Yes! Exactly what I wanted. Thanks for the help, Neo!
Recent Nsx Compliments anyone?
- Thread starter kld12
- Start date
Yes! Exactly what I wanted. Thanks for the help, Neo!
"Get Real?" Does it get any more real than a timeslip of a completely stock '03 SVT Cobra. This particular one didn't even bother removing his spare and jack :rofl:
He was in the right lane.
12.4xx
12.5xx
So you're telling me a 97+ NSX Coupe can do better than 12.5 or even pull even with that? Heck, someone said "off the showroom floor" a couple of posts back. I might be mistaken but I don't think you can even buy a Coupe any more. Aren't all the 03's NSX-T's? So find an NSX-T with a stock timeslip of 12.5 sec.
Go browse a Cobra forum, I found one guy complaining because he went to the track all stock and pulled a 13.1. He said "my time is so slow, etc can anyone tell me why"
In the few minutes I went to look for some time slips I found 12.5's 12.7's and 12.8's all around. So for every timeslip you can provide for an NSX-T in the mid 12's stock, I'll put one up for a Cobra in the mid 12's.
Isn't it amazing how often we find comparisons that turn out to be apples vs oranges!
Like trying to compare time slips at a race track on a particular day (when weather conditions, hidden mods, driver ability can all affect results) against magazine results (which are weather-corrected, bone-stock, using professional test drivers who do this for a living).
But when you look at an apples-vs-apples comparison, you'll find that the magazine test results are all consistent, usually varying by no more than a tenth or two, even from one magazine to another. And the magazines, with their bone-stock cars and pro drivers, never manage to equal those one-time results.
Funny how that works, isn't it?
Like trying to compare time slips at a race track on a particular day (when weather conditions, hidden mods, driver ability can all affect results) against magazine results (which are weather-corrected, bone-stock, using professional test drivers who do this for a living).
But when you look at an apples-vs-apples comparison, you'll find that the magazine test results are all consistent, usually varying by no more than a tenth or two, even from one magazine to another. And the magazines, with their bone-stock cars and pro drivers, never manage to equal those one-time results.
Funny how that works, isn't it?
All I'm asking is that you show me a few timeslips of Stock NSX-T's in the mid 12's! I can probably come up with a dozen Corbra timeslips in the 12's. Now it may be that I just happend to find the dozen Cobra's out there that were perfect factory ringers or *GASP* Cobra's are mid-12 second cars!! NO WAYYY. I mean it can't be. That's absolutely impossible, its a $30k car.
But ya know what, sarcasm aside, I don't think there's anything I can say or do that will convince you that SVT Cobra's are 12 second cars.
I give you timeslips, offer to give you more timesplits and you hide behind your magazine numbers. Magazine times are magazine times. I've always taken them with a grain of salt. I've seen S2000's 0-60's from 5.2 to 6.5 seconds.
You can magazine race all you want. Just promise me one day that you'll take your NSX out and race a bone stock '03 Cobra.
(If you remember, in mid-December, on of your fellow NSX-prime members started a thread "Got my doors blown off by an SVT Cobra")
But ya know what, sarcasm aside, I don't think there's anything I can say or do that will convince you that SVT Cobra's are 12 second cars.
I give you timeslips, offer to give you more timesplits and you hide behind your magazine numbers. Magazine times are magazine times. I've always taken them with a grain of salt. I've seen S2000's 0-60's from 5.2 to 6.5 seconds.
You can magazine race all you want. Just promise me one day that you'll take your NSX out and race a bone stock '03 Cobra.
(If you remember, in mid-December, on of your fellow NSX-prime members started a thread "Got my doors blown off by an SVT Cobra")
Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Isn't it amazing how often we find comparisons that turn out to be apples vs oranges!
Like trying to compare time slips at a race track on a particular day (when weather conditions, hidden mods, driver ability can all affect results) against magazine results (which are weather-corrected, bone-stock, using professional test drivers who do this for a living).
But when you look at an apples-vs-apples comparison, you'll find that the magazine test results are all consistent, usually varying by no more than a tenth or two, even from one magazine to another. And the magazines, with their bone-stock cars and pro drivers, never manage to equal those one-time results.
Funny how that works, isn't it?
