Is the engine in the NA2 NSX-R different from the "base" 3.2L V6

[ScienceofSpeed]

Yeah, but can you prove it??? Have you actually picked apart an NSX engine or are you just speculating? Amateurs.... :biggrin:

j/k

The NSX-R parts list uses the same part numbers as your standard 3.2L.

Keep in mind that the NSX-R clutch is the same as the 5-spd clutch which is significantly lighter than the standard 3.2L clutch. This results in lower rotational loss from the lighter assembly.

cheers,
-- Chris

 

[WingZ]

The NSX-R parts list uses the same part numbers as your standard 3.2L.

Keep in mind that the NSX-R clutch is the same as the 5-spd clutch which is significantly lighter than the standard 3.2L clutch. This results in lower rotational loss from the lighter assembly.

cheers,
-- Chris

That's good to know when it's time to replace the clutch ,but bad for Vancehu as now I'm sure he'll have to have this part as well:biggrin:

This thread is great! Hopefully now we'll find out what is worth getting from the NSX-R and what's not really necessary.

 

[ak]

NSX-R has different throttle and ABS computer programming.

 

[Frank Oles]

So were the NSX-R 3.2 heads (or 3.0 heads for that matter) ported from the factory or not? I find it hard to believe Honda would port the heads from the Integra Type R and not the NSX-R.

If the heads were ported, was the operation performed by hand or CNC machined?

A quality port job not only eliminates casting irregularities, but also has favorable benefits for turbulence/flow patterns.

Besides ECU programming, this must be where all the extra HP is coming from.

Chris - so are you saying the NA2 NSX-R went back to using the dual disc clutch from the early 5 speed cars because it was lighter?

 

[ScienceofSpeed]

Chris - so are you saying the NA2 NSX-R went back to using the dual disc clutch from the early 5 speed cars because it was lighter?

Yes, it uses the same clutch found on the 5-spd cars. I'm sure it's lower MOI was a significant reason why it was used.

Any 97+ M/T car can use this clutch, however, they would need to install the NSX-R 6-spd input shaft:
http://www.scienceofspeed.com/produ...ance_products/NSX/Honda/6spd_twinplateclutch/

cheers,
-- Chris

 

[AutoVation]

From here: http://world.honda.com/NSX/technology/index.html

 

[NSXGMS]

the way to find out is for those members with 03+ NA2s to post thier dyno sheets. Dyno results of over 260 rwhp stock or 280 rwhp with bolt ons will suggest something is up. Lets see them!

Yes, this is the bottom line. This thread is 100% speculation. The dyno is the only way we're going find out the answer.

I think it's very possible Honda B & B the 03+ motors and said nothing about it. So far I've seen more dyno evidence to support a B & B 03+ motor than not and I think it would be a very worthwhile and informative study if we could post 10-15 different 03+ stock dyno charts and find out once and for all.

 

[ozone]

Yes, this is the bottom line. This thread is 100% speculation. The dyno is the only way we're going find out the answer.

I think it's very possible Honda B & B the 03+ motors and said nothing about it. So far I've seen more dyno evidence to support a B & B 03+ motor than not and I think it would be a very worthwhile and informative study if we could post 10-15 different 03+ stock dyno charts and find out once and for all.

+1, I'm sure alot of ppl would be interested in this data/study

 

[markc]

If nothing else the lower final drive fitted to the NSX-R (gearbox ratios are the same) would make it "feel" faster as the car would go through the rev range more quickly in each gear whether the engine made more power or not!

That would explain the comments from the BMI, EVO, Car testers.

The standard 3.2 6spd car had, according to Honda, a new DBW set-up for MY'99. Did the +02 cars have another improvement in DBW program that might explain the perceived added "friskiness"? Is it possible apply these later settings to '97-'98 cars?

Mark

 

[silverNEEK]

From here: http://world.honda.com/NSX/technology/index.html

Great link AutoVation. I too was searching the site. It has some great information worth reading on this topic. Heck, it's from Honda. Here are some more quotes CLICK HERE:

"Rotating weight tolerance is reduced to below 1/10 that of the base NSX, to correspond to the same exacting standards used in racing"

"The adoption of these and other time-consuming methods normally unheard of in mass-production imbue the New NSX-R's engine with breathtaking response and feel."

