Should I do it (sell my car and get this one)?
 

Just spent an hour checking this car out and am contemplating trying to buy it and selling my Mercedes SLK. This is a '95 Acura NSX-T with 25,000 miles and belongs to a car collector. It's in perfect condition.

http://techquarium.com/temp4/P1292693cs.jpg
(Dianne in the background just figured out what the payments would be...)

http://techquarium.com/temp4/P1292694cs.jpg

Cons: It's 3 years older than my SLK and costs twice as much. Insurance is unknown but may be a bit more. It's not a true convertible. It's not as easy or as comfortable to drive as the SLK. It has even less storage area than the SLK. Wear & tear items (brakes, tires) may cost more than the SLK.

Pros: It's got lots more power. Depreciation on these cars is almost 0% at the age it's at now. Overall the Acura is surely a more reliable car than my MB. It's the only true exotic made that I would consider as a daily driver. And it is a true exotic. Aluminum body, chassis, engine, etc. This is a hand-built car.

Most important, this is the car I've always wanted. But I also know from experience that getting what you always wanted isn't always all that satisfying.

So, what says y'all? Keep the SLK or kick it to the curb and go for the NSX?

I would go with the NSX, but I just don't like Benz. Plus the NSX will turn more heads then the Benz, so go for the NSX its time for a change!

I don't see why parts for a Acura would cost more then a Benz? they are both over-seas cars but I guess the NSX is rare also.

Tough choice.

On the one hand, you have a very nice Benz in that SLK, but then, that's an Acura NSX.

I'd say if you could swing it financially, won't alienate anyone in the process, and if the NSX is in great mechanical condition, I'd swap for the NSX.

def swap for the nsx. That car handles AMAZINGLY, and if u ever decide to, it has alot of straight-from-japan goodies that can add to its power and sexiness even more.

Tonight at least I'm leaning hard towards doing it. Tomorrow I might feel different. My wife is being very supportive which is making me feel good about it.

Tough choice indeed. But you don't see a whole lot of those around. I would say go for it.

Id say kick the SLK to the curb. You said that its the car youve always wanted, and what are the chances you'll find another one this nice and in such perfect condition. The SLK's cool and all, but the NSX is just way nicer, to me atleast.

I'm gonna throw in another vote for the NSX. Its just a sexier, faster, rarer(?) car.

Plus, its an Acura, which is a Honda, which means reliability it way up there. Besides, if this is te car you've ALWAYS wanted, if you pass it up you are ALWAYS going to regret it.

I'd keep the Mercedes but then again I've never really liked the NSX. Always thought it was over priced and over rated.

Geez.. you even have to THINK about this?!? NSX!!! *melts*

Maybe if we get to hang one day, you'll let me drive it?!?!

Well, you already know you can't go wrong with either one.

The SLK is definitely classier. The NSX sportier.

I don't know about an NSX for a DD though. Not dependability wise, for sure, just practicality wise.

I think a lot of people look on an older guy (I can say that 'cause I am one) in a low-slung red sports car as someone trying to make up for deficiencies in other areas. I would always wonder when I got a second glace what people were really thinking.

Still, that NSX is beautiful. And 25K, wow. I'm sure the interior is immaculate too.

Good luck. You won't regret either choice.

nsx's are rarer than the slk in most instances. They are in very limited numbers, especialy depending on the options etc.

slightly off topic, but it always really annoyed me that Honda didn't modify one of their small displacement F1 engines for the NSX, it was always underpowered compared to its competition. I'd probably keep the SLK, but what do I know.

I wouldnt exactly call it underpowered, but im not sure what u define as its competition. The car has a beatiful balance of power and handling, and if it doesnt have enough power, there are alot of jdm goodies to boost up the hp.

if you can afford the maintenace get the NSX. Just make sure, especially with a car that old, that all the TSB (technical service bulletins) have been kept up to date. A friend of mine on my maxima.org forums works as an acura tech and says the honda/acura trannies are fragile.
BTW, my cousin has a 99 slk and either which you you go, you can't lose.

