first comparison lap times of the NSX versus its rivals - UK Top Gear

fastaussie

fastaussie

Suspended
Joined
27 February 2011
Messages
2,021
Location
Los Angeles, CA
i grabbed (some of) the lap times of the Stig's runs from UK Top Gear by freeze framing the video and making note of the Power Lap Times board:

McLaren 675 LT: 1:13.7
Audi R8 V10 Plus: 1:15.7
Lamborghini Huracan: 1:15.8
McLaren MP4 12C: 1:16.2
Mercedes AMG GTS: 1:17.5

Honda NSX: 1:17.6

Nissan GTR: 1:17.8
Ferrari 458: 1:19.1
Corvette Stingray: 1:19.8

- - - Updated - - -

p.s. unfortunately there wasn't a Ferrari 488 or McLaren 570S time posted on the board...

- - - Updated - - -

p.s.s. nor any 911's...
 
The 458 number does not surprise me as it's not the fastest track car usually. The GTS and R8 edging out the Huracan are surprising... Perhaps just expected/typical deviation as it's so close given the similarities between the two.
 
the 458 is a very fast track car, any mid-engined Ferrari is designed for the track. i imagine that particular run or day was not indicative of the 458's potential. i've driven all the other cars, and there's no way it's that far off of their times, or that the Vette is that close to it. simply no way.

the Huracan and R8 are in a dead heat, so that lends a lot of credibility to their near identical lap times. the AMG GTS is also deceptively fast for it's architecture and 500 horsepower engine, but not the level of the cars in front of it.

not one mention of where the NSX ended up relative to its peers?
 
i've seen this video numerous times, it may be my favourite of all time. watching Jeremy Clarkson giggling like a little child and at a loss for words in bewilderment of how good the 458 is (and it is that good) is the very reason Supercars should exist, and why Ferrari is the master of building them.

in contrast to the NSX's lap, the 458 is much more composed in all areas. that's the difference in the weight between the two.

however that was 6+ years ago, and time and technology march on. tire development alone would drop its time below a 1:19. now to see what the 488 can do...

p.s. i've told you before not to underestimate the AMG GTS. you should listen to me more often. :wink:
 
Cross referencing the Lightning Lap (C&D) results, the NSX should be in/near top 10 (of all time). Also I was reminded of what a monster the Z06 is. Note that the Top Gear lap was in the Stingray, not the Z06.


[TABLE="width: 678"]
<tbody style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]1
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 Porsche 918 Spyder
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:43.1
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]2
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll3-s-photo-642587-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 Chevrolet Corvette Z06
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:44.6
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]3
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 McLaren 650S Spider
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:45.8
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]4
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2009 Mosler MT900S
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:45.9
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]5
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 Lamborghini Huracán LP610-4
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:47.5
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]6
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll3-s-photo-642587-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2008 Dodge Viper SRT10 ACR coupe
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:48.6
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]7
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll4-s-photo-642588-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 Nissan GT-R NISMO
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:49.4
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]8
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2012 Mosler Photon
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:49.8
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]9
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll4-s-photo-642588-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2014 SRT Viper TA
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:49.9
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]10
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll4-s-photo-642588-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2012 Ferrari 458 Italia
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:49.9
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]11
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll4-s-photo-642588-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 Porsche 911 GT3
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:50.4
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]12
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll3-s-photo-642587-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2012 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:50.7
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]13
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2014 Ferrari F12berlinetta
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:50.8
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]14
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll3-s-photo-642587-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2015 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:50.9
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]15
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll4-s-photo-642588-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2016 Mercedes-AMG GT S
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:51.0
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]16
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll4-s-photo-642588-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:51.2
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]17
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll5-s-photo-642589-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2010 Lamborghini Gallardo LP570-4 Superleggera
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:51.8
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]18
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll3-s-photo-642587-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:51.8
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #EAEAEA"]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]19
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
llu-s-photo-662906-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2009 KTM X-Bow
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:52.3
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]20
[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]
ll3-s-photo-642587-s-original.jpg
[/TD]
[TD="width: 409, bgcolor: transparent"]2012 Nissan GT-R
[/TD]
[TD="width: 189, bgcolor: transparent"]2:53.2
[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
 
what gives you that logic?

if it's barely faster than a GTR, and slower than an AMG GTS, then the NSX would be closer to being a top 20 car. especially considering the R8, 675LT and others aren't even on this list. it was also slower up the mountain than a 911 Turbo S.

if you assume it'll finish in front of the 458, then theoretically (for this list) it'd be a top ten car.

but it's really all complete speculation at this time...
 
