Motortrend - NSX Vs GT-R

The stock Dunlop 600 GT on the GTR are 200AA so they are a step above the standard Continental so it's not a fair comparison either way.

Clearly Honda was very conservative with the ICE motors and emotors. 500 hp from 15 psi in a 3.5 V6 means those turbos are not as large as the GTR. Not sure why Honda didn't go super big since the emotors will mask the lag associated with such larger turbos.
 
Those Continentals are horrendous track tires. To be honest, I think there are far better choices even forms street tire. Pretty sure that was the sentiment from the press at when they drove the car at Infineon Raceway months ago.

And I'm sure Honda is doing what Nissan did with the GT-R. They're leaving some room to grow. I hope. The first year Godzila didn't make nearly the kind of power the 2017 Nismo edition does today.
 
So far, EVERY SINGLE review I have seen of read seems to be done with one of the pre-production models of the NSX.
I am talking about th serial no. 000000 cars.

If so, I'd like to know very much if Honda has made any modifications since then that would make the final production model different/better than those pre-prod cars.
 
$197K NSX less $112K GTR = Loaded $85K Corvette Gran Sport for your Mom
 
Well I'm going to ruin it for you guys since I have Motor Trend On Demand and can see the NSX/GT-R head-to-head and also the M4 GTS Ignition episodes.

The NSX beats the GT-R in the head to head, but admittedly Jonny and Jason were disappointed with both cars, calling the latest GT-R soft and understeer-prone while the NSX is neither as fun nor as fast as it should be. Yes the GT350R is faster, and by all estimates so is the Corvette GS. So Frankly I'm a bit disappointed by the NSX. Over a second slower than the cheaper less powerful AMG GT S. I couldn't see myself getting one over a 570S, AMG GT S, or Turbo S.

Here are the times we know as of Monday:

570S: 1:34:58
AMG GT S: 1:35:30
GT350R: 1:36.11
NSX: 1:36.36
GT-R: 1:37.08
M4 GTS: 1.37.66
SS 1LE: ~1.37.7 (Per M4 GTS Video: "about as fast as M4 GTS")

What surprises me most is that Camaro. Damn that Camaro is fast for $45k. Bet the ZL1 will come under 1:36. GM is really driving that performance bargain nowadays and the Japanese need to seriously catch up in the performance car marketplace.

Edit: And the R8 V10 plus takes the lead with a 1:34.23. Weird how MT got a time 2 seconds faster than the NSX while C&D was 5 seconds slower. They must have had a driver issue for theirs.
 
Last edited:
N Spec said:
Clearly Honda was very conservative with the ICE motors and emotors. 500 hp from 15 psi in a 3.5 V6 means those turbos are not as large as the GTR. Not sure why Honda didn't go super big since the emotors will mask the lag associated with such larger turbos.
Click to expand...

Honda never goes big, you know that...


haveblue said:
Well I'm going to ruin it for you guys since I have Motor Trend On Demand and can see the NSX/GT-R head-to-head and also the M4 GTS Ignition episodes.

The NSX beats the GT-R in the head to head, but admittedly Jonny and Jason were disappointed with both cars, calling the latest GT-R soft and understeer-prone while the NSX is neither as fun nor as fast as it should be. Yes the GT350R is faster, and by all estimates so is the Corvette GS. So Frankly I'm a bit disappointed by the NSX. Over a second slower than the cheaper less powerful AMG GT S. I couldn't see myself getting one over a 570S, AMG GT S, or Turbo S.

Here are the times we know as of Monday:

570S: 1:34:58
AMG GT S: 1:35:30
GT350R: 1:36.11
NSX: 1:36.36
GT-R: 1:37.08
M4 GTS: 1.37.66
SS 1LE: ~1.37.7 (Per M4 GTS Video: "about as fast as M4 GTS")

Edit: And the R8 V10 plus takes the lead with a 1:34.23. Weird how MT got a time 2 seconds faster than the NSX while C&D was 5 seconds slower. They must have had a driver issue for theirs.
Click to expand...

the only comparison i have seen with the R8 slower than the NSX (and not consistently 2 seconds a lap quicker) was the C&D Lightning Lap. so i'd throw that one out.

i spent all day lapping in a production 570S, and i'll say it again, that car is farking unreal fun. it takes some commitment to get the most out of, but nothing is as fulfilling once mastered (almost two spins and epic saves later! :biggrin:).

incredible time for the R8, and surprisingly it looks much more composed going faster than the NSX does going slower.

it should be officially official now, the new NSX is not the world beater everyone thought it was going to be...
 
