reviews are out

Hothonda said:
FWIW

Motor Trend - November 2016 issue - pp 20, MT CONFIDENTIAL column:

"The NSX has barely hit the showrooms, and already engineers in Ohio are working on upgrades.
New seats are under development to replace the current units. Insiders say the existing
NSX seats were designed to accommodate smaller females and lacked a height adjustment
mechanism for taller folks. New frames will allow a lower H-point, improving both driving
position and chassis feedback for taller drivers."
Click to expand...

Great to hear this. It's always nice to see proper product evolution unlike the first gen's unfortunate slow crawl.

- - - Updated - - -

The violent launch of the video you posted FA seems like it's 0-60 was way worse than 3 secs, perhaps even 4 seconds. Launches like that never result in superior 0-60 times unlike the cleaner launches of the NSX and Aventador in said video. Even if it bogged for a millisecond or two, it had the head start/jump. Lastly the distance, at the end of the race shows a clear winner.

I love to see the other end of the 650S vs NSX race. I hope that post that too, because the NSX had it on the 0-60.
 
Zoom said:
They used to be way ahead of 3 of those (given, Mclaren didnt produce road cars at the time). See how they have lost their way :(
As for the "wider demographic" they priced the car out of this to start with. By getting into Huracan price ballpark, chosing this name, and throwing bold claims about their SH-AWD they clearly positioned themselves in the "fast exotic" segment, which is the main issue IMHO.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that. I do not think Honda was way ahead. But a small lead yes. I personally would own the mclaren over the new X for the price. If actually close to its msrp I would strongly consider one.
 
fastaussie said:
i can't post any photos, but it's posted right here: http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showthread.php/198058-2017-NSX-instrumented-acceleration-testing
Click to expand...

Thanks FA but his post said C&D, not MT so I thought there was another magazine's stats to behold.

Regarding discrepancies between the Lightning Lap and the Best Drivers Car, I took a look at some of the details and there does appear to be a little more to the story. As far as I best can tell there are 2 things happening at the same time: The NSX did worse than it should have in the MT test and the R8 did much better.

First, lets look at the NSX. The Car and Driver car was lighter than the MT car, (by 22 lbs., presumably due to carbon fiber options) and was better balanced or had a better alignment. Also, Car and Driver seemed to spend more time optimizing its track performance over 3 days and made improvements as they got used to its unique handling.

Regarding the R8, The Motor Trend car seemed to have less options than the Car and Driver car which saved cost and weight ($198,850 vs. $202,750 and 3,642 lbs vs. 3,771 lbs - 129 lbs. lighter). The Motor Trend car also had Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2s vs. the Pirelli P Zeros that the Car and Driver R8 had.

SO, in summary:

1) There was a 151 lbs. weight swing between the two cars in the two tests,
2) The MT NSX was missing significant alignment or balance that the CD NSX had and
3) The MT R8 had stickier tires than the CD R8.

So, unfortunately, you really can't conclude too much about the NSX relative to the R8 if you are looking at these 2 test reviews.

I also find it interesting that even with all that against the NSX in the MT test, it still pulled a faster Figure Eight (23.2 NSX vs. 23.5 R8) with higher average Gs (.92 avg NSX vs. .90 avg R8).

I wonder if the alignment issue of the NSX did not impact the Figure Eight as much as the track?

Finally, I would like to see these cars tested with Michelin Sport Cup 2s. As good as the Trofeo Rs are, I wonder if they still can't quite compare.
 
Last edited:
NSX is a supercar (I don't think anybody here said it wasn't). I'm not a street or even track racer so the numbers don't mean that much to me, but like everybody here I am a bit of a bench racer. And purely by metrics, the numbers do disappoint. I thought with 3 electric motors and AWD it would be schooling the GTR in 0-60, easily sub 3sec. And a 10sec quarter mile. They had half a decade plus to benchmark the GTR at the very least.

It has the looks and sounds like it is daily drivable. I think it is vastly overpriced -- if it was loaded at $150K instead of $203K, I think not only would it be in higher demand, but it would be received far more warmly. So close in price to the R8+ and sniffing 570s/Huracan territory, it will be rightly compared to those (even if it's more positioned to go head to head with 911 TT/TTS/GT3). I think lightly used NSXes, post-depreciation hit will probably be great value purchases (that's what I always do anyways - never buy new unless someday I become a big baller and can afford the new car smell).
 
