Ahem. But *which* PZero's? Tire Rack lists three versions that would fit. Saying "P Zero" is like saying "Pilot Sport"-- the specific variant could mean 2-3 seconds/lap difference, right?
first comparison lap times of the NSX versus its rivals - UK Top Gear
- Thread starter fastaussie
- Start date
The point of argument centers on the brand of tire in question (Michelin or Continental) which, circumstantially (since I wasn't there), points to Pirellis being used. Considering that Pirelli P-Zero Trofeo Rs are an optional tire and that the sidewall as seen in the TGUK Power Lap and the Honda-Alsonso press event show the same design, one can make a reasonable deduction from there.
I'm not sure about the TG car, but this pic looks like it's a Trofeo-R, but that would be very surprising for a manufacturer to offer both the Trofeo-R & MPSC2 on the same car.
fastaussie
Suspended
mate, when a brand new model like this is released, in a performance class of vehicle (and especially a Supercar, sportscar, or Hypercar), every manufacturer including Chevy, Ford, Lamborghini, Audi, Porsche, Mercedes, Jaguar, Lotus, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Pagani, Hyundai, Subaru, etc., etc., etc., and yes, even Ferrari and Honda are going to absolutely put their best foot forward.
i have personally been at these tests before. it is not cheating. you build a performance car, you put on the best performance tires you can to showcase your offering. there's no moral dilemma here as you seem to be insinuating with Ferrari. you're really reaching with this one.
Honda is a multi gazillion dollar company. they want to sell you their cars, nor are they naive enough to sabotage themselves with the thinking of a 3-year old's level of business comprehension. it just doesn't work that way.
i have been behind the scenes, i have worked as a journalist. all the cars are pre-production. they all have a team of engineers with them. they are all babied every step of the way. the pride of Honda's corporate empire isn't gonna be a car from Bob's Honda dealership in Liverpool, this isn't amateur hour...
The accusation, as levied at Ferrari, is that they've gone beyond just slapping a very good street tire on their cars and showing up with the engineering team. The accusations are that they've supplied ringers with modified engines and cut out weight that allows them to put down times no owners were ever able to replicate. I'm a bit skeptical myself but Larry Webster himself has told me that the Italians supply blatant ringers to tests.
I'd agree that putting a set of Michelin Super Sports on and supporting your car at a test is not cheating. Some of the other stuff would be, but I don't put too much stock in the hearsay since no one has actually provided direct evidence, even though multiple journos have thrown that out there.
Last edited:
fastaussie
Suspended
of course, i fully understand what you're saying. putting sticky tires on a Supercar isn't cheating, although i have seen a few people insinuate that it is.
like i said earlier, all media cars are pre-production. they're all hand assembled and the first ones off the production line. engines are carefully broken-in and measured against each other on the dyno, clearances and tolerances checked, etc. no two vehicles are ever identical as you probably know. some will always be better than others without explanation. Honda will size up the first 20 NSX's they have, determine which make the most power, weigh the least, and lap the quickest, and send out those cars. every other manufacturer will do exactly this also. there's corporate pride and billions of dollars at stake. don't kid yourself by thinking any different.
just like the Olympics, every team sends the very best they have.
production cars will never receive that same level of scrutiny as media cars. there's no reason they would, they won't be compared and examined in a contest or comparison with instrumented testing and the like. you have to understand the entirely different purposes of a press car versus a production car...
- - - Updated - - -
i would concur with that concurrence...
Close-ups attached for reference. You can make out the E-R-O followed by an R on the front tire of the TGUK car.
I spent way too much time figuring this out.
i would also agree with this statement. :biggrin:
however, you can clearly see a legible P ZERO written on the side of the sidewall in the picture you provided. so it appears the Top Gear tire debate is settled...
p.s. unless the NSX Prime conspiracy theorists deduce that you've effectively photo shopped that close-up?!
That's a good blow-up. I was sleepy last night when I looked at the picture so I couldn't articulate it well.
Well, it seems Honda had the best tire choice on hand. So the 2 second deficit is a reasonable gap from the Huracan's V10 AWD.
Let's see some other comparisons tho.
Well, it seems Honda had the best tire choice on hand. So the 2 second deficit is a reasonable gap from the Huracan's V10 AWD.
Let's see some other comparisons tho.
I think it's cheating to test cars with tires that are not standard or optional tires installed at the factory. Apparently, only Conti's are shipping with the car. Publications should insist that test cars be delivered with the same equipment sold to end customers. Otherwise, what's the point?
There is talk of optional tires, but neither the configurator nor the dealers can specify them-- at least for the first ~$40M worth of cars they ship. If the performance tires will begin shipping for the 2018 Model Year NSX, then wait to test that configuration until actually available.
It would be like testing a 911 Turbo, but first goosing the tuning to match the future "Turbo S" on the logic that the optional increased performance will be available soon. Except that Cup2 (or the like) tires probably impact lap times more than the Turbo S's modest power boost.....
There is talk of optional tires, but neither the configurator nor the dealers can specify them-- at least for the first ~$40M worth of cars they ship. If the performance tires will begin shipping for the 2018 Model Year NSX, then wait to test that configuration until actually available.
It would be like testing a 911 Turbo, but first goosing the tuning to match the future "Turbo S" on the logic that the optional increased performance will be available soon. Except that Cup2 (or the like) tires probably impact lap times more than the Turbo S's modest power boost.....
Yeah, I like [MENTION=20915]RYU[/MENTION]'s idea of using a polar chart to determine performance differential with the new NSX and it's competitors. However, I can see complaints of validity and reliability (different days, weather conditions, drivers, dirty track, etc.) arising and rightfully so.
