Why look for a used NSX?
03-01-2006, 05:27 PM
#51
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 3,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 348 is a very solid and recommended by all the Ferrari techs I have spoken with. The 348 and 360 make great drivers and have proven to be the reliable ones. Most ferrari dealers and tech all say that the 355 is the service b^%ch of the group alway needing a ferrari service shop near.
I would love a 348, it was first F-car I had a chance to drive.
!
I would love a 348, it was first F-car I had a chance to drive.
!
03-02-2006, 06:55 AM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dana Point, CA
Posts: 4,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Bill,Mar 1 2006, 05:32 PM
I'm pretty sure a '98 911 will kill a stock NSX of the same year.
Autocross, in particular, favors the 911 with its shorter wheelbase and acceleration aided by the rear engine design. But PD Cunningham did pretty well with the NSX for quite some time and I honestly feel that if Honda had thrown any support at all at the car, it could have had a much better racing history here in the states than it did. It's done pretty well in Japan but take that for what it's worthy.
And for the record... neither the Cayman S (which I just drove for quite a while and really enjoyed) nor the 987 Boxster S "kill" an NA2 NSX. The Cayman S, IMO, same driver same day would likely put up better numbers than the NSX. But not by much and it doesn't "feel" faster. It's chassis rigidity is worlds better, however.
The 987, even the S model, isn't even close. As much as I hate magazine racing, the mag's confirm that and anyone who has put time in behind the wheel of both cars would also agree.
03-02-2006, 09:51 AM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N. Tx.
Posts: 4,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Bill,Mar 1 2006, 07:32 PM
I'm pretty sure a '98 911 will kill a stock NSX of the same year.
1998 911 - 3130 lbs and 282 HP Vs. 1998 NSX - 3150 lbs and 290 HP.
I can look up all the performance data, but then you will claim that that is mag racing. So - based on the HP/L ration and similar gearing- NEITHER CAR IS GOING TO KILL THE OTHER.
I REPEAT neither car is going to kill the other in acceleration. It is going to be close and be dependent on the driver and the length of the race(end of 1/4 mile or mile).
SO, the 1998 911 is NOT going to kill a 1998 NSX. If you have any data other otherwise - please do share it.
03-02-2006, 10:22 AM
#54
Registered User
Originally Posted by MDXLuvr,Mar 2 2006, 10:51 AM
neither car is going to kill the other in acceleration. It is going to be close and be dependent on the driver and the length of the race(end of 1/4 mile or mile).
the 1998 911 is NOT going to kill a 1998 NSX. If you have any data other otherwise - please do share it.
the 1998 911 is NOT going to kill a 1998 NSX. If you have any data other otherwise - please do share it.
03-02-2006, 12:03 PM
#55
Originally Posted by MDXLuvr,Mar 2 2006, 02:51 PM
...
I can look up all the performance data, but then you will claim that that is mag racing.
...
I can look up all the performance data, but then you will claim that that is mag racing.
...
I trust results from a season of racing even more than independant tests, but that's just me.
03-02-2006, 12:10 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N. Tx.
Posts: 4,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand how/why you are comparing a race car to a street car. Apples vs. Oranges.
That is why I am quoting stock Vs. stock #'s. Hell- my 1998 NSX is 80 lbs lighter for track use and has a fully modified track suspension. I will eat STOCK 993, and STOCK 996's all day long this wknd at a DE. That doesn't mean anything since my car is not stock.
Stock Vs. Stock. The cars are even.
That is why I am quoting stock Vs. stock #'s. Hell- my 1998 NSX is 80 lbs lighter for track use and has a fully modified track suspension. I will eat STOCK 993, and STOCK 996's all day long this wknd at a DE. That doesn't mean anything since my car is not stock.
Stock Vs. Stock. The cars are even.
03-02-2006, 12:12 PM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dana Point, CA
Posts: 4,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Bill,Mar 2 2006, 01:03 PM
Not me. Mag race away. I trust independant tests much more than claims from owners. Call me crazy.