Ferrari lap times should always be taken with a grain of salt, unlike Porsche or others Ferrari only allow timed laps if they can bring their mechanics to tune the car perfectly for whichever track it's being tested on. Chris Harris had written about this and Ferrari basically blacklisted him for outing them. Not saying their cars are not fast (I've tracked a 458 and it was otherworldly to me), but I wouldn't trust any laptime of their cars unless it was a stock car tested from a owner and not a factory supplied car/crew..
I'm loving the new NSX but that lap time to me is hugely disappointing and sort of feels not right, I mean 4 seconds off an Audi R8 V10 plus which you could argue is more of a direct competitor than the now old gen 458, same price range, similar hp, both AWD... 4 friggin seconds?!?! Would be interesting to see the data, I bet it's higher speed acceleration is where it's loosing time... Nothing extra boost can't fix though..
 
I'm a little confused. On hearsay, the NSX MkII [using Track Tyres] was a wash with the Viper ACR around the Thermal race track earlier this year? So I would have expected that with AWD and Electric Boost it would have been a better fit at the Top Gear track?? So a mid 15 second lap would be more in keeping with the performance at Thermal? {The ACR's time is 15.1 sec.}

Or perhaps the weight penalty is just too much on such a tight track??

We'll just have to be patient and wait for side by side comparisons.

Of course none of this takes away anything from what the NSX is, finally a great achievement by Honda/Acura, and a worthy successor to the MkI.
 
jon69 said:
I mean 4 seconds off an Audi R8 V10 plus which you could argue is more of a direct competitor than the now old gen 458, same price range, similar hp, both AWD... 4 friggin seconds?!?! Would be interesting to see the data, I bet it's higher speed acceleration is where it's loosing time... Nothing extra boost can't fix though..
Click to expand...

2 seconds not 4. The new V10 as I said in the other thread is severely underrated at high as 560 whp on the dyno whereas the new NSX is spotted at slightly over 500 whp. That's the 2 second difference.
 
jon69 said:
Ferrari lap times should always be taken with a grain of salt, unlike Porsche or others Ferrari only allow timed laps if they can bring their mechanics to tune the car perfectly for whichever track it's being tested on. Chris Harris had written about this and Ferrari basically blacklisted him for outing them. Not saying their cars are not fast (I've tracked a 458 and it was otherworldly to me), but I wouldn't trust any laptime of their cars unless it was a stock car tested from a owner and not a factory supplied car/crew..
I'm loving the new NSX but that lap time to me is hugely disappointing and sort of feels not right, I mean 4 seconds off an Audi R8 V10 plus which you could argue is more of a direct competitor than the now old gen 458, same price range, similar hp, both AWD... 4 friggin seconds?!?! Would be interesting to see the data, I bet it's higher speed acceleration is where it's loosing time... Nothing extra boost can't fix though..
Click to expand...

2 seconds a lap behind the R8 or Huracan, which validates the times as both cars are very similar in their running gear and electronics. and 2 seconds a lap is an eternity. 2 laps becomes 4 seconds, and 4 laps becomes 8 seconds. a few more laps and either one of those cars is a full straightaway ahead. it's an insurmountable difference at this time. it was 4 seconds behind the McLaren, but that is another story enitrely.

all new cars at all media tests are ringers. all magazine tests, all television show tests, etc., there are no exceptions. they all come with a bunch of technicians and engineers. all press cars are hand picked from the first batch, hand assembled, with the sharpest chassis, best tires, highest level of spec, lightest components, and the strongest engines.

don't kid yourself, Ferrari, Chevy, Ford, Hyundai, Mazda, Maserati, and yes, even Honda are supplying the very best they have...

sadlerau said:
I'm a little confused. On hearsay, the NSX MkII [using Track Tyres] was a wash with the Viper ACR around the Thermal race track earlier this year? So I would have expected that with AWD and Electric Boost it would have been a better fit at the Top Gear track?? So a mid 15 second lap would be more in keeping with the performance at Thermal? {The ACR's time is 15.1 sec.}

Or perhaps the weight penalty is just too much on such a tight track??

