Nsx R vs Viper Srt 10

Nsx vs Viper Srt 10? Which would you say is the better track car??

Im having a kinda tough time with this one. I dont like the Viper and at all. It just doesnt handle well enough. Dodge put too much money under the hood and not enough on the rest of the car. The NSX is getting old, and has been outclassed by its competition since its debut over 10 years ago. It handles great and is really light, but theres just not enough power there. Therefore I think I might just have to go with the Dodge because it would destroy the NSX on the straights. The SRT10 is about 10 years newer then most of the NSX.

However... Honda is in the process of developing a new NSX that should be much better competition.

Im having a kinda tough time with this one. I dont like the Viper and at all. It just doesnt handle well enough. Dodge put too much money under the hood and not enough on the rest of the car. The NSX is getting old, and has been outclassed by its competition since its debut over 10 years ago. It handles great and is really light, but theres just not enough power there. Therefore I think I might just have to go with the Dodge because it would destroy the NSX on the straights. The SRT10 is about 10 years newer then most of the NSX.

However... Honda is in the process of developing a new NSX that should be much better competition.

Yea I heard its supposed to compete with the new 430 modena. btw do u kno when the 430 is supposed to be realeased???

rumors fellas, just rumors. now there's rumors that honda has axed the HSC concept (and the NSX completely after 2004) and instead will be coming out with a roadster/coupe to compete with the mercedes SL series and bmw Z8. which in my opinion is a better idea than a new NSX or a replacement. love the car but with the success the mercerdes SL is seeing, maybe honda/acura would see some money doing tha tinstead. i've learned not to believe any rumor about what honda's future plans are. i'll believe what i see when i see.

so that i won't hijack the thread, i voted for the NSX-r. since the question asked which is a better track car, i have to go with the nsx-r. but if the question were to ask which is the better drag strip car, well then you all know which would win that comparo

Honda needs to axe the supercar idea all together. No one outside of Japan is willing to pay over $50,000 for a Honda.

an NSX is not a proper supercar, and will never be a proper supercar. A good sports car, yes. But not a supercar. The design is awesome, but it should've never been put to compete in the super car arena. And this comparison is stupid. Of course the SRT10 would own it. Shouldve pitted an NSX vs. Porsche or something.

Well I believe the only thing the NSX really is lacking in comparison to other supercars, is power. Honestly making power really isn't all that difficult, just ask Mercedes about that. If Honda decided to go ahead with a new NSX and it had around 450HP, I think it would seriously cause Ferrari, Porsche, and the Viper some trouble. I know about the HP agreement in Japan, but it's time to move on from that, and start getting the true potential out of these cars.

an NSX is not a proper supercar, and will never be a proper supercar. A good sports car, yes. But not a supercar. The design is awesome, but it should've never been put to compete in the super car arena. And this comparison is stupid. Of course the SRT10 would own it. Shouldve pitted an NSX vs. Porsche or something.
Then why did it scare the fuck out of Ferrari and Porsche back in the late '80's?

rumors fellas, just rumors. now there's rumors that honda has axed the HSC concept (and the NSX completely after 2004) and instead will be coming out with a roadster/coupe to compete with the mercedes SL series and bmw Z8. which in my opinion is a better idea than a new NSX or a replacement. love the car but with the success the mercerdes SL is seeing, maybe honda/acura would see some money doing tha tinstead. i've learned not to believe any rumor about what honda's future plans are. i'll believe what i see when i see.

so that i won't hijack the thread, i voted for the NSX-r. since the question asked which is a better track car, i have to go with the nsx-r. but if the question were to ask which is the better drag strip car, well then you all know which would win that comparo

Ill get the report 4 ya.

