All engines produce instant torque.
Perhaps you mean electric motors produce maximum torque at start-up and gas engines produce maximum torque at higher rpm.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
New NSX Engine Revealed
- Thread starter sporteknik
- Start date
All engines produce instant torque.
Perhaps you mean electric motors produce maximum torque at start-up and gas engines produce maximum torque at higher rpm.
Engine looks great !!
However, I am not seeing the front wheel electro engines there and I also don't see much that looks like a generator for the batteries.[/QUOTE
- - - Updated -
- - - Updated - - -
Splendid!! I can,t wait. But we all see the final result in 2015
- - - Updated
Last edited:
So I was reading up on the TLX concept and the 2.4 I4 DOHC i-Vtec engine can come with a dual clutch transmission, but this transmission also has a torque converter as well. I wonder if we will see this on the new NSX's dual clutch transmission as well?
What a great thread this is. I wish I'd seen it sooner.
I see someone else is hopeful for the ters system too, but I'm pretty certain we won't see it. They've said the car has three electric motors and twin turbos. For ters we'd need another two, one for each turbo. Do admit though, the pictures of the drive train do show highly encased turbos which could be hiding the small motor drive required and the resulting absence of wastegates. It's possible they may not need to count the motors as they aren't reactive motors that contribute to the wheel torque.
Plus they do have the battery architecture in place already.
I drove the i8 this week and can tell you the combination of turbo charged engine and electric drive motor did provide instant lag free response. Anyone worried about torque delivery needn't be.
One comment that I question is why the nsx won't match the gtr to 60?
It has the same 4wd, probably slightly better weight distribution and weighs a lot less. It also has the equivalent of boost off line (a Gtr retro fit due to remapping) that sees modded Gtrs doing sub 2.5 to 60. I'm not sure why the nsx can't match that?
I see someone else is hopeful for the ters system too, but I'm pretty certain we won't see it. They've said the car has three electric motors and twin turbos. For ters we'd need another two, one for each turbo. Do admit though, the pictures of the drive train do show highly encased turbos which could be hiding the small motor drive required and the resulting absence of wastegates. It's possible they may not need to count the motors as they aren't reactive motors that contribute to the wheel torque.
Plus they do have the battery architecture in place already.
I drove the i8 this week and can tell you the combination of turbo charged engine and electric drive motor did provide instant lag free response. Anyone worried about torque delivery needn't be.
One comment that I question is why the nsx won't match the gtr to 60?
It has the same 4wd, probably slightly better weight distribution and weighs a lot less. It also has the equivalent of boost off line (a Gtr retro fit due to remapping) that sees modded Gtrs doing sub 2.5 to 60. I'm not sure why the nsx can't match that?
Good to hear about the i8 anti-lag, considering it's only a 3 cylinder also! MT has the i8 clocking 12.3 on the 1/4 mile and 3.8 0-60. Mindblowing for a conservative 360 hp /3200 lb car. Those emotors are doing their job.
I'm excited to see performance numbers announced for the NSX soon hopefully.
turbocharger goes along nicely with these new direct-injected engines and SH-AWD would stick like glue regardless of power especially with mid-engine layout
shame it's not a high-power turbo really, it would mop up the floor with these newish supercars
shame it's not a high-power turbo really, it would mop up the floor with these newish supercars
What's not a high power turbo?
I guess this isn't considered a peaky top-end oriented turbo...? I mean, it's not a low-boost twin-scroll from a Volvo either. I don't see the problem.
Osiris_x11
Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
I'm thinking areout was referring to a turbo power-plant on par with the 3.8L 12C/650S, 3.8L 911 Turbo/S, 3.8L GT-R, and forthcoming 458T, etc with 500-600 bhp that's without any electrical-assist.
It'd be unrealistic to expect the high-power turbo engines of the P1, Agera, Huayra, etc of hyper-cars. Or anything close.
If the RLX SPORT HYBRID SH-AWD with the NA 3.5L is good for 377 bhp (with electric-assist/e-motors), and adding a twin-turbo (presuming more-or-less same electric-assist/e-motors output) should be good for a combined 500'ish bhp for the NSX-v2. I believe linear delivery through the power-band with a high-rev range, electric-assist/e-motor torque-fill to address turbo-lag, low-end on-demand torque optimized through AWD, etc all will contribute to a "less-gives-more" instead of just having a 600+ hp motor...
