-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
Oh my god!
- Thread starter Don Corenman
- Start date
Maybe I should have said "please PM me and explain" or "please explain briefly" or "please don't explain." :wink:TURBO2GO said:
Thread is already way off-topic anyway (from some guy sharing his joy to what we have now), not that that excuses it.
This site already uses a lot of time resources to defend why we have NSXs instead of a <insert cheaper, higher-HP, newer, etc. car name here>... now we have to defend our mods to *other NSX owners*? Scorp, you own an NSX. You should know better than to talk about your theories and ideas/ideals when you have no experience with the opposing argument.
Using the supermodel example that another poster did: I'll save my opinions of how good sex with one is until I've actually done it!
J
Using the supermodel example that another poster did: I'll save my opinions of how good sex with one is until I've actually done it!
J
02#154 said:
I did it once. I was out drinking with some buddies and we hooked up with some smokin model types. Next morning I woke up and a Kathy Griffin had apparently abducted the redhead I had been with and climbed into bed with me:biggrin:
nsxsupra said:
Jason,
It certainly wasn't my intention to infer the installation of a CTSC was a bad choice, my initial (rambling) post was in regards to a response made to Vance when he had posted about his CTSC order cancellation - essentially the basis was there are reasons why people who could easily afford the comptech package choose to instead spend their money on other things, and there are reasons why certain people might decide to take their car in a different direction, even if that direction were to involve F/I. The fact that your 3.0L car was able to pull 3 CL's on a much newer 3.2L nsx with a very strong motor speaks worlds for the positive impact of the CTSC on your car.
As I have mentioned several times in this thread I have not driven a CTSC nsx, and all of my F/I experiance is with either BMW's or Porsches - I do have a bias towards turbochargers, but as I stated above the CTSC is the most-economical method of boosting the nsx motor, it is also, I believe, the only carb-certified method of doing so (if this is a concern to you), and there is little mystery involved in the installation/tuning of such a setup. This said the use of a turbocharger would result in a better-performing package at similar boost levels, and if such a package were easily available I would give it a serious look, as I am sure others would as well. I have my reasons for not purchasing the comptech blower, and you have your reasons for installing one on your car - I am not trying to make it seem as though you made a bad decision, I am just explaining why I have not bought the same setup. My past experiance, with my Z3, involved a vortech blower, the differance between a vortech blower, like what is installed in a BBSC, and a roots-type blower, like what is used in the CTSC, is night and day with regards to low rpm power, but at its heart it is still a supercharger, and I am assuming it would have similar traits to the vortech I have experience with. The M50 used in a Z3 is also a high compression 6-cylinder motor, and the low-rpm effect of the supercharger was noticable when you took the effort to feel for it - it seems to me, given my reasons for buying the nsx, this would ruin the experience for me; others might simply be happy with the better performance of the comptech supercharger.
I didn't set out to buy the world's fastest car when I bought an nsx at the end of last year, instead I went out in search of an nsx, with little desire to go above and beyond what came out of the factory, and the desire for something quick enough from the factory, with good reliability - this is the car I decided to buy, because I was satisfied *gasp* with its performance - if I wanted a significantly faster car I would have bought one at that time. I have no doubt your nsx is a great deal faster than my nsx, just as a C6 ZO6 is faster than both of our cars, and an enzo is faster than the C6 ZO6 - there will always be someone faster, and there is a limit to how much certain people may be willing to spend on one car before they come to the realization that they are not an automobile manufacturer, and aftermarket companies spend far less time conducting R&D than automobile manufacturers do.
If one were to view the nsx as a 'balanced package' (I hate to throw the term around, given how it can be interpreted differently be different people, but stay with me here) any part that is "improved" could be considered as a part that is specializing the car towards one direction - as I mentioned earlier, anything you do to this car will result in some sort of benefit, and some sort of compromise - you could improve handling with a stiffer suspension, and lose some degree of ride comfort. You could install a CTSC, and lose some degree of the nsx feel in exchange for power - I would assume these trade offs are considered prior to making such a purchase, and you could consider such an item and make a different decision as a result of your consideration - I could make a different one, does this mean you're wrong? does it mean I am wrong? Certainly not, just a differance in opinion and priority.
