So why is 290hp not enough nowadays ?

[robbiedawg]

it's not just power,it's power to weight ratio,and cars have gotten a lot heavier.also,i think the nsx loses less power then some because of the drivetrain configuration.i think the most important thing to remember,though,is that the pleasure of driving the nsx transcends its numbers.in an old test where car and driver said the nsx was the car its staffers would like to have most,it made that point. my dd has 414 hp and is considerably faster than my nsx,and would still be even if i added a basic supercharger to the nsx.i prefer driving the nsx,though,you just feel more a part of it,it feels like a living thing sometimes.

 

[Ponyboy]

Because cars, in general, have gotten bigger and heavier. Requires more hp to move.

Actually, as far as paper numbers are concerned, 290 wasn't even adequate when it was introduced in '97.

 

[RYU]

Top 5 most fun?
http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/open-road/top-5-most-fun-cars-drive-under-35-221902513.html

Most fun doesn't always equal HP. Or we could always rewind back to 1969

-------------
You can’t beat fun for a good time. And you can’t beat a really fun car for less than $35,000. No matter how fun your Ferrari 458 Italia is, no matter how great your Lamborghini Aventador makes you feel, anyone who is larking about with a $27,000 grin-mobile can look at you and say: “I bought this with what it costs you to service your brakes.”
At least that’s what I’d say.
So with that in mind, here’s our list of top five fun cars under $35,000. (Why $35,000? It just seemed like a sensible number that had at least five cars that make me smile).
Fiat 500 Abarth: When Fiat left America in 1983, no-one thought they would come back with a charming, well-engineered, and (so far) reliable car like the 500. And certainly no-one guessed that they’d offer a wheel-smoking Abarth performance version. This is why small cars are fun. And, oh yeah, there’s that girl in the ad.
Subaru WRX STI and Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X: Despite being bitter rivals for years, battling it out in the World Rally Championship, these are really the same car. And they’re both ludicrous. Want to feel like ten times the driver you really are? These are your vehicles.
Volkswagen GTI: Since 1983, the GTI has been putting smiles on the faces of American drivers. And it has always been an absolute blast to drive. Think front-wheel-drive isn’t for enthusiasts? Think again. This latest GTI is maybe the best ever. How great is this car? I just bought one. No really, I just went out and bought one.
Ford Mustang 5.0: This is the culmination of everything that’s good about muscle cars. You just wanna break the law. It’ll drift, it’ll burnout, it may get you a girl. What’s not to like? OK, everybody’s got one. But don’t let that stop you.
Scion FR-S (and Subaru BR-Z): God bless Toyota. They built the “Hachi” – the mid-eighties Toyota Corolla GTS AE86 – and now they’ve gone and built it again. It’s underpowered (but upgradeable…) but so, so, so much fun. Balanced, poised, and as much fun as spiking the punch at the retirement home. Pure gold.
In a way, this is a nonsensical list. Why would you drive a car that isn’t fun to drive? That’s like eating things that don’t taste good. Or dating people you’re not attracted to.
Or driving cars that aren’t fun to drive.

 

[Night Prowler]

It certainly was enough to get me in some big trouble! Why would I need more? I love it just the way it was desgined:smile:

 

[Vega$ NSX]

It's not complicated. More is better. Faster is better. Bigger is better.

 

[fastaussie]

^^ You're talking about magazines and internet forums, not real life.

actually, i'm talking about my mate who was very interested in buying an NSX from knowing my car. he bought an '07 Cayman S instead. same money, more power. and then there's my other mate who bought a '02 ZO6 Vette, same story. so that's what i'm talking about...

- - - Updated - - -

It's not complicated. More is better. Faster is better. Bigger is better.

i'd have to agree with this. i do love my NSX as it is, but i'd love it a lot more with an additional 200 horsepower...

 

[NetViper]

actually, i'm talking about my mate who was very interested in buying an NSX from knowing my car. he bought an '07 Cayman S instead. same money, more power. and then there's my other mate who bought a '02 ZO6 Vette, same story. so that's what i'm talking about...

- - - Updated - - -



i'd have to agree with this. i do love my NSX as it is, but i'd love it a lot more with an additional 200 horsepower...

Buy a turbo. There is one for sale right now that will give you that.

