Why are NSX's so expensive?

[tun6twista]

Let the rant begin....

I'm looking at all of the 2000+ models and they're 50k used and up to 80k for a 2005. WTF are these Japenese thinking? V6 with 290HP and 224ft lbs and weighs in at nearly 3200lbs! People call this a "super car," I call it a big waste of money. Yeah sure, it can probably handle really good, but handling is not worth that much money. And they're knock off's on the looks too. Ferrari styling anyone? Could they have been any more blatent about the styling concept of the car?! Why not throw the ferrari emblem on there while you're at it; scheesh! If anyone paid this much for any of these 2000+ models, they're absolutley crazy! This car to me is worth around the 30-35k price tag new and 15-20k used like any other normal car. How would you like to spend 80k on a car which looks like a Ferrari and get spanked by an e36 m3 with mods like cams, chip, exhaust, intake and pullies? I sure as hell would not like to get beat by a 30-40k less priced car that is 10 years old!

I should note, I brought this up because I was eating in a restaurant with my gf tonight and I heard these ricer morons talking about how his friend who owns a NSX (which I don't believe for 1 second as I've NEVER seen one in town) beat up on a supercharged e46 m3 at the drag strip last week. I was turning red at the table because I just wanted to ream these little shit-heads' necks and set them straight! Funny thing is the guy who owns that Supercharged M3 is a friend of a friend of mine and he pretty much destroy's everything at Spokane International Speedway. He's a great driver and his car is modded to the max! Not much in the NW would come close to beating this car. Anyways, I'm done ranting now as I've calmed down. Thanks fellas, GERMAN POWER! (does that sound like a Nazi saying?)

[donald1476]

http://www.nctd.com/review-intro.cfm...SX&ReviewID=68
http://philip.greenspun.com/materialism/cars/nsx.html
http://www.automotive.com/2002/12/acura/nsx/reviews/

I'm sure you've seen just about EVERY car in your town, especially considering NSX's are commonly used as daily drivers. And from the information I've gathered from your tantrum here, it was never mentioned that the NSX was stock. You would like to ream these people's necks because they claimed an NSX beat an M3? Step away from your bias and try not to get angered so easily, You need to relax a little. Have a beer

[tun6twista]

edmunds.com lists a 2004 nsk at 77k :P do your research. And the kid did say it was a stock car (I just didn't mention it). I could care less if a m3 got beat by something that was REMOTELY possible like racing a b16 turbo hatchback running 20lbs of boost. Their story was not possible. I'm not here to have an argument with you Donald. Also all of those links you posted put the new pricing on those cars well over 60k. And I'm bias, but I'm realastic. A stock "super car" NSX will NEVER beat a supercharged e46 m3 in any race except maybe around twisties but even that would be a stretch. I would find it hard to see a turbo NSX beat a supercharged e46 m3.

Also they might be great cars, but to call them super cars is a HUGE stretch and the price is even more of a stretch for these cars. A 350z would probably spank one of these in a drag.

[donald1476]

Do my research? When did I say the price was different than that?

"I'm sure you've seen just about EVERY car in your town, especially considering NSX's are commonly used as daily drivers." Was purely sarcasm...

Well a S/C M3 would surely beat it on the strip, So the kids were obviously full of shit.. Anyway wouldn't a new e46 M3 with a supercharger cost close or more than that?

It's called a Supercar because it is very well-balanced and the car handles amazingly, but.. It's still a consumer car so its not THAT "super"

[tun6twista]

stock for stock an e46 m3 would still beat a NSK on a track. And no, a new m3 is what 50k? A supercharger with tuning might run up to 20k probably less. My whole reasoning behind this post is to try and figure out why this car is worth 80k new? I read those reviews of the older models, but the 2005 is selling for 80k? Why? I could never imaging spending 80k on a Japenese car that was a clone knockoff of a Ferrari with less balls then a 50k car. STI and Evo's would destroy this car and they cost 40k less! haha

[donald1476]

Well, I started wondering the same thing as you... then I came across a thread covering the same topic on another car forum...

Yep. Well it isn't. Heres why...

-If it was, then don't you think some authority regulating pricing would investigate Honda for overcharging?

-The Evo and STi here in the UK is the same cost as a 330 BMW. Skyline? Same power, same cost of LS430 here. But it is not a con because it has better technology (engine, chassis) and interior. But if you think the NSX is, then you can say the Skyline is. But it isn't. NSX is also a good tech car.

-Low units raise costs because of diseconomies of scale.

-Aluminium body. F1 technology. This costs a lot of money in itself. Sometimes moreso then the actual worth incorporated into the car. Honda were the first to have F1 tech in their car, at 1990, so you can't say it would be available cheaply. This was a risk, and Honda need to spend money on contingency plans. Cost in itself.

-A company has to make profit on their vehicles, even if the cost is too high for customers. If you want something, you've got to pay for it.

-The NSX-R does the 1/4 mile in 10.8 secs - same power, 'nuff said. Now imagine if it had twins.

