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

Road and Track: GT-R Spanks ZO 911T

Good point about the smaller wheels. So who's fault was that? The NSX brakes do fade after several hot laps - much more so than the ones on any Porsche that I have driven. Then there is the ABS....name me one other system where the pump squeals in the morning (by design I might add) and the brakes will lock up and then fade under heavy braking? Remember it has ABS - just like my old 951. Not once has my 951 locked it's brakes under braking. Not once has the ABS pump on the 951 rattled and squealed like the newer one on my NSX.

And since when is 3000 lbs considered a light weight sports car? So why all the ranting and raving in magazines about all the lightweight materials that were used? After all 3000 lbs of aluminum is still the same weight as 3000 lbs of steel. I fail to see what is so impressive about all that.

I agree with your point about lap times and perfomance numbers you read on the web. But surely you agree that the 951 and NSX are in similar ballparks when you think in terms of performance whereas the NSX and say an F40 or Porsche 959 are nowhere near in the same vicinity. My point was that the NSX didn't really deserve all the accolades it received. In the next car I would like them to aim higher - like Nissan did with the GT-R.
At the time -late 80s- early 90s, it was a huge deal if a car had 17" wheels. Gods Chariot (aka: supra) had 17" wheels which were considered "bling" and to some as too big. A couple years ago you could say that about 18" then 19" wheels -but many Ferraris now come standard w/ 19" wheels including Ferrari Challenge race cars.

-Never had this squealing problem you talk about in the ABS pump :confused:

Put some higher grade fluid in your NSX. Stock pads should be fine for more than a few laps with better fluid. Often neglecting flushing the fluid (not just bleeding after a track event) can result in the fluid breaking down and resulting in a super-low wet-boiling point.

Cause now 3,000 is considered light. Even the relatively bare-bones Ferrari F430 and Porsche GT3 are right at the 3,000lb marker, and cars are just getting heavier.

Get over the 951 and F40. Both of those cars caused their respective companies to lose money. They were also marvels of their time costing more than pretty much everything on the market. The NSX DOES deserve all those accolades prooving a supercar can be reliable and a daily driver forcing Ferrari, Porsche, the sports/supercar manufacturers to make more reliable and better cars. The NSX was the first all-aluminum production car, first production car with an altering valve timing, and a few other firsts that I dont care to remember or spout off like a fan-boy.

It is a great handling car, made a huge statement in the industry for the reliablity and ingenuity standard of cars (look at how many cars now have variable valve timing), etc...

Its late, gotta be on a plane in a few hours, get over it. The NSX was a supercar of its day, had performance figures above your favorite little Porsche and was faster than most of the cars of its time, all on 205f 225r 15/16" wheels!!!

Times change, the standard for power rises, tires become wider and larger, brakes become bigger, (trend = cars become heavier), you are all too often comparing apples to oranges.

0.02
 
i dont see why everybody thinks its so ugly, theyre not THAT bad:cool:


i would gladly take a spec-v with two recaros spg's, takata harnesses, harness bar, stripped out rear interior, custom carbon fiber dash/door panels, mines coilovers, carbon brake rotors, ac/airbags/nav/stereo/all that crap stripped out, with some 20" te37's:cool: (id say 18" magesium te37's but they only make them in 18" and that would look too small on that huge car)

2277405709_53b075a4cf_o.jpg



2278192340_26e36e1f5b_o.jpg

2277398659_0018ef4378_o.jpg

2277425389_33584a2bab_o.jpg

2277420549_a0f905f5b1_b.jpg

2277428473_869f9aa965_b.jpg

2278218058_ca8538a8b8_o.jpg

2277428855_320ffbb6de_o.jpg

2277427249_20c1c84518_o.jpg

2277429347_9b9b2d1992_o.jpg

2277389649_8dfa8dd782_o.jpg

2278181252_447dd2eddb_o.jpg

2277424209_085226c76a_o.jpg

2278214628_5d8539f489_o.jpg

2277425023_88401a9f67_o.jpg

2278215326_3c18bcf420_o.jpg

2277422171_e797c3e4ca_o.jpg

2278214080_b517347edf_o.jpg

2278142936_edc025f6dc_o.jpg

2278208774_c169537b7d_o.jpg

2277453511_6f990459d3_o.jpg

2277402583_22611d1d95_o.jpg

2278200582_12c1b80e7a_o.jpg
 
Even today there are many cars you could get for $35 K that would destroy a similarily priced NSX. An RX7, a 951, a C5 Z06, a V8 Esprit, and many more.

