• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

new 1/4 mile times

nsxmofo

nsxmofo

Contributing Member
Joined
8 June 2003
Messages
146
Location
hedonism III
went to the drag again last nite. think my stock clutch is going to die soon with over 50 runs on the single plate unit (want a comptech stage 2 clutch). regardless, some good times, including fun runs with a viper r/t and 911 c4. need to practice more and drop my 60' down to about 1.9 and 660' to maybe 8.3. in that case, for sure 12.8 or 12.9 is dead on. still running street psi on all tires and will do so until i hit 12.9, then drop the rear psi to see the changes.

personal best:

2.034
8.487
13.053 @ 108.420

2nd personal best:

2.036
8.507
13.079 @ 108.403

viper r/t (w/ exhaust) vs. nsx (with exhaust): viper hooks up really well around the 1/8th.

run 1
2.051........2.163
8.384........9.107 (misshift 2nd gear)
12.708 @ 116.008.........13.767 @ 109.541

run 2
2.094........2.053
8.413........8.554
12.717 @ 116.582..........13.139 @ 110.463

run 3: this would have been my 12.9 run
2.129........2.074
8.563........8.751 (misshift 2nd gear again)
12.949 @ 116.430..........13.615 @ 103.382

911 c4 vs. nsx: c4 awd has great traction obviously but nsx wins.

1.869........2.014
8.624........8.544
13.512 @ 102.563..........13.146 @ 107.989
 
Those are some very good numbers from your NSX. What year and mods do you have? I have a 92 with Comptech exhaust, Junn lightweight flywheel, Japanese short gears, K&N FIPK and upgraded clutch and my best was only 13.6 at 103+. My 60' times were in the 2.1 range.
 
Litespeeds said:
Those are some very good numbers from your NSX. What year and mods do you have? I have a 92 with Comptech exhaust, Junn lightweight flywheel, Japanese short gears, K&N FIPK and upgraded clutch and my best was only 13.6 at 103+. My 60' times were in the 2.1 range.
Click to expand...

thanks. it's 2003 that's 5mos old with 8500 miles. mods are:

- taitec gt lightweight parallel exhaust
- tein typeRA coilovers
- dali racing street/race adjustable front and rear sway bars
- jdm nsx-r front chassis bars, cf shift bootie and knob
- axxis ultimate brake pads
- ssr competition wheels 17x7.5 front and 18x9.5 rear
- s03 tires 215/40/17 front and 255/35/18 rear

running mobil1 10w30 motor oil and redline gear oil. saved 56lbs total with the exhaust, suspensions, wheels and tires. otherwise the car is pretty much bone stock.

ran those numbers with 1/2 tank of 91 octane gas, full interior, and with spare tire.
 
That is incredible with just a cat-back exhaust and lighter weight wheels. AKJS told me that he truely believes the 2002-2003 NSX's felt a little faster than the 97-2001's. The miles per hour of 108-110 through the traps indicates the cars horsepower is probably around the high 200's to the rear wheels. I had mine dyno'd and it was at 257 to the rear wheels with torque at 195. I have a feeling if you dyno'd your car, you will have numbers in the 280 range and torque around 220.
Congrats on some very impressive numbers and keep me posted on future runs.
 
Litespeeds said:
That is incredible with just a cat-back exhaust and lighter weight wheels. AKJS told me that he truely believes the 2002-2003 NSX's felt a little faster than the 97-2001's. The miles per hour of 108-110 through the traps indicates the cars horsepower is probably around the high 200's to the rear wheels. I had mine dyno'd and it was at 257 to the rear wheels with torque at 195. I have a feeling if you dyno'd your car, you will have numbers in the 280 range and torque around 220.
Congrats on some very impressive numbers and keep me posted on future runs.
Click to expand...

I've seen dynos of the stock 02 w/ Dynapack at 270-275hp and 200ft-lbs of torque to the wheels bone stock. I should have mine dyno'ed next week and will post. The car is quite strong and does catch ppl by surprise when they see it run. The most comment is, "But isn't it like a 12yr old car???" :D
 
If it is true that the 02+ NSX makes more HP, why would ACURA hide that information? The biggest complaint against the NSX is the lack of HP. If they are acutally making more power, why not annouce it?

A dyno of 270 rhwp is close to 310 assuming 15% loss..
 
