I ignored your 8% adjustment because it was completely arbitrary, as in, there's no factual basis for using 8% as opposed to 15% or 50%. Why is it a stupid idea to take relic cars from the past, adjust their price by a CPI-based inflation number, re-adjust that by another completely arbitrary percentage that you admit you pulled out of your ass, and then try to compare them against new models to assess the value they represented at the time they were released in any meaningful way? The list of flaws in that plan is long. From a quantitative perspective, you're not going to get any kind of comparable or reliable numbers that way. Is the bundle of goods used to create the CPI sufficient to reflect the buying power over the years of the typical purchaser of a S2000? What about the typical purchaser of a new NSX? Not to mention the obvious problem of using a completely arbitrary adjustment figure like 8% on top of the CPI. From a qualitative perspective, the comparison ignores differing constraints faced by manufacturers in both eras, such as government fuel mileage requirements, safety requirements, prevailing economic conditions, etc., as well as differing demands required by consumers of that era (increasing demand for reliability, technology, safety equipment, standard equipment). The comparison doesn't adequately account for advancing technology and the role that plays in cutting costs in r&d, manufacturing, and design. If that doesn't make sense to you, take that to the extreme and imagine comparing a 1970's era Corvette against a modern-era 430hp Corvette (C6) that meets modern safety and emissions standards. You can adjust it by the CPI and any arbitrary percentage you want to blindly pull out of your rear, but the comparison is futile in determining how good of a value the historic Corvette was in its era.
You can argue all you want about the S2000 competing in the class below, but it's a roadster and the only comparable roadsters at the time it was released were the Boxster, Z3/Z4, SLK, and TT Roadster. The 350z convertible was arguably a competitor as well, but that came later. If you wanted a 200+ hp sports car (in the original sense of the word, not the broad definition used today), those were your options at the time. The S2000 was created to be the
affordable, practical option in that segment, and it clearly was. There are plenty of published reviews of the S2000 matched up against Boxsters, Z3/Z4's, and it in fact won a couple of those comparisons based on value and performance.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests
Also Honda absolutely targeted the Ferrari 348 when it designed the NSX. That is public fact. All of the reviews compared it to the 348 (and later, the 355). In fact, the NSX was one of the reasons Ferrari quickly released the much-improved 355 because the NSX was comparable to the 348 -- many would argue better -- at a much cheaper cost. It was the
affordable, practical car in its segment (hmm, is that refrain starting to sound familiar?) But feel free to ignore facts in stating your points.
Lastly, your question as to whether I know what the CPI is, is pretty hilarious. My dad works at the US DOL as an economist and his sole job is to calculate the CPI. He and I have had plenty of debates about it (I've got an advanced degree in economics). Never know who you're dealing with, eh? Don't assume to know.