Possibly 3 Variants of the NSX - Mugen, Type R, and standard NSX

[JD Cross]

Even back in the day when the Integra type R was in production those engines were hitting 25m/s in stock form before hitting rev limiter. People were even raising it up to almost 9k on the stock valvetrain without valve float or rotating assembly issues. That's old tech too! OEM High performance engines today can do much better if they want it to. Hell with with aftermarket components I put the limit to my engine assemblies at no more than 29m/s or roughly 5800 feet/minute. They do just fine so long as the stroke is to my liking. Too much stroke with high rpm is bad juju

29 m/s is very high.
That speed would be reached at 10 k rpm on an 87 mm stroke Type R engine.
Would you be suggesting that your 29 m/s engine would be suitable in an OEM application and as reliable as our short stroke C30/32 engines?
It seems shorter stroke and lower piston speed adds to reliability and longevity while still having the capability to safely run at 9 k rpm redlines.

 

[Tom King]

Mr. Cross, I was inspired by your article in NSX Driver and tried to get on the list for a new NSX at my local Acura dealer today. The dealer said, "We're not taking deposits or orders until the vehicle is announced for production." So instead of three variants, there's none right now, at least here in Northern California. You Canadians have a more enlightened car culture. Sigh.

 

[dmscrx]

29 m/s is very high.
That speed would be reached at 10 k rpm on an 87 mm stroke Type R engine.
Would you be suggesting that your 29 m/s engine would be suitable in an OEM application and as reliable as our short stroke C30/32 engines?
It seems shorter stroke and lower piston speed adds to reliability and longevity while still having the capability to safely run at 9 k rpm redlines.

Of course the lowest piston speed would have the highest reliability. That's just common sense. That's partly the reason why diesel engines get some of the highest mileage on the planet. It reduces stresses on the bearings, piston skirts, reduces ring wear, etc. Longevity is in the eye of the beholder. If you want an engine to last 1,000,000 miles you build it a certain way. If you want it to last 500k miles you build it another. If you are fine with it lasting 100k then you can sacrifice some longevity for the sake of performance. The engines I build with 29m/s piston speed average between 60k-80k before needing a refresh. But that is so much dependent on how much the owner takes it to those rpms. Most of these guys will see the track a few times a year and drive it sensibly the rest. On my crx engine I rev the OEM gsr/type R 87.2mm stroke crankshaft to 11,300 rpm (32.8 m/s or 6465 f/m), but only on the drag strip. On the street it goes to 10.5k (30 m/s or 6005 f/m). I have torn it down at 12k miles and have seen only slight wear of the piston skirts (they have skirt coatings too) and mechanical compression never fluctuated. I don't expect this engine to get to 50k miles but that's the compromise I make for wanting 1100+ BHP out of a 1.9L engine. There can be a nice balance of reliability and longevity with regard to high rpm usage, but as I stated before stroke is one of the most important things to consider. The C engine has a stroke equivalent of a B16A (77.4) engine. Those engines in B16B OEM config were revving to a little over 9K rpm before hitting the limiter. These stroke configs are yummy for high rpm usage. The C engine can no doubt be built for 9000 rpm and 9500rpm and still be reliable. I've already done it with a few I've assembled already. Use the right internals and build the engine properly (to put it simply) and everyone will be happy happy happy for a long time.

 

[JD Cross]

Mr. Cross, I was inspired by your article in NSX Driver and tried to get on the list for a new NSX at my local Acura dealer today. The dealer said, "We're not taking deposits or orders until the vehicle is announced for production." So instead of three variants, there's none right now, at least here in Northern California. You Canadians have a more enlightened car culture. Sigh.

Not sure about the enlightened part
I've been on the dealer's wait list for many years and I think they finally took my deposit out of mercy.

I don't think the dealer has the blessing of Honda Canada to take deposits nor does the dealer have any formal allocation.
I think they expect to get a few of the new ones and hopefully I can afford to get one.

 

[Silver F16]

More update regarding different NSX variants.

http://vtec.net/forums/one-message?message_id=1165808&page_number=2#1165808

Looks like a coupe and topless version will be offered in the beginning. Then, A few years down, a Mugen and a Type-R. I'm guessing a manual transmission will not happen

How is this different than how Gen 1 NSX evolved? 91 NSX, 95 NSX-T, 99 Zanardi, 02 Re-face. I thought Ted said the Gen 2 NSX will have more customization, albeit not as much as 911. In addition, Gen 2 was to have upgrades and updates more frequently than Gen 1.

- - - Updated - - -

One more thing. The BEAK is staying. God help us.

 

[JD Cross]

On my crx engine I rev the OEM gsr/type R 87.2mm stroke crankshaft to 11,300 rpm (32.8 m/s or 6465 f/m), but only on the drag strip. On the street it goes to 10.5k (30 m/s or 6005 f/m). I have torn it down at 12k miles and have seen only slight wear of the piston skirts (they have skirt coatings too) and mechanical compression never fluctuated. I don't expect this engine to get to 50k miles but that's the compromise I make for wanting 1100+ BHP out of a 1.9L engine.

Wow
That's more hp than the Honda 168E V6 turbocharged 1.5L F1 engine and it was only good for a race at a time.

 

[sicarius82]