next nsx--convertable..please!!!!!!

[vtec]

hi guys im new to the fourm..i had a 91 red nsx ..sold it for investments and will be in the market again maybe next year...anyway when i had me nsx i kept hearing how good the new vette was..so i rented it for one day...pros--convertable,much more low end torq, and thats about it...negatives...everything elese(bad build quality..bad handling..bad shifter...seems much higher...just cant compare!!

i really hope the next gen comes out soon..has about 375-425 hp but also 300-325 foot pounds of good old low end...but above all esle...please please acura give us a convertable...i would pay the current price for it---anyday!!!

 

[G-man]

Welcome to the Forum "VTEC".

I too have had the same thoughts you have. I used to own a 1995 BMW 3 series convertible and after modifcation to M status with factory BMW parts, it was awesome! The secret was that BMW has found a way to make the convertibles even stronger than the coupes! In fact, the new 2000 convertible is also designed from the ground up as a convertible and is nearly twices as rigid in sections as the coupe is. The chassis is so stiff that it can support another 3 series convertible on the A-pillars and Rollover Protection in the rear.

I think the NSX would be considerably too heavy in convertible trim if they tried to make it just as stiff as the coupe. That stiffness has to come from somewhere and it adds a lot of weight. my 95 BMW was my first convertible, but now I make it a rule to always have one. I now own a 99 Miata Sport that is AWESOME on the race track, and equally fun to drive to the post office with the top down on a sunny day.

When it came time to buy my NSX, I opted for the "T" so that I could enjoy the top off experience. I think the coupes are considerably stiffer and the early coupes are also a bit ligher. I think if I had it to do over again, I might have opted for a Zanardi edition and really had my fun on the track and left the top down days to the Miata... but then again... there is nothing like rolling slow and letting everyone know that you brough game.

------------------
Gordon G. Miller, III
Y2K NSX #51 Yellow/Black

 

[STLVPR]

Like Edmnunds says, the C5 has 95% of the NSX's handling and 120% of it's speed. The interior of the C5 is not bad at all, but GM doesn't have the greatest quality control. Overall, it isn't a bad car...especially for the price.

 

[Jimbo]

I really considered a C5 before I got my NSX. I've owned a number of Vettes (C3s and a C4) and there's no comparison between those cars and the NSX. Huge difference.

However, I think the new C5, particularly the last two years has closed the gap with the NSX considerably. With all that steel and structure the C5 weighs in at 3200 pounds...or about the same as NSX-T with an automatic. Pretty impressive when you consider that it has a V8 and about 100 additional horses than the NSX. I would have thought that with the aluminum, the NSX would come in somewhere around 2600-2700 pounds.

The C5, while vastly improved, in my opinion still not a match for the NSX. I think it's a different class of auto. However, the gap is much closer and the C5 offers 80% of the NSX for 50% of the money.

I suspect that if the new NSX does come with a steel structure and body, the Honda engineers will find some clever ways to make it much lighter than the current car and the C5. If it helps them to keep the cost down too, then I think it's a good thing.

I love my 91 NSX and to me, I know I wouldn't have liked a new C5 any more.

Jim



------------------
1991 NSX Blk/Blk
1974 Vette 454 4 spd
Wht/Blk

 

[Edo]

Coprrect me if I am wrong but Jimbo, I think the C-5 Corvette weighs something in the neighborhood of 3400 pounds, not 3200lbs. If the Difference between and NSX and C-5 was only 200lbs, and it had 100 more horsepower, that would give it a significantly higher Power to weight ratio.
Nsx @ 3000#'s and 290hp would be 10.3lbs/hp
C-5 @ 3400#'s and 345hp would be 9.85lbs/hp
relatively close if you figure the C-5 weighs 3400lbs..
@ 3200lbs, it puts it at around 9.2lbs/hp..about 10% higher than an NSX. Which would be enough to give it a significant advantage as far as performance goes. And according to most automotove publications, the NSX and Corvette are relatively close in performance. So..with my amateur mathematics..I am going to guess that the C-5 'Vette weighs a porky 3400lbs or so. Anyone have the "actual" curb weight by chance?

 

[Lud]

The C5 is around 3220-3270 lbs depending on options. Peak rated engine HP and weight are not the only determining factors in straight-line accleration.

 

[nsxtasy]

The C5 is around 3220-3270 lbs depending on options.

According to Edmunds, it's 3307.

 

[Joel Zoldessy MD]

According to Chevrolet, the '01 ZO6 will be lighter than previous models (never mind 385 hp,a new 6 spd and performance axle ratio)!