Last edited:
This exactly. A high rev turbo(s) would be ideal to mimic characteristics of a high revving engine like what they are trying to achieve with the 458T or 408T. Low end torque assist from emotors and big power in the top range would be a perfect balance! Can any turbo experts guestimate the turbine size from the concept's depiction???
The biggest turn-off for me in a turbo car is not turbo lag but actually running of juice at ~6K RPM or not making full power all the way to redline.
Osiris_x11
Gold Member, Moderator: Marketplace
I think that's how it's all going to go down, from afar.
It's a great time as of late for Honda to optimize the NSX-v2's power-delivery by using the current case-studies being offered by Ferrari, Porsche, and McLaren...
- high-revving large displacement NA power-plant with electric-assist and RWD drive-train, namely LaFerrari
- high-revving moderate displacement NA power-plant with electric-assist and AWD drive-train, namely 918
- high-revving small displacement turbo power-plant with electric-assist and RWD drive-train, namely P1
Obviously, performance/handling of the aforementioned are in entirely different realm, but lessons can learned and insights can be made.
Last edited:
I was confused by the determination that we knew the turbo size already.
I must confess that I'm not entirely sure how a twin turbo charged V6 could produce little enough horsepower to only make 500bhp.
Assuming we have the same 67bhp from the electric motors as the RLX adds, then to get to only 500bhp, means making 433 from a twin turbo direct injection vtec 3.5 (minimum) V6.
I can't see it.
My last GTR ran the smallest turbos I could find that still spooled like wildfire. They were Borg Warner EFR turbos which made me 800bhp peak power from a standard geometry engine, but still produce 14lbs of boost at 3200, the same as the stock car.
The turbos on the stock car are the same size as IHI VF34s. These are typical stock size turbos that you'd find on various impreza incarnations. Even the stock GTR turbos can run to 650bhp on 93 octane fuel (we call that 98).
To only make 433 from a similar capacity engine in a halo car would be an embarrassment to Honda, and that's working on the assumption that the motors are ONLY as powerful as the RLX hybrid.
I can't estimate the size of the stock turbos, but even with the smallest possible incarnation I can think of, running pathetic stock boost (7 or 8 lbs), you'd still struggle to make less than 450-460 bhp. The downside of that would also be that you'd suffer all the downsides of a low compression FI engine, without the upside of the high power. On top of that, smaller turbos spool very low down. It would be making boost at close to idle. That's great except that the working range wouldn't allow the turbo to keep going to the redline to take advantage of that nice Vtec (regardless of what variety) cam lobe. A small turbo simply wouldn't be well paired with a revvy engine which I know Honda would want, or at least try to achieve.
There's a mismatch of components if we assume the power rating of the motors is a maximum (unlikely) and the total of 500bhp being bandied around is anything like accurate.
There's no point adding hybrid technology for performance on to a big engine, with small turbos. The motors and the turbos do the same thing of providing low down torque.
If you consider the P1, the base engine produces 727bhp (actually a bit pathetic considering the boost required to achieve it) and the motor 176. That gives 903 bhp. We all accept the NSX will not be reaching for these heights, but to expect it to come in 400bhp below with essentially the same components?
Ok, we can take 100 off the motor, but to lose 300bhp from the engine at the same time. Even if you scale down the turbo size because the torque filling motors have 100bhp (I realise we should be quoting torque but I don't have the numbers) less to play with, the resulting engine would be a joke, and the tiny turbos would be breathless at the top and would shun the help of the motors at the bottom.
it just doesn't add up.
In short, I say expect at least 550-600, or expect the total motor capacity to be 40/50bhp.
I must confess that I'm not entirely sure how a twin turbo charged V6 could produce little enough horsepower to only make 500bhp.
Assuming we have the same 67bhp from the electric motors as the RLX adds, then to get to only 500bhp, means making 433 from a twin turbo direct injection vtec 3.5 (minimum) V6.
I can't see it.
My last GTR ran the smallest turbos I could find that still spooled like wildfire. They were Borg Warner EFR turbos which made me 800bhp peak power from a standard geometry engine, but still produce 14lbs of boost at 3200, the same as the stock car.
The turbos on the stock car are the same size as IHI VF34s. These are typical stock size turbos that you'd find on various impreza incarnations. Even the stock GTR turbos can run to 650bhp on 93 octane fuel (we call that 98).
To only make 433 from a similar capacity engine in a halo car would be an embarrassment to Honda, and that's working on the assumption that the motors are ONLY as powerful as the RLX hybrid.
