NSX vs C5

[Jimbo]

Whether a C5-Z06-NSX-Zanardi can accelerate to 60 MPH in 4.5 or 4.9 seconds, it's still pretty quick and the times are pretty close.

After all...you can buy a 5 year old 5.0 liter Mustang, spend $2,500 and achieve the same results. I don't think that's the point.

I think we can all agree that the new C5 is a lot closer to the NSX in performance and quality than the old C4 was back in 1991. A lot closer.

I owned a 1984 C4 and the new C5 and my 1991 NSX are light years ahead. Styling is subjective. People like different things. For me the styling of the C5 is OK. Not wonderfully beautiful...but OK. I personally like the NSX much better. But as I said this is a subjective thing.

For the price of $40-$45K the C5 is a bargain considering the performance and level of improved refinement.

Is it better than a NSX? Is it better than a 911? Is it better than a Prowler? Is it better than a Viper? Who cares? It's a personal choice.

I've often heard that people who are impressed with labels buy a Ferrari and not a NSX. If you're impressed with price-performance alone, there's no doubt that the C5 or the Z06 would be a strong contender.

For me the choice of buying my NSX was much more complex than pure specs or labels.

I think what's interesting to me are the engineering and marketing implications that the C5 brings to the table.

In the end...when that new NSX comes out...I want to be able to say...."OH YEAH...I MUST have that car". I hope it looks great, performs better than the Z06 and comes in at price that I can afford and I price where I think I'm getting a great value for the money.

-Jim

------------------
1991 NSX Blk/Blk
1974 Vette 454 4 spd
Wht/Blk

 

[vtec]

I beleive the last magazine mt..did the comparison of the mustand/z06/viper..and they did rear wheel dyno's...THEY came up with 425 to the wheels for the viper..which equates to about 500 to the crank assuming 15% drivetrain loss on the borg tranny...re the vette youre right 385 to the crank...and mustang was sig higher..i think around 350 or so to the wheels...again latest mt mag did the comparison..and if u go on the viper board many surveys have been done asking dyno to the wheels for broken in vipers.and they avearge slighly over 400...re your time of 5.1 very impressive....what do u figure u could do with a supercharger?? mid 4's ...and by the way the driving exp of the nsx is really unmatched by the viper or vette..and the gears wow..the shifting on the vipers feels like a truck in comparison...later.

 

[Flying Low]

I sold my 2000 Millenium Yellow C5, 6spd for my 1994 NSX.

I've never looked back.

------------------
94 Red & Tan NSX 5spd
1999 Cosmos BMW M Coupe 5spd

 

[Jay]

I found C5 seats too comfortable. Didn't feel like a sports car.
I like it stiff!!

 

[STLVPR]

0-60 times don't prove anything. It all comes down to driver skill and tires in the end. A Corvette comes with EMT run flats, hardly a high performance tire. With drag radials or slicks, Vipers, Corvettes, and NSX's would run quicker 0-60 times, which still doesn't mean much. How often do races end once you get to 60mph? The Z06 has over 400 crank hp. The Z06 tested in the MT article (which sucked) dynoed at 346rwhp, the Cobra R at 385rwhp, and the Viper at 425rwhp. All these cars are underrated, and the course did not favor cars with massive horsepower and torque. A Dodge Neon ACR would probably have taken all 3 of these cars on that particular track. C5's have 120% of the NSX's acceleration, and 95% of it's handling. Not bad for half the price.


Jay,


I hope your not judging a car on it's seats (which are easily replaced).

 

[NSX4EVR]

Dear NSXY,

No problem man. I can see how you would get upset about having to "re-hash" the same topic over and over, I hate that too.

I would like to extend a big Thank You, to everyone who posted a reply about this topic, it helped a lot. I am new to NSX Prime but I already feel welcome, thanks.

I think you can tell by my name what side I am on (NSX). Some things you just cant get with numbers, like style and refinment. Well anyway keep driving (dont let your NSX become a garage queen). ;Þ

 

[dswartz]

I considered a C5 before I bought my used 98 NSX coupe last year. Previously, I drove Corvettes for 25 years. Reliability and build quality are definitely an issue. More importantly, for me, is the driving experience. A corvette feels big and like you’re sitting in a hole surrounded by mediocre material quality. In the NSX, as one writer put it, you feel like your sitting on the head of an arrow. The car is low around you, ergonomics are excellent, and you’re surrounded by quality materials and workmanship. On a road course or autocross track (where I’ve had 15 years of experience) the two perform equally well, however, the NSX feels refined and the sounds at 8,000 RPM are addicting. Also, the NSX has what I call long legs. It just keeps pulling for a wide RPM range while the corvette stops at 6,000 RPM (6,500 on the Z06). After all is said and done, however, and your having an ice cream at some road side ice cream stand, I find pleasure in watching people admire the NSX. While some people look at a Corvette, EVERYBODY looks at the NSX. Even if you don’t know what it is, it is clearly something rare and exotic.

