what have zero torque and a macdonalds employee got in common?
nothing
LOL
What does an S2000 and a man with no tongue have in common?
No Torque!!1111!?11;11
1!!!
:\Turbos
- Thread starter ubersonic
- Start date
What does an S2000 and a man with no tongue have in common?
No Torque!!1111!?11;11
1!!!:\
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,792
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
A lot of cars from that time period were quoted at the magic 280bhp but were over. I know for a fact that the R32 Skyline GTR was more realistically 305bhp than the quoted 280 so it wouldn't suprise me if the original nsx was the same.
This quote from gone in sixty seconds pretty much sums up why someone including me would have a NSX-R (not the original NSX) over a lot of other metal
Memphis: Roger, I have a problem...
Roger the Car Salesman: Yes?
Memphis: I've been in L.A. for three months now. I have money, I have taste. But I'm not on anybody's "A" list, and Saturday night is the loneliest night of the week for me.
Roger the Car Salesman: Well, a Ferrari would certainly change that.
Memphis: Perhaps, Mmmm. But, you know, this is the one. Yes, yes yes... I saw three of these parked outside the local Starbucks this morning, which tells me only one thing. There's too many self-indulgent wieners in this city with too much bloody money! Now, if I was driving a 1967 275 GTB four-cam...
Roger the Car Salesman: You would not be a self-indulgent wiener, sir... You'd be a connoisseur.
Memphis: Precisely. Champagne would fall from the heavens. Doors would open. Velvet robes would part.
ACTUALLY, if anything it was the single turbocharged "Turbo A" supra introduced in 1988 that would have sparked the BHP agreement. 287BHP and for the short time before the GTR, Japan's fastest car
.The twin turbo Supras available before the agreement only made around 200BHP (2.0 unit) and the 1JZGTE which did make 276BHP was introduced in 1990, which I understand was long after the agreement took affect.
Sorry, but old Supras are sort of my specialist subject
.
The R8 has both actually, just adds some nice Audi numbness but much better than all their other cars. Though come to think of it the R8 only has brute force for the first week until it gets clogged up with oil crud and drops 50bhp!
Everyone suddenly loves the NSX now a few others have posted.
Well i never. Shock, horror.
The japs are very good at lying about bhp, lol. Isn't the GT-R rated at 478, and it usually dyno's at over 500? lol.
Id say the term supercar is kinda subjective. I mean does it need a certain number of cylinders? Obviously needs to be mid engined, id say needs to be really expensive, fast, look insane, and be totally impractical, heheh.
Wether it's a supercar or not, it's awesome.
Well i never. Shock, horror.
The japs are very good at lying about bhp, lol. Isn't the GT-R rated at 478, and it usually dyno's at over 500? lol.
Id say the term supercar is kinda subjective. I mean does it need a certain number of cylinders? Obviously needs to be mid engined, id say needs to be really expensive, fast, look insane, and be totally impractical, heheh.
Wether it's a supercar or not, it's awesome.
the reason you would have an NSX is because the memphis wants a 275 GTB
your logic is crystal clear
i saw his logic
he's implying that by buying an NSX instead of a ferrari, he'd be a connoisseur, not a self-indulgent wiener like the rest who buy ferrari's and other popular supercars.
I wouldn't say a supercar needs to be mid engined... I don't think anyone could call the TVR Speed 12 not a super/hyper car and that was front engined.
a 275 gtb is a ferrari though
thats what threw me
dont worry I got the idea
and smokey, as school is out, my view on the nsx has been held here for years I'm not just jumping on a bandwagon - just in case you were insinuating I might have.
on with the show zero torque
Id like to retract my previous statement about the NSX being a supercar, I was arguing on the basis that it was easily on par with other supercars like the Ferrari 355 but it turns out that isn't a supercar either. According to Ferraris roadmap their supercars are the 250GTO, 599GTO, 250LM, 288GTO, F40, F50 and the F60 (Enzo), everything else is just a high performance sports car.
No-one here appears to have changed their long-held view.
The primary argument appears to have turned to whether it's a supercar or not, I remain firmly in the camp of "who cares".
Hang on a minute, I thought you said you owned a Supercar, you had an Integra once didn't you, that bloke up there lead me to believe it's a Supercar, stop messing with my mind!
All of my cars have been super.
Well, except for the VW Passat I thought would be a handy mile-mucher, there was nothing super about that unless you could the time I smashed it up it and it self-inflated - I remember standing at the roadside grinning and thinking "super" whilst looking at it's sorry ass.