-So many costs are incorporated into a very low production exotic. Moreso then just component costs. Markup, admin costs, costs for transportation, SVA costs, tax, dealer markup, other markups.

-At least this car is reliable. A Ferrari isn't. Its proven in tests, when not even treated to its realistic limits.

-An NSX is well built, bettter than its competitors. You pay for this, and reliability.

-This is not a ricer's dream car. Customers come from a background of not having the mentality that "Yes I am a ricer, and my dream car would be this".

-The NSX was not designed to be tuned because it is fast enough, yet it is tunable. NSX-R doesn't need much tuning - look above.

-Want to blame someone for the 290hp? Blame emmissions and the Gentlemens agreement in Japan (that law is stupid - it effects sales, the Jap economy; which is bad enough as it is; and the competitive nature of the car).

But I can guarantee (sp?) you on one thing. That is that if Porsche and Ferrari had the same external constraints as Honda, then you wouldn't see a better car, regardless of Porsche's or Ferrari's resources - whether better or not.

-If you don't like the car because of any reason (price or not - probably price for you people), then don't buy it.

-Don't question people who buy it. It is their decision, and they may be looking for something other than just straight performance, and the NSX may deliver on that.

-There is more to a car then just HP. Handling, weight - they all matter.

[tun6twista]

He's speaking in reguard's to the NSX-R which is how much? I'm assuming it's a turbo version of the car which create's tons more power then what is listed on edmunds and those links you gave me. There is no way a 290hp car which weighs 3200lbs is running a 10.8 1/4. It's IMPOSSIBLE. So that topic is referring to another version of the NSX. So basically they're selling an FI car chasis for 80k? Is that what I'm reading? Who wants to spend 80k on a car that has to be tuned to complete with lower priced higher HP/Torque rating cars? And they're doing this because of low units so the car then becomes a rareity. To me, that idea is insane. Although, I would like some info on that NSX-R

[donald1476]

General specifications

Record last updated Before 12 / 01 / 2004
Country of origin Japan
Year of introduction 2002
Numbers built N/A
Body design N/A
Weight 1270 kilo / 2799.9 lbs

Drivetrain
Engine C32B 60º V 6
Engine Location Mid , transversely mounted
Displacement 3.179 liter / 194 cu in
Valvetrain 4 valves / cylinder, DOHC, VTEC
Fuel feed Honda PGM Fuel injection
Aspiration Naturally Aspirated
Gearbox 6 speed Manual
Drive Rear wheel drive

Performance figures
Power 280 bhp / 209 KW @ 7300 rpm
Torque 304 Nm / 224 ft lbs @ 5300 rpm
BHP/Liter 88 bhp / liter
Power to weight ratio 0.22 bhp / kg
0-60 mph Acceleration 12.8 (Guy I quoted was way off!)

[Underscore002]

whats the deal with Ferrari's anyways, ugly ass cars. and remember, not everyone wants to buy a car and spend $20k to make it faster and handle better. these people buy the NSX (among other cars), a balanced fun car. I personally want to have sex with classic VW's, and I would drop $50k on one if i had the cash. people like different things, get over it.

[donald1476]

Totally disagree with you on the ferrari's looks, asshat. But, I agree those cars are for the people who have the $$, don't want mods, want a fast car, and ~80k isn't much.

[Underscore002]

Originally Posted by donald1476

Totally disagree with you on the ferrari's looks, asshat

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TALKING TO ME LIKE THAT!

[tun6twista]

Originally Posted by Underscore002

whats the deal with Ferrari's anyways, ugly ass cars. and remember, not everyone wants to buy a car and spend $20k to make it faster and handle better. these people buy the NSX (among other cars), a balanced fun car. I personally want to have sex with classic VW's, and I would drop $50k on one if i had the cash. people like different things, get over it.

I'm not trying to bash the people who buy the car, they have their reasons, I'm trying to figure out why this car is worth 80k+ new. I bought my car for a reason and someone might not like it, big deal. Doesn't mean squat to me. But I'm just trying to understand what the reasoning behind the car being priced so high is. With donald's post, I understand the reasoning, but now just totally disagree with it haha. Does anyone know the cost of an e46 m3 CSL? This is purely a race-developed car with handling in mind. I know the specs are around 380hp and 300ft lbs.

And yeah, Ferrari's are sexy man If I had the money, I would spend it on a 360 Spyder just for the sound of it!

[tun6twista]

Also I'm writing top gear and I want a review from Jeremy on the NSX in comparision to other "Super cars."

Donald you are right, 80k isn't a whole lot in the terms of spending money on a super car, but I don't think the NSX falls anywhere near this catagory, at least the 290hp version doesn't. What is this NSX-R? This sounds more interesting haha

[donald1476]

Oh, and the points that disproved Acura's seemingly outrageous pricing was infact for the base NSX (not the R).

[tun6twista]

I think I might steal Acura's idea... build an aluminum frame, throw in some FI pedal's and controls, throw in a RSX engine, put a turbo on it, spend 40k and sell it for 80k Great plan lol (this was totally sarcasm btw)