Notices
Automotive News
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Acura: NSX News

 
Old 11-24-2003, 08:47 AM
  #121  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
I disagree. You forget the weight factor, plus it's not all about all out power here. The Modena makes 390 HP and it costs 3.5 times the Z06's price which has more total HP.
The C6 is supposedly lighter than the C5, so I doubt that the NSX will be under 3000 lbs. The current C5 smokes the NSX in every performance catagory right now. To make the car an outstanding performance car, it needs to trump the competition.
Maximized is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 08:50 AM
  #122  
Registered Member
 
aaron1017's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Tampa, Florida
Age: 34
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I dont see theNSX being anything but N/A.
aaron1017 is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 08:53 AM
  #123  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Maximized
The C6 is supposedly lighter than the C5, so I doubt that the NSX will be under 3000 lbs. The current C5 smokes the NSX in every performance catagory right now. To make the car an outstanding performance car, it needs to trump the competition.
I agree with your main argument but a few points that are not totally acurate in the above.

1. The C6 has/had a weight target of 3100 pounds. Which is, yes lower, but not very much lower, than the current C5 car.

2. I am not sure the current NSX is "smoked" by the "C5" in all performance categories. Did you mean the Z06? The C5 base car, no way.

3. I have heard rumors of Honda dropping the alloy structure of the next NSX. Going back to steel to achieve a lower price. If true, the car will be at least as heavy as the base C6. If not true, then I would not be surprised the NSX to be pretty light once again.

Note: Current NSX MT weight is 3153 pounds. Current C5 weight is 3214 pounds.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 08:54 AM
  #124  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by aaron1017
I dont see theNSX being anything but N/A.
I agree but cannot be 100% sure. You never know.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 09:01 AM
  #125  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
I agree with your main argument but a few points that are not totally acurate in the above.

1. The C6 has/had a weight target of 3100 pounds. Which is, yes lower, but not very much lower, than the current C5 car.

2. I am not sure the current NSX is "smoked" by the "C5" in all performance categories. Did you mean the Z06? The C5 base car, no way.

3. I have heard rumors of Honda dropping the alloy structure of the next NSX. Going back to steel to achieve a lower price. If true, the car will be at least as heavy as the base C6. If not true, then I would not be surprised the NSX to be pretty light once again.

Note: Current NSX MT weight is 3153 pounds. Current C5 weight is 3214 pounds.
Remember, we don't know if this is true, but if it is........

1. Say the NSX is 100 lbs lighter than the C6.....100 lbs less weight doesn't make up for the 50 or so plus hp the Z06 will have.

2. The current NSX will get smoked in acceleration, handling a tossup, and I don't know the figures for braking. This is assuming a stock C5 with Z51 suspension vs. the current NSX. I have seen both of them at Gingerman raceway and it seems like the C5 was quicker. I am not sure of the skills of either driver.
Maximized is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 09:07 AM
  #126  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Maximized
Remember, we don't know if this is true, but if it is........

1. Say the NSX is 100 lbs lighter than the C6.....100 lbs less weight doesn't make up for the 50 or so plus hp the Z06 will have.

2. The current NSX will get smoked in acceleration, handling a tossup, and I don't know the figures for braking. This is assuming a stock C5 with Z51 suspension vs. the current NSX. I have seen both of them at Gingerman raceway and it seems like the C5 was quicker. I am not sure of the skills of either driver.
We all comment upon rumors. Agreed. No one ever said this is confirmed.

1. The next NSX wont be going after the C6 ZO6 like it's not going after it now. It's going after the Modena. The Modena will soon get a larger engine and more HP. Not much more though. So the NSX will probably be about as quick if not quicker than the mid-generation-life of the current Modena. The current Z06 is faster than the current NSX. Honda does not care.

2. The current NSX is about as fast as the current C5. They both will do about 13 flat for the 1/4 mile. You said "smoked". That's not smoked. I call that "it's up to the driver".