Vancehu said:
ONLY !!!
Heh. what a funny statement.
3 car lengths is what we call a anal raping in street racing lingo.
scorp965 said:Jason,
but at its heart it is still a supercharger, and I am assuming it would have similar traits to the vortech I have experience with.
Again, drive one one first, then give some feedback. You know how to spell ASSUME don't you? When you do you make an ASS out of U and ME:biggrin: :wink:
Shumdit said:
note, assuming in italics :wink:
I'm going to pick on the same quote as Shumdit, but a longer version of it...
If you look at the comparison at the top of that page they give their rankings for different F/I systems based on different variables (temp increase, boost curve, lag, power). Lysholm comes in first (best) in boost curve and lag, and second in temp increase (by comparison roots is ranked low in all of these).
What you have experience with is different and you're making poor assumptions.
The Vortech supercharger is a centrifugal supercharger, which you got right. The CTSC is NOT a roots-type supercharger, but a Lysholm (twin screw) supercharger. The two are quite different. From this article:scorp965 said:
If you look at the comparison at the top of that page they give their rankings for different F/I systems based on different variables (temp increase, boost curve, lag, power). Lysholm comes in first (best) in boost curve and lag, and second in temp increase (by comparison roots is ranked low in all of these).
What you have experience with is different and you're making poor assumptions.
scorp965 said:Jason,
and aftermarket companies spend far less time conducting R&D than automobile manufacturers do.
I'd have to disagree here Scorp, its not always the case. When a manufacturer concentrates on a single part, they do often come up with something better. How much concentration did Honda have when they decided the antenna is cool to have up when CD's are playing?
Take any aftermarket speaker and amp combo and it easily outperforms the factory... without a SINGLE drawback. I think better tires are available that are aftermarket... that perform better in ALL categories. A good seat manufacturer probably has seats that are better in every way... I would say any set of good aftermarket brake system is better in every way... lighter, stronger, more capable in extreme conditions.
This is what they concentrate on... what they do best. When you take one area and concentrate on it, you can do better than factory.... sometimes, at no more cost even.
Now what you say, is true in many instances. There is a lot of crap in the aftermarket.... but you can't lump everyone in the same group. Also manufacturers make mistakes sometimes (snap rings)...
I am all about factory... as far as I am concerned, the default opinion without deep examination is that stock is better. But its not always the case.
Hmmm...
I wonder where I fit in in all this... I suppose you could say that I swing both ways! :biggrin:
On the one hand I have a highly modified twin turbo track/event car with superior statistics (on paper) to a Ferrari Enzo. I'm pushing the envelope of what is (relatively) economically possible and sustainable on the NSX.
On the other hand I have a street only NA2 NSX that is absolutely as it came from the factory, right down to the tyres!
I have found out that if you track the NSX, there are some upgrades you need to do and others that keep you competitive against the current crop of Porsche’s and Ferrari's.
But for the street... The unmodified NSX is still an unbeatable package! Suspension, power, EVERYTHING is PERFECT! There is NOTHING any aftermarket part can do to better the OEM part without compromising something else!
I mean that! Lets take some pretty common "upgrades" NSX owners do and how they negatively affect the NSX as it was intended from the factory...
1. Bigger wheels: they are for looks alone and actually add weight to the rotating mass and actually slow the car down.
2. Exhaust: Adds power but would not pass sound tests for a new vehicle. The OEM is still the best exhaust for attenuating the exhaust noise.
3. OEM Bose Stereo: To get a better sound than the OEM Bose/Alpine stereo you have to install individual amps in place of the built-in Amps in the Bose speakers. This once again adds weight and consumes valuable space in the cabin or trunk. The OEM stereo is still the best sound/weight/volume system on the market.