On the subject of 0-60, I would like to point out something that everyone appears to be overlooking. 0-60 times are, in large part, based on useable torque at the rear wheels, not absolute engine torque. We all know we can spin our wheels with an NSX just as a Corvette can. What that means is that both cars have more torque than can be used to generate forward motion. The force that can move a car forward is the force that the drive wheels can put to the pavement. Without going through the math, this force is directly proportional to the percentage of weight on the drive wheels. That is why front engine, front wheel drive cars are good in the snow. The NSX has approximately 58% of its weight on the rear wheels while the corvette has 50%. Therefore, the NSX can exert 16% more force off the line then the Corvette! I understand that while “off the line” does not account for the entire 0-60 time, it does account for some advantage for the NSX. Between 4000-6000 RPM the Corvette, once launched, has an acceleration advantage, but not as much as one might think. The total torque at the rear wheels is the torque after drive train losses multiplied times the torque multiplier (transmission ratio x ring & pinion ratio). In first the Corvette’s torque multiplier is approximately 9:1 and the NSX 12.5:1. Assuming approximately 300 and 190 ft. lbs. of torque (for the Corvetter and NSX respectively) after drive train losses, the total torque for the Corvette is 2700 foot pounds and 2375 for the NSX. At this point the Corvette has a slight advantage. After 6000 RPM the Corvette must shift, lowering its torque multiplier to 6:1 or a total of 1800 foot pounds giving the NSX an advantage. When the NSX shifts to second, it still has an 8:1 torque multiplier giving it 1520 ft. lbs., giving the corvette a slight advantage. The end result is that the 0-60 times are almost identical. This same back and forth advantage shifting occurs through the quarter mile, also resulting in similar times. And, as pointed out in the Car and Driver 0-150-0 test, the NSX was 3 seconds quicker to 150 then the Corvette. This was due to its gearing advantage. As you can see, you can’t just compare absolute engine numbers or even rear wheel numbers to determine a car’s acceleration. When comparing these two cars, which are virtually identical in performance, I always point out one important fact… the corvette needs two more cylinders and 78% more cubic inch displacement to achieve the same results!! That, by the way, is a large part of what you pay for in an NSX.

 

[wish4nsx]

… the corvette needs two more cylinders and 78% more cubic inch displacement to achieve the same results!! That, by the way, is a large part of what you pay for in an NSX.

BRAVO dswartz!! The true beauty of the NSX is stated above. Why can't more people realize this? That's Honda engineering- (Note: Circa 1990!!!)

 

[David]

Who cares if the engine is bigger to get the same results? Does it really matter other than in an ego-flexing exercise? I don't care if the car is powered by a squirrel cage or a nuclear reactor -- power is power. The last time I went to the drag strip, no one was giving me bonus points for having a smaller engine.

 

[Kewjoe]

Originally posted by nsxer:
The Z06 does not put down 385hp at the wheels!!!!! It is at the crank, you need to look over your articles again, and 425hp at the wheels for a Viper? The best I have personally witnessed is 387hp(stock) but I have read about one that put down 392hp(stock). The highest I have seen for a stock C5 vette was 292hp. As far as 0-60 times, my experience has been that tires (type and air pressure) and the type of pavement play an enormous part. Being able to "hookup" in 1st gear is critical. You are correct that 4.5sec is extremely fast, especially for an NSX but I have posted a 5.13sec in my 92 (modified air intake, springs, 255 tires) and I am confident that I could post consistent sub 5 sec. runs in a 97+. Some of you that have read my last posts know that the best times we have clocked for a C5 (6,800 miles) was about 5.2-3sec. and he was a very good driver and made perfect shifts. Argueing 0-60mph times though is rather fruitless since in the real world (late night racing) it comes down to the drivers skills (that margin grows very narrow though when a Viper pulls up in the opposing lane).

I just watched a Car and Drivers show that had the Viper vs. the Z06 C5, and the Cobra-R Mustang. They had the cars on a dyno and this is the result:

viper 425 at the wheel
(Dodge says 450 at crank)
z06 344 at the wheel
(Chevy says 385 at crank)
cobra-r 376 at the wheel
(Ford says 385 at crank)

The Cobra-R only lost 9 hp from what Ford says it has at crank (385hp). Im neutral in this argument.. Just wanted to state the facts i saw.

Also Quarter Miles from the show.. are as follows:

Viper 12.33
Z06 Vette 12.86
Cobra-r 12.88

[This message has been edited by Kewjoe (edited 16 July 2000).]

