How much do short gears & 4.23 RP affect top end..?

Joined
1 February 2002
Messages
1,106
Location
San Dimas, CA
Hello- had a question, I know the short gears and higher R&P help from 0-60 and so on, but how about from like 90mph and up? Does it hurt acceleration? On my 93 setup my 3rd tops out around 90, so I am in 4th anything after....

I'm asking because the other day, me and a Camaro SS werent racing just testing our vehicles...my car seems it pulls hard in 4th, we went at about 90 and he started pulling away at a steady pace..dont think his was stock either...had to hit my Nitrous to pull back on him... =)

but anyways, it feels like the car is pulling hard, but I guess not that hard...is it the gearing?

My quick setup is 18" rims, Comptech Headers, Rm exhaust, and GruppeM intake, so I thought I would pull on him easy.....was kinda dissapointed though...
 
short gears: no effect
R&P: may drop it by some irrelevant amount (mathematically its about 4% -- changing tire diameters would give you about the same variance)

############

IMO getting there will be much more FUN !!!
biggrin.gif
 
this should answer all your gearing ? and break down for you what speed you can attain in what gear with both us and japanese gears.they are not refered to in this spec sheet as short gears but japanese.it shows top end for each gear broke down buy gear and ring pinion.hope it helps
david http://www.nsxhelp.com/faq/gearratios.htm
ps was the camaro an automatic? was it a friend and if so did you know what he had for gearing and mods.was it from a stand still or rolling,your chances are much better rolling in the nsx if you have a light fly wheel..oem fly is faster off a dead launch.nsx is not by default a drag car.but can be made to push some good runs with the right set up and TIRES.I personally drag mine on occasion but I have no delusions as to what the limits are.I dont think we will ever see a 10 second nsx 1/4 mile that is streetable and still resembles the oem car.the aem nsx drag car is not even considered an nsx any longer to me. just my 2 cents
pay no attention to the its the driver post.well it does make a great differance if you can drive well and you can beat a fast car with skill but the poster does not know yous or the other drivers skill nor how willing either of you were willing to push your car to the point of a mechanical failure just to win,thats the only reason I said to disgard it no disrespect intended.if the the other car was built he may just have been putting more to the wheels.you know how to remedy that one
wink.gif
 
Hey BadKarma- thanks for the link, it does help..dont worry about the driver post...hehe..inside joke..

We went from about 90mph to about 110-120, he wasnt a friend but really didnt line up with me to really try. I wish we could of went from like 60 or 70....I do have a Jun Flywheel and RM clutch...when I was full throttle in 4th I heard him hit it and he started pulling...
 
5inch,

The lower (higher numerically) final drive gears will always improve acceleration.

It may hurt the final top end because you'll hit the redline at a lower speed but that's generally not a problem for the street or most tracks.

It may also cause you to shift at different times and that may affect things, particularly on a timed race like say on the 1/4 mile.

But in general the higher numerical R&P should improve acceleration numbers and at higher speeds (i.e. 90 mph) where wind resistance starts to play a role the extra advantage of such R&P should help even more.

-Jim

------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
http://homepage.mac.com/jimanders/PhotoAlbum1.html
 
Originally posted by cojones:
short gears: no effect
R&P: may drop it by some irrelevant amount (mathematically its about 4% -- changing tire diameters would give you about the same variance)

Uh... no.

First, let's talk about top speed. The chart in the FAQ shows the theoretical speed at redline in each gear, not the top speed that's actually attainable in each gear without exceeding redline. In all gears other than top gear, those two are the same thing. However, the NSX cannot reach redline in the top gear because it is drag-limited. It will top out at 168 mph, short of redline.

Now, let's talk about acceleration at various speeds. Acceleration is indeed affected by the R&P and the short gears. At some speeds, the modded gears will be faster; at other speeds, the stock gears will be faster.

