Bruntingthorpe today 156mph

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick Graves

The mass thing is damned confusing; good job it's less significant in Vmax!

Basically, sometimes dry mass is quotes, kerb mass is determined with differing quantities of squirt required in different regions.

According to the EU CoC, my S2000 weighs 1,199-1,259 dry, 1,320-1,380 wet & with driver.

The handbook gives the EU mass as 1,260 'curb' mass.

NSX-wise, kerb mass of the 3.2 (final model) is quoted as 1,445 (T=1,500).

---

So what if the driver is 115 K, like me LOL.

:D

I think in Japan, they probably just 'trim off' your limbs, until you're down to the standard mass!

I'll just get a castration before weight in and I'll fly through. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trackdemon

But alas no empirical data to prove the genuine 170mph+ capability of a standard NSX in normal conditions. Could Autocar / Honda / EVO etc, etc. really have been wrong all these years? I dont think so.
The only 'proper' evidence I have seen is my own cars 160mph after 1.5miles @ Bruntingthorpe & Simonpreludes 156mph at the same venue. Both suggest a true 165-170mph max in normal conditions.

---

Autocar got 172mph when testing the 2002 model

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trackdemon

ctrlaltdelboy - my retort 'dear boy'

I concede that the 'overall' aerodynamic drag of the NSX may be lower than the Cayman taking into account frontal area - I really ought to have taken this into account! I'd be interested in your data sources though - I couldn't find anything concrete through an admittedly brief google session.

There is no concrete data to prove the NSX power output is anything more than that stated by the manufacturer, so until proved otherwise I'll stay with 286bhp at most.

Weight has little bearing on top speed, a 120bhp/750kg Elise tops around 124mph, and a 113bhp/1125kg MINI Cooper tops around 125mph (source Autocar). Nonetheless, Autocar quote NSX 3.2 @ 1320kg & Cayman S @ 1340kg - insignificant.

There is no supporting evidence which states the Caymans power curve drops off after peak power at 7200rpm; chances are (and this is surely borne out factually by the Caymans S top speed) the power output stays more or less level from then through to cutout.

I do believe the Cayman develops more bhp than an NSX, this conclusion is drawn both from on paper stats (and my interpretation thereof) and actually driving the 2 cars back to back.

So:

1. The Cayman has more power (proven, on paper, factually quoted)
2. Almost exactly the same weight (which has little effect on top speed anyway)
3. Alleged marginally more drag, although sources unquoted

So @ 171mph - speed is higher just as I would expect.

If someone can prove their factory spec NSX is capable of 180mph or more in normal circumstances then I'll happily eat a Honda hat. Otherwise, claims of realistic 175mph+ capability remain poppycock IMHO.

For the purpose of adding balance - people never cease to be impressed my my NSX's acceleration and speed capabilities when they experience it; I am certainly not underestimating NSX performance rather just trying to add a degree of realism to the discussion.

---

Cayman and NSX NA2 have the same power

http://www.caymanclub.net/cayman-uk/...-dyno-day.html


"I went there today with my Stock Cayman - (Before the garage full of bits gets put on next week) and At SRR my Cayman made 284.75 [Corrected] at the crank with 233.8 at the wheels. These figures may be considered low as my Cayman only has 2200 miles on it and everything will loosen up when it approaches 10,000 miles."

I got 233.9

http://www.noelwatson.com/blog/Perma...5d4560c45.aspx

There is a Cayman going to VMax this weekend so I will try and get a run against it

Seems rather slow to be proper, espicially two NSXs getting that speed or lack there of. The air density would have a small effect but you should have made 170 at least.
Their measuring equipment must be bollicksed up. Next time try and have some kind of porable GPS device that just plugs in to the fag lighter and that would be a reliable way to check their equipment and your indicator.
I have an older portable GPS, (Garmin 100) I take from aircraft to aircraft and put it on the instrument panel just ahead of me and found my installed indicator was off 4 mph. Maybe not fancy but accurate.
From being with Honda motorbikes for many years i've found their mph indicators are usually off a few mph and get worse the faster you go. Not enough to matter but off a bit until the digital ones came about.

Cheers
nigel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigel

Seems rather slow to be proper, espicially two NSXs getting that speed or lack there of. The air density would have a small effect but you should have made 170 at least.
Their measuring equipment must be bollicksed up. Next time try and have some kind of porable GPS device that just plugs in to the fag lighter and that would be a reliable way to check their equipment and your indicator.
I have an older portable GPS, (Garmin 100) I take from aircraft to aircraft and put it on the instrument panel just ahead of me and found my installed indicator was off 4 mph. Maybe not fancy but accurate.
From being with Honda motorbikes for many years i've found their mph indicators are usually off a few mph and get worse the faster you go. Not enough to matter but off a bit until the digital ones came about.

Cheers
nigel

---

I don't think it's a case of the NSX not being able to reach 170MPH,it just cant reach it in 1.8 miles,which is the length of the runway prior to the braking zone(i think)

Indeed, when I did the run, I had my GPS in the car showing the speed.
The traclk temperature was in the 40's C and cars that had previously run 200mph plus were have trouble getting to 190mph.