1992 Dodge Viper RT/10 roadster

-60 mph: 4.6 sec
0-100 mph: 10.6 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.9 sec @ 114 mph
Skidpad: .95g
Top Speed: 165 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 135 ft
Slalom Speed: 68.7 mph

Base price $50,700

1999-2002 Dodge Viper ACR Coupe

0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.6 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.0 sec @ 122 mph
Skidpad: 1.02g
Top Speed: 192 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 122 ft
Slalom Speed: 72.4 mph

Base price $84,000

2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 Roadster

0-60 mph: 3.9 sec
0-100 mph: 8.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.77 sec @ 123.6 mph
Skidpad: 1.05g
Top Speed: 190 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 97 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.4 mph

Base Price $79,995

1996 Acura NSX

0-60 mph: 4.9 sec
0-100 mph: 11.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.5 sec @ 108 mph
Skidpad: .89g
Top Speed: 168 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 123 ft
Slalom Speed: 63.0 mph

Base Price $85,000

1999 Acura NSX Zanardi Edition

0-60 mph: 4.8 sec
0-100 mph: 11.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.5 sec @ 108 mph
Skidpad: .93g
Top Speed: 175 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 123 ft
Slalom Speed: 64.0 mph

Base Price $87,000

2002 Acura NSX

0-60 mph: 4.9 sec
0-100 mph: 11.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.4 sec @ 106 mph
Skidpad: .91g
Top Speed: 175 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 117 ft
Slalom Speed: 65.8 mph

Base Price $89,000

And for gits and shiggles....

2002 Chevrolet Corvette Z06

0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.5 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.5 sec @ 115 mph
Skidpad: .99g
Top Speed: 171 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 104 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.3 mph

Base Price $49,905

Hmm, gee, I get more performance out of a Viper or Corvette for less money. Gee, what a choice to make.

2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 Roadster

0-60 mph: 3.9 sec 0-100 mph: 8.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.77 sec @ 123.6 mph
Skidpad: 1.05g
Top Speed: 190 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 97 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.4 mph

Base Price $79,995


Hmm, gee, I get more performance out of a Viper or Corvette for less money. Gee, what a choice to make.

Car and driver clocked it @ 4.2 sec. The noble wooped its ass hehehe.
I'd still take the nsx more upgrades :iceslolan. Signal nsx = woosh

Little company in Texas called Hennesey, another in Indiana called Lingenfelter, and another down (I believe) Georgia way called SVSi would disagree with you that there's more mods for the NSX available.


Facts are facts. The Viper wades around on the NSX. Hell, look at Speed World Challenge! The lone NSX in the field, campaigned by Honda powerhouse Realtime, needed a Vortech supercharger to make the power needed to keep up with the more or less stock ACR Viper Bobby Archer ran.

They shelved the car not to long after the Champion Audi RS4's showed up. Petey Cunningham flat out said "We cannot develop the car any further. It's no longer competitive."

Do we even need to mention the factory Viper Competition Coupe that slams the door shut on 360GTC Modenas and 911GT3 RSR's for about 100k LESS?

exactly from those specs the vip handles better too.

i agree with octagon, z06 all the way!

or SC LT1 ;)

but, the problem is that the viper has been revamped, and the nsx is still more or less the same car it was in the late 80's.

i'd take a NSX RACE CAR, not streetcar, over a viper RACE CAR. but, base for base (or racing editions) the viper should be faster.



but this is the car though ;)

1985/93/04 mr2 mk1.5
0-60 mph: ~4.5
0-100 mph: ?
1/4 mile: 11.6
skidpad: hang on!
top speed: dunno, bangs rev limiter in 5th
braking: eyes out the front of your head
slalom speed: tell u next week ;-)

base price: 650hrs of work at $60 an hour if you can find a shop to make you one

eh, sorry, work in progress... it'll be filled out as they get done

thank you Layla's Keeper.
The vipers handling seems to be really underrated by quite a few people(much like quite a few US sports cars these days).
I voted Viper! :)

Are we comparing the NSX-R or just NSX, cause there is a big difference

1992 Dodge Viper RT/10 roadster

-60 mph: 4.6 sec
0-100 mph: 10.6 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.9 sec @ 114 mph
Skidpad: .95g
Top Speed: 165 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 135 ft
Slalom Speed: 68.7 mph

Base price $50,700

1999-2002 Dodge Viper ACR Coupe

0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.6 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.0 sec @ 122 mph
Skidpad: 1.02g
Top Speed: 192 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 122 ft
Slalom Speed: 72.4 mph

Base price $84,000

2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 Roadster

0-60 mph: 3.9 sec
0-100 mph: 8.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.77 sec @ 123.6 mph
Skidpad: 1.05g
Top Speed: 190 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 97 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.4 mph

