Dodge Viper SRT-10 vs. new Acura NSX

[Ssom]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

Nice front & interior, the back looks like it was inspired by a computer game.

Well considering the nationality of Ridge Racer..................................Need I say anymore???

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by Moss1O6GTi

Well considering the nationality of Ridge Racer..................................Need I say anymore???

Ridge Racer was the one i was thinking of

[freakonaleash1187]

i never seen a back view of the car. i have only seen 3 quarter views of it. the back end does look kind of odd with it being so big. when you look at the 3 quarter view, it doesnt look like the back end would be that big.

[blindside.AMG]

The design alone looks like it will slap another $30-50k onto the price tag. Gimme a Ford GT for that price!

[Lambor]

I think I would chose the NSX only if the egine was a lot bigger. Cause I know im not going to pay 89,000 dollars for a car with a v6 and 290 horsepower.

[freakonaleash1187]

if they give me the combustion-electric engine with 400 hp and keep it at 90k, that would be a truly awesome car.

[mommaslilinjun]

think of the viper vs. nsx battle this way... $30g 10 and 11-year old nsxs have the same chasis, engine, etc. as the ones that sell for $90g now. The only thing different is the styling, and, personally i like the older styling better. I would definitely spend $30g and have a stock car with a 0-60 of 4.9 then pay $80g and have a car that does not handle as well, but is faster. And, you can always find a nice big turbo kit for it which would match, or beat the power of the viper.

[blindside.AMG]

Originally Posted by mommaslilinjun

think of the viper vs. nsx battle this way... $30g 10 and 11-year old nsxs have the same chasis, engine, etc. as the ones that sell for $90g now. The only thing different is the styling, and, personally i like the older styling better. I would definitely spend $30g and have a stock car with a 0-60 of 4.9 then pay $80g and have a car that does not handle as well, but is faster. And, you can always find a nice big turbo kit for it which would match, or beat the power of the viper.

Smart move, you just spent $30,000 on a 10 year old car. A 10 year old NSX will NOT handle better than a brand new Viper. The Viper is a full second faster than the NSX 0-60. That is a huge difference. Then you talk about slapping a turbo on a 10 year old car to add 200+ hp. Not smart dude. You're just asking for stuff to blow up.

[AcesHigh]

I don't know about that outhandling the Viper comment, blindside. Honda boasts some of the best handling tech in the world, and the Viper's 10 cylinders won't help it any.

0-60/quarter mile times and handling are related, but not directly dependent on each other. The third gen Rx-7 is slower in 0-60, but will hand the Viper its ass in an Autocross course.

[MexSiR]

I just read the whole fucking thread. You look pimper in an NSX than in a Viper. Of Course a viper will out perfrom an NSX pretty easily. The NSX-R does not compare to the Viper either, The Type R does the quarter mile in 12.9-13.1 seconds, shaving around .4 from the base model due to the weight reduction. At the track the NSX-R is pretty good, i saw it racing in a video on those japannese tracks and a Lamborghini Murcielago could barely keep up with it until the last straight were the Murcielago won. The NSX-R beat a porshe turbo, and a GT3 i believe. Of Course the driver of the NSX was badass.

The old NSX looks better than the new one, and performs equally. If Honda comes up with a 380-450 hp NSX with 3000 lbs weight, it will start battling again.

[CrzyMR2T]

yea i also hope that honda puts more power in the newer nsx, i think it should have at least around 100 more horses from its 290 hp, but its probably gonna get around 350 hp if its the bigger displacement v6, considering how honda is.

[Mr Payne]

Originally Posted by AcesHigh

I don't know about that outhandling the Viper comment, blindside. Honda boasts some of the best handling tech in the world, and the Viper's 10 cylinders won't help it any.

0-60/quarter mile times and handling are related, but not directly dependent on each other. The third gen Rx-7 is slower in 0-60, but will hand the Viper its ass in an Autocross course.

SRT-10 will destroy a third gen on an autocross course.

[Ssom]

Doubt it, as much as I despise the things (It's an owner/enthusiast related issue) there are very few cars that are set up as nicely by the factory as the RX7 be in an FD, FC or the early ones.


Then again, in reality autocross'd be about 85-90% driver, so it's an irrelevant argument, whichever way you look at it.

[Kurtdg19]

I think what blindside AMG said about a 10yr old NSX not being able to handling better than a brand new Viper holds some truth. A 10yr year old car will already be showing some signs of age. The chasis isn't going to be as strong, bushings are becoming worn as well as the rest of the suspension components. The bolts and nuts have already begun to lose their strength. The motor is getting age and miles put on, tranmissions also losing its strength. The seals in the transmissions become just as worn with age as they do with miles. Unless the owner planned to revamp the entire car (which would cost a lot of money), I couldn't see it handle as well as a Viper. Even if the owner was to replace everything, he would still be using the 10yr old chasis. Now a brand new NSX would be a different story.

[AcesHigh]

SRT outhandling an Rx-7?

That's the first time I heard that. And I've never seen it.