I have done more than 300 km p/h with my NSX. But haven't a video of that. I hope this gives you an idea what you can achiev on the Autobahn in Germany:wink:
282 km p/h
282 km p/h
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
top speed
- Thread starter Synthesis
- Start date
180 mph in my supra tt
160 in my NSX
160 in my NSX
282km/h /// 176mph in autobahn :smile: .
I believe 290km/h /// 181mph is possible without traffic.
My NSX is bone stock...
I believe 290km/h /// 181mph is possible without traffic.
My NSX is bone stock...
My one is lowered and got 17/18 rims with 215/40 and 275/35. Engine is stock.
I can reach aprox 240km/h in 4th gear. Shifting in 5th it seems to me the gear is too long. From there car climbs dragging to 265km/h in the flat. Maybe it will reach 270km/h and a little more at decline road, but up to now there was always too much traffic for the last 10 km/h.
Reading all the posts here makes me considering about a lack of power or a lazy speedo :frown:
Maybe it`s the tire size ?
I will check it out with my GPS Pocket PC the coming days.
Regards Michael
I can reach aprox 240km/h in 4th gear. Shifting in 5th it seems to me the gear is too long. From there car climbs dragging to 265km/h in the flat. Maybe it will reach 270km/h and a little more at decline road, but up to now there was always too much traffic for the last 10 km/h.
Reading all the posts here makes me considering about a lack of power or a lazy speedo :frown:
Maybe it`s the tire size ?
I will check it out with my GPS Pocket PC the coming days.
Regards Michael
Last edited:
|Adeel said:
getting small tires would be equivalent to making your gears shorter thus making you accelerate better but also lowers your top speed. it usually doesn't make too much of a different. a .5 inch shorter or taller tire would usualy add or minus 6+/- mph on the top speed. ( well thats with the gearing on a 240sx ) i know on a nsx it would probrably be closer to 10mph.
getting taller tires would make your gear ratio taller which as i mentioned earlier would make your theoretic top speed higher but would make it harder to get there.
lower the car would help prevent lift as less air would get trapped underneth the car and make it more stable. it should give you a slightly more better top speed. don't know why though, logic says that should increase drag but it doesn't.
adding a rear spoiler or wing would definitly decrease top speed. some downforce is needed for stability. but some cars like the F360 modena doesn't have a wing but its body was so well designed. the F360 would actually reduce lift as it gets to a certain speed.
I have tested my top speed today in the late afternoon with my GPS. I saw that the speedo is very exact, even at high speeds. I compared up to 250km/h and it shows the same as the GPS say without a noticeable tolerance. My top speed was 273km/h.
- How will larger/smaller wheels affect the top speed? Lowering?
Wider tires lowering the top speed !
For example my MB CLK:
With 205/55/16 topspeed was 250km/h (limiter)
With 255/35/18 topspeed is aprox 240km/h
I never drove my NSX with stock wheels but I guess he would be faster with them.
Regards Michael
- How will larger/smaller wheels affect the top speed? Lowering?
Wider tires lowering the top speed !
For example my MB CLK:
With 205/55/16 topspeed was 250km/h (limiter)
With 255/35/18 topspeed is aprox 240km/h
I never drove my NSX with stock wheels but I guess he would be faster with them.
Regards Michael
Last edited:
Gerard van Santen said:
Especially when you're high on Ecstasy. 300 Km/H is 186 MPH and there's no way on God's green Earth than a CTSC can provide enough horsepower to overcome the drag to push an NSX to those speeds.
These top speed threads are like fish stories. This is the age of high tech. If you're going to make a claim of top speed use a GPS and post the proof. Otherwise the post gets categorized under Internet Rule #1 which simply states "99.9% of anything posted on a message board is pure unadulterated bullshit."
This is an acceptable method of "proof"
MikeW said:
Negligably. At 273 KmH you've effectively hit a wall and to make any significant top speed increases you will need to massively increase your horsepower. Yuo would have to roughly double your horsepower just to get another 30 or so KmH. There's no way around the laws of physics.
If you want to learn more, read this.
roenick said:
You're another candidate who needs to read the above posts.
Trust me, the only way your '91 NSX will see 181 mph is if the Space Shuttle jettisoned it from its cargo bay just prior to re-entering Earth's atmosphere.
140 MPH on the front straight of Road America.
Hugh said:
Excause, but where the hell you got my NSX is -91?
It is -97 (if that have anymatter) :wink: , but why you think I have any reason to lie anybody
? The lane was enough straigh, and my speed was going on and on up.
I have one pictures, what my friend takes too early in the autobahn and the camera's battery end just after that..
The speedo was then about 275-278km/h.
After that we got that ~280 to 282km/h to my speedo.
There was enough straight to go and the car seems to get more speed "slowly", but traffic is coming so I have to slow down my speed.
So that was my feeling about the car could go up to 290km/h.
Possibly you are right, never know because I didn't get that speed
..I don't have any reason to lie anybody or proof my strenght to anyone!
If here or anywhere else is kind of that people, Im not one of them.
Peace
-Pegi-
roenick said:Excause, but where the hell you got my NSX is -91?