Base Price $79,995

1996 Acura NSX

0-60 mph: 4.9 sec
0-100 mph: 11.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.5 sec @ 108 mph
Skidpad: .89g
Top Speed: 168 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 123 ft
Slalom Speed: 63.0 mph

Base Price $85,000

1999 Acura NSX Zanardi Edition

0-60 mph: 4.8 sec
0-100 mph: 11.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.5 sec @ 108 mph
Skidpad: .93g
Top Speed: 175 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 123 ft
Slalom Speed: 64.0 mph

Base Price $87,000

2002 Acura NSX

0-60 mph: 4.9 sec
0-100 mph: 11.7 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.4 sec @ 106 mph
Skidpad: .91g
Top Speed: 175 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 117 ft
Slalom Speed: 65.8 mph

Base Price $89,000

And for gits and shiggles....

2002 Chevrolet Corvette Z06

0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.5 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.5 sec @ 115 mph
Skidpad: .99g
Top Speed: 171 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 104 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.3 mph

Base Price $49,905

Hmm, gee, I get more performance out of a Viper or Corvette for less money. Gee, what a choice to make.

yea id take the viper over any of those, z06 over those nsx's, but the nsx-r is a lot different from the ones you mentioned, it performs a lot better. the nsx-r is harder to obtain, but its the nsx-r that is being compared, and it lapped the nurburgring just as fast as the z06, with worse power to weight ratio. that shows that it had to corner faster, and with a 13+ yr old chassis. part of the reason for its price, is its all aluminum construction, the body, and chassis are made of aluminum.

But that's one of the biggest issues with the NSX. The Corvette and the Viper use steel in their construction and do just fine.

The base NSX weighs in at 3,020lbs.
The base C5 weighs in at 3,174lbs.
The base Viper weighs in at 3,386lbs.

Once again, all that whizbang techno babble at Honda doesn't do anything but drive up the price.

still, less corrosion, and the nsx-r weighs about 2825 lbs. z06 is about 3110.

The NSX-R kept up with a Lambo Murcielago on a track which is probably a better car than the Viper considering it has AWD/580HP and is lighter. And by the way, the NSX-R is lighter than a regular NSX. To whoever said it was 3k LB, I believe it is below 3k.


new:
I was just at the Honda website, the weight is 1270KG or 2799lb on the NSX-R

a lambo lighter? i always heard those where heavy(ish) cars. *shrugs

Yeah all those numbers are for the base NSX, the NSX-R is a different animal. Less weight, better handling, stronger brakes, and sadly still underpowered. The power issue is what holds the NSX or NSX-R back, they just need more of it. Also handling is much more than just skidpad numbers, although I am with you guys the Viper's handling is underrated on this forum (not in the real world).

Honda needs to axe the supercar idea all together. No one outside of Japan is willing to pay over $50,000 for a Honda.

If they gave it more bang for the buck, shit, I definitely would, just for the sake of reliability and "cost-efficient" parts. Even Ferrari engineerings aren't so reliable as they used to be, and talk about the price of parts.

If they gave it more bang for the buck, shit, I definitely would, just for the sake of reliability and "cost-efficient" parts. Even Ferrari engineerings aren't so reliable as they used to be, and talk about the price of parts.

Yea most definetly but tuner wise the nsx when really moded is insane just look at signals. That damn thing is a monster.

on another note ~

If your talking about bang for the buck well thats a no brainer the "noble m12" 360 hp 360 tq 55,000 and you aint beating the performance spec's it beat the viper with ease. 0-60 time is 3.9 the car weighs 2045 pounds and has a full race suspention the only down side is its U turns radius which is a Joke an amazing 27.5 feet my moms merc does it in like 10 or something like that.

i don't know about the viper but nsx is hand made. Anything hand made is gonna be more expensive, and most people overlook that.

Sorry I'm wrong, the Murcielago is heavy. I thought it was around 3100, maybe I'm thinking of some other car.


Here's a video of a NSX beating a Viper
http://nsxfiles.s2ki.com/cs_pulp2.wmv

Here's a 12.8s pass
http://www.nsxsc.com/r/drag.wmv

I don't think the car does 13's like someone earlier said.
Should really compare a new NSX-R to a new Viper.