I can't estimate the size of the stock turbos, but even with the smallest possible incarnation I can think of, running pathetic stock boost (7 or 8 lbs), you'd still struggle to make less than 450-460 bhp. The downside of that would also be that you'd suffer all the downsides of a low compression FI engine, without the upside of the high power. On top of that, smaller turbos spool very low down. It would be making boost at close to idle. That's great except that the working range wouldn't allow the turbo to keep going to the redline to take advantage of that nice Vtec (regardless of what variety) cam lobe. A small turbo simply wouldn't be well paired with a revvy engine which I know Honda would want, or at least try to achieve.
There's a mismatch of components if we assume the power rating of the motors is a maximum (unlikely) and the total of 500bhp being bandied around is anything like accurate.
There's no point adding hybrid technology for performance on to a big engine, with small turbos. The motors and the turbos do the same thing of providing low down torque.
If you consider the P1, the base engine produces 727bhp (actually a bit pathetic considering the boost required to achieve it) and the motor 176. That gives 903 bhp. We all accept the NSX will not be reaching for these heights, but to expect it to come in 400bhp below with essentially the same components?
Ok, we can take 100 off the motor, but to lose 300bhp from the engine at the same time. Even if you scale down the turbo size because the torque filling motors have 100bhp (I realise we should be quoting torque but I don't have the numbers) less to play with, the resulting engine would be a joke, and the tiny turbos would be breathless at the top and would shun the help of the motors at the bottom.
it just doesn't add up.
In short, I say expect at least 550-600, or expect the total motor capacity to be 40/50bhp.
We are actually hoping the size of the turbos to be rather large. That way, the power delivery is built as the RPM increases all the way to redline hopefully north of 8,000 rpms and thus mimicking a high rev NA motor. A small turbo can produce big torque as quick as 2500 rpm but will usually run out of juice/horsepower by ~6,000 rpm. This could leave a 2,000 rpm deficit until redline of "dead" power for instance. That dead power range is very upsetting to experience IMO.
I understand that and completely agree, the thing is large turbos do not fit with the power claims of circa 500bhp. It was 400bhp originally. Big turbos would make complete sense, but since the motors are 100% going in the car, either the power will be much higher than expected or to achieve what we all want, they'll have to handicap the car for the sake of it at the bottom, just to make it rev at the top. Ultimately that will be great for people like me who WILL be turning up the power at the first opportunity.
I am hoping to drop the car straight off to a very respected ECU hacking company in the UK so they can figure out how to remap the thing asap. If it comes with big turbos from the factory that saves me a job. Be nice if it had titanium conrods too.
Like I said, stock GTR turbos were fairly small. It revs to 7750 pretty damn easily, and that's without full vvt. It's intake cam only and doesn't alter lift, only phase. If you change the stock downpipes there's a massive amount of breathing potential released which sees it rev quite freely, though nothing like a proper screaming VTEC. As I said, stock turbos with a slight cranking of boost and some decent mapping are good for 650bhp alone.
That's a lesser engine, without Honda heads, without direct injection, and without electric motors. None of this adds up. Bring on January!!!
- - - Updated - - -
Based on the indirect comments of an acquaintance who owns all three of the above (and an F1 team btw.) it's the 918 they should be aiming to copy in terms of the complete package.
btw. there's not a huge amount of displacement difference between the P1 and the 918.
I am hoping to drop the car straight off to a very respected ECU hacking company in the UK so they can figure out how to remap the thing asap. If it comes with big turbos from the factory that saves me a job. Be nice if it had titanium conrods too.
Like I said, stock GTR turbos were fairly small. It revs to 7750 pretty damn easily, and that's without full vvt. It's intake cam only and doesn't alter lift, only phase. If you change the stock downpipes there's a massive amount of breathing potential released which sees it rev quite freely, though nothing like a proper screaming VTEC. As I said, stock turbos with a slight cranking of boost and some decent mapping are good for 650bhp alone.
That's a lesser engine, without Honda heads, without direct injection, and without electric motors. None of this adds up. Bring on January!!!
- - - Updated - - -
Based on the indirect comments of an acquaintance who owns all three of the above (and an F1 team btw.) it's the 918 they should be aiming to copy in terms of the complete package.
btw. there's not a huge amount of displacement difference between the P1 and the 918.