3. I am pretty sure that the current NSX handles better than the base C5. Even with the Z51 on. And I am pretty sure it out-brakes the base C5. Even if they are par, that's nowhere near the "being smoked" point you described.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 09:10 AM
  #127  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
It just hit me. If the next NSX is going after the Modena, then it's going after the Ford GT as well. What a comparo that one will be. 05 Ford GT vs. 05 Modena vs. 05 NSX Hehehe...
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 09:13 AM
  #128  
Shogun Assassin
 
fahoumh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Age: 38
Posts: 3,395
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally posted by gavriil
3. I am pretty sure that the current NSX handles better than the base C5. Even with the Z51 on. And I am pretty sure it out-brakes the base C5. Even if they are par, that's nowhere near the "being smoked" point you described.
Isn't the NSX designed to be track-ready out of the factory?
fahoumh is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 09:48 AM
  #129  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 41
Posts: 12,038
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
woW, that is 125hp a liter. I think it will HAVE to involve hybrid tech with instantanous torque. But I don't think a 100k Honda/Acura is gonna have any more success than a 90k Honda/Acura. The public just doesn't feel it.

We'll see, this thing will be a reliable rocket I am sure!
1SICKLEX is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 11:04 AM
  #130  
RIP Red-CL
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Age: 32
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i heard rumors of honda adding 3 electric motors to the 3.6 to add tourque.
thealliance15 is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 11:06 AM
  #131  
Floyd Mayweather Jr.
 
Black CL-S 4-Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The City of Syrup Screwston, Texas
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
I don't think it will have 450hp but I can see 400hp as a more realistic number.
Black CL-S 4-Life is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 11:08 AM
  #132  
The hair says it all
 
Python2121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Manhattan, NYC
Age: 32
Posts: 7,566
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Im with Black CL-S on this one, i cant see 450, but if they DO put a hybrid on there, 450 could def be achieved.

when your bumping high HP/Liter, dont you sacrifice reliability? (i dunno im curious)
Python2121 is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 12:37 PM
  #133  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i don't think 3.6 450 is realistic at all, an na engine of that type goes against their core value of being a green company and it goes against the hsc concept being as light as possible with a highly tuned, lower displacement engine.

i think this what to expect

It has the looks to match them, too; the headlamps resemble the existing NSX, but otherwise the styling is all-new. The sharp edges and flat sides aren't only for effect, though, as the HSC's aerodynamics have been tuned to give greater downforce at speed without the need for big external spoilers. At the rear, the LED tail-lights have a holographic 3D effect and a glass screen exposes the mid-mounted engine. Unlike the Enzo, the Honda makes do with a revamped 3.0-litre V6 rather than a V12, but it now produces 300bhp and is mated to a six-speed sequential gearbox. The interior, accessed via scissor-action doors, uses blue carbon fibre and a minimalist 'skeletal' dash structure, while the gearlever is replaced by a paddleshifter. Yet despite the technology, Honda insists that the new NSX will be no more expensive than the old car when it arrives in 2005.

Tom Barnard Source: Auto Express
heyitsme is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 12:59 PM
  #134  
4G TL-Elilte, 3G MDX
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Richmond,B.C.,Canada
Posts: 9,156
Liked 661 Times in 525 Posts
The 2.0L from S2000 can output 240hp - that's 120hp per litre. Honda is world famous for its ingenuity in building engines. I don't see why it is impossible to generate 450hp from a 3.6L engine, with a little more tuning.
Edward'TLS is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 01:21 PM
  #135  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: So Cal
Age: 43
Posts: 4,910
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I doubt 450hp on a 3.6liter... that's TOUGH especially considering emissions. It's do-able... there are 2.1liter 4-bangers making 340 at the crank!
allmotor_2000 is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 02:30 PM
  #136  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
We all comment upon rumors. Agreed. No one ever said this is confirmed.

1. The next NSX wont be going after the C6 ZO6 like it's not going after it now. It's going after the Modena. The Modena will soon get a larger engine and more HP. Not much more though. So the NSX will probably be about as quick if not quicker than the mid-generation-life of the current Modena. The current Z06 is faster than the current NSX. Honda does not care.

2. The current NSX is about as fast as the current C5. They both will do about 13 flat for the 1/4 mile. You said "smoked". That's not smoked. I call that "it's up to the driver".

