Scott in AZ

Midnight Mystery

Well, most interested bought it when it came out in 2017.

I've seen two and they are stunning!

nist7

The "entry level" supercar segment is extremely crowded at its price range and the new NSX doesn't really blow the doors off of its competitors in any stark way. And obviously it doesn't carry as much of a prestige compared to say Porsche or McLaren. People either love it or hate it. There are a few OG NSX lovers who can afford and love this car....a few others are converted over. On NSXPrime I've read about a guy who jumped ship from his 458 to the NSX....likely a rare story.

You and me are in the same boat in that I too hope that due to this low demand of the NSX, that a low-used example MAY be had for less than 100k in a few years....but given it's low production it may be more difficult than we imagine....

JonFo

Yes, pretty shocked at the low number, and 2018 was a gangbuster year economically, so I figured sales would be high. But maybe folks were waiting for the '19 MMC that just came out. Let's see how many move in Q1 '19.

Is there a place to see the existing national inventory of new NSX's? I also wonder how many '18's are on lots.

Tech

Unfortunately, although I know all the advantages of electric motors such as high torque right off 0 RPM.

My Acura dealer had an NSX in the showroom when I bought my '17 RDX. Nice car and I am sure very high tech, but it didn't do anything for me. I have yet to see one on the road. At the price, there are others to choose from.

Now when I was looking for something sporty back in 2009, I considered a used Gen 1, but everything was modified; I like my cars original.

Bartrdx

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I think we can all agree that at $155k to $200k, there are a lot of competitors. Arguably, of the cars in this price range, the Acura brand has the worst prestigious factor. It's also true that cars in this price range are generally very good and you can't go wrong with any of them. Most people grow up dreaming about owning a Porsche, a McLaren, or may be even a high end Audi. But rarely an Acura. So to me, the price tag is probably the biggest factor, even if we ignore performance, handling, styling, etc.

My understanding that the NSX is a $150+ car because of its engine. I believe if one were to replace that engine, it's gonna cost $70-80k. That goes to show how expensive that engine is. It's a bespoke engine that is designed specifically for the NSX and not shared with any other Honda's. It uses Cosworth Head and Blocks which are pricey. It's essentially a race car engine that and run in the 24hr races.

If people are willing to pay, then it's great to have a unique engine. However, Acura doesn't have that pull and we can see Mercedes found out about this the hard way too with its SLR and subsequently the SLS. They finally nailed it with the AMG GT. Mercedes figured out that while they are a prestigious brand, it's not quite there to ask for $200 or even $300k for a car. The AMG GT starts at $110k and tops out at about $160k. And at that price level, it works perfectly well for Mercedes. They are able to price the car that way by using a variation of the 4.0L turbo V8 engine found in many AMG 63 models. I think the NSX could have been priced at closer to $100k if it went with a more pedestrian 3.5 V6 TT. It can still make 500hp and it won't suffer much in performance.

ZDXROCKSTAR

if you are about to spend $120 to $200.....were talking alot of cars....r8's and even Ferrari 458 coupes are in that price range now. They are also much nicer to look at.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

$120-$200 is a pretty big range though. $120k for a brand new NSX would be pretty damn attractive, whereas $150k or more is a little too much. $200k is just outrageous.

For comparison, a New Nissan GT-R is already $100k-$130k. The Nismo one is $175k. While the NSX isn't exactly faster, it's got the engine in the right place along with way better ride comfort. The interior isn't state of the art but still noticeably more modern than the GT-R too.

In terms of appearance, I think the general consensus is that the NSX is right up there with the others in its class. It's just that it doesn't exactly excel in performance and is priced too high.

Tech

And does it matter if it is faster or not? The fact is, nobody will see the last few kph or mph as they take miles to achieve.

We had a guy at work who would rattle off the fastest 0-60 and 1/4 mile times off (for this month lol) of some car. I just responded "wouldn't it be nice to drive the car you really like" and besides, I am not suffering from SPS. Who cares what is faster; if I don't like the car, it doesn't do a thing for me.

gtinmia

I think Acura totally missed the mark with the overall reboot of the NSX. One of the key things about the old model was the distinctive look. The reboot totally changed the look of the car. While it isn't an eye sore, it doesn't look like the original. Porsche knows people like 911 so the overall look hasn't changed much since creation. Acura made a super car with a super car price, but in the end its an luxury branded Honda starting at $150K.

Acura should've invested R&D dollars on two sport cars, the NSX and a Legend Coupe reboot (call it the LSX). The NSX should have never been more than 120K starting price and keep the LSX affordable starting at 38K with a Type R version starting at 45K. They are missing out on the 24-54 y/o demographic. I wish I saw more Acura sport cars on the road than those Lexus RC's, Mustangs and Camaros. Since the NSX started selling, the only one I have seen has been in the Acura showroom. And what do you know, the original model prices are increasing.

The original NSX was an affordable exotic sports car, while the reboot is simply too overpriced, even for the enthusiasts who could afford it.

Tech

Just like they did to the Ford GT. The one from the mid 2000s looks like the original from the 60s and it looked great. Just a couple of years ago, they came out with another GT that looks like a rocket ship. Given the choice between the first and second gen, I'd buy the first one for the same money.

JonFo

I actually like the new NSX design and am glad they did not just copy the old profile. Porche does that and I hate it, and will never consider a 911 as a sports car.

The challenge for Acura is that they went all out on performance and used an expensive, unique engine as mentioned above. Had they used a highly massaged variant of the existing V6, the MSRP might have come in under $100K. That would have sold many more units.

But one can question if the goal was to sell several thousand sports cars a year or to set a corporate benchmark for performance, technology and build process. From what I've heard, it's the latter.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

dafuq 400+hp AWD in a coupe body isnt a sports car?

Tech

Well definitely not the first as I have not seen one on the road yet, but there are plenty in the showrooms.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I think the problem is that the car is called the NSX. You know what that stands for? New Sports Car eXperimental. If it looks like the old model, then the NSX name doesn't quite suit it, doesn't it?

The 1991 NSX started at $60k USD. In 2019, that's the same as USD $112k. And that's when the Japanese economy was doing great. It competes with the 911 Carrera, not the 911 turbo at the time.

Before long, the economy tanked. By 1995, the NSX was already at $81k. That's the same as $135k in 2019.

Whether it's $112k, $135k, or $157k like the brand new model, these prices are hardly affordable. The difference is that the new NSX now competes with the 911 Turbo.

The truth is, the original NSX was also seen as overpriced. But overall time, people start to realize and appreciate its greatness.

Midnight Mystery

I like that the new NSX doesn't look like a stupid flip-up headlight Lambo or Vette!


It's already a classic to me!


Give it time! She shall age with grace!