I hear Dallas is a huge McLaren volume dealer. Hope you get a smoking deal! Congrats!
NSX vs 570S
- Thread starter SUNLINE
- Start date
- Joined
- 19 March 2003
- Messages
- 3,442
I'm part of a local Silicon Valley/SF Bay Area exotic car club and the general consensus from McLaren owners - namely the 12C was that the reliability was not impressive.
I reached the same conclusion after reading McLaren message forums. Although it appeared the majority of problems were related to electrical and electronic glitches, not the engine or drive-train components. However even the most simple (nearly meaningless) of computer codes nearly always required the owner to ship the car to the dealer in order to be reset! I was shocked how often some owners had shipped their car back and forth via an expensive McLaren approved transport in order to have computer error codes looked at and reset, only to have a similar problem occur again very shortly thereafter.
Chris Harris' review. He seems to like the 570 quite a bit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyBc1GnJVlM&spfreload=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyBc1GnJVlM&spfreload=1
After sitting in the new Nsx, I have to say the interior was really nice. I liked it more than than 12c and personally I think the 570 looks much worse. Maybe it's better in person.
I'm not a mathematician, but: 500 + 47 +36 + 36 = 619hp, not 573hp.
http://www.carscoops.com/2015/10/its-official-2017-acura-nsx-has-573hp.html
"The NSX has a giant bag of neat tricks, but to understand them takes a lengthy explanation that starts with the Sport Hybrid SH-AWD powertrain. Behind the cockpit is a 75-degree, twin-turbocharged, 3.5-liter V6, made specifically for the NSX. On its own it puts out 500 horsepower and 406 pound-feet of torque. The rest of Honda's lineup uses a 60-degree layout, but the wider angle here lowers the center of gravity. Behind the engine is the rear assist motor, with 47 hp and 100 lb-ft. Hanging off the rear of that is the nine-speed dual-clutch, developed in-house.
In between the front wheels is the Twin Motor Unit (TMU), a pair of 36-hp, 54-lb-ft electric motors that add or subtract forces to their respective sides. The Power Drive unit manages the electronics, and sits in the center spine of the car like a traditional prop shaft. A lithium-ion battery pack is behind the pair of seats, on the cold side of the firewall. Total system output is 573 hp and 476 lb-ft."
Since I doubt Honda is incorrect with their 573hp total output, that would mean the gas motor makes 454hp on its own.
Above 124mph, the front motors are disenganged, so depending on the discrepancy above, the car is essentially a 454hp (or 500hp at most) car at higher speeds. I think this will greatly affect its performance on track since it is only a 573hp car at medium and low speeds. I'm very interested in seeing how it all pans out.
http://www.carscoops.com/2015/10/its-official-2017-acura-nsx-has-573hp.html
"The NSX has a giant bag of neat tricks, but to understand them takes a lengthy explanation that starts with the Sport Hybrid SH-AWD powertrain. Behind the cockpit is a 75-degree, twin-turbocharged, 3.5-liter V6, made specifically for the NSX. On its own it puts out 500 horsepower and 406 pound-feet of torque. The rest of Honda's lineup uses a 60-degree layout, but the wider angle here lowers the center of gravity. Behind the engine is the rear assist motor, with 47 hp and 100 lb-ft. Hanging off the rear of that is the nine-speed dual-clutch, developed in-house.
In between the front wheels is the Twin Motor Unit (TMU), a pair of 36-hp, 54-lb-ft electric motors that add or subtract forces to their respective sides. The Power Drive unit manages the electronics, and sits in the center spine of the car like a traditional prop shaft. A lithium-ion battery pack is behind the pair of seats, on the cold side of the firewall. Total system output is 573 hp and 476 lb-ft."
Since I doubt Honda is incorrect with their 573hp total output, that would mean the gas motor makes 454hp on its own.
Above 124mph, the front motors are disenganged, so depending on the discrepancy above, the car is essentially a 454hp (or 500hp at most) car at higher speeds. I think this will greatly affect its performance on track since it is only a 573hp car at medium and low speeds. I'm very interested in seeing how it all pans out.
From what I read the electric motors primarily serves as a "torque fill". It's also why there's no VTEC on this engine. It's probably running on a VTEC cam profile all the time. Therefore, as Billy said, you can't just add 500 + 47 +36 + 36 = 619. Only a 4 wheel dyno that has connected drums can tell us what the wHP is.
In a track day situation i'd be curious how long the battery stays charged. There's got to be a crossover point where the car is driven so hard it uses up more electric power than the gas motor can generate in a recharging scenario. I'm thinking KERS or ERS. I believe the KERS output is adjusted and optimized depending on track layout. Not sure.. hope someone can shed some light here.
In a track day situation i'd be curious how long the battery stays charged. There's got to be a crossover point where the car is driven so hard it uses up more electric power than the gas motor can generate in a recharging scenario. I'm thinking KERS or ERS. I believe the KERS output is adjusted and optimized depending on track layout. Not sure.. hope someone can shed some light here.
Yes, but no as good as the original. Similar to the 12c though. Still better than most cars I have been in.