Maybe we can develop a polar/radar chart that displays multivariate observations with six or seven important variables (performance metrics) with the best information we have?
- Joined
- 15 May 2004
- Messages
- 6,898
Please remind that these 'tests' have near to none scientific background (missing validity and reliability). Too many variables are not held constant.
People tend to believe in printed numbers but the purpose of the 'test' is mainly for the show only. That's all what Top Gear is about. A lot of bla bla and superlatives.
But it seems as if it's what people like to see.
In the end we should be fine that the NSX is among the fastest cars out there. Who cares if it's +- one second faster or slower than x or y?
People tend to believe in printed numbers but the purpose of the 'test' is mainly for the show only. That's all what Top Gear is about. A lot of bla bla and superlatives.
But it seems as if it's what people like to see. In the end we should be fine that the NSX is among the fastest cars out there. Who cares if it's +- one second faster or slower than x or y?
Can you even imagine what a pian it would be to test the top cars correctly? You would need multiple expert drivers and have each of them test a long list of cars each in a different order and multiple examples of each car would need to be swapped in.
And people would still probably find fault.
And people would still probably find fault.
I think it would be fun to see how the supercars are weighed in geometrically/graphically on this chart.
The Top Gear course seems to have an escalating leap frog effect. Each year cars seem to get faster, and faster simply with newer cars. The NSX is 2 seconds faster than the 997 GT2 and 670 hp Murcielago but the 700 hp Aventador is slower than the Huracan? However the not-so-sporty Veyron is right behind the new Lambos but faster than the 458, Carrerra GT, and Enzo?
The variables are definitely inconsistent but it paints some kind of picture as to where the NSX weighs in - which is pretty damn fast.
All I can say is, the 500 hp from the ICE seems to be very relaxed for an initial release and by the 4th or 5th MY, we could see the peak horsepower being escalated from that soft 15 psi setting...
fastaussie
Suspended
why is that? because it's near impossible or illegal for a customer to fit more performance oriented tires to their car after they buy it? because it is misrepresenting of a Supercar's abilities? because it's unethical and immoral?
Honda (and everyone else) has the option to put any tires they want on their car before they deliver it to a test. it strongly appears that they put on Pirelli P Zero's on the NSX. so the excuse book is now thrown out the window.
that's the first thing they do with motorcycle tests also. they put on stickier tires and thrash the shit out of them. that way you can get the most out of the vehicle, and not have its performance artificially limited by the tires...
every person on this website who said or thought it would smoke X or Y with its alleged superior Hondaness...
probably. but that's how proper comparison tests are done. same drivers, same tires, same track, same day. data loggers/acquisition, and a level playing field. you only need one example of each car, and a comparison of each driver's laps relative to each car he specifically drove. it isn't that hard...
- - - Updated - - -
this is called progression of technology. it's always been this way, the newer model is always better than the outgoing one. and each successive year, somebody builds a faster car...
the Huracan has been faster than the Aventador since its debut. the Aventador is a much more powerful car (up to 750 hp now), but it is also much heavier. and the big V12 Lambos were never really tuned for pure race track blitzing. they've always been more towards a big GT car. the Huracan is a masterpiece of a modern Supercar...
good to see you softening your stance a little.
get a drive in a Huracan, you'll be severely impressed...
Two reasons: (i) it aligns incentives for manufacturers and tire makers to develop performance tires as part of the design process of the car (why bother if the reviewers won't review the stock tires) and (ii) it is the only fair way to test the car 100% as it will be delivered to real customers. Otherwise, why not fit all cars with slicks and/or perform other mods before testing? It's a slippery slope. Why not just say zero tolerance for mods from stock.
Manufacturers want great reviews to sell more cars. Those reviews should be based on the car they are selling. Period.
Here, I will admit to being a bit of a stickler about the Pirelli R tires as is seems that they will, at some point, be offered as an option-- but they plainly aren't offered NOW for the first run of cars.
I think it'd be fun to gather the data and evaluate as well. Using a bounded rationality decision model, one makes due with the best information they have. We just have to determine what variables would be best for the graph; 0-60, 0-100, ¼ mile, 50-70 passing speed, mpg, lap time on TGUK, Nurburgring, cornering G, braking, etc. Peeps just have to know that data is what's available.
IIRC, Honda made a similar polar/radar graph in some of their initial promotional material. I'll have to look to see what variables they used.
The Huracan/R8 V10 and 911 Turbo S are still in the sights as they seem to be the true supercar benchmarks. I hope Honda can offer some more competitiveness on different courses soon.
I would be curious if a reviewer did track times in the Contis and then optional tires to see the difference.
As far as the optional tires being available upon release, I think it's just a matter of patience or just buy your own custom set of performance wheels with desirable tires (I find that aspect fun actually for any car for many different reasons)
I can understand Honda being sore from the class action suit that the first gen suffered from people complaining about fast tread wear from UHP tires instead of the 280AA rating they so safely chose this time around.
I would be curious if a reviewer did track times in the Contis and then optional tires to see the difference.
As far as the optional tires being available upon release, I think it's just a matter of patience or just buy your own custom set of performance wheels with desirable tires (I find that aspect fun actually for any car for many different reasons)
I can understand Honda being sore from the class action suit that the first gen suffered from people complaining about fast tread wear from UHP tires instead of the 280AA rating they so safely chose this time around.
I think P Zeros ARE optional for the NSX (Not sure if its a Trofeo-R or not). If it is, then that should answer the argument for testing cars with what they're sold with.
It still blows my mind that a car would be offered with MPSC2s & Trofeo-Rs. Now i'd like to see that back to back comparison, although I may know the answer
It still blows my mind that a car would be offered with MPSC2s & Trofeo-Rs. Now i'd like to see that back to back comparison, although I may know the answer