2003 SVT Mustang Cobra
Road & Track (8/02): 4.9 0-60, 13.3 1/4 mile
Autoweek (3/31/03): 4.85 0-60, 13.31 1/4 mile
MotorWeek (#2203): 5.1 0-60, 13.4 1/4 mile
So sure, keep claiming that all those magazines just don't know what they're talking about. I guess it's just a total coincidence that they all come up with the same "wrong" results.
There are a lot of reasons why magazine results don't match drag strip time slips. Sometimes, a car that is claimed to be stock, has a chip or drag radials or other mods that you can't see. Some drivers are quicker than others. Cars will get more power on a cold day than on a hot day.
Heck, look at just one variable and you can see why magazine test results are useful. Look at tire pressure. A car will get better times at the drag strip by letting a lot of air out of the tires, which increases the size of the contact patch. How much air do you let out? Do you let the pressure go down to 30 psi? 25 psi? 20? Drag racers can experiment over and over to see exactly what pressure gives them the best times for their particular car (and for the temperature and track surface that particular day).
Magazine testers, on the other hand, don't do that kind of experimentation. Magazine tests are run under controlled, standard conditions, rather than "prepping" the car and experimenting to get better results. So the magazines use only the tires that come on the car from the manufacturer, and only set the tire pressure as recommended by the manufacturer. Does that mean that magazine results are not as fast as some people get at the drag strip? Yes, absolutely. But that also means that the magazine tests are more objective, and enable one car, as it comes off the showroom floor, to be compared with another car, as it comes off the showroom floor. Stock vs stock, professional driver vs professional driver, no prepping vs no prepping. And that's why the magazine results are so consistent.
And, again, the magazine results, time after time, come up with the same results for the same car. It is not coincidence. It is the result of using a standard procedure. And this standard procedure gives the same test results for a 3665-pound 390-hp 2003 SVT Mustang Cobra as it does for a 3200-pound 290-hp 2003 NSX-T.
Time slips at a particular drag strip on a particular day are about as useful to me for comparison purposes, and about as believable, as the government statements coming from Baghdad. Not worth the paper they're written on, other than telling what happened in one particular run. But go ahead, believe whatever you want. Some people believe Saddam, too...
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 25 March 2003).]
Just a thought, no flame, please, the two time slips that you showed us seem like both results are from one car (since the car # on the slip are the same: 330CU), Do you have other time slips show other car's result? Do you know that many people have 03's Cobra SVT?
Maybe a Cobra SVT is faster than an NSX, but Cobra's handling is sh!t when it is compared to NSX's handling
Can you finish the rest of this story? And if that is the end then can you just make up an alternate ending?
Funniest thing I've heard for a long while.
But Ken, really, I don't see the point in arguing with that guy and get yourself potentially aggrevated. I mean, we all know the NSX was never meant to be a drag car. I personally wouldn't care if I can't beat a Cobra in a straight line. Hell, I even wouldn't care if I can't beat a suped up, turbo charged, nos intalled, stickers-all-over-the-place Civic in a straight line. Not just because they all can't turn for crap but to me, they're just another guy with a Mustang/Civic.
------------------
'98-T Kaiser Silver/Black
Thanks, Joy. Don't worry, I'm not aggravated. I'm just trying to set the record straight.
Part of the reason for the confusion is that there are a whole lot more cars with more horsepower than the NSX, than there are that are faster in a straight line. So people automatically assume that cars with 350 or 390 horsepower are faster, when many of them are not, stock vs stock using the same testing procedures.
There are indeed some cars that are faster than the NSX, stock vs stock, just not as many as folks sometimes claim. And that's fine - if you want to go fast in a straight line, there are other cars that are better at it than the NSX, and a new Z06 even can do it for less money. There are lots of nice cars on the market today in all price ranges, and the poor economy, which is a hardship for anyone who has lost a job or whose business is not doing well, is a bonanza for car shoppers. It's a great time to be buying a new car.
Part of the reason for the confusion is that there are a whole lot more cars with more horsepower than the NSX, than there are that are faster in a straight line. So people automatically assume that cars with 350 or 390 horsepower are faster, when many of them are not, stock vs stock using the same testing procedures.
