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

Top speed so far

The light front end feel at high speeds may be due to rear tires being worn far more than the fronts. Although it sounds like a small amount, aerodynamics are very sensitive and the stock NSX is typically dead level on new tires. (At least mine was and I've seen many others that looked slightly high in the front with worn tires.)

Also, since the rear caries more weight, it may be that over time the rear springs and shocks sag a bit more than the front. Again, it doesn't take much at those speeds especially with a mid engine and otherwise aerodynamic design.
 
I think your theory is right in my case sjs. With all the threads on tire wear, I am proud to say my Sumitomo's, that are the least expensive Z rated tire available for the NSX, has 14,000 miles on them! I estimate about another 4-5,000 miles remaining on the rears (25% tread left) and another 14,000 miles remaining (50% + tread left on the fronts). I don't know the current alignment settings, but I definitely am not complaining with my lead foot habit in a straight line (TCS is always on)! I agree, that the engine weight on the springs over the past 9 years has to take some toll on the height. Do you think reducing the front tire psi from 33 to 32 would help? I know my car handles like it is strapped to a rail at 130 to 135 MPH but as explained earlier the lightness sensation is around 140 +




[This message has been edited by Slingshot (edited 23 February 2002).]
 
I have compared the indicated speed on the speedometer with both GPS and a calibrated rally odometer. The indicated mileage and indicated speed (at least in my car) are both overestimates. My car was 4% off. In other words, when I had travelled 10.0 miles via odometer, the mileage indicated by GPS was 9.6. The figure was about the same using the rally odometer. The rally odometer was calibrated over a known (i.e. surveyed) distance (90 miles), so I am confident that it is more accurate than the stock odometer. Same thing about the speedometer. When the speedometer said 60 mph, I was actually travelling 56.4 mph.
 
I've heard that manufacturers tend to make the speedometer read slightly high. This is not surprising; the consequences of reading high are rarely as negative as those of reading low (and getting caught speeding as a result).

That being said, there are various reasons why the accuracy of the speedometer and odometer varies. To cite just one of them, the outer diameter of the tires varies by 2 percent as the tires wear from full tread down to the treadwear indicator bars, and as a result, the speedometer/odometer error also varies by the same percentage.
 
you guys are funny. i say i go 191 in a lambo, and get the third degree. then you guys post your little topic here and list the double digit speeds youve all hit.
 
Originally posted by ALLAN:
you guys are funny. i say i go 191 in a lambo, and get the third degree. then you guys post your little topic here and list the double digit speeds youve all hit.

It's not a hive mind here... If the people that gave you shit posted triple digit speed on this thread, give them shit back...
 
if you have the place to do it, thats great. i just dont know too many places left where the chance of hurting somebody else is non-existent.

i think that is part of the problem, the average person here doesnt know if your decision making on where you go fast is good, or extremely dangerous.

and yes, i too have gone triple plus on desolate interstates. (wish i could do it everyday)
 
Originally posted by ALLAN:
you guys are funny. i say i go 191 in a lambo, and get the third degree. then you guys post your little topic here and list the double digit speeds youve all hit.

Yeah but our double-digit speeds aren't as fast as the triple-digit speeds you hit!
biggrin.gif



[This message has been edited by POWERED by HONDA (edited 25 February 2002).]
 
Originally posted by ALLAN:
you guys are funny. i say i go 191 in a lambo, and get the third degree. then you guys post your little topic here and list the double digit speeds youve all hit.

I was as sure of this coming up as if it were the sun. After everything that was said I knew Allan would not forget.
 
Hey NasiRames, where are u located? feel free to email me.


Originally posted by NasiRames:
Max speed(155MPH) on a 92 3000GT VR-4 .

140 plus in a 96 NSX-T.

The experience of both cars are totally different. The 3000GT felt rock solid and totally cool. Too easy to drive. I suspect the 4WD and the 3.8K pounds did help make it "too" stable.

I could have gone faster than 140 in the NSX-T, but I can hear the air leaking through the targa top that I decided to lift off from the gas pedal. The NSX felt more thrilling as it's more involving(scarier as well). The GT is boring, but yet so safe.

Both cars are stock except for air filters.
 
you guys are funny. i say i go 191 in a lambo, and get the third degree. then you guys post your little topic here and list the double digit speeds youve all hit........


ALLEN,
we are are the defenders of the faith and
THATS BECAUSE YOU ARE THE ANTI-CHRIST AND GOD IS WATCHING YOUR ''DIABLO''(DEVIL)doing 191 in 55 zones!!!!!
LOL,Sorry I had to just insert that ....
Well I thought it sounded funny in a MYNSX kinda' way...




------------------
 
155+....it was nice, outside of EL PASO on I10, but wasn't quit like the time when I was a little passenger in the Ferrari Boxer doing 180+! Still love my NSX! Can't wait to go faster some day!!!

C.
 
Back
Top