Stock Gen 2 versus Modded (forced induction) Gen 1

C

chrisn

Experienced Member
Joined
8 March 2016
Messages
961
Location
SF Bay Area
I have heard several references to a supercharger from Comptech as being the quasi-standard power mod for Gen 1 cars.

Anyone have a sense of how a bone stock Gen 2 car would fare against a Gen 1 car with a supercharger or turbo charger (set up for everyday drivability and reliability-- nothing too extreme). I'm think about 0-60 times, 1/4 mile trap speeds, "passing power" acceleration from a roll (like 60-130MPH times) and lap times on similar rubber.

I'm sure the Gen 2 (even ICE-only) puts down more power, but it also weighs 800 pounds more.

Just idle curiosity.
 
https://youtu.be/RF_4crNTKzE
Reposted vid...
My low boost hustles pretty good to 60. Even with those pig usdm gears. I imagine the gen 2 being 3 car lengths in front or so on a 1/4 mile. Turbo might be a different story but have seen twin turbos lose slightly to stock gtrs. From what I understand it is all from the gearing and having a automatic modern transmission.
 
chrisn said:
I have heard several references to a supercharger from Comptech as being the quasi-standard power mod for Gen 1 cars.

Anyone have a sense of how a bone stock Gen 2 car would fare against a Gen 1 car with a supercharger or turbo charger (set up for everyday drivability and reliability-- nothing too extreme). I'm think about 0-60 times, 1/4 mile trap speeds, "passing power" acceleration from a roll (like 60-130MPH times) and lap times on similar rubber.

I'm sure the Gen 2 (even ICE-only) puts down more power, but it also weighs 800 pounds more.

Just idle curiosity.
Click to expand...

The Gen1 would need to be set up more extreme than you're thinking to be able to outperform the new car. I've driven a couple Gen1s with lots of parts from the Comptech catalog. Fast...for the 2000's. Not so much compared to the super cars of the 201x's.
 
I have to think the biggest factor for Gen 1 limitations would be that what ever power it can muster up being limited to 2 rear sneakers vs at all 4 corners. You can have all the power in the world, but if you can't apply it fully and efficiently (i.e. w/o losing to much in nonproductive wheel/car spin) for take offs and exiting corners it will not realize full potential. Just my too cents.
 
Maybe stuntman can chime in ...he has piloted many track oriented turbo gen 1's think factor X....if you watch his vids he has to have very quick hands and has the experience/ability to control over 500rwhp which the average Joe can't. I hope some of our turbo gen1 owners will chime in on 1/4 mile experience.
 
I think you can have any modified NA1/2 beat an NC1 in any of these metrics but in my experience the bulk of them (not all) will be one trick ponies. The magic is in the cohesive build and balance. I've found it very difficult to maintain that in the Gen 1 once you break the boundaries of what the fine Honda engineers designed from the factory. The effort is massive for any one person/enthusiast and often a case of 2 steps forward, 1 step back. I'm eager to see [MENTION=16531]stuntman[/MENTION]'s personal NSX as it's designed to be a well thought out 500+ wHP street oriented NSX.
 
@Gadgetman, after experiencing the bone stock C7 Z06 (650 HP/TQ), I've abandon the argument that there is an upper bound for useful RWD power on the track. I mean, all things being equal, AWD is better--- but things rarely are. Everything is a compromise. I will say that it seems to take more and more skill to handle extreme RWD power-- but even this is subtle when you're talking about a pro driver who can drive anything to the limit.

I am sure it is *possible* to build a Gen 1 car that is faster around the track than a stock Gen 2. I just imagine that it would be hard to do and still maintain street legal / pleasant daily driver behavior.

I'm also sure there are LOTS of Gen 1 cars out there that are faster than ME (in Gen 2) around the track, but driver issues are separate (and usually more important than car issues!).

