Anyone anti-turbo nsx???

P

powerslave7

Contributing Member
Joined
5 July 2007
Messages
141
Location
N Ireland
I know there is a strong contingent for turbo nsx's,i was hoping to hear from those of you who believe that the nsx should be NA only, and why?

I think having a history of big v8 cars in the us would lead one to believe the nsx is underpowered.....But with the roads in europe it feels like quite enough!

But then the most power anything i had growing up was about 150bhp from a hot hatch!

So of course the nsx feels fast, and it also feels like it could easily be much faster...:smile:
 
Reliablity.
Knowing that for the most part, 99.9% of the time, you are going to be able to go start your car and drive it and not have any worries about it blowing up on you.
I wouldn't say just anti-turbo but rather anit-FI.
That peace of mind is priceless.
 
I wouldn't say that I'm "anti" turbo, but I do feel that a car like the NSX is better served by a supercharger than a turbocharger. Just MHO...
 
I'm mixed.
From day one the car lacked 100Hp.
Imagine the reputation this car would still enjoy if it had been built with that HP. Honda would be building its third generation now. As it is it's still pretty incredible. A milestone.
400HP is the generally accepted limit on clutch and pistons WITH a proper fuel management system.
Turbo is "the right" way and considering the technology in this car; a supercharger just seems low tech.
That said I'm looking at a used Basch set up as it gives the best bang for the buck.

Other end of the spectrum is going super light. Shaving off a couple of hundred pounds would work wonders throughout its performance envelope.
 
lightguy said:
I'm mixed.
From day one the car lacked 100Hp.
Imagine the reputation this car would still enjoy if it had been built with that HP. Honda would be building its third generation now. As it is it's still pretty incredible. A milestone.
400HP is the generally accepted limit on clutch and pistons WITH a proper fuel management system.
Turbo is "the right" way and considering the technology in this car; a supercharger just seems low tech.
That said I'm looking at a used Basch set up as it gives the best bang for the buck.

Other end of the spectrum is going super light. Shaving off a couple of hundred pounds would work wonders throughout its performance envelope.
Click to expand...
Because Honda don't do turbo on their performance car, at least not yet.

The car may be underpower today, it was not until perhaps 2002. The USDM received raw end of the deal. We didn't get the Type R, which would have been some thing else.


So far, reliability has been an issue. I know couple of local guys with problems and had to rebuilt their engine. Also to do Turbo right, you really need to start from ground up. Sleeve the block with stronger internals to make Turbo worth while. That is why CTSC is probable the best way to go.
 
Last edited:
honda turbo their jet ski, so I think we might get turbo from honda car down the road, who knows lol
 
flaminio said:
I wouldn't say that I'm "anti" turbo, but I do feel that a car like the NSX is better served by a supercharger than a turbocharger. Just MHO...
Click to expand...

I could not agree more...now that I have a CTSC on my NA2. I am an old timer as some of you may know. My first Turbo car was a new 1978 930TT (that's what they called them at the time); very bad power delivery, most of it unusable as you were too busy staying on the road. Many cars and many turbos later (including a 600HP Supra) I drive a GTR (R35) as my daily driver; my dedicated track car is also a 350ZTT which brings me back to the NSX. Its SC power delivery is smoother, more usable and certainly adequate for the NA2 motor. I have driven a more powerful turbo NSX and I still prefer, by far, my CTSC, even with the stock low boost pulley. JMHO.
and btw, for those who idolize the Type R; not to blow off your candle, but a well set up CT NA2 (SC and suspension) would give the type R a very hard time...again IMHO
 
doc_tai said:
honda turbo their jet ski, so I think we might get turbo from honda car down the road, who knows lol
Click to expand...

MDX and JDM Honda Legend 2.0 Turbo V6/City Turbo.

They know how to make turbo engines. VTEC was their answer to Turbos, now they need more since every one copied it.
 
Vancehu said:
MDX and JDM Honda Legend 2.0 Turbo V6/City Turbo.

They know how to make turbo engines. VTEC was their answer to Turbos, now they need more since every one copied it.
Click to expand...

Vance buddy, what's the trend now, i'm catching your mistake again! :smile: RDX not mdx, buddy.

anyway, i'm anti FI as I have no money to afford the "proper" buildup, the maintanence, even just worry about the heat soak issues. Am I going to be as worry free as NA when i take the car to the track??
 
I live in south texas, with water to air intercooler so far in three months I havent have any problem with heat soak yet
 
NSXDreamer2 said:
Vance buddy, what's the trend now, i'm catching your mistake again! :smile: RDX not mdx, buddy.

anyway, i'm anti FI as I have no money to afford the "proper" buildup, the maintanence, even just worry about the heat soak issues. Am I going to be as worry free as NA when i take the car to the track??
Click to expand...

Easy there, you know what I meant. Hey, I might be up there next month, let's meet up!!!
 
powerslave7 said:
I know there is a strong contingent for turbo nsx's,i was hoping to hear from those of you who believe that the nsx should be NA only, and why?

I think having a history of big v8 cars in the us would lead one to believe the nsx is underpowered.....But with the roads in europe it feels like quite enough!

But then the most power anything i had growing up was about 150bhp from a hot hatch!

So of course the nsx feels fast, and it also feels like it could easily be much faster...:smile:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there's necessarily any kind of anti-turbo NSX contingent and I certainly am not anti-turbo but the bottom line is that installing a turbo on an NSX that will provide a comparable level of reliability to most popular NSX supercharger options will be much more challenging and expensive.

Even the NA stroker packages which are possibly equally or more reliable than a s/c package can easily cost twice as much than a s/c that can produce more power. Not to mention there's going to be significant down time for the car whereas most s/c packages require only a couple of days to install. Aside from this, the tuners and techs that are capable of doing this kind of work are few and far between. So one is looking at not only getting the car to a capable tech and tuner wherever that may be but the normal weeks-or-months downtime normally associated with a project like that.

I think it's just simply cost and time prohibitive for most NSX owners who desire more power than stock. The supercharger is the most reliable and cost-effective way to increase power up to a point and the vast majority of NSX owners don't desire to exceed that point anyway.

If you want to exceed the power level that can be provided by most of the proven reliable s/c packages out there or just have money to burn on a project there's nothing wrong or bad with going turbo but understand that it's an inherently more difficult and expensive road to go down compared to the typical NSX s/c package.
 
I've gone FI with the Gruppe M and love the way my car is now. The extra grunt of the SC down low where the car needs it the most to take advantage of its beautifully designed chasis was the deciding factor for me. I think this was the package originally intended. IMHO the NSX was designed for more power, but the engine designers and head office held them back for the self-imposed gentlemen's HP restriction agreement over in Japan (which the R35 pretty well pissed away).

Having said that, I'd love to experience a 3.8L stroker with the short gears. I hear its a completely different animal. :cool:
 
i really appreciate the input and opinions, thank you!

does anyone have experience of a 3.8 capacity engine?

Whilst I'm sure its tempting to get more power for less money going the FI route, i think i'd prefer this option.

No one seems to boast about NA power figures, is it because they are not impressive?

WHat sort of figures does a 3.8l c30 do?

Many thanks

Jamie
 
Oyagi said:
I've gone FI with the Gruppe M and love the way my car is now. The extra grunt of the SC down low where the car needs it the most to take advantage of its beautifully designed chasis was the deciding factor for me. I think this was the package originally intended. IMHO the NSX was designed for more power, but the engine designers and head office held them back for the self-imposed gentlemen's HP restriction agreement over in Japan (which the R35 pretty well pissed away).

Having said that, I'd love to experience a 3.8L stroker with the short gears. I hear its a completely different animal. :cool:
Click to expand...



I have driven a 3.8L and I can tell you that it sounds like a true exotic car.

When I stomp on it in 5th gear it feels like the acceleration I have in my 1 or 2nd gear on my stock 3.0L engine.

Just the sound of the motor is awesome.....and yes a supercharger is cheaper then a stroker motor but it doesn't have that sound that the stroker produces.

The stroker motor is a players motor.......if I had the funds I would do it over a SC, but thats just me.

Jamie you should talk to Jon Martin at Cerritos Acura if you want to know more about it........he is the designer of it.


I referred Anil SerialNsxer to Jon and he ended up doing a 3.8L build......

Here you go http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?p=545764
 
Last edited:
I'm a little against it. I have a turbo from Angus and it makes 360hp to the wheel. My opinion is that it changes the car so much, it doesn't feel like a NSX. Here are my reasons why:
*it's loud as hell compared to stock
*it actually has too much power where you feel like you can lose control
*you have to maintain it very carefully and it lacks the ability for any mechanic to look after it
*you CAN burn your clutch super fast if you don't drive it right
*gas mileage feels like a big a truck

If I had to do it all over again, I would make it stock as much as possible or close to a NSX-R. I think a lot of engineering went into these cars and it makes sense when it's stock. Now that I turbo'ed it. It feels like a glorified Civic that can break anytime if I don't take care of it.