Let's take a stock five-speed NSX and a five-speed NSX with 4.23 and short gears as an example. This gearing is shorter than stock in every gear. Thus, assuming that torque is roughly constant (it's close enough that that's a valid assumption for analytical purposes), acceleration will be faster at any speed where you are in the same gear, either way. For example, at 0-43 mph, the modded car will be quicker due to its shorter gearing (with the R&P). At 43 mph, the modded car will need to upshift; at 43-45 mph, the stock car will still be in first gear and will accelerate more quickly than the modded car. Above 45 mph, both cars are in second gear, and again, the modded car is quicker, until it needs to upshift to third at 70 mph. At 70-81 mph, the stock car accelerates faster because it's still in second while the modded car is in third. The stock car will also accelerate faster at 99-114 mph, and 133-144 mph; the modded car, at other speeds.

Depending on which road speeds you're looking at, the modded car may indeed be slower than the stock car. As you can see, the speed range of 99-114 mph is in the heart of the speed you were traveling, and could have easily affected your acceleration, since you could have stayed in third gear with the stock gears, but were forced to fourth gear with the modded setup.

Per Bob Butler, here are the calculated times in seconds for the individual components of the speeds traveled, first for a stock five-speed '91, then for a similar car with short gears and 4.23 R&P:

0-90 mph: stock 10.16, short 9.68
90-100 mph: stock 2.14, short 2.36
100-110 mph: stock 2.41, short 2.71
110-120 mph: stock 3.45, short 3.08
90-120 mph: stock 8.00, short 8.15

These times include the 0.3 seconds to accomplish each shift.

As you can see, when accelerating from 90 to 120 mph in each case, there is one upshift from third to fourth. The stock gears take 8.00 seconds to accelerate from 90 to 120, and the short gears take 8.15.

The advantage of the stock gears is even more pronounced when accelerating from 90 to 110, because the stock gears don't need to upshift. The stock gears take 4.55 seconds, and the short gears take 5.07.

Each gearset has advantages at different speeds. In general, the short gears have the biggest advantage in the early part of second gear (40-70 mph), whereas the stock gears have the advantage at higher speeds, such as the situation presented here. The R&P may help or hurt, depending on where it requires an additional upshift.
 
Originally posted by Jimbo:
The lower (higher numerically) final drive gears will always improve acceleration.

Jimbo,

The shorter R&P will always improve acceleration within a particular gear. However, at some road speeds (namely, those where the shorter R&P forces you to upshift into a higher gear), it can slow acceleration. At most speeds, it's an advantage, but not always. For example, with the stock five-speed, 0-80 mph is faster with the stock R&P than with the 4.235 R&P (7.98 vs 8.12 seconds), due to the need for the additional upshift.
 
Well....uhhh....yes....I believe that's what I wrote.

"...It may also cause you to shift at different times and that may affect things, particularly on a timed race like say on the 1/4 mile..."

If, because of the ratio, you need to squeeze in another shift, much of the *time* gains due to the increased acceleration will be reduced. Of course, as time goes on the acceleration benefits will continue to accrue. For any given transmission (not comparing short gears vs long gears), the actual acceleration (the force you feel pushing you back into the seat) will always be greater.

For untimed, unmeasured "street" racing and comparing one 5 speed against another 5 speed, it makes sense to go with the higher numerical ratio.

------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
http://homepage.mac.com/jimanders/PhotoAlbum1.html

[This message has been edited by Jimbo (edited 04 September 2002).]
 
Originally posted by cojones:
short gears: no effect
R&P: may drop it by some irrelevant amount (mathematically its about 4% -- changing tire diameters would give you about the same variance)

############

IMO getting there will be much more FUN !!!
biggrin.gif
My comments had to do with TOP END speed (max speed in 5th gear)... in terms of specific in-gear acceleration, they definitely make a difference, as nsxtasy points out.

###########

side question: assuming the "FAQ tables" are a reasonable reference, does the data for a short gear + 4.23 (+ some lightening adjustments) suggest that the 3.0L motor in the NSX-R makes more power/torque than the 3.0L in normal NSXs ??

Recent tests with the new (3.2L) NSX-R suggest this to be the case.
 
NSXTACY- your reply was perfect! THank You and everyone for helping me understand..its ny first car with different gearing, and I always thought it did affect higher MPH due to the fact of upshifting to a higher gear, just had to get it explained...

now where is that SS!!!!
wink.gif
 
Well, damn...NSXtasy, that was awesome. I was looking for that info and you had it all, thanks it was very enlightening. I'm trying to figure out if going to the shorter gears is something I'm interested in doing.
5inch, BadKarma has no idea how crazy you are and that you will blow your car up before losing...besides, 5inch, your car is slow...hehehehe...compared to a dragster. I think we should take your car back to the track and beat your best 1/4. I heard it did that best time smoking both first and second.
 