Got an email from the guy this morning with more pictures and details and stuff. Interestingly, the reason he's selling the NSX is that he has a 6 car garage and just recently purchased a 7th car so something has to go. What did he buy that's pushing the NSX out of the garage? This...

http://shallowleisure.com/gallery2/m...865-2/02_3.jpg

Eh I just think a so called "exotic" should be able to beat a Corvette.

And bodypainter that is a fine GTS...but what does this guy do to have a 6 car garage full of stuff like that?!

I'd go with the NSX too. And it's not that the PARTS would cost more, but that you go thru 'em faster. Midengined cars wear rear tires much faster than regular cars, and the tires on that car are not cheap.

That said, if you can afford an NSX, you can afford to change its tires.

In that case, I know of a civic that's an exotic :D

Pfft..... not even one of the new Vipers. Around here though, NSXs dont usually even warrant a second glance, they are not that rare. ANf for an $80k+ car, the specs aren't all that great. 270hp is ok, but nothing spectacular. Its heavier than your SLK, and has a huge turning circle. Its wont have a lot of the creature comforts your SLK has. The parts will be wicked expensive, if for no other reason than because its for a NSX (example : Viper stamped dodge parts are probably 5-10X more expensive on average). As for tires, 215/45/r16 tires, shouldn't be all that expensive as they are kinda small. The SLK comes with 205/55/16s.


Now theres no doubt its a nice car, and will smoke most cars you come across. You would probably be very happy with it. But I just think they are anywhere near what they are crakced up to be.

I also think you should go with the NSX. They are underpowered, but are probably much more fun to drive than the SLK (at least the old SLK's).

If u you look at older vehicles, there are old ferrari's that couldnt beat a corvette. THose are definately exotic...would u tell someone not to get a ferrari just cuz it cant beat a 'vette? I really hope not. Oh, and if yall wanna see some stock specs on 1/4 mile and 0-60's (for sake of comparison i suppose) this site is cool. http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html

I've always read the NSX had the most comfortable car seats known to man, and the driving position is perfect. What makes you think it's less comfortable than your SLK?

Same year? You better believe I wouldn't be very impressed but at least the Ferrari has the benefit of having more "Ooooohhh factor" than the NSX. The average person won't even know what an NSX IS. I've heard this very conversation at a car show.

Person A:Oooohhh a Ferrari.
Person B:What kind is it?
Person A:I dunno...
Owners: It's not a Ferrari...it's an NSX. Acura makes them. **Beems with pride**
Person A&B:Oh...**walks away**

Hey if you like the car and all go ahead but in my book at least new I've never really been impressed by them. Year to year they are as fast as a base Vette that costs less than half of their MSRP and I just think that's kind of sad. It was Honda's attempt to play the Euros at their own game and when you do that you can't just roll something that kind of looks good out there costs just as much as the competition and is slower. You either have to match them on power and performance and undercut the price or destroy them in performance and match them in price or if you can do all three.
Take a look at the Ford GT. Rapes the Ferrari in it's price bracket and is only moderately slower than cars twice it's price. Then you have the Viper and the new Z06 that's coming out...THAT is how you take down the king of the mountain.

Modded versus stock...yes.

that's a cool site getRdone, BTW, did anyone else notice the Lingenfelter 427's 0-60 and 1/4 times??!! under 2 seconds 0-60 and under 10 for the quarter. What does a GSX-R do, no better than that, right?

I wouldn't bother thinking before trading in the SLk for the NSX. I'd also smack the seller in the head for pushing the NSX out for a Viper, but that's just me.

ya know, buying a purely fun car should not be a penis measurement exercise. Don't buy it because it's faster than another car. Buy it because of what IT is.

Sure a corvette may be faster than an NSX but I'll put the driving experience of an NSX up against a vette any day of the week.

The 0-60 on a gixxer are a bit over 2, i wanna say like 2.6 maybe? Ive seen one run a 10.8 and i believe it was stock. U wanna see a really fast bike, check out Kent Stotz's bike. I think its at turbosystems.com under motorcycles but im not sure, its a hahnracecraft made turbocharged hond bike, runs 6's.

Well it depends on what your definition of fun is.

