V6 360 horsepower? Insider information?

[kookoo4nsx]

The combined HP better start with a 5 or 6, not a 4.

Think how HP numbers have skyrocketed in the last 5 years. When you can buy a Mustang with about 600hp for 60 grand, no one will want a 450hp "supercar" car for 140k.

By 2015 the typical soccer mom kid hauler will have 350hp.

At a Minimum, the next NSX should have the 3.5L punched out to 3.8-4.0L, twin turbos at 425hp. Add 100hp electric and your in the ballpark.

Someone please tell me how SH AWD hybrid is better than a AWD connected to a TTV8 like McLaren?

 

[N Spec]

All of this talk about very high hp at an arbitrary number is a bit silly. It doesn't matter if you can't utilize the power efficiently. All the cars referenced in this thread are 11 second cars. Many of the big engine ones are over 3500lbs and have traction issues - thus very inefficient. If Honda can achieve an 11 second car that does not have traction issues, then how would you complain?

You want a car that can compete with the big boys, while still being more refined and reliable than the cars in the same modest price range. That is what the spirit of the NSX has always been about. It's never been about high hp. The high rev limit coupled with very short gearing to compensate for late torque delivery. This resulted in a very unique situation where you don't get ridiculous amounts of wheel spin at launch and experience a hard thrust all the way to redline that very few sport cars out there exhibit. Most sports cars choke after 5500 - 6000 rpm and the rest of the way to redline is very disappointing.

If the original NSX was a large V6 that delivered "300 hp" and gobs of torque with a 7k redline, then it would have never been the same. It would have been a 350Z...

So if Honda can achieve an 11 second NSX with a "high revving" V6 and some electric motors reliability, why would it matter how much hp it's supposed to have. Besides Honda will say I.E. the V6 is rated at 390 hp and then dynos will show something like 360 whp.

 

[butter78]

All of this talk about very high hp at an arbitrary number is a bit silly. It doesn't matter if you can't utilize the power efficiently. All the cars referenced in this thread are 11 second cars. Many of the big engine ones are over 3500lbs and have traction issues - thus very inefficient. If Honda can achieve an 11 second car that does not have traction issues, then how would you complain?

You want a car that can compete with the big boys, while still being more refined and reliable than the cars in the same modest price range. That is what the spirit of the NSX has always been about. It's never been about high hp. The high rev limit coupled with very short gearing to compensate for late torque delivery. This resulted in a very unique situation where you don't get ridiculous amounts of wheel spin at launch and experience a hard thrust all the way to redline that very few sport cars out there exhibit. Most sports cars choke after 5500 - 6000 rpm and the rest of the way to redline is very disappointing.

If the original NSX was a large V6 that delivered "300 hp" and gobs of torque with a 7k redline, then it would have never been the same. It would have been a 350Z...

So if Honda can achieve an 11 second NSX with a "high revving" V6 and some electric motors reliability, why would it matter how much hp it's supposed to have. Besides Honda will say I.E. the V6 is rated at 390 hp and then dynos will show something like 360 whp.

+ 1... though the proposed styling of the new NSX hasn't grown on me as yet I believe Honda is still doing with the NSX what Honda is know for and that is reliable engineering and effective execution. Styling as I've mentioned before and this may change once I've actually seen one in person leaves much to be desired. Bottom line Let's wait and see what happens... There's still plenty of time to introduce changes between now and the 2015 release date.

 

[Caustic]

I would be very surprised if NSX 2.0 released with an hp figure that started with a 5. For all you hp junkies, prepare for disappointment.

All this talk about price representing hp, consider the price being pushed up by technology and materials. Don't know what all the electric doodads are going to cost and they still have a low curb weight target to achieve. I would suspect that is where much of the cost is going to reside.

If I'm completely wrong about the hp and its north of 500, then feel free to berate me till the end of time. I will still happily be in line (hopefully) with the rest of you nerds, checkbook in hand.

 

[Timpo]

Okay, I'm not taking about HUGE hp like Veyron SS or Ultimate Aero.
We don't need 1,000+hp.

But 360hp is stupid. As I said, that's a Hyundai coupe standard.

The original NSX with 270 or 280hp was totally acceptable back in 1990s. 20 years ago!

Back then, look at the numbers...

R32 GT-R: 280hp
911 Turbo: 320hp
Ferrari 348: 300hp
Supra: 320hp
SVT Cobra: 240hp
RX-7: 260hp
300ZX: 300hp
3000GT VR-4: 320hp
Corvette: 330hp
Firebird: 300hp
Aston DB7: 335hp

and now, fast forward 20 years....

