• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

NSX beats C6 ??

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
27 September 2001
Messages
20
I realize that the wmv file is about the 05 Corvette C6 ... but if you watch towards the middle of the wmv ... the drag race, the NSX is one of the other cars ... and it comes in 2nd to the TVR ... C6 third and Porsche 4th. That does not sound right ... but if it is, WOW to the NSX. :cool:

C6 review in England

:confused: :confused: :confused:
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
19 May 2003
Messages
1,393
Location
Green, New Jersey
That video is an old post. But for what it's worth I am highly skeptical about that drag race. They must have started the vette in 2nd gear!! There is no way a car with the same power to weight ratio as LAST year's Z06 would have performed that badly. I mean the NSX is fast, but let's stop pulling the wool over our own eyes. Let's get serious, in today's world of high horsepower cars, the current NSX is not up to the task any more. Handling, looks, braking, fuel economy, comfort....YES Straight line power....NO
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
The C6 and NSX essentially weigh within 100 pounds of one another and the C6 has an additional 110 horsepower and 170+ ft lbs more torque over the NSX.

It would be nice if it were a reality to put the C6 in our rearview mirrors though. :biggrin:
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
21 January 2005
Messages
1,384
CerberusM5 said:
The C6 and NSX essentially weigh within 100 pounds of one another and the C6 has an additional 110 horsepower and 170+ ft lbs more torque over the NSX.

It would be nice if it were a reality to put the C6 in our rearview mirrors though. :biggrin:

I guess the only way an NSX (3.2L) would be on equal footing with the C6 in terms of hp/tq is with CompTech i/sc/h/e installed. But this would be stock vs. modded so it's not really an apples/apples comparison. Never the less, I think (IMHO) the NSX with these mods would dominate the C6 on a road-course.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
13 April 2005
Messages
5,482
Location
Vegas/SoCal
The narrator did mention at the start of the race, that they were all in the same class with "roughly the same power." That sort of led me to believe the NSX was modified in some way, although they never say for sure. Nowhere (at least on this planet :tongue: ) can 290 hp be realistically considered “roughly the same power” as 400 hp even if you streched it.

It was a hell of a launch for the NSX though. If it was a 40 yard dash, the NSX might have been able to take it. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
13 July 2004
Messages
1,993
Location
Bay Area (SF)
PoohBEAR said:
leaf spring?
They were kidding right?
if not... HAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!! :biggrin:
a leaf spring LOL... :biggrin:
 

liftshard

Suspended
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
29 April 2005
Messages
442
Location
NoVA
Well, then, neither is the 911 and a host of other cars including the 360, 550, Esprit, and DB7. The C6 has a ridiculously big engine, tons of hp and immense straight-line speed. However, the NSX is consistently in the mid to high 4s now in 0-60. How much faster can anyone expect from a car that costs $90,000? The 911 ain't faster. The Esprit ain't. What, the Viper and C6 are now our benchmarks? Cars quicker than those? S7s, F1s, Enzos and whatnot. Otherworld supercars that half a mil can't get.

Anyone could only name a handful of cars that the C6 *isn't* quicker than. Criminy, an old Firehawk with $6000 worth of mods could smoke almost every Ferrari, Porsche, Aston, Lambo, and Lotus ever made. So what? If bang for your buck is what you're after, don't buy an exotic. You will be disappointed when your Modena gets beat by a Z06 costing $150,000 less.



jadkar said:
That video is an old post. But for what it's worth I am highly skeptical about that drag race. They must have started the vette in 2nd gear!! There is no way a car with the same power to weight ratio as LAST year's Z06 would have performed that badly. I mean the NSX is fast, but let's stop pulling the wool over our own eyes. Let's get serious, in today's world of high horsepower cars, the current NSX is not up to the task any more. Handling, looks, braking, fuel economy, comfort....YES Straight line power....NO
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
Leafsprings

The suspension on the Corvette is not that archaic. It is a highly evolved leafspring based suspension on the C6. The previous C5 ZO6 had higher cornering limits than my NSX, especially in the tight stuff. I would assume a Z51 suspended C6 is comparable. However, the Corvette does not have the same feel and precision as the NSX.

