From Transversal to Longitudinal layout

V

Venom2049

Experienced Member
Joined
8 July 2009
Messages
631
Location
Rockville, Md
After watching a bunch of videos of the Nsx on the JGTC, I noticed and I'm sure a bunch you guys did as well that our Japanese friends use a different layout of the NSX engine. So I was wondering if any you primers ever consider or crossed your mind at any point of changing the layout of your engine bay?? I mean come on, working on the NSX ain't cheap so how much more expensive would it be to change the layout of the engine bay? How much difference in power could you possibly gain from a longitudinal layout against a transversal one?? What about the transmission?? What about the axles?? What about the trunk :P ?? I'm just curious why it hasn't happened here in the states, or it just not worth it at all unless you are part of the JGTC. You Nsx experts chime in please. :victorious:

toda jgtc.jpg
Don't tell me that doesn't look sexy!! :love_heart:
 
I have looked into that. A few times actually. There are advantages and disadvantages to both set ups.

They use a longitudinal set up for racing for the ease of servicing the gear pack, suspension clearance and centering the weight. Although from an engineering standpoint, having the transverse set up keeps your rotating assemblies in the same direction.

I had a chance to see the car Mugen build a few years back. It almost looked like they were using a Pilot or Porsche trans. Not quite sure. It was cool though. You can fit it under the trunk with a slight "hump" in the trunk floor.

I told myself if I could ever get my hands on an HPD V8, I would build a longitudinal set up.
 
Jeff@Carbon6 said:
It almost looked like they were using a Pilot or Porsche trans. Not quite sure. It was cool though. You can fit it under the trunk with a slight "hump" in the trunk floor.
Click to expand...

Most likely the Porsche G60. The Ultima GTR that I have at my dealership uses this. They use it in a lot of mid mounted cars.
 
Last edited:
525979_439032126149830_500025021_n.jpg


In the process now, but with a 6.0 Liter LS1 engine, and Porsche G5052 Transmission. The NSX engine would fit without firewall clearance issues, and the trunk would need to be "humped" as Jeff put it.

One huge benefit of the LS engines, is that the CG is almost a foot lower than the NSX engine, even in iron block form.
 
I always thought it was a cost, time, and patience issue. There wouldn't be any power gains. The benefits are right and left balance mostly. The cost and time needed to convert would be extreme. Would be a nice project though.
 
Cody@LoveFab said:
One huge benefit of the LS engines, is that the CG is almost a foot lower than the NSX engine, even in iron block form.
Click to expand...

That and the power/torque output and potential for more is nasty and cheep.

Im surprised Chevy hasn't done this already. Even an turbo/SC LS1 mid mounted in a light weight body would compete with the best. If they could keep the American heft off the case.
 
Last edited:
Ponyboy said:
There wouldn't be any power gains. The benefits are right and left balance mostly.
Click to expand...

In a sense. Lowering the center of gravity would be the clearer answer. This affects more than left/right balance alone. Adding dry sump really aids in this.

Unless you can DIY like Cody does, it would be prohibitively expensive and only a value to the most hardened track rats. Easier to just buy a Ferrari.
 
Ponyboy said:
I always thought it was a cost, time, and patience issue. There wouldn't be any power gains. The benefits are right and left balance mostly. The cost and time needed to convert would be extreme. Would be a nice project though.
Click to expand...

If thats the case and there is not actual power gains why people on the JGTC would go for such a hassle? ?
 
Venom2049 said:
If thats the case and there is not actual power gains why people on the JGTC would go for such a hassle? ?
Click to expand...

Much of the performance of a track car is in the "balance" and suspension. HP is also important but if you can increase corner an exit speed, your farther ahead.
 
Juice said:
In a sense. Lowering the center of gravity would be the clearer answer. This affects more than left/right balance alone.
Click to expand...

Correct, but that really depends on the engine and engine mount locations. Where as the left/right balance, all else being equal, isn't a variable as long as it's mounted centerline. If I'm incorrect, let me know.

Venom2049 said:
If thats the case and there is not actual power gains why people on the JGTC would go for such a hassle? ?
Click to expand...

Sure. There's a couple of reasons: Super GT teams have a large budget, don't use "stock" chassis, operate with the goal for maximum handling performance w/i certain regulations, one of which is being limited to 500ps. Simply changing engine layout isn't going to effect hp. If I had a team, got to develop a chassis for race use, and if allowed by regs, I'd make the set up longitudinal. No brainer.
 