Nik

 

[WingZ]

Great link AutoVation. I too was searching the site. It has some great information worth reading on this topic. Heck, it's from Honda. Here are some more quotes CLICK HERE:

"Rotating weight tolerance is reduced to below 1/10 that of the base NSX, to correspond to the same exacting standards used in racing"

"The adoption of these and other time-consuming methods normally unheard of in mass-production imbue the New NSX-R's engine with breathtaking response and feel."

Nik

This was the first NSX-R info there's no mention on the Honda site that NSX-R engine was still made in seperate building once they moved to the new plant. If we could find that out then we would get somewhere. Other than just doing dyno's.

 

[NSXGMS]

If nothing else the lower final drive fitted to the NSX-R (gearbox ratios are the same) would make it "feel" faster as the car would go through the rev range more quickly in each gear whether the engine made more power or not!

Now we're talking different parts and part numbers and I highly doubt Honda would substitute a Type-R final drive and not say anything.

B & B a motor is something that Honda certainly could get away with and not say anything as the parts are still 100% identical.

 

[JohnJW]

B&B does not equal more power.

B&B equals more reliability @ higher rpm

Higher rpm might equal HP(depending of tune)

Higher HP is from flow from porting or lift, duration. And from cylinder pressure.

This thread is usless w/o dyno results. What is it gonna prove anyhow? Is everyone w/ a dime gonna go by a NA2 R motor? Or are we just going to feel inferior?

 

[BD]

Wow, taking a weekend off from Prime and see this thread back from the dead. Well, there were couple of threads with Dyno charts shown the late 02 NSX and up had more Dyno'd hp. Usually by about 10 to 15. Than again, some people questioned the legality because most of the high HP cars were dyno'd at S. Cal.

Oh well, once I figure out my new NA2 NSX-R ECU, I'll do another dyno to see if the power is the same, or more.

 

[ericwgnsx]

B&B does not equal more power.

B&B equals more reliability @ higher rpm

Higher rpm might equal HP(depending of tune)

Higher HP is from flow from porting or lift, duration. And from cylinder pressure.

Are you saying that if an unbalanced engine with out-of-spec parts has its reciprocating assemblies balanced, and all other parts brought into spec, and subsequently has less vibration across the RPM range it won't be producing more horsepower?

Doesn't sound right to me.

 

[KSXNSX]

Id be happy to volunteer my car for a back-to-back dyno with a pre 02 NA2.

 

[Synthesis]

i know what the difference is.....
insignificant

so who cares?

 

[NSXGMS]

i know what the difference is.....
insignificant

so who cares?

A possible 10% power swing is far from insignificant. I think it's absolutely worth investigating.

 

[Synthesis]

yeah, but if you ever have to replace your flywheel (or even wear it unevenly - ie, drive your car), you better bust out the dynamic balancer and super-experienced technician.

i say buy some headers and call it a day.

they should've paid more attention to stuff to make it really fast, not insane tolerances on wear parts and lightweight shift boots.

i gotta admit, though, it is kinda cool they looked into it that far..... honda IS a motor company

either way, interesting topic

 

[Paul Days]

i say buy some headers and call it a day.

:biggrin:

 

[Gansan]

i know what the difference is.....
insignificant

so who cares?

It depends. It's not insignificant if you compare it to a horribly balanced engine, but if you happened to have a well-balanced engine by chance, then it could end up being insignificant. B&B means you aren't depending on chance and you optimize that thing as far as you can.

My race car's engine was balanced and blueprinted by a super-obsessive-anal guy and that thing revs butter smooth. I was amazed. Less vibration means less friction and energy loss, and that means a little more power. But maybe just as important, it FEELS awesome (I guess Honda cites this reason themselves).

The other thing that people should consider is that production techniques are optimized and refined over time, especially if you have 16 years to do it. So it's not that surprising that the newest engines are overall better than the older ones.

