Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Adam
Actually, it should be noticably faster in a straight line than the old NSX. Even the 03//04 boxster S should have no problem showing the old NSX the tail lights. The old 270 hp NSX might have been fairly quick back in 91, but not by todays standards.
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html |
With all due respect, the data you have linked to states that the best ¼ mile time for a 3.0 NSX (1991 – 1996) is a 13.6. The one time listed for the Boxster S is a 13.8. Therefore I don’t know how you come to the conclusion that a 2000 – 2004 S will show it’s tail lights to the “old” NSX.
The majority of times I see quoted for the NSX in other publications is a 13.7. However, your data for the 3.0 NSX with the fastest time is the 1996 which is odd because it’s 100 lbs heaver than the 1991 – 1994 with the same HP. I guess you read the 14+ for the 1991. That’s a bad number. I’ve drag raced my car and got a 13.7 in stock condition.
The 1997 - 2005 (3.2) NSX is quoted at 13.3 which is what I’ve seen quoted quite a bit.
It would be a close run but I have no fear of winning by a car length. Torque and gearing also helps. I also believe the NSX has a higher top speed.
Please note that I rated the 2005 S a little faster and I still rate the 2000-2004 S a little slower. I’m sorry if you feel that I insulted your car. There are a lot of cars for less money faster than the Boxster and NSX. It’s not an issue. If I wanted performance for the $ I would be driving a Corvette.
It’s one of those things where one might say that it comes down to drivers. I feel the NSX would be a little faster. I’ve been racing for 13 years, so perhaps I should say that I driving my NSX would beat you driving a pre 2005 Boxster S in stock condition.
Threaded Mode
