Crazy question...anyone go back to N/A or think about it?

[funkynsx]

The nsx lacks torque in the low revs.
The only way you can increase that to a satisfying level is to add boost.
Especially for street driving there is nothing more disatisfying than coming out of a corner in second gear and not having enough torque.
Sure you change to first gear, but thats a pain and not always an option.

My ultimate N/A engine for racing would be a 3.5 stroker with ITBs and the works.
It would produce around 450 RWHP and bee alot kinder on tyers than a turbo or SC
But that engine would cost around $15000-$20000

 

[gsrboy]

The nsx lacks torque in the low revs.
The only way you can increase that to a satisfying level is to add boost.
Especially for street driving there is nothing more disatisfying than coming out of a corner in second gear and not having enough torque.
Sure you change to first gear, but thats a pain and not always an option.

My ultimate N/A engine for racing would be a 3.5 stroker with IBTs and the works.
It would produce around 450 RWHP and bee alot kinder on tyers than a turbo or SC
But that engine would cost around $15000-$20000

It would probably cost more than $20000.

 

[funkynsx]

I'm talking Aussie dollars. LOL
Your probably right.
It would be a nice engine tho.

 

[BATMANs]

that's because it is so poorly balanced. ATI harmonic damper sorted that out, its rotary smooth now. the NSX engine sound isn't very nice without some fancy restrictive muffler to make it sound better, though... and you like power so different folks different strokes. many have said mine sounds better than a Ferrari... and i can't say for sure if i agree, but i am not disappointed with the sound at all. i am more into the driving experience, not so much speed... if speed were my main concern, i'd be driving a Mustang or Corvette and leaving you in the dust.

poorly balanced? Then that means that all NSX s must be off balanced. It dun care for the sound of the dohc. Certainly not in a 6 banger.

 

[goldNSX]

I went CTSC last year and won't go back to NA. I hate turbo for their lag and love them for their torque. Turbos are may good for straitline driving but nothing for our mountains tracks where you change the throttle position several times within a fraction of time. The CTSC is very, very close to NA regarding throttle response. The charger itself sounds sweet too, nothing to be missed.

I had a first gen S2000 (not the housewife version they did later because people were not able to drive it ) a few years ago and it simply lacks power and torque. Great suspension, great steering response and great brakes but no power. Now, the NSX is in every aspect better than an S2000 except for the brakes (god safe electronic brake distribution ). Moreoverthis, they had quite a big number of engine failures (for Honda) in the early S2000 engines.

 

[MetalSpikeRacing]

I have always driven turbo cars, when I got the NSX I new right away it need it to be turbocharged, so I did.

Turbo lag is all big myth is this time and day, although youll have to be realistic at the same time.
With turbo technology going on and forward is easy to match a good amount of power for almost seemless spool.
When I say realistic in power I mean just that, many cars out there are running 700 whp and are useless for the track for ovius reasons too. Number one , the car cannot put the power down, number two and the most common ,the driver dont know how to actually drive or use a car with that much power .Driving a 500whp at its limits is not easy at all, just imaging driving a 700+ whp car!!! If you think you can, you are wasting your time at your office when you should be driving GT cars!

A great number for an NSX should be around 450-500RWHP, unless you are someone like Billy or Coz who are actually competting and have the car actually set up to handle this power, if not then big amounts of power are useless at track driving for the avarage joe .

Plus looking for huge amount power will for sure put on the lag buss.

I would go N A if I could buy everything to make 450whp for 10,000, other than that. Turbo makes me happy...very happy.


-MSR

 

[Accel Junky]

After having taken my car to the track this weekend (Atlanta Motorsports Park...70-80% speed during tour) I feel a little more comfortable with the power and reliability though in the back of my mind I have this weird desire to start over with another NSX and go back to my routine of bolt-ons. I think the answer is that I need a second NSX so I can have my NA bolt-on car in addition...maybe daily drive that one.

 

[NSX-Barque]

You loved the sound of my slow n/a following me on the track!!!!:biggrin:

 

[Accel Junky]

You loved the sound of my slow n/a following me on the track!!!!:biggrin:

:biggrin:

 

[fourringpilot]

I had a ctsc on my 1st NSX. My new one is NA and I will keep it that way. I do not like the FI sound. I intend to do ITB's and an engine build.

50% of my driving is on streets where I don't get the benefit of a supercharger. This car also has short gears so 0-60 isn't far behind what the supercharged car would do.

Of course, I miss rolling up Vettes and supercharged Mustangs. :frown:

 

[BATMANs]

U must enjoy wearing out ur clutch and master cylinder by up and down shifting with a torqueless NA setup.

My street benefits of a blown NSX is not having to down shift as often.

 

[GhettoRacer]

U must enjoy wearing out ur clutch and master cylinder by up and down shifting with a torqueless NA setup.

My street benefits of a blown NSX is not having to down shift as often.

for some, it is all about rowing the gears and performing perfect double clutch two (or even three) gear direct down shifts...

 

[tof]

U must enjoy wearing out ur clutch and master cylinder by up and down shifting with a torqueless NA setup.

My street benefits of a blown NSX is not having to down shift as often.

To me, on the street, wanting to shift any honda manual less often is like wanting to have sex less often.

 

[E-Nough Logic]

I went CTSC last year and won't go back to NA. I hate turbo for their lag and love them for their torque. Turbos are may good for straitline driving but nothing for our mountains tracks where you change the throttle position several times within a fraction of time. The CTSC is very, very close to NA regarding throttle response. The charger itself sounds sweet too, nothing to be missed.

I had a first gen S2000 (not the housewife version they did later because people were not able to drive it ) a few years ago and it simply lacks power and torque. Great suspension, great steering response and great brakes but no power. Now, the NSX is in every aspect better than an S2000 except for the brakes (god safe electronic brake distribution ). Moreoverthis, they had quite a big number of engine failures (for Honda) in the early S2000 engines.

Anyone with turbo lag is running a much larger turbo than necessary or making big power that would not be practical to use a s/c or even possible n/a. I see so many people running 67mm turbochargers for under 500whp when quality 67mm turbochargers are capable of making 850+whp. I've made 500+whp on pump gas on sub 2 liter 4 cylinders that had not much lag at all during practical use on the street, no reason to have any lag making 400-500whp on a 3.0+ 6 cylinder. A lot of people like to argue they prefer n/a because of turbo lag, but N/A is turbo lag all the time and never any power.

 

[gsrboy]

Anyone with turbo lag is running a much larger turbo than necessary or making big power that would not be practical to use a s/c or even possible n/a. I see so many people running 67mm turbochargers for under 500whp when quality 67mm turbochargers are capable of making 850+whp. I've made 500+whp on pump gas on sub 2 liter 4 cylinders that had not much lag at all during practical use on the street, no reason to have any lag making 400-500whp on a 3.0+ 6 cylinder. A lot of people like to argue they prefer n/a because of turbo lag, but N/A is turbo lag all the time and never any power.

Exactly! I agree with you 100% On a 3L there should be very minimal lag on a right size turbo. Especially when you only want 400-500whp. People run the wrong size turbo for their set up. A 67mm turbo is good for 1000+ whp on a 4 cylinder. There is no need to run a 67mm for anything under 800whp.

 

[GhettoRacer]

two disco potatos one for each bank should make plenty of power and have great response. i would imagine someone has done such a set up? no?

 

[E-Nough Logic]

two disco potatos one for each bank should make plenty of power and have great response. i would imagine someone has done such a set up? no?

The SOS turbo kit does.