- - - Updated - - -
So the lead tech said the car has easily done 40 minute track sessions without depleting the battery. He also said in track mode the batteries don't work as hard to last longer. They still help, but not as much.
He also said he wasn't sure how they came up with the final hp number.
He did say it's faster than a 911 turbo s around a track.
Last edited:
I'm a big fan of Mclaren and I'd buy a MP4-12C any damn day. My only gripe with the 570S in the pictures provided is the rear diffuser. It looks too much like a cheap ass Scion with a TRD body kit and to make it worse, in these pictures they painted it Orange. You can see the scuffs and dirt already on this pumpkin painted diffuser. This is not a good color combination for the body. The interior yes. The body, no way Jose. The air scoops and diffusers need not be accented by bright ass colors. Very unappealing to the eye.
that's great infoSo the lead tech said the car has easily done 40 minute track sessions without depleting the battery. He also said in track mode the batteries don't work as hard to last longer. They still help, but not as much.
He also said he wasn't sure how they came up with the final hp number.
He did say it's faster than a 911 turbo s around a track.
The separate values are peak horsepower and the peaks do not coincide.
A properly equipped 570 including taxes will be over $200k, and I bet a similarly equipped NSX will be about $30k cheaper - although in this price range, this sort of difference means less to the typical buyer. If I lived near a McLaren dealer (for servicing reasons) and was shopping in this price range, I'd probably prefer a 570 over an NSX. No McLaren dealer, than NSX or other under $200k toy!
I think you are incorrect in assuming that all three motors will be asked to output at 100% at the same time the engine is at it's peak output. You won't ever peak at 619...but you'll get a lot of torque all over the place. The motors are doing torque fill, helping reduce torque loss during shifts, yaw control, dragging on the engine to recharge batteries, etc. They key word I've read in several reviews is that the car, despite having turbos and blended regenerative braking, is LINEAR...which sounds really great with this kind of horsepower and the nature of electric-motor torque.
Utilize the electric motors in only the following ways, and I can certainly see how they'll last for a 40+ minute track session, and contribute a lot to lap times.
1) Torque fill while the turbos are not at full boost.
2) Torque fill during the (admittedly small) gap in thrust during shifts.
3) Torque vectoring while accelerating in a corner.
So peak acceleration would be what's expected of a 3800 lbs car with 500 hp... but the NSX would be closer to or at peak acceleration for much longer than we're used to from, say, a RWD, turbo, 6spd manual car.
(And if the computers are smart enough to recognize a lap, they can calculate the difference between charge lost to acceleration and gained through regenerative braking, and use that info to figure out just how much to boost peak acceleration if any.)
1) Torque fill while the turbos are not at full boost.
2) Torque fill during the (admittedly small) gap in thrust during shifts.
3) Torque vectoring while accelerating in a corner.
So peak acceleration would be what's expected of a 3800 lbs car with 500 hp... but the NSX would be closer to or at peak acceleration for much longer than we're used to from, say, a RWD, turbo, 6spd manual car.
(And if the computers are smart enough to recognize a lap, they can calculate the difference between charge lost to acceleration and gained through regenerative braking, and use that info to figure out just how much to boost peak acceleration if any.)
He did say it's faster than a 911 turbo s around a track.
That would give it a Nürburgring time of under 7:30 or so, placing it right next to the 12C lap times. Since the 12C is widely acknowledged to be faster than the 570S, the Honda tech's statement implies that the NSX is likely to be faster than the 570S around a track.
- - - Updated - - -
^^^ This
He said he didn't have lap times from the ring. I wouldn't assume it's faster there. Could be though.
It appears they did lots of testing at the ring, so I'm assuming that was one of their key benchmarks. Plus we've heard Ted Klaus say that the 458 and 12C were benchmarks and he has indicated the NSX would be "faster" than those cars. So I feel its a reasonable guess since all the aforementioned cars mentioned have similar lap times of slightly under 7:30.
My key point is that the new NSX is probably closer to 12C performance than 570S performance.
- - - Updated - - -
Some quotes from http://www.caranddriver.com/mclaren/570s-coupe
Gee, sounds quite similar to the reviewer's comments about the new NSX.
These last two comments are actually worse than any of the substantive negative comments about the NSX. This does not bode well for the 570S track performance.
Last edited:
I think you're missing my point in that at above 124mph, the car is essentially either a 454hp or 500hp car with no assist from the motors.
Where are you getting 454bhp from? I understand the motors are beyond the speed they can assist but how does that cost the engine 56 of its available peak horsepower?
Hence top speed is only 191MPH. I get it, and think probably it is worth the trade off for great performance under 124MPH (and probably still nice between 124 and 191, just not 650hp-nice).
Last edited:
Looks like everyone is trying to play in the $150-225k space.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-shows/los-angeles-auto-show/news/a27368/lamborghini-huracan-lp580-2/
Who knows.. maybe the NSX will be the bargain of the bunch *sarcasm* lol
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-shows/los-angeles-auto-show/news/a27368/lamborghini-huracan-lp580-2/
Who knows.. maybe the NSX will be the bargain of the bunch *sarcasm* lol
