Honda NSX (3.0) specs

Tsukuba lap is 1:07.49 From best motoring series 1996 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsjyEgzIA_Q

Quattroroute 07/1991:
Top speed – 272.962 kph (probably calculated)
0-60 – 2.7
0-80 – 4.0
0-100 – 5.6
0-120 – 7.4
0-140 – 9.6
0-160 – 12.3
0-180 – 15.4
0-200 – 19.9
400m – 13.6 sec 168.9 kph
1000m – 24.6 sec 216.7 kph
Braking:
60-0 – 13.1m
80-0 – 23.3m
100-0 – 36.5m
120-0 – 52.5m
140-0 – 71.7m
160-0 – 93.4m

Few people will recall the the absolute ripples and waves the Honda NSX created in the "exotic" market. I won't name who specifically, but I recall somebody stating in terms other than just metrics it put the "fear of God in to the opposition."

In certain respects. It did.

First Place: Acura NSX, Corvette ZR1, Porsche 911, Ferrari 348ts, Lotus Esprit Turbo SE so very SORRY!

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a15140663/porsche-911-carrera-4-cabriolet-vs-acura-nsx-chevrolet-corvette-zr-1-ferrari-348ts-lotus-esprit-turbo-se-archived-comparison-test/

"1990 Acura NSX
270-hp V-6, 5-sp manual, 3020 lb
Base/as-tested price (C/D EST): $58,000/$58,300
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.2 sec
1/4 mile: 13.8 sec @ 102 mph
Top speed: 163 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 157 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg."

Very interesting.

Automobil Revue, № 39, 19.09.1991:
Curb weight - 1350 kg (42%/58%)
Acceleration (2 persons +10 kg) -
0-40 kph 1,9 sec
0-60 kph 3,0 sec
0-80 kph 4,4 sec
0-100 kph 6,1 sec
0-120 kph 8,1 sec
0-140 kph 10,7 sec
0-160 kph 13,4 sec
0-180 kph 17,0 sec
0-200 kph 21,8 sec
0-220 kph 41,2 sec
1000 m - 25,4 sec
Top speed - 255 kph

Performance Cars 04/1991:
0-30 mph 2,1 sec
0-40 mph 2,9 sec
0-50 mph 4,0 sec
0-60 mph 5,3 sec
0-70 mph 6,5 sec
0-80 mph 8,1 sec
0-90 mph 10,2 sec
0-100 mph 12,1 sec
0-110 mph 14,6 sec
0-120 mph 17,5 sec
1/4 mile - 13,7 sec 106 mph
top speed - 157 mph

It killed the ferrari 348 while being cheaper, more reliable, etc

@ Fangio Man: Abra Cadabra!

This car was tested by "The Magic" himself!

What's time of Senna in Suzuka?

.youtube.com/watch?v=JUVkVB3SUf4

tsukuba lap time 1:09,87

.youtube.com/watch?v=jcVrkogTOAs&feature=relmfu

Hi,
Seems like it’s a nice blog. So let us also add something useful in it. With all positive manufacturing data scope of import and export is increasing day by day. In mechanical field everyone want to have one stop shop for there manufacturing needs. So Relicaexpo is the ultimate solution for them.

Regards
. Relicaexpo

Hi,
Seems like it’s a nice blog. So let us also add something useful in it. With all positive manufacturing data scope of import and export is increasing day by day. In mechanical field everyone want to have one stop shop for there manufacturing needs. So Relicaexpo is the ultimate solution for them.

Regards
. Relicaexpo

@bezza. 91 Nsx weights 170lbs less than 3.2 with six speed 20+hp. For the track the coupe has better chassis and suitable for cornering. Also the suspension is more toed in and aggressive than 3.2 and smaller wheels is less turn faster, larger wheels help top speed. I believe in the numbers.

1st, it has to be 0-100 km/h, not to 96 km/h, for me is almost the same, but it has to be like that, and the other thing, you have to post a source

0-60 Best time 5.4 average 5.6, 5.8 time is for 95-96 heaver NSX\'s.

Did this car really do 8 mins 16 round the Nurburgring? What tyres was it on? The time seems impossibly quick for an early NSX, given that later 996 Carreras and E46 M3s, much qicker vehicles are slower than this...Im intruiged by this lap time!

Since 160km/h is not quite 100mph, the 0-160km/h time should be (at worst) 12.0, not 12.5. Where is that from?

A lot of Scan test of autopista magazine ( spain);

http://www.forocoches.com/foro/showthread.php?p=15072724#post15072724

hmm makes sense ..lol

100 is a nice round number.

62, i mean 62 miles an hour?? why not an even number...like 60?? why an uneven number??

we have 0-100km/h not 0-60mph ... again.. 0-100km/h is NOT 0-60mph

Can someone put a better pic here?

And how about updating those 0-60's to 5.4 and 1/4 to 13.5 as specified in 3-4 links provided in above posts? - Thank you.

TT Supra Titan do you have any data for 0-62mph times as Fastestlaps.com doesn't use 0-60mph times. If the NSX can do a 5.0 0-60 I guess its 0-62 would be around 5.3sec

Actually the 91 3.0 stock NSX runs:
5.03 sec 0-60 and 13.47 1/4mi
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1990-12-sci.htm

The Heavier 95 3.0 coupe as mentioned before is not a Type-R if it were it would have the Red Recaro seats and 5 Spoke Enkei-made wheels.
Leather and the 7 spoke OEM's are not available in type-R. Plus the magazine does not say type-r anywhere.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1995-01-performancec
ar.htm

Then here is the even heavier NSX-T 3.0 doing 5.7 0-60http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1996-08-motorsport.htm

The confusion comes from the 91-94 3.0L non-powersteering early cars to the 95-96 3.0L Targa available cars. the targa was 200lbs heavier than 91-94 the 95-96 coupe was still 125lbs heavier than 91-94. thats why they uped the power in 1997 3.2L to accomodate the post 1995 Targa 3200lb frame.

so.. these are the corrected numbers
91-94 NSX 3.0L 5.03 sec 0-60 & 13.47 1/4
95-96 NSX 3.0L 5.4 sec 0-60 & 13.57 1/4
95-96 NSX-T 3.0L 5.7sec 0-60 & 13.7 1/4

Read all about it here...
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/magazine.htm

Plus if you know anything up you know you can get any NSX coupe into the 4.5 sec 0-60 range and 12sec 1/4s with $5k in bolt-ons and run 200k miles with no issues. NSX is Non-Turbo because it is road race ready thats damn fast for reliable NA power.

the number patrico has quotet are froma sportauto 1995 test ...but they are from a 1995 NSX-Type R not the standart like this one...5.4s is WRONG!!!!!!!! 5.4s is for the 1995 NSX-R!!!!! Please recorrect the numbers!

0-100km/h 6.2s
0-200km/h 21.9s

sportauto test 7/1991

done

heres another link showing a 1995 doing 5.4 0-60 and no drive train differences. still the 3.0l engine just added targa and abs.

http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1995-01-performancecar.htm