- Joined
- 27 May 2016
- Messages
- 831
i'm sure hennesey and underground racing will build 800hp NSXs. they may not last long or be daily driveable, but hey, 800hp. lol.
2017 NSX instrumented acceleration testing
- Thread starter fastaussie
- Start date
Not interested in a built car, I am interested in what kind of performance can come from a simple tune.
If its not much then Acura has optimized things, but I expect that wont be the case.
I expect that the NSX is track abuse reliable meaning that cranking up the power a little would still leave it spirited street driving reliable, this is what interests me quite a bit.
- Joined
- 27 May 2016
- Messages
- 831
if the new turbo civic is any indication, then its all good.
$300 for 25hp.
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=1284152
$300 for 25hp.
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=1284152
If you can get the same % out of a NSX tune, that will be some serious power.
fastaussie
Suspended
i've never seen any manufacturer take their lowest trim model to compare to the competition. would they be trying to sell as few cars as possible? Honda brought their best to the battle, and Audi brought theirs...
yep, but Honda has to meet noise emissions, carbon emissions, long term reliability goals, EPA mileage regulations, and getting all those engines to work in symphony, and so on, and so on. if it was so easy to just turn up the boost, it would have already been done. you guys are hilarious, :biggrin: maybe you should call up Honda and tell them how to build stronger engines?
the NSX is as good as it can currently be right now and for the near future, that's the reason it has taken this long to be released. Honda was doing everything they could to get it as competitive as possible during all these lengthy delays. and if you think Audi and the rest will just hang out while Honda decides to squeeze out some more horsepower and catch up, well i don't know what planet you boys live on?
Man you certainly like to piss on the parade - that last statement comes across as condescending and arrogant.
Nick Robinson of the NSX team in Ohio has made it clear that they are continuing to develop the car. They believe the car's chassis will take more power, plus the work being done by the GT3 development team is being feed back to the road car team. Nick has stated that this feedback will result in improvements being incorporated into the road car. Honda have invested large sums - I can't see them sitting on their hands to not progress it.
For those of us who like the car and choose it beyond the competitors' offerings, will be doing so for a variety of reasons, and that is the wonder and joy of human diversity. Some of us frankly don't care care two hoots about it not leading the field of xy and z by 0.5 seconds or whatever is considered an 'acceptable' margin. Those who want the more visceral analogue experience of the McLaren 570S or whatever car takes their interest, well good on them - I wish them every enjoyment of their choice. I don't have a performance car history - I've never been a ricer or a racer. My background is in electronics and computing, so the NSX appeals greatly because of it's technology package, and therefore it's potential to advance and develop, to my way of thinking is much more captivating than that of a straight ICE driven car. I follow blogs of guys who are reverse engineering EV and hybrid drive-train systems to experiment and learn, and so a new sub-culture of electro-technology tuners is emerging. Put this together with the guys who know ICE tuning and the NXS has the world as it's oyster.
Every forum has one.
Ditto
fastaussie
Suspended
sorry ladies, i'm a realist, and i know how these things work. and i genuinely apologise if you took a comment to be condescending or arrogant.
my points were:
that a car manufacturer does not simply just turn up the boost and make another 50 horsepower to become an R8. there are another 100 factors that go into making a production car engine. it's a rather complicated process, if it was really that simple Honda would have done it already.
and while plenty of people will buy the NSX whether it's fast or slow, i'd reckon 95% of this forum was eagerly and anxiously awaiting the performance testing figures to see where this car stacked up...
I don't think anyone disputes the myriad of decisions and testing that goes into any commercial automotive product. And of course every performance car on the market today has gone through a long history of development building on the shoulders of previous iterations and models. The point I and many have made here, is that Honda are only just beginning on that journey with a car that has little in common with it's quarter century old namesake.
I've repeated what a senior manager of the NXS program has said re the car's ongoing development, and I have every confidence that they are not going to waste their time and investment doing nothing with the product. Sure it won't happen overnight, but they have said unequivocally that the GT3 program will contribute.
And if myself or other's wish to experiment with aftermarket tuning that improves the figures and the fun, then we weight it up knowing the potential risks and prepare for the possible outcomes. That's all part of the fun of risk-taking.
And yes of course people in these forums have been keen to see how the car performs against it's competitors - that's only natural. But I'd say most of the egos here are not particularly inclined toward hand-wringing anxiety and disappointment if it's not leading the pack. We are intelligent enough to know that that game of leading the pack is always over in a flash.
- - - Updated - - -
..and you continue in your 'superior' manner of condescension.
fastaussie
Suspended
mate, just mucking about. there is not a superiority complex here, but you are of course welcome to your opinion. i don't know what you know about car manufacturing, i only know what i know. which is why i said "i know how these things work".
i don't deny or debate that the NSX programs will continue to evolve and progress. but the other competitors will also.
and let's be real, as if it hasn't been said here dozens of times recently. these are very high performance cars, their performance relative to each other matters...