Then again, the skinny tires on NSX contributes to the car's lithe handling feel. If it had tires comparable in width to today's sports cars, I would bet the handling feel would be severely degraded.

The Corvette is good handling car no matter what type of suspension architecture it uses plain and simple.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
liftshard said:
However, the NSX is consistently in the mid to high 4s now in 0-60. How much faster can anyone expect from a car that costs $90,000?

Are you joking?

The NSX is an underperforming car from an acceleration standpoint if you take it's $80k+ price into consideration. The competition walks away from the NSX in any speed contest. I don't know of one that doesn't.

I think the engine is this car's Achilles heel. Maybe in 1990 it was a technological marvel, but today, 290 horsepower out of 3.2 liters is nothing special by a longshot. The NSX needs an additional 100 hp minimum from the factory to be even considered competitive.

If you were making this comparison in the early 90s, then the NSX was easily equal to its peers in performance. However, the competition has made huge strides over the past 10 years, but Honda essentially sat on their butt and today their premiere sports car is a bench warmer at best.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
25 September 2004
Messages
838
Location
Canada
Yes, the NSX is faster than C6 in accelration.

The 2001 NSX did 4.5sec in 0-60mph, and 12.9 sec in 1/4 mile. (Tested by CAR & DRIVER)
Kunimitsu Takahashi (also known as Gan-San from Best Motoring) did 12.7 sec with an NSX Type-S Zero.

The 3.2L NSX is much faster than what people think.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
19 May 2003
Messages
1,393
Location
Green, New Jersey
The 2001 NSX did 4.5sec in 0-60mph, and 12.9 sec in 1/4 mile. (Tested by CAR & DRIVER)

Well...I just pulled up a page on the web also from Car & Driver that has the C6 0-60 at 4.1 & the Quarter at 12.6 @114mph.

I'm willing to bet that the vette numbers are also more consistent. But as for the NSX, I bet there's only a handfull of driver's that have ever seen Car & Drivers "reported" numbers out of their NSXs.

Look, I love the NSX just as much as the next guy, but if you review my orginal remarks I am only commenting on straight line power from a stand-still. 290 vs 400....enough said, and don't even think of throwing the old gearing trick at me, that much horsepower can't be made up in gearing:)
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
Timpo said:
Yes, the NSX is faster than C6 in accelration.

The 2001 NSX did 4.5sec in 0-60mph, and 12.9 sec in 1/4 mile. (Tested by CAR & DRIVER)
Kunimitsu Takahashi (also known as Gan-San from Best Motoring) did 12.7 sec with an NSX Type-S Zero.

The 3.2L NSX is much faster than what people think.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the NSX will not out accelerate a C6 Corvette. Maybe a quick race to 20 across an intersection possibly, but from a roll, the C6 will pull away decisively from the NSX. At higher speeds, the Corvette will literally walk away and never look back. I have done numerous runs against two different cars with good drivers and my NSX never had a chance. The C6 is clearly a faster car.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
12 May 2003
Messages
1,195
Location
Seattle, WA
CerberusM5 said:
Are you joking?

I think the engine is this car's Achilles heel. Maybe in 1990 it was a technological marvel, but today, 290 horsepower out of 3.2 liters is nothing special by a longshot. The NSX needs an additional 100 hp minimum from the factory to be even considered competitive.


too bad we cant bolt together two s2000 engines in a 60 degree configuration for a 500 hp 4.0 litre v8 :biggrin: :biggrin:
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
12 May 2003
Messages
1,195
Location
Seattle, WA
Timpo said:
Yes, the NSX is faster than C6 in accelration.

The 2001 NSX did 4.5sec in 0-60mph, and 12.9 sec in 1/4 mile. (Tested by CAR & DRIVER)
Kunimitsu Takahashi (also known as Gan-San from Best Motoring) did 12.7 sec with an NSX Type-S Zero.

The 3.2L NSX is much faster than what people think.

i dont know the history on this exactly but wasnt that Car and Driver NSX they tested a Coupe instead of the run of the mill NSX-T??
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
khappucino said:
CerberusM5 said:
Are you joking?