So: for tracks where Gen 2 has been tested, are there known Gen 1 cars that have lapped faster?
 
lets hope That some NE new owners will track their cars and we can compare some times
 
Chrisn
I totally agree with you.
I was just giving a generalized view for adding more power primarily isn't going to cut it to beat Hi Tech and AWD.
I realize there are some very high powered RWD Newer cars doing great, like the one you mention, Hellcat, Viper etc. However I also suspect huge wheels and rubber in large openings available on newer rides (not easily/readily done in Gen 1) , appropriately designed high tech suspensions (for wheel hop and control etc), and then the technology in modern traction and stability control helping out to a degree. I've done upgrades to my '91 Z32 TT. My stock Gen 1 compared to it is a slug. But I can't utilize all of what is there w/o fear of losing it. A lot of that because of not being a experienced aggressive driver I'm sure. Aggressive hole shots lead to too much spin and wheel hop so I'm not getting the power down. I will eventually deal with more suspension improvements- if I really want to get it to where it could be. Acceleration in roll on's is a lot better. So it is really good enough for me as is for now. Though I've had occasional fun with a few unsuspecting C6's and similar and enjoyed the view in mirrors as I marvel on how their cars transform with headlights getting smaller and closer together. I know enough that the right guy in a the right car or similar would probably do me in early or eventually. At least I've had some fun with a now 26 year old car.


chrisn said:
@Gadgetman, after experiencing the bone stock C7 Z06 (650 HP/TQ), I've abandon the argument that there is an upper bound for useful RWD power on the track. I mean, all things being equal, AWD is better--- but things rarely are. Everything is a compromise. I will say that it seems to take more and more skill to handle extreme RWD power-- but even this is subtle when you're talking about a pro driver who can drive anything to the limit.

I am sure it is *possible* to build a Gen 1 car that is faster around the track than a stock Gen 2. I just imagine that it would be hard to do and still maintain street legal / pleasant daily driver behavior.

I'm also sure there are LOTS of Gen 1 cars out there that are faster than ME (in Gen 2) around the track, but driver issues are separate (and usually more important than car issues!).

So: for tracks where Gen 2 has been tested, are there known Gen 1 cars that have lapped faster?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Jinks said:
Rob, 1k2go has done a 1:48 at Sonoma with a high boost ctsc and slicks and a stock bottom end. Chrisn, you said your best there so far was 1:51 with a C7 @ 1:48 right?
http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showthread.php/189787-Sears-Point-Sonoma-Raceway-June-6th-2015
Click to expand...

Correct. Not me driving, but a faster friend. This was on Cup2 tires that we later determined were running the wrong pressure all around (Gen 2 needs way more neg camber and, without it, you need to run higher PSI in front on some tires to avoid rollover). Even accounting for slicks, not sure if it would beat 1:48-- but it would be close. Gotta do it with with same driver on same day--- or at least two good drivers on same day.

So much comes down to the driver. But good data. Thanks.

Edit: I read the @1K2GO thread. That dude seems VERY serious and with TONS of experience at that track in his car (and has a huge wing!). In all fairness, the 1:51 was the very first day at Sonoma on (admittedly sticky) street tires. All props to 1k2go, but I'm thinking the bone stock Gen 2 appears "faster" after making all appropriate handicaps/adjustments.
 
Last edited:
chrisn said:
Correct. Not me driving, but a faster friend. This was on Cup2 tires that we later determined were running the wrong pressure all around (Gen 2 needs way more neg camber and, without it, you need to run higher PSI in front on some tires to avoid rollover). Even accounting for slicks, not sure if it would beat 1:48-- but it would be close. Gotta do it with with same driver on same day--- or at least two good drivers on same day.

So much comes down to the driver. But good data. Thanks.

Edit: I read the @1K2GO thread. That dude seems VERY serious and with TONS of experience at that track in his car (and has a huge wing!). In all fairness, the 1:51 was the very first day at Sonoma on (admittedly sticky) street tires. All props to 1k2go, but I'm thinking the bone stock Gen 2 appears "faster" after making all appropriate handicaps/adjustments.
Click to expand...
Oh most definitely on all accounts of Rob and the gen 2. He is a mad dog, I tried trailing him before in the mountains. My car cried uncle...
 
It's a bit surprising to see the Gen2 NSX on Cuo2 tires turning similar lap times as a Mustang GT350R.

