-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
High Speed Acceleration Times
- Thread starter nsx4jlp
- Start date
That would be interesting to know how the NSX compares to other cars. I guess you can use the car mags time and subtract them.
this is where the NSX really shines. Don't drag race much but sometime you are cruising down the freeway when someone wants to go, so a downshift to 3rd and run it all the way to redline is always fun.
------------------
92 Red/Blk
this is where the NSX really shines. Don't drag race much but sometime you are cruising down the freeway when someone wants to go, so a downshift to 3rd and run it all the way to redline is always fun.
------------------
92 Red/Blk
Well, for comparison....I have a '91 NSX with Exhaust/Intake/Clutch/Flywheel.
Coming out of Turn 9 onto the front straight at PIR I am going about 65-70mph...
I was following a Supercharged Hamann M3 (Yellow) and for 1-2 seconds he pulls away, but after 6000rpm's in 3rd gear I start pulling on him heavily. 3/4 the way down the front straight I am near 3 car lengths ahead of him. I suspect that this relates to the VERY close gearing of the NSX between 3-4th gear and also the Aerodynamics. 0.32cd is not exceptionally low, but the frontal area is VERY small compared to the M3 which will make a greater impact than just quoting Cd.
I believe that the NSX is built to shine from 100mph on. The NSX doesnt look as great below 100mph which is where most cars shine.
Coming out of Turn 9 onto the front straight at PIR I am going about 65-70mph...
I was following a Supercharged Hamann M3 (Yellow) and for 1-2 seconds he pulls away, but after 6000rpm's in 3rd gear I start pulling on him heavily. 3/4 the way down the front straight I am near 3 car lengths ahead of him. I suspect that this relates to the VERY close gearing of the NSX between 3-4th gear and also the Aerodynamics. 0.32cd is not exceptionally low, but the frontal area is VERY small compared to the M3 which will make a greater impact than just quoting Cd.
I believe that the NSX is built to shine from 100mph on. The NSX doesnt look as great below 100mph which is where most cars shine.
I have a Turbo Charged NSX and a friend and I thought it would be different to time the car from 60 to 120mph, He is part owners of a local Airport and has a selection of different radar devices so he set up one of his guns with a timer and timed me, I was running 12lbs of boost(motor dynoed at 459hp,380 ft lbs of torque) for the test, the car ran just under the 7 seconds.
I wish I could remember which magazine it was in, but they were doing one of those annual "sports car shoot-out" type of article. They did the normal sorts of tests, but they added a new one and it was acceleration from 60mph to 120mph, or something similar. Even though the NSX was getting beat in a number of categories, it THRASHED the competition in this category. It was quite impressive. I'd love to remember where I read this; I'm sure I still have around..
0-150-0 = http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/cd9808.htm
best handling = http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/rt9906.htm
[This message has been edited by justin hall (edited 06 December 2001).]
best handling = http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/rt9906.htm
[This message has been edited by justin hall (edited 06 December 2001).]
I know for the 0-150-0 the NSX was second only to a viper, beat porsche, vette, M Roadster
------------------
92 Red/Blk
------------------
92 Red/Blk
Here is the article. I linked directly to page 9 for the conclusion (see about two thirds down the page for results - under "How the Stockers Performed") but the whole article is there...
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/1998/August/199808_roadtest_0to150to0.xml?&page=9
I still keep that issue of R&T as a collectors item. It's also the issue where the Lingenfelter Corvette ZR1 destroyed the competition by a full 2 seconds including the 600HP Hennesey Venom.
I think the most compelling thing I got from the article was the fact that it takes so much more power (both HP and brake power) than an equivalent 0-100-0 test - despite the fact that there is only 50% more speed involved.
Quote from page 1 of the article:
"Although raising the test speed from 100 to 150 mph seems like a simple 50-percent increase, its effects are profound.
For one thing, overcoming the aerodynamic drag at 150 mph requires 3.38 times as much power as it does at 100 mph. Therefore, whereas acceleration at two-digit speeds is primarily determined by a vehicle's power-to-weight ratio, acceleration above 120 mph is limited more by the power-to-aerodynamic-drag ratio -- the factor that also limits a vehicle's top speed.