There are indeed some cars that are faster than the NSX, stock vs stock, just not as many as folks sometimes claim. And that's fine - if you want to go fast in a straight line, there are other cars that are better at it than the NSX, and a new Z06 even can do it for less money. There are lots of nice cars on the market today in all price ranges, and the poor economy, which is a hardship for anyone who has lost a job or whose business is not doing well, is a bonanza for car shoppers. It's a great time to be buying a new car.
The other night, a stripper licked the door handle on my NSX (anyone see the Volkswagon commercial?) and claimed it for her own. I'd consider that a compliment.
------------------
1996 NSX-T (red/tan)
1994 Mustang GT 5.0
2002 Dodge Ram Quad Cab
------------------
1996 NSX-T (red/tan)
1994 Mustang GT 5.0
2002 Dodge Ram Quad Cab
It is definitely a great time to buy new cars. I couldn't agree with you more (yea I know you've heard it many times and here's another one) that there are all kinds of cars in all price ranges nowadays. I, for one, do like the 350Z quite a bit. I guess it's mostly because of my respect towards the Fairlady Z. However, I do get pretty annoyed when people even think about comparing the 350Z to the NSX (my gf thinks the 350Z looks "cuter" than my NSX... sigh). To me, NSX is the tops of all Japanese production cars, period.
------------------
'98-T Kaiser Silver/Black
------------------
'98-T Kaiser Silver/Black
lol, what did she look like?
Thaaat's a compliment.
Time for a new GF!
So what are the corresponding 1/4 mile times to those road tests?
Just Curious.
is the car all she claimed?
3.0-liter 5-speed NSX Coupe: 13.8 (Car and Driver, 9/90)
3.2-liter 6-speed NSX-T: 13.3 (Motor Trend, 5/97)
3.2-liter 6-speed NSX Coupe: 12.9 (Car and Driver, 7/98)
Well like I said earlier, its like splitting hairs, And just so you all know, I'm a huge NSX fan and I don't think there is a new car for the price that has more appeal, (accel, handling, build qual, appearance, prestiege...)
But the question was about straight line, and I personally think an SVT Cobra would take an NSX. Car and Driver's 2003 April edition tests an 03 Cobra and gets 12.9 seconds in the 1/4. According to your stat above (also by C&D), an NSX coupe got the same. An NSX-T is 150 lbs heavier. And as I said above, you can't buy a coupe off the showroom floor anymore, so an NSX-T it is.
Interpret that however you want.
Originally posted by pbassjo:
I should'a bought a Mustang! What was I thinking!
No one's saying the Mustang is a better car than the NSX.
Read every post in this thread and quote where anyone said that.
Straight line acceleration != Better Car
But you knew this, already.
[This message has been edited by Rubber Chicken (edited 25 March 2003).]
8000RPM,
Nah, she's cool, in fact, I love her to death. She said the 350Z is cute and cool looking while the NSX is just plain cool. On the other hand, the "cute" part went to my Cooper S, she said.
Check out this thread I've posted last year, things were rough then but now we're talking.
http://www.nsxprime.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/004939.html
------------------
'98-T Kaiser Silver/Black
Nah, she's cool, in fact, I love her to death. She said the 350Z is cute and cool looking while the NSX is just plain cool. On the other hand, the "cute" part went to my Cooper S, she said.
Check out this thread I've posted last year, things were rough then but now we're talking.
http://www.nsxprime.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/004939.html
------------------
'98-T Kaiser Silver/Black
I did!
------------------
www.vincesautobodyworks.com
[This message has been edited by pbassjo (edited 25 March 2003).]
Hey Chicken, as a former cobra owner and a die-hard mustang enthusiast of old, the 03 cobra is NOT capable of mid 12 second runs stock. Lightning pulley, chip, exhaust, slicks and ur running mid to low 12s. Stock, 13.1-13.4 is about right. HOWEVER, the Cobra R has PROVEN to be a consistent mid to high 12 second car.
And please do not put the handling of a Cobra that far behind that of an NSX. It can't hang with an NSX, but it is not that shabby for an american muscle car.
From '03 Cobra Owners:
Although this one has no time, the 450 hp is just to give you an idea of the kind of power they are making (TO THE WHEELS) with just $2k of mods.
Not according to the magazines. 13.2 seconds according to Road & Track, April 2000.
Similar threads