 

[fastaussie]

i personally really couldn't be bothered with all that. but let me ask, how reliable would the NSX drive train remain with an additional 200hp?

 

[vivanshah]

i personally really couldn't be bothered with all that. but let me ask, how reliable would the NSX drive train remain with an additional 200hp?

Hugh has 300k+ miles on his 600+hp turbo nsx...

 

[NetViper]

Hugh has 300k+ miles on his 600+hp turbo nsx...

Hugh had a total motor build for the turbo not that many miles ago so that isn't really accurate.

Bottom line if you add 200hp you will probably run into problems down the line. But you can go 100hp more with near Oem reliability with a comptech SC.

 

[MetalSpikeRacing]

When I started tracking my it didnt have a turbo, I was faster than a couple GT3rs's that come to my local events..on the twist and turns. But on the straights I would start falling slowly but surely.

Now turbo at 450rwhp, I can actually pull on them.
Thats what I wanted as a track car.

 

[fastaussie]

prior to purchasing my '96 bone stock red/tan NSX, i test drove a '96 red/tan NSX with a Comptech supercharger, headers, exhaust, etc. honestly, i wasn't impressed by the set-up, and it really changed the dynamics of the car in my opinion. i preferred the car in the purity it was originally designed. the fact that so many people have supercharged or turbocharged their NSX's is a testiment in itself that the car could use more power. i'm ok with mine stock, but like i said previously, i certainly wouldn't mind if my car came with more power.
- - - Updated - - -

Now turbo at 450rwhp, I can actually pull on them.Thats what I wanted as a track car.

personally, i think for 2002 a normally aspirated 400hp NSX would have been the perfect road sportscar...

- - - Updated - - -

So why is 290hp not enough these days ?

I have started my process of seriously acquiring a 2002/2003 NSX. I've always wanted one since 2001 and have been through a few s2000's during those years. However, I am surrounded by people who claim I should focus my energy around my other choice a 2007 911 Turbo ? I hear from my mechanic , the nsx is underpowered, why would you want something so low on power nowadays, it so loose , etc. etc..

As of late, I'm surrounded with "horsepower" focused people. (nissan gtr, and corvette owners etc)

For regular roads, do you really need all that hp ? I know there is a "usable hp" range. But I don't see the justification ?

So why do we need 450hp ? I think I'll be just fine with 290hp J

the answer to your first question is quite simple. these days 290 horsepower for a supercar isn't much. not when a Toyota Camry or a minivan makes very close to that.

Your “useable horsepower range” is whatever you can use on the road or track. some people can use more than others.

Simon, i know exactly what you're saying. however it really only matters what you want. and if 290hp is enough for you, then you're golden. i too am in the market for an '02 to '05 NSX, but have recently started looking really hard at Ferrari 360's. they are in the same price range with significantly more horsepower, another 110. many of the roads i drive on in Southern California in my '96 NSX (with NA2 headers and RDX injectors) i can take flat in 3rd gear and could easily use more acceleration. when i run "the Snake" going up Mulholland in 2nd gear, i could definitely use more power there too. if you never drive a 450hp car, you'll probably be just fine with a 290hp one. but if you do, it'd be really hard to go back the other way. you don't miss what you've never had. and while it can be true, i've never heard anybody complain about having too much power. but we've all heard it the other way around. all things taken into consideration, my advice to you, drive both and then make a decision...

p.s. i will also say this. if you’ve never owned an NSX before, get one.

 

[NetViper]

prior to purchasing my '96 bone stock red/tan NSX, i test drove a '96 red/tan NSX with a Comptech supercharger, headers, exhaust, etc. honestly, i wasn't impressed by the set-up, and it really changed the dynamics of the car in my opinion. i preferred the car in the purity it was originally designed. the fact that so many people have supercharged or turbocharged their NSX's is a testiment in itself that the car could use more power. i'm ok with mine stock, but like i said previously, i certainly wouldn't mind if my car came with more power.
- - - Updated - - -


.

The ctsc setup doesn't really change the dynamics of the car at all. The power delivery is nearly the same as stock only more power everywhere. If you want to feel what a nsx feels like that changes the dynamics try a turbo.

 

[Coolberg]

Anybody on here running the SOS twin turbo system on a stock 2+? Would like to hear from people with first hand experience. If there is already a thread discussing this kit in the FI section please direct me to it. Thanks!

 

[RYU]

I drove my good friend's 400whP Evo 8 this wknd. It's fun as hell but it reminded me why I would never want a turbo on my NSX. There's no way I can control that beast!

2000 rpm = nothing
3000 rpm = nothing
4000 rpm = is it there yet?
5000 rpm = OH SHIT
6000 rpm = OH SHIT
7000 rpm = OH SHIT

At 60% throttle OR 70% OR 100% throttle.. it all felt the same. Throttle modulation was difficult under boost. Once that boost kicked it you be better be holding onto something!

I would absolutely hate that in the NSX but that's just me... Again.. fun as hell and he'd smoke me at the track. No doubt.

 

[fastaussie]

The ctsc setup doesn't really change the dynamics of the car at all. The power delivery is nearly the same as stock only more power everywhere. If you want to feel what a nsx feels like that changes the dynamics try a turbo.

i only drove a supercharged NSX once, but i preferred the flyweight, revvy nature of the stock engine. seemed like some of that was lost with the addition of the supercharger. which also masks the sound of the engine growl and VTEC cam change as well, which changes a lot about the car all by itself. i've spent a lot of time racing Japanese motorcycles revving to 18,000 rpm, so i like the nature of a very responsive, high revving engine. the supercharger seemed to weight it down a bit, for my tastes...

- - - Updated - - -

I drove my good friend's Evo 8 this wknd. It's fun as hell but it reminded me why I would never want a turbo on my NSX. There's no way I can control that beast!

2000 rpm = nothing
3000 rpm = nothing
4000 rpm = is it there yet?
5000 rpm = OH SHIT
6000 rpm = OH SHIT
7000 rpm = OH SHIT

At 60% throttle OR 70% OR 100% throttle.. it all felt the same. Throttle modulation was so difficult. Once that boost kicked it you be better be holding onto something!

I would absolutely hate that in the NSX but that's just me... Again.. fun as hell and he'd smoke me at the track. No doubt.

what type of turbo set-up does he have? the way you described it sounds like one huge turbo with heaps of lag?

 

[RYU]

i only drove a supercharged NSX once, but i preferred the flyweight, revvy nature of the stock engine. seemed like some of that was lost with the addition of the supercharger. which also masks the sound of the engine growl and VTEC cam change as well, which changes a lot about the car all by itself. i've spent a lot of time racing Japanese motorcycles revving to 18,000 rpm, so i like the nature of a very responsive, high revving engine. the supercharger seemed to weight it down a bit, for my tastes...

I agree with you but if you've settled on the NSX as being the right car and you want to get more out of this chassis by adding some power think of your alternatives. You can go with a turbo setup (personally not my taste). You can go with a centrifugal blower and get some lag like a turbo with parasitic drag like PD but cheap (also not my taste). You can go with a PD SC like the CTSC (what I did) or you can go with a full NA build. I'd prefer the NA build but at some point you need to ask the every popular HP/$ question and it gets just soooo exponentially expensive.

Having said that a lightweight flywheel and a good tune on a CTSC makes a world of difference in throttle response. I have a ton of fun tracking my NSX but also agree with you... a free revving NA is better but I think it's only incrementally better.

what type of turbo set-up does he have? the way you described it sounds like one huge turbo with heaps of lag?

I don't really know. What a great little car. I'd love to have a car like that.. I'd just hate to have that kind of temperament on the NSX. It would ruin the car imho. 0.02

 

[cptnsx]

i only drove a supercharged NSX once, but i preferred the flyweight, revvy nature of the stock engine. seemed like some of that was lost with the addition of the supercharger. which also masks the sound of the engine growl and VTEC cam change as well, which changes a lot about the car all by itself. i've spent a lot of time racing Japanese motorcycles revving to 18,000 rpm, so i like the nature of a very responsive, high revving engine. the supercharger seemed to weight it down a bit, for my tastes...


I don't agree. If the supercharged cars revved slower then they would accelerate slower and that is not the case. I think you are referring to the lightweight feel when the car is at idle and not loaded. Take an intercoolered 400+rwhp and punch it in 1st and 2nd (esp 1st) and you tell me how fast it revs. I have logs with a dig from 2.5k to 8k that take around 2.5 seconds. That is not a slow revving engine.

