Better loved now than then.

[565]

Original NSX.  No one bothered to buy them when they could be had new.  Now they are sought after.

[SVT666]

Original NSX.  No one bothered to buy them when they could be had new.  Now they are sought after.

Disagree. The NSX was loved when it came out.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Disagree. The NSX was loved when it came out.

[Morris Minor]

I think a lot of old cars are liked now because of boomers looking back at their childhoods with nostalgic rose-tinted spectacles & assigning classic status to very ordinary cars.  Thinking of my childhood. The only interesting car my dad had was a 1970 Renault 16TS: FWD 5-door hatchback with good handling, good ride & tons of space. Considered today to be ahead of its time for its era... and it was seen back then as being ahead of its time.

[12,000 RPM]

Love the 8 series. They can be had pretty cheap too, but I imagine maintenance is pricey.

No need to imagine, it is a nightmare. Plus, while I get that performance numbers aren't everything, a same year M3 was literally as fast and more fun to drive than the top dog 8 for like 1/3 the price. I'm still working on a clever term for this, but the 8 is the kind of car best enjoyed with the eyes and ears, not through ownership.

That said, the 8 is easily, easily BMW's best design outside of a 3.0 CSL. Nothing else comes close.

[MX793]

As much as I like the design of the 8, I'd put it behind the 507 and Z8. 

[Raza]

As much as I like the design of the 8, I'd put it behind the 507 and Z8.

Yeah, I'm a big fan of the 8 series, and I think the design falls behind the 507, Z8, E85/6 Z4, E30 M3, M1, 3.0 CS/CSL and E24, just to name a few off the top of my head.  Wouldn't say no to any of them, really, but I think the 8 series just isn't as striking as those cars, nor as timeless. 

[SJ_GTI]

Are they really that bad?  I was considering a Z3 M Roadster.  I like the way they look, but they're pretty rare.

I used to have a Z3 with the 2.5L I6 (smaller engine at the time, I think the larger engine was a 2.8L). It was a blast to drive and handled fantastically. I am sure it wasn't as buttoned down as an S2000 or a Boxster but it was a fun car than handled very well for its time IMHO. 

[Soup DeVille]

Disagree. The NSX was loved when it came out.

Loved by the press. Not as much by the public. All agreed it was a really well put together car, but it could be beat in most objective performance tests by cars costing a third of what it did.

[12,000 RPM]

They killed it with that damn long ass gearing. Would have been like 10-20% faster at street speeds with proper gearing. You can hit 80 in 2nd

[MX793]

IIRC, it was still a match for a 911 or 348.

[GoCougs]

Loved by the press. Not as much by the public. All agreed it was a really well put together car, but it could be beat in most objective performance tests by cars costing a third of what it did.

Not so sure about that when it was released in '90. 0-60 in the low 5 sec range and mid/upper 13s in the 1/4 mile was better than most performance cars, including the Corvette, 911 and 348. One had to bump up to a ZR1 or Diablo or some obscurity (Esprit V8 Turbo) to get quicker, and even then, in many/most comparos, the NSX still won out as it was a typical Honda whereas at that time many super hi-po cars, save for maybe Porsche, still had a foot in the kit car camp. Sure as the one got into the '90s Ferraris, Lambos and even the Corvette, made ginormous strides, and the NSX was basically the same car, but from '90 - '93/'94 the NSX was a top performance contender.

[Soup DeVille]

Porsche and Ferrari buyers have never been about looking for a value proposition;
And the NSX was already more expensive than the vette.

However, what people wanted and expected from a Honda- well...

[BimmerM3]

Wasn't the NSX known for being the first high end performance car that was easy to live with on a daily basis?

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Wasn't the NSX known for being the first high end performance car that was easy to live with on a daily basis?

Yup! And it was reliable....

[565]

Yeah people are remembering the NSX with rose colored glasses in terms of performance.  Hence it being a good example of being better loved now than then.

But how many people remember how well it actually performed in magazine comparisons from that time?

Luckily some have been scanned to refresh our memories.

The NSX put up decent numbers when it first debuted, as it was the first of that final generation of Japanese high end sports cars to be released, but once the Z32 300ZX, FD RX-7, and definitely the MK IV Supra Turbo came onto the scene, the original 3.0L NSX quickly became nothing special in the performance department.

Look at this comparison test.  NSX dead last in 0-60, slalom, midpack in pretty much everything else. MK IV Supra Turbo dominates everything, FD RX-7 and 300zx not to far behind.




And in another comparison on track, the NSX was midpack in track performance, it beat the 300zx and VR4 around the track, but was slower than the Vette (regular C4 vette, not ZR1), and the RX7 around the track



Also interesting in this article was they asked the editors with 40K what car they would choose, 4/5 of the reviewers picked the 300zx, when another 25K was added, only 1 would defect to the NSX, quoting that it's his only chance to own one, and even at 100k, they would stay with the 300zx.






What the NSX did do well at that time was drive very well compared to it's contemporary peers. However I think that it falls into the category of better loved now than because if you asked people on the internet even today, they would say that the NSX is still one of the best handling cars of all time.  In truth it handled well for that era.  But because the NSX stuck around for so long, it's possible to compare it's handling directly to cars of a newer generation when both were still sold new (and the NSX was long in the tooth).