Personally I think the new nsx looks better than the 570, the gtr, the R8, etc....
If your in the market for any of these new cars, you have the cash at your diposal.
Therefore I stongly do not understand why it comes down to weight of grams or milliseconds.
If you have the cash to own, you buy what you want and not what other people think. For the new nsx owners, I congratulate you in your purchase and commemorate you for sharing your thoughts here. This is something Ferrari owners do not do....

If I had this type of money to spend on a toy my views would differ greatly. But I cannot slam the new car. It is sexy as hell, different, and solid honda engineering. For new car owners here, keep posting please! Not everyone hates the car.
 
chrisn said:
Thanks for the link. Interesting. I'd love to see those numbers for different tires on same car. Kind of hard to compare tire stats on different cars.
Click to expand...

Yea I agree. But different tires might also work better on different cars too..haha (i.e. Trofeo R might work better than the Sport Cup 2 on the NSX, and the Sport Cup 2 might work better on the Vette than Trofeo R).
 
November 2016 Car & Driver (10/13/16)......new tests + reviews of the car in each mode - sport, sport plus, track & quiet.

Positive results.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LLq9MV2G00w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

just saw this post up on my feed
 
C&d

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-acura-nsx-supercar-full-test-review


2017 Acura NSX Supercar Full Test ? Review ? Car and Driver

Home
/
Reviews
/
Acura
/
NSX
/
2017 Acura NSX - Instrumented Test

Instrumented Test
2017 Acura NSX
The resurrected NSX previews the hybridized future.

Oct 2016
By ERIC TINGWALL

From the November 2016 issue
If a 3868-pound, all-wheel-drive hybrid strikes you as a curious sequel to the original bantamweight NSX, you’re not alone. As vehicle-performance lead engineer Jason Widmer tells it, the initial prospect of a gas-electric NSX caused as much hand-wringing within Honda’s hallways as raised eyebrows outside them. In the early days of the new car, NSX mules consistently laid down faster laps without the battery-electric assist system that was supposed to make the thing quicker.

That was more than 5 years ago, and the NSX’s hybrid-electric system is now a fully developed piece of go-faster kit. The car rolling out of Marysville, Ohio, seamlessly combines two turbochargers, three electric motors, 4 driven wheels, 6 cylinders, and nine forward gears to produce bona fide supercar performance. That won’t make it any less controversial; there are an infinite number of ideas as to what a resurrected NSX should have been. The concept that won out is a rolling testbed for the future of performance technology. “You will not find a car in this category in 10 years that won’t have electrification. I’m confident on that,” Widmer says.

VIEW PHOTOS

So are we. The NSX isn’t the 1st of its kind to mesh electrons and hydrocarbons in the pursuit of speed, but give Acura credit for so rapidly democratizing the technology. Even with a starting price of $157,800, the NSX is hard evidence of the kind of trickle-down economics that actually works. Sacrificing a fraction of the performance and the pure-electric driving capability of the 2015 Porsche 918 Spyder netted Acura a $700,000 price cut for its mid-engined hero.

Widmer may have been talking about McLarens, Lamborghinis, and Ferraris when he made his 10-year prediction, but the electrification of performance won’t stop at supercars. Defying physics, the electrons are poised to flow into iconic performance cars where there’s even more resistance. Hybridized 911s and BMW M3s are an eventuality, not just a possibility. This NSX is a preview of things to come.
VIEW PHOTOS

Our test car arrived with $11,860 worth of tire and brake upgrades. The base NSX wears iron brake rotors and less aggressive summer tires.

For Acura, the hybrid system that supplements the 500-hp V-6 plays perfectly to the character of the NSX, both old and new. Just like the original, the modern NSX is every bit as civilized as it is quick. The open sightlines, the wide cabin, and the seats that accommodate the average American are as notable in this class as are the electric motors that give it instant off-the-line thrust. It’s a supercar without a God complex, as unpretentious as a car with an engine behind the driver and a 6-figure price on the window can possibly be.