I don't think the NSX loses 15% to the rear wheels. If that were the case, my almost stock 92 NSX would have 302 horsepower at the fly.
A stock 92 NSX is rated at 270 horsepower stock but I have heard alot of earlier models that are stock testing at around 240-245 range to the rear wheels.
I believe it is about 10% loss. That is more realistic because my car would be at around 285 horsepower to the flywheel. With a 10% loss to the rear wheels, it would bring it to 256.5 which is very close to my actual numbers.
From what I heard through the grapevine, the engine is exactly the same as the other 3.2 motors but the OBD has been changed and that may have increased performance. Don't know why they didn't disclose the extra horsepower. Would you disclose an extra 5-10 horsepower if you were them? I sure wouldn't as the public would probably laugh at them.
 
Litespeeds said:
. Would you disclose an extra 5-10 horsepower if you were them? I sure wouldn't as the public would probably laugh at them.
Click to expand...

Why not? TONS of other companies do it all the time. The Vette did it when it went from 345 to 350. More HP is nothing to be ashamed of.

I think the NSX would sound better just to have 300HP vs 290. At least when someone asks how much HP you have, you dont have to start with a 2! :D
 
those times are amazing. what RPM were you launching it?
 
Wasn't there some agreement between the Japanese car companies to not go higher than a certain amount of horsepower?? Could this be a reason they hid an increase?
 
tararan said:
those times are amazing. what RPM were you launching it?
Click to expand...

3400rpm, just enuf for some wheelspin. anything above 3500rpm i'm sitting there waiting to hook up.
 
I launched mine right around 2800 rpms. Anything less would bog and anything more would have me sitting there spinning. Will try some stickier tires next time I'm out there to see if I can get my 60' times to the 1.9's. I do have a race clutch so it grabs alot quicker and harder.
 
Litespeeds said:
I launched mine right around 2800 rpms. Anything less would bog and anything more would have me sitting there spinning. Will try some stickier tires next time I'm out there to see if I can get my 60' times to the 1.9's. I do have a race clutch so it grabs alot quicker and harder.
Click to expand...

what tires are you running now?

what is your race clutch?
 
When I ran at Sacramento Raceway back in June of 2002, I decided to put on my stock 15/16 wheels with A-022 tires. Figured that those wheels are alot lighter than my 17/18 setup. The clutch that I have was installed before I bought my car at Davis Acura in Pennsylvania. The owner told me he had Bernie install a race clutch that was sold from Davis Acura Racing, a high performance division in their parts/service department for NSX's. Anyway, not sure exactly which model clutch but I do have the receipt that it was installed.
I have since added on Comptech headers and a Cantrell AIS. As soon as I have a lighter wheelset with wider and stickier tires, I will go back out and run it again. Maybe in the next month or so. Will be very happy to get a 13.2 at 106+. Those numbers should be realistic enough.
 
Litespeeds said:
I launched mine right around 2800 rpms. Anything less would bog and anything more would have me sitting there spinning. Will try some stickier tires next time I'm out there to see if I can get my 60' times to the 1.9's. I do have a race clutch so it grabs alot quicker and harder.
Click to expand...

what tires are you running now?

what is your race clutch?
 
ran those numbers with 1/2 tank of 91 octane gas, full interior, and with spare tire.
Click to expand...

91 octane??? Are you nuts? Or is that all you have where you live? The avg in WI is 93 or 94 octane which is still low compared to a lot of other countries.

Throw in some octane boost!
 
Bell turbo B18C1 said:


91 octane??? Are you nuts? Or is that all you have where you live? The avg in WI is 93 or 94 octane which is still low compared to a lot of other countries.

Throw in some octane boost!
Click to expand...

huh? maybe in WI but in MN (where i'm originally from) it's hard to find anything higher than 91. it all depends on what state. nothing nuts about it.

the nsx is now in montreal, where it's predominantly 91 or 92, depending on brand. petro canada, a leading brand, has 94 octane but uses a lot of detergent and i've had bad experiences with their gas before.

note the minimum gas required is premium 91 octane, so that is fine. i'm tryig to prove a point with the car as is - bone stock - running like a normal street car on the track. i see no sense in using boosters or other additives just to get a better time. run the car stock, then do other things in increment to see the effect.
 