Stop lumping the 951 in there with fast cars. The 951 is NOT faster than an NSX. It is NOT a better performer than an NSX. The only thing it is, is less expensive.

Its a good car but if you want to compare it to something, look at S2000s. That is a much closer comparison. The NSX is faster, better, better made, better looking; it is a FEW classes of car heigher. Why do you think the magazines compared NSXs to 911 variants? Why'd they skip the 951?
 
Stop lumping the 951 in there with fast cars. The 951 is NOT faster than an NSX. It is NOT a better performer than an NSX. The only thing it is, is less expensive.

Its a good car but if you want to compare it to something, look at S2000s. That is a much closer comparison. The NSX is faster, better, better made, better looking; it is a FEW classes of car heigher. Why do you think the magazines compared NSXs to 911 variants? Why'd they skip the 951?


Because the 951 weight over 3100lbs with a 4 cylinder and the NSX weight 3000 with a V6 thats why it was compared to a Ferrari or 911 :biggrin:
 
Here is a 5 lap battle between 911TT, GT3, NSX-R, GT-R, and Gallardo.

The "old 290 hp" didn't stand to have much of a chance but hardly embarrasses itself. I don't speak Japanese but the GT-R seemed to draw a LOT of praise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckWxoLxiV6I&NR=1

Fun to watch. Obviously a longer course with faster sweepers would have made the results more dramatic but on a shorter tighter course the NSX has to be considered a bargain and again outperforms what the "bench racers" would otherwise say.
 
Here is a 5 lap battle between 911TT, GT3, NSX-R, GT-R, and Gallardo.

The "old 290 hp" didn't stand to have much of a chance but hardly embarrasses itself. I don't speak Japanese but the GT-R seemed to draw a LOT of praise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckWxoLxiV6I&NR=1

Fun to watch. Obviously a longer course with faster sweepers would have made the results more dramatic but on a shorter tighter course the NSX has to be considered a bargain and again outperforms what the "bench racers" would otherwise say.

Its embarrasing for new cars to race an old car and say wow i just beat a 14 year old car, now this gtr is better than 14 year old nsx.:tongue: The nsx does not have 4wheel drive or forced induction that is a good thing.
 
At the time -late 80s- early 90s, it was a huge deal if a car had 17" wheels. Gods Chariot (aka: supra) had 17" wheels which were considered "bling" and to some as too big. A couple years ago you could say that about 18" then 19" wheels -but many Ferraris now come standard w/ 19" wheels including Ferrari Challenge race cars.

-Never had this squealing problem you talk about in the ABS pump :confused:

Put some higher grade fluid in your NSX. Stock pads should be fine for more than a few laps with better fluid. Often neglecting flushing the fluid (not just bleeding after a track event) can result in the fluid breaking down and resulting in a super-low wet-boiling point.

Cause now 3,000 is considered light. Even the relatively bare-bones Ferrari F430 and Porsche GT3 are right at the 3,000lb marker, and cars are just getting heavier.

Get over the 951 and F40. Both of those cars caused their respective companies to lose money. They were also marvels of their time costing more than pretty much everything on the market. The NSX DOES deserve all those accolades prooving a supercar can be reliable and a daily driver forcing Ferrari, Porsche, the sports/supercar manufacturers to make more reliable and better cars. The NSX was the first all-aluminum production car, first production car with an altering valve timing, and a few other firsts that I dont care to remember or spout off like a fan-boy.

It is a great handling car, made a huge statement in the industry for the reliablity and ingenuity standard of cars (look at how many cars now have variable valve timing), etc...