Would have been fun if the NSX was more of a world beater, but it still delivers a lot of smiles. The Z06 is a world beater (excepting >$1M cars and the ACR with its ginormous wing and aero) and is not as fun on back roads (IMHO). 570S does seem pretty special-- perhaps a better choice for folks primarily looking for a track toy.
 
haveblue said:
Well I'm going to ruin it for you guys since I have Motor Trend On Demand and can see the NSX/GT-R head-to-head and also the M4 GTS Ignition episodes.

The NSX beats the GT-R in the head to head, but admittedly Jonny and Jason were disappointed with both cars, calling the latest GT-R soft and understeer-prone while the NSX is neither as fun nor as fast as it should be. Yes the GT350R is faster, and by all estimates so is the Corvette GS. So Frankly I'm a bit disappointed by the NSX. Over a second slower than the cheaper less powerful AMG GT S. I couldn't see myself getting one over a 570S, AMG GT S, or Turbo S.

Here are the times we know as of Monday:

570S: 1:34:58
AMG GT S: 1:35:30
GT350R: 1:36.11
NSX: 1:36.36
GT-R: 1:37.08
M4 GTS: 1.37.66
SS 1LE: ~1.37.7 (Per M4 GTS Video: "about as fast as M4 GTS")

What surprises me most is that Camaro. Damn that Camaro is fast for $45k. Bet the ZL1 will come under 1:36. GM is really driving that performance bargain nowadays and the Japanese need to seriously catch up in the performance car marketplace.

Edit: And the R8 V10 plus takes the lead with a 1:34.23. Weird how MT got a time 2 seconds faster than the NSX while C&D was 5 seconds slower. They must have had a driver issue for theirs.
Click to expand...

Tires, Tires Tires!!!

I bet MT's R8 had either Trofeo Rs or MPS Cup 2s, whereas C&D tested it with P Zeros.
 
Last edited:
fastaussie said:
the only comparison i have seen with the R8 slower than the NSX (and not consistently 2 seconds a lap quicker) was the C&D Lightning Lap. so i'd throw that one out.

i spent all day lapping in a production 570S, and i'll say it again, that car is farking unreal fun. it takes some commitment to get the most out of, but nothing is as fulfilling once mastered (almost two spins and epic saves later! :biggrin:).

incredible time for the R8, and surprisingly it looks much more composed going faster than the NSX does going slower.

it should be officially official now, the new NSX is not the world beater everyone thought it was going to be...
Click to expand...

Not so fast - FastAussie. Before we reach that verdict, I would like to know the tires MT tested the NSX with. If they were Contis then that may explain quite a bit. Honestly I was surprised that C&D was able to test it with the Trofeo Rs since they are not a factory option. It seems they went above and beyond to give the NSX its best shot. Of course KC would have been the ideal driver - so apart from that.

- - - Updated - - -

Bricks and Bio said:
Playbook 4 specifically lists order info for the at Trofeo R and the Sottozero tires from TireRack
Click to expand...

What does that mean? Like just size specs for when the customer orders them from Tire Rack?
 
Last edited:
It provides full ordering info and points the dealer to either an Acura tire website or to TireRack

i am traveling and was not able to copy the content

this is the first tine I saw a playbook prior to EE4Life posting it on Acurazine

i am sure he will post it in a day
 
Valkyrie Pilot said:
Not so fast - FastAussie. Before we reach that verdict, I would like to know the tires MT tested the NSX with. If they were Contis then that may explain quite a bit. Honestly I was surprised that C&D was able to test it with the Trofeo Rs since they are not a factory option. It seems they went above and beyond to give the NSX its best shot. Of course KC would have been the ideal driver - so apart from that.
Click to expand...

any magazine can test any variety of cars with any tires they want. it's typically done to remove that equation from the end verdict. and, it's not illegal. :wink:

the NSX seems to consistently finish the same amount of time behind the 570S and R8 in several different tests, at different locations and tracks, in different parts of the world. i think it's safe to assume that is its average finishing order now...
 