I really don't think the Viper would take it on the track. It's a racing bred car with incredible handling, but probably not in straight line speed.

QUOTE=Janet Reno]Sorry I'm wrong, the Murcielago is heavy. I thought it was around 3100, maybe I'm thinking of some other car.


Here's a video of a NSX beating a Viper
http://nsxfiles.s2ki.com/cs_pulp2.wmv

Here's a 12.8s pass
http://www.nsxsc.com/r/drag.wmv

I don't think the car does 13's like someone earlier said.
Should really compare a new NSX-R to a new Viper.

I really don't think the Viper would take it on the track. It's a racing bred car with incredible handling, but probably not in straight line speed.[/QUOTE]

Hell ya :thumbsup: sweet videos man:1: GREAT FIND!!

nice videos. :cool:

Well at a track, it always comes down to the driver and how well he knows the car.

Different driving a torque monster with a huge 8.0 liter engine on the front, than a light high revving mid engine car.

Well at a track, it always comes down to the driver and how well he knows the car.

Different driving a torque monster with a huge 8.0 liter engine on the front, than a light high revving mid engine car.

Yea That has alot to do with it. But that was a sweet move on viper. But he also beat the 360 gt as well which is by far one of the best gt class cars ever.

Yea most definetly but tuner wise the nsx when really moded is insane just look at signals. That damn thing is a monster.

on another note ~

If your talking about bang for the buck well thats a no brainer the "noble m12" 360 hp 360 tq 55,000 and you aint beating the performance spec's it beat the viper with ease. 0-60 time is 3.9 the car weighs 2045 pounds and has a full race suspention the only down side is its U turns radius which is a Joke an amazing 27.5 feet my moms merc does it in like 10 or something like that.

However, the current price of that thing would probably drive me to rather get the SRT-10, Z06, or even an older Ferrari. Wish they'd lower the price.

i would choose the nsx-r on the best motoring dvds they were racing different nsx's the type r got #'s from 12.8-13.3 so i duno.. but the nsx-r isnt' just an nsx.. i would choose it over the viper

Tell you what, quote for me some cold hard facts.

What's an NSX Type-R run 0-60? 0-100? 1/4? 0-100-0?

How about slalom speed? Skidpad? 60-0 braking distance?

And most importantly, how much does an NSX Type-R cost relative to the Viper SRT-10?

I don't care what you saw in a video. Until you can prove to me that an NSX Type R can either hang with the Viper for less money OR handily outperform the Viper as its higher price tag demands, I will tell you the Viper is the better track car.

well jeeze.. im just telling you what i saw in the best motoring video.. im sorry if i said anything wrong.. seemed like i offended you or something

vipers are all around better cars i test drivenboth cars the nsx is light foreign ideal car easy on gas and fast on the track the viper just destorys with 3,300 pounds and v10 you just cant beat that the vanquish v12 and the 16 by cadillac is great but it cant tow 5000 pound motors on a race way i went with the viper but why whould i ever go foreign i love america no offense but dodge destroys the competition always has and will

vipers are all around better cars i test drivenboth cars,

the nsx is light foreign ideal car easy on gas and fast on the track,

the viper just destorys with 3,300 pounds and v10 you just cant beat that,

theres 2 engines bigger the vanquish v12 and the 16 by cadillac is great but it cant tow 5000 pound motors on a race way,

i went with the viper but why whould i ever go foreign i love america no offense but dodge destroys the competition always has and will

I'd take the "user-friendly super car", the NSX.

Tell you what, quote for me some cold hard facts.

What's an NSX Type-R run 0-60? 0-100? 1/4? 0-100-0?

How about slalom speed? Skidpad? 60-0 braking distance?

And most importantly, how much does an NSX Type-R cost relative to the Viper SRT-10?

I don't care what you saw in a video. Until you can prove to me that an NSX Type R can either hang with the Viper for less money OR handily outperform the Viper as its higher price tag demands, I will tell you the Viper is the better track car.

The NSX Type R does-
0-60- 4.4 to 4.5 Seconds
1/4 Mile goes in by in about 12.8-13.0 Seconds
Slalom Speed is around 70MPH
Skidpad- is about .96g-98g
Braking- 110-114FT
Price tag- I believe, don't quote me on this is close to or just over $100,000 in US Dollars.