Its late, gotta be on a plane in a few hours, get over it. The NSX was a supercar of its day, had performance figures above your favorite little Porsche and was faster than most of the cars of its time, all on 205f 225r 15/16" wheels!!!

Times change, the standard for power rises, tires become wider and larger, brakes become bigger, (trend = cars become heavier), you are all too often comparing apples to oranges.

0.02

The 951 and many other cars came with 16" wheels stock. It's easy to get a decent sized brake under that. Also, the squealing of the ABS unit is a common thing and part of the design - just do a search here and you will see what I mean.

Sales figures though don't lie - the NSX couldn't even sell their first year out and the numbers got worse as time went on. Contrast that with the GT-R where the waiting lists are long and the demand is high. The NSX was excessively hyped in it's day just as the GT-R is being excessively hyped now. So why was the NSX such a sales flop? I mean the car looked exotic and had good press. The reason was that when people took it for a drive they practically fell asleep. Not something you want from your "super car". The difference with the GT-R today is that the Nissan actually outperforms and is priced to make it competitive.

Finally, if all you guys are happy with mediocrity when it comes to a new car I guess nothing I can say will convince you otherwise. You are obviously tainted with your love for the machine. You are no different than Porsche or Ferrari snobs that think their cars are the end all be all when the reality says otherwise.
 
Nice Photos of the GT-R! Very nice.

I just got this issue yesterday and read it cover to cover. That article is pretty good. The Porsche costs nearly twice as much and got owned. WTF?

Go Nissan! Good job! Now if only Honda could spank you!
 
Stop lumping the 951 in there with fast cars. The 951 is NOT faster than an NSX. It is NOT a better performer than an NSX. The only thing it is, is less expensive.

It probably is faster than his CTSC NSX but, he may not have a very good example.
Some time back, in another thread he made mention that his CTSC car was dyno'd by the previous owner and the results were 295rwhp.
That's about the lowest I recall seeing for a CTSC car and it stuck in my mind. Who knows? It may dyno even lower now.

I've said this time and time again. I have driven DOZENS of NSX's. They are not all equal but everyone thinks they know how to buy a car and that they got a great deal and a great car.

I am surprised by what I have seen, driven, and what people think they have. I have had people with track experience, some with many performance cars bring in their NSX and have not a clue how the car is supposed to feel and perform. One fellow who had a nice M3 couldn't tell that his NSX timing belt was off a tooth.
If he feels his NSX is not what he expects or feels it should be, I say believe him. He ought to know.
 
It probably is faster than his CTSC NSX but, he may not have a very good example.
Some time back, in another thread he made mention that his CTSC car was dyno'd by the previous owner and the results were 295rwhp.
That's about the lowest I recall seeing for a CTSC car and it stuck in my mind. Who knows? It may dyno even lower now.

I've said this time and time again. I have driven DOZENS of NSX's. They are not all equal but everyone thinks they know how to buy a car and that they got a great deal and a great car.

I am surprised by what I have seen, driven, and what people think they have. I have had people with track experience, some with many performance cars bring in their NSX and have not a clue how the car is supposed to feel and perform. One fellow who had a nice M3 couldn't tell that his NSX timing belt was off a tooth.
If he feels his NSX is not what he expects or feels it should be, I say believe him. He ought to know.

We aren't talking about my specific NSX - just the stock NSX in general when it came out in 1991. My NSX makes more RWHP than a stock NSX has crank HP. The car was inspected by an Acura dealer and has near perfect compression and leak down. There are no issues with it. Other than the low boost supercharger kit my car is completely stock - stock headers, stock exhaust, stock intake. Is it faster than a stock 951? Yes no doubt. But my car was supercharged when I bought it.

However at one time I considered trading my 951 off on a stock NSX - until I drove one. What a dog. Step on the gas and there was lots of noise but no grunt. Contrast that to the 951 which planted you in the seat when boost came on. After my first test drive of a stock NSX I couldn't see what all the hype was about. The car just wasn't exciting to drive. Then I reviewed the numbers and guess what? If you sort through all the BS fluff and just compare the hard figures it suddenly became clear why I was so dissappointed. It didn't have the performance to justify the "super car" hype. I have since drove several stock NSX's and the result was the same. They just don't have the oomph that the chassis deserves. They should have stuffed a nice revving 400 hp engine in the car to begin with. Now that would have been something in that day that we could all say was in super car territory. A piddly 270 hp just doesn't cut it.