I trust results from a season of racing even more than independant tests, but that's just me.
I trust results from a season of racing even more than independant tests, but that's just me.
you're almost not comparing apples to apples. Why? Porsche is/was smart enough to actually put money behind racing efforts for the 911. And the marque has a comparatively huge aftermarket following. Moreover, the sheer number of 911's sold in the last 15-years makes the car a much more likely race car than the NSX.
Beyond that... and I'm not saying this is the case with the Porsche because it's not but... an excellent race car doesn't always translate into an excellent street car.
03-02-2006, 12:13 PM
#58
Originally Posted by Da Hapa,Mar 2 2006, 11:55 AM
I'm not sure how you define "kill" but I can tell you first hand that from a standing start and roll on perspective that is absolutely not the case.
Autocross, in particular, favors the 911 with its shorter wheelbase and acceleration aided by the rear engine design. But PD Cunningham did pretty well with the NSX for quite some time and I honestly feel that if Honda had thrown any support at all at the car, it could have had a much better racing history here in the states than it did. It's done pretty well in Japan but take that for what it's worthy.
And for the record... neither the Cayman S (which I just drove for quite a while and really enjoyed) nor the 987 Boxster S "kill" an NA2 NSX. The Cayman S, IMO, same driver same day would likely put up better numbers than the NSX. But not by much and it doesn't "feel" faster. It's chassis rigidity is worlds better, however.
The 987, even the S model, isn't even close. As much as I hate magazine racing, the mag's confirm that and anyone who has put time in behind the wheel of both cars would also agree.
Autocross, in particular, favors the 911 with its shorter wheelbase and acceleration aided by the rear engine design. But PD Cunningham did pretty well with the NSX for quite some time and I honestly feel that if Honda had thrown any support at all at the car, it could have had a much better racing history here in the states than it did. It's done pretty well in Japan but take that for what it's worthy.
And for the record... neither the Cayman S (which I just drove for quite a while and really enjoyed) nor the 987 Boxster S "kill" an NA2 NSX. The Cayman S, IMO, same driver same day would likely put up better numbers than the NSX. But not by much and it doesn't "feel" faster. It's chassis rigidity is worlds better, however.
The 987, even the S model, isn't even close. As much as I hate magazine racing, the mag's confirm that and anyone who has put time in behind the wheel of both cars would also agree.
Like I said, I'm not trying to start a war, and you guys can call me all the names you like. I just don't understand how Honda can justify 90K for one of those thing, nor do I understand why anyone would get a used one when a new Boxster S is just as fast and handles better.
I'm not sure any of you are winning the argument by claiming that Porsches that cost 20 grand less can't quite "kill" the NSX. But hey, its your 20 grand.
Ok, maybe I'm going overboard with the words "kill" and "crush" for some of the comparos, but the new 911 C4 WILL kill the NSX and it costs less.
I'm going for the data on the 98 911 now.
03-02-2006, 12:16 PM
#59
Originally Posted by Da Hapa,Mar 2 2006, 05:12 PM
I understand your point about the racing and I concede that it's dubiously convenient that my point helps my argument but...
you're almost not comparing apples to apples. Why? Porsche is/was smart enough to actually put money behind racing efforts for the 911. And the marque has a comparatively huge aftermarket following. Moreover, the sheer number of 911's sold in the last 15-years makes the car a much more likely race car than the NSX.
Beyond that... and I'm not saying this is the case with the Porsche because it's not but... an excellent race car doesn't always translate into an excellent street car.
you're almost not comparing apples to apples. Why? Porsche is/was smart enough to actually put money behind racing efforts for the 911. And the marque has a comparatively huge aftermarket following. Moreover, the sheer number of 911's sold in the last 15-years makes the car a much more likely race car than the NSX.
Beyond that... and I'm not saying this is the case with the Porsche because it's not but... an excellent race car doesn't always translate into an excellent street car.