Who would win?????

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Mar 16, 2007 | 06:52 PM

#61

jimmyloose

Registered User

iTrader: (22)

Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 1,638

Likes: 0

From: Irvine

Quote:

Originally Posted by UGOTZ'D

Rsx Would Own All With I/h/e!

don't forget k-pro or hondata.

Mar 16, 2007 | 08:35 PM

#62

priscilla ls1

New Member

iTrader: (15)

Joined: Aug 2005

Posts: 709

Likes: 0

From: Leesburg, VA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alberto

LOL which one is it? 3.2L NSX is good for 106+mph trap stock, it would stomp most NA Z's. He is racing a 94' NSX they dont run low 13's!

Well if you read the rest of what I wrote you can see that I included the age of his opponintes engine the NSX he is racing wont run low 13's. But it could back in 94.

Mar 17, 2007 | 05:53 AM

#63

2T350Z

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 341

Likes: 0

From: MD

Quote:

Originally Posted by tylerdurden07

Well in that case, I apologize.. I get irritated with all the e-thugs on this board talking shiet.. Anyway, I honestly don't know how fast the NSX is nor do I care.. I just want to see how fast it is on the top.. If you guys do show up to the white marsh meet, I promise to be on good behavior.. I'm actually areally nice guy.. Just have a bad temper.. I'll bring $200 if you really want to run for the money

sweet if weather permits and as long as I can get off work I work at tweeter we have to work sundays

Mar 17, 2007 | 07:35 AM

#64

cubu

New Member

iTrader: (21)

Joined: Dec 2005

Posts: 954

Likes: 0

From: DFW, TX

didn't the 94' nsx's have like 260hp?

edit: nvm the manual had 290hp, and auto had 252

Last edited by cubu; Mar 17, 2007 at 07:37 AM.

Mar 17, 2007 | 07:43 AM

#65

2T350Z

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 341

Likes: 0

From: MD

he just replaced everything in car new pretty much rebuild so runs like new

Mar 17, 2007 | 10:32 AM

#66

Alberto

Cranky FI Owner

iTrader: (14)

Joined: Mar 2003

Posts: 34,715

Likes: 8

From: DMV

2T350Z that NSX is good for 99-102mph trap speed stock, with only 270hp its the cars gearing and FD that make it "quick". Racing a mod'd Revup like tyler's would be a great matchup Id actually put $$ on the Revup. I never thought he got out of line or talked $hit, if anything you get too defensive for no apparent reason.

Mar 17, 2007 | 10:33 AM

#67

Alberto

Cranky FI Owner

iTrader: (14)

Joined: Mar 2003

Posts: 34,715

Likes: 8

From: DMV

Quote:

Originally Posted by cubu

didn't the 94' nsx's have like 260hp?

edit: nvm the manual had 290hp, and auto had 252

Wrong

96 and older had 3.0L 270hp with the 5 speed

97+ have 3.2L with 290hp and the 6 speed. These are the "fast" NSX's the others are slow...

Mar 17, 2007 | 11:18 AM

#68

cubu

New Member

iTrader: (21)

Joined: Dec 2005

Posts: 954

Likes: 0

From: DFW, TX

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alberto

Wrong

96 and older had 3.0L 270hp with the 5 speed

97+ have 3.2L with 290hp and the 6 speed. These are the "fast" NSX's the others are slow...

yeah, thats what i thought too, i just remember the older nsx's had less hp, till i read this http://www.hondanews.com/categories/777/releases/1415

Mar 17, 2007 | 11:20 AM

#69

cubu

New Member

iTrader: (21)

Joined: Dec 2005

Posts: 954

Likes: 0

From: DFW, TX

ok, you are right now i that i read this http://www.hondanews.com/categories/...9?archive=1994

Mar 17, 2007 | 10:56 PM

#70

Electricchild

Registered User

Joined: Aug 2005

Posts: 7,612

Likes: 0

From: Naples, Florida

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickRaine78

Sure buddy. A modded car vs a stock. Great comparison. Not to mention the other cars u listed. Unless your being sarcastic Put the crack pipe down and GO back to rsxdorks.com.