NSX Slow?

[Honcho]

If you are talking about drag racing "fast", then the NSX is not really the car for you, as others here have pointed out. It is geared long for a drag car and even the best cars with bolt-ons only manage to get into the low 13's...maybe high 12's if there is extreme weight reduction. If this is what you're into I suggest you move along and look at Evo's, STI's, Cobra Mustangs and C5/C6 Vettes. The imports do it with boost and the Detroit cars do it with beastly V8's, but both will give you that instant sensation of speed/pull that you're after.

However, the NSX is by no means slow. In fact, it is faster than you or I could probably ever drive it. It is just that the NSX was designed to be a race car on a road course, which is a different world than drag racing. To understand the performance level of the NSX, you need to be over 6000 rpm, which is where race cars spend most of their time. Next, you need to be on a road course, where you can dive bomb into a corner, hit the apex and rocket out at WOT. This is where the NSX shines and why so many people love it. There are owners out there like Billy Johnson (Stuntman here on Prime) who are professional race drivers that can take you around a course in a bone stock NSX and open your eyes to the true capabilities of the car. Believe me- after that you will think it's a fast car.

So, it all depends on your definition of fast. No, the NSX is not fast for a drag racer. Yes, the NSX is fast for a road race car. And ultimately, as RSO 34 pointed out, the true determining factor of speed is you.

HTH

Hi,

I'm looking into buying an NSX. So far I drove two of them. Is it me or is the car kinda slow? I didn't take it on the freeway, just drove around the streets locally. Only hitting 3rd gear. Are the fast gears 3rd and 4th? or the cars I'm driving jacked up? Do I have to take it up to like 4k RPM and up?

 

[condumbwerkz]

Like many of NSX owners say, it's all about the experience. Do you want to really go fast, and miss all those girls staring at you? Not me... I welcome it

 

[Hapa88]

Well, here's the dyno plots of the 3.0L ('96) and the 3.2L ('97) motor.

If you kept it under 4000rpm, looks like you had about 150-160HP to move a 3000 to 3200lb car. At those low RPMs it should drive like a Toyota Camary. :smile:

Bring the RPMs up next time because VTEC kicks in at ~5800 RPM. This should be your reaction afterwards:

 

[WillErickson]

As has already been pointed out, I think NSX's feel slower than they actually are, but I think it owes a lot of that feel to its very linear powerband. My car (CTSC 3.0, 375rwhp) doesn't feel really fast until you watch the speedo needle from 100-150. That's when it really feels impressive. at lower speeds it just doesn't feel that fast. It is, just doesn't feel so. I also have an older Miata with an FM turbo, 230 rwhp but 261 rwtq, it feels faster below 100, but I know its not. The Miata just has this surge of torque that gives such a great feel when the boost comes on that the nsx lacks.

Maybe you should just buy a turbo miata

 

[Honcho]

My dad put a Ford 302 V8 in his Miata. Fast is an understatement.

As has already been pointed out, I think NSX's feel slower than they actually are, but I think it owes a lot of that feel to its very linear powerband. My car (CTSC 3.0, 375rwhp) doesn't feel really fast until you watch the speedo needle from 100-150. That's when it really feels impressive. at lower speeds it just doesn't feel that fast. It is, just doesn't feel so. I also have an older Miata with an FM turbo, 230 rwhp but 261 rwtq, it feels faster below 100, but I know its not. The Miata just has this surge of torque that gives such a great feel when the boost comes on that the nsx lacks.

Maybe you should just buy a turbo miata

 

[RYU]

I had a supercharged Solara, plus driving my brothers STI. I guess I'm used to waiting for the boost to kick in. Once the boost kicks in, I have to shift pretty fast.(Boost kicks in around 3500) I'll give it one more test drive, push it to 7k rpm.

I don't know you but based on your two post you sound like you're a straight line guy so I'll just say.. if you're looking to buy an NSX (in stock form).. move on. You'll be disappointed and it's not the car for you.

 

[audax]

As has already been pointed out, I think NSX's feel slower than they actually are, but I think it owes a lot of that feel to its very linear powerband. My car (CTSC 3.0, 375rwhp) doesn't feel really fast until you watch the speedo needle from 100-150.

Agreed. I remember riding in your car and it not "feeling" fast, but regardless, I knew we were going fast.

Of course the Miata feels faster below 100, but after that it couldn't even hang with Boyd and I in the stock S2k's.

 

[nsxtasy]

If you kept it under 4000rpm, looks like you had about 150-160HP to move a 3000 to 3200lb car. At those low RPMs it should drive like a Toyota Camary. :smile:

Bring the RPMs up next time because VTEC kicks in at ~5800 RPM.

