performance in question

[pixelhaus]

so, i am driving down a relatively traffic free road, when a new 300hp 4.2litre audi A6 pulls up next to me. he gives me a thumbs up and slams the pedal to the floor. though i usually don't entertain such challenges, the roads were empty, and the stretch was too tempting. he had about a 3-4 car jump on me, but i thought i would be able to catch him. i downshifted to 2nd. tached it out to 7.5 shifted to 3rd. (rpms dropped pretty dramatically following the upshift) his high end torque was kicking in at that point and i never caught him. i dropped off of the accelerator well before approaching the populated part of the road and he disappeared in the horizon. i suspect we hit 115-120ish in that stretch. the question is, should i have easily passed him? is my car not running to its potential? i bought the car used, and i never drove any other nsx's hard enough to compare the acceleration, but it just doesn't seem fast enough. there is definitely no 'head jerking' sense of power. are there any tests that i can do to tell if it is running correctly? thanks.

 

[David Allen]

Interesting. It weighs 4,000 pounds, has 300bhp, and 295 lb/torque. I'd say it was pretty even, and since he had the jump on you, catching him probably wasn't realistic.

Can't beat nice torque - but the car does weigh 1,000 pounds more than the NSX.

Don't feel bad, just throw on a Baschboost and it won't happen again

------------------
David Allen
'00 Silverstone NSX-T
Comptech SC, Headers, Intake, Exhaust & a little Mark Basch tweakage

 

[mlambert890]

3-4 cars is a humongous lead. You would need a pretty major power advantage to make it up.

That said, the NSX is not going to give you that "push you back" feel. It simply doesn't have the torque for it.

The 3.2L NSX can generate some good times (equal to a Corvette C5), but it still doesn't feel as a fast as the Vette (even though it is).

 

[rquintero]

Edit - comment out of place.

[This message has been edited by rquintero (edited 17 March 2002).]

 

[nsxtasy]

In controlled conditions, a stock NSX will accelerate considerably faster than a stock Audi A6 4.2. For example, even an early five-speed NSX does 0-60 in around 5.3 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.8. The Audi A6 4.2 does 0-60 in 6.88 seconds and the quarter in 15.1, according to Autoweek (6/12/2000).

There are a lot of reasons that could explain why you didn't "catch him". Part of it could be driver skill; for example, you didn't even rev to redline, which you would need to do for maximum acceleration, and you admit that you're not accustomed to driving the NSX hard off the line. It's also possible he had modified his car in some way. And those 3-4 car lengths are hard to overcome.

It's tough to tell based on the brief description provided here. It might be worthwhile getting together with another NSX owner in your area for a comparison.

 

[JohnC]

I agree w/ the above. You just can't make up a big lead. Hitting a sub 5 sec 0-60 isn't easy, w/ a stick, and even if you do there is that lead.... Get caught off guard, and forget about it. The 4.2 is an auto, so all he had to do was mash the petal. Also, his 1st gear is very tall so while his 0-60 isn't up to par, his 20-60 is.

Get a G-tech or AP-22 and test your ability as well as the car's. That will let you know if it's on par. That or visit a dyno shop. My guess is the car is just fine, but practicing 0-60's is very revealing.

------------------
01' NSX-T Silverstone
02' Chevy Avalanche 1500
00' Suzuki Hayabusa GSX1300
02' Honda VTX-1800

 

[Lud]

Even more important than the distance lead is his speed lead (say that 10 times fast!).

By the time you downshifted and punched it, how much faster was he going? Probably at least 20MPH? You aren't going to make that up between traffic lights unless you have a far, far better power-to-weight ratio.

 

[1BADNSX]

Originally posted by Lud:
Even more important than the distance lead is his speed lead. You aren't going to make that up between traffic lights unless you have a far, far better power-to-weight ratio.

As usual Lud is correct. When I teach vehicle dynamics, I like to use the example of an NSX versus a ford focus. The NSX accelerates at twice the rate of a Ford focus, therefore only takes about 1/2 the time to reach any given speed. But if you give the Ford a 66 foot running start on a 1/4 mile it will tie the NSX. Yes, just back the Focus up 66 ft and let it get a rolling start, but both cars still start the 1/4 mile at the same time they tie!

This shows why the speed difference is so important and why corner exit speed is so important in road course racing.

Bob

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by 1BADNSX:
But if you give the Ford a 66 foot running start on a 1/4 mile it will tie the NSX. Yes, just back the Focus up 66 ft and let it get a rolling start, but both cars still start the 1/4 mile at the same time they tie!

If there were four car lengths between the two cars, that's pretty darn close to 66 feet!

 

[SoCal-NSX]

You looked way better...that's gotta count for something

. Next time, punch it sooner.

 

[alexander]

We must not forget that the stock NSX is a 12 year old design. Although 270ish BHP was considerable in 1990, its not more than average in 2002. Look how the current direct competitors from Porsche(911) and Ferrari(355 & 360) have between 350 -400 BHP. I think anyone who expects an NSX to have the punch of a Lamborgini Countach or Diablo will be dissappointed.

Looking on the bright side, it doesnt cost as much to buy or run and never breaks down.

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by alexander:
Look how the current direct competitors from Porsche(911) and Ferrari(355 & 360) have between 350 -400 BHP.

And cost tens of thousands of dollars more than the NSX.

Although 270ish BHP was considerable in 1990, its not more than average in 2002.

But most of the cars that have more horsepower than the NSX weigh a whole lot more than the NSX, too. You can still count on one hand the production cars sold in North America that are faster than the NSX. Which hardly makes it "average".

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 22 March 2002).]

 

[sabashioyaki]

Last time I checked the 996 was tens of thousands cheaper than the NSX. I don't know how much they raised prices when they went with the new 320hp 3.4.

I think there are more than 5 cars sold in the US that are faster than the NSX.

Z06
Viper
996
M3
M5
360
456
550
SLK55
SL55
Lambo
Saleen
Maserati

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by sabashioyaki:
Last time I checked the 996 was tens of thousands cheaper than the NSX. I don't know how much they raised prices when they went with the new 320hp 3.4.

He mentioned 350-400 hp so I assumed he was talking about the 911 Turbo, not the normally aspirated 996.

The cars that are faster than the current 3.2-liter NSX are the Z06, the Viper, the 911 Turbo, and the 360 Modena. The others you listed are either the same as the NSX or slower, with the exception of cars (Saleen, Lambo) manufactured in such low volumes that they are hardly qualify as production cars. List the weight for each of those cars and you'll understand why the magazine tests show that they're no faster than the NSX, despite their horsepower advantage.

[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 23 March 2002).]

 

[alexander]

Anyone who just looks at the max BHP or MPH or 0-60 figures is missing the point. In the real world what really matters is how this power is delivered.
When I drive my NSX (3.0 1993)I find that the car only starts "going" after 5000rpm, by which time any staight 6 or V8 that delivers its max power (torque) at around 5000 rpm will be long gone.
In the real world (not track) full of other road users, traffic lights, etc TORQUE is KING!

 

[steveny]

How much NOS would it have taken to make up the 4 car lengths?

 

[nsxtasy]

Originally posted by alexander:
Anyone who just looks at the max BHP or MPH or 0-60 figures is missing the point. In the real world what really matters is how this power is delivered.
When I drive my NSX (3.0 1993)I find that the car only starts "going" after 5000rpm, by which time any staight 6 or V8 that delivers its max power (torque) at around 5000 rpm will be long gone.
In the real world (not track) full of other road users, traffic lights, etc TORQUE is KING!

Actually, YOU may be missing the point. Where the NSX excels in acceleration is not through peak torque; it's through the extension of most of that torque to the upper end of the revband (thanks to VTEC), creating a flat torque curve. This enables the NSX to stay in a lower gear and out-accelerate other cars where they would be forced to upshift, thereby losing their torque advantage to a gearing disadvantage. In other words, that "staight 6 or V8 that delivers its max power (torque) at around 5000 rpm will be long gone" - long gone in your rear-view mirror!

 

[BladesNSX]

You know I have gotten my but wooped plenty of times by cars C-5 vettes, supercharged/NOS muscle cars, and others. I honestly dont really push my car to make a real challenge; the few times that I have my grandma '91 NSX hold her own pretty well. I dont know what year Pixel's NSX is. Though if it is a '97 or newer you should be proud of your car. Hell, you should be proud if its an NSX period.

My .02

now how do a get that line and place my auto stock down neeuah?



------------------
'91 blk/blk NSX
'96 Integra GSR
'02 CBR F4i