Did any car there achieve more than 156 on the day? Just trying to rule out equpiment failure (possibly software related).
156 might have been the highest that the hardware could register or display.
Richard
Printable View
Did any car there achieve more than 156 on the day? Just trying to rule out equpiment failure (possibly software related).
156 might have been the highest that the hardware could register or display.
Richard
192 RUF GT2 Nardo
191 SL600 Kleemann (184 roof down)
189 996TT DMS/Andy Fearns
184 993 RUF Turbo
183 GT2
183 993TT Earl of Bolton Spec.
183 996TT X50
183 993TT RS Tuning
182 996T X50 with aerokit
178 996TT
176 AM DB9
176 Gallardo Spyder (roof down, not maxing it)
176 996TT
173 Audi S4 modified
173 996TT cab (164 roof down)
167 F360 spider
167 993TT
166 CL65 AMG (engine problems, already at dealers)
166 F355 Berlinetta
164 SLK55 AMG
158 E46 M3
156 NSX 3.2
156 NSX 3.0
156 rx-7 turbo
154 996 C4
153 Supra TT
153 535D
153 Noble Tronspec (minus intercooler fan)
152 Z4M
150 993 C2
150 Z3M
144 3.2 Carrera
140 TVR Chim400
140 Lexus LS430
139 Lotus Exige S2
136 Golf R32
135 Imprezza Estate
123 mk3 Golf GTi 16v
Myself and Andrew Barwick spent a day at Bruntingthorp a while back. Track was all to ourselves! Anyway, he tried some max speed runs, and got fairly similar to 156 if I remember correctly. This was going around the circuit and getting a run up onto the straight.
Oh this was in winter, and it was freezing cold.
I saw 150mph on an uphill section of motorway in my last NSX(3.0L) so i would be supprised if 156 is all they give.
I've had my clock (maybe not that accurate) showing 164mph on a cool night over about a 2.5 mile stretch of road. Thats in bog standard trim, 1992 3.0L manual and with a passenger on board. Might have to pick my time with the new set-up to try again. I'll have to borrow my mate's Tom Tom Sat Nav to try and get a more accurate speed reading. I thought they should be good for 170mph+? Or am I just dreaming?
IMO 165mph is genuine max in my 3.0 manual - 160mph is the fastest I've seen at VMAX and it was the same through the traps and on the speedo so I'm inclined to think the 167mph I saw on the speedo *on a private track of course* in France is just about spot on as real VMAX. I'd be surprised if a standard 3.2 managed more than a 170mph - certainly the allusions to 180mph+ are pie in the sky, I'd happily bet £10k that a standard NSX cant do that speed (on the flat, no wind etc.) considering that genuine 180mph+ cars tend be nearer the 400bhp mark.
I think i would agree with you regarding the VMAX.I read somewhere on prime that a stock 3.0L was timed with gps at 168mphQuote:
Originally Posted by trackdemon
Well all I know is that Bentley Continental GT's shouldn't bother against an NSX. :lol:
that pic is from an american Acura NSX
here's one from an almost stock 3.0 UK NSX
(car owned and photo taken by one of our members here)
http://nsxcb.co.uk/forum2/files/nsx_187_982.jpg
I do wonder if the top end is directly related to how the car has been driven throughout its life. My NSX feels very spritely and now its got better breathing the throttle response is even better. I am however the 9th, yes 9th, owner. I dare say that the first couple of owners may have looked after the car but I dare say each person has had their fair share of 'fun'. Perhaps the different speeds people seem to be getting is partly down to how loose the engine is. Maybe a few more BHP are released?
Just a thought . . . .