I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX...
What we do by modifying the car is to personalise it and show where we place our priorities over the Honda design and engineering teams brief.
I wonder where I fit in in all this... I suppose you could say that I swing both ways!
:biggrin: On the one hand I have a highly modified twin turbo track/event car with superior statistics (on paper) to a Ferrari Enzo. I'm pushing the envelope of what is (relatively) economically possible and sustainable on the NSX.
On the other hand I have a street only NA2 NSX that is absolutely as it came from the factory, right down to the tyres!
I have found out that if you track the NSX, there are some upgrades you need to do and others that keep you competitive against the current crop of Porsche’s and Ferrari's.
But for the street... The unmodified NSX is still an unbeatable package! Suspension, power, EVERYTHING is PERFECT! There is NOTHING any aftermarket part can do to better the OEM part without compromising something else!
I mean that! Lets take some pretty common "upgrades" NSX owners do and how they negatively affect the NSX as it was intended from the factory...
1. Bigger wheels: they are for looks alone and actually add weight to the rotating mass and actually slow the car down.
2. Exhaust: Adds power but would not pass sound tests for a new vehicle. The OEM is still the best exhaust for attenuating the exhaust noise.
3. OEM Bose Stereo: To get a better sound than the OEM Bose/Alpine stereo you have to install individual amps in place of the built-in Amps in the Bose speakers. This once again adds weight and consumes valuable space in the cabin or trunk. The OEM stereo is still the best sound/weight/volume system on the market.
I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX...
What we do by modifying the car is to personalise it and show where we place our priorities over the Honda design and engineering teams brief.
Last edited:
AU_NSX said:
I hate to tell you, but you are likely to be proven wrong on this one. I am going to check back in a few hours to see what others have posted.
Off the top of my head:
Smartenna
Billet Cam plugs
some of the aftermarket brake kits
Strut tower bars
There are a number of exhausts that pass emissions and dB requirements and add a good aural improvement and more power
On a NA1 car: Exhaust manifolds
Downforce/Cantrell intake scoop
Vented front hood for those high speed guys.
HID headlight conversion
Window fix it thingies
LED interior light bulbs
aftermarket MP3 capable CD changer
Shumdit said:
While I do see your point I don't think you got mine!... Please take into account technology that was not around when the NSX was designed and the design breif...
I have a magazine article interviewing each of the engineers and designers who were responsible for the NSX. Each said what they would have liked to do (given a free hand) but there were constraints to work to!
The only thing on your list there is the window fix-it kit. Using a nylon guide is a great idea and it worked! But hindsight has shown it to fail over time (well outside warranty though) Some manufactures wouldn't consider that in need of fixing!
Billet cam plugs? added expense for what value?
Smartenna - I love it what a great idea, but what car EVER had one of those? It is not replacing anything... It was (and still is new technology) it is also an add on whose value is?
Aftermarket brake kit: $$$ for a street car? How much do you want this car to sell for??? The OEM brakes used existing calipers and pads in the Honda line up! The Brakes have been found time and time again to be totally adequate for the NSX.
Strut tower bars: The NSX has them where they are required! Redundancy costs $$$
Exhaust: Not everyone wants to signal their arrival. Honda wanted the sound of the engine in the cockpit not the exhaust!
Exhaust manifolds on the NA1 car: this has been discussed at length as to why cast iron manifolds are superior to stainless headers. Longevity being one of them. There is a really good article on the FAQ on this!
Cantrel intake scoop: The OEM is prefectly adequate and prevents more water injest the Cantrel does.
The vented hood: I think you'll find that the vented hood does not pass frontal collision requirements in most countries. I know it doesn't in Australia.
HID's / MP3's / LED's this car was designed back in 1986-89... That technology was either not around or too expensive then.
WOODY said:
Ah yes... I was waiting for that one!
Falls under the same category as the window fix-it kit... Making it out of nylon seemed like a good idea at the time... But it rarely fails and if it does, it's well outside of warranty! Fit for purpose!
I have to bring this back a bit. Scorp's point was that anything aftermarket is worse. This did not involve cost. Now, you are putting yourself in a 1980's Japanese engineer's shoes and adding cost and 80's technology as a factor.
We were talking about aftermarket parts made TODAY.
Please remember that Scorp made the point that nothing you can do today is as good as what the factory did. That there is always a compromise. And what some of us are saying, is that there are better parts around now, with absolutely NO compromise. This is the statement we are talking about.
We were talking about aftermarket parts made TODAY.
Please remember that Scorp made the point that nothing you can do today is as good as what the factory did. That there is always a compromise. And what some of us are saying, is that there are better parts around now, with absolutely NO compromise. This is the statement we are talking about.
You seem to be changing the rules of your challenge. Let me quote you:
I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX.
Nowhere in there do you mention costs, or that the item has to be something that was on the market at the time the NSX came out (when we all know that aftermarket NSX parts would not be out before the car was introduced).
And to dispute your disputes (even though there is no reason to):
Billet cam plugs? added expense for what value? If they had put them in when the car was made originally the cost difference would have been next to nothing, and the labor saved when the current style ones leaked would have easily been a better $$ result for owners.
Smartenna - I love it what a great idea, but what car EVER had one of those? It is not replacing anything... It was (and still is new technology) it is also an add on whose value is?- You said better than OEM. OEM would have been better with this relay (which is bascially what a smartenna is) and the cost would have be less than $5 in production I would bet. Saving the cost of 1 antenna mast replacement is a value and design improvement.
Aftermarket brake kit: $$$ for a street car? How much do you want this car to sell for??? The OEM brakes used existing calipers and pads in the Honda line up! The Brakes have been found time and time again to be totally adequate for the NSX Really? I looked and could not find any calipers in the Acura/Honda lineup with NSX cast into the side of them. Also, what other Honda/Acura car does the NSX share pads with?? I am not saying the brakes are not adequate, but your challenge was again:I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX. I think they could have improved the brakes without adding much weight or cost. Oh wait, they did in 1997!! So much for original design being the best:wink:
Strut tower bars: The NSX has them where they are required! Redundancy costs $$ There are gains to be had with aftermarket bars, most with weight savings, and on a T model the chassis bars also will help the rigidity of a street car.
Exhaust: Not everyone wants to signal their arrival. Honda wanted the sound of the engine in the cockpit not the exhaust! Again, your rules said improvement. More HP with little sound increase, and arguably a much better tone for a sports/exotic car with less weight to boot is an improvement in most people's books.
Exhaust manifolds on the NA1 car: this has been discussed at length as to why cast iron manifolds are superior to stainless headers. Longevity being one of them. There is a really good article on the FAQ on this! Really? So Honda changed the design due to the high cost of Iron?? You are buying the new Cantrell cast iron version headers yourself? I did not know they were making those!
Cantrel intake scoop: The OEM is prefectly adequate and prevents more water injest the Cantrel does. A Honda Civic is perfectly adequate, so why not sell the NSX and buy 10 of those? , but we are talking about improvements to the OEM design. Have you heard the Cantrell/DF in person? If not, you really have no point of reference to give an opinion on. On the water issue: Can you show me where anyone has had an issue? This is some hater's wives tale from what I have seen.
The vented hood: I think you'll find that the vented hood does not pass frontal collision requirements in most countries. I know it doesn't in Australia. It's got to be legal in many countries, and again, you are adding stipulations to the original challenge. Maybe you should reword the original statement.
HID's / MP3's / LED's this car was designed back in 1986-89... That technology was either not around or too expensive then. Too expensive? Like building a dedicated factory for the production of a hand built low volume auto would be? Like the R&D involved to develop the first all aluminum chassis on a production car? Like the R&D for the first production 4 channel ABS system? Like hand built engines with titanium con rods??? Get real.
I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX.
Nowhere in there do you mention costs, or that the item has to be something that was on the market at the time the NSX came out (when we all know that aftermarket NSX parts would not be out before the car was introduced).
And to dispute your disputes (even though there is no reason to):
Billet cam plugs? added expense for what value? If they had put them in when the car was made originally the cost difference would have been next to nothing, and the labor saved when the current style ones leaked would have easily been a better $$ result for owners.
Smartenna - I love it what a great idea, but what car EVER had one of those? It is not replacing anything... It was (and still is new technology) it is also an add on whose value is?- You said better than OEM. OEM would have been better with this relay (which is bascially what a smartenna is) and the cost would have be less than $5 in production I would bet. Saving the cost of 1 antenna mast replacement is a value and design improvement.
Aftermarket brake kit: $$$ for a street car? How much do you want this car to sell for??? The OEM brakes used existing calipers and pads in the Honda line up! The Brakes have been found time and time again to be totally adequate for the NSX Really? I looked and could not find any calipers in the Acura/Honda lineup with NSX cast into the side of them. Also, what other Honda/Acura car does the NSX share pads with?? I am not saying the brakes are not adequate, but your challenge was again:I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX. I think they could have improved the brakes without adding much weight or cost. Oh wait, they did in 1997!! So much for original design being the best:wink:
Strut tower bars: The NSX has them where they are required! Redundancy costs $$ There are gains to be had with aftermarket bars, most with weight savings, and on a T model the chassis bars also will help the rigidity of a street car.
Exhaust: Not everyone wants to signal their arrival. Honda wanted the sound of the engine in the cockpit not the exhaust! Again, your rules said improvement. More HP with little sound increase, and arguably a much better tone for a sports/exotic car with less weight to boot is an improvement in most people's books.
Exhaust manifolds on the NA1 car: this has been discussed at length as to why cast iron manifolds are superior to stainless headers. Longevity being one of them. There is a really good article on the FAQ on this! Really? So Honda changed the design due to the high cost of Iron?? You are buying the new Cantrell cast iron version headers yourself? I did not know they were making those!
Cantrel intake scoop: The OEM is prefectly adequate and prevents more water injest the Cantrel does. A Honda Civic is perfectly adequate, so why not sell the NSX and buy 10 of those?
, but we are talking about improvements to the OEM design. Have you heard the Cantrell/DF in person? If not, you really have no point of reference to give an opinion on. On the water issue: Can you show me where anyone has had an issue? This is some hater's wives tale from what I have seen.The vented hood: I think you'll find that the vented hood does not pass frontal collision requirements in most countries. I know it doesn't in Australia. It's got to be legal in many countries, and again, you are adding stipulations to the original challenge. Maybe you should reword the original statement.
HID's / MP3's / LED's this car was designed back in 1986-89... That technology was either not around or too expensive then. Too expensive? Like building a dedicated factory for the production of a hand built low volume auto would be? Like the R&D involved to develop the first all aluminum chassis on a production car? Like the R&D for the first production 4 channel ABS system? Like hand built engines with titanium con rods??? Get real.
WOODY said:
Magnets and stainless steel are expensive and were not discovered way back then right AUNSX?:wink: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Shumdit said:Exhaust: Not everyone wants to signal their arrival. Honda wanted the sound of the engine in the cockpit not the exhaust! Again, your rules said improvement. More HP with little sound increase, and arguably a much better tone for a sports/exotic car with less weight to boot is an improvement in most people's books.
Cantrel intake scoop: The OEM is prefectly adequate and prevents more water injest the Cantrel does. A Honda Civic is perfectly adequate, so why not sell the NSX and buy 10 of those?
The vented hood: I think you'll find that the vented hood does not pass frontal collision requirements in most countries. I know it doesn't in Australia. It's got to be legal in many countries, and again, you are adding stipulations to the original challenge. Maybe you should reword the original statement.
You are looking at the nsx from your point of view, while you may prefer to change the exhaust note, and loudness, of your particular nsx, there are other considerations for the company producing the car, including noise regulations, and looking for the correct amount of 'loudness' for the highest number of consumers - Honda decided on a given level of noise; more noise, or different noise, does not constitute 'better' noise. I have an aftermarket exhaust on my car, but I understand what I gave up in exchange for a "better" exhaust note.
Your statement regarding the cantrell scoop is on the extreme side, I am not sure retaining the stock scoop will relegate an nsx to 'honda civic' territory, but it seems you would prefer to be dramatic; this scoop is one of the items I take exception with - from viewing the item itself the primary intent seems to be the creation of a 'sucking' noise, which many people will take exception to, and some will not. You could not sell a production vehicle, let alone a car like the nsx, with this sucking sound coming from the car. Noise aside lets discuss the value of this item - here you have a team of highly motivated Honda engineers, desiging this air intake pipe. They can easily pop a silly curved piece of plastic into the fender of the car, but instead they design a bizzare shaped item every points to and calls restrictive - the name of this part? the resonator - with this in mind read the following article:
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72226&highlight=ram+air+resonance
Might it be possible the oem piece creates a resonance effect with the air and generates more power than a simple scoop would create?
The argument for the cantrell piece usually ends with supporters pointing out it is developed from a race part (a la procar specials 'lemans' scoop), if this is the case the race car was not using a factory airbox, indeed it was probably using ITB's mounted on top of the engine. In this situation the purpose of this air scoop changes, perhaps for use in brake cooling, perhaps for engine cooling, but almost certainly air induction would be via a hatch-mounted scoop. In a road car are you perhaps trading some actual power, from a highly engineered air intake scoop, and gaining a 'sucking' noise instead?
Finally you call a vented hood superior to a stock hood; I have a vented hood on my car, but would a mass audience looking at buying the car new prefer these hoods? It may have benefits, and Honda did put a vented hood on their type R, but on a regular nsx it's appearance could easily be too aggressive for a great deal of people and turn them off from the car.
From an engineering standpoint any task, be it modifying a car, or indeed creating a car, is going to turn out being a long string of compromises. When Honda designed the car they had to compromise between the highest level of performance, and the package they felt they could best sell to the largest number of consumers. They had to compromise cost, against performance, and the end result of all of these compromises is the nsx we all looked at and had to have; I would say they did a good job of it. (this is also some degree of the motivation behind further models of nsx, eg Type R, Type S, zanardi, NSX-R GT, etc.)
There will be some degree of compromise in the vast majority of aftermarket undertakings, be it more noise (which you may prefer), more weight, a harsher ride, an aesthetic piece that affects the aerodynamics of your car, the removal of weight from an area without retaining the 'balance' of the car, the switch to aftermarket tires for increased tread life, and less grip, the change to larger wheels for aesthetics (and increased rotational inertia), etc. etc. etc.
There are very few examples of a part that is just so much better now, without losing something in the process. Does this mean the compromise is a bad thing? Absolutly not, what you give up may have little importance to you, you may decide the benefit outweighs the loss, etc. - so long as you understand this when you are making your decision there is little downside to modifying your nsx.
One exception that comes to mind, of an aftermarket part with limited compromise, would be bilstein dampers.
Ski_Banker
Suspended
scorp965 said:
I completely see where you are coming from, re the CTSC potentially being a compromise. I've wondered the same thing myself. It seems, as AU NSX pointed out, that it (obviously) depends on the motivations of the driver. 1. Aesthetics (just appearance mods) 2. Daily Driver/ability 3. 100% track performance. #2 and #3 are, in your words, completely discomplementary. Dunno. IF (and a big if) the low pressure CTSC didn't materially effect engine life for daily driving, and didn't bring clutch life down from 70k to 10k, it might be a fairly balanced if expensive mod. Drivetrain wear is more a function of how much time is spent at high torqe/hp levels - so if in daily driving, you normally shift at 4k (at 250hp, say) then with CTSC, the drivetrain wear would be the same as daily driving shifting at say 5500 rpm. I think real problems would only occur if you very regularly pushed the 290hp design limits.
My biggest concern is just the go-fast crack pipe. Never ending quest for power - Z06 owners probably lament the same thing. Doesn't seem that anyone has successfully kicked that habit short of getting married. Maybe the key is to have a z06, 911TT, Viper for your hp/torque kicks and an NSX for everything else. :redface:
scorp965 said:
How do I even start to respond? First, you are the guy with no actual seat time in a CTSC car trying to tell us about them, so what does that say about your opinions which may be based on no actual knowledge of the item you might be disucssing (this is not a jab, I am seriously just asking if we should consider your points based on this earlier fact).
Second, AUNSX quoted this: I challenge anyone to point out ANY OEM part on the NSX that can be done BETTER by an aftermarket part without diminishing some other aspect or compromising the design intent of the NSX...
The items I mentioned all have shown either accepted improvements to the usability or performance of the vehicle without diminshing some other component (which is why I did not include items like the CTSC, which will increase fuel consumption, and decrease tire and cluch life if not driven by a wanker):wink:
On the exhaust, there are a few choices that add little noise increase (and by the majority of people here the stock note could be improved based on all the threads) and most add noticeable HP gains, while lowering weight at the same time.
AUNSX did not say the aftermarket had to use Honda's R&D goals for their parts. Hell if they did, there would be no friggin aftermarket, except OEM replacement brakes, bearing, etc. of OEM quality at a lower price. Therefore your viewpoint is coming from the wrong place. I am only responding to the wording (taken as written) by AUNSX.
On the intake: I did not say the scoop made the NSX as same as a Civic (you need to read the thread (instead of skimming them ???:rolleyes): I said if you want ADEQUATE then it seems to me owning any car other than basic transposrtation is overkill, so the NSX itself should be a car not even to be considered by someone who uses that line of thinking). Also, there have been HP gains documented by some others here, and it loses weight at the same time. I guess the sound is subjective although I can not recall anyone who actually heard it and disliked it (again, we are not palying by Honda's R&D rules so the aural characteristics they specify are not the benchmark we have to meet with this "challenge".
On the hood, it was not an aesthetic challenge, and the improved function of the hood is documented, so I see it as a worthy answer to his decree.
I also agree that what you said about most items involving a compromise, and of course the looks of any item are subjective, but my response was based on his blanket statement that in my opinion was not worded correctly or thought through before he made it.
Shumdit said:
They are improvements in your opinion, they are not improvements from sense of Honda's design intent when they built the nsx.
You are nitpicking either silly convenience items, such as the smartenna, or personal preferance items, such as exhaust note, these are irrelevant to the discussion.
Beyond these you claim a vented hood fits this challange, but a vented hood is a compromise in several ways; you will see only an aesthetic benefit on the street, unless you're driving in a highly illegal fashion, and its performance benefit is manifested in increased downforce, which means slower top speed, as well as increased fuel consumption - if you look at the construction of the type r you will find there is a panel underneath the front end with the inclusion of this vented hood, to create a low pressure zone, and there are also other aerodynamic tweaks, such as a larger rear spoiler and rear diffuser to balance the hood out, all working as one system, after significant R/D by Honda. If your DIY modification ends at just the hood how is this actually going to effect the handling of your nsx?
You will still see the downside, but you are now playing aerodynamicist with only the butt dyno as your R/D tool.
Weight loss is great, but from reading your responses it is as though you want to pluck weight anywhere you can find it; weight loss of a pound or two from an intake scoop on one side of the middle of the car, weight loss from the exhaust at the bottom of the back of the car, etc. etc. etc. - how does this truely effect your handling, at the extreme point where this weight loss makes a difference? Have you compromised the design of your nsx in an effort to make it better? This is the danger of aftermarket.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
