1991 Honda NSX 3.0 (1991)

1st, it has to be 0-100 km/h, not to 96 km/h, for me is almost the same, but it has to be like that, and the other thing, you have to post a source

0-60 Best time 5.4 average 5.6, 5.8 time is for 95-96 heaver NSX's.

Did this car really do 8 mins 16 round the Nurburgring? What tyres was it on? The time seems impossibly quick for an early NSX, given that later 996 Carreras and E46 M3s, much qicker vehicles are slower than this...Im intruiged by this lap time!

Since 160km/h is not quite 100mph, the 0-160km/h time should be (at worst) 12.0, not 12.5. Where is that from?

A lot of Scan test of autopista magazine ( spain);


http://www.forocoches.com/foro/showthread.php?p=15072724#post15072724

hmm makes sense ..lol

100 is a nice round number.

62, i mean 62 miles an hour?? why not an even number...like 60?? why an uneven number??

we have 0-100km/h not 0-60mph ... again.. 0-100km/h is NOT 0-60mph

Can someone put a better pic here?

And how about updating those 0-60's to 5.4 and 1/4 to 13.5 as specified in 3-4 links provided in above posts? - Thank you.

TT Supra Titan do you have any data for 0-62mph times as Fastestlaps.com doesn't use 0-60mph times. If the NSX can do a 5.0 0-60 I guess its 0-62 would be around 5.3sec

Actually the 91 3.0 stock NSX runs:
5.03 sec 0-60 and 13.47 1/4mi
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1990-12-sci.htm

The Heavier 95 3.0 coupe as mentioned before is not a Type-R if it were it would have the Red Recaro seats and 5 Spoke Enkei-made wheels.
Leather and the 7 spoke OEM's are not available in type-R. Plus the magazine does not say type-r anywhere.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1995-01-performancec
ar.htm

Then here is the even heavier NSX-T 3.0 doing 5.7 0-60http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1996-08-motorsport.htm

The confusion comes from the 91-94 3.0L non-powersteering early cars to the 95-96 3.0L Targa available cars. the targa was 200lbs heavier than 91-94 the 95-96 coupe was still 125lbs heavier than 91-94. thats why they uped the power in 1997 3.2L to accomodate the post 1995 Targa 3200lb frame.

so.. these are the corrected numbers
91-94 NSX 3.0L 5.03 sec 0-60 & 13.47 1/4
95-96 NSX 3.0L 5.4 sec 0-60 & 13.57 1/4
95-96 NSX-T 3.0L 5.7sec 0-60 & 13.7 1/4

Read all about it here...
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/magazine.htm

Plus if you know anything up you know you can get any NSX coupe into the 4.5 sec 0-60 range and 12sec 1/4s with $5k in bolt-ons and run 200k miles with no issues. NSX is Non-Turbo because it is road race ready thats damn fast for reliable NA power.

the number patrico has quotet are froma sportauto 1995 test ...but they are from a 1995 NSX-Type R not the standart like this one...5.4s is WRONG!!!!!!!! 5.4s is for the 1995 NSX-R!!!!! Please recorrect the numbers!

0-100km/h 6.2s
0-200km/h 21.9s

sportauto test 7/1991

done

heres another link showing a 1995 doing 5.4 0-60 and no drive train differences. still the 3.0l engine just added targa and abs.

http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1995-01-performancecar.htm

double check the 0-60 and 1/4 time. Due to how much faster it was than any ferrari and porsche at that time there was belived to be erroneus press. If you check Motor trend you will see 5.4sec.
here is link to motor trend 1990 review and test results. CLICK ON LAST IMAGE TO ZOOM
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/1990-12-motortrend.htm
Thanx!