Dealer records show a Snap Ring repair. Is it fixed for good?
- Thread starter jf308
- Start date
- Joined
- 7 February 2010
- Messages
- 618
What are the details for the snap ring repair? Either it was simple and was repaired before anything bad happened OR the snap ring ring failed and then it was repaired....
If you list the parts that were replaced we would be able to tell you. There is also like close to a hundred threads on what the proper repair is which you could refer to.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Troubleshooting/transmission.htm
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83561&highlight=proper+snap+ring+fix
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132406&highlight=snap+ring
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129329&highlight=snap+ring
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Troubleshooting/transmission.htm
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Troubleshooting/transmission.htm
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83561&highlight=proper+snap+ring+fix
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132406&highlight=snap+ring
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129329&highlight=snap+ring
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Troubleshooting/transmission.htm
If they only replaced the snap ring and not the housing then it will likely fail again at some point. Mine was starting to crack at the 125K mile mark so I swapped in a transmission from a 95 when I had my clutch changed.
I was under the impression that just because it was in the range didnt mean it was a definite fail component. My trans has 202K miles on it and feels amazing, most of which I can assure you werent taken easy with. It is within the snap ring range as well, would assume that if it was bad should have failed by now 
It doesn't matter if you can't afford to buy the car. Right?
I was under the impression that just because it was in the range didnt mean it was a definite fail component. My trans has 202K miles on it and feels amazing, most of which I can assure you werent taken easy with. It is within the snap ring range as well, would assume that if it was bad should have failed by now
Not every transmission in the snap ring range is bad. There is the *potential* that the snap ring may fail due to the varying width of the groove where the snap ring is supported. Read this thread and look at the write up Mark Basch (NSX master tech) has written about everything you needed to know about the snap ring and why it may or may not fail for those cars within the snap ring range.
Last edited:
Thats exactly what I had thought, thanks for the clarification.
Doc - you are jumping on Jf308 for no good reason - I've had two emails from him in private and he is seriously looking for an NSX - you have jumped to some erroneous conclusions and you need to rethink this stuff. We all do - He's looking for guidance and general information and has owned some damn serious autos in the past and can afford any car he wants - he's limiting his budget in this case but he's asking questions that anyone might.
I read a bit of this stuff on the other thread and I've written in partial support and now I'm writing in full support of JF308 - give him a break guys. He'll be one of us Primers with a car before long - he's serious - OK. Let's try and be helpful and not run off good folks due to some case of misiterpretation - as in the "tirekicker" comments. We primers are off base on this one. Let's get back to what we do best - helping folks understand the NSX! :wink::smile:
I was under the impression that just because it was in the range didnt mean it was a definite fail component. My trans has 202K miles on it and feels amazing, most of which I can assure you werent taken easy with. It is within the snap ring range as well, would assume that if it was bad should have failed by now
You are correct, just because you are within range does not mean you will fail.
Don't do this. Your words are important for the vitality of the forum.
My car was in the # range and since it was then still under (extended) warranty the dealer ordered a new case.
As long as Honda (Acura) was paying to deal with the warranty issue I bought a Comptech R&P (4.55) and a set of Japanese gears. So when they took it apart to check they could reassemble it with the cool guts -- which they did.
As it turns our my old case did NOT have a badly cut snap ring groove, but I ended up with a new case anyway along with the new gears and R&P.
This all occured 14 or 15 years ago... still running great (including lots of track time). Best damn mod done to the car (among MANY) by the way.
Cheers!
As long as Honda (Acura) was paying to deal with the warranty issue I bought a Comptech R&P (4.55) and a set of Japanese gears. So when they took it apart to check they could reassemble it with the cool guts -- which they did.
As it turns our my old case did NOT have a badly cut snap ring groove, but I ended up with a new case anyway along with the new gears and R&P.
This all occured 14 or 15 years ago... still running great (including lots of track time). Best damn mod done to the car (among MANY) by the way.
Cheers!