Those numbers are accomplished with upgraded suspension/wheels/tires and almost 400LB weight loss. While impressive, still not enough to take the Viper. The Viper is an awesome car, and despite it's weight is a great handling car and easily out powers the NSX Type R. Still I believe the NSX Type R is an awesome car, that just needs alittle more power.

vipers are all around better cars i test drivenboth cars the nsx is light foreign ideal car easy on gas and fast on the track the viper just destorys with 3,300 pounds and v10 you just cant beat that the vanquish v12 and the 16 by cadillac is great but it cant tow 5000 pound motors on a race way i went with the viper but why whould i ever go foreign i love america no offense but dodge destroys the competition always has and will

vipers are all around better cars i test drivenboth cars,

the nsx is light foreign ideal car easy on gas and fast on the track,

the viper just destorys with 3,300 pounds and v10 you just cant beat that,

theres 2 engines bigger the vanquish v12 and the 16 by cadillac is great but it cant tow 5000 pound motors on a race way,

i went with the viper but why whould i ever go foreign i love america no offense but dodge destroys the competition always has and will

Dodge always has destroyed the competition and always will? lol

though I would not consider NSX-R in terms of the price tag it has, and Viper is simply a sexy car, but in terms of reliability and longevity... hehe. Plus NSX- is a MR, another words, weight distribution matches the likes of Ferraris, so if it had that little boost of power to match the Viper's, Dodge can have its rivaling "Import." And with the added power, I believe its true handling could be tested. And they're cars, I won't bother looking at nations of origin.

And no personal offense, but your posts didn't seem like you've typed in English for long.

i vote nsx because come on now its a HONDA ol u could get more girls AND looks in that ar than a viper or boring corvette

i think i've mentioned this before but why are you guys so obsessed with how much cheaper something is?
i'm pretty sure you don't apply this factor to other 'status symbols'.
'yeah, my casio costs less than your rolex...'

i wonder how much the viper would be if it had an all aluminium chassis/body
and
carbon fibre roof, bonnet+spolier.

the viper costs less because well, it is a cheap car to make.
not saying that it is necessarily good/bad,
just that it doesn't mean much.

am i the only one who finds comparing a 3.2 litre car to a 8.0 litre car a little funny?

hmm, that poses another little set of questions.

ok,
the nsx cost probably twice (no idea what they cost in the u.s) as much as the viper but is it twice the car?
but then,
the viper has more than twice the engine but does it have twice the performance?

i think i've mentioned this before but why are you guys so obsessed with how much cheaper something is?
i'm pretty sure you don't apply this factor to other 'status symbols'.
'yeah, my casio costs less than your rolex...'

i wonder how much the viper would be if it had an all aluminium chassis/body
and
carbon fibre roof, bonnet+spolier.

the viper costs less because well, it is a cheap car to make.
not saying that it is necessarily good/bad,
just that it doesn't mean much.

am i the only one who finds comparing a 3.2 litre car to a 8.0 litre car a little funny?

hmm, that poses another little set of questions.

ok,
the nsx cost probably twice (no idea what they cost in the u.s) as much as the viper but is it twice the car?
but then,
the viper has more than twice the engine but does it have twice the performance?

Yeah I totally agree with you on that, the technology and time that went into building the NSX Type R fully justifies it's price tag. The very fact that we are even comparing a 3.2L N/A 6-Cylinder to a 8.3L N/A 10-Cylinder is amazing. The only thing don't agree with, (This is just my opinion so don't take it personal) is comparing watches to cars, price tag for cars is very important, because it the second largest purchase any person will make in their lives (First being a home). Buying a car is much more complex than buying a watch. There is a hella of alot more that goes into the thinking, such as price, performance, reliability, and etc. That is why there are 30 or more different car magazines published, while I can't remember ever picking up a magazine that dealt with watches. So I can understand why price would be a big factor, yet I still believe the NSX is worth it's price, but would be so much better with more power. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for paying more for the better product, but if I'm paying upwards of $30,000 or more for a car, it better be the better product.

um, price is a factor for the 95% of americans who dont' fit in that category we like to call "rich folks". if you make $200k plus a year, sure, the price of a car is among the least of your concerns. for the rest of us who don't make that kind of coin, such as myself for example, the price of the car is among the top 3 factors in my decision making process.

and i want to see value in every dollar i pay for a car. and while i love the NSX-r for everything the car is, even though i voted for the NSX-r over the viper, dollar for dollar, the viper just gives you more bang. technology, being hand built, etc are all great. but the bottom line of going straight from point A to point B faster and cheaper, that has to go to the viper. aroudn the track, i stillk vote for the nsx-r, price not a factor.

