C&D 1999: Acura NSX-T Road Test

Share and Enjoy:

February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm by admin
Category: Road Tests
Tags: 1999:, Acura, Acura Nsx, C&D, Honda, Nsx, NSX-T, Road, Road Test, Test C, Test:

25 Comments - “C&D 1999: Acura NSX-T Road Test”

hallal55 wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
is it cheaper to maintain than a ferrari 355?
efthimios wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Damn my 98 TA was faster! lol..
86collind wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
these numbers did not impress me at alllllllll!!!
vampnsx wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
It cost money when you need to fix it. I have 2 NSX’s I am selling one right now because I dont have time to dive both of them as much as I would like to.
Ge0vone wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
I’d <3 to own one of these someday
Ge0vone wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Agree, I’m so jealous
Klodust wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
no. try gran turismo.
DiggityD793 wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
That dude has a sweet mustache!
TheNRA4ever wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
I am looking at picking up a 1991 NSX, 76,000 miles, well kept, $25K. How is the maintenance on a car like this? Is it pricey when things go wrong or is it fairly affordable? Typical Japanese maintenance, regular oil changes, etc?? And since the tires are low profile, do you change them out every 10K miles or so?
subzero92MK wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
i’d like to own one
morgangamer22 wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
nice
kingmakoto718 wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
i like how he says “3.5 liter” but on the screen says 3.2
xStalkerxx wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
this car is just fucking great! gotta say NFS1 made this car even more popular!

what a beast!
nsxcpt wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Now I have a 2005 engine plus a intercooled supercharger and trap out at 121…..that was the only thing it lacked.
The build quality of the NSX is extremely high — man hours and quality materials plus no parts sharing drive up costs.
nsxcpt wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
I have a 92 NSX that I have owned since 2000. The car is still very tight, no rattles, and looks brand new. People always think it is a new car inside and out. I’ve owned brand new cars that after a year or ago that start to show their age ….. rattles….chassis flex up name it and I’m always amazed when I get in my NSX because it feels like a new car all the time. No degradation from when I got it.
RinneganMidnight wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
NSX or a Nice RX-7 either way there both good cars
redrosecross wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
thats weak lol
604Ronnie wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
If you are looking at a first or second year NSX, be sure to get the VIN and check if it falls into the group of cars that had the transmission “snap ring” problem. It is a costly repair, and if it is not done, the results could be catastrophic.
unknownally wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Do you like the feel of turbo or the naturally aspired better handling NSX?
cooleb wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
nsx is more fun to drive and there’s less maintenance to do on it.
cooleb wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
2:01 the guy said 3.5 liter v6 and they wrote 3.2
amitkalsi1 wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Whats the weight of a NSX in lbs?
darthhomie wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
that was supposed to be “don’t”

*face palms*
darthhomie wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
done come in here exaggerating trying to prove a point. The GTO doesn’t hit 300 HP until 4500 RPM and doesn’t peak till almost 6,000 RPM.

You are also comparing a 3.2 lt V6 to a 6 lt V8.
so its making 290 HP in that displacement compared to 400.

That’s 73% of the HP
in 53% of the displacement.

regardless how it “needs” to make power, it does it and reliably.
therpk11 wrote on February 8, 2010 at 6:24 pm
i’m thinking about getting an NSX but also a supra comes to mind as well. what should i get?