Originally posted by cojones:
side question: assuming the "FAQ tables" are a reasonable reference, does the data for a short gear + 4.23 (+ some lightening adjustments) suggest that the 3.0L motor in the NSX-R makes more power/torque than the 3.0L in normal NSXs ??

The speeds in the tables in the "Gear Ratios" section are straight multiplications, and horsepower/torque has no impact on those numbers. (Horsepower/torque affects how fast you reach those speeds, but there are no acceleration times in that section.)

There are acceleration numbers in the "Gears" section, but these are based on the assumption that only the indicated variable is changing - the gears, the horsepower, the weight, etc. These are also Bob Butler's calculations (a slightly simpler version than the more elaborate one presented in NSX Driver).

IOW - these are not based on actual tests, and should not be interpreted as any kind of proof that the NSX-R does, or does not, have more horsepower/torque than the standard 3.2-liter NSX/NSX-T.

Finally, just to bring the whole gearing question to a bottom line: In general, the short gears (better) or the six-speed (best) offer slightly better acceleration overall than the stock five-speed, and similarly for the shorter R&P gears. They help - not a lot, but a little (although they SEEM to help a lot, because you reach redline faster). Whether they are worth the money to upgrade is a personal decision that's up to you - although the expense can be mitigated somewhat by waiting until you need to open up the transmission anyway before installing them.
 
If you do the math. Hope i did it right. And my logic is correct (in doubt) their is only a total of 0.18 seconds
Difference with the numbers posted by ken between tall and short.all I did is add tall gear column and short gear column and check the difference.does this have any merit or is it bonehead dumb logic.if not it makes me perhaps want to reconsider the benefits and added cost of shorty's.considering I can purchase a rebuilt tranny tall gears from acr for 1400 and a core fee (refundable I think). I could break two additional trannys for the cost of upgrading to short gears.please correct me if im wrong,.is it really worth the cash in benefits speaking strictly 1/4 mile yes-no and total overall performance to top end. Take into consideration a good 1/4 mile run in the 120 mph range .and please take mercy on my number gimmick..don’t beat me up to bad.
David
0-90 mph: stock 10.16, short 9.68
90-100 mph: stock 2.14, short 2.36
100-110 mph: stock 2.41, short 2.71
110-120 mph: stock 3.45, short 3.08
90-120 mph: stock 8.00, short 8.15
diff- 0.18 seconds
 
5inch, BadKarma has no idea how crazy you are and that you will blow your car up before losing...besides, 5inch, your car is slow...hehehehe...compared to a dragster. I think we should take your car back to the track and beat your best 1/4. I heard it did that best time smoking both first and second.[/B]
Hopeful, he was taking it easy on you cause you drive a domestic
wink.gif
next time I think he will toggle the mercy switch to off position..guess you guys are tight
just joking bout the domestics really.you do have to have a ride you can park at k-mart on occasion bruhaha
 
As a quick observation from my experience of shorties and 4.55 as relates to top speed in 5th,for every 1000rpm its a 20mph jump,ie at 6000rpm=120mph,7000rpm=140 ect.
 
Originally posted by BadCarma:
If you do the math. Hope i did it right. And my logic is correct (in doubt) their is only a total of 0.18 seconds

0-90 mph: stock 10.16, short 9.68
90-100 mph: stock 2.14, short 2.36
100-110 mph: stock 2.41, short 2.71
110-120 mph: stock 3.45, short 3.08
90-120 mph: stock 8.00, short 8.15
diff- 0.18 seconds

No. I think you added all of the above numbers - which means you added the 90-120 portion twice (once as 90-100 plus 100-110 plus 110-120, plus once as 90-120).

The correct 0-120 figures are 18.16 stock, 17.83 with short gears plus 4.23. The difference is 0.33 second - a third of a second.

Is that difference significant? Yes. Is it huge? No. Is it worth paying for? That's up to you. (Keep in mind that, in addition to the actual performance benefit, there is also a "fun factor" in watching the tach spin faster and reach redline sooner, and needing to shift more often.)