3. I am pretty sure that the current NSX handles better than the base C5. Even with the Z51 on. And I am pretty sure it out-brakes the base C5. Even if they are par, that's nowhere near the "being smoked" point you described.
I guess I learned something today. I was always under the impression that the NSX ran roughly mid 13s. I did a little research and found that they can be low 13s cars. The C5 tends to be a few tenths quicker though, so I retract my "smokes" statement.
Maximized is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 02:44 PM
  #137  
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Zapata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: burbs of philly
Age: 41
Posts: 19,393
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
3.6 liters
Horsepower: 380 hp

anything is possible..........
Zapata is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 02:55 PM
  #138  
Registered Member
 
cusdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 40
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I think it's unlikely to be 450hp NA, but you never know. Should be interesting. I think it needs about that hp to compete especially if it isn't aluminum anymore
cusdaddy is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:10 PM
  #139  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by heyitsme
i don't think 3.6 450 is realistic at all, an na engine of that type goes against their core value of being a green company and it goes against the hsc concept being as light as possible with a highly tuned, lower displacement engine.

i think this what to expect

It has the looks to match them, too; the headlamps resemble the existing NSX, but otherwise the styling is all-new. The sharp edges and flat sides aren't only for effect, though, as the HSC's aerodynamics have been tuned to give greater downforce at speed without the need for big external spoilers. At the rear, the LED tail-lights have a holographic 3D effect and a glass screen exposes the mid-mounted engine. Unlike the Enzo, the Honda makes do with a revamped 3.0-litre V6 rather than a V12, but it now produces 300bhp and is mated to a six-speed sequential gearbox. The interior, accessed via scissor-action doors, uses blue carbon fibre and a minimalist 'skeletal' dash structure, while the gearlever is replaced by a paddleshifter. Yet despite the technology, Honda insists that the new NSX will be no more expensive than the old car when it arrives in 2005.

Tom Barnard Source: Auto Express
The above described the HSC. That does not mean that the engine will be identical to what Honda claims the HSC "wore" for the show.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:12 PM
  #140  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Edward
The 2.0L from S2000 can output 240hp - that's 120hp per litre. Honda is world famous for its ingenuity in building engines. I don't see why it is impossible to generate 450hp from a 3.6L engine, with a little more tuning.
One could say that 125 per liter is only 5HP/liter more than the S2000's engine, though the analogy cannot be used linearly in reality.

In lamens terms, the larger the engine, the larger the reciprocating mass, hence as you enlarge the engine, it's getting more and more difficult to increase the specific output of a given motor.

The ultimate NA application that I know of is F1. 800-900 HP from 3 liters (V10 config.)
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:14 PM
  #141  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Maximized
I guess I learned something today. I was always under the impression that the NSX ran roughly mid 13s. I did a little research and found that they can be low 13s cars. The C5 tends to be a few tenths quicker though, so I retract my "smokes" statement.
No worries Max. It's part of the forum's purposes. Knowledge for all of us.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:15 PM
  #142  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Maximized
I guess I learned something today. I was always under the impression that the NSX ran roughly mid 13s. I did a little research and found that they can be low 13s cars. The C5 tends to be a few tenths quicker though, so I retract my "smokes" statement.
Did you find anything about braking and handling? I will look too.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:27 PM
  #143  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
From C&D's article:
Acura NSX
More refined than ever, but will refinement alone be enough to keep it afloat?

BY TONY SWAN
February 2002



"Aside from the headlights, all these updates take a practiced eye to spot. There are, however, some functional benefits to the subtle resculpting. The coefficient of drag drops a couple of points, to 0.30, which improves the NSX's 0-to-125-mph time by 0.2 second, according to Acura, and its top speed from 168 to 175 mph."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

So the top speed is up there with the C5's (if not higher - I remember the first year C5s doing 172 mph for top speed, not sure about the 2004 models).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the same article:

"The last NSX we tested (July 1999) was an Alex Zanardi limited-edition model, which scaled in much lighter (2970 pounds versus 3153) than the curb weight Acura lists for the 2002 model. It sprinted to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds, covered the quarter-mile in 13.2 at 106 mph, stopped from 70 mph in 164 feet, and pulled 0.93 g on the skidpad.
Respectable numbers, but not extraordinary. Our long-term 1999 Carrera (May 2001) was about the same in its wrap-up runs (0 to 60 in 4.8 seconds; 13.4 seconds at 105 mph in the quarter-mile), with 19 fewer ponies than the '02 version.

Our most recent Viper test numbers are a year old (February '01). That Viper, a 460-hp GTS ACR model, hit 60 mph in 4.3 seconds and ran the quarter in a robust 12.6 seconds at 114 mph. The Z06 from that same test recorded 4.0 seconds and 12.4 at 116."

