Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Asian Imports
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-14-2005, 12:56 AM   #16
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISSANSPDR
12.9?

BAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

OMG that was so funny...

Not the US NSX...definitely more high 13's than high 12's

And Again, wrong you are.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2005, 01:09 AM   #17
ThirdeYe
CF Enthusiast
 
ThirdeYe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 112
In terms of reliability and build quality: NSX
In terms of performance and upgradability: Supra
__________________
1998 Nissan Altima GXE
ThirdeYe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2005, 01:48 AM   #18
NISSANSPDR
and the Revolution
 
NISSANSPDR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 591
Just b/c ONE guy ran a 12.96 doesnt mean that everyone can...generally speaking the average must be taken not the best time...and average I mean the average of a good driver...not some shmuck who sucks at driving

I mean lets take for instance...the 300ZX TT

The 0-60 times have been rated anywhere from 5.2-6.0 so there's alot of factors and discrepencies. Now...am I going to say that the 300ZX TT runs a 5.2 0-60? When I have only seen that number once out of all the magazines, internet sites, data etc.??? No...that would be saying...well if you and your brothers (lets say there's 7 of you) all have blue eyes and only one has green eyes...that you're offspring will have green eyes...that's kinda of a false based statement...you gotta take into account all the factors.

So what do I say about the 300ZX TT...either I give the range that it goes in...ie 5.2-6.0 or I say it runs on average a 5.5 or 5.6

That's the only fair way.

Now this 12.96 was BONE stock...stock tires...nothing removed from the car...etc etc etc???
__________________
Yours truly,
Gabriel
NISSANSPDR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2005, 03:07 AM   #19
car_crazy89
Part Time CFer
 
car_crazy89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,849
I guess it depends on what your wanting to do with the vehicle really. If you want like a good straight line car or the nice sports car look then the Supra TT would be the one to choose but if you want more of a track car, higher end looks then the NSX would be the better choice (forgive me if i'm wrong there). I personally would go for the Supra TT cause i like the looks and it just seems like an all round nice car. It also depends on what your taste is. They are both really nice cars and it'd be great to own either one but when it comes down to it, its all about numbers and performance and one will edge out the other by a small margin.
car_crazy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2005, 08:43 PM   #20
CarEXPERT
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 1,117
I dont like NSX cuse its V6.
CarEXPERT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2005, 10:09 PM   #21
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISSANSPDR
Just b/c ONE guy ran a 12.96 doesnt mean that everyone can...generally speaking the average must be taken not the best time...and average I mean the average of a good driver...not some shmuck who sucks at driving

I mean lets take for instance...the 300ZX TT

The 0-60 times have been rated anywhere from 5.2-6.0 so there's alot of factors and discrepencies. Now...am I going to say that the 300ZX TT runs a 5.2 0-60? When I have only seen that number once out of all the magazines, internet sites, data etc.??? No...that would be saying...well if you and your brothers (lets say there's 7 of you) all have blue eyes and only one has green eyes...that you're offspring will have green eyes...that's kinda of a false based statement...you gotta take into account all the factors.

So what do I say about the 300ZX TT...either I give the range that it goes in...ie 5.2-6.0 or I say it runs on average a 5.5 or 5.6

That's the only fair way.

Now this 12.96 was BONE stock...stock tires...nothing removed from the car...etc etc etc???

Notice in my post I said...

"They are 12.9 capable cars once you remove the magazine driver and put in someone who knows how to drive it."

*CAPABLE*. I was assuming the Supra is a low 13 second CAPABLE car (As they are, I've seen one or two stock passes with 13.20-13.30 slips). My WHOLE entire point is average times or fastest times, the NSX wins. I wasnt comparing the FASTEST NSX time to the 'average' Supra time. Never did. Matter fact I never even SAID in that first 12.9 post that it was an average time. I posted AVERAGE times for our day we spent at the dragway. Which was 13.10s-13.30s for 6spd C32 NSXs (which completely blows away your previous *guess* of 'more like high 13s'). Which the average MKIV Supra TT time is in the 13.50-13.70 range with a good-non magazine driver behind them (which is the the same damn time on average as my 300ZXTT, dont even bother explaining the 300ZXTT, I OWN ONE!).

Think, Type, Submit ->
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 12:34 AM   #22
JDMprelude92
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISSANSPDR
Just b/c ONE guy ran a 12.96 doesnt mean that everyone can...generally speaking the average must be taken not the best time...and average I mean the average of a good driver...not some shmuck who sucks at driving

I mean lets take for instance...the 300ZX TT

The 0-60 times have been rated anywhere from 5.2-6.0 so there's alot of factors and discrepencies. Now...am I going to say that the 300ZX TT runs a 5.2 0-60? When I have only seen that number once out of all the magazines, internet sites, data etc.??? No...that would be saying...well if you and your brothers (lets say there's 7 of you) all have blue eyes and only one has green eyes...that you're offspring will have green eyes...that's kinda of a false based statement...you gotta take into account all the factors.

So what do I say about the 300ZX TT...either I give the range that it goes in...ie 5.2-6.0 or I say it runs on average a 5.5 or 5.6

That's the only fair way.

Now this 12.96 was BONE stock...stock tires...nothing removed from the car...etc etc etc???