More than any other modern car, the NSX is a product of whichever of its four modes—quiet, sport, sport-plus, and track—is active at the moment. Along with the usual calibration tweaks to the electrically assisted steering, adaptive dampers, and stability-control system, the NSX takes on a different persona depending on how it blends internal combustion and electric thrust.
Not That Sporty: Sport Mode
Because there’s nothing “normal” about a 573-hp, torque-vectoring, gas-electric mid-engined Acura, engineers named the NSX’s default street mode “sport.” It strikes us as a misnomer, though, because getting the NSX to accelerate enthusiastically in this mode requires big, deliberate throttle inputs. It’s best suited to urban settings, where the low-end torque of the electric motors—2 up front and a 3rd, larger unit mated to the engine—pulls the NSX off the line faster than traffic, but without spinning the engine much beyond 3000 rpm.

VIEW PHOTOS

The engine-cover designer apparently grew up loving Jiffy Pop. The stiffer of the two suspension settings is a bit much for public-road driving.

The chassis is always awake even if the powertrain isn’t. With $1960 worth of Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R tires gluing the wheels to the pavement, our test car faithfully transmitted every minute steering input to the road regardless of the mode. Even as the steering weight ramps up with the more aggressive settings, the NSX turns in with zeal and precision. Most impressive, the NSX never belies its weight, no matter how fast the speed or how sharp the corner. Turns feel effortless, and as long as the pavement is smooth, the body remains flat.

That body is as much a hybrid as is the powertrain. It’s made primarily of aluminum castings, stampings, and extrusions, but the A-pillars, roof beams, and windshield header are all made of steel, meaning there is more ferrous metal in the body of this NSX than in the 27-year-old original. The front floorboards are the only structural carbon-fiber bits, although $21,600 will buy just enough carbon fiber to reskin the roof, engine cover, splitter, sills, diffuser, and spoiler as seen on our $202,960 test car. The outer panels are a mix of formed aluminum and molded plastics.
Not That Quiet: Quiet Mode
Compared with the mild-mannered sport mode, quiet mode is the self-effacing, almost apologetic way to pilot a low-slung, Valencia Red Pearl–painted, origami supercar through a crowd; it kills the V-6 whenever possible. It is not, however, a truly silent mode. The engine still fires when you start the car in quiet mode, though it revs only as high as the 1500-rpm fast idle and sounds as fierce as a Honda Odyssey minivan warming its catalysts. Once the powertrain is hot, quiet mode largely behaves like an aggressive stop-start system.

VIEW PHOTOS


If you were expecting to slice through town with the swift, mute moves of a Tesla, you’d be disappointed. With a small lithium-ion battery pack (Acura will only say its capacity is “approximately one kilowatt-hour”) and less than a Honda Civic’s worth of horsepower from the electric motors, the NSX rarely gets above walking speed without firing the engine. It prefers to ride the 3.5-liter V-6 to cruising speed and then sail on electrons up to 50 mph when the road is flat or downhill.

Quiet mode doesn’t soften the suspension or lighten the steering. It’s merely a dimmer switch for the gas engine, shifting more work to the electric motors and exercising the battery harder. The NSX rebuts any attempts to drive hard in this mode. It disables the paddle shifters and causes the transmission to short-shift at 4000 rpm when the accelerator is pegged. And while quiet mode turns down the volume both inside and outside the car by closing the exhaust bypass valves and the intake resonator pipe, it hardly feels tranquil from the driver’s seat. The constant on-off-on of the engine quickly becomes tiresome.
Waking Up the NSX: Sport-Plus Mode
The obvious panacea is sport-plus, in which the gas engine never shut off and we never saw the nine-speed transmission shift higher than sixth gear on its own accord. Sport-plus redraws the tachometer to cover 9000 rpm, rather than 8000, but the redline remains unchanged at 7500 rpm, which is also where the boosted V-6 makes its peak 500 horsepower.

The engine’s unusual 75-degree V angle results in a shorter and thus strengthened crankshaft relative to a 60-degree design, and a narrower overall width compared with a 90-degree unit. Forged internals include the crankshaft, connecting rods, and valves. Fuel is injected alternately into either the combustion chambers or the intake ports to maximize both power and efficiency. Yet the engine never sounds nor drives as exotically as it reads on paper.