 

[Tetsuo]

no but if you get the same time as those "big" engines you get to have
a bigger smile on your face

Originally posted by David:
Who cares if the engine is bigger to get the same results? Does it really matter other than in an ego-flexing exercise? I don't care if the car is powered by a squirrel cage or a nuclear reactor -- power is power. The last time I went to the drag strip, no one was giving me bonus points for having a smaller engine.

 

[Jimbo]

There is an inescapable logic to the "big engine" argument. If a larger, perhaps less sophisticated engine (as in the Z06) gets the job done then you have to give credit where it's due.

Let me play devil's advocate, and keep in mind, I decided on a 9 year old NSX instead of a new C5.

Yes, the C5 does have two more cylinders and more displacement to get the job done. However, I would expected the smaller and lighter engine in the NSX along with the aluminum construction would have enabled a far lighter structure than what we have.

As I said earlier, the C5 and NSX are for all practical purposes the same weight. I think the critique on the C5's engine and design might ring a bit more true if the car weighed 3400-3600 pounds.

-Jim

------------------
1991 NSX Blk/Blk
1974 Vette 454 4 spd
Wht/Blk

 

[ladman]

I honestly do not believe that someone interested in a NSX would even give a Chevy a blink. In the NSX you are surrounded by quality and precision craftmanship and it shows. This simply is not a feeling one can extract from a Chevy thus the difference in price. Not to fault GM however, they did not intend to have the C5 to compete against Acura's or Porsche's. Corvette's have always been the "affordable sports car" and GM has continued this tradition with the latest offerings.
I have owned two Vettes, a 85 and a 97 convertible. I would like to believe that I have since "graduated" to things finer that fit my lifestyle. Face it guys-how many of you make 10.00 a hour? Whether it be lifestyle, prestige or just it's merits, we love the NSX for what it is and for what IT IS NOT.
Just my little two cents for what it's worth
Lee Dye
future NSX or Viper owner, have not yet decided http://www.ladman.com

 

[nsxer]

10 or even 15 years from now, what car would you really rather drive around? An NSX or a Corvette. When you see a 10 year old Corvette, does it make you crank your neck around like say an NSX? Probably not! The NSX is in a different league. Do not get me wrong, the Corvette is a great car and very fast but in my opinion cannot match the feeling an NSX gives you. Maybe it is because there are so many Corvettes on the road it sort of takes a little of the specialness out of owning one? Before I purchased my NSX I looked at buying an 89' 911 turbo. It was a car that I could drive for a long time a be very happy with even though every year it would be getting older. For some reason, age on a Porsche just makes it better and an NSX is that way as well but I cannot say the same for the Corvette (OK, maybe the vettes from the 60s).

 

[fstvette]

Wow, its good to find a car that gets worse bang for the buck when I got my vette I was Pi$$ed off every time I bought a Mod for it. And the bang for the buck was pour at best. The problem is that I am ready to upgrade and am looking at either a C5 or 93 or older NSX. The vette doesn't rust either and it doesn't get door dings. But it doesn't look nearly as good, Honda did a great job with styling This is going to be a hard decision. Haven't driven a NSX but have the C5 and it is a nice ride.

------------------
1993 6-speed corvette 383 stroker.
12.0@120 on regular g-forces.

 

[Nsxotic]

Once you drive the NSX, the choice will be immensely obvious. An amazing difference in refinement and overall 'feel' of the road. I mean, it's not even close!!! Good luck with your new NSX....

------------------
Pls. visit my site w/ lots of info, pics and a new classified & discussion board (very new) @
http://www.geocities.com/nsxcessive/index.html

 

[NSXY]

fstvette:

Today I drove thru the local mountains and beach areas, about 110 RT miles. I saw six red or yellow C5's, but not one NSX. My car remains relatively unique in "SoCal Sports Car Land", yet it's a Honda!!! and so much more reliable than a Chevrolet. I got 22 mpg even though I was speeding thru the switch backs up and down Palomar mountain!!!! Only the cafe racers in leathers can stay with me in the turns.

I say "Buy the Honda," and you will not regret it. But you still need to be a good consumer, so read NSX Prime Faq, then start looking for a low mileage garage queen. That's what I did. Best luck.

------------------
NSXY
1995 NSX-T 5 speed, Red/Tan, Stock, except Dunlap SP9000s

 

[NSEX]

yeah I totally agree with "Buy NSX, you'll never regret" statement. I used to LOVE the Supra TT that I spend almost half an year to search for a good supra. However, most Supras in my area were in poor condition, as a result, I ended up buying my current NSX. I NEVER feel regret buying the NSX, even though they are some great Supras for sale now. In my opinion, I think Supra and Vette are two extremely similar car, but the NSX is just in another different league.

 

[hejo]

I think it's pretty simple. I ask my wife which one concerned her more..... I bought the NSX and now she wants to ride shotgun all the time......