One other thing, you really have to look at the NSX Type R and it's purpose. I know some people are talking about reliability and etc., but really when you think about it, what are reasons somebody would buy the NSX Type R over a regular NSX? For the performance. Does the NSX Type R performance put it on par with it's competetion, does the performance of this car match the performance of the Ferrari 360 Modena, Ford GT, Porsche 911 Turbo, Porsche 911 GT3, Lamborghini Gallardo, or Dodge Viper SRT-10? I really can't say it does, not with it's very technologically advance but underpowered 6-Cylinder.

well, if you are considering an nsx (or an nsx-r in particular) in the first place then the cost issue shouldn't be a factor.

Buying a car is much more complex than buying a watch. There is a hella of alot more that goes into the thinking, such as price, performance, reliability, and etc

a lot can be said for watches....
£100 for an accurist?
£1000 for a rolex?
£10,000 for a brietling?
£100,000 for a gerald perregeux?
£200,000+for a 100% hand built, co-axial escapement pocket watch that took ten years to make but is more accurate than anything else in the world?
cars and watches are more similar than you think...

no offence guys but you are basing how good a car is on how well it fares against cars on a track.
while this is a good reference these things are never 'definite' results.
there is always the unquantifiable question of how a car feels.
there are many mid engined cars in the world so why did gordon murray choose an nsx as a point of reference for the F1's handling?

you say the nsx-r is underpowered and that is a fact but you seem not to realise that in terms of lap times, performed by highly skilled drivers, the nsx is not that far behind.
like i said elsewhere, two or three seconds don't amount to much in the real world....

i mean, to throw another little spanner into things, lets look at the lotus exige as another point of reference.
it costs about half what the nsx-r does, has even less power and torque (and weight...)
but it can have a hell of a good time clinging onto the tail of the cars mentioned.

it isn't as fast
but
it can still give them cars a challenge.
is it a worse car because it isn't as fast?

hmm, should also point out that with the exception of the two american offerings on the list, the others are actually just as high-tech....
and seeing as how the nsx is essentially a ten year old car goes to highlight the achievement and significance of the nsx.
i mean, my point is, it isn't really a case that the nsx is expensive.
more like the viper is cheap.
the whole process of making the nsx costs more, from hand welding the aluminium chassis,
to forming the carbon fibre body panels
to painting the carbon fibre (which is a veeery expensive process...).

please don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that the nsx-r is a 'better'.
nor am i saying that the viper is a 'worse' one.
i'm just saying that when it comes to things like this you can't just say, the viper is faster and cheaper, therefore it is better.

Though I’d rather own the NSX, the Viper is the superior track car.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I think it does come down to better equals faster and cheaper... we are talknig about a consumer product here, I wouldn't buy a hand-made T.V. when the one next to it gives superior picture/sound quality, and top it off is CHEAPER. This is the nature of economics and consumerism.
And you can't compare Casio to Rolex, that's like throwing a Geo Metro into the comparison... both cars are fairly equal status symbols, more like Movado vs. Rolex, in which case price is a factor.

but errr, the viper isn't technically as good as the nsx...
it goes faster but then that is only because it has a bigger engine.
should point out that litre for litre, the nsx produces more power than the viper.

it is like comparing two boxers from different class weights.
the heavyweight will win
but only cos he is twice the size of the featherweight.
the featherweight might still be the better boxer.

unless of course you are saying that the viper can handle better than the nsx...
in which case i'll let the professionals argue the case for the nsx.

but errr, the viper isn't technically as good as the nsx...
it goes faster but then that is only because it has a bigger engine.
should point out that litre for litre, the nsx produces more power than the viper.

