Car & Driver's estimate has been 2.7 seconds, but now a spokesman for Acura says it's only 3.4 seconds. wtf?
Acura representative says 0-60 time is 3.4 seconds
- Thread starter BB
- Start date
Good point. If he really meant to compare to LaFerrari then it would be 2.4 seconds. But do you really believe the car will be that insanely fast? Seems really difficult to believe.
560 hp and 3.4 second seems about right with AWD. In order to crack the sub 3 second mark
650 hp is needed and to get into the 2.5-2.6 0-60 you're looking at needing
900 hp roughly which is what the P1 Maclaren and 918 have.
Now if the NSX is 560 hp and that includes the 160hp electric,
I think 400hp from a twin turbo 3.5L will be a colossal disappointment!
My ecoboost crap motor has nearly that much power AND ford's F150
Raptor is slated to have 450-500hp from a worked 3.5L.
650 hp is needed and to get into the 2.5-2.6 0-60 you're looking at needing
900 hp roughly which is what the P1 Maclaren and 918 have.
Now if the NSX is 560 hp and that includes the 160hp electric,
I think 400hp from a twin turbo 3.5L will be a colossal disappointment!
My ecoboost crap motor has nearly that much power AND ford's F150
Raptor is slated to have 450-500hp from a worked 3.5L.
Last edited:
Crap motor? It's pretty sweet with solid lifters!
If I were Honda, I would never quote any actual combined horsepower from the emotors and only quote reliable on tap hp from the twin-turbo motor. Then let the emotors do their magic in assisting in performance when they can. But that's just my own opinion and style.
- - - Updated - - -
The 458 can do 0-60 in almost 3 seconds flat depending on the iteration. I would hope Honda set the bar for GTR numbers like rumors suggests, so it should be under 3 seconds. 3.4 is not bad at all, but not really impressive for AWD.
Last edited:
I can't imagine this guy is supposed to be spouting off numbers when Honda has been so tight lipped up to now.
^ Agreed. Until I hear it from an official source it is just hear/said. However I doubt it will have a sub 3 sec 0 - 60 times
What do you think about this calculation?
I think that it would be about accurate for Acura's goal for the car (it might even slightly underestimated since e-motors give instant torque in their powerband).
Would appreciate your comments.
GeNSX
I think that it would be about accurate for Acura's goal for the car (it might even slightly underestimated since e-motors give instant torque in their powerband).
Would appreciate your comments.
GeNSX
Last edited:
This Video shows the trunk open (first time) that I have seen (YMMV). Right at .53 secs. Lets get some shots of those details. The cars is out touring and no shots are up of the front or end storage. I know the engine is still a work in progress..
Last edited:
Porsche lists the 560hp 3500 lb 911 turbo s at 2.9 sec 0-60, the various auto testers have done slightly better with generous rollouts and sticky tracks under ideal conditions. Basically anything in the low 3's realm is stupid fast in the real world anyway. Using launch control, the instant torque of the electric motors isn't that big of an advantage since your doing a clutch drop with the gas motor. If the NSX comes in at 3800 lbs, 3.4 sec (with the mags getting maybe 3.2) is probably about right.
^ This
- - - Updated - - -
Moving to pushrod or cams directly over the valves, instead of offset cams with rocker/follower-sytle lifters like old NSX? Solid as in not hydraulic or solid as in not hydraulic and not roller?
Source?
Last edited:
LMAO exactly!!
I don't see why 2.4 seconds is doable with the new NSX (of course we don't have the final numbers on the gear ratio, HP/TQ and weight) considering that stock GTRs are:
1. heavier (based on the assumed NSX 2.0 weight)
2. don't have the fancy hybrid instant TQ/HP of an electric engine to make up for the turbo lag
http://www.0-60specs.com/nissan-gt-r-0-60-times/
The S version has 552 bhp 553 lb·ft with over boost. Both vehicles have all-wheel drive and a seven-speed dual clutch sequential transmission. The Turbo S can reach 0 – 100 km/h in 3.1 seconds as claimed by Porsche but has achieved 2.6 seconds by many car magazine tests.
http://www.caranddriver.com/porsche/911-turbo-turbo-s
- - - Updated - - -
Not all AWD are created equal in terms of power distribution for ft/rr and side to side.
Last I checked Acura has the best with their SH-AWD.
1. heavier (based on the assumed NSX 2.0 weight)
2. don't have the fancy hybrid instant TQ/HP of an electric engine to make up for the turbo lag
http://www.0-60specs.com/nissan-gt-r-0-60-times/
The S version has 552 bhp 553 lb·ft with over boost. Both vehicles have all-wheel drive and a seven-speed dual clutch sequential transmission. The Turbo S can reach 0 – 100 km/h in 3.1 seconds as claimed by Porsche but has achieved 2.6 seconds by many car magazine tests.
http://www.caranddriver.com/porsche/911-turbo-turbo-s
- - - Updated - - -
Not all AWD are created equal in terms of power distribution for ft/rr and side to side.