Last edited:
I think Honda will be conservative and announce a horsepower just high enough edge out say the GTR which is currently at 545 hp, so maybe 560 or so. However, like typical Honda or many cars with conservatively claimed hp, the dyno (if even possible to accurately measure) shall be much more than that conservative number IMO.
11-14 psi from the factory sounds ideal. I imagine you will not be alone in the ECU modding endeavor!
In the Gtr world, there's only two companies when it comes to remapping, one of them is technologically far superior are develops far faster and conveniently is based very near me in the UK.
My plan is to take my car straight to them and leave it with them whilst they figure out how to proceed. Their technology is far better than any other stock ecu hacking solution I've seen on any other platform so it's a no brainer to take it straight to them. Especially as the NSX is an obvious evolutionary market for ex gtr owners who'll be very familiar with the quality of their products.
My plan is to take my car straight to them and leave it with them whilst they figure out how to proceed. Their technology is far better than any other stock ecu hacking solution I've seen on any other platform so it's a no brainer to take it straight to them. Especially as the NSX is an obvious evolutionary market for ex gtr owners who'll be very familiar with the quality of their products.
good if it's 560, but I've seen the guesstimated numbers run as low as 400...shameful if it doesn't get at least 50% more power than RLX
While I agree with you, the peak number is going to be a big factor in sales and bench racing among fanboys.
sad that the bench racers will be beating me 99.9% of the time....but that .1% that I'm actually at a track will suffice.... :biggrin:
I truly doubt 400 hp is the output unless the motor was NA and a 400+ hp all-motor V6 is not exactly unbelievable today. Emissions and mpg are main concerns for Honda though. I share the same sentiment as Adamantium in that if Nissan is cranking out 500 hp+ from twin turbos, then Honda should easy match them with ease and then some.
One of my old gtrs has just made just shy of 820bhp on a very accurate dyno on the stock engine. The amazing thing is the boost level was very low and the spool is better than stock on the dyno and the road.
I'm amazed at the performance and am hoping if we can get close to that gain with the NSX, the total package will be able to mix it with the P1 and 918.
I'm amazed at the performance and am hoping if we can get close to that gain with the NSX, the total package will be able to mix it with the P1 and 918.
Last edited:
I'd be very surprised if Honda had primitive ECU/Boost technology and couldn't figure out how to get power out of a turbocharged engine.
They've been at it a long time and the entry into F1 with a hybrid system is not a low tech application.
I think they understand the torque characteristics of electric and turbocharged gasoline engines.
The size of turbos, spin up rates, turbo lag won't be news.
My guess is they will/are spending lots of time developing a drivetrain system with a flat torque curve from low to very high rpm blending the charcteristics of the two power sources.
Flat linear torque at all rpm will result in high performance in real world driving conditions like the Doc says.
I don't think this new world of blended power systems is about peak horsepower numbers anymore.
That's not to say you won't be be able to take a Honda ECU controlling a multi-source power train to a tuner and have them find more gasoline engine hp by adding boost.
I would think however that Honda will have spent a great deal of time on the total car balance.
That would be balancing of the power delivery, the gear/final drive ratios, the suspension characteristics at various power and cornering/braking conditions.
I don't think the NSX will be a big heavy car like a GTR with an easy to boost engine and lots of electronics to assist in handling the heavy machine.
I'd expect balance, superior handling, adequate power, and very fast in the real world.
They've been at it a long time and the entry into F1 with a hybrid system is not a low tech application.
I think they understand the torque characteristics of electric and turbocharged gasoline engines.
The size of turbos, spin up rates, turbo lag won't be news.
My guess is they will/are spending lots of time developing a drivetrain system with a flat torque curve from low to very high rpm blending the charcteristics of the two power sources.
Flat linear torque at all rpm will result in high performance in real world driving conditions like the Doc says.
I don't think this new world of blended power systems is about peak horsepower numbers anymore.
That's not to say you won't be be able to take a Honda ECU controlling a multi-source power train to a tuner and have them find more gasoline engine hp by adding boost.
I would think however that Honda will have spent a great deal of time on the total car balance.
That would be balancing of the power delivery, the gear/final drive ratios, the suspension characteristics at various power and cornering/braking conditions.
I don't think the NSX will be a big heavy car like a GTR with an easy to boost engine and lots of electronics to assist in handling the heavy machine.
I'd expect balance, superior handling, adequate power, and very fast in the real world.
fastaussie
Suspended
Honda has always been about one thing more than any other. Balance...
Similar threads