True. But is this extra technology really practical?
I mean their determination to make a N/A 3.8L compare with a 8L V10 is admirable, but when you invest so much time and resources into engineering precision only to have you’re rivals get the better of you by them simply increasing the displacement of their engine, you sometimes wonder if it is necessary. It seems like the NSX is more of a technical demonstration of Honda's engineering then a car to win over the consumers.
I know you could say, "If Honda made a 8L V10..ect". And yes if they did make a large engine utilising the same technology it would probably be unbelievably powerful but hell just imagine how much the engine would cost to produce.

Don’t get me wrong Honda are 4-stroke wizards. Their insistence of not taking the easy and far more common way of using turbos in their engines is extremely admirable if a bit stubborn.

hey, Honda's philosophy, to make LEVs (low emission vehicles).

So I think they're good at technological refinement, who knows, in another 7-10 years, they'll get more than 600 horses out of a stock, natural aspirated 4 banger. lol.

True. But is this extra technology really practical?
I mean their determination to make a N/A 3.8L compare with a 8L V10 is admirable, but when you invest so much time and resources into engineering precision only to have you’re rivals get the better of you by them simply increasing the displacement of their engine, you sometimes wonder if it is necessary. It seems like the NSX is more of a technical demonstration of Honda's engineering then a car to win over the consumers.
I know you could say, "If Honda made a 8L V10..ect". And yes if they did make a large engine utilising the same technology it would probably be unbelievably powerful but hell just imagine how much the engine would cost to produce.

Don’t get me wrong Honda are 4-stroke wizards. Their insistence of not taking the easy and far more common way of using turbos in their engines is extremely admirable if a bit stubborn.

Wow good post, totally agree with you.

The new nsx is supposed to have alot more displacement and much more cylinders :naughty:...

I mean their determination to make a N/A 3.8L compare with a 8L V10 is admirable....
it seems like the NSX is more of a technical demonstration of Honda's engineering then a car to win over the consumers

well, that's exactly it.
they want to make the most advanced pieces of engineering they can.
it isn't their aim to simply make a superfast car.
i mean, take a look at their take on a diesel engine.
they don't just make a 'copy' of an existing good diesel, the go and change the rule rulebook...
and yes, the nsx IS their ultimate expression of engineering.

again, i mention that the best engineers/drivers in the world have all raved about the nsx and how it handles (set up by senna remember...)

in their eyes and in the eyes of the press, the viper isn't one of their rivals.
it is only a rival in the states which is not their biggest nsx market anyway.
in their home country, the rivals are gt-r, gto, rx-7 (again, remember the car IS ten years old...).

and well, yes....
i've also heard about a honda v8 in the pipeline.
only thing is, with the japan 300 bhp thing, what good is it?
unless of course they are only making it for outside japan, which seems highly unlikely.
who knows?
it might happen.

anyway.
we need guys like honda who don't take the easy route.
would an M3 be the same if it used a turbo or two?
how about if lamborghini ditched their V12 for a turbo V8?
what if ferrari hadn't given in to pinninfarina and made the 365 boxer (mid engined 12)?
what if audi didn't bother with aluminiuim.
what if honda didn't bother with aluminium (which can be said was the catalyst for ferrari to use aluminium for chassis in the 360...)?

a slight exaggeration
but
any tom dick or harry can slap a turbo in a car.
not many can get more than 100bhp per litre from a n/a engine....

That 280HP gentlemen rule should end with the next generation R35 Skyline, and good riddance. I know plenty of Japanese cars have passed the 280HP rule already, but they're either A) sold only outside of Japan or B) Incognito, meaning the rule is barely pushed and not openly admitted to in Japan, example Skyline R34, 280HP my ass. When the R35 Skyline comes out it will be the first time a manufactuer openly admits to breaking the 280HP rule, and breaking it by a lot.

i like one article about the r34 gt-r
had an interview with one of the chief engineers.

it went something like this.
reporter: "revs+torque=power (or something like this... don't quote me...)
so the new r34 revs higher?"
nissan guy: "yes"
reporter: "and it has more torque?"
nissan guy: "yes"
reporter: "so the r34 gt-r has more torque and at higher revs?"
nissan guy: "yes"
reporter: "so the r34 gt-r has more power than the r33?"
nissian guy: (pauses and smiles) "no...."

Umm, officially the Gentlemen's Agreement was breached with the most recent Japanese market generation of Infiniti Q45 which makes an advertised 330hp as I recall.

Again, though, as far as the handling of the Viper I need only point to its sterling competition record. Beyond being a tool for massacre (in capable hands) in SCCA track days, the Viper has handily been the dominant car in Speed World Challenge competition, at the Nurburgring 24hours/1000km, and the Oreca factory Vipers retired undefeated in Le Mans GTS competition as well as being the first GTS cars since the factory Nissan 300ZX's to win the Daytona 24hours outright (and they did it against a full crop of WSC/LMP cars).

Furthermore, yes the Viper has a big engine. SO FREAKING WHAT? Look at the number of cars over 5L these days. Lots of big 5 and 6 liter and up engines popping up, V8, V12, V10 and otherwise. From engines as exotic as Bugatti's 8.0L quad turbo W16 in the upcoming Veyron to engines as utilitarian as the Chevy Vortec truck engines. A large engine equals a more inexpensive power source that can be made reliable and fuel efficient through careful engine management.

Even Honda, king of the mighty mites, realized that the 2.0L four in the S2000 was too peaky to be useful, so they swelled the displacement to 2.2L to gain torque and a broader powerband.

You have to be a really REALLY foolish person to point to a performance car having a smaller, less power friendly engine and then saying it's a benefit.

In this case i choose the viper too. Its a tremendous track car. I used to make the same mistake a while ago thinking that vipers are drag cars, only to realise that i was completelly off. if anything they stink at very serious drag racing due to their purely track oriented suspension setup.

True the NSX is a very good track car but as mentioned by now its rather oudated, but even when it was a new thing it never particularly inspired me. Why? Because it was far to bland, and I like cars with personality that inspire passion and slap your hand if you're being stupid (mosler, viper gts, noble, stradale ETC....)


About the HP to displacement ratio, remeber this for handling hp to engine weight ratio is more important(one of the main reasons nissan is ditching the anvil aka rb26). Also if you have ever raced you'll realise the importance of a powerband (there are corners in autox when my little engine drops so badly out of the powerband that I have time to read a book till the power comes back on - there is nothing more frustrating) and here is where big displacement engines come in.

Umm, officially the Gentlemen's Agreement was breached with the most recent Japanese market generation of Infiniti Q45 which makes an advertised 330hp as I recall.



Like I said before, it has been breached plenty of times, but openly admited to it in Japan, I doubt that. Advertised 330HP in US or Europe, but not in Japan. The Supra Twin Turbo, 300ZX Twin Turbo, 3000GT VR4, NSX, and many other examples all lay down over 280HP, yet in Japan, they are rated at 280HP. Also I stated this rule has been passed plenty of times, but not by too much, why, well if you create a car that has 450HP and try to claim it only has 280HP, I don't think that would fool many people. Name a Japanese car that has over 350HP? With the introduction of the 400HP+ R35 Skyline Nissan knows there is no way that they can fool anybody into believing this car only has 280HP or maybe Nissan doesn't care anymore about the 280HP rule, so yes the car will supposidly be rated at it's true HP everywhere including Japan. What's the big deal, the big deal is that I hope that this could perhaps cause a HP war in Japan and put an end the 280HP rule, finally more powerful Japanese imports and perhaps maybe one day we will be comparing a 500HP NSX to European and American supercars.

What's the big deal, the big deal is that I hope that this could perhaps cause a HP war in Japan and put an end the 280HP rule, finally more powerful Japanese imports and perhaps maybe one day we will be comparing a 500HP NSX to European and American supercars.

I would be worried about a HP war between companies. This is what happened in the muscle car era. Cars became more and more powerful to the point that the public got concerned about safety and the government came down to ruin the party.
The backlash of a horsepower war would probably cause the government to institute a strict 200HP agreement, which would frankly stink.

About the R35 Skyline. That was the V8 one wasn’t it?
I thought Nissan axed that project in favour of the Q45.

About the R35 Skyline. That was the V8 one wasn’t it? I thought Nissan axed that project in favour of the Q45.

Haha Not exactly they probly still workin on it. The R35 will have to be released if the new nsx comes out (my opinion) which it will. No the new sky if produced will have a flat six. As far as im concerned the r34 does it for me. :biggrin: