NSX was Honda at pretty much its peak doing exactly what it wanted. Those days have gone and it's a shame, apart from the LFA and GTR I am not really interested in much coming out of Japan these days, it was different in the 90's, ITR, ATR, Supra, Skyline, Soarer......havoc said:
- for 'lack of character' - because they stereotypically need no tinkering/fettling/preventative maintenance by an enthusiast owner - the TVR/Ford/French/BL brigade view that as boring/characterless, because they confuse HAVING to get your hands dirty owning a car to bonding with the car to the car being intrinsically more engaging to own.
It's a common misconception. But, how many NSX's haven't been trimmed, had the wheels, calipers, exhausts swapped? How many little SOS products or OEM R kit gets substituted. People love to mess with NSX's and tinkering is part of ownership.havoc said:
I'm not saying they're the best in their sectors (although good arguments have been made for the DC2, EK9 and NSX), but they're usually up there...yet attract more criticism than the European competition.
DC2 and NSX were no question. It's difficult for some to see past a badge. It's also difficult for owners to hear their pride and joy criticized. I could say I never liked the steering, that it was a GT car and wasn't exciting enough for a toy, that it lacked that 'something', all this is true, but it won't stop the market or the enjoyment of the car for those that own them. It's just an opinion, from someone who drives an automatic Polo 
yonex said:
I have looked at 355's and tbh in comparison to an NA1-R that would be my choice.
They do lack torque, I found the DC2 and S2K quote tedious at times when you weren't in the mood, as you say that's the trade off for high specific outputs and if it bother you that much there are a number of cars with bigger NA engines out there.
I'm not getting into the S2K debate, I don't rate them, any of them it's as simple as that.
But, how many NSX's haven't been trimmed, had the wheels, calipers, exhausts swapped? How many little SOS products or OEM R kit gets substituted. People love to mess with NSX's and tinkering is part of ownership.
I could say I never liked the steering, that it was a GT car and wasn't exciting enough for a toy, that it lacked that 'something', all this is true, but it won't stop the market or the enjoyment of the car for those that own them. It's just an opinion, from someone who drives an automatic Polo
355 is IMHO less focused than the NSX-R, and is one of my favourite F-cars, so can wholly understand that.They do lack torque, I found the DC2 and S2K quote tedious at times when you weren't in the mood, as you say that's the trade off for high specific outputs and if it bother you that much there are a number of cars with bigger NA engines out there.
I'm not getting into the S2K debate, I don't rate them, any of them it's as simple as that.
But, how many NSX's haven't been trimmed, had the wheels, calipers, exhausts swapped? How many little SOS products or OEM R kit gets substituted. People love to mess with NSX's and tinkering is part of ownership.
I could say I never liked the steering, that it was a GT car and wasn't exciting enough for a toy, that it lacked that 'something', all this is true, but it won't stop the market or the enjoyment of the car for those that own them. It's just an opinion, from someone who drives an automatic Polo
DC2 / S2k - owned both, agree, esp. DC2 - try using one as a daily driver for 6 years - if you forget to change gear you may as well be in a Honda Jazz for all the result the right pedal will give you. But SO SO worth it for the 'compensations'...
S2k - owned for 3 years, with geo adjustments it became a good car but never a great car...trusted it to 9/10ths on the road, but that was plenty quick enough and the geo adjustments made it progressive enough...certainly no worse than a V8 TVR. But if in that market again I'd get a Boxster or a Chimaera, or maybe a habitable Elise...glad I did it, wouldn't go back without replacing 3/4 of the suspension components.
NSX tinkering - partly that's the "Japanese" scene - it's what they do. And partly it's Honda UK part prices - I'm replacing some components on mine with after-market simply to save myself a small fortune...e.g. Bilstein dampers a little over 50% of OE prices yet rated as longer-lasting and slightly better performing. Ferrari and Porsche 'markets' are obsessed by originality, Japanese performance car markets almost the opposite...
Steering - NSX EPAS is the only part of the car I'll criticise...after the DC2 it's a disappointment, but with familiarity it's no worse than 99% of modern systems...so I guess it was "ahead of it's time" in that regard too!
havoc said:
Stuff
We have a similar car history and maybe outlook, save for the S2K as you are obviously a masochist Two drives in the DC2 stick out. One was chasing a mate in his tweaked TT and banging off the limiter, having the front un-weight and then grip over a bumpy road, leaving him for dead. Second, after the NSX driving a prospective DC2 purchase and wondering where the power was 
I'll add another. The first Boxster came out when I was in the Integra, I used to get into it every other day with one chap on the way to work, nothing between them overall, the ITR was a tad quicker but was slower out of corners. I loved that car.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff