370 Nismo vs. NSX
 

I ran across an old friend that had purchased a 1992 nsx since the last time I had seen him and omg those things must have been the shiznits back in those days! If he would of caught me slip'n I might of been seeing tail lights. I didnt talk to him long so I dont know if he had any aftermarket stuff. I have HFC's and CAI. Are the older nsx usually that quick or do yall think he had some extra's. Either way it was good times.

well its about even.. 92 NSX 1/4 mile is high 13's - where the Z is more mid to low 13's .. hes got about 300-400lbs less then you but you got 60 hp more them him.. drivers race..

The Z would not be able to keep up on a track. NSX's were one of the best handling cars ever made. Even with its low hp, it took care of porsches and ferraris back in the day. I think stock older NSX's dyno about 240 so it would be very close in a straight line with its weight advantage.

I used to own an NA2 NSX (290hp engine). The car was pretty quick. I would say it is about as fast as my current Z. I would say it is a drivers race. Did you guys race each other and from what speeds?

I would expect the NSX to be slower in a straight line, but I think for a low torque car the NSX is a little easier to be aggressive in - feel like you have to really take the Z to redline for it to go quickly. Haven't driven the Z aggressively enough to say how curves would be, but it definitely doesn't feel as easy as an NSX in corners.

RE: NSX VS. Nismo
 

I previously owned, modified and tracked 3 NSXs and am the current owner of a 370Z Nismo.
On average, a stock first gen NSX (91-96, 270 HP, 5 speed) was typically capable of 13.7s @ 105-106 mph, while later generations (290 HP, 6 speed) were typically capable of 13.2s @ 107-108 mph.
From the standpoint of comparison, the Nismo is faster (in a straight line)than my stock 92 NSX and on a par with my later generation models.
From the standpoint of handling comparison between the cars, one must note that each generation of NSX demonstrated different handling characteristics. The first gen NSXs were purely Coupes; the 91-93 models had 15"/16" diameter wheels, the 94 had 16"/17" wheels. Overall, these NSXs were superior in steering/handling when compared to the Nismo. However, when these NSX owners replaced their rolling stock with 18"/19" wheels and latest tires, it greatly improved their capability.
The 95-96 NSXs were Targa only and suffered from terrible cowl and chassis flex. With the Targa roof off, I could not windshield mount my radar detector as it bounced around. Handling of these cars suffered as a result and was inferior in virtually all respects to the Nismo.
The 1997 and later NSX Targas received far better chassis reinforcement and were very good handling machines-better in most (but not all) aspects when compared to the Nismo.
The real handling/steering stars were the rare, special order 1997 and later Coupes-most especially the limited edition 1999 Zanardi and the post-2002 models. These cars, when equipped with the best tires were terrific machines in all respects.

First gen NSXs are about on par with a 350Z stock vs stock. 2nd gen NSXs are about on par with a 370Z stock vs stock with the 370Z having the edge. Handling is close between the two.

Awwhhhhh... The good ol days of the NSX!!!

The NSX was never a race car, the power is not there and it doesn't impress me for a suppossed "super car". On it days was way to pricey.

On the other hand on the twistys is a different story.

So what is your thought on Lotus vehicles?

Crazy how a 20 year old car (NSX) still competes with a modern true sports car(370z)

To me that NSX was not stock, it could be the driver too.

As far as the Lotus I have no comment since I don't know about the car other that is like a go-kart.

Well you have to remember they're mid engine so they have less drivetrain loss.. Plus we all know Nissan (sadly) over rates their HP ratings.. Plus the NSX is lighter.. You just never know though.

NSX does handle better.

It does handle better, but unless it has some mods in a straight line it will not make it.

But look at the specs for a supposed "super car":

252 HP SAE @ 6,600 rpm; 210 ft lb

Weight lb: 3152

Haha no.

If anything they underrate them. The US SAE closely regulates what manufacturers advertise for power figures, more often then not they are underrated. Never seen a Nissan that was overrated in power from the factory.

Not really. The 300ZX TT, Supra TT, RX7 TT, VR4, etc. are all competitive with the 370Z in terms of performance, but they all were priced significantly higher as well. Those cars would be well into high 60 low 70Ks if sold today. And FWIW a properly driven 370Z > NSX.

the type S and Type R nsx are capable of high 12's in the 1/4. the NSX handles much better than any Z car. it's on par with lotus and ferrari.

What made the NSX a supercar in it's time was the car's design, the extensive use of aluminum & mid engine layout.

Sport Auto ran a 7:38s lap time around the Nurburgring in the NSX in 1997.
Sport Auto ran a 7:26s lap time around the Nurburgring in the 350Z in 2003.

Motortrend ran a 1:46.5 lap time around Laguna Seca in the 370Z.
Top Gear ran a 1:57 lap time around Laguna Seca in the NSX.

Willow Springs:
370Z - 1:28.30
NSX - 1:32.59

Those are just a few tracks I picked, the 370Z has posted better lap times around essentially every track both cars have ran on.

WOW a 7:38 around the green hell for an NSX huh? and a 7:26 for a 350z?
thats pretty crazy man! they must have had a flux capacitator installed. i need to get one!

im sure you meant 8 instead of 7 haha.

links please? im pretty sure the nsx would be faster with both cars a 2005 NSX vs a 370z. both with the same tires and pads.

the NSX-R has a ring time of 7:56. the same time as a ferrari F360 stradale.

a car may handle better than another but not have a faster track time, due to tire size, compound and brake components, but like i said before i have no doubt in my mind that an nsx is the faster car.

Yes 8 minutes for both, not 7. Were talking about the regular NSX, not the JDM only limited production NSXR. Around a track 370Z > NSX.

:iagree:
Power to weight, the cars are nearly identical. I would love to see a real world comparison between the z34 and nsx around the track
Fastest numbers ive seen for the nsx is 0-60 4.5 and a 12.9@110 by car and driver back in 1998 (3.2L).
That one must have been a freak nsx though as the average seems to be around 4.8 seconds and 13.2 1/4

I was in the same run group a few weeks ago at my track with a mid 90s NSX. I almost lapped him after 20 minutes and he was a decent driver. This was in the advanced class and was my first time out...

Incorrect!
 

When the NSX appeared in the US as a 1991 model, what cars were superior in performance? Not the Ferrari 328/348 (it wasn't until the 355 models did Ferrari equal or surpass the NSX). Not the 911 Turbo. I had a 1988 911 Turbo Targa and was about to purchase a new 1991 Turbo when I test-drove the NSX. No comparison there. The Corvette ZR-1? I had a 1991 verrsion-for all of 4 weeks. While some of these cars had good top-ends and quick 1/4 mile times, the overall performance was inferior. And, it was junk. The Viper did not appear until the 1992 model year and was not in full production until 1993. Oh, and I had a 1994 RT/10. While significantly faster than the NSX, its steering/handling/refinement were inferior. It, too, was junk. And what of Lotus? I had a 1995 Espirit S4S. While that car offered excellent performance, steering and handling, the fit/finish/qualiy/reliability/maintenance were terrible.
The cost of the NSX in 1991-1992 was comparable to cars with inferior perforrmance, vastly inferior handling/refinement/fit and finish and were far more costly to maintain. How can anyone possible believe the NSX was overpriced?
As to the handling, refer to my easrlier post. One cannot compare the NSX track times with the 370 unless similar quality wheels/tires are used. The NSX (as with all mid-engine vehicles) was extraordinarily responsive to improved rolling stock. When so equipped, the 3.2L, 6 speed NSX Coupes will be faster around road/race courses than a stock 370. How do I know? Perhaps because I have almost 50 years in the hobby, holding NHRA (National Competition/Super Street) and SCCA (National Competition) licenses before most on this Board were born.

I often found the harshest criticism of the NSX was offered by people who never sat in-let alone never drove-the car. The best example of just how good and advanced the NSXs were was evident by the responses of both Porsche and Ferrari in bringing forward new models far sooner than was their norm.

Exactly,370Z > NSX.

I know the NSX will hold it's value better than the NISMO. (that should tell you something)

The NSX is one bad mutha fu****. What trips me out is most of you preach about your superior Z handling whenever people bring up more powerful cars like vette and camaro. Now that someone actually pulled a "BADAZZ" retro supercar, people aren't impressed or whatever. Lol
This car is crazy light. Its engineering its ahead of its time. It was a $60,000+ car that put quarter million dollar cars in check. It was kinda like the audi R8 and Nissan GTR today.. at the time 290hp was not very common. Even tho the 300zxtt outgunned it as well as the supra. The nsx was a true supercar design. As far as design goes, nissan or toyota has never tried to build anything so aerodynamically perfect. The nsx engine and tranny was perfectlytuned. The driving experience couldn't be duplicated, not even in a corvette Z06. Some of you need to go diggin in the archives. I'm not gonna repeat stats cuz a few well educated forum brothers schooled you to the stats already but a "true mid engine" car boasts handling that front mid or front engines can't possibly duplicate. I wish honda still was building such genius. Honda sure fell off. Instead of trying to build the NS-X, they instead build the cr-z. I just don't get it... :(

Do you have a link to those times?

Also, what tires were being run on each car...


The NSX is definitely past it's prime-- I wouldn't buy one for the performance, but it is a classic. It was truly an epic car.

My neighbor has a 1993-4 NSX, while I had a 300ZXTT. He would wait for me nearly every week day, just to drive in a competitive and spirited way. The two cars were very evenly matched, although he eventually stopped because he could not out pace me.
Since my 370 is approximately 10% better handling and 10% more HP, I knew the results before they happened. My neighbor was full of excuses.
I must say though his older car is still worth today about the same as my new car. The NSX is rare (approximate production 8,000), collectible and still relevant.

My car can keep up with an 06 maserati gt at the track... doesn't mean my car gives me the same driving experience as the maserati. Nissan gives a lot of car for the money. The driving experience in the Z and G (moreso in the Z) is awesome. But certain cars give a driving experience that's hard to duplicate.

I agree with unknown 100%. The NSX is the better car and that 252hp number is from an automatic. I knew a biased Z guy would pull that up.

The car is hand built and weighs as much as a focus. Very well ahead of it's time, the car was built for aryton senna's liking (famous f1 car champion). Also an NSX would destroy a 350 all day long. I would put my money on a 370 in a straight line but that would be neck and neck.

Where do you get this 10% figure from? Forza 3 on xbox?

:icon18: :icon18:

I really disagree with this. These things handled pretty damn well in the 90's, but they are seriously underpowered. As I said before on my very first track day I was in an advanced group with this black mid 90s NSX. Beautiful car, looked good out there, but I was running several second faster laps on a sub 2 minute track with mostly curves where it should supposedly excel. I think this is one of those arguments people with Z's seem to get into with the Mustang guys about how they may have a Z in a straight line but it can win on a track due to handling. Especially with the 5.0 this is just not true, and same goes with the NSX. Great vehicle for its time but no match for a 350 or 370z on the track with similar skill leveled drivers. It does look like a much faster vehicle but it is just not. I would absolutely buy one of these babies up because I do love them, but it's just not the monster people make it out to be.

People think regular NSXs are a lot faster then what they really are. There slower then a 350Z/370Z around a track. It's the JDM only limited production NSXR that's quick around a track. The regular NSX just barely out handled the 300ZX, Supra, RX-7 in the early 90s.

Here is some info.

The 1992 version should not have been competitive with you unless he had extensive after market parts. The 1996 however is virtually the same.

Oh, as to another poster's remark about the NSX out handling our cars, in a word...no, well, at least not the Sport model. The base a little, but then again the base autos have always shown the quickest 1/4 times too (13.1 for example).

Year Make Model Engine HP Torque 0-60 ¼ Mile Skidpad

My friend just bought a 96 NSX...we were messing around on the freeway and I always seem to pull on him. Any how, I always thought they were exotic looking....love the shape....beautiful car. I'm sure the 97+ models should give our Z's good competition.

I stomped one in my old LS1 F-body from a highway roll. They are nothing special in the speed department. What they do have going for them is the fact that they set a lot of automotive mile-markers in design/technology regarding material (aluminum chassis/suspension, etc. Every sub-system of the car was designed or tuned by what could read as a "who's who" list on racing at that time, from Japanese, to Americans, to Brazilians. The car was Japan's all-out shot at Ferrari.

Sadly, they built a masterpiece and then just polished it up from year to year without ever truly updating it. It has fallen by the wayside, but it's a great footnote in history!

Yeah, if I ever bought one I would drive it for fun, but mostly have it as a piece of automotive history. Without the NSX, the car world would likely be drastically different than it is now.

That can't be right because the 2012 GTR ran 7:24 in semi wet. That 350Z time was probably not the a full circuit.

Whaaat?! Honda tuned the NSX according to Ayrton Senna's feedback. And for those who don't know, he is considered by many as the best driver in the history of Forluma1. That's pretty "super" if you ask me.