R35 GT-R: 550hp
Shelby GT500: 662hp
911 Turbo: 530hp
Ferrari 458: 562hp
SRT Viper: 640hp
Camaro ZL1: 570hp
Lexus LFA: 552hp
Corvette ZR1: 638hp
Aston Vanquish: 565hp

 

[TURBO2GO]

I hope it doesn't turn out to be an HDH... Honda Disappointment Hybrid... LOL... "Honda would like to introduce its new technology, the HDH" LOL

 

[N Spec]

Okay, I'm not taking about HUGE hp like Veyron SS or Ultimate Aero.
We don't need 1,000+hp.

But 360hp is stupid. As I said, that's a Hyundai coupe standard.

The original NSX with 270 or 280hp was totally acceptable back in 1990s. 20 years ago!

Back then, look at the numbers...

R32 GT-R: 280hp
911 Turbo: 320hp
Ferrari 348: 300hp
Supra: 320hp
SVT Cobra: 240hp
RX-7: 260hp
300ZX: 300hp
3000GT VR-4: 320hp
Corvette: 330hp
Firebird: 300hp
Aston DB7: 335hp

and now, fast forward 20 years....

R35 GT-R: 550hp
Shelby GT500: 662hp
911 Turbo: 530hp
Ferrari 458: 562hp
SRT Viper: 640hp
Camaro ZL1: 570hp
Lexus LFA: 552hp
Corvette ZR1: 638hp
Aston DBS: 510hp

I would hate to see you in a locker room then You sound like a magazine racer, comparing quick read specs of hp and even forgetting about weight or how the power is delivered

On a more serious note tho, again, you are missing the point. The 458 and GTR, the lowest hp of the bunch with the smaller engines, are among the fastest 1/4 mile holders thanks to some very effective and efficient powertrains. Guess what, they are also monsters on the track. The 458 dynos only ~450 whp and it's surprisingly fast for this "low" number thanks to its 9k rev and short gears.

The NSX can achieve a low 11 sec 1/4 mile with sub 500 hp if they design the powertrain effectively. If the V6 can put close to 370 whp down and let the electric motors add ~70 whp, then that is pretty much 458 territory if they gear the 7 speed like the 458 - short gears and big final ratio. This is why the high rev limit is vital, which Honda just so happens to specialize in.

You want a big, unrefined hp so you strut your stuff, go buy a Corvette, Viper or a Supra :wink:

 

[NetViper]

FYI, the new motor trend has the rlx with a 3.7 l v6 with 310 hp. So maybe we will get close to 400 with motor alone. Add hybrid and we are around 500.

 

[WingZ]

FYI, the new motor trend has the rlx with a 3.7 l v6 with 310 hp. So maybe we will get close to 400 with motor alone. Add hybrid and we are around 500.

Never believe MT Netviper 9.5 out of ten they screw or invent information. Unless that was a typo as the largest Earth dreams engine is the new 3.5 V6.

If they start with the 3.7 where do they go down the road for more more as they won't use FI.


N-Spec is right on target if it performs what does a high number mean? If it performs as well as a GTR or 458 yet is rated 100 hp lower and more efficient with less maintenance wouldn't that give you bragging you rights??

 

[Midnight_Raven]

I was just looking at Honda's Earth Dreams article ( http://world.honda.com/news/2011/4111130Earth-Dreams-Technology/index.html ) and I noticed this sentence.

"Combination with a high-output 120kW motor allows for superior environmental performance and driving enjoyment."

When you check how many horsepower 120kW equals it's 160.922651 hp. Not sure if this is just for a single motor or 2 motors working together. I'm going to assume it's a 2 motor setup. That's 80 hp per motor. So if the NSX is suppose to have 3 of these which means the electric motors alone should output 240hp total. If they go with the 3.5L earth dream motor that outputs 310 hp that would give it a total power output of 550hp. If it's a 3.7L engine making 360 hp like the OP friend claims then that means it's actually 600hp.

If it's 160 hp per motor that would be insane but if you look at that quote they use a singular form for motor. That would mean total output with a 310hp 3.5L engine would be 790 hp total.

I don't know much about electric motors though so correct me if I'm wrong... which I'm probably am .

