1991 NSX vs RX-8
 

In my search for a reliable and unique sports car I've become more curious about the old NSX's since a lot of them can be had in good condition for $20,000-$30,000, about the same price as a new or slightly used rx-8. I like that they have so much aluminum, a vtec v6, mid-engine, daily driver reliability, and of course they look cool. I've heard that they handle better than pretty much anything else but I have 0 personal experience with them so I don't really know what they feel like. NSX's are labeled as "underpowered" in much the same way the rx-8 is and I have seen track times where they were within a second of each other. The NSX seems like it would blow away the 8 on paper but it also weighs around 3100-3200 lbs despite only being a 2 seater. Has anyone driven these two cars enough to compare them? Does ten years of age give the 8 the advantage or is the NSX still engineered to a higher caliber? Would it be worth buying a NSX with over 50,000 miles on it vs. a Brand new 8?

I'll pass on a 10 year old car... I'll always take the newer car. It's not like the NSX 10 year old is all that great. If you wanted to have speed, you could have bought a new S2000 or an WRX.

Maintanence on the NSX isn't too bad either, but how much longer would you want to keep a car that is already that old?

I'm planning to go test drive the new model of the NSX when it hits the states. For 100k or so, it better be much better than the previous Gens. At that price, might as well buy an SL500, Dodge Viper, or pay 20k more and get Ferrari Modena, Porsche 911..etc.

I concur. If you're looking for reliable, you should really stick with something that has a warrantee. Almost any car over ~8 years old is asking for trouble.

Especially with a sports car.

The next car I buy I will keep forever (or at least until it falls apart) so reliability and build quality are very important to me. I am used to driving 10-year-old+ cars so the age doesn't bother me as long as it was well cared for (which pretty much every NSX is). My current plan is to buy a new RX-8 or hopefully 7 but I am keeping my eyes open to other possible options. I like the NSX because I think it looks incredible and while the new price of $80,000+ is absolutely ridiculous, the older ones are much more affordable and the allure of a mid-engine car is hard to ignore. My first dream car was a testarossa and the NSX is about as close as I can get for a daily driver.

A 10+ Year old car is just asking for trouble. Unless you don't plan on driving it as your daily driver, it should be alright. I've driven my friend's NSX... and it still feels like a Honda. A fast Honda for sure... but still a Honda. A 10+ Year old Honda... hmm..

Saw a 99 Viper for 60k with 20k miles on it.. was tempted.. but said screw it, rather buy new cars for that money.

When I was looking for a sports car I thought about the NSX, still do. But I couldn't find one close enough to look at. At least not one I could afford. I bought a 1980 911. I have put 15,000 miles on this 24 year old car and I've spent $125 on repairs and $300 on maintaince. If you buy a good quality car that has been taken care of it should give you few problems. And why is a car that feels like a Honda a bad thing? I've owned two Acura coupes and loved them. I still have the 90 with 140,000 miles. If I could find an NSX in nice shape for around $30,000 I'd buy it over the RX8.
OOPS, now I went and and said a bad thing!!!!

A used NSX is a great choice. I considered one myself but figured it to be too much money used for what I wanted and the RX8 met my needs well. A 97 still goes for $45k. To me that is its achilles heel. Too much money for what it is. It is definitely a faster car but not justified for the price, especially new. You could accomplish the same with a 94 RX-7 for a lot less money and similar performance with a lot more potential, just not as reliable.

I do know costs for parts and repairs are high, especially for body work. Good thing it is so well built and reliable.

What is insurance like? Same or worse than a RX8?

I love the NSX and although there are some issues with the early ones it still does basically provide Honda reliability and daily drivability. I gotta say, if your getting this as your daily driver you should go with the 8. Warranty and all that practical stuff being the reason. As a second, weekend car I would go with the NSX. Actually for a second car I would go with the FD, but that isn't what you asked.

If you buy an NSX you should get used to buying rear tires every 2,000 miles. Yup, I said 2,000 miles. Imagine doing a nice, long road trip and having to get a set or two of new rears during the trip. The problem is suspension geometry based, not throttle dependent.

well from what i remember the older gen nsx's had some snap ring issues. I seen a black on black one the other day with some 19 inch work rexazz rims its so f'king sweet, for a split second I thought about giving up my 8 for one but then I came to my senses. When I think about the nsx I am in awe of what honda has done, only they can make a car and don't change a thing about the appearance and charge 85-95k for it and still be selling the thing. Til this day its still ahead of its time, even for a old version like a 91 I dont what anyone says its still one bad ass ride.

You should see how they hold up in a wreck... old man locally wrecked his and I saw it at the junkyard... TOAST... btw I have the door still with the sn and all it was about the only salvagable thing there

Expensive cars have expensive running costs. Even when old.