While I'll admit that it's the only NSX available at the moment, their "relative performance" needs to accommodate which models we are talking about here. Base NSX against mostly the performance variants in their respective ranges? As those still waiting for their cars to arrive [lucky them!] will attest, it's VERY early days in the life of the NSX MkII.
While I am not denying that the NSX has failed to hit it's prescribed bench marks, and SH-AWD is not providing the benefits I expected, with the electronic wizardry and turbo boosting I would expect a "performance" Type S to be step away, especially as I think they have got the pricing wrong by about $25,000 in the USA [and about $120,000 down under
]. And we can only salivate at the prospect of the Type R.
I think it's hard to decipher playfulness or sarcasm online without a tone in the voice. I use to think FA was a bit of prick too, but I think it's just the way it comes across in text.
But FA, to answer your question if I was satisfied with the rankings from MT's greatest race:
It's a realistic showing. 3rd or 4th place is fine (The GTR number was too close IMO). If the 488 made a showing then the new NSX would have been 5th technically...
I never expected it blow away the competitors, but provide close competitiveness at a much more reasonable price and approach in the way Honda did for the first gen NSX. The aforementioned cars all cost upwards of $300K+ sans the McLaren. The base NSX without all of the excessive carbon add-ons at $156K is a pretty damn good bargain for a serious mid-engine supercar for today.
Short of the McLaren, the 488 and V10 from Audighini have the NSX beat on power and weight, along with several extra years of refinement while Honda has been dormant for most of those years. I think they have done a great job of catch-up, unlike their stumbling in F1 along with McLaren in that aspect. The 570S is so light tho, that it can't be denied by physics. It simply takes less power to move a lighter car and it should obviously consume less fuel when in motion on the highway.
I think the biggest take-away from the article/comparison is that Honda should truly consider simplifying the new NSX either with more weight-saving solutions for the future OR non-hybrid/lesser-tech variants that should shave 300-500 lbs off of the car. The weight distribution would obviously have to be reworked tho...
- - - Updated - - -
Lastly. Given all of the praise and benchmark the "affordable" 570S has acclaimed, it apparently is not selling that well? So I do not think sales number is a sign of success considering many exotic super cars would fail in that category as it would rather defy the definition of exotic which is usually what keeps Porsche from the equation and perhaps even the R8...
That would be a terrible idea. Why throw away all the unique technology in the car and fight "the last war" with cars that were designed from scratch to be the car you are envisioning. Do you think the Three Hypercar Kings used electrics to win a "Green Award?" No. They did it because the new technologies allow for a faster/better car to be built. Did Acura lose some of that edge in its first attempt to deliver that technology at 20% the price? Yes. But giving up the lead they have in pursuing the future would be dumb, IMHO.
I'm with Chris on this.
Honda could have built their equivalent to a 570S etc.
However the original NSX offered segment leading technology and the new NSX does the same.
The performance upside in the new NSX is much higher than a conventional sports car.
They will work on weight savings, more power etc. over time.
All the second guessing/critiques on the new NSX are coming from those looking at reviews and numbers.
On the other hand owners of the new NSX all sound satisfied with the car.
fastaussie
Suspended
errr...thanks, i think? :biggrin:
good points all, but do remember the Porsche 911 Turbo S and Huracan 580/610 were also absent from that race. and that could push the NSX back even further down the list, likely to 6th or 7th place in the drag race. they're in the same $200,000 range along with the R8. and if the 420 horsepower Carrera matched the NSX around Laguna, imagine what the Turbo and GT3 will do.
for whatever reason, it seems every tested NSX is priced over $200,00 after a few options. it seems like most of them are being sold at that price point, do you think the car in base trim isn't that desirable?
i find this curious. it takes a lot of fuel to move a 4,000 pound car from a stop, especially when you're force feeding air into the engine. but it takes very little to maintain speed once you're up to it and coasting (at low rpm). and with 9 gears and several electric motors, i'd expect the NSX to get 35 mpg all day...
it would absolutely, there would be much re-engineering and development needed to do this, but i don't think Honda would "go backwards" with their technology as the other boys have previously stated. that wouldn't seem to be their way...
i don't think the 570S is about affordability, it's about the most raw and visceral driving experience you can have in an automobile. they took tech out of the car to make it more fun. and it has absolutely worked. that car is astounding exhilarating and just pure fun to drive. there needs to be more cars like that!
McLaren isn't a high volume sales car company. their numbers are not comparable to Honda, Porsche, or Audi...
As far as enjoying the car - those numbers are irrelevant.
As far as selling the car - those numbers are very important.
I predict the Audi will outsell the NSX2 in a 3:1 ratio if not higher.
With that said, I would by the NSX2 personally but that doesn't mean much in terms of overall people buying the car.
As far as selling the car - those numbers are very important.