VIEW PHOTOS

That’s the side effect of performance-enhancing electric motors. They smooth the power delivery to the point that they mask the full contribution of the gas-fed engine. Flatten the accelerator and the NSX stirs the motors, the turbos, and the reciprocating pistons into a cascade of low-end torque, midrange boost, and high-end power. If you could separate the sensation from the intake-resonance tube singing just behind your skull, it would evoke the initial torque swell of an electric vehicle with the seemingly endless pull of a 9000-rpm Porsche. Even during part-throttle shifts, gearchanges register strictly audibly, with the motors masking the momentary blip in gas-engine torque. Our VBOX test equipment, which logs data 100 times per second, failed to detect any slackening in the speed trace when the transmission shifted.

Left in automatic mode in sport-plus, the gearbox will downshift under braking, though not very aggressively. The transmission prefers to keep revs between 3000 and 4000 rpm, and it feels more natural to find the right gear on your own with the paddle shifters. Even then, the transmission often denies the final downshift into 1st gear as you slow for a stop sign, and it’s only as you stomp on the accelerator that you discover the aggravation of still being in second.

Acura resisted the temptation to provide a separate damper calibration for every drive mode, which is fine by us. The Germans often get mired in creating a different but similarly compromised tune for each drive mode. Based on feel alone, Acura’s two settings use a fairly narrow portion of the bandwidth afforded by magnetorheological dampers, with one position covering sport-plus and track modes and a softer tune for quiet and sport.

While the softer position nicely balances ride quality and body control, the stiffer position proved too much on our 10Best loop. The NSX skipped over lumpy sections, the engine revs surging and sagging as the rear tires shifted between light and loaded, which is unsettling busyness that saps confidence. Sport mode’s more compliant damping kept the body planted and allowed a faster pace over the same stretch of road. Unfortunately, there’s no way to decouple the damper settings from the drive mode.

VIEW PHOTOS

Supercar Demeanor, Engaged: Track Mode
In track, the NSX begins to reveal some slightly raw edges and finally begins to feel like what it is—a mid-engined supercar. It’s the rare car that will crash into the rev limiter, rather than automatically upshift during launch-control runs with the trans in manual mode. Track provides a tame launch with a relatively soft clutch engagement from 2500 rpm and no wheelspin, but there’s no mistaking the smeared landscape for anything other than speed. 60 mph arrives in 3.1 seconds, and the quarter-mile requires just 11.2.

Those figures are plenty quick, but the competition seems to challenge Widmer’s assertion that “the reason we have electrification is for performance.” In our August 2016 “Junior Achievement” comparison, the NSX’s rivals—the Audi R8 V-10 Plus, the McLaren 570S, and the Porsche 911 Turbo S—all delivered quicker acceleration without any electric assist. And they did so carrying at least 150 pounds less each.

You can feel the NSX’s urge relaxing near 120 mph as the two 36-hp front motors fade out. Their purpose is more sophisticated than simple straight-line speed, though. The motors do as much to turn the NSX as they do to accelerate the car, and they are never more effective at that task than in track mode. The NSX’s relatively low-torque, front-axle vectoring makes for a decidedly different feeling compared with the rear-axle action we’ve come to know well. A torque-vectoring rear differential, like that found in a Lexus GS F, often provides a tightly controlled drift. In the NSX, the front motors simply pull the car down toward the apex, tightening the trajectory instead of increasing the car’s slip angle. The effect is closer to breathing off the throttle rather than inducing power oversteer.

VIEW PHOTOS


The NSX rarely wants to let its rear tires slip, and with 1.06 g’s of lateral grip from the Trofeo Rs, it rarely wants to slide the front tires, either. The handling balance is practically as harmless as in any Acura sedan, which some might interpret as the ultimate dis from a car magazine. It’s not intended as such here. You want a car that drifts every time you look sideways? Buy a V-8 Chevy Camaro. All-wheel drive and a mid-mounted engine are good at delivering buttoned-up composure. The NSX is no exception.