We'll just have to be patient and wait for side by side comparisons.

Of course none of this takes away anything from what the NSX is, finally a great achievement by Honda/Acura, and a worthy successor to the MkI.
Click to expand...

was there an official time from the Thermal track day?

different tracks will suit different cars, different drivers, different styles, etc. the NSX may be better suited for lower speed, stop start tracks with lots of low speed acceleration corners? the Top Gear track has some fairly high speed stuff that may not suit the strengths of the NSX? at certain tracks it may be better or worse than its rivals? so far the Porsche 911 turbo beat it up the mountain in Colorado, and a lot of the others beat it at Top Gear's track. other tracks may tell a different story...

- - - Updated - - -

N Spec said:
The new V10 as I said in the other thread is severely underrated at high as 560 whp on the dyno whereas the new NSX is spotted at slightly over 500 whp. That's the 2 second difference.
Click to expand...

those V10's and AWD systems in the German cars are mind blowing, absolutely incredible. but watching the laps of the R8 and Huracan in comparison to the NSX's lap, the 2 seconds looks to me in the chassis, not the engine...
 
You may be right and handling played largely. The handling was off and even mentioned by the commentary that they've never seen a supercar get like that in the turn.
 
Well, in the launch presentation the NSX team stated more than once that the 458 was their performance benchmark and that they had exceeded it. So chances are it will be around the top 10 in the Lightning Lap, assuming some of the newcomers don't bump it out (570S, GT3RS, R8). Here the NSX is faster than the 458 as they said it would be.

The Top Gear lap time definitely looks slower than it should be, given how much of an advantage the Huracan and R8 have. The R8 in particular is 200 lbs lighter at best, with about 37 more hp but 100 ft-lbs less of peak torque. A 2 second gap on a 1:15 min course is a huge deficit. Has to be some sort of handling issue, whether it's tires, some of the software getting tripped up, or the chassis and suspension not being up to snuff.
 
G.Irish said:
The Top Gear lap time definitely looks slower than it should be, given how much of an advantage the Huracan and R8 have. The R8 in particular is 200 lbs lighter at best, with about 37 more hp but 100 ft-lbs less of peak torque. A 2 second gap on a 1:15 min course is a huge deficit. Has to be some sort of handling issue, whether it's tires, some of the software getting tripped up, or the chassis and suspension not being up to snuff.
Click to expand...

none of us know what the lap time should be? that may very well be the limit of the NSX on that track on that day. it was certainly being pushed hard.

and some times the numbers on paper don't add up in the real world. on paper the Huracan is lighter and more exotic than the R8, and should be tuned more for speed than practicality. but so far i have seen the R8 quicker than the Lamborghini everywhere. maybe the NSX doesn't put its power to the ground as effectively as the old school cars, maybe the electronics aren't as good as the Germans/Italians/English? maybe the NSX just isn't tuned as well for maximum race track speed?

there are a lot of maybe's as to why it isn't as fast as some would like?

i don't know if the 570S would be quicker, as it's tuned for fun not fast. and i can say it's the funnest car i've yet driven. purposely flawed for maximum grin factor. the GT3RS seems like a foregone conclusion, as now does the R8. a few more instrumented tests will give an accurate representation of where the NSX lies in the Supercar pecking order...

p.s. the 458 has been on the road for 7 years now, not the best target for your new release...
 
What we may be seeing is the NSX performing where the design team said it would.
Competitive with the 458 and old R8, which it is.
Since that time the new GT3 is out, the R8 is refreshed, and the 488 is with us so the bar has been raised.