Valkyrie Pilot said:
Not so fast - FastAussie. Before we reach that verdict, I would like to know the tires MT tested the NSX with. If they were Contis then that may explain quite a bit. Honestly I was surprised that C&D was able to test it with the Trofeo Rs since they are not a factory option. It seems they went above and beyond to give the NSX its best shot. Of course KC would have been the ideal driver - so apart from that.
Click to expand...

Apparently, the R8 was running on PSS and the NSX with Trofeo R .
 
I think the NSX is exhibiting the same qualities/symptoms as the first NSX -
-not as powerful as it's peers but powerful enough to compete confidently
-not as expensive as the Ferrari or Porsche (although the options can make it pricey and many still question for a Honda?)
-not the fastest track car around (It never was)

But yet, when the NSX is driven and owned, something just makes sense about the car. I think it's the anti-lag feeling of the twin turbo V6 this time. At the end of the day, these higher horsepower cars are getting better lap times because of the power to weight ratio ultimately. The 570 is nearly 700 lbs lighter with same hp, so it's expected for that car to be substantially faster around the track. Add to the fact that the NSX is technically only 500 hp at higher track speed, that is also hurting it even when compared to the GTR at similar weight and hp rating. Yet somehow, it's still faster than the GTR, which is no slouch and just as much as a "world-beater" as the Corvette is in it's own right.

Honda upgrading the turbos for higher ICE output and fine-tuning the SH-AWD will yield much greater results in the upcoming years. It's a great start for a company that hasn't produced a true sports cars for decade.
 
N Spec said:
.... It's a great start for a company that hasn't produced a true sports cars for decade.
Click to expand...

I agree. For a new release I think it's doing exceedingly well. I've watched the MT videos with great interest, and almost all the competing cars appear well developed variants of their original releases. Who knows what Honda have in mind to progress the NSX. Tuners Hennessey have already announced their intention to offer kit to improve ICE performance by around 50-100 bhp, and no doubt there will be others.
 
kendallj said:
I agree. For a new release I think it's doing exceedingly well. I've watched the MT videos with great interest, and almost all the competing cars appear well developed variants of their original releases. Who knows what Honda have in mind to progress the NSX. Tuners Hennessey have already announced their intention to offer kit to improve ICE performance by around 50-100 bhp, and no doubt there will be others.
Click to expand...

I can't wait to see the aftermarket development for the ICE output alone. I am curious to see what kind of hp range the internals can handle.

If Honda can manage to shave off some weight for future models, that would be fantastic also.
 
G.Irish said:
Video description says Randy was the one driving on track.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected.

Pretty interesting when you look at performance per dollar, weight vs lap time, weight vs tire size, weight distribution vs tire size, etc...

Viper ACR – Previous years (1:28.65 – 1:30.46) – 1:31.58 didn’t talk
$131,990
645/600
3,379 50/50
98.8”
295/355 Khumho Ecsta V720 ACR

Audi R8 V10 Plus – 1:34.23 didn’t talk
$198,850
602/413
3,642 42/58
104.3”
245/295 P-Zero

McLaren 570S – 1:34.58 didn’t talk
$219,770
562/443
3,188 42/58
105.1”
225/285 P-Zero Corsa

AMG GT S – 1:35.57 (no wing last year) 1:35.30 talked
$169,450
503/479
3,698 48/52
103.5”
265/295 MPSC2

GT350R – 1:36.11 talked
$66,990
526/429
3,711 54/46
107.1”
305/315 MPSC2

NSX – 1:36.36 loose, talked
$197,400
573/476
3,876 42/58
103.5”
245/295 P-Zero Corsa Trofeo

991.2 Carrera S – 1:39.0 (2013) - 1:36.44 Talks the most
$140,465
420/368
3,353 37/63
96.5”
245/305 Pirelli P Zero

Nissan GT-R Premium – Quickest non-Nismo prior: 1:36.35 – 1:37.08 - talked
$112,585
565/467
3,936 55/45
109.4”
255/285 SP Sport MAXX GT 600 DSST CTT RunFlat

M4 GTS – 1:37.66 twitchy, didn’t talk
$135,195
493/443
3,605lb 53/47
110.7”
265/285 MPSC2

Camaro SS 1LE – 1:37.78 talked
$45,700
455/455
3,735 54/46
110.7”
285/305 Eagle F1 Supercar G2
 
Last edited:
stuntman said:
I stand corrected.