 

[MoreRPMs]

Let's say you're rolling along in 3rd gear at 30 mph, the road (or interstate) ahead is clear as the blue sky, and you get the overwhelming urge to hit 180 or so. Maybe, slow back down to below 80, and hammer it again to the same speed. Do the electric motors keep squeezin' the juice, or did they run out of steam around 140 mph on the first attempt, thereby becoming, essentially, dead weight? If they do, count me as a big opponent to this gimmickry, which would be nothing more than bragging rights for a)people who take out their sportscar for little barely-over-the-speed-limit cruises where performance is way down on the their list of attributes &/or b)mpg junkies (in which case, why did they pick this type of car???).

 

[Timpo]

Toyota TS030

The ultimate hybrid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRECqhIZwIA

 

[sadlerau]

Toyota TS030

The ultimate hybrid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRECqhIZwIA

I would have thought the Audi Hybrid which actually won at Le Mans would be the "ultimate hybrid"?

 

[sadlerau]

I was just looking at Honda's Earth Dreams article ( http://world.honda.com/news/2011/4111130Earth-Dreams-Technology/index.html ) and I noticed this sentence.

"Combination with a high-output 120kW motor allows for superior environmental performance and driving enjoyment."

When you check how many horsepower 120kW equals it's 160.922651 hp. Not sure if this is just for a single motor or 2 motors working together. I'm going to assume it's a 2 motor setup. That's 80 hp per motor. So if the NSX is suppose to have 3 of these which means the electric motors alone should output 240hp total. If they go with the 3.5L earth dream motor that outputs 310 hp that would give it a total power output of 550hp. If it's a 3.7L engine making 360 hp like the OP friend claims then that means it's actually 600hp.

If it's 160 hp per motor that would be insane but if you look at that quote they use a singular form for motor. That would mean total output with a 310hp 3.5L engine would be 790 hp total.

I don't know much about electric motors though so correct me if I'm wrong... which I'm probably am .

That 120kw motor refers to the medium sector [Honda Accord] dual motor hybrid - not the large vehicle [RLX], let alone NSX v2 vehicles.

The NSX v2 will incorporate the 3 electric motor setup, similar to the RLX [which according to that site will have 2/20KW+ motors on the rear wheels, and an in-line 30KW+ motor with the transmission], but all that has been confirmed for the NSX is that it will have a similar 3 motor system - but no power ratings have been issued that I have seen?

And keep in mind it is a Hybrid - not a plug in, so if the power is depleted it will "harvest" energy form the brakes. As for how much fun it will allow you to have before the batteries are depleted, well we will just have to wait and see?

 

[Timpo]

i would have thought the audi hybrid which actually won at le mans would be the "ultimate hybrid"?

owned

 

[Honcho]

Listing cars with hp numbers is not useful. It is all about power-to-weight. In 1990, Honda was trying to match the power-to-weight ratio of the Ferrari 348. They did that, and the NSX was faster. People who ride in my "old" 1991 NSX still can't believe how fast it is given the power numbers. Let's repeat- power-to-weight.

There were a good number of cars back then that, if you put together a list of hp numbers with the other kids in junior high, would "stomp" the NSX on paper and during "my dad is tougher than your dad" conversations. Incidentally, most of those cars were complete garbage. Can anyone really claim they would take a C4 Corvette over a NSX? There's a quality car right there. Of course, if you were hp shopping, the Corvette would be a clear choice, right? After all it had 300 hp (330 at the end of the model run) and it was much less expensive than the NSX. Clearly that makes it a better sports car. Same with the highly exotic and desireable Pontiac Firebird (305 hp). Any takers?

Acura is still developing the new NSX engine. They have not released any information other than it will share the basic layout of the RLX system, i.e., a 3.5L V6 with a 3-motor hybrid boost system. There will be no turbos. The whole point of the hybrid motors is to provide a "green" power replacement for the "dirty" turbocharger. Unlike a turbo, the e-motors have no spool or lag. You get 100% torque instantaneously. Honda is trying to show the world you can have speed and green at the same time. Putting a turbo in the car would totally defeat that core message, confuse the brand and undermine the technological allure of the NSX.