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 04 September 2002).]
 
Originally posted by docjohn:
As a quick observation from my experience of shorties and 4.55 as relates to top speed in 5th,for every 1000rpm its a 20mph jump,ie at 6000rpm=120mph,7000rpm=140 ect.

John, you are correct. With the 4.55 R&P, you can indeed redline fifth gear on the five-speed, at 166 mph. (It may show on the speedo as 160 due to rounding or inaccuracy.)

However, the rest of this discussion was talking about the 4.235 R&P, not the 4.55. And you can't get to redline in fifth with the 4.235.
 
Originally posted by nsxtasy:
...you can't get to redline in fifth with the 4.235.

So it follows that with the added torque multiplication of 4.235 gears, top speed should be higher with 4.235 gears than with stock gears.

------------------
Russ
'91 black/black
 
Actualy the original question posed by 5inch,
redface.gif
was not specific to r&p he just asked about a higher r&p.Again from personal experience, not number or graph quoting, the percieved benefit is greater than the actual.In the real world of higway byway city driving were every shift is not to redline 2,3,and 4th gears are used briefly to get to 5th and there you stay.Its like having an auto tranny-I'm in 5th from as low as 45mph!Plus If the 1/4 mile is your bag its not optimal cause you must shift up to 4th which kills it.Its still a fun setup but has very narrow windows of real gain.
 
Doc,

Yes. And that's why so many owners rave about the higher numerical R&Ps and also why we don't hear too many people wanting to go in the other direction (i.e. 2.92 R&P).

The perception and reality is such that for 1/4 mile racing, closed road courses, 0-60 times and similar timed events the differences might indeed be slight. And I'm sure because the car accelerates faster that there's a certain perception of speed that occurs when you need to shift earlier than normal.

However, for seat of the pants, real world acceleration the higher R&Ps provide a proportional increase in actual true acceleration. For street driving, most of us don't use a stop watch. But we do notice how we're pushed back into the seat and how quickly the car accelerates to a certain speed in any given gear.

In some ways, it's like the short gear debate. For those people who track their car, the advantages of switching to the short gearset might be nil or even a disadvantage.

But for those of us who drive mainly on the street and spend a good percentage of our time and shifts making that 1-2 shift - the difference in driveability is real.

-Jim

------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
http://homepage.mac.com/jimanders/PhotoAlbum1.html
 
The Type-R motors do make more power and torque over standard NSX motors, though there has not been an exact number that I've gotten from various sources. The range of responses I have received from reputable people here and in Japan has varied from 10hp-30hp (flywheel) gain in power with the Type-R motors. One thing that lends some credibility to this is that the Type-R NSXs have different ECUs than their standard counterparts.


Originally posted by cojones:
Originally posted by cojones:



side question: assuming the "FAQ tables" are a reasonable reference, does the data for a short gear + 4.23 (+ some lightening adjustments) suggest that the 3.0L motor in the NSX-R makes more power/torque than the 3.0L in normal NSXs ??

Recent tests with the new (3.2L) NSX-R suggest this to be the case.




------------------
www.acrmotorsports.com / 949-929-8973
 
nsxtasy:

I have a european spec 92 NSX. Do these cars have the same short gearing as the JDM cars ??
(I'm pretty sure I read about a guy doing a short-gear/r&p-upgrade on his european CTSC NSX.)

I think I hit redline at around 84 mph in 2. gear...

------------------
92 Honda NSX, Style Auto body kit (fully repainted incl. roof), Bilstein/Comptech suspension, RH AL 8x18/10x19'' rims with 225/40 & 275/30 Yokohama AVS Sport, RM Racing air inlet/exhaust/gearknob, Comptech cat. pipes, Cantrell CF engine cover, Taitec CF mirrors, AP Racing 330mm brake kit (f&r), SoS sway bars, Taitec hub, SoS CF brake air ducts, Momo steering wheel, DC Sports headers.
 
Doesnt sound like it Trond....My 2nd tops out at around 60 or so, and my 3rd tops out around 90mph, so if youre 2nd is topping out at where my 3rd almost tops out, its seems different...
 
Back
Top