This post contains about 50 percent of the reason for the OP thinking that the car might be slow, but it then goes in the wrong direction (because, among other things, VTEC doesn't increase acceleration as revs rise; instead, it prevents it from dropping off, which is equally important).

You need to understand what creates acceleration. The acceleration of a car is a function of torque at the wheels. Torque at the wheels is torque at the engine, times gearing, minus drivetrain losses. Because of the "times gearing" part, acceleration in a higher gear is always less than acceleration in a lower gear. Here's how VTEC helps. VTEC (variable valve timing) kicks in at 5800 RPM and keeps the torque curve flat, instead of dropping off at higher revs like it would in non-VTEC cars. That's important because it lets you stay in each gear longer (i.e. to higher revs). With roughly the same torque as at lower revs, it gives roughly the same acceleration as the revs get higher and higher, instead of losing acceleration the way you would if you had to upshift. However, you can only experience the full extent of the NSX's acceleration capabilities if you rev it up close to redline before shifting.

If you want to understand more about acceleration, gearing, torque, and horsepower, this writeup by Bruce Augenstein is very good.

 

[Pignsteak]

Do what I do. I have a 2008 Honda Fit as my daily driver, all of 109 HP. I take the NSX out on the weekends it is like I am in a rocket ship.
My NSX is bone stock. I love the exhaust note. Barely there at low rpm, but such a nice note when you get above 5k. You can get much, much faster cars for less money than an NSX.

Same here - 2002 4-cylinder Accord as the daily driver. But since it has a whopping 150 hp, I like to weigh it down during the week so the NSX feels even faster on the weekends :biggrin:

 

[ENT]

...you can only experience the full extent of the NSX's acceleration capabilities if you rev it up close to redline before shifting.

If you want to understand more about acceleration, gearing, torque, and horsepower, this writeup by Bruce Augenstein is very good.

Exactly! Gearing is key and a high reving motor that doesn't drop torque as it revs is going to allow you to take advantage of it.

That writeup has been around for more than a decade and it's awesome. It's a really good read if you want to understand the difference between torque and horsepower.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[slightlyevil]

Fig'd I'd throw my 2 cents in, as I used to own a 'fast street car' in the form of a tuned STI. Turbo'd cars like that (and I imagine your F/I solara) will always feel faster. Same with something with a mountain of displacement (Vette, Viper). The 'fast' feeling is the torque obviously, which the NSX does lack. It's still fast, it just doesn't build speed or kick you in the ass the same way other more torquey cars will. That's the end of it, if you want that feeling you got kicked in the backside, get something else or be ready to turbo/SC your NSX. If you want a genuinely fast car with a lot more to offer than red light racing, get the NSX.

As someone above said, nobody on here has an NSX because they couldn't afford an STI/Evo/other torquey street car. They have them because they understand the trade-offs are worth it.

I'm not here trying to find an NSX because I couldn't afford to keep my STI...

 

[Huck]

Lazyboys69---is the NSX Slow? Compared to what??? What have you personally driven on a regular basis that does 0-60 in about 5 seconds???? What do you own that will do 160MPH any time you ask it?????? Do you have something that will do 160+ and still handle like a grand prix racer???? Fast is a relative term----most truly fast cars are either muscle cars that don't handle worth a dam and have looks that can be confused with 95% of the rest of the cars on the road. With some bolt up upgrades to a stock NSX, it will compete with 99% of the current, new high performance cars that are 20 years newer and cost twice as much as a 91-2 NSX---and when you pull into a service station or a car cruse----no one will look twice at that ----corvette, mustang, charger, nissan, porsche---etc. PS---to get the NSX to show it's speed, you need to press down on that pedal that is all the way to the right!:tongue:

 

[LJSB]

The NSX is getting older and slower. It is far from cutting edge. In many ways I'd say it's dated.
Fine, unmolested examples and getting more scarce with each passing year.

 

[N Spec]

Drive a shorter geared NSX and you would think it's faster, but in reality it is not that much faster, maybe a few tenths for 1/4 mile. It just feels faster due to torque delivery. The NSX is moderately fast for a sub 300 hp car. The NSX's flat torque delivery is very deceitful especially with tall gears and it will make you think you are not going that fast.

An example: Drive on the street, a stock NSX with its tall gears and then a stock MR2 turbo back to back(I own both) and if you did not know any better you would swear the MR2 feels faster with its shorter gearing and 200 ft-lb of torque (the NSX makes 210 ft-lb) for a 2800 lb car.