---

The numbers: a 2001 NSX, with the removable roof (standard for '02), carried a base price of $90,879. A 2001 Carrera C4 (all-wheel drive) was $74,156, a 2002 Viper GTS is $74,071, and a 2002 Corvette Z06 is $50,721.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Car-Stats.com Report for 2002 Acura NSX
Obtained from R&T March, 2002
0-60: 5 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.4
1/4 Speed: 106

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Car-Stats.com Report for 1998 Acura NSX
Obtained from C&D August, 1998
0-60: 4.5
1/4 Mile: 12.9
1/4 Speed: 110

---------------------------------------------------------------

Car-Stats.com Report for 2001 Chevrolet Corvette
Obtained from MT March, 2001
0-60: 4.8 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.1
1/4 Speed: 109

----------------------------------------------------------

Car-Stats.com Report for 1998 Chevrolet Corvette
Obtained from C&D May, 1998
0-60: 5.1
1/4 Mile: 13.6
1/4 Speed: 106
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:28 PM
  #144  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Zapata
3.6 liters
Horsepower: 380 hp

anything is possible..........
GT3
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:51 PM
  #145  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
From
http://members.aol.com/jimmylucky/150.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-150-0

To all those who say the NSX is underpowered!

Car and Driver in their August 98 issue did a timed comparison of 0 to 150 mph to 0.
In the stock class, the Acura NSX came in second to the Dodge Viper GTS!

The 97 NSX managed a 0-60 time of 4.5 seconds and a 1/4 mile time of 12.9 seconds.

The 0-150-0 was 35.9 seconds in 5191 feet







Here are a few quotes from the article

"Second Place was a surprise"

"We expected the Corvette, with the second best power-to-weight ratio and the best aerodynamics to snatch the silver..."

"The NSX diced with the corvette to 130 before pulling decisively ahead to reach 150 mph two seconds in front of the Vette."

"Our low mileage Porsche was neither the fastest nor the slowest 911 we've tested. but it was no match for the rocket NSX!"

The 911's 10 second time from 140 to 150 mph; was five seconds longer than the NSX's.



The entrants in the high performance theme were

Acura NSX -35.9

Dodge Viper -31.6

Chevy Corvette -43.7

1999 Porsche 911 Carrera -45.2

The high-zoot-sedan-banner

BMW 540i Sport -42.6

Jaguar XJR -43.4

Value Velocity

Chevy Camaro Z28 SS -43.7

http://members.aol.com/jimmylucky/150.html
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 04:55 PM
  #146  
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Zapata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: burbs of philly
Age: 41
Posts: 19,393
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
GT3
Zapata is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 05:48 PM
  #147  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
Did you find anything about braking and handling? I will look too.
Haven't really looked. Do you think Acura gave them a ringer? I mean [email protected] is faster than I would have expected. As for handling, my friend said that he has been on the track with S/Ced NSX's at Gingerman in his Z06 and they are not a challenge.
Maximized is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 06:04 PM
  #148  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Zapata
As an FYI, the official USA HP claim is 375 HP (due to conversion mostly). It's 380HP for Europe though and it was initially reported as 380 for the USA as well (possibly borrowed by the European HP claim). Picking nits though...
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 06:06 PM
  #149  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Maximized
Haven't really looked. Do you think Acura gave them a ringer? I mean [email protected] is faster than I would have expected. As for handling, my friend said that he has been on the track with S/Ced NSX's at Gingerman in his Z06 and they are not a challenge.
Well, the talk of a SCed NSX is a vague one since we dont know what exactly we are talking about, though I'd say that a SCed NSX should give a Z06 a run for its money. A well force fed NSX should be faster than a Z06.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 06:09 PM
  #150  
Parting out 02 Type S :(
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: LA,CA
Age: 69
Posts: 1,299
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by Maximized
Haven't really looked. Do you think Acura gave them a ringer? I mean [email protected] is faster than I would have expected. As for handling, my friend said that he has been on the track with S/Ced NSX's at Gingerman in his Z06 and they are not a challenge.
Really, i know of one guy with a comptech sced nsx that would have no hard time beating the z06. ive been in it too, so i know it can haul ass. however, at the track, alot has to do with the driver.
power3dfx is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 06:45 PM
  #151  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by power3dfx
Really, i know of one guy with a comptech sced nsx that would have no hard time beating the z06. ive been in it too, so i know it can haul ass. however, at the track, alot has to do with the driver.
My friends Z06 is running Goodyears and PF 01 Race pads btw. It would take a hell of a driver to come close to his times. The only times I have seen for a S/C NSX was in the C&D Supertuner challenge. The Z06 beat every car in that competition
Maximized is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 07:35 PM
  #152  
Doin' da crack shuffle
 
Red-CL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Philly and Bowie
Age: 41
Posts: 10,847
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
ok.......

