Image of Honda NSX

Honda NSX (3.0) specs

Price in US $86,642
Car type Coupe
Curb weight 1350-1410 kg (2976-3109 lbs)
Years built 1991 - 1997
Origin country Japan
Gas mileage 18.6-9.4 l/100 km (13-25 mpg US / 15-30 mpg UK)
Views 44.3k

Acceleration (mph)

0 - 30 mph1.8 s
0 - 40 mph2.9 s
0 - 50 mph4.0 s
0 - 60 mph5.2 s
0 - 70 mph6.5 s
0 - 80 mph8.1 s
0 - 90 mph10.2 s
0 - 100 mph12.1 s
0 - 110 mph14.6 s
0 - 120 mph17.5 s
0 - 130 mph23.2 s
Est. 0 - 140 mph27.8 s
0 - 150 mph45.5 s
Est. 0 - 160 mph49.2 s
Est. 1/8 mile9.1 s @ 82.6 mph
1/4 mile13.5 s
Est. 1/2 mile21.6 s @ 127.4 mph
Est. 1 mile34.6 s @ 147.3 mph

Acceleration (kph)

0 - 40 kph1.9 s
0 - 50 kph2.3 s
0 - 60 kph2.7 s
Est. 0 - 70 kph3.2 s
0 - 80 kph4.0 s
Est. 0 - 90 kph5.0 s
0 - 100 kph5.6 s
Est. 0 - 110 kph6.7 s
0 - 120 kph7.4 s
0 - 130 kph9.0 s
0 - 140 kph9.6 s
Est. 0 - 150 kph11.5 s
0 - 160 kph12.3 s
Est. 0 - 170 kph14.3 s
0 - 180 kph15.4 s
Est. 0 - 190 kph18.3 s
0 - 200 kph19.9 s
Est. 0 - 210 kph22.9 s
0 - 220 kph41.2 s
Est. 0 - 230 kph29.7 s
Est. 0 - 240 kph37.3 s
Est. 0 - 250 kph44.4 s
Est. 0 - 260 kph53.4 s
Est. 100 m6.0 s @ 103.0 kph
1000 m24.6 s @ 216.7 kph
60 - 100 kph (4)7.0 s
80 - 120 kph (5)9.9 s
Est. 100 - 140 kph4.6 s
Est. 100 - 200 kph15.5 s
Honda NSX acceleration graph

General performance

Top speed273 kph (170 mph)
Est. 0 - 100 mph - 021.8 s @ 1857 ft
Est. max acceleration0.53 g (5 m/s²)
Emissions353 g/km
Lateral acceleration0.95 g (9 m/s²)
Noise @ idle49 dB
Noise @ 50 kph65 dB
Noise @ 100 kph69 dB
Noise @ 70 mph78 dB

Powertrain specs

Engine type V6 n/a
Displacement 3.0 l (183 ci)
Power 274 ps (270 bhp / 202 kw)
Torque 284 Nm (209 lb-ft)
Power / liter 91 ps (90 hp)
Power / weight 200 ps (198 bhp) / t
Torque / weight 208 Nm (153 lb-ft) / t
Efficiency 20 PS per l/100 km
Transmission 5 speed manual
Layout middle engine, rear wheel drive

More 0-60 and 1/4 mile times

Braking distance

60 kph - 013 m (43 ft)
100 kph - 036 m (120 ft)
120 kph - 052 m (172 ft)
Est. 130 kph - 068 m (224 ft)
140 kph - 072 m (235 ft)
160 kph - 093 m (306 ft)
Est. 180 kph - 0128 m (419 ft)
Est. 190 kph - 0142 m (466 ft)
Est. 200 kph - 0163 m (534 ft)
Est. 30 mph - 010 m (34 ft)
Est. 50 mph - 027 m (87 ft)
60 mph - 036 m (117 ft)
70 mph - 048 m (157 ft)
User avatar
User avatar

Shwingbob  2w ago

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


User avatar

196ss  1m ago

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


User avatar

TypeF173  6m ago

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.


User avatar

TypeF173  6m ago

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.


User avatar

196ss  1y ago

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


User avatar

196ss  2y ago

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


User avatar

Cauf40f50  2y ago

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


User avatar

Shaggy  10y ago

@ Fangio Man: Abra Cadabra!


User avatar

Fangio Man  10y ago

This car was tested by "The Magic" himself!

 


User avatar

Giuliano (Brazil)  10y ago

What's time of Senna in Suzuka?

.youtube.com/watch?v=JUVkVB3SUf4


User avatar

Timmy  11y ago

tsukuba lap time 1:09,87

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


User avatar

relicaexpo  13y ago

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


User avatar

relicaexpo  13y ago

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


User avatar

expert  13y ago

@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.


User avatar

phavyarden  13y ago

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


User avatar

expert  13y ago

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


User avatar

Bezza  13y ago

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!


User avatar

J  13y ago

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?


User avatar

javi( spain)  15y ago

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

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


User avatar

Anonymous  15y ago

hmm makes sense ..lol


User avatar

danielk  15y ago

100 is a nice round number.


User avatar

Anonymous  15y ago

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


User avatar

Georg  15y ago

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


User avatar

850ci guy  15y ago

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.


User avatar

Anonymous  16y ago

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


User avatar

TT Supra Titan  16y ago

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.


User avatar

Georg  16y ago

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!


User avatar

Georg  16y ago

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

sportauto test 7/1991


User avatar

FastestLaps  17y ago

done


User avatar

patricio  17y ago

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