Acura Nsx R-GT vs R34 Nismo Z-Tune

[jcsaleen]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

My vote for looks is the Z-Tune. The forced induction scoop is rediculous because its just goes to show how its just for looks. It runs the same numbers with out the scoop (wtf). Just another example of an under powered sports car. 2568 lbs (214 hp per ton) not bad but atleast make use of the scoop and bump the litre's as well no one who buys that car is going to worry about gas $.

[VAD0R]

Originally Posted by jcsaleen

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

My vote for looks is the Z-Tune. The forced induction scoop is rediculous because its just goes to show how its just for looks. It runs the same numbers with out the scoop (wtf). Just another example of an under powered sports car. 2568 lbs (214 hp per ton) not bad but atleast make use of the scoop and bump the litre's as well no one who buys that car is going to worry about gas $.

And you know this how? That overhead scoop at least serves in cooling the whole engine at high speeds and perhaps decreasing reward drag. Like it said in the original post the modification towards body and maybe suspension, with all of it shaving about 500lbs lighter than the regular and 200lbs than the NSX R. Which is hard enough as is without doing any extensive body modifacations, which is exactly what they did. This car was made to fit homogenization requirements for a professional racing bracket, I don't think they would do a whole of things purely for looks to this car.

[slideways...]

actually the specific reason that nsx was made was to incorporate the large roof scoop that honda wanted to use in jgtc but couldnt because it wouldnt fit the nsx silhouette (sp). if anything the NSX-R GT is the stripped down race car, not the skyline.

edit: so if they wanted to use it in jgtc, its obviously not for looks...

[jcsaleen]

Originally Posted by VAD0R

And you know this how? That overhead scoop at least serves in cooling the whole engine at high speeds and perhaps decreasing reward drag. Like it said in the original post the modification towards body and maybe suspension, with all of it shaving about 500lbs lighter than the regular and 200lbs than the NSX R. Which is hard enough as is without doing any extensive body modifacations, which is exactly what they did. This car was made to fit homogenization requirements for a professional racing bracket, I don't think they would do a whole of things purely for looks to this car.

Yes but theres no power increase theres still the same weak numbers where as the Z-Tune is lighter and more powerfull.

A question to anyone why hasn't honda made a Turbo version?

[drunken monkey]

on a track, it's still very questionable as to whether the z-tune will be the faster car.
remember that vid of the nsx-r pounding on a lambo murcie and gallardo and two other cars that i can't remember (993 turbo+M3?)....
the only reason the lambo got ahead is because it held up the old man on one of the corners, preventing him from zooming off and maintaining the lead.
given a clear track, i'll bet the nsx could set faster lap times than the lambos.

and here we have an nsx that is lighter, has more downforce and an engine that has more cool air feeding it. Any ideas if its running on wider tyres?

turbo nsx.
no idea.
it's not like they don't know anything about them.
(1200bhp 1.5 engines anyone?)
i think a better question is why no V8?

[fairladyz_gt-r]

well....around the tsukuba the Z-tune beat the ferrari 360 challange....with the lap time of 1min01.5sec. and as for the NSX-R GT having more class.... i mean....try show up with that car and its huge intake...u will be laugh at for hours! and the interrior...one have a hand made leghter interrior another one have nothing...which one have more class ei?

[kman10587]

well....around the tsukuba the Z-tune beat the ferrari 360 challange....with the lap time of 1min01.5sec. and as for the NSX-R GT having more class.... i mean....try show up with that car and its huge intake...u will be laugh at for hours! and the interrior...one have a hand made leghter interrior another one have nothing...which one have more class ei?

You're missing the point completely. Real Ferraris and Lamborghinis have spartan interiors, giant intakes, and very overdone looks, but if you were to show up in one of those, you'd be the envy of the whole party. Sure, the NSX R-GT's big intake might get you laughed at, but it will definitely get you attention, more than any R34 is ever going to get you. When people see the Skyline Z-Tune, they see a $50,000 car with a wing and some rims. But when they see the NSX, they see an exotic sports car.

You'll get no argument from me that the Z-Tune is the faster car - the horsepower advantage is just too drastic - but the NSX is the much more desirable sports car.

[drunken monkey]

Originally Posted by fairladyz_gt-r

well....around the tsukuba the Z-tune beat the ferrari 360 challange....with the lap time of 1min01.5sec. and as for the NSX-R GT having more class.... i mean....try show up with that car and its huge intake...u will be laugh at for hours! and the interrior...one have a hand made leghter interrior another one have nothing...which one have more class ei?

yes.
which goes back to (not just) me saying that the regular off the shelf nsx (or if you really have to, nsx-r) being more than enough.
so what if the homologation car doesn't have much of an interior.
the regular car is practically 100% hand built and almost entirely made out of aluminium (i know, no biggie these days...). out of the box all them years ago, the car was near perfect. the skyline gtr on the other hand has gone through how many generations of evolution?

and heck, with that power/torque advantage, if it isn't faster then there is something really wrong.
the fact that despite the power/torque disadvantage, the nsx is still going to give most other cars trouble on a track says something about just how good the nsx is.
of course, this is not to say that the z-tune is a bad car.
i'm just trying to remind people about the pure and simple fact that 13/14 years after the nsx was first released that people are still comparing it to modern cars with much more power says something.

[fairladyz_gt-r]

well...NSX has recive alot of minor change too...u do know that rite?

[drunken monkey]

not that much.
they enlarged the engine, uprated the suspension, picked at the still heavy steering but nothing major like what the gtr has gone through from r32 to r34.

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

not that much.
they enlarged the engine, uprated the suspension, picked at the still heavy steering but nothing major like what the gtr has gone through from r32 to r34.

for the sake of argument, what has changed from R32-R34??? im not too familiar with the changes and what not but it still carrries the RB26DETT, still has the AWD system, im sure suspension has changed...someone clue me in. i wouldnt call body re-modeling major changes but i say that the RB26DETT survived over a decade without enlarging it.

but aside from that...id take the NSX over the Z-tune. something about the NSX that just seperates it...

[drunken monkey]

the biggest ones being revisions to software systems that manages the four wheel drive and four wheel steer
(i.e the thing that keeps the car moving in a straight line.... or not....).
completely remodelled undertray.
completely new, stiffer body shells.
then there's the usual larger wheels, bigger brakes, newer (better/more modern) gearbox, suspension tweaks.
(i think they also revised the multi-link suspension entirely from R33 to R34).
i can't remember exactly but i think there was also some revision of the turbos from R33 to R34.
at least i'm aware that official UK R33's had titanium turbos (as part of the all weather pack, usually a japanese option) which run better/smoother and from R34 i think it was standard.
perhaps all you guys who bought a GT-R brand new could fill in the holes.

anyway.
just to re-iterate in case people mistake me for a skyline hater.
i don't hate the skyline.
in fact i quite like it because it is one of the more capapble true seat four adults, big boot, easy to drive, fast cars out there. sure it's a little overpriced and while the interior's not the most luxurious, it's not as dull as the one in the NSX.
you also won't bang your head on the glass every time you check your blind spot as you do in the NSX (try it....)
and that's kinda it.

for me, the skyline is the car i'd maybe choose if i was after a sensible car that i could enjoy.
the nsx is just a car that i'd enjoy with no compromise.
it's that purity that sets it apart from the skyline but again, this is just because i view them as two totally different things.
if you want a japanese car to compare with it, i think the 3rd gen RX-7 and Supra compare better, all three being two seater coupes, light(ish) with more or less the same power.
the Skyline GT-R doesn't really belong in there, it, in Japan, being the car for the older gentleman.

given the choice, i'd have both.
if i don't have that option, then it'd be the nsx.
or a 911.

[slideways...]

the r33 got titanium and the r34 had ceramic turbine and compressor blades with dual ball bearings.(that were very heat resistant and efficient but tended to shatter over 500hp

the ATTESA ETS-PRO was not revised much at all until the later R34 versions got slight updates (i.e. vspecII, Mspec, NUR, ect.)

not sure about the suspension or brakes but im sure they were tweaked accordingly

[k3smostwanted]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

the biggest ones being revisions to software systems that manages the four wheel drive and four wheel steer
(i.e the thing that keeps the car moving in a straight line.... or not....).
completely remodelled undertray.
completely new, stiffer body shells.
then there's the usual larger wheels, bigger brakes, newer (better/more modern) gearbox, suspension tweaks.
(i think they also revised the multi-link suspension entirely from R33 to R34).
i can't remember exactly but i think there was also some revision of the turbos from R33 to R34.
at least i'm aware that official UK R33's had titanium turbos (as part of the all weather pack, usually a japanese option) which run better/smoother and from R34 i think it was standard.
perhaps all you guys who bought a GT-R brand new could fill in the holes.

yeah thats alot of remodeling...but it seems to me that all of those things were not a huge revision compared to most cars changes through generations. it still carried the same motor and same basic form and control systems. for a motor to last through technological revisions over a decade says something about that motor in particular.

i think they were both built REALLY well in the early 90's to hold up to their same basic format 15 years later.

[jcsaleen]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

turbo nsx.
no idea.
it's not like they don't know anything about them.
(1200bhp 1.5 engines anyone?)
i think a better question is why no V8?

Well the closest thing Ive seen so far was a basch (weird name) supercharger.