Esprit or 996 Turbo: What Are Better Car Options for the Price of an Old NSX?

"Wobbles the Mind" (wobblesthemind) 01/06/2016 at 15:02 • Filed to: Question

1

20

I firmly believe that NSX prices need to take a dive because there is no reason anyone should be paying so much for them. Now that they have appreciated too much for anyone to casually put miles on them, the whole “they’re reliable” argument is out the window in my mind. In light of this, I have two questions:

What are better options for the price of a used Acura NSX? That includes speculating prices for future 25 year rule vehicles.

Which would you rather own: NSX, Esprit, or 996 Turbo?

Here’s two NSXes for your immediate use which I thought were relatively “good” values:

1998 Acura NSX T Coupe, Manual, with 19,500 miles for $79,990

1992 Acura NSX with 91,600 miles for $37,500

Personally, what brought this up is the fact that a pristine, late model, low mileage, twin-turbo V8 Lotus Esprit is priced around $55,000 and dropping!

2001 Lotus Esprit V8 Twin Turbo with 9,000 miles for $54,900

Also, I believe that 996 Turbos were free of the IMS issue, and pretty much any issues.

2001 Porsche 911 Turbo AWD 17,300 miles for $47,800

Cherry_man1 > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:07

2

996 Turbo because I can fit inside of it. But if I could I would go with the Esprit V8 TT because Lotus.

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:08

0

In the long run, assuming you actually drive them though, the NSX will probably be much cheaper to own despite it’s higher buy in price

gin-san - shitpost specialist > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:10

0

I feel like you could get the 996 Turbo, put a bunch more miles on it and resell it without too much of a loss. In that same vein, I feel that the same amount of miles on a NSX would mean a much greater loss.

However, being a lover of unique cars, if I had money to spend to maintain these cars, I'd love to have the Esprit, even if values depreciate harder than NSX/996.

Wobbles the Mind > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras 01/06/2016 at 15:16

0

I don’t know, the NSX has about a $30,000 buy in premium over an equivalent mileage/condition competitor. In fact, you could get both the example Lotus and Porsche for just above the price of most NSXes with around 15,000 miles.

Discerning > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:17

1

I would not own the Lotus. My understanding is that it is like driving a kit car in comparison to a 996 or NSX. It just isn’t put together very well. Also, good luck finding parts or a qualified tech to work on it.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:17

0

All the reviewers say that the Esprit drives and feels like a truck below highway speeds, and it’s sure as hell not gonna be reliable.

Porsches are nice but they’re super generic, it’s the default choice for anyone and their mother who want to get an exotic.

Early Audi R8s are just now starting to drop into that price range. I’ve seen them for $60-70k.

daender > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:25

1

The NSX is apparently dead-reliable with low maintenance and upkeep fees. Go for the ‘92 and spend the pocketed cash on a 6-speed swap from a later model, a LSD, and some forced induction to scare the pants off newer cars.

Turbo and GT3/2 996 are indeed free of the IMS issue, but remember that you’re owning a car that cost about 150K$+ new , and the parts to keep it running haven’t depreciated.

Ditto for the Lotus, that’s about 86K$ when new. I’m not sure how reliable it is with Lotus’s own Type 918 engine. But the rarity and uniqueness certainly would turn heads everywhere it goes than any other car on this list.

Wobbles the Mind > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 01/06/2016 at 15:29

0

But all the reasons against the Esprit what make it awesome. It’s not like it would be a DD. Hell, not that I’m planning to buy anything, but I don’t even put 5,000 miles a year on my second vehicle, let alone what I’d do with any of these.

AntiSpeed > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:29

1

I almost bought a 1987 Gold Leaf Esprit with an upgraded engine (I forget how) in boxes for $13,000. I’m glad I didn’t because I live in a huge city now and any car is totally impractical, but at the same time I really wish I did.

Saracen > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 15:57

3

996 Turbo, because it has the power of the Esprit and bulletproof reliability of the NSX.

Saracen > daender 01/06/2016 at 15:57

1

There are so many 996’s on the road, parts aren’t are as expensive as you’d think.

daender > Saracen 01/06/2016 at 16:08

0

True, but I guess labor isn’t if you don’t have the time to work on it yourself. (Note to self, recommend Porsche 930 Turbo as Doug’s or Tavarish’s next car.)

ESSSIX GmbH - Accountant/Wagon Thumper > Saracen 01/06/2016 at 16:20

0

And VAG loves to use basic parts across all their brands. What makes these cars expensive isnt the parts, its the labor.

ciscokidinsf > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 16:30

1

92 NSX mate. It’s the proper shape and color. A few kibbles and bits added to the engine will satisfy any HP deficiency you feel. You won’t lose money even when they take a decline.

Saracen > ESSSIX GmbH - Accountant/Wagon Thumper 01/06/2016 at 16:30

1

I have news for you....NSX labor costs are every bit as high as those for a 911.

Edit: it’s also over 10 years older than a 996 Turbo. they’re 25 year old exotics at this point, regardless of who built them. Things are going to break. It’s not a Civic.

I wouldn’t buy a Porsche without intending to do at least routine maintenance myself...but I’m planning to buy one in a couple of years and I intend to do the regular maintenance on it myself, to save the aforementioned costs.

ESSSIX GmbH - Accountant/Wagon Thumper > Saracen 01/06/2016 at 16:47

0

And for the love of the game.

Opposite Locksmith > Saracen 01/06/2016 at 16:53

0

Ma man

Blunion05 drives a pink S2000 (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) > Wobbles the Mind 01/06/2016 at 17:32

1

You’re just looking for a large maintenance bill, aren’t you? The NSX’s appeal is good looks and reliability. Just don’t let the body panels get damaged...I recall reading somewhere that it’s not cheap to repair those.

Wobbles the Mind > Blunion05 drives a pink S2000 (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) 01/06/2016 at 17:52

0

I’m not buying anything, way outside my bubble. I just think the NSX has gone so price crazy that people can’t drive them anymore. At that point, why not the Lotus? If you want to drive the vehicle, the 996 Turbo will be worth $5,000 more by the time you put 7,000 more miles on it. The NSX I just don’t see anything but a money loss if you put more than 3,000 miles on it a year. Even that many miles would probably just break even.

Nauraushaun > Wobbles the Mind 01/07/2016 at 03:34

1

Now that they have appreciated too much for anyone to casually put miles on them, the whole “they’re reliable” argument is out the window in my mind

Nah. When classic cars go up in value, it’s not because they’re still good at what they’re known for. The million-dollar Mclaren F1 is no longer the fastest car in the world, nor the most livable supercar. All those old Ferraris that sell for $20 million are slower, wobblier and generally worse than any sports car built today. And don’t get me started on old race cars.

The value of a classic car is based on what it could do at the time. The NSX was a star in its time, regardless of how much that matters today.