Raising the peak speed from 100 to 150 mph also means that the brakes must dissipate 2.25 times as much energy while bringing the car to a complete stop. Moreover, it's done in one massive thermal jolt that's about twice as time-consuming as that produced by a stop from 100 mph."
Quote from page 1 of the article:
"Although raising the test speed from 100 to 150 mph seems like a simple 50-percent increase, its effects are profound.
For one thing, overcoming the aerodynamic drag at 150 mph requires 3.38 times as much power as it does at 100 mph. Therefore, whereas acceleration at two-digit speeds is primarily determined by a vehicle's power-to-weight ratio, acceleration above 120 mph is limited more by the power-to-aerodynamic-drag ratio -- the factor that also limits a vehicle's top speed.
Raising the peak speed from 100 to 150 mph also means that the brakes must dissipate 2.25 times as much energy while bringing the car to a complete stop. Moreover, it's done in one massive thermal jolt that's about twice as time-consuming as that produced by a stop from 100 mph."
Awesome! Is that a punch from a steady 60?
I'll dig up the acceleration graphs from my stock '93 and see how they compare. They will show the time from 60-120 while already accelerating, but not from a punch. I only recorded a few punch runs and don't recall one of that range.
Are you looking for numbers from a punch while holding at 50 in 2nd, or cut from a run when already accelerating before 50? Naturally there would be a big difference, but I have the latter for a stock ‘93.
Its funny you mention this. I just had the joy of racing a 360 from 30-120 and then from 50-130. I gotta tell you the NSX is a beast from 50-130. I pulled a little over 1/2 a car on him. From 30-120 though it was no competition, I was blasted by about a full car. The driver was cool, we pulled side by side and chatted, he threw a biz card and said he will race anytime. With the BBSC it would be really interesting.
disclaimer: I run a CTSC, ARC air/pipes/exhaust, shorties, and Type R R&P.
This was done on an open road during the day free of traffic.
Seven seconds from a punch is very fast![/B][/QUOTE]
Don't forget that my car also made 220 more hp to the wheels than your stock NSX. And also the time might not be 100% accurate but it was high dollar equipment that was used, we did four back to back runs all under 7 seconds,the slowest time was 6.94 secs and the quickest time was 6.82.
Don't forget that my car also made 220 more hp to the wheels than your stock NSX. And also the time might not be 100% accurate but it was high dollar equipment that was used, we did four back to back runs all under 7 seconds,the slowest time was 6.94 secs and the quickest time was 6.82.
I raced a 97 911 TT this morn from about 60-160. He was in front of me and took off.. I had not only to catch him from the jump he had cause he was in front, but get in the next lane and pass him by 160 I was a good 5 cars in front.. So I'd say it would be safe to assume if I were side by side I would have 7 cars on him?
Does that say much? I've also raced new 911 TT and beat the one and got eat by the "eddie whitman" one LOL
160??? You could hit about 40 here in LA before hitting traffic.
Are you sure that 911T driver wasn't afraid of going too fast? That car should take an NSX from any speed, by many car lengths- it's beyond fast in a straight line. Are you running a turbo or SC? That would make sense.
Are you sure that 911T driver wasn't afraid of going too fast? That car should take an NSX from any speed, by many car lengths- it's beyond fast in a straight line. Are you running a turbo or SC? That would make sense.
Don't forget that my car also made 220 more hp to the wheels than your stock NSX. And also the time might not be 100% accurate but it was high dollar equipment that was used, we did four back to back runs all under 7 seconds,the slowest time was 6.94 secs and the quickest time was 6.82.[/B][/QUOTE]
Hey, I'm not doubting you, I'm just impressed!
Originally posted by ilya:
160??? You could hit about 40 here in LA before hitting traffic.
Are you sure that 911T driver wasn't afraid of going too fast? That car should take an NSX from any speed, by many car lengths- it's beyond fast in a straight line. Are you running a turbo or SC? That would make sense.
Ohh sorry I got TT's
Similar threads