I think a 400-450whp NSX (assuming no heat soak) with Cup2 tires in a typical 235 /275 sizing with NSX-R aero and a good set of coilovers would turn similar if not better lap times. 800lbs is a huge penalty and with the Gen2 not making much more than 450whp (dynojet) on similar size tires, I'd put my money on the Turbo NA1.

0.02
 
@stuntman, it does seem like it would be close, but, based on the data I've seen, I'm thinking the Gen 2 would still have the edge (same day, same driver, same tires). Do you have a sense of how many seconds soft slicks would be good for versus Cup2 at Sonoma? I would guess 2-3, but I'm just pulling that out of the air.

I think all would agree that a modded Gen 1 is a far better "track toy" than its fat grandson, but that is true when comparing a lot of 15 year old track-prepped sports cars with their bloated "GT car" descendants in bone stock trim.

The GT350R is awesome, but for the same money the C7 Grand Sport is even more impressive, no?
 
Last edited:
RYU said:
Unfortunately that car was totaled. I believe at Sonoma.
Click to expand...

Yeah I heard that from Shad a few months ago. Too bad, it was a mean car.... The CT race prep motor at DAis still awaiting a new home;-)
 
chrisn said:
I have heard several references to a supercharger from Comptech as being the quasi-standard power mod for Gen 1 cars.

Anyone have a sense of how a bone stock Gen 2 car would fare against a Gen 1 car with a supercharger or turbo charger (set up for everyday drivability and reliability-- nothing too extreme). I'm think about 0-60 times, 1/4 mile trap speeds, "passing power" acceleration from a roll (like 60-130MPH times) and lap times on similar rubber.

I'm sure the Gen 2 (even ICE-only) puts down more power, but it also weighs 800 pounds more.

Just idle curiosity.
Click to expand...

You're going to need a lot more then just a comptech supercharged nsx to keep up with the new one. Maybe some heavy weight reduction dropping you to 2500 lbs and a high pulley supercharged car would fair ok with other mods like a good suspension, sways, ect. However a turbo would be a better bet depending on some factors, but since you list straight line times I would say a turbo, but then again I'll say turbo anyways. If you are in Cali though then you are pretty much stuck with the supercharger as the only option.
 
I already drove a full interior Turbo NSX with slightly more power and aero, but slightly worse tires to a 1:55 at Buttonwillow, about 2 seconds quicker than a GTR, which is similar in lap time to a Gen2 NSX. Ryan Rush was a few seconds off a 2nd Gen at Laguna Seca with relatively stock power levels and I think his car has another second in it, so I'd still put my money on a 400-450whp Gen1 being faster.
 
Last edited:
RYU said:
Unfortunately that car was totaled. I believe at Sonoma.
Click to expand...

that amazing car he was so passionate about got smushed:eek:
 
If all the stars align, we're looking to put together a test & tune track day with [MENTION=16531]stuntman[/MENTION] this spring/summer. It will be here at a California track. During that event Billy should be able to benchmark lap times with Gen 1 NSX's in various states of modification. It might be interesting if one of you NC1 guys come to have Billy set a laptime in yours.

I'd be curious how my NSX, which has full NSX-R aero but only ~350wHP compare on PSS tires.
 
I would love to see that ...he would get a nice moto IQ article out of that...
 

Similar threads

I
1992 NSX coupe Red/Custom 5-Speed 98/1 TURBO JH4NA1157NT000570
Replies
7
Views
9K
Italianx333
I
EuroBoutique
Thoughts on our new Huracan vs. the NSX 1st gen and 2nd gen
2
Replies
26
Views
12K
EuroBoutique
EuroBoutique
G
Not your typical '92 CTSC build...
Replies
3
Views
2K
davidf
davidf
phryxis
Group Buy Shorai Battery and CNC Machined Battery Tray Package - 7 pound setup - Direct bolt on
9 10 11
Replies
256
Views
77K
Speedmaster
Speedmaster
bonhamsurf
I need a Psychiatrist, I believe I'm obsessed!
2
Replies
30
Views
9K
Timeless1
Timeless1
Back
Top