What is NA???

What does naturally aspirated mean????
Red-CL is offline  
Old 11-24-2003, 09:48 PM
  #153  
THE SILVER BULLET
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: socal
Age: 31
Posts: 3,659
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
that would be one fast car and if they leave the price the same it would be the greatest car out there for the value
pimpscls is offline  
Old 11-25-2003, 05:13 AM
  #154  
Floyd Mayweather Jr.
 
Black CL-S 4-Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The City of Syrup Screwston, Texas
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
From
http://members.aol.com/jimmylucky/150.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------








Here are a few quotes from the article

"Second Place was a surprise"

"We expected the Corvette, with the second best power-to-weight ratio and the best aerodynamics to snatch the silver..."

"The NSX diced with the corvette to 130 before pulling decisively ahead to reach 150 mph two seconds in front of the Vette."

"Our low mileage Porsche was neither the fastest nor the slowest 911 we've tested. but it was no match for the rocket NSX!"

The 911's 10 second time from 140 to 150 mph; was five seconds longer than the NSX's.



The entrants in the high performance theme were

Acura NSX -35.9

Dodge Viper -31.6

Chevy Corvette -43.7

1999 Porsche 911 Carrera -45.2

The high-zoot-sedan-banner

BMW 540i Sport -42.6

Jaguar XJR -43.4

Value Velocity

Chevy Camaro Z28 SS -43.7

http://members.aol.com/jimmylucky/150.html
Holy shit! The 540 Sport is faster than the Corvette, Carrera and Z28SS in this race.
Black CL-S 4-Life is offline  
Old 11-25-2003, 06:39 AM
  #155  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Red-CL
ok.......

What is NA???

What does naturally aspirated mean????
NA means that an engine is "breating" with no....help...so to speak. Help from any device that will FORCE FEED it....with air. Like a supercharger and a turbocharger. NA also means that it's not "NOSed".

So, you press on the gas pedal, the throttle opens and air on a 14.7 (theoritical due to ambient variations due to altitude and other factors) psi of pressure enters. If you add a supercharger or a turbo, that 14.7 psi increases. Hence, it's not "naturally aspirated" any more.

Did that help?
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-25-2003, 06:42 AM
  #156  
Moderator Alumnus
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by Black CL-S 4-Life
Holy shit! The 540 Sport is faster than the Corvette, Carrera and Z28SS in this race.
No kidding!

Though remember, the first C5s were wearing those nasty non-flat tires. I think that's not the case any more. Hasn't been for a few years now. Average or bad tires will kill you in a 0-150-0 type of race.
gavriil is offline  
Old 11-25-2003, 07:09 PM
  #157  
Work safe avatar bish :D
 
nandowong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Avon Park/Gainesville FL
Age: 35
Posts: 3,056
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I think honday will do it. they always come up with new ways of getting more power. I wish them luck
nandowong is offline  
Old 11-26-2003, 10:02 AM
  #158  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
No kidding!

Though remember, the first C5s were wearing those nasty non-flat tires. I think that's not the case any more. Hasn't been for a few years now. Average or bad tires will kill you in a 0-150-0 type of race.
The C5's still have the Goodyear EMTs, they suck. The Z06 has Goodyear supercar F1's, which make a huge difference. I am still going to stick to my guns and say that a C5 accelerates faster than a NSX. 290 hp and 224 ft/lbs of tq in a 3153 lbs car does't equal low 13's IMHO. The 350Z has nearly the same hp and weighs the same, but only runs 13.8-14.0. What gives? Has anyone seen any actually timeslips or racing vids of an NSX???
Maximized is offline  
Old 11-26-2003, 10:17 AM
  #159  
Shogun Assassin
 
fahoumh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Age: 38
Posts: 3,395
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally posted by Maximized
290 hp and 224 ft/lbs of tq in a 3153 lbs car does't equal low 13's IMHO. The 350Z has nearly the same hp and weighs the same, but only runs 13.8-14.0. What gives? Has anyone seen any actually timeslips or racing vids of an NSX???
wouldn't gear ratios have some effect?
fahoumh is offline  
Old 11-26-2003, 10:26 AM
  #160  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 38
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by fahoumh
wouldn't gear ratios have some effect?
Yes, but if the car was geared short....The top speed would suffer, which doesnt seem to be the case.
Maximized is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Acura: NSX News


Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.