Last edited:
I hear this all the time - it must make a huge difference in the speed of the car or owners wouldn't rave so much about it. There are several ways to go - I have a 91 as most know - is this the cheapest way to get speed? How much would this cost if you bought the gears and R&P and paid someone to do it. Anyone know the labor hours involved?
Tim-
Short Gears are about $1000.
4.235 R&P is another $1000.
So you are at $2000 in parts for the upgrade. Now factor in about $500 for misc bits that may need replacing (synchros, bearings, etc.) So $2500 for all your parts. Labor is probably about another $1000 (just guessing). Figure $3500-$4000 all in for a fully-rebuilt NA1 NSX-R spec transmission.
Paul
Short Gears are about $1000.
4.235 R&P is another $1000.
So you are at $2000 in parts for the upgrade. Now factor in about $500 for misc bits that may need replacing (synchros, bearings, etc.) So $2500 for all your parts. Labor is probably about another $1000 (just guessing). Figure $3500-$4000 all in for a fully-rebuilt NA1 NSX-R spec transmission.
Paul
Spot on! (Would also include $ for alignment.) (Add $1,000 for a 4.55 R&P - $1K more than NSX-R)
Not true. Shorter gearing gives a perception of major improvements in acceleration, because you reach redline much more quickly. However, most of that is only that - perception. That's because you reach redline at a lower road speed. Differences in your actual rate of acceleration - IOW how fast you reach a given road speed - are relatively small. Furthermore, with the short gears, the slight improvement in acceleration at speeds below 70 mph is offset by a slight degradation in acceleration at speeds above 70 mph.
Here, look at the numbers (calculated by Bob Butler) for 0-60 and 1/4 mile acceleration in seconds:
stock '91 NSX - 5.31 - 13.67
'91 NSX with short gears - 5.09 - 13.56
'91 NSX with 4.235 R&P - 5.18 - 13.57
'91 NSX with short gears and 4.235 R&P - 4.96 - 13.48
That's not a whole lot of gain for your $4000. By comparison, you can improve acceleration considerably more than that by adding 15 hp (typical gain from minor mods like headers/exhaust) or reducing weight by 100 lbs.
Last edited:
Thanks Paul and Ken for the run down on the gearing and costs. Looks to me like Ken has a darned good point about the returns vs cost on the gears. Many say it makes all the difference in the world and "these are the gears that should have come stock to the US" - things like that; pretty strong language for shorties. When you look at the actual times it makes a lot less sense - but how much is noticed by the "seat of the pants"? Makes me wonder if there are any go fast mods that are justifyable for me. I'm not sure. Thanks again guys - yours truly - the waffle king!
Paul the only thing I'm really convinced of is that Swifts look good and after hearing from Rob about how they ride - sounds like the best bet for me. Did you like the pics he showed of his car with em on - looked nice didn't it?
Paul the only thing I'm really convinced of is that Swifts look good and after hearing from Rob about how they ride - sounds like the best bet for me. Did you like the pics he showed of his car with em on - looked nice didn't it?
i actually have a case against acura complaining about my snap ring. It went on me about 3 weeks ago and having many different records, clean car fax and maintance records, acura said they wanted me to have the car flat bedded up to check it out, and he said it was a great condition car, and they wanted to mess around and break it down and such, basically wanting me to just get suckered into having them make me pay 8900 bucks. I called barney who is a top notch professional, and he helped me along the way and gave me some good options. I am about 4 hours from him which hurts alot, i ended up having the nissan dealership I work for get me a refurbished one with a 1 year unlimited mileage warranty on it.
This has been a crappy experience, and my complaint with acura was the idea that on the service bulletin it was a fix after failure item, and I told them there was no recall because they would have to fix all the transmissions in every late 1991 early 92 model car. I used prime as a major staple for my case, and had proof of people getting the trans goodwilled or partinally goodwilled with more miles than my car has (103k), and it really was a waste of time.
I will let you guys know how it goes. Doesn't really matter, but I was kind of disappointed.
