Positive NSX-R review in German SportAuto Magazine

[ScienceofSpeed]

During Honda's test and tuning of the new car, the 2002 NSX-R lapped the Nurburgring's Nordschleife at 7:56", significantly faster than the SportAuto review. I believe Motoharu Kurosawa was the driver.

It's possible that the track was open to the public during SportAuto's test lap, which meant they had to dodge traffic. I'm not sure the magazine was able to get exclusive access during their testing which Honda/Best Motoring likely was able to.

Regards,
-- Chris

------------------
Revolutionize your NSX with ScienceofSpeed
www.ScienceofSpeed.com | [email protected] | 877-863-4520

 

[MAKO]

Originally posted by maomaonsx:
The German SportsAuto magazine is pretty famous for giving bias to Porsche. It seems that they always have the best times for Porsche cars. For example, it is them that got a 4.6sec 0-60mph time for the 996 C2 when it was first introduced. That time, has never been duplicated anywhere else. Same thing can be said for just about every car magazine. I would take their tests with a grain of salt and would only read them for entertainment.

Oh really? I call this a cop-out by fanboys. Any time a fanboy sees a time he doesn't approve of in a magazine, he says the magazine is "biased" towards the brand that kicked his favorite car's ass. Was it also similarly "biased" when SportAuto reported that the NSX-R beat the hell out of the 911 C2 at Hockenheim? I guess they were "Honda biased" that particular session....

For reference Steve Millen drove a 2001 3.2L NSX-T around Thunderhill Park for Road and Track with a best lap time of 2:14. He also drove a 360 Modena around the same course on the same day in 2:07, and a ZO6 in 2:08 on the same course/same day. And that's on a track that's just 2.9 miles long, lol.

It's entirely feasible that the SportAuto times are correct, and it's also entirely feasible that Chris Wilson's suggestion of traffic avoidance added to the mag's times across the board. Either way, comparing Nurburgring times is obviusly not a valid way to measure a car's improvement from genenration to genenration.

The bottom line is, are you an unbiased sports car fan that appreciates the NSX for what it is, or are you a fanboy that won't listen to reality and has an excuse for every time your particular car loses a track war?

You'll each have to answer that for yourselves.

PS - We don't need anyone translating to us why the new NSX-R is a solid vehicle from a BestMotoring tape. It's all right here in full english from Honda's engineers themselves with full stat charts etc:
http://world.honda.com/NSX/

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by MAKO:
For reference Steve Millen drove a 2001 3.2L NSX-T around Thunderhill Park for Road and Track with a best lap time of 2:14. He also drove a 360 Modena around the same course on the same day in 2:07, and a ZO6 in 2:08 on the same course/same day. And that's on a track that's just 2.9 miles long, lol.

Thunderhill is 1.9 miles long, not 2.9 miles long. ***ERROR*** - Corrected below.

The results were somewhat different in another test. In the March 2002 issue of Road and Track, in which Steve Millen drove three cars around Laguna Seca, which is 2.2 miles long and was somewhat wet that day, he achieved the following lap times:

Acura NSX: 1:54.74
Porsche 911 Carrera (NA 996): 1:54.22
Corvette Z06: 1:53.73

You can read the complete article on Road and Track's website here.

EDIT - Changed this post to reflect the reference to the above article, as noted in the link below, and to note the error in the Thunderhill length.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 01 August 2002).]

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

Ken,
I did read a magazine (forgot if it is Road and track, or Motor Trend), with some big name like Steve Millen tested the NSX in Thunderhill. Along with NSX, there are also Modena, and 911 turbo.

Mako,
maomaonsx also own a 911 C2. He probably bitter, cause he bought the 911 base on that article, and it doesn't live up to it?

I thought Steve turned in 2:17, not 2:14, can't recall on other cars.

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by Andrie Hartanto:
I did read a magazine (forgot if it is Road and track, or Motor Trend), with some big name like Steve Millen tested the NSX in Thunderhill. Along with NSX, there are also Modena, and 911 turbo.

Hmmm... Can anyone provide the magazine name and date to support this?

 

[Number9]

Probably the "Sibling Rivalry" article from ~Jan/01 R&T.

 

[nsxtasy]

Aha! This one. Thanks.

 

[MAKO]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Aha! This one. Thanks.

The "2.87 miles" quote is from R and T article directly, page 67, not memory. Take it up with them.

 

[MAKO]

Originally posted by Andrie Hartanto:
I thought Steve turned in 2:17, not 2:14, can't recall on other cars.

The 2:17 you mentioned was the S2000's time at the track in that same piece.

Some needless trivia for the group concerning this article:

This was the infamous piece that S2000 fanboys still use to justify their car's power as R & T had an admitted error in the print mag and duplicated the NSX's 0 to 60 time of 4.9 seconds and 134 foot 60 to 0 braking distance in the S2000's chart.

Even after a printed retraction and correction two months later in which R and T mentioned the error specifically, and offered the corrected time of 5.5 seconds for the S2000, there are still diehards on the s2ki message board that refuse to accept it.

Funny but true.

 

[maomaonsx]

Mako, I'm not a fanboy of the NSX or any particular car. I have both a Porsche and a NSX so I not claiming Sportauto is biased to protect or support my NSX. They are well known, even in the Porsche circle to be biased towards Porsche. Perhaps you can sign onto some Porsche forums or lists and ask their opinion(becareful of REAL biased responses there). Like I say I can careless what a magazine says, just pointing out a well know fact.

BTW, I'm bitter about my Porsche, I'm just bitter I don't have enough dough to mod two cars together!

------------------
G Dummy~

if you think I'm selling my go-fast parts to go back to stock, you are way wrong my friend

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by MAKO:
The "2.87 miles" quote is from R and T article directly, page 67, not memory. Take it up with them.

My mistake, sorry; it is indeed 2.9 miles long.

(I'm really striking out here, huh?)

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 01 August 2002).]

 

[Z18]

I'll just throw my two cents into this.

The initial article sited is EXTREMLY suspect to me, making me doubt all the 'statistics' simply because of this part:

Maximum G-force:
NSX-R: 1.2G
P-911: 1.2G

What the hell is this 1.2g? I assume they mean 1.02g? 1.2g is like what a 360 challenge gets in full slicks (1.24 according to one test). NO road car gets 1.2g... I think the F50 holds the record with 1.14 g with street tires, but it's like the only road test I've ever seen on the car measuring road holding, and it would be nice were there other tests out there for comparison.

Now, I will believe the new NSX-R will do 1.02g skidpad. The Zanardi/Type S pulls .99, and with tigher supsension and wider tires (yes, Ken, THIS matters

, I'm willing to believe 1.02g. Does anyone have any valid data on an older S-Zero? It has tighter suspension than a Type S.

I do NOT believe that the Porsche got 1.02g. The only Porsche with a 1.02g is the new 996 GT2. A regular 996 is low-mid .90s at best. The 996tt and the C4S are mid-high .90s.

Anyway, sounds like a very Porsche-biased article, and it sounds like people like Gan-san are getting better Nurburgring lap times.

Btw, driving the Nurburging, if you haven't already, is like the sport's car enthusiast's Mecca. We ALL need to pilgramage there at least once. I went there last September, rented an F40, and drove it on the Nordshliefe.

It is the most incredible track I've ever driven on bar none... I've driven Laguana Seca, Willow Springs, Streets of Willow, Holtville, Pahrump, and Buttonwillow. They don't hold a candle. Picture a 12 mile course with every type of corner, hill, and challenge imaginable, all within a beautiful forest setting, circling the old town of Nurburg such that you can see its ancient castle/tower from several points on the track.

I still have a dream of driving Suzuka one day, but I fear it will be #2 in my list of dream drives

-Z18

 

[Edo]

For reference Steve Millen drove a 2001 3.2L NSX-T around Thunderhill Park for Road and Track with a best lap time of 2:14. He also drove a 360 Modena around the same course on the same day in 2:07, and a ZO6 in 2:08 on the same course/same day. And that's on a track that's just 2.9 miles long, lol.

How on Earth did Someone as fast as Steve Millen run a 2:14 at Thunderhill in an NSX-T. I just watched Telly Chang run a 2:14 in his stock Miata on A032-R's.

No way on EARTH a pro driver in an NSX-T would run a 2:14...
I think Andrie's has a claim to running 2:08 in his NSX, and hell, I ran a 2:17 at T-hill my first time out there..(Not in my NSX, but a Miata turbo)

Something is a bit wrong with someone's info..

 

[Enzo]

FYI, I uploaded the Sportauto test on my website :
http://www.macs.ch/homepages/david/New_Pages/Gallery17.html

Regards,

David

 

[gheba_nsx]

Good job Enzo!

...and welcome back from the holidays!

 

[Zanardi 50]

Originally posted by Edo:

For reference Steve Millen drove a 2001 3.2L NSX-T around Thunderhill Park for Road and Track with a best lap time of 2:14. He also drove a 360 Modena around the same course on the same day in 2:07, and a ZO6 in 2:08 on the same course/same day. And that's on a track that's just 2.9 miles long, lol.

How on Earth did Someone as fast as Steve Millen run a 2:14 at Thunderhill in an NSX-T. I just watched Telly Chang run a 2:14 in his stock Miata on A032-R's.

No way on EARTH a pro driver in an NSX-T would run a 2:14...
I think Andrie's has a claim to running 2:08 in his NSX, and hell, I ran a 2:17 at T-hill my first time out there..(Not in my NSX, but a Miata turbo)

Something is a bit wrong with someone's info..