Ive driven an NSX before. Though I didnt have as much seat time as i've had in RX8s I can hive you a little comparison.

The one I drove was a 97 (with the larger engine than the 95 and before).
First ingress and egress is a little tricky, with the long doors and low seating position...dont park close to someone.
The engine tunrs on quietly, but sounds very mean.
The clutch is suprisingly light, and the shifter is very very good...both easier and smoother to operate than an RX8.
Its got pleny of power and is definitely quick (the first few years ran mid-high 13s, with the newer ones pulling of low 13s- very high 12s).
It seems like even in top gear it still pulls very nicely @ 60.
The handling of the car was excellent. It stayed in line easy and adjusted with my throttle input.
Its not as tossable as the RX8, but the handling is definitely up there.

I didnt like the outside view (alot of things I couldnt see from the drivers position). The car feels sooo long...like im driving a bus (well not that long).
The interior of the 97 was nice and comfortable, but the RX8s is probably more comfortable.


The NSX is a very capable and RELIABLE car. Dont listen to what people say here, because...well...most of them just dont know.
Who cares if its 10+ years old? my car is almost 20 and its a turbo rotary (the pinnical of UNreliability) yet I have had no problems.

Also a couple of my fathers friends have older ones that are holding up just fine. I think one has a 93 that he has been using ad a daily driver for years and HE loves it.


You just have to figure out what ou want for sure.

I'd chalk your situation up to pure luck. There is a reason why maintaince costs go up as the vehicle ages.

I've had a few Porsches, and even under 5 years old they cost more than I'm now willing to spend in just upkeep.

when you buy say a used 911 or an NSX, those were the super sports cars of their hey day. not just any cars. so most owners tend to take very good care of them. Old cars require maintenance more though. But that's a given. Put it this way, the depreciation on a 10 year old 911 or an NSX pretty much have leveled while a new car like the rx-8, Z, STi... will depreciate like crazy.
In 5 years time an rx-8 will cost a heck of a lot less than a 15 year old NSX.
but you won't get the new car smell. hehehehehe

No i'd chalk it up to a previous owner who took it to the right mechanic. And did all the proper maitenence...just like I have.

But NSXs are very strong reliable cars. The engines and trannys are usually stock (ie, not rebuilt or replaced). And most of them were taken car of very well and have low(er) mileage.


Porsches and most of the germans on the other hand are not really know to be the most reliable cars.

I've seen plenty of cars that were well taken care of fall apart just because parts wear out and fail.

It's good your car is running well, but it's luck of the draw when you buy a 10 year old used car. Even if EVERYONE in the world took their car to a great mechanic, fact is, some of the cars will still see problems and fall apart. How can you argue otherwise?

My point is, while you had luck with your car, but there is no correlation between your experience and what KC_Prelude will see in the used NSX.

Oh im not saying cars dont have problems, dont get me wrong.

But you have to take the car your getting (if its used) and bring it to someone who you trust and has excellent knoweledge of the car.
I mean if everything is working fine mechanically (perfect compression, shifter, brakes etc) chances are nothing major is going to happen if you still follow the maitenence schedule.

But little things will happen on a 10 year old car just because it is old, yes.

In my case it was easy...it may not be for others.

I've had one too many run-ins with transmission failure or some other costly thing. That's a major reason why I bought the Rx-8 new :)

What will you do when your warrenty runs out on the 8? Sell it? Buy another new car so you can have the warranty? If so the depreciation (sp?) will cost you thousands just so you can have a warranty. I don't mind working on my cars if it means I can have the car I want. And yes things go wrong with old cars, but....how many things have been "updated" on your new cars? Oil pans, ecu flashes, flooding, air bags, some engines, the list goes on. Now I realise that not all 8's have had all these issues, but just because it's new doesn't mean trouble free. And If I keep my 911 in good shape I should be able to sell it for just about what I paid for it. Not that I'm even thinking of selling.

The early 1990's 911's are not the ones to buy. Then add the mods and you are looking for trouble. The SC and 1980's Carreras are very reliable. Sure there are some issues but I checked out many cars before I decided on the 911 and have no regrets. I wanted a topless car but don't like canvas so targa was the only solution, and we all know how many affordable targa top cars are out there. And no, a Corvette was NOT an option. They all rattled like the pieces of plastic they are. My car is still tight and rattle free after 24 years.
Although an FD would be nice. Maybe next time.