 

[greenberet]

Since this issue keeps popping up in threads, some dyno pulls performed in England this spring indicate that the 2002+ NSX engines don't produce more horsepower than the 1997-2001 engines. NSXPrime member Markc attended an NSX dyno day at TDI, which was discussed at length on the NSX Club of Britain web site (http://nsxcb.co.uk/testvb/showthread.php?t=4636). To summarize:

Cars without modifications
1997 NSX: 259 rwhp (SimonPrelude's)
2003 NSX: 257 rwhp (NoelWatson's)

Cars with modifications
1997 NSX: 274 rwhp (Markc's - Dali Rice Rocket muffler)
1998 NSX: 274 rwhp (Senninha's - H&S muffler, Procar airbox)
2005 NSX: 267 rwhp (NSX 2000's - Taitec muffler, Procar airbox)

The 2002+ NSXs didn't produce more horsepower on the same dyno, on the same day, than the 1997-2001 NSXs. Maybe the European 2002+ NSXs got regular NA2 engines while the US NSXs got balanced and blueprinted Type-R engines, but it doesn't seem likely.

 

[David]

reality check

1) Is there any real evidence (beyond the pure speculation of people who want to believe the motors are different) that the R heads are ported?

2) The Integra Type R head porting some of you refer to is kind of a joke. They barely touch the heads and don't do much more than blend the seats. In fact, I have never met a professional porter who wouldn't rather start with a b16 head than an ITR head. The bulk of its power increase is from the change in cam profile.

Lastly, blueprinting an nsx motor will not net you much (if any) power. They are built to pretty close specs to start with.

 

[NSXGMS]

Re: reality check

1) Is there any real evidence (beyond the pure speculation of people who want to believe the motors are different) that the R heads are ported?

2) The Integra Type R head porting some of you refer to is kind of a joke. They barely touch the heads and don't do much more than blend the seats. In fact, I have never met a professional porter who wouldn't rather start with a b16 head than an ITR head. The bulk of its power increase is from the change in cam profile.

Lastly, blueprinting an nsx motor will not net you much (if any) power. They are built to pretty close specs to start with.

There's never been an official statement from Honda and all the evidence is anecdotal. I've seen more dynos to support the engines not being B & B.

Also, your comment regarding the minimal level of improvement due to a B & B motor in the NSX isn't supported by the NSX techs I've spoken with and people's general experience with the Type-R.

A motor is either B & B or it's not. True, some NSX motors end up closer in tolerance than others but unless it's truly B & B it will never have the tolerances that a B & B motor does. According to the NSX techs and engine builders I've dealt with the average NSX engine can be improved up to 10% with a B & B. The engines closer in tolerance will obviously improve less while stock motors that are measurably weaker can improve even more than 10% with a B & B. This is what has been explained to me by countless techs who have rebuilt many, many NSX engines for a long time. Dali's tech corroborates this view as does SOS.

The Type-R is almost universally accepted as having well over the quoted hp and this fact has been tacitly acknowledged by Honda and many within Honda's inner circle. Since the only drivetrain difference is a B & B motor that must necessarily account for the power difference.

 

[David]

Re: reality check

Since the only drivetrain difference is a B & B motor that must necessarily account for the power difference.

You really believe the ECU is exactly the same? Tuning changes could easily account for the bulk of the hp difference people have seen.

I have not built as many nsx motors as you obviously have, but the ones I have seen had very good tolerances for a production motor. If you consider b&b to be getting everything to the best production specification, I have a hard time seeing a 40hp increase. If they go well past spec and lighten parts past the normal range, they might get a bigger chunk of that.

The statement that a motor is either b&b'd or not does not really make sense. When you b&b a motor, you set tighter variances than a production build, but there are still variances and what they are is up to the builder. There is no set standard. What constitutes variance in balanced pistons? A gram? Half a gram? A quarter gram? An eighth? I generally use a quarter gram as the spec, but others choose a different variance and that does not mean their motor is somehow not b&b'd - just that they used a different variance.