The NSX’s 70-to-zero stopping distance measures a truncated 142 feet on the $9900 carbon-ceramic brakes. The braking system is essentially a brake-by-wire arrangement with pedal movement translated into electrical signals that are parsed to blend the regenerative braking from the electric motors and the clamping forces of the hydraulic calipers. The pedal is slightly springy when you stand on it, but otherwise it allays the common critique of hybrid brakes: that they are inconsistent and difficult to modulate. Once your foot is recalibrated to the feel, the NSX provides predictable and linear progression every time you go to the left pedal.

The hybrid powertrain is the single thin thread tying the NSX to the rest of the Acura showroom. There isn’t a single legitimate sports sedan in the Acura lineup to bathe in the glow of the halo radiating from the NSX, and that seems unlikely to change anytime soon. Instead, Acura can only brag that the electric components are essentially a mirrored reflection of the system used in the RLX Sport Hybrid.

Acura could highlight the NSX’s electric hardware if it would mimic Tesla’s strategy of activating full regen braking when the driver lifts off the throttle, either in the less sporty driving modes or with a standalone, selectable option. 1-pedal driving becomes another connection to the machine, allowing the driver to be an active participant in managing the battery charge and timing accelerator application with greater intention. If we were Acura, we’d consider it.

VIEW PHOTOS

We apparently weren’t too considerate with the right pedal, because we averaged 17 mpg in our time with the NSX, well off the NSX’s 21-mpg EPA combined rating. While the 21-mpg city rating is unmatched by the competition, the 22-mpg highway rating is below that of the 570S and the 911 Turbo S.

The irony of the NSX is that it’s far more impressive for its chassis than for the complex hybrid system that serves as its reason for being. Maybe that’s because the handling really is that good. Or maybe it’s because Acura is still searching for the perfect daily-use driving mode, somewhere between sport-plus and sport. You can be sure that Acura is in a race to perfect its hybrid system with multiple competitors currently prepping similar arrangements. Give it a few more years of development. But let’s hope Acura keeps the chassis the way it is.
Competitors


 
He should have left all three cars in Auto. With 9 gears to choose from, there is no way a human who is unfamiliar with the car can outsmart the computer in gear selection. With a short track, the NSX should spend a LOT of time in 2nd gear even when a human would naturally choose 3rd, for example. Not saying this impacted the results, but it may have.
 
Porsche makes fast sportscars. We all know this.

The NSX looks better than both German designed cars which is a huge plus for me. That one tenth win is kind of bad considering the weight and power difference between the V10 and TT V6...
 
chrisn said:
He should have left all three cars in Auto. With 9 gears to choose from, there is no way a human who is unfamiliar with the car can outsmart the computer in gear selection. With a short track, the NSX should spend a LOT of time in 2nd gear even when a human would naturally choose 3rd, for example. Not saying this impacted the results, but it may have.
Click to expand...

a professional driver will always lap faster shifting manually, always. these cars all shift up and down too soon, too much, and too unnecessarily when left in auto mode. a human is still heaps better than the DCT computer.

N Spec said:
Porsche makes fast sportscars. We all know this.

The NSX looks better than both German designed cars which is a huge plus for me. That one tenth win is kind of bad considering the weight and power difference between the V10 and TT V6...
Click to expand...

this is a small, tight track with an obviously low average speed. which definitely suits the Porsche and NSX more so than the R8. none-the-less, Porsche as always is still punching well above their weight (and that wasn't even the "S" version with another 50 horsepower)...

p.s. interesting to hear Steve also complaining of the front end on the NSX, which you can clearly see understeering off corner.
 

Similar threads

Chris_Lum
DIY: Brake Master Cylinder Bench Bleed & Installation (91-05)
Replies
0
Views
282
Chris_Lum
Chris_Lum
EuroBoutique
Comparing our 2022 Type-S to a Ferrari SF90 on a recent test drive....
Replies
6
Views
2K
EuroBoutique
EuroBoutique
Chris_Lum
DIY: Mugen Pedals Installation (91-05)
Replies
0
Views
224
Chris_Lum
Chris_Lum
Chris_Lum
DIY: OEM 00+ ABS Upgrade (SOS Version) (91-99)
Replies
0
Views
409
Chris_Lum
Chris_Lum
Honcho
***NSXPO 2024 CARAVAN***
Replies
3
Views
249
VANSXTC
VANSXTC
Back
Top