Last I checked Acura has the best with their SH-AWD.
Who cares of those fucking few 0.2-0.4s/ Is it going to be 2.9 or 3.4 s?
How many people here is going to buy the car either? How does that 0.3 s/0-60mph change your life? There is also day after day faster cars available in the market. I think people who will buy this car will update their new nsx's anyway to get it faster
How many people here is going to buy the car either? How does that 0.3 s/0-60mph change your life? There is also day after day faster cars available in the market. I think people who will buy this car will update their new nsx's anyway to get it faster
He is an Acura Assistant Zone Manager for Parts and Service. Hardly an Acura Spokesmen. He knows less than we do. He had a whole bunch of stuff wrong. I would guess the rest is wrong as well.
So, last night I was at an event local to me, lots of diversity of cars and people. I had my NSX and a friend had his. A few people came up and introduced themselves as current owners, and a few as previous owners. One guy came up and asked me if I was going to buy the new one. My answer was probably not, and besides I didn't think it was going to be easy to get one. He informed us that he works for a "local Acura dealer", and he could get us one. I thanked him, and that was that. Ooops, I didn't get his info in case anyone wanted in on this!!!
The guy in the video is an actual Acura employee, not just someone who works at a dealership. Furthermore he is purposefully here for this special event showing the car. Thus I would say he counts as an official source.
However I am wondering if he's in still in the dark (with respect to the performance numbers) as much as we are. He may be just rattling off a list of performance stats and advantages that everyone has already heard, e.g.
1. More than 560 hp
2. Better than 3.4 sec
3. Similarities to LaFerrari
I do believe the car will have a sub 3 second 0-60 time. If a heavy GTR that lacks electric motors can do so, why would the new NSX not be able to?
- - - Updated - - -
Who cares of those fucking few 0.2-0.4s/ Is it going to be 2.9 or 3.4 s?
How many people here is going to buy the car either? How does that 0.3 s/0-60mph change your life? There is also day after day faster cars available in the market. I think people who will buy this car will update their new nsx's anyway to get it faster
The NSX is supposed to be the brand's halo car. Thus the impressions of non-owners matter a lot. If it has inferior performance to the far cheaper GTR it will look bad. And if the performance is only 3.4 sec then even huge Tesla sedans will be able to out accelerate it. Due to the electric motors don't think for a second that people will not be comparing it to the Tesla.
While I realize it's ridiculous to compare the portly Tesla to a pure sports car, people will be making this comparison anyway and making fun of Honda if the car fails to deliver. It will be truly cringe worthy when the drag race videos appear showing a several year old Tesla clobbering the brand new NSX.
People are going to slam the new NSX regardless of 0 to 60 times saying it took 3 electric motors and a turbo ICE to compete with GTR or Tesla, which now with Ludicrous upgrade posts a 0-60 in 2.8 and is a luxury sedan and doesn't even have ICE. 0-60 has little to no real world implications anyway other than fodder for journalists. Drag racers race either 1/8 or 1/4 mile--there is no trophy for first to 60 mph. The NSX is designed as a GT car which should offer speed, comfort, and luxury. There will always be something quicker for less money. If that is what you want buy a muscle car instead.
Not a chance in hell it won't be under 3 seconds. Lower weight, more power and more torque than gtr, crucially it has better weight distribution with the weight over the rear wheels, the same set up that gives the Porsche its 0-60 advantage, then add in instant torque and also the 9 speed dct gearbox which has next to zero change time penalty.
anyone thinking an electric motor makes no difference to launching, I'd advise they test drive the tesla. Even with launch control the engine has a spread of torque over its operating range and doesn't therefore sit at max torque delivery unless it has a cvt which the nsx does not.
much as I've only launched my gtrs a handful of times, knowing it was about the best at it was important to me, so I'll be disheartened of the nsx is even a few tenths adrift - and yes I do have one on order.
anyone thinking an electric motor makes no difference to launching, I'd advise they test drive the tesla. Even with launch control the engine has a spread of torque over its operating range and doesn't therefore sit at max torque delivery unless it has a cvt which the nsx does not.
much as I've only launched my gtrs a handful of times, knowing it was about the best at it was important to me, so I'll be disheartened of the nsx is even a few tenths adrift - and yes I do have one on order.
Who cares of those fucking few 0.2-0.4s/ Is it going to be 2.9 or 3.4 s?
How many people here is going to buy the car either? How does that 0.3 s/0-60mph change your life? There is also day after day faster cars available in the market. I think people who will buy this car will update their new nsx's anyway to get it faster
My NSX already is in the high 3's (based on what I've raced off the line).
2's is bragging rights.
Yes the cam is directly above the valves and act on the buckets and solid lifters like a proper race motor, while the NSX has hydraulic lifters and followers.
Similar threads
