(first posted 8/27/2015) Not too long ago, there was a time when new car buyers looking for a coupe could pick from a cornucopia of offerings, in every size, shape, and class imaginable. From once being the most popular choice of body style among most car lines, the 2-door coupe fell from grace in relatively little time. Today there are just a handful of new coupes left, primarily in the form of somewhat affordable muscle cars, not-so-affordable luxury coupes, and very not-so-affordable supercars. As for truly affordable coupes, well…
There was once a thriving class of automobiles commonly referred to as “sport compact”. Predominately (but not exclusively) populated by 2-door coupes of Japanese origin, this class of vehicle offered sporty styling, reasonable performance, and a price that was within budget of many first-time new car buyers. Flash forward to the present day, however, and I can think of just three coupes currently sold in the U.S. that fall into this class: the Honda Civic, Kia Forte Koup, and Scion tC. The Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ also may fall into this category, though they are a bit pricier, starting above $25,000. Still, five total vehicles isn’t much to choose from, considering that over 25 sedans are available in the U.S. for under $25,000.
At the time this 1992 Nissan NX2000 was purchased new, Nissan alone offered no less than four coupes to choose from. Replacing the 1986-1990 Pulsar NX, the 1991 NX ditched the “Pulsar” prefix, funky multi-configurable rear end, and very 1980s angular styling. In its place, this third generation NX brought rounded, “aero” styling and only one fastback-styled roof-line.
While the overall design of this car was largely unmemorable, with inoffensive flowing lines, the NX did exhibit one of the most unusual front-end treatments of its time. The very deeply-inset headlights combined with its grille-less, “bottom-breather” nose made for a very anteater-like appearance (even more so on Euro-spec models a less-prominent lower valance). While it doesn’t bother me too much, I’m sure some potential buyers were turned off by it.
Still based on the Sunny/Sentra chassis, North American NXs were available with either the 1.6L or 2.0L inline-4s that were also found in the Sentra. Power from the base NX1600’s 1.6L was a rather pedestrian 115 horsepower, but the NX2000’s 2.0L produced a healthier 140 horsepower and 132 pound-foot of torque. With a curb weight of around 2,600 pounds, the NX2000 offered respectable performance for the time, with a zero-to-sixty time of under 8 seconds; lower than competitors such as the Mazda MX-3 and Honda del Sol. The NX2000 also received upgraded brakes, beefier tires, and a lowered ride height over the identically-powered Sentra SE-R for slightly better handling.
While the NX and Sentra may have sported very differentiated exterior styling, their close relationship was made clear once one entered the interior. The Sentra’s instrument panel was carried over, as were the seats. NX’s did, however, gain unique door panels and a center armrest. Most NXs were also equipped with glass-paneled T-tops, another once common sight among new cars.
Whether it was the car’s styling or just a sign of the declining market for cars of this type, NX coupe sales were not very strong and the car was dropped in North America after just three years. Another Sentra-based coupe would arrive two years later, the 200 SX, though it failed to earn much of a reputation for sportiness. For what it’s worth, Nissan does currently offer the $30,000 370Z coupe, as well as the $100,000 GT-R coupe. The previous generation Altima coupe sought to bring back a sporty and affordable coupe to Nissan’s lineup, although sales were predictably not high enough to warrant a next generation.
Even though they may not be very profitable, I would argue that there still is a viable market for cars of this type. While they may not offer any greater performance over sedans, the general styling of most coupes tends to project a sportier image. As someone within the demographic that the once-vast 2-door sport compact segment was aimed at, I can certainly say I’d be apt to consider a vehicle of this type. Unfortunately, today’s very narrow range of sport compact coupes just doesn’t excite me in the way that even this 1992 Nissan NX does.
Nice write-up. Put me in the list of people that think that the ugly front end and generic rear end of this car made it an unfortunate one.
Since ugly is better than bland, the previous generations of Pulsars/310/F10 are more memorable. Each generation got a little less ugly, but never got any more successful. With the impressive Nissan 2.0, it should have been good, and the T-tops promise fun. At it’s heart though, the NX2000 is an innocuous commuting appliance. This well preserved one seems to have served it’s owner well. I wonder what he or she would say about it.
I don’t find it ugly at all–I always found that front end design unique, but distinctive in a positive way. Nice design, with several good angles (the pic of the burgundy one cornering, for example) though the tail was indeed somewhat bland.
Also seems odd that the contemporary Sentra SE-R is something of a cult classic, often described as the “poor man’s 3-series”. Whereas the NX2000, on the same platform and with the same powerplant, is largely forgotten. Maybe it’s that no one expected a Sentra sedan to have competent handling and a great engine, whereas in a coupe it’s more expected?