Hey, maybe Chevy's paying R&T to rig the test. It could be a possibility ya know....

[This message has been edited by Zanardi 50 (edited 12 August 2002).]

 

[MvM]

Enzo,
Thanks for uploading the article.

 

[Z18]

Originally posted by Enzo:
FYI, I uploaded the Sportauto test on my website :
http://www.macs.ch/homepages/david/New_Pages/Gallery17.html

Regards,

David

Yes, thanks much for putting these imaages up.

I'm still VERY skeptical of this review, and wonder if this is a reputable German magazine?

The skidpad numbers are ludicrous, and then asserting that a stock Carrera has the same slalom speed as the new Type R.

I know this doesn't jive with Best Motoring data from Japan... but perhaps someone might argue this is biased as well.

Perhaps some american magazines will get a hold of one and truly test it? Problem is, they rarely do that with cars that won't be exported here.

-Z18 (who knows a stock carrera doesn't compete with his Zanardi, much less the new Type R... who knows you need a 996 C4S/TT/GT2 to beat a Zanardi, which is essentially a Type S, and in terms of performance a Type S < Type R).

 

[Andrie Hartanto]

Originally posted by Edo:

For reference Steve Millen drove a 2001 3.2L NSX-T around Thunderhill Park for Road and Track with a best lap time of 2:14. He also drove a 360 Modena around the same course on the same day in 2:07, and a ZO6 in 2:08 on the same course/same day. And that's on a track that's just 2.9 miles long, lol.

How on Earth did Someone as fast as Steve Millen run a 2:14 at Thunderhill in an NSX-T. I just watched Telly Chang run a 2:14 in his stock Miata on A032-R's.

No way on EARTH a pro driver in an NSX-T would run a 2:14...
I think Andrie's has a claim to running 2:08 in his NSX, and hell, I ran a 2:17 at T-hill my first time out there..(Not in my NSX, but a Miata turbo)

Something is a bit wrong with someone's info..

2:14 is about right with stock NSX, and street tires.

However, if they said their track length is 2.9 miles, that means they uses the bypass, instead of the cyclone, which the stock NSX should be able to turn 2:12.

 

[effer]

Hi everybody!

Very interesting to read this thread, I'm a new member and an NSX owner and I don't want to be a party pooper but I just want to say that Michael Schumacher, just a few weeks ago, did the pole at the new Hockenheim Ring in 1:14,389 s ( if you intend to argue that you were talking about the old Hockenheim I will be LOL a lot!!! )

So something is going wrong in some informations spreaded here!

It is IMPOSSIBLE for a stock Lamborghini or a Pagani or whatsoever exotic to achieve these times ( even a Mc Laren F1 LM!!! ).

It is well known that F1 are the ultimate fastest cars in road circuit conditions
( able to pull more than 3g in curves, etc )

850 bhp, 600kg ( with driver! ), mega sticky 80 km life tires and aerodynamics, I can't be wrong...

About all the debate about Nurburing lap times and biased opinions towards exotic sport cars evaluation,

for sure we must be prudent because reviewing that kind of products is big money, privileges and business politics.

Yes we must take all these numbers with half a grain of salt.

But between all the magazines writings it is possible to infer conclusions that could be near the truth

( alas it is often AFTER the production life of tested cars that we really know the truth about them )

but we should always be able to provide sources and conditions for every results we may present.

I will come back after analysing numbers of this thread and try with you to get things clearer.

Regards every body!!!

 

[Ojas]

Originally posted by Z18:
...The initial article sited is EXTREMLY suspect to me, making me doubt all the 'statistics' simply because of this part:

Maximum G-force:
NSX-R: 1.2G
P-911: 1.2G

What the hell is this 1.2g? I assume they mean 1.02g? 1.2g is like what a 360 challenge gets in full slicks (1.24 according to one test)....

Just because the SportAuto's "maximum G-force" G number does not fall within the range of the lateral acceleration G numbers I see in most auto mags would not make me doubt all the stats.

I doubt "maximum G-force" (defined by SportAuto) even means the same thing as lateral acceleration figure we see in most auto tests.

It's possible that they are measuring something other than lateral acceleration, probably braking acceleration. Both are expressed in Gs but describe very different things.

I don't have any hard numbers in front of me, but 1.2 seems about right for braking acceleration of modern performance cars.

If SportAuto's Maximum G-force measurement is, in fact, a measure of lateral acceleration, there may be some reasons for the seemingly high figure... I know most magazines calculate lateral acceleration based on the quickest time a vehicle can complete a circular path and express this in Gs. This is more of a steady-state measurement. Maybe they are looking at a peak measurement or have a completely different testing method.

------------------
ojaspatel.com/nsx