The best advantage of it is:
*I can beat STi's!
 
macready said:
I'm a little against it. I have a turbo from Angus and it makes 360hp to the wheel. My opinion is that it changes the car so much, it doesn't feel like a NSX. Here are my reasons why:
*it's loud as hell compared to stock
*it actually has too much power where you feel like you can lose control
*you have to maintain it very carefully and it lacks the ability for any mechanic to look after it
*you CAN burn your clutch super fast if you don't drive it right
*gas mileage feels like a big a truck

If I had to do it all over again, I would make it stock as much as possible or close to a NSX-R. I think a lot of engineering went into these cars and it makes sense when it's stock. Now that I turbo'ed it. It feels like a glorified Civic that can break anytime if I don't take care of it.

The best advantage of it is:
*I can beat STi's!
Click to expand...

Thank you for your experienced unbiased input.
I was a bit surprised by your comment about gas mileage thinking that turbos were supposed to be efficient. Unless you foot is in it all the time :)
 
One of the reasons why I chose a stroker build over turbo was reliability. Yet the appeal of massive hp is undeniable. That said, everytime I think of how many turbo p-cars I've seen blow up at the track, I'm reminded of how much a reasonable NA build makes sense.

Frankly, 335rwhp is more than enough for me at the track. Turbos for the NSX have come a long way in just the last several years but so has NA power plants.

< --- planning ITBs this winter. ;)
 
powerslave7 said:
I know there is a strong contingent for turbo nsx's,i was hoping to hear from those of you who believe that the nsx should be NA only, and why?
Click to expand...

I am not sure why you are asking for one side of the story only- but I will give you my perspective anyway.

Personally, I have never been troubled about the theoretical loss of "reliability" attributed to modified cars. In my case the combination of added performance (and I will admit, in most cases potential performance as in most instances I am driving well below the threshold of the stock car- never mind the modified one) and uniqueness or personalization of the finished product is well worth it.

But I am a "car guy" i enjoy looking at the mechanicals, electronics and braided ss lines - and spend many an hour hanging out in the garage with my car friends talking motors and mods.

Additionally I am fortunate to have several cars so- I am not sure I would feel the same about a car I drove every day or needed for work.

Although I have never considered my self a purist with regards to my cars I did leave my NSX bone stock for 6 years (I purchased mine with under 8k miles)- I did not buy it for its all out performance - but always thought it could probably do better with its very high performance chassis- not a unique thought.

After turbocharging will Angus's kit - and the addition of various gauges, RPS clutch and various suspension wheel/tire upgrades how do I feel?

Immensely satisfied!

Its true, I have to be more exact in my driving, I match revs on downshifts and I am more focused about what my throttle foot is doing-

Funny thing is that one critisism of the NSX was it was to "ordinary" in its driving manor- very Honda like

Now my car feels more exotic- not a car that your grandmother could or would care to drive- but a car that has a race car potential ready to be released on command

That said, my NSX idles and starts like stock the sound level is very comparable to stock until around 6000 rpm at full throtle then the pitch of the exhaust sounds more like a F1 car would at distance- but without the volume

My clutch is a little grabby in first or reverse but I knew what I was getting- there are ways to avoid this and still have the clamping force necessary for a 450 + hp motor but I was not looking to maintain my Honda Civic ride.

Bottom line is modifying your motor (FI or otherwise) will more than likely place added stress on the components but how you drive it is the biggest variable of all.

Think out your modifications and do them correctly (ie do not cut corners) learn to drive well and respect your car and I do not think you will have problems.

I would be more concerned about ignoring the timing belt!



Rich
 
Rich

thank you for your feedback and posting your experience.

I am a good driver (i feel) having had tuition, raced formula ford, jpa1 etc and done reasonably well, also do drag, trackdays and hill climbs for run, with different vehicles.

The nsx is an indulgence. I am happy to accept compromise and drive with great mechanical sympathy. I also would endeavor to do whatever job with quality in mind, ie no corner cutting as you said.

As an na owner for 6 years, how do you find your turbo nsx in terms of not driving 'like' an nsx?

Is it vtec madness still, to redline with boost? or do you end up short shifting once your boost has peaked.....

There is a turbo car built by HKS in Scotland but it was done so long ago i don't think it would be representative of the technology abound in the turbo kits today.

Thanks again

Jamie
 
Jamie

I max out HP at 7800 rpm and my torque is pretty flat from 5500 rpm up

It is screaming VTEC madness to redline

Its the same old NSX just turned up to volume level 12

Rich
 

Similar threads

Ron1999
From E39M5 to an NSX in 4 months :)
Replies
8
Views
521
Nukem
Nukem
N
New Owner - 1999 NSX-T turbo
Replies
7
Views
617
vh_supra26
V
gears&tears
Proud New Owner-1992 NSX
Replies
10
Views
615
Honcho
Honcho
icetoev
Joined the Club!
Replies
20
Views
1K
icetoev
icetoev
Gansan
2nd gen NSX development story by Takuma Sato
Replies
2
Views
361
The Kid
The Kid
Back
Top