 

[Ponyboy]

Anybody on here running the SOS twin turbo system on a stock 2+? Would like to hear from people with first hand experience. If there is already a thread discussing this kit in the FI section please direct me to it. Thanks!

I drove the SOS twin turbo silver shop car and thought it was awesome. It didn't have the lag I normally associate with turbos (buddy's 996 turbo and my f250 as an example) and was wicked quick. I don't remember if it had a stock engine or not but it was plenty fast. The workmanship was top notch as well.

It's quite a bit different animal than my stroker but it was the smoothest turbo that I remember driving.

 

[Coolberg]

I drove the SOS twin turbo silver shop car and thought it was awesome. It didn't have the lag I normally associate with turbos (buddy's 996 turbo and my f250 as an example) and was wicked quick. I don't remember if it had a stock engine or not but it was plenty fast. The workmanship was top notch as well.

It's quite a bit different animal than my stroker but it was the smoothest turbo that I remember driving.

Thanks for the feedback. I did find one thread on here. I gather not a lot of people are running this kit. It sounds good but I need to drive one before spending that kind of coin.

 

[freespace303]

Before my NSX, my '04 S2000 which I still own, was the most powerful car I've owned. Before that, it was an '03 RSX-S. Because of that, to me, the NSX has gobs of torque, which I just love. The gearing kinda lets me down though. That 1 to 2 shift in the NSX always seems awkward when going WOT, but then again I'm not shifting like crazy when compared to my S2000's gearbox, which seems to be geared really close/low.

I'd consider buying a close ratio gear set for the NSX, but I can't justify spending thousands just for a slightly different ratio. So I find myself driving it easier all the time, but that's probably due to the fact that I just love cruising in it. It has plenty of power for me. I have the S2000 for those days I want to drive balls to the wall.

 

[fastaussie]

I don't agree. If the supercharged cars revved slower then they would accelerate slower and that is not the case. I think you are referring to the lightweight feel when the car is at idle and not loaded. Take an intercoolered 400+rwhp and punch it in 1st and 2nd (esp 1st) and you tell me how fast it revs. I have logs with a dig from 2.5k to 8k that take around 2.5 seconds. That is not a slow revving engine.

i'm talking about the way the engine revs, especially on throttle blipped downshifts. that's my favourite part of the engine when driving an NSX, rev matching the downshifts while braking deep in a corner. not the way the engine accelerates or builds speed. the NSX engine with its titanium internals is a flyweight revver, and i love that. maybe the car i drove wasn't set up right, because it sure didn't feel like 400hp to me...

 

[cptnsx]

i'm talking about the way the engine revs, especially on throttle blipped downshifts. that's my favourite part of the engine when driving an NSX, rev matching the downshifts while braking deep in a corner. not the way the engine accelerates or builds speed. the NSX engine with its titanium internals is a flyweight revver, and i love that. maybe the car i drove wasn't set up right, because it sure didn't feel like 400hp to me...

I get what you are saying. I believe this can be mitigated (somewhat) by a lightened flywheel and/or the ATI crank pulley. I have the SOS twin carbon clutch (no ATI crank pulley -- yet) and the blips are not like NA but they are close if I press the throttle a little harder than normal for the blip. I do feel the drag but a more aggressive blip corrects it. Maybe those with the ATI crank pulley and supercharger can comment. The dynos show about a 5 to 10 horsepower gain throughout the rev range.

 

[fastaussie]

that's exactly what i'm saying...

 

[RYU]

i'm talking about the way the engine revs, especially on throttle blipped downshifts. that's my favourite part of the engine when driving an NSX, rev matching the downshifts while braking deep in a corner. not the way the engine accelerates or builds speed. the NSX engine with its titanium internals is a flyweight revver, and i love that. maybe the car i drove wasn't set up right, because it sure didn't feel like 400hp to me...

Was it a DBW car you drove or perhaps an NA2?

FWIW, even in stock form that car has a very heavy flywheel/clutch assembly (or slow DBW, i'm not really sure). It takes longer to rev match downshift. Throw a blower on top of it and i'm sure it's even worse. I don't really get that feeling in my CTSC 91 with 11lb flywheel (stock is 16lbs)