GOOD LORD! Size comparison between Godzilla...err Nissan GT-R and Acura NSX

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Of course, Honda is a major maker, and Lotus is almost a kit-car company, so that makes the NSX an impressively pure project that made it through the bean-counters and so forth.

The biggest criticism that I saw of the NSX, and I saw it repeatedly, was reviewers saying that it felt like an Accord unless you were driving fast. That is to say that the NSX was, and is, a car that, despite it's handling, is as easy to live with day in and day out as an Accord. The NSX is an amazingly fine-handling automobile that really does not impose any penalty on the owner for its abilities.

The Exige, while admittedly sportier, extracts a fair bit more in "payment" for its abilities.

ZV

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Of course, Honda is a major maker, and Lotus is almost a kit-car company, so that makes the NSX an impressively pure project that made it through the bean-counters and so forth.

The biggest criticism that I saw of the NSX, and I saw it repeatedly, was reviewers saying that it felt like an Accord unless you were driving fast. That is to say that the NSX was, and is, a car that, despite it's handling, is as easy to live with day in and day out as an Accord. The NSX is an amazingly fine-handling automobile that really does not impose any penalty on the owner for its abilities.

The Exige, while admittedly sportier, extracts a fair bit more in "payment" for its abilities.

ZV

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Dudewithoutapet

Originally posted by: SearchMaster

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The NSX is timeless. I love it! :thumbsup:

No doubt. I wish it had about 100 more hp stock, but looks-wise and handling-wise, ... wow.

You have to remember, the NSX began in '91. It's almost two decades old. It produces ~270 HP from a N/A V6. It did ~14 second quarter miles. How many cars can you name from that period that did that, or even now? Now subtract all the cars that use a turbo or super charger.

And weigh less than 3000lbs. I'll save you the trouble, the answer is zero.

Lotus Exige?

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vd....html&articleId=115908

The N/A version pulled a 13.5 Quarter and a 5.0 0-60 in the Edmunds test. And it's a 4-banger.

Of course the Exige is about as rare as the NSX, and similarly uncompromising in it's attitude towards performance.

It must be mentioned that the top-end performance of even the beefiest Exige, the S 240, is only 150mph.

NSX Type R does a 12.7 1/4... Not too shabby for ~290hp and 3000lbs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5GqAEbPNJU

NSX-R NA2 has curb weight of around 2750-2800 lbs due to extensive lightening and carbon fiber parts (even the leather shift boot is replaced with mesh to save like 20 grams).

 

[GoatMonkey]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Of course, Honda is a major maker, and Lotus is almost a kit-car company, so that makes the NSX an impressively pure project that made it through the bean-counters and so forth.

The biggest criticism that I saw of the NSX, and I saw it repeatedly, was reviewers saying that it felt like an Accord unless you were driving fast. That is to say that the NSX was, and is, a car that, despite it's handling, is as easy to live with day in and day out as an Accord. The NSX is an amazingly fine-handling automobile that really does not impose any penalty on the owner for its abilities.

The Exige, while admittedly sportier, extracts a fair bit more in "payment" for its abilities.

ZV

It probably feels even more like the newer Accords. Look at these specs and consider one other thing, the Accord is automatic only, and the NSX with an automatic was detuned to 252 hp. When you take that into account they're pretty damn similar. And even more if you compare the NSX to a TL. It's just a matter of weight, driven wheels, suspension and weight distribution that make the NSX faster.

2007 Accord
3.0 V6 244 bhp @ 6250 rpm, 211 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm

1991 NSX
3.0 V6 270 bhp @ 7100 rpm, 210 lb-ft @ 5300 rpm.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I have seen the GT-R in person at the Washington Auto Show, and I too was surprised by its size.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I have seen the GT-R in person at the Washington Auto Show, and I too was surprised by its size.

I hope I can find someone that has one and ask if I can ride in it 😛. If they let me drive it... well, I think I'd have to apologize in advance for the mess on their seat :Q!

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Dudewithoutapet

Originally posted by: SearchMaster

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The NSX is timeless. I love it! :thumbsup:

No doubt. I wish it had about 100 more hp stock, but looks-wise and handling-wise, ... wow.

You have to remember, the NSX began in '91. It's almost two decades old. It produces ~270 HP from a N/A V6. It did ~14 second quarter miles. How many cars can you name from that period that did that, or even now? Now subtract all the cars that use a turbo or super charger.

And weigh less than 3000lbs. I'll save you the trouble, the answer is zero.

Lotus Exige?

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vd....html&articleId=115908

The N/A version pulled a 13.5 Quarter and a 5.0 0-60 in the Edmunds test. And it's a 4-banger.

Of course the Exige is about as rare as the NSX, and similarly uncompromising in it's attitude towards performance.

It must be mentioned that the top-end performance of even the beefiest Exige, the S 240, is only 150mph.

Exige isn't a V6.

Not very rare here though...nsx is.

The Exige is a go-cart with a/c.

I didn't realize the NSX was so low...my roofline is about 49" in my 240sx.

 

[andylawcc]

dude, the tail reminds me the Cobalt SS

 

[dawheat]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Of course, Honda is a major maker, and Lotus is almost a kit-car company, so that makes the NSX an impressively pure project that made it through the bean-counters and so forth.

The biggest criticism that I saw of the NSX, and I saw it repeatedly, was reviewers saying that it felt like an Accord unless you were driving fast. That is to say that the NSX was, and is, a car that, despite it's handling, is as easy to live with day in and day out as an Accord. The NSX is an amazingly fine-handling automobile that really does not impose any penalty on the owner for its abilities.

The Exige, while admittedly sportier, extracts a fair bit more in "payment" for its abilities.

ZV

What's funny is that so many sports cars today are lauded for the same qualities- the standard 911s, E92 M3, etc. People today have come to expect a sports car that's comfortable, easy to drive at low speeds, has predictible handling, but comes alive when you want them to.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: andylawcc
dude, the tail reminds me the Cobalt SS

because it was inspired by the original probably.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: andylawcc
dude, the tail reminds me the Cobalt SS

because it was inspired by the original probably.

American cars copying Japanese styling. Who have thought that would ever happen? :laugh:

 

[shabby]

No wonder the gtr weighs 3800lbs...

 

[MustangSVT]

yum. I like both.

but If I can choose one Ill probably take GTR.

I would die trying to drive it in chicago today 😛

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
When you take that into account they're pretty damn similar. And even more if you compare the NSX to a TL. It's just a matter of weight, driven wheels, suspension and weight distribution

That's, like, everything that makes a car different.😕

Don't forget brakes.

 

[GoatMonkey]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
When you take that into account they're pretty damn similar. And even more if you compare the NSX to a TL. It's just a matter of weight, driven wheels, suspension and weight distribution

That's, like, everything that makes a car different.😕

Don't forget brakes.

Well yeah they're completely different types of cars. I'm not saying the NSX and Accord are the same, but their engines are a lot alike.

Honda could take that engine from the new Accord and put together a nice sports car for much less money at this point if they wanted to. The engine is no longer exotic.

Now if car manufacturers could come up with a way to cheaply make a lightweight frame and body that can pass crash tests, cars would become very different. The aluminum construction would still be expensive at this point.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
When you take that into account they're pretty damn similar. And even more if you compare the NSX to a TL. It's just a matter of weight, driven wheels, suspension and weight distribution

That's, like, everything that makes a car different.😕

Don't forget brakes.

Well yeah they're completely different types of cars. I'm not saying the NSX and Accord are the same, but their engines are a lot alike.

Honda could take that engine from the new Accord and put together a nice sports car for much less money at this point if they wanted to. The engine is no longer exotic.

Now if car manufacturers could come up with a way to cheaply make a lightweight frame and body that can pass crash tests, cars would become very different. The aluminum construction would still be expensive at this point.

The engines from the NSX and accord are nothing alike in design, they are not even the same family engine (as opposed to say accord vs TL).

the NSX is DOHC and real vtec, but accord is SOHC and fake vtec.
One interesting thing also is i think the NSX has titanium connecting rods.


but yes the power outputs are kind of similar, which speaks alot for ~15 years worth of engineering.

TOV has a short article about this;

"the TL engine absolutely dominates the NSX engine below 6000 rpm."

that is 3.2L vs 3.2L;

vtec.net article

TL-S makes even more power of course;

TL-S


It's really a shame honda makes some really good cars (s2k, nsx) and then lets the designs languish.

every year or so I think again I want an NSX, but all the ones I can afford without being financially stupid have too high mileage. There are alot of 100K+ mile NSXs out there.
The resale value is actually surprisingly good, early 90 NSXs with ~100K miles still ask atleast 25K, and the car costed like 65K new.

 

[alkemyst]

People get too caught up on two things which by themselves mean nothing: Curb weight and horsepower.

The NSX at the time made the most power per liter out of any production normally aspirated engine. That was part of it's design...pushing the boundaries. People talk all this shit about all these cars that make 300HP+ compared to the NSX's power just below that in it's most powerful 'production' form. They fail to realize that the NSX was MUCH LIGHTER and also had a TON less unsprung weight. The freaking body could be lifted by two women, that's how light it was made.

In it's prime it was turning a sub 13 sec quarter mile and still putting up exceptional lap times.

Most reviews bashed it because they didn't understand what it was supposed to be. It was indeed the 'accord' of the supercars at the time, it didn't have the hiccups and harshness that all the rest of the pack did...it simply did what did was made to do each time you got in it.

I have been around any mixed group of people (obviously non-car enthusiasts) that didn't notice one and wonder 'what kind of car' it was when one passed by or was parked.

Unfortunately unless majorly modified the NSX is beaten by a lot of cars today, at the same time it still can hold it's own against many though.

 

[Howard]

I think I hear an echo in here.

 

[thomsbrain]

The NSX is not exactly a tiny car, either. But Nissan have always made extremely bulky and heavy cars. Even the 300ZX was a colossal fatty in its time. And the modern 350Z dwarfs the S2000 and RX8 (That's what you get when your sports car shares an SUV platform). No one can argue the GT-R isn't outrageously fast, but damn, does it really have to be so freaking huge?

 

[alkemyst]

a lot of the size increases we are seeing are due to both SRS and options becoming more common. In many racing sanctions they have also gotten bigger and heavier due to their own safety requirements.

 

[PeeluckyDuckee]

Long, wide, and low is how I like them. But these days all vehicles, sedans or otherwise, have high roof lines and high seating arrangements, you lose that connectivity feel to the road.

 

[Q]

Originally posted by: CptCrunch
does anybody else think the rear of the gt-r looks like the camaro?

and yes, it is HUGE compared to the nsx

Yes I think it looks like a Camaro.

I actually don't really like the GTR that much, NSX looks really cool.