Good topic. The Acura NSX is indeed a very fast, fun, and inexpensive to maintain "exotic" car. Its VTEC V6 is very potent and delivers instant on the throttle acceleration. This is a tough one. Both cars share the same type of characteristics. The NSX would be a good choice because you get the exotic car look (low, wide, sleek), it gives you excellent performance and exhaust sounds :D, decent gas mileage, and in all of this you get Honda reliability. The RX-8 is extremely fun, handles well, is in the same price range you described, and likes to be rev'd to the moon (the mpg story is a little different :p ). This is going to be one of those decisions that comes down to a test drive. If you want to compare a brand-new NSX to the RX-8, im definitely going to have to go with the NSX on this one.....but a '91? Tough choice, but its all up to you. Go drive them.....NOW! :)

The NSX was fairly high on my list of cars when I was looking to replace my Integra. Ultimately I decided that while it would be cool to have a true exotic, I did not want to pay exotic repair costs should anything go wrong. Honda reliability is all fine and great, but even Hondas breakdown.

I can remember taking my Integra in to the dealership to have an emissions recall done. While I was waiting I noticed two NSXs in the service bay. I asked the service manager if that was a common thing. He said that the one was in for regular service. The other was in for a new clutch.

Cost of said clutch work: $8000.

That's the same reason why I didn't buy a 3rd gen RX-7 when I sold my 2nd gen. I could afford to buy a '95, but I couldn't afford the extra cash to have it bulletproofed. By the time I could, the 8 was available. It was a no-brainer.

Anyone who would pay $8000 for a new clutch on a honda is getting hosed. I took this from the nsx prime forum...

"I just purchased stock OEM clutch parts from a website - at a very good price (less than $500 delivered). Now, who in Houston can do the work? I seem to be somewhat limited to the Acura Dealers - John Eagle or Southwest, who both seem hell-bent on replacing the flywheel before they even open it up, burnt or not, with less than 32,000 miles on the car (blame it on slip-clutching in 1st - my bad). As well, bringing in my own parts means no guarantee, even though the parts are exactly the same as they would provide themselves, but at half the cost to me. I guess I'm trimming their profile margin, despite a labor quote of $1200, whether they do the work in 6 hours or 12."

To me it sounds like about $500 in parts and $1200 in labor at the dealer which is still very high but its no $8000. Granted he is getting the clutch replaced at 32k miles :).

Then I found this reply...

"Wheelman(Ricky) and Stormrider(Tommy) are right, you should give Brad a call at AutoLogic(713.516.2081). He has pulled the transmission out of my car several times. And it's no secret, his prices can't be beat(locally at least). As stated on his website, a NSX clutch job goes for $650. And he know's what he's doing. With my car alone, he has plenty of experience!"

So this guy says a clutch job is $650? Sounds like a case of the dealer screwing over people who are too dumb or rich to care. Of course doing the work yourself will almost always be better than taking it to the stealership and will certainly be significantly cheaper. It also helps to have local experts who will do work for you at discount prices, which not everyone has access to.

As for old cars being unreliable I will have to agree with Lawerence on that. If you buy something (japanese) that was well taken care of you have little to worry about. My 88 honda has 150k miles on it and It still drives like its virtually brand new, Original engine and tranny, rock solid. I paid premium for my car 4 years ago because I wanted it to be in the best shape possible and its paid off. I would take my 16 year old honda over any brand new ford, chevy, or dodge under $40,000 and I am not kidding at all. American cars are built to last 100,000 miles at most before they need major rebuilding. My dad's 93 ford explorer needed a new tranny and A/C at 40k, has terrible design flaws, and has all around been a rattly piece of crap since it was 3 years old. I am so disgusted with that car that I can hardly look at it and the clearcoat that is falling off of its hood in sheets. The last time I drove it the shift knob came off in my hand!
My experience with honda reliability has been excellent and I treat my car like it has a rotary, redline at least 2-3 times on every drive I take. I am convinced that I can EASILY get 250,000 miles out of my car before it would need an engine or tranny based on other peoples experiences with old preludes (there's at least one I know of who is quickly approaching 300,000 miles). If honda can build what was a $16,000 car in 1988 that is as reliable and solid as my car, then I would love to see what they could do with an exotic in 1991 costing 5 times as much. of course the real problem with owning an NSX is that I would never want to park it anywhere for fear of it getting scratched by some retard.
German cars are generally much less reliable and if you are basing your used car experiences off of porsches then I see why you are afraid of them. At one point I was interested in the old 944's from the early 80's and for cars that aren't even that fast they have incredible repair costs (mostly labor but parts are not cheap either). I quickly learned that I will never own a porsche simply because the maintenance costs are outrageous and I am looking for a daily driver, not a toy. Thats why people lease german cars, because they run out of status in 2 years and they are in the shop so much that if you didnt have free maintenance you would be broke.

I agree with what you're saying, except for calling the 944 slow. The 944 turbo S had 0-60 in 5.4 sec and over 160 top speed.