2017 NSX instrumented acceleration testing

[NZNick]

Umm... maybe you live in an area without hills or traffic on freeway, but the EV for sure helps in those cases. Agree that, per laws of physics, flat ground on cruise control not helped at all by electrics.

.......Unless the car can perform the cruise on electric-only or reduced ICE for a significant % of the time.

 

[fastaussie]

The ICE in the NSX isn't an Atkinson cycle engine like the engine in
a Prius (or various other hybrids built for economy). I say this because
Honda has never described it as such, and because of its power rating
(an Atkinson cycle engine has lower max HP/liter).

So given that the ICE is fairly conventional, the fact that electric motors
are included is no advantage with respect to highway mileage.

Electric motors can help in city driving because regenerative braking
recovers some of the energy spent in accelerating the car.

Umm... maybe you live in an area without hills or traffic on freeway, but the EV for sure helps in those cases. Agree that, per laws of physics, flat ground on cruise control not helped at all by electrics.

i'm referring 95% to the 9th gear in the transmission. the NSX should be massively overdriven and get insane highway mileage...

 

[chrisn]

Don't think I said 35. I have experience 26.2 with a bit of lead foot action on my actual commute. I expect 27 with no "playing"--- perhaps a bit better in heavier traffic.

- - - Updated - - -

.......Unless the car can perform the cruise on electric-only or reduced ICE for a significant % of the time.

Pesky physics says it almost never helps to burn gas to store in battery and then later extract. Some braking and steep hills are your friend for relative mileage improvement from hybrid system. The ideal high mileage car would have just enough weight and HP to accelerate to 60 in 20 seconds and make just enough power at peak specific efficiency to just off set drag and friction. It would not have electrics. Not a very fun car.

 

[NZNick]

Of course the new NSX is going to be rarer than the original - in the first couple of years of production, 10,970 had been built (but only 8,539 sold). Those levels of production are simply unobtainable (and undesirable) for the Ohio PMC.
In the final 9 years of the previous NSX, only 3123 were built.

I predict an absolute maximum of 10,000 units in the lifetime of this version of the NSX, probably closer to half that.

 

[Tom239]

chrisn: It was fastaussie who said 35. I didn't realize I was quoting your response and not his--my mistake, sorry 'bout that.

 

[NZNick]

Don't think I said 35. I have experience 26.2 with a bit of lead foot action on my actual commute. I expect 27 with no "playing"--- perhaps a bit better in heavier traffic.

- - - Updated - - -



Pesky physics says it almost never helps to burn gas to store in battery and then later extract. Some braking and steep hills are your friend for relative mileage improvement from hybrid system. The ideal high mileage car would have just enough weight and HP to accelerate to 60 in 20 seconds and make just enough power at peak specific efficiency to just off set drag and friction. It would not have electrics. Not a very fun car.

- sounds like the first-gen Insight!

This is where a plug-in option has the advantage - assuming free energy directly from the sun (via a garage-roof collector and battery storage).
Probably doesn't help the car's handling and having to have additional battery capacity (& therefore weight), but certainly can boost the MPG figure.

 

[N Spec]

chrisn, what's the rpm for 70 mph on the highway?

 

[fastaussie]

You said you'd expect the new NSX to get 35 MPG all day. 35, really?

perhaps close to that? it's a small engine with 9 gears in the DCT!

I don't disagree with either of you two about the new SH-AWD being the halo theme for the flagship car. This is why I say variants for lesser models or performance trims and emphasized weight saving techniques over the reduction of tech. Everyone has remarked that the turbo-lag masking is a great sensation and even remarked that the 488 should take note...

a Ferrari, like the McLaren, is designed for excitement. the 570S has noticeable turbo lag, but when they wake up, hold onto your panties because it's go time. and i love that car for it. a Supercar is by its very (non-literal) definition an exciting experience. whether you're looking at it, sitting in it, or driving it.

i would never drive or buy a Supercar to be removed from its sensations. and that has always been the bane of the NSX both past and present. not exciting enough...

Also, I think that many people will get closer to 30 mpg with mixed city driving for the new NSX thanks to those EV motors. I'm not sure how the EPA gets their city ratings, but my mixed city mpgs are always higher than what they rate.