I think the engine is this car's Achilles heel. Maybe in 1990 it was a technological marvel, but today, 290 horsepower out of 3.2 liters is nothing special by a longshot. The NSX needs an additional 100 hp minimum from the factory to be even considered competitive.


too bad we cant bolt together two s2000 engines in a 60 degree configuration for a 500 hp 4.0 litre v8 :biggrin: :biggrin:

Now that would be interesting. Would we still have the 9k redline? :smile:
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
khappucino said:
i dont know the history on this exactly but wasnt that Car and Driver NSX they tested a Coupe instead of the run of the mill NSX-T??

I think you are right.

That 7 year old C&D test report will be the banner that some NSX owners will waive for years to come. It will rank right up there with the disputed 7:56 NSX-R run on the Nurburgring.
 

LJSB

Suspended
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
7 September 2000
Messages
5,231
I have owned many Vettes.
I have not driven a C6 yet. I have driven and repaired many C5's and they are a huge step down from the NSX in quality. The stock C5 is about even in straight line performance taking the jump off the line but getting reeled in as the NSX hits V-Tec. The ZO6 is clearly faster but it is still a Chevy with a little plastic vent on the side.
I am interested in the new C6 but expect it to be the same deal as the much herald C4 and C5 were at their introduction. Both were disappointing once they had 20,000 miles and started to loosen up and wear.
GM is suffering as they have made their customers suffer and have had since the 70's to wake up and improve and as of yet, have not. I am waiting anxiously and am ready to come back but they need to improve and not just throw new cars at us and hope we don't notice how badly they hold up.
Zero percent financing is not enough. I want quality.
JMHO.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
pbassjo said:
I have owned many Vettes.
I have not driven a C6 yet. I have driven and repaired many C5's and they are a huge step down from the NSX in quality. The stock C5 is about even in straight line performance taking the jump off the line but getting reeled in as the NSX hits V-Tec. The ZO6 is clearly faster but it is still a Chevy with a little plastic vent on the side.
I am interested in the new C6 but expect it to be the same deal as the much herald C4 and C5 were at their introduction. Both were disappointing once they had 20,000 miles and started to loosen up and wear.
GM is suffering as they have made their customers suffer and have had since the 70's to wake up and improve and as of yet, have not. I am waiting anxiously and am ready to come back but they need to improve and not just throw new cars at us and hope we don't notice how badly they hold up.
Zero percent financing is not enough. I want quality.
JMHO.

It is without question that the NSX is clearly superior to the Corvette in terms of quality and reliability. I have owned two ZO6s and hated the quality and workmanship. I bought them primarily for their performance potential. However, I probably only put on 5,000 miles (mostly autoX, track and aggressive street driving) between the two of them, so I personally do not know how well they hold up over the long term. I am really hoping the new C6 ZO6 is a standout in performance with much improved quality.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
19 May 2003
Messages
1,393
Location
Green, New Jersey
pbassjo said:
I have owned many Vettes.
I have not driven a C6 yet. I have driven and repaired many C5's and they are a huge step down from the NSX in quality. The stock C5 is about even in straight line performance taking the jump off the line but getting reeled in as the NSX hits V-Tec. The ZO6 is clearly faster but it is still a Chevy with a little plastic vent on the side.
I am interested in the new C6 but expect it to be the same deal as the much herald C4 and C5 were at their introduction. Both were disappointing once they had 20,000 miles and started to loosen up and wear.
GM is suffering as they have made their customers suffer and have had since the 70's to wake up and improve and as of yet, have not. I am waiting anxiously and am ready to come back but they need to improve and not just throw new cars at us and hope we don't notice how badly they hold up.
Zero percent financing is not enough. I want quality.
JMHO.

Very well said Joe!!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
19 February 2001
Messages
5,236
Location
Southern California
CerberusM5 said:
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the NSX will not out accelerate a C6 Corvette. Maybe a quick race to 20 across an intersection possibly, but from a roll, the C6 will pull away decisively from the NSX. At higher speeds, the Corvette will literally walk away and never look back. I have done numerous runs against two different cars with good drivers and my NSX never had a chance. The C6 is clearly a faster car.