Pretty interesting when you look at performance per dollar, weight vs lap time, weight vs tire size, weight distribution vs tire size, etc...

Viper ACR – Previous years (1:28.65 – 1:30.46) – 1:31.58 didn’t talk
$131,990
645/600
3,379 50/50
98.8”
295/355 Khumho Ecsta V720 ACR

Audi R8 V10 Plus – 1:34.23 didn’t talk
$198,850
602/413
3,642 42/58
104.3”
245/295 P-Zero

McLaren 570S – 1:34.58 didn’t talk
$219,770
562/443
3,188 42/58
105.1”
225/285 P-Zero Corsa

AMG GT S – 1:35.57 (no wing last year) 1:35.30 talked
$169,450
503/479
3,698 48/52
103.5”
265/295 MPSC2

GT350R – 1:36.11 talked
$66,990
526/429
3,711 54/46
107.1”
305/315 MPSC2

NSX – 1:36.36 twitchy, didn’t talk
$197,400
573/476
3,876 42/58
103.5”
245/295 P-Zero Corsa Trofeo

991.2 Carrera S – 1:39.0 (2013) - 1:36.44 Talks the most
$140,465
420/368
3,353 37/63
96.5”
245/305 Pirelli P Zero

Nissan GT-R Premium – Quickest non-Nismo prior: 1:36.35 – 1:37.08 - talked
$112,585
565/467
3,936 55/45
109.4”
255/285 SP Sport MAXX GT 600 DSST CTT RunFlat

M4 GTS – 1:37.66 twitchy, didn’t talk
$135,195
493/443
3,605lb 53/47
110.7”
265/285 MPSC2

Camaro SS 1LE – 1:37.78 talked
$45,700
455/455
3,735 54/46
110.7”
245/275 Eagle F1 Supercar G2
991.2 Carrera S – 1:39.0 (2013) 1:36.44 Talks the most
$140,465
420/368
3,353 37/63
96.5”
245/305 Pirelli P Zero
Click to expand...

Not sure why you say he didn't talk in the NSX. It wasn't nonstop but he definitely was not silent.

Also, are you suggesting the NSX is under-tired for the weight?
 
Valkyrie Pilot said:
Tires, Tires Tires!!!

I bet MT's R8 had either Trofeo Rs or MPS Cup 2s, whereas C&D tested it with P Zeros.
Click to expand...

FWIW, anyone who has done any real amount of track driving will tell you that it's not only just tires.

Alignment specs can have a huge influence on how a car handles during cornering, a car with more aggressive alignment with high performance street tires can be as fast a a car with R-comps with less aggressive alignment.

From the various angles shown in the MT video for the R8, that particular R8 seemed to be running with more negative camber on the front wheels than what you would expect from a car with street alignment specs.

Watch the corner entry speed as well as the apex speed at T3, T4, T5, T6, T8, T9, T10 as well as T11 for the various cars to get a real idea regarding handling.

Watch the max velocity prior to the braking point at each turn to get a real idea regarding available traction/acceleration from the previous turn.
 
Last edited:
each manufacturer provides their car to a comparison test (with engineers and mechanics typically present to make adjustments and suggestions) with full prior knowledge of how, where, and in which manner it will be tested. this isn't amateur hour. it is up to Acura, Audi, McLaren, Mercedes, etc. to provide their car with the most competitive performance package available within their test fleet, and with their car set up for the parameters of the test of which they are attending.

in other words, you can absolutely believe they will be putting their best foot forward for not only corporate pride and bragging rights, but also future sales.

there aren't any more excuses, the NSX just isn't a world beater. it has a lot of tech that isn't working as expected...
 

Similar threads

neuronbob
neuronbob's trip to NSX Drive Experience (long)
Replies
6
Views
2K
EuroBoutique
EuroBoutique
EuroBoutique
Thoughts on our new Huracan vs. the NSX 1st gen and 2nd gen
2
Replies
26
Views
12K
EuroBoutique
EuroBoutique
NSX69
Yahoo! 1st Drive
Replies
0
Views
2K
NSX69
NSX69
stuntman
Stock vs. NSX-R wing vs. GT Wing vs. Hybrid? - On track
4 5 6
Replies
148
Views
38K
jwmelvin
jwmelvin
macgruber
1997 NSX-R GT-2 #11 of 11 for sale in Florida?
Replies
1
Views
3K
Teej
Teej
Back
Top