Honda NSX -> Ferrari F50 conversion

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: SilentZero
Ok, then lets use the E46 M3 as an example. As I know first hand the cost of one. That was imported, yet I still saved 35k compared to the NSX, yet it still would wipe the floor with it.

Where are you getting your info from?

The RX8 and the 350Z are as fast as the M3.
The S4, STi, and Evo are quicker than the M3.

So how does the M3 wipe the floor with the NSX?

Check

your link That NSX is slower than dog crap!

You see that W in Parenthesis ?
It means it's been done in the Wet.

Well, there are two NSXs on that page. Eitherway it's still getting killed by a ricer's $30k wet dream EVO/STI. There is a tuned M3 that, when wet, beats it handidly. Plus, conditions may be moist, but it's not like top gear is racing these around in a downpour - otherwise that list would be entirely meaningless.

Watch the Video Fanboy, when they tested the NSX it was a down pour

http://topgear.breedbandportal.kpn.com/Library.aspx#

Watch the Video.. does that seem just MOIST to you ?

Well that's silly isn't it! I'm sure overall the NSX is faster anyway than an M3, but it's still overpriced for what it is. It's not surprising the thing only needs a regular honda schedule - afterall, it's got less horsepower than a sub $30k 350z. This issue has been discussed in the past though, and people always rehash the same sh*t (me included).

 

[isekii]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: SilentZero
Ok, then lets use the E46 M3 as an example. As I know first hand the cost of one. That was imported, yet I still saved 35k compared to the NSX, yet it still would wipe the floor with it.

Where are you getting your info from?

The RX8 and the 350Z are as fast as the M3.
The S4, STi, and Evo are quicker than the M3.

So how does the M3 wipe the floor with the NSX?

Check

your link That NSX is slower than dog crap!

You see that W in Parenthesis ?
It means it's been done in the Wet.

Well, there are two NSXs on that page. Eitherway it's still getting killed by a ricer's $30k wet dream EVO/STI. There is a tuned M3 that, when wet, beats it handidly. Plus, conditions may be moist, but it's not like top gear is racing these around in a downpour - otherwise that list would be entirely meaningless.

Watch the Video Fanboy, when they tested the NSX it was a down pour

http://topgear.breedbandportal.kpn.com/Library.aspx#

Watch the Video.. does that seem just MOIST to you ?

Well that's silly isn't it! I'm sure overall the NSX is faster anyway than an M3, but it's still overpriced for what it is. It's not surprising the thing only needs a regular honda schedule - afterall, it's got less horsepower than a sub $30k 350z. This issue has been discussed in the past though, and people always rehash the same sh*t (me included).

So quit talking sh!t about the NSX, when you know it's a great car, although outdated.
M3 doesn't own anything against the NSX including handling.
Horsepower does not equal everything NSX with less HP owns the 350z as well. If you're comparing HP
Continue your masturbation to the Nissan vehicles fanboi

And i'm not a honda fanboi
Have a nice day

 

[SilentZero]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: SilentZero
Ok, then lets use the E46 M3 as an example. As I know first hand the cost of one. That was imported, yet I still saved 35k compared to the NSX, yet it still would wipe the floor with it.

Where are you getting your info from?

The RX8 and the 350Z are as fast as the M3.
The S4, STi, and Evo are quicker than the M3.

So how does the M3 wipe the floor with the NSX?

A RX8 and 350z as fast as the M3? S4, STi, Evo quicker? Are you on drugs? The only reason the STi and Evo are "equivalent" in the 1/4 is cause they are AWD, but get above 100mph and the M3 will destroy them (in stock form), and the M3 is quicker than the S4 in certain aspects (but gotta love AWD). I suggest you get off your computer and get into the real world before you post on things that you know nothing about.

