dean2900

I have always loved the NSX. I did consider buying a used one about 5 - 5 years ago but the maintenance cost seemed a little high for me. I always liked the idea of the Honda Supercar.

The 2009 NSX will probably be renamed and has a V-10 which will do 0-60 in 3.5 seconds and reach 200 + mph and is estimated to retail for $150k

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=120921

This all sounds good but I honesly have to say hat I think the Nissan GT-R is a much more impressive car at less than half the price (estimated).

http://www.edmunds.com/nissan/gtr/2009/review.html

The Nissan has a 6 cyllinder that does 0-60 in 3.3 seconds and 11.3 in the 1/4 miles as opposed to 11.7 in the NSX. I just find this car more impressive because it is creating all that power from a 6 clynder and on top of that, they have a 550hp version coming out inf 2010 that will also be 300 lbs lighter with the 80 extra hp. Most estimates have that being in the mid 10 secon range on the 1/4 mile and possibly under 3 seconds for 0-60.

Dont get me wrong, I would take either car and they are both nice but I can only dream about a $150k Honda whereas if I really wanted to push my budget, I might actually be able to own the GS-R lower spec that has the same performance (actually faster) for less than half the price.

Of course we have to wait and see how mouch price gouging goes on in both these cars.

Dean

derryck

First of all you're leaving out the part about the TWIN TURBO GTR which is misleading at the very least. The NSX will weigh considerably less and more than likely be worthy of it's hefty price tag. The beauty of the previous NSX was that it had supercar looks...almost supercar performance and was wrapped up in a reliable car that was comfortable and practical enough to be a daily driver. To say that the GTR runs 11.3 in the quarter is a little out of turn...I have seen a wide discrepancy in times for the GTR and we won't really know until owners get them to the track and start posting some real world times. The GTR also comes with no manual tranny option...BOOO!

Onehots2k

There will enough to justify the NSX's higher price tag. Here are a few:

It is badged as a luxury car.

Honda's are generally more reliable that Nissans.

Most reviews says the GT-R's ride is very very stiff...that will more than likely be unacceptable to ACURA.

Most reviews says the suspension and tranny make very strange noises...that will more than likely be unacceptable to Acura

IMO, the NSX will look better than the GT-R.

etc.... it goes on. The GT-R is an incredible performer at a great price...but I dont think it would be much as a DD. I believe is aiming for the DD once again this time.

I believe this car will match or beat everything the GT-R does but with more finesse.

Plus, who the hell is getting a GT-R for 70k anyway?

dombey

it's way to early to compare these right now.
On the upside, we'll have a few years to determine the reliability of the GTR before having to make a choice between the two. There are really only two brands I completely trust to give me a reliable car - honda and toyota. There are a lot of rumors and some anecdotal evidence that the GTR isn't exactly "ol reliable"...but I think at this point there isn't enough there to draw a conclusion.
From what I hear (and it really is just speculation at this point), ecu-tweaked R35s are showing massive signs of wear, so much that the tuning houses are saying the tranny will only last 12 months w/ the extra juice. If true, that means one of two things:
1) your car is going to cost you a lot more in fixes
2) you can't mod the GTR

I wouldn't be happy w/ either of those scenarios.

Spec_Ops2087

Those magazines are just BSing numbers out there ass about the new NSX. You can't compare them until official numbers are released from honda.

s2kva

ditto. the first few GTR mules had very low (well under 4 seconds) zero to sixty times. lately alot of the magazines have been getting much slower acceleration times -- so some people are wondering if the first test cars were rigged.

also, we don't know how much power the nsx successor will be making. it could 550hp, or it could be more like 600. honda is well known for making alot of power, and reliably (that last part is key).

dombey

about the underrated honda engines...if it really is a 5.5L V-10...the s2k makes nearly 120hp/L. If the redline photos are legit and it has an 8,500 RPM redline, I see no reason it won't put down the same power per liter as the s2k unless they detune it. So we're talking about potential for 660hp.




(okay, they'll probably detune it)

Habiib

Here is a question I have regarding the NSX and GTR. Based on what I've read so far, it sounds like the GTR and NSX both have advanced AWD systems. Will the NSX receive the same criticism that the GTR has? I'm referring to the saying that the electronics are doing all of the work for you.....etc. Will it be said that it has no soul or passion IF it only comes with a DSG style tranny? I'm trying to figure out how it won't receive those same complaints if its SH-AWD allows it to perform miracles around the track.

dean2900

First off, I can only speculate on what has been published. And the truth is we wont know for sure until at least a year or so after the cars are releases how much HP and real 1/4 and track times. The intitial magazine car numbers are useless on new vehicles as both are and people get used to the cars and find out how to drive them.

My point is that I actually like the fact that the GTR is a car I might be able to go out and buy and it does have super car number.

The NSX goes from a 6 to a 10 and is saying it will be 150k car. I may appreciate the car much in the way I appreciate certain Ferrari's or the 911 GT3 but those are cars I can never own.

I do like the fact that Nuissan is taking a proven Q35 series engine and cranking up the HP with twin turbos to make an affordable super car.

I only got to test drive a NSX-T and it was the most fun car I had ever driven. I liked it better than the 911 (turbo), Cayman, Vette, Boxster S. etc. The car was fun but not insanely fast but you could easily have the car sideways. Heck. I had the car sideways when pulling out of the dealer lot barely pressing on the gas.

I am not trashing the NEW NSX by any means but it is not the NSX anymore and they should rename it.

I just hate the fact that the car is going to be so expesnive that the majority of us will never have an opportunity to own it. The NSX could have been an option for me if I wanted to drive an older beater as my daily driver.

I really do like a variety of cars and I dont have bias towards any brand although I prefer the Japanese cars because I find them to be the best bang for the buck and the most reliable based on my experience.

Right now, I like the path Nissan is taking at this point to produce the higher horsepower.

However, it may turn out that Honda only asks 100k for the NSX replacement and Nissan prices jump up to 100k due to gouging.

These are two cars I am going to keep my eye on.

Dean

dombey

here's the other thing about the GTR. Hand built and apparently the variations in the engine are large enough to justify matching certain transmissions to particular engines...not sure if the electronics are modified or not, but I assume they are. So I suppose the 480hp rating is the bottom of the distribution - which results in some people getting overrated engines. If I was Nissan, I'd be sending the more powerful units to the mags and tv shows to be tested. (which I'm sure they are)

So, the question I have is... would you be happy with a car that wasn't as fast as it was in the magazine, knowing before purchase that they vary in output?