Acura also has not released any hp targets, mostly because that number is meaningless to them. What they have told us gives us a clue about their real design targets: they want to go after the R8 and GT-R in terms of power-to-weight. Let's look at the GT-R: 3800 lbs / 545 hp = 6.97 lb/hp

Assuming Acura meets Ito's ambitious design goal of sub-3000 lbs (which I think they will), using the "estimated" RLX data (300 hp engine, 80 hp motors)we get: 2950 lbs / 380 hp = 7.76 lb/hp That's pretty quick already and we know the NSX will have more power than the RLX. Using a combined power of "only" 425, for example, the SH-AWD system will deliver power-to-weight performance equal to the GT-R. If we use the rumor in this thread of 360 hp NA, we get a combined power of 440. That would make the NSX faster than a 2012 GT-R. Acura knows what is is doing.

This just goes to show how meaningless the whole hp game is. Either make the car lighter or make the engine more powerful. Acura is in the middle of that process right now on a test track somewhere in Ohio.

 

[Timpo]

sure power to weight ratio might matter at low speed.

but when you're talking about supercar speed it's more about max power.

so let's compare Supra and Elise.

Supra has 3,300lbs and 800hp.
Elise has 2,000 lbs and 484hp.

The power weight ratio is the same, however the max hp is sometimes all it matters when it comes to high speed or top speed.

why? i don't know...im no expert.

 

[Aaron94T]

I would hate to see you in a locker room then You sound like a magazine racer, comparing quick read specs of hp and even forgetting about weight or how the power is delivered

On a more serious note tho, again, you are missing the point. The 458 and GTR, the lowest hp of the bunch with the smaller engines, are among the fastest 1/4 mile holders thanks to some very effective and efficient powertrains. Guess what, they are also monsters on the track. The 458 dynos only ~450 whp and it's surprisingly fast for this "low" number thanks to its 9k rev and short gears.

The NSX can achieve a low 11 sec 1/4 mile with sub 500 hp if they design the powertrain effectively. If the V6 can put close to 370 whp down and let the electric motors add ~70 whp, then that is pretty much 458 territory if they gear the 7 speed like the 458 - short gears and big final ratio. This is why the high rev limit is vital, which Honda just so happens to specialize in.

You want a big, unrefined hp so you strut your stuff, go buy a Corvette, Viper or a Supra :wink:

Hello pot, this kettle, come in pot. Are you still painted black? For someone that does not like bench racing you sure filled 2 paragraphs with sold bench racing stats. How can you use a 570hp Ferrari 458 as your argument against hp? That car has good quarter mile times because it has solid hp and low weight. Nothing about that car is analogous to a hybrid V6.

Bottom line is, the new NSX needs to perform with its peers. It does not have to beat them in a drag race but it better keep up on a road course. We all know what the ethos of the NSX was and high hp was not it. Comparing it to the Viper or Vette is not fare as they are worlds apart from inception. With that said, those better be some healthy electric motors or the car will sell like crap. Which brings us to another problem which is Honda would rather have a bad selling halo car, that is green, versus making something people lust after.

 

[Nukem]

sure power to weight ratio might matter at low speed.

but when you're talking about supercar speed it's more about max power.

so let's compare Supra and Elise.

Supra has 3,300lbs and 800hp.
Elise has 2,000 lbs and 484hp.

The power weight ratio is the same, however the max hp is sometimes all it matters when it comes to high speed or top speed.

why? i don't know...im no expert.

The NSX 2.0 isn't going for land speed records here, its going for overall balance. Like said before if you want the highest top end speed car out there then your looking in the wrong class of cars. The total balance is what made the NSX better to drive than it appeared on paper.

 

[butter78]

sure power to weight ratio might matter at low speed.

but when you're talking about supercar speed it's more about max power.

so let's compare Supra and Elise.

Supra has 3,300lbs and 800hp.
Elise has 2,000 lbs and 484hp.

The power weight ratio is the same, however the max hp is sometimes all it matters when it comes to high speed or top speed.

why? i don't know...im no expert.

The Lotus Elise does not have 480hp...
http://www.lotuscars.com/our-cars/current-range/elise-specifications

 

[Timpo]

The Lotus Elise does not have 480hp...
http://www.lotuscars.com/our-cars/current-range/elise-specifications

oh sorry, I did not clearify,

I was hypothetically saying that if Supra and Elise were tuned up to certain hp to achieve identical hp/weight ratio.

because we have be talking about hp/weight ratio...but i was trying to make a point that one with higher hp will have advantage at high speed.

 

[NetViper]

Listing cars with hp numbers is not useful. It is all about power-to-weight. In 1990, Honda was trying to match the power-to-weight ratio of the Ferrari 348. They did that, and the NSX was faster. People who ride in my "old" 1991 NSX still can't believe how fast it is given the power numbers. Let's repeat- power-to-weight.