For example, do you think the NSX is head and shoulders above an RX7? I mean the RX7 is lighter and put's up similar if not better numbers. So why wasn't there endless magazine articles about the "super car" RX7? Is the NSX more reliable and better built - definately. But in the end that isn't what defines a super car. It's performance that we are looking for. The RX7 is a quick car, a nice looking car but not a super car. Same goes for the NSX.

So you can make all the potshots you like about my particular car but you are missing the point - I'm not talking about my car. I'm not talking about Joe's 500 rwhp turbo car either. Nor am I talking about Billy Bobs poorly performing "missing tooth on the timing belt" car. I am talking about the NSX - any NSX - when they came out new in 1991. If you take the time to get your heads out of your behinds and realize I'm not saying that Biobankers particular car is crap or that stuntman's particular car is crap you might understand that what I am saying is the NSX in general missed the mark whereas Nissan in general - with the new GT-R - hit the bullseye and I hope that any new NSX that comes out sets it sights on the super cars and exceedes our expectations. Otherwise we will get another reliable, well built but average performing car that is comparable to what we had 5 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Stop lumping the 951 in there with fast cars. The 951 is NOT faster than an NSX. It is NOT a better performer than an NSX. The only thing it is, is less expensive.

Its a good car but if you want to compare it to something, look at S2000s. That is a much closer comparison. The NSX is faster, better, better made, better looking; it is a FEW classes of car heigher. Why do you think the magazines compared NSXs to 911 variants? Why'd they skip the 951?

The S2000 is also a step down from a 951. About the only place an S2000 might have a chance in stock form is on a tight autocross circuit. Otherwise it's getting it's ass handed to it by a 951 S. Funny thing though, nobody is calling the S2000 a "super car". It's not being marketed as a super car either. Probably because Honda learned it's lesson with the NSX. Don't make the car out to be something it's not. The NSX is a higher end car than the S2000 but a "FEW classes" higher of car? Please....take off the rose colored glasses. The NSX is moderately better not leaps and bounds better. The difference between say an NSX and an old F40, Porsche 959, Porsche 993 TT is far greater than the difference between the NSX and an S2000 or 951. I would never proclaim the 951 to be a super car just as I would never proclaim the NSX or S2000 is a super car. The new GT-R on the other hand? You bet.. that is in super car territory. So is the C6 Z06 and the C6 ZR1 when it comes out.
 
First off, Ive not found much of a performance difference between 993TTs and MY 02 NSX (when it was stock).

Second, who's saying that the NSX is a super car? I dont think many here have their heads up their rear ends; Im pretty sure I dont. I bought my 02 NSX as an inexpensive alternative to a long list of cars that, with modding, I could achieve similar performance to but maintain a more reliable, and equally sexy, package. That is what the car is. It doesnt compete with ANY "supercars" IMO. Modded, its both cheaper, faster, as exciting but more reliable than, something like a F360. All of the fun. None of the headaches.

It is a reliable, rare, pretty well performing sportscar that is a highly modable platform because of its incredible chassis.
 
Hey Solo thankfuly I respect this guys opinion more than yours http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98116&highlight=a+supercar At least I don't have to hide my face in shame in my rectum as you have insisted others do.:tongue:

It's good to know you respect his opinion - so do I. What do you think of this quote from him:

# "Honda philosophy at the time seemed against higher cylinder counts, and maybe that's why the NSX never got a larger engine. Which it should've had. Maybe it had something to do with the self-imposed restraint on horsepower output."


Do you agree with me now when I say the car was underpowered? I never said the car was no good - hell I bought one. What I did say is it lacked the power to make it a "super car" beater. At least Mr Murray had the balls to build the F1 and give it the performance it deserved.
 