 

[Lud]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
The C5 is around 3220-3270 lbs depending on options.

According to Edmunds, it's 3307.

According to Chevrolet a '99 coupe is 3245
According to The Autochannel a C5 is 3263
According to auto.com a '97 is 3218
According to Car & Driver a '97 is 3260
According to Car & Driver a '98 is 3150-3250
According to idavette.net a '99 coupe is 3221
According to idavette.net a '97 auto is 3229, 6-spd 3218

 

[Jimbo]

I think the weights are pretty close. In any event I was surprised how close the weights were. I think it's reasonable to compare the C5 coupe with the NSX-T since they both have the targa roof.

First, it's an impressive achievement for Chevy to be able to offer a car that is nearly as light as the NSX, but with a V8 and major steel elements in the structure.

I think it's entirely possible and exciting that Honda might be able to use high-strength steel and innovative design to create a very lightweight NSX with a V8.

I know there have been some that automatically assumed that a steel V8-powered NSX would be heavy and undesirable. My point is that the C5 Corvette tells me that this need not be the case.

What if Honda's able to design a new steel "C2" NSX with 400 HP that weighs in at the same weight or even less than the first generation? And all for $60K!

I think we would see a lot of happy campers parked in parking lots of Acura dealers.

My only fear is that it won't look as nice as the current model.

Jim


------------------
1991 NSX Blk/Blk
1974 Vette 454 4 spd
Wht/Blk

 

[dollenz]

You can bet on that! It will not look as nice. Our NSX has an ageless look to it. When it came out in '91 the "round" aero look was in, yet the NSX was both round and angular at the same time. Today we are going back to the angular look and the NSX is right there with the newest of them.

Im my opinion, there are a few cars that have aged well and look as fresh today as they did when they were new. Examples? T-birds 55-57, Corvette 61-67, Jaguar XKs - just about any year, etc., etc. The NSX is bound to be one of them, the design is simply beautiful and ageless.

 

[Lud]

I don't think we can really look at the weight of the C5 and extrapolate it to the next NSX for a couple reasons.. the most important being drivetrain layout.

It is easier to keep weight down in a front or rear engined car (C5, 911) than a mid-engined car with a usable trunk. Of course Honda could drop the mid-engine configuration on the next NSX too but they probably aren't going to sell me one if they do.

The simple pushrod aluminum V8 probably isn't really much heavier than the DOCH VTEC V6 in the NSX either.

 

[Edo]

Ok, now I am confused. The Corvette weighing only 3200lbs raises 2 questions.
#1 If the NSX is all aluminum, and very advanced, then why does it weigh so much? 3000lbs is light, but not THAT light. Especially considering the fact that its contructed of almost exclusively aluminum.
#2 Why are the NSX and Corvette very close in performance if the Corvette weighs just a shade more, and is grossly more powerful? That doesnt make alot of sense..

 

[flaminio]

Convertible NSX? You mean like this?

-Bob ('94 #496)

 

[Lud]

Originally posted by Edo:
#1 If the NSX is all aluminum, and very advanced, then why does it weigh so much? 3000lbs is light, but not THAT light. Especially considering the fact that its contructed of almost exclusively aluminum.

See my note above about mid-engine layout. Also keep in mind that the C5 chassis design is newer than the NSX. It was also designed as an open-top car whereas the NSX had weight added to strengthen it for the -T top model.

#2 Why are the NSX and Corvette very close in performance if the Corvette weighs just a shade more, and is grossly more powerful? That doesnt make alot of sense..

See my note even further above about "Peak rated engine HP and weight are not the only determining factors in straight-line accleration." You need to consider driveline losses, gearing, traction and the difference between a large peak HP rating and a strong and flat overall power curve, etc.

 

[G-man]

Originally posted by Lud:
You need to consider driveline losses, gearing, traction and the difference between a large peak HP rating and a strong and flat overall power curve, etc.

Agreed. In fact BMW has just unwrapped its new 740D diesel engine. Now, I know what you are thinking, but the advantage to the new Diesel is that it has tons of torque to spare. It even has less horsepower than my V-8 740i, about 252 compared to 289, but the torque is something insane like over 351 ft-lbs. The car has faster 0-60 times and better overall performance to 100 mph. I was amazed, but I learned that it is better to have a smooth and strong torque curve to go with that power curve if you want to get the job done right. Lud is right, it takes a lot more than a Power:Weight ratio to make a good sports car... a lesson Chevrolet has yet to learn.

------------------
Gordon G. Miller, III
Y2K NSX #51 Yellow/Black