Seems it should have done well against the competition of the day, too. MX-3? Saw one yesterday. Still ugly after all these years. Del Sol? Attractive, but comparatively underpowered. Storm/Impulse? Strong sellers, but much more commonly seen in base form, which makes me think the performance didn’t back up the looks. Daytona? Looking pretty old by this time, and I think probably one price point higher. Scoupe and Paseo barely deserve mention.
Back in the early 90’s, I was hawking Toyotas, selling against these cars. The Paseo was fastback Tercel, with a slightly better looking interior. The NX, Del Sol and the Geo Storm/Isuzu Impulse were much better cars IMO. Even at the sales rallies, the Toyota folks would present the “enemy”, which was the Storm/Impulse.
Of all of these little coupes, I liked the design of the NX the most, inside and out. But I really wanted a Storm GSi (or the Impulse with the Lotus-tuned suspension), for that sweet revving Isuzu motor inside.
Meanwhile Toyota Japan was probably having a stroke at the thought of being bettered in any market segment by Isuzu!
Both the Camaro and Mustang could be had for under $25,000 during the 2015 model year. The Camaro is moving to the ATS/CTS Alpha platform for 2016 and will be more than $25,000 I think. I am quite sure that you have probably overlooked a bunch of others too, or you have not fully explained your criteria.
The Camaro and Mustang aren’t “sport compacts”. They fall into another class I defined in the first paragraph.
If you think you could explain this better or can offer greater insight, I’d encourage you to take the time and write an article. We do take submissions.
The VW Golf GTI and Mini Coopers are less than $25,000 but are European so I suppose are disqualified.
2-box hatch versus 3-box (or in the case of sloped hatches, which are mostly extinct now, 2.5 box?) design. A GTI or Cooper may have 2 doors, but depending on your definition it may not be a coupe.
I guess that I fail to understand why 4 doors are so horribly bad.
Chris already beat me to it, but yes, the Golf and Mini Cooper are both hatchbacks. They do not have a 3 box design with defined trunk, making them a coupe. Mini did offer a model with a more coupe-like roofline, but they have since ended production.
Regardless, the point I’m making in the article is that there are far less compact coupes available today than there were in 1992. I think that’s clear.
Not only are there far fewer small coupes, but larger coupes are also out of fashion. I think that what made the coupe fashionable was the hardtop design, and with its demise, coupes gradually went out of fashion in favor of the more utilitarian sedan, particularly sports sedans as defined by BMW.
Golfs and Minis fall into the hot hatch category which was dominated by the 306/ZX/Xsara during the late 80s-90s, I had an little street race with 2.0 Pulsar hatch recently along a lovely twisty piece of local road they are quite good but no match for a PSA chassis and they dont outperform my turbo diesel for pickup.
Wow! Look at that back end – a 10-year-old Malibu Classic is identical!
Risking ad nauseum, I strongly feel that either the main reason or a deciding factor in killing sales of larger coupes was fixed sideglass for anyone brave enough to get in the back seat.
I, for one loved the 80s Nssan Pulsar – a full-size Transformer! What’s not to like about it?
Count me in as someone who likes these. The Pulsar NX of the late 1980s has high novelty value for its wacky period styling details and modular hatch panel, but this 1990s replacement looks far more timeless, with attractive curves and a sleek grilleless nose.
The only negative I can muster about this car is one of comparison: There were so many attractive Japanese sports coupes and hatchbacks in the early 1990s that it would have been difficult to make a case for this one over the others. Would I have liked to own an NX? Yes. Would I have picked one over a del Sol or MX-3? Maybe, maybe not. Over a Celica, Integra, or MR2? No.
Evidently buyers agreed, because even when new these were fairly obscure cars. I spotted one last weekend (on the road, alas, so I couldn’t get a picture) and it was only the second NX I’ve seen this decade.
I really liked my mid-’80s Pulsar NX, and it’s too bad there are so few choices for these type of cars. 25 years ago the choices boggled my mind, MX3, Diamond star twins, Storm, Paseo, NX, etc. The recent Elantra coupe was appealing to me, but that got axed also. The NX was gone by the time I replaced my Pulsar, too bad.
This ugly little thing was doomed from the get go but having the same performance in the much. much better looking Sentra SE-R killed it pronto. Did it even last two years?
The 4-door sport sedan trend of the 80s, plus cars like the SE-R, Civic Si 2-door and Golf GTI, changed the way we looked at small sporty cars. It didn’t help true sporty coupes like the NX that they had tiny rear seats (young people are social) and associated imagery from “poser” models nearby such as the Paseo, Del Sol and EXP.
It was the wrong car at the wrong time and suffered in the comparison to the right car at the right time. The SE-R surely must have helped overall Sentra sales at the time, they were everywhere.
I spend a decent amount of time lamenting the demise of small, affordable coupes. Count me as someone that would strongly consider one. When buying my first new car in late 2005, I was all set to purchase an Acura RSX–in my mind, one of the last sporty liftbacks–until I called my insurance agent. I ended up with a Mini Cooper instead…and then stuck with the taller-hatchback body style for my next new car, a GTI. I absolutely would have bought a modern version of something like the NX2000 (or Probe, or Celica, or MX-3, etc.) if there were still competitive offerings in 2005 or 2012.
It’s been interesting to witness how wildly unpopular 2 door cars have become in the past few decades. For a lot of people (and I’m not one of them), a 4 door car is no less sporty looking than a 2 door. Sedans are indeed more practical, something I’m learning firsthand as a new dad with a baby seat in my coupe, but a 2 door is just plain exciting in my mind.
I rather liked the recessed headlights but they needed to be paired with a grille – see the early 60’s Ford Taunus (inspiration for the 61-63 T-Bird?). Even today I occasionally see one of these in rough condition on the streets in SoCal. Nissans of that era could take a beating. 0-60 time of 8 seconds is equal to the current Lexus IS250!
I always thought the front end treatment on this generation NX was quite unfortunate and probably hurt it with the target demographic of young, stylish and very likely female buyers.
I loved this car’s predecessor, which looked modern and unique both front and rear. While the novelty of the different rear hatch treatments was very gimmicky, it was still really cool.
I also miss the variety of small, sporty 2-door coupes. However, having owned a few back in the day, I can attest they weren’t that practical, though they were fun. I think the 21st century version of this segment are the “cute utes.” Today’s mainstream buyer seems to place a higher value on utility, and I think “pseudo rugged,” rather than sporty/low slung, is the current automotive fashion statement. Automakers follow high volume sales above all else, and the ballooning number of entries in the segment attests to its white hot popularity among buyers, very similar to how small, sporty coupes were the rage in the 1980s.
These were sold new in New Zealand as the Nissan NX. I don’t recall seeing many around, which is a shame as I think they’re quite nice looking little things. The headlights would certainly be quite polarising though!
I like this car, I think it’s really neat with a fairly unique design. I prefer hatchbacks or wagons over sedans or coupes with a trunk, and T-tops are extremely cool. Now, if my sister had had one of these instead of the 200SX I borrowed from her for a few months, my COAL would have had a much different tone. Instead, personality only goes so far in the fickle automotive market, doesn’t it?
I quite liked them. You sure don’t see many around any more.
The front-end treatment reminds me of this Tatra prototype, also with an “X” in its name (603X)
I bet these were pretty good cars, but that front end is hideous.
I’d have bought a Sentra SE-R over one of these just because of the styling. It looks like a hardboiled egg that someone has just pried away from the dog.
This was about the time hatchbacks were falling out of favor in the US, and IIRC the NX was a fair bit more expensive than the equivalent Sentra. This would have been important for the Japan-built NX versus the US-built Sentra at a time when the yen was rapidly appreciating and the US economy was in recession.
I owned a 93 NX2000 with 166k miles for a couple of years. It was a simple car that would haul ass! Personally, I loved the unique look. The close-ratio 5-speed helped it accelerated very good. The stock cable clutch did not allow me to quick shift, therefore that’s why the 0-60 for me was 7.3 seconds. With a better clutch, I probably could have made it in 6.4. I went through a personal crisis and lost everything…. I WILL own another one in the future!
I’m the original owner of a ’93 SE-R. Car & Driver Top-10 all four years of production, 91-94. As a 510 lover, I was sold before I walked into the dealership. I sat in the seat, took it for a test drive. Scared my salesman. The whole time thinking “Nissan somehow built this thing specifically for me.”
There is a relatively small and diverse crowd of true-believers world-wide that worship the cult of the SR20 powered vehicles. Nissan stuck that motor into a couple dozen or more platforms. 4wd, fwd, and rwd configurations. NA, turbo-charged, and Variable Valve Timing SR20’s.
Tons of parts swap back and forth in bolt-on fashion. My car is a sleeper, OEM-plus, and features parts from most of those models listed plus a turbo from a JDM Silvia. 274 whp in an innocuous and anonymous, yet classically handsome, 2,450 pound 90’s econobox is rather entertaining. Full interior, AC, and 28 mpg to boot.
First and only new car, took it on my honeymoon back in the day, and wifey swears she’s gonna bury me in it.
I don’t find these distasteful or bland from any angle. Will be honest and say that I sorta forgot about these cars, but do remember them cruising around back in the 1990’s and 2000’s. Distinctive in a good way.