It is -97 (if that have anymatter) :wink: , but why you think I have any reason to lie anybody
The lane was enough straigh, and my speed was going on and on up.
I have one pictures, what my friend takes too early in the autobahn and the camera's battery end just after that..
The speedo was then about 275-278km/h.
After that we got that ~280 to 282km/h to my speedo.
There was enough straight to go and the car seems to get more speed "slowly", but traffic is coming so I have to slow down my speed.
So that was my feeling about the car could go up to 290km/h.
Possibly you are right, never know because I didn't get that speed
I don't have any reason to lie anybody or proof my strenght to anyone!
If here or anywhere else is kind of that people, Im not one of them.
Peace
-Pegi-
Vancehu said:
So there you have it. 181 mph in a stock NSX is against the laws of physics. Knowing Vance I'm sure that is exactly what Honda said.
Not calling you a liar but physics are tough to argue with. Perhaps your speedo was off. Unless you were rolling down a 20* grade or something but not on a flat surface.
roenick said:Excause, but where the hell you got my NSX is -91?
It is -97 (if that have anymatter) :wink: , but why you think I have any reason to lie anybody
The speedo was then about 275-278km/h.
After that we got that ~280 to 282km/h to my speedo.
91 - 97 was a typo. I never said you were lying. You're just putting way too much faith in your speedo. The higher the indicated speed, the more innacurate the speedo. Mother nature says an NSX can't go much faster than 167MPH and there's no arguing with Mother Nature.
Go invest in an inexpensive GPS and go find out what she can really do.
Hugh said:Negligably. At 273 KmH you've effectively hit a wall and to make any significant top speed increases you will need to massively increase your horsepower. Yuo would have to roughly double your horsepower just to get another 30 or so KmH. There's no way around the laws of physics.
If you want to learn more, read this.
I fully agree to your statements to the relation between horsepower, drag/frontal surface and top speed.
Drag rise squared to the speed means to overcome the drag you need to square your horses for unlimited speed...
Ok, my issue was how do my wide tires affect the top speed? As I asume those posted high speeds (282km/h) have been achieved with stock tires or my NSX is a snail.
I agree with you that the increased roll-resistance of wide tires is negligably for the top speed issue. But wide tires will increase the frontal-surface and cause air resistance which rises squared...
Thats why my CLK lost about 10-15 km/h top speed with the wider tires.
So I asume a NSX could achieve 280km/h only with stock tires or in free fall. 215/275 in practice will lower the top-speed.
I assume the sonic wall for the NSX is about 280km/h with stock tires. Everthing else are fish stories, as you mentioned.
I hope my moderate english skills didn`t cause too much confusion...
Regards Michael
Hugh said:
I can not agree...,the speedo of the NSX is very accurate. As I already wrote there was no noticeable tolerance compared to the GPS up to 250km/h and I have checked this several times very overcarefull.
From 250 km/h on I did not watch my speedo anymore and the RECORDED max of the GPS was the 273,4 km/h.
In reversed direction of the same Autobahn-section I just reached 264,7km/h and the speedo needle was just between 260 and 270km/h.
I guess there maybe exists an interrelation between speed, adrenaline and hyperopia...:tongue:
Hugh said:
Why do you think a CTSC NSX with the same the horsepower or more than a Ferrari 360 can not reach 186mph. A F360 does 189mph with 400 crank hp. And because of the layout of the engine a F360 looses a lot more hp on the drivetrain than an NSX does (almost 75hp!).
http://www.2sportscars.com/fmodena.shtml
I can tell you and have prooven on more than one occasion that a CTSC NSX can be faster than a F360. On track and on the street.
Last edited:
Gerard van Santen said:
I just took some lessons in physics :biggrin: and have calculated that the NSX (274bhp, 270km/h) would need to have 374 crank hp
to achieve 300km/h.Seems to be realistic.:smile:
I have played with some numbers, basic was Honda`s stock specification for the NA1 with 270km/h @ 274bhp.
274bhp = 270,00 km/h
284bhp = 273,23 km/h
294bhp = 276,41 km/h
304bhp = 279,51 km/h
314bhp = 282,54 km/h
324bhp = 285,51 km/h
334bhp = 288,42 km/h
344bhp = 291,27 km/h
354bhp = 294,06 km/h
364bhp = 296,81 km/h
374bhp = 299,50 km/h
and if you double the horsepower:
548 bhp = 340,17 km/h
So, that`s it !
Regards Michael
Last edited:
MikeW said:I just took some lessons in physics :biggrin: and have calculated that the NSX (274bhp, 270km/h) would need to have 374 crank hp
Seems to be realistic.:smile:
Regards Michael
You prooved my point. So a CTSC NSX with 373 rwhp should be able at least 300km/h :wink:
Gerard van Santen said:
The extremely large air intakes on the front of the F360 play a vital role in the car's aerodynamics, effectively reducing it's frontal area and also channeling air underneath the car into the rear diffusers. At 180 MPH there is amost 400 lbs of downforce acting on a 360. Of course not many get to see 180 MPH because they've usually suffered a major mechanical malfunction or have self -incinerated.
A non CTSC NSX wil have little problem disposing of an F-360 on the street and especially on the track.
Similar threads