It's not that the NSX is a slow car.
I think the competition has had time to refine their offerings while the NSX team had to lock their parameters down based on what were the leading cars at that time.
 
Last edited:
fastaussie said:
none of us know what the lap time should be? that may very well be the limit of the NSX on that track on that day. it was certainly being pushed hard.

and some times the numbers on paper don't add up in the real world. on paper the Huracan is lighter and more exotic than the R8, and should be tuned more for speed than practicality. but so far i have seen the R8 quicker than the Lamborghini everywhere. maybe the NSX doesn't put its power to the ground as effectively as the old school cars, maybe the electronics aren't as good as the Germans/Italians/English? maybe the NSX just isn't tuned as well for maximum race track speed?
Click to expand...
My point was just that the cars are close enough in weight and power output that those two factors alone don't account for a 2 second gap on a course like the TG test track. Tires would be the first suspect but if the car had the Michelins on, then it's probably falling down on the job in the chassis and/or electronics departments.

i don't know if the 570S would be quicker, as it's tuned for fun not fast. and i can say it's the funnest car i've yet driven. purposely flawed for maximum grin factor. the GT3RS seems like a foregone conclusion, as now does the R8. a few more instrumented tests will give an accurate representation of where the NSX lies in the Supercar pecking order...
Click to expand...
I have to think the 570S is going to be right there in the mix in outright lap times. C&D tested it against the GT3RS and it was only maybe a second slower around the track, while being faster in a straight line.

p.s. the 458 has been on the road for 7 years now, not the best target for your new release...
Click to expand...
In talking to the some of the engineers they did say they tried to skate to where the puck would be performance-wise. So it should be around where the Turbo S and R8 are in lap times. With the engine they've still got some headroom to exploit with a Type-S or Type-R model, but it's hard to say how long it'll take for them to make something like that. I think uprated trims will have to come within 2 or 3 years to maintain interest in this car because there's a lot of stuff in the pipeline from the competition.
 
fastaussie said:
i completely agree with your assessment, but that's not very forward thinking...
Click to expand...

I don't think it's lost on the NSX team.
I'm sure Ted Klaus and Co are aware of where the car stands with today's competition.
The dilemma with a new offering is you have to benchmark your competition, build something to exceed that and hope the competition's ability to develop new models doesn't beat you to your launch.
In Honda's case it appears the delays, for whatever reasons, may have kept the new NSX just shy of leading edge.

However the car has good "bones", the ICE is not overstressed at current output, and maybe it's more a matter of software updates than anything else.
 
Did we confirm which tires were used for the TG test? The other thread seems to point that the Contis were used as the Cup 2s are not available in the UK. This is pretty darn fast for the Conti tire. I'd expect 1-2secs faster on the Cup 2s.
 
RYU said:
Did we confirm which tires were used for the TG test? The other thread seems to point that the Contis were used as the Cup 2s are not available in the UK. This is pretty darn fast for the Conti tire. I'd expect 1-2secs faster on the Cup 2s.
Click to expand...

"Rolled" over at the Temple has confirmed the car was on Contis. Stupid, stupid, stupid! Honda and marketing, oxymoron if ever there was one.
 
If the Top Gear car was on Contis, that give hope that it will do better versus the competition on a same-tire basis. OTOH, it serves Honda right that they are reviewed on the only tire they deliver the car with--- that is only fair. I like the incentives of refusing to test a car with better tires than it ships with-- just disappointed that Acura didn't respond rationally to these incentives.
 
Impressive time actually on the lesser performance oriented tires if this is true. I prefer the understated, honest, and from factory results.
 
I don't know. Blowing up the pic on the TGUK site doesn't show any identifying nomenclature that one can make out. However, the wide shoulder blocks on the tire make it look like the Michelins were used.
 
As others have mentioned before this, I am actually a bit disappointed in the new NSX being slower than either the new R8 and the Huracan.

I know the car is a lot heavier and yes, I know the V6's output is only 500 HP, but the SH-AWD system is supposedly something that would give the NSX an advantage at EVERY corner-exit.
 
Back
Top