In reality the MR2 is vastly slower. Everyone that I had ride in my MR2 says it feels faster than my NSX, but truth is its about a second slower on the 1/4 mile.

 

[Caustic]

The NSX is getting older and slower. It is far from cutting edge. In many ways I'd say it's dated.
Fine, unmolested examples and getting more scarce with each passing year.

Truth. The NSX is not necessarily "slow". On the track and in the hands of someone who knows what to do with it, the car can compete. But this does not describe the majority of us.

For the most part, 400hp has become baseline, ponycar V8s start at that number. Many sportscars start at 450hp as base engine options and 500+ with variants. 270 NA1 -290 NA2 horse was for a new NSX. Over the years and as miles pile on, a horse or two escapes the stable. The reality is these numbers just don't compete with new hardware.

But there still is nothing like it.

 

[nsxtasy]

Drive a shorter geared NSX and you would think it's faster, but in reality it is not that much faster, maybe a few tenths for 1/4 mile. It just feels faster due to torque delivery.
.
.
.
In reality the MR2 is vastly slower. Everyone that I had ride in my MR2 says it feels faster than my NSX, but truth is its about a second slower on the 1/4 mile.

Actually, the most important reason why a shorter geared NSX and some other cars FEEL faster is that the speeds at which they reach redline are slower, so it takes you less time to reach redline and you're shifting sooner. However, when you look at the actual rate of acceleration - how long it takes you to get from one speed to a higher SPEED (NOT to redline) - they may be close to equal or the NSX may be faster. For actual rates of acceleration, look at "apples to apples" like 0-60 or 1/4 mile times, not the speed to the shift points.

 

[Tony Montoya]

My automatic NSX is slower than my DD.

 

[LJSB]

Truth. The NSX is not necessarily "slow". On the track and in the hands of someone who knows what to do with it, the car can compete. But this does not describe the majority of us.

For the most part, 400hp has become baseline, ponycar V8s start at that number. Many sportscars start at 450hp as base engine options and 500+ with variants. 270 NA1 -290 NA2 horse was for a new NSX. Over the years and as miles pile on, a horse or two escapes the stable. The reality is these numbers just don't compete with new hardware.

But there still is nothing like it.

Nice post.

 

[junior40er]

Lets be honest, yes they are slow. Compared to similarly priced sports cars, they are. But people don't but these cars to be fast. If you want a nsx to kill your speed craves then you're doing it wrong.

 

[s14_tat]

Lets be honest, yes they are slow. Compared to similarly priced sports cars, they are. But people don't but these cars to be fast. If you want a nsx to kill your speed craves then you're doing it wrong.

haha that is a very interesting way to look at things.

 

[mlambert890]

The posts about CTSC are dead on as well. My current NSX is a CTSC (with all of the matching bolt ons) and while I *know* it is quick, and have timed myself at around 4.54 0-60 (and not beating it up either - which matches the power to weight expectation), it never "feels" very quick

It is all about power:weight if you want to measure pure performance capability in a straight line.

That said, I've long since left that behind as my measure for the "toy" car I'm pouring money into.

Also, I think each person needs to figure out for themselves if there is a performance plateau that is "enough" for them. For me, a 400HP, 3000lb car (what my current NSX is set up at), is more than enough to provide the "thrills" I need. So at that point, the intangibles rise to the top.

Anyone that can buy an NSX can also buy a used Viper or possibly TWO used Z06's (if you go back to the early ones... LOL), so this is really about personal preference and what your priorities are and really no one can tell you that, it is something you need to figure out on your own before dropping tens of thousands of dollars.

Personally, the only thing I'd trade my NSX for would be an 8 cyl Ferrari.

 

[tbromley]

Nice post.

Like your new avatar Joe....:wink:

 

[SFNSXguy]

Saying an NSX is "slow" is like saying a 1956 Ferrari Testa Rosa or 1956 300SL gullwing is slow. It's all relative. In today's world of speed cameras, radar and laser speed guns, who can see their car's potential (except on a track).
I've driven lots of (and owned) cars faster than my NSX... but even on a track the NSX is still more than fast enough for me.

 

[junior40er]

there is no relative here. It either is or it isn't. It's fast in 1991 standards but it's slow in comparison to whats out there for the same money. I was debating between a Z06 and a NSX but decided the NSX is what I'm shopping for now. I based my decision on wanting something rare and somewhat of a collectable. If I wanted fast then I would of got the Z06 for the same money. I love NSX but not because of power. I love my MR2 but when it was stock I considered slow, but im sure it was fast in 1991.

 

[Sumeronthechain]

there is no relative here.

Yes. There is.