That's weird, I raced against 1994 NSX when my Z06 was bone stock and I put couple of bus lengths on the NSX from 50 - 120 mph, it wasn't even close.

 

I think the NSX is fast for the same reason why the Z06 is such a monster given its specs.. It seems like one of those rare cars that have something extra about them that just makes everything work together in harmony really.

With the MkIV Supra, it is the engine, but with the Z06 and the NSX, i think as was mentioned above, it was the combination of engine, drivetrain, weight, aero, etc that just go together so well to create such a beast for the specs it has.

 

isnt it more expensive to mod NSXs??

 

Not really, i've seen some affordable tt kits for them. Trust me they are very fast with tt kits.

 

^I thought I read turboing NSX's is difficult because its tough to mount an intercooler and get proper air flow for it. Because of this, I read superchargers were the way to go.

 

50% of the car is the drive train. 20% is the chassis 30 % is the engine. That car, w/ a 8k redline, can have aggressive as hell gearing.

 

Most NSX's dyno 255-275, for the 3.2 liter (97+) -the 3 I've seen dyno atleast.
The older ones with the 3.0 are around .6/.7 slower in the 1/4 mile. 3.2's run 13.2 ish, seen some 12.8-12.9's stock with good tires. Anyways, 3.2 liter ones are underrated big time.
Always remember the drivetrain loss is almost nothing in them, rear engine, rear drive.

I/H/E usually put the newer ones just under 300 hp, Headers being the big gainer: 15-20whp

 

I own an NSX right now and a 350z and I can tell you that the 350z is almost dead even with the NA1. NA2 you wont stand a chance...

Normal dynos for the NA2 are around..

255-270hp and tq is around 210-218

Normal dynos for the NA1 are around...

240-250 hp and tq is around 195-205

Some S2000 owners think that the AP1 is near the performance of the NA1 which it IS NOT. I owned an AP1 and I would walk away from them stock VS stock. AP2 I would still walk away but it would be a little closer.

So bottom line is the 350z is just about equal to a NA1 but not an NA2.

 

The Nsx weighs 3150 pounds..Thats around 200 pounds less that the 350Z..

they dyno anywere from 245-265 rwhp bone stock on the 97-05 models..

bone stock NSX's have ran 12.9 at 108 mph on more than one ocassion..

My friends bone stock 05 NSX ran dead even from a 70-110 mph roll race against my 378 rwhp automatic C5 vette ( 2004)..

On a 30-110 roll race my friends stock NSX will loose by around 4 cars to my bone stock 410 rwhp and 465 rwt 99 viper...

that to me is very impressive since most cars ( including a stock C5) would be a tiny dot in my rear view from 70-110 mph..

How do they do it with only 250 rwhp?????

-.28-30 drag for starters is an amazing C5 or C6 vette like number

-3150 pounds is an amazing C5Z06 like weight

-But the thing that really dose it is the decent rwhp tied in with the great arodynamics and light weight is the INCREDIBLE 4.06 rear gears and LLLooong rpm's..

Imagine if C5 vettes had 4.06 gears instead of 3.42's and weighed 150 pounds less....You'd basicly have an NSX...

You will never know how fast the 97-05 NSX is with only 250 rwhp till you ride with some what and they punch it at 70 mph..My jaw dropped.

 

it's really amazing how fast the 98'-05' really are considering the specs. Makes me want to buy one at one point in my life. I knew they could run 12s stock but to hang with a 370whp corvette was not what I was envisioning. Wow.

 

www.hpturbos.com

same brand I will be going to for my mustang
I could go SC for half the price but some part of me wants a wave of 550+ ft/lbs of torque at the wheels

 

I have heard this comment before. While taking my friend for a ride, he put a 20 on the dash and asked him to try to grab it once he hit it in 2nd.


Though, i have raced the car in question and pulled him while spilling my dr pepper at 120 Of course i just drive a mustang and you need like 800 to the wheels for it to be impressive

 

Old post I noticed...but what did you have done to even keep next to a C5 Z06??? I have friends he went 11.8 and 11.90s in stock C5 Z06 cars.... if you were running slower than my camaro (as posted above)..you wouldn't be any where near 2 car lengths.

 

The site doesn't look too credible to me - how come M3 or 911 have a V6 engine ?? Also check out the groovy V4 engines in Audi TT, Miata, Celica for example. Just curious what else did they mixed up.

I would rather check the numbers @ www.globalcar.com or www.carfolio.com - which are more credible sites IMHO.

 

I disagree with you there. The Z looks better.

 

They have VTEC!!!!!!!!

 

rsx would still win . sorry to burst this out guys i couldn't help it .

 

I see the RSX comment everywhere... If you are being facetious as I suspect then LMAO!

 

actually michaeljr started the rsx is faster..... and everyone just started going with it..

 

power to weight ratio says it all