In those circumstances, the deficiencies of a car designed in the 1980s are clear.

Take a look at this comparison against a 996 911 Targa and C5 z06.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18738/mixing-and-matching-acura-nsx/

"However, on Laguna Seca's slippery track, it was a different story altogether. I felt that the Acura was out of its element when pushed hard on the slick surface. Intially, the car understeered heavily into tight corners, followed by the rear having a nasty tendency to swing around before you can say "Oh *%$#!" Even with the car's traction control switched on, I found myself victimized by its unpredictable nature, experiencing trouble through Turn 6 and the Corkscrew, thus seriously hurting my lap times."

"Millen, a master in the wet, felt the same way. "I found myself much more tense in the NSX than in the other two. The steering gets heavy and a bit numb, with the car developing a good amount of push. Then it can go into snap oversteer. That said, most owners will probably never experience this as it happens only when the car is pushed to its limits on the racetrack."


Compare this to the C5 Z06 , a car that I know and love.  Quotes from the same comparison test:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a18740/mixing-and-matching-chevrolet-corvette-z06/

"Millen and I ranked the Z06 first in the "lapping" department primarily because it did everything — accelerate, brake and turn — in an effortless manner.  The Z06 was obviously developed at a racetrack as the braking and handling are really well tuned. It encouraged me to push it hard very quickly. The harder this car is pushed, the better it behaves," Steve commented.

For me, the Z06 was easiest to hustle around the track simply because it behaved so predictably. Keep all inputs smooth and the Z06 will not get you in trouble. Because of logistics I logged only one timed lap in the Z06, but it was still good enough to be my best of the day. The car did feel significantly heavier through corners than the others, but its balance remained neutral, and the tail wasn't as eager to swing around."

[Rupert]

My recollection of the NSX back in the day (according to mags) was mediocre performance but a very nice car. My recollection of the Z06 was the second coming of jesus for only $19.95.

[MX793]

Of course, the NSX was over a decade old without significant update when the C5 Z06 came out (and was 7 years old when the C5 came out)...

From '90-'94, the NSX was in pretty rarefied air.  Then Honda didn't do anything with it and everyone else caught up and surpassed it for less money.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Then Honda didn't do anything with it and everyone else caught up and surpassed it for less money.

Same with the S2000.......

[dazzleman]

Inspired by the "best butts" thread. What car was before its time? I mean, nobody paid it much attention when it was built and sold, yet enthusiasts hold it in high regard today?

My pick is the BMW Z8. Largely ignored when it was sold 1999-2003, yet many lust after it today, and the going price of these beauties reflect that.

Oh man, I loved the Z8 back then.  They were pretty pricey or I'd have been tempted to buy one.

[Byteme]

Three come to mind, one might surprise you.

1956 Lincoln Continental mark II

1958-60 Thunderbird

the surprise:  1963 Corvette split Window Coupe.  ritics hated the rear window and for years that lowered the resale value vs. 64-67 models. 

[Payman]

Three come to mind, one might surprise you.

1956 Lincoln Continental mark II

1958-60 Thunderbird

the surprise:  1963 Corvette split Window Coupe.  ritics hated the rear window and for years that lowered the resale value vs. 64-67 models. 

No surprise. Many butchered the back window to make it look like the '64.

[Payman]

Oh man, I loved the Z8 back then.  They were pretty pricey or I'd have been tempted to buy one.

You're the only guy here that can afford one.

Be a hero.

[ifcar]

Yeah people are remembering the NSX with rose colored glasses in terms of performance.  Hence it being a good example of being better loved now than then.

But how many people remember how well it actually performed in magazine comparisons from that time?

Luckily some have been scanned to refresh our memories.

The NSX put up decent numbers when it first debuted, as it was the first of that final generation of Japanese high end sports cars to be released, but once the Z32 300ZX, FD RX-7, and definitely the MK IV Supra Turbo came onto the scene, the original 3.0L NSX quickly became nothing special in the performance department.

Look at this comparison test.  NSX dead last in 0-60, slalom, midpack in pretty much everything else. MK IV Supra Turbo dominates everything, FD RX-7 and 300zx not to far behind.

I think that performance numbers become pretty much irrelevant once the cars are at a certain age. In 2016,there's no additional bragging rights to having the fastest Japanese sports coupe of 1994 compared to having the third-fastest Japanese sports coupe of 1994. None of them is competitive by today's standards, so appeal has to be determined by something other than the specs.

[dazzleman]

You're the only guy here that can afford one.

Be a hero.

[68_427]

They've gone up in value Dave.  You goofed

[Raza]

They've gone up in value Dave.  You goofed

Yeah, I've given up my dream of owning one. I'll have to make do with an F-Type or Aston V8.

[Byteme]

No surprise. Many butchered the back window to make it look like the '64.

You know the history.  Many younger guys might not. 

[dazzleman]

They've gone up in value Dave.  You goofed

I guess I did.