Could anyone get me some extra information about certain dealerships they have dealt with in getting goodwills or partial goodwills I would greatly appreiciate it.
This has been a crappy experience, and my complaint with acura was the idea that on the service bulletin it was a fix after failure item, and I told them there was no recall because they would have to fix all the transmissions in every late 1991 early 92 model car. I used prime as a major staple for my case, and had proof of people getting the trans goodwilled or partinally goodwilled with more miles than my car has (103k), and it really was a waste of time.
I will let you guys know how it goes. Doesn't really matter, but I was kind of disappointed.
Could anyone get me some extra information about certain dealerships they have dealt with in getting goodwills or partial goodwills I would greatly appreiciate it.
Last edited:
Some would argue that .5 sec is a pretty substantial improvement in 0-60 mph.
But, as I previously implied, that improvement is reversed above 60 mph. The times from 0 to 110 mph are almost dead even (14.71 for the stock NSX and 14.75 for the shorties with 4.235), so the half-second advantage works in the opposite direction from 60 to 110. And it gets even worse above 110 mph; the modded car is a full two seconds slower 0-150 than the stock car (37.78 vs 39.82). So the stock car is a lot faster when accelerating above 60 mph.
But those are the numbers, and the costs are the costs. Do whatever you like.
Last edited:
Since I rarely drive above 60 mph the short gears work great for me. :wink:
Do you think a blower will help me on my occasional sprints from 110 to 150?
keN SaX completely misses the point of the short gears and tall (numeric) R&P -- drivability.
The difference is HUGE like nothing else you can do to the car. I live in beautiful Marin County California... driving on our twisty, challenging roads is a pleasure with the modified transmission -- 1st, 2nd, 3rd and even 4th gear are useable. A stock car would do the whole route in 2nd gear (with a little in 3rd).
Around town I can use 3rd gear often (in 45mph zones), a stock gearbox would be in 2nd tops.
More shifting maybe, but more fun absolutely.
AND if you think there is no gain in acceleration (I know, I know, you've got numbers) come let's have a drag race. Those few tenths translate into lots of inches, even feet and yards.
And, last but not least, I use my car on the track a lot... every track I've ever driven can be lapped quicker with the modified gearbox... substantially faster.
keN has driven my car on the track -- can't remember which one(s)... he should recognize the difference.
All things being equal, I would have a 6-speed with the 4.55 R&P -- that would be heaven.
The difference is HUGE like nothing else you can do to the car. I live in beautiful Marin County California... driving on our twisty, challenging roads is a pleasure with the modified transmission -- 1st, 2nd, 3rd and even 4th gear are useable. A stock car would do the whole route in 2nd gear (with a little in 3rd).
Around town I can use 3rd gear often (in 45mph zones), a stock gearbox would be in 2nd tops.
More shifting maybe, but more fun absolutely.
AND if you think there is no gain in acceleration (I know, I know, you've got numbers) come let's have a drag race. Those few tenths translate into lots of inches, even feet and yards.
And, last but not least, I use my car on the track a lot... every track I've ever driven can be lapped quicker with the modified gearbox... substantially faster.
keN has driven my car on the track -- can't remember which one(s)... he should recognize the difference.
All things being equal, I would have a 6-speed with the 4.55 R&P -- that would be heaven.
Last edited:
I did (at Infineon), and I do. On the track, you spend a lot of time in the 70-90 mph range, where the stock gears accelerate better. With the stock gears, you can take advantage of the top of second gear a whole lot, because it goes all the way up to 81 mph; with the short gears, you're stuck at the bottom of third gear where your acceleration just isn't all that great, due to the gearing disadvantage, and you will rarely use second gear (particularly if you put a shorter R&P on as well). I prefer the stock gears for track use - BY FAR.
If you're more concerned about beating out other cars at stoplights rather than on the track, then the short gears are superior. But on the track, there's no question in my mind - leave them stock.
On that, we can agree!
Last edited:
I've ridden in Ken's car. Those short gears, the rear end, and that NSX-R suspension make his car a real hoot!