My definition of fun isn't spending twice as much for the same amount of "fun" all things being equal. My version of fun would be more along the lines of taking it out and beating on it every once and a while at a track. Some folks would rather pull the toy out for a weekend cruise to get looks. Personally for that kind of dough I'd rather have a car that can put up some better numbers bone stock. If I wanted a car to tool around town in I'd go pick up a nice luxury sedan and turn heads in REAL comfort.

Not saying the NSX isn't a nice car...just in my book there are better deals. The NSX for the price doesn't have the performance to validate buy,it doesn't have the mystique to validate the buy, it doesn't have the notariaty to validate the buy. Again in my opinion. Not sure how much he is going to spend on this thing but let's say 50k. For that much money I can think of several other cars I'd rather have.

It doesn't matter who is or isn't impressed by it, or what anyone else thinks of you for owning it, it's what you want. Get it, you only live once.
They're also extremely practical, given their performance.

That was my point, although rereading my post I didn't express it very well. Your definition of fun would make you get a corvette over an NSX. Someone else's might make them get the NSX. Pure performance numbers don't tell the whole story of a car, and even cars that have spectacular numbers might not be as exciting as cars with lesser numbers. A Bentley will outaccelerate a midget, but the midget is, in my book, a helluvalot more fun ;)

I appreciate all the suggestions and input. Honestly, performance is not that important to me after a certain point and the NSX easily passes that point.

I like the NSX for the way it looks and the engineering that I know is inside the car and because it is relatively uncommon. I also like the growl of the engine being about 6 inches behind my ear when I step down on the throttle. Sounds great!

Anyway, after thinking about it for a day my wife and I are still pretty hot on the idea. I am going to talk to the S&L people today about money and call Geico and talk insurance. I'll keep y'all posted.

The car you've always wanted... in mint condition... at a price you can afford...

I need say no more.

I know it is purely your personal decision, so I would go with the NSX. However, if it were me, I would take that $40k and buy a 2003 (possibly 2004) C5 convertible and get a much better car in every aspect.

Anyone can go to a dealer and get a new corvette. Not rare, not exotic. Ya its fast as shit, but im pretty sure if he wanted a vette he woulda just got one, instead of asking us between the two cars.

It's true, Corvettes don't do it for me. I know they're fast but I always want something at least a little bit uncommon. Depreciation irritates me too. What's a new Vette run these days - $50K? In 5 years it will be worth less than the NSX even though it costs more now.

Anyway, it's a moot point. The Acura is what I want. If I'm not going to get that, I'll just keep driving the SLK which isn't a terrible car. Still, I do like hearing everyone's opinions and suggestions.

I hope you get it. Let us know

According to the two business cards he gave me, he's the president of an aviation gassing company and a pipeline company. A nice little guy in his 60's who says he works most all the time. He also has a Ferrari and I forget what else other than his wife has a Jaguar XK and they have an MB wagon. He doesn't buy brand new cars (and he doesn't like the new Viper's looks) but he takes outstanding care of his toys. All in all he seemed like a pretty sensible guy for a rich bastard. :)

I'd certainly kick the SLK to the curb if you've reached that point. However, were you me, I'm not sure I'd rush into an NSX either. The NSX always hit me as Japan's counter to the clear & present threat posed by the Buick Reatta. Looks over performance and an old fart as the target customer demographic. Coincidentally, that describes my former doctor to a tee. He also had a Lexus SC400 & a, well, Buick Reatta over the years too. Nice & comfy & he thought the 20 somethings thought he looked sporty in it. He was pretty close to a chainer as well now that I think about it. This is probably why the NSX doesn't land with me all the well. The ride of choice amongst the poser set. That & the nickname they are sometimes known by, the 'No Sex'. Yes, I know I am being a bit harsh on what is by any estimation, a very nice car. Anyways, If I wanted to get into a high-end, Japanese semi-exotic, I'd be looking for a last generation Supra. If I wanted to stay with something newer, hands down, an S2000. Bonus, it's a Honda too!

FWIW,

soundmotor

Thats why you put a twin turbo on it :thumbsup: