Turbos

Well, I think half the excitement with the Honda engines is their high state of tune and the need for high revs. That wouldn't be the same for the same power out of a higher displacement engine making the same power.
 
Give me 6 or more cylinders any day, you can keep those screaming 4's ;)
 
If its an exciting one in a high state of tune then fine (like in the M3).

That said, for every day driving, I'd take something with 6 cylinders any time.
 
Clarkey said:
Huh? The suspension is nothing alike..

The differences are most definitely there, you're not wrong. On release, DC5 was slated for being poor. In fact I think it was even said that the car wasn't deserving of the Type-R badge. Was never popular with tuners either, as I remember the story was that you couldn't really do anything to the front suspension without making it worse.
Seems that the only people who believe it's better than the DC2 are owners, funny that.
Click to expand...

Huh?

EVO said:
All things considered, the R is faster, better looking and better handling than ever. Only problem is, Honda has no plans to import it to the UK, because it's too close in price and ability to the Civic Type R. Shame, because the Integra is the fastest - and arguably most enjoyable - front-drive coupe on the planet.
Click to expand...

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/22697/honda_integra_typer.html

"Evo" seemed to think it was the best thing since sliced bread? "Car and Driver" put it on their Top Ten list 2 years in a row.

Not to mention how it looks about 30 million times better than the DC2.

Who slated it? And who said it wasn't deserving of a Type-R badge?? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Why is the NSX getting so much stick?

I'm far from a Honda fan, but can appericate that the NSX is far more of a car than it's 0-60 times and megar BHP figures. The debate of it been a "supercar" is a though one (arugbly they are a one up on the Supras, 300ZXs and GTOs doing the rounds at the time) but I think that they are far from "bad" cars. Smokey wanting to take on over a Porsche isn't as crazy as it seems... Like I said, I'm far from a Honda guy but I think I'd take a NSX over a Carrera 2 911 without much thought...
 
Joshy said:
Why is the NSX getting so much stick?

I'm far from a Honda fan, but can appericate that the NSX is far more of a car than it's 0-60 times and megar BHP figures. The debate of it been a "supercar" is a though one (arugbly they are a one up on the Supras, 300ZXs and GTOs doing the rounds at the time) but I think that they are far from "bad" cars. Smokey wanting to take on over a Porsche isn't as crazy as it seems... Like I said, I'm far from a Honda guy but I think I'd take a NSX over a Carrera 2 911 without much thought...
Click to expand...

So you would honestly spend 20k on an NSX over a 911?
 
[TW]Fox;17560810 said:
It's a bit like a Mitsubishi 3000GT or Toyota Supra with ideas above its station maybe? ;)
Click to expand...

Actually, it's nothing like those in the slightest.

The 3000GT weighed a million tonnes and was crap, the Supra is a tuning legend, and drag strip legend.

It's getting stick Joshy because i like them. What did Senna know eh? Hell have a little read on Gordon Murray and the F1, the NSX was his inspiration, but what does he know?
 
[TW]Fox;17559692 said:
It's a fantastic technical acheivement, but in the real world? Unless you really like the power delivery you could argue that 220bhp from an NA 2 litre engine (I'm assuming you dont just mean an NA engine because if you do then LOL, 220bhp is far from awesome from an NA engine!) is not really as good as 220bhp from a 2.5 litre engine in terms of flexible power delivery?
Click to expand...

Yes i like the delivery i like my 8600 revs. For a mass produced car thats reliable it's a great achievant, and then were talking almost 10 years ago.

Why is it no good for the real world? whatever the hell that means. B-road- 2nd or 3rd gear-fun.

Driving around town. 2k revs, good MPG. What am i missing?
 
Gluesniffer.jpg
 
[TW]Fox;17559692 said:
It's a fantastic technical acheivement, but in the real world? Unless you really like the power delivery you could argue that 220bhp from an NA 2 litre engine (I'm assuming you dont just mean an NA engine because if you do then LOL, 220bhp is far from awesome from an NA engine!) is not really as good as 220bhp from a 2.5 litre engine in terms of flexible power delivery?
Click to expand...

Was just saying it to end, what seemed a pointless arguement that one person couldn't seem to stop repeating.

I do find it pretty impressive that the power can be screwed out of a little engine. But then look at Mitsi's efforts squeezing even more with the add of a turbo. Two totally different state of tunes, and as you say its all personal preference on how you like your power delivery.

Personally, I prefer N/A power delivery. But the kick of a turbo is always exciting. :)
 
[TW]Fox;17560810 said:
It's a bit like a Mitsubishi 3000GT or Toyota Supra with ideas above its station maybe?
Click to expand...

I think very few Jap car fans would consider the NSX to be comparable to the likes of the Supra. I couldn't really tell you why, but it has always been considered a cut above the likes of those, despite what the straight line figures might say. Full blow Supercar? I don't think so, but I wouldn't mention the Supra, 3000GT and NSX in the same sentence.

"So you would honestly spend 20k on an NSX over a 911?"

I'd obviously try both, but I'd be very suprised if I came home in a 911. As far as I've read, both do similar things in terms of being truly usable sportscars, but the NSX seems to have an added bit of flare that I'd imagine a non turbo/RS post 993 911 to be lacking.

"The 3000GT weighed a million tonnes and was crap"
No, it didn't, and no, it wasn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom