Ron Suriyopas

• Personal home page: http://members.tripod.com/~nsxt/index-3.html

If you were to log in, you'd be able to get more information on your fellow community member.

Static Page Comments

• November 18, 1999, on Acura NSX Review:

  Well, I guess that it's been probably about a year now since I last commented on this site. And since then, I've seen more and more people driving NSX's (believe it or not, but I've NEVER seen anyone in an NSX prior to 1997). I'm also discovering that People are now starting to respect this great car (SOME nice comments about it in this site make it apparent). Also, since then I've heard about this awsome new Honda called the S2000, which is built in the same factory as that of the NSX. I've always wanted an NSX and knew that purchasing one would be of immense costs, but this new Honda from what I heard may only cost anywhere from $30K to $35K, which is obviously a steal when considering that it pumps out 240hp out of a 2.0 litre engine (120hp per litre!) and can reach 0-60 (in a still fast) 6 seconds or less. Anyways, I thought I'd just bring this up for those looking for a lesser expensive alternative to the now highly praised NSX. -Ron Suriyopas

• May 11, 2000, on Acura NSX Review:

  An Acura NSX going from 0-60 mph in 5.8 sec? And an NSX with an automatic transmission going from 0-60 mph in only 6.5 sec? Tell me, what kind of NSX's get imported to Italy/Europe--the old 3.0 liter 270hp NSX's? Because in the U.S., we now get the 290 hp NSX's, which can go from 0-60 mph in 4.8 sec (as tested by Motor Trend); and NSX's with automatic transmissions go from 0-60 mph in 5.8 sec. Personally, I would not compare an NSX to a Modena since they're not even in the same league. Let's be realistic about this. An NSX has 290hp; a Modena has (correct me if I'm wrong) around 400hp. And so basically, performance-wise, the NSX is no match for the Modena. But then again, I agree with Andreas that we should wait for the 400hp NSX to come out, and only then can we compare the #'s. -Ron