I get 23-24 mixed city driving in my old NSX now stacked against the 18 rating.

how on earth do you manage that? i drive my 2002 stocker very easily 90% of the time and i'd be lucky to get 15 mpg in city driving...

I view the R8 and Huracan variants as one entity even tho they differ aesthetically. A Porsche was still present and you're right, the Turbo S would have put the NSX even further back.

The new NSX isn't about high volume sales either. From the way they were talking it seems like they may be even rarer than the first gen...

but the R8 and Huracan have vastly different characters and driving experiences, they really shouldn't be classed as the same car.

McLaren is not a high volume manufacturer, Honda is...

 

[kendallj]

I think the biggest take-away from the article/comparison is that Honda should truly consider simplifying the new NSX either with more weight-saving solutions for the future OR non-hybrid/lesser-tech variants that should shave 300-500 lbs off of the car. The weight distribution would obviously have to be reworked tho...

I'd not like to see the technology in the current car pared back. I like it as it is as a luxury sport GT and it's the car I want to be able to buy. BUT, I do understand the desire for a lighter, simpler car because the current car has disappointed hope and expectation. I hope Honda do in time proceed with a more track-focused non-hybrid Type-R variant. I look at the GT3 development with interest, because the bones of the car are basically the same as the road car, excepting for the provision of the roll-cage. Surely with much of the work being done there, it's not going to be huge leap to translate that development back to a 'Type-R' non-hybrid variant.

 

[N Spec]

perhaps close to that? it's a small engine with 9 gears in the DCT!

how on earth do you manage that? i drive my 2002 stocker very easily 90% of the time and i'd be lucky to get 15 mpg in city driving...

but the R8 and Huracan have vastly different characters and driving experiences, they really shouldn't be classed as the same car.

McLaren is not a high volume manufacturer, Honda is...

-The NSX still weighs 3,900 lbs. How many 2 ton cars do you know get 30+ mpg on the highway?

-I used to have a 1995-T with heavy 18/19 chrome wheels. Shifted between 2500-3000 rpm in the city for daily driving and always got 23-24 mpg. ~29 mpg on the highway for 300+ miles roadtrips. My 92 recently did 27-28 mpg in 1000 mile roadtrip to Miami with AC on the whole time going about 75-80 mph and the car would loaded up with luggage. So I'm not sure how the EPA gets their ratings... In contrast, I have own and driven many 300ZX and G35 which have similar 18/24 mpg ratings. They are actually worst than the EPA ratings with my conservative driving... So it's one of the little things that I truly appreciate about Honda's mpg.

-The R8 and Lambo twins are different in philosophy/tuning but the metrics are nearly identical on paper considering the shared platform. It's like saying the 3000GT and Dodge Stealth were not the same car.

-Yes, but the NSX has never been a high volumes car/model.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd not like to see the technology in the current car pared back. I like it as it is as a luxury sport GT and it's the car I want to be able to buy. BUT, I do understand the desire for a lighter, simpler car because the current car has disappointed hope and expectation. I hope Honda do in time proceed with a more track-focused non-hybrid Type-R variant. I look at the GT3 development with interest, because the bones of the car are basically the same as the road car, excepting for the provision of the roll-cage. Surely with much of the work being done there, it's not going to be huge leap to translate that development back to a 'Type-R' non-hybrid variant.

I think it would be even more satisfying if they could keep the hybrid tech, but bring the weight down 200 lbs or even 300 lbs miraculously. Perhaps the interior is bit too lush maybe? It's certainly not a small feat to achieve tho obviously considering the million dollar 918 weighs almost as much as the NSX.

All of the future cars are embracing hybrid tech, so it's going to be interesting to see how they weigh in comparison to the NSX. I guess the hp numbers are going to swell over the years with escalating curb weights.

 

[fastaussie]

-The NSX still weighs 3,900 lbs.

yep, that's a problem in a lot of areas...

All of the future cars are embracing hybrid tech, so it's going to be interesting to see how they weigh in comparison to the NSX. I guess the hp numbers are going to swell over the years with escalating curb weights.

i would imagine with ongoing and progressive battery technology, the weight should go down. at least i would sure hope so. 4,000 Supercars aren't gonna cut it. (even the Hypercars are 3,400 lbs. - LaFerrari and P1, and 3,600 lbs. for the 918)...