Doesn't matter if you can do it in 12.96. The car can still do it.
__________________
Tuner
JDMprelude92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 01:28 AM   #23
Inygknok
El del Supra
 
Inygknok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
I know all about the Solara that runs 6.70s (best)...Maybe you missed in my post *6.50s* like the C32 powered DriverFX civic did.



the solaras do have to stick with certain rules in order to compete in their class. u gotta have that straight first. else, u could look for 2jz powered machines that run even low 6's, and if im not mistaken, probably even high 5's.


next up, about the nsx doing 12.96, ok, lets get some non-average driver on the supra n lets watch him test the car all day long in different courses n lets see how he does.

we can even take up an STI and an Evo along for the ride n test them out too. everyone will be posting quicker times than wat the magazines and the net show. thats pure logic. stadistics show average times tested on specific variables.

in fact, its actually unfair of even stock cars to compete with their stock tires, since some are equipped with better tires than others, and tires do make that much of a difference.

so all in all. no matter wat kind of testing anyone does, i think its complete krap, but magazine info and net info do come quite close to having good averages based on testing with certain atmospheres and wat not.

standing side by side, same track, same tires, same skill leveled drivers, im quite sure the supra will beat the nsx on the 1/4 mile.
__________________


Supra: To surpass or go beyond.
Inygknok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 07:38 AM   #24
ToCkS
CF Newbie
 
ToCkS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 59
With 90k, I'd rather buy something else. Not much bang for the buck. Looks wise, I'd go Supra. I find the Supra still a bit spicy, but the NSX... dated looking in my opinion. Specifically mentioning the rear. Can't make a choice... as I also like mid engined cars. =)
ToCkS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 08:23 AM   #25
NISSANSPDR
and the Revolution
 
NISSANSPDR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 591
If you like mid engine cars...for 90k you could probably pick up a Ferrari F355. Amazing car and I would take one in a heartbeat over a NSX...


__________________
Yours truly,
Gabriel
NISSANSPDR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 03:48 PM   #26
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inygknok
the solaras do have to stick with certain rules in order to compete in their class. u gotta have that straight first. else, u could look for 2jz powered machines that run even low 6's, and if im not mistaken, probably even high 5's.


next up, about the nsx doing 12.96, ok, lets get some non-average driver on the supra n lets watch him test the car all day long in different courses n lets see how he does.

we can even take up an STI and an Evo along for the ride n test them out too. everyone will be posting quicker times than wat the magazines and the net show. thats pure logic. stadistics show average times tested on specific variables.

in fact, its actually unfair of even stock cars to compete with their stock tires, since some are equipped with better tires than others, and tires do make that much of a difference.

so all in all. no matter wat kind of testing anyone does, i think its complete krap, but magazine info and net info do come quite close to having good averages based on testing with certain atmospheres and wat not.

standing side by side, same track, same tires, same skill leveled drivers, im quite sure the supra will beat the nsx on the 1/4 mile.

First off, same tires is NOT stock. It's not Acura/Honda's fault the Supra uses different tires.

Second, SAME skill leveled drivers is impossible to measure, so why bother and speculate?

I've personally never heard or seen of a Supra breaking 12s completely stock, just like I've never heard or seen of a 300ZXTT breaking 12s or a 3000GT VR-4 breaking 12s. Which are THE two cars it's 1/4 mile time nearly exactly matches (even though the Supra is known to be the worst of the three in the 1/4 mile because of it's launches). I've SEEN an NSX go 12.9s, so their must be others out there who can run 12s in them stock. Lastly, that Driver FX Civic is in the same exact class and obides under the same exact rules as the StreetGlow Solara.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 03:59 PM   #27
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISSANSPDR
If you like mid engine cars...for 90k you could probably pick up a Ferrari F355. Amazing car and I would take one in a heartbeat over a NSX...



So, you're comparing a decade used Ferrari F355 to a brand new NSX? Kind of unfair... If you decide to get fair with the situation and get a 95 NSX you wont pay more than $45k. With the $45k left over for mods the F355 = PWN3D.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 04:47 PM   #28
ThirdeYe
CF Enthusiast
 
ThirdeYe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarEXPERT
I dont like NSX cuse its V6.
Um, so is the Supra.
__________________
1998 Nissan Altima GXE
ThirdeYe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2005, 08:38 PM   #29
Accord_Man
CF Addict
 
Accord_Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdeYe
Um, so is the Supra.


don't mean to be picky, but its an inline 6
Accord_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2005, 03:52 AM   #30
Inygknok
El del Supra
 
Inygknok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
First off, same tires is NOT stock. It's not Acura/Honda's fault the Supra uses different tires.

Second, SAME skill leveled drivers is impossible to measure, so why bother and speculate?

I've personally never heard or seen of a Supra breaking 12s completely stock, just like I've never heard or seen of a 300ZXTT breaking 12s or a 3000GT VR-4 breaking 12s. Which are THE two cars it's 1/4 mile time nearly exactly matches (even though the Supra is known to be the worst of the three in the 1/4 mile because of it's launches). I've SEEN an NSX go 12.9s, so their must be others out there who can run 12s in them stock. Lastly, that Driver FX Civic is in the same exact class and obides under the same exact rules as the StreetGlow Solara.

i really cant remember the amount of times that, constantly, ppl in these forums have actually given examples about using drivers of the same skill levels. in fact, i do believe that there are ppl out there that can drive pretty much the same, just like some ppl can even skateboard the same, so on so on. some ppl can do some things better than others, true, but there are other things that im sure some ppl can do things on a same level (just like that one punk that could compare himself to ya at school in something).

i do believe there have been ppl using supras that have gotten even faster times in the 1/4 mile, most probably changing the tires, but that might be it.


as far as the whole ferrari ordeal goes..... well, im positive that if something happens to the ferrari, its a lot more expensive to fix than the nsx.... also, there are new models of nsx's out there. im not sure if there is a 2005 version, but the latest model is quite modern. i just prefer the older model with the flip ups. they gave too many curves to the newer model.
__________________


Supra: To surpass or go beyond.
Inygknok is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.