*Note: There are hundreds of tracks and conditions that make a huge difference on what cars perform better. I am referring to overall performance, not only on one particular track with turns every 500 meters (in which a powerful RWD car as the M3, z06, etc) would not perform as well. Im refering to top end, initial speed, skidpad, braking, 1/4, etc. Hell I bet my WRX would out-perform an M3 or corvette in the wet twisties because of awd, but that doesn't make it better.

 

[SilentZero]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: SilentZero
Ok, then lets use the E46 M3 as an example. As I know first hand the cost of one. That was imported, yet I still saved 35k compared to the NSX, yet it still would wipe the floor with it.

Where are you getting your info from?

The RX8 and the 350Z are as fast as the M3.
The S4, STi, and Evo are quicker than the M3.

So how does the M3 wipe the floor with the NSX?

Check

your link That NSX is slower than dog crap!

You see that W in Parenthesis ?
It means it's been done in the Wet.

Well, there are two NSXs on that page. Eitherway it's still getting killed by a ricer's $30k wet dream EVO/STI. There is a tuned M3 that, when wet, beats it handidly. Plus, conditions may be moist, but it's not like top gear is racing these around in a downpour - otherwise that list would be entirely meaningless.

Watch the Video Fanboy, when they tested the NSX it was a down pour

http://topgear.breedbandportal.kpn.com/Library.aspx#

Watch the Video.. does that seem just MOIST to you ?

Well that's silly isn't it! I'm sure overall the NSX is faster anyway than an M3, but it's still overpriced for what it is. It's not surprising the thing only needs a regular honda schedule - afterall, it's got less horsepower than a sub $30k 350z. This issue has been discussed in the past though, and people always rehash the same sh*t (me included).

Nope Skoorb. While working in germany where I bought my E46 M3, a good friend had a NSX and we raced many of times on autobahn A6, and he didn't have the top end to beat me. The M3 is faster than the NSX top end without a doubt.

 

[Scarpozzi]

To be honest...I don't care so much about speed as I do the unique ferrari engine sound. Unless he puts a PA on there to emit the whine that ferraris make when they go down the road, there's no point in doing any cosmetic work on the outside of the car.

 

[geno]

Why is the NSX left hand drive if it's Japanese?

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: SilentZero
Ok..I am not a fan of american cars either, however, if you can show me how a new NSX is better than a new corvette then Ill agree. But heres a few reasons why I don't agree.
1. MSRP on NSX = $90k , MSRP on corvette = 44k in coupe form to match NSX
2. Power/Engine: NSX 290 hp vtech, corvette = 400hp/400ft/lb tq
3. Corvette has a better weight distro.
4. The list continues on....

I personally don't care for corvettes, but just giving you one example of how the NSX is crappy and overpriced compared to an american car that outperforms and outclasses it in most all aspects. Now if I brought german cars in the mix, there would be no end to the NSX's blowout.

you're forgetting...NSX is a mid-engine car. vette is a front engine car. no way in hell does the vette have better weight distribution. also the NSX will handle a lot better than the vette due to it being a mid-engine car. I'm not saying the Z06 is crappy...its a DAMN good supercar. Yes it is faster than the NSX....but i think the NSX can give the Z06 a run for it in the twisties (i.e. not drag racing).

True, the NSX is waaay overpriced...but calling it a crappy car is just ignorant man

 

[sillymofo]

Yeah, that's just like calling Paris Hilton fugly





//runs and cover.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: geno
Why is the NSX left hand drive if it's Japanese?

Interesting. I didn't notice that before. I assumed since the page was in Japanese and the license plate was in (foreign language) The logo is an Acura instead of a Honda though.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: Aharami
you're forgetting...NSX is a mid-engine car. vette is a front engine car. no way in hell does the vette have better weight distribution.

A C6 Vette's weight distribution is 51/49
NSX's is 41/59

Oops! I guess having a rear mounted transaxle with the engine up front really helps that weight distribution eh? Just because a car has an MR layout doesn't mean it's going to have 50/50 weight distribution, there's nothing up front to even out the weight of the car!

NSX specs
Vette specs

 

[DingDingDao]

Been reading the thread, and it reminds of the MKIV Supra club my old roomie belonged to. They used to do canyon/banzai runs back-to-back, with open invitations to anyone who wanted to attend. It usually ended up being about 20-25 Supras upgraded to various degrees (from simple boost/fuel controller to full single-turbo upgrades in excess of 750 rwhp), Porsches, BMWs, Audis, sometimes a Ferrari, and always a number of NSXs. One NSX owner who always showed had a Comptech supercharger and full suspension work. Without fail, for at least 4 straight months, the NSXs would have to abandon their run, simply because they couldn't keep up. If they got lost in the twisties, they'd meet us at the rally point for the banzai run, and then proceed to get left behind again. Not saying the NSX sucks, but it is significantly behind the times in terms of technology and performance.

Oh, for those who don't know:
Canyon runs: usually Malibu canyons between PCH-1 and 101, Angeles Crest, or Ortega Fwy (in Socal).
Banzai runs: top speed runs. Usually on 101 north of Los Angeles towards Camarillo, or 15 Fwy east towards Las Vegas. Always done early, early in the morning, and always with lead and chase cars to try (if at all possible) to avoid any sort of traffic.

I realize that driver skill has a lot to do with it, but it's an interesting trend that I continually noticed for months on end.

Another anecdote: I have 4 (affluent) friends who have had a Sunday morning drive for the last two years up in San Francisco. Canyon driving to the ocean, then a speed run up the coastline. All four guys have race driving experience (track, drag, auto-x), and are easily the 4 best drivers I am acquainted with. Cars involved over the last two years:

2003 BMW M3 (lightweight BBS wheels/suspension work only)
1997 Toyota Supra TT (fuel/boost, suspension, lightweight wheels, around 450 rwhp)
1996 Porsche 993 TT (enlarged turbos, suspension, wheels, around 650 rwhp)
2002 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (upgrades unknown)
2004 Dodge Viper (upgrades unknown)
2003 Ferrari 360 Modena (stock)
2001 BMW M Coupe (stock)

In the last two years, the first two finishers in every Sunday drive was always the Ferrari, followed by the M3/M Coupe. Regardless of which other car ran, the M cars never finished worse than 2nd. I think that given the company in the list, that is very impressive.

 

[PowerMac4Ever]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: Aharami
you're forgetting...NSX is a mid-engine car. vette is a front engine car. no way in hell does the vette have better weight distribution.

A C6 Vette's weight distribution is 51/49
NSX's is 41/59

Oops! I guess having a rear mounted transaxle with the engine up front really helps that weight distribution eh? Just because a car has an MR layout doesn't mean it's going to have 50/50 weight distribution, there's nothing up front to even out the weight of the car!

NSX specs
Vette specs

The NSX has a better weight distribution, not an equal weight distribution. This is the way mid-engined cars are. Look at the Lotus Elise, which has a 40/60 weight distribution and probably outhandles both.

 

[DingDingDao]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: Aharami
you're forgetting...NSX is a mid-engine car. vette is a front engine car. no way in hell does the vette have better weight distribution.

A C6 Vette's weight distribution is 51/49
NSX's is 41/59

Oops! I guess having a rear mounted transaxle with the engine up front really helps that weight distribution eh? Just because a car has an MR layout doesn't mean it's going to have 50/50 weight distribution, there's nothing up front to even out the weight of the car!

NSX specs
Vette specs

The NSX has a better weight distribution, not an equal weight distribution. This is the way mid-engined cars are. Look at the Lotus Elise, which has a 40/60 weight distribution and probably outhandles both.

Saw a Lotus Elise last week in Austin, TX. Absolutely gorgeous. The retuned Toyota VVT-i engine sounds great (I don't know if it's the retuning, exhaust, or what). Definitely doesn't sound like a Celica.
Gorgeous lines, beautiful paint. I wonder how much over MSRP the Elise is going for...

BTW, I think part of the reason the Elise outhandles either the C6 or the NSX has to do with: 1) curb weight and 2) Suspension. The C6 and NSX both weigh in around 3200lb, while the Elise is something like 2200 lb (don't quote me on this). 1000 lb is a LOT of weight to not have to push around. The suspension is another issue. Lotus has been building some of the finest performance suspensions around, and I suspect it does a lot to help the Elise corner the way it does.

 

[boyRacer]

lol NSX threads always end up like this

nevertheless, its a 13 year old car people with a price tag from today. if you're comparing it to cars coming out now well what the hell do you expect? honda will not lower the price tag down because they don't intend to get any profit from the NSX. it's a halo car.

when it came out it was one hell of a car compared to its competition, and it was $70-75k. handbuilt and made of aluminum, mid-engine, comfort and reliability of a honda, and looks like no other in the road. well duh it doesnt look so impressive now but heh... people here jack off to M3s so whatever. for you.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

IMO the NSX is a brilliant car, regardless of whether it's the fastest car out there (which it clearly isn't). By all accounts it offers typically excellent Honda reliability, and unlike its exotic competitors, it doesn't require vast amounts of costly maintenance. It's definitely a VERY dated design, and I don't think many people would pick it as their dream car, but a used NSX offers mortals the chance to own a truly brilliant, exotic sports car. I could imagine owning one at some point, whereas I will almost certainly never be able to own a Ferrari.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: DonVito
IMO the NSX is a brilliant car, regardless of whether it's the fastest car out there (which it clearly isn't). By all accounts it offers typically excellent Honda reliability, and unlike its exotic competitors, it doesn't require vast amounts of costly maintenance. It's definitely a VERY dated design, and I don't think many people would pick it as their dream car, but a used NSX offers mortals the chance to own a truly brilliant, exotic sports car. I could imagine owning one at some point, whereas I will almost certainly never be able to own a Ferrari.

Maybe if youd stop buying titanium bikes you could.

 

[imported_vr6]

To the above poster. From personal experience

M3 is ALOT faster then the 350z and rx8.

evo/sti/s4 Faster? I doubt it. They are around the same, s4 probabaly slowest out of all of them, unless you are talking about the new generation of S4s with the V8.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: vr6
To the above poster. From personal experience

M3 is ALOT faster then the 350z and rx8.

evo/sti/s4 Faster? I doubt it. They are around the same, s4 probabaly slowest out of all of them, unless you are talking about the new generation of S4s with the V8.

what? me? i'm not the one who was talking about those cars.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: bR

Maybe if youd stop buying titanium bikes you could.

NEVER! Actually, for a while when I was in law school, I had something like $8,000 in bikes (at the time, I had my Serotta ATi with XT/XTR, a DeRosa Professional with Record/Chorus, and a beloved Bridgestone MB-Zip), and a $1,000 car.

I think if I get a decent job after separating from the AF this winter, I'll order a swanky custom lugged steel bike (I'm thinking a Della Santa, which wouldn't be ridiculously expensive, or perhaps a Kirk or even - dare I dream - a Richard Sachs).

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: SilentZero

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: SilentZero
Ok, then lets use the E46 M3 as an example. As I know first hand the cost of one. That was imported, yet I still saved 35k compared to the NSX, yet it still would wipe the floor with it.

Where are you getting your info from?

The RX8 and the 350Z are as fast as the M3.
The S4, STi, and Evo are quicker than the M3.

So how does the M3 wipe the floor with the NSX?

A RX8 and 350z as fast as the M3? S4, STi, Evo quicker? Are you on drugs? The only reason the STi and Evo are "equivalent" in the 1/4 is cause they are AWD, but get above 100mph and the M3 will destroy them (in stock form), and the M3 is quicker than the S4 in certain aspects (but gotta love AWD). I suggest you get off your computer and get into the real world before you post on things that you know nothing about.

*Note: There are hundreds of tracks and conditions that make a huge difference on what cars perform better. I am referring to overall performance, not only on one particular track with turns every 500 meters (in which a powerful RWD car as the M3, z06, etc) would not perform as well. Im refering to top end, initial speed, skidpad, braking, 1/4, etc. Hell I bet my WRX would out-perform an M3 or corvette in the wet twisties because of awd, but that doesn't make it better.

Yet you're the idiot who seems to be focusing solely on straight-line and top end performance while failing to take in the whole picture.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: bR

Maybe if youd stop buying titanium bikes you could.

NEVER! Actually, for a while when I was in law school, I had something like $8,000 in bikes (at the time, I had my Serotta ATi with XT/XTR, a DeRosa Professional with Record/Chorus, and a beloved Bridgestone MB-Zip), and a $1,000 car.

I think if I get a decent job after separating from the AF this winter, I'll order a swanky custom lugged steel bike (I'm thinking a Della Santa, which wouldn't be ridiculously expensive, or perhaps a Kirk or even - dare I dream - a Richard Sachs).

What did you do to the bikes? and the DeRosa? :heart:

...oh and there goes your Ferrari

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: bR

What did you do to the bikes? and the DeRosa? :heart:

...oh and there goes your Ferrari

The Zip sustained a huge dent on its top tube from my bar-end when I dumped it once, and I ended up giving it to a friend with a Zip so he could cannibalize the bottom bracket (they came with a unique Mavic BB that required a chamfered BB shell, and the bearings are out of production; the BB shell has no threads, so once your Mavic BB dies, the bike dies with it). The Zip was a fun bike, and VERY light for its era (it weighed 23 pounds in an era when 29 was average), but it was built with paper-thin Prestige tubing that was a little fragile - I wouldn't have been totally comfortable riding it with such a big dent. I originally built my Serotta with the parts from the Zip, but it evolved over the years to the point that only the front hub and front Suntour shifter are left from the original Zip kit.

I sold the DeRosa about a year ago. It really needed a paint job, and since the bike was always a bit small (it was a 60cm, and I really prefer a 61-62), I couldn't justify throwing $500 into paint for it. I ended up buying this NOS Woodrup 531 (I believe I paid $250 for frame/fork/headset) and building it up with the kit from the DeRosa. My Moots is, er, quicker, and a better rain bike (which is important in the Puget sound area), but I prefer the ride of steel overall.

 

[Chu]

This thread is halarious, Skoorb keeps trying to 0wn isekii, but ends up just digging his own grave :laugh: I give it a :thumbsup:

 

[bleeb]

hahah funny.. but I wouldn't fvck with my NSX...

 

[Apex]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: Aharami
you're forgetting...NSX is a mid-engine car. vette is a front engine car. no way in hell does the vette have better weight distribution.

A C6 Vette's weight distribution is 51/49
NSX's is 41/59

Oops! I guess having a rear mounted transaxle with the engine up front really helps that weight distribution eh? Just because a car has an MR layout doesn't mean it's going to have 50/50 weight distribution, there's nothing up front to even out the weight of the car!

NSX specs
Vette specs

The NSX has a better weight distribution, not an equal weight distribution. This is the way mid-engined cars are. Look at the Lotus Elise, which has a 40/60 weight distribution and probably outhandles both.

The mid-engined guys are correct.

Ideal weight distribution for the the vast majority of circuits & roads (nothing is perfectly ideal) is 42% front, 58% rear, much like F1 vehicles, with as much of that weight centered (not out in the 4 corners) as possible.

With acceleration, the weight is already transfered back and over the driving wheels, giving you greater acceleration.

With braking, weight transfers forward, so that each of your 4 tires do closer to equal work.

With cornering, you hit the apex slightly later, but you're braking later, and accelerating harder earlier, setting you up to hit the straight faster and with higher speed.

50%/50% is only ideal in marketing talk. BMW has been the worst at perpetuating this myth, but many companies are guilty.

Oh yeah, and the Elise is 1975lbs or lighter (depending on touring package, sports package or both).

Edit: bad spelling.