Originally posted by David:
Wow. How do I respond to the insightful, razor-like insight of 'duh!'
I don't know, but I noticed you didn't respond to my comment about the published magazine tests by quoting tests from the major magazines showing the LS1 Camaro with much quicker acceleration numbers than the 3.0-liter NSX. Obviously, this must be because there aren't any. No wonder you try to put up a smokescreen by responding to "Duh"!
Also, I notice you insist on comparing the earlier, lower-horsepower 3.0-liter NSX to the newest Camaro with its recent horsepower increases. Don't you think it would be fairer to compare a new Camaro with a new NSX?
However, while you are explaining how torque AT THE WHEELS is higher on the NSX, please elaborate as to why when I put both cars on a dyno and measure torque AT THE WHEELS, it is higher for the TA/Camaro than for the NSX.
The key here is that there is not one number for torque at the wheels; it varies by road speed. Plot the curve of torque at the wheels vs road speed for each of the two cars, and you will see that the torque drops with each upshift. And the Camaro will need to upshift sooner, thereby suffering a disadvantage vs the NSX at the road speeds following the upshift.
I'm not saying that the Camaro doesn't have higher torque at the wheels at SOME speeds, or higher peak engine torque; it does. I'm saying that when you plot the overall curve, it will not show an advantage for the Camaro throughout the acceleration range (i.e. at ALL road speeds).
The Camaro does have some advantages over the NSX - less expensive to buy, easier to modify, etc. If you want a muscle car, the Camaro will fit your needs. But the as-tested numbers don't support your claims about superior acceleration, comparing one stock car to another.
[This message has been edited by nsxtasy (edited 03 August 2000).]