Litespeeds said:
Those are some very good numbers from your NSX. What year and mods do you have? I have a 92 with Comptech exhaust, Junn lightweight flywheel, Japanese short gears, K&N FIPK and upgraded clutch and my best was only 13.6 at 103+. My 60' times were in the 2.1 range.
Click to expand...

I got a 92 NSX only modified with Prova exhaust only ( redline oil sae 30). I didn't down pressure the tire pressure, but i am pretty happy with the time i had. ( that was my first time and only one time doing 1/4 mile test ) my best time is 13.8 @ 99.944 my T1 is 2.08. But there was a little mistake when i shift into 3 gear, so i am still looking for 0.1 sec faster.

I am going to upgrade my intake, clutch and flywheel tomorrow. My friend told me it will faster 0.3 sec. how do you think about it? did you feel a lot different after you change the intake, clutch, and flywheel?

I had 275/40/17 on the rear, and ENKEI rpm is pretty lightweight. (of course, VALK RACING or BBS have lighter wheel, but too expensive for me) i feel this is pretty helpful. and I feel a little different after i changed REDLINE engin oil. My friend told me if I change REDLINE TRANSMITION OIL and also REDLINE DIFFERENTIAL OIL, It will help A LOT; around taking 15 HP back.
 
hi5417 said:
I got a 92 NSX only modified with Prova exhaust only ( redline oil sae 30). I didn't down pressure the tire pressure, but i am pretty happy with the time i had. ( that was my first time and only one time doing 1/4 mile test ) my best time is 13.8 @ 99.944 my T1 is 2.08. But there was a little mistake when i shift into 3 gear, so i am still looking for 0.1 sec faster.

I am going to upgrade my intake, clutch and flywheel tomorrow. My friend told me it will faster 0.3 sec. how do you think about it? did you feel a lot different after you change the intake, clutch, and flywheel?

I had 275/40/17 on the rear, and ENKEI rpm is pretty lightweight. (of course, VALK RACING or BBS have lighter wheel, but too expensive for me) i feel this is pretty helpful. and I feel a little different after i changed REDLINE engin oil. My friend told me if I change REDLINE TRANSMITION OIL and also REDLINE DIFFERENTIAL OIL, It will help A LOT; around taking 15 HP back.
Click to expand...

Hard to believe by changing to Redline synthetic tranny and gear oil will free up about 15 horsepower. I might believe about 5 but that is even pushing it. As for your times, it is very good as you almost got under a 2 second 0-60'. Your miles per hour is a little slower so that shows your true horsepower. But then again, you did mis-shift so that could be the reason.
When I bought my car used, it came with everything on it. I am not sure if you will notice a little improvement with intake and clutch/flywheel combo. Going 1-2 tenth of a second faster or 1-2 miles per hour faster through the traps is hard to tell by the seat of your pants. Only way is to take it to the strip and find out. I have since added Comptech headers and the Cantrell AIS intake scoop so when I get a chance, I will see if my car is any faster. The other thing is I am a 200 lbs guy so that also influences the performance. :rolleyes:
 
hi5417 said:
My friend told me if I change REDLINE TRANSMITION OIL and also REDLINE DIFFERENTIAL OIL, It will help A LOT; around taking 15 HP back.
Click to expand...

huh? 15hp from redline oils? i find that a bit hard to believe. i did for better shifting and like my baby to run good "blood".
 
ran again tonight for a few runs...13.083 @ 108mph. was consistently 13.0xx tonight. same setup, nothing changed...pretty stock.

60' at 2.002
1/8th at 2.51

a little better with those times. 2/1000ths to go on the 60' and about 5/100th on the 1/8th and it should be 12.9xx.
 
So close and yet so far. I bet you can just taste it. Haven't heard of another near stock NSX running those numbers except for maybe the Zanardi edition.
 
Litespeeds said:
So close and yet so far. I bet you can just taste it. Haven't heard of another near stock NSX running those numbers except for maybe the Zanardi edition.
Click to expand...

yeah, me neither, the NSX-S zero runs 12.7 and NSX-S 13.08 pro tested. the acura factory says 3.2L NSX is 13.5 for 1/4 mile. we assume you can go 0.3 second faster then factory announced. but... still...13.08 is way too fast for a stock NSX. are you sure the one you have is regular NSX-T? not Zanardi edition??

the following picture is my Quarter Mile test. Left side is my NSX.
 

Attachments

  • scan0005.jpg
    scan0005.jpg
    25.5 KB · Views: 967
Back
Top