Ponyboy said:
Correct, but that really depends on the engine and engine mount locations. Where as the left/right balance, all else being equal, isn't a variable as long as it's mounted centerline. If I'm incorrect, let me know.



Sure. There's a couple of reasons: Super GT teams have a large budget, don't use "stock" chassis, operate with the goal for maximum handling performance w/i certain regulations, one of which is being limited to 500ps. Simply changing engine layout isn't going to effect hp. If I had a team, got to develop a chassis for race use, and if allowed by regs, I'd make the set up longitudinal. No brainer.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by not stock chassis? ? Do they make a special chassis that looks like a Nsx but not really?
 
The Super GT NSXs used a driveshaft which I thought was rather odd.

From WikipediaSuper GT

For use in the Super GT (formerly the JGTC), the NSX has been highly modified (as allowed by series technical regulations) with chassis development by Dome, engine development by Mugen, for Honda.
Externally the NSX shape has developed race by race, season to season to the demands of increasing aerodynamic downforce within the regulations. The most notable change is the position of the V6 engine, which is mounted longitudinally instead of transversely as per the roadcar. Similar to the setup used in modern Lamborghinis, the gearbox is located in the center tunnel under the cockpit and is connected to the rear differential by a driveshaft. Engines can either be turbocharged or naturally aspirated, depending on the class and on the rules.
Prior to rule changes beginning in the 2003 season, the Super GT/GT500 NSX was powered by a specially modified version of the C32B V6 engine. Using a stroker crankshaft from Toda Racing, the naturally aspirated engine displaced 3.5 liters and produced nearly 500 bhp. Beginning in 2003, Honda substituted a highly modified C30A, augmented by a turbocharger, which also produces up to 500 bhp.
The NSX continued to be used as the works Honda car in the GT500 class, even though it is no longer in production, until it was replaced in 2010 with the HSV-010.
Click to expand...

I do like the way the Pantera engine configuration is laid out if somehow I'd be in someone like Cody's shoes and looking to do a project car NSX.
1974_detomaso_pantera_engine.jpg
 
You are forgetting that this configuration also allows them the clearance to use opposable suspension setups. But frankly, the arrangement allows them to get the engine just inches from the ground. I saw a overlay diagram of a GT NSX showing the engine height transition from year to year. They did extensive changes to gain centimeters!
 
In 2007, I had the opportunity of driving the racing NSX belonging to the Honda importer for Switzerland.
The track was Magny-Cours in France where they used to run the Formula 1 GP.
This car had been (re)built to take the NSX V6 longitudinally.
The engine was prepped in the USA but I forgot by whom?
The owner was kind enough to let me drive it but the engine configuration had been returned to normal.
I'm not sure I know all the reasons but I believe there were many reliability issues and mainly with the gearbox?
It was good fun to drive allthough I couldn't exploit the full potential as I couldn't concentrate given the noise level in the cockpit:rolleyes:
Here's a picture
G0616_NSX_0208_zpsd6e2d38f.jpg
 
Sheesh I didn't think the interest would be there!

Ill have subframes built on the Pikes Peak car within the next. Month. I'm basing those purely on a dry sump setup though. I don't see a "kit" happening for any less than $30k all-inclusive, and that's without engine building, or turbocharging.

I would be open to selling subframes, transmission/axle kits though for those who are comfortable with a sawzall to clearance the firewall and trunk. Even then, these Transmissions are north of $15k with clutch and adapters.

Anyone who would be interested in such offerings, including having us build their cars for a turnkey installation at our shop, please send a PM.
 

Similar threads

C
Grinding noise from rear driver's side under load
Replies
6
Views
186
Old Guy
Old Guy
B
HELP: What exhaust is this?
Replies
0
Views
213
Butters
B
Nukem
1991 NSX Clutch Replacement and Other Projects
Replies
5
Views
248
Nukem
Nukem
cdscivic
Higher mileage SOS Engine Rebuild
Replies
10
Views
511
MrPaultugal
MrPaultugal
R
A supercharged NSX.. revert back to stock or keep it?
Replies
10
Views
487
peiserg
peiserg
Back
Top