With your stock wheels or the 18/19 anchors? :biggrin:
Sounds like your selling Sandy!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
ANYTIME said:
With your stock wheels or the 18/19 anchors? :biggrin:
Sounds like your selling Sandy!

Hey John,

One time with the stock ones and the other with the polished anchors. The car is definitely not as lively accelerating from a start with the heavier aftermarket rims.

In regards to a sale, I'm not sure yet. I have a two candidates on order, both with a lot more power and edgier. We will see afterwards, if the NSX survives the new girlfriend.

Take care.
 

liftshard

Suspended
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
29 April 2005
Messages
442
Location
NoVA
CerberusM5 said:
Are you joking?

The NSX is an underperforming car from an acceleration standpoint if you take it's $80k+ price into consideration. The competition walks away from the NSX in any speed contest. I don't know of one that doesn't.

I think the engine is this car's Achilles heel. Maybe in 1990 it was a technological marvel, but today, 290 horsepower out of 3.2 liters is nothing special by a longshot. The NSX needs an additional 100 hp minimum from the factory to be even considered competitive.

If you were making this comparison in the early 90s, then the NSX was easily equal to its peers in performance. However, the competition has made huge strides over the past 10 years, but Honda essentially sat on their butt and today their premiere sports car is a bench warmer at best.

OK. What $80k cars can you name which are significantly faster? I mean, name them.

I agree that Honda should be making at least 340hp from this engine. But, I still wonder just exactly who in the hell "the competition" is supposed to be. The Viper? The Vette? Get the hell out of here.

The C6 will walk a $200k Aston Martin with ease. That doesn't make them competitors. The upcoming Z06 will probably out run every car in EXISTENCE short of the Enzo, S7, and F1. That make them a competitor to the F430 or 575? That make the DB9 "too weak"?

The NSX STILL delivers 911 numbers. THAT is the competition and the NSX acquits itself very WELL against that type of car. Against stuff like SL500s, Maserati 3200s, you know, OTHER $80-100k cars? You have your panties in a bunch because the car can't slam a Vette and you paid way more for the NSX. Well, get over it. The C6 will eat your Modena too, but I don't hear anyone complaining about that. We don't have freakin arguments about how the Vette is a better buy than a 360. Everyone and his MOM would take the 360 in a heartbeat, cuz "it's a Ferrari."

I think you expect FAR too much from $80,000 because of what CHEAPLY BUILT crap cars like the Corvette deliver. My buddy totalled my 00 NSX and I drove his 99 C5 for a couple of weeks. Similar straight line performance, but the Vette is a rattle bucket piece of shit. Don't EVEN compare these two cars.

My point still stands. An even CHEAPER car, a late-model Pontiac Firehawk, with $6000 in mods beats every car short of $500,000 in price. What a helluva buy! Boo hoo, I don't want a Lamborghini anymore.

Dude, why are you even buying an M5 w/ the V10? A C6 Z06 is going to beat your ass handily. A relatively lightly modded C5 will smoke you. Guys in 'Tegs running 20 lbs of boost are going to show you up.

It seems to me that you expect the NSX to compete with Ferraris costing twice as much instead of with ACTUAL $80k cars.


CerberusM5 said:
I think you are right.

That 7 year old C&D test report will be the banner that some NSX owners will waive for years to come. It will rank right up there with the disputed 7:56 NSX-R run on the Nurburgring.

Well, the C&D test actually happened. And an NSX with only 290hp outran a C5 with 345hp to 150mph. Amazingly, stated hp ratings aren't the be all and end all of cars.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
25 September 2004
Messages
838
Location
Canada
Also please don't say anything like "but Corvette is bang for buck"

This is what people make their mistake, Corvette is NOT bang for buck. Look how much you paid, and look how much quality you got.

You will not get a beautiful piece of art like NSX or Porsche... You are getting a Corvette, yes, made by GM, a plastic piece of garbage. GM = Garbage Machines

I really don't think GM has an idea of making a pure sportscar...I mean, look...it's not just a case of Corvette...