I predict the Audi will outsell the NSX2 in a 3:1 ratio if not higher.
With that said, I would by the NSX2 personally but that doesn't mean much in terms of overall people buying the car.
- Joined
- 23 February 2016
- Messages
- 2,591
I need some clarification on the positioning of the 570S
i thought it was intended to be a more obtainable car, that would be also be more usable (like a 911) than the 650
from the most recent annual report they moved 16xx cars last year.
they noted a production rate target of 20 cars per day by mid 2016, so my guess is they are shooting for about 4000 cars (All models/iterations included) this year
i thought it was intended to be a more obtainable car, that would be also be more usable (like a 911) than the 650
from the most recent annual report they moved 16xx cars last year.
they noted a production rate target of 20 cars per day by mid 2016, so my guess is they are shooting for about 4000 cars (All models/iterations included) this year
Do you mean the new R8V10+, or all R8 variants? Even all-in, I don't think that is plausible. R8 (whole line) in a ~600-700/unit/year kind of platform in U.S. in recent years. I expect a jump this year from the all-new version, but I doubt it will be even 2X higher than NSX if you start the clock at say 1/1/17 for 12 months (once NSX production ramps, but after all the "coverage" cars are delivered).
But I do think the R8 (all variants) will outsell the NSX in the U.S.--- just not 3:1.
Given the huge investment already, I'm just hoping that the NSX sells enough to justify further investment in the platform.
The ICE in the NSX isn't an Atkinson cycle engine like the engine in
a Prius (or various other hybrids built for economy). I say this because
Honda has never described it as such, and because of its power rating
(an Atkinson cycle engine has lower max HP/liter).
So given that the ICE is fairly conventional, the fact that electric motors
are included is no advantage with respect to highway mileage.
Electric motors can help in city driving because regenerative braking
recovers some of the energy spent in accelerating the car.
With R8 sales hitting a peak of 1145 in 2011, I will adjust my assessment a bit. Sales numbers for the NSX may peak for the first few years, but I expect they will hover around 300-500 units max per year.
Umm... maybe you live in an area without hills or traffic on freeway, but the EV for sure helps in those cases. Agree that, per laws of physics, flat ground on cruise control not helped at all by electrics.
I don't disagree with either of you two about the new SH-AWD being the halo theme for the flagship car. This is why I say variants for lesser models or performance trims and emphasized weight saving techniques over the reduction of tech. Everyone has remarked that the turbo-lag masking is a great sensation and even remarked that the 488 should take note...
I also agree with the sentiment that it doesn't need to be the fastest at one point only to be beaten next year/cycle as it's going to keep escalating so it has to be relative to the competition. However, the 570S is faster, better handling and rated to get better fuel mileage from an engine with more cylinders. It's the better overall winner (something that the NSX strives to be, a well rounded supercar) here given their close price points and it does it because it doesn't have 700 lbs of extra mass... There's something to be said there. Sure the McLaren has questionable reliability, depreciating value factors along with dealer ranged service issues, but these factors are yet to be tested for the new NSX too even if they look more promising in Honda/Acura's hands.
The biggest disappointment for the new NSX is the curb weight when it was first announced. I was very optimistic that Honda could atleast reach 3600 lbs if not 3500 lbs considering the RLX SH-AWD only gained about 400 lbs over the FWD model. I suppose Honda cares too much for safety ratings also as it leads me to believe that the car without the hybrid tech would have still weighed in at 3400 lbs, which is not vastly better than the competition, considering the similar sized (by dimensions) 570s weighs merely ~3200 lbs.
- - - Updated - - -
I think about ~8,000 units total in the US again for the 2nd generation until mark 3 shows up would be ideal. Just do it in 8-10 or so years Honda not 15 years.
- - - Updated - - -
Also, I think that many people will get closer to 30 mpg with mixed city driving for the new NSX thanks to those EV motors. I'm not sure how the EPA gets their city ratings, but my mixed city mpgs are always higher than what they rate.
I get 23-24 mixed city driving in my old NSX now stacked against the 18 rating. EV assisted cars get great city mileage, sometimes even better than highway depending on the driver's tendencies.
- - - Updated - - -
I view the R8 and Huracan variants as one entity even tho they differ aesthetically. A Porsche was still present and you're right, the Turbo S would have put the NSX even further back.
The new NSX isn't about high volume sales either. From the way they were talking it seems like they may be even rarer than the first gen...
Sure urban freeways are congested, but the term "highway mileage" is
generally understood to mean for driving at a fairly uniform speed, no?
There are hills where I live. I don't have a hybrid, but for every bit of extra
throttle the cruise control uses on uphill sections it gets to back off on the
downhill stretch. It's not a total wash, but it's not like my fuel economy
suffers markedly from typical highway grade variations.
You said you'd expect the new NSX to get 35 MPG all day. 35, really?
Similar threads