There were a good number of cars back then that, if you put together a list of hp numbers with the other kids in junior high, would "stomp" the NSX on paper and during "my dad is tougher than your dad" conversations. Incidentally, most of those cars were complete garbage. Can anyone really claim they would take a C4 Corvette over a NSX? There's a quality car right there. Of course, if you were hp shopping, the Corvette would be a clear choice, right? After all it had 300 hp (330 at the end of the model run) and it was much less expensive than the NSX. Clearly that makes it a better sports car. Same with the highly exotic and desireable Pontiac Firebird (305 hp). Any takers?

Acura is still developing the new NSX engine. They have not released any information other than it will share the basic layout of the RLX system, i.e., a 3.5L V6 with a 3-motor hybrid boost system. There will be no turbos. The whole point of the hybrid motors is to provide a "green" power replacement for the "dirty" turbocharger. Unlike a turbo, the e-motors have no spool or lag. You get 100% torque instantaneously. Honda is trying to show the world you can have speed and green at the same time. Putting a turbo in the car would totally defeat that core message, confuse the brand and undermine the technological allure of the NSX.

Acura also has not released any hp targets, mostly because that number is meaningless to them. What they have told us gives us a clue about their real design targets: they want to go after the R8 and GT-R in terms of power-to-weight. Let's look at the GT-R: 3800 lbs / 545 hp = 6.97 lb/hp

Assuming Acura meets Ito's ambitious design goal of sub-3000 lbs (which I think they will), using the "estimated" RLX data (300 hp engine, 80 hp motors)we get: 2950 lbs / 380 hp = 7.76 lb/hp That's pretty quick already and we know the NSX will have more power than the RLX. Using a combined power of "only" 425, for example, the SH-AWD system will deliver power-to-weight performance equal to the GT-R. If we use the rumor in this thread of 360 hp NA, we get a combined power of 440. That would make the NSX faster than a 2012 GT-R. Acura knows what is is doing.

This just goes to show how meaningless the whole hp game is. Either make the car lighter or make the engine more powerful. Acura is in the middle of that process right now on a test track somewhere in Ohio.

I agree, power to weight is important. However, what the those cars don't have is a battery than can be depeleted. So while the NSX might have the same p/w as a gtr, when the battery dies that equation goes way wrong. Soon no power and just weight.

We all know this will happen, we just don't know how long until it does. 0-100? 0-150?

 

[butter78]

oh sorry, I did not clearify,

I was hypothetically saying that if Supra and Elise were tuned up to certain hp to achieve identical hp/weight ratio.

because we have be talking about hp/weight ratio...but i was trying to make a point that one with higher hp will have advantage at high speed.

But wouldn't the lighter car and the heavier car have the same/identical rate of acceleration in that instance? We're talking identical power to weight ratios... The main difference in that case and I might be wrong where one car will be faster than the other is if it has a higher top speed. HP distribution over the weight would be negligible.

 

[Midnight_Raven]

But wouldn't the lighter car and the heavier car have the same/identical rate of acceleration in that instance? We're talking identical power to weight ratios... The main difference in that case and I might be wrong where one car will be faster than the other is if it has a higher top speed. HP distribution over the weight would be negligible.

I'm assuming it has to do with wind resistance (drag) and gearing. At a certain point your car will need the power/torque to overcome wind resistance and since the formula for drag has a factor of (velocity^squared) you can only imagine how fast drag really starts to push back as high speeds are achieved. A low hp/tq car with low weight will not be able to power through the air like a car with high hp/tq. That partially explains why a 1000hp Bugatti Veyron with a power to weight ratio of ~4.1lbs/hp has such a high speed (250mph) compared to a 300hp Ariel Atom with a power to weight ratio of ~4.5lbs/hp has a lower top speed of (~145mph).

 

[butter78]

I'm assuming it has to do with wind resistance (drag) and gearing. At a certain point your car will need the power/torque to overcome wind resistance and since the formula for drag has a factor of (velocity^squared) you can only imagine how fast drag really starts to push back as velocity high speeds are achieved. A low hp/tq car with low weight will not be able to power through the air like a car with high hp/tq. That partially explains why a 1000hp Bugatti Veyron with a power to weight ratio of ~4.1lbs/hp has such a high speed (250mph) compared to a 300hp Ariel Atom with a power to weight ratio of ~4.5lbs/hp has a lower top speed of (~145mph).

You make a valid point. I never considered that