One of the greatest cars being built
02-21-2005, 04:10 PM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
changing the topic Nimesh?
So do you retract your statement that a NSX "marginally" outperforms a stock S2000?
Do you admit that at minimum, it appears to marginally outperform a SCd S2000?
Do I have to come to your work and show everyone the famous PT picture with your hand on his ass?
So do you retract your statement that a NSX "marginally" outperforms a stock S2000?
Do you admit that at minimum, it appears to marginally outperform a SCd S2000?
Do I have to come to your work and show everyone the famous PT picture with your hand on his ass?
02-21-2005, 04:33 PM
#42
Originally Posted by BioBanker' date='Feb 21 2005, 03:34 PM
that 13.4@106 is an average time, much like a 14.3@98 is an average time for an S2000 and a 13.6/7@105 is an average time for a CT S2000.
So from this info the NSX is aprox 1s faster than the S2000 in the 1320 which is about 10 car lengths at the end.
Lets pretend the acceleration is linear (we all know it's not but this is enough to give you an idea) It takes the NSX 13.4s to reach 106mph which is a linear acceleration of 7.91mph/s
02-22-2005, 04:03 AM
#43
Registered User
Originally Posted by BioBanker' date='Feb 21 2005, 09:10 PM
changing the topic Nimesh?
So do you retract your statement that a NSX "marginally" outperforms a stock S2000?
Do you admit that at minimum, it appears to marginally outperform a SCd S2000?
Do I have to come to your work and show everyone the famous PT picture with your hand on his ass?
So do you retract your statement that a NSX "marginally" outperforms a stock S2000?
Do you admit that at minimum, it appears to marginally outperform a SCd S2000?
Do I have to come to your work and show everyone the famous PT picture with your hand on his ass?
1. no....but you weren't as engaging as i thought you would be.
2. no. i stand by what i said....if you feel otherwise, dis-prove it.
3. no....you haven't proven to me that it does.
4. sure, come on by...we'll have a drink and you can stare at the picture on my desk.
02-22-2005, 04:26 AM
#45
Registered User
Originally Posted by BioBanker' date='Feb 22 2005, 09:24 AM
Prove to me that a Ferrari Formula 1 car is faster around ANY track than a NSX Nimesh.
(hint: you cant)
(hint: you cant)
B. if i have to prove it, then you're a bigger idiot than i thought you were....
02-22-2005, 04:34 AM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think you can prove it to my satisfaction.
Not that I think that a F1 car cannot destroy any road car in the world, much less a stock NSX (BAHAHAHAHA), but Im asking YOU to prove that the F1 car is faster.
You cant prove it to my satisfaction, much like youre dumb enough to still believe that a NSX marginally outperforms a stock S2000, despite all of the above.
At first I thought that you didnt know what you were talking about. Then I thought that you were ignorant. Now I think youre retarded, as well.
Not that I think that a F1 car cannot destroy any road car in the world, much less a stock NSX (BAHAHAHAHA), but Im asking YOU to prove that the F1 car is faster.
You cant prove it to my satisfaction, much like youre dumb enough to still believe that a NSX marginally outperforms a stock S2000, despite all of the above.
At first I thought that you didnt know what you were talking about. Then I thought that you were ignorant. Now I think youre retarded, as well.
02-22-2005, 04:49 AM
#47
Registered User
Originally Posted by BioBanker' date='Feb 22 2005, 09:34 AM
Not that I think that a F1 car cannot destroy any road car in the world, much less a stock NSX (BAHAHAHAHA), but Im asking YOU to prove that the F1 car is faster.
i rest my case....
02-24-2005, 07:48 PM
#49
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1) well, from nsxprime/nsxsc there are many guys in the U.S. (i've seen at least 5 or 6 threads myself) that have run 12.8/12.9 stock 02+ nsx.
2) my NSX was a 3.0 L 5 spd. (270 hp) but it was one of the lightest. 3060 lbs
it only had an intake system, mugen ecu
it was raced against my 2000 S2K (cai, VAFC) at least a dozen times, and even the 3.0 L NSX lays down smack on the S2K with a solid/steady walk away from it that picks up as speeds increased. no official slips; but from my experience, my NSX was at least a good 5 lengths (plus or minus) on my S2k almost everytime.
on a road course of FABI size or bigger, the NSX will definitely be much faster than the S2K. NELSON will draw the 2 closer together.
that said, the NSX drive is more exhilirating, the S2K, more fun.
2) my NSX was a 3.0 L 5 spd. (270 hp) but it was one of the lightest. 3060 lbs
it only had an intake system, mugen ecu
it was raced against my 2000 S2K (cai, VAFC) at least a dozen times, and even the 3.0 L NSX lays down smack on the S2K with a solid/steady walk away from it that picks up as speeds increased. no official slips; but from my experience, my NSX was at least a good 5 lengths (plus or minus) on my S2k almost everytime.
on a road course of FABI size or bigger, the NSX will definitely be much faster than the S2K. NELSON will draw the 2 closer together.
that said, the NSX drive is more exhilirating, the S2K, more fun.
02-25-2005, 04:13 AM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eh - hear that Nimesh?
Before you buy your suped up VW Bug of a Boxster, at least look at NSXs. It'd be a shame for this "15 year old car" to lay a whoppin on your fresh and pretty 987 S.
I heard that everyone who buys a new Boxster gets a free lifetime subscription to ELLE magazine.
Maybe that will sway your wife?
Before you buy your suped up VW Bug of a Boxster, at least look at NSXs. It'd be a shame for this "15 year old car" to lay a whoppin on your fresh and pretty 987 S.
I heard that everyone who buys a new Boxster gets a free lifetime subscription to ELLE magazine.
Maybe that will sway your wife?