It's good to know you respect his opinion - so do I. What do you think of this quote from him:

# "Honda philosophy at the time seemed against higher cylinder counts, and maybe that's why the NSX never got a larger engine. Which it should've had. Maybe it had something to do with the self-imposed restraint on horsepower output."


Do you agree with me now when I say the car was underpowered? I never said the car was no good - hell I bought one. What I did say is it lacked the power to make it a "super car" beater. At least Mr Murray had the balls to build the F1 and give it the performance it deserved.

We'll have to agree to disagree.On paper 270 or 290 hp dose'nt seem like alot,and by todays standards it is not,but it performs like other cars with much more hp.The 1/4 mile times and 0-60 times equal cars from other makers with 350 hp:wink: I look at the whole package,and to that end we agree,you obviously have remedied your need for better acceleration.But back to the topic,that gtr is fast but not perty.
 
Here is some more from Gordon Murray to back up my viewpoint:

In my opinion, the NSX, while being such a great sports car, had two large flaws in it's marketing. First, at the time, the public was not ready to accept a Japanese car that was this expensive. The second is that for supercar customers, the power figures were not quite high enough. Of course, the prototype's engine was not bad, and soon the VTEC engine was added. Whenever I hear that VTEC sound it's amazing. I am repeating myself, but the NSX's excellent chassis would have been capable of handling much more power.

もう少し、低めの価格設定をするか、あるいは違ったブランド名で違ったバッジをつけて売るか、あるいは、少しだけ、ほんの少しだけですが派手で猛々しいスタイリングともっと大きなパワーを有していさえすれば、NSXは20年間スーパーカーのカルト的スターとして君臨したに違いありません。

With just a slightly lower price, or possibly selling it with a different brand name and a different badge, or perhaps endowing it with a touch flashier and more aggressive styling and additional power, there is no question the NSX would have reigned as a cult star of the supercars.

しかし当時のHondaのフィロソフィーとして、気筒数の多い大きなエンジンに対して抵抗感があったようです。よくわかりませんが、多分その当時、パワーリミットの自主規制をしていたことと関係があったのかもしれません。
Honda のエンジンを愛する私は、その後、自らHondaの栃木研究所に2度足を運び、当時の研究責任者に私の開発していたマクラーレンF1用に4.5リッター V10かV12を作ってくれるよう、頼みもし、説得も試みたのですが、結局聞き入れてもらえず、マクラーレンF1にはBMW製エンジンを載せることになりました。

However, during that time, in Honda's philosophy there was a resistance to large engines with many cylinders. I am not certain, but probably at the time, the voluntary restraint on power limits was a factor. Being a fan of Honda engines, I later went to Honda's Tochigi Research Center on two occasions and requested that they consider building for the McLaren F1 a 4.5 liter V10 or V12. I asked, I tried to persuade them, but in the end could not convince them to do it, and the McLaren F1 ended up equipped with a BMW engine.


So basically what he is saying is "Nice sports car with some innovative ideas but it fell short of being a super car. Too bad Honda didn't give it the power it needed to achieve elite status". Sort of validates everything I have said here. Thanks for the link. I hope that Honda learned their lesson and finally gives us the NSX that becomes the next F1 style supercar. Now that would be something.
 
What was this thread about again?

I'll take my GT-R Spec V in black, thank you very much. I'm glad I didn't follow through with the deposit on the C6 Z06. Now I can take both kids (with a back seat) to school and it actually be legitimate.

Woot.
 
What was this thread about again?

I'll take my GT-R Spec V in black, thank you very much. I'm glad I didn't follow through with the deposit on the C6 Z06. Now I can take both kids (with a back seat) to school and it actually be legitimate.

Woot.

How hard is it to actually get one in the US? I know here in Canada they are impossible - the waiting list at the local dealer is over 60 people long.
 
Apparently, not difficult if you want to fork over the market adjusted price or pay a premium to jump a spot in line. A local NSXer here in Tulsa is taking delivery of one in the next several weeks (IIRC).

I promise to take pics.:wink:
 
Back
Top