Pontiac Solstice, would it compete with the new Miata? I mean wow the Solstice has 2.4L engine!!! 0.4L bigger than the new Miata!!! OK sure, Miata will make approximately 160HP or so from 2.0L engine, and Solstice makes 177HP from 2.4L engine...and weighs almost 500lbs more. Yes, if you buy a solstice, you will get BIGGER engine and MORE weights.
But people say Solstice is bang for buck just because their MSRP is lower than the miata.
I would personally say the Miata is more bang for buck than the Solstice. Look how much money you pay and how much you get.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
17 June 2004
Messages
695
liftshard said:
OK. What $80k cars can you name which are significantly faster? I mean, name them.

I agree that Honda should be making at least 340hp from this engine. But, I still wonder just exactly who in the hell "the competition" is supposed to be. The Viper? The Vette? Get the hell out of here.

The C6 will walk a $200k Aston Martin with ease. That doesn't make them competitors. The upcoming Z06 will probably out run every car in EXISTENCE short of the Enzo, S7, and F1. That make them a competitor to the F430 or 575? That make the DB9 "too weak"?

The NSX STILL delivers 911 numbers. THAT is the competition and the NSX acquits itself very WELL against that type of car. Against stuff like SL500s, Maserati 3200s, you know, OTHER $80-100k cars? You have your panties in a bunch because the car can't slam a Vette and you paid way more for the NSX. Well, get over it. The C6 will eat your Modena too, but I don't hear anyone complaining about that. We don't have freakin arguments about how the Vette is a better buy than a 360. Everyone and his MOM would take the 360 in a heartbeat, cuz "it's a Ferrari."

I think you expect FAR too much from $80,000 because of what CHEAPLY BUILT crap cars like the Corvette deliver. My buddy totalled my 00 NSX and I drove his 99 C5 for a couple of weeks. Similar straight line performance, but the Vette is a rattle bucket piece of shit. Don't EVEN compare these two cars.

My point still stands. An even CHEAPER car, a late-model Pontiac Firehawk, with $6000 in mods beats every car short of $500,000 in price. What a helluva buy! Boo hoo, I don't want a Lamborghini anymore.

Dude, why are you even buying an M5 w/ the V10? A C6 Z06 is going to beat your ass handily. A relatively lightly modded C5 will smoke you. Guys in 'Tegs running 20 lbs of boost are going to show you up.

It seems to me that you expect the NSX to compete with Ferraris costing twice as much instead of with ACTUAL $80k cars.

Well, the C&D test actually happened. And an NSX with only 290hp outran a C5 with 345hp to 150mph. Amazingly, stated hp ratings aren't the be all and end all of cars.
Here are some cars that are significantly faster under $100k (not all are direct competitors, but still faster):

1. M5
2. C6 Coupe
3. ZO6
4. Viper SRT-10
5. Mustang Cobra
6. SLK55
7. E55
8. 997 Carrera
9. 997 Carrera S
10. GT3

Why am I buying an E60 M5? To replace my current M5. I want the best sports sedan on the planet; and in my opinion, it's the new M5. Of course the new C6 ZO6 (I have one on order) will out accelerate the new M5, it should since it is a focused sports car, but it doesn't have enough seats to take my kids to the park.

All out acceleration is not my primary focus. I want a blend of power, handling, braking and quality. I thought the NSX was Honda's equivalent to the GT3 (only $15k cheaper). However, after driving a GT3 upon buying my NSX, I saw the light. The GT3 was superior to the NSX in all perfomance aspects; it's an amazing sports car for the money. I will probably replace the ZO6 with a 997 GT3 when introduced, but not before I have some fun trashing the ZO6.

I do not compare the NSX to any modern Ferraris. The NSX is no longer worthy of such comparisons. In the early 90s it provided the wakeup call, but Ferrari has since improved their products light years ahead of the NSX.

With that said, I still think the NSX is a wonderful car, but not for $89,765. The NSX is the only car that Honda produces that is not competitively priced and is at least $20,000 overpriced in my opinion. For $70,000, the NSX would be a good buy.
 
Last edited:
Top