Each translation has its use depending on what you're looking for.
The Good News bible is useful for when discussing what Jesus meant regarding non-violence to evildoers, saying "Do not take revenge" rather than the head-scratchingly over-pacifistic "Do not resist".
For certain verses, the KJV has its definite place, such as Mark 7:19 where most modern translations deliberately distort the grammar from present tense to past to support their anti-Law doctrine.
Mark 7:19 For it doesn't go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)
*That little parenthesis part isn't what the text says but the translations like to cater to the idea that Jesus broke the Torah.
I usually like Young's literal but it's not perfectly literal.
The JPS comes in handy when discussing certain Tanakh passages, but it's too much based on the King James which can have issues in certain places.
Even the NLT (New Living Translation) has great use in certain verses when I think they nail the context correctly, especially in the face of other translations, but I can't stand it in other places where they change the context to support standard church doctrine.
There's many minority versions which I haven't looked at in depth but come in handy when showing non-church-related translations of controversial Trinity-related doctrines, like Wallace's Net Bible or Goodspeed's "An American Translation".
There's at this time no perfect translation, but there's plenty of, what I believe are, "perfect translations" of individual verses and passages contained in certain Bibles that others don't have.
