Finally! My 1996 NSX-T

[posterchild2]

In her more natural setting!

 

[Hapa88]

Very nice car and welcome to the family!! I have a 1995, so we're bothers!

It really isn't that much faster. The Mustang is a heavy car and takes a bit to get going whereas the NSX leaps off the line.


2014 Roush Mustang (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-roush-stage-3-ford-mustang-test-review)
4.5-second sprint to 60 mph.
12.9 quarter mile

1997 Acura NSX-T 0-60 mph 5.7 Quarter mile 14.1
1997 Acura NSX-T 0-60 mph 4.7 Quarter mile 13.1

source: http://www.zeroto60times.com/Acura-0-60-mph-Times.html


Usually comes down to driver reflexes on the street, especially for just your average driver that you come across.

Note that his is a 1996 model. So the times are slower due to the smaller 3.0L/270HP, 5spd tranmission (still can't tell if his is Manual or Auto) and additional Targa weight.. The Roush Stage 3 Mustang will destroy a 1995-1996 NSX regardless of driver, IMHO Haha.

From the website you quoted:
1995 Acura NSX-T 0-60 mph 5.5 Quarter mile 13.5
1996 Acura NSX-T 0-60 mph 5.7 Quarter mile 14.1

From the NSXWiki on NSXPrime: http://www.nsxprime.com/wiki/Performance
1995 Acura NSX-T 0-60 mph 5.2 Quarter mile 13.8
1996 Acura NSX-T 0-60 mph 5.3 Quarter mile 13.8

At the typical trap speeds these cars run, 0.1 second is about equal to a car length. So, based on the data, at best he'll only lose by 6 car lengths and at worst, 12 car lengths.
Bottom line - Don't race it!! (Unless you have some serious performance mods)

Oh, and if you go past the 1/4 mile it just gets way worse (only about 76 Car lengths)!!
1995 Acura NSX-T 0-130 mph 24.7
2004 Mustang Roush 0-130 mph 17.1

 

[Dynamic-uzed-auto]

Congrats